> For many emails you have, vehemently supported Bates' actions, as long > as it > gets us an unencumbered pre-season and sod anyone who gets hurt in the > process or the damage it may do to the club's reputation and future.
Just because I opposed the HMRC action (and still do fwiw), does not make me pro-Bates. My stance all along is that Bates may be a cnut, but applauding/encouraging HMRC action just to get him out, in the absence of any real info to the contrary, was in my opinion wrong. Because it affects us on the pitch next season. >Especially, the way you continue to re-write history...and pull stuff out of thin air. (relevant) examples? By relevant I mean something that would make it more difficult for you to not read what I have written at least 10 times in postings now. >One moment you were "being passionate," In the email to the FL, yes.. >and "finding it hard not to swear" about your position, No, get it right, I was finding it hard not to swear upon reading yet another attack by PaulC. >then next you are merely, "playing devil's advocate" (isn't that supposed to be a detached and non-passionate position?) wrong wrong wrong. It is meant to put the opposite argument (not detached) for the sake of debate/argument. It also doesn't have to be non-passionate. As you won't believe me I'll do a Cundell on ya http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate See? I quote " The phrase "let me be the devil's advocate" or equivalent is used in group discussions to counter groupthink; the speaker is about to say something counter to the perceived group consensus and does not want to be personally ostracized for this." When I started this the general group consensus, right or wrong, was that Bates was the devil himself, that he put nothing into the club, was going to take us to the wall etc etc etc. I admit to not knowing the ins and outs, as the google hit-meister himself PaulC would tell you, so that is why I asked on list. I was challenging those with such anti-Bates agendas whom I thought did know some of the ins and outs, to convince myself and the others on the list who believed there were agendas that there was a reason other than the fact they didn't like Bates. > Now > you'd have us believe you weren't pro Bates, just being "anti-anti > bates" > and then, within the next sentence not, "anti-bates per se." > > You do seem to be a little confused, all around, so no wonder we don't > / > can't get it. Well I can, and other who have a more detached view than you could also. I have had numerous mails off-list to that effect. > > Finally why and where do you get, the snide comment regarding the Trust > and > their "support the Redbus bid?" Where in the LUST statement did you > read, > or get a clue to that? Probably totally wrong and/or totally out of order. I just find the timing strange, following and repeating, as it did, Franks' (of Redbus) comments. Also RickD himself said he had been talking to Redbus last week I think. If LUST want to nail their colours to the REDBUS mast then that's cool - my suspicions are that they did so a while back. My suspicions are that as a result the list has been used for anti-Bates propaganda. As I said before, this is fine but I would like to be told so that I can temper my appraisal of their posts accordingly. As it happens everything I have heard from Redbus seems to be positive, and I would likely back their bid myself if I knew some more about it, especially coming from a detached supporter's organisation had they not got too close. Yes yes, blah blah blah, google, blah... > > I would suggest you work on the confusion, regarding your own position, > before trying to analyse hidden meanings or motives in other people's > statements. > > That way we all might get it. For the record I also distrust your position regarding LUST, as first you write a public thank you to them o the list, then you attack me for 'snide' comments about them. Make your mind up, are unchallenged snide comments to the list acceptable or not? _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
