Tom Lees

[parajack]

 

 

51 minutes ago, whatevertrevor said:

 

I'll move on when you stop misrepresenting what I said, ok?

 

I said from the start that none of the sources would discuss the point in terms of prefacing your own opinion, because it is nonsense. I didn't change from 'multiple to none'. I said multiple sources discuss the issue of using the word 'allegedly'. Here is one as an example https://www.humphreys.co.uk/articles/how-to-avoid-libel-and-defamation/ (section 4). Jesus christ man what can't you get about that? I said there are multiple sources discussing the use of the term 'alleged' but none will discuss its use as a preface to your OWN opinions. You misunderstood me and continue to do so. 

 

 

I never thought I'd have to stoop so low as to have to say this on a football forum, but I have PhD in neuroscience so yes I understand academic referencing. 

 

Not sure why I am taking lectures from an alleged drink driver anyway.

 

Why are you dragging this on? 

I was in a discussion with someone else that ended amicably with us both agreeing to disagree,You than decided after the event to join a conversation you wernt part of.Now back to your post did you read the ref before posting it? because one of the few refs in it to 'allegedly' would seem to refute the  view it can be used as a defence in the context of using others words

Quote:Repeating rumours
It is inadvisable to repeat a defamatory rumour unless you are in a position to prove it’s true. Even if you are contradicting the rumour you should not repeat it. And adding ‘allegedly’ is not enough to get you out of libel difficulties.Quoting others
If you publish defamatory remarks about people or organisations made by other people you will be just as liable to be sued as they are. So if you can’t prove the truth of their statements, don’t repeat them.Drawing unprovable conclusions end quote.

Now from the text of your ref) Cut and paste me please the text that you maintain refutes my view...(by the way its not there) enjoy

Edited April 27, 2021 by parajack

[parajack]

10 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I declined to do it because I didn't particularly want to engage with someone that accused me of taking the p*ss out of someone with dyslexia.

 

And again, very little point in engaging with someone who asks things like "what is your source" when the most advanced "stat" I offered was goals scored per game and/or points per gsme. The answer to your question is, of course, you add up the number of goals scored and divide by the number of games played... so my source is the application of basic arithmetic and any website you choose that lists Championship results from this season.

Sobbing my eyes out here.....all it wants is the our 'tune music' Simon Bates

[whatevertrevor]

Just now, parajack said:

A good place to start for you,would be to stop talking down to people,stop lecturing,and maybe read the source you have provided and cut and paste the bit you think disproves my view?(cos you wont find it) The only refeence to allegedly is:

 

I was in a discussion with someone else that ended amicably with us both agreeing to disagree,You than decided after the event to join a conversation you wernt part of.Now back to your post did you read the ref before posting it? because one of the few refs in it to 'allegedly' would seem to refute the  view it can be used as a defence in the context of using others words

Quote:Repeating rumours
It is inadvisable to repeat a defamatory rumour unless you are in a position to prove it’s true. Even if you are contradicting the rumour you should not repeat it. And adding ‘allegedly’ is not enough to get you out of libel difficulties.Quoting others
If you publish defamatory remarks about people or organisations made by other people you will be just as liable to be sued as they are. So if you can’t prove the truth of their statements, don’t repeat them.Drawing unprovable conclusions end quote.

Now from the text of your ref) Cut and paste me please the text that you maintain refutes my view...(by the way its not there) enjoy

 

What the hell are you talking about? You have misunderstood at every turn. 

 

As I said several times, there is no source that refutes your view directly, because nobody discuses your view directly, because it is nonsense. How many times does this need saying? Are you not reading the bit where I have said this over and over? Seriously?

 

Your view was that you can use 'allegedly' and it protects you from any legal action, even when it is just used to preface your own allegations. Yes? Can you confirm hat that is even the view we are talking about here? Because that is the view I am talking about. 

[StudentOwl]

3 minutes ago, parajack said:

Sobbing my eyes out here.....all it wants is the our 'tune music' Simon Bates

I have literally no idea what you're on about

[whatevertrevor]

5 minutes ago, parajack said:

A good place to start for you,would be to stop talking down to people,stop lecturing,and maybe read the source you have provided and cut and paste the bit you think disproves my view?(cos you wont find it) The only refeence to allegedly is:

 

I was in a discussion with someone else that ended amicably with us both agreeing to disagree,You than decided after the event to join a conversation you wernt part of.Now back to your post did you read the ref before posting it? because one of the few refs in it to 'allegedly' would seem to refute the  view it can be used as a defence in the context of using others words

Quote:Repeating rumours
It is inadvisable to repeat a defamatory rumour unless you are in a position to prove it’s true. Even if you are contradicting the rumour you should not repeat it. And adding ‘allegedly’ is not enough to get you out of libel difficulties.Quoting others
If you publish defamatory remarks about people or organisations made by other people you will be just as liable to be sued as they are. So if you can’t prove the truth of their statements, don’t repeat them.Drawing unprovable conclusions end quote.

Now from the text of your ref) Cut and paste me please the text that you maintain refutes my view...(by the way its not there) enjoy

 

Re: the bit in purple. You've lost the plot here. I am the one saying that you CAN'T use it as defence when it simply prefaces your own allegations.. You have said you can! However, it is sometimes a defence when using it in the context of others' words (for eg if you are quoted allegations made in the media) but it is never a defence when you simply preface your own view with 'allegedly'.

 

I think you have misunderstood what I have said in every post. 

[fredowl]

now now children calm down and tell me is tom lees still injured 

[Hookowl]

[83owl]

20 minutes ago, modboy said:

 

Brentford away should have been the last straw for Monk, shambles of a performance (to add to many before)

And plenty since

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I have literally no idea what you're on about

 

Just that post that left you feeling like that! 

[whatevertrevor]

I refuse to discuss this anymore on this thread as it is beyond tedious and not the right thread. I'm happy (well, not 'happy', but willing) to discuss it in the dressing room section if @parajackwishes. 

[parajack]

23 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I have literally no idea what you're on about

Yeah i know,didnt think you would understand ,getting old is like living in another world...if ya wernt there

[parajack]

1 minute ago, whatevertrevor said:

I refuse to discuss this anymore on this thread as it is beyond tedious and not the right thread. I'm happy (well, not 'happy', but willing) to discuss it in the dressing room section if @parajackwishes. 

You mean people willingly talk to you? no thanks mate...didnt i ask you what,4 or 5 posts back to politely stop and talk about football?

[parajack]

14 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Just that post that left you feeling like that! 

Quality...

[parajack]

26 minutes ago, whatevertrevor said:

 

Re: the bit in purple. You've lost the plot here. I am the one saying that you CAN'T use it as defence when it simply prefaces your own allegations.. You have said you can! However, it is sometimes a defence when using it in the context of others' words (for eg if you are quoted allegations made in the media) but it is never a defence when you simply preface your own view with 'allegedly'.

 

I think you have misunderstood what I have said in every post. 

 

[CircleSeven]

Well, we’ve covered a lot of ground on this thread! I’m just glad I found out about Polar Bears invading Russian villages.

 

As for Tom Lees I think we can all say with some certainty, he’s definitely injured. And he hasn’t signed a new deal.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

17 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

Well, we’ve covered a lot of ground on this thread! I’m just glad I found out about Polar Bears invading Russian villages.

 

As for Tom Lees I think we can all say with some certainty, he’s definitely injured. And he hasn’t signed a new deal.

 

I'll be honest, I didn't expect it to go quite like this when I posted the thread.

 

It's been quite entertaining, though.

 

[Sultan_Pepper]

There's an ignore user function if you hover over each other's profile image on the left. Just saying.

[parajack]

4 hours ago, Sultan_Pepper said:

There's an ignore user function if you hover over each other's profile image on the left. Just saying.

If only i had known that earlier....

[Standidno]

Brilliant servant - for 3 years he was one of the best in the league. 
 

all the best 

[Tollertonowl]

On 24/04/2021 at 15:59, Markowski77 said:

It’s one of them - he has been a good servant to the club 

 

obvs in no rush to sign a new contract , unfortunately this happened 

 

now maybe left on the football scrap heap 

He's been good for us in the past, but is getting old and is clearly less effective (each season) in his role over the last two years...