Ha, the very precise time in the format "hh:mm, dd/mm/yyyy", indicating when the suspension would cease to have effect nearly a decade down the line, amused me too. Unlikely I'd have luck on the good behaviour front though. My e-mails to the rather thick and humourless mods didn't get me very far. Maybe it's for the best...Originally Posted by Sullivinho
Anyone uninterested in reading about this need not delve any further.Seriously though, what did you do to deserve that? You hardly seem the type that gets banned from internet forums.
To be honest, I'm not really sure what I did. I'd set up an account on OWC under the same name as I use here back in January of 2007. Admittedly, the sole reason I went on was to try and clear up what I saw to be a few misunderstandings regarding Darron Gibson's switch to the FAI. 100 per cent of my grand total of eleven posts are now to be found in their infamous and bizarrely-titled "Football Apartheid in Ireland"[/cringe] section, so I won't try and claim that I was there to talk about the colour of David Healy's boots or how sexy Keith Gillespie was.
Around 2006 and 2007, I think the whole eligibility thing had been in the headlines for a while but was coming to a head as Gibson looked increasingly close to making his senior debut for us. I also felt compelled to defend, on OWC, Gibson's right as an Irish national in the face of what I viewed to be a heavy barrage of venom laced with sectarian undertones. Of course, my obvious intentions never went down well, but I wasn't doing anything contrary to forum rules. I was argumentative and defensive, sure, but isn't a forum all about exchanging arguments and opinions? Anyway, it's not like I was banned then or anything and I didn't post there again for quite some time for whatever reason - probably got a bit tired of banging my head off a brick wall - until last March when the switch of Shane Duffy brewed up a similar storm of bitterness and ignorance over there. I suppose I felt like defending another Derry man in the face of all this and maybe did come across as a bit eager for an argument. Still, no crime in that; there were issues and assumptions I felt needed stern addressing and encountering such willing stubbornness and ignorance on this issue is something that genuinely grates with me, after all. I'm sure that's very much apparent from my lengthy and endless number of posts on the eligibility thread here too.
In March, I contributed a few posts to their "Football Apartheid in Ireland" section - once again, probably sharp, to-the-point and impassioned but certainly nothing nasty, as acknowledged on here by 'Gather round', a fan of Northern Ireland and member of OWC, albeit an unusually progressive and tolerant one- and, soon enough, found my IP blocked with mods claiming on there that they'd sent me an e-mail explaining the reasons behind the suspension. 'Predator' made a few fruitless attempts to argue my case on there and kept me in the loop as to the claims being made against me as I'd never received said e-mail, so I tried e-mailing them a few times instead for answers. Eventually, I got a snappy response informing me that I'd been guilty of (ab)using two accounts on the site and that under another one I was allegedly using - no idea when this was supposed to have been as they weren't all that keen to inform me of the details - I had been particularly "threatening" towards other forum members. Of course, this was all news to me and it still puzzles me as I have absolutely no recollection of ever having had this second account, never mind using it to make threats, supposedly of a physically violent nature too, which is also kind of odd given it's not really something I could imagine myself doing nor would I even know where to start with dispensing my own personal form of vigilante justice upon anonymous Northern Ireland fans who had the nerve to disagree with my opinion on an internet forum, ha. If that former mystery account had been banned previously and they firmly believed it was connected to my account, then how come my account wasn't banned along with it either before I returned to post after my hiatus or straight after making my first post since the return? If memory serves me right, I was allowed to make three or four posts in the one discussion before being suspended; couldn't be certain though. I've been trying to wonder on what basis they might have made some connection between my account and some other one anyway, even if I had used a second one, but this fails me also. I was living in Dublin for the first period I visited OWC but was living here for the most recent one, so even if I had used some account to dish out explicit abuse, it's not as if my current IP could have been shared with the IP through which I formerly accessed the forum, nor could I have used a single e-mail address to set up two simultaneous accounts as that's just not possible to do. It's just baffling to me on every level conceivable. To be honest, I think they were just p*ssed off with my tone and the line of argument I was taking.
It since transpired that they seem to have problems, variously and when they feel like it, with "single-issue" contributors, or "trolls", as well as non-Northern Ireland fans posting on the site. At least, I've seen the presence of certain users come under serious threat for these given reasons, although it's all a bit arbitrary when duties of moderation are left to characters such as 'fhtb'. The banning of 'Predator', even a good while after he had paid a fiver in the hope of securing his membership against the continuous threats of suspension directed at him, was particularly inexplicable. Likewise, I don't believe he was given any fore-warning or sent an e-mail properly explaining the rationale. He says as much above.
