Click and Smudger.........where are you ?

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I never personally had a problem with Cluck... his opinion was his opinion.. fiar play to him at the end of the day...

I thought he''d been banned for threatening someones life? or a really bad comment? or doing an emily Pankhurst and chaining himself to that funny golden apple thing at Archant Towers determined to make himself heard!

 I''d let him back after a short time away.. give him a chance to apologise and bury the hatchet... We all get given another chance when we make mistakes.. and as has been said on here by others in this thread cluck wasnt the worst poster for personal attacks..

 I could name someone else who is continually allowed to post on here despite failing to insult me on a regular basis.. he knows who he is.. and im sure the Mods do too... u cant have 1 rule for "Peter" and 1 rule for "Paul"... why is this poster afforded different treatment to Cluckles?

I for one hope cluck comes back one day and contributes to the board... some people might be offended by him but if he can rein it in a bit and argue his point articulately im sure he could really contribute to here..

jas :)

 

[/quote]

I was thinking the same thing JAS.

I suppose I will have to start taking my happy pills before I get thrown off as well.

My point is that if there are any really offensive remarks to other posters, surely the Mods can delete that bit, or the entire post if they see fit.

Cluck and Smudge may have rubbed a few people up the wrong way but it strikes me a bit cowardly to report them and get them banned. Ralphy Wright has called me a few choice names recently but I can''t say I ever felt the need to report him for it. If people aren''t allowed to voice an unpopular viewpoint then what use is this Forum?

[blahblahblah 2]

I had no problem with Cluck or Smudger, I''d be happy to have them back.  What got my goat was the sheer number of threads that they would pollute with their copy and paste nonsense, most of which had little or nothing to do with football or NCFC.

[Buncey 1]

I don''t recall any of the mods saying he was banned due to a "report". Maybe the mods took a bit of an exception to him calling himself "web-team" and being a bit of d*ck during all that time, especially to Celia.

[First Wizard 0]

I for one, miss old Cuck and Smudger...............but then again, I miss Attilla the Hun too.............such a mis-understood lad, and nice to his mum as well![:D]

[macdougalls perm 0]

[quote user="Fellas"]I don''t recall any of the mods saying he was banned due to a "report". Maybe the mods took a bit of an exception to him calling himself "web-team" and being a bit of d*ck during all that time, especially to Celia.
[/quote]

Exactly.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I can honestly say, hand on heart, I have NEVER reported anyone on here. I have always replied through posts.

I suspect others have reported me but have never received a warning - just avatar removal usually.

With Cluck and Smudger they had just one agenda as opposed to others like Ricky and Arthur who clearly have a strong underlying loce of the Club.

[Yellow Rages 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I never personally had a problem with Cluck... his opinion was his opinion.. fiar play to him at the end of the day...

I thought he''d been banned for threatening someones life? or a really bad comment? or doing an emily Pankhurst and chaining himself to that funny golden apple thing at Archant Towers determined to make himself heard!

 I''d let him back after a short time away.. give him a chance to apologise and bury the hatchet... We all get given another chance when we make mistakes.. and as has been said on here by others in this thread cluck wasnt the worst poster for personal attacks..

 I could name someone else who is continually allowed to post on here despite failing to insult me on a regular basis.. he knows who he is.. and im sure the Mods do too... u cant have 1 rule for "Peter" and 1 rule for "Paul"... why is this poster afforded different treatment to Cluckles?

I for one hope cluck comes back one day and contributes to the board... some people might be offended by him but if he can rein it in a bit and argue his point articulately im sure he could really contribute to here..

jas :)

 

[/quote]

I was thinking the same thing JAS.

I suppose I will have to start taking my happy pills before I get thrown off as well.

My point is that if there are any really offensive remarks to other posters, surely the Mods can delete that bit, or the entire post if they see fit.

Cluck and Smudge may have rubbed a few people up the wrong way but it strikes me a bit cowardly to report them and get them banned. Ralphy Wright has called me a few choice names recently but I can''t say I ever felt the need to report him for it. If people aren''t allowed to voice an unpopular viewpoint then what use is this Forum?

