Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[BluffTHIS!]

You won't have BluffTHIS! to kick around in this thread anymore!

[Gildwulf]

So when someone points out the multiple holes in the logic on which your entire arguments in this thread have been based you are just going to skulk away with your tail between your legs?

An intellectually honest person would defend the logic of their argument instead of spouting a bunch of hot air for 12 hours and then dodging questions when people actually take the time to examine their argument.

[tuq]

Bluff,

Like Nixon in 1960, you lose this debate. Hopefully you'll do better in eight years like he did but I doubt Gildwulf is as weaksauce as LBJ.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
So when someone points out the multiple holes in the logic on which your entire arguments in this thread have been based you are just going to skulk away with your tail between your legs?

An intellectually honest person would defend the logic of their argument instead of spouting a bunch of hot air for 12 hours and then dodging questions when people actually take the time to examine their argument.

[/ QUOTE ]


My last post on this topic. You yourself made a lot of assertions that various points of mine weren't releveant, and/or the examples I used weren't valid, but without truly proving same. Instead you show yourself to be a graduate of the ASSERT YOUR WAY TO VICTORY SCHOOL. And while you can't prove with anything approaching accuracy your hypothesis about "lateral" movement, as opposed to posters who just decide to frequent the site less or not at all, there is in fact empirical evidence that many don't frequent OOT and perhaps the site itself as much, due to NT!'s modding.

And the fact is that there isn't a good way to decide this matter, except one. Which is the exact poll that blueman posted earlier without any editorial comment, being locked and stickied in OOT for a period of a week, with the title, "IS NT! A GOOD MOD?". But without the stipulation that NT! resigns if it goes against him. Is NT! willing to do that? Should I hold my breath?

Oh and LOLOL at any suggestion that such a poll will be overrun by gimmick accounts who can skew the true results. Any requirement that posters out themselves and their opinions on NT! in order to make their position known will be seen for what it is, just a pathetic excuse not to be willing to stand up and see what posters think.

[Gildwulf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So when someone points out the multiple holes in the logic on which your entire arguments in this thread have been based you are just going to skulk away with your tail between your legs?

An intellectually honest person would defend the logic of their argument instead of spouting a bunch of hot air for 12 hours and then dodging questions when people actually take the time to examine their argument.

[/ QUOTE ]


My last post on this topic. You yourself made a lot of assertions that various points of mine weren't releveant, and/or the examples I used weren't valid, but without truly proving same. Instead you show yourself to be a graduate of the ASSERT YOUR WAY TO VICTORY SCHOOL. And while you can't prove with anything approaching accuracy your hypothesis about "lateral" movement, as opposed to posters who just decide to frequent the site less or not at all, there is in fact empirical evidence that many don't frequent OOT and perhaps the site itself as much, due to NT!'s modding.

And the fact is that there isn't a good way to decide this matter, except one. Which is the exact poll that blueman posted earlier without any editorial comment, being locked and stickied in OOT for a period of a week, with the title, "IS NT! A GOOD MOD?". But without the stipulation that NT! resigns if it goes against him. Is NT! willing to do that? Should I hold my breath?

Oh and LOLOL at any suggestion that such a poll will be overrun by gimmick accounts who can skew the true results. Any requirement that posters out themselves and their opinions on NT! in order to make their position known will be seen for what it is, just a pathetic excuse not to be willing to stand up and see what posters think.

[/ QUOTE ]

How on earth does a flash poll on whether or not NT is a good mod settle the argument on whether he is hurting 2p2 financially by modding? And what do gimmick accounts have to do with any of this?

My problem is with your logical leap from "NT is a bad mod" to "NT is driving away traffic from this site" which you have not addressed at all.

I suggested a professional poll/attempt to use quant data earlier in the thread and you scoffed at the idea.

I explained very clearly that based on Sniper's quant analysis that there has been a strong growth in bbv4l posting (and el d) posting at a time when less posts were occurring in OOT. I also made it clear that a large amount of bbv4l posters are former OOT posters who do not agree with NT's policies (see the 'F OOT' campaign) but who are all still regular posters on 2p2. I tried to combine some kind of quant and qual evidence to make my point.

To see who exactly is moving and why we would have to do create a dataset on posters over time and do some crosstabs and regressions (oh noes, technical language again).

As for accuracy, you still have not explained the ridiculous logical fallacy that your "empirical evidence" of people not visiting the site as much is drawn from people posting on the site and that NT is hurting 2p2 overall. Or that the very people complaining about NT in this thread are posting quite frequently in the other offtopic forums, which would suggest lateral movement.

[Suigin406]

wth, i wake up this morning expecting another all-nighter feud and i see...nothing

[nath]

Wow, this is what I missed? Hahahahaha. And, I mean, Bluffthis... wow. Just, wow.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nath, I always make fun of toolios who sit on the same side as their date, it just seems so emasculating. In this case, however, it was a chance to get some quality body contact in so I don't care how stupid it looked to everyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I get your point, it just seems to me that if she really wants you to sit by her, she wants the "quality body contact" thing and that can only be a good sign, so who [censored] cares what people think.

[/ QUOTE ]


Tuq I still think you gotta tell her, "Bish you sit on MY SIDE of the

booth, I don't sit on your side of the booth. I'm tuqqqqq baby. T -

U - GIANT F--KING <font size=6>Q</font>. Tuq sits on the booth side of no man,

woman or child. U HEARING ME?!?!"





Or something along those lines.

[tuq]

CC,

I'm going to scribble that on my hand for our next date. I just hope I don't sweat too much. Thanks for your support.

tu giant effing q (can't get the font size thing to work for me, sob)

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
can't get the font size thing to work for me, sob

[/ QUOTE ]

<font size=5>l0lZ n00b</font>

plus

Wow this thread got epic. I should've known it would branch off and evolve.

plus

When does the BluffThis drama start, pagewise? Bear in mind I have my settings for 50 posts per page, so some calculations are required, multiplication for one I think.