Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

[gator]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums ravi.... man, hats off to u.... u have an infinitely cool head.... like predator said, save urself the trouble of predicting his moves and kick his sorry azz bak to tht hole...

[RameshG]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums Ravi wrote:

There is absolutely no crying.

No crying? Is that why you saw it fit to start 2 threads on this subject?

Why is that you only choose very few users to send your PM to? Rather you could have sent it to all including us right. Let's get this right, you were trying to sneak through thinking people won't really track the PMs. Anyways your job was futile and don't try to be the old forums mouth piece.

Well out of 400+ registered users on your site, only about 80 have actually posted or contributed something. The very fact that I sent the PM's to only those with 0 posts should make it obvious that I was not really serious about marketing. These people probably may not even log in again to this site. Like I said, it was only a tit-fot-tat response, nothing more or less.

The reason it has been disabled is to further enhance the security to make sure guys like you don't end up abusing the system and also save us fellas some moderation time.

Thanks for clarifying. But if you call what I did abuse, then the same should apply to what many of you guys (including the mods/admins here) did at ICFever.

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums I have to say RameshG had an agend even before he registered. Firstly he used a different ID, registered himself, looked around and then created RameshG. Then using the other ID sent a private message to RameshG to test run the PM. After he realised he can send the PM, he sent to our user base. The mistake he made was non stop PM sending and that triggered off flood control. ReameshG is not as holy as he claims but I won't worry about him or his previous ID.

[beetle]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums I don't think this guy is max1....or gaurang But even if it is one of them....it's ok... Spent some good times with them and yeh chalta hai...koi baat nahi..

[RameshG]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums I have a feeling there are many posters with multiple ID's registered on this site. What else could explain close to 450 registered users and just 80 actual posters :shrug:

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

Ravi wrote:

There is absolutely no crying.

No crying? Is that why you saw it fit to start 2 threads on this subject?

Why is that you only choose very few users to send your PM to? Rather you could have sent it to all including us right. Let's get this right, you were trying to sneak through thinking people won't really track the PMs. Anyways your job was futile and don't try to be the old forums mouth piece.

Well out of 400+ registered users on your site, only about 80 have actually posted or contributed something. The very fact that I sent the PM's to only those with 0 posts should make it obvious that I was not really serious about marketing. These people probably may not even log in again to this site. Like I said, it was only a tit-fot-tat response, nothing more or less.

The reason it has been disabled is to further enhance the security to make sure guys like you don't end up abusing the system and also save us fellas some moderation time.

Thanks for clarifying. But if you call what I did abuse, then the same should apply to what many of you guys (including the mods/admins here) did at ICFever.

Stop pretending here RameshG. You aren't as cool as you write. As I wrote above you plotted it nicely but in the end it didn't help. After having a quick look I'm convinced you used another nick for a while and then you tried this trick. If it was just a tit-for-tat response why did you have to register with a seperate ID first then test the PM and then start sending the PMs to the rest. BTW if you have no connections with the old forums then why do you worry? I can't quite understand why should you be hurt some of our users publicized this website over there.

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

I have a feeling there are many posters with multiple ID's registered on this site. What else could explain close to 450 registered users and just 80 actual posters :shrug:

Is that your problem? Definitely not. We are not asking for your suggestions on how to get those users active. Do you agree you created two IDs and if you did are you happy to let us know why? We need to decide which one to delete you see. Finally I can't believe all you guys from the old forums that aren't happy to see this website or do not hold this website in high regard visit us every day. If you guys don't like what you see here then why bother coming here and waste our time as well as yours?

[beetle]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums anu or shiva? :chin:

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums Do you care Rads? Believe me this will be never ending but am sure some of these guys will settle down here permanently.

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

ravi.... man' date=' hats off to u.... u have an infinitely cool head.... like predator said, save urself the trouble of predicting his moves and kick his sorry azz bak to tht hole...[/quote'] We will have plenty of such ones Gator, we kind of expected this anyways.

[yoda]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

I have a feeling there are many posters with multiple ID's registered on this site. What else could explain close to 450 registered users and just 80 actual posters :shrug:

Now that is getting desperate. Why the fack do you care how many are registered here and how many are posting? Shouldn't you be worried that your site is a shyte hole after driving out a vast number of regular posters from there?

[beetle]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

Do you care Rads? quote] are you asking me ? or is this just like .....do we care? :duh:

[RameshG]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums Ravi, can you answer my question first and then I'll reply to yours? Why did you mods start two threads on this issue, if you had no intention of "crying" about what I did with the PM's? Why all this chest thumping, if you really were onto me as you say, it should not have been such a big deal...you could have easily dealt with it quietly. Would have saved everyone (including me and you) a lot of time Now I'm unable to focus on my work...and there's plenty to do :mad:

[yoda]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums So, max1, it was you. Nice sneeky editing there. Welcome to the new ICF. Bookmark the site and start posting your rants about Chappell.

[beetle]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums yeh kya bachpana hai ramesh G......just tell us who you are ......and why not just post like normal people .

[Predator_05]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

Now I'm unable to focus on my work...and there's plenty to do :mad:

Yep, lots of work...those customers at Nirulas still haven't gotten their dosas yet. Get the f*ck out of here, maxine.

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

Ravi, can you answer my question first and then I'll reply to yours? Why did you mods start two threads on this issue, if you had no intention of "crying" about what I did with the PM's? Why all this chest thumping, if you really were onto me as you say, it should not have been such a big deal...you could have easily dealt with it quietly. Would have saved everyone (including me and you) a lot of time Now I'm unable to focus on my work...and there's plenty to do :mad:

The reason for creating two threads is very paltry and unintentional. What happened was I had installed a new module "Global Announcement" which is supposed to create a sticky announcement in all the forums I mark. In the end that one didn't work out very well. Instead of mirroring the same thread and having all the comments show in one single thread it created two topics in two different forums hence the two 2 threads. I wouldn't waste the server space by creating two thread will I? If I knew at first you had another ID created and had read those posts first I would have reacted differently than exposing the PMs :hic: Someone with a nick "RameshG" comes here, posts 127 PMs and you reckon I should have talked to RameshG, told him that isn't good is it? It's all good to hear mate but it won't work like that, does it? After I dug up a bit more I realised you had another ID created quite a while before. TBH I don't really care about it right now. Who cares you had two IDs but I think you should forgo one of them.

[King]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums

Do you care Rads? quote] are you asking me ? or is this just like .....do we care? :duh:

Just saying should we care if it's shiva or anu I meant. :spin:

[RameshG]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums Ravi, forget the stress on the "2 threads". Guess I should have worded it differently...my question is if it was not such a big deal as you claim...why did you choose to make this issue public at all? Also, I am not so naive to think you guys wouldn't get onto to me sooner or later, sending all those PM's in such a short period of time. Like I said, what I attempted to do was just giving you guys a taste of your own medicine, whether you believe it or not.

I think you should forgo one of them.

Ok, please delete this ID (the name sucks anyways). I'll use the other one in future if and when I post. Thanks.

[RameshG]

Re: Insecurity and the cheap tactics of the old forums radhika, does it really matter who I am? Anyways bumper got it right the first time.

Why the fack do you care how many are registered here and how many are posting?

Couldn't help noticing it when I checked the members list. Sorry if this info disappoints you.