Spagnolo embroiled in ASIC investigation

[parra pete]

I think Batman is attending a parade in his honour and waving to his fans

If you’re being run out of town, get in front of the crowd and make it look like a parade.

 

[bartman]

LOL.

I've made that claim a million times. lol: at us both)

Suity

:lol: "And another thing...."

Yeah, it is hard sometimes.

 

[TheParraboy]

If you’re being run out of town, get in front of the crowd and make it look like a parade.

sorta like Julia Gillard the other day? :sarcasm:

 

[Maroubra Eel]

sorta like Julia Gillard the other day? :sarcasm:

lol she was certainly out in front. I don't think she got away with making it look like a parade but.

 

[parra pete]

sorta like Julia Gillard the other day? :sarcasm:

:lol:

 

[mickdo]

Yeah I call you on that one too. KMcC would be regarded as one of the best investigative print journalists in the country. No way would she make shit up as a favour for some bitter old former CEO. She has an editor and legal to approve her text before they publish.

Sorry for being late to the party on this comment, but while McClymont may have some Walkley's she has also had a few howlers as well. The SMH has been successfully sued several times for defamation in her articles over the years that her editors and legal have let through. She might not necessarily make shit up, but that doesn't mean she's always right either.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/richo-wins-50k-from-fairfax-for-defamation/story-e6frg6o6-1111113104746

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/mp-wins-162000-in-defamation-case/story-e6frg6nf-1111112349333

 

[Gronk]

Sorry for being late to the party on this comment, but while McClymont may have some Walkley's she has also had a few howlers as well. The SMH has been successfully sued several times for defamation in her articles over the years that her editors and legal have let through. She might not necessarily make shit up, but that doesn't mean she's always right either.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...x-for-defamation/story-e6frg6o6-1111113104746

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-defamation-case/story-e6frg6nf-1111112349333

Howlers ? Mate that whole Offset Alpine Printing Press saga stinks like a Bangkok fish market. Bribery, corruption, arson, blackmail, murder - it'll make a good episode of Underbelly one day and all those names will figure prominently.

 

[Geronimo]

I reckon that if everyone gathered for a beer we would all get on like a house on fire. It's tough to gauge intent/emotion via text.

eels81236, that would never happen, HASMAN would have to reveal his "true" identity. :sarcasm:

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Arhh Gronk.

Haven’t you figured it out yet?

If you speak up against anything that the club has done, you are a Fitzgerald loyalist.

You’re only throwing stones because you secretly yearn for the club to fail under the current administration so that Fitzy can be proved right and as such returned as CEO of the club.

This is the spectre that causes so much fear in the current admin, that Denis is coming to get them. Can't say you blame them with the way Denis acts at AGM's and indeed the bitter court war between them afterwards.

I have long said it before the current board members made their tilt for the rolls, the spectre of Fitzgerald will long hang over this club, and to a large number of fans, they see that as either with them or with Fitzgerald, you can't be an interested observer without being on one side. You can't criticise the current board without being a Fitzy loyalist.

That is why the old hands don't post so much on here anymore. We can't stand the hypocrisy from those that support the current admin blindly.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Well said MITS. My sentiments too mate.

 

[bartman]

Nicely summed up MITS. It seems the habit of some to pigeon-hole any differing comments an us v them mentality (or the taking of sides) which is imo behind more of the negativity here than the occasional supposed "negative" comments themselves...

Hopefully as this year progresses people will get over their perceptions and agendas in that regard, and just present their own opinion to stand on its relative merits instead of perpetuating the paranoia cycle.

 

[Suitman]

Nicely summed up MITS. It seems the habit of some to pigeon-hole any differing comments an us v them mentality (or the taking of sides) which is imo behind more of the negativity here than the occasional supposed "negative" comments themselves...

Hopefully as this year progresses people will get over their perceptions and agendas in that regard, and just present their own opinion to stand on its relative merits instead of perpetuating the paranoia cycle.

My point yesterday Bart was that there are equally guilty parties on both sides of the fence. Equally guilty.

Suity

 

[hineyrulz]

My point yesterday Bart was that there are equally guilty parties on both sides of the fence. Equally guilty.

Suity

Yep, some people question the board and what they do which is fair enough. Then their are others that only started posting on here around the time you know who got the arse. And they will complain no matter what the board do good bad or whatever.

 

[eels81236]

Yep, some people question the board and what they do which is fair enough. Then their are others that only started posting on here around the time you know who got the arse. And they will complain no matter what the board do good bad or whatever.

To back up Suity's point we could also say...

Yep, some people question the board and what they do which is fair enough. Then their are others that only started posting on here around the time you know who got the arse. And they will defend no matter what the board do good bad or whatever.

Stephen Rodger Waugh used to play each ball on its merits. That's probably why there has only ever been one Stephen Rodger Waugh.

 

[eels81236]

Speaking of people leaving, where is Boxhead?

 

[Haynzy]

He's sorting out his Year 10 subject selections, covering his books with pictures of Eels players and sewing his name into the collar of all of his school shirts.

 

[bartman]

My point yesterday Bart was that there are equally guilty parties on both sides of the fence. Equally guilty.

Suity

And my point today, is that you seem to be still concerned about "sides"... :?

What a silly concept imo, when we've been talking about how the fun/good forum used to be, and how everyone (presumably) wants to move on. Why would anyone bring their perception of "sides" into any their comments in new thread in 2012?

Why wouldn't everyone who is concerned about the negativity of this place just let threads and posts take their course, (instead of bothering about their idea of old "sides", or bringing up past issues in their comments)? Just let it all go, and move on :lol:.

It's not rocket science if we really want the place to be more positive... Treat new threads/posts on their own merits, reply if you feel the urge (but play the issue at stake, not misperceptions/history), or ignore threads/posts if they're not worth it.

 

[Suitman]

And my point today, is that you seem to be still concerned about "sides"... :?

No, I'm not concerned about it, just like you, eh? I'm just pointing out the fact that it's a reality.

What a silly concept imo,

No, as I said, a reality. Try reading this thread and tell me there ain't sides? You take one yourself, no matter how hard you try and deny it. And I could well be accused of the same thing.

when we've been talking about how the fun/good forum used to be, and how everyone (presumably) wants to move on. Why would anyone bring their perception of "sides" into any their comments in new thread in 2012?

Don't patronise me Bart.

Why wouldn't everyone who is concerned about the negativity of this place just let threads and posts take their course, (instead of bothering about their idea of old "sides", or bringing up past issues in their comments)? Just let it all go, and move on :lol:.

Throw in the laughing emoticon if you like. Another patronising move.
You know very well where I am coming from, but refuse to admit that you are anti anyone saying anything defending the current regime.

It's not rocket science if we really want the place to be more positive... Treat new threads/posts on their own merits, reply if you feel the urge (but play the issue at stake, not misperceptions/history), or ignore threads/posts if they're not worth it.

And this Bart, is your expectation of the perfect world. It's an internet forum which you have reminded us of a million times, and everyone should be allowed their opinion. Obviously , your desire (and mine) isn't going to happen. Patronising posts like yours will never help the cause.

For the record, I've never heard or seen you take a swipe at Parra ads for example, who only ever comes on here for a snipe at the current board, but you don't mind targeting Jake or Mickdo for constantly defending the board. This is what I mean about there being sides.
I know you know it, but obviously, you think everyone should live a in a perfect cyber world. It ain't going to happen, whether you and I would like it to or not.

Suity

 

[bartman]

No, as I said, a reality. Try reading this thread and tell me there ain't sides? You take one yourself, no matter how hard you try and deny it. And I could well be accused of the same thing.

](*,) I just did tell you there are no "sides" - and nor should there be. This place is all just opinions that people post in any given thread.

My point is that people wanting to see "sides" out of everything are where I believe all the negativity gets in. You might disagree, and that's fine, but imo it's not worth trying to string together and post about make-believe agendas from all of that.

Don't patronise me Bart.

I will Suity, if you simply stop making things up...

You know very well where I am coming from, but refuse to admit that you are anti anyone saying anything defending the current regime.

What a load of bollocks! :lol: I am whatever my posts say at a given point in time, nothing less, nothing more... Which means that I write whatever I feel in the moment/thread, and don't spend any time on joining together any "stance". (Good luck to you if you persist in trying to invent one.)

So (in this thread, at this point in time) I am simply anti people taking "sides" where there are actually none to take, and anti people bringing in their (mis)perceptions from other/past threads into current discussions... And that's far from me being anti anyone defending current board members, if that's what matters most to them (and as if I'd give a toss anyway)? (And good luck to you if you want to spend time disbelieving my own words, for your own purposes.)

And this Bart, is your expectation of the perfect world. It's an internet forum which you have reminded us of a million times, and everyone should be allowed their opinion. Obviously , your desire (and mine) isn't going to happen. Patronising posts like yours will never help the cause.

You're the one that was whinging about how negative the forums are/have become, but you don't like my answer about what we can all do to fix it.... :crazy: Fair enough Suity, keep on whinging mate, and keep on "taking sides" and defending anyone who makes the first crap comment in any thread - that'll make things positive around here in no time.

For the record, I've never heard or seen you take a swipe at Parra ads for example, who only ever comes on here for a snipe at the current board, but you don't mind targeting Jake or Mickdo for constantly defending the board. This is what I mean about there being sides.

Here you are with your make-believe "sides" obsession again.... For the record, I don't keep any recollection of Parra Ads' posts or stance regarding the current or past board - but good luck to you if you have the time to try and keep track of that sort of stuff. Has he even made any posts in this thread?

As I've tried to explain to you, my aim in posting (in this thread) wasn't to wipe out all negative comments on the forums - I'll leave that expectation of a perfect world to others....

My aim/post has been to point out how the negativity between posters here often starts (in this thread/this year), and if that happens to point the finger at guys like Mickdo and Jake more than other people (in this thread/this year), then I'm comfortable with that - without thinking it's got anything to do with the silly concept of what "sides" that you think people here are/were/might be on.

I know you know it, but obviously, you think everyone should live a in a perfect cyber world. It ain't going to happen, whether you and I would like it to or not.

Thanks for trying to speak on my behalf, and trying to sum up what you think I mean or intend. :lol: Sadly though Suity, you've got it wrong again - what's that, about 3 or 4 years running now?

Maybe just look again at the advice again mate, it's not rocket science... if you and others let the obsession with "sides" go and move on, this place might just become what you've said you want it to be? *shrugs*

 

[Suitman]

*Shrugs shoulders.*

I'm done. You're a better man than me Gunghadin.
Truly, you are. I'm hopeless at reading people's intentions.
You win Bart. More power to you.

Suity