|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 16:15:07 GMT
[Edit: One year ago today, came these diatribes...As Pete, doing things he shouldn't have done - plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!....And OneQPR became de facto morribund...]Pathetic!
QPR Report's Goes Over The heads of ONEQPR
Posted Today at 03:43 PM by qblockpete Instead of consulting members he writes directly to the club for inclusion. The ONEQPR is a democratic process. QPR report had posted that in light of recent events I should not be included in ONEQPR, even though he agrees we follow the same team with a passion, and has no basis to finger point me, simply on me giving an opinion on games I actually watched. I find it incredible, that at the same time of trying to get me removed, he secretly tries to gain inclusion. This is very underhand and mischeivious to say the least, from a fan who admits as head of his board will never be able to personally attend these meetings www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=182My response Some secret! Try reading the QPR Report Board Post - up for the past week: qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2804As for the process: When WATRB moderator, Scott Jones initiated the idea of QPR Report attending and offered to attend on QPR Report's behalf A couple posts later, WATRB Moderator Scott Jones said "I think you may have to ask representation from Ali Russell." But the whole thread is there. Some Secret. Some behind the back. THE QPR REport Board discussion re this can be read at qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2804
|
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 15, 2009 16:23:07 GMT
Very strong smell of kippers there.
Who advised you to take the approach that you did?
How does that individual know what you did?
Don't ask him, he won't know.
OOH. Your post grew a bit, thus making my comments an elephant.
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 16:29:33 GMT
I also have absolutely no problem posting my email to Ali Russell. Haven't decided whether to do so or not. (Obviously I don't release - or leak - private letters or pms Sent TO me - So not responses)
Also I didn't mention it because I keep confidences, but my email to Ali Russel was responded to. It was passed on to a QPR fan site, who told me the process; and that if I was still interested, what would be done next.
Presumably Pete - and the other QPR fan sites thus have received my "request" - and Pete is one unhappy Camper.
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 16:33:00 GMT
And Pete's Response - (Am I threatening to play with his toys?)
You have moderators on the ONEQPR team, did it not occure to you to ask them? At a time of discouraging me, you were trying to worm your way in. Very sad state of affairs Where is the"You are actively ENCOURAGED to go over to the WATRB's web-site and bring me back any information" thread on the 9th April. You are actiing like man who has disciples !!
QPR REPORT's RESPONSE (Got to keep this sequential)
What's your problem? What's the trangression? Scott said I should go to Ali Russell, so I went to Ali Russell.
You think it's easier for me to get Russell than to contact my fellow moderators who are on the One QPR?
Now why did I ask people on my site to visit WATRB and let me know what was being said?
Because Pete, for the third time you had banned me from this site. You remember that ban, Pete. The one that your moderators lifted and apologized to me for you having imposed. You didn't actually mention it or respond to me.
Looking forward to you coming to post on my site. I promise not to ban you.
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 17:00:43 GMT
And I'm cognizant this is beyond the interest of many. But the thread goes on. The standing invitation to Pete to post on this site, of course remains. PETE POST IIIDFE is still banned by my moderators, so whats your point? You encouraged supporters that in the light of recent events I should be removed from "OneQPR". On what basis, would you recommend this? Because, I simply relied an opinion? o dear Don't try and swing it, you are very proud man and keep telling us you have a number of moderators. More than one of these members are on the team of ONEQPR, why didn't you ask them? QPR REPORT RESPONSE IIIPete: What has a ban on Dexter for England got to do with anything? YOU banned ME. Until your Moderators lifted the ban with this message "On behalf of the WATRB team of administrators and moderators I would like to apologise for this ban that is now lifted. From what I have learned, it was caused by a misunderstanding and the decision was, unfortunately, rushed due to the posting frenzy we were having to deal with. We have a due process for banning and it was ignored. I and other hard-working members of the team will do our best to ensure this does not happen again. " - As for what I said: For those who (unlike Pete) don't visit my messageboard, this is what I said: - The QPR Fan Groups Meet Club THIS Week « Thread Started on Apr 9, 2009, 4:55pm » ________________________________________ Who should attend? Personally I think given his conduct, and his close ties to certain club officials, fan groups should carefully consider the role of Pete in such a meeting - asuming they decide to go ahead and have the meeting. And you can argue it either way: Spite your face if you don't attend" Nothing more. Nothing less. And it's self explanatory Now I do have to repeat perhaps in single sylable words of the process I took. There's no there, there. I contacted Russell, cos that's what I was told was the process I needed to take to apply for "inclusion." No conspiracy, no end run. Nothing. www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=182#comments
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 17:13:16 GMT
IV: PETE Take a look at you blog on here and please tell me its not personal towards me. I'll give you 10 minutes to take a look at it again. Maybe encourage others to look at it as well. Who is not answering the questions now? Why did you not go to one of your moderators and ask them. You have 4-5 on the ONEQPR TEAM? QPR REPORT RESPONSE Pete: You're not making sense. I've answered twice re OneQPR. Unlike with some people, when I give an answer, it doesn't keep changing. I don't know whether it's based on your own experience, or your fantasies, or what, but while you may see deep conspiracies in the simplest act. Sometimes, as Freud was reported to have said, a cigar is just a cigar. But I'm so happy to invite people to come at look at my site - This is the QPR Report Messageboard qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgiThis is the QPR Report Blog www.qprreport.blogspot.com/And as always, Pete, You're invited to post on my site, just as I post on yours. This injured innocence is done well. But anything I've ever posted about you PALES in comparison to the various derogatory and derisory comments you've made to me. Now I apologize that I didn't write to you personally and ask if it was ok about ONE QPR. I didn't realize it was your toy. |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 17:26:48 GMT
Pete V Do you you think its right for a owner of a board to allow these kind of comments, on a web-site where all the team have invested time and money to make it a board worth visiting for all fans. "First place in The Hall of Shame goes to QblockPete:" not written by me of course, but your kind self. I can go on QPR REPORTRe the "Hall of Shame" you refer. Well I'm glad that at least someone is reading my blog posts! Since you give people blogs to write on, not sure why you're objecting if I use the blog. But since you mention it: This is my completed blog post to which you're referring (and which you could of course have responded to at any time). Now what parts of it do you wish to comment on? 1 in The The Hall of Shame Posted 05-04-2009 at 08:51 AM by QPR Report --------------------------------------------------------------- First place in The Hall of Shame goes to QblockPete: For an incessant campaign against Sousa; for his seeming willingness to promote the views and agenda of individuals within the club; and for his unyielding and unthinking defense of Paladini; and for his character assassinations of those who hold different views. Pete's "De Canio is prepared to come back" post was revealing. And Pete's attack on Sousa for lying by citing what Blackstock's agent said. When in fact what the very quote from the agent cited by Pete, in no way proved that Sousa was lying. www.wearetherangersboys.com/f...ead.php?t=5524A man who talks about people disagreeing with him having agendas continues to appear to be serving as a "Stalking Horse" for others. Sooner or later, the "chickens will come home to roost." www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=127 |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 17:27:10 GMT
Pete VI:
Why did you not go to one of your moderators and ask them. You have 4-5 on the ONEQPR TEAM?
QPR REPOR
Pete:
OK I WILL MAKE IT SIMPLE FOR YOU
THIS IS QPR REPORT
SEE QPR REPORT POST
POST QPR REPORT POST
HOW SHOULD I GET SEE ABOUT ONE QPR?
CONTACT ALI RUSSELL
SO QPR REPORT CONTACTS ALI RUSSELL
IF I HAD THOUGHT THE PROCESS WAS NOT TO GO THROUGH ALI RUSSELL, I WOULD NOT HAVE GONE THROUGH ALI RUSSELL. I WOULD HAVE CONTACTED ONE OF THE QPR "REPS"
SEE PETE ASK.
LOOK AT PETE ASK
SEE PETE SEE
AN ANSWER
|
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Apr 15, 2009 17:31:55 GMT
Very strong smell of kippers there. Who advised you to take the approach that you did? How does that individual know what you did? Don't ask him, he won't know. OOH. Your post grew a bit, thus making my comments an elephant. I smell it too. |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 17:35:01 GMT
To reiterate, I presume that my letter to the QPR Rep was passed on to the other QPR Reps (as I was aware it would be) and that Pete got that letter. And read it all by himself, got upset.
Now why Pete should suddenly be referring to an April 9 post by my me on this site, when I asked about ""Who should attend? Personally I think given his conduct, and his close ties to certain club officials, fan groups should carefully consider the role of Pete in such a meeting - asuming they decide to go ahead and have the meeting. And you can argue it either way: Spite your face if you don't attend"
- Now that question I can't answer
|
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Apr 15, 2009 17:40:41 GMT
I still think Pete has lost the plot.
If had the spare cash I would fly you over just to see his face. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 18:06:52 GMT
VII (or VIII)
PETE
oh dear your getting angry
What about the campaign to oust me from ONEQPR?
and I ask again, why not ask a member of ONEQPR?
I'm not suggesting you ask me ( I would have helped), but asking a member who is a moderator on your site may in hindisght have been better?
Posted Today at 05:54 PM by qblockpete
QPR REPORT
Pete:
It's gets frustrating responding to someone who gets a response to a question. Asks that same question. Gets another response. And so on. Pete: It's very simple: Read this thread. I told you what, why, where, who, when.
Now if your question is: Should I have taken as gospel the declaration of WATRB's In the Know Moderator Scott Jones that Ali Russell was the correct person to contact about ONE QPR?
Well obviously if I had known that Ali Russell was not the correct person to contact, then I would have contacted one of the several people who are also moderators of my very humble messageboard.
But the good news is that Ali Russell arranged for it to be sent to the correct person, so all's well that end's well.
But your concern that I save myself time and effort is of course greatly appreciated.
Now since I've made so many posts on WATRB, greatly looking forward to your trailblazing post on QPR Report's messageboard.
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 18:16:47 GMT
OH NO
Pete:
I will not post, but good luck.
25% threads are from this site or what I have said, so no real need to post
QPR Report
Well that's about the same accuracy ratio of your posts, so I won't take offense.
Strange how you always come up with different reasons why not to post on my humble site! Don't worry about it. When you change your mind, the option will always be available to you."
Thread concluded? Time will tell
|
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Apr 15, 2009 18:45:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by scottjones on Apr 15, 2009 19:43:45 GMT
All I can say is LOL
I dont think Pete had read that I offered to rep you Mike, or indeed that eusebio did too.
|
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Apr 15, 2009 19:48:20 GMT
All I can say is LOL I dont think Pete had read that I offered to rep you Mike, or indeed that eusebio did too. See what you started ;D |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 22:56:54 GMT
And on it goes Pete: Don't need to, but many thanks for the offer. Anything worth posting from me on here, you post on your messageboard if you get my drift. QPR REPORT So it would seem. After all where else would I be able to learn that our League Cup Final success was actually in 1968. PETE thats my point no-one in your world, can make a simple mistake.. I write too quick half the time. Anyway, thats the year i was born and we all know you was 50 at the time Will QPR Report respond? Will Pete post again if QPR Report doesn't respond? Does anyone give a shit?  |
|
|
|
Post by scottjones on Apr 15, 2009 23:40:31 GMT
Not really  no offence to you or pete! |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 16, 2009 0:03:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by FloridaR on Apr 16, 2009 2:14:52 GMT
LOL, the mans riddled with jealousy.
|
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 16, 2009 9:13:25 GMT
Not clicking those links Mike but I am sure it was a case of having your board/site/blog represented rather than you personally. Am I wrong? I don't think so.
"Fantasy Island", who represents it on OneQPR?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Apr 16, 2009 9:43:50 GMT
I cant get my head around all of this. If The Club Board, wish to hold a meeting with any interested fan sites and/or their respective representatives, then hold the damn meeting in a large venue, say at the ground on a Sunday afternoon. What's with all the seeking permission from other sites first and seeking this and that? If you message the club and state who you are and what site you represent and on the day show some form of identification, then everyone who responded should be allowed to attend.
have I got it wrong or does it currently smack of the old boys network yet again??
|
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 16, 2009 9:45:53 GMT
Not clicking those links Mike but I am sure it was a case of having your board/site/blog represented rather than you personally. Am I wrong? I don't think so. "Fantasy Island", who represents it on OneQPR? I think I can safely give the categorical assurance that should QPR Report the blog/messageboard be admitted, I will not be the one "representing" this site. As I said above, I'd like rotating reps. And also after reflection, I guess it would be best if the rep not also have "conflicting loyalties" - no offense intended. But of course this debate is a little premature. But it certainly raises interesting issues. Especially given Pete's reaction. "Who Ate The Strawberries?" |
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2010 6:46:39 GMT
The year bump!
|
|
