Forum Stats

[Speaker to Animals]

Roger.

[C-Mag]

If somebody is being called a "child molester," flag it. If it's intentional abuse, I'll delete the damn thing. Don't be a pussy though; you flag it, I'll review it.

I'm at the same place.
If that's your policy I'm cool with it.
I just want the policies posted some where so I know if I'm poaching the Kings deer or if it's open season.

[DrYouth]

Marty is the moderator of his own forum...

Honestly I can't see one thing wrong with that.

If you pay the bills, you can draw the line wherever you want...

It's a pleasant courtesy to inform us of your rules of engagement.... and then we can stay and play if we choose...

No infringement of liberty detected.

So are these stats a measure of some sort of change... how is this wee forum tracking over time?
It seems like we hit a lull in participation somewhere after the Hockey Talk wars...
But I haven't been posting as much for a while for a variety of reasons....

[Martin Hash]

We're coming back, spurred by Harry joining. I've already seen a couple missing faces post. I bet we're back to 70 active members next month.

[C-Mag]

When I run next time, I'm not going to post political to FB. What I found out was that novices can't recognize briganding, and even though I always won those exchanges (hence, the ban), normal folks got a bad impression of me. Briganding works. I don't want any fucking briganding here.

I've got a radical idea Marty.
Time to get out of the small pool and go national.

Consider that your little corner of the greater PRP doesn't have a big enough population of open minded people for you message and consider specifically working on taking your message national to build a base that will influence your small voter population.

I've just watched this video of Michael D Moore of True Pundit. Been reading him since at least when the Weiner Laptop story broke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeVd9nQqX5c

He reminds me of you a little, he's smart, top of his game and a bit cocky too.

He jumped into Blogging his investigative stories with the purpose of revealing dirt on the establishment. He started with a $100 investment in a website and his first month he had 30 people reading his stuff. He now has 400,000 readers.

[HarryK]

We're coming back, spurred by Harry joining. I've already seen a couple missing faces post. I bet we're back to 70 active members next month.

That may be the case, however I can’t exactly take credit for the uptick. I’ve been egged on a little from the old guard and finally ready to post and visit the jousting grounds again.

But I do appreciate that I’ve been missed a little. But I’m merely a bit playing in the larger scheme of the forum.

[BjornP]

I can only say that anyone who wants to diss me personally, or say something to me here that they would not say in my presence, is going to have their post deleted.

As this space is your property, that's entirely fair. But to be clear, by "dissing" you, you don't mean simply saying you're wrong about something and pointing out why, right?

Because.. you're wrong about quite alot. /temptfate

[Martin Hash]

The best way to find out what I’m talking about is to run for federal office and then post to FB.

[DBTrek]

The best way to find out what I’m talking about is to run for federal office and then post to FB.

Does “running from the feds” count?

[Speaker to Animals]

Nah. I read the whole thing, mutiple threads, on this local democratic party page on FB.

The key players knew exactly what they were doing. It's not obvious to normies.

All it takes is a few people to pretend to be unconnected throw down a barrage of criticism. That usually draws in a few normies to join one of their sides. Then they encourage the normies and carry on like it is an organic thing and "everybody" obviously hates whatever it is they are there to oppose. Instead of flaming people that disagree with them, they try to bury it with more posts and replies to people that agree with them.

That last part is usually how I catch on to it. Most people go into that to debate people. But when you see maybe two or three heavy posters going overdrive with the criticism, but rarely if ever responding to random people who disagree with them, while excessively replying to anybody who agrees with them, know that for whatever reason they are attempting to engineer a false consensus.

It's basically reverse shilling.