cyclists turned right when i overtook

custardy

The gift that keeps on giving.

Mercdriver

kraken776 wrote: »

I agree,
There are however problems with this

1)
Idiots dont like being called idiots.

As soon as you tell them they are an idiot on a forum an indefinite barrage of insults, disrespectful comments, attention seeking comments and logical fallacies starts. (they react the same way if you do it in person as well but at least in such situations they cant keep it up indefinitely).
To give an example this thread started getting spammed by trolls as soon as I referred to a "handful of idiots". These same individuals are still continuing the types of behavior mentioned even today (many months later).

At least one of these people had not even posted before I made the comment in question and since then has repeated many many of the listed behaviors over and over, and despite the fact that I have explained his/her mistakes to him/her many times keeps doing the same things over and over.

2)
Sometimes other people hold it against you if you disrespect other people, even if it is justified.

I dont think this one needs any explanation. although on a forum it can result in a mod deleting your posts.

It's not ever justifiable to be disrespectful in any circumstances. It can be understandable in certain situations but never justifiable.

Aylesbury_Duck

Oh kraken, you are hilarious. Everyone's a fool but you, of course!

What did your insurers say?

NBLondon

Hmmm.

Kraken's thanks to post ratio (at time of this post) a little under 2%

Mercdriver's a little under 60%
Aylesbury's a little over 85%
Joe Horner's around 81%
Silver-Surfer nearly 60%
Retrogamer just over 100%


I know which of these I think is an idiot...

Head_The_Ball

NBLondon wrote: »

Hmmm.

Kraken's thanks to post ratio (at time of this post) a little under 2%

Mercdriver's a little under 60%
Aylesbury's a little over 85%
Joe Horner's around 81%
Silver-Surfer nearly 60%
Retrogamer just over 100%


I know which of these I think is an idiot...

<<< Can I join in please.

Aylesbury_Duck

Head_The_Ball wrote: »

<<< Can I join in please.

I've just helped your ratio....not that it needed it!

Joe_Horner

NBLondon wrote: »

Hmmm.

Kraken's thanks to post ratio (at time of this post) a little under 2%

Mercdriver's a little under 60%
Aylesbury's a little over 85%
Joe Horner's around 81%
Silver-Surfer nearly 60%
Retrogamer just over 100%


I know which of these I think is an idiot...

[KRAKEN]
Well, obviously the idiots are the ones who aren't thanking me for all the useful posts I'm giving them. Like, DUHHHH!
[/KRAKEN]


Think I'm getting to understand his logic a little too well after months of reading this thread

kraken776

NBLondon wrote: »

Hmmm.

Kraken's thanks to post ratio (at time of this post) a little under 2%

Mercdriver's a little under 60%
Aylesbury's a little over 85%
Joe Horner's around 81%
Silver-Surfer nearly 60%
Retrogamer just over 100%


I know which of these I think is an idiot...

Here is some advice.

If you are going to cite evidence and use it against someone you need to do 2 things
1 - make sure it is relevant
2 - make sure it is not easy for the other person to evaluate and explain and giving an obvious explanation.

If you dont do both of these things the person you are trying to use it against will turn the tables on you and use your comment to make you look stupid by pointing out that it is not relevant.

I will now do just that

1)
The "thanks" stats have absolutely no connection with the previous thing which i said, if you believe they do then you need to explain why. without this explanation they are just irrelevant information which do not help you at all.

2)
A single Post can have an unlimited number of "thanks" but on this forum there is no such thing as a negative "thanks"
This means a small handful of idiots can boost their own "thanks" by each giving each others posts a "thanks" and any amount of negative opinion against them will never be shown.
Since each post counts as +1 to the posters ratio but can attract an unlimited number of "thanks" a single post only needs 1 thanks to create a 100% thanks ratio but could generate the "thanks" needed to maintain a 100% thanks:posts ratio for 10 or more of the posters posts.

In fact I would like you to appolgise for thinking that I would not point this out.

Aylesbury_Duck

kraken776 wrote: »

Here is some advice.

If you are going to cite evidence and use it against someone you need to do 2 things
1 - make sure it is relevant
2 - make sure it is not easy for the other person to evaluate and explain and giving an obvious explanation.

If you dont do both of these things the person you are trying to use it against will turn the tables on you and use your comment to make you look stupid by pointing out that it is not relevant.

I will now do just that

1)
The "thanks" stats have absolutely no connection with the previous thing which i said, if you believe they do then you need to explain why. without this explanation they are just irrelevant information which do not help you at all.

2)
A single Post can have an unlimited number of "thanks" but on this forum there is no such thing as a negative "thanks"
This means a small handful of idiots can boost their own "thanks" by each giving each others posts a "thanks" and any amount of negative opinion against them will never be shown.
Since each post counts as +1 to the posters ratio but can attract an unlimited number of "thanks" a single post only needs 1 thanks to create a 100% thanks ratio but could generate the "thanks" needed to maintain a 100% thanks:posts ratio for 10 or more of the posters posts.

In fact I would like you to appolgise for thinking that I would not point this out.

You're wrong. Negative opinion can be shown. You've had 29 pages of it. It just hasn't registered with you.

Following your display of mathematical brilliance, I will add that if you post nothing at all, I will thank you for it and you will therefore have an infinitely high thanks-to-post ratio.

Joe_Horner

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Following your display of mathematical brilliance, I will add that if you post nothing at all, I will thank you for it and you will therefore have an infinitely high thanks-to-post ratio.

Thanks for that useful suggestion, Aylesbury D :beer: