Fake twitter ITK bull

[milo]

Could we possibly adopt similar rules in January

I don't see any distinction between people posting made up stuff on Twitter and people posting made up stuff on blows, message boards or newspapers. People whinging about it constantly does get a little tiring though.

 

[Rossi22]

It's best to have a separate transfer rumours thread and an itk/twitter thread.

 

[ArcspacE]

It's best to have a separate transfer rumours thread and an itk/twitter thread.

What is the difference?

 

[ArcspacE]

I don't see any distinction between people posting made up stuff on Twitter and people posting made up stuff on blows, message boards or newspapers. People whinging about it constantly does get a little tiring though.

Alternatively we can always adopt a strategy of elminating non-credible sources much like they've attempted to do over there, take a stand against all these clownshoes.

 

[Jordinho]

Or we can just take it for what it is, a bit of fun. It's not exactly a matter of life or death or of any kind of significant importance at all.

 

[ArcspacE]

Or we can just take it for what it is, a bit of fun. It's not exactly a matter of life or death or of any kind of significant importance at all.

If that's the case - we need to accept there will be comments from both sides of the spectrum - i.e. those who enjoy it and those who don't and comment accordingly.

 

[Rossi22]

What is the difference?

Well transfer rumours is from media outlets, itk and twitter isn't. You and certain other posters derail the thread by slagging off anyone that posts the latter.

 

[Jordinho]

If that's the case - we need to accept there will be comments from both sides of the spectrum - i.e. those who enjoy it and those who don't and comment accordingly.

Why do we need to read the same anti ITK comments on every page of a thread? Especially when those comments have nothing to do with what has been posted.

 

[ArcspacE]

Well transfer rumours is from media outlets, itk and twitter isn't. You and certain other posters derail the thread by slagging off anyone that posts the latter.

Media outlets are often fed from twitter and itks themselves = no difference for me. The only distinction possible here is credible vs. non-credible sources which as already explained is unlikely to happen. For better or worse.

I don't slag people who posts ITK - I analyse the ITK itself and comment accordingly.

 

[Rossi22]

Yes so a separate thread would be better as there would be no need for Arcspace and others to even view the thread let alone post in it.

 

[Jordinho]

Yes so a separate thread would be better as there would be no need for Arcspace and others to even view the thread let alone post in it.

The problem is that people cannot stick to discussing info in separate threads, it will flow into every thread. The only way to uphold any separation would be heavy policing of those threads and we all know how happy some are about that.

 

[ArcspacE]

Why do we need to read the same anti ITK comments on every page of a thread? Especially when those comments have nothing to do with what has been posted.

It has everything to do with what has been posted, imv - most of the time they're related to the ITK post itself not the ITK (unless he has history of being persistently wrong) - i.e. 'We are signing Falcao' or that qunt who said 'we just spent 30m on deadline day around 10h45pm' only to see nothing happen.

The comments aren't anti-ITK - they are anti some the things ITKs post. Just few posts up you're arging people shouldn't be stupid enough to be duped by parody accounts and general nonsense - well some of us like to call flimflam when such is presented. I see little point in attempting to censor that.

 

[Jordinho]

It has everything to do with what has been posted, imv - most of the time they're related to the ITK post itself not the ITK (unless he has history of being persistently wrong) - i.e. 'We are signing Falcao' or that qunt who said 'we just spent 30m on deadline day around 10h45pm' only to see nothing happen.

The comments aren't anti-ITK - they are anti some the things ITKs post. Just few posts up you're arging people shouldn't be stupid enough to be duped by parody accounts and general nonsense - well some of us like to call flimflam when such is presented. I see little point in attempting to censor that.

Then I can only assume you don't read what you yourself and others post. It's bashing of ITK because of WHAT it is (as in the concept of someone being ITK), not because of who said it or what was said.

 

[Superhudd]

So, you ban or give infractions to WUM, but its ok to copy and paste what they say and discuss and talk about what they write. :-k

 

[Jordinho]

So, you ban or give infractions to WUM, but its ok to copy and paste what they say and discuss and talk about what they write. :-k

Not sure what you're on about here, but in a transfer window pretty much EVERYTHING is either agenda driven or just complete bs. If we were only going to allow credible rumours (ie. targets that have been acknowledged by the club itself, everything else is just speculation on someone's part) the transfer rumour thread would be VERY short.

 

[ArcspacE]

Then I can only assume you don't read what you yourself and others post. It's bashing of ITK because of WHAT it is (as in the concept of someone being ITK), not because of who said it or what was said.

I like to analyse what they post, not who they are (since that is unknown)

It's 'commenting on' it because it doesn't make logical sense (which is usually rationally presented in the response itself - i.e. eplained why it is being 'called')

Praising and 'bashing' are both responses from a different end of the spectrum and either both are tolerated or both are banned, imv

 

[Superhudd]

Not sure what you're on about here, but in a transfer window pretty much EVERYTHING is either agenda driven or just complete bs. If we were only going to allow credible rumours (ie. targets that have been acknowledged by the club itself, everything else is just speculation on someone's part) the transfer rumour thread would be VERY short.

Short = site Intergrity

 

[Superhudd]

I think that the RAWK thing about banning brick from non reputable sources if a good idea. When I say that I mean a name to the face, and face to what they write.

Intergrity to kick out the senseless WUMs that IMO will become even worse this coming window, with more freaks trying to decept and become popular. Twitter accounts need to be attached to newspapers or they must have had articles gone to print whether online or not.

We must cut out the brick from sites such as those from newnow that say we are signing a player for 30m only for the them to say 24hrs later we are signing bob for 40m.

If we don't we are no better than those that so many dispise.

Perhaps two threads, one a free for all, and one with decent reputable meaning. See how it goes, see which gets the more meaningful discussion.

Edit - When I mean reputable I do not mean an ITK saying my uncle knows Defoes agent and Mod from another site has vouched for that ITK status.

Also are you able to give mod status to a single thread only. Giving those that want such a thread the ability to police themselves and not have to stretch the resources of the mod team.

 

[milo]

I think that the RAWK thing about banning brick from non reputable sources if a good idea. When I say that I mean a name to the face, and face to what they write.

Intergrity to kick out the senseless WUMs that IMO will become even worse this coming window, with more freaks trying to decept and become popular. Twitter accounts need to be attached to newspapers or they must have had articles gone to print whether online or not.

We must cut out the brick from sites such as those from newnow that say we are signing a player for 30m only for the them to say 24hrs later we are signing bob for 40m.

If we don't we are no better than those that so many dispise.

Perhaps two threads, one a free for all, and one with decent reputable meaning. See how it goes, see which gets the more meaningful discussion.

Edit - When I mean reputable I do not mean an ITK saying my uncle knows Defoes agent and Mod from another site has vouched for that ITK status.

Also are you able to give mod status to a single thread only. Giving those that want such a thread the ability to police themselves and not have to stretch the resources of the mod team.

I disagree entirely. I think that people re-posting rumours here should link to a source. People here can then make up their own mind as to how reliable they think the information is.

 

[jts1882]

RAWK Transfer Forum Rules v2:

UNLESS FROM THE BELOW SOURCES, NO TWITTER brick.

Journalists from - The Times, The Liverpool Echo, The Liverpool Daily Post, The Guardian, The Torygraph, The Independent & The BBC.
Duncan Jenkins, Guillem Ballague, Gabriel Marcotti (Basically any respected foreign journalists) & any of the Anfield Wrap lads.
(If you think someone should be on the above list then PM me and I'll add them on once I've checked them out or missed them out.)

Please only discuss LFC related transfer moves. No 'Oh I see Spurs have signed Vertoghen thats depressing' As it ends up sparking a discussion about how far LFC have fell, why aren't we buying him now, blah, blah, blah. It's boring a tedious, leave it out.

Abuse any LFC Playing & None Playing staff will not be tolerated.

If a players' thread becomes locked for a reason other than arguments/going off topic don't come in here to start posting the views you would have posted in there.

If anyone breaks these rules persistently they will be muted or possibly banned. If you don't like it then sorry there's plenty of other places were you can discuss things.

Oh yeh, and no complaining about the rules either.

Seems a pretty good set of rules for a transfer forum.

Presumably there are other threads for complaining about their not signing Vertoghen, Sigurdsson, Dempsey etc, slagging off Liverpool players, and complaining about the rules. Just not in the transfer forum.

I think its interesting that they exclude the tabloids and Sky from the credible source list. The inclusion of Duncan Jenkins and Guillem Ballague is more questionable, although the latter is a perspiring journalist and did get some things right when Rafa was manager.