You're just proof of one of the many problem posters that roam these boards. Aiming typical personal attacks with some kind of cranial brain insult. Repeat, Repeat, Repeat the "Cliquey'' M-O

Amf you're proof that reproduction isn't always a wise move.....

You're tiresome and not worth my time and effort. I'll leave it there. TTFN.

Nice. Your Personal comments are very classy. Getting personal for no valid reason just proves your failings to debate like an adult. You should get on well with the rest of your mob over on the desolate DevilTalk.



If this is proof of your ''Reasonable Debates'' well I'm ''buzzin'' you're migrating too.

You are aware, I'm sure, that you also make personal insults?

I just don't understand what you get out of all this, I actually think you are a salford fan and care about the club. And also think you are not Mario. I also think Mario despite being a wigan fan does like salford. Some points you both make are good and valid. I just don't get why you want to annoy so many people.
Proper debate is why were all here, to disagree is fine, but all this intentional winding up is just bull mud.

Any hoooooo, roll on Saturday, few beers, bit of a sing song, n bring on the salford!

If I have projected any personal insults on this forum it's been justifiable through Ad Hominem provocation. I can honestly say I have never aimed cranial or brain dysfunction profanities at anybody even when I've been subjected to this myself.

Sorry, but I feel very much misunderstood, and Yeah, attracting the insults are just sticks and stones. I may seem to have an alternative outlook on life which certain folk can't handle its challenging nature, does it warrant such abusive projected vitriol.No, it doesn't, I'd go berserk if my kids were subjecting an individual to such vitriolic behaviour for having a varied outlook. I wouldn't mind but the main perpetrator is supposed to be a Copper with a diverse attitude.however, I love talking all things Rugby League on here and waking people up in the Sin Bin, waking them to the lies we've been indoctrinated with. Even if people think it's nonsense fair enough, I'm just planting the seeds, and some seeds become fruits in some minds, proven by private messages I'm receiving.

I personally don't go out to annoy people. I'm mostly retaliating the pack of Laughing Hyena. It's amazing how some people are perceiving me as the bad penny and failing to see the Elephant in the Living Room. I'm the easy target, so I'll follow suit is the common choice for most people on this forum.=#FF0000[u Not all obviously.[/u=#FF0000[u I'll apologise profusely if in someway I've offended any posters unprovoked.[/u Apart from this. Come On You Reds.

It's never you is it Stan? Everyone else are horrible goading bullies, which managed to get on fine for a decade before you farted yourself onto here. We're all in cahoots and we're all evil nasty people, and you're the honest nice bringer of truth.

You live in a fantasy world.

Up to now, I have challenged the new voice, Mr FlatStan, but no more than that. I've kept away from this thread until I noticed it had come to a close about a week ago and wondered why.
Reading it has meant that I need to stay and take a stance that challenges you to explain your comments. In my over 60 years of life, which have included teaching and leading youth, trade union representation and debate, and attending and involvement in local forums, I have not come across such a petty set of responses, Mr FlatStan, that have not been challenged by most chairs. Before you respond in the normal way, I do not chill as I'm older than that yoof comment, I am not in any clique I am aware of, and I am aware of bullying. Some of your comments have had the effect comparable to Savanarola on the art legacy of Florence. Please accept the dictum that for a debate, you need two sides. And for an adult debate, you need to support your comments.

What comments. Please elaborate as I don't own a crystal ball.

So then challenge my comments, think of it being like a setting for a trade Union conference, where you're in your pomp, yeah. Now you take the lead and fire away Mr. Chairman.

Again you fail to mention what my erroneous comments are according to your 60 years of life. I'm willing to elaborate my comments, please do carry on, and debate me

Yeah, that'll be totally worth his while...

So it seems that, in the near two months since I opened this thread, one or two things have been proved.

One is that Flat Stanley doesn't listen and is not prepared to behave with any good grace, but is a disruptive influence who will not moderate his behaviour.

He is therefore banned.

I'm posting this here for a number of reasons, including acting as a reminder that I am quite prepared to hand out bans for such disruption. If anyone is in doubt, banning for such a reason is in accordance with the AUP.

Everyone was warned – and certain 'suspects' were given the opportunity to prove themselves.