Yes, they sure can. And when you do, I simply ask that you actually read what I said and then compare it to what OTD says I said, and you will likely notice a significant difference. Where 'quoting mods accurately' is done by taking snippets of things we say and then inserting wild interpretations of those words in a concerted effort to make anyone with any amount of perceived power look as bad as possible. I could just as easily do the same thing with OTD's posts, but I've chosen not to, simply because it would be downright dishonest to do so.I won't comment on why i was silenced, beyond saying that it had nothing whatever to do with "harassing staff". "Manipulat[ing] our posts into things we never said" refers to my nefarious tactic of quoting mods accurately. Anyone can read the thread, and decide for themselves.
Well gee, if it's a popularity contest, clearly you've won /s. Another situation of OTD cherry picking what's useful for his argument to 'prove' he's the one in the right. I could just as easily flip his stats and say that the current 9,414 users (minus his 2 users) on StP are proof I'm right. It would be about as accurate as his rather childish quote above.At least two people said they would quit the forum as a result of that thread: @LuckyMinnie , and @wokofshame , and have never posted again, in addition to me being muted and the thread locked.
Well, mostly you kids just aren't as cool as me and my crew 30 years ago, or 40 years ago, or whatever, or as we are today, for that matter (the few of us that aren't dead). I mean, we invented this punk rock shit you kids are into, we were anarchists before you were even a gleam in daddy's eye, and you try to dress like we did back then.[W]ho will ... complain about how us kids aren't as cool as you and your cronies were 30 years ago!?!?!?!
I greatly resemble this insidious canard, and would like to say in my defense that it is very very seldom that i begin drinking before 9am, at least on week-days. Today was a rare exception, which i hardly ever make, except sometimes on the days that end with "y". It's a good rule, that i recommend to all you kids; like eating oysters only in "R" months really- just common sense.sometimes drunkest
Would it be super-awkward and gauche if i were to ask what percentage of those 9,414 registered users, over 12 years, who you say support you have voiced this support you claim you have by, say, posting even once ever? (until the recent change that required 10 posts, most who registered did so solely in order to read the Trainhopping section, and never posted even once- that's why the change was made. Thus the domination of the forum ever since by intro posts, and pointless, zero-effort, one-sentence posts by newbs, often asking questions that have been answered dozens and dozens of times.)I could just as easily flip his stats and say that the current 9,414 users (minus his 2 users) on StP are proof I'm right.
sorry but im just not going to bite on this. hypothesize all you want.Didn't want to rise to Matt's attempted provocation, and give him the excuse to ban me he so transparently longs for, but just can't resist responding to this unusually ludicrous argument:
Would it be super-awkward and gauche if i were to ask what percentage of those 9,414 registered users, over 12 years, who you say support you have voiced this support you claim you have by, say, posting even once ever? (until the recent change that required 10 posts, most who registered did so solely in order to read the Trainhopping section, and never posted even once- that's why the change was made. Thus the domination of the forum ever since by intro posts, and pointless, zero-effort, one-sentence posts by newbs, often asking questions that have been answered dozens and dozens of times.)
Perhaps an even more awkward question: what percentage of those 9,414 registered users who you say support you have posted at least once in the last year, about any topic at all?
Since the recent rule change requiring at least 10 posts to read the Trainhopping section will distort that (probably very low anyway) percentage upwards to artificially support your argument, what percentage of posters who registered after the recent "10 posts to read Trainhopping " rule have posted 11 or more times?
if anything, i have calmed down and mellowed considerably; you don't want to even think about how ornery i was at your age, back when i was a poverty lawyer, let alone when i was in my teens-20s, and really angry at the world, and all other humans. Where do you think that punk rock stuff came from?were you always this bitchy, or has that just increased with old age?
i'm not even going to bother with whatever madness the above relates to.My Scientific Wild-Ass Guesses (SWAGs), probably way high in all cases:
Percentage of the 9,414 registered users who have ever posted even once ever: 20%
Percentage of the 9,414 registered users who have posted about any topic in the last year: 5%
Percentage of users since the "10 posts to read Trainhopping" rule who have posted 11+ times: 10%
Matt as webmaster obviously knows the real answers; don't hold your breath waiting to learn anything about these figures, except that i am wrong.
This site is actually not an "online community for misfit travelers" , or for anyone, but is rather Matt's private property, as i have been told so many times by Matt and other mods, that he is free to do with as he chooses; but even a prudent property-owner cares about the condition, and sustainability, of their property.
I promise never again to take seriously the claim that this is a "community", or that i might be a legitimate participant in it (despite being among the .17% most popular posters among those 9,414 registered users* over the 12 years StP has existed; that is, my posts are more popular than those of 99.83% of all persons who have ever registered), or that StP is something that i have the right to care about.
* As measured by the site's "Highest Reaction Score" metric, even after Matt re-jiggered the stats to knock me off the "leader-board" after i first pointed this out to him in a PM a while back; i was back on it soon, i'm sure to his frustration.