I'm not going to get in discussion with you because you're just craving attention so I'll keep it short and sweet. I've never bullied anyone in my life but I stand up for what I believe in and I passionately despise people who take pleasure in ruining other people's enjoyment. Since the Chuckle Brothers appeared on this forum it's reached a new low. I imagine "The Butcher" has a similar outlook to myself and gets extremely irritated by "members" of this forum ruining what was once a decent, good natured discussion board. Some people might just stay quiet and leave the forum, others, like myself, will speak up. The fact pretty much all the mods have gone sums the situation up as even they've had enough and CBA policing the forum.

If what I've said breaks the A.U.P then me..... I'd rather get banned for saying what a lot of people are thinking than lose complete respect for myself for letting the lunatics take over the asylum unopposed.

Amf you're proof that reproduction isn't always a wise move.....

You're tiresome and not worth my time and effort. I'll leave it there. TTFN.

Nice. Your Personal comments are very classy. Getting personal for no valid reason just proves your failings to debate like an adult. You should get on well with the rest of your mob over on the desolate DevilTalk.

If this is proof of your ''Reasonable Debates'' well I'm ''buzzin'' you're migrating too.

You are aware, I'm sure, that you also make personal insults?

I just don't understand what you get out of all this, I actually think you are a salford fan and care about the club. And also think you are not Mario. I also think Mario despite being a wigan fan does like salford. Some points you both make are good and valid. I just don't get why you want to annoy so many people.
Proper debate is why were all here, to disagree is fine, but all this intentional winding up is just bull mud.

Any hoooooo, roll on Saturday, few beers, bit of a sing song, n bring on the salford!

If I have projected any personal insults on this forum it's been justifiable through Ad Hominem provocation. I can honestly say I have never aimed cranial or brain dysfunction profanities at anybody even when I've been subjected to this myself.

It's never you is it Stan? Everyone else are horrible goading bullies, which managed to get on fine for a decade before you farted yourself onto here. We're all in cahoots and we're all evil nasty people, and you're the honest nice bringer of truth.

You live in a fantasy world.

Up to now, I have challenged the new voice, Mr FlatStan, but no more than that. I've kept away from this thread until I noticed it had come to a close about a week ago and wondered why.
Reading it has meant that I need to stay and take a stance that challenges you to explain your comments. In my over 60 years of life, which have included teaching and leading youth, trade union representation and debate, and attending and involvement in local forums, I have not come across such a petty set of responses, Mr FlatStan, that have not been challenged by most chairs. Before you respond in the normal way, I do not chill as I'm older than that yoof comment, I am not in any clique I am aware of, and I am aware of bullying. Some of your comments have had the effect comparable to Savanarola on the art legacy of Florence. Please accept the dictum that for a debate, you need two sides. And for an adult debate, you need to support your comments.

What comments. Please elaborate as I don't own a crystal ball.

Yeah, that'll be totally worth his while...

So it seems that, in the near two months since I opened this thread, one or two things have been proved.

One is that Flat Stanley doesn't listen and is not prepared to behave with any good grace, but is a disruptive influence who will not moderate his behaviour.

He is therefore banned.

I'm posting this here for a number of reasons, including acting as a reminder that I am quite prepared to hand out bans for such disruption. If anyone is in doubt, banning for such a reason is in accordance with the AUP.

Everyone was warned – and certain 'suspects' were given the opportunity to prove themselves.

What about the disruptiveness of thebutcher. Surely whats good for the goose is good for the gander, although Stan is now been banned, it does worry me how the decision not to punish Stans aggressor was blindly overlooked. There's plenty of posts off thebutcher instigating disruptive waffle, which obviously got unbridled attention. Just saying.