Rangers Fans

[vasily09 0]

Thing is outlaw - that those he offended - and we can guess their names - are those who specialize in the same kind of offensive postings, have done for quite some time and yet seem to get away with it scot-free

The thing with Admin not explaining this kind of thing is that their silence just makes it seem that there are 3 or 4 posters on this board who yell "JUMP" and admin respond "How High"

Nice try vaseline but obviously just another post attempting to divide the fans !

Outlaw - this is the perfect example of what I mean - never makes a post without an accompanying insult

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,647]

Thing is outlaw - that those he offended - and we can guess their names - are those who specialize in the same kind of offensive postings, have done for quite some time and yet seem to get away with it scot-free

The thing with Admin not explaining this kind of thing is that their silence just makes it seem that there are 3 or 4 posters on this board who yell "JUMP" and admin respond "How High"

Nice try vaseline but obviously just another post attempting to divide the fans !

Outlaw - this is the perfect example of what I mean - never makes a post without an accompanying insult

Be my friend Outlaw !

[outlaw69uk 123]

The thread postings of others I have no problem with - its when you enter those threads to provide a contrary viewpoint - its a forum after all - and instead of debating that viewpoint you ju just get attacked over and voer and accused of being a TIM - for Batman, and for most of us, it is the only point that we differ on from most bears

Would you rather have a forum where most posters are afraid to post on certain topics?

So what is the point then? The only thing that differs. Batman certainly didnt make it clear.

Also, perhaps, given as you state above, that your views are different from "most Bears", and, certainly in Batmans case, he was highly offensive/aggressive/abusive/dismissive of anyone elses opinions, would a backlash not be expected?

ps: from before, you may not have meant myself or F, but, we were both highly offended by the man!

[outlaw69uk 123]

Thing is outlaw - that those he offended - and we can guess their names - are those who specialize in the same kind of offensive postings, have done for quite some time and yet seem to get away with it scot-free

The thing with Admin not explaining this kind of thing is that their silence just makes it seem that there are 3 or 4 posters on this board who yell "JUMP" and admin respond "How High"

Nice try vaseline but obviously just another post attempting to divide the fans !

Outlaw - this is the perfect example of what I mean - never makes a post without an accompanying insult

Be my friend Outlaw !

I thought I was BD

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,647]

Thing is outlaw - that those he offended - and we can guess their names - are those who specialize in the same kind of offensive postings, have done for quite some time and yet seem to get away with it scot-free

The thing with Admin not explaining this kind of thing is that their silence just makes it seem that there are 3 or 4 posters on this board who yell "JUMP" and admin respond "How High"

Nice try vaseline but obviously just another post attempting to divide the fans !

Outlaw - this is the perfect example of what I mean - never makes a post without an accompanying insult

Be my friend Outlaw !

I thought I was BD

But it looks as if you've got a new touchy feely one mate !

[minstral 5,375]

Thing is outlaw - that those he offended - and we can guess their names - are those who specialize in the same kind of offensive postings, have done for quite some time and yet seem to get away with it scot-free

The thing with Admin not explaining this kind of thing is that their silence just makes it seem that there are 3 or 4 posters on this board who yell "JUMP" and admin respond "How High"

what offensive postings are you on about, do you mean becuse we are proud of our protestant support that have followed the club for decades. and whats the problem with posting about our protestant support and defending our culture, no one is forcing you to join in, and dont be a coward name the three or four posters that upset you.

[vasily09 0]

No Minstral - you misunderstand - those posts that you allude to are completely fine - you are proud of the heritage and you can post those kinds of pasts as long as your arse points south as far as I am concerned.

I was merely pointing out that Batman, as much as he was a bit of a knob, was banned for - I would guess - offensive posts when others on here are equally if not more guilty - how many times is it acceptable to name someone as a TIM or to question their sexual preferences? it is those types of posts that I refer to

[vasily09 0]

The thread postings of others I have no problem with - its when you enter those threads to provide a contrary viewpoint - its a forum after all - and instead of debating that viewpoint you ju just get attacked over and voer and accused of being a TIM - for Batman, and for most of us, it is the only point that we differ on from most bears

Would you rather have a forum where most posters are afraid to post on certain topics?

