[1eyedjack]

Vampyr, on 2011-June-16, 17:40, said:

I found it a bit unsavoury that another member chose to make his very first post in support of the guy.

It is conceivable (I only speculate) that he was motivated to do so by reason of the OP receiving a vote of -3. Certainly, if I had had positive experiences of lessons with him and saw that reaction to his advertisement I can imagine that I would have posted in his defence.

[aguahombre]

1eyedjack, on 2011-June-16, 16:50, said:

So what you appear to be saying (and by all means correct me) is that the forum admin have decided that this sort of post is OK but as a forum member in order to express displeasure at that decision it is appropriate to vote down any post that applies that policy. Just wanted to be clear on that point.

Vampyr, on 2011-June-16, 17:31, said:

Is there something wrong with that? Or would you prefer that you get the job of filtering every downvote and deciding whether the reason is good enough?

FWIW. I don't think the one-eyed person was volunteering for a monitor job. Rather, it seems he/she was saying that it is distasteful when someone posts, in accordance with the rules of the site, that person is subjected to downvotes ---which to the rest of us don't matter much, but to him might adversely affect his income.

And for no other reason than that the voter objects to the policy of the site and/or to professionism in-general. The analogy to a fart on a train might well be applied to the voter and his current right to downvote anything he chooses, for any reason whether others like it or not.

If I don't like the advertisement, I might recognize that there are others to might find it useful --and, thus simply go on to another forum.

[Bbradley62]

Vampyr, on 2011-June-16, 17:40, said:

I found it a bit unsavoury that another member chose to make his very first post in support of the guy.

I don't have a problem with that, except for the fact that Supporter is anonymous. OP signed his real name at the bottom of his post, so prospective students can research him; Supporter did not. Maybe "real name" should be a standard (but optional) field in everyone's profile?

[BunnyGo]

matmat, on 2011-June-16, 01:40, said:

And if the ones that I do want to hear from only have sufficient time to reply "agree with the pinkbunnyrabbit," then so be it.

Some sort of dig at me? C'mon matmat, just come out and say it.

[Bbradley62]

matmat, on 2011-June-16, 01:40, said:

And if the ones that I do want to hear from only have sufficient time to reply "agree with the pinkbunnyrabbit," then so be it.

It takes even less time for them to simply upvote the bunny's post.

[matmat]

BunnyGo, on 2011-June-16, 21:28, said:

Some sort of dig at me? C'mon matmat, just come out and say it.

i thought you were the tealbunnyrabbit.

[Free]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-16, 08:25, said:

Sorting the member list by most recent join date and filtering for at least 10 posts, you'll see the following reputations: -2, 0, 0, -4, +1, 0, +2, +1, 0, -8, 0, 0, +3, 0, +2, 0, +3, +1, +1, 0.

But I suppose it never occurred to you to check your facts before making this kind of claim.

You're right, it never occurred to me to check this because I didn't realize this was available in the search function. I stand corrected and I'm sorry, no need to get bitchy about it.