I believe Ashley Fletcher has signed for Huddersfield on a free 🙂

7 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

More than you managed to do with Eddie's quote...

You say you don't take words seriously when written on the internet

You time and time again show that you clearly do

Finnegans Wake is far more interesting than your posts

1 minute ago, Sluffy said:

I can answer that easily, I never banned anyone who ever abused me.

It's just sticks and stones to me.

And people have called the mods on here names before and have been instantly banned, maybe it's different now under you?

Maybe you should check back why I was banned on here 6/7 years ago, and that wasn't because I was being abusive to anyone.

Anyway I've said what the score is with me, if people don't want to believe it, that's up to them.

just going back over the last few pages

plenty discussion going on

you replied to Eddie, decent post

then you reply to Feelgood

was a decent reply until

"I will look forward to you bitching about the length of this post and seeking to get me banned yet again, even though I wrote it specifically to reply to your point...

Have a nice day"

and then follow up with

"Doesn't bother me what he thinks or does, I don't get upset at shit on social media like he, you and many others do.

Thing is I saw something I thought I could help him with, and because I don't sulk, or care what he's said and done before, I was happy enough to try my best to help him.

After I posted my reply it struck me how it left him - does he thank me (not that I care if he did or didn't) or would he complain that I wrote yet another 'long' post even though it was to help him?

I just saw the irony it the situation.

I tried to help the bloke, you know turn the other cheek sort of thing and then realised the irony has I've said, what does he do next, ignore my post or complain about the length of it as per usual."

a lot of thought went into that for someone who doesn't take seriously or care what other people think

you refer to posts as helping someone, or your "work" and whether or not you get likes or thanked or not

You're over thinking things and want it to be about you, and your posts reflect that

you won't get banned because someone wants you to be

just be aware that you're protesting too much as to as to how serious you take it, how much your care about what people think

if someone moans, a quick fuck off will suffice

if people go on about how long your posts are, it's because they are, and you don't like being called out for it and it's them who had the problem

again, a quick fuck off and move on

stop harping on about folk following you with grudges, accusing folk of being someone else etc

because you're not helping yourself or the forum

You're not getting banned because of what other people might think about you

wind it in

15 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

More than you managed to do with Eddie's quote...

that's better see

Just now, Zico said:

that's better see

Let me try and make myself clear then

I'm not the "fuck off" response type of guy, I was taught that swearing showed a lack of vocabulary, I prefer to make any put downs I may happen to make as humorous as I can.

I'm not the type of person who believes anything I read on social media to be true without checking it out. I extend that to others too, in that they should not take anything I say as being factual also (because I can and do make mistakes).

I am serious about serious things - threat to democracy, global warming, meaningless wars killing innocent people, etc

I also have a modicum of intelligence, I saw an irony in writing a 'long' explanation, intended to be 'helpful' to someone who strives to get me banned for writing 'long explanations' - that wasn't me putting "a lot of thought" into it, it was simply my sense of humour and playfulness coming to the fore.

I'm interested in the accounts (but my background is in the public sector where shares dealing isn't applicable) I try to understand them the best I can, and in light of others who are professionals in this field, not willing to put their reputations on the line, I do my best to share what knowledge I have with others - I link back to people not necessarily 'believing' what I say without doing their own research because I do and have got things wrong.

So even the things I do take seriously 'on the internet' are only at best my opinions, as there is nothing I can say or do that can changing anything, and as such they are just 'empty words in the ether'.

And all the rest about people wanting to get me band, never ending arguments, not liking my 'internet persona' spending hours of anx over should we have a loan keeper or not are just all meaningless to my way of looking at things but I don't go around seeking that people get banned for doing so.

So if my serious 'stuff' is meaningless (they are only my opinions, not actions or deeds), and the rest is just folk "fucking around" then would it not be true to say that I don't taking anything serious on here, and if so why do folk seem to believe it is "all about me" and how do my posts "reflect that"?

If anything it's the other way around, people are seeing something in how I post that simply is not there.

I tried to help someone who would love to get me banned and realised in doing so it created an unintended irony for him, which simply amused me.

That's all there honestly was.

It's pretty clear that people don't know how to take me, they are just expecting a "fuck off" from me and it's confused them because I've not done so.

Anyway, that's how I see myself on social media, a place to chat shit and have a laugh.

It's not real life to me although I suspect it is to many folk these days.

