Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Non-Boro Football


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

Thanks for the response Brunners, I’m afraid I’m an advocate of free speech and so I do find banning people a draconian act.

You know as well as I do that CT won’t come back to the forum after this and so we’ve lost another valuable member. It’s Bugrit all over again , for those whose memories stretch back that far.

Just reinstate him for goodness sake and let’s all get on. 

Free Speech doesn't mean no consequences for your speech though mate, especially not on a privately owned forum.

CT is welcome back with open arms, we've made that plainly clear, but he's a grown up (I assume, I don't actually know how old he is!) and can make that decision for himself.

My memories do stretch back to Bugrit, Billy, and that ban was 100% justified, what Bugrit said was awful.

We will not be reinstating CT, he is welcome back once his ban expires.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 34.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    1582

  •  

    1478

  •  

    1365

  •  

    1232

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Their is a fascinating article about the Boro in today’s Athletic... Nine championship games in 29 days.  Following a team in their maddest run ever.    Neil Warnock was on the pit

Centuries ago Villages had ducking stools whereby if the person drowned they were innocent and if they lived they were guilty and sentenced to death. Nowadays not much has changed sadly. Idiots postin

Thanks for all your thoughts and prayers. I probably shouldn’t have made things public, but I was at as very low ebb. It’s been a difficult year, not made better by COVID. Lockdown bucket lists aren’t

Posted Images

11 minutes ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

Thanks for the response Brunners, I’m afraid I’m an advocate of free speech and so I do find banning people a draconian act.

You know as well as I do that CT won’t come back to the forum after this and so we’ve lost another valuable member. It’s Bugrit all over again , for those whose memories stretch back that far.

Just reinstate him for goodness sake and let’s all get on. 

It's all fair and well to say people are able to have their freedoms but is it fair when a minority of people take their freedoms for granted at the expense of others?

Enabling that doesn't mean nobody is affected, refusing to ban someone doesn't come without a consequence, the consequence is held by those who have done literally nothing wrong. That isn't fair.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Will said:

Got to disagree here Billy. What Bugrit said was objectively grossly offensive and fully deserved a ban.

I know what you mean, but I don’t believe in banning anyone.

Usually when someone has an outlandish opinion on here they provoke outrage from other forum members and that’s as effective as a ban.
 

Bugrit got it in the neck from me, you and Brunners at the time, that should have been enough. I was very sad to see him banned and I feel slightly guilty about that. 


 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CT takes great pleasure in staying just inside the lines of what's acceptable... most of the time it's pretty funny.

I wouldn't have banned him personally so get what other posters are saying.... But also feel for the mods if they've received genuine complaints from others as they're caught between a rock and a hard place at that point. 

He was asked to reign it in several times on this thread over the last day or two and carried on pressing buttons... so it was hardly out the blue.

I'm sure he'll be back.

Edited by SouthernSmoggie
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this thread I’m starting to get a bit confused as to why CT was banned.

A judgement call was made by the mods to suspend CT was this based just-on a few complaints made privately? As inferred by earlier comments by Mods.

If so then the fact that a few folk are publicly protesting the banning means that the mods are taking the rights of some members complaints to be more worthy than others.

Now I’m sure I’m reading this wrong and misunderstanding previous posts but would it be possible to clarify this for me please.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Naisby said:

Reading this thread I’m starting to get a bit confused as to why CT was banned.

A judgement call was made by the mods to suspend CT was this based just-on a few complaints made privately? As inferred by earlier comments by Mods.

If so then the fact that a few folk are publicly protesting the banning means that the mods are taking the rights of some members complaints to be more worthy than others.

Now I’m sure I’m reading this wrong and misunderstanding previous posts but would it be possible to clarify this for me please.

It wasn't a judgement call; it was a prolonged discussion over much of today. It was based on a couple of complaints, yes.

Complaining that someone is making it uncomfortable for you to post on the forum, and complaining because you don't like the fact there are mods on here are different things and not really comparable.

1 minute ago, Humpty said:

CT will be a big loss if he doesn’t come back. All very avoidable unfortunately.

