The Takeover Thread - Recon Group - NOW WITH NEW POLL

[Smirker]

Have we been taken over yet?

Yes, by some Canadian's apparently.

Right I've not read the thread but is this a wind up? I can't detect any sarcasm.

Doesn't matter.

Goodnight.

[Dave Clark Five]

To put a cap on the eastie stuff.... I know he is curently telling people on TBAR that he sent PMs to "three people" inviting them to another site and got banned for it.

Which is utter nonsense, he sent so many of them, he triggered the anti-flooding feature on the site, which flags an alarm if too many PMs get sent by one person inside a certain time. That's the only reason we actually knew about them at all.

One of the members he sent them to forwarded it to us and it was of the "come to this new forum, too many wankers on here, mods all hitlers" variety.

We told him this, and that we were disappointed, and flagged up the breach of rules, and he said "OMG! My account has been hacked!!!!!".

Fair do's. Can't argue with that... not that I was going to, mind.

Ultimately, if we'd wanted to ban eastie for some reason, we'd just have banned him. We wouldn't be making stuff up, and we wouldn't be frequently telling people on here why he was banned. End of the day, we don't have to justify banning anyone, if we wanted to get shot of someone, we just would.

Exactly. Everyone knows the site rules, such as not revealing PMs to anyone else.

[Dave Clark Five]

I've got a theory - it seems that the only people eastie liked, and the only ones who seem to stick up for him, are those who also have forum names with no capitals:

brian green
richard moore
adrenachrome
dave shelley

I've no idea what it means but it's definitely a sign!!!

Got to be worth posting again, in case someone else can help.

[pauliewalnuts]

To put a cap on the eastie stuff.... I know he is curently telling people on TBAR that he sent PMs to "three people" inviting them to another site and got banned for it.

Which is utter nonsense, he sent so many of them, he triggered the anti-flooding feature on the site, which flags an alarm if too many PMs get sent by one person inside a certain time. That's the only reason we actually knew about them at all.

One of the members he sent them to forwarded it to us and it was of the "come to this new forum, too many wankers on here, mods all hitlers" variety.

We told him this, and that we were disappointed, and flagged up the breach of rules, and he said "OMG! My account has been hacked!!!!!".

Fair do's. Can't argue with that... not that I was going to, mind.

Ultimately, if we'd wanted to ban eastie for some reason, we'd just have banned him. We wouldn't be making stuff up, and we wouldn't be frequently telling people on here why he was banned. End of the day, we don't have to justify banning anyone, if we wanted to get shot of someone, we just would.

Exactly. Everyone knows the site rules, such as not revealing PMs to anyone else.

I don't know if that's meant to be sarcastic or not, but I haven't revealed PMs to anyone else, I have pointed out that someone was banned for abusing the PM system and hinted at what they were saying - after the person in question mentioned it himself elsewhere.

[b23]

I remember watching that Michael (was it Michael?) Neville interview after it emerged he wanted to buy us, and he was being interviewed in front of what looked like the sort of modest, semi detached house your gran might live in, and feeling a crushing sense of disappointment that this was not going to involve huge sums of money.

You must have had, or known, posh grans ?

Mine lived in Briardale Road, Liverpool.

Her milk was delivered by horse and cart.

And

Beresford Road, Dingle, Liverpool.

Where you played tig with a hatchet.

[Dave Clark Five]

To put a cap on the eastie stuff.... I know he is curently telling people on TBAR that he sent PMs to "three people" inviting them to another site and got banned for it.

Which is utter nonsense, he sent so many of them, he triggered the anti-flooding feature on the site, which flags an alarm if too many PMs get sent by one person inside a certain time. That's the only reason we actually knew about them at all.

One of the members he sent them to forwarded it to us and it was of the "come to this new forum, too many wankers on here, mods all hitlers" variety.

We told him this, and that we were disappointed, and flagged up the breach of rules, and he said "OMG! My account has been hacked!!!!!".

Fair do's. Can't argue with that... not that I was going to, mind.

Ultimately, if we'd wanted to ban eastie for some reason, we'd just have banned him. We wouldn't be making stuff up, and we wouldn't be frequently telling people on here why he was banned. End of the day, we don't have to justify banning anyone, if we wanted to get shot of someone, we just would.

Exactly. Everyone knows the site rules, such as not revealing PMs to anyone else.

I don't know if that's meant to be sarcastic or not, but I haven't revealed PMs to anyone else, I have pointed out that someone was banned for abusing the PM system and hinted at what they were saying - after the person in question mentioned it himself elsewhere.

There have been countless references to PMs over the last few weeks. I reported one that was copied for general consumption a few weeks ago. Things that are private should be kept private. This applies to all forums and I maintain that privacy.

[pauliewalnuts]

There's a difference between "references to PMs" and revealing the contents of PMs.

The right to continued participation here ends when you start abusing the PM system like that.

[Dave Clark Five]

There's a difference between "references to PMs" and revealing the contents of PMs.

The right to continued participation here ends when you start abusing the PM system like that.

Good. Telling all and sundry the contents of a PM, unless abusive, should also be against the rules of any site, in my view.

I quote the site rules:

Private messages are intended to be simply that - PRIVATE.

Anyone posting the contents of a private message in any forum (including Golden Muppets) for any reason can expect a ban.

[b23]

There's a difference between "references to PMs" and revealing the contents of PMs.

The right to continued participation here ends when you start abusing the PM system like that.

Good. Telling all and sundry the contents of a PM, unless abusive, should also be against the rules of any site, in my view.

I quote the site rules:

Private messages are intended to be simply that - PRIVATE.

Anyone posting the contents of a private message in any forum (including Golden Muppets) for any reason can expect a ban.

I have to agree DC5.

One rule for some. Another rule for others ?

[Chris_Jephcott]

13 pages?

I'm not sure I can be arsed to read it all. Someone tell me, is it just gags from us about them or is there something worth reading? I really can't be bothered to go on to that site given the likely membership.

As a founder member of "that likely membership", may your next turd be a hedgehog. You bull's pizzle.

[saunders_heroes]

13 pages?

I'm not sure I can be arsed to read it all. Someone tell me, is it just gags from us about them or is there something worth reading? I really can't be bothered to go on to that site given the likely membership.

As a founder member of "that likely membership", may your next turd be a hedgehog. You bull's pizzle.

Ha!

[Irish villain]

This eastie thing has intrigued me  because he honestly doesn't strike me as the type of person who would spam.

I have contacted him about it to find out what happened and he is adamant it was only three messages sent to people he was friendly with in the days in or around the time he joined TBAR site.

I'm just relaying what has been said to me, because it has been brought up here today.

[dave.woodhall]

This eastie thing has intrigued me  because he honestly doesn't strike me as the type of person who would spam.

I have contacted him about it to find out what happened and he is adamant it was only three messages sent to people he was friendly with in the days in or around the time he joined TBAR site.

I'm just relaying what has been said to me, because it has been brought up here today.

Then he's lying and you can pop back there and tell him that.

[pauliewalnuts]

There's a difference between "references to PMs" and revealing the contents of PMs.

The right to continued participation here ends when you start abusing the PM system like that.

Good. Telling all and sundry the contents of a PM, unless abusive, should also be against the rules of any site, in my view.

I quote the site rules:

Private messages are intended to be simply that - PRIVATE.

Anyone posting the contents of a private message in any forum (including Golden Muppets) for any reason can expect a ban.

I have to agree DC5.

One rule for some. Another rule for others ?

So how are these rules split then?

[Sexual Ealing]

I've just been looking at the Bells Are Ringing site. It's not like I offer much to this one so it's unlikely that I'd be any use to them, but reading the 'Who Are You?' thread was odd. I felt like I was locked in a Datsun, being fellated by Lembit Opik. But instead of being annoyed at my inability to maintain any sort of wood in the circumstances, Lembit just kept offering me biscuits and gnawing at my shy lad.

Still, nobody made me look, I guess.