Latest IRB lunacy

First topic message reminder :

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/RugbyWorldCup2011/France-fined-for-haka-breach-20111024

Now I really miss that facepalm emoticon.

Every New Zealander I've discussed it with loved the French haka response. So please don't blame us for this one guys.

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:My PM stubbornly remains in my outbox. It reads:


RU: Grey Ghost

icentFrom Portnoy To Adam D (Hobo), Today at 9:10 pm
Is it true that he's been permanently banned? And if so, is there a published explanation?


Portnoy

Perhaps someone could forward it to another Creator?/Admin/Mod for confirmation

On it.

Whilst you are in here PJ. Congrats on a magnificent RWC SG win.

Portnoy wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:My PM stubbornly remains in my outbox. It reads:


RU: Grey Ghost

icentFrom Portnoy To Adam D (Hobo), Today at 9:10 pm
Is it true that he's been permanently banned? And if so, is there a published explanation?


Portnoy

Perhaps someone could forward it to another Creator?/Admin/Mod for confirmation

On it.

Whilst you are in here PJ. Congrats on a magnificent RWC SG win.

Gracias amigo - just guessing though isn't it?

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:My PM stubbornly remains in my outbox. It reads:


RU: Grey Ghost

icentFrom Portnoy To Adam D (Hobo), Today at 9:10 pm
Is it true that he's been permanently banned? And if so, is there a published explanation?


Portnoy

Perhaps someone could forward it to another Creator?/Admin/Mod for confirmation

On it.

Whilst you are in here PJ. Congrats on a magnificent RWC SG win.

Gracias amigo - just guessing though isn't it?

Best english peformance of the entire RWC 2011 campaign

Gatts wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:

Portnoy wrote:My PM stubbornly remains in my outbox. It reads:


RU: Grey Ghost

icentFrom Portnoy To Adam D (Hobo), Today at 9:10 pm
Is it true that he's been permanently banned? And if so, is there a published explanation?


Portnoy

Perhaps someone could forward it to another Creator?/Admin/Mod for confirmation

On it.

Whilst you are in here PJ. Congrats on a magnificent RWC SG win.

Gracias amigo - just guessing though isn't it?

Best english peformance of the entire RWC 2011 campaign

Can't argue with that.

The IRB have peed me off this world cup. It's all money money money with them. Oooooh rule can we make up that will likely be broken so hand out a few more fines. I think they've done there best to ruin what us fans were interested in... the actual rugby.

I even sent them an email lol

IRB want to get a grip,use a little common sense instead of being so rigid.
Fines for disrepecting a challenge THE HAKA,advertising on gumshields.{who can see them in the mouth].
Laying down rigid interpratations of the laws PRE RWC after stating previously they would`nt interfere until AFTERWARDS.
Problems with the refereeing in this RWC stems from IRB rigidty instead of Refs applying commonsense to each individual incident.

I have had a reply re: GG

From a mod (as it is PM, I'll respect his/her privacy)

"Portnoy,

Yes he has been banned and no there is no published explanation."

Portnoy wrote:I have had a reply re: GG

From a mod (as it is PM, I'll respect his/her privacy)

"Portnoy,

Yes he has been banned and no there is no published explanation."

The mod team decided to remove a post regarding GG's (apparently permanent) ban.

It has been decided that this is a non-RU matter. (hmmm!)

So - no discussion allowed on a discussion board then...

Portnoy wrote:

Portnoy wrote:I have had a reply re: GG

From a mod (as it is PM, I'll respect his/her privacy)

"Portnoy,

Yes he has been banned and no there is no published explanation."

The mod team decided to remove a post regarding GG's (apparently permanent) ban.

It has been decided that this is a non-RU matter. (hmmm!)

So - no discussion allowed on a discussion board then...

Portnoy, did you imagine that this board was run as a democracy?!

I never thought it was a democracy As.

I presumed that it was a forum for airing views.

Sadly I appear to be wrong as an article on pondering how NZers would feel after scraping home at home has been pulled.

Apparently the Central Committee didn't approve though.

Rule 1. The management's decision is final.

Rule 2. In any dispute refer to Rule 1.

