Right, Tony Stark... first off, thanks for actually taking the time to write a PROPER SENSIBLE REPLY.
Quote: Tony Stark "Your comment was viewed, as many of your posts are, as wholly designed to provoke a reaction that would lead to the derailment of the thread turning it into another bitch-fest. '"
That was not the intention at all. It was simply stating my opinion, the aim of any forum-based website. I think if you were looking for an example of a trolling post from this thread, how about "hudd giants" saying Cunningham is signing for Huddersfield? That wasn't opinion, it was a statement designed to draw a reaction, a trolling post.
How about "nikos" post? Intimating your new stadium won't be complete for another 8 or so years?
"Sibbs Rhinos" with this gemfat and old. Will be prone to more injuries. Glad saints snapped up his contract.[/i
The truth is, there are MANY examples, in this thread alone of "trolling". Mine ISN'T one of them, or if it is to be classified as "trolling", it's probably the mildest one you could have picked to warn.
Quote: Tony Stark "Your wikipedia-lite definition of trolling is interesting yet not entirely complete. Trolling is a method of fishing where one or more fishing lines, baited with lures or bait, this is what your posts are interpreted as by many.'"
That's conversation. I speak, you speak, someone else speaks. It would be boring if no-one posted for fear they might get a reply!
Quote: Tony Stark "You constantly fish for bites and hide behind the fact that you can use a dictionary and thesaurus and have a good grasp of the english language to hide behind this fact. You make out that you are merely trying to promote meaningful conversation and debate, yet your posting style suggest otherwise.'"
I haven't used a dictionary or thesaurus for years. Can I suggest the people who AREN'T trying to promote meaningful conversation and debate are those who, upon reading one of my posts, respond with nothing but insults?
Quote: Tony Stark "Ultimately the judgment that someone is a troll is a subjective one, if you feel you are being misidentified as a troll due to the moderation team's interpretation of your behavior and are genuinely interested in a 'straight' conversation then I'd suggest a simple solution - rephrase your views in a less hostile and obviously anti-Saints way. If you stopped that, people would probably respond better to you.'"
Like the examples above?
Quote: Tony Stark "As Saint Simon rightly points out, you are lucky you are not receiving at least another warning for publicly criticising the moderation process. Let this be the end of the matter.
TS'"
As an ex moderator of several other internet forums, I will say this is the craziest rule I've ever heard of. I think with this post and the examples above, I'll probably get the 2nd warning, but you surely must concede... I've got an unavoidable point, and certain others should have had red writing on their posts.
I'm going to leave it there and say some of us are just going to have to agree to disagree. But once again, thanks to you, Tony, for not following the route of many and posting insults/vitriol/utter balderdash, and setting a great example of how to have a conversation and get your point across in a reasonable gentlemanly fashion without any insults. Whether I agree or disagree with your points, respect where it's due for making your points very well indeed. Trolls, take heed, this is how it should be done.
