Why you should give Charvaka multiple negative votes

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:25 pm

i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way. notice for instance the negative votes cast against me--more than 280. Now check the negative votes cast by the person stalking me i.e. Ram Sharan--more than a 100. Except for one post all the posts of Ram Sharan have been attacking me so it is fair to say who he cast negative votes for. Tracy, Uppili, and Charvaka have all confessed to giving me multiple negative votes. It is also reasonable to assume that Hellsangel has also cast multiple negative votes for me given our recent history. Likewise Propagandhi with who i got into a fight after he repeatedly kept provoking me.

Problem is: i cannot give negative votes to all these people. I thought if i keep giving 20 negative votes to Charvaka every day some sense would come to members on this forum about the impracticality of negative votes. But the software in this forum seems to have been designed in such a way that if you get a certain number of negative votes then you cannot cast votes on your own.

I checked using another computer i have: could i register an account and cast negative votes from it? no i could not. i had lunch with a friend and after lunch i got on his computer and registered another account and tried to cast votes; again i could not. There seems to be an IP block on me with respect to casting any vote (my friend uses the same ISP i do).

Had i been posting using multiple handles (like Ram Sharan) i would not have received so many negative votes that i am now unable to vote. I urge members of this forum who would like the stupid negative voting system to go for good to keep giving negative votes to Charvaka. This will quickly encourage Charvaka and his cronies to agree to removing the stupid negative voting system.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:44 pm

Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:58 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

do you agree that you have subjected me to parental abuse? do you also agree that you have subjected gyaanputra and da gal to parental abuse?

Further, do you agree that you have called me jehadi, terrorist, suicide bomber, mullah, maulana, etc. in the past?

In your opinion, should people just ignore you whenever you abuse them?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:59 pm

Looks like Rashman Whinullah Akbari mdea a test post - to which no one can respond - and quickly deleted it.

Wonder what he is upto after earning the enmity of the entire CH membership - EXCEPT his admirer Maulana Merlot - and abusing everyone and trying tricks by registering multiple IDs (read his own confession at the top) to abuse everyone.

Change whiny boy - change.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:00 pm

Looks like Rashman Whinullah Akbari mdea a test post - to which no one can respond - and quickly deleted it.

Wonder what he is upto after earning the enmity of the entire CH membership - EXCEPT his admirer Maulana Merlot - and abusing everyone and trying tricks by registering multiple IDs (read his own confession at the top) to abuse everyone.

Change whiny boy - change.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:01 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

one reason i have been disrespectful of you is your claim that underage sex is all right and your defense of sex perverts like Foley and Carr. Can you explain why you said that seven year old girls are ready for sex? Do you think it is appropriate to call you a pervert?

Uppili posted Re: Jayamala - A Woman of Loose Moral Character? on 5 yrs ago
The logic behind the restriction on 10-50 yr women is
that they are fertile and hence liable to indulge in physical relations -
hence a threat to celibate women....(correct me if I am wrong).Now, we
know that women can engage in sex even in their 80s and women can
indulge in sex as early as 7 or 8... So the 10-50 yr rule is obsolete
and should be discarded with...Also, the idea that Lord Ayyappan does
not like women 10-50 coming to his temple is very similar to the Islamic
rule of not allowing women into many mosques or putting undue and
unfair restriction on their women...Traditions were created by men and
can be changed by men.In front of God, everyone is equal... PERIOD.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:03 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

do you agree that you have subjected me to parental abuse? do you also agree that you have subjected gyaanputra and da gal to parental abuse?

Further, do you agree that you have called me jehadi, terrorist, suicide bomber, mullah, maulana, etc. in the past?

In your opinion, should people just ignore you whenever you abuse them?

Sorry...to tell you this. Abusing parents, dragging family members and talking filthy about mothers, sisters and wives IS your specialty. I not anyone on this site have indulged in such lowly behavior - EXCEPT you.

As far as calling you names - that is the maximum we can do short of giving you islami-style whipping.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:06 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

one reason i have been disrespectful of you is your claim that underage sex is all right and your defense of sex perverts like Foley and Carr. Can you explain why you said that seven year old girls are ready for sex? Do you think it is appropriate to call you a pervert?

