Matty and Turk's Compost Thread

[trousers]

13 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Here is your answer @trousers

I'm not bothered by people on this forum finding me annoying. Even those on here that I find annoying. It has no impact on my life outside this forum.

Thanks for confirming my hunch that you're probably not an 'annoying twat' in real life...

Edited Saturday at 19:32 by trousers

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

I recently saw some posts from 2012, and the word "bellend" was regularly used in relation to MLG. And those posts referred to earlier events. So, not sure about that one.

I agree that more and more flies over his head, and the holes he digs are more desperate. His carer has reduced him to having the two buttons, "bullshit" and "strawman" to add to posts too.

When I say great poster i was being kind, he used to at least make some valid points sometimes rather than, like you say, resorting to strawman and bullshit on every thread.
 

He was the Frank Bruno (apart from the fact he wasn’t very popular)  of the forum world, a capable opponent but always lost when came up against a decent opponent, now everyone batters him. 

[Turkish]

13 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

1) As pointed out by several, there were far better ways to have communicated the same thing. But you went with a class defense of it.

2) You've been caught at this so often, your defence of it is infantile. Twice within the space of a few weeks recently.

3) No one else has issues, except yourself. Yet you were the one to give a list of several names. Perhaps you could put allmof them on ignore? Oh, and a few posters pretty much asked to be added, the following week, to be spared from your thread derailments.

It's a bit pathetic not to take the views of a number of people into account, about how you post. Oddly, you are the first to go into huffs and hiding when challenged. It clearly affects you here. Just not enough for you to avoid endlessly repeating your behaviour.

Yep who could forget the great sulk of 23/24. It started with not posting but adding confused emojis onto every post then he disappeared completely only to return a much poorer version. It was amusing how people claimed he was bullied 😂😂
 

Lack of posting time clearly meant he was ring rusty and he’s never recovered. 

[Matthew Le God]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

When I say great poster i was being kind, he used to at least make some valid points sometimes rather than, like you say, resorting to strawman and bullshit on every thread.
 

He was the Frank Bruno (apart from the fact he wasn’t very popular)  of the forum world, a capable opponent but always lost when came up against a decent opponent, now everyone batters him. 

Frank Bruno was once world heavyweight champion of the world and was on Noel's House Party! He was a winner! 😉 

Are you Butterbean?

[Weston Super Saint]

31 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Yep who could forget the great sulk of 23/24. It started with not posting but adding confused emojis onto every post then he disappeared completely only to return a much poorer version. It was amusing how people claimed he was bullied 😂😂
 

Lack of posting time clearly meant he was ring rusty and he’s never recovered. 

Fingers crossed we get another year of it now we are in the Championship again - it was the whole Championship season last time.

[Matthew Le God]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Fingers crossed we get another year of it now we are in the Championship again - it was the whole Championship season last time.

Again... if you really mean that then you can use the forum settings to not see posts from any user you want. You have no excuse not to. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

11 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Again... if you really mean that then you can use the forum settings to not see posts from any user you want. You have no excuse not to. 

Sadly, that doesn't stop the threads we're reading ruined by you digging holes based on being factually incorrect, logically flawed, missing the point entirely or often trying any excuse to defend any of the previous points.

What might be better is that you put everyone you go off in the huff against on ignore. That way, if the original poster is not on that list, you get to have your trademark response. But you won't see posters demolishing your position.

Therefore, you won't spend a dozen posts ruining the thread, trying to defend your nonsense, and it can move on far more quickly. Since there's "no excuse not to" put people on ignore, why don't you give that a go? You can convince yourself every point you make is a winner, and we get the golden peace that the year of The Great Huff, gave us.

[The Kraken]

11 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

digging holes based on being factually incorrect, logically flawed, missing the point entirely or often trying any excuse to defend any of the previous points.

Credit to you, that’s the most accurate description of MLG I’ve ever seen.

Sadly, as confirmed by himself, he’s perfectly happy acting the twat all of the time (and genuinely seems proud of it). So bed in for more I reckon.

[CB Fry]

4 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Again... if you really mean that then you can use the forum settings to not see posts from any user you want. You have no excuse not to. 

Can you stop telling people to put you on ignore you fucking twat

[Weston Super Saint]

10 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Again... if you really mean that then you can use the forum settings to not see posts from any user you want. You have no excuse not to. 

Again, this is bullshit.

[Matthew Le God]

8 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Again, this is bullshit.

Why?

[Weston Super Saint]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Why?

Because the moment someone quotes a post from a poster you have on 'ignore', you will 'see' their post.  There is nothing you can do about it.

Once again, you have your facts wrong.

