Not banned; Deleted
But unlike many my posts remain.

got a new user name as many do.

so you use a fake name.....

Fake:

i have a user name, all user names are fake aren't they? ( except mine here, as it gives u not only my name but where i live)

phuketrichard wrote:Fake:

i have a user name, all user names are fake aren't they? ( except mine here, as it gives u not only my name but where i live)

It's odd that you use a fake name over there, given you regularly post here wondering why people hide their IDs. You seem to positively boast about being open in fact, and if I'm not mistaken you even started a thread on the subject recently.

Still, your ID there is not exactly hard to work out is it?

Everyone knew me over there with my user name ( been posting since 2006) an am sure everyone knows my new one there as well.

phuketrichard wrote:Everyone knew me over there with my user name ( been posting since 2006) an am sure everyone knows my new one there as well.

Why would you feel the need to return and contribute to a forum where the owner decided you were dispensable and not of any value? Would you return to patronizing a store where the shopkeeper had thrown you out and told you that you were no longer welcomed in his store? Would you wear a disguise and return to that shop, giving that petulant shopkeeper your custom?

The childish owner of that other forum wrote how he can ban anyone he wants, and they will always come crawling back under a new user name because that's how wonderful his site is. You are the perfect example of that. You are proving him right.

takeoman wrote:Looks like I"m the latest to be banned. Had the temerity to challenge KiR about the failure to produce the expat expose he touted on the site and twitter. Result post removed and account blocked.

Ironic, since you were the one who started this thread questioning the early handling of this website.

takeoman wrote:I had hoped CEO would indeed be different, but it appears to be going down the the same road as that other site.

Still feel that way now? You most likely won't get your account frozen here (or banned, or whatever terminology they throw around), no matter how you challenge the owners in your posts.

takeoman wrote:Looks like I"m the latest to be banned.

Soi Dog wrote:

phuketrichard wrote:Everyone knew me over there with my user name ( been posting since 2006) an am sure everyone knows my new one there as well.

Why would you feel the need to return and contribute to a forum where the owner decided you were dispensable and not of any value? Would you return to patronizing a store where the shopkeeper had thrown you out and told you that you were no longer welcomed in his store? Would you wear a disguise and return to that shop, giving that petulant shopkeeper your custom?

+ 10
It puzzles me why so many still use that forum. After I was banned, and insulted, I would never have rejoined, or use any business connected or supporting the site. I did still visit as a guest, as there was no other source of info, but I didn't like even giving them the views/ stats. Now that we have here, I don't visit it. I used it up until the CEO thread was closed and the 440 for sale thread died. People with KiR's attitude should be shunned.

Slightly off topic, but I don't want to start a new thread here or rejoin k440 using a sockpuppet. BUT, can one of his mates please suggest to KIR that he change his sign off line? I just read the Neeson reply thread. Scott was re-quoted by KIR and right at the very end, after the photo's of the girl its says "I'm not inappropriate, your just f*cking boring. This appears, at first glance to be a comment. While most of us know it's not, many new people will view that thread and not realise. In my opinion, it is COMPLETLEY 100% inappropriate.I'm not having a go at KIR here and don't really know why I give a flying fuck about what people think about him or the forum. But someone, give him a heads up ay.