Dougal Howard

[B.M]

Riley Thilthorpe

NAB Rising star for R13

[BackFromUSA]

Teflon - I have reviewed this thread and you are on official notice for an ongoing dispute with B.M. If you do not like B.M. or his posting style or his opinions, then you would have been welcomed to debate his assertions, however you have taken the route of personal attacks on hsi character. As such I suggest that you refarin from responding to any of his posts. The best way to achieve that wold be to Foe him and not read his posts. Otherwsie, please note that continuing ongoing disputes carry a harsh penalty.

[CURLY]

Riley Thilthorpe

NAB Rising star for R13

Took 2 marks.

[B.M]

And kicked 3 directly opposed to Dougal

And he’s 18yo and 7 games in

We give Max ‘the young’ excuse at 21 and 30 games in

[CURLY]

And kicked 3 directly opposed to Dougal

And he’s 18yo and 7 games in

We give Max ‘the young’ excuse at 21 and 30 games in

Max King took 3 times as many marks kicked 2. He didn’t get gifted one.

[B.M]

Max played OK

But the coach agreed Riley was the best forward on the ground.

[CURLY]

Max played OK

But the coach agreed Riley was the best forward on the ground.

Also went into the ruck against Hunter.

[Viscount Jeremiah]

What a s*** thread. Howard tried his guts out as he does every week.

This is the reason I normally stay away from this place after we lose.

[ace]

I watched the game on TV.
Howard clearly beat Thrillthorpe so many times.
The umpires clearly had instructions to help Thrillthorpe get a rising nomination.

[B.M]

Clearly, it’s a conspiracy!

I find it interesting that Howard was given votes on here and his direct opponent (a kid) was given coaches votes

I would just like Dougal to play a smidge closer to his opponent when there is a F50 stoppage or when the opposition have a kick outside their F50 and at centre bounce

Is that to much to ask for?! For a full back to do that?!

And most, if not all players try… which ones DON’T try?

[Teflon]

Teflon - I have reviewed this thread and you are on official notice for an ongoing dispute with B.M. If you do not like B.M. or his posting style or his opinions, then you would have been welcomed to debate his assertions, however you have taken the route of personal attacks on hsi character. As such I suggest that you refarin from responding to any of his posts. The best way to achieve that wold be to Foe him and not read his posts. Otherwsie, please note that continuing ongoing disputes carry a harsh penalty.

Great to see balanced moderating exists on the site. Name calling goes 2 ways but let’s ignore that shall we??
Anyway, I’ve never been one to run to mods and whinge when I cop a bit and I cop plenty.
I wondered why I saw so many ex SS over on Bigfooty!

[B.M]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

[skeptic]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

[Teflon]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

It’s a good call Skeptic and I will say by the PMs I’ve gotten you’re not alone in that view...
Anyhoo let’s leave it there - I’m not one for running to mods, never have been, but geez it’d be nice to have some consistency in approach on that front.

[B.M]

Baiting again??

I really don’t care how many PMs you got, at all, if you feel that it vindicates you, fine.

I suggest you take the advice of putting me on your foe list? You clearly have a vendetta. That’s ok with me, as long as you play the ball. If you can’t, ignore!

And skeptic, please do enlighten me to posts where I get personal and name call. Maybe I have?
And provocative- that’s only from certain POV

[BackFromUSA]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

It’s a good call Skeptic and I will say by the PMs I’ve gotten you’re not alone in that view...
Anyhoo let’s leave it there - I’m not one for running to mods, never have been, but geez it’d be nice to have some consistency in approach on that front.

Teflon - don't re-write history. I look at who starts a dispute and who escalates it. Any reaction thereafter IS taken into account. Yes B.M. called you names but AFTER you started a dispute AND escalated it. Moderation is without any prejudice. I read the threads and moerate according to what is written. And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned. Gone are the days you could just start a new nic and use a floating I.P.

[asiu]

And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned.

joffa burns ?

[Teflon]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

It’s a good call Skeptic and I will say by the PMs I’ve gotten you’re not alone in that view...
Anyhoo let’s leave it there - I’m not one for running to mods, never have been, but geez it’d be nice to have some consistency in approach on that front.

Teflon - don't re-write history. I look at who starts a dispute and who escalates it. Any reaction thereafter IS taken into account. Yes B.M. called you names but AFTER you started a dispute AND escalated it. Moderation is without any prejudice. I read the threads and moerate according to what is written. And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned. Gone are the days you could just start a new nic and use a floating I.P.

Ofcourse you do BF buy great to see you recognise both posters had a role to play here and you dish out unilateral bans to one.
I think it’s actually a shame so many are over at BF - I’ve been here since day dot and actually enjoyed the variety of opinion. “Closed shops” aren’t always the best approach if you value diversity in opinions I’ve found
Anyway, in the great words of Neale Daniher..”play on”.

[Teflon]

And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned.

joffa burns ?

Great poster Joffa totally enjoyed his stuff it would be disappointing if we’ve lost that contribution

[Scollop]

“Closed shops” aren’t always the best approach if you value diversity in opinions I’ve found

Do you value diversity in opinions or do you lose patience when people aren’t agreeing with you?

I’ve often found that people who resort to name calling are more interested in trying to ‘close’ down a discussion.

You started with the name calling and you have form when someone has an alternate point of view.

How ‘bout respecting B.M’s right to have a different opinion to yours without getting personal?

[Scollop]

What a s*** thread. Howard tried his guts out as he does every week.

