Ban Quakerz

Threads that got the whole forum ROFLing

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

Return_of_Fetish
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:24 pm
Team Supported: Hartlepool

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Return_of_Fetish » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:28 am

I really have a pet hate for fans like DC (and not because he's a Darlo fan), I mean fans who consider themselves to be "better fans" than others. A fan is a fan, I've said many times that I consider myself a "lucky fan" always got cover when working to attend games, now I'm retired I just go. But fact that I might attend 46 league games out of 46 doesn't make me any better than someone who only attends 10 homes games I don't know that 10 game fans circumstances/commitments. and when fans like DC accept all fans as being the same and being able to give opinions then so much better for whichever club they support.

And to show what a hypocrite DC is
Darlo Cockney wrote:Yes - I do believe in free speech,


Unless it a different opinion to mine then I want him banned
Darlo Cockney wrote:[
I notice that this is only your 2nd post.
If you were a real Darlo supporter, given what we have been through in the last few weeks, you would not be asking such stupid questions.

Mods - ban him.

DC
And another for free speech, just out of interest when does the amount of posts someone makes make them a real supporter, just so I can finish one before his total and so don't become a Darlo Fan

tinshedender
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:16 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by tinshedender » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:30 am

A prerequisite of supporting Darlington FC is that you have to be either very thick or
mad, preferably both.
Quakerz has had to explain for a billion times to those of us who are thick, which divisions
we can and can't play in next season depending on CVA's being agreed, deadlines being met etc,etc. I rather fear he will have to explain it a trillion times.
He of course has 3 season tickets and is very definately mad.

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 12644
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Spyman » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:37 am

tinshedender wrote:A prerequisite of supporting Darlington FC is that you have to be either very thick or
mad, preferably both.
Quakerz has had to explain for a billion times to those of us who are thick, which divisions
we can and can't play in next season depending on CVA's being agreed, deadlines being met etc,etc. I rather fear he will have to explain it a trillion times.
He of course has 3 season tickets and is very definately mad.
I can absolutely gaurantee that 'true supporter' Darlo Cockney will be among those who don't understand which divisions we can play in next season as well.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

User avatar
Lawman3
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:47 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Lawman3 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:40 am

Return_of_Fetish wrote:I really have a pet hate for fans like DC (and not because he's a Darlo fan), I mean fans who consider themselves to be "better fans" than others. A fan is a fan, I've said many times that I consider myself a "lucky fan" always got cover when working to attend games, now I'm retired I just go. But fact that I might attend 46 league games out of 46 doesn't make me any better than someone who only attends 10 homes games I don't know that 10 game fans circumstances/commitments. and when fans like DC accept all fans as being the same and being able to give opinions then so much better for whichever club they support.

And to show what a hypocrite DC is
Darlo Cockney wrote:Yes - I do believe in free speech,


Unless it a different opinion to mine then I want him banned
Darlo Cockney wrote:[
I notice that this is only your 2nd post.
If you were a real Darlo supporter, given what we have been through in the last few weeks, you would not be asking such stupid questions.

Mods - ban him.

DC
And another for free speech, just out of interest when does the amount of posts someone makes make them a real supporter, just so I can finish one before his total and so don't become a Darlo Fan
Apparently, it's 316 posts, then you're officially a Darlo fan.
Never argue with an idiot: The best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot.

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by al_quaker » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:57 am

:lol:

princes town
Posts: 4127
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 2:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington/Blackburn

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by princes town » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:10 am

tinshedender wrote:He of course has 3 season tickets and is very definately mad.
why does he have 3 season tickets? :?

Of all my favourite DC posts was the one where he virtually accused some board members of scuppering the PW deal. I think I asked for an apology (a first).

I respect his fund raising efforts though.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Quakerz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:13 am

princes town wrote: why does he have 3 season tickets? :?
I don't have 3 season tickets, I pay for 3 (2 kids).
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

princes town
Posts: 4127
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 2:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington/Blackburn

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by princes town » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:30 am

Quakerz wrote:
princes town wrote: why does he have 3 season tickets? :?
I don't have 3 season tickets, I pay for 3 (2 kids).
That's a relief. I did start to wonder if you really are insane. :lol:

fat tony
Posts: 3403
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by fat tony » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:41 am

I just love Cockney's powers of reasoning in the opening post: Quakerz should be banned for being negative because Lidds cried and the Darlo Tykes hired a box :lol:

Fatty eats roadkill
Posts: 3664
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 7:31 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: On top of a 29 year old big chested woman

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Fatty eats roadkill » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:03 am

What is that stench?

Eau de shite by Mr Fetish!

Stirring yet again!
I DO NOT want Mr Fetish banned as I find him odious AND amusing when he comes on here with his mock sympathy or pretending to be reasonable!

His smarmyness is a cross between a snake oil salesman and bob monkhouse!

In fact I wish no one was banned hence my signature!
Waiting for Raj to shaft them!

tinshedender
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:16 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by tinshedender » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:39 am

Now that Snowscape is banned on Uncovered can we sponsor him to go on the Bunker and bore them all to death ,just like the asshole Mr Fetish on here.

User avatar
Christophano
Posts: 1841
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Christophano » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:50 am

mikkyx wrote:
Christophano wrote:Rule of thumb is to ignore him for an hour or so after a disappointing defeat while he gets it out of his system.
Only an hour? I'd've said a week. Maybe we should ban him from the final whistle in one game until kick off in the next ;)

DISCLAIMER: JOKE.
Botrash and I saw DarloPete pull out his phone when we went 1-0 up and openly considered slapping a temporary ban on him, until full time.

DISCLAIMER: DEADLY SERIOUS.

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 12644
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Spyman » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:52 am

Darlo_Pete wrote:Paul is one of the more controversial posters on here, as perhaps me and you are as well Pete.
Pete, I hate to break it to you, but you are far too boring to ever be considered controversial.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

User avatar
davidcorks 40yard OG
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by davidcorks 40yard OG » Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:58 am

tinshedender wrote:Now that Snowscape is banned on Uncovered can we sponsor him to go on the Bunker and bore them all to death ,just like the asshole Mr Fetish on here.

I would contribute to any sponsored Fuck off snowscape & MERLIN :lol: :clap: :clap:
Image

User avatar
wylam_rangers
Posts: 4249
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: North Riding of Yorkshire

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by wylam_rangers » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:25 am

Hawkeye wrote:Incidentally, DC, do the people who sit near you at matches also think Quakerz should be banned? I for one would like to hear their views on this.
I too must distance myself from DC's original post on this occasion.

The trouble is that we're all waiting on the perpetuator of this mess and everyone's getting twitchy.

User avatar
MKDarlo
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:39 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by MKDarlo » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:33 am

Mullet69 wrote:
Darlo Cockney wrote:We all know that most of us are working really hard to ensure that our Club still survives into the future.

Last Saturday, Geoff and the Tykes sold out the boxes, DFC 1883 and the Supporters Club, organised the after match presentaions and evening do, which all our players attended and expressed thanks to the fans for everything they are doing to try and save the Club.

Lidds was in tears about how much he cares about our Club and how much pressure he has been under in trying to run both the Youth set up as well as the team.

Then we have the inane postings of QUAKERZ, who criticises everything.

We all know that he is a serial criticiser, but, I am sorry, this is a guy that does not even come to games. - but chooses to post his bile on here, when he contributes absolutely nothing to the Club.

As far as I am concerned, he has got no right to post on this board anymore .

Please administrators - ban this prick - he is NOT a Darlington Supporter.

DC
You are probably the biggest c*** to have ever graced an internet messageboard. You, and people like you are also the reason I'm falling out of love with this football club. I've said before and will say again, I turn up on a Saturday as and when I want or can (few home games, most away nowadays), have a few beers, vent my spleen then go home and get on with my life and other hobbies. I'm rather proud of the £300 quid or so that I've probably put into the coffers, but am getting a bit fed up with the "I'm doing this, I'm doing that, what are you doing" attitude that's emanating from those who really do have nothing better to do with their lives.
Yes, the fundraising is fantastic and all that, but the biggest heroes are the unsung heroes - the ones who don't feel like they need to have their back patted every time someone gives them a quid.

As for opinions, I think Quakerz is quite good value for his at times (though I disagree with many) and as someone who quite obviously does go to games, and has done for many years see no reason why he should be banned.

DC, you have a giant chip on your shoulder, probably with life in general, possibly just with your own weasel-like appearance. You mention Q posting bile - ever read your own posts back? you are the most opinionated, obnoxious and horrible little man to have graced this board, and are generally wrong.

