Redhyde Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I wouldn't want to sift through the nonsense that is on there.If you think otherwise go and read a whole page of "questions."
Guest Ron Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 For those of you jumping up and down thinking I have resigned I hate to disappoint you as I will still be here and will still be answering fans queries but in a different format. :laugh: http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?s=&showtop...ndpost&p=487137 - He's not afraid to get stuck in!!!
Frank Reynolds Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 It was full of incoherant rants anyway.He's an intelligent guy, he has better things to spend his time on than looking at some stupid rant.
Dolman_Stand Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Methinks it was NickJ's final post who pushed him over the edge
Guest Ron Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Methinks it was NickJ's final post who pushed him over the edgeI can personally tell you the decision to close down the SteveL forum was made a long time before 11:15am today.
Guest Topbuzz Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Now thats closing i wonder what will be next??
Frank Reynolds Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I love the attitude by Steve on NickJ's post!You know he wants to swear, and he knows he can't!I hope that he does keep channels open to talk to him about things that actually matter to us though. I didn't think the forum would last long though, I'd get p........ ( ) at so many knee-jerk reactions.
solo1bc Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Why not keep it open but give the mods free reign to remove the nonsense?I think it was an excellent service so am sorry to see it go.
Dorset_Cider Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I can personally tell you the decision to close down the SteveL forum was made a long time before 11:15am today.By you Ron?
Guest Ron Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 By you Ron?Yes of course, after all, with the proclaimation that I am in charge of the forum by someone in the Hayter-scandal thread, who else would have made the decision
Guest twaters Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 It was a good service but i always felt he ignored the questions i wanted to hear most. I think a new forum should be opened with a few changes. 5 Posts per day on a first come first served basis. And re design it so its more a ask City forum and not ask Steve.
BCAGFC Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 SL could have always ignored the stupid/irrelevent posts or let the mods do it, very suspicious IMO.I, like NickJ am still not satisfied with the answer regarding the stadium security etc. BCAGFC
WTFiGO!?! Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 It was full of incoherant rants anyway.....the problem being? I wouldn't be half as sane as I am with out spouting and receiving the odd incoherant rant thrown in from time to time. Alright, maybe Stevie L isn't of the same emotional need but hey. 5 Posts per day on a first come first served basis. Surely that would just be an unfair advantage to the night owls out there?
next_year_I_hope Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 now if any of us was to write a answer like that from a business point of view then i would take my business elsewhere!!! p*** ignore p*** summat else i am sure the kids would no what that is.and on a serious note if we used language like that down the ground i am sure we would have someone in a orange jacket having a word with us...
NickJ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 :laugh: http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?s=&showtop...ndpost&p=487137 - He's not afraid to get stuck in!!!Trouble is, Steve was wrong. See my subsequent post to Steve, even though he obviously wont answer it.Methinks it was NickJ's final post who pushed him over the edgeI can tell you that I knew a week ago it was being closed today. That is why I put the question on, before it was too late.
NickJ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 It was full of incoherant rants anyway.He's an intelligent guy, he has better things to spend his time on than looking at some stupid rant.I don't mean to be rude, but intelligent people will tell you that it was not full of incoherent rants. And nor was the original post. All the posts were if I might say so myself very well thought out and an attempt to get answers to a potentially fundamental situation at this football club.
cider head Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 mabe it is to do with a shake up that is to happen on here soon
NickJ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 SL could have always ignored the stupid/irrelevent posts or let the mods do it, very suspicious IMO.I, like NickJ am still not satisfied with the answer regarding the stadium security etc. BCAGFCPrecisely. The fact is, SteveL was very happy to answer the drivel. It gives the impression of being "open".The awkward questions, he doesnt want to know.It was the same at the AGM. One lady asked Gary Johnson what he thought about bladed boots (Brooker had been cut by one the previous week). GJ rambled on for about 20 minutes about bladed boots. Did SteveL put an end to that in order to return to the serious questions that an AGM should be all about? No.Its common strategy at AGM's. The directors of M&S love it when old ladies turn up and ask why their favourite cakes aren't made any more.
richieb Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Precisely. The fact is, SteveL was very happy to answer the drivel. It gives the impression of being "open".The awkward questions, he doesnt want to know.It was the same at the AGM. One lady asked Gary Johnson what he thought about bladed boots (Brooker had been cut by one the previous week). GJ rambled on for about 20 minutes about bladed boots. Did SteveL put an end to that in order to return to the serious questions that an AGM should be all about? No.Its common strategy at AGM's. The directors of M&S love it when old ladies turn up and ask why their favourite cakes aren't made any more.Very interesting.Me and my Brothers said exactly the same thing.They seemed to spring the AG bit on an unsuspecting public.No one was prepared for the announcement. Therefore it was only later when things sunk in the people began to ask questions.
gaz897 Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Precisely. The fact is, SteveL was very happy to answer the drivel. It gives the impression of being "open".The awkward questions, he doesnt want to know.It was the same at the AGM. One lady asked Gary Johnson what he thought about bladed boots (Brooker had been cut by one the previous week). GJ rambled on for about 20 minutes about bladed boots. Did SteveL put an end to that in order to return to the serious questions that an AGM should be all about? No.Its common strategy at AGM's. The directors of M&S love it when old ladies turn up and ask why their favourite cakes aren't made any more.I'm glad i'm a FOOTBALL fan.
Frank Reynolds Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 I don't mean to be rude, but intelligent people will tell you that it was not full of incoherent rants. And nor was the original post. All the posts were if I might say so myself very well thought out and an attempt to get answers to a potentially fundamental situation at this football club.It was full of incoherant rants.I never said yours was one, because your query is a valid one and is what that forum is all about.There have been so many rants, and questions people know that SL cannot answer in the public domain, yet he still gets bombarded with them. I'm not surprised its been shut down; its been a long time coming.
NickJ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 It was full of incoherant rants.I never said yours was one, because your query is a valid one and is what that forum is all about.There have been so many rants, and questions people know that SL cannot answer in the public domain, yet he still gets bombarded with them. I'm not surprised its been shut down; its been a long time coming.I'm sorry, I thought you meant my post was an incoherent rant - the comment followed on from referring to my post.I agree that questions concerning players contracts cannot be answered in the public domain.But the issue of Ashton Gate stadium is one which every Bristol City supporter has a right to know.The forum could have easily continued, with the drivel being filtered out by the mods and Steve being just left with the serious posts. But that didnt happen. Wonder why.Nick
Admin Phantom Posted January 29, 2006 Admin Posted January 29, 2006 I can personally tell you the decision to close down the SteveL forum was made a long time before 11:15am today.Go on the Ron, tell us how you knew this ?
Guest Ron Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Go on the Ron, tell us how you knew this ?I don't know anything, just thought it'd be fun to indulge in the non-source rumour making that is rife on this forum nowadays And as usual you fell for it
PhatWill Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Precisely. The fact is, SteveL was very happy to answer the drivel. It gives the impression of being "open".The awkward questions, he doesnt want to know.It was the same at the AGM. One lady asked Gary Johnson what he thought about bladed boots (Brooker had been cut by one the previous week). GJ rambled on for about 20 minutes about bladed boots. Did SteveL put an end to that in order to return to the serious questions that an AGM should be all about? No.Its common strategy at AGM's. The directors of M&S love it when old ladies turn up and ask why their favourite cakes aren't made any more.Well if it's 'common strategy' as you put it then stop whinging.How do you know that Steve was 'very happy' to answer the 'drivel' as well?The guy met up with you personally, no doubt taking time out of a very busy schedule, let you talk to him and yet you're still kicking up a fuss and coming across like some annoying stalker.He's under no obligation to listen to or take note of your views. In this instance he has clearly said that he is not willing to divuldge any further. At this point most people would drop the issue.
Guest twaters Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Surely that would just be an unfair advantage to the night owls out there?True, but it would stop to many posts and wasting of Steve and others time. If one or even five of the questions are drivel then it will be a wasted opportunity. And I'm sure they will be ignored.I think renaming the forum ask city would also take the personal attacks element out of it. I know people can direct their posts at Steve but i think calling the forum Ask Steve put alot of pressure on him to answer where as the responsibiity of this new ask forum would be shared. The club should decide on who will answer what and in what manner.Anyway i think its a real shame this function has been got rid! Steve and others harped on about how this was a privalidge and now he has got shot. I don't blame Nick, I'm sure it was alot of factors.As for Steve and others dodging questions i too have exoerienced being fobbed off by the club with bla bla bla so can certainly believe what Nick has been saying. Steves response was very OTT and very public. Somthing he in his post criticises Nick for!!!
Admin Phantom Posted January 29, 2006 Admin Posted January 29, 2006 I don't know anything, just thought it'd be fun to indulge in the non-source rumour making that is rife on this forum nowadays And as usual you fell for it Will miss you when this forum goes...
Guest Ron Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Will miss you when this forum goes...Or I go, if the best the forum can stump up on a Sunday night with 177 members online is "Do You Know Any City Players Lookalikes?" then I will look for a new forum.I'll miss you too
NickJ Posted January 29, 2006 Posted January 29, 2006 Well if it's 'common strategy' as you put it then stop whinging.How do you know that Steve was 'very happy' to answer the 'drivel' as well?The guy met up with you personally, no doubt taking time out of a very busy schedule, let you talk to him and yet you're still kicking up a fuss and coming across like some annoying stalker.He's under no obligation to listen to or take note of your views. In this instance he has clearly said that he is not willing to divuldge any further. At this point most people would drop the issue.I'm tempted to tell you to p... off but I wont, that would be stooping to the same level of rudeness as SteveL succombed to in his reply to me.I'm not whinging mate.I am trying to press home a serious point that SteveL refuses to answer. It concerns the stadium of our football club for the past 100 years. There have been certain things said, and actions taken, which make many of us very concerned.A cynic might have a view as to why Steve requested to met up with me personally. Keep your friends close but your enemies closer? Hope that by having a personal audience with our Chairman I might be less likely to kick up a fuss? I'm not saying that, but a cynic might.For your information I also have a very busy schedule. Is SteveL's time more valuable than mine?You are right, SteveL has no legal obligation to listen to or take note of my views. But I thought a forum called "Ask SteveL" would lead to answers being given. Silly me.You are right, SteveL is saying he wont divulge any further. Havent you asked yourself why not?You are right, most people would drop the issue. We are all different.
Admin Phantom Posted January 29, 2006 Admin Posted January 29, 2006 Funny thing is since it was announced that Steve was closing "that" section look at the number of people that are still posting on there....Should be locked down....
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.