Anonymous
Share this content
81

.

Didn't find your answer?

.

Replies (81)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

RLI
By lionofludesch
28th Oct 2020 09:56

+1

Thanks (1)
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 10:14

+1=3

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Oct 2020 10:17

Speaking for all Pauls everywhere, even from SX
+6 =9

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Oct 2020 10:19

Only three likes
There are four people so far
Who forgot?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 10:22

The OP?

Thanks (3)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
RLI
By lionofludesch
28th Oct 2020 10:26

Wilson Philips wrote:

The OP?

+1

Thanks (0)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Mr_awol
28th Oct 2020 10:25

I assume TD didnt like her own post, so the three are the responders?

It would now be four but I'm undecided whether to like it or not - if it's a form of flagging posts i really don't think it will work so wont be joining in with that. I would suggest a concerted effort of reporting posts to make them read it might be better - although in hindsight maybe that's what happened to the dotted thread and it's been (temporarily) auto-deleted because too many people reported it?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Mr_awol:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 10:33

At least we could try to get it to the top of the most liked pile, and therefore visible to all.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
avatar
By Mr_awol
28th Oct 2020 12:05

Wilson Philips wrote:

At least we could try to get it to the top of the most liked pile, and therefore visible to all.

Perhaps - although i think 'most liked' gets forgotten. Plus this time it might actually be an innocent mistake/auto delete as I've said. We await clarification.

Also i wouldn't want to do it with all threads. Rage Against The Machine is only appropriate for a one-off.

I would have said persistent bumping would get more attention than mass liking, especially since we have the ability to do it multiple times each. Replying with just a dot would also be quite symbolic. This actually could be done for multiple threads if people wanted to.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Mr_awol:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
28th Oct 2020 12:50

My current approach is troll-bumping (as below) and not debumping (I'm not replying on other threads at present).

We could try to make this thread demonstrate everything that's wrong with Aweb. But I'm not quite prepared to dot out my OP and anonymise it, to ice that cake. (I'll see how I feel later!)

Thanks (1)
Replying to Mr_awol:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Oct 2020 12:53

Replying with dot does not work because Op or Anon Op only dots and deletes after real replies
But deliberate Anon avoidance seems to be the only solution

Thanks (0)
Replying to Mr_awol:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Oct 2020 14:41

I will now report all anon
But only after an appropriate reply

Thanks (0)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 15:27

Reporting will not get you anywhere. Sift view is that 'there might be a reason for the anon post', even though it is blatantly obvious when there isnt. A bit like their original, now apparantly resolved, misunderstanding about forensic questioning.

I have a plan, mwha haha.

Quote. Always.
Say you have PMd the answer (loved that idea!)
Everyone else do the same/similar.
Never ever answer their question until known.
Ask questions.
No real responses, soon puts a stop to it.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Cheshire:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Oct 2020 17:08

Anons are different to existing members

The one referred to was a real poster, a genuine question, real responses and useful title that would have been available on the any answers only search.

Do not believe accident
Do believe toys out of pram, Sift warning and Snowflake Op over reaction.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 17:23

This one was a real suprise.
Why would it be a sift warning?

Although I also if it was an ccident, why did Lee not just come back on and just apologise/make some comment 'oops I deleted it'.

I did wonder about toys out of the pram as one or two of the comments may have been consider a wee bit harsh to someone a teeny tiny bit delicate. Although the poster has been around since 2014 so should seen some of the PNL etc spats and reaslise he got off very very lightly!

Its just very odd.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 10:28

It was I. I have now corrected.

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
28th Oct 2020 10:44

No it was (and is) I.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 11:37

Well, like Holmes I therefore deduce that Mr or Mrs X must have liked the thread but had not, at that juncture at least, posted a comment.

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
29th Oct 2020 20:54

Concur

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Mr_awol
28th Oct 2020 13:58

Tax Dragon wrote:

No it was (and is) I.

No I'm Spartacus

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Mr_awol
28th Oct 2020 10:26

I didnt see the original thread. I saw it once it had been dotted anonymised, and assumed it was an anon freeloader doing the usual.

Before the thread got killed*, someone else had said it was a real life poster. As such i assume the dotting and anonynoninunimising may have been because they realised they'd put a little more info online than they should have. If they'd edited it, made it anonymous, and explained, I doubt anyone would have cared. Perhaps im giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt - hard to tell as i dont know which poster it was.

Anyhoo, this wouldnt have been too much of an issue if it had been an isolated incident and/or managed better*.

* Edit see above response. This could be an innocent auto-deletion as a result of a call to arms within the thread itself.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Mr_awol:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
28th Oct 2020 10:40

Innocent autodeletion explanation seems plausible. I'd not thought of that. Time will tell. (I reported my own comment* on the other thread... so maybe it was me kicked the autodeletion bot into action... oh the irony!! :-D)

*The "If you remember, Paul, the question was not posted anonymously. It was a perfectly good question from someone I thought was a perfectly respectable questioner" one.

Thanks (1)
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
28th Oct 2020 10:32

And there's the recently deleted thread in which the Midlands' leading insolvency expert advised the practitioner who was seeking to transfer ownership of her company together with its BBL loan funds:

"OP, ignore everything posted here. Those responding are giving advice on a topic they are not experts in. As you are talking about an insolvency situation, you need guidance from either a licensed insolvency practitioner or an insolvency lawyer. You really should pay no regards to advice from general or tax accountants because this is an insolvency and not a solvent situation."

Come to think of it, I can see why the poster might petition Aweb to remove such an ill-advised missive.

Thanks (3)
Replying to I'msorryIhaven'taclue:
RLI
By lionofludesch
28th Oct 2020 16:24

I'msorryIhaven'taclue wrote:

And there's the recently deleted thread in which the Midlands' leading insolvency expert advised the practitioner who was seeking to transfer ownership of her company together with its BBL loan funds:

Should've gone to insolvencypractitionersweb.co.uk

Thanks (0)
Stepurhan
By stepurhan
28th Oct 2020 10:33

Agreed.

This happens far too many times. It is one of the reasons I don't respond as much as I used to.

Thanks (0)
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 10:40

I would point out that it is more stats and geography students who join the dots (with a bit of careful colouring in), accountants do join the numbers puzzles instead.

(I presume I am not the only one whose parents bought them a bumper puzzle book and pencils/crayons before throwing them into the back of a car with their siblings and then driving somewhere for eternity whilst the children's legs stuck to the vinyl car seats that got hotter and hotter as the day progressed , all in the sure and certain knowledge that one of your siblings was bound to throw up at some point during the never ending journey- of course if your parents really hated you then an I Spy book was all you got.)

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
28th Oct 2020 10:48

Are you trolling me? :-)

Join the numbers... not seen those. I did have some "what's the next number?" type puzzles. The sequence at the start of this thread provides a handy example: 1,3,9,....

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 10:58

The number puzzles involved drawing lines from 1-2-3 etc to create a picture, back in the 1960s before gameboys etc these sorts of low tech distractions were all the rage. My kids, when we holidayed in the car across Europe , initially had cassettes or CDs with a quiz or stories (Do you know a small child can do the same quiz/hear the same story 1,000 times in a row, imho Gameboys were the greatest single tech advance of my lifetime.)

27 perhaps

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 15:29

I love number puzzles,. I can spell boob on my calculator, does that count?

Thanks (2)
Replying to Cheshire:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 15:35

ShellOil and Boobies are also possible

Thanks (2)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 11:47

Apart from the obvious, I can think of a couple of other valid answers:

65 (followed by 625, and then ?)
81 (followed by 2187, and then?)

The second is probably easier to fathom out than the first.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
28th Oct 2020 12:37

Second is 177,147 but the first is tricky.

Thanks (0)
Replying to I'msorryIhaven'taclue:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
28th Oct 2020 12:47

But a sequence with those rules would run:

1, 3, 27, 729, 59,049...

So either Wilson has spotted something else, or I question "valid".

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 13:04

What rules? One can of course make up any rule they want (as I did) although obviously there has to be a degree of consistency/logic in its application otherwise I too would question the validity.

177,147 does not follow in 'my' sequence.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
28th Oct 2020 13:13

I thought it (the second) 177,147 might be to do with powers:
3 to the power of 0
3 to the power of 1
3 to the power of 2
3 to the power of 4
3 to the power of 7
3 to the power of 11
I figured you increase the indices in a pattern of 1, 2, 3, then 4.
If I'm wrong then I shall demand the entire thread be wiped!

Thanks (0)
Replying to I'msorryIhaven'taclue:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 14:00

Well that works, sort of - although you've increased in a pattern of 1,1,2,3,4. (But it's no less valid than my contrived rule - which does not involve indices. But my first example does - but the pattern is equally contrived)

Next numbers in the two sequences are, respectively, 7777 and 531441.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
28th Oct 2020 17:44

Doh!

I'm still on the easy sequence: is the next number 3486784401?

Thanks (0)
Replying to I'msorryIhaven'taclue:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 20:04

Told you it was easy :-)

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
Avatar
By I'msorryIhaven'taclue
29th Oct 2020 17:00

Lucky guess!

I'm struggling with the other, so I'll let those who are fond of number puzzles have first bite at it :)

What a splendid advertisement for the Dunning Kruger effect!

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wilson Philips:
ALISK
By atleastisoundknowledgable...
28th Oct 2020 13:54

We had a Zoom family quiz a few months ago. One of the questions I posed was ‘name the sequence’ : 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,16.

It’s my 2 year old counting. (The 12 is pronounced ‘twelve-teen’)

Thanks (1)
Replying to atleastisoundknowledgable...:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 14:22

For a 2 year old as my audience I would prefer 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12........

Work out why 9 is not there (remembering the audience)

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
Psycho
By Wilson Philips
28th Oct 2020 14:26

Because 7 had not had his breakfast

Thanks (4)
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 10:51

I saw the earlier thread where the OP deleted their comment.

Yes a regular-ish poster, at least recently, so should know better.

No there was nothing at all in the original post that was needing an anon comment, there was no absolutely no identifying information in there whatsoever.

But yet again we are seeing inconsistent moderation. Some of the responses evidence so far when deletions feature:-
1) Post is re-instated in full, with name of poster (name of poster left out if its genuine case)
or
2) No action
or
3) Complete deletion of the thread
or
4) Comment from the mods on the thread reminding folk not to delete their thread again (or else)
or
5) Shut down of the thread so no more comments can be made
or
6) Emails to those who have reported the said bad behaviour advising they will warn off the offending person.

Should be the same treatment for all.

Put back the deleted comments, warn poster offline, warn poster on the thread (so that others take note!), lock out said poster for a period if they have committed the same offence more than once. Do not delete the thread and do not lock it down. Simple.

Thanks (1)
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 10:55

TD - I think your 'Joining the Dots' heading will not get Sift to read it, unless of course any or all of you lot are still on the naughty stair in which case JS will be reading everything you post.

Perhaps change it to 'Joining the Dots - what the hell are you doing Sift?'

Thanks (2)
Replying to Cheshire:
By SteveHa
28th Oct 2020 11:26

Cheshire wrote:

unless of course any or all of you lot are still on the naughty stair in which case JS will be reading everything you post.

I'm still QBE, and therefore a frowned upon cowboy (which is ironic, because I do wear a Stetson on a daily basis). Is my responding, therefore, enough to get the thread noticed?

Thanks (1)
Replying to SteveHa:
.
By Cheshire
28th Oct 2020 15:33

[quote=SteveHa]<''I do wear a Stetson on a daily basis''

As a result of working close to the gay village in Manc for so long? Or just since you were called a cowboy by JS?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Cheshire:
By SteveHa
29th Oct 2020 10:08

Neither - the first hat appeared back in '91, and they have been a permanent feature since.

I still worked for HMRC back then.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Cheshire:
avatar
By Mr_awol
28th Oct 2020 12:43

Didnt we have a 'what the hell is going on' thread before?

(or so I've heard. I wouldn't know, obviously, as i was in Guantanamo Bay at the time)

Thanks (1)
Replying to Mr_awol:
Hallerud at Easter
By DJKL
28th Oct 2020 12:58

Is that why the site headers etc are all in orange.

Thanks (1)
Oaklea
By Chris.Mann
28th Oct 2020 11:02

"Mods, IMHO deleting a thread that members had spent time contributing to undermines the value of members' contributions.

You tell us - why should we bother?"

Tax Dragon - you didn't honestly believe that Aweb had any respect for any of us, did you? Really?

Clearly, the days of this forum are numbered, for the likes of me.

Thanks (1)

Pages

Share this content

Related posts