About everything!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS

I mean Q has clearly swallowed profanaurus but I do find that his views are close to my own.

Spectacular OG here from Darlo Cockney – can we not all live together in peace and harmony and stride arm in arm to the broad sunlit uplands of a new future as a community club?

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 12644
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Spyman » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:04 pm

Another huge positive about this thread is that it means we won't see Darlo Cockney on here for a little while until he thinks it has all blown over.

He's like that you see. When he gets shown up he dissapears for a little while, avoiding all questions directed at him.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

fat tony
Posts: 3403
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by fat tony » Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:26 pm

Spyman wrote:Another huge positive about this thread is that it means we won't see Darlo Cockney on here for a little while until he thinks it has all blown over.

He's like that you see. When he gets shown up he dissapears for a little while, avoiding all questions directed at him.
That's a shame. I would have thought a radical free-speech evangelist like Cockney would have eagerly wanted to exercise his right of reply.

I was quite looking forward to seeing what his response would be as well... My money was on a risible, squirming, dignity-averse, deflection attempt that would have everyone laughing at him again. But I guess we'll never know.

User avatar
Free_Transfer
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Hartlepool

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Free_Transfer » Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:32 pm

Fatty eats roadkill wrote:Now it's obvious that DC has self amputated his lower limbs with the biggest howitzer in the gun shop but some of the other posters on this thread are acting like rats out of a bag!

We all know DC posts some mental ramblings after the pub at times but I think this witch hunt is going a bit far now!

2 facts written in stone here:

1- Quakerz won't be banned!
2- DC & Quakerz love DFC!

They just go about things in different ways!
Careful mentioning guns around DC, last time we had this discussion i believe his moustache actually did a 360 turn in disgust.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by loan_star » Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:04 pm

If Quakerz was ever banned from this board then it wouldnt be worth reading. DC has shown himself to be an total dildo over this. Thank fook he wasnt made moderator!

BillinghamPoolie
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:37 pm
Team Supported: Hartlepool United

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by BillinghamPoolie » Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:21 pm

Fatty eats roadkill wrote:What is that stench?

Eau de shite by Mr Fetish!

Stirring yet again!
I DO NOT want Mr Fetish banned as I find him odious AND amusing when he comes on here with his mock sympathy or pretending to be reasonable!

His smarmyness is a cross between a snake oil salesman and bob monkhouse!

In fact I wish no one was banned hence my signature!
I always liked this line from Bob Monkhouse

“The secret of success in show business is sincerity…… Once you can fake that, you’ve got it made”

Sadly our Bob hasn't mastered it yet. :o :lol:

lenniedodge
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:19 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Ban Quakerz

Post by lenniedodge » Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:49 pm

In May of 1993, deeply offended by its "blasphemous" content, a priest wrote to Channel 4 and complained about the recent screening of "Revelations," a recording of Bill Hicks's live show at London's Dominion Theatre some months before (a show which, incidentally, can be seen in its entirety here).

Upon receiving said complaint, Channel 4 passed it on to Hicks himself. Hicks then responded to the priest directly with the following letter. It doesn't disappoint.

(Source: Love All the People; Image: Bill Hicks, via The Quiet Front.)

8 June 1993

Dear Sir,

After reading your letter expressing your concerns regarding my special 'Revelations', I felt duty-bound to respond to you myself in hopes of clarifying my position on the points you brought up, and perhaps enlighten you as to who I really am.

Where I come from — America — there exists this wacky concept called 'freedom of speech', which many people feel is one of the paramount achievements in mankind's mental development. I myself am a strong supporter of the 'Right of freedom of speech', as I'm sure most people would be if they truly understood the concept. 'Freedom of speech' means you support the right of people to say exactly those ideas which you do not agree with. (Otherwise, you don't believe in 'freedom of speech', but rather only those ideas which you believe to be acceptably stated.) Seeing as how there are so many different beliefs in the world, and as it would be virtually impossible for all of us to agree on any one belief, you may begin to realize just how important an idea like 'freedom of speech' really is. The idea basically states 'while I don't agree or care for what you are saying, I do support your right to say it, for herein lies true freedom'.

You say you found my material 'offensive' and 'blasphemous'. I find it interesting that you feel your beliefs are denigrated or threatened when I'd be willing to bet you've never received a single letter complaining about your beliefs, or asking why they are allowed to be. (If you have received such a letter, it definitely did not come from me.) Furthermore, I imagine a quick perusal of an average week of television programming would reveal many more shows of a religious nature, than one of my shows — which are called 'specials' by virtue of the fact that they are very rarely on.

All I'm doing in 'Revelations' is giving my point of view in my language based on my experiences — much the same way religious broadcasters might organize their programs. While I've found many of the religious shows I've viewed over the years not to be to my liking, or in line with my own beliefs, I've never considered it my place to exert any greater type of censorship than changing the channel, or better yet — turning off the TV completely.

Now, for the part of your letter I found most disturbing.

In support of your position of outrage, you posit the hypothetical scenario regarding the possibly 'angry' reaction of Muslims to material they might find similarly offensive. Here is my question to you: Are you tacitly condoning the violent terrorism of a handful of thugs to whom the idea of 'freedom of speech' and tolerance is perhaps as foreign as Christ's message itself? If you are somehow implying that their intolerance to contrary beliefs is justifiable, admirable, or perhaps even preferable to one of acceptance and forgiveness, then I wonder what your true beliefs really are.

If you had watched my entire show, you would have noticed in my summation of my beliefs the fervent plea to the governments of the world to spend less money on the machinery of war, and more on feeding, clothing, and educating the poor and needy of the world ... A not-so-unchristian sentiment at that!

Ultimately, the message in my material is a call for understanding rather than ignorance, peace rather than war, forgiveness rather than condemnation, and love rather than fear. While this message may have understandably been lost on your ears (due to my presentation), I assure you the thousands of people I played to in my tours of the United Kingdom got it.

I hope I helped answer some of your questions. Also, I hope you consider this an invitation to keep open the lines of communication. Please feel free to contact me personally with comments, thoughts, or questions, if you so choose. If not, I invite you to enjoy my two upcoming specials entitled 'Mohammed the TWIT' and 'Buddha, you fat PIG'. (JOKE)

Sincerely,

Bill Hicks

darlotoon
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by darlotoon » Mon Apr 30, 2012 7:20 pm

Quakerz is always worth a read , whether it is in his calmer moments or his rants . He is one of the few posters who really has made me laugh out loud .

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Mon Apr 30, 2012 7:28 pm

Lawman3 wrote:We don't need mavericks posting their own opinions
What about Javericks?

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Quakerz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 7:40 pm

Still can't believe Jazz got banned!
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

PierremontQuaker03
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:53 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by PierremontQuaker03 » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:04 pm

in answer to this thread I don't really care to be on honest, we as fans, our club, have more to be concerned about.
Although Quakerz your language and attitude at times goes a bit over the top - to learn that you have two kids makes me more concerned and I hope you dont display this kind of language in front of them.
In your favour Quakerz your always up for a debate.
“If you can't hit a driver, don't.”
Greg Norman

fergies50yarder
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by fergies50yarder » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:11 pm

Darlo_George_96 wrote:
fergies50yarder wrote:DC, why should he be banned?quote]

Read the post again
Yep, DC wants Quakerz banned, I don't happen to agree with that stance. Can't see anything wrong in what I said to be fair.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Quakerz » Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:32 pm

PierremontQuaker03 wrote:in answer to this thread I don't really care to be on honest, we as fans, our club, have more to be concerned about.
Although Quakerz your language and attitude at times goes a bit over the top - to learn that you have two kids makes me more concerned and I hope you dont display this kind of language in front of them.
Yes I do swear in front of them, but why are you concerned? Swearing is part of life and people that are offended by it need to worry about more important things like "what am I making for tea tonight", and "have I been a good christian today?" because the invisible made up sky man is watching.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

JonnyBoy
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 4:30 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Norwich

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by JonnyBoy » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:05 pm

Why is this in Virtual Feethams?

User avatar
Ash_Quaker
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:09 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Thirsk/Southampton

Re: Ban Quakerz

Post by Ash_Quaker » Mon Apr 30, 2012 9:21 pm

JonnyBoy wrote:Why is this in Virtual Feethams?
So nobody misses the chance to have a go at DC and do a bit of arse licking towards quakers whilst they're at it.

Locked