As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Gunnersaurus wrote:No, I believe he probably was suspended but they caught him because he uses one e mail account for Twitter and his Arsenal log in.
If you use several e mails for different accounts than I'm not sure it's possible.
My twitter e mail and my Arsenal e mail are separate, my user names are different, fail to see them spending time trying to put two and two together for everyone.
So in other words he was banned for being racist AND stupid
armchair wrote:What did he tweet that was so offensive anyway?
No-one knows.........
The absence of the tweets in question speaks volumes, as altho it is possible the person in question doesn't know, I'm sure if he would have the right to know if he wished to challenge the ban!!!
In general, I'm all for people being held accountable for what they post on line. People get away with atrocious behavior that they would never dream of away from the anonymity of the internet.
So if the accused tweeter was posting anything outside of the law then I'm delighted they were banned. Named and shamed would be great too!
That said, the absence of evidence in that letter from Arsenal is worrying
To be considered racist you only have to call Wenger a French something or other and whoops apocalypse you are guilty of racist comments .
Summary secretive Justice handed out from the bunker Via anonymous letters . If you appeal they wont accept personal appearance or representation so thats useless too .
g88ner wrote:In general, I'm all for people being held accountable for what they post on line. People get away with atrocious behavior that they would never dream of away from the anonymity of the internet.
So if the accused tweeter was posting anything outside of the law then I'm delighted they were banned. Named and shamed would be great too!
That said, the absence of evidence in that letter from Arsenal is worrying
But if he/she posts anything outside the law, then surely it is up to the cops to take action ?? I keep saying this but I really don't see where the club has the right to ban somebody who has yet to be convicted of any crime In my opinion people are being blinded by the nature of the alleged crime, and are either ignoring or cant see how disgraceful it is that the club can be allowed govern outside their property and media sites, and we also refuse to accept the possible serious precedent they have set for the future. Ignorant people often view racism as a colour thing (black versus white), but as herd rightly pointed out, it is a nationality thing and calling wenker a French cock on here would give the club grounds to expel any one of us for racism if they are given free reign to do so
Robin_L wrote:Glad these Twitter trolls get banned, well done Arsenal.
I only hope the more derisory stuff on this website i've seen on occasion about Wenger needing to expire has been treated in the same way. After all I got a ban for calling someone a prick who basically fully deserves it. I can only presume their ban was proportionally appropriate
Only that's not quite true, is it. You were banned after several warnings about personal abuse on here. Your delightful habit of regularly just rocking up here and calling everyone "mugs" and "pricks" is what got you a temporary ban. On other forums it would have been permanent.
Ed Hunter The Gooner wrote:It could be that Kick it out reported this to Arsenal and they HAD to act to not to look like they don't care. Or could be something else, who knows.
If this was the case you can understand that the club would have to be seen to be going in hard.
I have to ask other than the picture has anyone actually laid hands on or seen the document?
I'll say it again, to uphold something like that i'm fairly sure you'd need to produce evidence and state clearly the details of the incident within the letter before it would become legally binding after all we're talking about a service/goods that the individual may have paid a significant amount for