As I said earlier; should councillors be using their time (i.e. taxpayers money) to deal with this?!! Obviously many councillors have brought it up in a council meeting today, otherwise Brady wouldn't have released a statement. This really is a non-argument. The REAL argument should be with taxpayers seeing councillors using their paid time to deal with their 'out of work' interests. Along with the numpty councillor (Phil Webster) on the RL forum, who stated on there that "Johnny Whiteley has done more for Hull than all the millionaires put together" ...considering many people don't even seem to know who he is, or what he has done, makes that statement look stupid and shows why idiots like Cllr Webster need booting out of the council. I thought the coalition government said about bringing in more power to taxpayers where if you didn't think your local councillor wasn't doing his job, you could boot him out??? Was this ever brought in? To say Johnny Whiteley has done more for Hull than Assem Allam, Joseph Rank, Thomas Ferens, John Ellerman, James Reckitt etc... put together is laughable. Heck, I'd say Dean Windass has done more for Hull... his £60 million goal at Wembley put Hull as a city, as well as a football club into the spotlight around the WORLD, as in, Hull City taking part in the top division of the best league of the most watched sport in the world. I wonder how many people around the world know who Johnny Whiteley is?
If its only a case of unpaid/wont pay, why dont Hull Fc just pay it to get them back up then argue the toss. Its AP whose forced SMC to take down the pictures by not paying his due,s. Makes them look small time.
Can't really argue with any of that. Surely it's in the tenats agreement that they will have to pay extra to put pictures up?
People grumble at us modding on here, but that FC board just bans anyone that doesn't agree with the main stream. Alternative views are simply nor allowed. No wonder they come across as clueless at times. It's just pure propaganda. I think there's two gone on that thread alone for daring to ask questions that don't match the agenda.
We may have had a couple disagreements about how the moderating is done on here, but at least it works to suit almost everyone and mishaps are few and far between. Their moderating is just petty and futile, I only wish they were coming on here by the bucket load so you could ban them all one by one and watch the irony unfold over on their board Here's a little extract: The_Mighty_F90 wrote: I suppose they could put the pictures up for free but ask you to contribute towards the £400,000 loss for last season. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I seriously doubt you're long for this place, haven't you had one warning already? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The_Mighty_F90 wrote: What have I done to warrant a warning? I thought it was a discussion board. What rules have been broken? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AUP 1.4. Messages intended to destroy threads or to only increase post counts are prohibited This is a general anti-trolling provision designed to stop people like you trying to start arguments for the sake of it. No more warnings.
Another brilliant piece of moderating from the same bloke: My Uncle Harry Given the issue is primarily about money so the club would have known the score before any pictures were moved, have any of you asked the Club why they let it come to this? It's interesting to see you've finally realised Adam Pearson's a good egg, given the abuse some gave me for defending him against similar vitriol to that you're offering Dr Allam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kosh The issue is not primarily about money. As Councillor Brown pointed out, the sums involved are peanuts compared to the rent we pay. There are three issues: 1. What justification can there be for charging for the display of pictures and memorabilia that were already on display? 2. City having to pay this charge is basically just the Allams moving cash from one pocket to the other. 3. Why should anyone have to pay for pictures of Johnny Whitely to be displayed in the suite named after him? It's the last point which has triggered the mass response. A warning. Any trolling on this issue from you will not be tolerated. And there will be no further warnings. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ My Uncle Harry But if you paid the 'peanuts' there's no argument to be had. I'm sure the Council have bigger issues they should be discussing than FC being asked to pay the same as other tenants to use the facility. I'm not trolling. I never have. I just have a different opinion and that's what boards are about so knock the threats on the head it makes you look paranoid. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kosh I'll be the judge of that, ta. Nobody is interested in your pointless and deliberately inflammatory opinions. You post purely to start arguments, and that's the very definition of trolling. In fact - goodbye. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ And banned.... you couldn't make it up! ****ing pathetic, hats off to you mods on here at least you tolerate peoples differing opinions and ways of looking at things.
The new ones that joined here would have been banned from there for their names alone. I wouldn't ban them, I'd rather they came and discussed it. I still can't see why they're not questioning their clubs part in this. This isn't recent, it's from a year ago. If it's that important their club could have paid the cash and then argued from a stronger position. As it is, they chose not to put the pictures up. Unfortunately, the ones that did come here, seem to have gone shy when offered a place in a free debate. I can see that there's a chance that there's spite involved in all of this from Mr Allam, but unsubstantiated rants and digs at the football club isn't really likely to convince me.
This line does it for me "Nobody is interested in your pointless and deliberately inflammatory opinions. You post purely to start arguments, and that's the very definition of trolling." Which is basically saying "Any opinion different to that of mine or the hardcore users of this board will not be tolerated and you will be banned." Is FC fans' nickname 'The Yes Men' by any chance?
I really don't get why there is all this animosity between the Rugby league supporters and the City supporters. It just seems extremely childish, all this name calling etc and I am sure there are some people who enjoy both games. At a time when there are things going on in this City to try and update it, all the schemes in the pipeline like the plans discussed on this board a while ago its a shame that all this childish slagging each other off is going on. If one of the Rugby League clubs were playing a Challenge Cup Final I would watch it and be cheering for the City of Hull and I would like to think that any rugby supporters out there would cheer for City in that situation as well.
Lets get a list together of all the good things Allam has done for Hull and the surrounding area. 1: Bailed Hull City out of almost certain doom 2: Donated money (how much?) to Hull KR 3: Donated (how much?) money to North Ferriby United 4: Donated (how much?) money to Castle Hill hospital 5: Kept his business in the east riding of yorkshire offering jobs and oppurtunities for locals in a tough economic climate, when his particular business could become much more profitable and ran at far less cost on a day to day basis abroad. And then a list of how many bad things he's done (be honest here, lets not have our short sighted tinted glasses on like the rugby lot, let's have an honest and genuine comparison) 1: Took down some photos of rugby players in the KC Stadium.
How can that mod genuinely think he is doing the right thing through mass banning for raising a differing opinion to his? It really is taking your ball home. What an absolute Grade-A insular, narrow minded ****.
That whole board is a forum version of someone sticking their fingers in their ears going "lal la la, I'm not listening". They've got their own opinion on the matter and don't care if it's the truth.
