FILTERED

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

We try and debate formations, who should play etc then it just turns into a massive bun fight over who thinks the manager is a, (CENSORED As Per Para 127 of the Communications Act 2003), and who doesn't.

Nobody ever really comments on the humourous threads anymore, nor the fun filled questions of players & moments of yesteryear.

It's interesting that some people think 'fun' is abusing posters, winding people up and generally arguing about sod all.

I've been commenting on here and BBC606 for about 5 years now, take Tony Caldwell, for example. He used to come on, try to wind Bricks up and then beggar off. His mate, Carrs Pastie, in my eyes is worse. E will only appear when TC and Bricks are arguing.

This example shows the misuse of this site. It's not here to be funny, it's not even here to ask where you should go on holiday - (I think MT should bog off to Syria and not come back). It's to debate football.

I like to think that I use this site properly by debating football and I've never been banned from it.

TC and MT on the other hand have been banned numerous times for misusing this site. Think about it. Who is in the wrong?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

You've argued and actually sulked when people didn't share your view.... Then deleted people with a manner and air of arrogance...

-------

Stupid plank.

I filtered them because they weren't on topic. I even explained that.

You think my articles were pathetic. At least they were vaguely about BWFC and generally the conversation stayed on that topic - whereas yours have been about going on holiday, and the rest have decended into pally conversations about sweet nothing. You don't debate football. You just want to wind users up an think it's fun. It's frigging boring mate. You're boring. You're worthless to this site, even though you think you're the **** and balls.

Of course I have some details on here. I can't be bothered trailing through articles trying to find out what you've said, some things I've brought in myself, some you have.

Yes, I have details out on here. Take you and HH for example. You both are privy to exactly the same info about me. Why do you choose to abuse that and HH not do so? I'm just asking for a little respect mate. We damn well hate each other, but we should still refrain from sharing personal info.

Off the top of my head, you have quoted details of my physical nature, my work place an my girlfriends physical nature. That's just not on.

I wouldn't describe aspects of your son, would I? I can. I can see his picture...

No, I don't care about you as a person. Not one bit.

I politely ask you to stop sharing my personal details. Even CEF and largehat have the same access to the same details, but once again, they respect my privacy on here. Take a lead from their book, eh!?

*gave x2

Oh, it was your son then.

Your decision to change the picture now confirms it!

Didn't suggest anything. I 'wondered'.

Well, thanks for agreeing to that. Hopefully now that should stop any potential arguments between us and we can get back to 'debating about football'.

It's funny that you need to 'make a deal' with moderators on an Internet forum to be able to use it...

I'm not filtering you. I've said before that it actually would put me - the 'filterer' in a worse position. If I don't filter you, I can see what you're saying about me.

Are you talking to yourself?

IGOR < laugh>

The discussion appears to be happening across 2 threads Making it difficult to follow!!

But why anyone would want to follow it is beyond me.

TRR, this thread makes it impossible for you to maintain any sort of moral high ground.

Everyone knows you and MT don't get on. Everyone knows that Bricks and TCT dont get on.

Not sure I agree with you about the 'anonymity' thing. The internet is an open platform. If you use a bit of imagination and intelligence, you can simply google anyone.

The moment anyone registers on Twitter or Facebook, they make a decision to put themselves out there.

CEF.

Is facebook or twitter anything to do with JA696 though?

Not directly. But all social networks, forums and websites are linked. There is @ja606 and #ja606 on twitter. There is a ja606 page on Facebook. There are buttons on here to post comments and articles to both.

You have used twitter yourself in direct reference to ja606 - today in fact.

D 1 ckheads was something you only typed recently on twitter.

Two separate entities, CEF.

Yes there are buttons on here for facebook and twitter, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people not to sure info from twitter in here.

MT and myself have a mutual agreement on that now, which I am pleased to report. Now we can just get back to hating each other - respectfully...

'D 1 ckheads' could be in reference to people outside of JA606. Your just assuming that I mean MT and there was no direct reference to JA606

Hmmmm. Even if that is the case, there are tweets by you and others that are in direct response to discussions on here. I too have tweeted about ja606 goings-ons.

