al_bro Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 6 hours ago, GlossopLatic said: Mike Keep shining a light on the shambolic goings on at our club some fans don't want to read it because they don't want to hear the truth, and would rather bury their heads in the sand about whats going on. If anyone wants to know where the problems lie at our football club start at the top amd work your way down. This has nothing to do with how the club is run. It's simply a player not paying a small fine when he should have done. I don't get why AL would apply for Isreali citizenship, or why it would stop him getting into the country. He has travelled in and out of the UK without problem for years, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 19 minutes ago, al_bro said: This has nothing to do with how the club is run. It's simply a player not paying a small fine when he should have done. I don't get why AL would apply for Isreali citizenship, or why it would stop him getting into the country. He has travelled in and out of the UK without problem for years, Yeah but that doesn’t suit the conspiracy lovers on here. We have to believe that he has now randomly been stopped coming into the country. Without any explanation offered as to why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosa Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 5 hours ago, Dick_Valentine said: I’ve heard that using his vast wealth & clout in the international community that’s he’s applying for Israeli citizenship. We’ll be reet. If he gets Israeli citizenship before I get an Irish passport I'm gonna be livid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 9 hours ago, OAFCMIKE said: Ironically, the only misleading headline is your edited version, Kowenicki. Funny, that. There was no intention to mislead. The headline and the first sentence tell the whole story. To be honest, I found it quite amusing. It’s not a Pulitzer, just a quirky little piece that, unless you’re ultra-sensitive, isn’t really having a pop at the club. I went as a fan for the first time this season, yesterday. Going really well, isn’t it? You should be a little less precious Mike. To block someone because they said your journalism isn’t Woodward & Bernstein at their investigative best suggests a rather thin skin for someone who likes to put stuff in a national newspaper and then tweet about it. just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archiecat Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 8 minutes ago, LaticsPete said: You should be a little less precious Mike. To block someone because they said your journalism isn’t Woodward & Bernstein at their investigative best suggests a rather thin skin for someone who likes to put stuff in a national newspaper and then tweet about it. just saying. I like having a reporter who has a genuine interest in the club, he writes stuff that is on the face of it true, If he calls Lemsagam a i can see where he is coming from. If some on here tell me Lemsagam is not a then i think they are cuckoo sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 2 hours ago, al_bro said: This has nothing to do with how the club is run. It's simply a player not paying a small fine when he should have done. I don't get why AL would apply for Isreali citizenship, or why it would stop him getting into the country. He has travelled in and out of the UK without problem for years, It was more a wider criticism of him. People who are complaining about him reporting a story about the bus lane fine should really stop being so precious its the type of story that appears in the "and finally" section of the news. The israeli citizenship thing was a throw away lime from someone on here refering to when Roman Abramovich couldnt get a visa into the UK so he gained Israeli citizenship due to him being of jewish decent, doubt Lemsagam will be doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 If anyone is bothered, it was Gevaro... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archiecat Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 3 minutes ago, Lee Sinnott said: If anyone is bothered, it was Gevaro... Typical, couldn't cross to the right place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesidg Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 40 minutes ago, archiecat said: Typical, couldn't cross to the right place He crosses to the right place, it’s others who are in the wrong place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejh45 Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Dear God......we are plummeting new depths in point scoring. This really is a non-story and not worthy of national print space as it is an issue about a minor international, lower league player not paying a fine and shame on whoever released this to Keegan. This is NOT a club issue. Just poor, weak journalism from a hack with an axe to grind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 Morning All, You can attack Mike's writing as much as you want, you can have the times of your lives if that's what gets you hard. Crack on. However when you post baseless and derogatory comments about the man you cross a line that puts OWTB in a difficult position. We have a legal obligation to remove those things when asked, and a moral obligation to treat those posting it like children, seeing as that's what they're acting like. So what happens is I come in and bulk-remove 10-15 posts that are possibly making a fair or valid comment about the content of an article, because they're contaminated by the pollutant posts talking about the man. Please, just think before you post - that way you can all slag his writing off as much as you need to reach climax, and everyone's having a good time! Cheers, Ack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 7 minutes ago, Ackey said: Morning All, You can attack Mike's writing as much as you want, you can have the times of your lives if that's what gets you hard. Crack on. However when you post baseless and derogatory comments about the man you cross a line