Inter v Napoli

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

What is wrong with what I said ?? Inter have had it rough throughout all the years I supported them. When Inter are winning there are various media tactics to unstable/damage the club. Inter have been heavily favoured AGAINST in crucial moments.. even in crucial European games. (unjustly red cards , 100% goals disallowed , penalties not given)

Inter is a rich north Italian team , and the southern teams have it much rougher. But still Inter is far and away a much tougher act to follow up then JuBe.. The crap JuBe has done on Serie A over the past 15 years (since I started following football) is just sickening. You can and never will understand what it feels like to win when the going get's tough.

'JuBe'

Is not allowed.

This is the Inter section , It's a word that is hardly or ever will be used outside of here.

You are acting like a kid going up to Curva Nord and crying about how they/we percieve JuBe. Get this to your head , this is the Inter section.... Grow a pair and deal with it.

I dont agree dela, this is not Inter forum, this is just Inter section and all fans are welcome to post here, this is not like forza inter forums or such where you can say whatever you want, you have to be more respectfull here, and if JuBe insults them or anything its their right to ask to not be used.

Dude dont get urself banned again over stupid shit.

LOL? Who's crying... I'm just saying.

Anyways Cro... said it all.

I'm with delaurentiis...Jube isn't profanity, so I dont see what the problem is tbh

CroInter wrote:I dont agree dela, this is not Inter forum, this is just Inter section and all fans are welcome to post here, this is not like forza inter forums or such where you can say whatever you want, you have to be more respectfull here, and if JuBe insults them or anything its their right to ask to not be used.

Dude dont get urself banned again over stupid shit.

Respect is a great word.. Not fitting on a forum like this.
I don't like JuBe and that's that.. How my opinion is of any importance to some is their problem.

Everybody is free to do whatever they want.. But in my opinion this has always been a place for Interisti.
I don't come online that often anymore , but it is a sight to behold when emotional tranvestites rule the rule around here. Back in the day when it was a true Inter section , we all had the most fun..

Lol and now we can't do anything we want in our own section? And besides, what do outsiders even do here, have they given positive contributions on our board?

Hell no they just troll. So why don't we troll them in our own section, and hell, if we can't troll them in our own section, where else can we do it?

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

Don't make up crap.

CroInter wrote:I dont agree dela, this is not Inter forum, this is just Inter section and all fans are welcome to post here, this is not like forza inter forums or such where you can say whatever you want, you have to be more respectfull here, and if JuBe insults them or anything its their right to ask to not be used.

Dude dont get urself banned again over stupid shit.

+ 1

Jack Daniels wrote:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

Don't make up crap.

Who's making up crap? Go speak to Mclewis please and Devi please. I have some conversations about this saved on Skype.

When a poster gets to 0%, all admins must vote to see if the majority want the poster banned or not. Depending on the situations and warnings, the votes will be depended on that.

Does jube mean anything else other than juve with a b to signify serie b, or is there more creativity to it?

CSS is the local lawyer (lolyer) over here.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

Jack Daniels wrote:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

Don't make up crap.

Who's making up crap? Go speak to Mclewis please and Devi please. I have some conversations about this saved on Skype.

When a poster gets to 0%, all admins must vote to see if the majority want the poster banned or not. Depending on the situations and warnings, the votes will be depended on that.

I know more than you. Don't think that i don't speak to them regularly.

All warnings you received was justified and agreed by all of us. If not, your warn level should've been restored by now.

BTW, when a poster reaches 0% from 25% no matter how light the rule the poster offended he will be automatically banned and such situations doesn't warrant a majority vote from the admins unless the warning received is not right or a case for a permanent ban. Meaning, if one of us Admins or Mods caught you trolling or break any kind of rule 1 more time then you get a ban straight away unless it was mistaken.

And if by chance Mclewis or Devi did say that you're in safe hands from them, They probably just lied to stay away from you trying to justify your actions like a little girl every time you get sanctioned.

I would've probably do the same just to avoid annoyance.

Please don't humiliate yourself some more and stop making up crap.

Jd is trolling sciacca to get him banned

Good that you know more than me, nobody is denying that, speaking to other admins though, your post difers from there's. As for the other admins knowing the warnings, it's odd indeed as I was they don't always know most of the warnings users get. When I spoke to both Mclewis and Devi, none of them even knew my warnings to begin with, so how can they approve of it? They found out, when I told them.

'If the warnings are not right', and that is where the voting comes in as I was told. They are going to evaluate my warnings to see if that warning was really justified for a ban. Clearly saying = God, is not worth being banned. Posting a picture saying 'Sto Stronzo' without directly saying it to no one and me having that in my name is once again a warning that does not merit a ban.

Once again it's not made up, I got conversations on Skype that suggest not. Yes, you do get automatically banned, but depending on the circumstances a vote would be in place for it.

