Koptalk ban user for email feedback

Duncan Oldham is forever claiming that the reason he doesn’t like to hear feeback on his forums is because he doesn’t think other people want to hear it. Or because it’s easier to deal with if it’s emailed. Or (long list of other reasons that don’t really wash).

If the feeback’s positive, it stays on the forum, followed by a rant from Oldham about how 99.9% of the feeback he gets is like this. Then he locks the thread, to prevent anyone contradicting him.

If the feeback’s negative, it is removed from the forum. Even it it’s only slightly negative, more often than not it will be deleted. Along with the user-id of the person who posted it.

He’ll deny this – saying only jealous ex-members would say such things. Nonsense.

Q. What happens if you email him with negative, but constructive, feeback?

A. He bans you.

Most readers aren’t surprised to hear this, but we keep getting new members who take a week or two before they’ve seen enough to convince them of our arguments. So here’s some proof. Consider this post to be part of our own “Feedback” section – feeback to the liar who owns Koptalk.

Former Koptalk user, and still a paying member, Brian wrote in to us. He’d sent this to Dunk in an email –

I don’t know what is happening with all this post deleting today. As stated in another post that again was deleted, someone has posted Toms original post on another forum. There has been a lot of bad publicity surrounding Koptalk of late, and I think Tom was addressing this to try and rectify some of bad negativity, some good and valid comments were made, others that not everyone would agree to, but that was the whole point of the post, to gauge what could be done to improve things.

The post was intended to provide a bit of debate (in the Gold Club) to try and look at various ways of improving the site as well as its reputation, but then for it to be deleted and then posted onto another site, has probably caused more harm than good. In doing this, it has probably put off future potential memberships, money that is needed to keep the site running.

Nothing has been prevented as emails are going around now of the original post anyway, yes not all koptalkers will have seen the post, but many respected koptalkers have. Tom is a respected poster on here and also a honoury member, and I don’t think he was out to cause problems.

I just think the site has shot itself in the foot today.

Nothing really over-the-top. Nothing that Duncan should have been unable to take. He can’t though – criticism frightens him, and has done for years. He’s a bully, and doesn’t like getting a bit back. Not a bit of bullying, just a bit of honest criticism. He’s shit-scared his remaining members will find stuff out about him.

Brian got a reply from Duncan, asking if he’d reply with his username, so he “knew who he was talking to”. As soon as that happened Duncan locked Brian out, saying his details were not up-to-date. ANOTHER Oldham lie. Brian had updated his details with Oldham twice recently.

This is Brian’s feedback. Duncan won’t print this on his site, he can’t accept or face up to criticism, he thinks he’s right all the time. Which suits us, because it’s costing him more money for less visitors every day.

From: Brian Xxxxxxx <email address removed>
Date: Jul 23, 2006 4:51 PM
Subject: Missing Info
To: Duncan Oldham <editor@koptalk.com>

Dunk

As i have said before in an email to you, my details are up to date, as requested before on both signing up to the gold club and also for a competition you recently ran, that was after November, when you said you would be checking everyones details, that you keep going on about. Why is it that more details are needed? Surely i wouldn’t be able to access the free sites forums as well if this was the case.

It seems funny that i have been locked out since i questioned you about the deletion of Toms post last week, and also sending negative feedback for your Gold Club sign up page, and replacing it with the positive one i wrote about 2-3 years ago (which is still on the page, although you said you would remove it).

I was denied access as soon as you emailed me to ask what was my username, which i gave to you. I also told you i would not be renewing my subscription so this is just a matter of principle, I have paid for the service, so should be allowed to gain access. I have never broken any of the AUPs that you use on the site. So this leads me to think it is because of the emails last week.

Brian (ba75)

Keep up the good work Duncan, keep up the good work.

Advertisements

41 Responses to “Koptalk ban user for email feedback”

  1. Sinon Says:

    Wow, I’d like to see some of the Dunkin apologists try and see a problem with that email – consise, articulate and not abusive….oh, and subsequently banned. Remember that within Dunk’s Reich, feedback is not welcomed. Money is, but not feedback.

  2. An Observer Says:

    Dispute the charge with paypal, or contact Royal Mail and ask for the address on file for the koptalk PO BOX number and pop round asking for your refund.

    As they state @ http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/content1?catId=600006&mediaId=600043

    We reserve the right in all cases to give the address of the PO Box holder, should it be requested.

    That info will also be helpfull when reporting him to the tax man.

  3. univofchicago Says:

    duncan oldham = kim jong il

  4. fat_boy_fat Says:

    With him just renewing it shows that all Oldham is after is Dosh!
    You can be 99.9% sure that if this member only had a month until his next subs was due that he would not have been banned. His card would have still been marked though.

    Oldham can argue Toms case for being banned because he done it on the forum (its possible he did break the AUP, although a diabolical decsion to ban him for pointing out views that were not over the top)
    BUT to ban this member who gave his negative feedback by email is surley the last straw for you ‘floaters’? i mean people like you Disco.
    How can you have a forum were opions are not allowed?

  5. rupertinsider Says:

    The Oxford Dictionary of Oldhamese

    feedback = flattering comments to the editor usually from the editor’s nom de plumes.

    whinges = unflattering feedback that has to be binned.

  6. rupertinsider Says:

    An Observer. Thanks very useful information.

    “As they state @

    http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/content1?catId=600006&mediaId=600043

    We reserve the right in all cases to give the address of the PO Box holder, should it be requested.”

  7. Koptalksucks.com Says:

    This is all part of Dunk’s campaign to weed out the people behind this blog. He is instead banning good and decent members. If this is the same Brian I am thinking of he’s a good kid. Maybe we’ll see him on Est1892 soon.

  8. rupertinsider Says:

    King Herod and the Slaughter of the Innocents. I don’t know about Insider, but I feel slightly guilty that so many are laying down their KT lives while I continue untouched.

  9. Tom Says:

    Poor Brian. says it all really.

    Brian please join the rebel alliance at:
    http://www.est1892.co.uk
    you’ll find the best of the old KT there, thriving away from the influence of “the daddy”.

    🙂

  10. univofchicago Says:

    if fatty thought brian was “behind the blog”, he is so wrong…

    do you think insider-insider or rupert would give away their username just like that?

    for all his effort, i don’t think hes been able to catch even one of us…hahahahaha.

  11. rupertinsider Says:

    univof chicago: He could find me really easily if he looked. I’m the one with an @ in my email address.

  12. fat_boy_fat Says:

    Well UNIVOFCHICAGO he has not caught me yet also. i think i know the reason why……… you want a clue OLDHAM??? ok here are a few

    1) Hahaha Dunk that thing you said was sooooooo funny.
    2) Thanks Dunk your a legend
    3)Great site Dunk, keep up the good work
    4) Ignore all them idiots Dunk, they are just jealous
    5) Dunk will you be my dad?

    YOU SEE DUNK? I SUCK YOUR INTERNET DICK! SO YOU LOVEEEEEEE ME! I PRETEND DUNK! JUST LIKE YOU DO WITH YOUR INSIDER INFO!

    SO YOU SEE NOW DUNK? YOU HAVE GOT RID OF ALL THE ONES SLAGGING YOUR SITE, NOW YOU NEED TO GET RID OF THE REST TO FIND ME AND THE OTHERS OUT

    IVE WARNED YOU THAT YOU WILL BE BROUGHT DOWN FROM THE INSIDE!!

  13. Koptalksucks.com Says:

    I know that a number of Dunk’s inner circle infact contribute to this blog. He really would be surprised.

  14. togga Says:

    An aneurysm is too good for Dunk.

  15. rupertinsider Says:

    5) Dunk will you be my dad? LOL

  16. A_I Says:

    Don’t feel guilty rupert )I’m sur you don’t), it’s Dunk who is banning/locking everyone. est1892 is thriving, it’s a better format, it’s free and there is a much better atmosphere. Without this blog,I wouldn’t have found est1892. You have more supporters than you know….

  17. ba75 Says:

    Rupert, dont feel bad mate! Koptalk has really gone to the dogs, but Dunk is too blind to see, maybe he will soon when he hardly has any members. Keep up the good work and providing snippets of what Dunk has to say here as he keeps dropping himself in it, much to mine and other peoples amusement.

    Must say though i managed to get my deposit back of his non-existant book 🙂

  18. univofchicago Says:

    “You have more supporters than you know…”

    rupert rocks!

  19. ba75 Says:

    What Dunk doen’t realise is, i myself have access still through a friends account, which i will only access from work. He too has had enough of Koptalk, and is not going to renew.

  20. rupertinsider Says:

    “I wouldn’t have found est1892.”

    Neither would Brendan!

    Nice to see how the genuinely witty and cool guys there are easily handling his programmed Pobitch insults. Even he is begining to acknowledge that KT is nothing without the banned informers and that it’s owner “may be bent” (cough cough!)

    Also nice to see Anfield Anfield there and a few others.

  21. univofchicago Says:

    i just visited est1892…i did register some time ago but hadn’t been back…til today that is…

    its looking good…very surprised…i think a lot of the ex-koptalkers will feel very comfortable there with all the old members, and a format that is not a whole different from koptalk.

  22. chapeau du soleil Says:

    Free Brian!

  23. rupertinsider Says:

    FREE THE KopTalk 6,000!

  24. Tom Says:

    I’d say that est1892 has probaly trebled its membership in the past week. 🙂

    It’s getting there, I’ll continue to submit articles and hopefully we’ll be able to prise a few more of the more substantial members from the deathstar.

  25. univofchicago Says:

    hey guys, ive started posting on est1892 today…

    one pressing question though:

    i encountered a poster named “brendan” with that weird avatar. does anyone know if this is the same brendan from koptalk?

    please tell me its not. thought i saw the end of that prick when i left KT for good…

  26. rupertinsider Says:

    You have not seen my post above? Didn’t you see the posts where he introudced himself on 1892 claiming to be “famous on KT” with or without his swear words. And several of the 1892 KT posters said they’d never heard of him. I could almost hear his jaw drop.

    My post above:

    “I wouldn’t have found est1892.”

    Neither would Brendan!

    Nice to see how the genuinely witty and cool guys there are easily handling his programmed Pobitch insults. Even he is begining to acknowledge that KT is nothing without the banned informers and that it’s owner “may be bent” (cough cough!)

    Also nice to see Anfield Anfield there and a few others.

  27. rupertinsider Says:

    You have not seen my post above? (See it below, then)

    Didn’t you see the posts where he introduced himself on 1892 claiming to be “famous on KT” with or without his swear words. And several of the 1892 KT posters said they’d never heard of him. I could almost hear his jaw drop.

    My post above:

    “I wouldn’t have found est1892.”

    Neither would Brendan!

    Nice to see how the genuinely witty and cool guys there are easily handling his programmed Pobitch insults. Even he is begining to acknowledge that KT is nothing without the banned informers and that it’s owner “may be bent” (cough cough!)

    Also nice to see Anfield Anfield there and a few others.

  28. univofchicago Says:

    yeah, i read that it rupert,

    that is why i went to pay a visit to est1892…in the posts that i had encountered, he seemed to have toned down so i wasn’t so sure if it was him…

    ill go back again and check his other posts…

  29. univofchicago Says:

    hey rupert,

    anfield anfield just replied and he doubts its brendan: http://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=974

    i did a search on his old posts…and he certainly bullshits a lot like the real one…

    but i dunno…im very bad at figuring out whether someones impersonating or not…

  30. rupertinsider Says:

    I don’t think that was Brendan in those three posts. He said “Crouch “instead of “Lurch” or his new favourite “Lurchio”. He didn’t swear, not even in code. His grammar was too structured. He was not trying to draw attention to himself by insulting anyone.

    But I thnk the earlier visits were him. He even attracted some banning warnings and two posters put him on ignore.

    Someone described his avatar as “that guy with his knickers over his head!”.

  31. Insider Insider Says:

    I believe that the brendan on est1892 is the same one as the brendan on Koptalk. I am 99.9% certain.

    As for using Crouch instead of Lurch, the administrators of est1892 have put a filter on that word. If you type “Lurch” you get “Crouch” displayed. Seriously.

    What a great idea. Some might call it censorship, but I think it’s perfectly harmless. And quite funny – you might hear more jaws dropping at that!

  32. univofchicago Says:

    I hope you are wrong Insider-Insider…

    I just detest that guy…although I quite fancy his chances of getting banned from posting there as well….

    As for the “lurch” filter, hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    hilarious.

  33. rupertinsider Says:

    “What a great idea. Some might call it censorship, but I think it’s perfectly harmless.”

    Very funny!

    Now they should change the word “thick” to “intelligent” and “fcuking ” to “darling” and ” media ” to “shit” and “loon” to “charmer”.

    Then you would get some thing like this. “I’m Brendan. I’m in the shit you darling intelligent charmer.”

  34. univofchicago Says:

    rupert LOL

  35. est-er Says:

    One poster like Brendan out of over 450, I think that’s an improvement on Koptalk.

  36. a kt insider user Says:

    It is Brendan alright. He got bitch slapped quite a few times the other day by some very funny members taking the piss out of him and got quite a bollocking when calling a user a spaz. Typical Brendan bullshit and i think he knows he has knowone on there to help him out of a jam when he starts using his long fancy words to insult someone.

  37. StevieM Says:

    The very fact that Brendan is discussed on places like this seems to validate his argument for posting in the way he does and back up his “infamy”.

    He actually used to be a very good poster, until people started worshipping him and depending on your taste in humour.. he can actually be quite amusing from time to time.

    I suspect that est1892 might have to many mature people to pander as much to the “cult of Brendan”.

    By the way… liking the new site

  38. Sinon Says:

    It sounds like Brendan, he has even used his ‘head-wand’ expression and other…hold on, my sides are splitting…hilarious phrases.

    On this subject, I am starting to have doubts about Brendans existence. On Koptalk he genuinly seemed knowledgable and thought provoking, but on Est1892 he seems incredibly bitchy and snappy, as if his ‘name’ is being sullied and he doesn’t have the power.

    Could Brendan be Dunk? I’ve long since thought that Brendan doesn’t actually support Liverpool – if we had won (especially if Crouch or Morientes had scored) he would disappear for a few days, maybe even a week, and then start on some other thread dissing a Liverpool player. On Koptalk he seems to be a name that everyone knows, and love him or hate him he starts conversations and generates hits. On Est1892 he doesn’t seem to bother – could this be to not generate extra discussion on a site he hates – like Dunk? The fact he is ultra bitchy too looks likes someone who is genuinely hurt by the existence of Est1892.

    Could Brendan just be another pseudonym that Dunk uses on the Free site, to generate hits and also get people to eventually ‘move upstairs’ to avoid him, where Dunk or Steve change into ‘Wallet’ or ‘Insider’ and start discussion?

    Just a thought, if they both post at the same time then its a moot point!

  39. Stevie M Says:

    Simon… you have to be having a laugh… seriously… this conspiracy theory thing has the potential to get way out of hand…. if it hasn’t already… alot of the things written on here are very interesting and informative…. but people’s imaginations are starting to run riot and if a dose of perspective is not taken then whatever this site is trying to achieve will ultimately fail.

  40. rupertinsider Says:

    Stevie – Brendan is not Oldham but he shares many of Oldham’s charactersitics.

    He questions the validity of the S** boycott, claims to read the S** “at the office”, supports Oldham’s criticism of the boycoot.

    He shares Oldham’s pathetic desire to be thought of as being part of the media.

    He shares Oldham’s verbal contempt for foreigners, refers to the Irish as “muck slaves”, and uses “welsh” as a term of contempt. and frequently refers to black players as “stupid” and does something similar with “Spanish” references.

    Brendan’s posts are Oldham-like in their constant anti-LFC theme – frontal attacks on the manager and officials as well as players and supporters.

    He reflects the insulting tone Oldham adopts towards KT users – like Oldham suggesting that they are stupid – he prefers “thick” and “loons”.

    Like Oldham, Brendan apes a certain written style unconvincngly. He implies he is more intelligent, educated and witty than others. But his clumsy use of words his reliance on obscenities and exclamation marks and his whoelsale borrowing of phraseology from Popbitch, proves he is not.

    Like Oldham he thinks the function of the forum is to get bites and raise the hit count.

    Like Oldham he will turn mawkish about LFC and emotion when he is under sustained attack – especially when drinkign heavily at weekends.

    Like Oldham he does not care about the truth of Oldham’s claims as long as they bring in an audience for him. He also thinks critics are divis and loons.

    Like Oldham he enagages on campaigns against players, adopting Oldham’s name for crouch, “Lurch”.

    He congrautaltes himself on being important to Oldham of creating hits by his insults. Oldham confirms this symbiotic relationship.

    Like Oldham he refers to the complications of his own sexuality in public claiming to be gay at the same time claiming to be just married and expecting a child.

    Like Oldham he is fat.

    Brendan is not the target of this blog, Oldham is, but Brendan’s ability to survive on KT, but not on any genuine supporter’s site, is a very eloquent statment about Oldham values and his manipulation of the readers on hsi free forums.

  41. StevieM Says:

    Rupert – I can’t quite believe I’m in the position of speaking up for Brendan, but the fact is he represents a type of fan that is very common.

    Maybe this is something more prevalent amongst people who watch Liverpool from afar, but the truth is if you watch Liverpool games in a large group you will very easily find the peoiple who are never happy and always complain. Some of my own friends are “shocking” Liverpool fans, always complaining, abusing the players. Brendan has players he likes and players he detests… like most normal people. You see, generally Brendan does start happy or encouraging posts, but he will defend certain players… even though it’s generally by attacking another posters view point…

    You might not like his style of writing…. but that’s his choice… we all choose to write posts in a style we’re comfortable with and to achieve goals that we set… Brendan chooses to write his posts in an agressive manner, that many people don’t like…. but it stirs up debate… and if we all wrote insightful and inflamable posts there would be no debate… just a series of sychophantic replies.

    As far as the comments regarding foreigners, I don’t know Brendan personally… but was under the impression that he was at the very least “part irish” himself… not that it really matters…

    But, interesting you choose to bring up the point regarding contemptuous remarks and round it off by pointing out that “like Oldham he is fat”…. I wasn’t aware that to be a Liverpool supporter you had to be thin… actually.. truth be told…. I’m fat as well… does that make me “like Oldham”.

    It’s things like that that undo the good work this site is trying to do.

    Added to that… if one of the major criticisms of Oldham, Brendan et al is that they “support the s**”… well here’s the thing… in a world of free thought & speech it’s the right to do and say so… regardless of how disgusted it makes you feel…. and while I understand that the S** boycot is a very immotive issue… there is a legitimate debate to be had on the subject…

    The thing that I find most annoying about this whole thing is the feeling that filters through at the end of your post…. that people, Brendan and the like are somehow not “genuine supporters” because they post on or participate on KT or because they choose to pay money to Oldham to participate on his pay sites.

    The irony being that may sites, particularly EST1892 were created by and are almost completely populated by what looks like former KT’ers… whioch suggest that at some point KT was a vibrant and interesting internet culture.

    The issue as I understand this blog to be all about is that Oldham is ripping off of fellow Liverpool fans by enticing them to part with their money under false pretenses…. not that Oldham or the likes of Brendan continue to post material that is of an opinion different to the creaters of this site or that they post in a manner or style or include content that they don’t agree with.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: