Aidan Smith in the Scotsman

[Cumbria_blue 51]

Has anyone called Aidan ever had a worthwhile opinion about Rangers?

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

2 hours ago, graeme_4 said:

Not being a smart arse, but why the fuck would you give this guy a thread of his own and link to his article. 

You’re keeping them relevant and giving them the reaction they want.

Just fucking ignore no marks like this. 

Should we ignore articles such as this or avail ourselves of the strategy & output of our enemies & challenge it  ?

Id plum for the latter, as I'd respectfully suggest the strategy of dignified silence which you appear to be advocating Graeme, not only is ineffectual but Id go so far as to suggest it emboldens our enemies.

[theiconicman 2,991]

TL;DR

 

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

2 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

Should we ignore articlles such as this or avail ourselves of the strategy & output of our enemies & challenge it  ?

Id plum for the latter, as I'd respectfully suggest the strategy of dignified silence which you appear to be avocating Graeme, not only is ineffectual but Id go so far as to suggest it emboldens our enemies.

Very well put,  D'art:) 

[minstral 5,375]

For years we were told just ignore the people that attack our club. We did that, and for years have allowed our enemies to attack our club and fans with blatant lies. The good thing is, that we are starting to fight back and call out all our haters.

[The New Era 339]

fadin aidan, you’ll be reading this.

you are a bitter incestuous fuckin prick.

your club is about to be outed big time in the courts.

it’s history stinks.

 

[Malvern 11,329]

20 minutes ago, Sweettartangirl said:

Then don't read it and killing cats is not cool even if they are sly little moggies. 

Well if i didn't get past the third paragraph I did not read it all and the cats are in my bed quite happily snuggled up thanks.

[Bakbear 3,586]

I refused to read it yesterday. Read the first couple of paragraphs today and gave up. 

He seemed to take issue with seasons. Like more than one season. His interpretation of seasons appears to be back to the 80s. Wouldn’t  seasons just be two or more? And wouldn’t Steven Gerrard actually watch football games in Scotland in the last 5 or 6 years. 

How can you formulate an entire article based on the definition of seasons and the assumption that Stevie G would have to watch recordings of those.

the unfair refereeing practices trace back to john Reid and have got worse year on year due to unconscious bias  

So In summary. pish article 

[graeme_4 34,521]

15 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

Should we ignore articles such as this or avail ourselves of the strategy & output of our enemies & challenge it  ?

Id plum for the latter, as I'd respectfully suggest the strategy of dignified silence which you appear to be advocating Graeme, not only is ineffectual but Id go so far as to suggest it emboldens our enemies.

There’s bugger all ‘strategy’. Certain individuals and collective groups in this country hate us and write factually incorrect news or heavily skewed opinion based articles about us. We don’t need to be aware of each of them. 

If we must have a second topic in the Bears den about a nonsense article from some no mark called Aiden, at least copy and paste it in. 

The clicks / views are their source of income. Starve them of it and watch them die out. 

The club aren’t going to (and shouldn’t) lower themselves to responding to pish like this, and fans aren’t responding to it either aside from a few wee comments on a Rangers forum. And even if we did something more formal, it would be via a Rangers fans blog that (surprise surprise) only Rangers fans read and only fuel the conversation (and bring attention on the Rangers hating writer). 

No one likes us, we don’t care...

[beararse 6,375]

28 minutes ago, Cumbria_blue said:

Has anyone called Aidan ever had a worthwhile opinion about Rangers?

How about:

’Buzzing to have signed a long term deal at a huge club’

Aidan McAdams

12.10pm: 23 June 2017

[Bakbear 3,586]

Never mind

[Davie Mr Magic Cooper 515]

Just another agenda driven parasite.

If it wasn't for The Rangers, these people would just shrivel up and die.

A lot of 'people' are starting to get a bit flustered (understatement of the year) at the moment, for various reasons. I enjoy their pain. 

 

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

8 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

There’s bugger all ‘strategy’. Certain individuals and collective groups in this country hate us and write factually incorrect news or heavily skewed opinion based articles about us. We don’t need to be aware of each of them. 

If we must have a second topic in the Bears den about a nonsense article from some no mark called Aiden, at least copy and paste it in. 

The clicks / views are their source of income. Starve them of it and watch them die out. 

The club aren’t going to (and shouldn’t) lower themselves to responding to pish like this, and fans aren’t responding to it either aside from a few wee comments on a Rangers forum. And even if we did something more formal, it would be via a Rangers fans blog that (surprise surprise) only Rangers fans read and only fuel the conversation (and bring attention on the Rangers hating writer). 

No one likes us, we don’t care...

You dont think collectivey challenging them on twitter is a strategy ?

You dont think Rangers blogs and articles or the output of this and other fan forums such as VB, Gersnet & Follow Follow is a strategy ?

You dont think the Media Policy currently being employed by Rangers is in itself a strategy ?

You dont think the boycotting of certain publications is a strategy ?

Furthermore Aidan Smith is not a "no mark". He is a journalist who writes for one of Scotland's leading broadsheets.

By all means you carry on with a policy of dignified silence - whilst chanting a mantra "no-one likes us we dont care" - others amongst us will pursue a different strategy. Thankfully.

 

[graeme_4 34,521]

1 minute ago, D'Artagnan said:

You dont think collectivey challenging them on twitter is a strategy ?

You dont think Rangers blogs and articles or the output of this and other fan forums such as VB, Gersnet & Follow Follow is a strategy ?

You dont think the Media Policy currently being employed by Rangers is in itself a strategy ?

You dont think the boycotting of certain publications is a strategy ?

Furthermore Aidan Smith is not a "no mark". He is a journalist who writes for one of Scotland's leading broadsheets.

By all means you carry on with a policy of dignified silence - whilst chanting a mantra "no-one likes us we dont care" - others amongst us will pursue a different strategy. Thankfully.

 

You forgot the ‘give his articles as many clicks as possible and subsequently fund his salary’ strategy. 

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

Just now, graeme_4 said:

You forgot the ‘give his articles as many clicks as possible and subsequently fund his salary’ strategy. 

There are other people who click on the site even if Rangers supporters don't  so it won't make a massive amount of difference.  

But if Rangers supporters collectively challenge the bias written by any mhedia bitter scumbags, then surely that is better than pretending it doesn't happen?  

Why bury your head in the sand then moan about it later?  

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,723]

7 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

You forgot the ‘give his articles as many clicks as possible and subsequently fund his salary’ strategy. 

That's why folk copy and paste the article so there's only one hit but include the link purely as source, helpful should any part of it be disputed.

[coopsleftboot 5,512]

4 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

You forgot the ‘give his articles as many clicks as possible and subsequently fund his salary’ strategy. 

You're forgetting he get's multiple clicks anyway....from the multitude of green and grey who he's feeding.

You've heard the phrase "spend a penny to save a pound"?  That's a sensible part of the strategy D'art is talking about.

A few more clicks to gather information to fight back (if that's what you want to call it) will do absolutely nothing of substance to fund his salary.  The fight back might actually do something negative for his career..

 

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

7 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

You forgot the ‘give his articles as many clicks as possible and subsequently fund his salary’ strategy. 

I woud suggest Virtuoso has done the opposite - he has given it one click & reproduced it on here - thus negating the need for any us to click on it.

[graeme_4 34,521]

3 minutes ago, Sweettartangirl said:

There are other people who click on the site even if Rangers supporters don't  so it won't make a massive amount of difference.  

But if Rangers supporters collectively challenge the bias written by any mhedia bitter scumbags, then surely that is better than pretending it doesn't happen?  

Why bury your head in the sand then moan about it later?  

Obviously it will...we make up 50% of the devide. 

But we’re not, we’re just funding him, promoting him and giving him the attention he wants from articles like this. 

Who is pretending it doesn’t happen? I’m far from burying my head in the sand. My ‘strategy’ is to starve them of attention and income.

Cunts like this are an irrelevance in my Rangers life. We don’t need two threads telling us about one shite article. 

[graeme_4 34,521]

3 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

I woud suggest Virtuoso has done the opposite - he has given it one click & reproduced it on here - thus negating the need for any us to click on it.

He has now. 

It was just the link initially. 

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

3 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

That's why folk copy and paste the article so there's only one hit but include the link purely as source, helpful should any part of it be disputed.

This 100% 

Copy and paste, but include link for the people disputing proof - which happens a lot.  It's up to the individual if they click on it or not.  

3 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

I woud suggest Virtuoso has done the opposite - he has given it one click & reproduced it on here - thus negating the need for any us to click on it.

To be fair,  Virtuoso had initially just posted the link,  but then corrected it,  haha:)  

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Just now, graeme_4 said:

Obviously it will...we make up 50% of the devide. 

But we’re not, we’re just funding him, promoting him and giving him the attention he wants from articles like this. 

Who is pretending it doesn’t happen? I’m far from burying my head in the sand. My ‘strategy’ is to starve them of attention and income.

Cunts like this are an irrelevance in my Rangers life. We don’t need two threads telling us about one shite article. 

So, dignified silence then.

How did that work out last time round ?

[graeme_4 34,521]

1 minute ago, D'Artagnan said:

So, dignified silence then.

How did that work out last time round ?

How’s your series of ‘strategies’ going now? 

I’m not picking a fight here, but it’s clear we have polar opposite views on this. 

Success on the park will be the only thing to begin to make a dent in the off field nonsense IMO. Hopefully we’re moving towards that. 

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

2 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

Obviously it will...we make up 50% of the devide. 

But we’re not, we’re just funding him, promoting him and giving him the attention he wants from articles like this. 

Who is pretending it doesn’t happen? I’m far from burying my head in the sand. My ‘strategy’ is to starve them of attention and income.

Cunts like this are an irrelevance in my Rangers life. We don’t need two threads telling us about one shite article. 

You're grouching for sake of grouching now.  If they are an irrelevance to you then don't read,  don't click.  It's that simple.  Then you can go back to your happy Rangers bubble where life is unicorns and fairies minus the irrelevant stuff.  

[cushynumber 25,178]

most of the rationale behind people saying we have had bad refs decisions appears to be "you had it good for years so haha". Its essentially admitting that they know we are getting a rough deal - but that we somehow deserve it. Weirdness.

 

.