Uppili posted Re: Jayamala - A Woman of Loose Moral Character? on 5 yrs ago
The logic behind the restriction on 10-50 yr women is
that they are fertile and hence liable to indulge in physical relations -
hence a threat to celibate women....(correct me if I am wrong).Now, we
know that women can engage in sex even in their 80s and women can
indulge in sex as early as 7 or 8... So the 10-50 yr rule is obsolete
and should be discarded with...Also, the idea that Lord Ayyappan does
not like women 10-50 coming to his temple is very similar to the Islamic
rule of not allowing women into many mosques or putting undue and
unfair restriction on their women...Traditions were created by men and
can be changed by men.In front of God, everyone is equal... PERIOD.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

Are you responding to the above or should your name be changed from Samiyaar to Pervert? Why did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:07 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

one reason i have been disrespectful of you is your claim that underage sex is all right and your defense of sex perverts like Foley and Carr. Can you explain why you said that seven year old girls are ready for sex? Do you think it is appropriate to call you a pervert?

ROFLMAO.....really...who gives a Shyt whether you give me any respect or not? Certainly not....in fact no one on this forum will care for what you think of them. Really.... ROFLMAO.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:11 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way.

too bad... this is the non-violent method of telling you that you are a complete Agmark idiot. People are afraid bcz you start abusing their mothers, sisters, wives, and otehr female members.

Change your ways.

one reason i have been disrespectful of you is your claim that underage sex is all right and your defense of sex perverts like Foley and Carr. Can you explain why you said that seven year old girls are ready for sex? Do you think it is appropriate to call you a pervert?

Uppili posted Re: Jayamala - A Woman of Loose Moral Character? on 5 yrs ago
The logic behind the restriction on 10-50 yr women is
that they are fertile and hence liable to indulge in physical relations -
hence a threat to celibate women....(correct me if I am wrong).Now, we
know that women can engage in sex even in their 80s and women can
indulge in sex as early as 7 or 8... So the 10-50 yr rule is obsolete
and should be discarded with...Also, the idea that Lord Ayyappan does
not like women 10-50 coming to his temple is very similar to the Islamic
rule of not allowing women into many mosques or putting undue and
unfair restriction on their women...Traditions were created by men and
can be changed by men.In front of God, everyone is equal... PERIOD.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

Are you responding to the above or should your name be changed from Samiyaar to Pervert? Why did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:19 pm

Rashmun wrote:

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Hahahaa.... stop thinking that you are some Headmaster and we are all some kid students. For someone who has lost all respect, you should know how to request anyone for any opinion.

Say "please" for a change...

by ashdoc Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:23 pm

Rashmun wrote:[

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

while we are on this topic ,tell me what is your opinion about prophet muhammad marrying 6 year old Aisha , and having sex with her when she was 9 Shocked

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:39 pm

ashdoc wrote:
Rashmun wrote:[

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

while we are on this topic ,tell me what is your opinion about prophet muhammad marrying 6 year old Aisha , and having sex with her when she was 9

you need to ask this question to Uppili. He is the one who has said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex. I am completely against child sex no matter by who.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:39 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Hahahaa.... stop thinking that you are some Headmaster and we are all some kid students. For someone who has lost all respect, you should know how to request anyone for any opinion.

Say "please" for a change...

Could you please tell us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:45 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Hahahaa.... stop thinking that you are some Headmaster and we are all some kid students. For someone who has lost all respect, you should know how to request anyone for any opinion.

Say "please" for a change...

Could you please tell us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Why ? Do you have a new 7 yr old wife/GF like (Your Prophet) and want to know if you can consummate your marriage ?

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:48 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Are you going to explain to us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Hahahaa.... stop thinking that you are some Headmaster and we are all some kid students. For someone who has lost all respect, you should know how to request anyone for any opinion.

Say "please" for a change...

Could you please tell us on what basis you said that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Why ? Do you have a new 7 yr old wife/GF like (Your Prophet) and want to know if you can consummate your marriage ?

In other words, you have no defense for why you proclaimed that 7 year old girls are ready for sex. All you can do is falsely accuse me of being a muslim to divert attention from your claim that 7 year old girls are ready for sex.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:52 pm

Thanks for telling us that you have a 7yr old GF and you were asking us all for sexual advice. Perhaps, this is the very first honest statement you have ever made in all these 15 yrs on CH.

Ask any of your Maulana friends, and they will give you Allah's answer.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:54 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:Thanks for telling us that you have a 7yr old GF and you were asking us all for sexual advice. Perhaps, this is the very first honest statement you have ever made in all these 15 yrs on CH.

Ask any of your Maulana friends, and they will give you Allah's answer.

Still no reply to my original question: on what basis did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

Uppili posted Re: Jayamala - A Woman of Loose Moral Character? on 5 yrs ago
The logic behind the restriction on 10-50 yr women is
that they are fertile and hence liable to indulge in physical relations -
hence a threat to celibate women....(correct me if I am wrong).Now, we
know that women can engage in sex even in their 80s and women can
indulge in sex as early as 7 or 8... So the 10-50 yr rule is obsolete
and should be discarded with...Also, the idea that Lord Ayyappan does
not like women 10-50 coming to his temple is very similar to the Islamic
rule of not allowing women into many mosques or putting undue and
unfair restriction on their women...Traditions were created by men and
can be changed by men.In front of God, everyone is equal... PERIOD.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:29 pm

Rashmun wrote:i am against the concept of having negative votes on this forum. it makes possible bullying in a somewhat subtle way. notice for instance the negative votes cast against me--more than 280. Now check the negative votes cast by the person stalking me i.e. Ram Sharan--more than a 100. Except for one post all the posts of Ram Sharan have been attacking me so it is fair to say who he cast negative votes for. Tracy, Uppili, and Charvaka have all confessed to giving me multiple negative votes. It is also reasonable to assume that Hellsangel has also cast multiple negative votes for me given our recent history. Likewise Propagandhi with who i got into a fight after he repeatedly kept provoking me.

I just saw that Propa has only given one negative vote despite our recent clash. Propa i would like to inform you that you have won my respect by not stooping to the cheap level of casting multiple negative votes against me despite fighting with me.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:57 pm

Rashmun wrote:

Still no reply to my original question: on what basis did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

If Uppili had any opinion, then yu should be able to google for it - just like you are able to dig up all the old threads.

I have no comments on the issue.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:03 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Still no reply to my original question: on what basis did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

If Uppili had any opinion, then yu should be able to google for it - just like you are able to dig up all the old threads.

I have no comments on the issue.

Everyone here knows that you are Uppili.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:18 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Still no reply to my original question: on what basis did you say that 7 year old girls are ready for sex?

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

If Uppili had any opinion, then yu should be able to google for it - just like you are able to dig up all the old threads.

I have no comments on the issue.

Everyone here knows that you are Uppili.

Everyone knows you can google for old posts and your real agenda. And if I am indeed Uppili - just if I am - then you should have no problem in digging up his comments.

by Guest Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:23 pm

I've used this feature just for fun once or twice and don't intend to use it seriously.

I think it is an incredibly stupid feature and there's no point getting worked up over it. If it really restricts other people from voting, it should be removed.

I don't like the idea of judging others and reducing his/her privileges using this method.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:08 am

blabberwock wrote:I've used this feature just for fun once or twice and don't intend to use it seriously.

I think it is an incredibly stupid feature and there's no point getting worked up over it. If it really restricts other people from voting, it should be removed.

I don't like the idea of judging others and reducing his/her privileges using this method.

I disagree...

it is a stupid system, but a useful system against stupid people.

P.S. seriously, who judges a poster by looking at this +/- I will be shocked if I get a whole lot of + votes.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:11 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
blabberwock wrote:I've used this feature just for fun once or twice and don't intend to use it seriously.

I think it is an incredibly stupid feature and there's no point getting worked up over it. If it really restricts other people from voting, it should be removed.

I don't like the idea of judging others and reducing his/her privileges using this method.

I disagree...

it is a stupid system, but a useful system against stupid people.

P.S. seriously, who judges a poster by looking at this +/- I will be shocked if I get a whole lot of + votes.

