lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
No to be fair, that is his dads, used to post quite a lot on GMK back in the day.
Not that I am aware of. That's what I mean, he wasn't really on here trying to be undercover and fool people.
Its a good quality to be able to admit when you're wrong and change your opinion.
No to be fair, that is his dads, used to post quite a lot on GMK back in the day.
Yep I know, but it was him logging in and using it a few times. Which was my point when he went on about being strict with the rules etc so I said that is against the rules. I did say then it isn't an "ongoing" thing where somebody is living a double life etc.
Did he try to sue you though?
He does like a strop and could see that happening!
SISU are to football what Jimmy Saville was to hospitals.
No, I didn't get any legal letters or anything but there was talk of it so more a threat. I just took it as something said when somebody was angry to be fair.
Ironically not the only thing like that I have had off members when people disagree with them. Usually the ones who love to go on about SISU taking legal action against fans.
Loved by everybody then hated?
Not that I am aware of. That's what I mean, he wasn't really on here trying to be undercover and fool people.
Never a good quality to be so certain that you're right that anybody who disagrees is an idiot though.
Doesn't that describe most of us on here though?
His opinion only changes when the council tells him to change it.
Wouldn't it be a better quality to not be wrong in the first place rather than being wrong every time and keep changing?
(This is not me saying I am right about everything in the world, just a question)
I'd much prefer to listen to somebody who is right most of the time than somebody who is wrong a lot and keeps changing their mind. Wouldn't youThe man that made no mistakes made nothing. It's impossible to be right about everything in the first place and to assume that someone/anyone ever could is plain and simple stupid. Probably more stupid than not being big enough to admit you're wrong and change your mind when it becomes obvious that you should.
I'd much prefer to listen to somebody who is right most of the time than somebody who is wrong a lot and keeps changing their mind. Wouldn't you
I'd much prefer to listen to somebody who is right most of the time than somebody who is wrong a lot and keeps changing their mind. Wouldn't you
Shirley..sorry...Surely Sepalla, Fisher, and Waggott must be included tooDoes this mean that you are going to ignore Les Reid from now?
A new day, a new reason added.
Does this mean that you are going to ignore Les Reid from now?
Was it a strategy though? Have you seen the minutes and stuff from meetings?
Could it be said about other parties recruiting the trust?
What about the council using local media?
Neither are right, just adding to your list as it seems to get forgotten.
No, that is saying something about the council and telegraph. This defending by stealth stuff is bollocks. Find something actually defending them, rather than somebody saying they like blue which is taken as they hate green.In another thread you asked for a link to a post by anyone other than RFC defending SISU. Well here you are.
If this had been posted on any other thread I'd have argued that it was defending by stealth (i.e. the quick,let's change the subject quick method that you and some others do on a regular basis when people start pointing the finger at SISU) but given the topic of this thread I'm going to promote your post to out and out defending.
No, that is saying something about the council and telegraph. This defending by stealth stuff is bollocks. Find something actually defending them, rather than somebody saying they like blue which is taken as they hate green.
Post a link to somebody actually defending them. Ie saying they have done nothing wrong, saying they are proud of them etc. Not somebody saying the council are bad.Denial isn't a river in Africa.
Post a link to somebody actually defending them. Ie saying they have done nothing wrong, saying they are proud of them etc. Not somebody saying the council are bad.
Apparently it happens all the time so won't be too hard. Obviously bar rfc.
So does this mean that BS comments about defending CCC cease for the same reason or does it come under a different category so has different rules?
A new day, a new reason added.
Somebody attacking SISU isn't defending CCC. Somebody saying "Tim Fisher is a wanker" isn't defending CCC.
Somebody defending CCC is saying how proud they are of them, how they have done nothing wrong etc etc.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?