RST - Let it sink without trace

[*Manticore* 1,893]

I would also like to know what Mr Dingwall would do to try and change that perception of both Follow Follow and the RST.

Well FF would be a matter for Mark but the perception of the RST is an issue for the whole Board, don't fall for the line that he's running both.

[Briton 394]

Good post. I know what I was banned for and Manticore is technically right when he hides behind semantics

Facts = semantics.

Great stuff.

You hide behind semantics. OK it is a fact that I was not banned for 'nothing'. 'No good reason' would be a better description but no doubt you'd still avoid the point.

[JR 1,480]

I would also like to know what Mr Dingwall would do to try and change that perception of both Follow Follow and the RST.

Well FF would be a matter for Mark but the perception of the RST is an issue for the whole Board, don't fall for the line that he's running both.

I'm not falling for anything, I'm merely pointing out that that perception does exist, and if he (Mr Dingwall) or the RST Board are going to win any PR offensive that they clearly need to embark on - this has to be addressed.

Would you agree with that? Would you say that perception exists?

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Good post. I know what I was banned for and Manticore is technically right when he hides behind semantics

Facts = semantics.

Great stuff.

You hide behind semantics. OK it is a fact that I was not banned for 'nothing'. 'No good reason' would be a better description but no doubt you'd still avoid the point.

Oh so now you know what I would say if you told the truth? You really are full of it.

It's the second time you've accused of 'hiding behind semantics', what is it that I'm hiding from?

[Friedmarsbar 1]

I would also like to know what Mr Dingwall would do to try and change that perception of both Follow Follow and the RST.

Well FF would be a matter for Mark but the perception of the RST is an issue for the whole Board, don't fall for the line that he's running both.

I'm not falling for anything, I'm merely pointing out that that perception does exist, and if he (Mr Dingwall) or the RST Board are going to win any PR offensive that they clearly need to embark on - this has to be addressed.

Would you agree with that? Would you say that perception exists?

Banning, I am an expert on it. I have had a lot of user names on FF and been banned a lot of times. The reason is I am termed as a' handwringer' (stupid term)because I have constantly argued against views that I consider bigotted and harm the name of Rangers. I have debated with the major names on the board, the thread gets so long, then its chopped and my account suspended. At first I used to be really hurt, could'nt believe it, I had not used bad language, the threads just disappeared.

I am living proof that there is no free speech on FF. Tried on a few occasions to be re-instated, just blanked.

I am back again, tend to be a bit quieter, only discuss football. That is the way it is on Mark Dingwall's FF.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

I would also like to know what Mr Dingwall would do to try and change that perception of both Follow Follow and the RST.

Well FF would be a matter for Mark but the perception of the RST is an issue for the whole Board, don't fall for the line that he's running both.

I'm not falling for anything, I'm merely pointing out that that perception does exist, and if he (Mr Dingwall) or the RST Board are going to win any PR offensive that they clearly need to embark on - this has to be addressed.

Would you agree with that? Would you say that perception exists?

The perception not only exists, it is being pushed by people - including some who had an anti RST agenda long before these resignations.

My point is that the perception of the Trust is an issue for the whole Board, not any particular member of it.

[JR 1,480]

I would also like to know what Mr Dingwall would do to try and change that perception of both Follow Follow and the RST.

Well FF would be a matter for Mark but the perception of the RST is an issue for the whole Board, don't fall for the line that he's running both.

I'm not falling for anything, I'm merely pointing out that that perception does exist, and if he (Mr Dingwall) or the RST Board are going to win any PR offensive that they clearly need to embark on - this has to be addressed.

Would you agree with that? Would you say that perception exists?

The perception not only exists, it is being pushed by people - including some who had an anti RST agenda long before these resignations.

My point is that the perception of the Trust is an issue for the whole Board, not any particular member of it.

Your point is valid, the only reason I named Mr Dingwall is that it's his position on the Board that makes the connection - rightly or wrongly to any detractors.

Would you not say however, in order to further the cause of the RST, Follow Follow has to work hard to rid themselves of these accusations as much as they can - given the obvious parallels to the Trust?

After all, the present RST Board member has already confirmed that the RST was born from FF - so it's easy for those with agendas to say - if it happens there....etc.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Your point is valid, the only reason I named Mr Dingwall is that it's his position on the Board that makes the connection - rightly or wrongly to any detractors.

Would you not say however, in order to further the cause of the RST, Follow Follow has to work hard to rid themselves of these accusations as much as they can - given the obvious parallels to the Trust?

After all, the present RST Board member has already confirmed that the RST was born from FF - so it's easy for those with agendas to say - if it happens there....etc.

I think the RST being formed through FF is a misnomer. I doubt if there was any other vehicle around five years ago that could have done that.

But we are five years on, they are separate entities, and I don't think FF has to do anything vis-à-vis the Trust's rep.

People are simply wrong to link the two. Even if FF were to completely change its nature, the same people would refuse to acknowledge it.

It's like death and taxes....

[JR 1,480]

Your point is valid, the only reason I named Mr Dingwall is that it's his position on the Board that makes the connection - rightly or wrongly to any detractors.

Would you not say however, in order to further the cause of the RST, Follow Follow has to work hard to rid themselves of these accusations as much as they can - given the obvious parallels to the Trust?

After all, the present RST Board member has already confirmed that the RST was born from FF - so it's easy for those with agendas to say - if it happens there....etc.

I think the RST being formed through FF is a misnomer. I doubt if there was any other vehicle around five years ago that could have done that.

But we are five years on, they are separate entities, and I don't think FF has to do anything vis-à-vis the Trust's rep.

People are simply wrong to link the two. Even if FF were to completely change its nature, the same people would refuse to acknowledge it.

It's like death and taxes....

Many thanks

[Briton 394]

Good post. I know what I was banned for and Manticore is technically right when he hides behind semantics

Facts = semantics.

Great stuff.

You hide behind semantics. OK it is a fact that I was not banned for 'nothing'. 'No good reason' would be a better description but no doubt you'd still avoid the point.

Oh so now you know what I would say if you told the truth?

I did tell the truth when I said I was banned for 'nothing'... it is quite reasonable for 'nothing' to mean for no good reason and I certainly wasn't trying to mislead. Semantics.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

I did tell the truth when I said I was banned for 'nothing'... it is quite reasonable for 'nothing' to mean for no good reason and I certainly wasn't trying to mislead. Semantics.

You love that 'semantics' word don't you?

Fact is you don't seem to know what it means.

'Nothing' implies no reason at all, and that, on your own admission, was a lie.

You were banned for what you regard as no good reason.

Can you really not see that one is a fact and one is an opinion?

So, what is it that I'm hiding from through use of what you wrongly call semantics?

[Briton 394]

I did tell the truth when I said I was banned for 'nothing'... it is quite reasonable for 'nothing' to mean for no good reason and I certainly wasn't trying to mislead. Semantics.

You love that 'semantics' word don't you?

Fact is you don't seem to know what it means.

'Nothing' implies no reason at all, and that, on your own admission, was a lie.

You were banned for what you regard as no good reason.

Can you really not see that one is a fact and one is an opinion?

So, what is it that I'm hiding from through use of what you wrongly call semantics?

Wrong. It is semantics. It is perfectly reasonable for 'nothing' to mean 'for no good reason' in this context.

You are hiding from the fact that FF do ban Bears for no good reason by bringing up this use of the word nothing. Unless of course you think banning someone for the reasons I have given is reasonable. That wouldn't surprise me given your comments on here about Bears being banned were this FF.

[agr9 0]

I did tell the truth when I said I was banned for 'nothing'... it is quite reasonable for 'nothing' to mean for no good reason and I certainly wasn't trying to mislead. Semantics.

You love that 'semantics' word don't you?

Fact is you don't seem to know what it means.

'Nothing' implies no reason at all, and that, on your own admission, was a lie.

You were banned for what you regard as no good reason.

Can you really not see that one is a fact and one is an opinion?

So, what is it that I'm hiding from through use of what you wrongly call semantics?

Wrong. It is semantics. It is perfectly reasonable for 'nothing' to mean 'for no good reason' in this context.

You are hiding from the fact that FF do ban Bears for no good reason by bringing up this use of the word nothing. Unless of course you think banning someone for the reasons I have given is reasonable. That wouldn't surprise me given your comments on here about Bears being banned were this FF.

Some long standing bears were banned from FF for the sole reason the Dingwall couldn't handle them.They now have another web site for non handwringers.Dingwall has also banned the url of that site on FF.

[Boab 73]

What url?

[agr9 0]

What url?

PM'd you Boab.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Wrong. It is semantics. It is perfectly reasonable for 'nothing' to mean 'for no good reason' in this context.

You are hiding from the fact that FF do ban Bears for no good reason by bringing up this use of the word nothing. Unless of course you think banning someone for the reasons I have given is reasonable. That wouldn't surprise me given your comments on here about Bears being banned were this FF.

No, it is not semantics, and doesn't become so no matter how often you assert it.

Maybe you don't quite understand the difference between facts and opinions?

So I'm 'hiding from the fact that FF do ban Bears for no good reason'? That is a truly bizarre concept.

But hang on in there with it if it pleases you.

[JR 1,480]

Although this is partly my fault for asking the question, may I ask you 2 gents to refrain from dragging this further off-topic and perhaps settle any differences in another thread or better still, via PM?

Much appreciated.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Although this is partly my fault for asking the question, may I ask you 2 gents to refrain from dragging this further off-topic and perhaps settle any differences in another thread or better still, via PM?

Much appreciated.

Fine JR

[Jimenez 1]

It certainly looks like it needs a name change at the moment.....

Yes, how about...The Proddy Fuck The Pope There Ain't No BLack In The Union Jack Big Jock Knew No One Likes Us We Don't Care Supporters Trust?

Surely you jest?

You think?

This isn't an episode of 'who's line is it anyway' where we answer questions with questions.

You tell me.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

It certainly looks like it needs a name change at the moment.....

Yes, how about...The Proddy Fuck The Pope There Ain't No BLack In The Union Jack Big Jock Knew No One Likes Us We Don't Care Supporters Trust?

Surely you jest?

You think?

This isn't an episode of 'who's line is it anyway' where we answer questions with questions.

You tell me.

I must admit I was surprised that Admin let that one stand.

Yesterday I had a post 'amended' for a joke about the new board raping nuns, and I thought it was clear that it was meant ironically.

It is an interesting post from somebody who was banned from FF for 'nothing', maybe the mods there have some super power and can see future posts?

[Jimenez 1]

I must admit I was surprised that Admin let that one stand.

Yesterday I had a post 'amended' for a joke about the new board raping nuns, and I thought it was clear that it was meant ironically.

It is an interesting post from somebody who was banned from FF for 'nothing', maybe the mods there have some super power and can see future posts?

Well he can claim he was banned for nothing, but judging from that post I aint going to start believing it any time soon.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

I must admit I was surprised that Admin let that one stand.

Yesterday I had a post 'amended' for a joke about the new board raping nuns, and I thought it was clear that it was meant ironically.

It is an interesting post from somebody who was banned from FF for 'nothing', maybe the mods there have some super power and can see future posts?

Well he can claim he was banned for nothing, but judging from that post I aint going to start believing it any time soon.

From the mouths of babies and all that

[davie_bluenose 20]

It's a difficult question JR.

People come on here and say 'I was banned from FF for nothing'.

Well let's face it, they were banned for something.

Something insignificant to them, maybe, but something nonetheless.

I've posted on FF for years, long before RM was a twinkle in CR's eye, over the years I know loads of folk who have been banned. Some of the mods have attitudes.

Thing is, all the ones I know have been reinstated - maybe after a ban - by appealing to, well you know who

And they all knew the reason for the ban.

In one case I intervened on behalf of somebody who I had invited to join, but was banned after one post, simply because he didn't understand the ground rules. But when explained, he was reinstated (I now regret that but that's another story )

So surely you can forgive me when folk come on here, moan about FF and complain they don't know why they were banned, and I'm a bit cynical?

As for the notion that everyone has to toe the party line, it's just bollox. Simply not true.

The other fact to bear in mind that is that while RM and FF both get attacked by imposters, so far as I know no RMer has been trapped and attacked by a trap set by one. This has happened to FFers.

Things like that lead to a certain mindset.

Manti, that is a good post.

I've decided to try and not post about FF - they banned me and I was bitter about it - but best to move on etc - live and let live etc - RM suits me - FF suits others etc - I've let it go tho at the time I swore enmity against them for the treatment etc.

But in the interest of fairness I have to point out one thing - in relation to this - "Thing is, all the ones I know have been reinstated - maybe after a ban - by appealing to, well you know who... And they all knew the reason for the ban."

I was banned for misplaced humour (or so I deduced) - it was obvious humour and I'd been on there long enough - and I was pretty shocked at the perceived injustice of it - I had been reacting to humour against hand-wringers with a little humour of my own etc.

But, though I was banned and unable to log back on - I NEVER was told why I was banned - I sent a couple of emails myself to suck that were reasonable not angry or whatever - and I was BLANKED, totally blanked.

I was never told why I was banned - therefore strictly speaking I still don't know - there was no contact and no reinstatement even though I emailed suck personally etc - I was just banned with no explanation at all.

So, in my experience, it isn't true that those of us who were banned ALL know the reason for the ban. I personally know nothing because they banned and blanked me at the same time.

Of course I may be the exception, though I doubt it.

And I have to say I was very bitter that a Rangers site would treat other Rangers fans like that. I was bitter and I carried forth a serious grudge against them - and I usually hold my grudges as long as I draw breath.

Anyway, I've tried now to just let it go (and not post about FF anymore either).

Perhaps I have failed on both counts...!

"But, though I was banned and unable to log back on - I NEVER was told why I was banned - I sent a couple of emails myself to suck that were reasonable not angry or whatever - and I was BLANKED, totally blanked.

I was never told why I was banned - therefore strictly speaking I still don't know - there was no contact and no reinstatement even though I emailed suck personally etc - I was just banned with no explanation at all.

So, in my experience, it isn't true that those of us who were banned ALL know the reason for the ban. I personally know nothing because they banned and blanked me at the same time.

Of course I may be the exception, though I doubt it."

You aint alone thier, I got banned for being a taig, but really thats just a pathetic excuse to ban someone in my eyes, all i did was enquire about the trust and 10 minutes later I had a life bad. I did email MD, but never heard anything back so wont bother my arse again. The thing is, I was looking to be joining the RST, but if its guys like MD in the forefront then absolutely no chance they will be getting my money, but all they same i wouldnt discourage anyone from joining. I just think they are becoming an embarrasment now.

Real shame

[Coopermania 1]

Youre far from being the only person banned from FF without explanation Davie. I know it has happened many times.

Its not the way we run things here.

[davie_bluenose 20]

Youre far from being the only person banned from FF without explanation Davie. I know it has happened many times.

Its not the way we run things here.

I dont post too often, not as often as some anyway, but I always check out the threads etc, at least Free Speech exists in RM and constructive arguments take place, just the way it should be, having somewhere to voice an opinion :unionflag: