FAO Admin

Post Reply
MarkMcBurney
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1670
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 07:47

FAO Admin

Post by MarkMcBurney »

Please can we stop the autocorrect now when trying to write Frank W@rren and allegedly? It's getting rather an old joke and is very tiresome now. For everything he's done wrong he does a lot right and deserves a little more respect than that IMO.
surfthehurf
Middleweight
Posts: 123
Joined: 14 Jul 2014, 18:05

Re: FAO Admin

Post by surfthehurf »

I agree it's a bit tiresome, but W4rr3n does have a reputation for lawsuits, and this site doesn't deserve to be sued. Perhaps swap the world 'allegedly' for a noun so the posts still make grammatical sense?
davie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6763
Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 00:45

Re: FAO Admin

Post by davie »

I agree.
For a boxing forum not to be able to mention one of the countries biggest promoters and it's only dedicated boxing channel is a bit silly

If were freely able to slander Frank it would take the heat off #goCampEddie
Parson Cross
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1991
Joined: 03 Dec 2012, 18:57

Re: FAO Admin

Post by Parson Cross »

Are you trying to set somebody up for a Court action Mark ? Ha.
On a serious note Said person was the one who instigated this by threatening legal action ?
It is a little petty but it takes two to tango.
The Law
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1949
Joined: 19 Feb 2005, 19:02

Re: FAO Admin

Post by The Law »

Parson Cross wrote:Are you trying to set somebody up for a Court action Mark ? Ha.
On a serious note Said person was the one who instigated this by threatening legal action ?
It is a little petty but it takes two to tango.
^ This is correct.
MarkMcBurney
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1670
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 07:47

Re: FAO Admin

Post by MarkMcBurney »

Parson Cross wrote:Are you trying to set somebody up for a Court action Mark ? Ha.
On a serious note Said person was the one who instigated this by threatening legal action ?
It is a little petty but it takes two to tango.
No, it's VERY petty that you can't even write his name or the only dedicated boxing channel on British TV. No, scrap that, it's fornicating pathetic.

Is Eddie Hearn the admin of this site or something?
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 17113
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: FAO Admin

Post by keithmoonhangover »

MarkMcBurney wrote:
Parson Cross wrote:Are you trying to set somebody up for a Court action Mark ? Ha.
On a serious note Said person was the one who instigated this by threatening legal action ?
It is a little petty but it takes two to tango.
No, it's VERY petty that you can't even write his name or the only dedicated boxing channel on British TV. No, scrap that, it's effing pathetic.

Is Eddie Hearn the admin of this site or something?
If you knew the full story, you'd understand. It's not like that to be petty.
jonp
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2081
Joined: 29 Mar 2007, 12:44

Re: FAO Admin

Post by jonp »

It only came about because of threatened legal action its not a joke or a publicity stunt its the site just trying to stop legal action being took against it
Tarkus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 04 Jul 2010, 08:50

Re: FAO Admin

Post by Tarkus »

surfthehurf wrote:I agree it's a bit tiresome, but W4rr3n does have a reputation for lawsuits, and this site doesn't deserve to be sued. Perhaps swap the world 'allegedly' for a noun so the posts still make grammatical sense?
Lying old prick?
MarkMcBurney
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1670
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 07:47

Re: FAO Admin

Post by MarkMcBurney »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:
Parson Cross wrote:Are you trying to set somebody up for a Court action Mark ? Ha.
On a serious note Said person was the one who instigated this by threatening legal action ?
It is a little petty but it takes two to tango.
No, it's VERY petty that you can't even write his name or the only dedicated boxing channel on British TV. No, scrap that, it's effing pathetic.

Is Eddie Hearn the admin of this site or something?
If you knew the full story, you'd understand. It's not like that to be petty.
Pray tell, then.

Regardless, it's still disrespectful and childish IMO.
Boxerbeetle
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 32968
Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59

Re: FAO Admin

Post by Boxerbeetle »

Tarkus wrote:
surfthehurf wrote:I agree it's a bit tiresome, but W4rr3n does have a reputation for lawsuits, and this site doesn't deserve to be sued. Perhaps swap the world 'allegedly' for a noun so the posts still make grammatical sense?
Lying old prick?
You better lawyer up :lol:
dookus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4492
Joined: 17 May 2005, 06:00

Re: FAO Admin

Post by dookus »

Boxerbeetle wrote:
Tarkus wrote:
surfthehurf wrote:I agree it's a bit tiresome, but W4rr3n does have a reputation for lawsuits, and this site doesn't deserve to be sued. Perhaps swap the world 'allegedly' for a noun so the posts still make grammatical sense?
Lying old prick?
You better lawyer up :lol:
http://www.matchroomboxing.com/news/sta ... cky-burns/
allegedly was found to have lied in Court about an alleged oral agreement relating to Burns. His evidence was described as “untruthful”, “unrealistic” and “unreliable” by the Judge, Mr Justice Knowles. Warren had previously been found to have lied in his litigation with Joe Calzaghe.
Don't think he's sued Camp Eddie for this yet...
Tomasino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7876
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 16:39

Re: FAO Admin

Post by Tomasino »

MarkMcBurney wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote: No, it's VERY petty that you can't even write his name or the only dedicated boxing channel on British TV. No, scrap that, it's effing pathetic.

Is Eddie Hearn the admin of this site or something?
If you knew the full story, you'd understand. It's not like that to be petty.
Pray tell, then.

Regardless, it's still disrespectful and childish IMO.

It's what Frank wanted. He made serious threats of legal action a few years ago that forced this to be done. It looks a bit daft but it's hardly disrespectful.
MarkMcBurney
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1670
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 07:47

Re: FAO Admin

Post by MarkMcBurney »

Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 17113
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: FAO Admin

Post by keithmoonhangover »

MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
el_grande_mauro_mina
Lightweight
Posts: 11215
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 11:54

Re: FAO Admin

Post by el_grande_mauro_mina »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
I would like it changed to

Twat
Wanker
Gobshite

:yay:
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 17113
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: FAO Admin

Post by keithmoonhangover »

Fat Git wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
I would like it changed to

Twat
Wanker
Gobshite

:yay:
I get called them on a regular basis.
MarkMcBurney
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1670
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 07:47

Re: FAO Admin

Post by MarkMcBurney »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
He explicitly asked for his name not to be able to be written on a public forum? And the administrators of this site said yes?
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 17113
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: FAO Admin

Post by keithmoonhangover »

MarkMcBurney wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
He explicitly asked for his name not to be able to be written on a public forum? And the administrators of this site said yes?
I would imagine it was Mr W's Lawyers and the lawyers for the owners of Boxrec, but yes, you get the idea.
Deserter
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6441
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 10:01

Re: FAO Admin

Post by Deserter »

MarkMcBurney wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:Frank wanted all mention of him and his channel to be instantly changed to 'allegedly'? BS.
He wanted his name removed. What word would you like to change it to?
He explicitly asked for his name not to be able to be written on a public forum? And the administrators of this site said yes?
As I understand it, the admin here took the steps they deemed necessary to avoid exposing themselves to legal action from someone who is known to be extremely litigious. I don't understand what your issue is?
Post Reply