Please do not get into a slanging match with 'Into the Valley' they are a group of Charlton supporters, just like us, wanting to discuss issues. I'm sure Reams did not mean what he said With regard to Reams comment on poaching from a site that is busier than here, ummmm?? I wonder how long a similar thread on CL would last before being taken down? 30secs, 1min, 5mins?? no longer I guess yet this thread is still here and not closed! If I started a similar thread on ITV how long would it last before Reams took it down? Also if you want to have a dig at Super and myself Reams, please get your facts right about who is banned and who isn't!
Well I don't think you can take a site seriously that bans a poster with a tirade of anger bordering on foul mouthed abuse at times only then to want to reinstate him as soon as a book is out, smacks of desperation. Also why interfere with decisions and comments made on here when it's not a site you run.
Reams, as far as I'm aware JA was banned from Into The Valley because other posters didn't like him, whereas on here he was banned for persistently breaking the rules. Also you say you've never heard a good word said about him on here, myself, IA, Super and CharltonNutNut (?) have always been decent towards JA and just seen the humour behind what he says
I think posters are entitled to express their view to someone from another site who suddenly appears on here after a book is published (if the book hadn't been published then he would've made this appearance) when I think many on here aren't interested anyway or in being told how to 'react' to this event.
Why did I ask people not to get into a slanging match. Perhaps a bit of history so here goes, when this site started while 606 was closing another new site (not CAFC dedicated) decided that they wanted ALL former 606 posters and started a series of actions in an attemp for 'denial of service' for this site. At the time the site's owner said he did not want to get into a war and refused to retaliate, I see no difference in answering Reams points in a civilised manner as Mick's actions in not starting a war against this other forum site. Sorry Pat if you do not agree but that is just my view.
I don't really see anything uncivilised in the way I've responded to his comments but have made it clear that not everyone is interested in 'the book' or him changing his mind about reinstating a poster banned from his site,having previously slated this poster in no uncertain terms, as well as his reasons for it. Also why doesn't he use his own site for these announcements or just post his comment on the thread already dedicated to the JA articles.
Fair dinkum blind hey Reams, most of the words and arguing over JA was because of his behaviour and thread content.. not many had a problem with the book, real or not, unrelated. Well done JA, getting a book out is a magnificent effort.
I think his attack on other posters when the rules were constantly being flouted and threads popping up all over the place leading to the temporary ban, is totally unwarranted. Is anyone else not in the slightest interested in this book and all the attention seeking?
JA's book is going into a pre-selected spot between Kierkegaard's Concluding Unscientific Postscript and Hegel's Science of Logic. That is how highly I rate his offering.
I think I'll start a new book, working title, 'Life in the Curbs Lane'. Perhaps I can create countless threads, posts and articles to promote it, I'm sure nobody else would mind let alone be interested.
I would certainly be interested, Pat. I could do a little sub-editing or proof-reading for a nominal fee?
Ok 1p it is then PEA. I'll need about 5 years to get this off the ground, it will be nothing but praise for the great Curbs and a fond look at the days of CISA on the coach.
I don't no if anyone's noticed, but there a quite a few Ackworth threads where one person seems to constantly make it about themselves...
Well I suppose I could make it 2p PEA but my budget is a bit limited in the economic climate, well that's my excuse anyway. Now how many threads on here in the last quarter of year 5, will 10 a day do.
So it is 2p to me, but 5p to a non-white editor - due to the added premium. I get it now, Pat - enough said...
But I am white though PEA, sorry to disappoint you, so there's no discrimination there. You've had a 50% increase and most people would be happy with that. Now I need to work on the 10 threads a day business.
Last I heard t was at the proof read stage. It needs to be printed in numbers, have buyers and be distributed before Dec11th or so.. Fat chance
