Ban announcements

[Prince EWS]

If they're irrelevant, move them to TF

If they're irrelevant, post them in TF

 

[vic_orthdox]

That's basically what I just said

As I said, I speak in hyperbole. There may be some people who want him kept.

Hell of a lot want him banned too.

Hell of a lot of people wanted Richard banned at certain stages as well, that wouldn't make it the right decision.

 

[Smudge]

If they're irrelevant, post them in TF

Bingo. I can't see why so many people are leaping to the defence of the Three Pommieteers. They knew what they were doing, they appeared to expect a ban for their behaviour, and they got a ban - the length of which was to be expected after two of the three had been banned in recent months and the other a year or so ago. Personally, as I said earlier, I thought the length of the bans were a tad long, but taking their track record into account, I can understand why they were givien such lengthy bans by the moderating team.

To me, it simply looks like they got what they wanted. They had other options to complain about the closure of the earlier threads made in Site Discussion, but they chose to take the alternative route knowing (most likely) what the consequences would be.

Que sera sera

 

[Pratters]

Don't like the bloke, but never had a massive issue with him in any of his various guises. His prissy, trollish posts at least have the merit of brevity. Less hard to swallow than x-dozen rambling, adjective laden, multi-quoting posts reinterating the same tired points over and over again.

IMHO, obv.

Yeah, Sir Alex is fine. Well put.

 

[Burgey]

If they're irrelevant, post them in TF

Fair point.

 

[Agent TBY]

Yeah, Sir Alex is fine. Well put.

Seem to remember you using the PMs to call him a **** tbh.

 

[Pothas]

So anything exciting happened in the hours that I have been at the pub?

 

[Son Of Coco]

Pointless and juvenile, yes.

Would agree with this. The effort a few weeks back when GIMH was banned was lame and the latest was a bit annoying too.

On another note though, it's good to see these boys getting back together

If anyone posts a reply that doesn't totally agree with me, at 7pm I'll be getting my middle school girls to post a number of threads along the lines of 'Annyeong Hasseo'; 'Annold Hasseo'; 'Annmiddle-aged Hasseyeo'; 'Ann1-year-old Hasseyeo'; 'Ann2-year-old Hasseyeo' etc etc to introduce themselves to the forum. Repeatedly.

It'll be hilarious.

Gee there's been some catching up to do here overnight too!

 

[Agent TBY]

Almost as hilarious, as a boot, stamping on Sir Alex's face. Forever.

 

[Flem274*]

I wonder how many application withdrawals we'll get after this...

Tbh you might get more. Everyone wants to ban someone around here.

I am glad that someone said that and I would just like to state what Pratters has done by using this website.

It is a shame that someone like Pratters is still allowed on this forum. This guy takes my email address from this site and starts spamming when asked to stop he rudely refuses to do so. He then goes on to hack the email account (after I reply to all his emails). Somehow I got my Google to reset my password since I had all the security question. He continued to spam and stopped only after I contacted his Email Provider and also threatened him to report him to appropriate authorities.

Obviously now he takes my email address and has started registering at all the Adult sites he visits. Thanks to him I had to give up my email address which not only I had been using since year 2004 but also it was an account that reflected my official name. Thanks to his friendship that now I use an account that sounds like P_S_%$%%@gmail.com

I take this opportunity to warn and advise all CW members that they never ever communicate with Pratters through their official email, never share any personal information with him. He is a dangerous individual to have friends/enemy with, Not that I ever was his friend. All I ever said to him was that I did not trust him and that was enough for him to show his real side.


It is a shame that he is still here.

wtf. Crazy.

Is it just me, or has all the attempted humour in here been really, really bad? Trying to lighten the mood definitely a good idea but the execution has been horrible. If only we hadn't banned sledger.

Oh, says the guy who went back and edited his post after I exposed his batsman hate?
and you laughed

This is by far the worst thread in CW history.

DWTA.

Help me. Plz give suggestions.

Do you think the BCCI should help minnows?

In order to progress sacrifices must be made. /Stalin

Lol

 

[Pratters]

Seem to remember you using the PMs to call him a **** tbh.

No I didn't. I said 'I have nothing against you.' Check his pm or ask mods/James for verification on it.

 

[Sir Alex]

There have been so many people who've openly stated it in both this thread and mine. Others who have more politely implied it. I have spoken to people off forum who think he should be gone. Ex-mods, staff members, normal posters. He has to go, just has to.

Lol

The whinge gets better with each passing day.

 

[Sir Alex]

Key term in that post is of course Cricket Chat.

Cricket Chat is still dire, because Sir Alex (and others) are still there and little has been done to address this.

The rest of the forum was fine but is now **** because the stricter moderation we wanted in CC was not applied there but has been over-zealously applied everywhere else.

Instead of the useless trolls being banned, harmless posters have been banned.

EDIT - or what Srizza said.

Saying the same stuff thousand times does not make it a truth.

I challenge you to produce proof of my trolling in CC or please STFU.

 

[vic_orthdox]

This thread is not for challenges, collecting evidence, deriding of members or other accusations. The thread is not going to be of a constructive nature if it descends to this.

 

[Sir Alex]

I fail to see any attempt at constructive discussion on part of the thread starter. Well he is continuing to make baseless allegations and isn't getting warned by anyone.

 

[alternative]

Haha what a thread.

Sooo many stories... Pratters v Sanz = EPIC.

 

[_Ed_]

Whew. Just spent the best part of an hour catching up with this saga.

The post I agree with most is this:

On second thoughts, greatest thread in CW history. So many personal animosities I was unaware of.

Simply fabulous stuff.

 

[GIMH]

I fail to see any attempt at constructive discussion on part of the thread starter. Well he is continuing to make baseless allegations and isn't getting warned by anyone.

I didn't start the thread.

I think it was Shri who said your trolling is subtle and isn't obvious to someone who hasn't read a lot of your posts. Take the post in my sig - to the untrained eye it just appears as uneducated posting from someone who isn't very bright. To those of us who have endured your pathetic bull**** it's obvious that you post it because you enjoy the reaction it gets.

I'll give you one thing, you aren't stupid. That's the difference between you and the other trolls.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yeah, Sir Alex is fine. Well put.

Not quite what I said, tbf. I find him a minor irritant at best, but one that's mercifully easy to ignore.

My gripe is that if he is precam (and, frankly, would bet cash on it) and he's already been permaed more than once before it makes a mockery of the concept of banning someone if the bans are so easily overcome.

 

[Jono]

If the BCCI were incharge of CW this wouldn't have happened.