get this feckin idiot out now before its too late

Thank you Young Mr Grace!

The trouble is that some on ATD continually post their own version of "What did you do in the war?" whilst claiming to scorn others who ask the same question on pasoti.

Meanwhile ....... the Daggers & Northampton are still drawing as is Bradford at Wimbledon after 25 minutes.

I've not been on this site long enough to know why it was created so accept it was because of the disaffected being unceremonially slung off or being driven off PASOTI. However it was created does not have to mean it cannot evolve into a site with it's own identity and not be driven forever by what is said or done elsewhere. If you only see ATD as being the watching eye of another site then what does that say about it. It's a bit like being a feeder club for a rich and famous one. Always supplying the goods but never getting anything itself. If it is to be the watchful eye on something it ought to be Argyle rather than another forum.

Cyber space is a very big place and there is room in it for every kind of opinion and supporter. There is nothing wrong with being a happy clappy if you want to be and there is nothing wrong with being the opposite either. Whichever one you are you can join in most debates and that should be ok without branding people. Disagree by all means because if there were never decenting voices against the popular opinion then every debate would be sterile. There is nothing wrong also with using another sites opinion in a point making exercise either for or against an argument. There is no need to deride it though. Picking out certain people constantly though is a bit like stalking in my book and if they are considered to be foolish then should be ignored rather than publicised. This doesn't just apply to ATD but to PASOTI also. I don't believe for one moment that they have a scrap of real influence in the Argyle Boardroom or the training ground. The appointment of a supporter President was no more than a publicity stunt by Brent's PR people as part of the "I'm a man of the people" he wants to be portrayed as. It certainly wasn't to advise on football matters that's for sure so why people have to even take any notice of it is beyond me. If James Brent wishes to do something and it not to be noticed he must be pissing himself laughing at the way the fans forums spend most of their time having a pop at each other rather than watching where his hands go. If you want to be the eyes and ears calling people to account then watch Brent and the club rather than each other.

The important thing is that the users evolve the site as we are seeing, not moderators.

With new users and different opinions the site will be a healthier site and a more interesting site to use and as one of those that speaks out regarding certain users on a certain other site, I'm glad to be challenged and welcome it.

I concur with the need for ATD to develop an identity of its own and that it is regrettable that Pasoti gets mentioned as much as it does. The truth of the matter is that Pasoti lies much nearer the heart of what is happening at Argyle than ATD does. Indeed some might say with some justification that Pasoti is the beating heart of the club. This is partly due to ancient history going back to when Pasoti was the only Argyle site on the net and partly due to recent history when Pasoti quite rightly stepped up and provided the platform for communication that eventually played a crucial part in the club being saved. If Pasoti was not what it is then in all likelihood there would be no Argyle at all now. So well done to it for that.

The problem with Pasoti is epitomised with threads and pages like [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Just go there and read it. Ignore the various personal attacks that fire off in all directions earlier in the thread and concentrate on the linked page and the one or two just before it. That page is riddled with "if you knew what I know" and nudge nudge wink wink between a handful of posters who have all been economical with the passing on of information about who did or said what, why it was done when it was done or how etc. Take this little gem "we really should not have started the season. Without giving too much away P & A were furious that we played the opening game of the season against Shrewsbury after Ridsdale did a lot of work behind the scenes to make sure we played that game".

So why would anybody be worried about "giving too much away"? Just how and about what were P&A furious? What did Ridsdale do? Why shouldn't this all be given away? How can telling the truth ever be too much? These are all reasonable questions but they won't be answered and they probably won't even be asked. They probably won't be asked because anybody who cares to ask them knows that they won't be answered if they are asked. Those who know the answers to those and similar questions know that knowledge is power and that while they control the steady dripfeed of information then they attain ever higher levels of "power". They also know that there is no point keeping totally quiet about what they know. Where is the gain in that? It is an ego trip and it pisses people off. Well it pisses me off. If ATD serves no other purpose than to tell pompous purveyors of partial truths that they are making themselves look like smug, self-serving assholes then that is enough reason for it to exist.

Surely the problem is that the biggest antagonist on pasoti keeps on picking at the open wound that is the rivalry between the two sites. ATD cannot move on and develop its own identity properly until that person stops. In the short time I have been on this forum the pattern has always been the same. General bickering between individuals from both sites growing until the shite really hits the fan, common sense then prevails and it quietens down for a while. Then questionable new posters start to join and exchanges between people start to get personal and it all starts again. He has at least one helper and it will not stop until something is done about the man and his rampant rabbit. That will happen one day but until then posters need to stop rising to the bait and just say feck off!

Cerbera wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

Correct GOB.

What I should have said was 'concerned that this site might be seen'.

But what you mean is.... You might be seen.

Nothing worse than a whore turned nun.

Care to explain that?

Be my pleasure... 'Poacher turned gamekeeper' would be another term.

One day Sir Francis the truth & i mean the WHOLE truth will emerge.
Many individuals will emerge with much credit but others not so.

I too wonder about the info eluded to by PL2 but he is in the know and the rest of arent so only specualtion wil occur and thats the big problem too many small snippets of inof with the meat missign from the bones - in note also some other info has emerged about D Johnson giving a lot up finaicailly to keep the club alfloat!!!!

If we go down the fall out will be huge, questions will be asked, why didnt the powers that be do more ?,
couldnt Chris Webb have carried on leading the trust to put pressure on Brent to put money into the club to keep it up & build a base for a promotion challenge (maybe he;'s tried that from his President role who knows?) next season.

Ive said this before & i'll say it again the club is still very much run like a charity - WHY ? WHY ? WHY ?
I expcected Brent to sweep in, put a top notch CEO (in the short term) in to kick backsides (not literally) & get the profile of the club raised get it running properly again, none of this can be done overnight of course but he took over nearly 6months ago now. Surely Brent has a Red Adair type figure to give businesses a kick start ?
And even now you still cant even get buy a home shirt for gods sake!

To me it seems those running the club just need it to get to the end of the season, that is when ALL the big decisions will be taken, i fear if its Conference the 'Charity' will continue for years to come.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

I've not been on this site long enough to know why it was created so accept it was because of the disaffected being unceremonially slung off or being driven off PASOTI. However it was created does not have to mean it cannot evolve into a site with it's own identity and not be driven forever by what is said or done elsewhere. If you only see ATD as being the watching eye of another site then what does that say about it. It's a bit like being a feeder club for a rich and famous one. Always supplying the goods but never getting anything itself. If it is to be the watchful eye on something it ought to be Argyle rather than another forum.

Cyber space is a very big place and there is room in it for every kind of opinion and supporter. There is nothing wrong with being a happy clappy if you want to be and there is nothing wrong with being the opposite either. Whichever one you are you can join in most debates and that should be ok without branding people. Disagree by all means because if there were never decenting voices against the popular opinion then every debate would be sterile. There is nothing wrong also with using another sites opinion in a point making exercise either for or against an argument. There is no need to deride it though. Picking out certain people constantly though is a bit like stalking in my book and if they are considered to be foolish then should be ignored rather than publicised. This doesn't just apply to ATD but to PASOTI also. I don't believe for one moment that they have a scrap of real influence in the Argyle Boardroom or the training ground. The appointment of a supporter President was no more than a publicity stunt by Brent's PR people as part of the "I'm a man of the people" he wants to be portrayed as. It certainly wasn't to advise on football matters that's for sure so why people have to even take any notice of it is beyond me. If James Brent wishes to do something and it not to be noticed he must be pissing himself laughing at the way the fans forums spend most of their time having a pop at each other rather than watching where his hands go. If you want to be the eyes and ears calling people to account then watch Brent and the club rather than each other.

I can see exactly where you are coming from but the emphasis coming from Webby [Pasoti], is to not question and to fall into line. We all know where that got us before and I personally, am not prepared to shut up and give those with a history of trying to control all thoughts Argyle a free ride.
There has been much debate over the administration process and I simply don't buy into the theory that certain individuals saved the club. They assisted JB in acquiring it and are probably seen by him as creating a steady income stream. We are only talking a few hundred people here but it is an active and local minority.
Personal issues have added fuel to the fire of discontent . I have tried to defuse the situation but that would require Pasoti to become inclusive. They have totally rejected such moves and as a result have denied many reasonable people a voice. As a result, the proposals coming from the fans groups have been and are likely to continue to be, largely Pasoti approved. With long term respected posters , now feeling the need to challenge the control group and post on here exclusively, or as well as Pasoti, there clearly is a problem down on the farm.
Dingle's comments concerning the Chuckle Brothers turning up at the Senior Greens[ these two get everywhere!] is further evidence of a seeming need to control. What is on offer via these people is years of mediocrity and the fans being expected to foot the bill for the mistakes of previous owners.
I suppose , now that Brent is the owner, that the dye is cast but I don't feel enthused to buy back into the club when I feel I don't have a voice and can see no like minded locals being backed to become involved in steering the club.
If unity is demanded their must be inclusivity. Not the glib, 'put up or shut up !'

Rickler wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

Correct GOB.

What I should have said was 'concerned that this site might be seen'.

But what you mean is.... You might be seen.

Nothing worse than a whore turned nun.

Care to explain that?

Be my pleasure... 'Poacher turned gamekeeper' would be another term.

My views haven't changed. My opinions are my own and always have been. If you have an issue with me come out and say it and stop talking in riddles.

Just because I am leaving Newell, Pasoti et al alone gives you cause for silly sniping comments?

I think he's intimating you may be in line for 'contact', as a means to an end for those who seek to control Argyle cyberspace.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Picking out certain people constantly though is a bit like stalking in my book and if they are considered to be foolish then should be ignored rather than publicised. This doesn't just apply to ATD but to PASOTI also. I don't believe for one moment that they have a scrap of real influence in the Argyle Boardroom or the training ground.

I suspect you're correct. A supporters forum which boasts over 5k members has zero influence in the Boardroom or on the training ground. You dont see a problem with that?

Just for the record ..... my understanding is that the age-limit for the Senior Greens is 55 (or at least in the 50s). I think! That means Ian Newell qualifies. The club President attending meetings surely is quite appropriate.

Just for the record ..... my understanding is that Damian Johnson did not give money to help save the club. Like other similar creditors - ex-players included - he agreed to postpone receipt of his outstanding pay. As he was one of the highest earners he also postponed one of the largest amounts. I may be wrong.

"There has been much debate over the administration process and I simply don't buy into the theory that certain individuals saved the club. They assisted JB in acquiring it and are probably seen by him as creating a steady income stream. We are only talking a few hundred people here but it is an active and local minority." I am not sure what that means. It sounds "good" but, in my view, merely has an implication of wrong-doing without giving substance. Or, to put it more straightforwardly, it is smear - chuck shit against a wall and some will stick. Do you mean a new owner wants to engage with the fans and has identified a small group with whom to work to help ensure improved attendances at matches? Is that a bad thing? What on earth being "seen by him as creating a steady income stream" otherwise means, I simply cannot see. Do you mean the new owner recognised the power of the internet in general and the actions led by people on pasoti in particular and, in so doing, he wished to ensure that a positive level of communication continues to be available? As for the process whereby Mr Brent became owner and whether it was a stitch-up that prevented queues of philanthropists or those motivated only by a love for Argyle or football coming forward, we will probably never know. To continue to claim otherwise is mere mischief-making. There is a fine line between that and asking pertinent questions but I think that is crossed at times.

Perhaps one of the few positives I draw from such debates is the knowledge that if the situation had been reversed and the contrary views - such as those espoused by some of the posters on here - had won the day and those people had become the 'ruling elite' then they in turn would be subject to attacks by small revolutionary cadres on breakaway web-sites. Their integrity would be questioned. Their 'supporters' would be vilified. Their intelligence would be scorned. Sadly, that's how it works. I have no problem with asking pertinent questions. I have no problem with differing views. I have no problem with argument. I do have a problem with closed minds. I just wish that the petty bickering would stop.

If you can't see the thought control delivered by Pasoti for several years, you are less astute than I believed.

Trust in Stapes ? Silence dissenting voices ?

Nothing has changed down on the farm as far as I can see.

I think some people have missed or forgotten the point of democratic. I dont see people here as wanting to become part of a "ruling elite".

Coxside_Green wrote:

I think some people have missed or forgotten the point of democratic. I dont see people here as wanting to become part of a "ruling elite".

I agree - for various reasons - I don't see anyone wanting to be part of a 'ruling elite'. I used that phrase to make a point. I was trying to suggest that if the opposing view had won the day then the inevitable process would have been one in which that in turn would have been "scorned". Some of that is positive - questions are good. Some of it is sniping (to use another provocative word ).

I have largely moved here because of the prevailing mood on pasoti - though I think that has improved a lot of late. That doesn't mean: pasoti = all bad; ATD = all good. The bickering from both sides reflects badly on all those involved.

Tringreen wrote:

If you can't see the thought control delivered by Pasoti for several years, you are less astute than I believed.

Trust in Stapes ? Silence dissenting voices ?

Nothing has changed down on the farm as far as I can see.

Sorry, I've read through what I wrote several times and tried to link it with your reply. I still can't see any connection.

knecht wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

I think some people have missed or forgotten the point of democratic. I dont see people here as wanting to become part of a "ruling elite".

I agree - for various reasons - I don't see anyone wanting to be part of a 'ruling elite'. I used that phrase to make a point. I was trying to suggest that if the opposing view had won the day then the inevitable process would have been one in which that in turn would have been "scorned". Some of that is positive - questions are good. Some of it is sniping (to use another provocative word ).

I have largely moved here because of the prevailing mood on pasoti - though I think that has improved a lot of late. That doesn't mean: pasoti = all bad; ATD = all good. The bickering from both sides reflects badly on all those involved.

Apologies for misunderstanding you.

IMO there should be no need for a ruling elite whatsoever on a forum which really encourages healthy debate and can include polls at any given time. Of course we all remember the recent 'ultras' poll

Pasoti needs monitoring and scrutinising, they (and we know who they are) are trying to re-write history, silence real debate and are rapidly becoming a mouthpiece for the club to only say on message things. The bickering will only stop when everybody realises that there can be differing viewpoints without one being good and the other bad.

Tringreen wrote:

I think he's intimating you may be in line for 'contact', as a means to an end for those who seek to control Argyle cyberspace.

What?!

Let me get this straight, Rickler thinks I am in Ian Newell's pocket?

Who else believes this?

Bit of a worry since I help administer this site. Think of the potential damage I could do! Ask yourself one question, if that were true, why haven't I already started disassembly from within?

Also, why do I not post on or read Pasoti, am I that deep a 'sleeper' then?

Vote Vote Vote!


My opinion is, not a chance in hell of that!

It was implied previously many posts ago that I might be a "spy" from the other place or something similar. That is just a cheap jibe of course and an easy response to somebody who questions the main occupation of some posters on here. The similarity in accusations made on PASOTI as well as here to anyone who doesn't sing the party tune so it is same thing for both which numerous people criticise PASOTI for apparently doing.

Of course the saving of Argyle was not down to the famous duo. Even the thought is quite ludicrous. But, if they want to believe that and their faithful followers also believe them then what odds does it make. Anyone with half a brain knows it made little difference and at best only was a bit of a prompter to the Administrators to look elsewhere or at Brent.

I said previously that I do look at PASOTI from time to time but never feel a compunction to join it or join in. The decenting voices on there are not easily silenced these days and they are more and more as Argyle sink towards the BSP. There are those that always jump in and support the party line but they are not as successful as they perhaps once were in shutting people up and more come to the defence of the picked on than ever before. What is comes down to is that PASOTI itself is evolving once more and there are growing questions and less party line following as the days go by. In further time the "leaders" of the pack will also lose their following and influence. History shows that all empires crash in the end. This will happen with or without a watchful eye from ATD or help. What bullying people hate is to be ignored. If people on here could bring themselves to ignore rather than engage with them the end game might come sooner rather than later.

I agree with that SG, bullies hate to be ignored. The problem is that in this case they have placed themselves in political positions making it difficult to ignore, but generally I agree.

The proles are revolting as our league position becomes indefensible, must be time for some questions and carefully worded replies. Dogger Darren and his multi-accounting pals will all glory in the future and peace will return. Seen it all before SG.

Cerbera wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

Correct GOB.

What I should have said was 'concerned that this site might be seen'.

But what you mean is.... You might be seen.

Nothing worse than a whore turned nun.

Care to explain that?

Be my pleasure... 'Poacher turned gamekeeper' would be another term.

My views haven't changed. My opinions are my own and always have been. If you have an issue with me come out and say it and stop talking in riddles.

Just because I am leaving Newell, Pasoti et al alone gives you cause for silly sniping comments?

I don't have an issue with you and I'm not talking in riddles. I think most people get what I am referring to...

Which is... Just because you have now decided to leave 'Newell alone' after your moment in the limelight it doesn't mean the rest of us have to. Did you see his comments about me and Tringy yesterday? Truce? What Truce?. And although you are not 'sniping', your recent 'comments' on the issue I find haughty.

As for Tringy's comment you have to ask him. I don't think anyone has ever mentioned you being in Newell's pocket - I don't know where on earth that came from?

But, if I was a betting man....
I would say that you have been 'approached' by Newell. I can't see him resisting the chance to butter up someone like your good self.

Am I correct?