N Power Fan of the Year

125+1 wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Nope and Nope, to that, whether it is legal or not, is irrelevant, this is supposed to be a site talking about Argyle and having open discusions and debate about Argyle related matters, but to many on here would rather just slag off pasoti and turn every thread around to make it about pasoti.

That's a shame. You would have got my vote, seriously.
Pasotiwise, it's a residual situation for online fans, it's part of the mix, that's just an unfortunate reality.

How about starting a rip roaring thread on tomorrow's game ? Go on. Have you heard Chadders is playing ? Has he bought new boots ?

Plus1, of the 50 odd pages on the first page of this forum, I make it about 6 which regard PASOTI. The facts don't lie, they are there. They are always going to be whilst it remains such an inward-thinking forum. But 6/50, or 12%, can you cope with that? If not then I'm not sure what else there is to say.

Both Sue & Zee are good people who get on with doing what they think is right with no fuss.

And, with a certain amount of seriousness, Cobi should be in there. Argyle fanatic - he would have been on the Devonport in the good old days. Good lad. I just wish he would step away from the key-board from time to time.

Failing that my brother's sister-in-law - who goes to all home games, lots of aways. Has done for many years. Buys my brother & his wife a treat ticket every now and again because they are totally skint. She does it quietly and I don't think she would have a clue who pasoti or ATD are but goes on supporting her club quietly because she always has.

Lots of people like her who will go unnoticed.

Failing that, anyone who supports Exeter - it must be really hard for you.

Are Tescos or the Co-op going to run a customer of the year ?
I reckon I'm in the running for the Co-op gong. Loads of away trips.

penzancepirate wrote:

Are Tescos or the Co-op going to run a customer of the year ?
I reckon I'm in the running for the Co-op gong. Loads of away trips.

Yep and the first prize is a years supply of milk

Sorry, I'm knackered from a night's work. So irony meter running a bit low both receiving and transmitting.

I just thought it was a bit over the top to have a go at Sue P and Zee who are, I think, totally outside of the self-agrandisement over there. They seem good people.

My suggestion of Cobi was because he comes in for tons of flak (some of it deserved) and he needs something good to happen to him.

And my suggestion of Sue, my brother's sister-in-law was to make the point that there are thousands of fans whose support goes unnoticed. It's like the annual love-in that is the New Year Honours List.

But I am knackered. Maybe I should win the award as here I am at almost midnight still working to save the club I love .....

penzancepirate wrote:

125+1 wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Nope and Nope, to that, whether it is legal or not, is irrelevant, this is supposed to be a site talking about Argyle and having open discusions and debate about Argyle related matters, but to many on here would rather just slag off pasoti and turn every thread around to make it about pasoti.

That's a shame. You would have got my vote, seriously.
Pasotiwise, it's a residual situation for online fans, it's part of the mix, that's just an unfortunate reality.

How about starting a rip roaring thread on tomorrow's game ? Go on. Have you heard Chadders is playing ? Has he bought new boots ?

id run but i want my own company car

Mock Cuncher wrote:

Plus1, of the 50 odd pages on the first page of this forum, I make it about 6 which regard PASOTI. The facts don't lie, they are there. They are always going to be whilst it remains such an inward-thinking forum. But 6/50, or 12%, can you cope with that? If not then I'm not sure what else there is to say.

I think you 12% is very very misguided

Mock has it about right.
But subjects that crop up about the club and which are debated, will sometimes be similar on both sites. So, cross pollenation of thoughts and the debating process is bound to happen. With one site being well known for it's "green tint" position, especially after it's cleansing, and the other with many often representing a different view, references are inevitable. It's the debate that counts 125.

Mind you, with recent events the other website has become part of the news itself and is now far more closely linked to the club. That is bound to influence talk on here .... and so it should.... as GOB would say ....."ATD, policing Pasoti "
I'm certainly not obsessed, I just talk about what's on the table.

Sue the bucket lady has done a lot of fundraising and for this she should be commended. I would prefer the award to go to Steve Dean (GoS bloke) who has given 13 years of devoted service in the running of Greens on Screen.

i'll vote for anyone who put zero money into ridsdales pockets

Sue would be very deserving of gaining the fan of the year award. We have become very good friends throughout the last year, and I know she hates the publicity that comes with doing good stuff, you only have to read her response on pasoti to see that.
She does a fantastic job, and always willing to help out, whether it be with the trust the gt's, forza Verde or anything to do with the club.

I don't know why I have been brought into it on this thread to be honest, the only comment I made on the pasoti thread was 'i agree' and I haven't been nominated on there or anything, so don't understand the stick aimed at me on here..

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

Czarcasm wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

Sort of off topic, but I was thinking of posting a thread on this subject, but my view is slightly different to yours Czarcasm. Can a mod move these 2 posts to a new thread?

I was thinking that with all of the events of this week, and some of the comments by 125+1 yesterday, that it would be a shame if we are slightly too liberal with the modding on here, and we definitely do have too many posts that just keep referring to Pasoti whatever the topic is. I just wonder how many more contributing members we might get if the constant Pasoti bashing eased down a bit, please don't go mental anyone, but possibly more relevant, if more piss-taking threads and posts were moved to the correct forum? I just wonder if there would be more people glad to use the site if the extreme stuff is always put in the Block 17 section, then if anyone is genuinely offended by some stuff and a really clear warning was posted, they can choose not to see it.

I think the modding on this site is way way way better than the other site, but there are often posts and threads on the main board which really shouldn't be there. I'm as guilty as everyone else on this and to be honest am a bit dim with some things and always used to start a thread on the main section, before I realised that you need to go to the relevant section before posting a new topic

There are some really good posters on here now that I get the impression don't want to see all of the banter and rubbish that goes on, and if the posts are in the main section they wouldn't know until they read the post and some might be off-putting. It's just an observation anyway.

I also do think that if we tweaked things just a little bit, like the amount of Pasoti bashing being toned down and some warnings given out by the mods, that we might get an even bigger membership. Maybe a truce on bringing up past events and injustices we have had from Pasoti? Maybe stop the Ian Newell crucifiction all the time? By all means if Pasoti and Ian do anything new that gets on your wick, take the piss have a rant whatever, but maybe just leave history in the past and see how it goes?

Please don't go slating me for suggesting it, and no-one needs to be told about past events misdemeanours etc, but I honestly feel that this is such a great site compared to Pasoti, and I think it could be even better with just a few amendments.

Again sorry for replying off topic, so if Czarcasms and my post could go onto the site section as a new thread, that would be brilliant.

Czarcasm wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

That's a good post and it's something that's been discussed in the past and is ongoing.

Many of us remember how Ian Newell, his friends and at least one other GT caused mayhem, posted personal abuse, gained access to personal messages and information and possibly gained access to personal financial information culminating with the closure of our last site, I now assume it was because he and others didn't want voices to be heard that would possibly oppose their personal ambition for furthering their Argyle careers.

We are aware that having a democratic process leaves this site open to abuse and attack but that's something we have to live with if we want to remain without the corruption that long term secure positions can bring.

It would not be possible or right to defend the site so that a similar attack could not occur. The very nature of the site’s openness will mean that it will be a fragile and an easy target for those that have unscrupulous intentions, the best that can be achieved is to limit this kind of action and that I believe, has already been achieved by the present Moderators.

If Ian Newell or anyone else should want to place himself in an election then it is the boast of ATD that they can and, if they should win that election it’ll be because the majority want them to win.

Ian Newell was voted into his position on Pasoti many years ago and promptly decided after that elections were a bad thing and Pasoti’s been lumped with him ever since. We do not want a similar problem on ATD and discussions need to be had so that a method is found to eliminate this problem.

Apologies for mentioning Ian Newell so frequently but he really does provide an excellent example of the problems we are likely to encounter at some stage.

Having said allllllllll that, I suggest that the members have a simple vote on whether there should be an election or not. Personally I would like to see the present team carrying out the same roles for another twelve months., co-opting who they wish and continuing to evolve the site.

Mods, can we have a vote asking if we believe there should be an election and to state whether we are happy or not for the present team to continue for another twelve months?

Personally I would prefer such an award was given to the likes of Rob & Doreen Sams of Langport Somerset or John Kimber of Ashburton who to my knowledge have been to every home and away match for years. They don't own a computer between them and as such are highly unlikely to win such an award over someone who is well known in internet circles.

In the quest to keep Argyle alive,there are far too many people who have done their bit to help to single out individuals. Some have become well known,mainly through the power of the internet but there are countless more who have received little or no thanks at all. Indeed some don't wish any thanks.

GOB wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

That's a good post and it's something that's been discussed in the past and is ongoing.

Many of us remember how Ian Newell, his friends and at least one other GT caused mayhem, posted personal abuse, gained access to personal messages and information and possibly gained access to personal financial information culminating with the closure of our last site, I now assume it was because he and others didn't want voices to be heard that would possibly oppose their personal ambition for furthering their Argyle careers.

We are aware that having a democratic process leaves this site open to abuse and attack but that's something we have to live with if we want to remain without the corruption that long term secure positions can bring.

It would not be possible or right to defend the site so that a similar attack could not occur. The very nature of the site’s openness will mean that it will be a fragile and an easy target for those that have unscrupulous intentions, the best that can be achieved is to limit this kind of action and that I believe, has already been achieved by the present Moderators.

If Ian Newell or anyone else should want to place himself in an election then it is the boast of ATD that they can and, if they should win that election it’ll be because the majority want them to win.

Ian Newell was voted into his position on Pasoti many years ago and promptly decided after that elections were a bad thing and Pasoti’s been lumped with him ever since. We do not want a similar problem on ATD and discussions need to be had so that a method is found to eliminate this problem.

Apologies for mentioning Ian Newell so frequently but he really does provide an excellent example of the problems we are likely to encounter at some stage.

Having said allllllllll that, I suggest that the members have a simple vote on whether there should be an election or not. Personally I would like to see the present team carrying out the same roles for another twelve months., co-opting who they wish and continuing to evolve the site.

Mods, can we have a vote asking if we believe there should be an election and to state whether we are happy or not for the present team to continue for another twelve months?

Only a suggestion but how about also maybe adding 1 or 2 more to the existing mod team if the current team felt it would benefit them? I think the current team do a fantastic job and infact do such a good job I only know who 2 of the mods on here are! That's how mods should be, not covered in spanner banners like some kind of royalty.

Czarcasm wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

I do actually agree with that. i dont even know who the mods are. and despite being a member on pasoti this is the only forum i post on as its interesting here, and you dont need to be a lemming.

in the norm they're a bunch of sheep! All they've done is copy the leader.

Good to see a few people disagreeing though! I love how they're picking the winner, when it might not even be an argyle fan who wins overall!

Yea Man wrote:

GOB wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Here's a question for you 125. there's going to be elections soon on ATD to elect our new moderators.
Would you stand, and would you ban anything on her that is legally acceptable, like, say Pasoti bashing ?

Do you know what PP, with the continued rise and rise of this sites popularity, if I were making decisions (which I'm not) I would give very serious consideration to how any vote for a change of Moderator is taken.

Why? Because there are far too many loons out there with an axe to grind against ATD.

I know we bear the 'Democratic' name, but for me, that really only ought to relate to the way that all posters freedom of speech is upheld.

I'll give you a (albeit unlikely) scenario - Mod elections are upcoming, this coincides with an avalanche of new members who, shall we say, see things differently from many already on here. Anyway, lets say one member puts himself up for election, lets pluck a name out of the air, Ian Newell.

Can you see where I'm going here?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The Mods on this site are virtually anonymous, because they all go about their business with a minimum amount of fuss, and to be fair usually have very little to do anyway.

I hope none of the moderators are looking to stand down, simply because they think they ought to in the name of democracy.

I think it would be a sad day if the Mod team changed at all to be honest.

That's a good post and it's something that's been discussed in the past and is ongoing.

Many of us remember how Ian Newell, his friends and at least one other GT caused mayhem, posted personal abuse, gained access to personal messages and information and possibly gained access to personal financial information culminating with the closure of our last site, I now assume it was because he and others didn't want voices to be heard that would possibly oppose their personal ambition for furthering their Argyle careers.

We are aware that having a democratic process leaves this site open to abuse and attack but that's something we have to live with if we want to remain without the corruption that long term secure positions can bring.

It would not be possible or right to defend the site so that a similar attack could not occur. The very nature of the site’s openness will mean that it will be a fragile and an easy target for those that have unscrupulous intentions, the best that can be achieved is to limit this kind of action and that I believe, has already been achieved by the present Moderators.

If Ian Newell or anyone else should want to place himself in an election then it is the boast of ATD that they can and, if they should win that election it’ll be because the majority want them to win.

Ian Newell was voted into his position on Pasoti many years ago and promptly decided after that elections were a bad thing and Pasoti’s been lumped with him ever since. We do not want a similar problem on ATD and discussions need to be had so that a method is found to eliminate this problem.

Apologies for mentioning Ian Newell so frequently but he really does provide an excellent example of the problems we are likely to encounter at some stage.

Having said allllllllll that, I suggest that the members have a simple vote on whether there should be an election or not. Personally I would like to see the present team carrying out the same roles for another twelve months., co-opting who they wish and continuing to evolve the site.

Mods, can we have a vote asking if we believe there should be an election and to state whether we are happy or not for the present team to continue for another twelve months?

Only a suggestion but how about also maybe adding 1 or 2 more to the existing mod team if the current team felt it would benefit them? I think the current team do a fantastic job and infact do such a good job I only know who 2 of the mods on here are! That's how mods should be, not covered in spanner banners like some kind of royalty.

Why not keep the mods as they are and add 1 or 2 as suggested but with a safeguard built in to the site that if a mod starts to overstep the mark (as a la p****i) then we can complain without fear of retribution.

M P C R

T S P Q T A

penzancepirate wrote:

T S P Q T A

LOL !

greengenes wrote:

M P C R

Good to know that you're an animal lover.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Fvnex
svfx