ATWSC Quarter Final: Fred Davis v Ronnie O'Sullivan

Iranu wrote:

LDS wrote:

Iranu wrote:We think nothing.

I already told you. We know what happened.

So... what happened?

In your opinion.

You can find out for yourself. As I said, it’s been posted elsewhere. We know what happened.

Alternatively you can go satisfy your male urge.

Iranu wrote:You can find out for yourself. As I said, it’s been posted elsewhere. We know what happened.

Alternatively you can go satisfy your male urge.

LDS wrote:

Iranu wrote:You can find out for yourself. As I said, it’s been posted elsewhere. We know what happened.

Alternatively you can go satisfy your male urge.

So what you're saying is you can't remember where on the site it was talked about, but you read something that gave a reason and you accepted that reason but you can't remember what that reason is and by being ever more aggressive you might be able to make me look like an a-hole to hide the fact that you temporarily are struggling to find where the real reason is written?

Pink Ball wrote:Why do you want to know? I thought you already knew? You seemed so certain?

LDS wrote:

Iranu wrote:You can find out for yourself. As I said, it’s been posted elsewhere. We know what happened.

Alternatively you can go satisfy your male urge.

So what you're saying is you can't remember where on the site it was talked about, but you read something that gave a reason and you accepted that reason but you can't remember what that reason is and by being ever more aggressive you might be able to make me look like an a-hole to hide the fact that you temporarily are struggling to find where the real reason is written?

Iranu wrote:Oh, no. No, not at all. I know exactly where it was posted and it’s also been discussed elsewhere between members. Several of us noticed before the post I’m referring to was even made.

Unfortunately for you I’m under no obligation to do your work for you. You posted an unsubstantiated claim that, also unfortunately for you, we know to be false.

I’ll say it once more for those in the back: we KNOW what happened.

I have no need to make you look like an a-hole. You really need to just accept that you don’t know everything there is to know on this one.

LDS wrote:So now you're doubling down on the fact that you really can't remember and that possibly the discussion that you're referring to doesn't actually have any factual information in it either?

LDS wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Why do you want to know? I thought you already knew? You seemed so certain?

Yes, I wrote "wot I thought" was the facts of the matter. I then got aggressively challenged. But nothing has refuted "wot I thought", other than a repetition of the very vague term 'Sabotage', which, by itself, is not an informative statement.

Iranu wrote:

LDS wrote:So now you're doubling down on the fact that you really can't remember and that possibly the discussion that you're referring to doesn't actually have any factual information in it either?

I’m literally saying the opposite of that.

LDS wrote:

Iranu wrote:

LDS wrote:So now you're doubling down on the fact that you really can't remember and that possibly the discussion that you're referring to doesn't actually have any factual information in it either?

I’m literally saying the opposite of that.

Then why not just type what you believe the reason was? What's with all the smarminess?

Pink Ball wrote:This is what actually happened.

Four matches were ongoing at once. Within a very short space of time, about 20 minutes, exactly 13 people had voted for the less-fancied selection on each of the four matches. That was suspicious.

It also coincided with the visit of a former forum user to these shores before he was quickly scrubbed out of the only account that made it through the moderation screen. This account was one of many, many accounts that signed up for this forum within an unusually narrow time period. So several of us forum users discussed the matter and brought it to a moderator.

In this timeframe, while still awaiting a moderator's confirmation, I took the logical decision to switch to comment voting instead as a precaution.

After this moderator investigated the matter, it was quickly confirmed that, yes, the polls had been sabotaged by one visitor.

Pink Ball wrote:Check where you're sticking your cockerel in future. Because I am a bucking blender.

LDS wrote:Still with the over-aggression tho

LDS wrote:The true story was that two of the polls did not meet with Pink's expectation of a correct result and so he gerrymandered the real estate so that only people who bother actually posting on the site can vote

Holden Chinaski wrote::bags:

LDS wrote:Phew! That was a struggle! But we got there in the end!

LDS wrote:

Holden Chinaski wrote::bags:

No bags here, just tryin' to find out what's going on

All I saw was one poll giving a result Pink didn't like and them him announcing the cancellation of polls. Seemed like a perfectly logical thing to think. At no point in these poll threads has the matter been discussed or mentioned, at least of all those I've seen. Who knows were this above 'discussion' took place nor why it was so difficult to talk about

Pink Ball wrote:Chat rubbish, get banged.

LDS wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Chat rubbish, get banged.

If you want to be technical, even knowing the actual truth, wot I said is still factually correct, in that if this spammer-account-troll-thingy had voted in a way that you agreed with you probably wouldn't have changed anything and it was only the fact that the polls were going against what you wanted them to be that made you sit up and take notice.

If you'd let the whole forum know about it, you know, with, like another thread about it, we probably would have all agreed that XYZ polls were shams and that we'd all have accepted re-running those polls and gone on from there.

But, sure, you do you! It's all good

LDS wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:Chat rubbish, get banged.

If you want to be technical, even knowing the actual truth, wot I said is still factually correct.

McManusFan wrote:Maybe you shouldn't start 'false rumours' then?

LDS wrote:Well I certainly hope you don't get admonished for talking about it and, yes, the truth is always preferable to people spreading false rumours, that I can wholeheartedly agree with.

So to the moderators, yes, you can see how keeping schtum in this matter has caused as much if not more trouble than whatever trouble you might have been expecting from the spam-troll-account-thingy, so I hope in this case you can act with due rationality.

Pink Ball wrote:I don't blame the moderators for someone spreading false 'truths'. Most people can control themselves. And if I were to be punished, I'd take it on the chin, because I believe their system is by far the most effective way of dealing with this issue. I think most regular users on here agree with me on that.

LDS wrote:

McManusFan wrote:Maybe you shouldn't start 'false rumours' then?

Oh ffs

As far as I was aware, the idea that it was 'sabotaged' was a 'false rumour'

Please, curtail your desire to kill for just a day or so?

Iranu wrote:

LDS wrote:

McManusFan wrote:Maybe you shouldn't start 'false rumours' then?

Oh ffs

As far as I was aware, the idea that it was 'sabotaged' was a 'false rumour'

Please, curtail your desire to kill for just a day or so?

I told you repeatedly it wasn’t a rumour.

You weren’t interested.

LDS wrote:

Iranu wrote:

LDS wrote:

McManusFan wrote:Maybe you shouldn't start 'false rumours' then?

Oh ffs

As far as I was aware, the idea that it was 'sabotaged' was a 'false rumour'

Please, curtail your desire to kill for just a day or so?

I told you repeatedly it wasn’t a rumour.

You weren’t interested.

#holden's avatar

Pink Ball wrote:I love how this was all our fault anyway.