1 hour ago, DirtySanchez said:

You say you don't take words seriously when written on the internet

You time and time again show that you clearly do

Finnegans Wake is far more interesting than your posts

And Ulysses more than yours...

21 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Let me try and make myself clear then

I'm not the "fuck off" response type of guy, I was taught that swearing showed a lack of vocabulary, I prefer to make any put downs I may happen to make as humorous as I can.

I'm not the type of person who believes anything I read on social media to be true without checking it out. I extend that to others too, in that they should not take anything I say as being factual also (because I can and do make mistakes).

I am serious about serious things - threat to democracy, global warming, meaningless wars killing innocent people, etc

I also have a modicum of intelligence, I saw an irony in writing a 'long' explanation, intended to be 'helpful' to someone who strives to get me banned for writing 'long explanations' - that wasn't me putting "a lot of thought" into it, it was simply my sense of humour and playfulness coming to the fore.

I'm interested in the accounts (but my background is in the public sector where shares dealing isn't applicable) I try to understand them the best I can, and in light of others who are professionals in this field, not willing to put their reputations on the line, I do my best to share what knowledge I have with others - I link back to people not necessarily 'believing' what I say without doing their own research because I do and have got things wrong.

So even the things I do take seriously 'on the internet' are only at best my opinions, as there is nothing I can say or do that can changing anything, and as such they are just 'empty words in the ether'.

And all the rest about people wanting to get me band, never ending arguments, not liking my 'internet persona' spending hours of anx over should we have a loan keeper or not are just all meaningless to my way of looking at things but I don't go around seeking that people get banned for doing so.

So if my serious 'stuff' is meaningless (they are only my opinions, not actions or deeds), and the rest is just folk "fucking around" then would it not be true to say that I don't taking anything serious on here, and if so why do folk seem to believe it is "all about me" and how do my posts "reflect that"?

If anything it's the other way around, people are seeing something in how I post that simply is not there.

I tried to help someone who would love to get me banned and realised in doing so it created an unintended irony for him, which simply amused me.

That's all there honestly was.

It's pretty clear that people don't know how to take me, they are just expecting a "fuck off" from me and it's confused them because I've not done so.

Anyway, that's how I see myself on social media, a place to chat shit and have a laugh.

It's not real life to me although I suspect it is to many folk these days.

You can have all those so called qualities

But one I was told

Know your audience

Just now, DirtySanchez said:

You can have all those so called qualities

But one I was told

Know your audience

Which would be good advice if I were to be playing to an audience,

But I'm not.

7 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Which would be good advice if I were to be playing to an audience,

But I'm not.

Probably because no one is interested

Just now, DirtySanchez said:

Probably because no one is interested

Probably because I post for myself and not to seek to please others.

4 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Probably because I post for myself and not to seek to please others.

After I posted my reply it struck me how it left him - does he thank me (not that I care if he did or didn't) or would he complain that I wrote yet another 'long' post even though it was to help him?

I just saw the irony it the situation.

I tried to help the bloke, you know turn the other cheek sort of thing and then realised the irony has I've said, what does he do next, ignore my post or complain about the length of it as per usual."

You clearly don't post for yourself

1 minute ago, DirtySanchez said:

After I posted my reply it struck me how it left him - does he thank me (not that I care if he did or didn't) or would he complain that I wrote yet another 'long' post even though it was to help him?

I just saw the irony it the situation.

I tried to help the bloke, you know turn the other cheek sort of thing and then realised the irony has I've said, what does he do next, ignore my post or complain about the length of it as per usual."

You clearly don't post for yourself

I do.

I posted my thoughts about the irony.

That's all.

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

Anyway, that's how I see myself on social media, a place to chat shit and have a laugh.

5 hours ago, Zico said:

I've been looking after this site for 6 years and not been abused or called anything

What a Thruster ! Just had to be the first !!!

37 minutes ago, Krimzon said:

What a Thruster ! Just had to be the first !!!

sounds like a compliment to me, thank you

6 hours ago, Sluffy said:

in light of others who are professionals in this field, not willing to put their reputations on the line

Assuming I'm one of those this is aimed at. If this is a social media site for messing about as you keep asserting then why would commenting by 'putting my reputation on the line?' My work is entirely seperate from stuff on here.

Clubs generally lose money, 'Investors'/Directors tip up money through the year to cover negative cash flow, those loans get converted to equity (these days). I dont need to look at the accounts to know that.

So the truth is I just cant be arsed looking and you throwing down the gauntlet only makes me less likely to bother.

Edited July 11Jul 11 by RoadRunnerFan

Right, now that’s sorted can we just get back to the point of this thread unless of course we’re considering transferring or sending on loan, Sluffy to another teams forum? 🙂

3 hours ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Assuming I'm one of those this is aimed at. If this is a social media site for messing about as you keep asserting then why would commenting by 'putting my reputation on the line?' My work is entirely seperate from stuff on here.

Clubs generally lose money, 'Investors'/Directors tip up money through the year to cover negative cash flow, those loans get converted to equity (these days). I dont need to look at the accounts to know that.

So the truth is I just cant be arsed looking and you throwing down the gauntlet only makes me less likely to bother.

In simple words.

You know that.

You haven't share your knowledge .

I didn't know that.

I've had to learn it.

I've simply shared what I've learned to fill the vacuum (my return was allowed to answer someone's question about the finances)

Why do I share it?

Because most folk have a no understanding between reality and fantasy when it comes to the legality and the fiscality of how clubs actually are required to operate.

Some are interested.

Most are not.

I've have zero jeopardy in being wrong...

Wolves just signed a winger from Liege for £7.75M, he was also at Troyes at the same time as our loan signing Kyliane Dong.

13 hours ago, Sluffy said:

Look for what it is worth over the years I've been a mod on The Wanders, Burnden Aces and Bolton Nuts,

Once, all happy, thriving forums, then you turned up. How are they all doing now?

You're the Owen Coyle of Wanderers' forums. I'm hoping the board suss you quickly and get rid before this forum goes the same way.

And ANOTHER thread ruined.

One used to be safe on this side of the board from the insufferable arguments that ruin BTS, but it looks like its been brought to this side too.

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

Because most folk have a no understanding between reality and fantasy when it comes to the legality and the fiscality of how clubs actually are required to operate.

Everybody knows clubs lose money in the main. A tiny minority of people care how this is reflected on the balance sheet - so I'll stick to my usual topics of football and obscure 'in jokes' and cultural references thanks.

As an aside the term fiscal relates to taxation and public expenditure.

'A little learning is a dangerous thing.'

I'll leave it at that.

Edited July 11Jul 11 by RoadRunnerFan

8 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

And ANOTHER thread ruined.

One used to be safe on this side of the board from the insufferable arguments that ruin BTS, but it looks like its been brought to this side too.

Yep, it's like an infection spreading across all threads until eventually everything's completely strangled by insufferable shite

9 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

Once, all happy, thriving forums, then you turned up. How are they all doing now?

You're the Owen Coyle of Wanderers' forums. I'm hoping the board suss you quickly and get rid before this forum goes the same way.

How appropriate!

When I was a little kid my mother used to call me a 'duck egg' when I said anything silly.

Forums were one of the first forms of popular social media platforms and have long been superseded by Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and all the rest of the plethora of new developments and trends in popularity and usage.

Regrettably forums have been very much of a quaint and niche market for many years now for those of us who still partake in using them.

There is really only a hardcore of us left, nearly all of us I would suggest have been a member of a forum for the best part of 15 to 20 years or more, there's very little new blood joining and becoming regular contributors anymore.

Even this forum has declined overtime too in respect of participation, you only have to look at some of the old threads in the archives to see how many past regulars no longer post on here anymore.

Times change, people move on, do different things, and fewer and fewer of us remain to be posters on a forum.

It is simply the lifecycle of any product

9 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Everybody knows clubs lose money in the main. A tiny minority of people care how this is reflected on the balance sheet - so I'll stick to my usual topics football and obscure 'in jokes' and cultural references thanks.

As an aside the term fiscal relates to taxation and public expenditure.

'A little learning is a dangerous thing.'

I'll leave it at that.

Indeed it is...

fiscal

1 of 2

adjective

1 : of or relating to taxation, public revenues, or public debt

2 : of or relating to financial matters

FISCAL Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

Search results for 'fiscal':

fiscal adj 1 belonging or relating to government finances or revenue. 2 belonging or relating to financial matters generally. noun, Scottish a procurator fiscal. fiscally adverb.
ETYMOLOGY: 16c: from Latin fiscus rush-basket or purse.

Chambers – Search Chambers

23 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Everybody knows clubs lose money in the main. A tiny minority of people care how this is reflected on the balance sheet

If I had to guess it's because our outgoings are more than our incomings. Am I right?