Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by neil

  1. 2 hours ago, David said:

    He could very well be the real deal, but beating John Phillips, Rhys McKee, and Gerald Meerschaert doesn't prove anything. 

    He's exciting, but let's wait until he faces someone of note before we all start talking about him as a top five fighter, especially considering the top five consists of Covington, Burns, Edwards, Masvidal, and Thompson.

    Exactly...he is exciting but its amazing how in MMA people are so quick to anoint the next champ.

  2. 2 hours ago, Keith Houchen said:

     angry taylor swift GIF

    I'm extremely sad about this. Whenever I'm be coming back to the UK my Mum will always ask what she should go out and get for the house (bless), Brannigans were always on the list. She had said she couldn't always find them at Tesco's, I thought it was the old bird mugging me off, but not only does it seem like she was right but she'll always have this excuse now 😭

  3. Covington strikes me as a very frustrating person to fight, both in his personality and his style of fighting. Just someone who is very hard to get anything going against. Was pretty disheartening seeing Woodley going against him, every fight I want to see Covington destroyed, but also realize against many many fighters it simply isn't going to happen.

    Woodley is done, he needs to retire. This feels like the 3rd fight where he's CLEARLY been losing and just takes the approach of throwing less strikes and being less aggressive.

    Covington's shit post-fight was gross and I'd like to see Usman break his jaw again.

  4. 19 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said:

    This thread has been ruined for me by most people not understanding it. 

    Ain't that the truth, it's a simple premise, here's a thing I liked, then something happened, now I can't like it. Not "I don't like wotzits, never liked em, disgusting".

  5. I don't mind it, although not a fan of how narrow actual posts are now with the thread stats sitting there - thats a snazzy feature but I don't think it has much real value on an ongoing basis.

  6. On 9/12/2020 at 7:37 AM, jazzygeofferz said:

    Covid Marshalls. Definitely not just some idiot on a power trip who wants to get away with wearing their hi-viz to get away with some dodgy stuff 


    Hahahaha, this is glorious. Just the other week I was explaining to a Yank coworker of mine about how much they love a hi-viz jacket in the UK.

  7. Donkey's years ago now, but I was a fresh faced 17 year old who just got a "dream job" working for an IT company. In reality I was just taken advantage of by a couple of Tory cunts who ran a shitty IT company. However, this was around 97/98 so the internet was still fairly new, there were lots of places you could learn about all sorts of naughty things that people didn't know about, and operating systems would be vulnerable for ages with bugs.

    The best was a program I'd found, I don't recall what it was but it was along the lines of a ping of death type tool, that would cause a BSOD on another computer. My manager was the type of person who loved to put you down constantly, loved to brag about his public school upbringing that no-one gave a shit about and would never give you any credit what so ever for what you did for his fucking company. So this tool became very valuable in the war that myself and my coworker waged against him.

    Nothing was better than waiting for him to write up a long email and just before he hit send running this tool and watching his computer throw up the BSOD. He'd be cursing at the computer, but because he was such an ego maniac he couldn't bring himself to ask us minions for help. He spent weeks taking his computer apart, changing parts, reinstalling windows etc. The joy of letting him gloat for a bit because he proclaimed the issue fixed just to fire up the tool once again and dash his hopes was immense.

    Eventually Microsoft fixed the issue, the advantage of "them days" when you didn't get daily updates on your computer and instead had to wait ages for a "service pack" to be released, and ended that fun.

  8. On 8/23/2020 at 9:42 AM, David said:

    This is the first show in god-knows how long that I didn't even bother watching at all. I looked for spoilers on the Edgar fight and chose not to bother even watching the main event.

    Same here. I turned it on late and caught the main event and that was about it.

  9. 6 minutes ago, Pinc said:

    But a vote on Dolt of the Year isn’t human nature and it can go without anyone’s enjoyment of the forum being effected.

    And I guess that is where we differ, I see those awards as ridicule.

  10. 1 hour ago, Pinc said:

    I don't understand how you can concede that the negative awards could be harmful but not support getting rid of them. Why take the risk? Who finds the negative awards so amusing to risk causing harm? Vulnerable people often aren't the best placed to work out whether the internet is a safe place for them. Why put that decision on them? When the consequences could be dire?

    Because I can see the difference between the possibility for them to be harmful vs them actually being harmful. We've had a "At, not with" award since 2003 you know. Now I know what you're going to retort with, "so you're ok with it just because someone hasn't done themselves in yet? Disgustedly yours, Pinc". But lets consider the following:

    Let's assume we do get rid of the negative awards, what happens? Probably people end up flaming someone in whatever threads they post in because there is no other mechanism to express such views, so I suppose those types of posts should be banned too because surely there is the same risk of harm there if someone gets flamed? Oh wait we do have a rule for that, but I can't stop someone from posting that and the person seeing that post and if they see it then who knows what they might do. Ok I'll make it so everyones posts need to be approved. Sounds like a fun forum. Don't be silly neil, that is over the top, just police the forum and make it clear that any flaming at all results in a ban, its fine if we ban the 10 year largely loved poster because they got pissed off with the brand new poster who keeps on posting shit in every thread ruining any discussion that was taking place.

    Ok, so what if the person just keeps on posting away, pissing off the majority of the forum, then what? Posters should use the report function for them because they are "low quality posts" (note: a rule many forums have and aggressively enforce), and perhaps a mod sees enough reports and bans the person. Should we ban the act of banning because of the risk that someone may view getting banned as putting them over the edge? Ah thats not going to work then is it, ok what about downvotes? Nope can't have them because cliques use it to bully someone don't they. What about karma? That will work won't it, just like reddit...oh wait.

    My point being is that I don't see any magical solution for this risk, if someone is in that fragile of a state it's pretty much impossible to have a functional forum where people freely interact while completely mitigating the risk of someone doing self-harm. That's why I say that the decision whether to stay as a participant on this forum needs to be made by them, I cannot and will not do a mental assessment of each and every poster here to figure out whether I should stop them from posting here or not.

    If there were enough people who messaged mods on this forum that negative awards were doing them in then I would imagine we'd adjust them, but we haven't had any reports that I recall in almost 20 years. What we have received year after year are complaints from shit posters who don't like being nominated for them despite being encouraged to be less shit.

  • Create New...