UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Welcome to the UK Justice Forum => Admin introduction, forum rules, colours and requests for documents and photos. => Topic started by: Alfie on May 30, 2016, 01:12:00 PM
-
May I suggest that only forum members with a minimum post count of x (let's say 200 or more) should be able to like a post? That way we wouldn't have the somewhat suspicious situation of the giver of the most likes (over 900) being a member of this forum who has never written a single post before.
-
I've been put off posting since this like thing started. It just serves to highlight how unpopular I am!
8)><( 8)><( %56&
-
Some people may not post but follow the posts of others and appreciate them. It allows them to have an input so why not.
-
Some people may not post but follow the posts of others and appreciate them. It allows them to have an input so why not.
DO you not find it somewhat suspicious that the two most prolific "likers" have less than 20 posts between them and between them have liked approx 2000 posts (most by McCann sceptics)?
-
DO you not find it somewhat suspicious that the two most prolific "likers" have less than 20 posts between them and between them have liked approx 2000 posts (most by McCann sceptics)?
Oh, is that why you want to change the rules? Because the sceptics get more likes than the supporters? You seem to be suggesting it's not because they make the best posts either.
Perhaps others could achieve the most 'likes' if they changed their posting style and content. There's a point to ponder.
-
Oh, is that why you want to change the rules? Because the sceptics get more likes than the supporters? You seem to be suggesting it's not because they make the best posts either.
Perhaps others could achieve the most 'likes' if they changed their posting style and content. There's a point to ponder.
No, I am simply suggesting that to avoid the possibility of accounts being set up or used simply to issue "likes" to bolster the reputation and egos of certain ther members of the forum that it would be fairer if posters had to earn the right to 'like' posts by actually taking part in discussions occasionally. A system like this is open to such abuse and it's one way to counter it, surely you can see that?
-
No, I am simply suggesting that to avoid the possibility of accounts being set up or used simply to issue "likes" to bolster the reputation and egos of certain ther members of the forum that it would be fairer if posters had to earn the right to 'like' posts by actually taking part in discussions occasionally. A system like this is open to such abuse and it's one way to counter it, surely you can see that?
Are you seriously suggesting that people would conspire to make sure certain members got more likes than other members? Do you really think that people would bother?
I think suggesting there might be some grand conspiracy afoot to 'bolster the reputation and egos of certain members' says a lot more about you than about anyone else. Just because you don't appreciate these people's posts you think it must be a conspiracy if others 'like' them?
Perhaps, Alfie, people just like the posts pure and simple, much as it galls you.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that people would conspire to make sure certain members got more likes than other members? Do you really think that people would bother?
I think suggesting there might be some grand conspiracy afoot to 'bolster the reputation and egos of certain members' says a lot more about you than about anyone else. Just because you don't appreciate these people's posts you think it must be a conspiracy if others 'like' them?
Perhaps, Alfie, people just like the posts pure and simple, much as it galls you.
If you had ever been a member of the Yahoo forums a few years ago, you would realise exactly how important it is for some "people" to be seen to receive multiple "like" votes. Indeed, one gave himself over 80 votes in 10 minutes from his various accounts (he had at least 100 different profiles). If you think the system on here is not being abused for the same macho-ego reason, then you are very naïve.
-
If you had ever been a member of the Yahoo forums a few years ago, you would realise exactly how important it is for some "people" to be seen to receive multiple "like" votes. Indeed, one gave himself over 80 votes in 10 minutes from his various accounts (he had at least 100 different profiles). If you think the system on here is not being abused for the same macho-ego reason, then you are very naïve.
I don't take much notice of likes myself, so anyone seeking to enhance their reputation by fiddling them is wasting their efforts in my case. I use them now and again if I see a post I appreciate, but that's aimed at the post, not the poster. Anyone manipulating likes as an ego-boost is a very sad individual indeed in my opinion, as the ego-boost is a false one and they know that.
I don't know who has the most 'likes' on here, but if it was me I would not be amused if people were insinuating that I had gained that position by dishonestly manipulating the system. How insulting is that?