I highly doubt Devi would lie, as me and him are close... So that assumption is meh. Mclewis, maybe, maybe not, but me knowing him from my own experience, I highly doubt he would lie as we spoke a quite a while for this.

Funny how you seem to be the only one warning me though.

Since you guys are discussing the laws
Is there anything you Mods can do to ban "Rocchi" from ever refereeing Inter games ?? I think he has trolled us enough in the past now hasn't it.

I'd like to have CSS as Lawyer, since he seems to be very dedicated and knows his stuff well.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:Good that you know more than me, nobody is denying that, speaking to other admins though, your post difers from there's. As for the other admins knowing the warnings, it's odd indeed as I was they don't always know most of the warnings users get. When I spoke to both Mclewis and Devi, none of them even knew my warnings to begin with, so how can they approve of it?

There are 7 admins and 2 moderators. Go figure it out.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:'If the warnings are not right', and that is where the voting comes in as I was told. They were going to evaluate my warnings to see if that warning was really justified for a ban. Clearly saying = God, is not worth being banned. Posting a picture saying 'Sto Stronzo' without directly saying it to no one and me having that in my name is once again a warning that does not merit a ban.

For the 78967865786574506 time, you did not get warned just for saying "=god" but by spamming it like there is no tomorrow. If you still have any objections about that, then may god help us all.

The Sto Stronzo warning was agreed by Me, RG and RedOranje.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:Once again it's not made up, I got conversations on Skype that suggest not. Yes, you do get automatically banned, but depending on the circumstances a vote would be in place for it.

I have conversations on Skype too but I'm not the type of guy who'd broadcast private conversations publicly.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:I highly doubt Devi would lie, as me and him are close... So that assumption is meh. Mclewis, maybe, maybe not, but me knowing him from my own experience, I highly doubt he would lie as we spoke a quite a while for this.

OK then lol.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:Funny how you seem to be the only one warning me though.

I was the one who clicked but not the only one who made the decision. We always talk to each other especially when taking actions towards members. Remember that.

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

Jack Daniels wrote:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

Don't make up crap.

Who's making up crap? Go speak to Mclewis please and Devi please. I have some conversations about this saved on Skype.

When a poster gets to 0%, all admins must vote to see if the majority want the poster banned or not. Depending on the situations and warnings, the votes will be depended on that.

Pretty sure there is no such thing like that.

Jack Daniels wrote:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

Jack Daniels wrote:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

You're 75% closer to a ban than he is

Already spoke to admins, the warnings I recieved are not worthy of a ban even if it results to 0. It will be another chance within admin votes.

Don't make up crap.

Who's making up crap? Go speak to Mclewis please and Devi please. I have some conversations about this saved on Skype.

When a poster gets to 0%, all admins must vote to see if the majority want the poster banned or not. Depending on the situations and warnings, the votes will be depended on that.

I know more than you. Don't think that i don't speak to them regularly.

All warnings you received was justified and agreed by all of us. If not, your warn level should've been restored by now.

BTW, when a poster reaches 0% from 25% no matter how light the rule the poster offended he will be automatically banned and such situations doesn't warrant a majority vote from the admins unless the warning received is not right or a case for a permanent ban. Meaning, if one of us Admins or Mods caught you trolling or break any kind of rule 1 more time then you get a ban straight away unless it was mistaken.

And if by chance Mclewis or Devi did say that you're in safe hands from them, They probably just lied to stay away from you trying to justify your actions like a little girl every time you get sanctioned.

I would've probably do the same just to avoid annoyance.

Please don't humiliate yourself some more and stop making up crap.

:lol!: :lol!: :lol!:

Camurrìa.Sto.Stronzo wrote:Good that you know more than me, nobody is denying that, speaking to other admins though, your post difers from there's. As for the other admins knowing the warnings, it's odd indeed as I was they don't always know most of the warnings users get. When I spoke to both Mclewis and Devi, none of them even knew my warnings to begin with, so how can they approve of it? They found out, when I told them.

'If the warnings are not right', and that is where the voting comes in as I was told. They are going to evaluate my warnings to see if that warning was really justified for a ban. Clearly saying = God, is not worth being banned. Posting a picture saying 'Sto Stronzo' without directly saying it to no one and me having that in my name is once again a warning that does not merit a ban.

Once again it's not made up, I got conversations on Skype that suggest not. Yes, you do get automatically banned, but depending on the circumstances a vote would be in place for it.

I highly doubt Devi would lie, as me and him are close... So that assumption is meh. Mclewis, maybe, maybe not, but me knowing him from my own experience, I highly doubt he would lie as we spoke a quite a while for this.

Funny how you seem to be the only one warning me though.

Why dont you just stop trolling, it will be much easier than going through all this.

^^ ur kid?

my baby girl.