• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cheatski are still scum

mephitis said:
I hasten to add I don't like the headline, just Yiddo's comment. No less than I'd expect from that lot:( CVNTS
Click to expand...

Anyone in the public eye will have had death threats, it's a very easy way to make someone appear to be a victim and it's kind of tiresome.

If there are people genuinely plotting to kill Potter and his family obviously that's not cool, not would it be cool just to send false death threats obviously, it's just small people using what little tools they have at their disposal but also kind of pointless.

Chelsea fans aren't all clams because a few potential bots have sent death threats, they're all clams because they're Chelsea fans.
 
Gotta be some kind of special breed to send a death threat, especially to a football manager. Potter seems a nice bloke, he might be a failure of a manager at Chelsea but how that then equates to sending a decent family man a death threat over a game of football, beggars belief really.

Between the racism, hissing, Spurs are on the way to Auschwitz chants and racism, they really are a lovely bunch aint they
 
spurspinter1 said:
Anyone in the public eye will have had death threats, it's a very easy way to make someone appear to be a victim and it's kind of tiresome.

If there are people genuinely plotting to kill Potter and his family obviously that's not cool, not would it be cool just to send false death threats obviously, it's just small people using what little tools they have at their disposal but also kind of pointless.

Chelsea fans aren't all clams because a few potential bots have sent death threats, they're all clams because they're Chelsea fans.
Click to expand...
Just because others in the public eye have had death threats doesn't make it ok. Would you be happy if you got death threats because you didn't meet expectations at your job?
If it's not highlighted nothing will be done about it. Anyone that sends death threats or other abuse on social media is scum and deserves a prison sentence.
 
DubSpur said:
Just because others in the public eye have had death threats doesn't make it ok. Would you be happy if you got death threats because you didn't meet expectations at your job?
If it's not highlighted nothing will be done about it. Anyone that sends death threats or other abuse on social media is scum and deserves a prison sentence.
Click to expand...

We seem to live in a world where people don't think there are consequences for their actions. Totally agree on a prison sentence for anyone found guilty.
 
DubSpur said:
Just because others in the public eye have had death threats doesn't make it ok. Would you be happy if you got death threats because you didn't meet expectations at your job?
If it's not highlighted nothing will be done about it. Anyone that sends death threats or other abuse on social media is scum and deserves a prison sentence.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be happy no and it's a can of worms but my jobs haven't anywhere near the level of remuneration as Graham Potters, not that that makes it okay but must be more bearable if you can afford security and massive gates to the mansion. When I have been threatened and attacked it has been genuine rather than from deranged angry fan boys on the internet.

I agree on the punishment for those guilty of making death threats, that's why there should be more accountability with any kind of social media, whether it's here or Twitter etc. Abuse is a tricky one, one person calling someone a clam is a joke and to other it's abuse of the highest nature, I don't know enough on the current legal definitions of how it is framed.

As I see it, obviously the death threats aren't okay but would I want some to be punished if they called Nigel Farage or Shamima Begum a clam in a DM on some social media platform? Probably not but it then hurtles towards the debate about free speech or what is deemed as hate speech.

Age isn't an excuse but I wonder what you'd think if a 15 year old scrote faced a prison sentence for making a hollow death threat towards a footballer because they thought they'd get away with it.

Edit - Forget to mention, yes highlighting it is a good thing as long as it's to the right channels that can actually affect change. Maybe it sounds cold but in Potter's case it feels like more of a buying a bit of sympathy things he does seem like a genuinely nice person and doesn't deserve it but that doesn't mean much, it's a jungle out there.
 
spurspinter1 said:
Abuse is a tricky one, one person calling someone a clam is a joke and to other it's abuse of the highest nature, I don't know enough on the current legal definitions of how it is framed.
Click to expand...
The legal definition for defamation of a public figure has much to do with whether an average person would believe it to be true.

So if I state that John Terry is a clam, that's fine. Whilst he's demonstrably a clam of the highest order, nobody is likely to believe that he's a reproductive part of a human woman's body.

If I were to state that he has a penchant for pulling on a gimp mask and rimming STD-ridden hookers (I have no reason to believe he does) then I could possibly get into legal trouble.
 
spurspinter1 said:
I wouldn't be happy no and it's a can of worms but my jobs haven't anywhere near the level of remuneration as Graham Potters, not that that makes it okay but must be more bearable if you can afford security and massive gates to the mansion. When I have been threatened and attacked it has been genuine rather than from deranged angry fan boys on the internet.

I agree on the punishment for those guilty of making death threats, that's why there should be more accountability with any kind of social media, whether it's here or Twitter etc. Abuse is a tricky one, one person calling someone a clam is a joke and to other it's abuse of the highest nature, I don't know enough on the current legal definitions of how it is framed.

As I see it, obviously the death threats aren't okay but would I want some to be punished if they called Nigel Farage or Shamima Begum a clam in a DM on some social media platform? Probably not but it then hurtles towards the debate about free speech or what is deemed as hate speech.

Age isn't an excuse but I wonder what you'd think if a 15 year old scrote faced a prison sentence for making a hollow death threat towards a footballer because they thought they'd get away with it.

Edit - Forget to mention, yes highlighting it is a good thing as long as it's to the right channels that can actually affect change. Maybe it sounds cold but in Potter's case it feels like more of a buying a bit of sympathy things he does seem like a genuinely nice person and doesn't deserve it but that doesn't mean much, it's a jungle out there.
Click to expand...

You've been attacked? Never. You seem such a nice bloke.
 
Lilbaz said:
You've been attacked? Never. You seem such a nice bloke.
Click to expand...

This did make me chuckle so my sincere thanks.
Occasionally it has been me totally asking for it but on occasion completely unprovoked ie just getting jumped but I didn't mean to make the thread about me!

Also you've made the odd interesting post of late so well done ;)
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
The legal definition for defamation of a public figure has much to do with whether an average person would believe it to be true.

So if I state that John Terry is a clam, that's fine. Whilst he's demonstrably a clam of the highest order, nobody is likely to believe that he's a reproductive part of a human woman's body.

If I were to state that he has a penchant for pulling on a gimp mask and rimming STD-ridden hookers (I have no reason to believe he does) then I could possibly get into legal trouble.
Click to expand...

But surely the labelling of someone as a clam (whether public or online) is subjective, it may be me trying to apply logic to the law where it isn't appropriate to do so but I guess that's the line between defamation/ abuse / "banter" (ie people being mean and then just calling it a joke and then gaslighting the recipient for being too sensitive etc).

I don't think it's possible to determine who an "average person" is nor what they may believe...
 
Fp5sf_QWAAAs0cn
 
How can any half decent manager not find 11 players out of their ludicrously expensively assembled squad and get them playing at least halfway decent!?
They were awful today, long may it continue
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back