-
I don't take much notice of likes myself, so anyone seeking to enhance their reputation by fiddling them is wasting their efforts in my case. I use them now and again if I see a post I appreciate, but that's aimed at the post, not the poster. Anyone manipulating likes as an ego-boost is a very sad individual indeed in my opinion, as the ego-boost is a false one and they know that.
I don't know who has the most 'likes' on here, but if it was me I would not be amused if people were insinuating that I had gained that position by dishonestly manipulating the system. How insulting is that?
It's not an insinuation, G-Unit, it's an absolute accusation aimed at the little group who are doing it.
Perhaps we could have a "dislike" button to redress the balance.
-
It's not an insinuation, G-Unit, it's an absolute accusation aimed at the little group who are doing it.
Perhaps we could have a "dislike" button to redress the balance.
Careful! You never know who'll 'win' that one. @)(++(*
-
It's not an insinuation, G-Unit, it's an absolute accusation aimed at the little group who are doing it.
Perhaps we could have a "dislike" button to redress the balance.
I agree with that. %£&)**#
-
My curiosity arisen, I just checked the Like stats. Horrifyingly I feature in them. I don't want to, I haven't conspired to do so and anyone accusing me of doing so had better be able to prove it! I suggest the button is removed immediately as it will never be seen as a compliment by anyone now thanks to the nasty unfounded accusations of some people.
-
No, I am simply suggesting that to avoid the possibility of accounts being set up or used simply to issue "likes" to bolster the reputation and egos of certain ther members of the forum that it would be fairer if posters had to earn the right to 'like' posts by actually taking part in discussions occasionally. A system like this is open to such abuse and it's one way to counter it, surely you can see that?
Seeing as how that will notably affect both "sides" I would be in agreement with that.
Or better yet bin the whole idea if people are going to be mardyarsed over it because they don't perceive they are "winning" as the result of a vast conspiracy.
Don't phone us we know where you are and will phone you.
-
My curiosity arisen, I just checked the Like stats. Horrifyingly I feature in them. I don't want to, I haven't conspired to do so and anyone accusing me of doing so had better be able to prove it! I suggest the button is removed immediately as it will never be seen as a compliment by anyone now thanks to the nasty unfounded accusations of some people.
My accusation was not directed at you, G-Unit, although you can now see how "guilty by loose association" works.
As I said - both Brietta & I have experienced, on another forum, how certain people like to manipulate statistics & ikes to suit their own ends. I have every reason to believe they are operating here.
Perhaps John would do the sensible thing & revert to the old practice, where truth & justice matter & the "reputation" of Mr Anonymous doesn't.
-
I applaud the intent to keep the forum fresh and relevant.
And the pertinent question is whether it has improved the forum or not.
I tend not to be a fan of like or dislike buttons. It simply adds more froth for us to bicker about.
On media reports with hundreds or thousands of comments, I do use the ratings to try to cut through the dross a bit.
However, most popular or least popular does not influence my evaluation of the comment. There or here.
So it's back to the test as to whether it is seen as an improvement or not.
-
I applaud the intent to keep the forum fresh and relevant.
And the pertinent question is whether it has improved the forum or not.
I tend not to be a fan of like or dislike buttons. It simply adds more froth for us to bicker about.
On media reports with hundreds or thousands of comments, I do use the ratings to try to cut through the dross a bit.
However, most popular or least popular does not influence my evaluation of the comment. There or here.
So it's back to the test as to whether it is seen as an improvement or not.
That will be in the eye of the beholder according to which team of campanologists* is putting up the most "likes".
* Ringers ?{)(**
-
My accusation was not directed at you, G-Unit, although you can now see how works.
As I said - both Brietta & I have experienced, on another forum, how certain people like to manipulate statistics & ikes to suit their own ends. I have every reason to believe they are operating here.
Perhaps John would do the sensible thing & revert to the old practice, where truth & justice matter & the "reputation" of Mr Anonymous doesn't.
How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.
I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?
I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.
If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.
-
How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.
I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?
I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.
If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.
I think Alfie more than explained what is happening in the opening post. I happen to support his stance, based on my own experience elsewhere & based on the knowledge that some of those same people are on here.
Please stop thinking that every accusation is levelled at you or it may make people think you actually have a guilty conscience.
-
I think Alfie more than explained what is happening in the opening post. I happen to support his stance, based on my own experience elsewhere & based on the knowledge that some of those same people are on here.
Please stop thinking that every accusation is levelled at you or it may make people think you actually have a guilty conscience.
Who are your accusations levelled at then? Speak out and give us names and reasons instead of insinuations. The most profilic 'liker' is someone called 'Kipper' who has never posted. The 'likes' seem evenly distributed between members holding opposing views, however. Are you accusing 'Kipper' of wrongdoing?
It would be interesting to see how you liked it if people accused you of being involved in manipulating 'likes' to make yourself feel popular. Perhaps that's why these accusations are being made; have manipulations been attempted and have failed?
-
Who are your accusations levelled at then? Speak out and give us names and reasons instead of insinuations. The most profilic 'liker' is someone called 'Kipper' who has never posted. The 'likes' seem evenly distributed between members holding opposing views, however. Are you accusing 'Kipper' of wrongdoing?
It would be interesting to see how you liked it if people accused you of being involved in manipulating 'likes' to make yourself feel popular. Perhaps that's why these accusations are being made; have manipulations been attempted and have failed?
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.
You work it out.
-
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.
You work it out.
Are you referring to the original leader who was voted up there by a poster who has been on here for 3 years and made only 97 posts, perchance ?. Oh what a kin shame, both "sides" have ringers, now there's an amazing revelation. I am truly mortified such scurrilous behaviour should take place.
-
Are you referring to the original leader who was voted up there by a poster who has been on here for 3 years and made only 97 posts, perchance ?. Oh what a kin shame, both "sides" have ringers, now there's an amazing revelation. I am truly mortified such scurrilous behaviour should take place.
No, Alas, I'm not. 'Twas a poor soul who got a mite upset about my lolling but we sorted it out by jovial screed.
-
No, Alas, I'm not. 'Twas a poor soul who got a mite upset about my lolling but we sorted it out by jovial screed.
The mind boggles at a leveled layer of concrete with a smile on its kite.
-
The mind boggles at a leveled layer of concrete with a smile on its kite.
Not much joviality in this;
screed;
a long speech or piece of writing, typically one regarded as tedious.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that people would conspire to make sure certain members got more likes than other members? Do you really think that people would bother?
I think suggesting there might be some grand conspiracy afoot to 'bolster the reputation and egos of certain members' says a lot more about you than about anyone else. Just because you don't appreciate these people's posts you think it must be a conspiracy if others 'like' them?
Perhaps, Alfie, people just like the posts pure and simple, much as it galls you.
yes, I really do believe some people are that childish.
-
LOL. I'm never going to win a popularity contest, manipulated or otherwise and you're wasting your time if you think I care a jot.
Can you not hear the deafening silence from those normally so quick to jump down my throat?
Kipper only joined the forum on 15/5/16, has made no posts, & spent a mere 11 hours online. Somehow, in those 2 weeks, he/she has become the most prolific liker of posts.
A few days ago, the most prolific liker was someone whose name started with a V., 11 posts & 11 hours online.
3 weeks ago, a poster on here was trailing another in the "most liked stats" at 114. Now they have well over 1000 while the original leader is around the 400 mark.
You work it out.
Haha, exactly right! 8@??)(
-
How you can say it wasn't directed at me I don't know. Neither do I know what you mean by "guilty by loose association". It sounds like a further slur to me.
I am not associated, loosely or otherwise, to anyone or anything dodgy! Got it?
I don't give a fig what has happened on other forums but if I used a forum where dirty tricks were in evidence I wouldn't go elsewhere and make unfounded accusations there. If you have reason to believe something is going on here then you need to say who, what, how and why instead of issuing mysterious accusations. Let's all see your 'reasons'.
If this is what you call truth and justice you may need to rethink your definitions.
Have you actually seen whose contibution to this forum is the most liked? *&*%£
-
I cant see the like button anymore, what could cause this pls?
Eta
Pls ignore question,they have reappeared for me
-
It's being suggested that members have conspired to get the most 'likes'. If true, it's very childish and immature and it makes the 'like' button obsolete because it doesn't really reflect the opinions of members.
Having said that, I find it childish and immature to complain about it too. I can almost hear the voice in the playground 'Miss, Miss, it's not fair!' Why anyone should care escapes me.
I shouldn't really be so surprised. Some people seem more interested in scoring points over others than in serious discussion and this seems to be just another demonstration of it. The last one was a vote which had to have it's rules changed in order to produce the result desired by some (in my own opinion, of course).
-
yes, I really do believe some people are that childish.
I agree with you.
-
Have you actually seen whose contibution to this forum is the most liked? *&*%£
Why worry about it?
What precisely is your objection?
A system of likes was put in and you couldn't spot beforehand it was likely to be abused/rigged?
It was bloody obvious within a few posts there were ringers.
-
Why worry about it?
What precisely is your objection?
A system of likes was put in and you couldn't spot beforehand it was likely to be abused/rigged?
It was bloody obvious within a few posts there were ringers.
I must be very naive because it didn't enter my head. Even at my age I have things to learn about human nature it seems.
I have been accused of all sorts of failings on this forum, but I still believed that people were here because their main aim was to discuss the case of the unexplained disappearance of a little girl.
I find the dirty tricks and jostling for position quite distasteful and disrespectful to be honest.
-
I must be very naive because it didn't enter my head. Even at my age I have things to learn about human nature it seems.
I have been accused of all sorts of failings on this forum, but I still believed that people were here because their main aim was to discuss the case of the unexplained disappearance of a little girl.
I find the dirty tricks and jostling for position quite distasteful and disrespectful to be honest.
Me too but with some it is their very ethos.
-
Me too but with some it is their very ethos.
Naive old me just thought that those who ridiculed, disrupted and attacked posters did so because they passionately believed in their point of view and that when they were losing an argument they used those ploys out of frustration and desperation.
Now I'm wondering if I'm wrong and the whole point was to ridicule, attack and disrupt rather than to discuss. This forum is making me cynical. 8(8-))
-
We have been monitoring the Likes statistics since the facility was introduced to the forum and what it has exposed were several clone accounts now since deleted. As time goes by it should settle down but if not we can always have an open vote on the subject of whether to retain it or not.
-
Thank you for taking action, John.
-
Thank you for taking action, John.
We are monitoring this facility constantly as we are all statistics. Over the last six months we have had hundreds of requests for membership from China as well from many other far flung places, naturally none of these have been approved as they are spammers. Just one of the little things which go on in the background in order to preserve the integrity of the forum.
-
Why worry about it?
What precisely is your objection?
A system of likes was put in and you couldn't spot beforehand it was likely to be abused/rigged?
It was bloody obvious within a few posts there were ringers.
1)I'm not remotely worried about it, just wryly amused by it and highlighting it, hope that's OK with you?
2) I believe the likes system was introduced during my absence and not being clairvoyant, nor able to suss in advance their introduction to the forum, I was not able to come to any conclusions about abuse of the system beforehand.
Obviously my highlighting this issue is simply another excuse for you to have a go at me, so very predictable.
-
Who are your accusations levelled at then? Speak out and give us names and reasons instead of insinuations. The most profilic 'liker' is someone called 'Kipper' who has never posted. The 'likes' seem evenly distributed between members holding opposing views, however. Are you accusing 'Kipper' of wrongdoing?
It would be interesting to see how you liked it if people accused you of being involved in manipulating 'likes' to make yourself feel popular. Perhaps that's why these accusations are being made; have manipulations been attempted and have failed?
Interesting to note that since this thread was started "Kipper" has disappeared from the forum altogether, as has another highly prolific "sceptic" 'liker' with Vulcan ears....
-
Interesting to note that since this thread was started "Kipper" has disappeared from the forum altogether, as has another highly prolific "sceptic" 'liker' with Vulcan ears....
It seems there may have been some basis for your accusations. Should I congratulate you? I won't if you don't mind. I have no time for cheats and not much for those who whinge either. I just hope we don't get a 'dislike' button, there'll be even more fuss.
-
Interesting to note that since this thread was started "Kipper" has disappeared from the forum altogether, as has another highly prolific "sceptic" 'liker' with Vulcan ears....
There are still a few of all makes and shapes left.
-
It seems there may have been some basis for your accusations. Should I congratulate you? I won't if you don't mind. I have no time for cheats and not much for those who whinge either. I just hope we don't get a 'dislike' button, there'll be even more fuss.
Very gracious you are too. 8((()*/
-
You only have 67 'likes' 8)><(
8**8:/:
-
Another question about likes:
why is it possible to like a post more than once? For example Xtina appears to have enjoyed this post by Stephen so much she's liked it 5 times!
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7311.msg338486
-
Another question about likes:
why is it possible to like a post more than once? For example Xtina appears to have enjoyed this post by Stephen so much she's liked it 5 times!
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7311.msg338486
It isn't possible, so that must be some sort of a conspiracy. Ooer! *&*%£
-
It isn't possible, so that must be some sort of a conspiracy. Ooer! *&*%£
Clearly it is possible as my link shows. Perhaps it's only possible withe Stephen's posts, after all, despite posts which are very repetitive, often illiogical and usually off-topic he seems to be the most liked member of the forum!
-
Clearly it is possible as my link shows. Perhaps it's only possible withe Stephen's posts, after all, despite posts which are very repetitive, often illiogical and usually off-topic he seems to be the most liked member of the forum!
Illogical Alf ?
No.
Repetitive , well just as much as yours are.
By the way Alf , I don't vote for myself.
-
Illogical Alf ?
No.
Repetitive , well just as much as yours are.
By the way Alf , I don't vote for myself.
I think someone's jealous. £4%4£
-
I think someone's jealous. £4%4£
dJealous that Stephen has lots of likes from Xtina? Oh yes, frightfully jealous. @)(++(*
-
dJealous that Stephen has lots of likes from Xtina? Oh yes, frightfully jealous. @)(++(*
Yes ! jealous enough to write a thread to get it pulled...ROTFL...
.... I feel a song comming on.. #no body likes me everybody hates me I think I wll go eat worms... dum de dum de dah dah
None of the supporters, including the mods got' likes votes.'..oh dear!
-
Not sure if this has been raised before... Apologies if so.
Did I miss any posts by "Kipper"? I haven't found a single one, yet he/she/it constantly "likes" posts by certain members.
I'm not quite sure what the purpose is... to raise the supposed kudos level of certain members? In whose perception?
Is this "member" human or a bot?
Just asking...
-
Not sure if this has been raised before... Apologies if so.
Did I miss any posts by "Kipper"? I haven't found a single one, yet he/she/it constantly "likes" posts by certain members.
I'm not quite sure what the purpose is... to raise the supposed kudos level of certain members? In whose perception?
Is this "member" human or a bot?
Just asking...
Kipper prefers to read posts and like them rather than comment.
-
Kipper prefers to read posts and like them rather than comment.
And having given 15,508 likes has never, ever liked any supporter posts. 8)><( afaIaa)
-
I have just been reading through recent posts and noticed that a post by Slartibartfast has 9 likes.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10062.msg482708#msg482708
I thought that was a lot so I checked the most liked post that I had spotted earlier on here For some reason the most liked post has only 8 likes.
Slartibartfast's post with 9 likes should surely be there rather than a post with 8. Is there a reason for the discrepancy?
-
I have just been reading through recent posts and noticed that a post by Slartibartfast has 9 likes.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10062.msg482708#msg482708
I thought that was a lot so I checked the most liked post that I had spotted earlier on here For some reason the most liked post has only 8 likes.
Slartibartfast's post with 9 likes should surely be there rather than a post with 8. Is there a reason for the discrepancy?
A post by a moderator attacking me, well I knew I was hated on here but hadn’t realised the scale of it until now! @)(++(*
-
A post by a moderator attacking me, well I knew I was hated on here but hadn’t realised the scale of it until now! @)(++(*
Slarti's quality post now has 10 likes. I suggest you & Davel "like" Eleanor's post to even the score. ?{)(**
-
A post by a moderator attacking me, well I knew I was hated on here but hadn’t realised the scale of it until now! @)(++(*
An ironic post in my opinion. Why would anyone hate you? I think that's an exaggeration of your impact on here.
