Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

Someone who grasses Rangers fans to the police and encourages others to do the same and shows a desire to travel with tarriers to watch Celtic in Europe (I don't care if he denied it, it's true) deserves EVERYTHING he get's.

The only thing I'd draw the line at is death threats and people starting on him at his front door, work or in front of family.

Outwith that he's fair game for all his shite. 

Agree entirely with the first paragraph.

The second part i have to agree about death threats/folk going to his door/work (when he finds a job).

But him and his wee group didn't hesitate on starting on Bears and their families at the superstore during their wee protest so if it happens to him he could have little complaint.

The Beast and DavieAyrshire like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 574
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Rangers men don't grass on their own. He's a self important bald banger. 

Haven't read this thread, just a couple of the last pages, then had a quick look of FF. Lots on FF saying 'just had a look on RM and add expletive here' etc. My question to those people is t

Yer a grass, you forgot to address that.

Posted Images

21 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

Agree entirely with the first paragraph.

The second part i have to agree about death threats/folk going to his door/work (when he finds a job).

But him and his wee group didn't hesitate on starting on Bears and their families at the superstore during their wee protest so if it happens to him he could have little complaint.

Agree it would be hypocritical of him to complain but he and his cronies are rightfully criticized on here for their behaviour so it would be saddening to hear of others stooping to that level.

plumbGER likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, reallyruff said:

Agree it would be hypocritical of him to complain but he and his cronies are rightfully criticized on here for their behaviour so it would be saddening to hear of others stooping to that level.

Aye, i agree with that.

It's scumbag behaviour and they wonder why folk don't like them:thinking:

He would be the first one online greeting if he received a bit of verbal in front of his family, condemning the perpetrators and claiming they aren't real Rangers fans.

Just like his wee mob did at the superstore when folk used the shop.

What i don't get is, who made him and his mates the judge and jury of the Rangers support?

reallyruff likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

Aye, i agree with that.

It's scumbag behaviour and they wonder why folk don't like them:thinking:

He would be the first one online greeting if he received a bit of verbal in front of his family, condemning the perpetrators and claiming they aren't real Rangers fans.

Just like his wee mob did at the superstore when folk used the shop.

What i don't get is, who made him and his mates the judge and jury of the Rangers support?

Self appointed. The weird thing is that CH's association with those of a colourful past leaves our fans open to the vilest characterization yet he is wanting to be seen as representative of us as a group and the arbiter of our behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, reallyruff said:

Self appointed. The weird thing is that CH's association with those of a colourful past leaves our fans open to the vilest characterization yet he is wanting to be seen as representative of us as a group and the arbiter of our behaviour.

Him and his group will never speak for me thank god.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ForeverAndEver said:

Somecunt on FF says they were b a ned for supporting King.

They are 100% lying.  They will have been banned for something else, and blamed it on liking king.  It's more likely he signed up out of the blue, just to have a pop at the site, was a multi accounter, or broke some other rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, gogzy said:

They are 100% lying.  They will have been banned for something else, and blamed it on liking king.  It's more likely he signed up out of the blue, just to have a pop at the site, was a multi accounter, or broke some other rule.

I believe it was our favourite publican who made this claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Beast said:

I believe it was our favourite publican who made this claim.

I really hold back saying what I think of him sometimes out of respect for Greg.

My old mans a twat too and I've no time for him but it would still break my heart seeing him run down and bad mouthed online by others if he was well-known enough.

I know more people who seriously dislike him than like him. In real life, not even in the online world. 

gogzy and The Beast like this
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

Not posted much in this thread so just to say, fuck Houston and all who sails with him in his divisive ship of shite.

This is my own opinion and nothing to do with the other 97.5% of RM. :Fod:

Time to lay off the bamboo shoots if you constitute 2.5% of RM big lad.

Bears r us likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gogzy said:

They are 100% lying.  They will have been banned for something else, and blamed it on liking king.  It's more likely he signed up out of the blue, just to have a pop at the site, was a multi accounter, or broke some other rule.

 

Sometimes folk are banned, with no reason given after over 10k posts.  Oh, allegedly...... :whistle:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, siddiqi_drinker said:

Sometimes folk are banned, with no reason given after over 10k posts.  Oh, allegedly...... :whistle:

It's entirely possible that could happen, many posters with over 10k posts have been banned,  but it would not be "with no reason given".  A poster with as many posts will have been definitely warned before being banned, and then probably banned for not listening to the warning.   They wouldn't need given a reason for the ban, they will have known why they were banned.

I can say with 100% certainty though, that no poster has ever been banned for simply posting something in support of King/CG/CH/Ashley or any of the others.

 

most people will lie about why they are banned, because no one usually admits they fucked up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Siam69 said:

I don't know, i'm not calling anyone a liar, but I just don't buy those on FF who say they got banned for nothing but challenging that cunt McMurdo, or Toxic Jack. I'm assuming they mean Bawsburst when they say TJ, though I doubt it was him, the amount of time Bawsburst spent on here. Maybe an 'employee' of Toxic Jack, but I doubt it was actually him.

Anyway, I was posting on here back when the 'propaganda war' was in full swing, when the above two and Guardian were posting. I don't know anyone on here that gave any of those 3 as much abuse or challenged them as much as I did. McMurdo was trying to find out my personal details to take me to Court ffs :lol: Fucking treacherous, rat bastard that he is, paid propagandist masquerading as a Rangers fan! To say I was pretty 'coarse' with them would be quite an understatement, though I stand by it, and I feel time has proven me right.

Of course others challenged them as well, Carson's Cat for example, more articulate than me, but what i'm trying to say is I find it hard to believe anyone got banned specifically for challenging anyone on here, whether those mentioned or not. Maybe the personal insults involved were bad enough to warrant it, i got warned myself at times, but just for challenging anyone, or backing King, no chance. FFS, and i'm a founder  member of the RM Kingaling Loyal :UK:

That's a great piece posted from Gersnet. A forum I used to post on a bit under my same user name, but a combination of asking for password change every so often, I forgot it, and my daughter arriving, has me spending less time online in general anyway. A much smaller forum, though with many good posters, where I used to read and absorb more than post on it anyway.

SonofWilliam got a good welcome, of course as he had previously read here, he knew his views would get challenged, I thought he had came on to challenge some on here. But didn't really work out that way so far. To anyone else reading from FF, as I know there are plenty, I ask again, come, express your views, challenge those you don't agree with. It's a football forum, about something we all love, our club, so people are going to get passionate, heated, whatever.

One other thing, I seen someone ask on FF yesterday why Houston was called a Grass, someone answered about the 'Wee Jay' thing, calling Houston a snake, insinuating he only did it as it was RM, as there was loads worse on twitter that he ignored. I think the guy who responded had a point, and this is from someone who was very vocal on here at the time saying the posts mocking that wee lad Jay were wrong. The post is still there on FF I think, not deleted. Is it because of this thread, the accusations of banning for such, I don't know, but it's still there.

Heard he's a wanker...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once upon a time, even those amongst us with no interest in actually joining a supporters group, thought that they could potentially be of use. The club had been abused by a series of shysters and we thought that fans groups with easier access to those in power at ibrox, would be a good thing. 

It's pretty clear now that (despite some well intentioned people being involved) the whole thing is a load of shit. 

Self serving egomaniacs. 

Why does anyone bother with them?

Ignore them. Go to games with your mates and enjoy it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Getstiffed said:

The proof that its contradictory is all here in black and white.

He got a debate and soon as he's stumped for an answer everyone is either a tarrier or a mentalist.

PS you'll notice that despite myself and KAI disagreeing with you neither of has alluded to your mental state, your validity as a Bear or demanded you be banned.

Con-tra-dic-tion.

I don't really follow? I don't believe I named any particular names as I don't know most users from Adamzcuk (see what I did there).

I am merely stating that it appears to be the same old stuff on here RE name calling etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, glasgowrangersno1 said:

I don't really follow? I don't believe I named any particular names as I don't know most users from Adamzcuk (see what I did there).

I am merely stating that it appears to be the same old stuff on here RE name calling etc.

How don't you follow? it's laid out quite well mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gogzy said:

It's entirely possible that could happen, many posters with over 10k posts have been banned,  but it would not be "with no reason given".  A poster with as many posts will have been definitely warned before being banned, and then probably banned for not listening to the warning.   They wouldn't need given a reason for the ban, they will have known why they were banned.

I can say with 100% certainty though, that no poster has ever been banned for simply posting something in support of King/CG/CH/Ashley or any of the others.

 

most people will lie about why they are banned, because no one usually admits they fucked up. 

I absolutely believe this. But equally, I don't believe posters when they say they were banned from FF for disagreeing with Dingwall or whatever.

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...