The Barisone threads

[Scribbler]

General thought.

Algorithms on chat boards are entirely automated be cause there aren’t enough hours in the day for an actual human to subjectively rank posts by relevance or accuracy. And the bots aren’t good enough to do that yet.

This is why every single online modality uses an algorithm based on some combination of likes, other emojis and/or direct engagement. That’s how FB decides on Top Posts and Top Responses.

This method has flaws when it elevates stupid fights online because they get traffic, but honestly I don’t know how else you could do it. It has to use data generated by the site to automatically run the ranking algorithm.

[La-LaPopRider]

Well, I don’t “junk things.” I screenshot them. Then, I may quote them.

For example, KnightsMom has made the fictitious claim numerous times that I have posted I “own a Ruger.” Not only that, she posted I said own a “matching pink & black Ruger.” When asked to produce evidence of this very serious and libelous accusation she posted a fb post made by her friend “Suzy,” who “agreed,” she “recalls seeing that too.” That is not evidence of a post made by me. That is evidence that KnightsMom has fb friends who agreed with her nonsense.

Further, it would be (and is, factually) a crime to post such accusations and fail to immediately disclose this “evidence,” of hers to law enforcement as this would be an obstruction of justice and “interfering with an ongoing criminal investigation.”

I then sent her a pm. During that exchange many of her replies were “yawn,” or, “boooooring.” Then, she has chosen to act as a victim of some type of “harassment,” on the threads. My request wrt her (flagged, numerous times) post, which I sent in a pm after reading YOUR post, (which I will post in screenshot if you’d like) was to remove her libelous post. If her response was “yawn,” she probably should refrain from stating she had been “harassed.” Bored? Or Harassed? Can’t be both.

Additionally, if KM is making a criminal accusation here on this BB, the TOS literally state that she must do so in the first person - using her real name. She has not complied with CoTh TOS or the actual law outside this BB in making such serious claims such as, “LK has posted she owns a Ruger.” Or, “LK has posted she owns a matching ruger.”

Now that we know through reliable reporting and much more reputable news sources than “CoTh,” that the gun owner has entered into a PTI agreement and admitted to owning the gun used in the shooting, KnightsMom should be made aware publicly by @Moderator_1 that she must post EVIDENCE of the lie she told here. (Many, actually.) These are not lies which cannot be verified by mods as lies. They can easily be verified as lies- and should be.

When I pm’d this user saying subpoenas had been distributed as stated in “Sdel’s, post,” the moderator said they received no such subpoenas. Yet, you, yourself posted “it was interesting watching arguments today and learning that posts by KnightsMom (and some other poster) made into evidence.” KnightsMom reply to you was this: “yeah, it wasn’t on my list of things to do to be dragged into this mess.”

Do you believe any court on the planet is not going to pursue subpoenas to identify a person whose statements on Coth “made into evidence?” Do you believe courts say, “look! We have evidence! A username on Coth called KnightsMom provided it!” No. That is not how it works. I believe CoTH is well aware of this. It seems that you, however, are not. But, we will return to this topic (of subpoenas) soon. I have many more concerns and, as promised, screenshots to back them up.

[La-LaPopRider]

TBC- even FB has a system which flags posted links which do not provide reliable information & literally labels it “false information.” FB and Twitter do not allow false or misleading links, “news stories,” or the like to be posted anymore without being labeled “false/misleading information contained in this post.” If CoTH adopted this method zero links to articles by Nancy Jaffer would be allowed, as an example. Or, it would be labeled, “false/misleading information.”

General thought.

[La-LaPopRider]

@trubandloki

I do not believe you can delete the OP itself to make someone else the OP. You can delete the content, but not the post itself.
An E in a circle could also be any number of other posters whose screen name starts with an E.

Oh. Really? An “E,” in a circle could be “any number of posters?” Perhaps, as usual, you are confused. I very clearly stated a “green E signifying “Eggbutt.” Are you saying this poster has many “E’s in a circle?” Never mind. I’ll help you out using a better visual.

I’ll even do you one better. Eggbutt (the green E with the most open threads on this topic & naturally, the most post count) also makes a blatantly FALSE claim right here. Regarding a cop’s testimony. No cop testified he “found a second clip that the first cop missed.” This was an admission of statements made my Barisone hearing. NOT a testimony hearing. No such claim by either officer was made. Making up such things will not make them true just bc some attention craved NC woman says so.

Are you now clear on who we are talking about? I can easily make it clearer, since I have numerous posts by you, claiming to be “confused,” at every turn. Lmk if I should post those. As well your own edits AFTER the thread was, in fact, closed. For instance, your many added screenshots to posts you made prior to its closing, after it had been closed. Shall I provide you these screenshots to ensure your understanding, rather than risk your confusion? Lmk and I will be glad to help.

@Moderator_1 when an easily verifiable lie, as posted by Eggbutt in her false narrative of a court transcript, is posted by a user who is knowingly lying, what steps can be taken by mods to correct material which can easily be verified as factually incorrect material? Anything? Or, is it up to us as coTh users to locate the facts and waste many pages of “discussion,” to do what a mod can do with just one post, and often do, especially when it is a more “senior,” member requesting “moderator clarification.”

Further, could you please re-clarify why it is certain posters are banned for reasons which were sent to them in a pm by moderators, (some of them screenshot) but other posters who violated CoTH TOS in much more violent, egregious & notorious way have not been so much as admonished? I believe this answer would be appreciated by many, many users. If you would like, I can post these screenshots and black out the names of the banned - but not the reason FOR the banning - then provide you with screenshots of users like Eggbutt (who admits in an above screenshot to having inside knowledge of users moderators have privately admonished) and others who have severely broken rules and never received so much as a “slap on the wrist,” by those charged with doing just that. Thanks in advance.

[trubandloki]

@La-LaPopRider, you want to be mad at me so much you missed my point. I did not say that Eggbutt did or did not start lots of threads. I simply said that a green E is not always Eggbutt. Just like a green L is not always you or a grey C is not always CurrentlyHorseless. The colors in the circle are not unique to one user.
I also was not confused when I said you can not delete the original post, which was the thing you were saying happened, you now know it could not happen. I am not going to dispute who started the most threads on the topic, and last time I checked there is nothing wrong with starting threads on any topic, even if someone does not agree with the content.