January transfer window: Your shout

[Skinhead in a Suit]

One mention of "itk" and this thread has gone way off topic. Go figure...

 

[Crawley]

I believe in father Christmas too.

Why wouldn't you?

 

[JellySpur]

It should be akin to how it was a few years back with the 'danchevs enclosed' thread for ITk's (yes, I was lurking even then... back to my corner for a few days).

 

[ArcspacE]

The ITK worshipping and bashing have to be in the same thread or what's the point.

This

 

[ArcspacE]

We are outing someone who has multiple accounts (against the rules) and did the big strop off under his original name, but has crept back and is trying to con everyone.

Bit different isn't it?

Out of interest - why is he still at large - trolling the exact same threads with the exact same topics of polarised division and having more and more posters biting?

 

[Jordinho]

This

The reason for having a separate ITK thread would be that those that actually want to read it and talk about it could do so without the bashing derailing the thread and those that don't care for it can avoid it.

 

[Jordinho]

Out of interest - why is he still at large - trolling the exact same threads with the exact same topics of polarised division and having more and more posters biting?

As long as someone hasn't been banned they're free to come here and post all they want.

 

[Crawley]

Out of interest - why is he still at large - trolling the exact same threads with the exact same topics of polarised division and having more and more posters biting?

A bit like countless other posters on here. Also known as having an opinion. Regardless if you agree with it or not.

 

[Kingdawson]

I love how mods simply ignore posts when they see they've made an error rather than simply put their hands up and admit it was an error:ross:

 

[milo]

I love how mods simply ignore posts when they see they've made an error rather than simply put their hands up and admit it was an error:ross:

We're not ignoring it, we are discussing it between ourselves and will come back with a response later.

 

[Jordinho]

but you're avoiding the question. Can you make it clear so we're all aware of the rules come January rather then simply avoiding it now and then out of the blue stating someone is breaking site rules in January.

Is it ok to claim a poster is someone else now? i've made a promise that i will try my best to keep the itk bashing to a minimal but will i be threatened with post mod if i refer to a poster as an itk (i also would like to know how it's ok to refer to Moonlit as push and run but not ok to refer to spursfan1957 as moonlit but i doubt that will be answered).

These are my personal opinions and may not reflect the official stance once/should we take one:

There is no explicit rule on this. Continually referring to someone as someone they're not can be interpreted as targeting that poster with hostile rumours. It will depend on how the mods as a group sees it. I don't see why there's a need to do it though.

When a poster returns under a new name I think it's acceptable to let on that this is the case, but not to constantly keep bringing it up in a way that seems like someone taking a dig. The name spursfan1957 is not registered and I have no recollection of that poster, though it appears some of you do. Whether or not that poster is now here under a different name doesn't really matter, many have changed their names at some point, for various reasons.

 

[P.D.]

8 pages of discussing how it should be done is boring me already.

If you want to have a read only thread for rumours then it should allow all ITK, Twitter, Newspaper stories as long as the original source is there.

Then one other thread for anything goes e.g. ITK could be posted in there as well and discussed.

I'm happy with just one thread myself but the above suggestion would work best for those who don't like that.

 

[Spursalot]

Out of interest - why is he still at large - trolling the exact same threads with the exact same topics of polarised division and having more and more posters biting?

The big difference here, of course, is you accused Rossi of being someone not associated with this forum.
We are outing someone who has multiple accounts (against the rules) and did the big strop off under his original name, but has crept back and is trying to con everyone.

Bit different isn't it?

As long as someone hasn't been banned they're free to come here and post all they want.

Dear Santa, what i would like for christmas is some consistency.

 

[Jordinho]

Dear Santa, what i would like for christmas is some consistency.

That's Crawley from the future, once the rule is in place in writing.

And it's consistent, the poster in question isn't banned.

 

[billyiddo]

how do those two points contradict each other ?

 

[Spursalot]

how do those two points contradict each other ?

He has multiple accounts, that is against the rules, therefore why has he not been banned?



I can see into the future? damnit, not even something useful like lottery numbers..

 

[Jordinho]

Back on topic: Burn the ITKs at the stake or not?

 

[milo]

He has multiple accounts, that is against the rules, therefore why has he not been banned?

I can see into the future? damnit, not even something useful like lottery numbers..

Currently, multiple accounts are only against the site rules if you are already banned. The admin team are discussing this at the moment and might change the rules on this.

What is against the rules is members of this board taking modding into their own hands and deciding to "out" someone, particularly when the outing is unrelenting. The admin team have the benefit of having the IP records for everyone who registers here and are in a better position to see whether someone has multiple accounts.

The issue with Rossi getting called Jjetset by a number of posters on here is that it was taking threads off topics and making it difficult for him to post.

No one has been given infraction points for accusing a poster of being someone else before, just quietly asked to stop.

 

[ArcspacE]

The reason for having a separate ITK thread would be that those that actually want to read it and talk about it could do so without the bashing derailing the thread and those that don't care for it can avoid it.

Why should ITK discussion be treated with preference and protected from being questioned on the same grounds other rumours might be 'analysed'?

Else you need separate discussion threads for

- ITK
- Tweeter
- Newspaper articles
- Hearsay
- NOTW
- etc.

Is that truly viable?

 

[milo]

Why should ITK discussion be treated with preference and protected from being questioned on the same grounds other rumours might be 'analysed'?

Else you need separate discussion threads for

- ITK
- Tweeter
- Newspaper articles
- Hearsay
- NOTW
- etc.

Is that truly viable?

Why don't we suck it and see. What happened in the summer wasn't a roaring success, so we would like to try something else.