It is a forum for airing views. And neatly organised so views on rugby are in the rugby section, views on football are in the football section and views on moderation are in the 'alert a moderator' section.

Why not take it up there? They might even give you a reference number for tracking. You know how much you like those.

Portnoy wrote:I never thought it was a democracy As.

I presumed that it was a forum for airing views.

Sadly I appear to be wrong as an article on pondering how NZers would feel after scraping home at home has been pulled.

Apparently the Central Committee didn't approve though.

Rule 1. The management's decision is final.

Rule 2. In any dispute refer to Rule 1.

P, it's a privately run board? The rules are there for all to see - if you breach them, expect the worst, surely? If you breach them continuosly, definitely expect the worst (and then some)!

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Portnoy wrote:I never thought it was a democracy As.

I presumed that it was a forum for airing views.

Sadly I appear to be wrong as an article on pondering how NZers would feel after scraping home at home has been pulled.

Apparently the Central Committee didn't approve though.

Rule 1. The management's decision is final.

Rule 2. In any dispute refer to Rule 1.

P, it's a privately run board? The rules are there for all to see - if you breach them, expect the worst, surely? If you breach them continuosly, definitely expect the worst (and then some)!

And that justifies those of the remaining members not to have an opinion?

I'm not being deliberately arseholey. But I do kick against the summary dispensations of justice without tolerating queries.

That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

It's a conspiracy Portnoy, I tell you

Portnoy wrote:That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

This place is a stalag in the same way Samoa's RWC fixtures were akin to slavery and the holocaust.

greybeard wrote:

Portnoy wrote:That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

This place is a stalag in the same way Samoa's RWC fixtures were akin to slavery and the holocaust.

Listen to you the voice of the hegemony

Your name is now in my little book

Well PM the Founders/Admins/Mods to get details as to why he was banned.

And why any discussion is prohibited. I suspect you'll hit a brick wall.

fxp@live.co.uk

Heil Hobo,



Anyway, Portnoy, instead of spreading hate, just read your PM's.

Portnoy wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Portnoy wrote:I never thought it was a democracy As.

I presumed that it was a forum for airing views.

Sadly I appear to be wrong as an article on pondering how NZers would feel after scraping home at home has been pulled.

Apparently the Central Committee didn't approve though.

Rule 1. The management's decision is final.

Rule 2. In any dispute refer to Rule 1.

P, it's a privately run board? The rules are there for all to see - if you breach them, expect the worst, surely? If you breach them continuosly, definitely expect the worst (and then some)!

And that justifies those of the remaining members not to have an opinion?

I'm not being deliberately arseholey. But I do kick against the summary dispensations of justice without tolerating queries.

That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

Opinions are grand, Portnoy, but what's with the crusade? You might be better off going back to your 'elephants'?!

Glas a du wrote:

greybeard wrote:

Portnoy wrote:That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

This place is a stalag in the same way Samoa's RWC fixtures were akin to slavery and the holocaust.

Listen to you the voice of the hegemony

Me? the hegemony?

Possibly the reverse Glas. You might need to look it up.

Seriously Portnoy, grow up and stop trying to fight a battle that doesn't exist mate.

Ozzy3213 wrote:Seriously Portnoy, grow up and stop trying to fight a battle that doesn't exist mate.

If a simple ephemeral debate about GGs banning had be allowed, there wouldn't be a battle.

Portnoy wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:Seriously Portnoy, grow up and stop trying to fight a battle that doesn't exist mate.

If a simple ephemeral debate about GGs banning had be allowed, there wouldn't be a battle.

Surely we don't need to know the answer to something in order to be able to debate it? Otherwise theologians and philosophers would need to find new professions.

And by ephemeral you mean, you ask a question, we give you the answer and that's the end of it.

We all know that wouldn't happen, because you can never just let things go. GreyGhost is banned, end of. Why does it matter to anybody else why? He knows why, that is it, no other discussion is required.

You have been PM'd with an answer to your question, so how about letting it go now and stop with the EFS type twitter nonsense that you have been PMing to myself and the rest of the moderation/admin team all day.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Surely we don't need to know the answer to something in order to be able to debate it? Otherwise theologians and philosophers would need to find new professions.

