|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 19, 2010 15:38:00 GMT
Again thanks DC. I have no problem with calls for civility and understanding. And I'd never suggest this site, or myself is perfect.. BUt I Have to tell you that the address for those calls really should be elsewhere directed.
Without turning this into something I'm not interested in doing (and my fellow posters are definitely not interested in this site becoming)....In the case of QPR Report Board...and in the case of QPR Report, the "person" - far more sinned against than sinning.
Over the years, maybe rightly and maybe wrongly, I have focused on QPR and QPR staffers. Yes of course definitely including Gianni Paladini, who after is a paid QPR staffer.
Now I have pointed to things that have been said by QPR Staff; I have pointed to things that have been done. I have even on occasion offered my own opinion.
Have I ever raised questions or had debates with other individuals, most notably QBLockPete, on things he's said and done? Have I suggested "aberrations" with proclaimed acceptable policies of the website. Absolutely. Go back and read them. See what I said. See what Pete said. And then more than that, perhaps for a future occasion. Throw in that fairly or otherwise, Pete has been widely viewed as not just the Defender of Paladini but also the source of Paladini leaks and spin.
See what's been tolerated on that site. See some of the things Pete has said and done. See the posts by a couple of other individuals. And then look back through this site and see some of the things posted including by a couple of deliberately people who came on not to debate but to deliberately stir.
I would obviously not say I've never gone beyond the pale, in some of my comments vis-a-vis my fellow posters; but those are far and few betweeen. I have used Yiddish words, notably Schmuck. I did use the word Mamzer last year, for which I both publicly and privately apologized.
But I have an open challenge to things I've said: Repost things I've said (Just provide a link to provide context and to check the veracity of the quote. From this site. From WATRB. From LFW or LSA or Indys or .org or dot.org. I'd have no problem with that.
This site opened with a vision of an openeness and serious talk on various subject. Has it totally achieved it? Regrettably not. But to a large degree it has - and without fabrications.
I'm sure I left out some things which maybe I return to
Now I also have a "Challenge" or an "Invite" to DC: Go back to WATRB and and call on that handful of indivduals (we all know who they are) to both cease what they've done. And moderators to cease tolerating certain things, which are not acceptable. Not just to accept comments that they are "Moving on" when they clearly are not. If you're a regular reader, you'll know exactly what I mean (although sometimes after a few days, declarations made are moved or as recently occurred were deleted)
And I would just so welcome your recollections and memories and views of 40 years of QPR, because we both share about the same time of supporting the club, even if for many of those years, I've been abroad.
Thanks...Onwards and Upwards
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 19, 2010 15:45:31 GMT
DC, as polite as you are being and I thank you, you are actually inferring and implying that the aforementioned chap is continually the victim and only responds in kind, which is not the case but i assume from what you've put that you are simply unaware.
I asked you in an earlier post for examples, which you did not give.
Perhaps you can give examples of "some like to make up stories and tell lies to further their own ends" that you have seen on this site.
I agree with much that you write but there appears an undertone that the aforementioned is simply a victim and singled out on this site and indeed, on many others. Perhaps you should ask yourself why!
I may or may not have met Pete over the years, I'm not sure, however,he has been rude and condescending to me and thus invites reciprocal responses. I'm sure this will also be denied but there you go. I have no axe to grind nor bear him any malice whatsoever as that is pointless.
It's only messageboard bollox and a bit of fun for me but it's patently obvious that for some it goes much deeper, suffice to say, it doesn't for me.
Interesting debate, nevertheless. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Sept 19, 2010 15:58:03 GMT
DC, Have you listened to the Devlin/JNet interview show?
You post on this thread making wild assumptions, accusations and snide remarks only to admit later that "No one has particularly told me anything, and..only know one side of the story.".
It would appear to me that you're trying to hijack this thread for your own agenda.
I wonder if this has anything to do with your commercial involvement and part funding of WATRB...
|
|
dc
Gerry Francis
Posts: 37
|
Post by dc on Sept 19, 2010 18:03:36 GMT
Thanks again to those of you who replied. Absolutely onwards and upwards, apart from one example I have been asked to give, which I will incorporate into my reply to Zed, if I may.
Zed, Firstly, with regard to your suggestion of yesterday
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 19, 2010 18:09:40 GMT
Thanks again to those of you who replied. Absolutely onwards and upwards, apart from one example I have been asked to give, which I will incorporate into my reply to Zed, if I may. Zed, Firstly, with regard to your suggestion of yesterday My word, dc's been kidnapped!
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Sept 19, 2010 18:19:27 GMT
Thanks again to those of you who replied. Absolutely onwards and upwards, apart from one example I have been asked to give, which I will incorporate into my reply to Zed, if I may. Zed, Firstly, with regard to your suggestion of yesterday My word, dc's been kidnapped! Before anyone asks I have an alibi.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 19, 2010 18:23:43 GMT
My word, dc's been kidnapped! Before anyone asks I have an alibi. Only the guilty require an alibi.
|
|
|
Post by superckat on Sept 19, 2010 20:46:53 GMT
Ok that was weird.
|
|
dc
Gerry Francis
Posts: 37
|
Post by dc on Sept 19, 2010 21:05:43 GMT
Sorry about earlier chaps, me and iphone not working well together. Home briefly now, so just thought I'd finish where I left off.
So Zed, you have perhaps illustrated, albeit unwittingly but in spectacular fashion over the course of your two responses, just about everything I was originally talking about.
First of all, you queried the timing of my post, as we had not long achieved another great result. I was simply at home, on the site and in my view, simply responding out of courtesy to those who had replied to me, in what I had already acknowledged as a surprisingly honest and polite way. I simply thought it good manners, perhaps you disagree.
You then suggest I keep out of politics and stick to football. To some people, not necessarily myself, this would be taken as a "keep your opinion to yourself as you do not know the facts" type of response. Still, moving on.
You then suggest that I was perhaps trying to "Hijack" the thread. Once again, apologies if it came across like that at all. I only kept the dialogue going as others were responding in as I have already said, a generally positive way.
For my own "Agenda" no less. A sarcastic response to an accusation like that may well be along the lines of :
"Seeing as you seem to know everything and clearly more than me, perhaps you could tell me what my agenda is?"
However, as I am not looking to cause any fuss, I shall just remain "in the dark".
When I mentioned that no one has particularly told me anything and talking about one side of the story, I was actually pointing out that I have formed my own opinions, both good and bad about all involved, having witnessed all the nonsense going on before.
Finally, and rather surprisingly, in response to cpr's request, I can now give a perfect example of a grossly misleading statement, which could be seen by some as a lie on the basis it is wrong, and to reinforce your own view, which it quite clearly would have done if ther were any truth in it.
I can categorically tell you now, 100% fact, that I am no way involved in part funding of WATRB. Absolutely not.
I can also categorically tell you with absolute certainty yet again, that I have no commercial relationship with WATRB.
In fairness to you, and in this case a little knowledge has certainly been a dangerous thing, I can understand why you think there may be, but I assure you that there is not.
Finally, I assume your status as Global Moderator, was what enabled you to know my full name, which led to you coming to a wrong assumption. This could potentially be a little awkward, as my user name on here is different from on there, for a very good reason. That being so that nobody from either site can point the finger either in support or in accusation at me or anything I post. In order that I can have civil discussions on both sites, without being accused of having any agendas. I did say very early on that I was not here to cause anyone trouble, quite the reverse. In actual fact, before making my first post on here some while ago, I did have a brief dialogue with Report, pointing out that I had had very civilised disagreements with him before on a certain matter and that I was not looking to continue them.
Hope this clears everything up for all concerned.
In the interest of common sense and to show good faith, I shall refrain from posting anything further on this thread and will post only in future on less sensitive QPR related issues.
However, should anybody wish to ask me anything in relation to this, I will be happy to respond to PM's.
Thanks guys, I appreciate your welcoming comments.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 19, 2010 21:22:57 GMT
OK DC - And being in "the real" DC, that's a nice name! Thanks for your posts. And I won't get into the specifics of your response. But even if you're not going to post further on this thread, I hope you do continue to post on other threads.
I can only reiterate that if you look through this site, I think what I said previously stands .
And when you're back on WATRB, go back and look at some of the things said by Pete and by a couple of others about me. (The posts that haven't been subsequently deleted). And then maybe, I hope (and think) you'll come to different conclusions. And then pose some questions of Pete. (Careful that you don't get banned there!)
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 20, 2010 2:48:00 GMT
Such an interesting read. But not quite as interesting as Ronski's on that other thread about QPR in the 40's real football and players and fans. That's why this site is bloody good. There are few threads discussing various MB politics, and more threads discussing QPR - past, present and future.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 20, 2010 6:46:11 GMT
Ironically, it was exactly "one Year Ago On this Site" that there were a series of posts and allegations from a couple people that I was referring to (who currently no longer post here). While Scott - expressing unhappiness at this site, announced his departure from this site. It got so that I even posted a (very pretty!) thread "And a moment of Calm Descends Onto QPR Report" qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=6893
|
|
finney
Dave Mangnall
Posts: 175
|
Post by finney on Sept 20, 2010 8:34:06 GMT
DC i like the way you are coming across and respect what you say. My issues however is that Pete is the person wronged,and that is not the case he is very much the architect in his own downfall.
I can give untold examples of lies that Pete has come out with and his lack of facts and indeed his smears as they are at times amaze me.
This is the man who told the world on the world wide web that steve russell one of the most honest souls you could meet was ripping of Qpr fans.when in fact it was not even steve russell selling the thing he said now not only is that wrong its a smear.
Then there was the classic time when Pete and Scott took loads of ideas of the old LSA messageboard and went to see the club and put them ideas as their own. And in fact i have been in a meeting with Pete when he has took posting of the message boards and tryed to pass them off as his own even had some from indyrs which is how i clocked it.
This is also a man who conned people into thinking he was doing an interview with Flavio and it was a con job. A man who said that if you question him you question the board of Queen's Park Rangers.
The thing about pete is that he wants to be Mr QPR which is why the press office at QPR work with him on many things which is why he got this gig on the radio. Yet if someone else was doing it Pete would be doing his nut in and calling the person a media whore.
Pete, to me will always be the fella who smears to try and climb over peoples heads to get his ego wings. Which is why he always says that others think they speak for the fans and why he even tryed to say as well with MYU in saying that Clive from LFW was making money off QPR fans. Pete could not or even now get it in his head that their is no fans spokesman/woman their are many QPR fans who put this club and the fans points across so well one of which is Robert Elms many others do a great job as well. There never was this superfan rubbish and message board wars till Pete came out fighting. My problem is i say what i feel and let myself down by trying to take Pete and his "friends" on with facts and thinking as you can tell in that Jnet stitch up job on the radio that Pete trys to just shout out people and lie badly when cought out.
Still good debate and done in a manner that i think is a big plus.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 20, 2010 8:47:59 GMT
[Just to reiterate, as noted in the "Welcome to this site": If any parties being "discussed" wish to post a response to this or any other thread, but are unable (as unopposed to unwilling) to post here, send an email to me and if within the board's paramaters, it will be posted]
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Sept 20, 2010 9:54:05 GMT
I have no doubt come across as someone who is here to defend Pete, although that is not the case. The poster doth protest too much, methinks. Mark, Thanks for the reply. As already mentioned, I am neither looking for an argument or here specifically to defend Pete. See the above and now it's getting slightly surreal in your denials of your own clear as day actions as well as completely incredulous. I was not referring to this board in particular with regard to the adverts, but that some like to make up stories and tell lies to further their own ends. Then why post that on our board? Again I refer you to your earlier post where you say it's unfair to tarnish all with the same brush but instead you make a general sweeping statement on our board only to back down from that position and state that you meant something else. Please be more clearer in your intended message as again what others do elsewhere is irrelevant to us and by bringing it over here it seems a tacit attempt to lay that blame with us. With regard to Pete's actions in the past, obviously I am not aware of all of the things he may have done in terms of contributing to this ill feeling from various parties. And in fairness, even his staunchest critic may be unaware of some ammunition. Pete has contributed to this boards opinion of him by coming on here under different usernames, flaming the board and blatantly lying about other QPR fans who simply do not agree with him and take him to task over his immature and blatantly disrespectful attitude towards other posters. Pete is the sole cause of any animosity towards him and to try to imply that the ill feeling is unfounded and that Pete has only contributed to it rather that caused it is either simple ignorance on your part (if so you really do not know enough about this to have a valid argument by your own admission of lack of facts) or your simply watering down his own involvement in his self-caused battles in order to portray him as a wronged individual. That is frankly laughable in it's-self. What I was hoping to achieve with the previous posts, was a scenario where perhaps we can all move on from what may or may not have gone on in the past and start afresh. Would love to, but I'm a long way off forgive and forget whilst I still see snide comments and lies about this message board elsewhere and then see a post like yours here as the matter is still obviously relevant. Also I don't give a shit about this enough for it to be something to move on from either. It's just an aside to discuss on a message board, nothing more, nothing less and certainly not something worth writing a PM for.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 20, 2010 10:03:42 GMT
DC, may I just point out that I have only referred to you as DC and nothing else. Just in case anyone reading your last post is misled. Thank you. You didn't answer me again (mainly) but never mind.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 20, 2010 15:52:19 GMT
Anyway, I presume the show is on this Saturday. Who will be listening?
Sadly and I am gutted, I will be at the game, in the pub before and hopefully after.
I do have World/Player (whatever) and my login and password details were posted on a messageboard last season, I was not best pleased by that, I can assure you. After listening to the away commentary last Saturday, I'm not sure I need to continue with the player as it was simply radio London's commentary and kept shooting off to other London games for updates. That is not what I expect or pay for.
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 20, 2010 15:55:13 GMT
I hope to be listening in.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 20, 2010 15:57:00 GMT
Next time you tell your children not to lie, they can ask: But why not?
|
|
|
Post by toboboly on Sept 20, 2010 18:43:17 GMT
Pete lies continuously. Victims don't lie.
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 21, 2010 2:19:56 GMT
I look forward to DC rationalised response to this and of course I also wish to see him not restrict himself to only this thread which thus far he has only done. Surely there are much more interesting and more positive threads on this site for him to participate. I am a tad disappointment that he has chosen at this stage not to join in with the other discussions.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 21, 2010 6:13:01 GMT
Just to return to the original focus of this thread: This was a decision made by our club (or by various people at our club). It may be "a success" in terms of listenership or "interest" or how it comes across, etc. Or it may not be. To me that's not the point. It's that this decision was made.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Sept 21, 2010 7:14:08 GMT
Pete Davies' actions have shown him to be a truly despicable character and I'm ashamed our great club have chosen to associate themselves with him. I have cancelled my subscription.
|
|