Dibden Purlieu Saint

Mate. Frankly this sounds terrifying to me, but then although I have never had an experience with ghosts/demons it is something I have always been 'frightened' of. I suggest you go down to that church down at the bottom of your road and ask the Rev. He'll have an idea of a course of action.

We should put them all in a massive sack, do it up and then throw it in the North Sea.

Turkish is a pikey sympathist, and like other gypo lovers like Vanessa Redgrave, they are completely detached and clueless of the issues they cause.

Another post just to get a reaction by stating something that is 100% false. Do you never stop? The object of this page is to bring together a definitive document to cover the utter sadness of the Internet troll. Usually, a troll is nothing more than a passing nuisance, but, as this page will show, they can be a worry (stalkers). However, it is almost invariably an inadequate individual who can be safely ignored. This page will define the activity, and help with early recognition; once acknowledged, trolls can take up residence, and, like athlete's foot, can be difficult to shift. And when you've finished here, I recommend this fairly comprehensive guide to managing sad thirteen year olds loose on Mom's computer. What Is A Troll? The term derives from "trolling", a style of fishing which involves trailing bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The troll posts a message, often in response to an honest question, that is intended to upset, disrupt or simply insult the group. Usually, it will fail, as the troll rarely bothers to match the tone or style of the group, and usually its ignorance shows. Why do trolls do it? I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful. Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too. For trolls, any response is 'recognition'; they are unable to distinguish between irritation and admiration; their ego grows directly in proportion to the response, regardless of the form or content of that response. Trolls, rather surprisingly, dispute this, claiming that it's a game or joke; this merely confirms the diagnosis; how sad do you have to be to find such mind-numbingly trivial timewasting to be funny? Remember that trolls are cowards; they'll usually post just enough to get an argument going, then sit back and count the responses (Yes, that's what they do!). Troll - Angler or Underbridge Dweller? How can troll posts be recognised? No Imagination - Most are frighteningly obvious; sexist comments on nurses' groups, blasphemy on religious groups .. I kid you not. Pedantic in the Extreme - Many trolls' preparation is so thorough, that while they waste time, they appear so ludicrous from the start that they elicit sympathetic mail - the danger is that once the group takes sides, the damage is done. False Identity - Because they are cowards, trolls virtually never write over their own name, and often reveal their trolliness (and lack of imagination) in the chosen ID. As so many folk these days use false ID, this is not a strong indicator on its own! Crossposting - Any post that is crossposted to several groups should be viewed as suspicious, particularly if unrelated or of opposing perspective. Why would someone do that? Off-topic posting - Often genuine errors, but, if from an 'outsider' they deserve matter-of-fact response; if genuine, a brief apposite response is simply netiquette; if it's a troll post, you have denied it its reward. Repetition of a question or statement is either a troll - or a pedant; either way, treatment as a troll is effective. Missing The Point - Trolls rarely answer a direct question - they cannot, if asked to justify their twaddle - so they develop a fine line in missing the point. Thick or Sad - Trolls are usually sad, lonely folk, with few social skills; they rarely make what most people would consider intelligent conversation. However, they frequently have an obsession with their IQ and feel the need to tell everyone. This is so frequent, that it is diagnostic! Somewhere on the web there must be an Intelligence Test for Trolls - rigged to always say "above 150" Where are you likely to find trolls? Wherever they are tolerated - this means forums and networking sites that have loose or lazy moderation, and places like Usenet (newsgroups) where there may be no moderation at all. Where trolls are successful is a slightly different issue - some forums allow members to set an 'ignore' function, so they just do not see troll posts, after the first one, and some specialist forums are tightly focussed so that troll posts stick out a mile and are ignored - it's larger, more general forums that have issues, as it only takes a couple of members to be drawn in for the whole forum to suffer. They also thrive on 'opinion' sites, such as politics and religion, where feelings often run high anyway. But, again, only if moderation is weak. Usenet has a special problem, as moderation is impossible; for trolls to be controlled, requires committed members using their killfiles effectively, and avoiding accidental cross-posting - which is all too easy with many newsreading software setups. Some career trolls have set up their forums to exchange notes. These rarely thrive, as most trolls are not team players, and they simply fight among themselves. in other cases, they become centers for cyberbullying (see stalking); while that's a sad development, it makes it easier to have the sites closed. Who is at risk? Any newsgroup, bulletin board, forum or chatroom can attract trolls, but they don't have the brains to attack nuclear physicists, and they are drawn to the quick response where sex, religion and race are found; so politics is easy prey. One troll famously tried to infiltrate a mensa group; the results read like 100 trolls and one regular, it didn't have a chance - but it was stupid enough to persist until removed. When Should You Be Concerned? Usually, no, though fractured funny bones and occasional waves of nausea have been reported. When a troll become persistent and personal, you may need to consider the possibility that it has fermented into an Internet Stalker - equally pathetic, if not more so - but sometimes requiring weedkiller.

Sorry, I thought we signed a CB on loan.

I love the way he is trying to defend himself. It's laughable. Why can't he just admit he's wrong and doesn't know what he's talking about.

Hypo. 100% wrong, 100% of the time. Why he is now on ignore.

Can't wait, but then that may change if Peyton aint fit for us this season...

Sky Sports saying no other players likely to leave Celtic...

Lets think about this. He only played 10 times for Celtic after falling out of favour when Lennon took over. He may have struggled playing for such a big club, it happens to a lot of players. He played for AIK, and then went to FC Copenhagen on loan. But most importantly, FM stats: 15 Heading 12 Marking 14 Tackling 12 Pace CA = 121 PA = 130 Sounds similar to Fonte actually.

Me. But then I know **** loads about football.

Agreed, the PL isn't the be-all and end-all. I like winning football matches myself.

Who actually believes that Cortese expects us to go balls out for promotion this year? I don't think he's that unrealistic, and I also, even with the start we have had, don't believe we are backing the Manager with the funds needed for promotion, even after the sale of Chamberlain. It says to me that this year is not the plan, especially with the strength of other Championship clubs. I don't care, I am more than happy to consolidate.

Or it would have been if I hadn't put it in the wrong way round. FML.

Another 100% in the old Prediction League.

I don't want to see Beckford here.

I'm on Orange and never have problems, not compared to when I was on O2 and Vodafone.

Mods, infraction please.

I love all this 'underwhelmed' rubbish from the same people who were underwhelmed at Adkins appointment. Sorry if I don't share in your blatant lack of football knowledge.

Lol, yeah... ...as long as it doesn't get me an infraction.

We SHOULD be going for Scott Dann.

I would happily sign him to that as he practically won us 2nd place with those goals against the MK Dons.

It's opinion, but I don't think we've ever been interested in him at the prices banded about.

To be fair though, how do you know it's third or fourth choice CB? I think Martin will be a half decent Premiership CB, he just needs time and games. Seabourne is fine as back up, and has been pretty good recently.

...Waghorn and Fontaine, or no-one? Personally, I'd take the signings, as Fontaine is an upgrade and Waghorn is a decent player, and young. We aren't getting J Rod or Maynard now, we know that, so I would welcome them.