Peg Leg wrote:Moron's out!
EDIT:
@IanD do you not find it more annoying that every thread is over populated with extreme negativity about the manager and anything he is trying to achieve is being twisted into some form of "reasoning" as to why he should step-down? Can you not see the humour in being facetious about the negativity?
No. I think it is a pain in the a$$ to click on a thread scroll down for a couple of pages to see the only new post is 'MOC Out' - or a variant - when the thread has nothing to do with it.
Dont get me wrong I am annoyed with all the cr@p about MOC - there is a thread for it so keep it there. I dont want the ott negativity or the ott positivity so I dont read that thread. I can see a point in discussing the managers performance in relation to a particular match etc but I dont see any point to the random insertion of MOC out or derivatives - funny once or twice but now IMO it adds nothing to the quality of the board.
Anyway this is not how the rant thread works - I dont have to justify anything to you.
Treat life like a dog: If you can't eat it, play with it, or hump it, p1$$ on it and walk away!
Peg Leg wrote:Moron's out!
EDIT:
@IanD do you not find it more annoying that every thread is over populated with extreme negativity about the manager and anything he is trying to achieve is being twisted into some form of "reasoning" as to why he should step-down? Can you not see the humour in being facetious about the negativity?
No. I think it is a pain in the a$$ to click on a thread scroll down for a couple of pages to see the only new post is 'MOC Out' - or a variant - when the thread has nothing to do with it.
Dont get me wrong I am annoyed with all the cr@p about MOC - there is a thread for it so keep it there. I dont want the ott negativity or the ott positivity so I dont read that thread. I can see a point in discussing the managers performance in relation to a particular match etc but I dont see any point to the random insertion of MOC out or derivatives - funny once or twice but now IMO it adds nothing to the quality of the board.
Anyway this is not how the rant thread works - I dont have to justify anything to you.
Peg Leg wrote:Moron's out!
EDIT:
@IanD do you not find it more annoying that every thread is over populated with extreme negativity about the manager and anything he is trying to achieve is being twisted into some form of "reasoning" as to why he should step-down? Can you not see the humour in being facetious about the negativity?
No. I think it is a pain in the a$$ to click on a thread scroll down for a couple of pages to see the only new post is 'MOC Out' - or a variant - when the thread has nothing to do with it.
Dont get me wrong I am annoyed with all the cr@p about MOC - there is a thread for it so keep it there. I dont want the ott negativity or the ott positivity so I dont read that thread. I can see a point in discussing the managers performance in relation to a particular match etc but I dont see any point to the random insertion of MOC out or derivatives - funny once or twice but now IMO it adds nothing to the quality of the board.
Anyway this is not how the rant thread works - I dont have to justify anything to you.
Tony O'Reilly disputing & negotiating his debts with AIB. He may not be a billionaire anymore and he may have lost shed loads with Waterford, INM & other investments but you can be damn sure he's not broke & there are assets there to pay what he owes.
simonno6 wrote:
Surely that would tell you the complete opposite?
It tells you that democracy works, but that it may not be an entirely efficient way of picking the people to run a country.
It's incredibly efficient. Local man with mandate elected by his peers to represent them Nationally (and perhaps on a European level).
Beats career politicians forced down your throat by parties that all essentially stand for the same thing that are bound to a party line set by a centralised bunch of career politicians.
Saturday 23rd May 2009 - Number 1 Saturday 21st May 2011 - Brace Saturday 19th May 2012 - Hatrick!
simonno6 wrote:
Surely that would tell you the complete opposite?
It tells you that democracy works, but that it may not be an entirely efficient way of picking the people to run a country.
It's incredibly efficient. Local man with mandate elected by his peers to represent them Nationally (and perhaps on a European level).
Beats career politicians forced down your throat by parties that all essentially stand for the same thing that are bound to a party line set by a centralised bunch of career politicians.
Just think that there are millions of people around the world that would love to do what we are doing today, something we almost take for granted, and, shamefully, many don't even bother. I always think of those who fought for the right to allow me to vote, and those who have protected that freedom.
"The one thing we learn from History, is that we never learn from History".
