Swords, I see that you are true to your word, and although I note you are currently "loitering with intent" (online), you haven't posted further. Are you perhaps going to channel your thoughts through a muse, a role I believe DT was blessed with a while back (not sure for who?), but I recall that it certainly made for some rather odd reading?
Some interest in Brentford, for me as well as Chelsea's opponent on the day, but like many of you, would probably support my local team, Toronto FC. But not with anywhere near the depth of feeling as I have for QPR. And if there were to be an AFC QPR, well...
Quote Originally Posted by Swords Hoopster. View Post Communications will be upheld through this proxy server as previous emissary's proved unreliable when the the last Boycott reached a critical juncture. I lay the blame for the collapse of that protest squarely on the shoulders of fragile supporters who hadn't the stomach for the difficult part of the campaign. This time, when the powers that be put the squeeze on, I shall rely on my steadfastness alone. A herd is only as strong as its weakest link. Some messages: * My prediction for Brix' competition is QPR 1-1 Leeds (Jenas & McCormack) * Great article posted up by Nines yesterday but that bloke Clive don't 'alf go on a bit does he? * Congrats to KentGaz and Congleton Regarding the principle behind this current Boycott, I'll leave you with this quote. (Stan gets it) "Politics, man. If you're hanging onto a rising balloon, you're presented with a difficult decision - let go before it's too late or hang on and keep getting higher, posing the question: how long can you keep a grip on the rope?"
Swords alla napoletana: http://www.repubblica.it/sport/2014/03/01/foto/hamsik_vestito_donna-79960294/1/?ref=HRESS-19#1
I’m glad this one got bumped back up as I hadn’t realised that Swords’ grievance is against me! On Thursday evening Swords’ posted a far too vivid description of what he believes that the male Brighton supporters enjoy in the stands of the Amex Stadium which fell along way short of the basic standards as defined in our rules. Having deleted his sordid post I got distracted by a couple of events in the real world which required my immediate attention haven’t subsequently given his post another thought. I can’t speak for Nines here, but I don’t read every post on every thread; I don’t have the time nor the inclination. The agreed way of bringing a mod’s attention to any situation is via a PM, this procedure was not followed, but then, of course, that is not as dramatic and doesn’t offer the same mischief making possibilities. Had he done so I would have received an email and would have aware of his “concerns” much sooner. If there was any truth in Swords’ amusing little conspiracy theory I would have let the post stand and then banned him as soon as the first complaint rolled in, but he does like to play the victim.
please log in to view this image please log in to view this image A herd of buffalo can move only as fast as the slowest buffalo. When the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. http://io9.com/5812892/where-the-buffalo-theory-gets-neuroscience-right-almost
