This Message Board

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

Good afternoon everyone, isn’t Alka-Seltzer an amazing tonic after over indulging. Always a relief to read back one’s posts and realise you didn’t over step the line 

Edited May 29, 2023 by Midlands Yellow

[hogesar 9,618]

4 hours ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

In fairness Hoggy, most of the forum are old compared to you. @nutty nigel's got socks that are old enough to be your great grandparents. 😉

It's mad to think that even I have been supporting Norwich for 37 years...as the saying goes, you get less for murder. I guess I'll be in line for a City Stand blanket in a few years - Nutty, can you hook me up with one?

OTBC

Talking about age, I was 14 I think when I signed up to this forum, mostly to rant about Delia and how we had no money and how could I get involved in anti-board protests...

Just look how much age can change someone! 😉

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

5 minutes ago, Flying Dutchman said:

 

But aren't opinions just exactly that? Opinions?

There's no legal, humanitarian or moral obligation to be informed. And even so, when informed,  people still have their own take on it anyway, qhich is surely their right. So it's largely irrelevant.

And maybe this is one of those things that SHOULD be entitled: The air we breathe, the decisions we make, the right to have your own thoughts, no?

I'm of the school of thought that there thing should not be policed. They ARE an entitlement, surely?

Unless of course, like the OP, you don't like people being entitled to the basics of free thought and speech.

Then welcome to the Pink 'Un, you'll feel at home here.

By all means have your own thoughts. However, if you put them up on a discussion forum/social media/public arena, people will take an interest, take them apart to see what is underpinning them, and indeed question or agree with this. That's pretty much the whole nature of a discussion. Good, robust discussion is the policing right there.

But if your stance is readily shown as uninformed, then is there really much need to take it all that seriously?

[Flying Dutchman 744]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

By all means have your own thoughts. However, if you put them up on a discussion forum/social media/public arena, people will take an interest, take them apart to see what is underpinning them, and indeed question or agree with this. That's pretty much the whole nature of a discussion. Good, robust discussion is the policing right there.

But if your stance is readily shown as uninformed, then is there really much need to take it all that seriously?

Exactly. Everyone entitled to their opinion, including the ones who have a differing one and challenge it.

The point here is not with people challenging them, but not liking the fact that there IS a different opinions.

'Entitlement' has become a dirty word, and in some ways a lot of people are unduly entitled. But that can't be the approach with opinion, that IS simply an entitled right. It's what makes us who we are.

I feel we are agreeing here, to an extent. Which is what is glorious about the whole thing.

We have a different angle on the same subject, no right or wrong, just a different flavour of how we both perceive the approach.

[Mr Angry 1,547]

35 minutes ago, Flying Dutchman said:

 

But aren't opinions just exactly that? Opinions?

There's no legal, humanitarian or moral obligation to be informed. And even so, when informed,  people still have their own take on it anyway, qhich is surely their right. So it's largely irrelevant.

And maybe this is one of those things that SHOULD be entitled: The air we breathe, the decisions we make, the right to have your own thoughts, no?

I'm of the school of thought that there thing should not be policed. They ARE an entitlement, surely?

Unless of course, like the OP, you don't like people being entitled to the basics of free thought and speech.

Then welcome to the Pink 'Un, you'll feel at home here.

 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,020]

18 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

 

Know your rights........

[mrdi 373]

3 minutes ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

Know your rights........

…all three of them

[Mello Yello 2,281]

28 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

 

Eeh honestly...."All you young punks".....

[Mello Yello 2,281]

Give 'em enough rope....

[C.I.D 302]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Talking about age, I was 14 I think when I signed up to this forum, mostly to rant about Delia and how we had no money and how could I get involved in anti-board protests...

Just look how much age can change someone! 😉

Felt much the same about Geoffrey Watling in my youth so f*ck-all has changed in 60-odd years 😔

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,020]

3 hours ago, mrdi said:

…all three of them

You have the right not to be killed..........

[mrdi 373]

31 minutes ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

You have the right not to be killed..........

Unless…

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,020]

23 minutes ago, mrdi said:

Unless…

It was done by a policeman or an aristocrat........

[mrdi 373]

I’ve been earwormed all afternoon. This is not a bad thing. 

[mrdi 373]

6 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

This place is busy when we lose, not so busy when we draw or don't play, quiet when we win. It's the way of it...

To be fair, nothing beats a good moan into the void. And for its foibles, this place is far more sympathetic to that moaning than the wife is. 

[Bert 236]

This message Board was much much better under Chris Hughton as everything in life was to be honest 

[Monty13 2,229]

7 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

@Monty13 

Who are "those who won't accept a single criticism of the guy"?

What you’ve quoted is not what I said, it’s traditional to quote that.

Regardless reading the Women’s football thread comes to mind in terms of what I did say. 

His comments were not only representing the club, but he’s the most Senior sporting person at it. He’s also a SD at one of the country’s top 30, or maybe less, biggest clubs. What he says about the women’s game objectively matters. 

He screwed up. However the amount of people defending him like it was just some comments from Dave down the pub was interesting to me.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

21 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

What you’ve quoted is not what I said, it’s traditional to quote that.

Regardless reading the Women’s football thread comes to mind in terms of what I did say. 

His comments were not only representing the club, but he’s the most Senior sporting person at it. He’s also a SD at one of the country’s top 30, or maybe less, biggest clubs. What he says about the women’s game objectively matters. 

He screwed up. However the amount of people defending him like it was just some comments from Dave down the pub was interesting to me.

Fair.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

7 hours ago, Monty13 said:

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to see us rip everything up and start again (although I’d argue on the footballing side the last 2 years we at least partly have).

Criticism is part and parcel of any high profile job, abuse shouldn’t be but is, which I understand is the unfortunate reality of what he has to deal with.

I think given what’s happened the last two years the quantity of negative reaction to him is going to be greater, especially given the deliberate (unnecessary and unhelpful IMO) provocation he engages in.

He’s reaped what he’s sowed to a certain extent, Nutty’s right if we won more games he wouldn’t be getting it as much as people wouldn’t care, but he hasn’t.

Mistakes are inevitable in any organisation, I’d actually argue failure is just a stop on the path to success. Personally I don’t blame him for making mistakes, I’m just intrigued by what’s being learnt from them. He’s certainly learnt nothing about PR.

I don’t agree though, yes within those posts/threads is a few with pretty much a deep seated hatred of the guy it seems, not denying it. But I also see plenty who won’t seem to accept a single reasonable criticism of the guy, which I don’t get. It just seems so polarised.

Who are the plenty Monty?

[Monty13 2,229]

2 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Who are the plenty Monty?

I’m not calling people out, what’s the point?

I didn’t ask Mason to name those with the “burning personal hatred” of Webber. I have a good idea of who they mean, I see it and recognise it.

[shefcanary 2,389]

10 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I will admit the "PurpleCanary How To Make Millions By Betting Against Norwich City Fund" keeps me reasonably well provided for but I will sue anyone who calls it a Ponzi scheme...😍

Insider trading fits it better?😉😂

[nutty nigel 7,509]

37 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I’m not calling people out, what’s the point?

I didn’t ask Mason to name those with the “burning personal hatred” of Webber. I have a good idea of who they mean, I see it and recognise it.

I guess nobody's going to call out those sho live in the halfway house either. That's not really the spirit of a thread designed to be a race to the bottom.

 

 

Edited May 29, 2023 by nutty nigel
🙃👍