rbr 1,270 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 G_s may only be one person, but he holds great sway over the vast majority who post on �£�£ , again unfortunate but true 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) Of course I care about what happened with respect to my involvement with the Trust but that was almost 3 years ago now. I wouldn't dream of holding any inter-site project back simply because I fell out with a few people. To be fair Frankie I don't think anyone could accuse you of not caring, nor has anyone done so. I respect your positive support for Rabbit's admirable proposal and I'm sure everyone understand's why you might be taking a positive view of bridges being built where previously they were only burned. However, if the people are the same, which they are, and they still act the way they did, which they do, then where is the basis for believing the outcomes will be any different. It's not the mission that needs to change for progress to be made but, like Rangers, it's the individuals involved. You suggest G_S is only one man but he was only one man three years ago too. I see no change in his outlook or his influence, no change in his attitude towards other fans' groups. He's the root of too much division to believe FF will ever stand side by side with other sites. Where then does your unity come from? We all wish for it but you know what they say about wishes. Edited April 5, 2011 by maineflyer 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I believe the G_S will continue to refuse any and all proposals which by definition are extended to the likes of V_B. I can perhaps understand why he personally would want to avoid discourse with them but if he feels that he is incapable of sitting down with all Rangers fans, then surely he has to do what is best for the support and remove himself as an obstacle? Letting others talk where you are not willing would be a bold and brave move and might open the door to more fruitful discusion between the various groups. He has done alot for the support but he has also been involved in some of the worst cases of footshooting you will ever see (on all sides) and perhaps it is time he created a platform for co-operation, either by throwing himself into talks or by removing himself from the path of talks. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I believe the G_S will continue to refuse any and all proposals which by definition are extended to the likes of V_B. I can perhaps understand why he personally would want to avoid discourse with them but if he feels that he is incapable of sitting down with all Rangers fans, then surely he has to do what is best for the support and remove himself as an obstacle? Letting others talk where you are not willing would be a bold and brave move and might open the door to more fruitful discusion between the various groups. He has done alot for the support but he has also been involved in some of the worst cases of footshooting you will ever see (on all sides) and perhaps it is time he created a platform for co-operation, either by throwing himself into talks or by removing himself from the path of talks. The fact this proposal comes from RM, regardless of who on there devised it, is an instant block for FF - both forums have had threads crushing each other, particularly personal stuff at one another. I was once called, by FF, an 'enemy of Rangers, worse than Spiers'. And they slurred others. Actions mirrored on RM. No initiative will ever happen because, as MF says, it's the individuals who are the problem. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think there will be any barriers put up by the folks from VB, who have on more than one occasion offered to include FF in initiatives, only to be shut out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) The fact this proposal comes from RM, regardless of who on there devised it, is an instant block for FF - both forums have had threads crushing each other, particularly personal stuff at one another. I was once called, by FF, an 'enemy of Rangers, worse than Spiers'. And they slurred others. Actions mirrored on RM. No initiative will ever happen because, as MF says, it's the individuals who are the problem. Meaning if those individuals remove themselves......? Edited April 5, 2011 by Pokeherface 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think there will be any barriers put up by the folks from VB, who have on more than one occasion offered to include FF in initiatives, only to be shut out. Suck has told of personal threats to himself and others from individuals on VB. If they are true, and there seems to be an awful lot of poeple willing to say they have experienced it first hand for there to be nothing in it, it is perfectly understandable that those people holding out a hand of friendship would be viewed with suspicion at the least, and hostility as the most likely. A forum bashing excercise was to be avoided, so this is not that, it is simply an opinion based on available evidence (not facts, only those involved know the facts of the matter) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Suck has told of personal threats to himself and others from individuals on VB. If they are true, and there seems to be an awful lot of poeple willing to say they have experienced it first hand for there to be nothing in it, it is perfectly understandable that those people holding out a hand of friendship would be viewed with suspicion at the least, and hostility as the most likely. A forum bashing excercise was to be avoided, so this is not that, it is simply an opinion based on available evidence (not facts, only those involved know the facts of the matter) In that case, Perhaps it's best then to leave it to those involved to speak for themselves. Otherwise it's little more than shit stirring. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pokeherface Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 If we cant discuss reasons why suck might not be willing to participate in debate, then it is extremely unfair to discuss reasons debate wont happen that are his fault. That would be a one sided shit stirring excercise. You cant have it every which way MF. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 If we cant discuss reasons why suck might not be willing to participate in debate, then it is extremely unfair to discuss reasons debate wont happen that are his fault. That would be a one sided shit stirring excercise. You cant have it every which way MF. Your a charm. You raise unsubstantiated allegations of personal threats, don't back them up but offer this as a reason for Suck's behavior. That's shit stirring in my book. Surprised the irony of doing it on this thread isn't choking you. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.