Obviously this response was coming...Yes, but ever since 'upsetting the guy who is always upset' became the most common banning offence not everyone can use their own identity, can they?
As for agendas, p8 now works on the lines that if your agenda coincides with that of the 'owner' you can say pretty much what you please, insult people etc etc, but if it doesn't you'll never be seen here again. Yet some still act like you can have a grown up debate on here with your fellow adultsYeah right, all fine until you make a point the wrong person can't answer or chooses to take as 'disrespect', at which point see ya'.
If the forum had rules, and break 'em and you're gone, then fair enough. But the 'you can argue until I don't like it or you're winning and then you're banned' bit makes having any real debate about the Fed, the forums or the sport a waste of time, not to mention being a pretty childish way of dealing with dissent.
Sorry mate, I don't agree with what you say here. Sure, Pete can be a hothead at times, but a lot of people have pissed him off and are still here.
True, some people got banned in an angry mood and didn't really deserve it, but Pete let most of them back on after an hour or a day. Some were let back on after a gentle nudge from the other mods.
Besides that, even if you are right about getting banned, what would you rather do? Go down fighting like a man or woman, or go the chickensh*t route?
So far the Pete has made no mention here of why he posted this thread, so people assume and jump to conclusions (right or wrong...).
Even what some of you say is indeed the reason for this thread, I see nobody giving any good arguments of why Pete is in the wrong for posting this, or why it is wrong to delete the subforum...
Feel free to come up with some valid points, defend your corner, but do it civilised. All I see now is:
"Boooh! Bad Pete!"
"Why?"
"Ehhhhhhhhhh...."