Or at the very least, new titles.

Ozzy3213 wrote:And by ephemeral you mean, you ask a question, we give you the answer and that's the end of it.

We all know that wouldn't happen, because you can never just let things go. GreyGhost is banned, end of. Why does it matter to anybody else why? He knows why, that is it, no other discussion is required.

You have been PM'd with an answer to your question, so how about letting it go now and stop with the EFS type twitter nonsense that you have been PMing to myself and the rest of the moderation/admin team all day.

And I have responded to my PM. And the reason I have had to PM loads of people is because I failed to get a sensible reply.

Sent Box: Re: GG
Adam D (Hobo) - Today at 2:35 pm

GG
Y I Man - Today at 1:25 pm

GG
Adam D (Hobo) - Today at 1:25 pm

GG
Ozzy3213 - Today at 1:25 pm

GG
Kiwireddevil - Today at 1:25 pm

GG
rugbydreamer - Today at 1:25 pm

Re: The Grey Ghost
Adam D (Hobo) - Today at 11:06 am

Re: The Grey Ghost
Kiwireddevil - Today at 11:06 am

Re: The Grey Ghost
Ozzy3213 - Today at 11:06 am

Re: The Grey Ghost
rugbydreamer - Today at 11:06 am

Re: The Grey Ghost
Y I Man - Today at 11:06 am

The Grey Ghost
Ozzy3213 - Today at 10:43 am

The Grey Ghost
Adam D (Hobo) - Today at 10:43 am

The Grey Ghost
Y I Man - Today at 10:43 am

The Grey Ghost
Kiwireddevil - Today at 10:43 am

The Grey Ghost
rugbydreamer - Today at 10:43 am

RU: Grey Ghost
rugbydreamer - Yesterday at 10:47 pm

RU: Grey Ghost
Ozzy3213 - Yesterday at 10:29 pm

RU: Grey Ghost
Kiwireddevil - Yesterday at 10:29 pm

RU: Grey Ghost
Adam D (Hobo) - Yesterday at 9:17 pm

RU: Grey Ghost
Adam D (Hobo) - Yesterday at 9:10 pm

Inbox:

Re: GG
Adam D (Hobo) - Today at 1:33 pm

Re: RU: Grey Ghost
Ozzy3213 - Today at 8:55 am

No, what you mean is you failed to get the reply that you wanted, that is vastly different to failing to get a sensible reply.

Portnoy wrote:

Glas a du wrote:

greybeard wrote:

Portnoy wrote:That's not a forum. It's a stalag.

This place is a stalag in the same way Samoa's RWC fixtures were akin to slavery and the holocaust.

Listen to you the voice of the hegemony

Me? the hegemony?

Possibly the reverse Glas. You might need to look it up.

I wasn't talking to you brother comrade

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Surely we don't need to know the answer to something in order to be able to debate it? Otherwise theologians and philosophers would need to find new professions.

Aha, what about existentialists? Or are you saying that is an invalid philosophy?

What do you have against invalids, Glas? Does Prop know how you feel?

Why are you being nasty to me Lucky? Is it because I ask questions that nobody else wants to and demand answers? Is this a conspiracy you and your cabal of coloured plaque running dogs are hatching against the proletariat?

Ozzy3213 wrote:No, what you mean is you failed to get the reply that you wanted, that is vastly different to failing to get a sensible reply.

Sorry Oz, the reply I got was just asking for further investigation.

"Yes he has been banned and no there is no published explanation."

Portnoy

Please explain to me why you feel there should be published explanations as to why individuals are banned from the site?

You are I presume aware that he is not the only person to have been banned from this forum? The house rules are there for all to see. If you continually breach them you get banned. it is not rocket science.

Cardiff Taffy wrote:Good to see the IRB have been using there time well Morons.

this is true....if the IRB concentrated more on getting rid of the crappy referees and less time on trivia like this, our game would be in much better shape.

Trivia? I am asking a fundamental question as to why a fellow poster was banned! Trivial indeed!

