I'd say self important and arrogant fitted better on someone that thinks their personality assessment matters so much, they post it in favour of discussing the thread. Given that you're someone that posts very little of substance other than to whine about posters saying something you don't like, forgive me if I don't give a flying **** about your half arsed, inaccurate opinion on this occasion.
Yep, I can see where your error is. I didn't say I want the club to talk to fans, I asked if others expected the club to listen to fans. I guess I shouldn't have used the royal 'we'. The point remains the same, credible arguments are better than incredible claims or just grumbling.
Is it another dig at the council? "For too long has Hull aspired to be a 'top 10 city' in the UK without success. We have gone one further and made the Tigers a 'top 10 world city'.
Is the self important condescending nature of your post meant to be ironic or don't you realise you're doing it?
Having a similar view on one poster hardly makes a clique. A clique would be something like, a group that 'likes' each others posts and joins in with thread diverting abuse. Having said that, I've found myself agreeing with quite a lot of the points Happy raises.
That's because you're in the same clique. As it seems it needs explaining, the last post was a joke, as is this one.
I think he was referring to ones who may not be pass holders but want to go in there as relative newcomers. The thing is, should we be encouraging these youngsters? The little blighters might stand up and cause problems by making a noise in support of the team and upset a lot of our fans who prefer to contemplate the game in silence.
Think the club bent over backwards, gave preferential treatment to these "youngsters", ably abetted by some "tired" people who then got a bit bored and some ****ed off and supported Rovers instead.
It's sad that you need to create divisions where none exist. If only along with being honest, you were able to see who the blame lays with for this.
