Saving Koptalk's Top 10

Dunkon has a handy little feature showing the top 10 posters on the new Kraptalk site. 3 are “staff” and 7 are £30 a year paying members. 2 of the staff are unsavable, those being Katie and Richteabiscuits. I don’t know what the deal is with JD he’s probably a lost cause too.

Of the remaining 7 members wezo23 paid £1600+ to Dunkon for 2 FA Cup final tickets and the money was to go to to Lauren to buy her a new mobility bike, no proof was ever provided. Wezo is a member of Es1892 and was on there a few days ago and is aware of the blog yet is still on Kraptalk. I think its safe to say he is unsavable.
Same goes for X, he’s fully aware of the blog and the truth about Dunkon and Koptalk but still visits the site. Unsavable.

There is a chance that we might be able to save 5 of the remaining top 10, The Reaper, Gazami69, southafricanred, macers, El Matajo. I don’t have any contact details for any of these members because Dunkon doesn’t allow members to look at other members profiles and PM’s (private/personal messages) are banned on Kraptalk. If you wish to get intouch with another member you must go through Dunkon or one of his staff via a “support ticket”!

So I am asking you as a blog reader to get intouch with these savable members or pass on their email or MSN messenger addresses to other blog readers so we can let them know what the blog is about and save them from the Kon the is Kontalk and Dunkon.

By removing the few remaining top poster will hopefully go a way to finally killing off the stubbon Kontalk once and for all. This is a list of the top 10 posters direct from Kocktalk;

Top Posters
The Reaper-6046
El Matajo-778


17 Responses to “Saving Koptalk's Top 10”

  1. 1892 Insider Says:

    At least two more of those have known about the blog for months. I think most if not all of the top posters would have forum friends who left and would thus be aware of why they’ve gone. It’s saving the less indoctrinated members and the newbies that we probably have most success with.

    The Reaper was formerly known as DMH, and DMH Pioneer prior to that. I’m pretty sure he knows about the blog.

  2. Koptalk Outsider Says:

    There are other posters with more posts than that. But the KT staff is too busy with moving all members over to the new site, so they don’t have time to edit the post count and join date just yet. Remember, the eight of them have moved almost one member an hour each.

  3. KT Hater Says:

    For a site with thousands of members they only have 8 posters with over 1000posts, thats a little bit odd. Also Steve and Dunk aren’t in the top 10?

  4. Superdan Says:

    Just been on the koptal blog and noticed they’re selling stuff now. FFS the fat cont is selling plain white hats that may or may not say “for sure” on them when you get them, and all for the fantastic price of $20. Money hungry bassturd

  5. Tam Says:

    “Saving”?? You sound like some ultra-extreme religious group!

    I am a Koptalk member, so what do I think I get for my money? Well, I know I am not guaranteed insider information. (A couple of posters seem from time to time to have an inside track, but they get things wrong so they are probably ‘on the edge’ rather than actually inside.) And I know that I am not going to get any wise words from Duncan Oldham – the majority of his posts seem designed to increase the number of clicks on his website (an objective that seems perfectly legitimate in my view). And I know I am not going to get privileged access to anything else. (Buying football memorabilia from any privately-run website in my view involves a leap of faith I cannot make.)
    And do I think Duncan Oldham is a god? Of course I don’t; he is a first rate idiot.

    So I get nothing for my money? Well, I use a lot of LFC websites and sometimes Koptalk just seems livelier than the others I use.

    Do I begrudge paying £30 to a first rate idiot who makes claims about his site and about his posts that do not stand up. Not really, because I am paying for access to what seems to be (at times) a lively site, nothing else.

    Do I think people should be warned that the claims etc do not stand up. Well, I think only a fool would be fooled, but I think Koptalk Insider performs a useful role.

    Do I think people need to be “saved” from Koptalk. Now that sounds arrogant to me. The people who are regular users of Koptalk understand what the site is like, recognise its warts, but still enjoy using it. Why do they need saving?

    “Because he is a S** lover” you might argue. Personally I think people are a bit hypocritical about the S** thing (personally I feel very strongly about it – and have never bought it, before or after Hillsborough and actually don’t have Sky because I think of that as associated to the Sun – but I buy the Times and watch Sky in the pub) but I think this a legitimate reason for nagging regular users to leave Koptalk.

    But is that the only reason to try to “save” Koptalk users? Maybe I have just over-reacted to a single word, but I think my message is that this site works best if it stays calm and factual and moderate in tone. “Saving” is for extremists.

  6. 1892 Insider Says:

    I think you are overreacting to one word, yes.

    I’m glad you are sensible and balanced enough to judge for yourself what’s real and what’s not; as you’re aware, the ‘insider’ information is firmly in the latter category. This summer, as in previous pre-seasons, KopTalk has taken rumours from elsewhere or simply made things up. A classic example was over the Babel transfer, which completely wrongfooted Dunk, who then proceeded to pretend that he’d known all along but had been asked to keep it quiet. Yeah, right. Yet, with the passage of time, people actually believe KopTalk broke these stories first. Dunk has had many years of experience online and he wouldn’t run false or distorted stories if they didn’t increase his hits, his membership numbers and thus his income. That is why it’s wrong.

    It was just the same with Torres. Every bit of information was what was freely available elsewhere, just rehashed and sometimes with extra trivia that could be neither proven nor disproven. As the transfer became obviously imminent, various medical dates were thrown about, one of which inevitably turned out to be correct. I now read on there that the ‘insider’ in question is regarded as a top source, based on that spurious premise.

    What does this prove? Well, it certainly demonstrates that many KopTalkers are not as savvy as you when it comes to detecting what’s true and what’s not.

    You could argue that it’s speculation and a bit of fun, something that happens to an extent on many other sites, but no other site is operated on a model that requires so much money. No others have an obligatory charge. With that comes responsibilities. Responsibilities like not using The S*n as a source of news and quotes for a website. You’re obviously well aware of how he has done that. You seem vehemently behind the boycott yourself and you concede that point, so how do you reconcile that with your use of the site?

    By the way, I disagree that it’s a lively site. The quantity and quality of debate is worse than on most other forums I’ve visited, though I am aware that it’s a subjective judgement.

    Frankly, it exasperates me that people come here to pick on very minor points, but don’t bother to come and acknowledge the very major points we’re right on. It smacks of desperate barrel-scraping that you pick a post like this to comment on and leave alone the many, many others that have demonstrable evidence of wrong doing. Have you read any of those? Do you have thoughts and comments on them?

  7. Andy Says:

    Tam – you make some reasonable points but I’m bewildered by your statement that “sometimes Koptalk just seems livelier than the others I use”.

    KT is very, very quiet nowadays. It has been that way for some time, irrespective of any server move. Which other LFC forums do you use?

  8. Tam Says:

    1892 INSIDER: I don’t want to get into an argument with you, but I think your comments about exasperation and barrel scraping – if aimed at my post which would appear to be the case – are unreasonable. I am no apologist for Koptalk, and I strongly resent the implication that I am. Having said that, I must admit I do not fully understand why you guys put what appears to be so much time and effort into denigrating Duncan Oldham rather than just ignoring him, so I prod and question to understand better.

    However, I do not feel the necessity to post when I agree with what is written, nor even always when I believe what is posted is unfair or wrong. That does not make me a bad person y’know.

    And I have indeed read (I think) most of the ‘editorial’ material that it on this site.

    ANDY: Of course it has been pretty dead for the last couple of weeks since his infamous database building exercise, but I had thought it had been quite lively before that. Compared to what? Well, the main sites I look at are: RAWK, TLW, Shankly Gates, TTWATR, YNWA, Est1892, Anfield online and LFC online plus the official site. Feel free to recommend some others, or even to suggest that some of the those I have mentioned are either (a) particularly useless and not worth bothering with or (b) particularly good and worth focusing on more. I am only a LFC fan now working away from Liverpool looking for the internet equivalent of a pub full of LFC fans to talk and listen to.

  9. 1892 Insider Says:


    RAWK is not somewhere I post or even lurk often, but I have an account there and it is far more lively than KopTalk. Alexa stats bear out that opinion. I am less familiar with the others, though Est1892 is certainly busy as well.

    Ignoring him is tantamount to condoning his actions. If a newspaper printed some of what he has in the past, it would have been held to account years ago. Fans would have been up in arms. Why should it be any different just because it’s online?

    Before his site was subject to the scrutiny that Insider Insider instigated, he had thriving free forums and boasted of many thousands of paying members on the Insider and in the Gold Club. Since then, the free forums dwindled and were discontinued, and most of the best long-time members left the subscription sites. KopTalk is now much quieter than it once was. Not all of that is a direct result of the blog, but much of it is because of the same things that the blog has drawn attention to, whether or not those leaving read the blog.

    As I said, you are clearly perceptive enough to discern for yourself whether Oldham’s claims are factual or not. However, from the feedback we receive, both on here and privately, it is apparent that many other people have been taken in and feel cheated after realising. We all access KopTalk not by paying, but because disaffected members send us screenshots and information, or even donate their usernames and passwords for our purposes. I think that is quite an eloquent gesture.

    I asked how you reconciled KopTalk’s demonstrable use of news from The S*n with your own adherence to the boycott. You have neglected to address that point. I could also additionally query what your view was on the recent update on the charity appeals. I think that in itself would count as a valid area for concern to many who are current or former members.

  10. Says:

    @ Tam;

    “Well, I use a lot of LFC websites and sometimes Koptalk just seems livelier than the others I use.”

    Your kidding right? Koptalk is a graveyard.

    ““Saving” is for extremists.” Saving is an act of heroism, or storing a document for later lol.

  11. Andy Says:


    I envy the amount of free time you must have. Checking regularly on nine LFC sites must take up most your day. Of those you list, TLW and Est are the only ones I visit most days. Both of them are a great deal busier than KT ever is nowadays. They’re also far more likely to make you laugh out loud or provide intelligent analysis of football issues.

  12. Tam Says:

    1892 INSIDER: I guess we are not going to agree on some of the points we have been debating – but I still think you have helped me, so thanks – but I thought I should comment on two points raised in your last paragraph:

    1 The S*n – I mentioned that I think people are fairly hypocritical about the S*n. For example, who should we really be boycotting?
    (a) The S*n? Well, it (sort of) apologised so should we be accepting that apology? In my view, no – it was not (if my memory is right) a proper apology. And anyway sometimes the ‘crime’ is too great for any apology to count. But many people attending games at Anfield continue to read the S*n, so they have presumably reached a different conclusion.
    (b) The editor of the S*n – MacKenzie? Yes in my view, but he subsequently worked for the Mirror and was also involved in Talksport so should we be boycotting them too?
    (c) The owner of the S*n – News International (is that right?)? MacKenzie says it was Murdoch that forced the S*n to apologise, but as I have just said it was not really a proper apology and Murdoch could have forced the S*n to make a proper apology so really he has condoned the S*n’s behavior. On the other hand, that would mean boycotting ing The Times, The Sunday Times, The News of the World, and Sky TV to mention just a few. I happen to be anti-Sky for that reason, but I do continue to buy the Times and the Sunday Times. That makes me feel guilty sometimes.

    But all-in-all this way of thinking has led me to the view that how we react to the S*n, its editor and owner is a personal thing, and I try to avoid judging some one badly because they have acted in a different way to me. Having made that decision I close my mind to the issue.

    2 The charities – Yes, this is a concern – but again I have to admit that part of me cannot help thinking that a fool and their money are easily parted. (The guy runs a discussion board for god’s sake; that does not make him any more trustworthy than any other stranger so why give him money?) To be honest this is also part of this site that makes me a little queasy because, if I was in possession of the sort of information it would appear that some on this site are in possession of, I would be hammering on the door of the Charity Commissioners to get him investigated. Talking about it on a website but doing nothing else is to my mind like watching a person being beaten up but not going to their rescue. (I am sorry for the strong words, and don’t mean to insult anyone.)

    But as I said, I guess we will not see eye to eye on all these issues.

    ANDY: I didn’t say I checked on them all regularly or even frequently – there are certain periods during which I do not look at them at all (such as when we lose to Everton!). Anyway, I will make a special effort to keep an eye on TLW and Est1892 to see if it is just that I am not used to their “rhythym”. Thanks for your advice.

  13. 1892 Insider Says:


    I’m glad that my response helped to clarify some of your issues. That was my intention.

    Re: the boycott, I don’t think there’s any confusion at all. Insider Insider has written about this extensively in the past, but the families ask that Liverpool fans (and anyone else, really) do not buy or read The S*n newspaper. That is the beginning and end of it, as far as I am concerned.

    Some people will extend that to the NotW, since it’s often seen as the ‘sister’ paper. Others extend that to all Murdoch enterprises, such as Sky and The Times. That’s personal choice, though; we’re not asked to do that and I see no obligation for anyone to do so. Nor is it what the HJC print on their yellow stickers.

    One newspaper alone went that far in their allegations and only one has refused to give an unreserved retraction to this day. I’m sure you don’t need me to reiterate this, because you’ve already stated your backing, but it’s worth pointing out that the other publications and outlets did not print or broadcast what they did. Some even argue that to extend it would dilute a boycott which remains very successful on Merseyside to this day, as I can personally attest. And ‘many people attending games at Anfield continue to read it’? Since when? I have seen no evidence of that, and I have spent a lot of time in the city, not just for football.

    Even if you feel you shouldn’t patronise Murdoch’s other businesses, that is a poor excuse for turning a blind eye to the use as a source of the very newspaper we’re asked not to buy. As you say, though, we are probably not going to agree on some points and further debate won’t alter that.

    You seem to imply that those ‘taken in’ by Dunk are fools; you realise his flaws and so filter out those parts of KopTalk that you don’t believe. I think that is a harsh evaluation. It’s worth remembering that a large proportion of Dunk’s members are from overseas (the majority, according to Alexa) and some are likely to be young. They encounter a fan site that works to cultivate an image as a ‘family’ and where the owner portrays himself as a central and jovial character. Therefore, they trust him, his utterances and they perhaps don’t have your insight into the reality. Perhaps that makes them naive but, by your logic, they are ‘asking for it’ and deserve to be exploited. I don’t think that excuses him at all.

  14. Tam Says:

    1892 INSIDER: Although I don’t agree with all your comments in your last mesaage, I don’t intend to respond because, as you yourself suggested initially, we are in danger or arguing over little things when we are in broad agreement over many of the big issues: that if you subscribe to Koptalk thinking you are getting access to insider information you will be disappointed, and if you think Duncan Oldham is a reliable individual who can be trusted you will also be disappointed.

    Thanks for your time. You haven’t “saved” me yet, but I will keep reading and will no doubt post again.


  15. Koptalk Outsider Says:

    Tam. I’d like to try to answer this:
    I must admit I do not fully understand why you guys put what appears to be so much time and effort into denigrating Duncan Oldham rather than just ignoring him,

    Duncan Oldham has been conning LFC supporters for about a decade. Before that he was known to sell sky cards without delivering what he sold. For the past 10+ years he’s made a fortune from cheating people in various ways as shown in numerous articles here on this blog. He has based his site on lies, lies and more lies. It’s well documented if you go through all that’s been written here, but I don’t expect you to do that because here are about 750 articles.

    As LFC supporters we can’t just sit down and ignore him. At least I can’t do that. I feel obliged to inform those that are unaware of his scams what Koptalk is all about. And in short it’s about making money.

    What I don’t get is that you, who seems to be more anti-S*n than most, is supporting the only LFC-site that use the s*n as a news source, thaton a daily basis quotes the s*n’s news, that run ads for the s*n and who has an editor who admits to have the s*n delivered. You don’t find that anywhere else on LFC websites, only on Koptalk. And when Dunk is questioned about wearing that s*n hat in France, he trips himself up with more lies.

    Then there’s the fake memorablia. Do any other LFC websites sell fake signed kits or footballs? I don’t think so. Only on Koptalk you will find that. It’s all about making money.

    Then there’s the cyber squatting. Why does Duncan Oldham have lots of domains that are similar to the domains of other LFC-forums? There’s abslutely no reason for him to have these.

    What about his campaigns agaist certain LFC players? Do you find that on other LFC sites? I think not.

    How do you like the freedom of speech at Koptalk? Do you think it’s OK to be unable to send other members PM’s or see their profiles? Only on Koptalk you will have to go through the admins to get in touch with other members outside the boards.

    This is a few of the many things that make koptalk different from most other LFC-sites. I hope you see some of the points, and realize what koptalk’s all about.

  16. Todda Says:

    Tam, screw your head on mate.

    The Sun is full of lies, why the fuck would you want to buy it? Oh wait a minute, i see whats going on here, you like paying to read lies. Must be why your sticking up for KrapTalk.

    If you fancy being a mug and paying £30 to watch a bunch of fat, power crazy wasters pretend to give a shit about LFC then by all means go for it. But i’ll be laughing at you behind your back.

    Why not go and buy a koptalk t-shirt? Then the fat prick can laugh at you aswell, with a few pints and pies.

  17. LouDeKross Says:


    I dont see anywhere in Tam’s statements that he buys the Sinking S*n, never mind read it.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: