Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
PilcheskyDeceit True Freedom of Speech -> True Freedom of Speech ... Pilchesky denies Freedom of Speech -> DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Post Info TOPIC: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Paul


Fvck you, clown. Sue me.

Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Date:
DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

In this thread, poster Thoughts of Joe questions the validity of the membership numbers, something we've been doing here since at least as long as I've been here.

The answers range from the ridiculous:
pragmat
Posts: 15
Date: Tue Feb 13 9:04 PM, 2007
Views: 86
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

I know many who register and never post. This is where they get their news. Accurately and before the paper.


to the assinine:

jimbu15



Posts: 197
Date: Tue Feb 13 10:18 PM, 2007
Views: 3
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

Thoughts of Joe wrote:

What's up with that Pilchesky?  Half of your posters are deaf mutes.  Something is very wrong in Mudville.  Care to explain that mystery.  Waiting.  This ought to be good.

T.O.J...The only mystery here is whether YOU prefer the "pole" or the "hole"!!!  Get bent loser!!!...Jimbu15...


It's a very valid question.  Joe has challenged us to debate facts.  Here's a very real fact, one that disputes the popularity of the site.   Joe likes to rely on the numbers to flaunt his percieved relevance in this city, and from the very beginning, he was accused of padding his membership roll.  When one poster does, naturally, none of the DD sheep have a factual answer, so they fall back on the Pilchesky defense: spin, false reasoning, and personal insults.  Jim Burch has yet to post one intelligent thing on that site.  I bet Milo, Anti, and Jim share the same brain, among other organs.  You the pole or the hole, Jimmy? Duh huh!

As long as we're placing wagers on Joe, anyone think there will ever be a response from the old man, other than either to ban Thoughts or make a longwinded and rambling speech on how numbers suddenly don't matter, it's the message that's important?  I'd be willing to pony up the first $50 to the Janet Evans for Governor campaign fund if we ever get a straight answer to the question. 

-- Edited by Paul at 22:41, 2007-02-13 spelling, twice.


-- Edited by Paul at 22:43, 2007-02-13

__________________

LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

 When you look at the number of members at DD ...  it was 1,023 and they have 1,009 topics ... that's a little more than one topic per poster ... hmmm I guess Joey isn't doing as well as he claims is he ...Our membership is 15 ... with 175 total topics ... I would say that on average that we are more successful.  598 of those topics go back to Oct. 7, 2005 and before ... How many of those memberships are from the original message board?  3,230 replies to topics are from 2005 ... so is Joey as successful as he thinks ... I think not ... just because he shows the membership numbers ... well they are not posting ... and how many disagreed with Joey and were banned ... I know of a few ...

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Paul


Fvck you, clown. Sue me.

Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Just when you thought the replies couldn't get any more stupid than Jim Burch's, along comes MistyMtTop, squirting out this gem:

MistyMtTop

Irritating avatar deleted

Posts: 75
Date: Wed Feb 14 11:38 AM, 2007
Views: 29
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here

        Can you imagine that & I guess the fact that I have 40 pairs of pants I should wear all of them at the same time as well as my shoes, yep putting them all on now. Oh wait I should put all my jackets on too, hang on gotta go get all my gloves & hats & scarves & pj's . Wait there food in the fridge, I should go eat it all because it's there. I guess I should call everyone all the time because I have a phone & apparently I didn't get the rules about if you have something, you have to use it all the time.  Thanks for bringing it to my atten. I must of missed the memo 


First of all, Misty, you must HAVE missed the memo.  You fcktards need to stop saying "must of" or "could of" or "should of".  Really.  At least learn the damn language before you go on polluting the internet any further.

Secondly, that's your response?  Are you five?

Anyway, to my point.  As far as having 40 pairs of pants, good for you.  I've never seen you use that fact to claim that you are an authority on fashion, though.  As you are very well aware (or, you should of known this already ...), the lying old man is more than happy to point to the number following "registered members" and crow about how that proves he is important, relevant, and popular.  The SIMPLE FACT, which none of you have yet rationally disputed, is that this is clearly a misleading number.  Take out the banned members, the user names who have never posted, and the one off posters who just posted to show off their boobie avatar, and that number is reduced by at least 75%.  Anyone can "use this site for news", whether registered or not and you all know that.  So that argument simply has no merit whatsoever.  I've been banned, I can't sign on over there anymore, but I can still access your site and get "information".

Pilchesky spins.  Pilchesky decieves.  Pilchesky flat out lies.  You want to defend that using a third rate overreaction the way that you did?  Go right ahead.  In the absence of facts, that's all you have.  Just know that outside of the dozen or so of you who actually buy into his nonsense, the rest of us see right through that bullsht. 

Sure would be fun to see Janet Evans subpoena Joe and have him account for his numbers, just like she's doing to the mayor.  Yep.  Joe Pilchesky = Chris Doherty. 

PCN conspiracy, anyone?  Polish Catholic Network?

__________________

LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Paul ... I think that we need to look further into this post and the message that I see in Misty's post ...

MistyMtTop

Irritating avatar deleted

Posts: 75
Date: Wed Feb 14 11:38 AM, 2007
Views: 29
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here

        Can you imagine that & I guess the fact that I have 40 pairs of pants I should wear all of them at the same time as well as my shoes, yep putting them all on now. Oh wait I should put all my jackets on too, hang on gotta go get all my gloves & hats & scarves & pj's . Wait there food in the fridge, I should go eat it all because it's there. I guess I should call everyone all the time because I have a phone & apparently I didn't get the rules about if you have something, you have to use it all the time.  Thanks for bringing it to my atten. I must of missed the memo 



Now what I see is just this ... Misty is saying that even though she has 40 pairs of pants ... she does not wear them all ... I get that ... but that translates to me that she has registered as maybe not 40 ... but a considerable number of registered user names at Doherty Deceit ... am I the only one who picked up on that ... she has more user names ... however she uses her favorite ... that's what I got out of that. 

And the PCN ... I think that is more likely than the ICN ... because I tell you this ... I am Irish ... Catholic ... and supported Mayor Doherty in his successful bid for the Mayor of Scranton ... and yet I don't seem to be one of the elite that they are always speaking of ... what happened.  But I do believe that there may be a PCN ... you may have hit on something there!

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
His Girl Thursday


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

I am so glad someone else pointed out the 'must of'.  What illiterates !

Anyway, I guess I'm going to have to go skulking across the hall and delete my user name.  I'm one of them who has a a user name but has never posted.  I signed up just so I could get a closer look at the pictures.  Imagine my surprise when they were nothing special to look at and certainly nothing to laugh about.  Damn, I picked a real pisser of an avatar too

__________________

Stupid people piss me off !
Paul


Fvck you, clown. Sue me.

Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Heh, that newbie at DD, PC, sure is handsome.

PC
Posts: 6
Date: Wed Feb 14 9:48 PM, 2007
Views: 33
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

It's a very valid question.  Joe has challenged us to debate facts.  Here's a very real fact, one that disputes the popularity of the site.   Joe likes to rely on the numbers to flaunt his percieved relevance in this city, and from the very beginning, he was accused of padding his membership roll.  When one poster does, naturally, none of the DD sheep have a factual answer, so they fall back on the Pilchesky defense: spin, false reasoning, and personal insults.  Jim Burch has yet to post one intelligent thing on that site.  I bet Milo, Anti, and Jim share the same brain, among other organs.  You the pole or the hole, Jimmy? Duh huh!

First of all, Misty, you must HAVE missed the memo.  You fcktards need to stop saying "must of" or "could of" or "should of".  Really.  At least learn the damn language before you go on polluting the internet any further.

Secondly, that's your response?  Are you five?

Anyway, to my point.  As far as having 40 pairs of pants, good for you.  I've never seen you use that fact to claim that you are an authority on fashion, though.  As you are very well aware (or, you should of known this already ...), the lying old man is more than happy to point to the number following "registered members" and crow about how that proves he is important, relevant, and popular.  The SIMPLE FACT, which none of you have yet rationally disputed, is that this is clearly a misleading number.  Take out the banned members, the user names who have never posted, and the one off posters who just posted to show off their boobie avatar, and that number is reduced by at least 75%.  Anyone can "use this site for news", whether registered or not and you all know that.  So that argument simply has no merit whatsoever.  I've been banned, I can't sign on over there anymore, but I can still access your site and get "information".

