Nick Pope' s stunning girlfriend

[taio]

I have one person who is a "foe" on here. As long as I'm logged in here, I never have to read anything that is posted by that poster.

Surely that is better than trying to organise a messageboard fatwah or try to treat IT like you'd treat an immigrant surely?

Not convinced "foe" is the answer - tried it but didn't work for me because the odd proflific poster who will argue at any opportunity is frequently quoted and responded to. It's a tough one for the moderators to deal with but I'm not sure doing nothing is the answer - clearly it has turned many good people off or away completely.

[Greenmile]

No, not at all - just your reference about people suggesting banning - that was your central point with the other stuff bracketed

Oh, i see.

He has the right to ask for another poster to be banned, as I have the right to suggest that that’s an anti-free-speech position (and you have the right to disagree, and so on, ad infinitum).

The problem would arise if CT or any other mod started banning people just because other people had asked him to. Breaking the forum rules should be the only grounds for a ban, not some sort of “critical mass” of posters you’ve upset, as you seem to be suggesting.

[Millertime v1.7]

I once 'shagged' a bird who was so fat her ankles covered half her shoes.

Was out on town a week later and lost my keys, couldn't get hold of my flat mate to let me in. Phoned up Gunt Face and asked her if I could come over to hers.

"Nope" she replied abruptly.

"Why?" I asked, slightly miffed

"Cos you're a shite ride" she answered truthfully...


Also once shagged a proper real life dwarf, not just a girl of stunted growth, a bona fide real McCoy dwarf.

Ended up going back to hers as she liked my style. And being a charming man, didn't ask her once if I could rest my pint on her head.

Next morning when the deed was done I was looking for a proof souvenir prior to making a sharp exit while she was in the bathroom. Was going to steal her underwear, but it looked normal, so that was no use.

Heard the shower switching off so I knew departure had to be immediate.

Stole the family portrait from her bedside table.

Rumps mate, you nipping out for an Indian tonight?

[biggles]

so you'd let one or two posters [who are often out to cause bad feelings on here] turn many others away, would you? how about using the three strikes rule? ban him for a couple of weeks and if he still continues with his childish behaviour the ban increases to a month and then six months. the mods only need to read some of his threads to convince them that he is an 'undesirealbe' on here. he wouldn't carry on in the pub like he does on here, would he? maybe that could be a measure for the mods to use.

[Tall Paul]

Oh, i see.

He has the right to ask for another poster to be banned, as I have the right to suggest that that’s an anti-free-speech position (and you have the right to disagree, and so on, ad infinitum).

The problem would arise if CT or any other mod started banning people just because other people had asked him to. Breaking the forum rules should be the only grounds for a ban, not some sort of “critical mass” of posters you’ve upset, as you seem to be suggesting.

There don't appear to be any forum rules.

[Greenmile]

so you'd let one or two posters [who are often out to cause bad feelings on here] turn many others away, would you? how about using the three strikes rule? ban him for a couple of weeks and if he still continues with his childish behaviour the ban increases to a month and then six months. the mods only need to read some of his threads to convince them that he is an 'undesirealbe' on here. he wouldn't carry on in the pub like he does on here, would he? maybe that could be a measure for the mods to use.

Ban him on what basis? Because you don’t like his opinions?

[Greenmile]

There don't appear to be any forum rules.

Well there should be.

[taio]

Oh, i see.

He has the right to ask for another poster to be banned, as I have the right to suggest that that’s an anti-free-speech position (and you have the right to disagree, and so on, ad infinitum).

The problem would arise if CT or any other mod started banning people just because other people had asked him to. Breaking the forum rules should be the only grounds for a ban, not some sort of “critical mass” of posters you’ve upset, as you seem to be suggesting.

I was merely suggesting that saying someone deserves to be banned is the same free speech you refer to as important, that's all. I cant recall suggesting someone should be banned just based on a critical mass of views.

[Greenmile]

I was merely suggesting that saying someone deserves to be banned is the same free speech you refer to as important, that's all.

And I’m agreeing with you on that (in the post you quoted).

[biggles]

have you ever read his posts? I suspect not. if it was only opinions, fair enough. it's all the keyboard warrior, childish antics which annoy many on here. i assume you would back him up whatever he said so there's little point discussing it with you, tbh. the mods [sorry CT but I believe it to be true] really should have at least warned him to stop it with all the personal attacks/insults, put-downs etc. there's just no need for it. maybe when he grows up and is old enough to give his local hostelry the benefit of his presence he will learn how to discuss/argue without getting decked... but i doubt it.

[timshorts]

Why is it that this thread full of shyte yet the picture of Ashley youngs wife is the only thing that seems to have been removed?

Not her best snap, ok, but preferable to the volley full of sniping that remains.

[Greenmile]

He's not on his own - I've seen many people say they've had enough of a very small handful wanting to constantly create disagreements about anything and everything, so they have decided to post much less as a result. The free speech point is exceptionally weak in this context.

This is the post that I inferred the “critical mass” idea from (maybe incorrectly).

Along with this one...

Not convinced "foe" is the answer - tried it but didn't work for me because the odd proflific poster who will argue at any opportunity is frequently quoted and responded to. It's a tough one for the moderators to deal with but I'm not sure doing nothing is the answer - clearly it has turned many good people off or away completely.

(Emphasis mine in both quotes)

[Greenmile]

have you ever read his posts? I suspect not. if it was only opinions, fair enough. it's all the keyboard warrior, childish antics which annoy many on here. i assume you would back him up whatever he said so there's little point discussing it with you, tbh. the mods [sorry CT but I believe it to be true] really should have at least warned him to stop it with all the personal attacks/insults, put-downs etc. there's just no need for it. maybe when he grows up and is old enough to give his local hostelry the benefit of his presence he will learn how to discuss/argue without getting decked... but i doubt it.

Id like to think I would (with the odd exception, as mentioned in my convo with Taio). That’s what freedom of speech is all about. (Insert Voltaire quote here)

And can’t you see the irony in you complaining about a poster’s “personal attacks/insults, put-downs etc” and calling them a keyboard warrior, and then suggesting they’re a child and that they would get “decked” in a pub in the same post?

[Walton]

so you'd let one or two posters [who are often out to cause bad feelings on here] turn many others away, would you? how about using the three strikes rule? ban him for a couple of weeks and if he still continues with his childish behaviour the ban increases to a month and then six months. the mods only need to read some of his threads to convince them that he is an 'undesirealbe' on here. he wouldn't carry on in the pub like he does on here, would he? maybe that could be a measure for the mods to use.

I've definitely seen some posts by Biggles which would fall foul of a properly moderated board, and also see him decked in a pub.

[taio]

This is the post that I inferred the “critical mass” idea from (maybe incorrectly).

Along with this one...




(Emphasis mine in both quotes)

Seems like you're putting words into my mouth. The first quote is based on what I believe to be the case about too many people being fed up with it, and the second acknowledges the difficulty in dealing with it, yet there has to be a better way forward. Anyhow I'm not getting into another petty argument when I was simply supporting the view that there is a problem, so I'll leave it there.

[Greenmile]

Seems like you're putting words into my mouth. The first quote is based on what I believe to be the case about too many people being fed up with it, and the second acknowledges the difficulty in dealing with it, yet there has to be a better way forward. Anyhow I'm not getting into another petty argument when I was simply supporting the view that there is a problem, so I'll leave it there.

I didn’t feel like we were getting into any argument (petty or otherwise). Sorry if you felt different.

[tim_noone]

So back on topic...is she fit then? Or just stunning.

[jackmiggins]

Difficult to tell with the amount of warpaint - but I’d guess ‘plain’.

[Lord Rothbury]

Playing in the final at Eastbourne Aryna Sabalenko.Fantastic body when she is hot and sweaty .Well worth looking up on google.

[Rumbletonk]

This woman is more attractive.

EDIT: And she's almost 40.

There is a tale to be told here. Spill the beans

[Quicknick]

There is a tale to be told here. Spill the beans

No beans to spill. High school teacher. Nice woman. A touch fiery, though.