-
An ironic post in my opinion. Why would anyone hate you? I think that's an exaggeration of your impact on here.
Really? Why is the most popular post on this forum not one making an incisive point about the case but one in which a moderator has nothing else to say apart from a put down addressed to me?
-
Really? Why is the most popular post on this forum not one making an incisive point about the case but one in which a moderator has nothing else to say apart from a put down addressed to me?
“O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!"
-
“O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!"
I never did like Rabbie Burns, and in any case I know exactly how some people see me. I did spell it out but for some reason the moderator chose to delete my post, funny that.
Now, for the second time of asking (a waste of time on my part, I know) why do you think the most popular post on the entire forum is not one making an important point about the case, but one in which a McCann supporter is put in their place by a sceptic moderator?
-
On a different but related subject has anyone noticed how Kipper the most “like giving” member (who never made a single post in their forum life and who liked virtually ALL of Stephen’s posts to make him the most liked forum member ever) stopped liking posts over a year ago. Now, when did Stephen leave the forum...?
-
I see Eleanor's post is still the most liked with 9 and yet from what I have read Slartibartfast's has 10 likes.
Vertigo Swirl perhaps there were a number of likes for Slartibart's post for 2 reasons one it was funny and two it was accurate.
-
I see Eleanor's post is still the most liked with 9 and yet from what I have read Slartibartfast's has 10 likes.
Vertigo Swirl perhaps there were a number of likes for Slartibart's post for 2 reasons one it was funny and two it was accurate.
In what way was it either funny or accurate? Perhaps you would like to explain.
-
In what way was it either funny or accurate? Perhaps you would like to explain.
Sorry I was busy.
Obviously as beauty is in the eye of the beholder so is humour.
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 22, 2018, 04:57:09 PM
IMO discussion is regularly closed down on this forum by sceptics - those who refuse to answer questions or to be drawn into discussing their opinions, their theories or to say what they really think, who deflect with ad homs, strawmen and other tactics. I'm all for completely open and honest exchange of views, but that doesn't seem popular with some sceptics.
You managed to type that with a straight face?
Funny? Well as I said that is dependant upon whether you are a sceptic or supporter.
Accurate, well IMO the post was as so far I have found that what you have said there is as far from the truth as is possible, hence why Slartibartfast's post is accurate too.
-
Sorry I was busy.
Obviously as beauty is in the eye of the beholder so is humour.
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 22, 2018, 04:57:09 PM
IMO discussion is regularly closed down on this forum by sceptics - those who refuse to answer questions or to be drawn into discussing their opinions, their theories or to say what they really think, who deflect with ad homs, strawmen and other tactics. I'm all for completely open and honest exchange of views, but that doesn't seem popular with some sceptics.
You managed to type that with a straight face?
Funny? Well as I said that is dependant upon whether you are a sceptic or supporter.
Accurate, well IMO the post was as so far I have found that what you have said there is as far from the truth as is possible, hence why Slartibartfast's post is accurate too.
What I wrote was sincere, and therefore I was not attempting to be humorous. So, in your opinion I was the butt of a (IMO not very funny) joke made by a forum moderator, which was liked by more people than have ever liked any post written on this forum before. It is in short the pinnacle of all posts ever written, and it is a post that contributes nothing apart from to put down a supporter, suggesting they are lying, hypocritical or deluded, or all three. This indicates that most or all sceptics believe I am a liar, deluded or hypocritical or all three, in short that I am a pretty contemptible member of the forum that deserves to be ridiculed. Thanks for bringing this issue to the forum’s attention, it really makes me feel very valued and appreciated. @)(++(*
-
What I wrote was sincere, and therefore I was not attempting to be humorous. So, in your opinion I was the butt of a (IMO not very funny) joke made by a forum moderator, which was liked by more people than have ever liked any post written on this forum before. It is in short the pinnacle of all posts ever written, and it is a post that contributes nothing apart from to put down a supporter, suggesting they are lying, hypocritical or deluded, or all three. This indicates that most or all sceptics believe I am a liar, deluded or hypocritical or all three, in short that I am a pretty contemptible member of the forum that deserves to be ridiculed. Thanks for bringing this issue to the forum’s attention, it really makes me feel very valued and appreciated. @)(++(*
Seeing as a reasonable percentage of your posts (IMO) have been moaning about some aspect or other of this forum I wonder why you are here at all Vertigo Swirl. Perhaps you could explain why to me.
