This messageboard is for Adults 18 years and over.
If you are under this age please leave the board.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other
content posted on it.
Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks.
If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Any potentially libellous comments that might jeopardise the future of this messageboard will therefore be deleted, and the person posting them will receive a
ban.Enjoy.
WALT
Posted by Corndog McRicklaus on 8/8/2024, 12:14:03
Just seen Mike Simmonds tweet that the WALT article released this morning is virtually a word for word copy of an article he published just before. I read them and is blatantly a copy and paste with the odd word changed.
The people behind WALT and especially Ollie Kay are complete weapons and give Luton fans a bad name with their embarrassing social media accounts.
!NEVER DO ANYTHING!
Posted by MediaMan on 8/8/2024, 14:46:57, in reply to "WALT"
Trust the club's epic comms. Trust the BBC and their 3CR lackeys. Trust the Luton News and their 0.1 journalists.
Anybody who dares make content, pose questions, or do something different is automatically a cunt.
Re: !NEVER DO ANYTHING!
Posted by EastEnder on 8/8/2024, 14:55:56, in reply to "!NEVER DO ANYTHING!"
Not really "making content" when they're Just nicking it from one of your 0.1 journalists.
His point is fair though, this board thought WALT were cunts long before Ollie was around.
This board has always flapped around like a wet lettuce - ever since we started the Facebook page in 2008.
Never come up with a tangible reason, you're just a handful of grumpy fuckers that don't like anything apart from attacking anything they don't know.
Ollie is a knob and I tell him all the time, but he also makes some great content with past players, commentators and recently Price of Football - the winding up of oppo fans has been nipped in the bud, so you lads can have that mantle back now and stop crying.
They do, but imo as an impartial observer to both, if you're not in the clique on here you're getting abuse regardless. That being said, some do seem to have a problem with WALT creating and sharing content. If the Luton media team was better they probably wouldn't have to.
Posted by Brills thruppeny bits on 8/8/2024, 13:34:06, in reply to "WALT"
I don’t know the background of the Simmonds article. But if you don’t like the content, don’t watch it.
Whilst it’s not all my cup of tea, he puts out some decent stuff, especially some of the interviews with ex players. Just take or leave what you like and don’t like.
Re: WALT
Posted by Brko's Bicycle on 8/8/2024, 13:31:01, in reply to "WALT"
Seem like very weird people to me.
Sure they're lovely deep down. But there's definitely a weird ecosystem of online attention seekers around the club gaming the twitter subscription system and it's very cringeworthy
Re: WALT
Posted by EastEnder on 8/8/2024, 13:28:47, in reply to "WALT"
Put it on substack as well, so looks like WALT are trying to make money from copying word-for-word an interview that Mike has done and subsequently made available for free.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 13:30:38, in reply to "Re: WALT"
No money to be made on SubStack mate.
Re: WALT
Posted by Earls on 8/8/2024, 15:23:07, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Bullshit. Substack can be a source of income for journalists, like the one you’re stealing from.
Re: WALT
Posted by Duh on 8/8/2024, 16:15:25, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Only if you monetise it. Which they haven’t. The quotes in question that Mike Simmonds was wetting his knickers about were from over a month ago, from a club released video.
Not an exclusive interview. Wrong on both sides.
Re: WALT
Posted by Earls on 8/8/2024, 16:26:50, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Whether or not you choose to monetise your Substack, it’s wrong to say there isn’t money to be made on it. Mike isn’t wetting his knickers, he’s pointing out you’ve nicked a story he’s researched, that you’ve then cut-and-paste from to a forum which professional writers make money from. And then passed off as your own.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 16:37:30, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Mike's not wetting his knickers to be fair, but a couple of you are.
Throwing a right wobbler.
We drive traffic to the way of Luton Today through our Facebook all the time, which helps those said professional writers, a large following on Facebook and we share articles on the regular.
But that article wasn't an issue to you, just an excuse to have a pop.
Re: WALT
Posted by Earls on 8/8/2024, 16:57:10, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I’ve no opinions one way or the other about the podcast itself. Good luck to you on that in general. I do care about you nicking other people’s work, then trying to play that down by making out it’s not a big deal and lying about Substack. That’s shoddy.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 17:05:38, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I do care, that's the only reason you care.
Embellishing about my 'lying' about SubStack, I said there's no money in SubStack, to me there isn't and I didn't even know you could. I didn't lie.
I'm assuming you're a grown man and you're getting upset over one article, I doubt you guys contribute by sharing links on the regular in here.
Re: WALT
Posted by Teacher on 8/8/2024, 23:24:24, in reply to "Re: WALT"
You DO know that Earls is a professional journalist, and a very well respected one at that, don't you?
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 9/8/2024, 6:52:03, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I don’t, you’re all hiding behind silly names.
But what does that have to do with anything we’ve talked about, the only disagreement we’ve had between me and him is whether we knew SubStak had functionality to be monitized or not.
Re: WALT
Posted by Antonio from Venice on 9/8/2024, 9:10:10, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I’m sure at least ONE of you knew it was monetised.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 9/8/2024, 11:16:53, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Again, it isn't monetized and never has been.
The argument was more over whether it you can make money from SubStack or not, we didn't know you could - the subscriptions aren't live and never have been.
Re: WALT
Posted by silly name on 9/8/2024, 9:07:19, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Look, you’re making yourself look daft now. Of all the people hiding behind silly names, Earls isn’t one of them.
I’ve listened and watched some of your ‘content’ and I think it’s embarrassing.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 9/8/2024, 11:19:18, in reply to "Re: WALT"
You're welcome to your opinion, lots do listen and watch - that's life.
Re: WALT
Posted by crumpsall on 8/8/2024, 17:14:07, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Plagiarism is pretty serious stuff to a professional journalist, it's completely out of order and deserves an apology not excuses.
Re: WALT
Posted by Doctor Ince on 8/8/2024, 17:25:37, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Genuine question - do you need to put credits to a quote someone else has lifted from a publicly available interview they didn't conduct?
Re: WALT
Posted by crumpsall on 8/8/2024, 17:37:48, in reply to "Re: WALT"
You or I, on here for instance, may get away with a short uncredited quote though it's not good form. We're just punters. WALT isn't and should always give credit for quotes and it is totally unacceptable to claim other people's work as your own, or give that impression.
Unless they're rank amateurs (they're not) they should/will know that.
Don't know the specifics of this instance but I know who Earls is (not personally) and he will be in the right.
Re: WALT
Posted by Doctor Ince on 8/8/2024, 17:42:11, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Ok thanks. Makes sense. It's what I thought tbh. If WALT had watched the same interview and taken the same quotes but done their own copy that wasn't word for word would that be acceptable?
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 17:41:35, in reply to "Re: WALT"
No right or wrong in the argument, We've admitted being in the wrong with Mike - they both fair from Mike and blown out of proportion by Outlaws.
Earls little input was more about us 'lying' about SubStack being able to be monetized, we didn't lie - we just didn't know.
We're not monetized and never have been, feel free to verify that independently as it's in the public domain.
Re: WALT
Posted by crumpsall on 8/8/2024, 17:45:07, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Fair enough. No idea why on earth you would do it, but not that interested either.
You, like me, should know what's right and do it. It isn't complicated
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 17:48:29, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Nice to know you never make mistakes Crumpsall.
Mr perfect Crumpsall. What a delight.
Re: WALT
Posted by Doctor Ince on 8/8/2024, 17:57:02, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Very aggressive replies for some reason
Re: WALT
Posted by jimmyp on 8/8/2024, 18:05:13, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I thought it was a bit teary, especially in the repetition. Quite embarrassing.
Cheers, Jim
Re: WALT
Posted by Doctor Ince on 8/8/2024, 17:26:56, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Although I agree posting it as they did is bad form
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 17:23:06, in reply to "Re: WALT"
We responded and put credit to the quotes straight away and apologised.
In the grand scheme of things it's not that serious, we give much more back to the paper than we've ever taken from it which is the first instance.
Where were the excuses?
Re: WALT
Posted by The Outsider on 8/8/2024, 17:09:12, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Earls probably knows more than most about this sort of thing.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 17:13:59, in reply to "Re: WALT"
That's great, he knows how to use SubStack and I'm sure that's really great for him.
Not sure someone not knowing you can monetize it is automatically a liar, would be an odd detail to lie about.
Re: WALT
Posted by Oh on 8/8/2024, 19:16:45, in reply to "Re: WALT"
You come across as a proper bell end.
Re: WALT
Posted by David on 8/8/2024, 14:47:57, in reply to "Re: WALT"
You’re so clever with money Ollie….
Re: WALT
Posted by Anti Semitic Hatter on 8/8/2024, 16:50:05, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I agree. We should gas Ollie.
Re: WALT
Posted by Brills thruppeny bits on 8/8/2024, 18:54:58, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Brave man posting fascist statements anonymously. Fucking coward. Front up and let me know who you are and we can have a proper chat about it
Re: WALT
Posted by Brills thrupenny bits on 8/8/2024, 16:25:19, in reply to "Re: WALT"
If you’re going to be fascist just have the balls to do it outright. Tosser
Re: WALT
Posted by Brills thrupoeny bits on 8/8/2024, 16:18:58, in reply to "Re: WALT"
I see you David. You prick.
Re: WALT
Posted by Papua New Guinea on 8/8/2024, 12:35:56, in reply to "WALT"
Glad someone's stood up to them.
Had the misfortune of watching 20 seconds of a clip where the geezer's asking for "more communication" from the club about injuries!
The entitlement of such fans blows my mind. No doubt opposition clubs would love to know such detail.
Guaranteed half these lads wouldn't know what to do with a clit if it slapped them in the face.
Re: WALT
Posted by Huh on 8/8/2024, 14:14:50, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Tell me you’ve never seen a woman naked, without telling me you’ve never seen a woman naked
Re: WALT
Posted by Doctor Ince on 8/8/2024, 13:47:23, in reply to "Re: WALT"
We went through this with Herve Baquet the other day.
Liverpool for example openly post their injury news on the website. It's not as big a secret as we make it, for whatever reason
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 13:26:46, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Stood up to them? Jesus christ.
Clits slapping in faces, who have you been sleeping with?
Re: WALT
Posted by Olly Kay's Mum on 8/8/2024, 13:32:11, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Me.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 13:32:55, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Re: WALT
Posted by Copy and Paste on 8/8/2024, 13:52:52, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Admit it you Twat.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 13:59:23, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Ok, I have never been slapped with a Clitoris.
Happy?
Re: WALT
Posted by Copy and Paste on 8/8/2024, 14:04:09, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Hopefully you get a good slap the next time you dress up the GT statue.
Re: WALT
Posted by WALT on 8/8/2024, 14:05:40, in reply to "Re: WALT"
Finest work that!
Re: WALT
Posted by Inspector on 8/8/2024, 12:24:52, in reply to "WALT"
Agreed, particularly your point about the people who run the site. Constantly goading other opposition supporters online. Embarrassing.
Re: WALT
Posted by Agreed on 8/8/2024, 12:15:31, in reply to "WALT"
They are sad no life wankers that crave attention. Full of their own self importance. And probably on some sort of register.
The posts made on this board are the opinions of the people posting them and do not always reflect the opinion of the board
administration.
Luton Outlaws is a totally independent forum, paid for and run by supporters of Luton
Town and is not associated with Luton Town Football Club, lutontown.co.uk, lutonfc.com, Loyal Luton Supporters Club, Trust in Luton, Luton Town Supporters Club or
anyone else for that matter and is declared a 100% Tombola Free Zone.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any
other content posted on it. Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Enjoy. Admin contact - dilligaf.outlaws@gmail.com.