[/quote]

Is that your new point because that wasn''t what you were saying before but you are right, it is one way of dealing with the offensive side. However, should the mods have to cover for people by editing posts? We are the makers of our own destiny afterall and should accept the results of our actions, not rely on someone to paper over our cracksfor us.

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I never personally had a problem with Cluck... his opinion was his opinion.. fiar play to him at the end of the day...

I thought he''d been banned for threatening someones life? or a really bad comment? or doing an emily Pankhurst and chaining himself to that funny golden apple thing at Archant Towers determined to make himself heard!

 I''d let him back after a short time away.. give him a chance to apologise and bury the hatchet... We all get given another chance when we make mistakes.. and as has been said on here by others in this thread cluck wasnt the worst poster for personal attacks..

 I could name someone else who is continually allowed to post on here despite failing to insult me on a regular basis.. he knows who he is.. and im sure the Mods do too... u cant have 1 rule for "Peter" and 1 rule for "Paul"... why is this poster afforded different treatment to Cluckles?

I for one hope cluck comes back one day and contributes to the board... some people might be offended by him but if he can rein it in a bit and argue his point articulately im sure he could really contribute to here..

jas :)

 

[/quote]

I was thinking the same thing JAS.

I suppose I will have to start taking my happy pills before I get thrown off as well.

My point is that if there are any really offensive remarks to other posters, surely the Mods can delete that bit, or the entire post if they see fit.

Cluck and Smudge may have rubbed a few people up the wrong way but it strikes me a bit cowardly to report them and get them banned. Ralphy Wright has called me a few choice names recently but I can''t say I ever felt the need to report him for it. If people aren''t allowed to voice an unpopular viewpoint then what use is this Forum?

[/quote]

Is that your new point because that wasn''t what you were saying before but you are right, it is one way of dealing with the offensive side. However, should the mods have to cover for people by editing posts? We are the makers of our own destiny afterall and should accept the results of our actions, not rely on someone to paper over our cracksfor us.

[/quote]

Perhaps I''ve got it wrong "Yellow", but I thought that was what moderating the board consisted of.

You have a fair point Mr. Rages but I still think some people are far too sensitive when it comes to a bit of heavy banter.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I had no idea Cluck had been banned and I think it''s a shame.

I would imagine it''s something to do with that little link at the bottom right hand corner of the posts that say''s "report".

I think that''s there for posters with thin skins, it gives a third option after reply and ignore. There are cry babies on this forum from all points of view and it''s not difficult to work out who some of them are.

I get shedloads of abuse on here for enjoying supporting the club I love but am happy to stand my ground and would feel like a failure if I resorted to being a "cry baby".

I have no problem with either Cluck or Smudger other than what I have said to them in exchanges on here.

[/quote]

I agree with you nutty.

Quite frankly, I never really realised that there was a report button for the ''cry babies'' as you graphically describe them.

For myself I prefer to operate on a few basic ''principles'' within the limits of the law:

* If you can''t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen

* Put up or shut up

* The truth shall set you free

* Logic, logic, logic

All the same y''know, if Cluck was really interested he could easily arrange to come back under a different user name and invent a slightly different persona.

But he is probably just pi*sed off - or enjoying himself again on the Great Barrier Reef. But I bet he looks in from time to time and has a good laugh or a good cry.

OTBC

P.S. If you get ''shedloads'' of abuse (which I don''t think you really do. Rather you like to think of yourself as a selfless martyr in the cause), it''s not for ''supporting the club you love'' - but for your particular views, and also of course for your well-known hypersensitivity about those devils incarnate - your Piswich.

[;)]

 

 

 .

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Fellas"]I don''t recall any of the mods saying he was banned due to a "report". Maybe the mods took a bit of an exception to him calling himself "web-team" and being a bit of d*ck during all that time, especially to Celia.
[/quote]

Congratulations Fellas...  [B]

Four and a half pages of comedy and finally the penny has dropped!!!

[Smudger 0]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Smudger, don''t be so unwittingly pompous and disingenuous - Cluck used many ''pseudonyms'' and avatars in his time on this board.

Has Cluck appointed you as his spokesman/woman?

And if as you say authority silenced him then he is shows a distinct lack of backbone in meekly bowing thereto. No, it sounds more like a strategic withdrawal or an extended fit of pique. Losing a battle to win a war, perhaps.

Cluck will be back in one form or another. He will be unable to resist the demands of his considerable ego - which, by the way, I''m sure would not permit you to speak on his behalf.

Trying for a little reflected glory, are we? Give it up.

And why are you shouting at us?

OTBC

[A Load of Squit 5,198]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Yeh, I liked the one about people who were not born in Norfolk not being allowed to support City. How are Leicester doing, I assume thats where you''ve been, afterall you wouldn''t want to disagree with your mate would you?

 

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Cluck, I for one, have missed your incisive banter. This Forum has lost a bit of "edge" since your departure.

If this is indeed the end then I say

R.I.P. you will be sadly missed.

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

What a load of clap-trap! This is a message board for a respectable local sports paper if anyone had forgot, not a fansite where anything goes. Moderation is in place to stop the insulting or libellious remarks. As for the bit about "Real Life", just ask yourself the question; would you go into a room full of strangers and start insulting them if they did not agree with your views? We are strangers here, it''s not the same as having a bit of banter with your mates down the pub after the game.

And Smudger, once again (because you obviously can''t quite understand it) - Cluck did not get banned for "stating hard facts"!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Cluck, I for one, have missed your incisive banter. This Forum has lost a bit of "edge" since your departure.

If this is indeed the end then I say

R.I.P. you will be sadly missed.

[/quote]

Still, it seems the majority don''t quite get it Ricardo.

I nearly commented the other day when some relatively new poster started to group you in the Cluck, Smudger, Ricky and Arthur bracket... they obviously weren''t about when you and I used to sling a bit of mud at each other from opposite sides of the fence on the great debate of the board???

It really does make you laugh doesn''t it???

We used to fight like cat & dog, but now I have a great deal of respect for what you have to say... you are one of the few on here who I think I could share a few laughs with over a pint in the real world.

Me and Cluck do keep up to date via e:mail now and again (probably about once a month)...   I mean, we shared an awful lot of views and banter with each other in our time here didn''t we?  Is that really so hard for some on here to believe?

Read it again... they sure as hell ain''t my words.

The above message is indeed Cluck''s own response to me asking him if he had seen this thread, after me taking a look on here coz my brother told me about it (another person who also finds it hysterical how many on here view the world in such a simple way).

Cluck has said that he will not return under another name and will only return if asked to by the moderators.

I have been quite surpised by it too, but Cluck has held to his word and not posted.

Maybe this has shown to some how the forum is really run?

[corbs 0]

''Norfolk Noddies'' -both.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

The constant comments about ''having a laugh'' usually ''over a pint'' and the persistent effort to make it appear that Smudger and Cluck are in some way intellectually superior and have an insight beyond everyone else sits oddly with getting banned from a liberal and open minded forum or turning up for a protest alone because no one wants to join you.

Some people really do need to get a life.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]

The constant comments about ''having a laugh'' usually ''over a pint'' and the persistent effort to make it appear that Smudger and Cluck are in some way intellectually superior and have an insight beyond everyone else sits oddly with getting banned from a liberal and open minded forum or turning up for a protest alone because no one wants to join you.

Some people really do need to get a life.

[/quote]

So says Sad Old...

Strange that from a guy who got so upset that his was taken from him for a while.

At least on the whole the school playground is yours again Sad Old... enjoy it while you can....  [;)]

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Cluck, I for one, have missed your incisive banter. This Forum has lost a bit of "edge" since your departure.

If this is indeed the end then I say

R.I.P. you will be sadly missed.

[/quote]

Still, it seems the majority don''t quite get it Ricardo.

I nearly commented the other day when some relatively new poster started to group you in the Cluck, Smudger, Ricky and Arthur bracket... they obviously weren''t about when you and I used to sling a bit of mud at each other from opposite sides of the fence on the great debate of the board???

It really does make you laugh doesn''t it???

We used to fight like cat & dog, but now I have a great deal of respect for what you have to say... you are one of the few on here who I think I could share a few laughs with over a pint in the real world.

Me and Cluck do keep up to date via e:mail now and again (probably about once a month)...   I mean, we shared an awful lot of views and banter with each other in our time here didn''t we?  Is that really so hard for some on here to believe?

Read it again... they sure as hell ain''t my words.

The above message is indeed Cluck''s own response to me asking him if he had seen this thread, after me taking a look on here coz my brother told me about it (another person who also finds it hysterical how many on here view the world in such a simple way).

Cluck has said that he will not return under another name and will only return if asked to by the moderators.

I have been quite surpised by it too, but Cluck has held to his word and not posted.

Maybe this has shown to some how the forum is really run?

[/quote]

Thanks for the meglomaniac style responses on here, but if i''m honest....

A.) Some of that reads like a Chris de Burgh ballad...............Ewwww.

B.) I''m not sure Cluck would approve, he wasn''t one for ''emotional bilge''........allegedly.

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]

The constant comments about ''having a laugh'' usually ''over a pint'' and the persistent effort to make it appear that Smudger and Cluck are in some way intellectually superior and have an insight beyond everyone else sits oddly with getting banned from a liberal and open minded forum or turning up for a protest alone because no one wants to join you.

Some people really do need to get a life.

[/quote]

It takes all sorts to make a decent Forum Rudolph and I would like to see it remain open and liberal.

I fail to see how applauding censorship of minority or unpopular view posters sits alongside that wish.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="ricardo"]

I fail to see how applauding censorship of minority or unpopular view posters sits alongside that wish.

[/quote]

But again - that''s not actually what happened, is it?

[Buncey 1]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"][quote user="ricardo"]

I fail to see how applauding censorship of minority or unpopular view posters sits alongside that wish.

[/quote]

But again - that''s not actually what happened, is it?

[/quote]"Still, it seems the majority don''t quite get it Graham...."

[Green and Yellow 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]

[quote user="Web Team - Vince"]Cluck.

Persistant aggravation, taking threads off topic.

Although he deserved an award for his Neil Cluckcaster avatar.
[/quote]

Seems a bit extreme to me Pete.

I thought this was a free country.

[/quote]

It is as long as those in charge agree with and sanction your comments first.

[Green and Yellow 0]

Moderators, are you rescinding your decision regarding Cluck and be seen to be open minded and fair or are you going to be narrow minded and blinkered??. It is all  personal  preference. You, the Moderators, currently allow a poster to use his or hers aviator for political purposes in relation to Chine. That in my opinion is out of order but I accept it as an adult with an open mind to free speak and debate.   

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Smudger"]

Greetings to friends and foes alike. Cluck did indeed get barred and when he discovered this he simply sent a "no hard feelings" email to the moderator who did it. No fuss...no tantrums. That''s what grown ups do and life goes on.

 

As for returning under a "pseudonym"?... I suspect that Cluck would rather remove his genitalia with a rusty bread knife and call himself Mary before that would happen...and the same goes for "moderating" his opinion to suit others.  For those who felt able to understand and play along with the banter he sends his regards...whereas for those who are so lilly livered and full of themselves he simply sends his sympathies. Real life must indeed be very difficult for them. There will be no return for Cluck in any way, shape or form unless by invitation from those who felt brave and powerful enough to silence him.  That however would take real courage wouldn''t it? 

 

Deliberately pompous, he stated more than a few hard facts which others found too difficult to observe...and on reflection....even allow to be read by adults it seems. Looking back...he wasn''t too far out on what he said was he?

[/quote]

Cluck, I for one, have missed your incisive banter. This Forum has lost a bit of "edge" since your departure.

If this is indeed the end then I say

R.I.P. you will be sadly missed.

[/quote]

Still, it seems the majority don''t quite get it Ricardo.

I nearly commented the other day when some relatively new poster started to group you in the Cluck, Smudger, Ricky and Arthur bracket... they obviously weren''t about when you and I used to sling a bit of mud at each other from opposite sides of the fence on the great debate of the board???

It really does make you laugh doesn''t it???

We used to fight like cat & dog, but now I have a great deal of respect for what you have to say... you are one of the few on here who I think I could share a few laughs with over a pint in the real world.

Me and Cluck do keep up to date via e:mail now and again (probably about once a month)...   I mean, we shared an awful lot of views and banter with each other in our time here didn''t we?  Is that really so hard for some on here to believe?

Read it again... they sure as hell ain''t my words.

The above message is indeed Cluck''s own response to me asking him if he had seen this thread, after me taking a look on here coz my brother told me about it (another person who also finds it hysterical how many on here view the world in such a simple way).

Cluck has said that he will not return under another name and will only return if asked to by the moderators.

I have been quite surpised by it too, but Cluck has held to his word and not posted.

Maybe this has shown to some how the forum is really run?

[/quote]

Yes Smudger, I remember many an argument with you. However I don''t think either of us thought about pressing the report button.

It''s a sad day when so many posters on here are happy to see someone banned. I always enjoyed a bit of banter with yourself and Cluck and this is going to be a very bland Forum if it degenerates into a cheerleader section for the present board and owners.

My understanding is that Cluck was offensive to a Mod. Surely both sides are big enough to sort this out without resorting to a ban.

Some people do have a very abrasive way when putting forward their point of view but we can''t all have a degree in diplomacy.

Long live disagreement I say. What else is this Forum for?

[ca 1]

[quote user="The Great Escape. "]Moderators, are you rescinding your decision regarding Cluck and be seen to be open minded and fair or are you going to be narrow minded and blinkered??. It is all  personal  preference. You, the Moderators, currently allow a poster to use his or hers aviator for political purposes in relation to Chine. That in my opinion is out of order but I accept it as an adult with an open mind to free speak and debate.   [/quote]

Lets be fair about this The Great Escape. We really don''t know what went on, how many warnings he may or may not have been given and what he may or may not have said to the staff on here to upset them. I''ve always found the  staff to be open minded and fair so I''m sure they wouldn''t have taken that decision lightly.

.

 

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

It''s especially hard on Smudger though........now he doesn''t feel he has any friends although he fails to realise he never did and Cluck just used him as a fag.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]It''s especially hard on Smudger though........now he doesn''t feel he has any friends although he fails to realise he never did and Cluck just used him as a fag.[/quote]

oh Sad Old... when will you ever get it???

Myself and Cluck never posted on here for friendship (unlike you and so many others).

We both didn''t give a monkeys about popular opinion, but came on here to express our views.

It was comical when many made the suggestion of "ignore them and they will go away".... coz we do not even post for a response.... but we do love it when gullible fish like you jump on to that little hook time and time again.

All of the ways that have been brought about to silence us are shameful in my opinion (and yes I have been silenced for a while too).

The recent ''Banter between the crowd'' thread says much about how some City fans allow themselves to be taken the piss out of so readily.

Friends on here??? 

I think I would have more joy looking for friends in a nunnery than on here, don''t you?

In the meantime, enjoy your dreams of Roeder & Co turning the club around, coz just like Grant after a brief stint doing well it is already showing signs of falling apart.... and all of this before that wonderful board of ours have had to think up yet another excuse for the joke that will be the Summer Transfer Window 2008.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Almost got through the entire thread there Smudger thinking it was just your usual tripe and then you come out with a paragraph you may be surprised to find has echoes of the kind of questions many free thinking posters have asked lately.

Try to work on your reasoning and I think you''ll find you have more in common with a large number of posters than you thought possible. Who knows, that little chip might even fall off your shoulder.