Former Eels stars Mick Cronin, Bob O'Reilly and Peter Wynn consider rebel ticket

[Twizzle]

PS. I'm not arguing LU's crackdown and can understand why they are doing it. It just seems as though there is some grey areas that need to be addressed atm. That is all.

Suity

What grey areas are you referring to ?

 

[TooheysNew]

No grey area.

If you are posting for political gain, it will get deleted. If you are posting something that can not be substantiated, it will get deleted. If you are posting something that breaches our guidelines, it will be deleted.

Any 'grey area' is simply an area where moderator discretion will apply, and their decision is final.

Having a quick read through the members guidelines will probably clear up any 'grey areas'. http://www.leagueunlimited.com/forumrules.php

 

[Suitman]

I'm a bit surprised you cant see the difference. MITS has been a member here since day 1 and is clearly not here for political gain,

He's not a member of any allegience, no. But he CAN push a political agenda if he so chooses. Just like Terry. Terry has NO official role with the Leagues Club nor does he have any official position with the Football Club.
Seriously, if you didn't know who he was and he was an anonymous poster, his posts would be considered the same as Uncle Leo's, or Parra Adds or Jake the Snakes or Jodeci's or Bartmans or even mine or Gronks or HJ's. He will have just been considered as giving an opinion. Just like the rest of us.

You'd have to ask him but his posts are clearly for political gain for the benefit of his associates, and nothing to do with footy.

LOL, and other's on here aren't? I could name a few who are on here for political gain.

What grey areas are you referring to ?

The above.

Suity

 

[fish eel]

No grey area.

If you are posting for political gain, it will get deleted. If you are posting something that can not be substantiated, it will get deleted. If you are posting something that breaches our guidelines, it will be deleted.

Any 'grey area' is simply an area where moderator discretion will apply, and their decision is final.

Having a quick read through the members guidelines will probably clear up any 'grey areas'. http://www.leagueunlimited.com/forumrules.php

Like Suity, I'm not arguing against the crackdown.

Far from it, I think it's needed given what this forum has looked like over the last two or so months.

As an example though, Barty can start a thread calling Roy Spagnolo a liar. Deemed OK as he is not deemed to be posting for political gain. Fair enough. But then if Spagnolo came in and started posting in that thread, defending himself and arguing his case, would his posts be deleted?

 

[Suitman]

No grey area.
If you are posting something that can not be substantiated, it will get deleted.

Really?

So it HAS been substantiated that the Leagues Club Board leaked the announcement of Nathan Cayless's retirement, has it? And please, do not quote me a Telegraph article to prove your case.

Suity

 

[Twizzle]

He's not a member of any allegience, no. But he CAN push a political agenda if he so chooses. Just like Terry. Terry has NO official role with the Leagues Club nor does he have any official position with the Football Club.
Seriously, if you didn't know who he was and he was an anonymous poster, his posts would be considered the same as Uncle Leo's, or Parra Adds or Jake the Snakes or Jodeci's or Bartmans or even mine or Gronks or HJ's. He will have just been considered as giving an opinion. Just like the rest of us.

LOL, and other's on here aren't? I could name a few who are on here for political gain.

The above.

Suity

and if my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle,

the fact is we do know who he is and its been made pretty clear, no grey area there

 

[Suitman]

and if my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle,

the fact is we do know who he is and its been made pretty clear, no grey area there

Yes there is. You don't know who uncle Leo is, so his posts are ok?
And, don't even start me on Casper!!

Suity

 

[Twizzle]

Depends what he says.

We dont remove posts from Parra future that dont represent political gain.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-board-elections/story-e6frexq0-1225704166736

As he celebrated alongside about 100 raucous members in the level-three Sterlo's Bar, 3P spokesman Terry Leabeater said the new directors would immediately inspect the records and Fitzgerald's contract with a "fine-tooth comb".

"The first thing the members need to know is the real position of the club," Leabeater said. "Denis has to be responsible. There's no more mucking around. He has to tell us where all the bodies are buried and where the skeletons are."

 

[Gronk]

It's all fair enough really. There are parties running in this election that have litigious form.

The real challenge is what to let slide and what to delete. For example; if a person who is known to have acted as a scrutineer for 3P in the last election posts here, are all of his posts deemed to be for political gain ? If someone who is known to have friendships with the former Board in the same boat ?

 

[Suitman]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-board-elections/story-e6frexq0-1225704166736

LOL.

Suity

 

[fish eel]

It's all fair enough really. There are parties running in this election that have litigious form.

The real challenge is what to let slide and what to delete. For example; if a person who is known to have acted as a scrutineer for 3P in the last election posts here, are all of his posts deemed to be for political gain ? If someone who is known to have friendships with the former Board in the same boat ?

god you can be a stirrer :lol:

 

[Twizzle]

It's all fair enough really. There are parties running in this election that have litigious form.

The real challenge is what to let slide and what to delete. For example; if a person who is known to have acted as a scrutineer for 3P in the last election posts here, are all of his posts deemed to be for political gain ? If someone who is known to have friendships with the former Board in the same boat ?

exactly

wanna swap jobs till the elections ?

easy for some to criticise but we give up our spare time to run a forum for people to enjoy free of charge and yet some people still find something to criticise us for

this is a fan site and not a place to run an election campaign if some dont like it, tough

 

[Gronk]

god you can be a stirrer :lol:

Piss funny. :lol:

 

[fish eel]

exactly

wanna swap jobs till the elections ?

easy for some to criticise but we give up our spare time to run a forum for people to enjoy free of charge and yet some people still find something to criticise us for

this is a fan site and not a place to run an election campaign if some dont like it, tough

well dont get me wrong Twiz, I'm not actually criticising (or atleast I dont mean it to come across that way).

Hence, I've said it would be better just to kill off all election talk. Certainly make your life easier, the forum more readable and no dramas about who can post what.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

god you can be a stirrer :lol:

Bloody oath Gronks a stirrer.

I don't like stirrers.

 

[Suitman]

It's all fair enough really. There are parties running in this election that have litigious form.

The real challenge is what to let slide and what to delete. For example; if a person who is known to have acted as a scrutineer for 3P in the last election posts here, are all of his posts deemed to be for political gain ?

Actually, you make a good point. If I defend 3P and support them, am I not doing anything different to Terry.
If I criticise them, should my posts stay here without question?

Grey area.

As Gronk points out, who's to say that I don't have a political gain one way or another.
I'm also good friends with Parra Future. How does LU know that if I start making positive posts in support of him that I'm not trying to gain a political advantage personally?

If it's all open to personal moderator disgression, that the grey area.

Suity

 

[Twizzle]

well dont get me wrong Twiz, I'm not actually criticising (or atleast I dont mean it to come across that way).

Hence, I've said it would be better just to kill off all election talk. Certainly make your life easier, the forum more readable and no dramas about who can post what.

you're right it would be easier, but I feel that the fans have a right to their opinion and it does make out job a bit harder but its a genuine topic for discussion so we do our best to let the fans voice their opinions

 

[Suitman]

well dont get me wrong Twiz, I'm not actually criticising (or atleast I dont mean it to come across that way).

Neither am I. Seriously. I just find like others, that it's unclear what is able to be posted by some and what isn't.
Also, refer to my post earlier, below.

PS. I'm not arguing LU's crackdown and can understand why they are doing it. It just seems as though there is some grey areas that need to be addressed atm. That is all.

Suity

 

[Gronk]

Bloody oath Gronks a stirrer.

I don't like stirrers.

stirrer
noun

Stirrer \Stir"rer\, n

1: a person who spreads frightening rumors or stirs up trouble [syn: scaremonger]
2. Maroubra Eel
3: an implement used for stirring

;-)