Has anyone got anything else that they want to say about this?

Honestly if anyone wants to lay the boot express disapproval about my behaviour now's the time to do it.

I don't want anyone to speak up for me now or offer support, I'd rather just face the music....

feather ?

Like dubs I'll spill.

BT you made the decision that you wouldn't get a fair hearing so you decided to override that option.
You created the sock account despite being aware that was unacceptable.
You decided to maintain your deceit and your lame defence of 'dropping hints' is garbage when done in the 3rd person.

I do resent your actions because they have resulted in argument and division amongst a group of people who did nothing to invite that shite.
I'm also yet to be convinced that you're not gaming this group. (You have history, you earned that suspicion, suck it up).

Imo, nothing should be altered to accommodate or legitimise your previous actions.
When you followed the course of action you were supposed to initially, you were let back onto the site.

Proof that your assertions were wrong and it's your assertions that need reviewing, not SZ policies.

I certainly will not be partaking in the fawning fest with regard to yourself for the foreseeable future
As far as I'm concerned, the weight is on you to try to convince a mistake hasn't been made here.

eta:
Please do fuck off with the lay the boot victim bs.

Can't say that i'm encouraged by you implying my rather diplomatic post constitutes "laying the boot in"...

feather wrote:

For the record...

I may have been one in favour of tackler returning but it has to be said, I'm also of this opinion.


EDIT - There's no 'laying in of boots' going on either.

@ feather I see

And do you think such a poll would have ended in my reinstallation if I had not shown myself of to be at least being capable of adding to this community, surly frothy would have failed?

My appeal is that.

Yes ok I agree that my third party comments about frothy were unlikely to be a disclosure, as for mistakes, the last thing I'm going to do it to go through all that again feather, we both know what's happened, the very fact that the sock policy is being discussed, means perhaps yes it's needs changed as oi had pointed out in a previous post here it now seems to have worked, ''from your part you approached the forum (via admin) to state your case, you were open and honest, you're back'' the point is feather was the policy used correctly to ban frothy, would he have had his vote?

What would likely have happened should frothy have knocked at the front door, even if he got a poll he was thought to be 'mike' a 'troll' a trouble maker.

Seems to be the policy worked this time because I've been able to show constructive posting even though with a cover identity.(for the want of a better term) (oh yeah sock)

I'm proposing that without this covert identity (sock) Would I have had a fair chance?

dubmeup wrote:
I was not referring to your post dubs

Ok nobody is laying the boot in.

Blue_Tackler wrote:

Blue_Tackler wrote: As you are so clearly aware, we'll never know now how frothy would have faired because you decided to ignore that process.
So now that hypothetical is stone dead.

and my conviction that you're gaming this site has gone up another notch.
Keep talking.

Blue_Tackler wrote:

In this case no because you completely blew it when you refered to gilly as blubber, or words to that affect and went on to use it as your signature. From what I've been reading, that was really where it all went downhill bigtime.

And the fact that you were originally thought to be mike, was irrelevant from that point in to be honest.

To have been able to retaliate as frothy and build a case (so to speak) in your defence, you would have needed to not have gone as far as you did.

dubmeup wrote:
btw I did appreciate what you said, it's just I can't quite find the words to respond at the mo, because of my situation at present I'm a little restricted, I don't want to sound like I want to argue, yet I would like to respond to some of the points you made, like when I was having 'cheap shots' at you, I take it you meant when I was altering my emblem message etc....
tbh I thought we were having a laugh, unless the cheap shots you referred to were from something else?
Can you elaborate or send a link?But then I know I better not get into all that because I am trying to get back to 'not being in the dog house'



It's not a good time for me to comeback with any smart comments dubs, so I won't, and that's only because I respect your opinion on here and so do other posters, thus there's no gain in debating the particulars when I think the general theme of your post is you're willing to let bygones be and have a go at continuing as before all this broke out, as far as I was concerned CF was banned, and I'm not him, I'm not him posing as BT, he's gone, his arguments have gone, I'm sorry about what happened then & now and that's that.
So it's just me BT without the duality of c_F

The one thing I'm not able to do is to walk on eggshells, I'm not suggesting that you're saying that I should, it's just that how it feels, I want you and the others to stop looking for arguments in my posts.

How's that for a bag of mixed messages.

My heads a bit fucked up now Dubs I'm not sure what I'm posting and if it makes any sense.

feather wrote:
Is that how you're going to be responding to posts where I defend myself?
I meant that when I was C_F I didn't even know that there were polls for such behaviour, even if there were I was not offered one, and had I been offered one, what do you think that the chances of success for me then were?

Goldenprince13 wrote:
Chose another thread and stop supporting my obsessions

Lets just give it a rest.
BT is back so get on with other threads BT and forget it ever happened, thats the best thing you can do to convince people you're straight with them and leave it at that.

Its obvious you have noting to do with Mike, I dunno why thats even brought up as your posts are nothing like his track record thus far which is more akin to Zara_T or Barnfish than yours tbpfh...

psketti wrote:

Now that's a painful hit psketti, I think if you check you'll find that to be not quite right.

Blue_Tackler wrote:
Brace yourself for a loud pop when this bubble bursts ............

Dude ............You ARE Cousin_Frothy.
You're the same person. You can't just choose a new net nick and completely reincarnate.
The same fingertips that typed crap as Cousin_Frothy are now typing as Blue_Tackler.
True dat.

Blue_Tackler wrote:

Pointing it out is not support, that is the last thing you will receive from me

Fair enough GP

Blue_Tackler wrote:

Its not far off it lad and theres no way I'm going back through all that again to look... its all there for anyone to check.

And I went for the 'painful hit' to empathize why frothy was fucked already so any points being raised about 'what if he'd done this or what if he'd done that', are completely moot.