Page 3 of 3

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:52 pm
by Mad Dog
Well I was hoping it to be a list of players of note for our club, not the one appearance players of 2004 - early 2009.

Thought it would be worth adding to wiki.

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 8:40 pm
by Formic
Mad Dog wrote:Well I was hoping it to be a list of players of note for our club, not the one appearance players of 2004 - early 2009.

Thought it would be worth adding to wiki.
So would it be more like the Diamonds Legends section of the OWS ?

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:27 pm
by Mad Dog
I was thinking along those lines. I know it's on the OWS, but there is nothing beyond a list on wiki which is ambiguous. I set it up originally back in August to get rid of that list on the main wiki article as compromise with Jimbo (which he didn't honour) over the list (which he's campaigning to have deleted).

Still would be a good wiki article though to add to our entries there.

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:46 pm
by Formic
Good idea.

Does anybody know "Jimbo"'s real name, so we might discuss the issue with him directly when we go to Grays. I'd suggest that challenging a list which is on an official website is beyond his remit.

Similarly if he challenges facts that are listed in the Diamonds history on the OWS then he is overstepping the mark.

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:46 pm
by wewantourdarbyback
We all at times become jumped up little pricks on the internet. Some though take that beyond the ridiculous, power from behind a keyboard becomes too much, there is no accountability. People like him would never dream of challenging this kind of thing in real life, but on the internet they feel they can become the person they wish they were. The person who has power, knows everything and can say what he wants.

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:34 pm
by Mad Dog
Formic wrote:Good idea.

Does anybody know "Jimbo"'s real name, so we might discuss the issue with him directly when we go to Grays. I'd suggest that challenging a list which is on an official website is beyond his remit.

Similarly if he challenges facts that are listed in the Diamonds history on the OWS then he is overstepping the mark.
I've done that and the argument I got was it isn't a reliable or secondary source (So where the @!"£$ am I going to find one that is for RDFC?! :roll: :evil: ) even when using stats such as goals scored, appearances, etc. When asked about his knowledge on the subject or negotiating a criteria, he goes quiet until I deem the matter closed and he assented to my suggestion on compromise. He then comes out of his hole and the process starts again.

Its not just him, its the whole lot of them that edit football wiki articles. This got taken to "debate." Not many were interested in coming to an agreed criteria, they only piped up to critise without offering an alternative proposal. This isn't the first time this has been discussed without a conclusion to it.

My previous discussion which is now archived (don't edit it whatever you do):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_ ... yers_lists

Incidently this matter has come around AGAIN as a result:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_ ... er_players

wewantourdarbyback wrote:We all at times become jumped up little pricks on the internet. Some though take that beyond the ridiculous, power from behind a keyboard becomes too much, there is no accountability. People like him would never dream of challenging this kind of thing in real life, but on the internet they feel they can become the person they wish they were. The person who has power, knows everything and can say what he wants.
More or less sums him up. He's a 20 year old nobody according to his profile on there.

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:04 pm
by BartonRaz
According to the Byrne's interview on the OS, we're better than Burton!

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:36 pm
by Jemfy
BartonRaz wrote:According to the Byrne's interview on the OS, we're better than Burton!
Yes but most people thought, and were proven right at the end IMO, that Burton were one of the worst sides to get automatic promotion from this division. Clough did a great job managing the players he had until he left. Nice thing to hear, but everything taken into account it means little. Just have to hope these players push on. Hope Byrne continues to do well here and decides to stay in the summer when Forest don't renew his contract (almost certain).

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:25 am
by jimbobjaw
Jemfy wrote:
BartonRaz wrote:According to the Byrne's interview on the OS, we're better than Burton!
Yes but most people thought, and were proven right at the end IMO, that Burton were one of the worst sides to get automatic promotion from this division. Clough did a great job managing the players he had until he left. Nice thing to hear, but everything taken into account it means little. Just have to hope these players push on. Hope Byrne continues to do well here and decides to stay in the summer when Forest don't renew his contract (almost certain).
I guess its something he would be expected to say to. I agree that Burton were awful, and am quite embarrased that they are doing so (comparatively) well this year. Just shows how poor League 2 is!

Re: Mark Byrne

Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:13 pm
by TheIncognitoKid
http://www.thediamondsfc.com/page/NewsD ... 33,00.html
Confirmed staying till the end of the season now and McGuinness staying at Weymouth for the same duration