Puns

[Milo]

I'm devastated - I love puns but I also aspire to be pompous. Does this mean my ambitions are for nothing

 

I see you - looking down your nose at my post. But I'll treat your reply with total disdain, proving that I'm the pompouser!

 

(note to Admin: try censoring this - or die trying (suicide is punless).

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Agree. Keep the thread on topic.

 

Q..What has a hazelnut in every bite?

 

A..Squirrel poo.

[Steven H]

Agree. Keep the thread on topic.

 

Q..What has a hazelnut in every bite?

 

A..Squirrel poo.

 

now that is either an obscure pun or or an accidental one

[east lothian jag]

Like a sort of punishment exercise?

thats a punishable offence

[east lothian jag]

Can't believe it's got to the stage where we are having a poll as to what to do with puns.

 

If we are going down this route, can we add some more questions to the poll.

 

1). what should we do with people who send abusive posts about the punsters but continue to use an offensive avatar?

2). what do we do with posters who continually post comments just to provoke a reaction and be controversial?

3). what to do with posters who see positives in being a jags supporter and a bright future and don't see eye to eye with those who don't.

4). What to do with posters who won't slate the old board at every given opportunity ?

 

I find this poll appalling. We give far too much air space to those who want to send abusive, threatening or intimidating posts to those who dare to have a differing view from them. Some of the things players, manager, board and fellow fans get called on here are pathetic..................still, lets have a poll as to what to do with some guys who dare to have a bit of a laugh on here and cause no offense to anyone.

 

We can all have differing opinions as to what we want to see from the jags and have views on past, present and future. There are, however, ways to go about it. Good few on here would do well to remember that.

Well said Lenny

[Norman]

Perhaps we should let the thread's intended discussion play out before it gets hijacked by puns?

 

Say there's not been a post on the thread for 48 hours, then it's fair game.

[Mr Bunny]

I'm devastated - I love puns but I also aspire to be pompous. Does this mean my ambitions are for nothing

 

You can aspire to be punpous.

[Vladimir Putin]

I have to admit, I do find it annoying at times. Although I wouldn't go to the extent of censoring them, it would be good if serious discussions were not hijacked by pages of puns.

 

It's fine when it's right at the start - for example, when someone starts a thread about us signing Gary Twigg or Alan Trouten, and frankly anyone who does so should expect nothing else. But when it starts in the middle of a 3 page discussion about league reconstruction it is a little irritating.

[Jaggernaut]

I have to admit, I do find it annoying at times. Although I wouldn't go to the extent of censoring them, it would be good if serious discussions were not hijacked by pages of puns.

 

It's fine when it's right at the start - for example, when someone starts a thread about us signing Gary Twigg or Alan Trouten, and frankly anyone who does so should expect nothing else. But when it starts in the middle of a 3 page discussion about league reconstruction it is a little irritating.

I'd just like second Vladimir Puntin's post.

[east lothian jag]

I'd just like second Vladimir Puntin's post.

now now Jaggernaut, behave

[B.C.G. JAG]

I'll also put my name to the support of Lenny's post. Seriously, if things get too anally retentive around here then what's the point? Ok, some people get a bit miffed, but just scroll through them, it only takes a few seconds. Let's face it, if you're wasting time on here, you really haven't got anything better to do, or if you have you're clearly procrastinating and another few seconds of scrolling aint going to kill you. We're Partick Thistle fans, we need a little comedic relief now and then.

 

Bring in censorship of harmless fun and all we'll have left will be pretty uptight. This what freedom of speech means - putting up with crap that sometimes you don't agree with. We are a community, trying to discuss things. That means different people with different opinions and different levels of amusement. If things sometimes descend into farce, it's probably because it deserves too.

 

Can we have a poll about banning killjoys too?

[jaggybunnet]

I'll also put my name to the support of Lenny's post. Seriously, if things get too anally retentive around here then what's the point? Ok, some people get a bit miffed, but just scroll through them, it only takes a few seconds. Let's face it, if you're wasting time on here, you really haven't got anything better to do, or if you have you're clearly procrastinating and another few seconds of scrolling aint going to kill you. We're Partick Thistle fans, we need a little comedic relief now and then.

 

Bring in censorship of harmless fun and all we'll have left will be pretty uptight. This what freedom of speech means - putting up with crap that sometimes you don't agree with. We are a community, trying to discuss things. That means different people with different opinions and different levels of amusement. If things sometimes descend into farce, it's probably because it deserves too.

 

Can we have a poll about banning killjoys too?

 

 

you want to ban yourself???

[Jaggernaut]

Yesterday the BBC Wimbledon commentators got into a discussion on players grunting, which got me thinking of the parallels with what this thread and poll are about.

One of the pundits asked the other what could be done. "Nothing," was the reply. It's not illegal, and you can't ban a player for grunting just because it annoys some (or even many) folk. Could you ban excessive grunting, then? But who decides what is excessive? The number of grunts? How loud or otherwise outrageous they are? Some players just can't help themselves.

 

So, it would seem that it's just one of those annoyances that you need to try to block out or resentfully accept, like mobile phones, or wall to wall old firm coverage in the media. Unless some arbitrary legislation comes in.

 

And on the subject of Wimbledon, what a rip-off: £2.50 for a punnet of 10 strawberries and a teaspoonful of cream!

Edited June 24, 2011 by Jaggernaut

[twinny]

Yesterday the BBC Wimbledon commentators got into a discussion on players grunting, which got me thinking of the parallels with what this thread and poll are about.

One of the pundits asked the other what could be done. "Nothing," was the reply. It's not illegal, and you can't ban a player for grunting just because it annoys some (or even many) folk. Could you ban excessive grunting, then? But who decides what is excessive? The number of grunts? How loud or otherwise outrageous they are? Some players just can't help themselves.

 

So, it would seem that it's just one of those annoyances that you need to try to block out or resentfully accept, like mobile phones, or wall to wall old firm coverage in the media. Unless some arbitrary legislation comes in.

 

And on the subject of Wimbledon, what a rip-off: £2.50 for a punnet of 10 strawberries and a teaspoonful of cream!

 

The screaming at Wimbledon is mental, and half of the intention is to put off opponents. I do think that should be banned, or at least players should be told to tone it down. Sharapova and Azarenka were so incredibly annoying. Umpires should be able to dock games to players excessively grunting.

 

The poll is only a question, nothing is being done yet. There have been plenty of complaints about puns and it is good to find out what users of the forum think about it.

Edited June 24, 2011 by twinny

[Jaggernaut]

The screaming at Wimbledon is mental, and half of the intention is to put off opponents. I do think that should be banned, or at least players should be told to tone it down. Sharapova and Azarenka were so incredibly annoying. Umpires should be able to dock games to players excessively grunting.

 

The poll is only a question, nothing is being done yet. There have been plenty of complaints about puns and it is good to find out what users of the forum think about it.

That's right, though nobody will admit it. Opponents often use the sound of the ball coming off the racket as a cue about the speed of the ball and type of hit. This sound can be masked by a scream. It never used to exist, so why now? Simple answer: to put off opponents. Oh, and imitation.

[twinny]

That's right, though nobody will admit it. Opponents often use the sound of the ball coming off the racket as a cue about the speed of the ball and type of hit. This sound can be masked by a scream. It never used to exist, so why now? Simple answer: to put off opponents. Oh, and imitation.

 

There is the belief that by exhaling you can put more efffort into your shot, and by moaning like that you ensure you exhale every time. That doesn't require noise though, does it? Azarenka this afternoon made no noise at all wheen warming up, but only started the screeching once the game restarted. I would imagine when warming up you want to play shots as you would during a game

 

Anyway, we seem to be going off topic...

[Fearchar]

I'd prefer to see a PUN ALERT notice for the first few, say 5, and then relegation of a thread to the sin bin of the general forum.

[crazy davie]

Puns are a good laugh until they are over-used, like the fish pun. They're just tedious now cos we've heard them all too often.

[Jaggernaut]

Puns are a good laugh until they are over-used, like the fish pun. They're just tedious now cos we've heard them all too often.

Agreed. It becomes pish fun.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Agreed. It becomes pish fun.

I'm sure that's OK it's just your buns that are getting panned.

[Jaggernaut]

I'm sure that's OK it's just your buns that are getting panned.

Before anybody starts, there's no knead to take this thread to a dark place.

[jaggybunnet]

Before anybody starts, there's no knead to take this thread to a dark place.

 

the prosecution rests mlaud.. off with his head

Edited June 25, 2011 by jaggybunnet

[sandy]

Add me in support of lennythistle's post.

 

Any forum which ends up getting into discussions like this usually end up falling into disuse.

 

I'm inclined to believe the type of behaviour that is being criticised is actually the indication of a good, lively community of users. That will deteriorate if a forum is over-policed. (That might be appropriate for an "official" forum which is why it's a bad idea to have such things)

 

I had a post a couple of weeks back which responded to the topic, and included a pun in the last sentence to follow some of the preceding ones. That sentence was deleted along with the other puns - frankly, I just think that's pathetic.

 

How about an option to find out if over-management of threads in this way will make people less inclined to use the forum. There have been previous instances where I think the moderators have over-sensitive of issues with no good reason.

Add me in support of lennythistle's post.

 

Any forum which ends up getting into discussions like this usually end up falling into disuse.

 

I'm inclined to believe the type of behaviour that is being criticised is actually the indication of a good, lively community of users. That will deteriorate if a forum is over-policed. (That might be appropriate for an "official" forum which is why it's a bad idea to have such things)

 

I had a post a couple of weeks back which responded to the topic, and included a pun in the last sentence to follow some of the preceding ones. That sentence was deleted along with the other puns - frankly, I just think that's pathetic.

 

How about an option to find out if over-management of threads in this way will make people less inclined to use the forum. There have been previous instances where I think the moderators have over-sensitive of issues with no good reason.

 

I am with Mr Heron, Lenny and BCG Jag on this issue.

 

I posted an informative item about the background to the new Club Secretary a couple of weeks back; she happens to be a Director if a seafood company, so it felt natural and fairly innocent to slip in a fish pun. Mod7 dives in, removes the pun without even the courtesy of a PM or a full explanation. And later the published comment of another poster who describes those who use puns as 'halfwits' goes unchallenged?!

 

Thistle fans have always had a sense of humour. If this Forum is to be moderated in such an inconsistent and heavy-handed way, then you can count me out. A poll about puns? Someone is either having a laugh or taking it all too seriously.

 

I'd advise you to look at the balanced moderation that operated under Liane, FT and previous incarnations of a Thistle Forum.

[jaggybunnet]

I am with Mr Heron, Lenny and BCG Jag on this issue.

 

I posted an informative item about the background to the new Club Secretary a couple of weeks back; she happens to be a Director if a seafood company, so it felt natural and fairly innocent to slip in a fish pun. Mod7 dives in, removes the pun without even the courtesy of a PM or a full explanation. And later the published comment of another poster who describes those who use puns as 'halfwits' goes unchallenged?!

 

Thistle fans have always had a sense of humour. If this Forum is to be moderated in such an inconsistent and heavy-handed way, then you can count me out. A poll about puns? Someone is either having a laugh or taking it all too seriously.

 

I'd advise you to look at the balanced moderation that operated under Liane, FT and previous incarnations of a Thistle Forum.

 

 

pretty sure they would have just deleted them as well as loads of others

[Hot Shot]

Puns are knot something we should tie ourselves up in, it's poor use of the malapropism that makes the forearm annoying to read.