Our chat with Westaway and Burke.

Life Long Saint · Tue 02 Oct 2007 1:56pm

GrumpyOne wrote:We as a forum don't want to be represented by some individual with the collective intelligence of a bucketfull of pond algae.

Gee, Grumps, I didn't realise you had such a low opinion of pond algae!

GrumpyOne · Post: # 467902Post **GrumpyOne** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 1:57pm

Dan Warna wrote:its a free forum

I disagree with 95% of what B4E has to say but he has the right to say it as long as he doesn't break forum rules.

Have you read some of his recent posts Dan.

Broken more rules that I've had hot breakfasts.

Does this every year, and its always glossed over.

Somebody needs to get the balls to delete this intellectually disabled simian.

Dan Warna · Post: # 467905Post **Dan Warna** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 1:58pm

><

><

the cycle of abuse is repeating itself from 12 months ago

Dan Warna · Post: # 467906Post **Dan Warna** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:00pm

GrumpyOne wrote:
Dan Warna wrote:its a free forum

I disagree with 95% of what B4E has to say but he has the right to say it as long as he doesn't break forum rules.
Have you read some of his recent posts Dan.

Broken more rules that I've had hot breakfasts.

Does this every year, and its always glossed over.

Somebody needs to get the balls to delete this intellectually disabled simian.

maybe.

I remember b4e from the social games, and from seeing him at the footy.

i disgree with the stuff he's typing but he is a saints person, just with a different view.

9 months ago it was me being lambasted for having a view different from the norm.

7 years ago it was the pro timmy/anti timmy fights.

IMO every time we lose a poster or move towards homogeniety its a poorer place.

B4E IMO has issues, so be it. accept him for what he is and move on.

we all want st kilda to succeed, just see the mechanism differently.

Life Long Saint · Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:02pm

I think that it is the tirade of thinly veiled personal insults that go along with every reply to a post that disagrees with his point of view.

Lose the attitude and regain the respect.

barks4eva · Post: # 467909Post **barks4eva** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:05pm

n1ck wrote:stuck on repeat stuck on repeat stuck on repeat stuck on repeat.

Questions for you nick

Which player always took 100 cents in the dollar while many others took 22.5 cents in the dollar to keep this club in existence?

Need some clues?

Same player left for another club at exactly this same time, when there was more money to be made elsewhere

getting warmer

Have any players who took 22.5 cents in the dollar for actually PLAYING ON THE FOOTBALL GROUND IN OUR JUMPER ever sued the club for not recieving money that is actually owed to them.

still need more clues

The guy who took 100 cents in the dollar, you know the guy who was never owed one cent, is the same guy who is currently suing the club which includes $167,000 for holiday pay that he is not even owed.

Apparently this guy loves the club, bleeds red, white and black and would never do anything to hurt it

Post: # 467913Post **n1ck** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:09pm

so you just repeat it again?

why not say it once more?

go on.

we all know you have nothing new or interesting to say, so prove us right, again.

barks4eva · Post: # 467916Post **barks4eva** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:13pm

n1ck wrote:so you just repeat it again?

why not say it once more?

go on.

we all know you have nothing new or interesting to say, so prove us right, again.

It's indefensible isn't it?

These FACTS don't sit to well with the brainwashed and conned, disenfranchised malcontents and cult worshippers do they?

Do the maths and you'll find that the squares are rooted

SENsei · Post: # 467917Post **SENsei** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:14pm

Grant Thomas is gone FFS. Get over it.

1. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he did in the 1980s?
2. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he did in the 1990s?
3. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he's doing right now?

HE IS IRRELEVANT. Like most of this thread now thanks to hijacking.

Look forward to the transcript. Can I suggest you post it in a closed topic that people can read unpolluted, and then a second comments thread for the replies?

barks4eva · Post: # 467920Post **barks4eva** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:17pm

SENsaintsational wrote:Grant Thomas is gone FFS. Get over it.

1. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he did in the 1980s?
2. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he did in the 1990s?
3. Who gives a flying rats tossbag what he's doing right now?

HE IS IRRELEVANT. Like most of this thread now thanks to hijacking.

Look forward to the transcript. Can I suggest you post it in a closed topic that people can read unpolluted, and then a second comments thread for the replies?

Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

How relevant is that?

SENsei · Post: # 467924Post **SENsei** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:22pm

Well then they need to look further. Grant Thomas was a symptom of RB and his board's poor management. The fact that they couldn't reign him in until it was inevitable.

I think sacking GT was one of the only good things RB has done in the last 2-3 years.

As for GT's replacement, my jury is still well and truly out. Again, this is another RB decision.

I'll be helping to vote RB's arse out, based on all the facts that I know. GT is just one.

I repeat GT is irrelevant.

bob__71 · Post: # 467929Post **bob__71** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:30pm

SEN I think u miss the point. This isnt all about GT this is all about B4E.

Look at me Look at me....I have an opinion....quick everyone look at me.

The biggest problem with Narcicism is that the person who is suffering has no idea. Its everyone else who has a problem.....and they just wont "Look at me"

Its about time you found a new mirror barks.

satchmo · Post: # 467931Post **satchmo** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:32pm

Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

By my estimate, three.

joffaboy · Post: # 467932Post **joffaboy** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:33pm

barks4eva wrote:
Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

How relevant is that?

What concern is that of yours? The individual member can vote on the board makeup for whatever reason they like?

Relevancy or otherwise has nothing to do with it.

You might not like it but if every single person voted on the GT sacking and no other issue, then you would have to suck it up.

spert · Post: # 467939Post **spert** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:40pm

As for people dragging GT up over and over, I agree, he is gone and so is Alves, Jeans and various other coaches..can we move on please. From what I can work out, currently there is the board with Butters as President, RL is coach and so on and so forth..lets have a holiday and look forward to our successful 2008 season with a minimum of fuss as any successful club would expect to do.

SENsei · Post: # 467941Post **SENsei** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:42pm

bob__71 wrote:SEN I think u miss the point. This isnt all about GT this is all about B4E.

Look at me Look at me....I have an opinion....quick everyone look at me.

The biggest problem with Narcicism is that the person who is suffering has no idea. Its everyone else who has a problem.....and they just wont "Look at me"

Its about time you found a new mirror barks.

Yes quite so.

bigcarl · Post: # 467943Post **bigcarl** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:44pm

Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

it's not to be underestimated as a factor in rb's demise. split the club. now the people will have their say. don't underestimate good people

barks4eva · Post: # 467944Post **barks4eva** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:45pm

joffaboy wrote:
barks4eva wrote:
Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

How relevant is that?
What concern is that of yours? The individual member can vote on the board makeup for whatever reason they like?

Relevancy or otherwise has nothing to do with it.

You might not like it but if every single person voted on the GT sacking and no other issue, then you would have to suck it up.

You misunderstood the context

SENsaintsonal stated that GT is irrelevant

What you quoted was in reference to that, just making the point that Thomas would still be relevant to some people who would be basing their choice on this

nothing more, nothing less

As for the board challenge, I'm still sitting on the fence, not decided either way

bob__71 · Post: # 467945Post **bob__71** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:48pm

barks4eva wrote:
joffaboy wrote:
barks4eva wrote:
Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

How relevant is that?
What concern is that of yours? The individual member can vote on the board makeup for whatever reason they like?

Relevancy or otherwise has nothing to do with it.

You might not like it but if every single person voted on the GT sacking and no other issue, then you would have to suck it up.
You misunderstood the context

SENsaintsonal stated that GT is irrelevant

What you quoted was in reference to that, just making the point that Thomas would still be relevant to some people who would be basing their choice on this

nothing more, nothing less

As for the board challenge, I'm still sitting on the fence, not decided either way

nothing more except for previously calling such people

"brainwashed and conned, disenfranchised malcontents and cult worshippers"

barks4eva · Post: # 467946Post **barks4eva** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:49pm

SENsaintsational wrote:
bob__71 wrote:SEN I think u miss the point. This isnt all about GT this is all about B4E.

Look at me Look at me....I have an opinion....quick everyone look at me.

The biggest problem with Narcicism is that the person who is suffering has no idea. Its everyone else who has a problem.....and they just wont "Look at me"

Its about time you found a new mirror barks.
Yes quite so.

Considering you voted for Howard at the last election SENsaintonal I'll just accept that once again you have no idea

GrumpyOne · Post: # 467949Post **GrumpyOne** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:53pm

barks4eva wrote:
SENsaintsational wrote:
bob__71 wrote:SEN I think u miss the point. This isnt all about GT this is all about B4E.

Look at me Look at me....I have an opinion....quick everyone look at me.

The biggest problem with Narcicism is that the person who is suffering has no idea. Its everyone else who has a problem.....and they just wont "Look at me"

Its about time you found a new mirror barks.
Yes quite so.

Considering you voted for Howard at the last election SENsaintonal I'll just accept that once again you have no idea

Relevance?

Anyone?

rodgerfox · Post: # 467951Post **rodgerfox** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:54pm

barks4eva wrote:
joffaboy wrote:
barks4eva wrote:
Yeah and how many people will be voting for a new board based solely on the exiting out of Thomas?

How relevant is that?
What concern is that of yours? The individual member can vote on the board makeup for whatever reason they like?

Relevancy or otherwise has nothing to do with it.

You might not like it but if every single person voted on the GT sacking and no other issue, then you would have to suck it up.
You misunderstood the context

SENsaintsonal stated that GT is irrelevant

What you quoted was in reference to that, just making the point that Thomas would still be relevant to some people who would be basing their choice on this

nothing more, nothing less

As for the board challenge, I'm still sitting on the fence, not decided either way

Thomas is quite clearly relevant to you in almost every way.

He's winning. You're not.

It bothers you. Clearly.

The more you talk about him, the more he wins.

Let go, he's gone.

Move on.

saint66au · Post: # 467954Post **saint66au** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 2:56pm

barks4eva wrote:
SENsaintsational wrote:
bob__71 wrote:SEN I think u miss the point. This isnt all about GT this is all about B4E.

Look at me Look at me....I have an opinion....quick everyone look at me.

The biggest problem with Narcicism is that the person who is suffering has no idea. Its everyone else who has a problem.....and they just wont "Look at me"

Its about time you found a new mirror barks.
Yes quite so.

Considering you voted for Howard at the last election SENsaintonal I'll just accept that once again you have no idea

What the HELL has that got to do with it????????????????? except perhaps your appallingly condescending and patronisng attitude to anyone who dares hold a differing view to your good self

bob__71 · Post: # 467959Post **bob__71** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 3:01pm

Dan Warna wrote:
GrumpyOne wrote:
Dan Warna wrote:its a free forum

I disagree with 95% of what B4E has to say but he has the right to say it as long as he doesn't break forum rules.
Have you read some of his recent posts Dan.

Broken more rules that I've had hot breakfasts.

Does this every year, and its always glossed over.

Somebody needs to get the balls to delete this intellectually disabled simian.

maybe.

I remember b4e from the social games, and from seeing him at the footy.

i disgree with the stuff he's typing but he is a saints person, just with a different view.

9 months ago it was me being lambasted for having a view different from the norm.

7 years ago it was the pro timmy/anti timmy fights.

IMO every time we lose a poster or move towards homogeniety its a poorer place.

B4E IMO has issues, so be it. accept him for what he is and move on.

we all want st kilda to succeed, just see the mechanism differently.

Dan I have one question about this

How many people do you think dot speak up and contribute to this forum because of abusive bullies?

I appreciate the freedom of spech thing, but quite frankly we have read it all before

maybe thats what the b4 in b4e stands for

skeptic · Post: # 467964Post **skeptic** » Tue 02 Oct 2007 3:06pm

can't we just habe a poll as to whether or not ban barks...

I think most forumites like me are sick of

- the same reptitive dribble
- hijacking countless good threads
- the unnecessary swearing and abuse
- the facts that aren't facts, mysterious sources and the posts that are ignored because they blow his argument apart
- the fact that he contributes nothing to this forum and that (IMO) most forumites enjoy it when he's not here