|
|
Post by greysrigging on May 17, 2022 1:13:38 GMT -5
Being an asshole to some members != evil He was evil indeed to me. He bullied me and AJ incessantly. ”Metsfap you Latin Jew fuck” - I don’t want to bring this shit back. ^^ this.... fair dinkum ( an AU term that translates to 'really' ? ) see, this whole freedom of speach' thing is a fucken fallacy....its ok to say the shit that the likes of AA, Kronan and the like used to utter ? really ? Of course it turns newer members off, especially those from other countries and cultures where the nuances of simple things like taking the piss on someone can be construed as deeply insulting. And 'freedom of speach' means that you can say things behind the anominity of a keyboard and computer screen, stuff that would get ya head punched in if you said to someones face. The Forum that AA used to prattle on about, Aussie 'Ski.com.' has a section called the 'bear pit', where almost anything goes....anything except racial, sexual, miscenogistic, personal insults and or libelous and slanderous. AA has been pulled up a few times in his early days and in no way nowadays does he engage with the members on Ski in the same way he did on WWF. See, ya dont have societal rules, the natural born bastards tend to rule the roost. |
|
|
|
Post by greysrigging on May 17, 2022 3:10:55 GMT -5
Another stat ( a damning one ) re participation rates. So on the 1st page of "Climate Battles' I've counted the number of votes per post ( ie those bothering to play ) Its 16.5 participants per topic on average ( this is just on page 1 ) out of a forum membership of 135. The posts resurrected from the past back to 2018 ( on page 1 )have been disregarded in these stats athough here they are...7 topics with an average of 28 participants.
So an average 16 members bother to participate in 'climate battles'. Thats about 12% of the membership engages in the 'climate battle' section of the Forum.
Why bother having it if the majority of the membership couldn't be bothered using the function ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Giorbanguly on May 17, 2022 3:52:17 GMT -5
I'm not suggesting bringing back Aboniggerby Fagler, though; I'm not advocating for animosity/aggression/vitriol on this forum. I just think Tommy was a very knowledgeable member too. Tommy wasn't banned, he can post at any time. He willingly chooses not to |
|
|
|
Post by Benfxmth on May 17, 2022 7:47:59 GMT -5
I'm not suggesting bringing back Aboniggerby Fagler, though; I'm not advocating for animosity/aggression/vitriol on this forum. I just think Tommy was a very knowledgeable member too. Tommy wasn't banned, he can post at any time. He willingly chooses not to Of course; I was just responding to Razza's point (I don't doubt the aforementioned chill users who also deal with logic and common sense (e.g. Niggaros, Urania, Boombo) would be great to see back here, but I doubt they'll return). Plus, most of GayJ's contributions are literally just "yeah Tucson and Flagstaff is 95% more variable than the rest of the world!!!11111", "you can't live in the South without A/C!!!111!!", stuff like that. Tommy sure as hell was more knowledgeable and interesting than that. It's unfortunate that he chose to be abrasive and to team up with Fagler, which led to his downfall, but behind that exterior online persona, was, like I mentioned earlier, a knowledgeable member. |
|
|
|
Post by Giorbanguly on May 17, 2022 7:58:54 GMT -5
Overall AW's ban was a good thing as it reduced toxicity. Also I noticed Candle-san has improved a lot since the ban as well. I have quite enjoyed reading his posts recently. Tommy could go back to posting normally too but he decided to take the butthurt path.
|
|
|
|
Post by desiccatedi85 on May 17, 2022 8:04:13 GMT -5
Tommy wasn't banned, he can post at any time. He willingly chooses not to Of course; I was just responding to Razza's point (I don't doubt the aforementioned chill users who also deal with logic and common sense (e.g. Niggaros, Urania, Boombo) would be great to see back here, but I doubt they'll return). Plus, most of GayJ's contributions are literally just "yeah Tucson and Flagstaff is 95% more variable than the rest of the world!!!11111", "you can't live in the South without A/C!!!111!!", stuff like that. Tommy sure as hell was more knowledgeable and interesting than that. It's unfortunate that he chose to be abrasive and to team up with Fagler, which led to his downfall, but behind that exterior online persona, was, like I mentioned earlier, a knowledgeable member. Tommy was definitely knowledgeable about the South climatically (as well as general PWS/station stuff), and good at looking up data. In addition, it was always fun teaming up with him to shit on polar foaming. However, many of Tommy's takes on Mediterranean climates were extremely stupid. From claiming that Seattle and Portland are "arid", to delusionally saying that "humid heat is more comfortable than dry heat", to saying that "Mediterranean climates are horrible for agriculture" was extremely dumb and ignorant of him. Mediterranean climates have been breadbaskets since ancient times, before modern irrigation even existed. |
|
|
|
Post by Benfxmth on May 17, 2022 8:06:53 GMT -5
Overall AW's ban was a good thing as it reduced toxicity. Also I noticed Candle-san has improved a lot since the ban as well. I have quite enjoyed reading his posts recently. Tommy could go back to posting normally too but he decided to take the butthurt path. I agree with this take. |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on May 17, 2022 8:08:56 GMT -5
Another stat ( a damning one ) re participation rates. So on the 1st page of "Climate Battles' I've counted the number of votes per post ( ie those bothering to play ) Its 16.5 participants per topic on average ( this is just on page 1 ) out of a forum membership of 135. The posts resurrected from the past back to 2018 ( on page 1 )have been disregarded in these stats athough here they are...7 topics with an average of 28 participants. So an average 16 members bother to participate in 'climate battles'. Thats about 12% of the membership engages in the 'climate battle' section of the Forum. Why bother having it if the majority of the membership couldn't be bothered using the function ? Climates battles have been a staple since forever. People have always enjoyed them and still do. I'll admit I'm not very active on them but I'll play along from time to time, and I can't see the forum without it. |
|
|
|
Post by greysrigging on May 17, 2022 16:17:18 GMT -5
Another stat ( a damning one ) re participation rates. So on the 1st page of "Climate Battles' I've counted the number of votes per post ( ie those bothering to play ) Its 16.5 participants per topic on average ( this is just on page 1 ) out of a forum membership of 135. The posts resurrected from the past back to 2018 ( on page 1 )have been disregarded in these stats athough here they are...7 topics with an average of 28 participants. So an average 16 members bother to participate in 'climate battles'. Thats about 12% of the membership engages in the 'climate battle' section of the Forum. Why bother having it if the majority of the membership couldn't be bothered using the function ? Climates battles have been a staple since forever. People have always enjoyed them and still do. I'll admit I'm not very active on them but I'll play along from time to time, and I can't see the forum without it. Don't get me wrong...personally I like the 'Climate Battles' pages, but the section doesn't elicit much participation.....just sayin'.... |
|
|
|
Post by Beercules on May 17, 2022 19:44:49 GMT -5
Another stat ( a damning one ) re participation rates. So on the 1st page of "Climate Battles' I've counted the number of votes per post ( ie those bothering to play ) Its 16.5 participants per topic on average ( this is just on page 1 ) out of a forum membership of 135. The posts resurrected from the past back to 2018 ( on page 1 )have been disregarded in these stats athough here they are...7 topics with an average of 28 participants. So an average 16 members bother to participate in 'climate battles'. Thats about 12% of the membership engages in the 'climate battle' section of the Forum. Why bother having it if the majority of the membership couldn't be bothered using the function ? Well to be fair, merely about 12% of the membership logs on at all |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on May 23, 2022 7:26:19 GMT -5
103 posts per day.   |
|
|
|
Post by Strewthless on May 23, 2022 8:05:22 GMT -5
The reports of this forum's death were greatly exaggerated.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on May 30, 2022 7:04:15 GMT -5
106 posts per day.   |
|
|
|
Post by desiccatedi85 on May 30, 2022 20:06:43 GMT -5
It appears that the infamous Gaytime Airlines has gone defunct.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benfxmth on May 30, 2022 20:09:30 GMT -5
It appears that the infamous Gaytime Airlines has gone defunct. ... for now at least |
|
|
|
Post by Beercules on May 30, 2022 20:12:46 GMT -5
It appears that the infamous Gaytime Airlines has gone defunct.  |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on Jun 6, 2022 5:31:45 GMT -5
97 posts per day.   |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on Jun 12, 2022 23:36:42 GMT -5
94 posts per day.   |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on Jun 21, 2022 7:59:39 GMT -5
87 posts per day.   |
|
|
|
Post by Beercules on Jun 21, 2022 19:44:35 GMT -5
It appears that the infamous Gaytime Airlines has gone defunct. Rather it appears they expanded their fleet |
|
