PDA

View Full Version : Should post counts be for this board only?



Kevin Bonham
25-07-2004, 04:24 AM
Jeo and I have been discussing resetting the post counts to only include posts on this board and no longer include posts from the old Australian Chess BB.

A bit of history - The old ACF BB had post counts from its year of existence, which don't include the posts made during the c. 2 months lost in the Brazilian hacker crash. When we moved here several posters, including everyone currently over 1000 (except Jeo?), had their old totals transferred so people could get a clear indication of who the regulars from the old board were. However, not every user transferred their post counts. Users could request that their post count be transferred, but not everyone did it.

There have now been enough posts made here that the post counts from this board alone will give a good indication of who the regulars are. Furthermore because many people who are fairly regular (in the hundreds on this board) didn't transfer their counts, the current post counts are skewed and make it look like the 1000+ club whose totals include the old BB (Bill, KB, Matt, CL, Barry, arosar, gg, starter) dominate discussion a lot more than we actually do.

If we reset the totals, everyone's post count would be their posts here since the start of the year, excepting those who were here before (Jeo and Gandalf are the only two with any significant number of posts and 80+% of Jeo's here have been since the start of the year anyway.)

Should we do this? Comments welcome - for, against, indifferent. Main reason (despite the above) would be just a bit of novelty to add some fresh interest to the post count wars and force starter to change his .sig. :P

NB I haven't discussed this with K yet but I assume everyone with custom title would keep it.

Rincewind
25-07-2004, 07:42 AM
In fact, it would be novel if the post count was always for the last 6 months. So figures would be constantly rising and falling with the ebb and flow of each individuals activity on the board. Not sure if Karthich would entertain this idea either, but I think it would prove interesting.

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 09:45 AM
.

I am not entering this new poll until I get awarded my prize, or recognition, for getting the poll on the Euro_Cup_winner correct. (And I hope there are no appeals or challenges in regard to my Euro_Cup win; it did get a bit unseemly last year when my BB_post win was subject to recount. :uhoh: ).

BTW KB I don't know which response, (a),(b),(c), or (d) is correct in your poll; it might help if I was able to indicate a confidence range in voting; can you adjust the poll?

starter

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 09:47 AM
Jeo and I have been discussing resetting the post counts to only include posts on this board and no longer include posts from the old Australian Chess BB.

Main reason would be just a bit of novelty to add some fresh interest to the post count wars and force starter to change his .sig. :P


:confused:
But I change it every day KB.

Garvinator
25-07-2004, 10:07 AM
why is this even been debated when most of us claim that we dont care about post counts??

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 10:22 AM
why is this even been debated when most of us claim that we dont care about post counts??

The scorecard of posters who have shown interest in post counts enough to start threads on them (recently) have been

gg'' = 1
KB/Jeo = 1

And Jeo has only shown interest from the moment that some-one loomed in his rear vision mirror.

starter

PHAT
25-07-2004, 11:25 AM
I voted "Couldn't care less" because I find such raw data of limited usefulness.

However, if there is to a change, it could be something like:

1. Reset at zero every month.
2. Cut and paste the monthly tallies on to a closed thread.
3. ALL posts from all threads ought to be counted because, in my opinion, it is total contribution to the Australian chess community's BB* that should real count.

*This BB belongs to US not 'aldof.

Garvinator
25-07-2004, 11:45 AM
i wonder what the post counts would look like if it was based on quality and not quantity :uhoh:

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 11:56 AM
i wonder what the post counts would look like if it was based on quality and not quantity :uhoh:

I have now doubt whose post count would suffer most if one-liners did not qualify for an increment.
It is rare that there is quality in a one-liner retort.

starter

skip to my lou
25-07-2004, 12:00 PM
:beard: The main reason for this suggestion is because CK v5 / CKN is coming soon.

Bill Gletsos
25-07-2004, 12:16 PM
3. ALL posts from all threads ought to be counted because, in my opinion, it is total contribution to the Australian chess community's BB* that should real count.
Non chess related threads certainly arent relevenat to any post count, especially your crap.



*This BB belongs to US not 'aldof.
No it belongs to Jeo.

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 12:18 PM
:beard: The main reason for this suggestion is because CK v5 / CKN is coming soon.

Strange that you say that is the main reason.

The initiator of the thread says the main reason was
'Main reason would be just a bit of novelty to add some fresh interest to the post count wars and force starter to change his .sig. '

However, if you are saying that your upgrade to CK v5 / CKN cannot retain the functionality of our past post counts then there is not really much to debate. Looks like we all go back to zero. Sobeit.

starter

skip to my lou
25-07-2004, 12:24 PM
Strange that you say that is the main reason.

The initiator of the thread says the main reason was
'Main reason would be just a bit of novelty to add some fresh interest to the post count wars and force starter to change his .sig. '

Yes that is another 'main' reason, since the BB is a bit dull after the matt, dr, bg war started.


However, if you are saying that your upgrade to CK v5 / CKN cannot retain the functionality of our past post counts then there is not really much to debate. Looks like we all go back to zero. Sobeit.

They will not be reset to zero but it will be set to the actual amount of posts you have on this board. Since ACF has abandoned the BB completely, it would not be fair to newcomers to provide some people with an increment from another bb either.

ursogr8
25-07-2004, 12:40 PM
Yes that is another 'main' reason, since the BB is a bit dull after the matt, dr, bg war started.



They will not be reset to zero but it will be set to the actual amount of posts you have on this board. Since ACF has abandoned the BB completely, it would not be fair to newcomers to provide some people with an increment from another bb either.


Well J/K if that is your logic, that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the coming s/w upgrade, then I am totally in favour of what you propose. I will be ticking (a).

starter

skip to my lou
25-07-2004, 12:45 PM
With the upgrade will come alot of newcomers to this BB. The upgrade will cost alot of time and money but it is worth it. Because CKN will be the only Australian chess site to provide such services. It will also be a fresh site with lots of new features not found on any other chess sites in the world.

Bill Gletsos
25-07-2004, 01:05 PM
They will not be reset to zero but it will be set to the actual amount of posts you have on this board. Since ACF has abandoned the BB completely, it would not be fair to newcomers to provide some people with an increment from another bb either.
Makes sense to me.

PHAT
25-07-2004, 01:34 PM
Non chess related threads certainly arent relevenat to any post count, especially your crap.

Gratuitous insult. At least attempt to put some meat on the claim, You lazy pr.ck.

Bill Gletsos
25-07-2004, 01:38 PM
Gratuitous insult. At least attempt to put some meat on the claim, You lazy pr.ck.
This is rich coming from the master of gratuitous insults.
My post was succinct and to the point.

PHAT
25-07-2004, 01:52 PM
With the upgrade will come alot of newcomers to this BB.

That's interesting! Where are they coming from?



The upgrade will cost alot of time and money but it is worth it.

Hit the ACF for a donation.


It will also be a fresh site with lots of new features not found on any other chess sites in the world.

I hope one feature will be an 18+ zone - a place where adults can be candid and free to be mature.

skip to my lou
25-07-2004, 01:56 PM
That's interesting! Where are they coming from?

Everywhere


Hit the ACF for a donation.

I doubt ACF will have such money, and even if they do, I doubt they care about such things.


I hope one feature will be an 18+ zone - a place where adults can be candid and free to be mature.

Not a bad idea, I can implement this with some sort of identity checking system. You may have to scan your drivers licence or any other document that proves your age and send it to my email to gain access.

Bill Gletsos
25-07-2004, 01:57 PM
I hope one feature will be an 18+ zone - a place where adults can be candid and free to be mature.
What you really mean is be crude, rude and vulgar.
Qualaties you have repeatedly demonstrated you excel in.

Gandalf
25-07-2004, 02:18 PM
In my opinion the greatest sign of maturity is the ability to show restraint. If this holds then a forum about chess should not need a restricted access section - especially since the world of Chess rarely overlaps those to which children are denied access.

Besides, the amount of work and/or risk involved in individually validating the age of members is enourmous. Either we implement a credit card facility (which is easily fooled by simply using dad's) or we sift through dozens of poorly scanned (or oh so easily modified) drivers licenses. The fact of the matter remains that we don't need a seperate section for swearing and discussion of naughty bits when the current system of simply deleting such posts works so well. :)

Bill Gletsos
25-07-2004, 02:29 PM
In my opinion the greatest sign of maturity is the ability to show restraint. If this holds then a forum about chess should not need a restricted access section - especially since the world of Chess rarely overlaps those to which children are denied access.

Besides, the amount of work and/or risk involved in individually validating the age of members is enourmous. Either we implement a credit card facility (which is easily fooled by simply using dad's) or we sift through dozens of poorly scanned (or oh so easily modified) drivers licenses. The fact of the matter remains that we don't need a seperate section for swearing and discussion of naughty bits when the current system of simply deleting such posts works so well. :)
Exactly.
If Matt wants a mature board let him setup his own.

skip to my lou
25-07-2004, 07:11 PM
Will check poll tommorow or tuesday and make decision.

Kevin Bonham
25-07-2004, 10:51 PM
Strange that you say that is the main reason.

I think that one "main reason" is the reason for doing it now rather than some other time, while the other "main reason" is the reason for doing it at all. One appeals to rationale, the other to opportunity. Confused?

As for an over 18 subsection for those with tourettical tendencies, bring it on! :clap:

JGB
27-07-2004, 12:36 AM
I would also be for an over 18 section but I can imagine how quickly it would dissolve into a bloodbath. Regarding a few of the guys who post here when it is already censored... Sometimes its probably good to have slight restrictions on what can be said in the open forum just to keep everything on a Chess course.

skip to my lou
27-07-2004, 12:59 AM
Posts have been recounted.

Since chesslover has stopped polluting the non-chess section with statistics, non-chess posts now counts towards your post count. Please let me know if it is counting your posts.

If someone can create another thread about the +18 section with a poll, I will see how the poll goes and decide if there needs to be a +18 only section.

Good luck.

Kevin Bonham
27-07-2004, 03:41 AM
I'll create an 18+ poll thread.

Hmmm, the rejig has left the same person in #1 place but left three posters very close for second. starter will be beside himself with excitement watching as gg catches and passes us (which I assume he will do within weeks given his Mt B involvements.)

Garvinator
27-07-2004, 08:58 AM
Hmmm, the rejig has left the same person in #1 place but left three posters very close for second. starter will be beside himself with excitement watching as gg catches and passes us (which I assume he will do within weeks given his Mt B involvements.)
stop encouraging starter to keep mentioning post counts :hand:

Alan Shore
27-07-2004, 11:02 PM
stop encouraging starter to keep mentioning post counts :hand:

The primary reason I (left) the BB was starter and his postcount whinging. If he doesn't take it out of his sig I'm going to leave again. I'm back for a short while since I have some chess related questions on other threads.

Paul S
28-07-2004, 12:06 AM
My only "concern" with the new post counts is that I understand that every time you make 200 posts you are entitled to change your identity (or more precisely your avatar and Custom Title).

I was thinking about having an identity change, but now I have to build up my post count again due to about 200 posts in my post count being recently deleted!

:( :P ;)

skip to my lou
28-07-2004, 12:25 AM
Everyone can change their avatar, regardless of their post count. With Custom Title status, you get custom title and several more features. You get more PM allowance, more attachment space etc.

The recount should not affect people that already gained Custom Title status and their new post count is < 200. You should still have Custom Title + all the other features that come with it.

Paul S
28-07-2004, 12:32 AM
Sounds good, Jeo (Jeo).

It looks like I was "worried" about nothing!

:D ;) :P

arosar
28-07-2004, 09:44 AM
The primary reason I (left) the BB was starter and his postcount whinging. If he doesn't take it out of his sig I'm going to leave again. I'm back for a short while since I have some chess related questions on other threads.

Don't be a bloody sook! Stay...we demand it. We are your mates, aren't we?

AR

Alan Shore
28-07-2004, 04:30 PM
Don't be a bloody sook! Stay...we demand it. We are your mates, aren't we?

AR

I changed my response - you can see it on the starter's post count obsession thread. If I left it would be for other reasons.

ursogr8
13-08-2004, 12:46 PM
hey Jeo

Do I get any extra functionality or storage for reaching 1500 posts? :uhoh:

starter

skip to my lou
18-08-2004, 10:14 PM
Sorry, I missed this post. At the moment, the only level set is 200. There may be many levels added after the CKN structure is implemented.

ursogr8
12-09-2004, 11:02 AM
Will check poll tommorow or tuesday and make decision.

K.

What is happening with the post-count mate. It just jumped by 5 with no new posts. Are some post being counted, but not appearing when I use NEW POSTS?
(Money bets are contingent on this integrity). 11am 12/9/4.

starter

skip to my lou
12-09-2004, 12:58 PM
Which post count are you looking at?

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2004, 01:49 PM
K.

What is happening with the post-count mate. It just jumped by 5 with no new posts. Are some post being counted, but not appearing when I use NEW POSTS?
(Money bets are contingent on this integrity). 11am 12/9/4.

starter
You are aware that there are restircted forums that only certain people have access arent you. e.g ones for moderators only, and I think ones for the organisers of the MT. Buller events.

ursogr8
12-09-2004, 07:47 PM
Which post count are you looking at?
K.

On the front INDEX screen.......current count is 26,606.

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2004, 07:52 PM
K.

On the front INDEX screen.......current count is 26,606.
Are you sure you dont have a typing error in that as I show it as 26,209.

ursogr8
12-09-2004, 07:52 PM
You are aware that there are restircted forums that only certain people have access arent you. e.g ones for moderators only, and I think ones for the organisers of the MT. Buller events.

This is awful news Bill. :eek: :eek:
Surely such posts are not being included in the Posters count? This would explain why we have had to take gg'' 's out of the betting to have a race-fixing allegation investigated. Now I see (nearly) all. There have been complaints from the Club here that gg'' 's count seemed to rise and yet we could not find the posts that would account for it.

K. ... can something be done to bring back integrity and visibility of the posts. Drop all your other developments and just concentrate on this please.

starter

skip to my lou
12-09-2004, 08:25 PM
K. ... can something be done to bring back integrity and visibility of the posts. Drop all your other developments and just concentrate on this please.

1) Just because the posts are not visible to you does not mean they lack in integrity. There is much less spam, if any at all, in the private forums.

2) What other developments?

Alan Shore
12-09-2004, 09:41 PM
This is awful news Bill. :eek: :eek:
Surely such posts are not being included in the Posters count? This would explain why we have had to take gg'' 's out of the betting to have a race-fixing allegation investigated.

Who's actually involved in this betting and how much is at stake?

ursogr8
12-09-2004, 10:34 PM
Who's actually involved in this betting and how much is at stake?

BD
Do you mean
>the horses?
>> the bookie
>>> the punters?
Which?

starter

Garvinator
12-09-2004, 10:37 PM
Who's actually involved in this betting and how much is at stake?
dont you really mean, how do i get on and for how much :P

Alan Shore
12-09-2004, 11:11 PM
BD
Do you mean
>the horses?
>> the bookie
>>> the punters?
Which?

starter

Um.. all of the above. Just give me the info.


dont you really mean, how do i get on and for how much

.......

Yes.

:whistle:

ursogr8
13-09-2004, 08:52 AM
Um.. all of the above. Just give me the info.
.......


BD
Consensus around the office punters is that you have a COI and so you can't get any action. Some-one said something about jockeys cannot bet. :hand:
But thanks for showing interest.
starter

Alan Shore
13-09-2004, 02:22 PM
BD
Consensus around the office punters is that you have a COI and so you can't get any action. Some-one said something about jockeys cannot bet. :hand:
But thanks for showing interest.
starter

1. What is COI?
2. You still didn't tell me who's involved
3. Or what's at stake

So far the commentary isn't too informative!

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 02:36 PM
1. What is COI?
2. You still didn't tell me who's involved
3. Or what's at stake

So far the commentary isn't too informative!
COI = Conflict of Interest.

I'm guessing 2 & 3 are on a needs to know basis and as far as starters concerned you dont needs to know. ;)

Now starter since you claim my post count is never part of the beting I guess I'm therefore eligible to play.

Alan Shore
13-09-2004, 02:46 PM
Now starter since you claim my post count is never part of the beting I guess I'm therefore eligible to play.

You realise of course I am in the same boat as you Bill, mine has not been subject to this razzle dazzle either.

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 03:13 PM
You realise of course I am in the same boat as you Bill, mine has not been subject to this razzle dazzle either.
Yes but according to starter my post count is explicitly barred from consideration. I'm not sure that is the reason in your case but rather that yours has just not fallen under consideration so far.

Garvinator
13-09-2004, 04:42 PM
Yes but according to starter my post count is explicitly barred from consideration. I'm not sure that is the reason in your case but rather that yours has just not fallen under consideration so far.
i think the betting market each day is mentioned in starters sig. today its from the gong ;)

Rincewind
13-09-2004, 05:18 PM
i think the betting market each day is mentioned in starters sig. today its from the gong ;)

Betting on provincals is always a tricky business with local knowledge having a big impact on the market. I think starter would be well advised to stick to running books on group 1 fixtures. ;)

ursogr8
13-09-2004, 05:37 PM
Now starter since you claim my post count is never part of the betting I guess I'm therefore eligible to play.

Bill
Cut it out mate.
You are like that jockey in the Melbourne Cup who whipped the other horses, not his own.
It would be different if you just restricted yourself to cheering from the side-lines.

starter

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 07:03 PM
Bill
Cut it out mate.
You are like that jockey in the Melbourne Cup who whipped the other horses, not his own.
It would be different if you just restricted yourself to cheering from the side-lines.

starter
Ah so you see me as possibly leading to an increase in certain other posters post counts. :lol:
Of course given the rubbish they post those posters rarely if ever would give me anything to cheer about. :hand:

ursogr8
13-09-2004, 08:33 PM
Betting on provincals is always a tricky business with local knowledge having a big impact on the market. I think starter would be well advised to stick to running books on group 1 fixtures. ;)

Well that is true Baz.

But the sticks was forced on us by the revelation that some posters were posting in areas that count but are not visible. Until that is sorted out by K. we will be forced to bet in Regions that don't have underhanded guile; and the GONG suited that criteria today. Of course we were obliged to keep the differential down to simple digits for any locals that were handy. Hence the use of mod 9.
Where the 'horses' float to overnight will be a tightly guarded secret so that they are not nobbled by performance-robbing feed supplements.

starter

skip to my lou
13-09-2004, 09:24 PM
Post count will increment in private forums. I am not changing this.

PHAT
13-09-2004, 09:39 PM
... and the GONG suited that criteria today.

I feel like Zeus and his mates are playing with me and me boat on the blue Aegean. :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 09:42 PM
Post count will increment in private forums. I am not changing this.
Personally I see no reason why you should.

Also before any fool claims I have a vested interest let me point out I dont have access to any forums other than the general ones we all have access to.

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2004, 09:45 PM
I feel like Zeus and his mates are playing with me and me boat on the blue Aegean. :hmm:
You just dont come across as being anything like Ulysses. :lol:
Also wasnt it Posiedon who had it in for him.

PHAT
13-09-2004, 10:44 PM
You just dont come across as being anything like Ulysses. :lol:
Also wasnt it Posiedon who had it in for him.

I am Leopold Bloom.

ursogr8
14-09-2004, 08:14 AM
Post count will increment in private forums. I am not changing this.

KR

You have never made an error in judgement previously in your construction principles for this BB, so if this is your ruling then we will abide by it.

But, in order to re-introduce transparency into the data could you please list those posters who
> have access to private forums
>> use private forums.

In the mean-time, we are are restricted to those 'horses' whose credentials are unblemished by subterfuge.

starter

skip to my lou
14-09-2004, 10:50 AM
> have access to private forums
>> use private forums.


No, sorry.

ursogr8
14-09-2004, 12:07 PM
No, sorry.

KR
OK
So you cannot answer with advice on
those posters who
> have access to private forums
>> use private forums.

As an alternative could you switch off the post count facility for those posters who are using private forums? This would be very useful to ensure that only those posters who are posting in public have their data visible.

regards, and in anticipation,
starter

skip to my lou
14-09-2004, 12:17 PM
As an alternative could you switch off the post count facility for those posters who are using private forums? This would be very useful to ensure that only those posters who are posting in public have their data visible.

regards, and in anticipation,
starter

I will not do that, and I will not answer any more questions regarding post counts and private forums.

ursogr8
17-09-2004, 08:16 AM
I will not do that, and I will not answer any more questions regarding post counts and private forums.

K.

Our records show gg'' post count as
14/09/04 13:01 >> 2341
15/09/04 8.07am >> 2362
16/09/04 8.03am >> 2378
17/09/04 8.07am >> 2351

Mate; there is a discontinuity. Is somebody deleting posts?
Can we have it investigated please. There are 4 days of jackpotted bets riding on this.

thanks

starter

ursogr8
18-09-2004, 09:39 PM
K.

Our records show gg'' post count as
14/09/04 13:01 >> 2341
15/09/04 8.07am >> 2362
16/09/04 8.03am >> 2378
17/09/04 8.07am >> 2351

Mate; there is a discontinuity. Is somebody deleting posts?
Can we have it investigated please. There are 4 days of jackpotted bets riding on this.

thanks

starter

Jeo
The discontinuity in gg'' posts still remains?
At 19/9 21:24, the count has only climbed to 2361.
Any idea what happened to 27 posts?

starter

skip to my lou
18-09-2004, 10:10 PM
I don't know, maybe they got deleted by a moderator.

ursogr8
19-09-2004, 08:38 AM
I don't know, maybe they got deleted by a moderator.

Jeo :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It is stretching credibility to believe that 27 posts of gg'' 's would fail the moderators criteria for posts being within the guidelines we have signed up for.
And to expect zero reaction from gg'' from deletion of his crafted posts is further unlikley.

Can you have a look at delete logs or something?

starter

Alan Shore
19-09-2004, 09:39 AM
Jeo :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It is stretching credibility to believe that 27 posts of gg'' 's would fail the moderators criteria for posts being within the guidelines we have signed up for.
And to expect zero reaction from gg'' from deletion of his crafted posts is further unlikley.

Can you have a look at delete logs or something?

starter

Starter, stop wasting Jeo's time and find something useful to do with your life.

skip to my lou
19-09-2004, 09:43 AM
I will look into it on tuesday.

ursogr8
19-09-2004, 09:51 AM
Starter, stop wasting Jeo's time and find something useful to do with your life.

hi BD

Bet you were a bit worried last night when the Lions only entered the forward 50m on 40 occasions whereas the Cats entered 59. If the Cats had not got stage fright then they would have pulled off one of the great upsets of all time.

Since when is the loss of 27 posts by the estimed ggrayggray not a cause for concern.
Jeo suggest the mods have found the posts offensive (to their standards); I think a few of us would like to know why.

starter

ursogr8
19-09-2004, 09:54 AM
I will look into it on tuesday.
Thanks KR

Garvinator
19-09-2004, 07:23 PM
Jeo :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It is stretching credibility to believe that 27 posts of gg'' 's would fail the moderators criteria for posts being within the guidelines we have signed up for.
And to expect zero reaction from gg'' from deletion of his crafted posts is further unlikley.

Can you have a look at delete logs or something?

starter
i find it highly unlikely that any of my posts would be up for deletion :eek: unless i have deleted them myself. I have deleted a couple that i remember, but not 27 of them.

As for my post count, i didnt even realise that i had 'lost' 27 posts.

ursogr8
22-09-2004, 09:24 AM
I will look into it on tuesday.

^^

skip to my lou
22-09-2004, 09:26 AM
Haven't had a chance yet, I will try tonight.

skip to my lou
23-09-2004, 10:44 AM
Something to do with the post reporting system, because it adds to the reporters post count, but on auto post recount it doesn't include them. That's my guess, because there are no entries in the deletion log for that amount of posts.

ursogr8
23-09-2004, 10:50 AM
Something to do with the post reporting system, because it adds to the reporters post count, but on auto post recount it doesn't include them. That's my guess, because there are no entries in the deletion log for that amount of posts.

Thanks Jeo for the research.

What it means for the Punters Club is that we have to add another POSTER to the banned list (now BG and gg'').

Normal betting can now resume and the most interesting bet looks like the chances of the differential (details in the footer) being reduced under 100 by cob 24/9.

starter

Garvinator
23-09-2004, 11:53 AM
What it means for the Punters Club is that we have to add another POSTER to the banned list (now gg'').
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

ursogr8
23-09-2004, 12:51 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^

gg''
Glad the action meets with your approval.
starter

Garvinator
23-09-2004, 01:28 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^

gg''
Glad the action meets with your approval.
starter
curious though, why have i actually been banned?

ursogr8
23-09-2004, 01:38 PM
curious though, why have i actually been banned?

gaggy''

Read Jeo's post #79.
Something like an intermittent fault in your record is his assessment.

Now we can't be betting on something lacking reliability can we.
Hence the 'scratching'.
A guy in the office here, who is an expert on such things, keeps talking about the need for 'clean wind'.........must be a racing term. Anyhow I put his reference to 'clean wind' down to your over-use of the :whistle: .


starter

Garvinator
23-09-2004, 02:53 PM
Anyhow I put his reference to 'clean wind' down to your over-use of the :whistle: .
this is what i think of your assessment... :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: ;) :P :lol: