Joey Barton

[Wally Banter]

I quite admire that some people's egos prefer "this guy's attacking me with 4 different aliases!" to "hmm, looks like quite a few people on here think I'm a bit of a plonker".

[The Reverend]

Guy who uses aliases: “guys, there are no aliases on here”

[Wally Banter]

Which aliases are CEB again, Rev""yyy?

[CEB]

is he mentioning me?

I’ll just paste this, from the locked thread:

“I don’t care whether you’re convinced; in fact I think it’s hilarious and telling that you’re happy to openly take up that position rather than concede you were wrong.

Feel free to start another thread moaning about my rule break, but here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to post this comment, then immediately foe you, and then not mention or reply to you again, unless it comes to my attention that you are making significant efforts to grab my attention, disregarding this.
Up to you what you do with that info - and I’ll even give you a free reply so you can have the last word. But for me - I’ve told you you’re a **** (fool) once I saw you do what you did on my posts to Spen’s, and now I’m done. We can totally stay away from each other and - as you seemed to want - you can also save yourself from ever experiencing my posts again.

Up to you, but just know that any time you mention Spen or me again, everyone will know that it’s because you actually can’t stand being ignored by the people you’ve stoked conflict with.”

I don’t think I need to add any more to that, really.

[Tuffers#2]

Genuinely baffled by the go-to accusation of “aliases”. It seems like it’s a hangover from when there actually was a trend for accounts to be set up for multiple users for the LOLs, and where some users really did utilise multiple accounts in order to harass people with a step removed from their known identity.

Neither of those things seem to currently exist, and even the accusations of “having an alias” usually seems to just be a scattershot accusation after someone says something, rather than a genuine response to suspicious patterns of behaviour.

I mean, obviously Joe is Tuffers (he hasn’t even denied it, he’s just said “I am Joe, nobody else” which is strictly speaking, 100% true) but he hasn’t used aliases in the sense of having multiple accounts in order to shape the way conversations with him go

I definitely agree that hoover attack displays the same level of intelligence/wit as tuffers, I just think your radar is slightly off

Your's to
I'm Joe
Nobody else.

Blimey your up early this morning being pedantic tuffers

It's Joe,
Ask LSN if My I.P is the Same as this Tuffers
Should put it to bed once & for all.

Think you'll find I Joe have denied it plenty of times

[CEB]

It’s the fact that you put “this” in front of Tuffers that makes it so clear that you don’t even know of whom I speak. Very compelling.

[CEB]

Genuinely baffled by the go-to accusation of “aliases”. It seems like it’s a hangover from when there actually was a trend for accounts to be set up for multiple users for the LOLs, and where some users really did utilise multiple accounts in order to harass people with a step removed from their known identity.

Neither of those things seem to currently exist, and even the accusations of “having an alias” usually seems to just be a scattershot accusation after someone says something, rather than a genuine response to suspicious patterns of behaviour.

I mean, obviously Joe is Tuffers (he hasn’t even denied it, he’s just said “I am Joe, nobody else” which is strictly speaking, 100% true) but he hasn’t used aliases in the sense of having multiple accounts in order to shape the way conversations with him go

I definitely agree that hoover attack displays the same level of intelligence/wit as tuffers, I just think your radar is slightly off

Your's to
I'm Joe
Nobody else.

Blimey your up early this morning being pedantic tuffers

It's Joe,
Ask LSN if My I.P is the Same as this Tuffers
Should put it to bed once & for all.

Think you'll find I Joe have denied it plenty of times

Could you maybe post an example of where you’ve denied it? Because neither of those are denials.

Thanks for the nostalgic “do you remember 2003?” glow you’ve given me with the “feel free to check my IP a address” schtick though.

I don’t mind if you are or aren’t Tuffers anyway. Doesn’t bother me, the point is that whether you are or not, you’re just being a person on the internet, not particularly adopting a persona. And that’s fine

[Tuffers#2]

I put this Tuffers ,purely because I don't know
who he is. Your assumption is beyond my control.

[The Reverend]

Hypocrisy showing once again. Makes a long speech about his he’s going to ignore me and then proceeds to post something which is related to me (I recently accused him of using an alias).

He then tries to claim that I’m the obsessed one.

Proper strange behaviour.

[CEB]

“ Up to you, but just know that any time you mention Spen or me again, everyone will know that it’s because you actually can’t stand being ignored by the people you’ve stoked conflict with.”

[spen666]

To misquote Carly Simon, but perhaps apt for this thread

"You're so vain, you probably think this post is about you, don't you"

[Tuffers#2]

Of course I can

Genuinely baffled by the go-to accusation of “aliases”. It seems like it’s a hangover from when there actually was a trend for accounts to be set up for multiple users for the LOLs, and where some users really did utilise multiple accounts in order to harass people with a step removed from their known identity.

Neither of those things seem to currently exist, and even the accusations of “having an alias” usually seems to just be a scattershot accusation after someone says something, rather than a genuine response to suspicious patterns of behaviour.

I mean, obviously Joe is Tuffers (he hasn’t even denied it, he’s just said “I am Joe, nobody else” which is strictly speaking, 100% true) but he hasn’t used aliases in the sense of having multiple accounts in order to shape the way conversations with him go

Your's to
I'm Joe
Nobody else.

It's Joe,
Ask LSN if My I.P is the Same as this Tuffers
Should put it to bed once & for all.

Think you'll find I Joe have denied it plenty of times

Could you maybe post an example of where you’ve denied it? Because neither of those are denials.

Thanks for the nostalgic “do you remember 2003?” glow you’ve given me with the “feel free to check my IP a address” schtick though.

I don’t mind if you are or aren’t Tuffers anyway. Doesn’t bother me, the point is that whether you are or not, you’re just being a person on the internet, not particularly adopting a persona. And that’s fine

Ah the IF word.

I’ll agree with the the Rev on this. Thanks for your comment Tuffers

I'm not him though. Agree with who you want. You still fail to understand this being about things like belief, determination, unwillingness to give up, fight & not about formations.

viewtopic.php?t=13170&start=25#p356276

4th of December.
Hope that puts an end to it.

[The Reverend]

This is a fine example of the manipulative and controlling behaviour/bullying I called out previously.

He makes a declaration that if I respond to ANYTHING relating to him then it’s proof than I want his attention. Not only is this absurd it’s logically incorrect.

After doing this he then proceeds to post a comment which is related to me.

So I cannot reply without him immediately making the false allegation that the ONLY reason I’m commenting is because I don’t want to be ignored by him. He has set up a situation where he can basically say anything related to me and I can’t reply without having this false accusation thrown at me.

It’s the kind of manipulative behaviour an abusive partner uses. Quite creepy really.

[Tuffers#2]

This is a fine example of the manipulative and controlling behaviour/bullying I called out previously.

He makes a declaration that if I respond to ANYTHING relating to him then it’s proof than I want his attention. Not only is this absurd it’s logically incorrect.

After doing this he then proceeds to post a comment which is related to me.

So I cannot reply without him immediately making the false allegation that the ONLY reason I’m commenting is because I don’t want to be ignored by him. He has set up a situation where he can basically say anything related to me and I can’t reply without having this false accusation thrown at me.

It’s the kind of manipulative behaviour an abusive partner uses. Quite creepy really.

Don't worry
It's the Self Diagnosis kicking in.

[spen666]

[CEB]

“ and then not mention or reply to you again, unless it comes to my attention that you are making significant efforts to grab my attention, disregarding this.”

“ by The Reverend » Tue Jan 09, 2024 1:38 pm

Guy who uses aliases: “guys, there are no aliases on here””

[The Reverend]

Conveniently misses out the post before this which was a sneering commentary on accusing people of using aliases, after I pointed out that he almost certainly uses aliases the other day

Again, like a manipulative abuser he uses gaslighting & omission of relevant info to drive a narrative. Very, very sinister pattern of behaviour.

[Daily Express bot]

Misogynistic comments - Real World

Transphobic comments - Real World

Calling someone a pr1ck - UNACCEPTABLE

All unacceptable of course and sadly in the all occur in real world but you cannot go running to teacher every time. Thankfully , the status quo is generally maintained. Now , swearing and being unkind on a board like this is another matter. With reference to the first two above I would imagine they would be red cards here. I feel the third should be at least a yellow.

Can you please explain what the alternative to this “real world” you keep banging on about is?

Surely everyone alive lives in the “real world”.

Refer to what I originally said, most of the stuff Barton spouts is nothing more than you would here in the average pub, cafe or football ground . Hardly shocking unless you are confining yourself to the average University Campus , BBC environment or a Local authority work place for example where the Woke Agenda will be instilled. I find some of the abuse screamed out and football officials from the crowd in front of women and kids far more offensive as you can switch Barton off the TV or Radio.

[Daily Express bot]

Keep telling yourself that.

I do not need to tell myself anything, I do not drink. Many people are non-drinkers, probably many on this Board.

You mean your aliases are all Tee Total as well ?

I don’t have any .

[spen666]

[Wally Banter]

Top notch 'being kind' there, spen.

[The Reverend]

All unacceptable of course and sadly in the all occur in real world but you cannot go running to teacher every time. Thankfully , the status quo is generally maintained. Now , swearing and being unkind on a board like this is another matter. With reference to the first two above I would imagine they would be red cards here. I feel the third should be at least a yellow.

Can you please explain what the alternative to this “real world” you keep banging on about is?

Surely everyone alive lives in the “real world”.

Refer to what I originally said, most of the stuff Barton spouts is nothing more than you would here in the average pub, cafe or football ground . Hardly shocking unless you are confining yourself to the average University Campus , BBC environment or a Local authority work place for example where the Woke Agenda will be instilled. I find some of the abuse screamed out and football officials from the crowd in front of women and kids far more offensive as you can switch Barton off the TV or Radio.

Thanks for clarifying.

“Real world” = pubs, cafes and Football grounds
“Fake world” = BBC, universities and public sector workplaces.


What about the supermarket, where does that fit in your real world/fake world dichotomy?

[Tuffers#2]

I do not need to tell myself anything, I do not drink. Many people are non-drinkers, probably many on this Board.

You mean your aliases are all Tee Total as well ?

I don’t have any .

[CEB]

Again, this is all very strange. Why are people arguing about what aliases people have when there isn’t even a suspicious account backing someone up in something? It’s like “you have an alias” is being used as a catch-all insult or attempt to delegitimise …. something. But what? It’s weird.

[The Reverend]

Weird how he’s been utterly obsessed with aliases ever since some suspicious behaviour on accounts was pointed out.

Almost certainly a case of the lady doth protest too much.