[Matthew Le God]

4 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Because the moment someone quotes a post from a poster you have on 'ignore', you will 'see' their post.  There is nothing you can do about it.

Once again, you have your facts wrong.

Forum settings allow for that to be disabled. Make a request to the mods.

[Weston Super Saint]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Forum settings allow for that to be disabled. Make a request to the mods.

Or, and here's a novelty, stop posting like a complete weapon.  Problem solved  

[Matthew Le God]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Or, and here's a novelty, stop posting like a complete weapon.  Problem solved  

Pot meet kettle

Have you and some others considered what stalking my posts might be? It isn't only confined to opinion ones. Just because someone has a different opinion to you, doesn't mean they are a 'complete weapon'.

@Paul Chuckle for example puts confused emoji on every post. Even ones that aren't remotely controversial like in the contracts thread when I posted Lewis Payne is leaving.

Johannes Spors (and many other Southampton backroom staff) follow me on Twitter, so perhaps my football opinions aren't as daft as you think!

 

[Weston Super Saint]

9 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Pot meet kettle

Have you and some others considered what stalking my posts might be? It isn't only confined to opinion ones. Just because someone has a different opinion to you, doesn't mean they are a 'complete weapon'.

@Paul Chuckle for example puts confused emoji on every post. Even ones that aren't remotely controversial like in the contracts thread when I posted Lewis Payne is leaving.

Johannes Spors (and many other Southampton backroom staff) follow me on Twitter, so perhaps my football opinions aren't as daft as you think!

 

Strawman argument.

[Weston Super Saint]

24 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Forum settings allow for that to be disabled. Make a request to the mods.

I do not believe this is true.  You can ignore posts, messages or mentions - e.g. @Matthew Le God from posters.  You cannot ignore posts from your ignored poster that were quoted by other posters.

[Matthew Le God]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Strawman argument.

That just highlights you do not understand the fallacy.

[Matthew Le God]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I do not believe this is true.  You can ignore posts, messages or mentions - e.g. @Matthew Le God from posters.  You cannot ignore posts from your ignored poster that were quoted by other posters.

Invision forums have that functionality. Just needs to be turned on for Saints Web.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Pot meet kettle

In the last couple of weeks you've admitted to "being a bit of a twat" and that you're "not bothered by people on this forum finding me annoying." Now, by equating yourself to someone you think posts like "a complete weapon," you're admitting that you are one. No surprise.

As @The Kraken said "...as confirmed by himself, he’s perfectly happy acting the twat all of the time (and genuinely seems proud of it)." While normal people would be like @trousers who said "If people were to accuse me of being annoying, my natural instinct would be to engage in some self-reflection as I would see being perceived as annoying as a bad character trait..."

I guess, with your attitude, it's no suprise you act poorly when challenged. As I said "digging holes based on being factually incorrect, logically flawed, missing the point entirely or often trying any excuse to defend any of the previous points." Not to mention editing your posts, going off in huffs and setting out to undermine posters.

What a legacy, when you can look back in years to come and say you were "a bit of a twat" on a football forum.

 

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Have you and some others considered what stalking my posts might be? It isn't only confined to opinion ones. Just because someone has a different opinion to you, doesn't mean they are a 'complete weapon'.

 

A number of people seem to want as little interaction with you as possible.

"No reason not to" do the following, as you're often reduced to asking of others, after you've been embarrassed. "What might be better is that you put everyone you go off in the huff against on ignore. That way, if the original poster is not on that list, you get to have your trademark response. But you won't see posters demolishing your position.

Therefore, you won't spend a dozen posts ruining the thread, trying to defend your nonsense, and it can move on far more quickly." I think there would be a few volunteers to go on your list, if it meant we could enjoy the threads."

 

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

@Paul Chuckle for example puts confused emoji on every post. Even ones that aren't remotely controversial like in the contracts thread when I posted Lewis Payne is leaving.

Is that the @Paul Chuckle who posted your "one to watch" guides? The ones where you failed badly to divert from  the facts, admitted fibbing to the readers of the guides,  then blamed the other SI thread creators and finally SI? That @Paul Chuckle.?

4 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

Johannes Spors (and many other Southampton backroom staff) follow me on Twitter, so perhaps my football opinions aren't as daft as you think!

There. You can learn. The last time you trotted out this one it was to impress people with the backroom staff and players who follow you on what has been X for a while. Only that turned out to be 2 youth players, one of whom had left and the other who noone had heard of. Another complete fail.

Rather than do a bit of self reflection, you're now asking for forum settings to be changed to accommodate your nonsense. "a bit of a twat" indeed.

[Matthew Le God]

33 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

The last time you trotted out this one it was to impress people with the backroom staff and players who follow you on what has been X for a while. Only that turned out to be 2 youth players, one of whom had left and the other who noone had heard of. Another complete fail.

Bullshit. You can check yourself that Spors does. Plus a large number of other current and former staff at the club and some national and local journalists.

Edited 15 hours ago by Matthew Le God

[Weston Super Saint]

49 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Bullshit. You can check yourself that Spors does. Plus a large number of other current and former staff at the club and some national and local journalists.

Wow. You're incredible. They follow you on social media. You've really hit the big time, well done you.

How many have actually engaged with you? I'm guessing none...

[Holmes_and_Watson]

53 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Bullshit. You can check yourself that Spors does. Plus a large number of other current and former staff at the club and some national and local journalists.

Thanks for confirming you dropped all mention of players after being found out last time. Also for running away from the other points.

I also saw you were still desperately trying to prove you were the first to break the Will Still news earlier, with the response that just rightly mocked you. Such a child.

[Matthew Le God]

9 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Wow. You're incredible. They follow you on social media. You've really hit the big time, well done you.

How many have actually engaged with you? I'm guessing none...

I've been to the training ground for meetings on a number of occasions. So have a guess.

[Matthew Le God]

3 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

1) Thanks for confirming you dropped all mention of players after being found out last time. Also for running away from the other points.

2) I also saw you were still desperately trying to prove you were the first to break the Will Still news earlier, with the response that just rightly mocked you. Such a child.

1) You can fact check if Spors follows me or the many other current and former staff and journalists do yourself. It is publically available information. 

2) I did no such thing. Stop bullshitting.

[Weston Super Saint]

42 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

I've been to the training ground for meetings on a number of occasions. So have a guess.

None on X then!

Quelle surprise.

[Matthew Le God]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

None on X then!

Quelle surprise.

Conversations with them on X. Yes, I have. Because they have chosen to follow me we can have private conversations.

[Weston Super Saint]

7 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Conversations with them on X. Yes, I have. Because they have chosen to follow me we can have private conversations.

Which you can screenshot to prove of course - but you won't citing that they're 'private' to carry on the pretense they really did engage with you even though they didn't.

[Matthew Le God]

18 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Which you can screenshot to prove of course - but you won't citing that they're 'private' to carry on the pretense they really did engage with you even though they didn't.

They are private conversations. I'm not putting them on here. Why do you they are following me? You can check that they are.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

1) You can fact check if Spors follows me or the many other current and former staff and journalists do yourself. It is publically available information. 

2) I did no such thing. Stop bullshitting.

1) As above. "Thanks for confirming you dropped all mention of players after being found out last time. Also for running away from the other points." I've not mentioned Spors and you're just sadly deflecting away from having been embarrassed the last time you went down this path.

2) The first couple of mocking responses that come to hand below. I can't think of a single time you've put "bullshit" in one of your posts that ever made you anything other than more wrong. Such a child.

 

 

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

45 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Which you can screenshot to prove of course - but you won't citing that they're 'private' to carry on the pretense they really did engage with you even though they didn't.

We can speculate.

MLG: Please can I have a job as a video analyst? Please?
Spors: Why would we employ someone who admits to being "a bit of a twat". Besides, RDF Tactics knows loads more about FM.

Or

MLG: For the hundredth time, Mr Spors, please follow me! Look at all the fawning posts about you, I put up on SaintsWeb.
Spors: Of course I will. I must have not seen all your previous, pestering comms... (begins to google "Restraining Orders")

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Holmes_and_Watson said:

RDF Tactics knows loads more about FM.

Really? I've played the game for 33 years and helped make it for the last 18 years. 

[trousers]

7 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Johannes Spors (and many other Southampton backroom staff) follow me on Twitter, so perhaps my football opinions aren't as daft as you think!

Much like here, Twitter isn't the real world, ergo it doesn't really matter what people think of you on there...

[Matthew Le God]

4 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

1) As above. "Thanks for confirming you dropped all mention of players after being found out last time. Also for running away from the other points." I've not mentioned Spors and you're just sadly deflecting away from having been embarrassed the last time you went down this path.

2) The first couple of mocking responses that come to hand below. I can't think of a single time you've put "bullshit" in one of your posts that ever made you anything other than more wrong. Such a child.

1) You are still avoiding points in responses.

2) "desperately trying to prove you were the first to break the Will Still news earlier"

You've failed to show that.

[Matthew Le God]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

Much like here, Twitter isn't the real world, ergo it doesn't really matter what people think of you on there...

Real world people at Saints are interested in what some people on this forum have to say and not others. 

[Matthew Le God]

They aren't queuing up for @Turkish @Holmes_and_Watson @Weston Super Saint etc

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

They are private conversations. I'm not putting them on here. Why do you they are following me? You can check that they are.

As predictable as a first generation AI bot.

They were private so I can't show them - aka they're made up and I have no proof.

[Matthew Le God]

5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

As predictable as a first generation AI bot.

They were private so I can't show them - aka they're made up and I have no proof.

Puzzling why you think private conversations should be put on a public forum for anyone to see. Why do you think they follow me? You've yet to give a reason why they would do that but not engage in a private conversation. 

[Weston Super Saint]

8 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Puzzling why you think private conversations should be put on a public forum for anyone to see. Why do you think they follow me? You've yet to give a reason why they would do that but not engage in a private conversation. 

Because you've failed (once more) to provide any proof.

At the moment all we have is your word - as H&W has pointed out, that is increasingly worthless given all the lies you keep being caught out telling.

Why should we accept your word without any evidence when you stubbornly refuse to accept the word of the Holy Bible - citing there is zero evidence?

Either you want to live in an evidence based world or you don't, you can't pick and choose to suit your own agenda.

[Matthew Le God]

5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Because you've failed (once more) to provide any proof.

At the moment all we have is your word - as H&W has pointed out, that is increasingly worthless given all the lies you keep being caught out telling.

Why should we accept your word without any evidence when you stubbornly refuse to accept the word of the Holy Bible - citing there is zero evidence?

Either you want to live in an evidence based world or you don't, you can't pick and choose to suit your own agenda.

You avoided the questions... again!

Why do you think they follow me? You've yet to give a reason why they would do that but not engage in a private conversation?

People won't engage in private conversations if you then go and put it on a public forum. It defeats the point of them being private in the first place. Why are you incapable of grasping that?

Edited 9 hours ago by Matthew Le God

[Weston Super Saint]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

You avoided the questions... again!

Why do you think they follow me? You've yet to give a reason why they would do that but not engage in a private conversation?

People won't engage in private conversations if you then go and put it on a public forum. It defeats the point of them being private in the first place. Why are you incapable of grasping that?

I don't care why they follow you. I don't doubt they do - I don't have an X account so can't check either way.

I doubt they've engaged with you - other than becoming cyber contacts - and you have provided no evidence that they have.

I'll leave you to your imaginary conversations, Walter Mitty.

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Weston Super Saint said:

I don't care why they follow you. I don't doubt they do - I don't have an X account so can't check either way.

I doubt they've engaged with you - other than becoming cyber contacts - and you have provided no evidence that they have.

I'll leave you to your imaginary conversations, Walter Mitty.

More avoided questions!

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

More avoided questions!

Bullshit.

I answered your question by saying I don't care why they follow you.

The reason why I believe they may follow you but not engage in a conversation (except the imaginary ones in your head), is because you are an absolute weapon.

 

[trousers]

2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Real world people at Saints are interested in what some people on this forum have to say and not others. 

What, even the self-confessed annoying twats on here...?

Edited 9 hours ago by trousers

[Matthew Le God]

5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Bullshit.

I answered your question by saying I don't care why they follow you.

The reason why I believe they may follow you but not engage in a conversation (except the imaginary ones in your head), is because you are an absolute weapon.

 

People won't engage in private conversations if you then go and put it on a public forum. It defeats the point of them being private in the first place. Why are you incapable of grasping that?

[Matthew Le God]

@Weston Super Saint

Here is one with the former lead data scientist at Saints. He is now at Leicester City, so it doesn't matter anymore. He initiated the conversation not me. So you can now retract your bullshit allegations. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Matthew Le God

[Matthew Le God]

Still waiting @Weston Super Saint

[Weston Super Saint]

33 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

People won't engage in private conversations if you then go and put it on a public forum. It defeats the point of them being private in the first place. Why are you incapable of grasping that?

I'm not.

I just don't believe that happened with you - you could easily provide evidence (redacted) if it happened. But you won't. The most obvious explanation for that is because it didn't happen.

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Weston Super Saint said:

I'm not.

I just don't believe that happened with you - you could easily provide evidence (redacted) if it happened. But you won't. The most obvious explanation for that is because it didn't happen.

I have provided it ffs

 

[Weston Super Saint]

32 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

@Weston Super Saint

Here is one with the former lead data scientist at Saints. He is now at Leicester City, so it doesn't matter anymore. He initiated the conversation not me. So you can now retract your bullshit allegations. 

Well done.

You've provided evidence that someone has had a private conversation with someone who doesn't work at SFC!

There is zero evidence that the person who doesn't work at SFC was communicating with you - he could have been communicating with anyone!

You have not met the burden of proof.

Another fail.