Yard Dog Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) i was, i wasnt aware it went noticed but i quite like jonesy now, i think he is spot on in most things he says about where we are going as a club (i think the same im not just agreeing with him) this board needs jonesy i feel, to keep the nodders and clappers in check bonus points for yard dog No, you miss the point. Wasn't interested in whether you agree with him or not ( I agree with him, to a large degree, if it matters). I was interested in how you used to slate him for repetition and now you're cosying up to him....? Seems like with some people it is ok for CJ to repeat when he's saying stuff they like, but not ok when he's saying stuff they don't like ?? Edited January 17, 2010 by Yard Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddogs Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 wow 11 pages of bull,the sooner we play a game the better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creepy Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 No, you miss the point. Wasn't interested in whether you agree with him or not ( I agree with him, to a large degree, if it matters). I was interested in how you used to slate him for repetition and now you're cosying up to him....? Seems like with some people it is ok for CJ to repeat when he's saying stuff they like, but not ok when he's saying stuff they don't like ?? cosying up to him? to be honest with you, hes not my type he has said the same thing forever, you either believe him, disagree with him or it takes a poxy stadium for you to agree with him you are not seriously having a go at me or anyone else for changing there mind are you with the events of the stadium fiasco? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Dog Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 cosying up to him? to be honest with you, hes not my type he has said the same thing forever, you either believe him, disagree with him or it takes a poxy stadium for you to agree with him you are not seriously having a go at me or anyone else for changing there mind are you with the events of the stadium fiasco? No, I am not having a go at anyone for their views on stadium, down-scaling, lack of ambiton blah blah blah - as I said, I agree with a lot of what the Corp says, to an extent. I'm merely highlighting the fact that some posters used to bemoan the Corp's repetitive nature, but now they suddenly embrace it - why ? Is it because he's now saying stuff they like/agree with... That's what I take issue with. Couldn't give a flying....what someone's view on anything Latics related is.. Just can't understand why some people now think it is ok for Corp to keep banging on about the same point, when before they didn't. Anyway, I think I've got my point across now and will try to stop going on about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Dog Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Back on topic. I think all of us would love it if someone bought Latics who had more money than TTA and wanted to keep us at BP, but it's not going to happen. Stadium move aside, I'm quite happy with TTA, to be honest. Every year they provide us with a decent budget, it's just unfortunate we've fallen short on the playing side...that is not TTA's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 No, I am not having a go at anyone for their views on stadium, down-scaling, lack of ambiton blah blah blah - as I said, I agree with a lot of what the Corp says, to an extent. I'm merely highlighting the fact that some posters used to bemoan the Corp's repetitive nature, but now they suddenly embrace it - why ? Is it because he's now saying stuff they like/agree with... That's what I take issue with. Couldn't give a flying....what someone's view on anything Latics related is.. Just can't understand why some people now think it is ok for Corp to keep banging on about the same point, when before they didn't. Anyway, I think I've got my point across now and will try to stop going on about it. It happens to everyone but more so to corp... It all comes down to how someone feels about the opinion being expressed... You do not see Diego taking issue with the many more positive opinions that are repeated on a daily basis for example 9 (Diego is not the only one doing this though, just a perfect example)... Its all about censorship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Back on topic. I think all of us would love it if someone bought Latics who had more money than TTA and wanted to keep us at BP, but it's not going to happen. Stadium move aside, I'm quite happy with TTA, to be honest. Every year they provide us with a decent budget, it's just unfortunate we've fallen short on the playing side...that is not TTA's fault. I kind of agree with this about the budget... You can never attack them over the budget I feel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creepy Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 No, I am not having a go at anyone for their views on stadium, down-scaling, lack of ambiton blah blah blah - as I said, I agree with a lot of what the Corp says, to an extent. I'm merely highlighting the fact that some posters used to bemoan the Corp's repetitive nature, but now they suddenly embrace it - why ? Is it because he's now saying stuff they like/agree with... That's what I take issue with. Couldn't give a flying....what someone's view on anything Latics related is.. Just can't understand why some people now think it is ok for Corp to keep banging on about the same point, when before they didn't. Anyway, I think I've got my point across now and will try to stop going on about it. fair enough he is obviously saying stuff people agree with though isnt he, people change there minds, its all to do with what is happening on and off the pitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) The last 20 years of British politics has been :censored:e because the days of the conviction politician - people who genuinely believe in their views (Benn, Thatcher etc) - have gone. We are now stuck with career politicians who are more interested in their soundbite and spin than their actual philosophy. Do I agree with what CJ says? Some of it. He's consistent at least, and consistency is not a bad trait for an individual to have. But in football things can change quickly, even at this level. Even for an Oldham Athletic that has, by statistical fluke, remained in the same division as others have come, gone and returned. So I struggle with the concept of permanent doom and gloom. In my younger years Chelsea moved between the lower half of the top division and the top half of the second flight. It was their level. I remember my mate's Grandad (a big Utd fan) telling me that Man City used to be the big team in these parts, not Man Utd, but that had changed and he had no doubt it would change again in the future - he's not around to see it start happening, but the next couple of years could prove him right. Those younger years gave me a mindset that Oldham, Bolton and Preston are second tier sides, Stockport and Rochdale fourth tier and Bury somewhere between the lower two leagues. But in the period since those thoughts were formed all but Rochdale have played in at least 3 different divisions. I've seen exceptional things happen to Wigan Athletic. I've seen Burnley move from top flight to bottom flight to seconds away from dropping out of the league altogether and then, over an extended period, rise again to the top flight. Forest won the European Cup. Twice. They were also outclassed at BP not that long ago. Football fortunes ebb and flow. Many posters on here have seen Latics play in all 4 divisions with 20 years between bottom and top. While today's success might be a JPT trip to Wembley, tomorrow's could be avoiding relegation out of the league altogether. Equally it could be a strong FA Cup run while hovering around the play-off spots in the Championship. Jeez - if Blackpool can be there then there's no reason why Oldham can't. Just because successive recent owners (and the managers they appointed) have failed to deliver the sustained progress the fans of this football club want doesn't mean that its demise is around the corner. If there are new, committed owners out there with more money than sense then I welcome them to take on the business and make it a hobby. If not, I'd rather TTA remained in town a little longer to enjoy the new stadium and the football played within it. Failsworth might just be the refreshing and new stimulus that the fans need to reinvigorate their dwindling love for football in Oldham. Staying put has little chance of doing that. Edited January 18, 2010 by opinions4u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F.O.B. Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Well said O4u. If you look at the times I have picked up on CJ, it invaraibly when he ays that a certain action means certain consequence. Usually, smaller stadium=Perm Lower leages. Whislt I have issues with the location, and the stadium deisgn, I feel these can be overcome with the architects and Marketing guys, so am prepared to whilst they do their job. It is not a personal attack on him, it is picking up on the fact that repeating the same point on size=demise mantra has a consequence of some impressionable lemmings taking that happening as fact, when it is not. It might happen but is it not certain as he implies. So I am countering as I also believe and have seen the ebb and flow you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Why is everyone just trying to get one over on one another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Why is everyone just trying to get one over on one another? Whoa! No way am I flirting...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 It happens to everyone but more so to corp... It all comes down to how someone feels about the opinion being expressed... You do not see Diego taking issue with the many more positive opinions that are repeated on a daily basis for example 9 (Diego is not the only one doing this though, just a perfect example)... Its all about censorship Also you do not see me taking issue with C_J's repeated opinion. C_J may well be spot on about the future of the Club. My stance is to wait and see when the plan is published for consultation rather than make a final judgement in advance of that plan. It seems that I have to keep repeating that it is nothing to do with censorship of opinion, but all to do with repetition of opinion. It's purely a matter of compliance with the Forum Rules. In view of the lack of support for my request for members to comply with the Rules, in order to make the job of the Moderators easier, it is quite clear that the Rule about repetition of opinion is considered generally to be unnecessary, in the interest of getting as many posts as possible to produce income for the Club. Therefore I have suggest to the Moderating Team that that particular Rule be rescinded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Also you do not see me taking issue with C_J's repeated opinion. C_J may well be spot on about the future of the Club. My stance is to wait and see when the plan is published for consultation rather than make a final judgement in advance of that plan. It seems that I have to keep repeating that it is nothing to do with censorship of opinion, but all to do with repetition of opinion. It's purely a matter of compliance with the Forum Rules. In view of the lack of support for my request for members to comply with the Rules, in order to make the job of the Moderators easier, it is quite clear that the Rule about repetition of opinion is considered generally to be unnecessary, in the interest of getting as many posts as possible to produce income for the Club. Therefore I have suggest to the Moderating Team that that particular Rule be rescinded. That seems eminently sensible. Though the question might be do we need a quourum of Mods or a quorum of OWTB members? I feel a poll coming on, if we can get a quorum to agree the question..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Also you do not see me taking issue with C_J's repeated opinion. C_J may well be spot on about the future of the Club. My stance is to wait and see when the plan is published for consultation rather than make a final judgement in advance of that plan. It seems that I have to keep repeating that it is nothing to do with censorship of opinion, but all to do with repetition of opinion. It's purely a matter of compliance with the Forum Rules. In view of the lack of support for my request for members to comply with the Rules, in order to make the job of the Moderators easier, it is quite clear that the Rule about repetition of opinion is considered generally to be unnecessary, in the interest of getting as many posts as possible to produce income for the Club. Therefore I have suggest to the Moderating Team that that particular Rule be rescinded. I've offered you the opportunity to speak to me, in private, about the running of the site. You've declined, instead taking every opportunity to snipe away in a (not so) subtle fashion on the boards. For someone who seems to spend an inordinate amount of time telling people they should stop asking questions on OWTB and instead go directly to the club's owners, as per their invitation, one can only assume that you're the living embodiment of irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Also you do not see me taking issue with C_J's repeated opinion. C_J may well be spot on about the future of the Club. My stance is to wait and see when the plan is published for consultation rather than make a final judgement in advance of that plan. It seems that I have to keep repeating that it is nothing to do with censorship of opinion, but all to do with repetition of opinion. It's purely a matter of compliance with the Forum Rules. In view of the lack of support for my request for members to comply with the Rules, in order to make the job of the Moderators easier, it is quite clear that the Rule about repetition of opinion is considered generally to be unnecessary, in the interest of getting as many posts as possible to produce income for the Club. Therefore I have suggest to the Moderating Team that that particular Rule be rescinded. If you applied this critisim in response to more than just Corp you might have a point... But you don't... So you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I've offered you the opportunity to speak to me, in private, about the running of the site. You've declined, instead taking every opportunity to snipe away in a (not so) subtle fashion on the boards. For someone who seems to spend an inordinate amount of time telling people they should stop asking questions on OWTB and instead go directly to the club's owners, as per their invitation, one can only assume that you're the living embodiment of irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I do believe mods need to be more responsible in getting threads back on subject after yet another thread has turned into a Corp :censored:fest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelaticsfan Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I do believe mods need to be more responsible in getting threads back on subject after yet another thread has turned into a Corp :censored:fest. I dont believe there is much the mods can do! seems to be every turn and every corner there is a thread being turned, they have been very vigilant so far but no matter what thread it is, if corps name is brought up or TTA or new stadium thats it, another 12 page sleeping pill, I think we will see a return to football matters after the matches have got back on track! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Diego, please for the sake of our sanity stop this campaign directed at just one member and based entirely on your own interpretation of the forum rules. I have read the forum rules and have concluded that you have no interest in abiding by the spirit of the rules and every interest in trying to interpret the use of a specific set of words to your own ends. At the same time, you seem happy to ignore the section immediately following, which says that constantly questioning forum rules and policy on the board is also against the rules - something that in my opinion is far more disruptive of the forum than anything the Corp has done. Perhaps it's worth considering that the moderators may have reviewed complaints about the Corp's activity and found nothing wrong? I do not believe the relevant rule should be rescinded, but I do believe it could perhaps be worded better, and will - if and when time allows - make a suggestion privately to the mods. In the interests of NOT publicly discussing forum policy on the forum I intend to make no further comment on this issue and implore everyone else to do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelaticsfan Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Cant we just put all this on hold as sort of a truce until theres more news on the stadium? as its same arguments from both sides week in week out or should i say thread in thread out, lets just get back to the football and argue about this when theres more facts, not hearsay, rumours and same old arguments! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Diego, please for the sake of our sanity stop this campaign directed at just one member and based entirely on your own interpretation of the forum rules. I have read the forum rules and have concluded that you have no interest in abiding by the spirit of the rules and every interest in trying to interpret the use of a specific set of words to your own ends. At the same time, you seem happy to ignore the section immediately following, which says that constantly questioning forum rules and policy on the board is also against the rules - something that in my opinion is far more disruptive of the forum than anything the Corp has done. Perhaps it's worth considering that the moderators may have reviewed complaints about the Corp's activity and found nothing wrong? I do not believe the relevant rule should be rescinded, but I do believe it could perhaps be worded better, and will - if and when time allows - make a suggestion privately to the mods. In the interests of NOT publicly discussing forum policy on the forum I intend to make no further comment on this issue and implore everyone else to do the same. I think they'll be very pleased with your help G, it's one thing pointing out problems - however it's completely another offering a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) Diego, please for the sake of our sanity stop this campaign directed at just one member Hardly. It's a point he's made that revolves around several posters and based entirely on your own interpretation of the forum rules. Rather sweeping. I know of several others who share his interpretation. However they don't feel that there is much chance of the rules being applied I have read the forum rules and have concluded that you have no interest in abiding by the spirit of the rules I think DS has entered into the spirit of this board - and recognised the limitations set by what are reasonable rules - as much as anyone and every interest in trying to interpret the use of a specific set of words to your own ends. At the same time, you seem happy to ignore the section immediately following, which says that constantly questioning forum rules and policy on the board is also against the rules - something that in my opinion is far more disruptive of the forum than anything the Corp has done. Perhaps it's worth considering that the moderators may have reviewed complaints about the Corp's activity and found nothing wrong? Maybe something in what you say. But frustration at inaction is apparent. Hey, we all know that feeling, whether it's here, at work, about the club or whatever. I do not believe the relevant rule should be rescinded, but I do believe it could perhaps be worded better, and will - if and when time allows - make a suggestion privately to the mods. In the interests of NOT publicly discussing forum policy on the forum I intend to make no further comment on this issue and implore everyone else to do the same. I appreciate the point you're making but not discussing policy on the forum .....where can it be discussed openly? Edited January 18, 2010 by LaticsPete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Pete, Not to put too fine a point on it - it can't. I've extended the same invitation to you that I have to DS: if you want to discuss OWTB policy and/or the moderation of the site, please feel free to PM myself or wardlelatic. We're more than happy to listen to any suggestions, but only when they're made in the correct manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts