My view is that it's okay to question but it isn't okay to attack at every opportunity. The issue is there are posters at both extremes.
The sensible view is let's wait and see? Stop either writing off or claiming a player is the next Messiah judging players until we see them play.
It's all people jumping to conclusions based off nothing but conjecture, 'oh we wasted all the money on the attack' but 2/3 more signings are yet to sign so that doesn't even make sense?
As I say, let's wait 3 more weeks if we don't sign anybody else I'm 99% certain almost everybody who has stood by the recruitment will agree that we have issues.
Granted I don't think it's valid to state that a player is a poor signing before seeing him in action however if you formulate a reasonable arguement as to why you question whether they'll be an improvement on what we've had previously I really don't see how there's anything wrong with that.
I'm afraid I don't agree. It's not really all that sensible to outright refuse to even comment on a player prior to seeing them in action - as to me it merely just suggests that you either lack the intellect or balls to form an actual view. For instance, I've seen posters, and they know full well who they are, deride others for reasonably questioning a signing and when counter-questioned as to why they're so sure said signing will come good they've simply said because if it's a Robins signing then of course they'll be an upgrade.
Which proves my point regarding a lack of intellect and/or balls as frankly that's an idiotic stance to take as no manager has the record to warrant such blind faith being afforded to them.