Post history

History for Napier Phoenix

Phoenix Ownership - Rob says FTFFA (Part 2)

Back to topic

Current version

Posted November 30, 2015 09:27 · last edited March 18, 2021 07:34

bwtcf wrote:

The FFA are plain wrong when they CLAIM that they only ban people when they are absolutely SURE that thewy have positively identified them.

https://audioboom.com/boos/3884794-blue-white-brig...

Like most on here I think the FFA are a bunch of tossers but do you really think they have gone out of their way to ban people just for the sake of it? I'd be very surprised if in most [if not all] cases they have reasonable grounds to impose the ban. I'm saying that they might be wrong with a couple of cases, but what would their motivation be to get it wrong on purpose? To get back on thread, the same with getting rid of us, I'm sure they are quite convinced their reasoning is right, despite it obviously being wrong. by the same token, there seem to be plenty of Ockers that agree with them [disregarding the obvious FFA mouthpieces at Fox]

Previous versions

2 versions
Unknown editor edited March 18, 2021 07:34
bwtcf wrote:

The FFA are plain wrong when they CLAIM that they only ban people when they are absolutely SURE that thewy have positively identified them.

https://audioboom.com/boos/3884794-blue-white-brig...

Like most on here I think the FFA are a bunch of tossers but do you really think they have gone out of their way to ban people just for the sake of it? I'd be very surprised if in most [if not all] cases they have reasonable grounds to impose the ban. I'm saying that they might be wrong with a couple of cases, but what would their motivation be to get it wrong on purpose? To get back on thread, the same with getting rid of us, I'm sure they are quite convinced their reasoning is right, despite it obviously being wrong. by the same token, there seem to be plenty of Ockers that agree with them [disregarding the obvious FFA mouthpieces at Fox]
Napier Phoenix edited November 30, 2015 09:27
bwtcf wrote:

The FFA are plain wrong when they CLAIM that they only ban people when they are absolutely SURE that thewy have positively identified them.

https://audioboom.com/boos/3884794-blue-white-brig...

Like most on here I think the FFA are a bunch of tossers but do you really think they have gone out of their way to ban people just for the sake of it? I'd be very surprised if in most [if not all] cases they have reasonable grounds to impose the ban. I'm saying that they might not be wrong with a couple of cases, but what would their motivation be to get it wrong on purpose? To get back on thread, the same with getting rid of us, I'm sure they are quite convinced their reasoning is right, despite it obviously being wrong. by the same token, there seem to be plenty of Ockers that agree with them [disregarding the obvious FFA mouthpieces at Fox]