What will your reaction really be?

You can't debate with him so you put him on ignore? You coward dumbarse.

 

What a cowardly **** Dumbarse. Losing the argument, so puts the person on ignore to avoid justifying his posts.

Coward and **** of the highest order.

 

Something you've not mentioned in your Allam love-in:

Treatment of the fans. But that don't matter, right?

 

There's a difference between having a debate, and just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

Again, justify why you think me too confused to know the difference between 'branding' and 'rape'.

You brought it up. Justify it.

Quotes welcome again.

 

Tell me... Do you stop and listen to the mad christian who hangs around outside McDonalds in the City Centre rambling on about Jesus saving everyone, or do you walk on by because its just not worth the effort?

 

Neither because I live in Huddersfield.

Cowardly prat.

 

Well, you've certainly shown your true colours to the rest of the forum.

If there was any doubt, like....

 

Whatever you say, you KNOW it's bad form.

 

Not really. Everyone knows I disagree with many on here, but I would never put them on ignore because other than the topic of the Allams/name-change, they generally are useful contributors to the forum, and post interesting points.

That guy just bores me.

 

Apologies to those of you watching this crap unfold.

But, as you can tell, I want Smartarse to justify why he thinks I'm too confused to know the difference between 'branding' and 'rape'.

 

If I bore you, fair enough. A valid point. And that's fine if that's the reason you put me on ignore.

But I still want you to justify your comment about me being too confused to know the difference between 'branding' and 'rape'.

Just do it, then this will be done. Then you ignore me and all's well.

 

Okay, thanks, but I'm not looking for a bite, I never do. For you it is as simple as that; anti vs pro. What I don't understand is who would meet and why.

I take it the owners would represent the pro-name-changers, but who would be the representatives of the anti-name-changers? Perhaps we could consider the options:

Hull City Supporters Trust - is the eventual marriage of City Till We Die (the original one-issue protest group) and another group - this might seem to be the obvious answer to the question, but is it? Some thoughts:

• I have frequently posted that my main concern about the trust (of which I am a member) is that, due to it being a multi-issue Trust, it will not be able to muster the type of response that CTWD managed - and like it or lump it, CTWD was successful in what it set out to do.
• To be fair, it has maintained a strong position against the name-change and has made it clear that they see no purpose in stepping it up until there has been a verdict from the FA.
• They have also said that once the verdict comes (and they expect it to be against name-change) they will then start their campaign of reversing the malicious rebranding that has taken place so far.
• Another concern might be that they now have a split loyalty as not all of the CTWD members were enthusiastic about the new Trust; of course, conversely they do have the contacts, knowledge and the social/industry weight to have some immediate impact.
• Yet another concern is that the Trust and it's hierarchy are persona non-grata as far as the owners are concerned.

There has been ample opportunity for folk to speak up at their meetings (membership not necessary) or they can communicate through their website; unfortunately too many expect threads on here to stay balanced and that helps no one, as there is too much mischief around.

Is this the one to represent you, if not, why not?

A Re-formed City Till We Die (or something similar) - a single issue group exerting and maintaining pressure on the owners to reverse their branding campaign - who wants to start one, who wants sole focus and open discussion? Is there anyone out there with friendly, collaborate links to the club, someone who might use those links to forge communications to influence change, someone who might not be happy with the efforts of the Trust and the individuals who run it and someone who knows how to do it better?

Hull City Official Supporters Club -they voted in the majority against it (in their most recent FA submission) - as the majority voted against it, do they feel a moral obligation to represent that majority and act against the name-change. You must make your own minds up on that one.

Of course, some might see the two opposing parties as the owners and Hull City Council. It is very well documented that the owners (Assem Allam in particular) have accepted the name-change is all about a battle/grudge against HCC and nothing to do with marketing advantage. What is strange is that there is an element (on here and elsewhere) who support their right to make the change, simply because they think they should be able to do so. Perhaps those hearty souls could form a Pro-Name-Change Allegiance to support the owners and spread the gospel of why name-change is so beneficial to us that it is worth destroying our cultural identity as a football club.

There might be other options, if so, please share.

Whatever your view, it does seem that there is ample opportunity to do your own thing, if you feel strongly enough about it.

 

Oh **** off you senseless twat. 2 houses 3 cars and a house in Florida - I'm calling bullshit.

 

Seriously, you should just **** off aswell. Thick twat.

 

He is a thick **** isn't he.

 

It's something he excels at, he's found his calling.

 

Oh **** off and get back on the CIty transfer thread with your daily moan about who we havent signed yet, and who we shouldnt have let go.

Whining ****

 

He falls for it every time. I posted twice, both posts contained nothing but Tickler's own words. The gormless ****.