I don't like the fact that receiving a certain number of negative votes prohibits the recipient from casting votes - negative/positive votes are fine but it should not impact the privileges of any poster.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:15 am

Rashmun wrote: I checked using another computer i have: could i register an account and cast negative votes from it? no i could not. i had lunch with a friend and after lunch i got on his computer and registered another account and tried to cast votes; again i could not. There seems to be an IP block on me with respect to casting any vote (my friend uses the same ISP i do).

no. there is no ip block on you. the fact is that you have to make a minimum of 5 posts or so before the voting privilege is extended to your id. so go make 5 test posts and vote away merrily.

I urge members of this forum who would like the stupid negative voting system to go for good to keep giving negative votes to Charvaka. This will quickly encourage Charvaka and his cronies to agree to removing the stupid negative voting system.

since at least some people do not like the voting system, i think this feature should be removed to avoid bad blood.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:32 am

blabberwock wrote:I don't like the fact that receiving a certain number of negative votes prohibits the recipient from casting votes - negative/positive votes are fine but it should not impact the privileges of any poster.

yes. i fully agree with this. i think this is a very good reason why this voting feature should be done away with.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:37 am

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:

since at least some people do not like the voting system, i think this feature should be removed to avoid bad blood.

??? may be there should be to make it a livelier place. Besides, are we having good blood here ?

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:10 am

if a feature makes a few unhappy and if they cannot choose to stop using it or participating in it (it's not like chat), then the pissing-off factor of having that feature outweighs the benefit of having it (the benefit, btw, being either non-existent or marginal in this case). a livelier place should not be at the risk of pissing of a few members. while inevitably there will always be some members pissed off by this feature or that, in this case, the feature does not seem to contribute anything to the forum save bolster a circus like atmosphere -- while nothing stops members from behaving clownishly, it is certainly not the intent of the admin to set up this forum as a circus.

worse, blabberwock has given a damn good reason for why we should get rid of it. robbing you of your privileges is humiliating regardless of who has given you how many negative votes.

by Hellsangel Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:12 am

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
since at least some people do not like the voting system, i think this feature should be removed to avoid bad blood.

One whiny loco does not make some people.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:14 am

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:if a feature makes a few unhappy and if they cannot choose to stop using it or participating in it (it's not like chat), then the pissing-off factor of having that feature outweighs the benefit of having it (the benefit, btw, being either non-existent or marginal in this case). a livelier place should not be at the risk of pissing of a few members. while inevitably there will always be some members pissed off by this feature or that, in this case, the feature does not seem to contribute anything to the forum save bolster a circus like atmosphere -- while nothing stops members from behaving clownishly, it is certainly not the intent of the admin to set up this forum as a circus.

worse, blabberwock has given a damn good reason for why we should get rid of it. robbing you of your privileges is humiliating regardless of who has given you how many negative votes.

I agree that the privilege should NOT be taken away no matter how many -votes one gets - not even the king of Negative votes Maulana Rashmun-Al-Akbari.

by charvaka Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:35 am

Rashmun wrote:I thought if i keep giving 20 negative votes to Charvaka every day some sense would come to members on this forum about the impracticality of negative votes.

You are welcome to do this. Just create a new ID, and make enough posts with it, and then you can vote.

Rashmun wrote:I checked using another computer i have: could i register an account and cast negative votes from it? no i could not. i had lunch with a friend and after lunch i got on his computer and registered another account and tried to cast votes; again i could not. There seems to be an IP block on me with respect to casting any vote (my friend uses the same ISP i do).

Why you should give Charvaka multiple negative votes 3077217049

Rashmun wrote:Had i been posting using multiple handles (like Ram Sharan) i would not have received so many negative votes that i am now unable to vote.

Haha... how does that work again? If you post with multiple IDs, you get fewer votes? Or did you mean you would have been able to cast more negative votes had you been posting under multiple IDs?

by lurker Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:21 am

Creating handles from friend's place just to give negative votes - unbelievable childishness.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:29 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:I thought if i keep giving 20 negative votes to Charvaka every day some sense would come to members on this forum about the impracticality of negative votes.
You are welcome to do this. Just create a new ID, and make enough posts with it, and then you can vote.

Rashmun wrote:I checked using another computer i have: could i register an account and cast negative votes from it? no i could not. i had lunch with a friend and after lunch i got on his computer and registered another account and tried to cast votes; again i could not. There seems to be an IP block on me with respect to casting any vote (my friend uses the same ISP i do).

Rashmun wrote:Had i been posting using multiple handles (like Ram Sharan) i would not have received so many negative votes that i am now unable to vote.
Haha... how does that work again? If you post with multiple IDs, you get fewer votes? Or did you mean you would have been able to cast more negative votes had you been posting under multiple IDs?

this is why i wanted you to relinquish admin control of this forum to someone neutral because you are unable to be wear the Admin hat in an impartial manner. you would have immediately agreed to the request if some of your cronies like hellsangel would have made this perfectly reasonable complaint--i am now unable to cast any vote in my Rashmun handle and this shows the voting system needs to go. but it looks like a cheap indian politician you will keep clinging to the Admin powers because of your craving for cheap popularity.

the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum. i have made my point that the negative voting system need to go and blabberwock and huzefa have agreed with what i say. Earlier Silhouette had also said the same thing. i rest my case.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:34 am

people actually use the voting feature? the only time i remember using it is when some profile wanted us to test something. seems like a childish thing to vote something up or down. isn't it enough to just say what you want?

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:37 am

blabberwock wrote:

I don't like the idea of judging others and reducing his/her privileges using this method.

i agree.

by Propagandhi711 Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:30 am

lurker wrote:Creating handles from friend's place just to give negative votes - unbelievable childishness.

this is getting funnier by the day. classic case of obsessive compulsive disorder.

by Propagandhi711 Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:38 am

Rashmun wrote:but it looks like a cheap indian politician you will keep clinging to the Admin powers because of your craving for cheap popularity.

the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum. i have made my point that the negative voting system need to go and blabberwock and huzefa have agreed with what i say. Earlier Silhouette had also said the same thing. i rest my case.

HAHAHAAAAAA....ewwerry one knows you started the new forum to lure ppl away to that place and beat them over the head with your crackpot theories. probably thought it was gonna be your fatehpur sikri from where you could mughal over the internets . must have been humiliating when ppl made fun of the ridiculously large font and talked abt nothing else. nice attempt to save face when that idea fell flat on it's face. you are a bigger joke than joblessfella at this point.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:07 am

Propagandhi711 wrote:
Rashmun wrote:but it looks like a cheap indian politician you will keep clinging to the Admin powers because of your craving for cheap popularity.

the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum. i have made my point that the negative voting system need to go and blabberwock and huzefa have agreed with what i say. Earlier Silhouette had also said the same thing. i rest my case.

HAHAHAAAAAA....ewwerry one knows you started the new forum to lure ppl away to that place and beat them over the head with your crackpot theories. probably thought it was gonna be your fatehpur sikri from where you could mughal over the internets . must have been humiliating when ppl made fun of the ridiculously large font and talked abt nothing else. nice attempt to save face when that idea fell flat on it's face. you are a bigger joke than joblessfella at this point.

i am going to continue using that forum whenever i wish to write blog posts. The reason is that posts written on that forum will not get buried after a few days. you need to cool down now.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:18 pm

Rashmun wrote:
i am going to continue using that forum whenever i wish to write blog posts. The reason is that posts written on that forum will not get buried after a few days. you need to cool down now.

You mean stealing all the blogs from Sulekha and giving links to those blogs in YOUR website? Of course, it wont get buried EVER, as you will be the only one using YOUR own website.

Pls....will you stop... you are killing us all with your comedy.

by charvaka Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:30 pm

Rashmun wrote:this is why i wanted you to relinquish admin control of this forum to someone neutral because you are unable to be wear the Admin hat in an impartial manner.

You also started a poll, and we all know the results. You should learn to live with lack of support for your ideas.

Rashmun wrote:i am now unable to cast any vote in my Rashmun handle and this shows the voting system needs to go... i have made my point that the negative voting system need to go and
blabberwock and huzefa have agreed with what i say. Earlier Silhouette
had also said the same thing. i rest my case.

There was a poll on the voting system as well, and that one failed too.

Rashmun wrote:the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum.

This is not the first time you created multiple handles with various excuses. You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

You are welcome to keep the whining going, though. It is very entertaining.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:39 pm

charvaka wrote:You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

lolll. when was this?

