By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I'm delighted to let the forum know that, following a cordial exchange of emails, viewpoints and apologies, the matter has now been resolved amicably between Frimley and Wes's dad, David, and a line has been drawn under it by all parties.
I think there was a bit of naivity from Frimley on the impact his posts might have - which I think all of us can be guilty of at times - of which he is now more acutely aware, while the rather unpleasant Instagram post at the weekend I think was the catalyst for the release of a few understandable frustrations.
Perhaps the rest of us can now move on from the matter and put it behind us, as they have, while remaining conscious that there are families behind players who may be reading posts on here and on social media.
85
Let's just blame the ref. (n/t) on 16:24 - Feb 13 with 2402 views
I don't know about those..... on 16:17 - Feb 13 by LankHenners
I've addressed that with Phil so will leave it there if that's alright.
Not sure I quite agree really (although I'm sure I've probably just not seen some more egregious examples) but as I said yesterday or whenever it was, everyone who's been banned has deserved it for one reason for another and I don't think anyone can really have any complaints about anyone who's been kicked into touch to be honest.
Not sure it's worth going into specific examples here really but there has been the odd instance of posters being banned not necessarily because they said something horrendous but because the nature of what and how they posted just rubbed too many people up the wrong way and made the state of the board a bit tedious. Think it's fair to say that is ultimately the case here more or less.
Think a lot of people could do with ignoring things more (even you, even me!) when it is essentially just some pointless crap, although I know it can be hard when someone's either calling someone out or deliberately posting about something or in a way that is clearly trying to irk a certain person. The latter I do sympathise with Phil and Gav having to manage as the 'instigator' can always swear blind they weren't actually doing what it looks quite a bit like what they were doing.
The daft thing is if Town win a couple or so games all these issues shrink right down to next to nothing.
Elite Level Poster: Elite Level Supporter: Elite Level Human
0
Let's just blame the ref. (n/t) on 16:29 - Feb 13 with 2379 views
This isn't a criticism (although I'm sure some will see it as one) - it feels like effectively this is a commercial decision now rather than a moral one?
I don't agree with that slant Chris. It could be that Frimley returning is commercially attractive, due to the content he produces and replies he attracts. It's difficult to know whether Frimley-related traffic increases or decreases forum footfall and output, from our position, but I'd wager many days are busier on account of him alone (alongside Admin's red box, in fairness). We should take Phil's consideration for the board at face value, in my opinion. He could easily have just foisted Frimley back on us with a differently crafted message after all (one which effectively mitigated potential fallout).
Personally, I agree with Dan. February's a short month and we're halfway through already. Afford him the rest of the month to reset himself and experience life without the forum, which may do him the world of good, and then let Frimley return with renewed vigour if he wishes to (🫣). They say it takes 90 days to break a habit but I don't believe it's for us to impose that on him. Phil will provide him with a short guide on how to avoid a repeat of this situation. The rest of us will be in a better place to know whether to apply the ignore function instantly (I understand this makes for a more fractured reading experience, but life isn't intended to be perfect).
I offer this opinion as someone who doesn't feel they benefit from Frimley's posts, who is occasionally annoyed by them but who doesn't have him on ignore. I do believe we should accommodate as many viewpoints, personalities, writing styles and intelligence levels as possible though, when contributions don't overstep into hateful content.
This isn't a criticism (although I'm sure some will see it as one) - it feels like effectively this is a commercial decision now rather than a moral one?
Not really sure what you mean. Commercially, whether one user is posting or not is neither here nor there in the grand scheme of our income.
This thread is one of the most amazing and revelatory things I have read on here in over 25 years. I feel like I live on a different planet from many people posting in here.
In all fairness we've had that impression of you for years....
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
There are basically 4 types of posters.... on 15:07 - Feb 13 by Bloots
....when it comes to dealing with Frimmers.
1. Those that just ignore him (sensible) 2. Those that engage in discussions with him (madmen) 3. Those that just respond negatively to whatever he types, and end up clogging up the board more than even he does (argument seeking bullies) 4. Those that bring him up on threads that he hasn't even contributed to and then moan when he responds (obsessive weirdos)
Those in groups 3 and 4 need to sharpen up and take some responsibility as well.
You do of course realise that in this post you are bringing him up in a thread that he hasn't even responded to, don't you, you obsessive weirdo? 😘
Pleased to hear that. I think it is a good reminder to everyone that players and their families DO read this forum, and whenever I go to an away game and the families are there (QPR and Wimbledon come to mind), I just want to welcome them with open arms into our club.
I think it is also useful for the players and their families to understand we are delighted with what happened last year AND this year too. But....... we have been in the championship for many many years before and we know how tough a league it is to get out of. So there maybe additional nervousness / tension right now, that we have lost our 2nd position and 10 pt cushion. A lot of people (me included) may be fearful that if we don't do it this season we maybe set for another long period in this division. That does unfortunately add pressure to the situation and expectations are high due to the incredible playing style the manager has implemented.
Anyway, I am sure David will be there Saturday in what should be a great game down in Wales, where he will witness first hand that we love Wes Burns. There just is no debate to be had about that.
Good on you Phil, it’s testament to your character that you resolve such things in a dignified way. The whole episode is a bit embarrassing innit.
I thought the cadence of his negativity towards Burns was the real issue. This place is great for discussing opinions, we’ll never all agree on stuff and that’s part of the fun. Most people seem capable of being objective and discussing things respectfully.
To my mind the issue with Frimley was it became less an opinion and more an ongoing vendetta in this case. Seemed intent on nailing his colours to a mast with his latest ‘hot take’ and then became intent on trying to validate his opinion even when so clearly unfair. As others have said it’s not so much about the ‘what’ but the ‘how’, and it was incredibly tedious and off putting in terms of engaging with the site.
I’m all for 2nd chances myself. Maybe it’s a lesson he can learn from. Your pub thought innit.
Pleased to hear that. I think it is a good reminder to everyone that players and their families DO read this forum, and whenever I go to an away game and the families are there (QPR and Wimbledon come to mind), I just want to welcome them with open arms into our club.
I think it is also useful for the players and their families to understand we are delighted with what happened last year AND this year too. But....... we have been in the championship for many many years before and we know how tough a league it is to get out of. So there maybe additional nervousness / tension right now, that we have lost our 2nd position and 10 pt cushion. A lot of people (me included) may be fearful that if we don't do it this season we maybe set for another long period in this division. That does unfortunately add pressure to the situation and expectations are high due to the incredible playing style the manager has implemented.
Anyway, I am sure David will be there Saturday in what should be a great game down in Wales, where he will witness first hand that we love Wes Burns. There just is no debate to be had about that.
Well said
0
There are basically 4 types of posters.... on 20:24 - Feb 13 with 1811 views
I'm a member of an Essec Cricket forum and Simon Harmer's mum is a member. If your son/daughter/brother/sister is playing for a team it's natural to have a look what people are saying about them or what else the fans are saying. They become fans/followers of the team because that's who they play for, they want Ipswich/the team your kid is playing for to win as much as we do. They've been driving them around to football training from about 5 years old and have put everything in to give their kid a chance.
Family will read this and I reckon a fair number of current players have a look on here to see what's going on, everything will be seen. It's not being posted into a void.
I think if there's a bit of a change in terms of volume of posts and a bit more thought and consideration, then I don't have a problem. David Burns asked if he could be allowed back.
But I don't see this as just mine, Gav (and Mark)'s forum, it is the users' as well, so would be interested in others' thoughts. Some I know are not going to be entirely receptive to the suggestion.
I think a decent break is required. Then a trial return
Other banned posters seem to have been given an extended break before being allowed back then swiftly removed again if they return to their old ways which I think is fair enough as a general rule.
Have to say I think reducing the issue in this case to simply people not arguing 'properly' a bit (well, very) disingenuous.
For example I never really felt comfortable with him being allowed on here after his multiple posts mocking mental health, using it as a stick to beat people and going as far as to infer that people calling the Samaritans helpline are 'attention seekers'. For my money that crosses a line that shouldn't easily be able to be crossed back.
Not bringing that up for the sake of stirring an old argument but think it puts things in better context rather than just talking about him like he was a bit of a div that posted too much.
If you applied the 'you can just ignore them' excuse to everyone you might as well let everyone who's been banned back and that obviously won't go down well.
With the greatest respect in the world, there's a poster on this forum who I imagine most would call respectable who used the death of Kevin Beattie to have a pop at Paul Lambert and is still freely able to post on here.
So whilst Frimley has been a complete and utter loon, from what I've seen, he never stooped that low.
I'm a member of an Essec Cricket forum and Simon Harmer's mum is a member. If your son/daughter/brother/sister is playing for a team it's natural to have a look what people are saying about them or what else the fans are saying. They become fans/followers of the team because that's who they play for, they want Ipswich/the team your kid is playing for to win as much as we do. They've been driving them around to football training from about 5 years old and have put everything in to give their kid a chance.
Family will read this and I reckon a fair number of current players have a look on here to see what's going on, everything will be seen. It's not being posted into a void.
That's sort of why I felt the need to always challenge his erroneous views. If he was just saying it down the pub after a few pints most people would ignore the daft sod. When it's on a forum we know the club monitors (and also now know families and perhaps even players look at) then it becomes harder to ignore (for all those saying just ignore him).
Nobody's above criticism in sport, and fans will have a rant occasionally, but there are ways to do it and ways that overstep the line. That's true on the terraces or online.
So to be clear; are we allowed to strongly criticise players’ individual performances? If their mum kicks off on Twitter about it does the poster in question have to become a lotus eater or something?
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
No strong opinion on Frims personally - but in general I'm a libertarian about these things, banning should be for extreme circs only and I see no evidence Frim crossed that line.
There are basically 4 types of posters.... on 15:07 - Feb 13 by Bloots
....when it comes to dealing with Frimmers.
1. Those that just ignore him (sensible) 2. Those that engage in discussions with him (madmen) 3. Those that just respond negatively to whatever he types, and end up clogging up the board more than even he does (argument seeking bullies) 4. Those that bring him up on threads that he hasn't even contributed to and then moan when he responds (obsessive weirdos)
Those in groups 3 and 4 need to sharpen up and take some responsibility as well.
5. The gentle teasers, like Maltesers, but less crunchy......
Just one small problem; sell their houses to who, Ben? Fcking Aquaman?
This thread is one of the most amazing and revelatory things I have read on here in over 25 years. I feel like I live on a different planet from many people posting in here.
Just one small problem; sell their houses to who, Ben? Fcking Aquaman?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
