saintbletch

It's clear that I'm going to have to do all the "heavy lifting" in this investigation. What we need is the sort of test that they used with witches. You know, where the witch is ever so gently encouraged into the middle of wide, deep and cold lake. If she floats, then she is a witch and is burned alive for being a witch and if she sinks then she is someone who bravely died proving their innocence. It's a sort of win-win (or lose-lose if you're the non-witch). We need to ask Cheese on Toast a Yossarianesque, Catch-22 style question. I propose "Are you Dune?". If Cheese on Toast says "yes" then he should be banned for coming back from perma-ban hell. If, on the other hand Cheese on Toast says "no" well then that is a whole different matter. Because that is exactly what Dune would have said if he was masquerading as Cheese on Toast and did not want to be discovered. So we will have flushed out Dune and he should be banned for coming back from perma-ban hell.

Thanks for the update Makepeace but I think I've found him.

It's Dune.

I've never been a fan of innocent until proven guilty so I've decided that I better put Cheese on Toast on Ignore just in case. Problem is, I can't stand idly by and watch Bearsy and Tokyo-Saint playing Dempsey and Makepeace in their "dumb cop, dumber cop" routine. You see in the real world; I analyse language - structure, patterns, frequency, sentiment, that sort of thing; and so in the tracking down of the new Dune I could be a valuable resource for "the police". I''m a sort of independent PI - the Jim Rockford that does the police's job for them. You see if you're going to post after a ban under a different user name you've got to completely change the structure, grammar and lexicon of what you're going to write - not to mention the themes involved. Otherwise your words will betray you. It's not easy and to pull it off you'd need to pretend to be some sort of half-wit that pluralises everythings and ends sentences with a "whatever" if you want to stay undercover or whatever. But of course that sort of constructed writing-style, coupled with perfect punctuation, stands out like so much horse **** spread on a beautiful cake. Just me? Oh. So instead I'll keep Cheese on Toast off ignore, quietly watch the posting style of a few 'suspects' and report back. I'll leave the professional interrogation to "Dempsey and Makepeace". I'm just waiting for the moment whenthey point the anglepoise light in Cheese on Toast's eyes, tell him that they've got Turkish in the room next store and that he's singing like a canary, and then they'll hit Cheese on Toast with the the killer question..."Are you Dune?". I just haven't worked out which one is Makepeace.

Now that Dune is gone this place can truly be run like a socialist workers cooperative. There's just a few things to sort out first, not the least of which is some reinventing of history. So I'd like to put forward a number of resolutions for 'conference' to debate. Whilst we're all obviously equal, like sheep we need a leader. I'd like to put forward pap on the basis that he has been playing that role already anyway. I'd like to amend comrade scotty's resolution slightly by suggesting that in addition we mount a campaign to erect a statue (or picture thereof) of proud comrade Dune in the banner at the top of the forum. The picture should serve as a memorial to Dune and feature things that he held dear. It's not for one member to control the comrade Dune memorial so I'd like to hear your own resolutions. Like all images in post Dune, socialist worker Saintsweb, it should be heavily symbolic so as to inspire and influence comrades as they read the resolutions and debate respectfully with their fellow comrades. As such, I'd like to see comrade Dune depicted centrally astride a large shire horse (to represent leading the workers he so passionately cared about). He should be wearing a revolutionary red army gimnasterka (to reflect his allegiance to the people's fight) with a small but prominent European Union flag stitched just above his heart. A queue of people is forming to his right (so he is always to the left of them) ready to reach up and shake his hand. In the distance we see, walking away having greeted comrade Dune, Nelson Mandela smiling warmly (representing the struggle for race equality that was so important to comrade Dune). And at the front of the queue, about to shake his hand is Bob Mugabe - comrade Dune is sporting a quizzical "so, I was wrong about you all along" sort of look on his face. Happy to listen to other resolutions or amendments to the above resolution before conference gets the chance to vote.

I hear that some of the monkeys from Marwell are getting a petition together to stop the comparison with Peter Reid. They find it offensive. It's a position I have some sympathy with.

