We should be careful

Subject: We should be careful Thu May 17, 2012 3:00 pm

One of the reasons I, and I suspect many others, no longer post on Pasoti, was the general feeling of nastiness that pervaded that site, particularly when anything was posted that upset the party line, or dared to question any views held by Webb, Newell or the Moderators - something that still seems to be the case. There was also the unseemly spectacle of people being rounded on for holding views that went against the masses - cyber bullying, I suppose it's called.

It gives me no pleasure at all to say that there has been a similar feeling on here over the last couple of days. Some of that has been inspired by people like Rapson and Pilgrim Pete who are intent on spreading the bile that infiltrates Pasoti and I think most posters can see through their infantile games.

But the more concerning thing is that established posters on this site seem to be arguing amongst themselves and those arguments seem to be getting more and more spiteful by the day. I don't know the cause of these disagreements, and don't particularly want to, but what I would say is don't let this site turn into a 'bitch fest' and go the same way that Pasoti has gone. They would love over there to see that happen, which is probably why a couple of their poodles are on their mission.

This is a good site to belong to and post on, let's not ruin that.

Posts : 331 Join date : 2011-11-14

Good afternoon PP, nice to hear from you.

Speaking of spreading bile, how is that nice picture of the Stapleton's with their thumbs up doing? That was nicely spread wasn't it.

To your case in point.. I don't see what I am doing wrong. I am asking probing questions (just as ATD did when 'flickr-gate' was exposed, and rightly so).

I have no agenda, and not being told what to post by anybody. I am, believe it or not, trying to help ATD improve and get to the bottom of the fact that personal information on this site has been leaked and sent to third parties, as well as mod's allegedly being secretly co opted. Do you want whoever is responsible for this to continue on ATD?

Everyone was so up in arms about the 'avivas' not questioning the mods/Ian Newell and just towing the party line etc yet here I am doing it and I still get slated (not by all, I'll hasten to add) It smacks of double standards to me.

Guest

pilgrim_pete wrote:: Speaking of spreading bile, how is that nice picture of the Stapleton's with their thumbs up doing? That was nicely spread wasn't it..

That wasn't spreading bile, that was taking a photo...........and very funny it was too. How can PP publishing a photo spread bile? If they hadn't have put their thumbs in the air to celebrate Argyle losing in a year we got relegated then it would never have surfaced. Poor example.

Guest

If I wasn't a mod I would be asking those questions publicly. I have no problem with the questions.

Posts : 331 Join date : 2011-11-14

Well it certainly caused the Stapleton family a lot of grief (not that that bothers me in the slightest) although looking back it was a bad example.. PP, please reply to the sensible part of my post.. Doesn't leave much does it. Very Happy

Guest

knecht wrote:: If I wasn't a mod I would be asking those questions publicly. I have no problem with the questions.

What has being a mod got to do with it?

Posts : 7233 Join date : 2011-05-12

pilgrim_pete wrote:: Good afternoon PP, nice to hear from you.

Speaking of spreading bile, how is that nice picture of the Stapleton's with their thumbs up doing? That was nicely spread wasn't it.

To your case in point.. I don't see what I am doing wrong. I am asking probing questions (just as ATD did when 'flickr-gate' was exposed, and rightly so).

I have no agenda, and not being told what to post by anybody. I am, believe it or not, trying to help ATD improve and get to the bottom of the fact that personal information on this site has been leaked and sent to third parties, as well as mod's allegedly being secretly co opted. Do you want whoever is responsible for this to continue on ATD?

Everyone was so up in arms about the 'avivas' not questioning the mods/Ian Newell and just towing the party line etc yet here I am doing it and I still get slated (not by all, I'll hasten to add) It smacks of double standards to me.

A *****wallet (spit) lover! Never thought I'd see live one jocolor

Posts : 1666 Join date : 2011-12-03 Age : 66

PP, you're stirring, but thats ok on this site. In fact, I share some of your concerns, I just find it strange you didn't have the backbone to do it in your own backyard with the other poodles. One rule for them, another one for us. pig

Guest

Cerbera wrote:

knecht wrote:: If I wasn't a mod I would be asking those questions publicly. I have no problem with the questions.

What has being a mod got to do with it?

I would be asking questions of both 'sides' as well as making comment.

But there is more than enough crap being stirred without me adding more to it.