that puts OWTB in a difficult position. We have a legal obligation to remove those things when asked, and a moral obligation to treat those posting it like children, seeing as that's what they're acting like. So what happens is I come in and bulk-remove 10-15 posts that are possibly making a fair or valid comment about the content of an article, because they're contaminated by the pollutant posts talking about the man. Please, just think before you post - that way you can all slag his writing off as much as you need to reach climax, and everyone's having a good time! Cheers, Ack So if someone gets personal abuse on here... such as "UserX is a pillock" then you have to re move it? Not being argumentative, I'm genuinely interested about the boundaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorvik_latic Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 8 minutes ago, kowenicki said: So if someone gets personal abuse on here... such as "UserX is a pillock" then you have to re move it? Not being argumentative, I'm genuinely interested about the boundaries. Basically, when writing anything about Mike, think 'is this something that he will threaten OWTB owners with legal action about*' and if it is, don't post it. He's even threatened the Trust in the past. *If you're struggling to think what that might be, look how precious he is on Twitter with the amount of people he blocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitygoo Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 37 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said: Basically, when writing anything about Mike, think 'is this something that he will threaten OWTB owners with legal action about*' and if it is, don't post it. He's even threatened the Trust in the past. *If you're struggling to think what that might be, look how precious he is on Twitter with the amount of people he blocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 Can we lot just block him Simples Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 52 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said: Basically, when writing anything about Mike, think 'is this something that he will threaten OWTB owners with legal action about*' and if it is, don't post it. He's even threatened the Trust in the past. *If you're struggling to think what that might be, look how precious he is on Twitter with the amount of people he blocks. I'd also say when posting on owtb think of it as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper, if you think it wouldn't be legally accepted then why post it on here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 It’s a bit ridiculous that someone would resort to legal action over a bit of name calling on a football forum. But I suppose that the world we live in these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, jorvik_latic said: Basically, when writing anything about Mike, think 'is this something that he will threaten OWTB owners with legal action about*' and if it is, don't post it. He's even threatened the Trust in the past. *If you're struggling to think what that might be, look how precious he is on Twitter with the amount of people he blocks. Assuming someone's gender. There'll be protests against OWTB in this day and age for a crime like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, kowenicki said: So if someone gets personal abuse on here... such as "UserX is a pillock" then you have to re move it? Not being argumentative, I'm genuinely interested about the boundaries. Here's the thing I don't get, and this isn't specific to you but relates to your comment (not just on OWTB either, but the internet as a whole); what you're openly asking me there is "is it ok to be mean to someone?". Like me saying "no" is somehow required. Why do we want the right to be mean to someone? What good comes from that? Would you want to be mean about people to their face, say if it was someone in your office, local pub, coffee shop or anywhere else? Why does the anonymity of a screen make it ok to make someone else feel bad? I'll never understand that. As it stands no, it's not against the law to be mean about someone and if you look back through this thread there's still plenty of people slagging off Mike as a person, not refuting or rebutting his articles. They remain because I've not the time nor inclination to moderate them. What was removed comes down to the below... 15 minutes ago, latics22 said: It’s a bit ridiculous that someone would resort to legal action over a bit of name calling on a football forum. But I suppose that the world we live in these days What was removed was not name calling (though I think I grabbed a couple of those along the way - as before I'm not inclined to be subtle when having to tidy threads up, I will just bulk-remove things), but was far more than that. What was removed was either suggestive or outright stating as fact actions or characteristics of Mike's personal life for which there's no foundation. Now we can continue down the road of "well what's the problem, he should have thick skin" all we want, but that's not the law. The law is on Mike's side, or anyone else's of course, and thus when reported we have an obligation to act as quickly as we can - that's what I've done and will continue to do the best I can. All that's to say I come back to my original comment: why not just be nice? Mike's a real person, he's probably got a family or even kids, he'll have good days and bad days, he'll go through all the things you do every day. He's just a human being at the end of it. And if we all acted like that was more important than semi-anonymously calling each other names on a poxy little internet forum then we'd be far, far better off. It's really not that hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latics22 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 6 minutes ago, Ackey said: Here's the thing I don't get, and this isn't specific to you but relates to your comment (not just on OWTB either, but the internet as a whole); what you're openly asking me there is "is it ok to be mean to someone?". Like me saying "no" is somehow required. Why do we want the right to be mean to someone? What good comes from that? Would you want to be mean about people to their face, say if it was someone in your office, local pub, coffee shop or anywhere else? Why does the anonymity of a screen make it ok to make someone else feel bad? I'll never understand that. As it stands no, it's not against the law to be mean about someone and if you look back through this thread there's still plenty of people slagging off Mike as a person, not refuting or rebutting his articles. They remain because I've not the time nor inclination to moderate them. What was removed comes down to the below... What was removed was not name calling (though I think I grabbed a couple of those along the way - as before I'm not inclined to be subtle when having to tidy threads up, I will just bulk-remove things), but was far more than that. What was removed was either suggestive or outright stating as fact actions or characteristics of Mike's personal life for which there's no foundation. Now we can continue down the road of "well what's the problem, he should have thick skin" all we want, but that's not the law. The law is on Mike's side, or anyone else's of course, and thus when reported we have an obligation to act as quickly as we can - that's what I've done and will continue to do the best I can. All that's to say I come back to my original comment: why not just be nice? Mike's a real person, he's probably got a family or even kids, he'll have good days and bad days, he'll go through all the things you do every day. He's just a human being at the end of it. And if we all acted like that was more important than semi-anonymously calling each other names on a poxy little internet forum then we'd be far, far better off. It's really not that hard. Fair enough, I don’t like the name calling and swearing either. But...... let’s leave it there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 27 minutes ago, BP1960 said: I'd also say when posting on owtb think of it as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper, if you think it wouldn't be legally accepted then why post it on here? Bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 5 minutes ago, Ackey said: Here's the thing I don't get, and this isn't specific to you but relates to your comment (not just on OWTB either, but the internet as a whole); what you're openly asking me there is "is it ok to be mean to someone?". Like me saying "no" is somehow required. Why do we want the right to be mean to someone? What good comes from that? Would you want to be mean about people to their face, say if it was someone in your office, local pub, coffee shop or anywhere else? Why does the anonymity of a screen make it ok to make someone else feel bad? I'll never understand that. As it stands no, it's not against the law to be mean about someone and if you look back through this thread there's still plenty of people slagging off Mike as a person, not refuting or rebutting his articles. They remain because I've not the time nor inclination to moderate them. What was removed comes down to the below... What was removed was not name calling (though I think I grabbed a couple of those along the way - as before I'm not inclined to be subtle when having to tidy threads up, I will just bulk-remove things), but was far more than that. What was removed was either suggestive or outright stating as fact actions or characteristics of Mike's personal life for which there's no foundation. Now we can continue down the road of "well what's the problem, he should have thick skin" all we want, but that's not the law. The law is on Mike's side, or anyone else's of course, and thus when reported we have an obligation to act as quickly as we can - that's what I've done and will continue to do the best I can. All that's to say I come back to my original comment: why not just be nice? Mike's a real person, he's probably got a family or even kids, he'll have good days and bad days, he'll go through all the things you do every day. He's just a human being at the end of it. And if we all acted like that was more important than semi-anonymously calling each other names on a poxy little internet forum then we'd be far, far better off. It's really not that hard. Fair enough. If someone is being aggressively abusive in a serious way then I agree and its unacceptable, there is no need. But if a public figure is threatening to sue an independent forum (and the trust) of a club he supposedly 'supports' because some faceless individual on that forum said something mean, then that person needs to grow up. Mike's defence on twitter of his 'article' speaks volumes, his arrogance and condescending tone is very apparent. He is a regional sports journalist.... that's all. If someone here wants to have a pop at me, call me a pillock (or worse) for my views then I don't care. Offence is taken too easily these days. I frankly don't care what a bunch of people I don't know think about me... I don't care what most people who know me think about me for god sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, jorvik_latic said: Basically, when writing anything about Mike, think 'is this something that he will threaten OWTB owners with legal action about*' and if it is, don't post it. He's even threatened the Trust in the past. *If you're struggling to think what that might be, look how precious he is on Twitter with the amount of people he blocks. Nail and head. Sooo arrogant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 12 minutes ago, kowenicki said: Nail and head. Sooo arrogant. Perhaps he is, but the way you speak to people that have a differing opinion than you is also really arrogant and borderline abusive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League one forever Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 1 hour ago, kowenicki said: Nail and head. Sooo arrogant. Perception is projection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.