Comment Moderation Thread

Any queries about moderation, please put them here and not on the main current thread.

144 thoughts on “Comment Moderation Thread

  1. jean7brodie says:
    March 18, 2014 at 8:51 pm

    Real question people. What is all this about TSFM filter, I’ve missed a chapter or two?

    Good question Jean. Is there a list of what is being ‘filtered’, TSFM? I thought from the beginning that we were being trusted as adults not to be naughty.

    Correct. Right up to the point where we cease to behave like adults.

  2. TSFM
    The silly season brings out the worst in you. Your previous post is in moderation and available for you to edit. Otherwise, count to ten before you post. On second thoughts – make that a couple of thousand.

    I was measured and careful in my response as is indicated by the few who saw it and gave the initial few votes which were TU (notable because that is unusual for me).

    No you weren’t. I’m still trying to remove the snide from my mousemat.

    What it did do is raise some uncomfortable questions/issues that you’d obviously rather not appear.

    No you didn’t. You were trolling – as you often do.

    Please don’t pretend that this is an all inclusive blog, because it isn’t.
    The blog is simply what it is, no more or less.

    It is not completely all-inclusive. We don’t encourage trolls or people whose sole aim in a post is to demean others. Of course you HOPE that is not inclusive. Often your MO is simply to discredit the work people on here do.

    ps. post is there but not with edit facility.

    That’s because you took too long to turn it into something acceptable

    I have sent you a a C&P of what I wrote to satisfy your curiosity.
    As far as I’m concerned if you wish to comment on it’s tone and content, feel free.

    I’ll bet he can’t wait.

  3. Hmmm, where to start?!

    Jack, you know that you are swimming against the tide here. I can feel empathy towards the position you find yourself in. I have disagreed with a lot of what you have said over the period of time I have ‘known you’ through this blog. But, as I stated in a very early spat we had, I will defend and back your right to an alternative view to the hilt (which, even to me seems a bit perverse considering I may not agree with said view!)

    Having read what you sent to me I must confess to finding it a lot less contentious than I thought it was going to be. I thought it would be earth-shatteringly explosive. Not in my eyes.

    By the same token do not take that as a ringing endorsement of your ‘key-rattling’! By naming individuals you almost asked the mods to censure you, akin to a child being told not to take a biscuit but taking one anyway whilst smirking at the parent!

    I agree that at times the level of moderation is puzzling. And it certainly does come across as exhibiting favouritism at times. In my own mind I put that down to different mods being on shift at different times, thereby demonstrating what people often fail to take into account when discussing/criticising a lot of our subject matter – an individuals’ perception. I myself have been censured for trying to raise a point I felt worthy of discussion only to see the same point being posted on by others with no apparent similar restrictions enforced. Different mods, different views, different perceptions? So yes, it can be frustrating when it seems that ‘he can talk about it so why can’t I’.

    I’m no big hitter on here. I most certainly know my place in the cheap seats, hanging on to the coat-tails of the great and the good whilst sticking my neb in now and again. But for what it’s worth, I really don’t think there was any need for TSFM to take your post above piece by piece writing what (s)he did. It comes across as a bit puerile and, personally, I find it unbecoming.

    I think it would be good to realise though Jack, that although there is a large contingent of Celtic supporters on here there are surprises in amongst the regulars. I thought I had most sussed out in my early days of visiting the site but, even still I find the odd surprise when an allegiance is declared. It’s worth remembering that not everyone who abhors what has happened and indeed continues to happen within Scottish football, it’s governance, and it’s coverage in the media does so due to a hatred of all things “Rangers”. Unfortunately for supporters like yourself, it just so happens that a large majority of the bad things have involved your team, hence drawing the ire of a cross section of fans.

    And finally, I saw your post talking of ‘…exposing it for what it is’, or words to that effect. I was a bit bemused and amused in equal measure at that one. I put that down to the blogging equivalent of flicking the bird at TSFM in a touch of pique?! Happens to us all!

  4. TSFM?

    Did I have a post removed that referred to the Vanguard Bears and what one is required to pledge to sign up to join them?

    If so I do not understand why?

    The reason it was posted was to illustrate, to anyone that may not be aware, exactly the thinking and mind set of the kind of people are leading this particular group. All the more important I would have thought given that this is the group that the current The Rangers board seem to favour and who coincidentally back the board 100%.

    Rather important to the overall debate I would have thought? No?


  5. TSFM ??? My comments regarding the singing at ibrox yesterday have all been removed? Fair enough but why leave them in when other people have copied them in on their own comments????? Other comments regarding this topic have also been left in …….. If it’s a ‘no go’ it should be for everyone, it is a major problem in scottish football and has to be addressed. And just for the record No I am not surprised any longer just sickened.

  6. TSFM says:
    April 13, 2014 at 3:36 am
    11 21 Rate This

    Are we really gonna have the surprised and outraged “bile and sectarian chanting” debate EVERY time Rangers are on the telly?

    No more please. Let’s agree that it is a bad thing and move on
    TSFM asking the questions the media won’t ask.
    If the media or the football authorities will not report on sectarian singing and chanting,who will? I think Jean/Brenda and others are perfectly entitled to pose the question.

    How often though? .. and when does embedding yet another YouTube video become tedious and offensive in itself?

  7. Brenda says:
    April 13, 2014 at 8:48 am
    TSFM apologies I did not realise there was a comment moderation thread.

    Putting something in comment moderation thread is as effective as deleting it entirely. I doubt anyone regularly looks to see what is in there.

    An indication perhaps that most folk are broadly satisfied with the moderation policy.

    Similarly if a comment is held for review then later published, it can lose all relevance and miss the chance to contribute to a debate.

    Different situation brought about mainly by lack of time and availability of the mods. We do need more.
    To be fair though we often alter the time stamp of a post to avoid it being missed.

  8. I listened to yesterday’s game on radio Scotland and the songbook was heard loud & clear before and all during the match ….
    And TSFM I think you are wrong to say enough is enough ….

    Obviously I disagree. Perhaps we will be able to have that discussion one day, but only if it is balanced.
    Incidentally and apropos of nothing, I also listened to the game on RS (tuned in a third of the way through the first half), but apart from a huge chorus of WATP, I was not particularly aware of the TRFC fans.

    Probably the ONLY reason I never took my kids to that particular glesga derby !

