The Gooner Forum

flash gunner wrote:can we stop the bullshit on here lads.....????? USmartin you have to accept people dont agree or dont want to go along with your view on the board of Arsenal but also it seems everyone else is bumming eachother up to have digs at USMartin ie quartz is winning the boxing match, quality posts or animations that depict Martin but not Quartz or oldgit etc etc etc....

Now i have nothing against USMartin, Quartz, olgit or anyone else on here but its becoming quite tedious and im suprised you all havent got better things to do

Sorry Flash but there is no notion of us wanting to join up for digs at USMartin.

His argument style, and his accusations of others "withholding information" to deceive other posters, or to simply win an argument with him, is not cool, and it has to be dealt with.

Him and I have something in common in that we both use quite long posts, argue hard, and keep arguing a point when many would have stopped, all of which can wind others up.

But I like to think I argue to the point, but I believe it has been USMartin's habit to split hairs.
Or turn a discussion into an argument about people deceiving others, or into an argument about the very framework of the argument, that has wound up a number of posters.
Good posters, who add to the Forum.

It has to be dealt with or various people will continue to take issue with Martin and his argument techniques, rather than the subject matter/issues of his post.
They will see him as WUM, and if he is genuinely not one, he needs to change the way he writes and how he speaks to people.

LDB wrote:seems a tad non committal to me... at no point does that email apologise for banning you, she is merely absolving herself of any responsibility.

If anything this: "Tragically my Son is not here to run it, but I am 100% sure He would not run it any differently" suggests your claim to victim status is somewhat shaky.

No doubt this post is pissing in the wind, if there is one thing I've learned about you is that you read what you want to read.

Nice try - she doesn't even acknowldge that she is either. Indeed sha doesn't even acknowledge any awareness of whether I am being banned or not turthfully. As I say I was told by another long-time member she contacted because he was considering leaving over my banning that she told him that it would not have happened were Steve still alive. I cannot be sure that is true but have no reason to believe he would lie about Mrs Gleiber.

QuartzGooner wrote:

flash gunner wrote:can we stop the bullshit on here lads.....????? USmartin you have to accept people dont agree or dont want to go along with your view on the board of Arsenal but also it seems everyone else is bumming eachother up to have digs at USMartin ie quartz is winning the boxing match, quality posts or animations that depict Martin but not Quartz or oldgit etc etc etc....

Now i have nothing against USMartin, Quartz, olgit or anyone else on here but its becoming quite tedious and im suprised you all havent got better things to do

Sorry Flash but there is no notion of us wanting to join up for digs at USMartin.

His argument style, and his accusations of others "withholding information" to deceive other posters, or to simply win an argument with him, is not cool, and it has to be dealt with.

Him and I have something in common in that we both use quite long posts, argue hard, and keep arguing a point when many would have stopped, all of which can wind others up.

But I like to think I argue to the point, but I believe it has been USMartin's habit to split hairs.
Or turn a discussion into an argument about people deceiving others, or into an argument about the very framework of the argument, that has wound up a number of posters.
Good posters, who add to the Forum.

It has to be dealt with or various people will continue to take issue with Martin and his argument techniques, rather than the subject matter/issues of his post.
They will see him as WUM, and if he is genuinely not one, he needs to change the way he writes and how he speaks to people.

Agree 100%

Not that i want to be accused of bumming you in order to have a dig at USmartin or anything

LDB wrote:
Agree 100%

Not that i want to be accused of bumming you in order to have a dig at USmartin or anything

No danger of that. I do not play tennis!

LDB and Quartz - the battle of the busts

You ask what forum rule that you have been in violation of. Well I have looked at the rules and it would seem that they are either incomplete or simply not explicit enough. By the exact words contained within you are not in contravention of any of those listed specifically.

The need to check the rules this closely has not arisen before. However it would seem that they fall well short of what is required if challenged. For instance, according to the rules, a poster could simply post their views about various seaside resorts in the Algarve. In fact they could make that same post 40 times a day, each and every day.


It should be noted that the rules have not been changed one iota in the three-plus years since this incident happened

http://forum.stevegleiber.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=9

Oh and LTG's point about seaside reports in the Algarve well anybody familiar with Steve's Forum knows that is what happens every other day

USMartin wrote:

LDB wrote:seems a tad non committal to me... at no point does that email apologise for banning you, she is merely absolving herself of any responsibility.

If anything this: "Tragically my Son is not here to run it, but I am 100% sure He would not run it any differently" suggests your claim to victim status is somewhat shaky.

No doubt this post is pissing in the wind, if there is one thing I've learned about you is that you read what you want to read.

Nice try - she doesn't even acknowldge that she is either. Indeed sha doesn't even acknowledge any awareness of whether I am being banned or not turthfully. As I say I was told by another long-time member she contacted because he was considering leaving over my banning that she told him that it would not have happened were Steve still alive. I cannot be sure that is true but have no reason to believe he would lie about Mrs Gleiber.

But the evidence you are presenting at the very best refuses to verify the interpretation of Mrs Gleiber's stance you picked up from a third party. At worst it outright contradicts it by seeming to back the moderators. It is entirely possible that Mrs Gleiber has told your friend one thing in the hope that she could diffuse the situation without the need to create a further scene.

Either way, i dont think Mrs Gleiber, largely for reasons she stated herself (lack of involvement/interest in the running of the forum) is the person you should really be presenting to fight your corner.

QuartzGooner wrote:

LDB wrote:
Agree 100%

Not that i want to be accused of bumming you in order to have a dig at USmartin or anything

No danger of that. I do not play tennis!

You should give this US open final a watch though, jolly terriffic stuff. Lets just hope novak can take the second set to make a real contest of it eh? I want to see them sweat

Edit: Djokovic has taken the second set, looks like im in for an all nighter

Martin, in the four months you have been here you have bored the pants off most and have been abusive to many.

I can't remember one single poster ever describing fellow forum members as liars, hypocrites, twats, assholes, etc,etc,etc on a regular basis. And refusing to apologise for it.

You got a bad mouth.

Which is one reason I enjoy ruffling your feathers.

In all seriousness Quartz

You are sying that the Highbury re-development should be judged over a fifty year time frame only, and you cite as evidence to support this how its similarity to the building of and payment for the East and West Stands;.

Let's see

East and West Stands

Paid for over a forty year period produced profits for 30 years after that

Highbury Re-development


Already fully paid for and have produced almost all profits they will for the club

That is a clear and indisputable difference you neglect to point out in making this point and comparison and you withhold your knowledge of this information when making that point. That is withholding information then is it not?

LDB wrote:

USMartin wrote:

LDB wrote:seems a tad non committal to me... at no point does that email apologise for banning you, she is merely absolving herself of any responsibility.

If anything this: "Tragically my Son is not here to run it, but I am 100% sure He would not run it any differently" suggests your claim to victim status is somewhat shaky.

No doubt this post is pissing in the wind, if there is one thing I've learned about you is that you read what you want to read.

Nice try - she doesn't even acknowldge that she is either. Indeed sha doesn't even acknowledge any awareness of whether I am being banned or not turthfully. As I say I was told by another long-time member she contacted because he was considering leaving over my banning that she told him that it would not have happened were Steve still alive. I cannot be sure that is true but have no reason to believe he would lie about Mrs Gleiber.

But the evidence you are presenting at the very best refuses verify the interpretation of Mrs Gleiber's stance you picked up from a third party. At worst it outright contradicts it by seeming to back the moderators. It is entirely possible that Mrs Gleiber has told your friend one thing in the hope that she could diffuse the situation without the need to create a further scene.

Either way, i dont think Mrs Gleiber, largely for reasons she stated herself (lack of involvement/interest in the running of the forum) is the person you should really be presenting to fight your corner.

I wasn't - Olgit made the drect refrence to her in bold letters with rolled eyes

Correct.

After you used her as a defensive ploy.

BTW LDB that last post you offered sounded like me

Now you've been abused mate.

USMartin wrote:BTW LDB that last post you offered sounded like me

Now you've been abused mate.

You like tennis too?

USMartin wrote:In all seriousness Quartz

You are sying that the Highbury re-development should be judged over a fifty year time frame only, and you cite as evidence to support this how its similarity to the building of and payment for the East and West Stands;.

Let's see

East and West Stands

Paid for over a forty year period produced profits for 30 years after that

Highbury Re-development


Already fully paid for and have produced almost all profits they will for the club

That is a clear and indisputable difference you neglect to point out in making this point and comparison and you withhold your knowledge of this information when making that point. That is withholding information then is it not?

USMartin.

So I have not mentioned every detail of the scheme.
But that is not an intentional "withholding of information".
Of course there is a difference in how the schemes were paid for, but I consider that difference a technicality.
The impact of borrowing a huge amount of money, redeveloping Highbury, and then paying it back, cannot in my opinion, be fully judged straight away.
Especially when the club is paying back the new stadium bond over many years too.
The effects knock on for years.

If you think I am intentionally withholding information to deceive, it shows a paranoia in your mind, and seriously you need help for that.
It is just a difference of opinion.




LDB

Tennis all-nighter?

Maybe you should PM Franksav?