This is the reason I normally stay away from this place after we lose.

What’s wrong with a thread that challenges? What’s wrong with a thread that looks at each moment in a game. Howard was one of our best players, but he would probably be the first to put his hand up and admit he could have done things differently

I heard Joey Montagna on AFL 360 tonight and he spoke about player leadership

He said there are too many guys who are prone to being introverts and that doesn’t bode well when it’s time to review losses

He said one of the main things that needs to reviewed and improved at the club is the ability of players to give and accept strong feedback. I think Rooy also spoke about this 2 years ago. We will only improve as a team if the leaders and all players on the list challenge each other to get better

[The_Dud]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

It’s a good call Skeptic and I will say by the PMs I’ve gotten you’re not alone in that view...
Anyhoo let’s leave it there - I’m not one for running to mods, never have been, but geez it’d be nice to have some consistency in approach on that front.

Teflon - don't re-write history. I look at who starts a dispute and who escalates it. Any reaction thereafter IS taken into account. Yes B.M. called you names but AFTER you started a dispute AND escalated it. Moderation is without any prejudice. I read the threads and moerate according to what is written. And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned. Gone are the days you could just start a new nic and use a floating I.P.

Ofcourse you do BF buy great to see you recognise both posters had a role to play here and you dish out unilateral bans to one.
I think it’s actually a shame so many are over at BF - I’ve been here since day dot and actually enjoyed the variety of opinion. “Closed shops” aren’t always the best approach if you value diversity in opinions I’ve found
Anyway, in the great words of Neale Daniher..”play on”.

You're allowed to have your opinions on here, as long as they stick inside a very small window.

It's not just about being a Saints supporter, it's about being a Saints supporter that supports them in a very specific way that is approved by a handful of people, otherwise you're out.

Yes I agree 'consistency' would be nice, it is clear there are 'protected species' around here, and it ends with losing quality contributors like Joffa.

[skeptic]

Hmm…

I just called out your behaviour (name calling) and suggested it was as weak as piss. Childish and pathetic.

Maybe that’s a little too forward, and I should have phrased it better, but I was sick of the little jibes and personal comments

Not necessary IMO

Just debate the topic… no need for Harves (what ever that means?) God (?) Teach (??)

It is better to respond to people with respect.

Apologies if you took my comments as calling you weak as piss
I was referring to keyboard warrior type behaviour

With all due respect BM, don’t play the self righteous victim now.
You do more than your share of having unprovoked cracks at people or just being plain provocative

Heck an improvement thread doesn’t go by without you having a generalised crack at everyone who criticised Richo’s coaching even though it’s completely off topic.

Teffer’s has gotten a whack here but you give just as much as you get if not more so.

If you want to just talk footy then just talk footy... you don’t get to repeatedly and when unprovoked have cracks at ppl and call foul when you get it back

It’s a good call Skeptic and I will say by the PMs I’ve gotten you’re not alone in that view...
Anyhoo let’s leave it there - I’m not one for running to mods, never have been, but geez it’d be nice to have some consistency in approach on that front.

Teflon - don't re-write history. I look at who starts a dispute and who escalates it. Any reaction thereafter IS taken into account. Yes B.M. called you names but AFTER you started a dispute AND escalated it. Moderation is without any prejudice. I read the threads and moerate according to what is written. And more and more people may be over at BigFooty because they are NOT allowed back on here. It is a closed shop. No re-entry for those that have been banned. Gone are the days you could just start a new nic and use a floating I.P.

Ofcourse you do BF buy great to see you recognise both posters had a role to play here and you dish out unilateral bans to one.
I think it’s actually a shame so many are over at BF - I’ve been here since day dot and actually enjoyed the variety of opinion. “Closed shops” aren’t always the best approach if you value diversity in opinions I’ve found
Anyway, in the great words of Neale Daniher..”play on”.

You're allowed to have your opinions on here, as long as they stick inside a very small window.

It's not just about being a Saints supporter, it's about being a Saints supporter that supports them in a very specific way that is approved by a handful of people, otherwise you're out.

Yes I agree 'consistency' would be nice, it is clear there are 'protected species' around here, and it ends with losing quality contributors like Joffa.

Protected species is about right. I dare say based on the number of and different instances of bird flipping every time there’s a disagreement... one species may in fact be the 10 most hated ppl here and the reason why so many migrate over to BF.

[BackFromUSA]

It’s not hard.

There are rules.

Minor infractions are ignored.

There is a light punishment for breaking rules - a one day ban.

For major infractions there is a one week ban - usually with a PM or posted warning before it gets to a ban but in severe cases it is traght to the one week ban.

3 x one week bans =
Goodbye.
Now forever.
I gave people 2nd or 3rd chances.
Mostly they reoffend and get banned again.

Reasons for one week bans are listed in the Admin Forum.

As for Joffa - who was personally a favourite of mine.

Joffa Burns (3/3) - permanent ban
- commentary on a poster (severe category) - removed on appeal
- commenting negatively on a poster and perpetuating an ongoing dispute
- abusing and negatively commenting on another poster
- abusing and negatively commenting on another poster

As for being “protected” 1 nobody (except me) is protected.

If you break the rules then the penalties above apply.

However I always look at who is the first to break the rules in a dispute. That’s fair.

[The_Dud]

In Joffa's case, 3 strikes over a 17 year period (though I'm not sure when his first one was) is different to 3 in a short amount of time as some posters have had.

Maybe strikes could be disregarded after a couple of years of good behaviour (retrospectively in this case)?