FAO 'the club'

Come on here and tell all who asked for a thread to be taken off and why.

Money's obviously on Fenty as he posts on here from time to time but could be any of them.

The clubs attitude towards The Fishy is terrible, I seem to remember Mrs Doyle posting once about what they said to her when she told them that she was a fishy poster

Maybe the club could work with The Fishy and create a partnership which could be used to move the club forward, this would be a start by not having Fenty posting on here and being argumentative towards fans

This forum is supposed to be somewhere fans can comment and discuss things concerning the football club - be it positive,negative,neutral etc etc. However, it's been apparent for a long time anything that doesn't tow the Party line isn't welcomed. Which in itself is a shame as it doesn't promote debate, balanced - not everyone see's things the same way. We're individuals. Difference of opinion is good - it can sometimes lead to an interesting thread,providing reasoned argument is used and not insults etc. Some on here provide that.

The power, or powers that be, should recognise that said difference of opinion is needed, and should be welcomed. It can be useful at times.

Quoted from marinerjase

This forum is supposed to be somewhere fans can comment and discuss things concerning the football club - be it positive,negative,neutral etc etc. However, it's been apparent for a long time anything that doesn't tow the Party line isn't welcomed. Which in itself is a shame as it doesn't promote debate, balanced - not everyone see's things the same way. We're individuals. Difference of opinion is good - it can sometimes lead to an interesting thread,providing reasoned argument is used and not insults etc. Some on here provide that.

The power, or powers that be, should recognise that said difference of opinion is needed, and should be welcomed. It can be useful at times.

Excellent post. As I get bored of saying, the powers that be need to have a little think about what the loyal GTFC fans spend, both home and away, before they start trying to gag us.

By the way, really good article/interview with Burnsy in tonight's Telewag

http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.....39-detail/story.html

Quoted from marinerjase

This forum is supposed to be somewhere fans can comment and discuss things concerning the football club - be it positive,negative,neutral etc etc. However, it's been apparent for a long time anything that doesn't tow the Party line isn't welcomed. Which in itself is a shame as it doesn't promote debate, balanced - not everyone see's things the same way. We're individuals. Difference of opinion is good - it can sometimes lead to an interesting thread,providing reasoned argument is used and not insults etc. Some on here provide that.

The power, or powers that be, should recognise that said difference of opinion is needed, and should be welcomed. It can be useful at times.

Exactly things concerning the football club. So why should we attack and threaten and call someone who has supported town and sat next to us for over 20 years based on e newspaper report as to his business activities   there are probably town supporters sat with us who have done a lot worse and we don't delve into their activities and then open a thread on them. By the way the opening post states that the club asked us not forced us not to carry the previous thread on

Quoted from Kk700

Exactly things concerning the football club. So why should we attack and threaten and call someone who has supported town and sat next to us for over 20 years based on e newspaper report as to his business activities   there are probably town supporters sat with us who have done a lot worse and we don't delve into their activities and then open a thread on them. By the way the opening post states that the club asked us not forced us not to carry the previous thread on

Wow. I must have missed a post.
When was he threatened ??  By who ? And what were they threatening ??

Quoted from Civvy at last

Wow. I must have missed a post.
When was he threatened ??  By who ? And what were they threatening ??

There was at least one post on the original thread where someone said they would physically assault Newman if they saw him at a Town game. It received plenty of green ticks but now almost everyone is saying they didn't see.

It is not ok to threaten someone in that manner. It's not good enough to say "free speech" or "it's just because we care" or "just letting off steam" which i believe is the standard catch-all excuse for saying totally unacceptable stuff on the Fishy. Newman is reasonably well known and recognisable and I believe he attends many matches despite living in Scotland so if he was the one who complained I wouldn't blame him.

Just to clarify, as mine was the post you've quoted - I haven't done any of the things you've mentioned.

Not repeating the threat. Think it's been removed now but was in the original post

Quoted from marinerjase

Just to clarify, as mine was the post you've quoted - I haven't done any of the things you've mentioned.

Sorry  wasn't suggesting that at all

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

There was at least one post on the original thread where someone said they would physically assault Newman if they saw him at a Town game. It received plenty of green ticks but now almost everyone is saying they didn't see.

It is not ok to threaten someone in that manner. It's not good enough to say "free speech" or "it's just because we care" or "just letting off steam" which i believe is the standard catch-all excuse for saying totally unacceptable stuff on the Fishy. Newman is reasonably well known and recognisable and I believe he attends many matches despite living in Scotland so if he was the one who complained I wouldn't blame him.

The bit where I say 'I MUST HAVE MISSED A POST' should give you a slight clue that I hadn't seen the post !!!!!!!
FFS

Quoted from Civvy at last

The bit where I say 'I MUST HAVE MISSED A POST' should give you a slight clue that I hadn't seen the post !!!!!!!
FFS

Didn't mean to imply any wrong doing from you (I can see how it may read like that though). My apologies.

My beef is with all the people going off on one about the club censoring the good fans North Korean style and claiming outright there was nothing wrong in the original thread.

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

Didn't mean to imply any wrong doing from you (I can see how it may read like that though). My apologies.

My beef is with all the people going off on one about the club censoring the good fans North Korean style and claiming outright there was nothing wrong in the original thread.

Then why not just remove the offending post and ban that particular poster?

You know as well as I do where the club's problem lies, and that's with people objecting to a potential source of income. Fans are well within their rights to voice their concerns and objections, and in the initial thread there was very little discussion about the club at all - it was mainly around the morally reprehensible secondary ticketing market. The Club wading in has now dragged GTFC officially into the dirt, excellent work from someone there.

Ok.
Obviously an emotive subject. If it was specified that the thread was removed due to threats of violence I could understand. But that doesn't seem to be the case.  It just appears that someone in an official capacity asked for the thread to be removed. Most of us are aware of what happened last time this board upset 'the club'. Unfortunately it's a lose lose situation.  Roll on next season when we have proper reasons to moan.
70th minute like for like substitutions, big punt to Monkeys replacement, etc etc 😉

To delete threads making libelous statements about someone involved with the Club (either as a sponsor, director or employee) is fair and reasonable.  It isn't reasonable when the information is in the public domain and is, in fact, a link to a press article.  Some won't care how he makes his money - some will find his activities objectionable and will say the club should not take his money....that is fair argument and no reason to remove the thread!

Threats of any kind must not be interpreted as freedom of speech. Threatening to harm others is extreme and crosses the line of personal opinion into criminal behaviour.

The 'Forum Rules' ([url=http://thefishy.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1377632884/]link[/url]) doesn't really cover this and to be honest I would like to see this included, but it's common sense. Post what you do at your own risk.

'To make libelous statements about someone involved with the Club (either as a sponsor, director or employee) is fair and reasonable.'

You might want to rethink that before someone's on your case

Quoted from marinerjase

'To make libelous statements about someone involved with the Club (either as a sponsor, director or employee) is fair and reasonable.'

You might want to rethink that before someone's on your case

Oops!! That should have said to ban a thread making libellous statements!! lol

Roll on August

Quoted from MeanwoodMariner

There was at least one post on the original thread where someone said they would physically assault Newman if they saw him at a Town game. It received plenty of green ticks but now almost everyone is saying they didn't see.

It is not ok to threaten someone in that manner. It's not good enough to say "free speech" or "it's just because we care" or "just letting off steam" which i believe is the standard catch-all excuse for saying totally unacceptable stuff on the Fishy. Newman is reasonably well known and recognisable and I believe he attends many matches despite living in Scotland so if he was the one who complained I wouldn't blame him.

Clearly posts like that should be deleted, but to ban debate is just bonkers.

Quoted from Kk700

Exactly things concerning the football club. So why should we attack and threaten and call someone who has supported town and sat next to us for over 20 years based on e newspaper report as to his business activities   there are probably town supporters sat with us who have done a lot worse and we don't delve into their activities and then open a thread on them. By the way the opening post states that the club asked us not forced us not to carry the previous thread on

I'm all for bringing stuff out in the open. So when you hear of something let us know.

Think it's more him using the money to fund OP and then being called a 'sponsor'

Maybe all of us who donated to OP should be called a "sponsor"

The thing is, which doesn't seem to have been picked up on, is that in the eyes of the law a threat of physical violence to somebody is actually the same as carrying out that act o violence - as by it's nature it can be intimidating. Whether it actually is or not is another matter.

If something like that is bought to the notice of the Fishy, then I assume there is a duty of care to the person concerned. That being the case, whether or not folk agree with the decision to remove it, the Fishy administrators would be left with no option but to remove or face possible legal consequences themslves? If it comes to removing one post, or losing the Forum again, I know which side I'd come down on.

"Credible threats of violence to the person or damage to property may also fall to be considered under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988, which prohibits the sending of an electronic communication which conveys a threat, or section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 which prohibits the sending of messages of a "menacing character" by means of a public telecommunications network. However, before proceeding with such a prosecution, prosecutors should heed the words of the Lord Chief Justice in Chambers v DPP [2012] EWH2 2157 (Admin) where he said:

"... a message which does not create fear or apprehension in those to whom it is communicated, or may reasonably be expected to see it, falls outside [section 127(i)(a)], for the simple reason that the message lacks menace." (Paragraph 30)
As a general rule, threats which are not credible should not be prosecuted, unless they form part of a campaign of harassment specifically targeting an individual within the meaning of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997"

I'd say it falls short but you only have to cite steward 'being in fear of his life' after being bopped by an inflatable to see how things could be taken.

In any case threats of violence should not be tolerated on here; the Fishy rules should be amended to state this clearly and a immediate final warning as to conduct should be issued.

Quoted from jock dock tower

The thing is, which doesn't seem to have been picked up on, is that in the eyes of the law a threat of physical violence to somebody is actually the same as carrying out that act o violence - as by it's nature it can be intimidating. Whether it actually is or not is another matter.

If something like that is bought to the notice of the Fishy, then I assume there is a duty of care to the person concerned. That being the case, whether or not folk agree with the decision to remove it, the Fishy administrators would be left with no option but to remove or face possible legal consequences themslves? If it comes to removing one post, or losing the Forum again, I know which side I'd come down on.

They're the operative words

Nobody condones violence or the threat of violence but surely the best option here would have been to remove the single offending post, send a PM to the correspondent concerned and move on.

I know that's a bit of hindsight, we've already seen that the person concerned regrets it (probably should have thought twice or three times) and it has caused another negative reaction. Surely by now, the powers that be ought to be able to think twice before loading up their PR gun and shooting themselves in both feet.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Nobody condones violence or the threat of violence but surely the best option here would have been to remove the single offending post, send a PM to the correspondent concerned and move on.

I know that's a bit of hindsight, we've already seen that the person concerned regrets it (probably should have thought twice or three times) and it has caused another negative reaction. Surely by now, the powers that be ought to be able to think twice before loading up their PR gun and shooting themselves in both feet.

I think the powers that be took exception to the thread rather than any individual post, but whichever way you look at it, 'twas a massive own goal to request it's removal.

Quoted from ginnywings

I think the powers that be took exception to the thread rather than any individual post, but whichever way you look at it, 'twas a massive own goal to request it's removal.

One leader who has the power to rule all GTFC forums, welcome our glorious and the gracious, most honorable respected and dear leader, a leader, who is a perfect incarnation of the appearance that a leader should have, Commander-in-Chief, Father of the People, His Excellency, Guiding Star of the 21st Century, Bright Sun of Juche, Eternal General Secretary of the Party, Savior and Supreme Leader of the Nation.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/I3yJjXg.jpg[/img]

Hail Hydra

PMSL Marinerz93.  

Looks like Peter Kay.

My first thought was Michael McIntyre.