On a lighter note, I think it's the shape of Gibson's eye-brows that makes him look like he has a permanent attitude:
Even when he's smiling, he still looks like he could be plotting your capture and torture behind it all. Maybe he could get the ends trimmed or something.
Edit: Excuse the hasty effort, but he just wants to give you tea and biscuits really:
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 10/09/2010 at 3:24 PM.
What's this about?
you have to pay to be a full member of OWC.
They have site "members" and site "supporters", who can donate an annual fee of £5 for special treatment. It also goes towards the up-keep of the site. "Members" are your normal, every-day users, whilst those classified as "supporters" are given exclusive access to certain areas of the forum that are closed off to "members" and the public. Presumably that's where all the really juicy stuff comes out! Naturally, "supporters" probably get an easier ride, having proven their loyalty and being part of the clique and all, whilst the threshold of tolerance for anything that might stir a bit of controversy will be lower if it's coming from a common "member".
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 10/09/2010 at 2:45 AM.
You did what??!!
I assume your tone and argument were consistent with those shown in the eligibility thread on this forum. Full marks for netiquette. In which case I imagine it was the latter which drew the mighty mod hammer upon you. A shame really. Someone might have a superior argument and the ability to express it but have a bit of integrity when reaching for the censorship button ffs.
Cheers for taking the time to explain it anyway. Who knows, someone might be along to clear things up or refute your claims
Tonight Matthew, I'm going to be...Jeffrey Dahmer.
There undoubtedly was an implicit suggestion in what you said. You insinuated that the description I offered on here regarding Gibson in his school-days was in some way synonymous with - whatever exact meaning you wish to invoke - the character of a "scumbag", as someone else had described him on OWC with what I felt were sectarian connotations beyond a mere personal level and relating to more than just his general character. You can't deny that. This is exactly what you said:
"Anyhow, if Gibson is not a "scumbag", do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?..."
At the least, what you were trying to do was put words in my mouth. Naturally, I felt compelled to refute the original nasty slur and its association by yourself to what I had said in post #1237.
No, you're correct; I'm not embarrassed. I didn't contradict myself, after all. In fact, I've defended his right to play for us without having to put up with being dubbed a "scumbag" before in full knowledge of what my old English teacher thought of him and I would still defend him on that front now.If, having defended DG on OWC, you are a little embarrassed at having your own words from elsewhere quoted, then there you go - these things happen on the Internet. (Perhaps you aren't embarrassed, I don't know).
I admit my understanding of the minutiae surrounding the whole eligibility issue wasn't as complete or refined then as it is now, having had a glance over what else I'd written, but there's no shame in that, nor would there be much point in picking holes in unpolished arguments I've long since attempted to bolster out of better educating myself on the issues. I certainly didn't invest time trying to improve my overall comprehension of the whole thing in order to maintain the exact same position as the one with which I started nearly half a decade ago.
Technically, I was suspended for something daft and arbitrary like eight years, but it appears posting histories are not deleted in any case. Predator's posts similarly remain in spite of his recent outright banning, although, I believe a few of his last ones were deleted for being "speculative" in nature, which appears to be against forum rules as of a week and a half ago. Ultimately, the mods have the discretion to keep what they wish and censor what they wish at whim.As for having no opportunity to defend yourself, I forgot/overlooked that you were banned, I suspect because I thought a Banned Member's posting history was deleted from site and therefore wouldn't show up on the Search function?
The two are not incompatible and need not contradict one another. Whether he played with and fell out with the IFA or not, there is no strict contradiction in possessing an ultimate wish to play for Ireland one day, presumably at senior level. Although he did make the switch at the age of 16 or so. Perhaps the falling out with the IFA over the trial at United simply hastened his inevitable "defection to the Darkside".Beyond that, all I can say is that your original post offers an interesting insight on one aspect of the Gibson saga which always puzzled me. Namely, I have seen him/his family quoted as saying that he originally only fell out with the IFA because they insisted he play for one of our under-age teams, rather than be allowed to attend a training session at Old Trafford. This was what then caused him to turn to the FAI.
On the other hand, I have also seen him/his family quoted as saying it "had always been his dream to play for Ireland etc".
That's to miss the point of what I found objectionable about the use of the word "scumbag" within the context in which it was originally used on OWC to refer to Gibson. I am of the opinion that it was loaded with politicised contempt in the context of the debate. Basically, as I said in the 2007 post from OWC you quoted:Perhaps the explanation is that whilst he's no "scumbag", he is a contrary hoor?
"I felt there was something more to it than simple annoyance towards the guy for not choosing to represent Northern Ireland"
To be blunt, I feel he was being called a "scumbag" for reasons beyond merely having no intention to play for Northern Ireland, but also because he:
i) Happened to be from a Catholic/nationalist background.
ii) Switched to "the Baggars", of all possible places!
I don't think a northern-born Protestant with a Welsh parent, for example, would be dubbed a "scumbag" if they expressed an intention to represent Wales and the slur then subsequently accepted as appropriate. In the context there was a lot of hatred, bitterness and contempt behind the word "scumbag" that I just don't feel a willingness alone on some player's part to play for another team over Northern Ireland could warrant, but maybe that's just me... See the thread on Shane Lowry on this forum, for example, and you'll see a more appropriate reaction to a very similar decision made by a player whereby we lost someone who had represented us at under-age level to Australia. Rather than dub him a "scumbag", however, his wish to play for Australia was accepted as perfectly understandable given his dual nationality and he was broadly wished the best of luck.
If, however, in this instance here and now, "scumbag" was to be treated as synonymous with "contrary hoor" and free of any sectarian baggage - although, I must add, it wouldn't be my word of choice - maybe I would have less of a problem with it. After all, and for what it's worth, my own feeling is that Gibson probably is a bit of a stubborn one. But as I said, it's all about nuance and context. Consider the difference between an African-American referring to another African-America as "n*gger" and a Caucasian referring to an African-American as such. The former is considered neutral when used in a familiar sense; the latter is considered a social taboo and deeply offensive. Ultimately, I feel OWC is a forum in denial and one of complete hypocrisy.
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 10/09/2010 at 5:16 AM.
Danny, you are demonstrating an unhealthy obsession with the OWC forum, you may need some time off to develop a few perspectives.
In a similar vein, you mention EG in one of your posts and in a burning bush flash he appears
Sometimes it's appropriate to choose not to take the offered insult and definitely not willingly drag an issue from the OWC cesspit of emotional hangups to this grand location.
£4-5 million?£1 million would be a fair price tag.
I'd say Gibson is worth around the £3m mark. James Perch (Forest to Newcastle) went for about £1.5m and he cannot even kick a ball!£4-5 million?
Fergie is playing 4-4-2 at the moment and his two best central midfielders are still Paul Scholes and Darren Fletcher. Gibson won't get a sniff until one of them gets injured/suspended or Fergie reverts back to 4-3-3/4-5-1. Anderson was injured again last night in a reserve game so his only real competition for promotion to the starting 11 if something does happen to Scholes/Fletcher is Carrick. Gibson will get a run out at some point, he just has to make sure he impresses when he does start.
Haven't a clue who James Perch is.
Gibson isn't first choice at this club. It's unknown if he is capable of holding a consistent standard of play over an extended period of time. Any prospective buyer does not really know what they're getting if they wished to purchase Gibson expect that he is of Manchester United stock and that he's a good striker of the ball. I don't think a club would risk paying a transfer fee for him but if it were to happen, I couldn't see him going for more than a £1 million.
Carrick out for the weekend's game against Everton: http://fourfourtwo.com/news/england/62921/default.aspx
Gibson should at least make the bench so?"We've had a little setback with Michael Carrick. Out for three weeks with an Achilles problem. He's seen a specialist and had an injection," Ferguson told reporters.
Frazier Campbell went for 6 million despite having little first team experience. Gibson is an international who's scored in the Champions League - he'd easily fetch 7 or 8 million.Haven't a clue who James Perch is.
Gibson isn't first choice at this club. It's unknown if he is capable of holding a consistent standard of play over an extended period of time. Any prospective buyer does not really know what they're getting if they wished to purchase Gibson expect that he is of Manchester United stock and that he's a good striker of the ball. I don't think a club would risk paying a transfer fee for him but if it were to happen, I couldn't see him going for more than a £1 million.
Frazier Campbell's English and a striker though.
Yeah I spotted that Tets on BBC website just after I posted. They are dropping like flies up at OT. Gibson should make the squad for Everton and has a good chance of starting once Man Utd play two games a week because Fergie will want to preserve Scholes when he can.
ifk 101 I'd be amazed if Gibson only went for a million. I used James Perch as an example because he is just a bog standard Championship player. Our own Jon Walters went for nearly 3 million!
Yeah but Darron Gibson is talented.
Just look at the prices Man Utd sell their established players for. If they wanted to offload Gibson half the teams in the Premiership would be queuing up and a few on the continent.
I had more money than sense at the time. You live and learn.
you still dont have much money.
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Campbell went for £3.5 million with add-ons potentially pushing the total transfer fee up to £6 million (according to wikipedia
But Walters was an established player at his previous club. Stoke knew what Walters could contribute over the course of the season when they bought him. Also Walters has played a lot more competitive games than Gibson and he is still relatively young. He's a proven professional in the English game.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks