Views from the Sieve

Not !!!!

Why have you deleted the rapist thread ?

I spent 15 minutes last night carefully composing a reply which I knew would receive little support, and certainly you would have disagreed with. Arnu. My message was considered, controversial but not insulting or libellous. Yet the moderators decided to delete the thread without so much as a courteous acknowledgement to those who had spent time contributing. Maybe my post didn't deliver an acceptable narrative, or maybe my post was answered by some particularly unpleasant abuse. Whatever the case, I find the moderators behaviour in this quite disappointing ...... particularly after enduring the pitiful drivel in another thread of who is going to attack who at the next away game.
A moderator has a difficult job - but if you are to delete threads without explanation then it is hardly surprising that so few people contribute.

PS ....... It is "role" not "roll"!

ARNU wrote:Not !!!!

Why have you deleted the rapist thread ?

The thread was pulled because I believe that the thread was causing too much trouble. I'm not bothered about the initial point of topic and also believe that you (ARNU) didn't do anything wrong.

I'm very relaxed and not really monitor this forum much, but that thread was getting out of hand.

admin wrote:

ARNU wrote:Not !!!!

Why have you deleted the rapist thread ?

The thread was pulled because I believe that the thread was causing too much trouble. I'm not bothered about the initial point of topic and also believe that you (ARNU) didn't do anything wrong.

I'm very relaxed and not really monitor this forum much, but that thread was getting out of hand.

Fair enough.

Although I have a very firm opinion on this subject I do accept that some have an opposite view.It is disappointing when name calling and personal attacks enters any discussion and I apologise for my occasional lapses into stupidity though do normally only participate in such silliness in retaliation.

ARNU wrote:

admin wrote:

ARNU wrote:Not !!!!

Why have you deleted the rapist thread ?

The thread was pulled because I believe that the thread was causing too much trouble. I'm not bothered about the initial point of topic and also believe that you (ARNU) didn't do anything wrong.

I'm very relaxed and not really monitor this forum much, but that thread was getting out of hand.

Fair enough.

Although I have a very firm opinion on this subject I do accept that some have an opposite view.It is disappointing when name calling and personal attacks enters any discussion and I apologise for my occasional lapses into stupidity though do normally only participate in such silliness in retaliation.

Ooh, ooh miss. He started it.
Jeez, you really think you never do anything wrong don't you.

rechitski kinzhal wrote:I spent 15 minutes last night carefully composing a reply which I knew would receive little support, and certainly you would have disagreed with. Arnu. My message was considered, controversial but not insulting or libellous. Yet the moderators decided to delete the thread without so much as a courteous acknowledgement to those who had spent time contributing. Maybe my post didn't deliver an acceptable narrative, or maybe my post was answered by some particularly unpleasant abuse. Whatever the case, I find the moderators behaviour in this quite disappointing ...... particularly after enduring the pitiful drivel in another thread of who is going to attack who at the next away game.
A moderator has a difficult job - but if you are to delete threads without explanation then it is hardly surprising that so few people contribute.

I didn't start that thread expecting to have everyone agree with me,any sensible debate is welcome.You are always polite in any response to most of my bullshit and if theres any chance I might change my opinion it is most likely when politeness and reason are used.I think I remember you being of the opinion he's done his time or something.Id just like to say he didn't really did he ? Got out way early and doesn't accept he did any wrong.Also if he were a plumber he'd go back to work,again,not so likely without certain questions being asked about his time in nick.Under the rehabilitation of offenders act the plumber should by law get a look in but we all know he wouldn't stand a chance if were to admit he was a rapist.

Adrian wrote:

Ooh, ooh miss. He started it.

Well you did.You cant debate anything without rudeness,abruptness.pedantry or in this case calling into question my parenting ability.You can carry on being an apologist for rapists drunk drivers and sex deviants all you want ,Im sure you don't need to be rude about it though.

ARNU wrote:

Adrian wrote:

Ooh, ooh miss. He started it.

Well you did.You cant debate anything without rudeness,abruptness.pedantry or in this case calling into question my parenting ability.You can carry on being an apologist for rapists drunk drivers and sex deviants all you want ,Im sure you don't need to be rude about it though.

The parenting thing being brought is likely to be the main reason why the original thread got pulled. I did say that as much as I disagree with the opinion that he should be given no 2nd chance for a crime he may not have committed, no need for anything to get personal like it did.

Arnu, you are not correct in thinking I had said he had done his time ...... and that is why I am so angry the moderator pulled this thread. (PLEASE REMEMBER MODERATOR, WHEN YOU PULL A THREAD YOU MAY WELL LEAVE PEOPLE THINKING THEY HAD SAID THINGS WHICH THEY DIDNT ......AND NOW THERE IS NO WAY OF CLARIFYING THE ISSUE).
I am not going through it all again ..... basically, one person had written certain "facts" about the case which I pointed out were not "facts" but urban myths that have built up around this case. I repeated certain other "facts" (most particularly that the girl never went to the police complaining of rape, she went to the police to say she had lost her handbag and phone and thought she might have had her drink spiked in the disco before she met the footballers - it was the police who charged them with rape having pieced together a story gleaned from nothing more than the three people there on the night). My point was that I don't particularly believe 100% the version I have read, and I certainly don't believe the version peddled by the newspapers. And that leaves enough of a doubt in my mind that any crime ever took place.
Are you, Arnu, really so convinced that he is guilty that you are prepared to condemn the man to a lifetime of shame when there is such gaping holes in the evidence. And please remember there is no evidence she drank any more than the two glasses of wine in the first bar she visited that night.

Should of put it in the other football section on the forum and let people argue there points on there surely? Could not give two hoots about this rapist and what he does next.

rechitski kinzhal wrote:Arnu, you are not correct in thinking I had said he had done his time ...... and that is why I am so angry the moderator pulled this thread. (PLEASE REMEMBER MODERATOR, WHEN YOU PULL A THREAD YOU MAY WELL LEAVE PEOPLE THINKING THEY HAD SAID THINGS WHICH THEY DIDNT ......AND NOW THERE IS NO WAY OF CLARIFYING THE ISSUE).
I am not going through it all again ..... basically, one person had written certain "facts" about the case which I pointed out were not "facts" but urban myths that have built up around this case. I repeated certain other "facts" (most particularly that the girl never went to the police complaining of rape, she went to the police to say she had lost her handbag and phone and thought she might have had her drink spiked in the disco before she met the footballers - it was the police who charged them with rape having pieced together a story gleaned from nothing more than the three people there on the night). My point was that I don't particularly believe 100% the version I have read, and I certainly don't believe the version peddled by the newspapers. And that leaves enough of a doubt in my mind that any crime ever took place.
Are you, Arnu, really so convinced that he is guilty that you are prepared to condemn the man to a lifetime of shame when there is such gaping holes in the evidence. And please remember there is no evidence she drank any more than the two glasses of wine in the first bar she visited that night.

Well like a lot of people Im not completely word for word literate with the transcripts of the trial but rape is rape whatever amount of drink you've had spiked or not.Also what dosent help him is the fact that he whilst having a girlfriend was invited to "Jump on" by a friend which in itself doesn't show him in a decent light.He dosent deny jumping on does he or the general circumstances that bought this matter about ? He hasn't really any remorse and I cant see any angle that the girl would have or has benefited from. I've been on jury service twice and although there are a few people out there you wouldn't want on a jury a unanimous verdict statistically anyway points to some wrong doing.Im not sure Ive seen any protests that he wasn't represented properly or had an unfair trial.I know men and women have one night stands but Id imagine "phone a friend" is largely stuff of porn films rather than an every day occurrence for the majority.I will do some more research though as I have condemned him without all the facts.What do you reckon though ? Young Flash footballer a good few quid in his pocket treated like a god in those parts Girls throwing themselves at him a lot of the time.Do you not think he'd believe he could do what ever he wanted so did ?

Adrian wrote:

ARNU wrote:

admin wrote:
The thread was pulled because I believe that the thread was causing too much trouble. I'm not bothered about the initial point of topic and also believe that you (ARNU) didn't do anything wrong.

I'm very relaxed and not really monitor this forum much, but that thread was getting out of hand.

Fair enough.

Although I have a very firm opinion on this subject I do accept that some have an opposite view.It is disappointing when name calling and personal attacks enters any discussion and I apologise for my occasional lapses into stupidity though do normally only participate in such silliness in retaliation.

Ooh, ooh miss. He started it.
Jeez, you really think you never do anything wrong don't you.

Bit rich coming from someone who can never comtemplate anybody's point of view but his own.

I've tried to discreetly close the thread with as minimum fuss as possible. Feel free to discuss the Ched Evans situation, it doesn't bother me. However it was causing a bit of unrest and I stick with my decision to pull the thread. I was doing it with the correct intentions.

ARNU wrote:

Adrian wrote:

Ooh, ooh miss. He started it.

Well you did.You cant debate anything without rudeness,abruptness.pedantry or in this case calling into question my parenting ability.You can carry on being an apologist for rapists drunk drivers and sex deviants all you want ,Im sure you don't need to be rude about it though.

Ha, brilliant. Ill point out again that I didn't question anyone's ability on anything.
I made a conditional statement which you failed to properly understand and jumped to an incorrect conclusion(again). Funny how when I explained this before you didn't then respond on that particular point.

I've never been an apologist for any of those things. I just point out the ridiculousness of your reaction to anyone ever doing anything wrong.