-
Seeing as a reasonable percentage of your posts (IMO) have been moaning about some aspect or other of this forum I wonder why you are here at all Vertigo Swirl. Perhaps you could explain why to me.
Your post is off topic.
-
Goodness Me. I didn't know this Thread was here, and I have never before looked at The Like Stats. I was only alerted to it by a Deletion Notification.
I am not sure that I deserve the honour as my comment was only intended as a joke. But thanks anyway.
-
On a different but related subject has anyone noticed how Kipper the most “like giving” member (who never made a single post in their forum life and who liked virtually ALL of Stephen’s posts to make him the most liked forum member ever) stopped liking posts over a year ago. Now, when did Stephen leave the forum...?
The same thoughts had crossed my mind. ^*&&
-
I never did like Rabbie Burns, and in any case I know exactly how some people see me. I did spell it out but for some reason the moderator chose to delete my post, funny that.
Now, for the second time of asking (a waste of time on my part, I know) why do you think the most popular post on the entire forum is not one making an important point about the case, but one in which a McCann supporter is put in their place by a sceptic moderator?
I'll forgive your remark about our national bard. 8)><(
I hadn't realised just how unpopular you are with the sceptics. 8(8-))
Must be touching a few nerves somewhere.
Keep up the good work. 8((()*/
-
I'll forgive your remark about our national bard. 8)><(
I hadn't realised just how unpopular you are with the sceptics. 8(8-))
Must be touching a few nerves somewhere.
Keep up the good work. 8((()*/
Is Robbie Burns the national bard of the English too Erngath? I never knew that.
Back on to my earlier post I see Slartibart's post has 10 likes and Eleanor's has 9. Eleanor's post is still down as the most liked post.
IMO neither post is amazing or particularly thought provoking but it is disappointing that the most liked message on here is actually NOT the most liked post. Perhaps John could look into it.
-
Is Robbie Burns the national bard of the English too Erngath? I never knew that.
Back on to my earlier post I see Slartibart's post has 10 likes and Eleanor's has 9. Eleanor's post is still down as the most liked post.
IMO neither post is amazing or particularly thought provoking but it is disappointing that the most liked message on here is actually NOT the most liked post. Perhaps John could look into it.
Where did I say that Robert Burns was the national bard for the English?
I do believe John has enough to do without being concerned by irrelevant details.
In my opinion of course.
-
Where did I say that Robert Burns was the national bard for the English?
Perhaps I misread your post Erngath. It was the use of the word "our" to Vertigo Swirl.
-
Erngath I have a guilty secret. I actually like Robbie Burns (well some of it) and I am not Scottish.
-
Perhaps I misread your post Erngath. It was the use of the word "our" to Vertigo Swirl.
I believe you did.
He is our( Scotland's) national bard.
-
Erngath I have a guilty secret. I actually like Robbie Burns (well some of it) and I am not Scottish.
I like some of it, not all of it.
Certainly not The Cotter's Saturday night.
We had to study Burns at school and I hated that one.
Although I did win the Burns prize, says she immodestly.
-
I like some of it, not all of it.
Certainly not The Cotter's Saturday night.
We had to study Burns at school and I hated that one.
Although I did win the Burns prize, says she immodestly.
Looks like we are in agreement on at least something Erngath. And a belated congratulations on receiving the Burns prize. 8@??)(
-
Looks like we are in agreement on at least something Erngath. And a belated congratulations on receiving the Burns prize. 8@??)(
Thank you.
I don't believe I have won a prize since and that was nearly sxty years ago. @)(++(*
-
I'll forgive your remark about our national bard. 8)><(
I hadn't realised just how unpopular you are with the sceptics. 8(8-))
Must be touching a few nerves somewhere.
Keep up the good work. 8((()*/
Sorry, I’m not keen on poetry generally, unless it’s John Cooper Clarke or Ian Dury.
-
Is Robbie Burns the national bard of the English too Erngath? I never knew that.
Back on to my earlier post I see Slartibart's post has 10 likes and Eleanor's has 9. Eleanor's post is still down as the most liked post.
IMO neither post is amazing or particularly thought provoking but it is disappointing that the most liked message on here is actually NOT the most liked post. Perhaps John could look into it.
Why are you disappointed by this? Do you not have more important concerns in life than this, really?
-
Why are you disappointed by this? Do you not have more important concerns in life than this, really?
Of course I do. That is why I am not here 24/7 I do have a life Vertigo Swirl. Am I not allowed to be a little bit disappointed that the proclaimed most popular message is not actually the real most popular message.
If the situation was reversed and a sceptic post was proclaimed most popular when a supporter one was really the most popular would you not be disappointed too?
-
Of course I do. That is why I am not here 24/7 I do have a life Vertigo Swirl. Am I not allowed to be a little bit disappointed that the proclaimed most popular message is not actually the real most popular message.
If the situation was reversed and a sceptic post was proclaimed most popular when a supporter one was really the most popular would you not be disappointed too?
LOL, are you kidding? Disappointed?! No, I left the playground a long time ago.
-
LOL, are you kidding? Disappointed?! No, I left the playground a long time ago.
Not so long ago sometimes it seems, Vertigo Swirl. Being disappointed has nothing to do with childishness nor immaturity as any adult would know.
-
Of course I do. That is why I am not here 24/7 I do have a life Vertigo Swirl. Am I not allowed to be a little bit disappointed that the proclaimed most popular message is not actually the real most popular message.
If the situation was reversed and a sceptic post was proclaimed most popular when a supporter one was really the most popular would you not be disappointed too?
I doubt any supporter would give a tinker's curse about who had the most likes
Seriously when discussing the case of a missing child is this really a cause for concern.??
-
I doubt any supporter would give a tinker's curse about who had the most likes
Seriously when discussing the case of a missing child is this really a cause for concern.??
One clearly did as since I made my original post regarding Eleanor's 8 likes and Slartibartfast's 9 likes a supporter has liked Eleanor's post making it 9 too. Slartibartfast now has 10 likes though.
It is not a cause for concern just something I was a bit disappointed to see.
-
One clearly did as since I made my original post regarding Eleanor's 8 likes and Slartibartfast's 9 likes a supporter has liked Eleanor's post making it 9 too. Slartibartfast now has 10 likes though.
It is not a cause for concern just something I was a bit disappointed to see.
It's puzzling why a post which contributes zero to the thread and which is a rather sarcastic and disparaging comment about another poster should be given so many likes.
I'm surprised you want such a post recognised as having the most likes and therefore the "best"??post on the forum.
-
It's puzzling why a post which contributes zero to the thread and which is a rather sarcastic and disparaging comment about another poster should be given so many likes.
I'm surprised you want such a post recognised as having the most likes and therefore the "best"??post on the forum.
I suggest you re read Eleanor's post that you have liked and tell me what this post contributes to it's thread if you could please Erngath.
IMO neither post is noteworthy in itself and probably do not warrant the most liked accolade here but perhaps that is how this forum's "likes" work. People of course will like what they want IMO
-
I suggest you re read Eleanor's post that you have liked and tell me what this post contributes to it's thread if you could please Erngath.
IMO neither post is noteworthy in itself and probably do not warrant the most liked accolade here but perhaps that is how this forum's "likes" work. People of course will like what they want IMO
Eleanor's post is on topic, does contribute to the thread and most certainly is not a personal insult to a fellow forum member.
All in my opinion.
I suggest you contact John about this grave injustice to Slartis post and I'm sure he will alter the statistics to show hat Slartis post is recognised as the one with the most likes.
-
Just forget it Erngath. I made one post as there was a discrepancy on the most liked post and have had you and Vertigo Swirl badgering me for days.
Perhaps you should look to yourself as to why you seem to care so much about what I consider "disappointing"
-
I’m disappointed that such a well liked post by a moderator putting me down hasn’t been deleted for being both off topic and rude. Is this the sort of thing designed to make fellow posters feel welcome?
-
Who nicked the likes?
-
They’re back.