buthery carnage massacre slaughter

[Suzi]

Re: butchery carnage massacre slaughter

If it continues like this I will be left with no votes. Many old votes were removed in the past few days. Since I had only a few per poem to start with, now 23 of my submissions have no vote, and 44 just 1 vote. Also 44 received 2 votes, 26 got 3 votes, four have 4 votes, and one has 5. That's all.

uuuuuuuuuummm...how does one remove votes? *scratches head*

 

[WickedEve]

Re: Re: butchery carnage massacre slaughter

This has gone too far!! IT has happened!

I had several poems that only had 1 or2 votes. Now they have NONE !!!
How is it possible that ALL VOTES are fraudulent?

Regards,                 Rybka

I've had votes disappear off and on over the year. Maybe some of it is fraud and some of it is screwy software. But I don't worry about it anymore. I turned my voting off. I'll leave in on for new poems for a few days or so and then it's off. (except for 1 poem that's in the running for some monthly thingy) Voting was getting me too uptight when I received those darn 1's or no votes at all.

 

[Star At Sunrise]

Creepy

I have to say, this thread is creepy and bizarre. Halloween is coming early this year.

But voting for poetry is bogus anyway. And I don't mean false. I mean it in the old school way. Would you have children simply to enter them in beauty contests?

There's some cool parts about voting. Hopefully when a new reader goes to the top rated poems, they're getting an accurate tally of the most popular poems. But I don't vote on my poems at all anymore, and don't really care about the rankings. If a poem means something to me, then that's enough.

Who really cares anyway? It's kinda cool to look at the vote tallys, but I think the views are most important. I've got my own theory as to why some poems get very few votes compared to the views, but I'll keep that opinion to myself in order not to get anyone mad!

 

[Suzi]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

I am content if people read my writings and respond by their feedback...voting is nice, but it does not replace an email, telling me they like or dislike it. Or even telling me their emotional reaction to the poem...Feedback is feedback...

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Dear Senna,

Why must you be so angry

This is not for you to say or know. You just did something unfair. This is not a cultural way to discuss issues.

... and force a confrontation here?

Just the opposite. Laurel has confronted us, especially myself. Angeline,

                I am doing everything to avoid further
                escalation of the confrontation caused by Laurel.

You wish to make a point about what you believe are fradulent voting practices.

No, Angeline, please do not distort things. You disappoint me.

Let me quote Laurel:

The system will occasionally find a cluster of fraud votes from months ago and dredge these up for our review. If we find them to be fraud, they are removed,

This is her response to my observation that votes for my poems were vanishing. She says in effect that she and her stuff found several 5s awarded to my poems to be a fraud. This is false, this is offensive. She has to apologize for that or to face the consequences of such a false accusation. I ask her a very sensible thing which she should have done right away. She should simply and fully apologize to me and to those of readers of Literotica (possibly some of them present on this forum) who voted 5 on some of my poems and whose votes were removed.

The second would be that, recognizing that you cannot force what you want,

Laurel should be willing to apologize to me. One should be willing to act honorably.

you find another site [...]

You are not the first one trying to push me out, how nice of you. Too late. My leaving Literotica would not change the fact that Laurel has crossed a line which she should not. She still would have to apologize to me. For you, Angeline, to be called a fraud may mean very little. For me it is not acceptable.

Angeline, there is such a thing called justice. I want justice. Why are you denying me my rights? It's not me pressing anything. It was Laurel who added insult to injury, when she has repeated in a response to Rybka but addressing me (I quote):

        Fraud votes were removed


And Angeline, I was never rude. For a contrast, word "fuck", hell" and other violent expressions and its derivatives. plus very thinly disguised primitive insults were directed at me more than once by the participants of this forum (but not by you and not by Laurel).

My intent in saying it is to speak honestly and not engage in battle.

If honesty is important to you, if you would like a peaceful conclusion to this unfortunate incident caused by Laurel, then you should address your appeal to Laurel, you should ask her to apologize. I don't want any conflict, I don't want any confrontation. All I need is her apology for her false accusation. This is very little to ask in such a situation.

Angeline, it's very simple: if you know that the removed 5s for my poems were fraud then say so and justify your statement, tell some people here that they have committed a fraud. If you think that these 5s were not a fraud then ask Laurel to do the right thing, to apologize. If you have no opinion then don't press me, it's not nice. Stay neutral.

How is it that none of you has anything to tell Laurel when she calls you frauds? Why all these comments, some of them (not angeline's!) outright ugly, are all directed against me? Don't you have a minimum of selfrespect? Do you really feel good being called frauds?!

Best regards,

 

[Angeline]

I do not know whether any vote anyone received

is fraudulent, Senna. I don't follow the votes. You may notice that I never ask for people to vote on my poems. I rarely even look at the top list unless I am checking for something specific.

I am sorry that you feel as you do about my comments, but it is cetainly your perogative to interpret them as you see fit. I stand by what I said and believe it to be a logical explanation--from my point of view--of what I felt was happening. My intent was not to attack you, nor was it an underhanded attempt to make you leave this site. You have every right to be here and, what's more, I like reading your poems and I appreciate the helpful reviews you've given mine.

I am not going to nitpick over details--that is a waste of time for both of us. You feel the way you feel and I feel, well, differently. I don't expect to always agree with people or have them agree with me. And having said that, I look forward to reading your poems and am always appreciative of the feedback I receive from you.

Thanks for listening,
Angeline

 

[KillerMuffin]

5's are as fraudulent as ones. You have yet to prove that they cannot be. You have yet to prove that several 5 votes from one person is not fraud while several 1 ones from one person is fraud. You don't even have a reasonable argument for your position, just a flat statement that you are correct. The reason why you don't have a reasonable argument, let alone logical, is because there is no argument that can defend your claim. You cannot pick and choose what's fraud and what's not fraud. It's the same across the board. Friends padding voting is just as wrong as enemies voting you down.

You do not know that your 5's are not fraud.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

uh?

Angeline, it's very simple: if you know that the removed 5s for my poems were fraud then say so and justify your statement, tell some people here that they have committed a fraud. If you think that these 5s were not a fraud then ask Laurel to do the right thing, to apologize. If you have no opinion then don't press me, it's not nice. Stay neutral.

How is it that none of you has anything to tell Laurel when she calls you frauds? Why all these comments, some of them (not angeline's!) outright ugly, are all directed against me? Don't you have a minimum of selfrespect? Do you really feel good being called frauds?!

Best regards,

From where I'm standing, these comments denote a very odd identity you seem to see between your intrinsic value as a poet and the votes for your poems (votes you have often considered being insignificant). Laurel said some votes were, in face of evidence provided by the system, fraudulent, she didn't claim that you, or any of us, are frauds.

The question is, do you have any logical basis to claim them not to be?

Either way, what's your point?

 

[Rybka]

5's are as fraudulent as ones. You have yet to prove that they cannot be. You have yet to prove that several 5 votes from one person is not fraud while several 1 ones from one person is fraud. You don't even have a reasonable argument for your position, just a flat statement that you are correct. The reason why you don't have a reasonable argument, let alone logical, is because there is no argument that can defend your claim. You cannot pick and choose what's fraud and what's not fraud. It's the same across the board. Friends padding voting is just as wrong as enemies voting you down.

You do not know that your 5's are not fraud.

Granted, everything you say, KM. - But when a poem only has 1 vote and that is suddenly gone???
Surely a single vote can't be fraudulent? Isn't your friend or enemy, or you yourself allowed to vote at all??

With all this said I will put this dead horse to sleep. . . Where'd you say your bed was?

Regards,                 Rybka

 

[Senna Jawa]

5's are as fraudulent as ones. [...]

Nothing but noise. Nothing serious to reply to.

 

[Never]

Senna Jawa:
"Nothing but noise. Nothing serious to reply to."

It is a tale.
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing