(That long since we've had any, couldn't find the thread)

Alan Nixon: "Top Liverpool starlet Cameron Branagan will Ben allowed out on loan in Jan.

Bolton lead the race for the 20 year old midfielder"

Edited December 11, 20169 yr by Ratwhite

20 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I'm not being mournful mate?

You do know what lugubrious means don't you?

It means looking or sounding excessively sad or melancholy.

19 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

@Sluffy re loquacity

It can relate to written comms in a secondary way.

Very much like fiscal relates to taxation and public expenditure primarily and a more generalised financial term in a secondary sense.

You are either in favour of exact terms or more of a generalist, make your mind up.

I'm in favour of the dictionary definition.

loquacity

1. the state of being loquacious; talkativeness; garrulity

2. an instance of talkativeness or garrulity; a loquacious flow of talk The sherry increased my loquacity

LOQUACITY definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

loquacity

the quality or state of being very talkative

LOQUACITY Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

Can't find anything so far that it relates to the written word...?

@Sluffy One minute you are all loose and relaxed on definitions then you want the exact one.

I can be a bit of a stickler to be fair.

Make your mind up or better still just stop being such a gobshite.

2 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

@Sluffy One minute you are all loose and relaxed on definitions then you want the exact one.

I can be a bit of a stickler to be fair.

Make your mind up or better still just stop being such a gobshite.

I'm quite happy if loquacity relates to the written word, but up to now I can't find any dictionary that defines the word that way.

If you can find one that does define the word that way then by all means provide a link to it and then we can all happily move on.

If you care to examine the link to Collins dictionary I've provided in my earlier post it states the origin of the word...

Word origin

[1595–1605; ‹ Lloquācitāstalkativeness, equiv. toloquāci-, s. ofloquāxtalkative (deriv. ofloquīto speak; cf.eloquent) +-tās-ty²]

And am I a gobshite as I'm just being a stickler in the same way you are.

Look I don't know why it always seems to get like this. Wakey has yet another little dig at me but this time I call him out over it, Zog chips in with some long words, so I query if he actually understands the words he's used, then you come piling in because I proved you wrong recently on a definition and you've decide to prove me wrong on one now.

Thing is, up to now you can't and decided to call me a gobshite instead???

All of this is over nothing at all other than Wakey and you having some bruised ego or something, on the internet.

It's pathetic really, I can't understand why grown men get so worked up over fuck all on something said on an innocuous little footy forum?

None of this actually matters to me in the slightest but it clearly does to you two (I take it that Zog was only having a laugh, which is fair enough) but you two clearly have taken things personally.

For Christ sake this is the internet not real life.

If you both get so wound up with me on here then God knows what you are like with real people, in the real world?

Christ 🤣

me:

can loquacity relate to written communication

gemini:

The short answer is yes, absolutely.

While the word loquacity (or loquaciousness) comes from the Latin root loqui (meaning "to speak") and traditionally refers to talkativeness in conversation, its meaning has long since expanded. In modern usage, it is frequently used to describe written communication that is excessively wordy, rambling, or verbose.

When applied to writing, it is often used interchangeably with terms like verbosity, prolixity, or simply being "long-winded."

Loquacity in Action: Written vs. Spoken

Here is how the concept translates across both mediums:

Attribute	Spoken Loquacity (Talkativeness)	Written Loquacity (Verbosity)
The Behavior	Dominating conversations, speaking without pausing, or taking too long to make a point.	Using 100 words when 10 would do; over-explaining simple concepts; excessive filler.
The Impact	The listener loses focus or struggles to get a word in edgewise.	The reader loses interest, skims the text, or misses the core message entirely.
Common Venues	Social gatherings, long-winded meetings, or phone calls.	Overly dense emails, academic papers, or "fluff-filled" blog posts.

Why Written Loquacity Happens

In writing, loquacity usually isn't just about "talking too much." It typically stems from a few specific habits:

• The "Academic" Trap: Believing that complex, multi-clause sentences and rare vocabulary make the writing sound smarter or more authoritative.

• Lack of Revision: It is much easier to write a long, rambling paragraph than it is to edit it down to a sharp, concise sentence. (As the famous saying goes: "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.")

• Fear of Being Incomplete: Over-explaining every possible nuance or edge case because you worry the reader won't understand.

The Golden Rule of Writing: Good writing is like a good conversation — it respects the reader's time. If a word isn't adding value, it's just noise.

sluquacity

5 minutes ago, Zico said:

me:

can loquacity relate to written communication

Yes, very good but it still isn't a dictionary definition is it...

loquacity

the fact of talking a lot:

LOQUACITY | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary

loquacity

Search results for ' loquacity':

loquacity noun talkativeness.
ETYMOLOGY: 17c: from French loquacité.

Chambers – Search Chambers

To be honest I'm not really bothered, more to the point is that there's clearly are people on here very wound up about me.

I've no idea why but they aren't going to change are they?

How about if I offer up an open-ended apology for anything I might have said or done on the internet that has clearly got under their skin so much so that it has affected them in their behaviour towards me in their real lives?

Would that be enough for them to draw a line under everything and help them move on with their lives or are we going to get this sort of behaviour every few days or so, as we are getting now?

So here is my apology, I'm sorry that I've upset you in some way or other, can we all now move on please.

Well what do you say?

It is the internet when all said and done for fuck sake!

It is not real life and should not be treated by you as being in anyway real.

Schuey seemed quite confident of getting another new body in this week but so far it seems to have gone very quiet on that front so I wonder if whatever it was has fallen through or is just taking longer? Hopefully now the World Cups pretty much over things will move on a pace.

29 minutes ago, Whitesince63 said:

Schuey seemed quite confident of getting another new body in this week but so far it seems to have gone very quiet on that front so I wonder if whatever it was has fallen through or is just taking longer? Hopefully now the World Cups pretty much over things will move on a pace.

'Gone very quiet' compared to ?? Surely you know thats the general way our business is done plus its only thursday morning!

33 minutes ago, Whitesince63 said:

Schuey seemed quite confident of getting another new body in this week but so far it seems to have gone very quiet on that front so I wonder if whatever it was has fallen through or is just taking longer? Hopefully now the World Cups pretty much over things will move on a pace.

Time yet.

We have done a fair amount of business already, so I'm not unduly concerned.

7 weeks since Wembley and we’ve brought 5 in.

Another 7 weeks until the transfer window closes and suspect we need another 5 or so.

Plenty of time yet even if we have to start with what we’ve got.

I’d be surprised if a couple of decent loans haven’t already been lined up but the players are going through pre season at their club.

24 minutes ago, W.cramp said:

'Gone very quiet' compared to ?? Surely you know thats the general way our business is done plus its only thursday morning!

Just that Schuey said he was hoping for another in this week and yes of course it’s still only Thursday and there’s still time but I took it to mean that he’d have whoever in for their training week over there. Still time I suppose but I’d expected at least a trialist or two whilst in Europe but I’ve seen no word of that. Now the WC is nearly finished everybody can hopefully concentrate on domestic matters?

7 hours ago, Sluffy said:

1. Look I don't know why it always seems to get like this.

2. Wakey has yet another little dig at me but this time I call him out over it,

3. For Christ sake this is the internet not real life.

1. there seems to be one common thread

2. you posted a lengthy missive then ended it with "but I don't care". T responded to another poster to say I also didn't care and demonstrated my lack of interest by not writing lengthy posts. If you take that as hounding you because of some age old vendetta I'd suggest forums aren't the place for you.

3. and a point we can both happily agree on, although I'm sceptical that you really mean it.

I'll disagree or take the piss out of your posts in exactly the same way I would with any other posters, but if you want to think it's down to some old grudge then crack on.

This thread is about transfer gossip so why in transfer gossip have we got people having a go at others which is nothing to do with the thread. I read this thread because I want to see transfer gossip not babies fighting. Sluffy is entitled to post what he feels is relevant to the thread if people don’t like him or thinks he waffles then scroll past it.

We are all grown men act like it

6 hours ago, Sluffy said:

It is the internet when all said and done for fuck sake!

It is not real life and should not be treated by you as being in anyway real.

I'm not quite sure what point you want to make when you keep saying this

it's not like it's a forum for cosplaying, where we meet at the weekends, take on different personas and re-enact historical or ficitonal battles, or are playing magic the gathering or something

everything we talking about is real - the club, transfers, games, poltics, wars, films, etc

the internet is just a medium that allows us to do it conviniently on our device of choice

ok, some may use it to vent in a way they may not do in real life, or don't get the chance to, or they don't conduct themselves with friends or strangers in the way they do on here, but I wouldn't say that makes it fake, or meaningless

all the views and opinons and takes on the things I discuss on here are real, discussing them with real people, many of whom I know in real life and see at the match

i'm not pretending to be anyone else

if it's not real life to you, why do you spend so much time composing your thoughts and opinions in attempt, as you put it, to help people - if it's not real, why even try?

This place is now as much fun as watching Gareth Southgate take his Thomas Tuchel mask off.

19 minutes ago, Flannel Truscott said:

This place is now as much fun as watching Gareth Southgate take his Thomas Tuchel mask off.

yeah

that said

do you go on the other side of the forum?

Friday nights with Miami or Royals epics with London and Cheese?

it's what the internet is for

my take is

if you don't like the sluquacity, just skim past

folk know what he's like, and what triggers him, so if they keep on doing it, he will keep on doing it

that said

i don't want it to spread into every thread like, and will make sure it doesn't (and no, i don't mean via a ban)

it takes two to tango

don't be the other one

"Co-Pilots" thoughts on Sluffy:

Based solely on this excerpt, I'd say Sluffy comes across more as a highly argumentative and pedantic poster than an obvious "wind-up merchant."

A few observations:

Signs that don't strongly suggest trolling

• He generally responds to the substance of points being made (loan contracts, options to buy, player transfers).

• He doesn't appear to be deliberately posting outrageous opinions just to provoke reactions.

• He often tries to justify his position with examples or explanations rather than simply insulting people.

Signs that make people react to him

• He is very literal and pedantic ("loquacity relates to speech", "dripping tap or spews, can't be both").

• He appears sensitive to criticism and repeatedly frames comments as people "having a pop" at him.

• He tends to prolong arguments rather than letting them die.

• He often adopts a slightly condescending tone ("How stupid of you", "You do know what lugubrious means don't you?"), which can irritate other posters.

The reaction of other members

What's notable is that multiple posters seem frustrated with him:

• wakey repeatedly mocks his posting style.

• Zog1 makes jokes about him being long-winded.

• only1swanny refers to a "know it all Nigel."

That suggests he's developed a reputation on the forum, whether deserved or not.

My verdict

If I were moderating a forum, I probably wouldn't classify Sluffy as a classic troll/wind-up merchant from this page alone. A classic wind-up merchant usually posts things mainly to provoke and harvest reactions.

Instead, Sluffy looks more like:

An intelligent, argumentative, verbose poster who enjoys being right, takes criticism personally, and has long-running feuds with other members.

The result is similar—threads get dragged off-topic and people become irritated—but the motivation appears more like defending his position than deliberately trolling.

From this page alone, I'd rate him:

• Pedant: 9/10

• Argumentative: 8/10

• Victim mentality: 7/10

• Deliberate wind-up merchant: 4–5/10

1 minute ago, auckland_bwfc said:

"Co-Pilots" thoughts on Sluffy:

Based solely on this excerpt, I'd say Sluffy comes across more as a highly argumentative and pedantic poster than an obvious "wind-up merchant."

A few observations:

Signs that don't strongly suggest trolling

• He generally responds to the substance of points being made (loan contracts, options to buy, player transfers).

• He doesn't appear to be deliberately posting outrageous opinions just to provoke reactions.

• He often tries to justify his position with examples or explanations rather than simply insulting people.

Signs that make people react to him

• He is very literal and pedantic ("loquacity relates to speech", "dripping tap or spews, can't be both").

• He appears sensitive to criticism and repeatedly frames comments as people "having a pop" at him.

• He tends to prolong arguments rather than letting them die.

• He often adopts a slightly condescending tone ("How stupid of you", "You do know what lugubrious means don't you?"), which can irritate other posters.

The reaction of other members

What's notable is that multiple posters seem frustrated with him:

• wakey repeatedly mocks his posting style.

• Zog1 makes jokes about him being long-winded.

• only1swanny refers to a "know it all Nigel."

That suggests he's developed a reputation on the forum, whether deserved or not.

My verdict

If I were moderating a forum, I probably wouldn't classify Sluffy as a classic troll/wind-up merchant from this page alone. A classic wind-up merchant usually posts things mainly to provoke and harvest reactions.

Instead, Sluffy looks more like:

The result is similar—threads get dragged off-topic and people become irritated—but the motivation appears more like defending his position than deliberately trolling.

From this page alone, I'd rate him:

• Pedant: 9/10

• Argumentative: 8/10

• Victim mentality: 7/10

• Deliberate wind-up merchant: 4–5/10

do @Cheese next

Just now, Zico said:

do @Cheese next

that might end AI before it gets fully started :D

Revised assessment: Cheese - BASED on the ann widdecombe thread:

Wind-up merchant: 8/10
Troll: 6–7/10
Genuine political beliefs: 8/10

The reason the troll score has gone up is that he's no longer just mocking arguments—he's increasingly mocking the people themselves.

The key pattern

Notice how the discussion repeatedly returns to the topic, but Cheese repeatedly returns to Athy.

For example:

Athy says:

"I am not thick nor am I a racist"

Cheese replies:

"Cracked the case yet? Was she murdered by an immigrant, like you were hoping?"

That's not really a rebuttal to anything Athy has just written.

It's designed to:

• provoke;

• imply motive;

• get a reaction.

And it works immediately.

Athy responds:

"cretinous little cnut"

Cheese then follows with:

"I'll take that as a 'no' then. How disappointing for you."

That's classic bait-and-hook behaviour.

Why I think he's not a pure troll

A pure troll usually insults everyone.

Cheese doesn't.

His targets are very specific:

• Athy

• Bolty

• TMGJ

He seems to have decided these posters represent a particular worldview that he dislikes.

His behaviour looks more like:

"I'm here to mock these people"

rather than

"I'm here to create chaos among everyone."

Most revealing post

For me, this one is quite telling:

"Ey up, Athy has posted - there must be an advert break on GBNews."

The joke isn't responding to the content.

The joke is:

"I know exactly what type of person you are."

That's social-status trolling rather than debate.

How forum regulars probably see him

I suspect the forum is divided into two camps.

One group likely sees Cheese as:

"Someone who calls out nonsense."

The other group likely sees him as:

"An arrogant gobshite who contributes very little except insults."

The interesting thing is that both descriptions can be true simultaneously.

What Cheese appears to enjoy

In order:

1. Mocking perceived conspiracy theories.

2. Mocking GB News.

3. Mocking posters he considers gullible.

4. Getting a reaction.

5. Winning social battles.

Actual persuasion appears much lower on the list.

The Firthy accusation

The accusation about him being an older poster ("Firthy") is interesting because it suggests other members see a recurring pattern:

• same posting style;

• same attention-seeking behaviour;

• same way of winding people up.

Whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

The fact other posters make that accusation implies:

Cheese already has a reputation on the forum.

Final verdict

If you asked me:

"Is Cheese a wind-up merchant?"

I'd now answer:

Yes, absolutely.

But I'd add an important qualifier:

He isn't a random nonsense troll. He's a politically-engaged poster with genuine opinions who has developed a forum persona based around sarcasm, mockery, and provoking specific opponents.

In football-forum terms, he's less:

"village idiot troll"

and more:

"smart-arse sniper who enjoys making people lose their temper."

And judging by these exchanges, he's very good at getting exactly the reaction he's looking for.

13 minutes ago, auckland_bwfc said:

Revised assessment: Cheese - BASED on the ann widdecombe thread:

Wind-up merchant: 8/10
Troll: 6–7/10
Genuine political beliefs: 8/10

The reason the troll score has gone up is that he's no longer just mocking arguments—he's increasingly mocking the people themselves.

The key pattern

Notice how the discussion repeatedly returns to the topic, but Cheese repeatedly returns to Athy.

For example:

Athy says:

Cheese replies:

That's not really a rebuttal to anything Athy has just written.

It's designed to:

• provoke;

• imply motive;

• get a reaction.

And it works immediately.

Athy responds:

Cheese then follows with:

That's classic bait-and-hook behaviour.

Why I think he's not a pure troll

A pure troll usually insults everyone.

Cheese doesn't.

His targets are very specific:

• Athy

• Bolty

• TMGJ

He seems to have decided these posters represent a particular worldview that he dislikes.

His behaviour looks more like:

rather than

Most revealing post

For me, this one is quite telling:

The joke isn't responding to the content.

The joke is:

That's social-status trolling rather than debate.

How forum regulars probably see him

I suspect the forum is divided into two camps.

One group likely sees Cheese as:

The other group likely sees him as:

The interesting thing is that both descriptions can be true simultaneously.

What Cheese appears to enjoy

In order:

1. Mocking perceived conspiracy theories.

2. Mocking GB News.

3. Mocking posters he considers gullible.

4. Getting a reaction.

5. Winning social battles.

Actual persuasion appears much lower on the list.

The Firthy accusation

The accusation about him being an older poster ("Firthy") is interesting because it suggests other members see a recurring pattern:

• same posting style;

• same attention-seeking behaviour;

• same way of winding people up.

Whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

The fact other posters make that accusation implies:

Final verdict

If you asked me:

I'd now answer:

Yes, absolutely.

But I'd add an important qualifier:

In football-forum terms, he's less:

and more:

And judging by these exchanges, he's very good at getting exactly the reaction he's looking for.

now do @bolty58