I suspect Hymen is a bot.. at just over 1000 posts karma over 50.. smite just below that figure. Those numbers aren't matched in terms of volume or ratio for the rest of us. VV.. Raggs have the highest.. Neils.. Rossm.. great contributors.
Most of us have a love/hate of 90/10.. so Hymens figures .. in the words of Alan Turing.. don't compute
You know I'm not because you have DM'd me..so nice try. If your a stat man, start a thread and find out why the numbers are what they are.
What they do display are aside from haters like Backdoc, who by the way has a net neutral on the people that like or dislike his opinions(19/19), or Wiltshire suggesting I get banned, which is frankly an embarrassing statement and who's like or dislike numbers don't lend to a particularly meaningful contribution, people also like my contributions, given the 50+ positives, which must represent something?
This board is built on varying contribution, it doesn't have to all 'yay COYW'. You like, you dislike, you contribute or you move on by..these are freely available options. The day I start to call people names or get personal then by all means bring me to task, but in over a 1000 contributions it hasn't happened once. I'm going to give an opinion, that's the point of this board and it shouldn't have to be dressed up in fluffy stockings just in case someone chooses to take offence to it because they have nothing better to do.
If i refer way back to what started this mass debate, my opinion is that there is no credibility to someone offering me their expert analysis having watched a 5 minute highlight show and I stand by that. I also assigned credit when said individual states they subsequently took the time to watch an entire match...so what is the issue exactly? I took no offence to the catty remark about my 'computability', which appears ignored by all.
Always a Wasp
