I fail to understand

You should have stopped here mate.

You should have stopped here mate.

Ouch...medic !!!!

blah blah blah

Dear Hazy,

On behalf of the silent majority of posters on this site - GAGF.

Should you wish to complain about the club (as per usual for you), there are still plenty of threads for you too choose.

On the front page I can see:

- McLardy, Schwab and Co must go; and

- Cameron Schwab.

Your repetitive whinging is not being stifled (unfortunately).

To Moderators - thank you for your attempts to clean up what had become an unreadable mess since last Sunday's debacle.

I would support a cap of one new thread per poster per day. Or if RR just self-imposed this limit on himself.

Dear Hazy,

On behalf of the silent majority of posters on this site - GAGF.

Should you wish to complain about the club (as per usual for you), there are still plenty of threads for you too choose.

On the front page I can see:

- McLardy, Schwab and Co must go; and

- Cameron Schwab.

Your repetitive whinging is not being stifled (unfortunately).

To Moderators - thank you for your attempts to clean up what had become an unreadable mess since last Sunday's debacle.

I would support a cap of one new thread per poster per day. Or if RR just self-imposed this limit on himself.

You miss the point, which is about WJ's proposal to merge all new critical threads into this one "unless they're exceptional".

I don't appreciated your personal abuse.

Thanks for the laughs though. As mjt has already pointed out, the Schwab thread was locked this morning.

Edited April 5, 201312 yr by Hazyshadeofgrinter

Dear Hazy,

On behalf of the silent majority of posters on this site - GAGF.

Should you wish to complain about the club (as per usual for you), there are still plenty of threads for you too choose.

On the front page I can see:

- McLardy, Schwab and Co must go; and

- Cameron Schwab.

Your repetitive whinging is not being stifled (unfortunately).

To Moderators - thank you for your attempts to clean up what had become an unreadable mess since last Sunday's debacle.

I would support a cap of one new thread per poster per day. Or if RR just self-imposed this limit on himself.

You are welcome to start a thread in support of the administration. What's stopping you?

You also have the right not to read threads which don't interest you.

Quit your moaning.

Nice to see you leading by example again there WJ.

I never accused you of any ulterior motive or "agenda". I have always found such accusations ridiculous and I make no exeption when they are directed at others (even imaginary accusations).

I did however infer that there are a small number of people on here who appear to be allergic to criticism of any element of the club, especially the administration, and often try to censor it. Yes, I number you amongst this group.

I am not here to defend every stupid thread that someone starts. I am posting here to complain about your ill-conceived, self-serving proposal to merge all critical threads, including all of the most popular topics, into an unreadble morass.

You say you have a responsibility to everyone on the site well here I am. You say I can question you over your attempts to moderate this site, well that's what I am doing.

You continue to snipe at me but you only make yourself look foolish. The notion that I have not been posting much recently because I have an "ulterior motive" is ridiculous. It's not as if there has been a shortage of things to criticise the club about over the break.

The penny is dropping. It has been a lonely few years holding our administration to account here WJ, but other forum users are starting to realise that pointing out how our club is being turned into a spiritless, hopelessly divided train wreck does not make you a bad supporter - it makes you a good one.

Please don't paint yourself into an embarassing corner out of some misguided loyalty to Schwab and the other "mates". The club will still need you long after they are gone.

I think Nutbean has succinctly responded to the gibberish above.

Sniping, embarassing, foolish. Yep, you're all that and more.

Cheers

I think Nutbean has succinctly responded to the gibberish above.

Sniping, embarassing, foolish. Yep, you're all that and more.

Cheers

Code Of Conduct

...

With regard to posts on the Demonland Forums, the Demonland Administrators and Moderators reserve the right to edit and/or remove posts that are considered to be:

• Acts of personal abuse

...

• Posters that continue to flaunt the Code of Conduct regarding these issues will receive warnings or bannings, depending on the severity and regularity of the offences committed.

Leading by example again I see.

Try to keep you eyes on the ball for once.

Edited April 5, 201312 yr by Hazyshadeofgrinter

I'm struggling to work out whether Hazy and RR are participating in deliberate irony by whinging about the whinging thread in the whinging thread.

"being turned into a train wreck"?

What were we before Stynes, McLardy, and Schwab rocked up?

We were hardly on the rails.

The Gardner Express was pulverised in the mud, next to the Szondy Pacific, next to the Gutnick Transcontinental, next to the...

I'm struggling to work out whether Hazy and RR are participating in deliberate irony by whinging about the whinging thread in the whinging thread.

Now you are whingeing.

Leading by example again I see.

Try to keep you eyes on the ball for once.

Apologies.

I forgot to add "hypocrite".

Now do us all a favour and stay on topic.

Leading by example again I see.

Try to keep you eyes on the ball for once.

glass houses

Posted Today, 03:13 PM

nutbean, on 05 Apr 2013 - 14:59, said:

I fail to understand

You should have stopped here mate.

"being turned into a train wreck"?

What were we before Stynes, McLardy, and Schwab rocked up?

We were hardly on the rails.

The Gardner Express was pulverised in the mud, next to the Szondy Pacific, next to the Gutnick Transcontinental, next to the...

Gardner has nothing to do with this. The fact that Gardner is contantlty brought up as an excuse/deflection years after he left the club speaks volumes for the mentality of the Kool-Aid drinkers on this site.

Don't take my word for it on the train wreck front - that was a quote from Garry Lyon less than 2 weeks ago - and he should know - he's one of the drivers.

Gardner has nothing to do with this. The fact that Gardner is contantlty brought up as an excuse/deflection years after he left the club speaks volumes for the mentality of the Kool-Aid drinkers on this site.

Don't take my word for it on the train wreck front - that was a quote from Garry Lyon less than 2 weeks ago - and he should know - he's one of the drivers.

Perhaps the train was so well and truly wrecked by the end of the Gardner admin that the current lot have been unable to get it back to your lofty standards?

Apologies.

I forgot to add "hypocrite".

Now do us all a favour and stay on topic.

The topic, as I see it, is your decision to merge all new critical threads.

Instead of defending your decision in the face of my concerns, you resorted to ad homiem attacks and then hid behind nutbean's pathetic attempt to put words in my mouth.

Perhaps the train was so well and truly wrecked by the end of the Gardner admin that the current lot have been unable to get it back to your lofty standards?

Gardner has nothing to do with this. The fact that Gardner is contantlty brought up as an excuse/deflection years after he left the club speaks volumes for the mentality of the Kool-Aid drinkers on this site.

Don't take my word for it on the train wreck front - that was a quote from Garry Lyon less than 2 weeks ago - and he should know - he's one of the drivers.

So predictable. It is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Hazy i simply don't understand what you mean by the stifling of criticism of the admin or related aspects of the club. I have been posting on the site for 2 years or so and there is frequent debate about the admin,the FD, the coaching etc etc.

You have made many good arguments as to why you think Schwab should leave and that the club has long been run poorly (and continues to be). I think you have made some very valid points over the journey.

However your position is clear and you have made your case. Why not leave it there?

Schwab has been reappointed for 3 years. The argument could be made this was an error and he should be given his marching orders. But what is the point making that argument on DL, more than a handful of times. Even if by dint of effort you convince 99% of DL posters that he should be sacked do you really believe that will result in his him being sacked? I don't.

But lets say convincing all DL posters (or the majority) that he should be sacked actually does result in him being sacked it would be by definition a very, very long game. The same tired arguments would come out over and over.The very definition of tiresome.

Edited April 5, 201312 yr by binman

The topic, as I see it, is your decision to merge all new critical threads.

Instead of defending your decision in the face of my concerns, you resorted to ad homiem attacks and then hid behind nutbean's pathetic attempt to put words in my mouth.

Pot, kettle, black.

If you took notice, WJ explained his decision. He doesn't owe you anything more.

Gardner has nothing to do with this. The fact that Gardner is contantlty brought up as an excuse/deflection years after he left the club speaks volumes for the mentality of the Kool-Aid drinkers on this site.

Don't take my word for it on the train wreck front - that was a quote from Garry Lyon less than 2 weeks ago - and he should know - he's one of the drivers.

Stop stifling dissent!

I feel subjugated!

The topic, as I see it, is your decision to merge all new critical threads.

Instead of defending your decision in the face of my concerns, you resorted to ad homiem attacks and then hid behind nutbean's pathetic attempt to put words in my mouth.

you really need to look at what others write... was not trying put words into your mouth - simply stated and ill state it again...disagreeing with you is exactly that disagreeing with you...it does not mean one is allergic to any criticism of the club - its just a different opinion..

there...now i have gone and put pathetic words in my mouth

you really need to look at what others write... was not trying put words into your mouth - simply stated and ill state it again...disagreeing with you is exactly that disagreeing with you...it does not mean one is allergic to any criticism of the club - its just a different opinion..

there...now i have gone and put pathetic words in my mouth

Shame on you for having your own opinion that contradicts god, you've just joined me as a fish in a Hazy's barrel!

Hazy i simply don't understand what you mean by the stifling of criticism of the admin or related aspects of the club. I have been posting on the site for 2 years or so and there is frequent debate about the admin,the FD, the coaching etc etc.

You have made many good arguments as to why you think Schwab should leave and that the club has long been run poorly (and continues to be). I think you have made some very valid points over the journey.

However your position is clear and you have made your case. Why not leave it there?

Schwab has been reappointed for 3 years. The argument could be made this was an error and he should be given his marching orders. But what is the point making that argument on DL, more than a handful of times. Even if by dint of effort you convince 99% of DL posters that he should be sacked do you really believe that will result in his him being sacked? I don't.

But lets say convincing all DL posters (or the majority) that he should be sacked actually does result in him being sacked it would be by definition a very, very long game. The same tired arguments would come out over and over.The very definition of tiresome.

Binman, I am posting in this thread about WJ's decision to merge critical threads, I am not interested in justisfying why I may or may not want to discuss other topics at other times in other threads.

I will however quickly point out that "what is the point making that argument on DL" can apply to anything written on this forum the raison d'etre of which is pointless discussion. "what is the point making that argument on DL" is the forum equivalent of diving by zero and is an invalid basis for argument.

Shame on you for having your own opinion that contradicts god, you've just joined me as a fish in a Hazy's barrel!

Just for balance - i strongly disagreed with WJ's take us on accepting the tanking fine and Connolly suspension - I thought it was a show of weakness - not happy Jan...Alas - a different opinion.

I've read what everybody has had to say about the moderation on the site and I agree with the way the moderation has been carried out.

That's it ... no further correspondence on this will be accepted.

Thank you.

I've read what everybody has had to say about the moderation on the site and I agree with the way the moderation has been carried out.

That's it ... no further correspondence on this will be accepted.

Thank you.

Everything in moderation, I say...