everyone complains about maine but no one wants to help

I would love to help, but he is only allowing people with 1000 posts plus to participate. I suspect that there are many people like me who have been active consistent participators on this forum for many years, but have had things to do and lives to live not on the internet. 1000 is a LOT of time posting.
 
still don't have my email.....:p

and I agree with the 1000 posts, or two bars of green or up

for newcomers, we've had trouble in the past with well embedded trolls.... so better be safe than sorry. Don't worry! Your time will come. Plenty of work to go around.
 
Last edited:
Don't worry! Your time will come. Plenty of work to go around.

If you mean the time when I would meet your criteria, at my current rate of 2 posts per day during active election cycles, I will never meet your criteria while Ron Paul is still living. He is free to make whatever rules he wants, I am just pointing out that people shouldn't be bellyaching that no one wants to help when the stringent criteria likely rules out most of the people who would. In this case, it rules out people like me who find sitting around the internet reading and posting on forums for more than 30-45 minutes a day an unfruitful activity. I am actually the kind of person who :rolleyes:would be very LIKELY to accomplish such a task efficiently and on time!
 
If you mean the time when I would meet your criteria, at my current rate of 2 posts per day during active election cycles, I will never meet your criteria while Ron Paul is still living. He is free to make whatever rules he wants, I am just pointing out that people shouldn't be bellyaching that no one wants to help when the stringent criteria likely rules out most of the people who would. In this case, it rules out people like me who find sitting around the internet reading and posting on forums for more than 30-45 minutes a day an unfruitful activity. I am actually the kind of person who :rolleyes:would be very LIKELY to accomplish such a task efficiently and on time!

Yeah, this.
 
If you mean the time when I would meet your criteria, at my current rate of 2 posts per day during active election cycles, I will never meet your criteria while Ron Paul is still living. He is free to make whatever rules he wants, I am just pointing out that people shouldn't be bellyaching that no one wants to help when the stringent criteria likely rules out most of the people who would. In this case, it rules out people like me who find sitting around the internet reading and posting on forums for more than 30-45 minutes a day an unfruitful activity. I am actually the kind of person who :rolleyes:would be very LIKELY to accomplish such a task efficiently and on time!

Kinda cool.
 
^This is true

Expressing willingness to help tends to get one involved in helping.
Thanks shemdogg et al for setting up this effort.

To anyone who hasn't tried it getting more directly involved may be daunting but it feels great to get hands on and know you're making an impact. I highly recommend it.
 
Just how many who can actually vote in Washington county have >1000 posts?

I live a couple counties over and will be there Saturday morning to cheer lead the crowd.

I hope that helps and counts for something--- (even as a newbe on this particular forum).

We with fewer than 1000 posts plan to make headlines baby!!!
 
still don't have my email.....:p

and I agree with the 1000 posts, or two bars of green or up

for newcomers, we've had trouble in the past with well embedded trolls.... so better be safe than sorry. Don't worry! Your time will come. Plenty of work to go around.

Well, I've noticed a lot of times when someone has just joined and replies to every thread with "bump" or something really hard for about a month until they get 1000 posts (or more) - I'd be way more distrustful of someone with 1000 posts that occurred in a short time and then nothing - if I were trying to get to be "an embedded troll" (whatever that is) I'd get up to 1000 posts real quick during my "embedding" period. If one was truly serious about a meaningful post threshold that did its best to exclude "embedded trolls" then the post count ought to be some sort of formula like -

((mean_posts_per_month+months_of_membership)/(months_where_postcount_exceeds_mean_monthly_postcount_by_a_factor_of_10_or_more)*(percentage_of_posts_that_just_say_bump_or_this^^)

or something like that, otherwise 1000 posts is a useless measurement of trust.
 
Back
Top