And the winners are...

[Guest superbrad]

Wise up Jim.  For 'controversial' read 'most disliked and detested' and you'll not be far off the truth.  Whilst I am 'easy' about that fact and dont subconsciously seek or need universal acclaim or appraisal it seems that you are having problems realising just how much the other posters dislike you.  Did you have an unhappy childhood by any chance?

Couldn't agree more.

All journalists find it easy-copy to be critical.

Constructive criticism seems too difficult for the tabloid types.

They are the scum of the earth.

[Flopsy]

This is a discussion on the awards and the fact that you lot only think im the second funniest on the board  

It is not an excuse to start a slagging match about peoples proffessions.

Excellent - its christmas have some good will and enjoy those sprouts

[thenodrog]

And should I be pleased or upset to come second to a complete lunatic?

Paul.....you obviously see fit to ignore your own guidelines so  thats fair enough.  But if you do choose to do so you should do your best to remain impartial.  

Second to a lunatic eh, Jim?  Dwell on that line of thought too long and it could drive you mad............

Oh for @#/?'s sake!!!

Why the @#/? have I been yellow carded for this, eh Paul???  

I was the victim of abuse of board regulations was I not?  Afraid you've gone well over the top this time matey!

Afraid 'Something is rotten in the state of Denmark'......and Board Admin!

[thenodrog]

In fact ......stuff it!  I'll see that you get your award back asap!  (sorry voters and modi...many thanks for your efforts) But it's not worth a piggin light....is it?  

Jim........you can realise your ambition and you can be the complete lunatic now!

Oh BTW Merry fcukin Christmas everyone.......

[den]

Merry christmas thenodrog. It's only a message board, you know!

[T4E]

Am I the only one that at the moment feels that people have a license to say whatever the hell they like to thenodrog and get away with it, purely because of the problems he's had with some of the admin and board members?

I'm not trying to insight an arguement, just wondering what exactly it is that he has said on this thread that sets him apart from all the other contributors? I really can't see anything that is significantly worse than anyone else, yet he has been warned and no one else has. Anyone shed some light?

[Ricky]

I always treat each post individualy T4E

This means that I have managed to upset several of you lot by editing or deleting your posts. Lets try not to turn this thread into an argument on Christmas eve.

Merry Christmas all....

[blue phil]

Nevertheless , Ricky ; it needs saying that Theno is getting a raw deal - primarily in my opinion because his political views are somewhat to the right of centre .

This shouldn't mean that anyone can have a pop at him anytime they feel like it. Either the rules are applied equally to all or they should be changed accordingly.

 If this forum is supposed to be a true reflection of all supporters and not just a happy-clappy meeting place for the PC brigade then articulate members such as Theno should be at the very least treated with courtesy.

[Flopsy]

Right wing?? Hes got a long way to go before he beats me and Chesh  :'>

The reason why Thenodog gets carded is a) Because I have no sense of humour hence the coming second in the funniest poster section (and i dont have a chip on my shoulder over that, honest   )

Because we are trying to keep some kind of semblence of order on this board, to prevent it turning into something like the official message board, which means that we dont take to having abuse aimed anyone.

Then keep the award  - you won it fair and square.

However it is most interesting that you delight in being rude at times, but the minute anything is returned in your favour, your y-fronts get twisted quicker than a mother going to the January Sales.

Have a nice Christmas one and all and dont forget, its football, its just game, (although beating the ManU was one of the greatest feelings ive had all year, bar the worthy cup final)

[T4E]

So the lunatic jibe wasnt abuse then? I don't think Thenodrog is denying he has been abusive, but in this instance he was abused, reacted, and got warned.

[Alan75]

Bloody hell this reminds me of Johny Vagas. And the new comers award.

Dont know whats gone on, and at this time of night(gmt) is the xmas eve drink kicking in, when all said and done we are all BLACKBURN ROVERS SUPPORTERS.

If people feel agrieved, by any action by the mods/admin then message appropriate mod/admin. We will then discuss and action as necessary.

[Don]

Im confident Paul will have thought long and hard before warning someone. He always acts impartially.

Out of interest are posters happy for swearing to be allowed on the board.?We could use anagrams such as fcuking tawt and be oh so nice to each other.

Have a happy Christmas.

Rather than carry on an argument here try messaging mods/admin or stick it in the Ask the Board section.

[Paul]

I thought hard about that warning to thenodrog - it was given, as he knows, for publicly accusing me of NOT being impartial. It has nothing to do with the exchange with Jim. This is the second occassion on which thenodrog has done this. I'd ask you all to consider the following:

In late November/early December thenodrog accused me, publicly, of conducting a vendetta against him. I asked this accusation be publicly backed up - somthing thenodrog has completley ignored.

