D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Laughable.
Your camp, like NW, is to tacitly back Sisu's position while trying to act like some sort of smug heroic 'neutral'.
Your camp, like NW, is to tacitly back Sisu's position while trying to act like some sort of smug heroic 'neutral'.
I haven't defended them. You are basically saying "I am in a majority so you must agree with me and act like me, else you are defending them and causing a divide etc etc".
Have a think before posting ay?
Rubbish Nick most of us are working class lads brought up in working class areas of the City.
We fought our own battles our way and if people didn't like it tough.
Most of us are too old to change the way we are.
Worked at Fords for 16 years we went on strike some crossed the picket lines they were called scabs and all matter of things these were our mates for years.
When we returned to work it was forgotten in a couple of days.
That's just the way it is and always will be.
Look at Wimbledon some kept supporting the club when it moved other didn't.
They both now believe they were right.
Sorry but we already look silly playing in that shithole with less then 2000 fans.
How have I?
Yes, it is a democracy. It doesn't mean everybody has to think the same, act the same way and have the same opinion as the majority does it?
Laughable.
No, I am saying the majority think this and people need to accept that the only way to move this forward is to go with the majority view.
Surely you can see that if the majority vote that the best way forward is to take a cut in 'what they like' yet after the vote some 10% continue to have ' all they like' then there will be a divide?
Similar to 90% of people vote that the best way to save a company is to not have a pay rise yet 10 % disagree. Should the 10% get a pay rise whilst the 90% don't ?
The evidence over years suggests otherwise-- yellow, quacks, sisu duck etc.
I didn't say that did I? If you actually read posts, rather than discriminate the poster instead of the post.
Anyway, what I was saying is, say we all boycott, zero home fans, and we don't then go back to Ricoh, surely the minority can have the "I told you so" opinion still. Same with the other way round.
Like you said, does everyone have to support conservative, no they don't, but they can still say "haha, told you they weren't the correct choice".
Sadly not. Disappointing because you used to be a decent poster, but got the biggest issue in our history completely wrong- and were nauseatingly smug and self-important in the process.I think your memory's shot old boy.
So you are saying that everybody should change their actions and views to join the majority so they then get bragging rights? You are saying people should change what they think and the actions they take to agree with the majority by boycotting just because the majority want to?
I can't see where I discriminated the poster?
Sadly not. Disappointing because you used to be a decent poster, but got the biggest issue in our history completely wrong- and were nauseatingly smug and self-important in the process.
No. I'm saying if they are so certain in their opinion, they would prove it. The 1500 say that do go say, right a total boycott, one game, and let's see. Then if we weren't back they can say their opinion is justified.
Waiting for my Dr.evil/speechmarks reply, but the thread was closed.
So what has that got to do with a democracy???
Any issues with closed threads, just drop me a PM.
Your the one who mentioned conservatives. I'm just saying if I believed in something so much, I'd be willing to be proved wrong.
A good example would be RFC and a certain senior poster shall we say, almost praying the JR would be won by sisu. (They're opinion remember). And when they lost, huge backtracks and "no, I didn't say that".
All I'm saying is, those that attend strongly believe they aren't influencing a return, so why not prove it.
I didn't have a problem with the thread being closed, but using the English language I don't see how that warranted the Dr Evil post?
Surely as a democratic society, those in the minority follow the majority, and then if the majority are proved wrong, the minority can be smug about it?
I don't think that the majority should expect the minority to change their mind but also I don't think that one of the majority should be chastised for being "argumentative and devisive " when they continue to post to put across their point of view .So you are saying that everybody should change their actions and views to join the majority so they then get bragging rights? You are saying people should change what they think and the actions they take to agree with the majority by boycotting just because the majority want to?
I can't see where I discriminated the poster?
It doesn't mean that everybody has to change their views to the majority does it? Does that mean everybody now has the support the conservatives because of it?
A straight forward, not taking the piss question here....Why, "If as some of you claim" are anti-SISU, yet jump to their defence if a poster says anything remotely Anti-SISU?
So this isn't mentioning the conservatives?
Do we really have to this every time I ask you a question?
It's life in this country. Less than 50% support the conservatives yet they are the majority party and have the main say in running this country.
Did you not see the post I quoted when I posted that? I didn't bring politics or democracy up.
I don't think that the majority should expect the minority to change their mind but also I don't think that one of the majority should be chastised for being "argumentative and devisive " when they continue to post to put across their point of view .
I just used your post to ask you a question. Do you still not know what I'm asking?
Surely as a democratic society, those in the minority follow the majority
No, spit it out. You were the one bringing up democracy, somebody else used conservatives as an example.
What has this country being a democracy got to do with anything?
Nothing?
I asked, if those that go are so certain they are right, that them going does not affect a return, why would they not prove it?
Nothing?
I asked, if those that go are so certain they are right, that them going does not affect a return, why would they not prove it?
Some would, some wouldn't. Everybody is different.
You were the one who went on about it being a democratic society originally so the minority should follow? How has that turned into people should do it to prove a point?
The only relation I made to democracy, is those that didn't vote for the party in power have every right to say I told you that they wouldn't be the right choice.
I was just saying if I'm so certain in something, I'd happily be proved wrong, if people said what I thought was wrong.
It works both ways, those that go say it doesn't influence anything. So boycott or pack sixfields out, either way proves them correct, yes?
Surely as a democratic society, those in the minority follow the majority
Why don't you prove that it does? Bullshit argument.
No, you said:
That is nothing to do with being proved wrong. That the minority should follow the majority.
Just read my reply to Samo. That's all I'm trying to ask you.
See my reply.
Let's say I'm the only one who goes to sixfields, and you all say me going stops us going back to the Ricoh. So I boycott, we go back and I put my hands up saying I was wrong.
On the the other side of the coin, if those that do go boycott, doesn't make any difference, then those who don't go can't say your influencing a return.
Correct?
So just ask it rather than go on about majoritys and minoritys and people having to follow because of democracy
I'd have no issue boycotting a single game to see if it made a difference. The same as I said in another thread I'd be the first to ask for some humble pie if a protest i doubted got us back
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?