Turn off the swear filter. No, Im not being facetious about the photo At the bottom of the page is a drop down, switch that to "Swearing", and see if that "fixes" the 3 dots, which it should do. You might have to reload the page, best bet is press Ctrl and F5 together to do that.
Thanks Happy Tiger, I'll have to have a think about whether I want to see the pictures with the swear words. I quite like seeing *** in the text.
The filter only *s typed words in messages, not photos. The convention for "naughty" photos and images, which tbh is followed pretty rigidly thankfully is that goes in a "NSFW" tag, so you have to physically click to view it. The swearing isn't too bad either tbh, a lot of words you'd normally just hear in a pub and wouldn't think about are *d out, although obviously there's a couple of posters who can't post without littering their musings with words designed to offend. I just mentally filter those out tbh. The convenience of being able to see normal images makes the filter a pain in the arse for me.
I am a little confused over the way that the application has been dealt with. The application has been made to change the "Playing Name" ie Hull City to Hull Tigers Yet the campaign has been to keep the name Hull City Association Football Club. Suggestions that anything other than a retention of Hull City AFC was not acceptable where roundly condemned. So if our playing name is the only change, has Hull City AFC already bitten the dust? Sorry if this has already been dealt with.
Hull City AFC is our registered name. When we win the Champions League it will be what appears on the cup. Hull City is our playing name and will be written on the FA Cup if we win it. Its possible Hull City has been our playing name since 1904, somebody better qualified than me may be able to help with that. Since clarifying this early on the whole of CTWD's campaign is to retain Hull City as the playing name. I hope that helps.
If the FA are about to reject the Allams proposed name change for the reasons of no financial benefit and to protect the heritage of English football, why are they allowed to change the names of all its competitions every few years? Has the npower championship not just changed to the sky bet championship? The FA Cup sponsored by E-on is now the The FA Cup with Budweiser. The Carling Cup is now the Capital One Cup. You get my point. Why is this different to our change, if anything these are worse as they incorporate actual sponsors names. It strikes me as double standards. Is this not destroying the heritage of English football?
There is a hand written book held in the FA archives, that lists each clubs formal name as it was registered when it joined a league and in that we're down as Hull City AFC. The playing name is the one the FA officially recognise for fixture lists/tables etc and on that we're Hull City(the FC/AFC suffixes are not normally used). The AFC has now obviously been dropped from the registered company name and AA will not change that, but as long as we retain Hull City we can refer to ourselves as Hull City AFC and hopefully a future chairman will reinstate it formally.
Competitions, kits, stadiums, team busses, all sorts of things are allowed to be sponsored, but sponsors names are not allowed to be used in club names, that's why the name change rule was introduced in the first place.
Because there is a clear financial benefit to that, which there isn't to the name change. You answered it yourself. Seriously, how can people keep writing such ridiculously stupid things?
But we aren't asking for a sponsors name to be put in our name. It strikes me as unfair that they have made it so they can make profits from changing names but clubs can not.
Because obvious financial benefits exist. The League Cup is still The League Cup, The FA Cup is still The FA Cup. Clutching at straws. EDIT: I see PLT beat me to it.
It wasn't rejected for having a sponsors name in it anyway, so I don't really see what your point is, they rejected it because it's a stupid idea that couldn't be justified.
Clubs taking part in sponsored competitions share the prize money round by round, therefore all the clubs benefit financially, not just one.
If there was any chance of a financial benefit it might be a decent point. But there isn't and that's been the argument all along. This isn't about tradition vs finance. If it was there would be some debate to be had. Despite all the talking he's done over the last 7 months, Allam still hasn't demonstrated a single benefit to changing the name.
It's not the league cup, It's the capital one cup. Why does this not change history and affect the heritage of our game?
So if our chairman came back next year claiming he wanted to change our name to Hull Tiger Beer and had them on board. Would that be ok? I would have thought that would be worse, but it would have financial benefit.
I'd still be strongly against it but tt'd be better in the sense that there'd be a clear financial benefit, unlike the current situation which is just about Allam being a daft ****.