Pilchesky spins.  Pilchesky decieves.  Pilchesky flat out lies.  You want to defend that using a third rate overreaction the way that you did?  Go right ahead.  In the absence of facts, that's all you have.  Just know that outside of the dozen or so of you who actually buy into his nonsense, the rest of us see right through that bullsht. 

Sure would be fun to see Janet Evans subpoena Joe and have him account for his numbers, just like she's doing to the mayor.  Yep.  Joe Pilchesky = Chris Doherty. 

PCN conspiracy, anyone?  Polish Catholic Network?


bo peep



Posts: 426
Date: Wed Feb 14 9:56 PM, 2007
Views: 22
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

hey, nice rant PC. Your not exactly correct in your opinions but at least you're a DObee who posted something more than total, lack of content, bull****. We might be able to actually debate something with you. Pick something nice and let's have at it! Come on people, we have a real live wire DObee here! I like this guy. He has spunk! (not that kind of spunk,,,,,,well) ;)

__________________
Bo PeepolopolisPC
Posts: 6
Date: Wed Feb 14 10:01 PM, 2007
Views: 11
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

The topic is a factual answer to the OP.  Have at it.



What goes up



Posts: 5
Date: Wed Feb 14 10:06 PM, 2007
Views: 7
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

Why don't you bless us with telling us where we can go to get some truth in this city?  Don't take the time to get up off your knees from blowing Doherty to point to the Times.  Your post rings with jealousy over Pilchesky, WOW.  Had that long?  You miss the point.  While other websites have shut down from pressure, or been shut down by Wingtippy, Pilchesky has stood his ground and fought back when the PSP did shut him down.  Awwww, you can't say that about youreslf can you?  Pilchesky stands for an element of justice in this town.  It's the only one we have. It's not always pretty.  It's not always done with refined scholarly writing. It's not always done to literate perfection.  The point you miss it that it gets done.  Pilchesky not only never flinched when the PSP and DA's Office tried to pin him, he pinned them right back with a federal lawsuit.  He's protected each and every poster here since day one, even those he's banned.  No one has ever been outed here.  There's no betrayal here, and that's priceless.  As for the numbers, they're really immaterial. A showing of unity, though.  If only ONE person was posting the information that gets posted here for all to read, that is all that matters.  There was only ONE Paul Revere, not a cavalry of them.  Wars were turned on the infiltration of ONE spy who returned with vital information, just ONE.  There's ONE man at the top of the heap in this city, that's Chris Doherty.  And there's ONE man resisting and opposing him, and that's Joe Pilchesky.  But, like Doherty has an army of corrupt thieves behind him, Pilchesky has an army of posters and spies.  This is working.  If it wasn't, you WOULDN'T HAVE POSTED THAT. 

PC
Posts: 6
Date: Wed Feb 14 10:09 PM, 2007
Views: 2
Quote | ReplyRE: 1,023 registrations, but less than one-half post here.

Nice spin, there Kong, but I was looking to an answer to the question, not more empty rhetoric.

I think Bo Peep wants to be my naughty valentine....

-- Edited by Paul at 22:15, 2007-02-14

__________________

Paul


Fvck you, clown. Sue me.

Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Banned at 11:00.

I wonder if my posts will stay?

__________________

Voice of Reason


Milo ... we told you smoking Ganja would do you no good!

Status: Offline
Posts: 333
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Are you banned or banned again ... Art has been banned so many times I have lost track ... I have proudly been banned 2 times now ... I don't think I'm going to go for a third time.

__________________
This is just one person's opinion -- mine! ~~PD where True Freedom of Speech Rings ... DD ... where freedom of speech only applies if you agree with King Joe Pilchesky ... I prefer true Freedom of Speech!
Paul


Fvck you, clown. Sue me.

Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Banned again.  Paul and PC.

I might go for three, who knows...

__________________

Agamemnon


DD: Where logic & proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

Status: Offline
Posts: 3768
Date:
RE: DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Permalink  
 

Too much in the way of logic and rational thought for the knuckle-dragging crew Paul.

__________________ 
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
PilcheskyDeceit True Freedom of Speech -> True Freedom of Speech ... Pilchesky denies Freedom of Speech -> DD Membership Numbers Questioned
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard