"Sniping"

This site seems to have descended into exactly the same sort of "sniping" that the other site was accused of.

It seems that it's fine on here to snipe at those who support the Trust and their approach.

Isn't that exactly the sort of behaviour what was criticised about the other forum?

Personally I think the best way to go about things involves a happy medium of both direct action and the way the Trust are going about things. Why should they be mutually exclusive

Meanwhile Rome burns and everyone continues to fight about which type of substance should be used to put the fire out.

i havent read any sniping, only opinions. but then i suppose one persons snipe is another opinion.

i havent read any sniping, only opinions. but then i suppose one persons snipe is another opinion.

That's why I put it in exclamation points.

The comments on here have been no different to what what accused of being sniping on CCMB.

i havent read any sniping, only opinions. but then i suppose one persons snipe is another opinion.

That's why I put it in exclamation points.

The comments on here have been no different to what what accused of being sniping on CCMB.

"sniping" is personal digs and i havent seen anything of the sort tonight.

i havent read any sniping, only opinions. but then i suppose one persons snipe is another opinion.

That's why I put it in exclamation points.

The comments on here have been no different to what what accused of being sniping on CCMB.

"sniping" is personal digs and i havent seen anything of the sort tonight.

So....

LETS FACE IT YOU HAVE TRIED TO JOIN UP WITH THE SUPPORTERS CLUB TO SAVE FACE.

AND

TLG wouldnt do that because someone from this Forum like Carl started the Petition.

are not personal digs then?

Rhigheo.

I'm not trying to take sides here but lets call a spade a spade is it?

That's why I put it in exclamation points.

The comments on here have been no different to what what accused of being sniping on CCMB.

"sniping" is personal digs and i havent seen anything of the sort tonight.

So....

LETS FACE IT YOU HAVE TRIED TO JOIN UP WITH THE SUPPORTERS CLUB TO SAVE FACE.

AND

TLG wouldnt do that because someone from this Forum like Carl started the Petition.

are not personal digs then?

Rhigheo.

I'm not trying to take sides here but lets call a spade a spade is it?

hardly worth a sniping thread is it? the mods are constantly trying to cut out any sniping , there are 5 of us and belive me its hard work trying to keep an eye on it all.

i even get up early to check

This site seems to have descended into exactly the same sort of "sniping" that the other site was accused of.

It seems that it's fine on here to snipe at those who support the Trust and their approach.

Isn't that exactly the sort of behaviour what was criticised about the other forum?

Personally I think the best way to go about things involves a happy medium of both direct action and the way the Trust are going about things. Why should they be mutually exclusive

Meanwhile Rome burns and everyone continues to fight about which type of substance should be used to put the fire out.

This board does not snipe, People have opinions and have strong views, the problem seems to be that if there is a negative response there are those who think we are downing things, the reality of the situation is negative.

LETS FACE IT YOU HAVE TRIED TO JOIN UP WITH THE SUPPORTERS CLUB TO SAVE FACE.

AND

TLG wouldnt do that because someone from this Forum like Carl started the Petition.

are not personal digs then?

Rhigheo.

I'm not trying to take sides here but lets call a spade a spade is it?

Your first example is a question which could easily be answered yes or no, the second is an opinion which again can be challenged.

Neither are sniping. On CCMB yesterday TLG said he wouldn't repeat his belittling to my face because it was too 'ugly' even though he has no idea what I look like.

I would say that is closer to sniping than the examples you have given. Also there is a tendancy to over state what has been said. Because I questioned whether TLG was engaging enough with the membership to decide on the Trust direction, rather than him just taking his own route, he decided that was enough to conclude I was referring to him as a 'wanker' when no such expression was ever made.

I'm sorry you are totally wrong with your conclusion. There will always be boardline remarks in heated debates but this MB has got nowhere near as bad as CCMB.

We are NOT Sniping just airing our Views .