Les Reid prefers GMK (12 Viewers)

[DaleM]

Well he's certainly living up to the "Less Read" moniker working for the observer and going on GMK

 

---

[olderskyblue]

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/37149-CCFC-Chat/page3?highlight=stuart+linnell

Blimey, was it that long ago he was on? It must have been bad, he hasn't been back since has he??

 

[mrtrench]

At least gmk have real supporters - interested in the club and only the club.

Ah, the old 'real supporter' chestnut.

 

[Grendel]

Ah, the old 'real supporter' chestnut.

I maintain this forum is unique in attracting so called supporters who seem far happier promoting other causes than the club.

 

[bigfatronssba]

I maintain this forum is unique in attracting so called supporters who seem far happier promoting other causes than the club.

Who exactly are you to decide what defines a "real" fan.

 

[italiahorse]

Reid is correct.

Football fans are supposed to put their club first above all else. This site is unique in that it has council sycophants and many who do not seem to have any interest at all in the future of the club but just want more and more manure dumped on it so they can stick two fingers up at the owners.

You wouldn't get idiots bragging about wasps on normal forums.

If other club supporters visited this site and saw some of the pro council tripe we really would be the ultimate laughing stock.

At least gmk have real supporters - interested in the club and only the club.

Ostriches ?
Can you really ignore everything else and concentrate on the football?
You rate GMK as better yet are on here.

 

[tisza]

grendel - if you transfer your argument across does it stand to reason that ACL should put their shareholders and the council put the taxpayers above all else?
every football fan has the right to question the owners & management of their club just as every taxpayer has the right to question their council. only difference being the taxpayer can change their council if they aren't happy.
also both sides of the argument are put on GMK as well - it's hardly unquestioned support of the owners or universal criticism of the other side of the argument.

 

[skybluetony176]

Journalist of the year and now battling for the crown of 'most SBT vitriol 2015' with Pressley

Don't worry. With the distraction artist we have on here that award will always be Ann Lucas's

 

[lordsummerisle]

also both sides of the argument are put on GMK as well - it's hardly unquestioned support of the owners or universal criticism of the other side of the argument.

Fishy is the pro-CCC equivalent of RFC on here.

Neither of whom real as such, Fishy even occasionally had a log-in fail and posted something lucid.

I miss _brian_ anyway.

 

[tisza]

Fishy is the pro-CCC equivalent of RFC on here.

Neither of whom real as such, Fishy even occasionally had a log-in fail and posted something lucid.

I miss _brian_ anyway.

listen Bob Bones & curtis would put to shame some of the posters on here in terms of multiple usernames &; crazy postings

 

[Grendel]

grendel - if you transfer your argument across does it stand to reason that ACL should put their shareholders and the council put the taxpayers above all else?
every football fan has the right to question the owners & management of their club just as every taxpayer has the right to question their council. only difference being the taxpayer can change their council if they aren't happy.
also both sides of the argument are put on GMK as well - it's hardly unquestioned support of the owners or universal criticism of the other side of the argument.

The taxpayer doesn't give a fuck who owns the Ricoh. They are only interested in services and any impact on their overall lives. They do not care about a building in holbrooks which 90% of them will never visit or let it occupy one second of their lives.

Both sides are put on gmk - that's my point

 

[skybluetony176]

Reid is correct.

Football fans are supposed to put their club first above all else. This site is unique in that it has council sycophants and many who do not seem to have any interest at all in the future of the club but just want more and more manure dumped on it so they can stick two fingers up at the owners.

You wouldn't get idiots bragging about wasps on normal forums.

If other club supporters visited this site and saw some of the pro council tripe we really would be the ultimate laughing stock.

At least gmk have real supporters - interested in the club and only the club.

Is that why we hardly hear from you? You spend all your time on GMK?

 

[lordsummerisle]

listen Bob Bones & curtis would put to shame some of the posters on here in terms of multiple usernames &; crazy postings

I still think my favourite was Hackneys Mainstandnoe1, "30 years on business", "looked Michael Doyle right in the eyes at Birmingham Airport" etc.

 

[Grendel]

Is that why we hardly hear from you? You spend all your time on GMK?

No Tony there are some of us who have a balanced view. We have to try and ensure there is some equilibrium and some credibility so the site isn't a complete laughing stock to any member of the wider community who cares to visit the site.

 

[tisza]

I still think my favourite was Hackneys Mainstandnoe1, "30 years on business", "looked Michael Doyle right in the eyes at Birmingham Airport" etc.

a trip down memory lane. noel used to get more grief than anyone on here does.

 

[bigfatronssba]

No Tony there are some of us who have a balanced view. We have to try and ensure there is some equilibrium and some credibility so the site isn't a complete laughing stock to any member of the wider community who cares to visit the site.

I never considered SBT a laughing stock before. However you claiming to be balanced is without doubt the funniest thing I have read in ages!

 

[skybluetony176]

No Tony there are some of us who have a balanced view. We have to try and ensure there is some equilibrium and some credibility so the site isn't a complete laughing stock to any member of the wider community who cares to visit the site.

Lol

 

[tisza]

The taxpayer doesn't give a fuck who owns the Ricoh. They are only interested in services and any impact on their overall lives. They do not care about a building in holbrooks which 90% of them will never visit or let it occupy one second of their lives.

Both sides are put on gmk - that's my point

the taxpayer does give a fuck if the council has dropped a bollock over their use of taxpayer's money in the ricoh. that's why it needs a full disclosure of everything involved in the decision making process over the sale of ACL and the loan provisions.

 

[Sick Boy]

This is a Les Reid tweet from Twitter,

Les Reid ‏@Lesreidpolitics 52 minutes ago
More goood reaction to our story today on #ccfc fans fourm @gmkonline,the 1 not plagued by anonymous vested interests http://www.gmkonline.com/?page=forum&forum_id=6&thread_id=39495 …

It is actually true though, as confirmed by Nick before.

 

[tisza]

It is actually true though, as confirmed by Nick before.

really when?

 

[Nick]

There are people who come on here with Vested Interests in the whole saga, some anonymous too.

 

[tisza]

There are people who come on here with Vested Interests in the whole saga, some anonymous too.

then shouldn't they be named and shamed? or at least made to declare their interest. this is primarily a forum for supporters?

 

[martcov]

then shouldn't they be named and shamed? or at least made to declare their interest. this is primarily a forum for supporters?

Yes, name and shame the anonymous posters.

 

[Astute]

I maintain this forum is unique in attracting so called supporters who seem far happier promoting other causes than the club.

And we all know that you see SISU as our club. So is your idea of promoting our club having a go at everyone else? You even go as low as having a go at anyone who works for CCC.

 

[Nick]

then shouldn't they be named and shamed? or at least made to declare their interest. this is primarily a forum for supporters?

Isn't really my place to do so is it. There will be others I don't know about no doubt.

 

[John_Silletts_Nose]

There are people who come on here with Vested Interests in the whole saga, some anonymous too.

Is this forum "plagued" by them?

 

[skybluetony176]

There are people who come on here with Vested Interests in the whole saga, some anonymous too.

You obviously mean the posters who endlessly talk about parties who are not responsible for the club like Wasps, AL, CCC, PWKH, AT, BR, Higgs etc.etc.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

Aren't most people on here anonymous? I'm one of the few that uses his real name

 

[bigfatronssba]

If their anonymous how do you know they have a vested interest?

 

[martcov]

If their anonymous how do you know they have a vested interest?

Exactly. But it sounds good.

 

[steveo1987]

How incredibly unprofessional for a journalist to even infer such ridiculous rubbish about the different sites. Does the prat not think that the same posters just have different names for different sites. Some us of course have always only ever had one username to hide behind and haven't been interested in anything but genuine discussion although I did have to make myself a Lord once on GMK as the site wouldn't accept the plain 'Ashdown' having crashed for the umpteenth time.

Same here. I'm the same username on gmk. Personally I prefer gmk for the balanced view although I do post on here from time to time. FYI I think you'll find that 100% of the posters on gmk want sisu out.by the way fishymores is our equivalent to your grendel.

 

[tisza]

Isn't really my place to do so is it. There will be others I don't know about no doubt.

am i being naive? as the moderator if you know about people manipulating the forum for vested interests shouldn't you say something or block them?

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

am i being naive? as the moderator if you know about people manipulating the forum for vested interests shouldn't you say something or block them?

He'd end up not being the moderator then

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Is that the board that no one can join

 

[Deleted member 5849]

am i being naive? as the moderator if you know about people manipulating the forum for vested interests shouldn't you say something or block them?

Forums are all about anonymity though. There are some who are less than anonymous than others, sometimes we all decloak and bump into each other at games/protests/tomato juice orgies. I'd be very concerned about a forum that pre-banned people however... even if they were Tim Fisher, Ann Lucas, and Nick Eastwood in disguise. Even when they seek to manipulate it's often obvious to the non moronic... and enough hints are flagged up now and again which, interestingly, are often let slide within a thread and ignored...

He'd also be breaking all kinds of rules to 'out' people... and it's only so easy to ban people for being manipulative as where do you end?

Anyway, GMK still the greatest from days gone by, quiet now, sadly unwieldy to use... some of the more moronic on here remind me of former posters there, shall we say, who were all over SISU like a monk over a lapdancer. To say it's pro-SISU is to show an insult to the likes of brocco and fergynn really, and shows a certain idiocy to claim a whole forum as such unless poking, and poking hard (back to the lapdancer?)