Same.
Why is Scholesy banned?
- Thread starter Plan M
- Start date
- Status
Same.
I'd struggle to argue with this
I completely disagree with Sultan on this, but I think he's taken a decision for the right reasons even if its an undesirable outcome, and I think he's handled it extremely well. He certainly didn't have to answer my request the thread reopened. But he did (after he'd asked the mod who closed it first!)
You earn a lot of respect when you handle things the right way
Ah here, when you do it it's "good natured" but when others do it it's bullying? I'd say almost everybody gave Scholesy that level of stick, with a minority going after him too much (usually with rubbish jokes about Modric, the one player he was 100% spot on about).
Nor has anyone else.
That's not the point is it. You've gone on and on about "bullying responses" yet those are a bunch of posts which would fall under that category.
You are here, going on about the abuse he suffered by posters and mods, and arguing that taglines and continued negativity forced his exit, yet there's evidence of you and others doing exactly the same, and even suggesting he asks for it when you say "you must be looking for trouble", enforcing the point he wasn't just a helpless abused poster, but someone who craved a reaction.
Christ Brad, if only you knew. It's like you are in a giant beautiful bubble, and I'm on the outside with a feck off giant needle.
At the end of the day, he attracted a huge amount of negative attention (including being referred to as a "WUM" and "mental" by the two most vocal opponents of the ban in this thread). Whether he courted this attention deliberately or not (I'm inclined to think it was deliberate) is actually fairly moot.
The only way to avoid this negative attention continuing to constantly derail threads would be for Scholesy to change his internet persona and either stop making controversial sweeping statements or at least try to back them up with reasoned debate (which seemed impossible, despite repeated advice from lots of different people to do so) or to engage in some prolonged and heavy-handing modding, eventually banning and infracting dozens of people instead of just one.
The latter approach would be an awful lot of hard work and probably result in a number of other posters getting banned - the departure of whom would prompt the same tiresome fecking post mortem demanded by the usual suspects after every other banning, including Scholesy's. And so the cycle continues...
The only way to avoid this negative attention continuing to constantly derail threads would be for Scholesy to change his internet persona and either stop making controversial sweeping statements or at least try to back them up with reasoned debate (which seemed impossible, despite repeated advice from lots of different people to do so) or to engage in some prolonged and heavy-handing modding, eventually banning and infracting dozens of people instead of just one.
The latter approach would be an awful lot of hard work and probably result in a number of other posters getting banned - the departure of whom would prompt the same tiresome fecking post mortem demanded by the usual suspects after every other banning, including Scholesy's. And so the cycle continues...
Hmmm.
Not that it's not admirable to live your life by an amiable moral code and what not. Does cheapen it somewhat when you remind people of it constantly though.
Personally I think the football forums will be a much more boring place without Scholesy's unique brand of retardation, and I think banning anyone who likes the odd WUM or some attention is poor. It's why the football forums are getting more and more boring as we just have endless circular arguments about tactics and gabriel obertans mentality and if darron gibson will veer learn to do something apart from shoot. At least he was interesting even if he was a massive Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime.
See, I kind of agree with this.
That said, it's not hard to see why his banning was thought to be for the greater good. I mean, why else would Sultan do it? Does anyone think he's the type of person to do it out of spite?
Firstly, I don't think anyone could find a post of mine where I've abused Scholesy though I'm sure Top will relish the task of trying.
It's interesting - you so bullishly defend this move and say it had to happen because of the widespread controversy he caused and yet, Brwned aside, pretty much everyone has said they'd rather he wasn't permanently banned in this thread. So for who's benefit was it? Were posters regularly using the report function to complain about his posts?
Noodles says posting on here is no fun anymore, yet a poster who in reality was at worst a likeable wally has been canned despite widespread protest from a lot of posters who otherwise keep quiet about such things. Just seems a bit of a shame - why not keep him, change his tagline, and let things go on? At worst, he held some laughable opinions on football and never comprehended the results he'd get if he posted them - yet all around him there's abuse flying around, which he never joined in, yet he's banned.
Yup, this was brought up quite a few times in the mod forum whenever we were discussing Scholesy.
Like I said earlier; he's a character, and I always read his posts. But then again, as interesting, from a car-crash point-of-view, as it was reading his strange opinions, it did derail far too many threads, and while the Football Forums shouldn't always just be about the football, it just became a bit too much in the end.
I'd agree with this, and was a big reason he lasted a few years. His posts certainly attracted my curiosity.
The football forums don't half get some stick sometimes. I tend to find that they're pretty good. Most of the 2010 promotees are great(I'm obviously not going to refer to myself there) and really contribute brilliantly. It's probably as a result of the fact that it is apparently harder to get out of the newbies now than it was three years ago. It does show.
Agree with those sentiments sam, which is why I didn't make it permanent earlier, but can definitely understand why it ended up that way. I've argued both cases for him before, as ridiculous as his posts are, I do laugh a lot of the times, at him, rarely with him, but as Top said, he became a bit too much.
I didn't find him likable in the slightest. Scholesy was just something I'd try to ignore until he started whining about the shit he'd always bring upon himself, at which point he became an unavoidable irritation.
I'd feel sorry for him, but then what's to stop him starting over and taking the forum in better spirit this time around? It's not like Sultan's taken his computer away and smashed it up
It's the bitching and whining and pandering to it that's sapped the fun out of this place.
I still can't believe i fell into that Welbeck post match interview arrogance bit with him.
Nope, I don't think its one rule for me and one for another. I'm as culpable as others when I have done it. If we're being fair, Top could equally scroll the threads and find ten occasion where I've debated with the point Scholsey has made. Something plenty don't do, and simply resort to mocking him for past comments instead
Regardless, I just think its a crying shame a United supporter who evidently loved posting on here now can't, and the reason is to clean the forum up, because the reaction to his posts was over the top bordering on bullying
Is it really a crying shame though? A crying shame for Scholesy?
If Scholsey goes then I go.
Not much effort really, the search engine is working very well lately:
And here's one where you call Scholesy up on his tendency that many in here have stated as the main reason why he always caused a fuss:
Yes, for him
Everyone who bullied or took the mick should bow their heads in shame. Scholesy himself and the abusers are more culpable for his banning than myself. 
This thread has been wonderful for posters to revisit their earlier selves. A time portal for insulting Scholesy of sort.
you're deluded if you actually think Scholesy was a United fan
This is based on what?
I have an offer Brad. Scholesy is permanently banned, but, he can be brought back. However, it can only be for your place.
Do you accept a trade of your account for Scholesy's?
elvis doing his best to strengthen the 'Scholesy out' argument, even if it involves such personal sacrifice. What a trooper.
Not even Brad Himself wouldn't throw Himself on his sword like that...
Why would you make such a pathetic offer?
I do find it hilarious that one of the most abusive posters on the Caf baldwinlegend is saying anything at all.
Who else does?
What is in in his posts over 3 years convinced you that he wasn't a United supporter?
watch the ticker there JD
I'm trying to understand how deep the drama goes.
I think he was a United fan, I dont really know how much of a fan he was though
I've evidently read them GB, and I don't have a clue where you'd get such an impression from
One of the things he's been accused of is making a point, then not backing it up. So lets rise above it, because I am curious and wonder if I've missed something, what is it that's convinced you he's not a United supporter?
- Status