exposingtherhats Latest Report (Not A Blog)

[buster. 4,974]

Couldn't have put it any better, calscot.

 

Still, I would rather see us move on than time and again have to do with essentially school-yard stuff of the "but you once said" variety. When it comes to Whyte and Co., quite a few of us have to live with what they thought and said back then - whether they had any influence on the situation or not. And that is probably punishment enough.

 

But it isn't about "school-yard stuff", it's about many people who weren't interested to, couldn't or refused to learn from an important misjudgement. Instead they generally gave a "ok, you were right.....do you want a gold star" type of reply.

 

I thought at the time that the important thing to do was to try and educate regards the situation the club found itself in, the further dubious characters on the horizon and how spin was being used with Jack Irvine, the sp1v 'continuity bridge' at the heart of it.

 

In 2012, there were still too many who weren't interested in what some called 'conspiracy theories' and very quickly went back to their comfort blanket of toxic bullshit.

 

Another feature with some was tribal.

ie. internal fans group disputes that saw some side with the sp1vs because they 'hated' the alternative so much. This created a different dynamic to those who had made a simple misjudgement. They were at times encouraged and used by Irvine, eg. in an attempt to prevent a perception of unity.

[chilledbear 16]

But it isn't about "school-yard stuff", it's about many people who weren't interested to, couldn't or refused to learn from an important misjudgement. Instead they generally gave a "ok, you were right.....do you want a gold star" type of reply.

 

I thought at the time that the important thing to do was to try and educate regards the situation the club found itself in, the further dubious characters on the horizon and how spin was being used with Jack Irvine, the sp1v 'continuity bridge' at the heart of it.

 

In 2012, there were still too many who weren't interested in what some called 'conspiracy theories' and very quickly went back to their comfort blanket of toxic bullshit.

 

Another feature with some was tribal.

ie. internal fans group disputes that saw some side with the sp1vs because they 'hated' the alternative so much. This created a different dynamic to those who had made a simple misjudgement. They were at times encouraged and used by Irvine, eg. in an attempt to prevent a perception of unity.

 

And if someone came in tomorrow asking to buy Kings shares, no matter who they were, they would have a section of the supports backing.

[buster. 4,974]

And if someone came in tomorrow asking to buy Kings shares, no matter who they were, they would have a section of the supports backing.

 

Modern society has been shaped in such a way that you can fool most of the people most of the time.

 

Creative lying (often with 'plausible' deniabilty get-out) has become a very well paid and accepted artform and in conjunction with the media is often far too powerful for the truth or an accurate representation of X, Y or Z to compete with.

Edited May 11, 2016 by buster.

[der Berliner 3,548]

But it isn't about "school-yard stuff", it's about many people who weren't interested to, couldn't or refused to learn from an important misjudgement. Instead they generally gave a "ok, you were right.....do you want a gold star" type of reply. ...

 

I can't tell how you perceive replies or what sort of replies you got elsewhere. You imply what people did or felt and that they apparently refused to learn. If that is your impression, so be it. IMHO, SDM was no Whyte and the latter no Green or Ashley. They were all - on hindsight - of an (we have to put it politically correct, given court cases et al) ilk that caused us harm. If you or fs or others had the insight or the brains to see through that, fine. Perhaps it would be better to add a signature saying "Well, I told you so!" or the like, rather than going after people claiming a) you were deaf and b) unable to learn. Which is the school-yard stuff I spoke about. If anything, it would befit this board if people would actually stop this sort of goading and handing out hindisght lecture altogether though. No-one can see through the monitor screen and see what people are actually thinking or what type of person they are (i.e. unable to learn).

 

And while we are at it, it is far beyond black and white in these cases, even though some can't see past that. Far too many were dug into their ditches and if someone wanted to make reason of e.g. Green's behaviour at certain stages in his ill-fated reign, he was shot down as a e.g. pro-Green advocate. That this kills debate straight away and stops people from thinking was only a secondary notion. And more often than not, those willing to debate were not exactly on Green's side (but like most of us unable to remove him or stop what he did).

[buster. 4,974]

I can't tell how you perceive replies or what sort of replies you got elsewhere. You imply what people did or felt and that they apparently refused to learn. If that is your impression, so be it. IMHO, SDM was no Whyte and the latter no Green or Ashley. They were all - on hindsight - of an (we have to put it politically correct, given court cases et al) ilk that caused us harm. If you or fs or others had the insight or the brains to see through that, fine. Perhaps it would be better to add a signature saying "Well, I told you so!" or the like, rather than going after people claiming a) you were deaf and b) unable to learn. Which is the school-yard stuff I spoke about. If anything, it would befit this board if people would actually stop this sort of goading and handing out hindisght lecture altogether though. No-one can see through the monitor screen and see what people are actually thinking or what type of person they are (i.e. unable to learn).

 

And while we are at it, it is far beyond black and white in these cases, even though some can't see past that. Far too many were dug into their ditches and if someone wanted to make reason of e.g. Green's behaviour at certain stages in his ill-fated reign, he was shot down as a e.g. pro-Green advocate. That this kills debate straight away and stops people from thinking was only a secondary notion. And more often than not, those willing to debate were not exactly on Green's side (but like most of us unable to remove him or stop what he did).

 

You don't seem to understand or want to understand the point I was putting forward.

 

The basic premise being that you should try to learn from your mistakes and not as many did,.... point to what they perceive as point-scoring and partly attempt to deflect from their own mistakes.

 

One of the reasons many became so 'defensive' was pride........that they had invested much message-board capital, paragraphs and posts in what they perceived to be right that it wasn't felt as a simple mistake but rather an embarrassing passage of time. This for some meant it preferable to maintain a distance and continue deflective noise instead of being prepared to take lessons on board.

 

General polarized message-board culture was seized upon by Toxic Jack and exploited.

Like many aspects of the past few years there were many different angles, eg. there were those on the message-boards who were spin conduits and activley encouraged support for the then incumbents of the boardroom or whoever suited the moment.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

John Brown got a lot wrong but he also got enough people not to renew to force through regime change.

 

Or helped at very least to get the thousands required. He played his part.

[calscot 0]

You don't seem to understand or want to understand the point I was putting forward.

 

The basic premise being that you should try to learn from your mistakes and not as many did,.... point to what they perceive as point-scoring and partly attempt to deflect from their own mistakes.

 

One of the reasons many became so 'defensive' was pride........that they had invested much message-board capital, paragraphs and posts in what they perceived to be right that it wasn't felt as a simple mistake but rather an embarrassing passage of time. This for some meant it preferable to maintain a distance and continue deflective noise instead of being prepared to take lessons on board.

 

I agree that you are making a good point about how people argue on forums, but that works both ways. Some people need to learn from the mistake of not communicating well.

 

I think many people are willing to listen somewhat on this forum, but they wanted it to be credible and clear. They want good references and explanation of complex subjects (or just unfamiliar and uninteresting to your average football fan) and don't want over exaggeration, demonising or too much presumption of future actions of certain characters.

 

None of that arrived. Many were caught out with wishful thinking on Whyte, but I think it was more a wait and see on Green. There is also a lot of innocent until proven guilty sentiment.

 

I personally don't think this forum in particular was overly guilty of simple cloth ears.

 

I think rather than all of this forum completely refusing to listen, part of it was that the message wasn't delivered in a compelling enough way among the context of all the lies, propaganda and innuendo coming from our enemies.

[buster. 4,974]

I agree that you are making a good point about how people argue on forums, but that works both ways. Some people need to learn from the mistake of not communicating well.

 

I think many people are willing to listen somewhat on this forum, but they wanted it to be credible and clear. They want good references and explanation of complex subjects (or just unfamiliar and uninteresting to your average football fan) and don't want over exaggeration, demonising or too much presumption of future actions of certain characters.

 

None of that arrived. Many were caught out with wishful thinking on Whyte, but I think it was more a wait and see on Green. There is also a lot of innocent until proven guilty sentiment.

 

I personally don't think this forum in particular was overly guilty of simple cloth ears.

 

I think rather than all of this forum completely refusing to listen, part of it was that the message wasn't delivered in a compelling enough way among the context of all the lies, propaganda and innuendo coming from our enemies.

 

1. I am not talking particularly or generalising about Gersnet and my personal experience during most of that time was on FF.

 

2. Everyone can make a mistake, my problem was a general refusal or lack of will to learn from any mistakes (see my 'signature' below) and in many cases a predictable repeat followed.

 

3. Apart from the available facts, one of the important lessons to learn was about spin, the methods, the conduits, it's delivery, the timing, those involved etc (today, this goes for our society as a whole and not just the clubs troubles). Establishing a consistent toxicity coming from particular people or mediums helps in knowing what to believe and what to wonder why they would try and lie/mislead on a particular issue.

 

4. Rarely will you find open and shut cases that X will be able to brief a messageboard on. To expect such is unreasonable. It's not just about listening, today everyone can dig if they have some time and the inclination.

 

 

 

Don't make excuses...........instead be open and Learn Lessons.

Edited May 12, 2016 by buster.

[colinstein 294]

And if someone came in tomorrow asking to buy Kings shares, no matter who they were, they would have a section of the supports backing.

 

Faux outrage of King.....what's behind it ?

[Bluedell 5,471]

Some heard what had happened in the past and jumped to a conclusion, others decided not to do so and wait for further evidence. is the latter a "mistake"?

 

I've gone over what I knew and when I knew it and don't believe I would change the way I look at things if they happened again.