On December 9th I informed the rest of admin I planned to take 2-3 weeks break from moderating the MB. This was because I was finding the MB a very depressing place to visit. Since then I have posted on a few football related items, I have not read the MB in full for nearly three weeks. In that time I have confined myself to posting news, fixture and ticket information.

I informed thenodrog some weeks ago that I was A) not interested in what he has to say on the MB and was not going to moderate any exchange of abuse between him and others. Quite simply it is not worth the heartache. The last time I had any moderating contact with thenodrog was November 13th.

Today I read the MB fully for the first time in three weeks. I posted a remark agreeing with thenodrog about Sharp products. I posted a comment on my view that Jim is a popular poster.

I expressed the view Jim is a popular poster, saying:

(thenodrog @ Dec. 24 2002, 00:05)

it seems that you are having problems realising just how much the other posters dislike you..............

my comment was Can't say I can recall anyone posting to the effect that jim is disliked. True he may not be as optimistic as many of us but disliked? no, just can't see that at all.

For this I recieve the following response from thenodrog:

Quote (jim mk2 @ Dec. 23 2002, 19:41)

And should I be pleased or upset to come second to a complete lunatic?

Paul.....you obviously see fit to ignore your own guidelines so  thats fair enough.  But if you do choose to do so you should do your best to remain impartial.  

Second to a lunatic eh, Jim?  Dwell on that line of thought too long and it could drive you mad............

For me being impartial means attempting to view every post equally, regardless of who posts it. It does not mean that I cannot express the view that an individual is popular. Equally expressing the view Jim is popular is not a sly dig at thenodrog. If I feel it necessary to have a dig at any member it will be in private. Thenodrog has been asked on countless occassions, over several months, by all admin, publicly and privately and through third parties to cease his remarks and abuse at individuals. He has also been asked, repeatedly, to discuss any problems he has with admin in private - something else he consistently refuses to do. All of this is ignored - consequently I am NOT prepared to jeopardise my impartiality by moderating any view expressed by him or about him unless the matter becomes extraodinarily serious.

I'll leave you all to make up your minds. This whole thing just leaves me depressed and bewildered yet again. I really do need some one to explain how stating I believe an individual is popular is breaking guidelines, favouring others over thenodrog etc. I have to ask, just who does have a problem here?

[T4E]

Thank You for taking the time to explain that. Much appreciated. Just to emphasise that my question wasn't intended as a criticism, was just curious and wanted to understand the procedure a bit better, as in this case I realy didnt get it.

Cheers Paul.

Merry Christmas everyone.

[Paul]

No problem, T4E.

Have a good Christmas. I think I'm going to switch this damn thing off!!

[Shaddy]

Actually, just want to say something. It is only a messageboard, but I think some of the long-terms on here recognise that it has a fertile one in terms of topic and banter since day one. So, although we must bear in mind that it is a only a messageboard, you can't blame anyone for taking it oh so seriously.

From a personal standpoint, I don't dislike either jim or thenodrog. But then again, it takes a bit for me to build a dislike to someone. Mind you, I rarely ever agree with the bulk of their postings, and in those circumstances accept some as part of on-line persona (which is a seperate topic. on-line vs. off-line/social persona).

It's easy to avoid the post rage. Just button it when you feel your emotions are getting the best of you, and if you can't, at least avoid direct abuse in your posts. I do think though, it would be impossible to arbitrate on veiled, indirect comments/abuse, so it isn't fair to pillar the mods for that.

[tashor]

the problem is 99% of posters here are as thick as pig @#/?.

lol and all the seasonal best to all you retarded ####.

   

Edited by admin.

Watch the language tashor.

My child reads this board.

Ozexile

[tashor]

so do my lovely 7 and 10 year olds oz, lovey, what are you trying to say?

do your young 'uns also listen to eminem and play vice city like mine?

even if you don't realise it i bet they do (unless under 5 years old)

the one thing i cannot toletate is sanctimonious crap.

[Don]

What annoys me tashor are certain posters who constantly seek to flout the posting guidelines.

The posting guidelines request that foul and abusive language should not be used as children often view this forum.

In my opinion the word you used was foul and abusive.

Whether you think that is sanctimonious crap is an opinion you are entitled to.

[Modi]

And should I be pleased or upset to come second to a complete lunatic? Or is that me being controversial again?

Wise up Jim.  For 'controversial' read 'most disliked and detested' and you'll not be far off the truth.  Whilst I am 'easy' about that fact and dont subconsciously seek or need universal acclaim or appraisal it seems that you are having problems realising just how much the other posters dislike you.  Did you have an unhappy childhood by any chance?

PS You dont have to answer that of course.  Hope you win next time.......

thelunatic

Oh dear, the Groobies were meant to be a bit of fun, a chance for regulars to acknowledge the contributions of others, and a bit of self congratulation for all members to recognise that this site remains by far the best Rovers messageboard on the internet.   Remember that people, please.