I agree, he could have just not made any xenophobic comments - or apologised afterwards - and we wouldn't be in this situation, 100% agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Naisby said:

Reading this thread I’m starting to get a bit confused as to why CT was banned.

A judgement call was made by the mods to suspend CT was this based just-on a few complaints made privately? As inferred by earlier comments by Mods.

If so then the fact that a few folk are publicly protesting the banning means that the mods are taking the rights of some members complaints to be more worthy than others.

Now I’m sure I’m reading this wrong and misunderstanding previous posts but would it be possible to clarify this for me please.

That’s a good take on the situation, I don’t think it matters how many of us disagree with the ban, we won’t be listened to, there is no VAR as far as the mods are concerned.

As it goes, I’ve been subject to many ageist comments from CT in the past, but I just laughed if off and played on it. 

Maybe I have a thicker skin than some, but I really don’t think that’s the case. You just have to take anything that CT directs at you with a pinch of salt and move on.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Naisby said:

If so then the fact that a few folk are publicly protesting the banning means that the mods are taking the rights of some members complaints to be more worthy than others.

That's not really how handling these situations should work, in my opinion. It is not the side that shouts loudest that 'wins'. The arguments put forward against his ban, for me, do not take away from the fact he made derogatory comments. They don't take away from the fact people were insulted by them.

We've all said it plenty of times whilst discussing this publicly and privately. CT brings good debate into the forum. But that's about as meaningful in determining a ban as whether or not a racist is 'otherwise a good laugh'. That seems to make up the majority of the response so far. None of what I've seen mentioned in here outweighs the comments he made and the way he has made some members feel as a result of them.

The last thing we want is for said members to have to come to the fore themselves too so let's not turn this into members vs. members. If people want to be mad at us, by all means continue. But I absolutely do not want those who spoke to us in confidence to have to come forward to fight their case. We collectively stand with them, that's all you need to know about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

That’s a good take on the situation, I don’t think it matters how many of us disagree with the ban, we won’t be listened to, there is no VAR as far as the mods are concerned.

As it goes, I’ve been subject to many ageist comments from CT in the past, but I just laughed if off and played on it. 

Maybe I have a thicker skin than some, but I really don’t think that’s the case. You just have to take anything that CT directs at you with a pinch of salt and move on.  

Fair play to you for dealing with that in your way Billy but, just for example from my POV, I remember a few months ago Old Codger raising the point publicly about ageism around the Warnock debate and I have tried, perhaps not always successfully but tried, to adjust my own manner of speaking to avoid that from happening. We all want to be here to discuss football. We sometimes say things we shouldn't but most of us will own up and apologise if it hurts someone. That's not the case for everyone though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BearSmog said:

Interesting to see if there is any retrospective action regarding any anglophobic (is that even a word?) comments that have been made historically ...

1. No, because we don't take retrospective action like that.
2. No, because I know people who have made those comments have apologised previously, which is often enough.

We are treading the line of what is acceptable "banter" and what is genuine xenophobia - we sometimes might not always get that right, which is why the report button exists. I urge people, if they are genuinely ever put off or offended by anything said, please, please report the comments and the mods will discuss it as a group and action as appropriately.

We might miss comments, or not realise the gravity that they have towards certain people and that's why the report function is so vital. 

Also as a further reminder, bans are very, very rare and we don't like issuing them unless in extremely necessary circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

That’s a good take on the situation, I don’t think it matters how many of us disagree with the ban, we won’t be listened to, there is no VAR as far as the mods are concerned.

As it goes, I’ve been subject to many ageist comments from CT in the past, but I just laughed if off and played on it. 

Maybe I have a thicker skin than some, but I really don’t think that’s the case. You just have to take anything that CT directs at you with a pinch of salt and move on.  

I appreciate your take on it Billy and fair play for the way you handle it - but for what it's worth, if you came to us and said someone had made some comments about you that you weren't comfortable with, we'd take those just as seriously. 

Again I have to stress that bans are rarely issued and was only issued in this case because he's already been told plenty of times before and eventually you have to put your foot down on the behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...