[inquiry]

PhantomSac, on 2015-December-24, 20:44, said:

No kidding, had no idea Al_U_Card was still posting here. Feel like he posted about bridge when like chamaco, inquiry, the hog, luis etc were regs. Remember when inquiry had like more posts than everyone else combined?

Edit: looked up "top posters", forgot pbleighton, whereagles, luke warm also lol. And winston.

Hey, I retired so I. Have no time to post now.

On a serious note, my health hasn't be in great past couple of years, but hopefully it is on the right track now. I plan or posting a stream of BBO movies at the BB0 "store", all free of course.

Ben

[Al_U_Card]

inquiry, on 2015-December-24, 21:42, said:

Hey, I retired so I. Have no time to post now.

On a serious note, my health hasn't be in great past couple of years, but hopefully it is on the right track now. I plan or posting a stream of BBO movies at the BB0 "stone", all free of course.

Ben

"Re-tired" as in "twice as tired"? I feel ya, after 5 years it makes you wish you were back at work where you could take it easy...

[Zelandakh]

Al_U_Card, on 2015-December-23, 17:01, said:

Or you could just take a vote and eliminate those who receive the most down-votes.

Quite hilarious - you realise you have the lowest Reputation on BBF, right? Since down-votes are no longer possible, it is clear that this will remain a record.

inquiry, on 2015-December-24, 21:42, said:

On a serious note, my health hasn't be in great past couple of years, but hopefully it is on the right track now. I plan or posting a stream of BBO movies at the BB0 "stone", all free of course.

Stay well Ben. Your movies and educational threads are always well received and well worth the time to go through in detail.

[PhantomSac]

Zelandakh, on 2015-December-26, 13:19, said:

Quite hilarious - you realise you have the lowest Reputation on BBF, right? Since down-votes are no longer possible, it is clear that this will remain a record.

butnahhhh

http://www.bridgebas.../5672-chudecek/

[1eyedjack]

Given that BBOF has decided, for better or worse, that down-votes are undesirable, it would be logical, were it possible, to eliminate the effect of down-votes from members' histories. No doubt the histories are lost in the mists of time and it would not be possible, however desirable, to make those adjustments. But I expect that they could, given the will, reset any net negative reputations to zero.

[Al_U_Card]

Might be as interesting to see who cast the stones, just to see how much glass their own house is made of... myself included.
What people contribute to the discussion is more important than how they do so but a modicum of respect ia always appreciated, if only for others that are looking on and thinking of contributing.

[Al_U_Card]

Zelandakh, on 2015-December-26, 13:19, said:

Quite hilarious - you realise you have the lowest Reputation on BBF, right? Since down-votes are no longer possible, it is clear that this will remain a record.

Glad you got something out of it, if only a good laugh...

[hrothgar]

Al_U_Card, on 2015-December-26, 16:16, said:

Might be as interesting to see who cast the stones, just to see how much glass their own house is made of... myself included.
What people contribute to the discussion is more important than how they do so but a modicum of respect ia always appreciated, if only for others that are looking on and thinking of contributing.

This from the man who openly states that he deliberately lies in his posts and is justified in doing so because the warmists do it...

[Al_U_Card]

hrothgar, on 2015-December-26, 17:00, said:

This from the man who openly states that he deliberately lies in his posts and is justified in doing so because the warmists do it...

Calling Dr. Pavlov.... ROFL

[Zelandakh]

PhantomSac, on 2015-December-26, 13:36, said:

http://www.bridgebas.../5672-chudecek/

I stand corrected.

Al_U_Card, on 2015-December-26, 16:16, said:

Might be as interesting to see who cast the stones,

I asked for this functionality some time ago and Barry wrote that it is in the pipelines. What I want it for is to be able to find the post that received an upvote though, rather than some sort of tit-for-tat effect.

[nige1]

The Climate Change controversy unhinges a few posters but it's

• always breaking news,
• of vital interest to many, and
• better elucidated by scientific observation and argument than most Water Cooler topics.

In most topics, some contributors regard some posts as rubbish. They are free to refute such posts or to advance their own facts and arguments. It seems wrong however, that simply by insulting those with whom he disagrees, a poster can close down a topic. Please would the moderators reconsider their decision.

[Al_U_Card]

nige1, on 2015-December-30, 16:13, said:

The Climate Change controversy unhinges a few posters but it's

• always breaking news,
• of vital interest to many, and
• better elucidated by scientific observation and argument than most Water Cooler topics.

It seems wrong however, that simply by insulting those with whom he disagrees, a poster can close down a topic. Please would the moderators reconsider their decision.

SEVERAL TIMES and yes it is wrong but special consideration is often given to people with special needs...

[BillHiggin]

My opinion (which is normally worthless):
Reopen the d*** topic so that the trolls can troll there and the fools that feed trolls can feed them there (and I can go back to ignoring a silly thread) and both sets can stop flaming this thread!

[cherdano]

nige1, on 2015-December-30, 16:13, said:

The Climate Change controversy unhinges a few posters but it's

• always breaking news,
• of vital interest to many, and
• better elucidated by scientific observation and argument than most Water Cooler topics.

LOL

[cherdano]

Al_U_Card, on 2015-December-31, 08:07, said:

SEVERAL TIMES and yes it is wrong but special consideration is often given to people with special needs...

Maybe non-native speakers need to be explained what "special needs" refers to. https://en.wikipedia...i/Special_needs
This piece of shite gets tolerated because he hides his insults well-enough (just like his frequent anti-semitic dog whistles), whereas hrothgar, who (a) makes his insults direct and to the face, and (b) makes worthwhile contributions to the overall forum frequently gets disciplined.

This is the kind of shiit the moderators decided to get into by tolerating the climate change thread.

[cherdano]

I am out of here.

[mgoetze]

cherdano, on 2016-January-01, 13:14, said:

Maybe non-native speakers need to be explained what "special needs" refers to. https://en.wikipedia...i/Special_needs
This piece of ***** gets tolerated because he hides his insults well-enough (just like his frequent anti-semitic dog whistles), whereas hrothgar, who (a) makes his insults direct and to the face, and (b) makes worthwhile contributions to the overall forum frequently gets disciplined.

This seems to be general BBF moderation policy. I got "disciplined" by inquiry once when I retaliated quite bluntly against a rather new poster (who is long gone now after 34 total posts) who insinuated that my English was bad. My post got deleted, the original insult was allowed to stand.

[barmar]

BillHiggin, on 2015-December-31, 08:44, said:

My opinion (which is normally worthless):
Reopen the d*** topic so that the trolls can troll there and the fools that feed trolls can feed them there (and I can go back to ignoring a silly thread) and both sets can stop flaming this thread!

The thread has been reopened.

FYI, the reason it took so long is not that we were being obstinate. The "We'll always have Paris" thread seemed to be a follow-on with the same general subject matter, so we didn't think the old one was still needed.

But since people seem to want the original, we're giving you what you want.

[Al_U_Card]

barmar, on 2016-January-01, 13:48, said:

The thread has been reopened.

FYI, the reason it took so long is not that we were being obstinate. The "We'll always have Paris" thread seemed to be a follow-on with the same general subject matter, so we didn't think the old one was still needed.

But since people seem to want the original, we're giving you what you want.

Makes sense. The topical nature of the subject lends itself to a constantly evolving discussion. As for those that have such strong personal feelings, it might be best that they avoid the topic. For those that wish to discuss the actual implications of the situation, it might not change any minds but at least it will provide additional useful information for further evaluation.

[Vampyr]

nige1, on 2015-December-30, 16:13, said:

The Climate Change controversy unhinges a few posters but it's
[list][*]always breaking news,[*][size="2"]of vital interest to many,

What controversy?