I suspect that Dune knew what the reaction would be and that perhaps he had planned to have some fun taking the stance you appear to be this morning. i.e. that there was no racist intent and that to his eye he saw a similarity. But his collar got felt before he had chance to wind a few people up. I do understand the substantive point you're making, but you know that certain things are simply off limits. Dune's clumsy/racist comparison was one of them. Moving abroad or campaigning to change laws and/or our moral compass are your only options I fear.

I tend to agree SuperMikey about the freedom of speech and the confused morals - the same moral confusion saw Pro-life campaigners killing doctors in US abortion clinics. It's a difficult one because campaigns like that are important. if humour transcends legal boundaries then it can't be allowed. If the law is perceived wrong, then we should work to change it. If I went to a comedy gig and heard some humour that I thought was in poor taste I'd have the benefit of looking the comedian in the eye, perhaps walking out if I felt strongly enough about it. My reaction might register with the comedian and that is the feedback loop. I might feel morally outraged but I'd also feel I'd had had 'my say'. On the anonymous, or virtually anonymous Internet, that feedback loop doesn't exist. We don't know the 'joke' teller, he may even being hiding his/her identify and it's not easy to lodge our reaction/disapproval. Campaigns like the one you describe on Facebook are the walking out of the gig in my example above. For that reason they have their place. But I'm not suggesting that Facebook should intervene (they will of course) as the two should stand in opposition to each other as they would in real life. The campaign should serve as the admonishment for the 'joke' teller and the joke teller should decide if they think it's a good idea to continue. The problem with the Internet is that somewhere in an obscure part of the planet there is a 12 year old boy sitting in his bedroom posting jokes about dead babies without the necessary emotional development to understand or care about the pain caused to the 39 year old childless woman reading the 'jokes' and crying herself to sleep. This is societal moral development in microcosm. Without the feedback loop, and the venting it provides, something would go bang.

Turkish, post an image of a black person next to a monkey. It'll short circuit the next 24 hours of rage against the machine. Oh, and while you're at it take a bunch of bananas to St. Mary's next home game and offer them to Gaël Clichy, one at a time from the stands. You'd be truly amazed by the reaction some people will have to that kind-hearted gesture. Offence, and law breaking are not not always about what we intend my friend. And those that run a forum, or a football stadium for that matter can be judged complicit if they take no action. But you knew all this.

I'll let you into a secret pap... I wasn't struggling with the P. He was very good at what he did. Very funny and witty too, just hope he was on a continual wind-up as if he held some of the beliefs he espoused then perhaps the P will be Prisoner one day. Just hope it's never Politician.

R I P? I got the Racist and Intolerant bits but I'm struggling with the P.

Good points alpine_saint. For what it's worth I think the balancing role that the Lib Dems are playing in the coalition is much needed. But I wonder if they are not making the biggest sacrifice, a slow and drawn-out political suicide that will see them in the wilderness for years. As important as those things are to you, I can't help thinking that they will be little succour to grass-roots Lib Dems who have seen electoral reform, HoL reform, and tuition fees go up in smoke. Perhaps getting the other 75% of manifesto commitments and a referendum on electoral reform counts as a victory? That's why I started the thread. I was interested to see where people stood now.

I agree that sometimes pragmatism has to win over pledge. But when these pledges come from apparent principles, I think the electorate has every right to remember the abandonning of these principles and to hold their politicians to account at the next opportunity. You can u-turn on policy, but surely not deeply held conviction and principles? After all, most of us I'm sure vote for the principles behind parties as much as their then current policies. Clegg gives assurances about tuition fees - safe in the knowledge (he thinks) that he will never be given the reigns of power to implement these policies. He leaves the audience in no doubt about the principles behind the policy. He thinks tuition fees are wrong. If someone asked me if, having watched these videos and with Clegg as deputy leader of a coalition government, whether he would allow tuition fees to increase, I would say "over his dead body". Politically, I think that may come to pass. Why do some people struggle to distinguish between a 'pledge' made under one set of circumstances and the reality of having to do something different under another set of circumstances?

...just the Tory party's b***h? Or do they some credibility left? £10K tax threshold aside, they appear to have either backtracked on every stance they have taken and have either lost or capitulated in every major policy or principle they held dear. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19149212 I'm not looking to start a anti-Lib Dems political thread here. I'm interested to know how people think they will fare in the next and subsequent elections. How do staunch Lib Dem supporters feel about the party?

Well, I like Bearsy, and I like The Kraken. But which is best? There's only one way to find out. A POLL !

Yeah, a bit of both really The9. They've put three big TVs on the wall that were showing the Olympics, so I can see the sports-bar thing but it's not done out in the usual loud gaudy sports-bar colours. It's all dark greens and browns and low-lit like a gentleman's club. It also featured the formulaic carved and painted wood fly-fishing sign above the urinals and some of the most pretentiously expensive sinks and taps I've seen outside of a posh London hotel lobby bog. They've taken Strongbow off the menu and replaced it with Aspalls which wasn't quite to my taste. But they do now serve Staropramen (@£4.40 a pop, mind), which did make the afternoon very pleasant. It was very quiet in there yesterday and I'm not sure they'll have enough through-traffic to create the demand to sustain those prices. I don't know Winchester well enough to know whether there are other places showing sport after work. If not, perhaps that's the niche they're going for.

As I will do tomorrow, a few times a year I spend a hazy afternoon in a Winchester pub getting slowly sozzled with a mate who lives there. We used to go to The Albion before it closed to have its interior as well as its clientèle refurbished. That was a fascinating pub - a real den of iniquity. I think many 'clients' were dependent on their beer and most had seen more than their fair share of life but they made fantastic company though. I must admit that being surrounded by life's 'characters' pouring angry juice down their heads made me shamefully less conscious about drinking in the afternoon. It usually wouldn't take long before there was some form of altercation which you end up sort of looking forward to. Although being interviewed by the Police at home some weeks after I'd witnessed the barman 'help' a client outside and onto the pavement was a little uncomfortable. When it closed we moved our meetings to the The White Swan and I have to say it's been fine for our purposes. You tend to meet a better class of loser in there. Wayne Bridge was in there last time I was there; listening to me drunkenly pontificate on this, that and the rest. But I'm not sure if that supports or contradicts my better class of loser assertion. When we first started going there it was run by a Spanish lady who had the idea of live music jamming sessions on a Friday night. She was a great host but I don't think she was making any money and she soon left. It is a little soulless now, but I've met a lot of interesting people in there when Winch office and market workers come in to quench a thirst. The last landlord was always helpful if a little distant but I haven't been in since it's changed hands. I'll be interested to see if it's changed much. I quite enjoy The Bridge on hot afternoons / early evenings. But whilst they do carry Staropramen, and watching the Itchen course its way toward the sea can be nice, it's not a real pub.

Completely agree CB Fry. I used to read the Scouting Report column he wrote in the Guardian. He identified up-and-coming talent, rated them and discussed their strengths and weaknesses. Whilst his peers were talking about the Premiership he was looking at youngsters and lesser lights in the lower leagues. He identified Clyne as a talent at 17 as well as Lallana, Mackail-Smith and others. For me, the majority of current football pundits form some sort of cosy old boy's club. The smooth running of a television or radio show is more important than getting their point across. Claridge, and perhaps Gabriele Marcotti are the only pundits I regularly listen to/see that call it as they see it. Claridge doesn't care about relationships or coming across as an argumentative tool. He wants to get his point across - right or wrong. I can completely understand that he is not to everyone's taste. But he knows his onions, doesn't toe a party-line and tells you exactly what he thinks.

Double hernia op. Should be back to full training next week.

On his way to Norwich for a medical according to SSN.

One down, one to go. A 20 second penalty for Vettel and demoted to 5th as a result. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18947482

My wife's just got the same phone too. For the money you really can't fault it - although it has turned her from a technophobe into a complete geek within a week.

Yeah, I remember that he was always longest in the shower after the match. Fantastic dribbler, ball was glued to his feet - it was like he had three legs.