Eric, I simply asked a question of marlowchair. Disagreeing with a refereeing decision is hardly on a par with a constant stream of criticism of so many aspects of the way WWFC is run by well meaning volunteers who are bound to get things wrong sometimes.
I don’t see where this is my opinion and not fact .
It is a widely accepted truth that consistent failure to get minor detail right is a reflection of wider dysfunction in organisations.
Either your understanding of what a fact is is wrong or mine is. A fact to me is something that can be proven. Can you prove in this case that a (generally) consensual ‘accepted truth’ (I.e. informed opinion) applies to a lack of crisps in one part of the ground?
We would be hugely critical here if our football team often failed to trap simple passes with the food yes? My point is , why does highlighting a similarly frustrating off pitch issue attract such responses ?
I can’t speak for others, but as i’ve said before I find your posts frustrating. If the Trust are going round with the equivalent of £350 million on the side of a bus (or £600 000 a year), I see you as Osbourne* giving me/us the equivalent of Project Fear.
It is why being clear that what is factual and what is opinion matters to me.
*And sorry. No-one deserves to be linked to that slimy &@£&.
@bookertease - I am not sure that you can state as a FACT that Osbourne is slimy, unless you have of course shaken his hand or touched some other part of his body!
I don’t wish to sound like a boring old fart (whilst accepting that I am) but I have to say that in my opinion, using four letter words and bringing politics into the ring does nothing to enhance the level of debate in this forum.
@glasshalffull said:
I don’t wish to sound like a boring old fart (whilst accepting that I am) but I have to say that in my opinion, using four letter words and bringing politics into the ring does nothing to enhance the level of debate in this forum.
@glasshalffull said:
I don’t wish to sound like a boring old fart (whilst accepting that I am) but I have to say that in my opinion, using four letter words and bringing politics into the ring does nothing to enhance the level of debate in this forum.
Just ignore it then if it bothers you.
Or raise the matter politely, as @glasshalffull has done, if you think it a fair point to make and the audience likely to share your interest in having this place be a relatively civil outpost of the interweb.
Come on Dr.Congo, I have the utmost respect for your opinions but why feel the need to use the kind of language you’re likely to find on the dreaded fans FB page? You’re better than that.
Gee Halfull,you’ve done a fine job failing to understand and subsequently alienating the majority of sub 30 year old supporters are n Facebook , can you give the stick-in -the mud routine a rest for 5 minutes At least ?
It may not enhance the level of debate @glasshalffull but it is surprising cathartic to some of us (well me at least). it Is childish, immature and puerile and no doubt hypocritical but does it bring joy to my life? Yes. Sorry if it brings sadness to yours but in the context of a generally serious, sober (and @LX1) forum i’m sure you can shake your head and move on.
I also think it can be helpful to ‘bring politics into the ring’ as you state it (I would I suppose given how frequently I do). I think we can and should learn from the recent/current ‘lessons’ that have occurred when people deliberately/inadvertently misrepresent ‘facts’ and/or opinions to further their cause.
I appreciate your position, knowledge, support for the future of the club but feel that so much more can be done regarding honesty and transparency about how we are where we are, rather than the ‘sorry, we’re screwed if we carry on like this’ message that has come out in the last couple of months.
All I really want, as someone who will have to make a decision on the future of s football club that has been ever-present in my life for 50+ years (to a lesser or greater degree at times) is for people who do have genuine knowledge and information to inform me in an open, factual and unbiased way to allow me to make a suitably informed decision.
And that applies both to your side (as an advocate as I see it of the current board) and the alternative side as espoused by the likes of @marlowchair.
Oh I also want to not take this too seriously, have a little fun along the way and, amongst other things, express my opinion in ways I am comfortable to do so on the character of people I will never meet and who may or may not genuinely try and do a decent job, but who, come the revolution...
@marlowchair said:
Gee Halfull,you’ve done a fine job failing to understand and subsequently alienating the majority of sub 30 year old supporters are n Facebook , can you give the stick-in -the mud routine a rest for 5 minutes At least ?
If I have failed to understand and alienated those who berate our manager and most of our players in the foulest language and those who leap in to criticise before a game is over then I have indeed done a fine job. However, I will give the stick-in-the-mud routine a rest if you promise to do likewise with your constant criticism of those trying to run our club.
Bookertease, I come on here to read people’s opinions about WWFC. If I wanted to enter a political debate there are plenty of forums that would allow me to do so. That’s my opinion, you have yours and I respect that.
I disagree with you @glasshalffull. People are free to talk about whatever they wish here - if two people want to talk about pigeon racing or the latest fashion trends, that is their right - your right is to ignore it if you please. Arguably on this forum and its predecessor, some of the most interesting topics IMHO have come when politics has raised its head.
I would be sad if strong swear words became commonplace here but in very rare instances they have their place. I think the balance is about right at present. For what it is worth I largely save @drcongo 's epithet for three individuals - Johnson, a rival Lg1 manager and Mercer - a local Tory mp to me that few of you will be much aware of at present but sadly I fear you will get to experience more in future years.
DevC, I respect what you say even though a lot of posters disrespect almost everything you write on other occasions. I was merely making the point that I don’t come onto this forum to engage in political debate and I don’t understand people who normally express themselves in an articulate fashion feeling the need to use four letter words. We move on.
Indeed @glasshalffull , I welcome and respect your contributions and more often than not agree with them. Occasionally though we disagree. as you say onwards with a metaphorical handshake and perhaps beer.
Mooneyman, when I trained as a journalist I learned early on in my career that the written word is very different to the spoken word. What you say out loud can mean many things to many people according to context and interpretation. What you put down in black and white can’t be. Do I occasionally criticise referees during a game in language that some may deem inarticulate, guilty as charged.
Back on topic, the assertion that failing to buy crisps for the bar is a sure sign that the more important things are being run poorly is one of the silliest things ever posted on here. Every organisation of any size has to make priority decisions, by definition, the important things are going to be pretty high up that priority list, the crisps are going to be pretty low. I'm sure you don't believe that buying crisps is as important as say, paying the electricity bill or ensuring we have the legal requirement of stewards available for the next match day, or even buying beer for the bar. All of which suggest that you do believe that there's an infinite number of man hours at the disposal of the club and therefore everything can be achieved in any amount of time.
Apologies @glasshalffull. I wasn’t really trying to discuss politics as such but more place our current debate in the context of how not to debate things of importance. Probably not very well.
On the subject of the use of the ‘profanity’, the point is used as it was by @drcongo it was very funny at that time. Some I’m sure were upset but I would wager most on here laughed, which in a long thread like this has to be good.
I wasn’t upset or shocked and didn’t find it amusing - just surprised that our esteemed seigneur de domaine should have resorted to the only profanity/obscenity that is generally seen as taboo even in the most liberal of civilised circles. My own sensitivity probably dates from my teens/twenties when extreme shyness apparently made me appear aloof and “stuck up” and the epithet was muttered at me by passing “yobs” on more than one occasion.
Wait until you see what will happen to crisp supplies once the kind of Brexit desired by our unprincipled, entitled, slightly racist, mop-top future Prime Minister comes to pass!
(Crisps? tick! politics? tick! and no ****)
Comments
Eric, I simply asked a question of marlowchair. Disagreeing with a refereeing decision is hardly on a par with a constant stream of criticism of so many aspects of the way WWFC is run by well meaning volunteers who are bound to get things wrong sometimes.
fair enough
Food can be very difficult to trap @marlowchair.
Either your understanding of what a fact is is wrong or mine is. A fact to me is something that can be proven. Can you prove in this case that a (generally) consensual ‘accepted truth’ (I.e. informed opinion) applies to a lack of crisps in one part of the ground?
I can’t speak for others, but as i’ve said before I find your posts frustrating. If the Trust are going round with the equivalent of £350 million on the side of a bus (or £600 000 a year), I see you as Osbourne* giving me/us the equivalent of Project Fear.
It is why being clear that what is factual and what is opinion matters to me.
*And sorry. No-one deserves to be linked to that slimy &@£&.
@bookertease - I am not sure that you can state as a FACT that Osbourne is slimy, unless you have of course shaken his hand or touched some other part of his body!
@mooneyman Valid challenge. I should of course have made it clear that it is only my opinion that Osbourne is a ‘slimy &@£&’.
It's a fact that he's a cunt though.
Although probably in this case alone - correct. Which I think was the point somewhere here.
be careful using words, @drcongo.
If you use the worst epithet you can think of to describe the likes of Osbourne, where do you go when you need to describe Johnson.
Johnson is easy. He is a inutilia duobus signis cunnus (in my opinion).
Admittedly @DevCs general concern is worthy.
I don’t wish to sound like a boring old fart (whilst accepting that I am) but I have to say that in my opinion, using four letter words and bringing politics into the ring does nothing to enhance the level of debate in this forum.
Just ignore it then if it bothers you.
Or raise the matter politely, as @glasshalffull has done, if you think it a fair point to make and the audience likely to share your interest in having this place be a relatively civil outpost of the interweb.
Apologies @glasshalffull, nobody should have to read words as offensive as G****e O*****e
Come on Dr.Congo, I have the utmost respect for your opinions but why feel the need to use the kind of language you’re likely to find on the dreaded fans FB page? You’re better than that.
Gee Halfull,you’ve done a fine job failing to understand and subsequently alienating the majority of sub 30 year old supporters are n Facebook , can you give the stick-in -the mud routine a rest for 5 minutes At least ?
It may not enhance the level of debate @glasshalffull but it is surprising cathartic to some of us (well me at least). it Is childish, immature and puerile and no doubt hypocritical but does it bring joy to my life? Yes. Sorry if it brings sadness to yours but in the context of a generally serious, sober (and @LX1) forum i’m sure you can shake your head and move on.
I also think it can be helpful to ‘bring politics into the ring’ as you state it (I would I suppose given how frequently I do). I think we can and should learn from the recent/current ‘lessons’ that have occurred when people deliberately/inadvertently misrepresent ‘facts’ and/or opinions to further their cause.
I appreciate your position, knowledge, support for the future of the club but feel that so much more can be done regarding honesty and transparency about how we are where we are, rather than the ‘sorry, we’re screwed if we carry on like this’ message that has come out in the last couple of months.
All I really want, as someone who will have to make a decision on the future of s football club that has been ever-present in my life for 50+ years (to a lesser or greater degree at times) is for people who do have genuine knowledge and information to inform me in an open, factual and unbiased way to allow me to make a suitably informed decision.
And that applies both to your side (as an advocate as I see it of the current board) and the alternative side as espoused by the likes of @marlowchair.
Oh I also want to not take this too seriously, have a little fun along the way and, amongst other things, express my opinion in ways I am comfortable to do so on the character of people I will never meet and who may or may not genuinely try and do a decent job, but who, come the revolution...
If I have failed to understand and alienated those who berate our manager and most of our players in the foulest language and those who leap in to criticise before a game is over then I have indeed done a fine job. However, I will give the stick-in-the-mud routine a rest if you promise to do likewise with your constant criticism of those trying to run our club.
Bookertease, I come on here to read people’s opinions about WWFC. If I wanted to enter a political debate there are plenty of forums that would allow me to do so. That’s my opinion, you have yours and I respect that.
@bookertease - excellent and sensible post.
I disagree with you @glasshalffull. People are free to talk about whatever they wish here - if two people want to talk about pigeon racing or the latest fashion trends, that is their right - your right is to ignore it if you please. Arguably on this forum and its predecessor, some of the most interesting topics IMHO have come when politics has raised its head.
I would be sad if strong swear words became commonplace here but in very rare instances they have their place. I think the balance is about right at present. For what it is worth I largely save @drcongo 's epithet for three individuals - Johnson, a rival Lg1 manager and Mercer - a local Tory mp to me that few of you will be much aware of at present but sadly I fear you will get to experience more in future years.
DevC, I respect what you say even though a lot of posters disrespect almost everything you write on other occasions. I was merely making the point that I don’t come onto this forum to engage in political debate and I don’t understand people who normally express themselves in an articulate fashion feeling the need to use four letter words. We move on.
@glasshalffull - Out of interest, do you always express yourself verbally regarding referees in an articulate fashion at matches?
Indeed @glasshalffull , I welcome and respect your contributions and more often than not agree with them. Occasionally though we disagree. as you say onwards with a metaphorical handshake and perhaps beer.
Mooneyman, when I trained as a journalist I learned early on in my career that the written word is very different to the spoken word. What you say out loud can mean many things to many people according to context and interpretation. What you put down in black and white can’t be. Do I occasionally criticise referees during a game in language that some may deem inarticulate, guilty as charged.
Any crisps yet?
Back on topic, the assertion that failing to buy crisps for the bar is a sure sign that the more important things are being run poorly is one of the silliest things ever posted on here. Every organisation of any size has to make priority decisions, by definition, the important things are going to be pretty high up that priority list, the crisps are going to be pretty low. I'm sure you don't believe that buying crisps is as important as say, paying the electricity bill or ensuring we have the legal requirement of stewards available for the next match day, or even buying beer for the bar. All of which suggest that you do believe that there's an infinite number of man hours at the disposal of the club and therefore everything can be achieved in any amount of time.
Apologies @glasshalffull. I wasn’t really trying to discuss politics as such but more place our current debate in the context of how not to debate things of importance. Probably not very well.
On the subject of the use of the ‘profanity’, the point is used as it was by @drcongo it was very funny at that time. Some I’m sure were upset but I would wager most on here laughed, which in a long thread like this has to be good.
I wasn’t upset or shocked and didn’t find it amusing - just surprised that our esteemed seigneur de domaine should have resorted to the only profanity/obscenity that is generally seen as taboo even in the most liberal of civilised circles. My own sensitivity probably dates from my teens/twenties when extreme shyness apparently made me appear aloof and “stuck up” and the epithet was muttered at me by passing “yobs” on more than one occasion.
Wait until you see what will happen to crisp supplies once the kind of Brexit desired by our unprincipled, entitled, slightly racist, mop-top future Prime Minister comes to pass!
(Crisps? tick! politics? tick! and no ****)