The obvious fact that lots of the stirring is not just coming from you (and that's not a comment on how right or wrong I think you are) but from people taking your part from the pasoti mafia also ought to give you pause to consider the effect of all this. And, I repeat, that's not to take sides at all.

Guest

knecht wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

knecht wrote:: If I wasn't a mod I would be asking those questions publicly. I have no problem with the questions.

What has being a mod got to do with it?

I would be asking questions of both 'sides' as well as making comment.

But there is more than enough crap being stirred without me adding more to it.

The obvious fact that lots of the stirring is not just coming from you (and that's not a comment on how right or wrong I think you are) but from people taking your part from the pasoti mafia also ought to give you pause to consider the effect of all this. And, I repeat, that's not to take sides at all.

The effect of all this is not for me to consider, your the bloody mod! You decide if it's right and decent for one of your fellow mods to bully and call me a liar, threaten to publish private deleted threads that were copied contrary to the site rules and run roughshod over the very constitution he wrote!

Make no mistake knecht, I'm not stirring at all, and I resent that. I am simply stating facts and asking for answers. I'm just totally f--ked off being lied about, threatened and bullied by one of your number. I have repeatedly asked for a judgement from the mods and you say one is coming, until then I'm going to keep asking the questions.

Remember, I haven't broken any of this site's rules and if I had, would expect the full wrath of the posters and mods alike and deserve it.

Posts : 2291 Join date : 2012-01-24

Isn't there a quote about "all that is needed for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

Well, I don't regard Brent as evil, but, I don't 100% believe that he's got the interests of PAFC football club (as opposed to PAFC Property Inc.) at heart either.

So the best way to try to control him is to maintain some degree of "challenge" to what he does. And one of the ways of doing that is to maintain a strong, vocal, independent (so not his vision of a GAS Board) forum that is prepared to question what he does.

Pasoti is clearly not that forum.

If you want the best for PAFC no matter who owns the club, use ADT-but don't get upset if not everyone on here shares your views wholeheartedly.

If you want to support the ownership of the club unequivocally, throw you weight behind Pasoti.

I also think we should be wary of JB's claim that he's not interested in disputes between fan forums. He was quite happy to benefit from support drummed up on Pasoti when he suited him, and I think that like the Trust, he is now seeking to marginalise any groupings that could be an "irritant" to him and his plans.

Posts : 1666 Join date : 2011-12-03 Age : 66

Grovehill wrote:: Isn't there a quote about "all that is needed for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

Well, I don't regard Brent as evil, but, I don't 100% believe that he's got the interests of PAFC football club (as opposed to PAFC Property Inc.) at heart either.

So the best way to try to control him is to maintain some degree of "challenge" to what he does. And one of the ways of doing that is to maintain a strong, vocal, independent (so not his vision of a GAS Board) forum that is prepared to question what he does.

Pasoti is clearly not that forum.

If you want the best for PAFC no matter who owns the club, use ADT-but don't get upset if not everyone on here shares your views wholeheartedly.

If you want to support the ownership of the club unequivocally, throw you weight behind Pasoti.

Grovey
Don't always agree with what you post but that was ace. Well apart from the last part, I think one or two are still fighting the good fight but are badly outnumbered.
Darn, 99% ace then elephant

Guest

shonbo wrote:

Grovehill wrote:: Isn't there a quote about "all that is needed for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

Well, I don't regard Brent as evil, but, I don't 100% believe that he's got the interests of PAFC football club (as opposed to PAFC Property Inc.) at heart either.

So the best way to try to control him is to maintain some degree of "challenge" to what he does. And one of the ways of doing that is to maintain a strong, vocal, independent (so not his vision of a GAS Board) forum that is prepared to question what he does.

Pasoti is clearly not that forum.

If you want the best for PAFC no matter who owns the club, use ADT-but don't get upset if not everyone on here shares your views wholeheartedly.

If you want to support the ownership of the club unequivocally, throw you weight behind Pasoti.

Grovey
Don't always agree with what you post but that was ace. Well apart from the last part, I think one or two are still fighting the good fight but are badly outnumbered.
Darn, 99% ace then elephant

And the fact it's ATD. ADT was the site that portrayed me as a heavy drinking, drug taking benefit sponger scratch

or was that my profile on ATD?