Banning rules

[El Presidente]

El Pres.
A man of compromise.
Posts with two commas and two apostrophes (see above sentence}

Surely the comma would win a grammatical balloon race every time?

 

[cjd]

It's an opinion, and you're perfectly entitled to hold it, but it is not a fact.

For the rest of the board it will of course appear an opinion.

But you and I know...........it,s a fact.

 

[Buzzer]

Do you agree that 3 separate threads each within an hour from you and WW is a tad over the top? Especially as they were all essentially the same?

Nothing wrong with passion, CB and for what it's worth I think your reading of the game is pretty astute. I may not often agree but they're usually informed and pertinent.

It's all the other histrionics and the sheer flood of posts/threads. Your passion as you call it can be your biggest enemy. Would it be fair to say that you use NSC to offload all the disappointment and frustration of games like Barnet/Walsall/Port Vale? If so, it might be better if you don't post so soon after a game when you're still fuming. Give it a few hours and then see how you feel.

 

[dougdeep]

What a signature Badger, saddest thing I've seen for a long time.

 

[Brighton till i die]

Just to set this one straight, then no this is not "all I have to worry about in life." Nor do I "need" rules to adhere to. However, having been banned twice for contributing to FOOTBALL threads I feel it's reasonable to ask exactly what the ruling is. I'm not suggesting Bozza prints a new bible or anything, and the rules on non-football stuff is quite clear (no racism, no abuse, no defamation etc), but what is deemed as "over the top" when debating a bad albion defeat? Ok, I may have gone ballistic over both the Port Vale and Walsall games, but I pay my money, and a bit of passion is more than a lot of people on here offer. So, no, I'm not a goon who needs to get a life, but if nsc is there to discuss the good and the bad about the albion it's possibly worth just pointing out what's allowed.

erm... ok

 

[Common as Mook]

. So, no, I'm not a goon who needs to get a life, .

I think a lot of people on here will beg to differ.

 

[Brovion]

Just to set this one straight, then no this is not "all I have to worry about in life." Nor do I "need" rules to adhere to. However, having been banned twice for contributing to FOOTBALL threads I feel it's reasonable to ask exactly what the ruling is. I'm not suggesting Bozza prints a new bible or anything, and the rules on non-football stuff is quite clear (no racism, no abuse, no defamation etc), but what is deemed as "over the top" when debating a bad albion defeat? Ok, I may have gone ballistic over both the Port Vale and Walsall games, but I pay my money, and a bit of passion is more than a lot of people on here offer. So, no, I'm not a goon who needs to get a life, but if nsc is there to discuss the good and the bad about the albion it's possibly worth just pointing out what's allowed.

I think there is one simple rule as was pointed out earlier: don't be a bell-end. Like you I think the last thing we need is page after page of 'Rules' that some geeky twat can refer back to and say "Well according to Rule 7 paragraph 3 sub-section 4 calliing someone a twat without prior provocation merits a four day ban, so why did Poster X only get two days whereas Poster Y got seven days? FOR THE SAME OFFENCE! WHY BOZZA? WHY? GOD THIS PLACE IS SHIT!"

Come on, I've read your posts and no, you're not as vitriolic as some. Sometimes you might, in other people's opinion, go over the top and get banned as a consequence. Just live with it and accept it's not an exact science.

 

[Keeping The Dream Alive.]

If you come onto an internet forum to express your 'passion' then may I suggest; getting a life?

If you've got a bit of 'passion' and anger in you then I suggest using it a little more wisely or slowly dispensing. Go and play football, go to the pub with your mates and sink a few pints, go out on the pull, or go home and relax, watch TV or someting calming.

 

[Brighton till i die]

If you come onto an internet forum to express your 'passion' then may I suggest; getting a life?

If you've got a bit of 'passion' and anger in you then I suggest using it a little more wisely or slowly dispensing. Go and play football, go to the pub with your mates and sink a few pints, go out on the pull, or go home and relax, watch TV or someting calming.

cant argue with ANY of that!!

 

[Man of Harveys]

I think a lot of people on here will beg to differ.

I couldn't possibly comment...should we have a poll?

 

[NMH]

If you come onto an internet forum to express your 'passion' then may I suggest; getting a life?

If you've got a bit of 'passion' and anger in you then I suggest using it a little more wisely or slowly dispensing. Go and play football, go to the pub with your mates and sink a few pints, go out on the pull, or go home and relax, watch TV or someting calming.

Which all adds up to "think before you post" - but there's no telling some people.

Just like in the stands, there are some bloody idiots who cannot understand normal thinking, and have to let out their brain-farts for everyone else to smell their stench.

Wisdom is rarely found where there is vitriolic expression.

Adj. 1. vitriolic - harsh or corrosive in tone; "an acerbic tone piercing otherwise flowery prose"; "a barrage of acid comments"; "her acrid remarks make her many enemies"; "bitter words"; "blistering criticism"; "caustic jokes about political assassination, talk-show hosts and medical ethics"; "a sulfurous denunciation"; "a vitriolic critique"
acid, blistering, caustic, sulfurous, sulphurous, acrid, acerb, acerbic, bitter, virulent
unpleasant - disagreeable to the senses, to the mind, or feelings ; "an unpleasant personality"; "unpleasant repercussions"; "unpleasant odors"