So what is the point then? The only thing that differs. Batman certainly didnt make it clear.

Also, perhaps, given as you state above, that your views are different from "most Bears", and, certainly in Batmans case, he was highly offensive/aggressive/abusive/dismissive of anyone elses opinions, would a backlash not be expected?

ps: from before, you may not have meant myself or F, but, we were both highly offended by the man!

Heres is the way this goes as far as i am concerned

Poster A makes a posting about History, Protestantism etc etc

Poster B makes a response disagreeing with that but laying out hsi reasons why

Poster A and his mates come back with insults, Tim Calling etc etc

Poster B takes the bait and the rest is like a snowball rolling down a hill - with both sides point scoring with infantile name calling and general insults.

So in that scenario is poster A solely to blame? Is Poster B solely to blame?

Or do you treat both sides equally, either banning both or warning both as to their conduct?

My vote goes for the latter?

[outlaw69uk 123]

No Minstral - you misunderstand - those posts that you allude to are completely fine - you are proud of the heritage and you can post those kinds of pasts as long as your arse points south as far as I am concerned.

I was merely pointing out that Batman, as much as he was a bit of a knob, was banned for - I would guess - offensive posts when others on here are equally if not more guilty - how many times is it acceptable to name someone as a TIM or to question their sexual preferences? it is those types of posts that I refer to

Batman did similar?

Phrases like, billy Britain, that bird etc.

It is all assumption as to why he waas banned, however, even this thread has become a debate again now he is elsewhere!

[vasily09 0]

No Minstral - you misunderstand - those posts that you allude to are completely fine - you are proud of the heritage and you can post those kinds of pasts as long as your arse points south as far as I am concerned.

I was merely pointing out that Batman, as much as he was a bit of a knob, was banned for - I would guess - offensive posts when others on here are equally if not more guilty - how many times is it acceptable to name someone as a TIM or to question their sexual preferences? it is those types of posts that I refer to

Batman did similar?

Phrases like, billy Britain, that bird etc.

It is all assumption as to why he waas banned, however, even this thread has become a debate again now he is elsewhere!

I agree Outlaw - Batman did do dimilar - that is exactly my point - so why was he the only one banned then?

Listen, I do not know - maybe he was repeatedly warned, but if he was, were others warned? Or was he singled out because his views differed from those of the admin on here

Without any admin feedback I can only come to my own conclusions that he was singled out

[Briton 394]

Yeah I would guess it's something like that. Be interesting if the admin who took this decision explained the process though.

They dont need to, to be fair. Perks of the job

I know they don't need to. Can't see what anyone would fear from openess though.

He did manage to upset and offend a lot of people in a short time, including those not normally involved in "heated" debate (shall we say). He very carefully chose to work things, and choose topics that would most certainly be insulting and offensive to a lot of people, but, which also would not bother some others. I would guess that was noticed, along with a number of people reporting some of the more "debatable" posts he made.

Just a thought

Fair enough. There's no question he was asking for trouble if that is true (haven't read all his posts obviously). I'd still be interested to know if he was warned.

[outlaw69uk 123]

The thread postings of others I have no problem with - its when you enter those threads to provide a contrary viewpoint - its a forum after all - and instead of debating that viewpoint you ju just get attacked over and voer and accused of being a TIM - for Batman, and for most of us, it is the only point that we differ on from most bears

Would you rather have a forum where most posters are afraid to post on certain topics?

So what is the point then? The only thing that differs. Batman certainly didnt make it clear.

Also, perhaps, given as you state above, that your views are different from "most Bears", and, certainly in Batmans case, he was highly offensive/aggressive/abusive/dismissive of anyone elses opinions, would a backlash not be expected?

ps: from before, you may not have meant myself or F, but, we were both highly offended by the man!

Heres is the way this goes as far as i am concerned

Poster A makes a posting about History, Protestantism etc etc

Poster B makes a response disagreeing with that but laying out hsi reasons why

Poster A and his mates come back with insults, Tim Calling etc etc

Poster B takes the bait and the rest is like a snowball rolling down a hill - with both sides point scoring with infantile name calling and general insults.

So in that scenario is poster A solely to blame? Is Poster B solely to blame?

Or do you treat both sides equally, either banning both or warning both as to their conduct?

My vote goes for the latter?

In that scenario, if it happened EXACTLY like that, then, i would assume a double warning, however, due to poster A.

However, you tend to find in reality, that poster B does not respon like that. Generally Poster B responds with a bit more vim and vigour (yes! got to use that phrase in a post), and generally decries it all, says it has no place at Rangers, generally uses words like dinosaurs, time to move on etc.

That is the problem. As you made mention of earlier, Poster A is fairly in the majority, especially with regard to the history of the club, and, generally more accepting of all colours, creed etc, however, Poster B generally comes across as anti-poster a (phrases like "no place at this club"), and appears to accept many things apart from the beliefs poster a has. Which is wrong!

[vasily09 0]

The thread postings of others I have no problem with - its when you enter those threads to provide a contrary viewpoint - its a forum after all - and instead of debating that viewpoint you ju just get attacked over and voer and accused of being a TIM - for Batman, and for most of us, it is the only point that we differ on from most bears

Would you rather have a forum where most posters are afraid to post on certain topics?

So what is the point then? The only thing that differs. Batman certainly didnt make it clear.

Also, perhaps, given as you state above, that your views are different from "most Bears", and, certainly in Batmans case, he was highly offensive/aggressive/abusive/dismissive of anyone elses opinions, would a backlash not be expected?

ps: from before, you may not have meant myself or F, but, we were both highly offended by the man!

Heres is the way this goes as far as i am concerned

Poster A makes a posting about History, Protestantism etc etc

Poster B makes a response disagreeing with that but laying out hsi reasons why

Poster A and his mates come back with insults, Tim Calling etc etc

Poster B takes the bait and the rest is like a snowball rolling down a hill - with both sides point scoring with infantile name calling and general insults.

So in that scenario is poster A solely to blame? Is Poster B solely to blame?

Or do you treat both sides equally, either banning both or warning both as to their conduct?

My vote goes for the latter?

In that scenario, if it happened EXACTLY like that, then, i would assume a double warning, however, due to poster A.

However, you tend to find in reality, that poster B does not respon like that. Generally Poster B responds with a bit more vim and vigour (yes! got to use that phrase in a post), and generally decries it all, says it has no place at Rangers, generally uses words like dinosaurs, time to move on etc.

That is the problem. As you made mention of earlier, Poster A is fairly in the majority, especially with regard to the history of the club, and, generally more accepting of all colours, creed etc, however, Poster B generally comes across as anti-poster a (phrases like "no place at this club"), and appears to accept many things apart from the beliefs poster a has. Which is wrong!

I agree with most of that outlaw - nice use of vim and vigour too!

Though the scenario that you paint, I would say that the poster is probably wrong, but is it really offensive? The whole dinosaur thing, no place at the club etc - as I say, not the slant I would go for, but as long as he isnt abusive with it, Im fine with him bringing that opinion into the debate

Sometimes as well Outlaw, I am nto sure if the others are in the majority or whether they are just the loudest - it can be difficult to tell really

Either way - its in the past now - life goes on - fathers day weekend here and Im travelling back to the wifes folks for a weekend of beer, bbq, golf and other frivolity - so after about 8pm today I wont be on here for a couple of days

So in case I forget - have a great weekend - no idea what the weather is doing there, but its pushing 90 this weekend here - so have a good weekend anyway folks

[outlaw69uk 123]

To highlight, this was posted on another thread, and, I think highlights my point about the aggressive attitude of those unconcerned (to put it politely) about the history of Rangers

"Usual muck raking shit by the dinasors (spelling) within the support. WTF has this got to do with football or Rangers other that some wishful thinking by a handful of stuck in the past regressionists. Time to move on lads, realise that the club is dissassociated from this nonsence and get on with what it should be all about - FOOTBALL!"

That above is a disgraceful post, which attacks and belittles everyone at once. Surely, the better response would be, to just disagree and say each to their own? or, maybe, not even post this? Dont you think?

[vasily09 0]

To highlight, this was posted on another thread, and, I think highlights my point about the aggressive attitude of those unconcerned (to put it politely) about the history of Rangers

"Usual muck raking shit by the dinasors (spelling) within the support. WTF has this got to do with football or Rangers other that some wishful thinking by a handful of stuck in the past regressionists. Time to move on lads, realise that the club is dissassociated from this nonsence and get on with what it should be all about - FOOTBALL!"

That above is a disgraceful post, which attacks and belittles everyone at once. Surely, the better response would be, to just disagree and say each to their own? or, maybe, not even post this? Dont you think?

Let me say this first - I disagree with the sentiments in the above post. But I will also say that I dont think it is offensive as such, take the sh*t out and to me it is acceptable - wrong, but acceptable

And certainly no worse than the regular tim calling or sexual preference intimating that goes on here

I agree with you that on that thread from a very early stage both sides could have agreed to disagree - but of course that snowball was rolling down that hill

[Dado 334]

We take into account a number of factors when considering when to ban someone from these boards.

It doesnt happen very often as everyone has as much of a free reign as we can possibly give no matter their viewpoints.

We have a wide range of opinions in the Admin/Moderating team, with many conflicting sets of beliefs, no one person can just ban someone if they feel like it, the ban will only occur if everyone agrees.

Also things are never as black and white as they seem on the boards, we have a number of factors that cant be judged just by reading the posts in the Bears Den.

Some of the speculation and accusations in this thread is actually quite frustrating and wildly off the mark, we take alot of time out to make sure the board runs in the best way it can for every poster on here and take a great deal of pride in the way we run the board and to make sure every poster gets treated fairly.

[minstral 5,375]

so vasily what you are saying is that poster a should not start a thread about things that you might not like, and if people become abusive in the thread then poster a should just be as much to blame for starting the thread. also if you feel i deserve to be warned then take it up with the mods, but to me if you cant stick up for our protestant fans who helped the club be as big as it is today is sad. amazing how the other side promote their culture and history, yet some of our fans try to hide ours.

[vasily09 0]

so vasily what you are saying is that poster a should not start a thread about things that you might not like, and if people become abusive in the thread then poster a should just be as much to blame for starting the thread. also if you feel i deserve to be warned then take it up with the mods, but to me if you cant stick up for our protestant fans who helped the club be as big as it is today is sad. amazing how the other side promote their culture and history, yet some of our fans try to hide ours.

No Minstral - that is not what I said - sticking up for principles you believe in is totally fine

If people become abusive in a thread then they should be held equally accountable IMO - thats pretty much all I am saying

[Bazza 21]

Getting back on topic would be nice...

[Briton 394]

We take into account a number of factors when considering when to ban someone from these boards.

It doesnt happen very often as everyone has as much of a free reign as we can possibly give no matter their viewpoints.

We have a wide range of opinions in the Admin/Moderating team, with many conflicting sets of beliefs, no one person can just ban someone if they feel like it, the ban will only occur if everyone agrees.

Also things are never as black and white as they seem on the boards, we have a number of factors that cant be judged just by reading the posts in the Bears Den.

Some of the speculation and accusations in this thread is actually quite frustrating and wildly off the mark, we take alot of time out to make sure the board runs in the best way it can for every poster on here and take a great deal of pride in the way we run the board and to make sure every poster gets treated fairly.

That's reassuring and thanks for the info.

[minstral 5,375]

so vasily what you are saying is that poster a should not start a thread about things that you might not like, and if people become abusive in the thread then poster a should just be as much to blame for starting the thread. also if you feel i deserve to be warned then take it up with the mods, but to me if you cant stick up for our protestant fans who helped the club be as big as it is today is sad. amazing how the other side promote their culture and history, yet some of our fans try to hide ours.

No Minstral - that is not what I said - sticking up for principles you believe in is totally fine

If people become abusive in a thread then they should be held equally accountable IMO - thats pretty much all I am saying

all i am saying is batman must have really oversteped the mark, as the mods on here are all fair guys, who dont ban people for nothing and warn them or pm members and have a quiet word.

[Briton 394]

To highlight, this was posted on another thread, and, I think highlights my point about the aggressive attitude of those unconcerned (to put it politely) about the history of Rangers

"Usual muck raking shit by the dinasors (spelling) within the support. WTF has this got to do with football or Rangers other that some wishful thinking by a handful of stuck in the past regressionists. Time to move on lads, realise that the club is dissassociated from this nonsence and get on with what it should be all about - FOOTBALL!"

That above is a disgraceful post, which attacks and belittles everyone at once. Surely, the better response would be, to just disagree and say each to their own? or, maybe, not even post this? Dont you think?

Interesting that you should pick that example (I assume you realise it's not a Batman quote?). As you know that comes from a thread in the Bear's Den entitled: A Great Picture, and it had a sub title: If a MOPE, please open . Now how does that sit with those posters whining about others trying to 'divide' the support?

The OP is obviously stirring and trying to get a rise, that was surely his motive for posting a picture of an Orange march (not a great one actually), and 'belittling' others in a goading fashion in his sub-title? He got what he was looking for. Granted it may have an uneccessarily aggressive reply but it's quite ironic how many people were 'most offended' by that statement.

[mackerel 0]

Interesting that you should pick that example (I assume you realise it's not a Batman quote?). As you know that comes from a thread in the Bear's Den entitled: A Great Picture, and it had a sub title: If a MOPE, please open . Now how does that sit with those posters whining about others trying to 'divide' the support?

The OP is obviously stirring and trying to get a rise, that was surely his motive for posting a picture of an Orange march (not a great one actually), and 'belittling' others in a goading fashion in his sub-title? He got what he was looking for. Granted it may have an uneccessarily aggressive reply but it's quite ironic how many people were 'most offended' by that statement.

I completely agree with this post and the comments regarding the OP's motivations for starting this thread (A Great Picture) in the first place are a good illustrative example of the double standards on display here.

[minstral 5,375]

Interesting that you should pick that example (I assume you realise it's not a Batman quote?). As you know that comes from a thread in the Bear's Den entitled: A Great Picture, and it had a sub title: If a MOPE, please open . Now how does that sit with those posters whining about others trying to 'divide' the support?

The OP is obviously stirring and trying to get a rise, that was surely his motive for posting a picture of an Orange march (not a great one actually), and 'belittling' others in a goading fashion in his sub-title? He got what he was looking for. Granted it may have an uneccessarily aggressive reply but it's quite ironic how many people were 'most offended' by that statement.

I completely agree with this post and the comments regarding the OP's motivations for starting this thread (A Great Picture) in the first place are a good illustrative example of the double standards on display here.

the poster that started the thread is a good and decent guy, and the easy way is just dont take part in the thread, then no one will get upset.

[mackerel 0]

Interesting that you should pick that example (I assume you realise it's not a Batman quote?). As you know that comes from a thread in the Bear's Den entitled: A Great Picture, and it had a sub title: If a MOPE, please open . Now how does that sit with those posters whining about others trying to 'divide' the support?

The OP is obviously stirring and trying to get a rise, that was surely his motive for posting a picture of an Orange march (not a great one actually), and 'belittling' others in a goading fashion in his sub-title? He got what he was looking for. Granted it may have an uneccessarily aggressive reply but it's quite ironic how many people were 'most offended' by that statement.

I completely agree with this post and the comments regarding the OP's motivations for starting this thread (A Great Picture) in the first place are a good illustrative example of the double standards on display here.

the poster that started the thread is a good and decent guy, and the easy way is just dont take part in the thread, then no one will get upset.

Ok, and the next time you see one you don't like just keep out as well.