|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 15:16:20 GMT
Question--- Shouldn't these sort of posts and the videos on them be banned? Question--- It's sensored nobody has to watch it More to the point. It is the needless portrayal of pointless behaviour on a moderated board.
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 15:18:54 GMT
It's sensored nobody has to watch it More to the point. It is the needless portrayal of pointless behaviour on a moderated board. Like wars & murders that are reported on TV?
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 15:19:36 GMT
Question--- Shouldn't these sort of posts and the videos on them be banned? Question--- And pretend it doesn't happen? No Maybe stop.it happenings and certainly don't give any...
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 15:23:52 GMT
More to the point. It is the needless portrayal of pointless behaviour on a moderated board. Like wars & murders that are reported on TV? Hmm I didn't turn the TV on I opened the "Stoke City" Page, on the "Oatcake" Fanzine
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 15:28:44 GMT
Like wars & murders that are reported on TV? Hmm I didn't turn the TV on I opened the "Stoke City" Page, on the "Oatcake" Fanzine I gree. I love the freedom of being able to choose what sites to go to and click on whichever threads I want to.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 15:29:57 GMT
Like wars & murders that are reported on TV? Hmm I didn't turn the TV on I opened the "Stoke City" Page, on the "Oatcake" Fanzine You then clicked on a thread with a title that makes it clear what the subject matter is, found a post with a vid that clearly describes what's on the video and warns you it displays sensitive material and then you clicked on "Play" anyway despite that warning. Don't try to pretend you had it forced upon you with no knowledge of what is was about and therefore just couldn't avoid it.
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 15:41:35 GMT
Hmm I didn't turn the TV on I opened the "Stoke City" Page, on the "Oatcake" Fanzine You then clicked on a thread with a title that makes it clear what the subject matter is, found a post with a vid that clearly describes what's on the video and warns you it displays sensitive material and then you clicked on "Play" anyway despite that warning. Don't try to pretend you had it forced upon you with no knowledge of what is was about and therefore just couldn't avoid it. Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... .
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 15:43:50 GMT
You then clicked on a thread with a title that makes it clear what the subject matter is, found a post with a vid that clearly describes what's on the video and warns you it displays sensitive material and then you clicked on "Play" anyway despite that warning. Don't try to pretend you had it forced upon you with no knowledge of what is was about and therefore just couldn't avoid it. Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . I don't think that they should be banned
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 15:45:02 GMT
Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . I don't think that they should be banned On this board or?
|
|
|
Post by ilikelamp on Feb 11, 2023 15:48:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 15:49:10 GMT
I don't think that they should be banned On this board or? On any media
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 15:51:01 GMT
You then clicked on a thread with a title that makes it clear what the subject matter is, found a post with a vid that clearly describes what's on the video and warns you it displays sensitive material and then you clicked on "Play" anyway despite that warning. Don't try to pretend you had it forced upon you with no knowledge of what is was about and therefore just couldn't avoid it. Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2023 16:05:27 GMT
Hit from the side again without warning from someone he wasn’t looking at incredibly dangerous , not long before someone dies t get up from one of these he might be a sick but I hope he’s ok No he wasn't. The lad who twatted him was in front of him with another lad. You play with matches long enough, eventually you get burned.
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 16:08:01 GMT
Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it) Double nope. There are other pages for other topics. Aa you are well aware of.
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 16:10:45 GMT
And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it) Double nope. There are other pages for other topics. Aa you are well aware of. Is your issue the content or the fact its on the Stoke City board?
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 16:12:31 GMT
And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it) Double nope. There are other pages for other topics. Aa you are well aware of. This page is for anything related to football, which this subject clearly is. Anyway, why should it be banned? Are you going to give any reasoning or do you just think people should agree witb you based on well, literally nothing. As you keep saying, it should be simple enough to answer.
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 16:12:41 GMT
Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it) Horses for courses Put the sport on the sport pages. Put the TV guide on the...
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 16:16:51 GMT
And you were given an answer, comparing it the news showing war and murder and you said that was "different" because all you did was click on the Oatcake (which is in no way true, as to see the vid you would have to log on, find the thread, find the post, read the description of the vid ,see the warning and then click anyway. Merely logging on to the Oatcake would not mean you'd even come across that vid, let alone have to watch it). If you decided not to watch because of all the warnings i.e. thread title, description of the video itself, warning that it's sensitive material, then yes that IS VERY different to the news as the news doesn't have anything like that many pre-warnings of what they're going to show. So, in summary....according to you, the news is fine to display anything with no warnings but on here it's not ok to post a vid that takes about 5 steps for people to find and then decide if THEY want to make the CHOICE to view it. There's nothing illegal in any way about people posting it and there are clear warnings so people who don't want to see it don't have to. If you didn't bother watching, then you're not really in any position to comment on the suitability of it anyway are you, let alone decide it should be banned. Why should it be banned anyway? I don't think you've actually given any reason as to why it should be as yet (apart from the "all i did was log on" lie, as we've established you'd have to take far more steps than just logging on to view it) Horses for courses Put the sport on the sport pages. Put the TV guide on the... "Stoke City and OTHER FOOTBALL RELATED TALK". Clearly states that on the homepage where it explains what is/isn't allowed on each board. On that basis no, it should not be banned. There you go. You're right, it actually WAS a simple enough question to answer as it turns out...we just weren't aware that the answer is "enuntio just can't bloody read the rules of the board"
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 16:23:42 GMT
Double nope. There are other pages for other topics. Aa you are well aware of. Is your issue the content or the fact its on the Stoke City board? If it was purely the board it was on (which is the angle he's now trying to spin),surely he'd want the whole thread to be banned rather than just be complaining about specific posts? If it's about the content, then as pointed out, there are many warnings before viewing the post. My guess is that he's not really got any clear argument (hence him never as yet explaining WHY it should be banned) so is now flip flopping around in different directions as and when people point out his arguments have zero validity.
|
|
|
Post by albundy on Feb 11, 2023 16:30:06 GMT
Is your issue the content or the fact its on the Stoke City board? If it was purely the board it was on (which is the angle he's now trying to spin),surely he'd want the whole thread to be banned rather than just be complaining about specific posts? If it's about the content, then as pointed out, there are many warnings before viewing the post. My guess is that he's not really got any clear argument (hence him never as yet explaining WHY it should be banned) so is now flip flopping around in different directions as and when people point out his arguments have zero validity. I fully agree. His first post was asking if posts like these should be banned, referring to the content rather than the board itself.
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 16:39:10 GMT
Horses for courses Put the sport on the sport pages. Put the TV guide on the... "Stoke City and OTHER FOOTBALL RELATED TALK". Clearly states that on the homepage where it explains what is/isn't allowed on each board. On that basis no, it should not be banned. There you go. You're right, it actually WAS a simple enough question to answer as it turns out...we just weren't aware that the answer is "enuntio just can't bloody read the rules of the board" Again nope Engage the grey matter. See the bigger picture. Think about what happened in Surry this week And then look at the drivel that has just been wote/written on these very pages. The Internet has created a
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 17:02:07 GMT
"Stoke City and OTHER FOOTBALL RELATED TALK". Clearly states that on the homepage where it explains what is/isn't allowed on each board. On that basis no, it should not be banned. There you go. You're right, it actually WAS a simple enough question to answer as it turns out...we just weren't aware that the answer is "enuntio just can't bloody read the rules of the board" Again nope Engage the grey matter. See the bigger picture. Think about what happened in Surry this week And then look at the drivel that has just been wote/written on these very pages. The Internet has created a They are the rules of the board, so no it shouldn't be banned and your "nope" response is therefore pointless whether you like it or not. You're simply factually incorrect. It really is that simple. You may not like those rules but with all due respect, in terms of the question you asked i.e. should it be banned,your opinion of the rules is 100% irrelevant. Factually, no it shouldn't because of the very rules of the board. Are you therefore calling for any post on any platform anywhere on the internet that portrays any kind of violence to be banned because of what happened in Surrey?? Why Surrey anyway? There have been countless threads on this subject on here before, also countless violent offences comitted in other places apart from Surrey for millennia yet you've never once complained before. In fact, you've only just even mentioned Surrey despite me asking several times why it should be banned. Sounds suspiciously like yet another change of direction from you and something that just popped into your mind just now, as you continue to really, really flounder and flap around (to a pretty embarassing extent actually) So.... 1) The post has more warnings than any news programme does, to ensure you DON'T HAVE TO WATCH IT!! 2) The thread is absolutely on the right board of the Oatcake 3) The thread is clearly titled (and even if you somehow seemed to be confused by it, the several pages of posts that precede the posts you complained about make it abundantly clear what the thread is concerning) 4) What happened in Surrey was not football related in any way, so absolutely nothing to do with this thread. To conflate the 2 is erroneous, disingenuous and another sign of you really clutching at straws (and by the way, people videoing what happened in Surrey is precisely what is likely to convict the people charged. Without those videos getting convictions would be far harder) I suggest YOU engage the grey matter (something you've struggled with since first being questioned on this matter), learn how to read (the rules of this board are laid out in black and white) and realise that the internet wasn't invented solely for you and that although incidents like those in Surrey and shown on this thread are different, they do share one thing in common i.e. both have been going on for decades (centuries when it comes to the Surrey incident) before the internet was even invented. To blame what happened in Surrey (disgusting as it was) solely on the internet is utterly ridiculous and especially distasteful to now suddenly come up with it to use as a tool to "win" an argument on here, considering you never once even implied any issue relating to it at any point beforehand Now, where are you moving the goalposts to next i wonder? P.S. what is really strange, is the fact that the actual full video of the Surrey incident (which is far worse than the vid you complained about here) has been on a specific thread devoted to that very incident for over 3 days now...yet you haven't ONCE even commented on that thread to show your concern/worry or asked for that vid to be banned...weird considering how concerned you apparently are about the incident and the effect these videos can have. It's almost like you've quickly shoehorned the Surrey incident in here as some desperate attempt to make a point, although very badly it has to be said. Stranger still is the fact that this sudden heartfelt and sincere concern with the Surrey incident was your THIRD stab at a reason for why it should be banned. First was because all you had to do was log on to be confronted by the vid you complained about (pointed out to you that was 100% incorrect), second was it's on the wrong board (again, pointed out you were 100% incorrect) then finally your "Surrey...think about the children" bullshit. All over the bloody place.
|
|
|
Post by lstokie on Feb 11, 2023 17:54:03 GMT
"Stoke City and OTHER FOOTBALL RELATED TALK". Clearly states that on the homepage where it explains what is/isn't allowed on each board. On that basis no, it should not be banned. There you go. You're right, it actually WAS a simple enough question to answer as it turns out...we just weren't aware that the answer is "enuntio just can't bloody read the rules of the board" Again nope Engage the grey matter. See the bigger picture. Think about what happened in Surry this week And then look at the drivel that has just been wote/written on these very pages. The Internet has created a What the fuck are you on about?
|
|
|
Post by st3mark on Feb 11, 2023 18:04:56 GMT
You then clicked on a thread with a title that makes it clear what the subject matter is, found a post with a vid that clearly describes what's on the video and warns you it displays sensitive material and then you clicked on "Play" anyway despite that warning. Don't try to pretend you had it forced upon you with no knowledge of what is was about and therefore just couldn't avoid it. Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . No is the answer. We live in a world where everyone wants to ban everything and it's allowing the gimps to take over. These kind of videos are educational for football fans in terms of safety and also a lot of people find them interesting.
|
|
jm
Academy Starlet
Posts: 188
|
Post by jm on Feb 11, 2023 18:18:31 GMT
Reading fan, friend of mine, got punched at Man Utd last week - lost 3 teeth, totally unprovoked
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2023 18:25:14 GMT
Nope, a bit of mither could refer to football players pulling shirts. And I did not ask if i should watch i asked if Whether these sort of posts and videos should be banned on this particular board An easy enough question to answer... . No is the answer. We live in a world where everyone wants to ban everything and it's allowing the gimps to take over. These kind of videos are educational for football fans in terms of safety and also a lot of people find them interesting. Bizarre really. He previously made posts like "Football is a man's game" and people who don't like it are "wet lettuces and big girls blouses", now he sees a vid he doesn't like and it's "Ban it immediately!"
|
|
|
Post by st3mark on Feb 11, 2023 18:29:36 GMT
No is the answer. We live in a world where everyone wants to ban everything and it's allowing the gimps to take over. These kind of videos are educational for football fans in terms of safety and also a lot of people find them interesting. Bizarre really. He previously made posts like "Football is a man's game" and people who don't like it are "wet lettuces and big girls blouses", now he sees a vid he doesn't like and it's "Ban it immediately!" I don't get offended by any of the stuff mentioned. But when things do offend me I don't believe in banning that either. The law has told us the basic rights and wrongs for a long time. If the thread showed videos of dodgy porn or someone dying maybe I'd understand. But banning a video of something as everyday as football fans getting excited? Do me a favour.
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Feb 11, 2023 18:30:33 GMT
Football related hooliganism doesn't need to be glamourised and the modern trend to do things just to be uploaded on U-Tube and viewed X² amount of times is becoming a very nasty social problem. I seem to remember a thread about banning Russia from football getting either locked or moved. Yet this thread is about what?
Let's all have a disco...
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Feb 11, 2023 18:34:57 GMT
Reading fan, friend of mine, got punched at Man Utd last week - lost 3 teeth, totally unprovoked Nothing surprising at the home of the wheel chair attackers the.msot diabolical institution on the planet
|
|
|
Post by st3mark on Feb 11, 2023 18:51:17 GMT
Football related hooliganism doesn't need to be glamourised and the modern trend to do things just to be uploaded on U-Tube and viewed X² amount of times is becoming a very nasty social problem. I seem to remember a thread about banning Russia from football getting either locked or moved. Yet this thread is about what? Let's all have a disco... There was nothing glamorous about the videos on this thread. I'd be embarrassed if I was on on any of them. Happy slapping videos etc I find unpleasant. But if you're a football fan attending games this awareness is important. I'm not trying to be critical of the Reading fan mentioned by someone else but football matches aren't picnics, there are pricks everywhere who will attack randomers and alertness at the match is a must. When my son is old enough to go to the games alone I'll show him this type of stuff so he knows not to be letting his guard down ready for some stranger to knock his teeth out.
|
|