As for 'controversial' meaning 'most disliked and detested', a few facts that hopefully won't be seen as revealing information on a secret ballot:

1.  A few people did ask if 'controversial' meant 'deliberatly annoying'.   I replied it meant whatever anyone thought it to mean.

2.  Gordon received more than one set of votes across a range of topics - eg most controversial and funniest - not likely to happen if everyone hates him.  

3.  I received a comment that said they wouldn't vote for Gordon as controversial, as his football comments are generally reasoned and they think of ICBINF as secondary importance.

If the Groobys are run again next year, and after the pains of this time I'm certainly not keen on doing them, then I suspect Controversial might have to be dropped.

Finally, remember Thenodrog, when refered to as a lunatic, "anyone who is remotely interesting is mad in someway or another."    

[AlanK]

Ah but define irony. Thenodrog wins most controversial award just ahead of Jim, yet it is Jim`s lunatic remark about Thenodrog ( which was probably tongue in cheek knowing him ) that has caused all the controversy about the contoversial award!!!  

[thenodrog]

Finally, remember Thenodrog, when refered to as a lunatic, "anyone who is remotely interesting is mad in someway or another."    

You are quite right Modi.  I'm not so much mad as bloody livid!

I may be controversial,  I may be abrasive, blunt, aggresive, I may be accused if sarcasm and using heavy irony, I may be lots of things but I rarely insult anybody directly EXCEPT in retaliation, which was the case on here, both with Paul McGarry and Jim.

I'm sure that you have read theguidelines on more than one occasion (in fact you might well have written them) but please peruse them again and tell me on what grounds and why Paul issued yet another yellow.  Nowhere in those guidelines is there any reference to questioning the impartiallity of the mods......also read em again and tell me why the initiators of the personal insults got off scott free.  The continuing silence of Jim (who should, if he had anything about him, have cleared all this up by issuing an apology) speaks volumes about his character does it not?  But then again he must be tainted by working in an industry that apologises for absolutely nothing without there being threat of legal action.    

When you have done all that then please investigate the second yellow card and you will find that yet again the perpetrators of personal insults as well as posters palpably guilty of breaking those board guidelines seem able to get off scott free of any disciplinary measures.

Maybe then you may detect a certain bias from this boards equivalent of Graham Barbour.

I am not particularly in favour of this board being heavily censored but I am in favour of it being fair and even handed in it's treatment of all members.

[Alan75]

Can we give this a rest, Paul has in the past and still puts a lot of work to keep this site alive.

I would draw everyones attention to the final paragraph of the board rules.

The moderators decision is final.

Sometimes moderators will make decisions that they feel are for the good of the site. This includes choosing to close a thread if they feel it can no longer be discussed in a friendly manner.

If a moderator is forced into making such a decision they wont have done it lightly. Please accept their decision even if you dont agree with it.

[Don]

"SITE: I think I have been unfairly treated by another user, what can I do.

If it is regarding a post on the messageboard then click on the "Warn" link to warn the moderators of the post. If it is regarding something else then email the moderators at [email protected]

All complaints are looked into and will be treated seriously and confidentially."

Thenodrog this refers to how you can complain about how you feel you have been treated.

"One Person, One Account. The messageboard operates a one person, one account rule (on the messageboard). There are a few rare occasions that more than one account per user is acceptable, but you must get acceptance from a moderator first. Signing up a new account whilst having your account is banned will result in measures being taken to ensure no further access to the message board."

Thought Id put this here as well.Its not aimed at thenodrog but its a gentle reminder to the current member who is using two ids and is suspected of making multiple password requests.

Their action is being monitored and appropriate actions will be taken.

In the meantime a single click counteracts their actions.

[Paul]

tell me on what grounds and why Paul issued yet another yellow.  Nowhere in those guidelines is there any reference to questioning the impartiallity of the mods......also read em again and tell me why the initiators of the personal insults got off scott free.  

thenodrog it might be more productive to address the question to me. I have explained twice, once by messenger and once in this thread that the yellow card was issued for questioning again my impartiality.

In recent weeks you have publicly accussed me of conducting a personal vendetta against you and questioned my impartiality. In response I have:

1. Asked the dicussion be conducted in private.

2. Requested you provide evidence of this vendetta and lack of impartiality.

3. Explain how a point of view that suggests Jim is popular is in someway lacking impartiality.

4. Requested you cease the constant sniping at mods and admin

5. I have clearly stated I will not moderate the insults and abuse you direct at others, equally I will not moderate the reply. It is called being impartial.

All of this you have chosen to ignore or failed to reply to. You were warned for publicly questioning my impartiality. I have now answered your request three times - just one reponse from yourself would be sufficient.