[Siderite]

“Claims that COVID-19 vaccines will make people who receive them magnetic”

lol – Claimed by the so reliable youtuber.

[Siderite]

I was aware that the video comes from official sources. The channel is what’s dubious, and how they might distort such.

“Of course you’re not because your presuppositions would be destroyed.”

Sure it would. Meanwhile, outside of la la land, such nonsense are frenzied conspiracies. At least you have your echo chamber to keep your confirmation bias going.

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

Sounds like a reliable source/sarcasm.
Can you explain your sarcasm from an official paper?

I didn’t realise a youtube channel is an official peper. I am not commenting on such, because your covid nonsense is a thread hijack. This is about anti-vaxxers undermining measles, which has caused needless rises in the disease.

[Siderite]

In a sense, I am right? How am I not in any way? There were tonnes of anti-vaxxer content from before 2020 and from Wakefield’s study.

Also, I am not talking about covid vaccines in the original, so the accusation has sod all to do with your covid conspiracies.

[Siderite]

Sounds like a reliable source. /sarcasm

I know threads can morph, but it does seem a bit hijacked to go on about your covid woo when you were making nonsense about how no-one opposes measles jabs, when they do.

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

The evidence is out there ,reported by official papers,that there is an alarming increase in deaths,compared to pre- Covid levels. The statistics are also clearly being seen all over the world, and it isn’t covid that was the cause. Look into it,the main stream media will not report on these official reports.

I am sure http://www.crankyblogpost.com is a reliable substitute for actual reporting.

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

…no-one against tried and tested vaccines.There’s your problem.
The reliable evidence ( which the main stream media won’t report on) is out there,if you just look for it.

People oppose the measles, mumps, rubella, polio and other vaccines. If no-one opposes ‘tested vaccines’, does that mean these aren’t tested?

Some people have been against them since Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent study. This was back in the 90s, so has sod all to do with covid. It made big news at the time and many, who should be ashamed, peddled the nonsense. I was talking about the woo about autism, because this was the charge at the time. Not the covid vaccine conspiracies.

I disagree with you on covid vaccines, but this is irrelevant to this. People are not taking measles vaccines, and take up has been on the decline since before covid. So your statement about covid links to vaccine distrust are just not true. Anti-vaxxers have existed for decades.

[Siderite]

No worries. It didn’t seem clear to me who you were referring to and I was thinking someone might have got the wrong end of the stick with my comment. Turns out it was me. :-D

[Siderite]

Iron-awe wrote:

Siderite wrote:

CMC wrote:

2-0 up and the usual idiots more interested in point scoring, there’s a surprise.

If you’re referring to me, I was being very tongue in cheek (as the asterisk should have made obvious). I don’t want to be serious all the damn time.

Probably referring to the difference between mayo and salad cream myself and ironfromafar were laughing about, some miserable gits about.

Maybe. I guess I was paranoid, because I know my deprecating joke has the potential to aggravate if people thought I was using it to make some point. For any avoidance of doubt, I wasn’t. :-)

Hopefully this result will calm AA down a bit and we won’t have many frantic replies of worry.

[Siderite]

CMC wrote:

2-0 up and the usual idiots more interested in point scoring, there’s a surprise.

If you’re referring to me, I was being very tongue in cheek (as the asterisk should have made obvious). I don’t want to be serious all the damn time.

[Siderite]

Not a great advert for the support potential for a groundshare at Ilkeston*.

How are we playing? Looking more gelled?

*I am joking.

[Siderite]

We don’t, but I don’t doubt Zakarin’s commitment to the club or honesty when stating what he believes to be true. I would with Swann and I am sceptical of Hilton. Though, the latter may be true, I cannot fully place my trust in their best intentions as I would a fan.

Though, I think this strip of land would be sorted by either Swann or Hilton if they weren’t looking for an excuse.

1 user thanked author for this post.

North Lincolnshire Irons

[Siderite]

Jordan Zakarin has a good record in bringing Swann’s issue to light. Hilton says such, but he has skin in the game in a way Jordan doesn’t. Or whoever said that. It wasn’t Swann.

[Siderite]

Thanks for the earnest reply. That cleared up a lot of it. I am sorry if my last reply was curt towards you, but I have felt that many fans have been chastised for worrying and being sceptical of Hilton.

As for animosity towards Iron Bru on Facebook, you must have missed last week when Hilton launched baseless accusations against the runners of the site and ended up appearing to insult fans on here by calling them ‘vermin’. He later clarified by saying he meant Swann, but it was really clumisly worded so it was easy to misinterpret this. Thankfully he and the site owners have cooled the animosity this week, but plenty of fans on there seem to have taken it as a means to abuse others. There is one fan on there who has been threatened for being sceptical of Hilton. It’s this what bothers me when negativity is deemed toxic by those engaging or turning a blind eye to this.

I don’t remember the thread where Dean and Hilton got personally abused (not saying it didn’t happen), but I wouldn’t agree with such.

I am sure you do hope such, but I am sceptical about Hilton’s good work on such so far. I am aware of Swann’s own role and am not defending such. We would be nowhere near where we are now if it wasn’t for him. Anyway, I hope you enjoy the game tomorrow and hope Ilkeston have a good season.

[Siderite]

We have a court case pending where we could lose our rights to play at our ground, no groundshare is definitive, and the National League may not allow us to start the season if we cannot prove we can fulfil our home fixtures. This is an existential threat to the club, no matter who is to blame. I would say that anyone who thinks otherwise are living with their heads in the clouds, but the people who see fit to attack others for thinking differently would start getting outraged for calling them into questiom.

I am simply bamboozled at how people are acting as if this is thriving off misery. In what world are we a stable club, right now? We have no idea what’s going to happen. What isn’t helping are derisive comments about anxious fans, especially not from Patrick, Paul Skillington and the Ilkeston fans who do not have remotely the same emotional investment in our club. There’s little we can do, but if things go really belly up, we may need a phoenix club, and that’s not going to happen amicably if we’re at loggerheads.

I have no issue in you discussing tomorrow’s game, but your jabs at actual fans of our club who think differently just create division and you are not helping.

[Siderite]

Didn’t someone (maybe Jordan Zakarin) state that it’s the club’s responsibility to sort the ransom stip out now Hilton has bought the club?

[Siderite]

We would be more likely to have unity if people like bpg didn’t slag off anyone who dares to think differently.

Some of us are concerned about what might happen to our club because of the ground issue. If that makes me an ingenuine guy and not a proper fan (because I am not just cheering on the owner and believing whatever he says, no matter how fishy), then so be it. I am not going to delude myself to please others.

2 users thanked author for this post.

bartonscorpion, Heath

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Interesting piece, particularly to see some fresh discussion from the pair. Trying to choose my words carefully – sounds like Hilton was hoping against it going to court and is now banking on it being a long process. I’ll resist saying anything more about either of their characters – but we all have our views.

Yep. I think you’re right. One seems more confident in their position, and it’s not Hilton. His methods seem to be buying time to me, and the changing in deal offers suggest he hasn’t got a firm leg to stand on.

[Siderite]

Usual suspects? Is Pat Bucks in disguise?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe

[Siderite]

Sorry Aidan. Typo for your name.

[Siderite]

You don’t need to gloat.

[Siderite]

There’s me trying to be optmistic. Haha. I am admittedly only going off what Aidan said on twitter.

[Siderite]

Ferrite wrote:

Siderite wrote:

The one meagre positive is that if it’s heard within a month, we won’t have a cloud of anxiety over this if this was months down the line. The negative is that it gives short time for the two egos to come to terms.

I wonder if the die hards on social media, who refused to believe that post came from Swann, are still clinging on to that delusion.

Except that is after the season starts, will the NL let us begin with such doubt over our future?

None of us know the truth of what was – and wasn’t – agree between the parties, presumably that is what the court will have to establish?

Precisely why I said there is a meagre positive that this is probably going to happen soon.

[Siderite]

A good, balanced read which summises the situation well. It’s refreshing to get an outside perspective, away from emotional biases.

A shame the disclaimer at the end needed to be said, but without it (and maybe still with it), Hilton would likely claim he is some trouble maker and should accept how much he’s done to save the club. As if that refutes worries about what’s going on.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Heath, Ferrite

[Siderite]

No party comes across well, but there is more than one allegation now. The Sun should have been more professional when dealing with the story. However, professionalism is probably beyond hope for The Sun.

The BBC should have investigated this straight away, so the vultures didn’t circle. Something like this would be hard to hush, and that shouldn’t be the answer to controversy. I do feel sympathy for Huw; he is evidently a troubled man and needed help. However, plenty of people suffer from mental health crises and don’t harass people far younger than them like that. The age imbalance is inappropriate and the power imbalance is bad. It may not be illegal, but it is not becoming. It’s important to remember that there is more than one allegation now, and that the initial young adult may have been unaware of the inappropriate nature or power imbalance. Not like that excuses how The Sun reported on the story.

First and foremost, I feel sorry for Huw’s wife. I have no idea how much she knew, but if can’t be easy for her and she is totally innocent in this, while having to face this situation from her husband.

A mess of a situation, amplified by news out for clicks. I don’t like going into news conspiracies, it is a story, but with a NATO summit, rising mortgages and Johnson refusing to hand over legally obliged WhatsApp messages, I can’t help but feel it’s not the most important story out there right now. That said, the media have always liked hounding around when one of their own is involved.

[Siderite]

Unfortunately, I think you’re right.

[Siderite]

I hope DH has a case and wins, but will partially blame him for us being in this situation. Especially if the courts rule that he is in the wrong.

[Siderite]

Awaywego wrote:

A lot of fans believe he stole the ground from the club is that not a good enough reason.

Like 64, I’d rather banning someone’s ability to speak out is less readily used, according to the policies of this forum.

[Siderite]

Being an arsehole isn’t enough of a reason to be banned.

[Siderite]

[Author]

Posts