Glas a du wrote:Why are you being nasty to me Lucky? Is it because I ask questions that nobody else wants to and demand answers? Is this a conspiracy you and your cabal of coloured plaque running dogs are hatching against the proletariat?

This is equal parts amusing and baffling!

The IRB maybe felt obliged to enforce some fine given that they only introduced the penalty fairly recently.
If nothing else, the fine should go to some good cause - I would suggest an NZ earthquake fund (I am sure there are plenty).
Actually France could really make the IRB look bad by coming out and say they will pay this fine, but to a specific charity and not to the IRB.

Portnoy wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:No, what you mean is you failed to get the reply that you wanted, that is vastly different to failing to get a sensible reply.

Sorry Oz, the reply I got was just asking for further investigation.

"Yes he has been banned and no there is no published explanation."

Portnoy, GG was an arch wum whose mask regularly slipped to reveal a very real and nasty dislike of the English. When he wanted to talk about rugby or wind up the English a bit, he was good value. I'm not so precious or patriotic to be easily offended, but he said plenty of things that were way beyond that. When he knew he'd done so the false bonhomie he displayed was utterly transparent.

I know plenty of people on here thought he had some fine, dry wit. But as the Mods keep telling you, if you break the house rules, you;re gone. You can probably take your pick of incidences where he did this.

Was it because he is grey?

I think the IRB are looking for any excuse to fine anyone they can just to swell their coffers!

Portnoy wrote:I never thought it was a democracy As.

I presumed that it was a forum for airing views.

Sadly I appear to be wrong as an article on pondering how NZers would feel after scraping home at home has been pulled.

Apparently the Central Committee didn't approve though.

Rule 1. The management's decision is final.

Rule 2. In any dispute refer to Rule 1.

Its more benevolent dictatorshup than Politburo but yes there is certainly some major empire builders amongst the Mods and Admin team

I understand the freedom of speech line and all but do we want a forum a la the old 606 where sometimes it degenerated into a personal slug fest?

People like GG and old MikeyPhil had their comical moments but there was always a nasty edge that would surface all too often.

If someone came into our house as a guest and spent the evening insulting some people with cheap shots wouldnt we all tell them to please leave?

tigerleghorn wrote:I understand the freedom of speech line and all but do we want a forum a la the old 606 where sometimes it degenerated into a personal slug fest?

People like GG and old MikeyPhil had their comical moments but there was always a nasty edge that would surface all too often.

If someone came into our house as a guest and spent the evening insulting some people with cheap shots wouldnt we all tell them to please leave?

If it were my house I'd knock them out and put them by the bins.

tigerleghorn wrote:I understand the freedom of speech line and all but do we want a forum a la the old 606 where sometimes it degenerated into a personal slug fest?

People like GG and old MikeyPhil had their comical moments but there was always a nasty edge that would surface all too often.

If someone came into our house as a guest and spent the evening insulting some people with cheap shots wouldnt we all tell them to please leave?

But that is the whole point it is not their house, it is our house, we make it a forum, they 'rule' it like a personal fiefdom

Time for a UN declaration and an arab spring

Infidels! Boing-boing.

Gatts, how many people post on this forum? How many have expressed an objection to TGG's exclusion?

The silent majority would appear to be in favour of the Mods response. I am.

Are you against TGG's exclusion or just the process? He was mad as a box of frogs with a touch of racism thrown in!

Silent majorities can be strange beasts. Usually the ones shouting the most are the unsilent minorities. As an England fan (and let's be honest, it was England who bore the brunt of TGG's rants), I'd be more than happy to see him back.

Perhaps it's time for the silent majority to speak up

tigerleghorn wrote:Gatts, how many people post on this forum? How many have expressed an objection to TGG's exclusion?

The silent majority would appear to be in favour of the Mods response. I am.

Are you against TGG's exclusion or just the process? He was mad as a box of frogs with a touch of racism thrown in!

Agree entirely. figure i can take a joke, but TGG said some pretty hateful stuff that was glossed over far too readily.

For everyone saying 'it's a forum to post your opinions' - of course, but if those opinions display casual racism, it's probably right to draw a line. And the problem with TGG is he rarely posted rugby related opinions. When he did he was good value, he should have stuck to that.