Author Topic: Scouse Pilgrim  (Read 7971 times)

Artemis

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
    • View Profile
Scouse Pilgrim
« on: April 30, 2014, 12:58:14 AM »
Ken

Scouse Pilgrim has overstepped the mark with his 'cretinous lump' insult.

Either he is banned or I will no longer post and delete my account.

beefpilgrim

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2014, 06:13:04 AM »
Just ignore him.... he is getting the desired effect.

If nobody replied to his obvious intent to wind everybody up hopefully he will get bored.

You will never be able to have a sensible conversation with him because you will ALWAYS be wrong and be patronised by someone who has never met you and does not know you...... I would love to see if he would insult you or I face to face, but that I very much doubt especially as you would never meet him due to the toilet phobia, and the pure general hatred of everything BUFC.....
A moaney clapper!......... best of both worlds

Scouse Pilgrim

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2014, 11:14:06 AM »
Ken

Scouse Pilgrim has overstepped the mark with his 'cretinous lump' insult.

Either he is banned or I will no longer post and delete my account.

Either man-up Artemis or delete your account. No room on here for the fragile!  :bunny
The B-Ark.  For Boston fans to talk about anything and everything they want to. Including trolls.

Scouse Pilgrim

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2014, 02:11:10 PM »
as you would never meet him due to the toilet phobia,

For the record BP I am not in the habit of meeting anyone in toilets, apart from my cat Arfa who wanders in occasionally to see what is going on.

You should be careful conducting meetings in this manner for they could be misconstrued  :bunny
« Last Edit: April 30, 2014, 04:45:08 PM by Scouse Pilgrim »
The B-Ark.  For Boston fans to talk about anything and everything they want to. Including trolls.

Pete Brooksbank

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2014, 02:55:33 PM »
as you would never meet him due to the toilet phobia,

For the record BP I am not in the habit of meeting anyone in toilets

Didn't Jim Rodwell once "attack" you in the bogs? I.e., piss on your shoes?

Scouse Pilgrim

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2014, 03:08:52 PM »
You back on the toilet duck Pete B?  :bunny
The B-Ark.  For Boston fans to talk about anything and everything they want to. Including trolls.

Pete Brooksbank

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2014, 03:26:37 PM »
I never drink at work Mark.  8)

Pete Brooksbank

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2014, 03:27:15 PM »
Ken

Scouse Pilgrim has overstepped the mark with his 'cretinous lump' insult.

Either he is banned or I will no longer post and delete my account.

I was clearing out emails from my Hotmail account the other day and stumbled across a large cache of emails from Mark, much like one might stumble across an unexploded ordnance on a building site. They dated from the days when he was involved getting the Trust up and running. The remarkable and surprising thing is that the correspondence is, initially at least, reasonable, logical, level-headed and laced with an articulate, good-humoured logic you struggle to find in emails a few months later.

I’m not entirely sure what happened, but it swiftly degenerated into nonsensical mud-slinging and personal tirades, when he had become the Mark we read today on this forum. The interesting thing, of course, is that back then we were fighting a common enemy: the Lavaflow crooks. Except this was a theoretical fight, since the trust never really got to the point of making a tangible impact beyond pissing a few people off. Mark’s behaviour at that time was counterproductive and detrimental to the efforts put in by others, like Pat Everitt and Mick Taylor, who are actual fans who go to games and genuinely have the best interests of the club at heart. In fact, I remember having a very long conversation with Dave Boyle at Supporters Direct about how we might be able to permanently bar Mark from the Trust. I think most people got thoroughly fed up and quit long before any of Dave’s good advice could be implemented.

The point being that Mark is exhibiting exactly the behaviour now as he did then, which to me suggests it really doesn’t matter who runs the club. A chairman could be genuinely malicious or entirely benevolent, but you can be sure Mark that regardless of who is in charge, Mark will be online, wittering away, winding people up with a copy of Roget’s next to him, because he is a classic narcissist; a self-absorbed megalomaniac with extra smiley faces. I highly doubt David Newton’s trembling in his boots at any of Mark’s ramblings (if he’s even bothered reading them) and why should he? Mark’s opinions are ultimately irrelevant. He was incapable of leading an organised charge against the Lavaflow crooks, so what hope does he have of ever undermining the plans laid down by the infinitely more credible Chestnut Homes? None.

Personally, even though he’d probably lump me in with everyone as a cretinous lump (as insults go, you have to admit that one’s quite funny) I quite like the bloke… well, the version I met in the mid-2000s anyway, I haven’t gone fishing with him recently. I find him entertaining in his own unique way. Just don’t take him too seriously, or ever become involved in anything he’s part of.

Ken Fox

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2953
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2014, 03:34:56 PM »
I said I'd ban him if more than half of the regular posters (81) asked for him to be banned (http://www.bufc.drfox.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=5177.0).

So far it's only up to about 45 users.

But there's no time limit so I'm sure he'll eventually annoy enough people for the target to be met.

Artemis

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2014, 03:40:17 PM »
I said I'd ban him if more than half of the regular posters (81) asked for him to be banned (http://www.bufc.drfox.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=5177.0).

So far it's only up to about 45 users.

But there's no time limit so I'm sure he'll eventually annoy enough people for the target to be met.

Half of 81 is 40.5.  If 45 have said they want him banned....... that's over the 50% level

Artemis

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2014, 03:41:37 PM »
Ken

Scouse Pilgrim has overstepped the mark with his 'cretinous lump' insult.

Either he is banned or I will no longer post and delete my account.

Either man-up Artemis or delete your account. No room on here for the fragile!  :bunny

It has nothing whatsoever to do with being fragile.  You wouldn't call anyone 'a cretinous lump' to their face without expecting a reaction of some kind and over stepping the boundary on a public is no different.

You are a Troll and have ruined most threads on this forum at some point but went too far yesterday and as such will have to accept the consequences of your action.






father Ted

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1748
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2014, 03:51:55 PM »
Presumably 81 is half of 162 ,
 Not like Ken to make a booboo.

Scouse Pilgrim

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2014, 03:54:27 PM »
Ken

Scouse Pilgrim has overstepped the mark with his 'cretinous lump' insult.

Either he is banned or I will no longer post and delete my account.

I was clearing out emails from my Hotmail account the other day and stumbled across a large cache of emails from Mark, much like one might stumble across an unexploded ordnance on a building site. They dated from the days when he was involved getting the Trust up and running. The remarkable and surprising thing is that the correspondence is, initially at least, reasonable, logical, level-headed and laced with an articulate, good-humoured logic you struggle to find in emails a few months later.

I’m not entirely sure what happened, but it swiftly degenerated into nonsensical mud-slinging and personal tirades, when he had become the Mark we read today on this forum. The interesting thing, of course, is that back then we were fighting a common enemy: the Lavaflow crooks. Except this was a theoretical fight, since the trust never really got to the point of making a tangible impact beyond pissing a few people off. Mark’s behaviour at that time was counterproductive and detrimental to the efforts put in by others, like Pat Everitt and Mick Taylor, who are actual fans who go to games and genuinely have the best interests of the club at heart. In fact, I remember having a very long conversation with Dave Boyle at Supporters Direct about how we might be able to permanently bar Mark from the Trust. I think most people got thoroughly fed up and quit long before any of Dave’s good advice could be implemented.

The point being that Mark is exhibiting exactly the behaviour now as he did then, which to me suggests it really doesn’t matter who runs the club. A chairman could be genuinely malicious or entirely benevolent, but you can be sure Mark that regardless of who is in charge, Mark will be online, wittering away, winding people up with a copy of Roget’s next to him, because he is a classic narcissist; a self-absorbed megalomaniac with extra smiley faces. I highly doubt David Newton’s trembling in his boots at any of Mark’s ramblings (if he’s even bothered reading them) and why should he? Mark’s opinions are ultimately irrelevant. He was incapable of leading an organised charge against the Lavaflow crooks, so what hope does he have of ever undermining the plans laid down by the infinitely more credible Chestnut Homes? None.

Personally, even though he’d probably lump me in with everyone as a cretinous lump (as insults go, you have to admit that one’s quite funny) I quite like the bloke… well, the version I met in the mid-2000s anyway, I haven’t gone fishing with him recently. I find him entertaining in his own unique way. Just don’t take him too seriously, or ever become involved in anything he’s part of.


Pete B is still in therapy by the sounds of it. Get well soon Pete and I'll have that 20 quid you owe sometime if you really are a man with any self-respect  :-*
The B-Ark.  For Boston fans to talk about anything and everything they want to. Including trolls.

Ken Fox

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2953
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2014, 04:03:52 PM »
There are about 160 regular posters on here. So half of that is 80, so 81 is more than half, i.e. a majority.

Artemis

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
    • View Profile
Re: Scouse Pilgrim
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2014, 04:08:46 PM »
There are about 160 regular posters on here. So half of that is 80, so 81 is more than half, i.e. a majority.

160??? 

I find that hard to believe. 

For a poster to be classed as regular how often to they have to post?