I cant top Teddy but I did have a piss next to John Humphries once. I figured it wasnt a good time to ask for an autograph though.
I was about to say, or to ask him if he was free, but then I remembered that was John Inman!
Probably not a good idea to say that to John Inman anywhere, or a respected broadcaster and journalist like John Humphries in a public convenience!
Cheers, Halo, KRG,
As you know, Iâve let a lot of things slide in this place. Swear filters, language that some mods might consider racist (even with the context) and more besides. I still think that self-policing is the best way to go for most moderation, and indeed, thatâs the way things usually work.
KRGâs point should strike home particularly hard for anyone that has spent time on TUI or TSW. Nick has had to issue a couple of appeals to deal with persistent trolling. Last summer, TSWâs disinterested moderation enabled quite a few posters to wreak havoc in what was a tumultuous enough time for Saints supporters. Not dealt with, cultures are created and it becomes a much bigger problem down the line.
With regard to SWDP in particular, the reason I suspected the post as not being well intentioned is because very little of what SWDP has written has been. The first few posts of our Juanmi thread are all about the persecution of gay people. The Nathaniel Clyne transfer saga was enlivened with Nateâs potential feelings about not wanting to be sold, because he is black, and West Africans were historically bonded into slavery. Also this week, he has insinuated that he has stalked Tokes online. None of that stuff reflects well on the site, and all of it factored in to raising my heckles on this occasion.
And judging by the content, I reckon Iâm justified in my concern. I deliberately bailed out of this thread after seeing Inspector Goatboy take up the charge. SWDPâs posts since have hardly been a defence of his position; theyâre all infantile attempts to get people to admit theyâre attracted to transgendered people, because that would make them gay, and thatâs funny, right?
As for the claims of taking the Internet too seriously. Damn right. This place was hard-won, and despite me having done much bigger stuff with much more personal code involvement than this little forum, it is probably my favourite ever thing Iâve put online. Iâm going to take a dim view of anyone that intentionally tries to diminish everything weâve done.
2 Likes
But youâre fine with a thread discussing and criticising specific individuals from a different forum, yeah?
Thatâs an interesting observation which deserves a response. I personally havenât been critical of anyone on that list, just added to a couple of people on the poll. I donât know if youâve noticed, but Iâve recently been pretty guarded in what Iâve said about others over there, preferring to comment on the character of threads rather than specific individuals. And FWIW, while some of that thread has been people sounding off, most of it is constructive criticism, and even those posters that are engaging in a bit of bloodletting have contributed positively to this place far more frequently than theyâve criticised that place.
Itâs a thing that I have to accept, but donât endorse, and I largely donât. There have been tons of posts having a proper pop at CB Fry or whomever. You wonât see me upvoting many of them, because it isnât the sort of thing I want to encourage. I would much rather focus on the positives, and drop in a quiet post indicating my preference, than coming down like a ton of bricks on people who have the occasional pop at things over there, because if I did that, people would be upset at that too.
As Iâve said before, itâs got fuck all to do with the thread and everything to do with the intent. The intent of the thread you refer to is best SaintsWeb poster, and thatâs largely the way it is going. I wonât bore you with a repetition of what I think the intent of this thread is.
Hi Pap,
I donât know how you know what my intent is when I donât even really know myself.
However, i can categorically say I have not been intentionally racist, homophobic or rapey.
Youâve been accused in the past of drawing bad conclusions from limited data. I think this might be another of those times.
Clyne: I had a theory, i shared the theory, i never claimed that it was anything else but a theory. Maybe i too drew a bad conclusion from limited data, but I fail to see anything racist about considering this possibility. Infact Iâm pretty sure itâs a viewpoint that has been publicly expressed by black athletes on numerous occassions. The fact that Clyne may not be of West African is descent would not preclude this theory from having validity.
Gay persecution: i had a theory, i shared the theory. The theory boils down to gay people being persecuted for being successful and intelligent. Is it disrespecful to label gay people as succesful and intelligent? I shared the theory on a juanmi thread. I suspect this is your main gripe.
tokyo stalking: This was a misunderstanding. I was actually stalking Turkish via Tokyo and the vague way this was communicated led to the misunderstanding. Perhaps Tokyo would care to confirm this. Took the jordie clasie thread off topic.
T-girls: the decision to discuss this was again made on a whim initiated in response to a post on another forum. The original post briefly took the Mario Suarez thread off topic briefly. After Spudders suggested to make a thread I obliged, again on a whim, I decided to take him up on the offer. There are many things discussed on these football forums that I consider to be juvenile. Computer games is one that springs to mind. Taking pleasure from images of the human form is apparently juvenile too.That doesnât mean itâs not a valid topic for exploration. I didnât find those pictures funny. More interesting than funny, but to be honest the plan was to post now think later. Thatâs not necessarily wrong, sometimes thats how creativity happens.
If i had to guess, your main gripe is that i have briefly taken a few threads off topic. I.e. you want the right things in the right boxes. That sounds a bit spectrum to me.
I think Iâve described my gripes plainly enough.
I appreciate the qualification youâve provided here, but I donât really agree with it, especially the implication that your input has been a valid expression of creativity.
I always like it when someone takes the trouble to explain themself.
That said, the one thing Pap doesnât mind is going off topic. Or at least, if he does mind, he hasnât picked anyone up on it yet.
Originally posted by @Coxford_lou
I always like it when someone takes the trouble to explain themself.
Weâve seen some classics already. Sadly, I donât rank this amongst them.
That said, the one thing Pap doesnât mind is going off topic. Or at least, if he does mind, he hasnât picked anyone up on it yet.
Iâm one of the worst offenders for going off topic, so itâd be self-defeating if I tried.
Hi Pab
This is like the crisis actor thing again right?
Iâm claiming that my motives are pure and that i posted pics of scantily clad women in good faith, but to your mind the obscenity I have unleashed could only be the product of a concerted campaign of misdirection on behalf of dark forces.
Its really very interesting to be me right now. I was always kind of sympathetic with the consipiricists angle, but this is making me rethink.
oi stickypiss! WHO R U? I feel like I should know this, but I prob Forgot. tks.
Would you believe me if I said Chappel End Charlie?
No, itâs not at all like that. Everything Iâve pulled you up on is verifiable, most in this thread - unless of course that you think insisting other posters are into transgendered over their clarifications is âgood faithâ.
Weâre just a small site, SWDP. I am certain that youâd pull a much larger audience on one of the larger Saints forums (e.g. all of them) with this âgood faithâ thread. Why not try your luck there with your existing user account?*
*Rhetorical
This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
OK SSWDP. Really, deep down, I would love to be rammed in my pooper by a wrongun with a longun. Can we put this to bed now?
1 Like
Hi Goatboy 
,
i think your obsession with this particular aspect of the encounter is a little insensitive to the plight of the women and frankly a bit out of order. My understanding is that if the woman is receiving hormones itâs quite likely that she will have problems performing in the trouser department.
Hi Pap,
iâd rather stay on this forum, the other forums make me sad. The people arent good people like what there are (mainly) on this forum.
It would appear that the examples you have used (posted on this thread) have no trouble in the trouser department. I will keep researching though to see if things become more flaccid.
1 Like
Originally posted by @StickyWhiteDovePiss
iâd rather stay on this forum, the other forums make me sad. The people arent good people like what there are (mainly) on this forum.
Hi StickyWhiteDovePiss,
If you like this forum so much, whatâs the issue with taking on board Papâs view on things? Quit taking piss out of minority groups! Be a bigger man - take the piss out of yourself!
Lou. x
1 Like
As someone famously said to Jeffrey Archer, if you cant laugh at yourself you might be missing the joke of the century!