Jump to content

The RST and the £92k


TheLawMan

Recommended Posts

I don't know what the banning is for, but I'm going to speculate...

Accusations against Mark Dingwall are allowed unabated, and seen as allowing fair debate, but as soon as someone else a bit more RM friendly had accusations made against him, censorship came into play.

If I'm wrong, then I apologise.

Apology accepted. The reason for the 24-hour timeout was nothing to do with defending the RST, he broke a fundamental rule which he also broke (and apologised for) a few weeks ago.

He's not banned, his posting rights were restored after the 24 hour timeout (around 10pm last night). He is more than welcome to come on here and defend the RST, we welcome both sides of the debate. He's well aware of what he isn't welcome to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So there is a 22 page thread asking the RST a question...and the 2 guys on the thread who appear to have the ear, one actually on the board, of the RST are banned?

That is an interesting way to look for answers to questions.

Neither are banned, the RST board member is free to post. gunslinger likes to throw insinuations and accusations around, he's currently sitting on the naughty step thinking about what he's done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RM Admin said yesterday that the good thing about RM was that both the pros and the antis of the RST etc. would be allowed to be expressed on this board, unlike other boards.

When it was put to the test, that doesn't appear to be the case.

It looks like RM and FF aren't so different when it comes right down to this kind of stuff.

At the risk of repeating myself, shoredbear (or any other RST member) is welcome to come on and defend the RST. We don't extend that to being allowed to post anything they want. Any RM member who posted what shoredbear did would be treated the same, whether they are supporters of the RST or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of repeating myself, shoredbear (or any other RST member) is welcome to come on and defend the RST. We don't extend that to being allowed to post anything they want. Any RM member who posted what shoredbear did would be treated the same, whether they are supporters of the RST or not.

Pretty much as i thought.

If people cant handle questions or debate without resorting to going tonto or breaking rules then it says more about them than the people who have to deal with them. (tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people found and started using RangersMedia because of the Pravda like mindset that had taken hold at Follow Follow. FF had, and probably still has, some excellent posters, but the promotion of certain ideas and the continual 'sniff sniff' accusations that were made to anyone who didn't share them stultified debate. In my opinion that policy directly led to the rise of RangersMedia. A Rangers forum where posters like AndyPendek, Manticore, OlegKuznetzov, Contacts and WVB could state their usually contradictory piece, 'admined' by the much missed and always excellent Rabbit, without anyone thinking they were Tims or somehow being unfaithful to Rangers was very appealing to many posters.

Gunslinger is a great poster, ShoreRdBear seemed lucid and making an effort to reply. It would be to RangersMedia's detriment if posters like that were being banned, timed-out, or in some other way being unable to post at a very important time for the club.

I'm not a member of the RST and never have been and have particular dog in this fight.

PS Having been on the Shore Road many times it's a brave man who'd ban someone from there!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, it seems the admins and mods are in a no-win situation here. It's obviously a debate that generates a lot of passion - when that passion goes too far and someone needs warned / temporarily banned, it's inevitable it may seem like favouritism or vested interests from the admin team. Don't envy the job they do - but all the posters on here need to accept their responsibility to keep things civil :)

As to the debate at hand.. I'll admit I don't know that much about the in-depth goings on of the RST. And from the response of some (one?) of the pro-RST members on here, I don't really think I want to know much more about them, certainly not have them anywhere near the club. Full transparency is vital for fan organisations, and that transparency must be shown to all and sundry, not just their members. Trust will never be built by writing off questions as unimportant or stating that you only have the right to ask as a member.

Had that rule of thumb been followed, this thread would have only been a few pages long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of repeating myself, shoredbear (or any other RST member) is welcome to come on and defend the RST. We don't extend that to being allowed to post anything they want. Any RM member who posted what shoredbear did would be treated the same, whether they are supporters of the RST or not.

What a bunch of hypocritical crap. You appear to allow these rules to be broken when people lie about both the trust and Mark Dingwall. It's not opinion, it's downright lies but posters are allowed to say whatever they like. This will probably be my last visit here for that reason. You have someone on here who is a very bitter ex-Board member (the other six have moved on and seem decent guys) who makes particularly snidey remarks and even criticises things that also happened on his watch. For that reason, I'm out.

PS For people who genuinely want answers to questions, I'm sorry but I am not prepared to put up with this nonsense. I may come on to monitor from time to time but frankly I have better things to do with my time. I'd rather go somewhere like Gersnet where at least people are civil to each other. We are all supposed to be Rangers supporters but some people on here certainly don't act like it.

Regarding the DSL thing, it was all organised when Direct Sharedeal did the handover is what I've found out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of hypocritical crap. You appear to allow these rules to be broken when people lie about both the trust and Mark Dingwall. It's not opinion, it's downright lies but posters are allowed to say whatever they like. This will probably be my last visit here for that reason. You have someone on here who is a very bitter ex-Board member (the other six have moved on and seem decent guys) who makes particularly snidey remarks and even criticises things that also happened on his watch. For that reason, I'm out.

If there are lies about the Trust and Mark Dingwall, you are free to point them out. It's a forum, people will post what they believe. If they are wrong, correct them. How am I supposed to decide what is and isn't lies about the RST/MD?

Removing negative posts about either would be censorship, as I've said repeatedly we want to hear both sides of this or any debate.

PS For people who genuinely want answers to questions, I'm sorry but I am not prepared to put up with this nonsense. I may come on to monitor from time to time but frankly I have better things to do with my time. I'd rather go somewhere like Gersnet where at least people are civil to each other. We are all supposed to be Rangers supporters but some people on here certainly don't act like it.

Regarding the DSL thing, it was all organised when Direct Sharedeal did the handover is what I've found out.

So, you complain that RM is anti-RST, yet when posters on RM ask questions about the RST you refuse to answer them but accuse RM of allowing lies?

The questions stand, hopefully someone from your organisation will come on and answer them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

Good comment 00000042.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

(tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

This. (tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

To be fair to him, he was trying to answer some of those questions. Certain people obviously didn't like those answers and now he has gone.

FF admin would approve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to him, he was trying to answer some of those questions. Certain people obviously didn't like those answers and now he has gone.

FF admin would approve.

:lol:

I wondered how long you'd take! :D

As has already been explained (ad nauseam), shorerdbear broke a fundamental rule which had nothing to do with answering the questions asked. It was a rule he had broken before and apologised for, so he knew the rule existed.

If he has gone it's because he's chosen to go, he's welcome on here anytime he wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

I wondered how long you'd take! :D

As has already been explained (ad nauseam), shorerdbear broke a fundamental rule which had nothing to do with answering the questions asked. It was a rule he had broken before and apologised for, so he knew the rule existed.

If he has gone it's because he's chosen to go, he's welcome on here anytime he wants.

What fundamental rule was broken?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoreRdBear - appreciate you have made your case on why you are leaving though I would suggest that will do nothing to benefit the RST case. If RST really wants all fans to rally round the cause, then it's only by engaging with bears on forums such as this that you will achieve those goals. As it stands as the minute, there are a lot of unanswered questions and, it seems, one less person to put across your case.

(tu)

It was refreshing that someone was willing to exchange information for a change. Pity. (tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very convenient.

Certain admin pick and choose what rule infractions they will act upon and then clam up when tackled.

What makes you think I acted on any rule infractions? I'm assuming you mean me, on account of the 'clam up' comment.

As for picking and choosing, I'd have thought that was the best way to run a forum. If any minor rule infraction resulted in a ban, we'd have a pretty quiet forum. If someone breaks a serious rule - particularly one they were warned about recently (and apologised for breaking) - I'd say it's relatively lenient for them to have posting rights suspended for a day.

As for what the rule was, shorerdbear knows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you think I acted on any rule infractions? I'm assuming you mean me, on account of the 'clam up' comment.

I don't think that you did on this occasion, so get over yourself.

As for picking and choosing, I'd have thought that was the best way to run a forum.

Yes, you obviously do, but you're not alone in that.

As for what the rule was, shorerdbear knows.

Pretty meaningless, given that he's no longer posting

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...