If we talk on Twitter and on here, there is bound to be cross-over.

So, sorry to say TRR, the two are linked. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Not sure I agree with you about the 'anonymity' thing. The internet is an open platform. If you use a bit of imagination and intelligence, you can simply google anyone.

---

I said the anonymity thing isn't there for a qualified person with the right motives, and they could breach the anonymity thing in minutes.

Using ICMP 'tracert' command on the IP with a few carefully chosen attributes and some determination will reveal an awful lot of sensitive personal information about an internet user, quite legally.

It makes it easier of course to do to a user of a site like burndenaces who reveal the IP of their users if you know where to look. IP's are safe on here, but it's still easy enough of obtain the IP's using something like wireshark software for example.

I have to in my profession for example, cooperated with the authorities/CEOPS where serious criminal activity has occurred, with the permission of/instruction from my client of course, but they always cooperate to save being subject to a court order.

Only governments and their appointed parties, and military get the use of "reserved addresses", class D & E addresses and they are extremely secure but not infallible.

then I really feel sorry for you - and your offspring. I wonde in my future youth work whether I'll be dealing with MT junior.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Bit odd to try and take moral high ground about abuse when in your OP you basically insinuate MT's kid might turn out to be a reprobate? Unless your youth work is going to be with well adjusted kids with a happy homelife and good grades at school. In which case my mistake.

Yes, he and others create non BWFC articles. So what? There's no limit on the number of articles that can be posted in a day, so his holiday article didn't meant another article couldn''t be published.

You can see who writes the OP without going into it, so, if they're one of the people you say you don't respect - why even read it?

WATOAW

I appreciate that you probably haven't read mine and MT's whole 'debate'.

I didn't insinuate anything. I wondered. You can wonder without insinuating or meaning any hard. I wonder if Bolton are going to keep a clean sheet vs Cardiff, for example.

"You can see who writes the OP without going into it, so, if they're one of the people you say you don't respect - why even read it?"

That would normally be a good point, but recently, MT writes lots of stuff with digs at me. Unfortunately, I have to read the article to see this and I only read it because experience suggests that he will mention me at some point.

Anyway. It's all irrelevant now because myself and MT have mutually agreed to basically not mention each other. If we must, I hope we can both refer to each other by our usernames.

Bricks, not sure what you've just said. I imagine you're saying that someone that knows how to, can get sensitive info from anywhere.

I appreciate that. I imagine you yourself could get info about people on here. You may already have, but you have kept that to yourself rather than tell everyone else. It's a sign of respect for other users.

Yes I may have given out some select details about myself and I may be naive to expect that info to not be shared against my best wishes. I don't think, on this forum, that anybody should be in a position to have personal details given out against their wishes...

Anyway. It's all irrelevant now because myself and MT have mutually agreed to basically not mention each other. If we must, I hope we can both refer to each other by our usernames.
------------
But then you keep mentioning him!!! What personal info has MT actually given out that either I couldn't google or that you haven't offered on here yourself????

I have looked back at the original thread which started all this and I am struggling to understand what was disclosed.

CEF.

Sorry fella, but you're not gunna get anything from me on that. I'm mentioning MT because I am explaining to other users our agreement.

Give over trying to get another argument out of this.

Move on. Me and MT have made our deal, now lets play it out.

Thanks.

Better side-step than Ronaldo

It is a fair question, because the whole basis of your grievance is that MT disclosed personal info about you on here.

You created this thread and my comments are on-topic. I am not trying to argue, just understand.

I genuinely can't find anything that has been said about you that can't be googled!

People can do that and they quite obviously do, all the time.

I can do it but only when authorised to do so by the relavent authority and with permissions from the client, the owner of that network.

For my work, I hold several certifications and am a member of a professional organisation, the InterNIC and also an RFC member & contributor.
If I was to be prosecuted for an internet misuse crime that involved breach of confidentiality using my skills (sometimes commonly known as hacking), my membership would be withdrawn and I would not be allowed to do my 2 yearly re-certifications, effectively rendering me unqualified for what I do.