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:45 pm

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
charvaka wrote:You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

lolll. when was this?

only on one occasion:

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/regarding-nand-lal-bose.htm

Nand Lal Bose and Prof Buzugmehr were handles used in the past by someone who was having fun posting different handles . I posted several posts using the Nand Lal Bose handle and one post using the handle name Prof Buzugmehr.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:47 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum.

This is not the first time you created multiple handles with various excuses. You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

You are welcome to keep the whining going, though. It is very entertaining.

Not only he abused other people in his original handle, he also created da_gal, Gyaanputra, and others to appreciate mutually and abuse others collectively. remember the bengali handle and got busted due to his usual stupidity.

This guy justifies his abuses, his changing stances, excuses, absurdities and believes in those. no wonder he supports the corrupt congress and pigvijay, and all dictatorial actions of congress. Everything falls in place now.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:49 pm

Charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i am now unable to cast any vote in my Rashmun handle and this shows the voting system needs to go... i have made my point that the negative voting system need to go and
blabberwock and huzefa have agreed with what i say. Earlier Silhouette
had also said the same thing. i rest my case.
There was a poll on the voting system as well, and that one failed too.

Three things. First, the posters who have complained this time (Blabberwock, Max, Huzefa, Sublime) and earlier Silhoutte may not have voted on that poll.
Second, the results of the poll were 10-9 in retaining the voting system.
Third, there was a vote for whether multiple forums should be created or only one forum should be maintained on this site. As per what i recollect, there was a narrow majority for retaining the main forum only but because of the close vote it was agreed to maintain the other forums as well.

the deficiency of using polls to decide what to do on this forum also is because some vindictive person or people could keep registering multiple IDs and use them in voting for a particular poll. If there has to be a poll on something as important as this then let the poster disclose his handle name when voting.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:51 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:the reason i created the other handles was for testing the software on this forum.

This is not the first time you created multiple handles with various excuses. You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

You are welcome to keep the whining going, though. It is very entertaining.

Not only he abused other people in his original handle, he also created da_gal, Gyaanputra, and others to appreciate mutually and abuse others collectively. remember the bengali handle and got busted due to his usual stupidity.

Uppili, your accusations have no credibility whatsoever after you got busted:

Uppili posted Re: Jayamala - A Woman of Loose Moral Character? on 5 yrs ago
The logic behind the restriction on 10-50 yr women is
that they are fertile and hence liable to indulge in physical relations -
hence a threat to celibate women....(correct me if I am wrong).Now, we
know that women can engage in sex even in their 80s and women can
indulge in sex as early as 7 or 8... So the 10-50 yr rule is obsolete
and should be discarded with...Also, the idea that Lord Ayyappan does
not like women 10-50 coming to his temple is very similar to the Islamic
rule of not allowing women into many mosques or putting undue and
unfair restriction on their women...Traditions were created by men and
can be changed by men.In front of God, everyone is equal... PERIOD.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/jayamala-a-woman-of-loose-moral-character.htm#704465

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:55 pm

let me be clear about the specific feature that i don't like, so i am not misquoted by anyone. i don't think receiving a large number of positive votes should confer any special privileges and receiving a large number of negative votes should result in losing privileges. in other words voting should have no impact on anyone's privileges one way or the other.

in other words i don't see the point of having a voting system.

by Guest Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:58 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:let me be clear about the specific feature that i don't like, so i am not misquoted by anyone. i don't think receiving a large number of positive votes should confer any special privileges and receiving a large number of negative votes shouldn't result in losing privileges. in other words voting should have no impact on anyone's privileges one way or the other.

in other words i don't see the point of having a voting system.

Agree completely. And this point can be discussed here by posters so that we know the handle which is expressing the point of view. In a poll on this forum there is no way of knowing whether multiple votes are being cast by the same person who has registered multiple handles.

by charvaka Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:24 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Huzefa Kapasi wrote:
charvaka wrote:You used to even create two fake handles, and use one of them to praise the other.

lolll. when was this?

only on one occasion...

... were you caught doing it.

by charvaka Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:24 pm

Rashmun wrote:i am going to continue using that forum whenever i wish to write blog posts. The reason is that posts written on that forum will not get buried after a few days. you need to cool down now.

by Sponsored content