[Humour] The Iron Fist of Bozza

[Goldstone1976]

yes I get that - was being facetious... but not entirely.

Anonymity on 'social media' seems to give some people a license to be far more aggressive / confrontational / downright rude than they ever would dream of if they were chatting with a stranger or casual acquaintance in a pub. I have chosen to apply that thought when posting on social media... which is why I don't bother engaging on many threads (although \I do read many of them). If someone was being that shouty in a pub, I would steer well clear.

Yep, that’s pretty much my approach too.

To continue the pub analogy, what’s happened here is that the landlord, supported by his bar staff, has decided he doesn’t want quite so many shouty people in his pub because they can spoil the atmosphere for the vast majority of his punters. Being a fair minded chap, he’s decided to give the shouty ones a chance to reform, however unlikely it is that they will do so.

 

[Stat Brother]

Yep, that’s pretty much my approach too.

To continue the pub analogy, what’s happened here is that the landlord, supported by his bar staff, has decided he doesn’t want quite so many shouty people in his pub because they can spoil the atmosphere for the vast majority of his punters. Being a fair minded chap, he’s decided to give the shouty ones a chance to reform, however unlikely it is that they will do so.

It would seem the shouty ones would rather continue to shout, get banned, in order to be proven 'right'.


T'is a funny old world.

 

[bhafc99]

To continue the pub analogy, what’s happened here is that the landlord, supported by his bar staff, has decided he doesn’t want quite so many shouty people in his pub because they can spoil the atmosphere for the vast majority of his punters. Being a fair minded chap, he’s decided to give the shouty ones a chance to reform, however unlikely it is that they will do so.

Yeah, but are we allowed to keep the tops on our bottles, or not?

 

[The Clamp]

Yeah, button it you slag.

Ha! It’s not so much I say offensive things or troll. I just engage with some of the nastier/weirder characters on here a bit too much. No more.

On a last note though, interesting to see some posters needing quite so much explanation and reassurance about someone essentially saying “stop being childish pricks”

Bozza has the tolerance of an anvil.

 

[Eric the meek]

Look, it's quite simple. It's the landlord's pub, and what he says, goes.

You've got to have rules. Where would we be without rules?

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Look, it's quite simple. It's the landlord's pub, and what he says, goes.

You've got to have rules. Where would we be without rules?

No, you've got to have a dream, coz if you don't have a dream, how the heck you gonna have a dream come true!?

Sent from my SM-A326B using Tapatalk

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Any chance of resurrecting Paul Valley?

 

[The Clamp]

Look, it's quite simple. It's the landlord's pub, and what he says, goes.

You've got to have rules. Where would we be without rules?

France

 

[Eric the meek]

No, you've got to have a dream, coz if you don't have a dream, how the heck you gonna have a dream come true!?

Sent from my SM-A326B using Tapatalk

I've been there and done that. I once dreamed I was shagging Angelina Jolie. The landlord woke me up with a slap, and told me to put my trousers on and **** off out of his pub.

 

[Billy the Fish]

The " Banned Section " is gonna more exciting than some of the threads now.

If we get banned . Can we still go on the "Banned Section " Asking for a friend

This is a good idea, we could have an HMP NSC for banned posters.

Nobody else can read it or post in it except for 1 hour every month.

 

[sparkie]

This is great news. I genuinely think that banning 3-5 persistent, insidious posters will change NSC for the better.

 

[sparkie]

Any chance of resurrecting Paul Valley?

I thought he was only hiding in Timmy's loft hijacking the Internet connect, not actually dead !

 

[GT49er]

................. like the right wingers who complain the BBC is not neutral, because their definition of neutral is "always agrees with my own views".

...............and of course, that definition of 'neutral' applies just as equally to the left wingers as to those on the right. As always, one side (whichever is the side you agree with) is making a valid complaint, whie the snowflakes/gammon* on the other side are just making a fuss over nothing because they're wrong.

*delete as approriate.

 

[Baldseagull]

I'm on the list but not sure I'm proud to be in the company of some of the tw@ts on that list.

But then again I'll never meet HWT and his opinion of me merits about the same as any other faceless person on the internet, squat diddly. Don't know what I did to upset him but I don't care either.

Saying all that, agree with the Mods stance. I gave up posting on the Brexit thread and other 'political' threads as it was just a free for all against others with opposing views.

The main problem with the thread you mention, is that it was a very divisive and emotive subject, and people were/are emotionally invested in their position. The other problem was that one side of the argument ran out of argument.

 

[amexer]

I am on this forum because of my support for Albion and it is interesting to see other peoples views. However do think so many responses are down right aggressive which makes board so often very unpleasant. I suppose when people are hidden behind a username this will always happen. I would not want it any other way as certainly would not with aggression showed want to bump into some that have disagreed with a post. Its all very much over the top and assume moderators will continue to keep those that make board unpleasant off the site.
I personally in general find it more interesting to have a discussion with people that have opposite views to mine but certainly not on this forum

 

[The Clamp]

Bozza puts out a blanket message to EVERYONE, addressing EVERYONE ON NSC IN ITS ENTIRETY and still people come along and ask “why are you picking on me”?

Absolutely ****ing brilliant

 

[Bold Seagull]

yes I get that - was being facetious... but not entirely.

Anonymity on 'social media' seems to give some people a license to be far more aggressive / confrontational / downright rude than they ever would dream of if they were chatting with a stranger or casual acquaintance in a pub. I have chosen to apply that thought when posting on social media... which is why I don't bother engaging on many threads (although \I do read many of them). If someone was being that shouty in a pub, I would steer well clear.

At least you have a poster who will say someone is a ‘moron and has a predilection for teenage gymnasts and swimmers’ for having a different pov watching your back. That must be comforting.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

Look, it's quite simple. It's the landlord's pub, and what he says, goes.

You've got to have rules. Where would we be without rules?

 

[vegster]

This is great news. I genuinely think that banning 3-5 persistent, insidious posters will change NSC for the better.

And they know exactly who they are!

 

[Eric the meek]

I feel your frustration, but you know where you are with rules. Imagine being in a country where you can drive anywhere, because there is no rule telling you not to.

See this video of the chaos of the Arc de Triomphe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVNAtzOnDRU&ab_channel=StunningVideos

It's almost expected for drivers to make death-defying lane changes (you have to imagine the lane markings, as there aren't any).