Site stats are amazing

Iceman234 · Post: # 536217Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 5:27pm

Yeah yeah look at me look at me

Please move this to the General Forum when it's had 50 views.....

This site currently has 17527 members.

We have had 105216 topics posted.

We have had our top twenty posters post 143183 posts.

We currently have (I gave up in the 2000's) posters who have zero posts - and welcome to nickdalsantoswife. I'm sure the mods would be able to tell us how many zero posters we had.

However when a specific post (and it wasn't mine but I'll defend it) is posted and I make a post where I use actual percentages of responses from that thread and it gets compared to the total number of posters registered - laughable.

Stats that should be taken into account for a specific post should be the stats of posters who actually responded, not the number of posters who are registered. You guys will get a long way in marketing if you stick to those stats....

Absolutely laughable.

Relevant and relative - to a specific topic - not just der there's 280 million posters registered so they must all be genuine and all able to post on that topic.

Pretty simple business really.

bigcarl · Post: # 536230Post **bigcarl** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 5:47pm

Iceman234 wrote:However when a specific post (and it wasn't mine but I'll defend it) is posted and I make a post where I use actual percentages of responses from that thread and it gets compared to the total number of posters registered - laughable.

Stats that should be taken into account for a specific post should be the stats of posters who actually responded, not the number of posters who are registered.

absolutely. anyone doing otherwise is fiddling with the figures in a big way and probably trying to make the conclusion match their own views.

what was the post by the way?

Iceman234 · Post: # 536231Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 5:49pm

http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 2&start=75

A positive thread to a really good bloke and a champion footballer.

But again destroyed and locked....

Iceman234 · Post: # 536234Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 5:50pm

As always gets locked by foolish statistics.

Yeah 99.99% had nothing positive to say.....

Whateva

St Fidelius · Mon 24 Mar 2008 5:58pm

Iceman234 wrote:http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 2&start=75

A positive thread to a really good bloke and a champion footballer.

But again destroyed and locked....

Yeah, good point...

This site is very much like the collingwood one IMO...

Some on here hate any criticism of a Saints player and could not give a rats about any other player...

In another thread I mentioned that Gram played a p1$$ poor game IMO

and a poster mentioned that he did not make too many mistakes and mentioned that other saints players made more...

yep that maybe true, with just 6 kicks and he still managed to stuff up a quarter of them...

this poster has previously stated that he could give a rats about any other player...

The_Dud · Post: # 536238Post **The_Dud** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:00pm

St Fidelius wrote:yep that maybe true, with just 6 kicks and he still managed to stuff up a quarter of them...

how do you stuff up 1.5 kicks

my les foote · Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:01pm

I didn't think anyone would take it seriously.

It looks like someone has taken it VERY seriously.

Sorry to waste your time.

St Fidelius · Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:02pm

The_Dud wrote:
St Fidelius wrote:yep that maybe true, with just 6 kicks and he still managed to stuff up a quarter of them...
how do you stuff up 1.5 kicks

lol

try a third

Iceman234 · Post: # 536241Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:03pm

St Fidelius wrote:
Iceman234 wrote:http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 2&start=75

A positive thread to a really good bloke and a champion footballer.

But again destroyed and locked....
Yeah, good point...

This site is very much like the collingwood one IMO...

Some on here hate any criticism of a Saints player and could not give a rats about any other player...

In another thread I mentioned that Gram played a p1$$ poor game IMO

and a poster mentioned that he did not make too many mistakes and mentioned that other saints players made more...

yep that maybe true, with just 6 kicks and he still managed to stuff up a quarter of them...

this poster has previously stated that he could give a rats about any other player...

There was actually only three of thirty posters who were on that thread who were negative - but they flogged it and didn't back down to the point that the thread was locked.

And they would be the same people who would never stand up when it counts - keyboard warriors.

What's worse is - it wasn't even a true Saints thread - it was about an oppo player - I just took umbrage to their ignorance of other teams and thei arrogant sh1tty attitudes towards the OP.

my les foote · Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:04pm

Iceman234 wrote:http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 2&start=75

A positive thread to a really good bloke and a champion footballer.

But again destroyed and locked....

Do you think it was becuase people were hurling personal abuse at others who offered opinions?

Otiman · Post: # 536246Post **Otiman** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:08pm

I personally didn't post on the thread as I had nothing positive (or negative) to say on the subject. You can expect that was the same for quite a few other posters. Obviously he has a certain amount of respect from quite a lot of supporters, but to use either of those methods of statistics is both not representative and over representative of the "silent majority".

Iceman234 · Post: # 536249Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:12pm

my les foote wrote:
Iceman234 wrote:http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 2&start=75

A positive thread to a really good bloke and a champion footballer.

But again destroyed and locked....
Do you think it was becuase people were hurling personal abuse at others who offered opinions?

ABSOLUTELY!

Because it wasn't the sort of thread that needed those negative comments.

So yes absolutely it was locked because of that.

Why can't we just have good honest positive threads that praise an oppo player?

I don't get why others have to destroy it.

Either get another thread going about how sh1t Brad Johnson is or just f*&k off from the thread - just leave it alone.

It'll be the same when Aker gets his tribute game - I was with a Doggy supporter yesterday and I asked him (jokingly) if he needed counselling when Aker came to the Dogs.

But if someone here puts a tribute up to him I'll comment on what a great footballer he is and has been - not negative cr@p and then start a storm.

And thanks for the Bolton/Roo incident.

Iceman234 · Post: # 536251Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:14pm

Otiman wrote:I personally didn't post on the thread as I had nothing positive (or negative) to say on the subject. You can expect that was the same for quite a few other posters. Obviously he has a certain amount of respect from quite a lot of supporters, but to use either of those methods of statistics is both not representative and over representative of the "silent majority".

Agreed.

Which is why I only quoted stats on people who had bothered to comment on it - if you go to it you will see my stats are fairly accurate - except JD (who was a fence sitter I thought) I now put in the negative posts category.

johnpeterbudgefanclub · Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:17pm

Hey Iceman do u have statistics regarding opposition posters and the average time they have successfully remained members of this forum before being "moved on"?????

Surely I must be up there?????

matrix · Post: # 536253Post **matrix** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:18pm

i actually was enjoying it.
i too started a thread on Johnson pretty much 5 secs before the siren ended, it just happened to be at exactly the same time as the other one. locked.
mine was locked in about 10 mins ('theres already a thread on Johnson').
ok....can handle that...ill just follow the other one.

umm then its locked......as well.
ummm....i also checked the last two pages of the gen area and there doesnt seem to be too much footy threadage in there.....
i mean thats why i posted the one i did in the saints area.....

jesus the guys a champ, and won the game off his boot, in his 300th, kicking the last three goals....
who cares how long the thread goes for.....i really dont understand the locking business.
so what, do we need a complete OTHER footballer talk section....

and we can ONLY talk about saints related stuff in this area....that is correct??

Iceman234 · Post: # 536255Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:20pm

johnpeterbudgefanclub wrote:Hey Iceman do u have statistics regarding opposition posters and the average time they have successfully remained members of this forum before being "moved on"?????

Surely I must be up there?????

jpbfc - we've chatted before - you go alright.

As an oppo poster, you've had your down times but very low %'s of negatives mate.

Generally you come in better than some regulars I reckon.

And I'm only an SSFFL coach not a life member.....

snoopygirl · Post: # 536256Post **snoopygirl** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:20pm

Matrixcutter, we actually had another forum to discuss other clubs/players, not sure why it was removed. Perhaps we could look at getting it up & running again as their seems to be a lot of angst about discussing other teams on this forum.

Iceman234 · Post: # 536259Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:22pm

[quote="matrixcutter"][/quote]

Had you in the 57%

Saw your other thread too, but it was locked by the time I got there.

matrix · Post: # 536260Post **matrix** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:22pm

would be call snoopygirl

i mean if peeps dont like it in here then ok
another area would be cool...
just didnt understand why the thread was ended.

Iceman234 · Post: # 536261Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:25pm

snoopygirl wrote:Matrixcutter, we actually had another forum to discuss other clubs/players, not sure why it was removed. Perhaps we could look at getting it up & running again as their seems to be a lot of angst about discussing other teams on this forum.

Snoops, thebulldogsbarking used to have the saem but it's gone now.

Had called for it to go to General when it got to 50 but maybe it needs to be discussed in the main forum - so many people "perceive" it to be an issue.....

Like Hawks "perceived pressure".....

Anyway good to see you here....

St Fidelius · Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:25pm

snoopygirl wrote:Matrixcutter, we actually had another forum to discuss other clubs/players, not sure why it was removed. Perhaps we could look at getting it up & running again as their seems to be a lot of angst about discussing other teams on this forum.

Don't cater for the imbeciles just delete or warn posters who do the wrong thing IMO.

There is NO need to have another forum because they will do the same on there

snoopygirl · Post: # 536265Post **snoopygirl** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:29pm

The whole flare up today stemmed from people objecting to there being a post on a "SAINTS" forum about an opposition player. If we had another forum as we did in the past a lot of what has happened could have been avoided. If people don't wish to read about other teams/clubs they wouldn't need to enter that forum. Of course, people could just show some restraint.

matrix · Post: # 536272Post **matrix** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:35pm

so mods ACTUALLY received complaints?
u have got to be kidding?

Iceman234 · Post: # 536276Post **Iceman234** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:43pm

snoopygirl wrote:The whole flare up today stemmed from people objecting to there being a post on a "SAINTS" forum about an opposition player. If we had another forum as we did in the past a lot of what has happened could have been avoided. If people don't wish to read about other teams/clubs they wouldn't need to enter that forum. Of course, people could just show some restraint.

Did you recieve complaints?

Are you able to answer that one snoops?

Cos my PM's in and out are saved.

Would be interested to know.

No way I am gonna be bullied out of the way by the pathetic minority when I know the majority support the OP.

Interesting.

snoopygirl · Post: # 536281Post **snoopygirl** » Mon 24 Mar 2008 6:47pm

I did receive a complaint via pm from someone else but the Brad Johnson thread had already been locked by another mod. I was actually referring to the objections within the thread. I'm sure you'd be quite shocked Matrix at some of the things we get complaints about. As are we.

Site stats are amazing

Site stats are amazing

Re: Site stats are amazing