Time to do the right thing mods

And ban Alpine Saint.

I think more and more posters are noticing patterns of behviour which indicate that Alpine is either trolling or being inflammatory on purpose just to get a certain response.

Despite the fact that some posters have certainly used abusive language towards him at times, he simply hides behind this and claims abuse when people merely question his motives.

If you look at the main board, there are severals posters who at least try and engage in a rational debate but are met more often than not with an unpleasant and rude response.

I know plently have him on ignore, but despite their best efforts his inflammatory manner means the majority of his posts get seen by all anyway via quotations.

I think the forum would be a far better place with less threads derailed if you simply banned him. When will enough be enough?

If we had a poll on this I'm sure you'd see that many agree and surely providing a good customer experience is important to this site and any prospective revenues?

Also, it's well known that Alpine has a weight issue which can lead to multiple related health problems, exasperated by stress and anxiety. IMO, the SWF only contributes towards this so there is a moral obligation for you to be considering here as well.

I will not place Alpine on ignore myself and will continue (in vien I feel) to try and debate with him in a rationale manner but I'm asking you to consider this seriously.

I'm sure others who either agree or disagree will contribute this thread.

I do agree with this. At least for a temporary time.

I have had AS on Ignore for a while now (probably a year or so) but it does nothing because he has a habit of taking over so many threads (look at his post count) that you end up seeing the tosh he writes anyway.

I certainly feel for someone like him that a three posts per day cap would be excellent when he returns from his ban.

At the end of the day, most of us pay money to use this forum, and if a poll was conducted Im sure 80+% would support some sort of ban.

80% makes no difference at all, banning someone as you do not apopear to agree with then is at best close minded and at worst fascist, paying money? What has that to do with it? He pays his money, I pay my money, if I dont agree with a post I respond to it or I ignore it, I suggest you do the same.

80% makes no difference at all, banning someone as you do not apopear to agree with then is at best close minded and at worst fascist, paying money? What has that to do with it? He pays his money, I pay my money, if I dont agree with a post I respond to it or I ignore it, I suggest you do the same.

Maybe people will complain about you Bazza when you reach 30,000 posts of drivel.

80% makes no difference at all, banning someone as you do not apopear to agree with then is at best close minded and at worst fascist, paying money? What has that to do with it? He pays his money, I pay my money, if I dont agree with a post I respond to it or I ignore it, I suggest you do the same.

At the end of the day, the Owners of the board decide what they want to do. If they dislike someone's behaviour or feel they lessen the discussion quality then they can act as they want to.

The fact that 80% of the members who pay their fee would agree then that surely is important to them, as any Customer feedback would be.

Ignoring someone is better in my book than grassing and using the old "I am a paying customer" routine.

At the end of the day Alpine is entitled to his opinion as everyone else here is entitled to theirs. Just because a few of us don't think everything is rosy in the S.F.C garden, doesn't mean we should be banned for daring to express that fact.

You can't ban someone just because they are a manic depressive.

Has anyone ever recieved an infraction because of Alpine?

I have

At the end of the day Alpine is entitled to his opinion as everyone else here is entitled to theirs. Just because a few of us don't think everything is rosy in the S.F.C garden, doesn't mean we should be banned for daring to express that fact.

You're missing the point Darren. He's very deliberate in what he does. He's been doing it for years and years and it doesn't add anything but bickering on the main forum. It's not just about not agreeing with an opinion.

You're missing the point Darren. He's very deliberate in what he does. He's been doing it for years and years and it doesn't add anything but bickering on the main forum. It's not just about not agreeing with an opinion.

Best thing you can do then mate is to ignore him. As they say, don't feed the trolls.

Best thing you can do then mate is to ignore him. As they say, don't feed the trolls.

But I have him on ignore and still have to read his drivel because everyone quotes him all the time. Ignore doesn nothing. He ruins threads - cap him to 3 posts per day.

Best thing you can do then mate is to ignore him. As they say, don't feed the trolls.

Happy to do so on a personal level, however it would take everyone doing the same in order for it to be successful.

Many people have him on ignore yet still have their forum visits tainted by him.

If many people believe him to be a troll, the mods should take action IMO.

Happy to do so on a personal level, however it would take everyone doing the same in order for it to be successful.

 

Many people have him on ignore yet still have their forum visits tainted by him.

 

If many people believe him to be a troll, the mods should take action IMO.

I think rather than ban him they could do what Saint Charlie said.

Cap him to 1-3 posts per day for 1 month and see if he learns his lesson.

I think rather than ban him they could do what Saint Charlie said.

Cap him to 1-3 posts per day for 1 month and see if he learns his lesson.

This would be tolerable and IMO would please nearly everyone. If he shows he can debate properly then give him full member status the next month.

I would like him banned more than the next person...with that, I would like NickG banned...he is the complete opposite end of the spectrum

I would like him banned more than the next person...with that, I would like NickG banned...he is the complete opposite end of the spectrum

Dunno, NickG has at least got some stuff right and has been enjoying the ride over the last few seasons...it's what it's supposed to be about after all.

Quiet from the mods it seems. I hope they are taking some time to consider the positive impact this one simple action will have on the forum.

Dunno, NickG has at least got some stuff right and has been enjoying the ride over the last few seasons...it's what it's supposed to be about after all.

 

Quiet from the mods it seems. I hope they are taking some time to consider the positive impact this one simple action will have on the forum.

I think the MODs stance is...dont like it, ignore it...alpine is the least personal from many posters..more than those that argue with him (i am one of them)....its just words on a computer screen/mobile about a game...nothing more..he is not breaking the law, being racist, being personal

I would like him banned but can see why he is not

I think the MODs stance is...dont like it, ignore it...alpine is the least personal from many posters..more than those that argue with him (i am one of them)....its just words on a computer screen/mobile about a game...nothing more..he is not breaking the law, being racist, being personal

 

I would like him banned but can see why he is not

Well I would argue he does get personal....ever been accused of being thick, illiterate, poorly educated etc by Alpine? I know I have as have plenty of others.

He's just an unpleasant character and doesn't contribute much to the forum other than ill feeling. The mods could take action if they want, it shouldn't have to be about him being racist etc.

This is quite funny, there was a response above saying about another poster as being positive over the last couple of years so therefore validating in him not being banned!

If he is rude and personal then of course there is merit for that, to lose an opinion on a forum, yes a forum is self defeating and says more of the people advocating then the so called rude accused.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

This is quite funny, there was a response above saying about another poster as being positive over the last couple of years so therefore validating in him not being banned!

If he is rude and personal then of course there is merit for that, to lose an opinion on a forum, yes a forum is self defeating and says more of the people advocating then the so called rude accused.

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

If you're referring to NickG, he seems like a nice chap and doesn't hurl abuse at anyone who doesn't agree.

Don't confuse what I'm writing here as being about an intolerance to other peoples opinions because it isn't about that at all.

I'm sure your staunch defence of Alpine is all in relation to your ban on 606 or whatever but also consider my concerns for Alpines health which shouldn't be over looked

Has anyone ever recieved an infraction because of Alpine?

 

I have

I have.

Alpine is annoying.

The right thing to do is close this thread. Very unfair to single out individual users.

Could you add Turkish to the list too?