  9. Thousands sing bile at Ibrox because they can. Nobody in authority’s do anything. We should be allowed to mention or debate it in the hope for change. The other option of doing nothing is what keeps them singing.

    I don’t think repetition of outrage on this issue which is aimed at just one constituency is advancing the cause of change. In fat it hinders progress. Until we can take a more holistic view, the mods will err on the side of safeguarding the blog’s credibility.

  10. RyanGosling says:
    May 2, 2014 at 10:10 pm

    Matty Roth – nail on head! It would improve the equality of the environment and drive the debate no end. If we could get some Rangers fans on here who had enough time on their hands to research and enhance the debate from a different viewpoint, in ways that I can’t, it would enhance the blog immeasurably. And of course the main point in what you said – “reasoned and non dogmatic”. I hope we get there one day. And that is not in any way to belittle the contributions of all the posters here already, who make the site worth visiting day after day, hour after hour.

    I can see the benefit of having more Rangers fans on here to talk honestly about their club and how it can be cleansed financially and morally so that the spivs and sectarianism can be left in the past and football and fan ownership are seen as the way forward. But that’s just my opinion.

    More Rangers fans on here with opinions on this that and the next thing (ie oldco/newco, TUPE) would only make it more WoS focused and ultimately like SSB without the annoying voices (BFDJ, Dalzeel, Hannah,etc and Frankie’s snorts).

    TFSM I believe is a more serious project than that (aside from its obsessive censorship) and needs to be looking at issues from an investigative/factual basis. Am I wrong? What is your view on this post?

  11. Two posts removed without explanation. The authoritarian tackety boot of a suppressor is one thing; rudeness quite another. Will I now be classified as a “troll” and banished alongside my demon posts?

    burghbhoy says:
    May 3, 2014 at 8:07 am

    True, true and true but stretching my imagination to breaking point, if I were a Rangers supporter I would come on here and knock seven bells out of people like me. If only I could post without looking over my shoulder. Mmm… perhaps if I demanded that certain individuals lose their job – Stewart Regan or Campbell Ogilvie or Neil Doncaster for example – instead of highlighting farce through humour…

    I count the seconds before this post is similarly deleted. Go on Herr Verboten, make my day.

  12. Two posts removed without explanation. The authoritarian tackety boot of a suppressor is one thing; rudeness quite another. Will I now be classified as a “troll” and banished alongside my demon posts?

    burghbhoy says:
    May 3, 2014 at 8:07 am

    True, true and true but stretching my imagination to breaking point, if I were a Rangers supporter I would come on here and knock seven bells out of people like me. If only I could post without looking over my shoulder. Mmm… perhaps if I demanded that certain individuals lose their job – Stewart Regan or Campbell Ogilvie or Neil Doncaster for example – instead of highlighting farce through humour…

    I count the seconds before this post is similarly deleted. Go on Herr Verboten, make my day. (Apparently you already have because I am already blocked from posting on the main thread).

  13. Once again, my posts are automatically blocked. What is it that TSFM fears? Intelligent comment? Humour? A different opinion? God forbid, criticism?

  14. Yet another contrary post silently ushered down a cul-de-sac and strangled at birth. Disagreeing with the excessively one-sided world-view presented by TSFM outriders is clearly against committee policy.

    This is The Scottish Football Monitor – “helping to expose misinformation, lies, corruption and lazy journalism” – or have I entered a fake copycat site, The Selective Football Manifesto?

    Ok, you win. I shall console myself with freedom of thought, if not freedom of speech.

  15. So, expunging original post while retaining complaint about draconian deed is somehow an example of “winning the trust of ordinary fans, to fill a gap in the football media in Scotland.” Censorship, however perfumed, does not equate to credibility.

    Is there a secret handskake I ought to learn? Obsequious cap-dothing? Stand at the door and shout “I Hate Sevco!” one hundred times? Promise to engage in a never-ending faux paroxysm of look-at-me outrage towards everything and everyone connected with Rangers and send look-at-me letters to anyone who is someone to demand JUSTICE-FOR-US and then form a really big ring-a-ring-roses until they-who-have-sinned-against-us all fall down?

    TSFM community = cocooned lynch mob. Discuss.

  16. TSFM,

    I have had a few of my posts appear and then after some time, ~ 30 mins, they disappear. I’ve had no email to suggest I’ve broken any rules.

    Any ideas ?

  17. Bards
    Only had sight of one post from you. How many do you think have gone missing?

  18. TSFM says:
    May 14, 2014 at 10:30 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    I posted on around midday wednesday (21:00 in Aus). Was TU/TD by about 12 and then woosh ! Gone.

    It has happened 3 times now.

  19. Can I ask why my post – details below – is still marked as being in mederation

    ecobhoy says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    May 17, 2014 at 11:52 pm

    And I want to check whether a post of mine was deleted by mods as claimed by Bill1903 says:
    May 17, 2014 at 10:23 pm where he states: ‘Your previous post was judged by the enormous amount of thumbs downs it received before it was deleted.’

    I certainly didn’t delete it and have no knowledge of any of my posts being deleted but then I don’t actually check on such things. And a poster making that claim six days after the event doesn’t help memory but I’ve looked through the blog for what I assume to be the relevant period and can’t identify any post of mine which might have been deleted apparently on or about May 11, 2014

    Obviously it’s important for me to know what has prompted TSFM to delete my post. As to TD or TUs they very seldom enter my consciousness and I therefore wouldn’t remember the post for that reason. I take notice of responses to any post I make and in return try to reply where possible.

    I look forward to a response.

  20. Hello TSFM

    I appear to have had a post deleted. It was made around 10.30 pm on 21st May and responded to a post by yourself a few minutes earlier.

    I am not aware of any posting rules that this comment might have infringed. I would be grateful for some feedback.

  21. Fantastic, and brave article by Kevin McKenna in today’s ‘Observer’ about Neil Lennon’s treatment whilst in Scotland, and his lack of support/protection in context with what he had to endure.

    Please, please read the article first with an open mind. Sorry, I don’t know how to post a link to it. Perhaps someone else can?

    Fair play to McKenna for asking the real questions that the media wont. Should we keep ignoring this as it might sidetrack the blog? Maybe there’s more important things to discuss? On recent evidence, I can’t agree with that.

    Maybe I’ll get put in maderation again, or get a naughty warning? 😈 That’s ok, at least I
    will not sit on the fence on things like this, or give it the old, convenient ‘Not in my back yard’ response.

    Again, fair play to McKenna. He’s not party to this great shame!

  22. no idea why a post came up twice and without the delete/edit options
    apols for not being techno-thingy literate
    system is not idiot proof 😉

  23. I appear to have had a post made around an hour ago deleted.

    Can you advise how I have transgressed?

    All Roy Keane related posts were removed as OT

  24. I remember at some point way back on the late Paul McConvilie’s site Ecobhoy (Ecojon) chastised me and suggested that I was in fact a bears fan (not that there would be any harm in that) over some comment that I had posted.

    The details escape me but it was for me at any rate highly amusing and somewhat emblematic of the energy of that site and the charged emotions that were prevalent at the time.

    As it happens I continued to post comments, albeit in my own limited fashion. Perhaps more importantly I continued to read.

    Ecobhoy / Ecojon on this site and on Mr McConville’s always provided thoughtful and thought provoking, well research posts.

    As a reader I am indebted to him for the time and effort he has committed to his work, all of which has been done freely for the benefit of anyone with a care who takes the time to engage.

    It’s not necessary to agree with anyone’s post to make reading it worthwhile, as I get older I find myself drawn to the challenge of reading views which trouble me. I find it helps my understanding of things I feel I’m certain of by putting them under the pressure of alternative ideas.

    Consequently I like an open forum for all ideas and viewpoints.

    More often than not I’ve found myself in agreement with Ecobhoy’s posts and respected his work. Actually that’s not saying enough, I’m astonished by the work he puts in.

    In recent times a kindly and hearty ‘Chapeau’ would be doffed at sterling work done.

    It would be a shame to see Ecobhoy’s work marginalized.

  25. ecobhoy says:
    June 11, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    ” I certainly know when my contribution is no longer needed or desired.”
    I think your contribution on the topic has been a good each way bet. You have provided a body of material that you can call upon should the topic ever become pivotal. Contributors have different skills, aptitudes and levels of engagement but all these components combine to give the blog its strength.

    I am recalled a few line of poetry:

    No man is an island,
    Entire of itself,
    Every man is a piece of the continent,
    A part of the main.
    If a clod be washed away by the sea,
    Europe is the less.

    You are one of the scribes that thrive on investigation and insight. The blog is a forum for this activity. There are a number of contributors who offer well thought out analysis that at times bamboozles me but I think the blog would be diminished for its absence. We can all skip posts that are too long or detailed. I forced myself to read John Clark(e)’s UTT reports through gritted eye lashes. We all choose what is important to us and no one individual has license to dictate the tone of the debate but every contributor has the right to express an opinion and these two things must stand alongside each other even though they may not always exist as friends.

  26. Speaking for myself as a lurker (in the main), and someone who is astonished at the goings on in the game
    I grew up with, it would be a travesty if Echobhoy decided to go quiet. Well thought out, well constructed and hugely informative postings that have most definitely enhanced the site.
    Keep up the good work and as someone mentioned earlier, chapeau…

  27. I have followed old Ecojohn’s postings from Random Thoughts days and followed him over to this forum after Paul passed away. Like Martin in a post above I would hate to see his work marginalized Celtic -centric or otherwise. I would urge the old boy to carry on digging on whatever subject takes his fancy and if his efforts are not welcome here to post elsewhere. Given the efforts over the years to silence Eco by various PR types it would be a shame to see him silenced by what seems to be a minor point of what amounts to political correctness. Dig away old boy it is what you do best and as Paul once put it the BBC have a well funded research department I have an Ecojohn or words to that effect. Dig on.

  28. Perhaps these `land-bears` justice pilgrims would do better concentrating on getting [as one example] to the truth and forcing resolution of the sevco5088 assets switcheroo
    – That will hang over them for all time until they do.

    They all know it stinks to high heaven. A permanent stain will shadow them.
    The nonsense distraction they`ve caused is typical of blinkered one-sided focus that has unerringly damaged them in the last three years in particular

    Eco tackling a fundamental structural flaw in their attitude and pressure they exert

  29. I wholeheartedly endorse the comments supporting Ecobhoy’s input on all matters on this site. As someone who depends on factual information I have benefitted greatly from his input.
    Please continue, Ecobhoy, and thanks.

  30. I hope Ecobhoy carries on here with the land deal stuff. As I only glean through the posts these days,Eco’s info on this subject is one of the few things I really enjoy reading now. I really hope he’s not put off.

  31. @Ecobhoy

    It is indeed a shame when independently investigated facts are no longer required on this site.
    While I agree, to some extent, that this issue has little to do with the perceived corruption in our game, at the same time it actually is an extension of the very tactics that have blighted our sport over the last two and a half years.

    Privately some of the journalists have confessed to being intimidated regarding specific issues surrounding the goings on over the last two years. So the media won’t report the, now deep rooted, issues within our sport.
    This does not satisfy the bully, it only emboldens them.
    It is a form of appeasement and we all know how that panned out in the 1930’s..

    They now bombard Politicians, Councillors, Heath Board staff, Public servants, both Scottish and European, and call into question the dealings of all as well as one of the top teams in the country.

    Yet we have someone with a forensic mind who investigates and lays out, in detail, why these accusations are dubious to say the least and downright mischievous or malicious to say the most.
    I personally would not even know where to begin to look for the information that has been supplied to this site.

    Football fans are interested in this!
    They want to know whether the accusations made against Celtic have any substance and on this site we can read the two sides of the argument.
    We cannot get that information on the site of the people making the accusations because debate is not encouraged.
    We can’t get it form the media for the reasons mentioned above or for other darker reasons.

    Somehow I do not think this issue is ever going to make it into any Land Registry publication but TSFM propose to side line this debate even further.

    You only embolden the bully further.
    They could be coming for this very site next.
    What will be your answer then?
    Will you side line yourself.

  32. To Eco, I say keep on telling the truth. That’s what TSFM is for.

    To the mods, I say we’ve resisted putting specific topics in separate threads in the past, so why now? The majority seemed to like to have the opportunity to see everything and decide if they want to read it. JC’s UTT diaries were a good example of this, but then being quickly corralled for posterity in their own thread. If that’s what ‘s on offer for Eco’s State Aid work, then fine.

    To Eddie Goldtop, I say keep on pushing the authorities for the truth. Good luck in your meeting.

    To those looking to invest in the football stock market, I say hahahaha.

  33. TSFM, I’m surprised at your response to ecobhoy’s pieces on the alleged corrupt land deals/state aid. Unlike the OCNC and TUPE discussions it does’t go round in circles (even Campbell’s money was reduced to shouting). The pieces are always temperate and reasoned and fact-based on a matter relevant to the wider Scottish football community.

    Twopanda, can I have the home team please?

  34. TSFM says:
    June 11, 2014 at 5:58 pm
    I’m really not sure that Ecobhoy’s comments on the “land bears” activities need to be shunted to a separate thread – unlike the OCNC debate Eco’s comments haven’t generated the same circular arguments and, I think, have relevance to the on going discussions on this site and in truth have been infrequent, proportionate and at times have been responses to requests from others on this site.

    I understand the thinking behind your suggestion but I don’t see Eco’s contribution in this matter to be a distraction or becoming one.
    ====================================================================ecobhoy says:
    June 11, 2014 at 7:29 pm
    I know when my contribution is no longer needed or desired.
    If you don’t mind me saying, a wee bit of an overreaction there?

    TSFM can doubtless speak for himself but I didn’t get the feeling that your contribution wasn’t wanted.

  35. blu says:
    June 11, 2014 at 10:46 pm
    TSFM, I’m surprised at your response to ecobhoy’s pieces on the alleged corrupt land deals/state aid. Unlike the OCNC and TUPE discussions it does’t go round in circles.
    Beat me to it 🙂

  36. Ecobhoy has earned the right to be a bit mifffed, his land deal rebuttals and his defence of the public servants’ honour are one of the many vanguards of TSFM.
    His posts are an essential ingredient of what makes TSFM enthralling and deliciously different.

  37. I see I am in good company on the naughty step for voicing support of Eco on the bear land deal thread. Why we are joined by the fair Brenda with a 3 word post “Ecobhoy please stay” is beyond me as it was a gesture of support for a fellow poster and a kindness. TSFM make the rules of the house and we must abide by them or walk but the mods do seem a bit draconian at times.

    Draconian or not, and of course we would say ‘not’, it is hardly the naughty step Hector. Comments about moderation get posted on the moderation thread. The naughty steppers don’t get posted at all 🙂

    I am also a bit saddened and surprised that people have rushed to take offence to the earlier suggestion about a new thread. Unlike the OCNC thread, which I think is a bit tedious, a thread for this subject would have been particularly useful because of its importance. I did explain that on my original posting, but I get the sense that some folk have cherry-picked information and arrived at incorrect conclusions.
    There is no question of cutting off discussion about the subject on the main thread. It seemed sensible to restrict discussion there to new material and have it underpinned by a catalogue of information on its own page.

  38. Firstly, let me thank all those who have posted that they thought my State Aid posts were relevant to the Blog as obviously I wouldn’t have posted them here if I thought otherwise.

    Anyone interested in the latest episode in the saga can see it at:

    I make no criticism of TSFM having the ability to moderate as he sees fit as it’s his site and he makes the rules.

    I would suggest however – in my own defence – that I have never seen the State Aid issue as applying solely to Celtic or even Celtic-centric. I believe the issue has deep repercussions not just for the whole of Scottish Football but for the wider Scottish Society and how it develops.

    I have fought throughout my life to defend those under unwarranted attack for various reasons and that includes their right to support any football club no matter their religion (if any) or their country of origin or that of their forebears. That might be at the ‘frivolous’ end of the scale but it’s part of a continuum that stretches to the right to live and form part of an inclusive society and not be singled out for abuse or harassment.

    When football is used as a cloak to launch that kind of attack I thought this was a place to shed light into that dark pit. Obviously my view isn’t shared but I accept that. I won’t change my ways but it seems obvious to me that TSFM is unable to accommodate them.

    I have regrets about that because I have had so many enjoyable times here and have learnt so much from fellow posters which have given me many fresh insights not only into a diverse range of issues but into myself as well.

    Keep digging folk – I intend to 😎

  39. @TSFM

    You stated:

    On the subject of the Land Deal. I have up to now been happy to let the thing go as long as there was no objection to the Celtic-centric nature of the subject.

    Ecobhoy has worked very vigorously to debunk the nonsense that is out there. We are grateful to him for that, and through his efforts I think we are all on the same page as far as the spurious nature of the allegations is concerned.

    Unless there is anything significantly new posted here by way of accusation that Celtic or any other agents involved in these purchases have acted improperly, can I suggest that further discussion on the matter should be reserved for Celtic forums, or;

    in view of the wider interest in the matter, I am happy to open a new thread if ecobhoy would like to summarise the story in a leader post. That way we would have a record of the facts and arguments for reference and back-reading.

    I have no recollection of any post which stated an objection to your alleged Celtic-centric nature of the subject and if there wasn’t one then I am left to assume, perhaps wrongly, that this objection must have come in some other way.

    That’s a pity because if it had been made publicly then I would have responded to it and made my arguments as to why the topic is by no means Celtic-centric. Other posters would then have had the opportunity to post their views on the subject. As it is they have ended-up in the mod thread which really seems terribly unnecessary IMO. And I don’t think I have seen any poster claim my posts were Celtic-centric although I would like to think most might have been tantric rather than tantrum.

    I actually love the ‘significantly new’ sniff test. I wish I had a 1p share for every time I have seen some of the continually repeated circular topics that endlessly go over old ground with no new info or insights.

    But IMO that’s what a blog is for if posters want to post on these topics. I might join them or I might just pass-on and ignore the subject whether there is anything ‘significantly new’ or not.

    As to the idea of a new thread for the ‘archive’ material on State Aid I would have had no problem with that although it would have been nice to have been approached and sounded-out on the issue first. However to offer it at the time of closing down the debate on the main thread I think was poor timing.

    I also believe that there was a lot of ‘significantly new’ material in my latest thread so I therefore find it hard to accept there was a valid reason to close it down. There is also the point that whether or not a post has ‘significantly new’ material or not douext exclude a response to a post having such and that’s often how we progress our knowledge in my experience.

    My main interest on this site has not been to act as a cataloguer or librarian but to dig a bit below the surface and to post what I find and read other posters’ responses and see if it can lead to a deeper understanding of what I thought we were all trying to do.

    However it ‘s obvious to me that I have nothing further that I can usefully add and I have no wish to leave on a discordant note as that would be unfair to great posters on here. But it all seems a great pity that it has come to this.

  40. TSFM
    Is there a preferred posters list? ( I demand to know) 🙄

    As auldhieds suggests in his title of the blog, it takes two tango. I posted twice late last night, Neither posting was inflammatory ? If they were then I would like to know why please?
    Ryan, is an accomplished poster on the blog, I’m sure he can look after himself and is more than capable to responded to any of my posts if he ” chooses to do so”.

    Like many others I am an avid reader of the Blog and have been since the early days, I sometimes revert to type and at no point have the intent to discredit anyone or to be malicious.

    Therefore, I would request my posts are reinstated, then the readers can decide if I’m way of the mark.

    Response please.

  41. Hi I seem to have a post on The it takes two thread either edited or cropped as a couple of lines are gone as is one of the emoticons you provide. Do you edit posts ?

  42. RE;
    twopanda says:
    June 29, 2014 at 4:52 pm

    Re: TSFM says:
    June 28, 2014 at 11:10 am [edit]

    Sincere apologies tendered TSFM
    – Should not have selectively edited a Leaders post
    – please delete as you see fit

  43. TSFM
    Post removed again, appreciate it on the wrong part of the blog but I have tried both the comments page and the moderation page, still no response.
    Please at least acknowledge the receipt of the e-mail. I would understand that your busy and may not have the time to answer although to be honest I can’t see why not.

    No email received

  44. This blog debates the merits and actions of authorities in Scottish football. Referees are integral to the game and they should absolutely be scrutinized in the same way that is deemed fair game for The SFA and executives at individual clubs.

    I made it clear I didn’t believe in conspiracy theories, however individual decisions should be able to be debated. When these decisions have a collective appearance that looks unusual, then I believe they are fair game for comment.

    Hugh Dallas and Dougie McDonald were removed from the Scottish game as they were unfit individuals to carry out onerous duties. There is very good reason to believe that they would still be in place if it hadn’t been for the actions of online blogs.

    Equally there is absolutely no doubt that Rangers would have been introduced straight into the SPL if it wasn’t for the actions of the online community. This blog has been active in leading discussion on a number of topics.

    It would be a shame if a future Hugh Dallas or Dougie McDonald was deemed off limits . Not sure at all how that benefits Scottish football

  45. Barcabhoy says:
    August 6, 2014 at 11:46 am

    tomtom says:
    August 6, 2014 at 11:52 am

    Re. refereeing decisions.

    I’d agree that this would be a worthwhile discussion for TSFM if there was a catalogue of evidence that pointed to any referee, or a group of referees acting in concert, favouring a particular team. My immediate reaction to Mr Beaton’s decision last night was a stunned disbelief at his over-reaction. That doesn’t mean there’s evidence to support corrupt or simply incompetent refereeing, it’s just an opinion, possibly biased – the person I was watching the game with asked why I was so annoyed at an incident in a game I’d no interest in.

    Good moderation call by TSFM I’d say.

  46. @Barcabhoy at 1146
    Let’s have a look at what it says on the tin.
    Well, it’s about Scottish Football and it seems to be encouraging us to monitor the product therein.
    To me that seems to include referees and their actions/inactions.
    As long as we don’t get personal or abusive then let’s comment on them.
    I see the MSM tried to get Alan Stubbs to say something about the red card last night but he’d learned a thing or two from his five years up here and swerved the trap.
    If you read his excellent biography you’ll know exactly how he feels about Scottish referees.

  47. ecobhoy says:

    September 16, 2014 at 9:17 pm

    My understanding was that – as usual – we should treat each other with courtesy and that there should be no campaigning for either YES or NO. I have not contravened that.


    IMO you clearly did just that or I would not have said anything. I cannot debate my opinion as to why I believe you did contravene the direction as that is exactly what I want to avoid on here so I’m out on this subject matter. You are of course entitled to your opinion so if The Mods and others are fine with that then I have to accept and ignore it.

  48. TSFM

    I see my post at 8.31 last night has been binned?

    It was a simple analogy of the overspending during the Murray era and the fans culpability so can’t have fallen foul of the recent restrictions, explanation welcomed

    It was OT. The proper place for that comment would have been on the forum where you saw the original opinion you were taking issue with.

  49. It was OT. The proper place for that comment would have been on the forum where you saw the original opinion you were taking issue with.
    I completely disagree. Supporters are not innocent bystanders and are capable of bringing pressure on their clubs and the authorities as demonstrated by the vote in 2012 re Sevco’s admission to the leagues. Therefore it is highly disingenuous for supporters to disassociate themselves from the actions of their Boards yet revel in the glory that brought them.

    A lot of this site’s energy is spent looking into who is responsible for the ongoing shenanigans and my point is that we shouldn’t let supporters wash their hands of their responsibility and claim that they were duped when sites like this have continually shed light on matters.

  50. Wrt te following posts:

    Bryce Curdy says: November 21, 2014 at 5:55 pm
    Bryce Curdy says: November 21, 2014 at 7:09 pm
    Bryce Curdy says: November 21, 2014 at 8:58 pm

    Can you advise why my responses to the above posts have been deleted. Mr Curdy has attempted to drag me into issues I have not discussed and I am bemused by his accusations.

    But my posts are deleted and his are allowed to remain including a puzzling comment that I have: ‘Made an ill-judged or worded comment that was entirely against the entire ethos of TSFM and indeed Celtic.’

    The comment hasn’t been identified so I am totally in the dark as to what it is meant to be. However I doubt if any objective poster on here would believe that I would do such a thing.

  51. Why was my post concerning all clubs having an AGM and possibility of it being covered o here removed?

  52. TSFM says:
    November 21, 2014 at 9:40 pm

    I am not perturbed, but rather disappointed that our long held desire to see sporting integrity as a higher priority than the maximisation of profit seems to have been set aside for some purposes – which as I infer is the reason the discussion got so heated.

    I have never posted that the maximisation of profit trumps sporting integrity and would ask you to identify the post where I allegedly made this statement.

    As to the discussion getting heated I reject that inference. I am happy to have my 3 deleted responses to Bryce Curdey put on the Comment Moderation thread for other posters to make their own judgement.

    All rather strange. I suggest that you re-read of my original post which stated:

    ecobhoy says:
    November 21, 2014 at 5:07 pm

    Dear oh dear – it would appear that PL is to be cast as this season’s panto villain – deflection of the first order!

    As chief executive of Celtic his role is to maximise profit – pure and simple. Obviously that has to be achieved within the rule of the various footballing authorities but also all of the other legal requirements that apply to running a club the size of Celtic.

    He and other Celtic officials/officers are also involved in the governance of the game but all the ills of the game can’t be laid at Celtic’s door. Some can but every other club and their representatives have a responsibility as well.

    As to the £10 million – perhaps I’ve been sleeping but I always assumed it was turnover.

    This appears to have sparked-off the responses from Bryce Curdy which tbh I found bizarre and hard to understand as they introduced topics I had not raised.

    I was puzzled by this but certainly things have become clearer as the night has progressed.

  53. TSFM – I’m reading back and don’t see any ‘insulting language’ or ‘disrespect’ from me. I simply see a disagreement. Indeed, I went out of my way to congratulate ecobhoy about his investigations into ‘State aid’ which I massively respected. The relevant posts from ecobhoy have been mysteriously deleted, at least on my iPad.

    Happy to ‘repair’ in what ever way you feel fit, but genuinely don’t feel I’m the one that’s caused the damage.

  54. ‘The relevant posts from ecobhoy have been mysteriously deleted’

    In case anyone wonders: I didn’t delete the posts and earlier asked TSFM on the Moderation Thread why they had been deleted.

    I have also asked that the deleted posts be re-posted by TSFM on the Moderation Thread.

  55. Really? My Bob Newhart back of a napkin playlet?

    When I think of all the lame attempts at humour you *haven’t* deleted.

  56. Spotted a post of mine has disappeared tonight – I assume removed to moderation for some reason?

  57. No reply? I thought this thread might be the place to ask why posts were removed, rather than clog up the main thread.

    However I am drawing my own conclusions now anyway, so this will likely be my last contribution or visit to the site.

    It was fun while it lasted but I don’t see any sensible balance in whats discussed or allowed to stand on the blog now. There seem to be an increasingly small number of non-Celtic posters over time and the blog is very much poorer as a result.

    Its difficult to make any statement that might be perceived as a criticism of Celtic or a Celtic player now.

  58. I see a couple of posts of mine have been deleted but not the silly ones to which I commented. i found them extremely patronising but I suppose it’s all in the eye of the beholder.
    Read only mode for me then. Disappointing but not terminal as TSFM is the only football forum (that I’ve found) that attempts serious discussion.

  59. ernie says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:19 pm
    1 0 Rate This

    I see a couple of posts of mine have been deleted but not the silly ones to which I commented. i found them extremely patronising but I suppose it’s all in the eye of the beholder.
    Read only mode for me then. Disappointing but not terminal as TSFM is the only football forum (that I’ve found) that attempts serious discussion.


    Couldn’t agree more ernie and I’ve suffered the same fate.

    But the pattern seems quite clear now, if you disagree with or criticise Celtic then you can expect a group of posters to round on you at great length or for your posts to mysteriously disappear.

    The lengths at which some posters will go to “prove” a Celtic player has been unfairly treated because he has been found guilty of something they don’t like is becoming a bit embarassing.

    The attempts to confuse a discussion about the governing body applying its rules with the proof required to convict of someone of a criminal offence are entirely misleading IMO. Tonev has not been charged or tried or convicted of a criminal offence. He has been found guilty of a breach of football rules – therefore evidence sufficient for breaching those rules is what was sought and found in the case.

    I fully expect this will be removed shortly but lets see.

  60. Matty Roth, ernie

    I have not read the deleted posts in question, and even although I am a Celtic supporter I would not want this site to be moderated in any kind of pro-Celtic manner. One of it’s main strengths is that all clubs are represented (although Rangers/Sevco are obviously very under represented in relation to their fan base) and the minute it starts to resemble the Sevco thread on kerrydalestreet (very enjoyable from a Celtic fan’s perspective) or a Sevco based thread on CQN (possibly even more so) is the beginning of the end.

    Matty, I genuinely don’t believe there are deliberate attempts to confuse the debate. To take up your point, the problem I and many Celtic fans have is that Tonev has been charged by the footballing authorities with the equivalent of a criminal offence. Few will appreciate and even fewer will be arsed to make the distinction you describe. He has been found guilty of what is a criminal offence even although he has not been investigated for one by the police or charged with one by the fiscal on the basis of one person’s word and is forever more branded a racist in the public’s eye (see The Sun). Perhaps some Celtic supporters are incapable of viewing this without green tinted specs but I would be hugely troubled by this regardless of the club involved.

  61. Bryce Curdy says:
    December 18, 2014 at 5:32
    Good post BC and agreed on all counts. Almost! I also visit team specific sites, AFC primarily but also Fieldsofgreen and other entertaining sites. Sometimes for the sheer laddishness I participate in the AFC one but I never do the racism/sectarianism/general insulting that features highly and I also try not to indulge in whataboutery. They can be a bit of a laugh but my inner liberal cringes at the tone! Never mind, it’s what they are and one knows what to expect. TSFM is (should be) different. I said a few weeks ago (tongue in cheek) that if we can’t trust fitba clubs to honestly report the attendance figures how can we expect them to be honest with the important stuff? I’m at the same level of credibility with many of the regular posters on TSFM when it comes to anything connected with CFC; as I read all I can hear is “my club right or wrong”. I have to ask if that is all they’re saying when talking about the important stuff.
    It’s probably me. I ‘m understand completely the demographics of fitba support in Scotland and the perfectly understandable majority on the forum but I think I’ll stick to (selective) read only. It’s by far the best source of information on football governance in Scotland and I hope it keeps up the good work. I certainly intend to keep supporting.

  62. Folks
    The pro-Celtic charge is patently ridiculous when one considers the lengths we have gone to in criticising Celtic for all sorts of different reasons. The moderation rules are not in place to protect Celtic or anyone else. They are there to ensure that the rules of the blog are upheld.

    Angry folk don’t make good TSFM contributors. Be sorry to see anyone go, but if people want to bow out because they think the mods are pro Celtic, then we have a serious communication gap which I can’t do a lot about.

    This has become largely an Aberdeen v Celtic thing – which is quite ridiculous. We really don’t need partisanship on here, so perhaps the blog is evolving in the right direction as we discover those who can’t get past that partisanship?

    Maybe it’s for the better and maybe not – but we aren’t changing the rules to allow people to shout at each other.

    I asked people to refrain from passing personal judgements on the Tonev/Logan case. There have been as many posts criticising Logan and Aberdeen removed as there have been on the other side – happily without too much protest.

    I don’t want to turn this into a proxy debate on the substantive issues here. There are others on the main blog who are doing that sensibly. If you don’t like what you see and hear on TSFM, then of course you won’t want to hang around. Maybe sad, but let’s just leave it at that.

  63. TSFM you seem to think the blog is becoming less partisan. I don’t agree.

    Although if fans of other clubs drift away leaving the blog for celtic fans only then I guess there won’t be much conflicting opinion only acceptance and then the double standards can be trotted out without question.

    Not particularly impressed with this response tbh as it makes no attempt to explain why things were removed but instead seems to be designed to patronise and antagonise.

  64. TSFM
    The forum is not pro Celtic. I don’t envy your moderation role and admire what you do. The vast majority of posters are pro-Celtic, which is fine, but a few of them dominate the forum with a “my club right or wrong” attitude. The issue has been noted by you as Aberdeen/Celtic and previously Hearts/Celtic and you are correct. Basically it’s everyone/Celtic.
    To be accused of partisanship in the face of such nonsense that has been hammered out every day about Tonev and the Ann Budge stuff (e.g) strikes me as a bit ironic but it’s your forum.

  65. TSFM

    Firstly, apologies, I did not know this thread existed. Had I known I would have aimed my previous two PM’s to you here instead. Perhaps I would have received some response if I had.

    Fair do’s on your comment last night, I fully expected Steffs comment to be deleted and I probably would have done the same if I was in your shoes. My comment was intended more just to flag up that there seems to be a drive to delete messages that may cause upset to some. Frankly that upset is required to stop people relaxing into the navel-gazing, comfortable pseudo-intellectual guff (for want of a better word) that I find a certain subset of the TSFM community love to wallow in. Please understand I don’t just mean in the recent Tonev etc debate, I mean in general – sometimes a more confrontational tone is required simply to give folks a shake. However, I completely agree that if it takes an overly personal tone it should be deleted, or better still edited or returned to sender (I also accept that that would be a ridiculous amount of work for you, I can imagine you have more than enough on your plate – if there is a Mrs (or Mr) TSFM she (or he) must be very understanding!)

    So, yes, Steff overstepped the mark, and perhaps I did, but I’m not sure what your “guess” remark refers to.

    Your comment above that “Angry folk don’t make good TSFM contributors” is perfectly true, but I don’t see much evidence that the community as a whole makes any effort to understand why there appears to have been a marked increase in the levels of anger recently. The comments over the past few days on this particular thread should tell you all you need to know! In recent times there have been several issues which have amplified the Celtic versus everyone else debate to a point where bore a significant undertone of superiority and the feeling of entitlement that is normally associated with the Blue side of the famous Glasgow twosome. Sometimes you require a needle to poke at such balloons of pomposity.

    The “then we have a serious communication gap which I can’t do a lot about” statement above is worrying. Sorry mate but that just sounds like a cop out. I’ve harped on about this before and don’t want to bore you again, but for this place to work it needs to retain a good level of “multiculturalism” (can’t think of a better term). Now, its difficult because as you have pointed out from my side I don’t see all of the comments that you have deleted, but I do see what I believe to have been perfectly reasonable comments deleted, whilst others I find offensive/patronising from the, I’ll say green side but that is just an oversimplification for the sake of this argument, remain listed for eternity. I’m sure you can’t go sending explanations for all deletions, and many will require no explanation, but I have requested explanations in the past cos I honestly didn’t understand why they were pulled. Some could have been very easily edited in much the same way as you doctored my comment last night.

    As others have pointed out the blog can be made more partisan simply by driving out all opposition, then you will have a happy blog but alas it will be a pointless talk-shop that will achieve nothing. In all seriousness I don’t know how to solve this – maybe another thread on which this debate can be hammered out? I fear that would dissolve into a massive argument within the day!! Dunno… but from talking to others here and from my reading of other fan sites, TSFM has a massive problem. Steff made comments that were certainly forthright about his views on the colour of this blog, but my god they don’t come close to some comments I’ve read on the subject elsewhere!

    Finally “I don’t want to turn this into a proxy debate on the substantive issues here. There are others on the main blog who are doing that sensibly. If you don’t like what you see and hear on TSFM, then of course you won’t want to hang around. Maybe sad, but let’s just leave it at that.”

    – That’s a sad statement indeed – “shut up or get lost” is what it sounds like to me, but I assume that’s not what you intend it to sound like. Sorry mate, but it’s impossible to debate such a massive issue on the main blog. In my experience and from others its a debate that is completely dismissed by many, leads to a gang of naysayers belittling any attempt to discuss it, leading directly to deleted posts from exasperated members overstepping the mark, creating more anger and cries of troll aimed at anyone that dares ruffle the feathers of the TSFM royalty! The dreaded downward spiral is rapidly becoming a cliff.

    I’m over egging it slightly, but then I’m angry because I honestly thought this place could be a force. I’ve read it for years (including RTC), I don’t have any special knowledge that I can use to help dissect the TRFC situation, Mrs Tayred and offspring thinks I spend too long reading posts here as it is, so I can’t devote time to helping the dissection of TRFC but I have been amazed at the power of this place to dig into the murky side of our society. It has been a phenomenal example of what such a blog can do. I am angry that such good can be subverted into a place that can carry statements that I find abhorrent – recent posts on the minutes silence at Pittodrie were indefensible, some responses to Anne Budge equally indefensible. The Tonev case is more uncomfortable for everyone, but the tone of many here that somehow has been fully accepted has made my skin crawl at times.

    Now I really must find ways to make my posts shorter….

  66. tayred says:
    December 19, 2014 at 9:22 am
    1 0 Rate This


    Firstly, apologies, I did not know this thread existed.
    Me too until a couple of days ago. Once upon a timeI did a fair amount of time offshore and on one of the ships I worked on there was a suggestion box on the gangway leading to the bridge . If you opened it you would see that there was no bottom, only a clear drop to the ocean below. Anyone who had a problem was advised to put it in the suggestion box.

  67. tayred says:
    December 19, 2014 at 9:22 am
    2 0 Rate This


    I’ve also been an avid follower since RTC days, reading pretty much every post over the last few years, at times its like an addiction, so hard to put down.

    I was until a short while ago also a paying subscriber but cancelled this when I got a feeling about the way things I felt were heading.

    I’ve only ever been a sporadic poster of course and I’ve no doubt my contributions won’t be missed in any way whatsoever. Thats fair enough, but I don’t think there’s much need for the rather unpleasant if-you-don’t-like-it-just-go-away mentality being displayed and I think that it is now a fairly good pointer to the issue that now exists.

    I thought there was some desire to bring fans of all clubs together and work on creating some sort of consensus of the issues that affect us all.

    That no longer seems the case and personally I now find the comments sections on the blog a little unpleasant and overbearing.

    Good luck in achieving the blogs stated aims folks I genuinely hope you can all work together so it can be improved and moved onto the next level.

  68. I’ve also been on board since RTC days. Sorry to see guys leaving but how else does one respond to ” If you don’t like what you see and hear on TSFM, then of course you won’t want to hang around. Maybe sad, but let’s just leave it at that.”
    Nevertheless, keep up the good work.

  69. Folks,

    My comments were not intended to dismiss anyone out of hand if they don’t like what they see on TSFM, and I apologise if that is how it came across.

    I haven’t even looked at a club fansite since before 2000 because they are tedious in the extreme – and they bore me. If I felt that TSFM was going that way, someone else would be running it.

    If people feel there is any club bias going on then they would feel the same as me – and will be lost to TSFM because we have no other USP than the cross-club thing.

    We can’t do anything more except reassure people that we very definitely about building a community, but if you feel so strongly about this issue that you want to leave us, then I respect your position. I hope you also respect ours – that these squabbles between opposing fans are not as important to us as they are to you, and that we should agree to disagree.

  70. TSFM. I’m afraid you can’t see what the issue here is. Wouldn’t matter if you think it’s right or wrong but if you can’t see it then you’re part of the problem.
    Anyway, I’ve abused the moderation thread enough, time to go.

  71. ernie

    That was a bit condescending and somewhat contemptuous, but clearly I’m not the only person who doesn’t see it.

    A dismissal of those people as “part of the problem” is exactly what I am getting at here. You appear to view this matter as being one of fundamental importance such that it implies a character defect on the part of those who don’t share your insight.

    The issue, whether I get it or not is not the reason why posts have been removed. Posts are removed only when the rules of participation are broken – not because of any opinion that a poster may hold.

    If we don’t “get it”, then by all means explain what “it” is. I am – and the vast majority on this blog are – listening

  72. TSFM. I genuinely feel bad about keeping this running, the blog is doing a good job and will be none the worse without me. I may be the only one who feels the way about the direction the forum is taking although I suspect that the 70 or so who TU’d the Pictish post, for example, probably feel it too. The vast majority apparently don’t and so be it. They won’t “get” this either.
    “My club right or wrong” is laughable up to a point but the lengths some are going to on here with regard to Celtic at every turn is stripping the forum of all credibility. Justifiably we all laugh at the “fingers in ears and lalalalal” attitude of the TRFC support over the years: being unaware of the problem is part of the problem.

  73. TSFM says:
    December 19, 2014 at 5:10 pm
    2 6 Rate This


    My comments were not intended to dismiss anyone out of hand if they don’t like what they see on TSFM, and I apologise if that is how it came across.

    I haven’t even looked at a club fansite since before 2000 because they are tedious in the extreme – and they bore me. If I felt that TSFM was going that way, someone else would be running it.

    If people feel there is any club bias going on then they would feel the same as me – and will be lost to TSFM because we have no other USP than the cross-club thing.

    We can’t do anything more except reassure people that we very definitely about building a community, but if you feel so strongly about this issue that you want to leave us, then I respect your position. I hope you also respect ours – that these squabbles between opposing fans are not as important to us as they are to you, and that we should agree to disagree.


    TSFM, thanks for the sincere words.

    I do recognise that yourself and Big Pink are doing everything you can here and with the best intentions. Its only fair I make that clear before I pop off.

    I also believe when my post was removed and I was not in the best frame of mind having become extremely frustrated with some of the more overbearing stuff being posted – I assumed the worst and of course I was wrong.

    From what you have stated you clearly believe and aspire for the blog to become free of partisanship.

    Unfortunately I do think the direction of travel of the blog is actually the opposite of what you hope and what you clearly still believe can be achieved and would simply ask that you consider carefully whats going on in the comments section.

    I do hope that partisanship can be spotted (and so gently removed) from fans of ANY club and not just where it stands out because it from a minority or dissenting voice. It would not further the aim of the blog, to smooth over conflicts or disagreements by simply ushering away the smaller parties each time until there are no voices left to disagree with the majority.

    On the subject of squabbles I really don’t see it tbh and it does seem we are looking down different ends of the telescope on this one. What I think I see is that some posters who are used to having their way in every argument and every point of discussion, investing a great deal of time and words rebutting every single word they don’t like in a rather tiresome, repetitive and overbearing manner.

    Over the time I have regularly visited the blog I’ve never felt closer to fans of all clubs and thats been a great thing to experience. Sadly I really do feel there are a few posters now working hard to hit reverse gear and draw back from the fold, build up the old defences and declare a return to “us against the world”. Its a shame to see and maybe I’ve got it all wrong but thats what seems to be happening.

    Despite my dawning realisation the forum has changed and that it is simply time for me to move on, it is only fair I try to end on some positive note:

    I have spent some genuinely brilliant time on the blog learning so much and really enjoying hearing others opinions and stories. I’ve come to understand all sorts of things that I’ve never personally experienced from people in all walks of life. Bravo to them all, from the most modest contributors to the swinging intellects.

    To you and to Big Pink also, thank you so much for creating and nurturing the forum and for all the hard work you have both put into it.

    “So long and thanks for all the fish”

Leave a Reply