EthicalScottishFitba
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: PeterGrant on November 20, 2020, 04:26:14 pm
-
Tbh it was never in doubt.
Nae pant pishing on my part either, poll taken in the correct manner.
Some people could learn from that 😇
-
Coyne exonerated by two thirds majority. Matter closed.
-
No
-
I would Pete if I knew how to do it
Could you add the option to the poll
Something like this... neither banned and put a thread up as to what is and is not allowed on here
We shouldn’t just jump on the thread imo to nit pick. If it’s ethical then we know where we stand👍
-
If the second amendment poll remains as is, this poll will surely have to be scrapped.
Absolutely. You can't ban one poster and not the other for the same alleged (in my case) offence. Especially so when Brenty did it twice.
Depends if the community with full sight of the facts decide to or not.
-
If the second amendment poll remains as is, this poll will surely have to be scrapped.
Absolutely. You can't ban one poster and not the other for the same alleged (in my case) offence. Especially so when Brenty did it twice.
-
If the second amendment poll remains as is, this poll will surely have to be scrapped.
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
I suggested AJ apologised and it goes no further but he wasn't willing to do so.
Aye, that's what I'll do. Daft cvnt.😂
Think of your handicap and how low you might get it. Silver lining
The floors will be gleaming too.
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
I suggested AJ apologised and it goes no further but he wasn't willing to do so.
Aye, that's what I'll do. Daft cvnt.😂
Think of your handicap and how low you might get it. Silver lining
-
It's funny watching Pete peddle this ethical garbage when everyone knows he's been one of the bitterest bigots (on many subjects) that's ever posted.
Big words used out of context won't ever change that.
And that ;D ;D ;D
ITB is on here?!
This is turning into an eventful day on the board
Been reading sporadically and this board is pretty rubbish most of the time but watching the usual suspects at their bullying worst has spurred me to post :'(
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
I suggested AJ apologised and it goes no further but he wasn't willing to do so.
Aye, that's what I'll do. Daft cvnt.😂
-
I suggest certain posters who nip away like wee nyaffs, as they've always done, cut it oot.
Cool
-
It's funny watching Pete peddle this ethical garbage when everyone knows he's been one of the bitterest bigots (on many subjects) that's ever posted.
Big words used out of context won't ever change that.
And that ;D ;D ;D
ITB is on here?!
This is turning into an eventful day on the board
He answered the sos flare.
-
Good to see you back mr theboy hope all is well.
-
I suggest certain posters who nip away like wee nyaffs, as they've always done, cut it oot.
-
It's funny watching Pete peddle this ethical garbage when everyone knows he's been one of the bitterest bigots (on many subjects) that's ever posted.
Big words used out of context won't ever change that.
And that ;D ;D ;D
ITB is on here?!
This is turning into an eventful day on the board
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
I suggested AJ apologised and it goes no further but he wasn't willing to do mso.
Nonsense, you’ve been pant pishing all day.
-
A good way to sort it out, IMO, would be first of all to ask the board whether an automatic ban should apply to anyone who reveals a name.
After that, an individual poll regarding the length of the ban could take place for each poster?
At the moment, the automatic ban/second amendment poll has already been compromised as it only relates to one poster.
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
I suggested AJ apologised and it goes no further but he wasn't willing to do so.
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
Put forward a motion then.
-
It's funny watching Pete peddle this ethical garbage when everyone knows he's been one of the bitterest bigots (on many subjects) that's ever posted.
Big words used out of context won't ever change that.
And that ;D ;D ;D
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
No. In my opinion, neither poster should be banned. I'd like to just see it all forgotten about and perhaps some ethicicity shown by all parties going forward.
What's happened is that a poster is about to be banned for doing something that another poster did previously, one case being an automatic ban but one not.
No automatic ban. The board has seen to it that ethical best practice is being followed.
So can the result of the second amendment poll also apply to Coyne then? That seems fair to me.
-
When do the polls close Pete?
6 for AJ on the ban question.
9 for the question of the length of required.
12 for Coyne on the ban question.
3am for question of length.
Aye sorry, seen it on the other thread after I posted.
-
I’m withHL here. Neither posters be banned . Just a explanation of what is and isn’t allowed.Then we all know where we stand and go from there
-
When do the polls close Pete?
6 for AJ on the ban question.
9 for the question of the length of required.
12 for Coyne on the ban question.
3am for question of length.
-
When do the polls close Pete?
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
No. In my opinion, neither poster should be banned. I'd like to just see it all forgotten about and perhaps some ethicicity shown by all parties going forward.
What's happened is that a poster is about to be banned for doing something that another poster did previously, one case being an automatic ban but one not.
And that's what's eating away at them. It was all fun and games when AJ was in the stocks this morning, not quite so much now that I've provided proof that Brenty used a posters real name twice. Funny how things turn out sometimes. 🙂
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
No. In my opinion, neither poster should be banned. I'd like to just see it all forgotten about and perhaps some ethicicity shown by all parties going forward.
What's happened is that a poster is about to be banned for doing something that another poster did previously, one case being an automatic ban but one not.
No automatic ban. The board has seen to it that ethical best practice is being followed.
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
No. In my opinion, neither poster should be banned. I'd like to just see it all forgotten about and perhaps some ethicicity shown by all parties going forward.
What's happened is that a poster is about to be banned for doing something that another poster did previously, one case being an automatic ban but one not.
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
Length of ban will be in a different poll. Learning as I go.
It’s differently worded because it was me who did the motion and those were the words in my head at the time. I didn’t go back and check and copy yours.
You could have raised your own motion but didn’t seem to want to for some reason.
I left it in your ethical hands but it appears I was wrong to do so.
I always strive but I can’t always succeed in everyone’s eyes. Which is why it’s good to have the checks and balances of democratic process.
No, you've shown blatant favouritism and bias. But at least I know the rules going forward.
I don’t feel any favouritism or bias, but I do have an objective opinion on what has transpired.
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
The ban on duration for AJ is rendered moot should the poll regarding him being banned at all go in his favour.
If Coyne gets a ban vote we will of course vote on the duration.
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
Did he say that?
Can you not read my username Angry Janny
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
Did he say that?
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
Of course it should. I don't know who Pete is trying to kid here.
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
So you think AJ should be banned?
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
Length of ban will be in a different poll. Learning as I go.
It’s differently worded because it was me who did the motion and those were the words in my head at the time. I didn’t go back and check and copy yours.
You could have raised your own motion but didn’t seem to want to for some reason.
I left it in your ethical hands but it appears I was wrong to do so.
I always strive but I can’t always succeed in everyone’s eyes. Which is why it’s good to have the checks and balances of democratic process.
No, you've shown blatant favouritism and bias. But at least I know the rules going forward.
-
I was thinking that in the interests of consistency, the poll would be how long Coyne should be banned for, rather than whether there should be a ban or not.
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
Length of ban will be in a different poll. Learning as I go.
It’s differently worded because it was me who did the motion and those were the words in my head at the time. I didn’t go back and check and copy yours.
You could have raised your own motion but didn’t seem to want to for some reason.
I left it in your ethical hands but it appears I was wrong to do so.
I always strive but I can’t always succeed in everyone’s eyes. Which is why it’s good to have the checks and balances of democratic process.
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
Length of ban will be in a different poll. Learning as I go.
It’s differently worded because it was me who did the motion and those were the words in my head at the time. I didn’t go back and check and copy yours.
You could have raised your own motion but didn’t seem to want to for some reason.
I left it in your ethical hands but it appears I was wrong to do so.
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
Length of ban will be in a different poll. Learning as I go.
It’s differently worded because it was me who did the motion and those were the words in my head at the time. I didn’t go back and check and copy yours.
You could have raised your own motion but didn’t seem to want to for some reason.
-
Why, why, why Delilah.
-
Why is this worded differently to mine and why is there no option to pick a length of ban?
-
It has been reported that the poster Coyne posted the name of another board user.
The motivations for this are a matter of debate.
For referring to the poster VoiceofReason as “paddy” what is the board’s doom upon Coyne?
Is the a banning offence or not?