LoveItIfWeBeatU Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I think the problem with having a resident Mackem is that they will always get a disproportionate number of replies to their posts purely because they are a Mackem. For example, the "I'd rather have Cattermole than Tiote" post resulted in a hell of a lot of replies! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 thought he was just kicked out for a week for going mental? He started out alright, they always seem to go mad after a bit of time on here...I thought he got a bit much stick first time he posted and was well mannered but he did go downhill... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Another thick mackem t***... That's worse than anything Pax said tbh. #justiceforpaxton :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Another thick mackem t***... That's worse than anything Pax said tbh. #justiceforpaxton Look at me, look at me. I've just cracked a joke. Pathetic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Rules are rules, doesn't matter who you support. Our libel rule is there for a reason. You gonna ban some of the trolls in this thread then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Rules are rules, doesn't matter who you support. Our libel rule is there for a reason. You gonna ban some of the trolls in this thread then? Seriously why are you even bothered? Just drink your coffee and pipe the hell down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 He called Pardew a wankstain, how is that a level headed? It was clearly tongue-in-cheek. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Another thick mackem t***... That's worse than anything Pax said tbh. #justiceforpaxton Look at me, look at me. I've just cracked a joke. Pathetic. Still love that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Rules are rules, doesn't matter who you support. Our libel rule is there for a reason. You gonna ban some of the trolls in this thread then? Seriously why are you even bothered? Just drink your coffee and pipe the hell down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Mackems never last long on here, there's always a fucking feeding frenzy whenever they inevitably share a different opinion. He can stay banned for all I care, just an observation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karjala Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Mackems never last long on here, there's always a fucking feeding frenzy whenever they inevitably share a different opinion. He can stay banned for all I care, just an observation. Ban them? I'd shoot them, every last one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Mackems never last long on here, there's always a f***ing feeding frenzy whenever they inevitably share a different opinion. He can stay banned for all I care, just an observation. Ban them? I'd shoot them, every last one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 That game yesterday was the worst televised game I've seen all season. Turgid is a kind assessment. Amazing that they always have to try and get one over on us. "Mags had a boring game on Friday, well we make our game even more boring FTM." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Serious? The stuff was in the papers. If you can't discuss stuff that's already in public then what can you discuss? Not it wasn't. What was reported in the papers was that the women that were there were in possession of cocaine, not Carroll or Nolan and they certainly weren't charged or done as he said. And it wasn't a discussion, he was accusing. Anything else you'd like to be wrong about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It was a discussion about both clubs having employed players who have done stupid shit, which he was right to point out that all clubs have. This was a minor, minor point of incorrect detail which doesn't affect the point that he was making. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It was a discussion about both clubs having employed players who have done stupid shit, which he was right to point out that all clubs have. This was a minor, minor point of incorrect detail which doesn't affect the point that he was making. If he has been muted for 24 hours he has been treated more leniently than most tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It was a discussion about both clubs having employed players who have done stupid shit, which he was right to point out that all clubs have. This was a minor, minor point of incorrect detail which doesn't affect the point that he was making. It's not a minor detail, its a huge detail accusing someone of something that would ruin them professionally. Stop talking shite. It was me that muted him and i stick by it, if you've got any problems with that direct them at my PM box and we can discuss it further, though i doubt you will as its not the public showing that you are craving for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 He called Pardew a wankstain, how is that a level headed? It was clearly tongue-in-cheek. Was it fuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest schmuck Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It was a discussion about both clubs having employed players who have done stupid shit, which he was right to point out that all clubs have. This was a minor, minor point of incorrect detail which doesn't affect the point that he was making. It's not a minor detail, its a huge detail accusing someone of something that would ruin them professionally. Stop talking shite. It was me that muted him and i stick by it, if you've got any problems with that direct them at my PM box and we can discuss it further, though i doubt you will as its not the public showing that you are craving for. Why isn't this kind of thing enforced on the dozens of other occasions it could be then? For example every time someone makes a comment about Pardew having it away with player's wives. Some people are like virgins on viagra every time a mackem comes on here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Martin the Magician, of course it was If it wasn't a joke then it's a pretty direct contrast to the rest of his posts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Another thick mackem t***... That's worse than anything Pax said tbh. #justiceforpaxton Look at me, look at me. I've just cracked a joke. Pathetic. toffee cunt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakie Doke Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 He was a bit of a WUM, but worthy of a ban? Would anyone be willing to pitch in for a 'Justice for Paxton' banner to take to the Bolton match? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 He was a bit of a WUM, but worthy of a ban? As has been explained, it seems he was only given '24 hours off' after posting potentially libelous claims about former NUFC players and drug use. He wasn't banned for anything else he posted. However, form what I did see of his posts, it seemed that most had an undercurrent of bitterness/WUM, call it what you like about NUFC, much like previous mackem posters that have been here before him. It starts like that, but generally only ever ends up one way. /wireside/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It's a 24 hour rest for a libellous claim. Don't know how it can be argued so fucking much. As someone else says, he could've been dealt a harsher hand. Don't get the advocating of banning him completely tbh. I know I wasn't that endearing at first, but if anything I think he'd started improving from the 'Catts over Tiote for me' tripe. As others have said, he's got rose-tinted specs like most fans. But he's made some fair points amongst some of his bias. And he's handled the throngs of abuse better than most would. What do you expect to get from a mackem who, from each of his posts, gets 20 replies? It's a forum of hundreds of regularly active users ganging up on one guy ffs. I do expect him to break, like every one of them does for the reason above. But let's just make the most of the only half-mental mackem while we can. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts