-->
@RationalMadman
I think I'd consider that virtue signalling more than narcissism
Hall of Fame Upcoming
Posts
Archived
Total:
41
-->
@Vader
virtue signalling is a trait of narcissists especially when it is blatant that the individual doesn't do it when nobody is watching (doesn't stay true to the value).
-->
@RationalMadman
I'd agree with that, but I don't think that virtue signaling alone is a narcissistic thing to do since it does focus on others. Voting yourself is more narcissistic because while you are voting yourself, you take away others chances at being voted because you voted yourself. You can argue virtue signaling is more deceptive, but it's effect are not as bad as voting yourself
-->
@Vader
I'm sorry is that a joke? One involves socially pressuring others to reward you for not voting yourself, the other is just honest about your intentions and beliefs about yourself.
I know which is worse. If Obama didn't vote Obama in his elections, I'd see that as bullshit cockiness.
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm sorry is that a joke? One involves socially pressuring others to reward you for not voting yourself, the other is just honest about your intentions and beliefs about yourself.
No one is socially pressuring anyone to vote for someone. I didn't vote for myself in the first Hall of Fame and didn't win. I didn't signal that (and yes I ultimately did because I was very narrow minded at the time) I wanted votes. I just felt like I shouldn't vote myself, not because I had an ulterior motive
I know which is worse. If Obama didn't vote Obama in his elections, I'd see that as bullshit cockiness.
There's a huge difference between a websites Hall of Fame and an entire country
When is the Hall of fame? If it's when I'm going to be on vacation, can I vote early?
-->
@TheUnderdog
Nominations tomorrow through the 8th,
Proper voting on the 9th through the 12th.
-->
@Barney
How many votes does it take to be in the hall of fame?
-->
@TheUnderdog
I don't recall if there is a set minimum. I would assume if the site truly died it wouldn't be worth the effort to add anything that received literally only one or two votes, especially if that was the peak amount of voting anything received.
Or if you mean how many votes to win: It depends on how popular the other options are. I would guess around 9? Last year the winners for the user category had 13 each.
-->
@fauxlaw
I suggest getting an honorable mention as the debater in the top 20 with the most no-vote ties: 8 of 11 ties that no one, zip, nada, bothered to read and vote. Over 400 of you who are "active," which is one of the site activities, yeah?, cannot be bothered to read and vote. If I was not also in the top ten in voting [in fact, for my single year, plus presence, I've voted more often than just 7 of you], so I'm trying to contribute, and wish that more did, as well. Thanks, everybody for your ignorance. What is this site all about, anyway? It's apparently premature efactulation; a bunch of adolescents who have no idea what stuff is really all about [and yet, most of you are well. beyond the trustable age, and are not yet trustable. That's 30, by the way, to boomers]. I have two more debates in in voting with no votes; go ahead; make it a round 10. There happen to be two more in voting with no votes. Make it an even dozen no vote ties. Congratulations. I have a life and I'll get back to it.Au revoir.
Typical of Fauxlaw to leave with a flurry of complaints of which literally zero, zip, nada people care about. What less did the membership except than from the great Fauxlaw to exists with a cacophony of mud sticks thrown at "everybody", who neck deep in "ignorance". There's a saying which says that when someone is gone, they live on through their legacy, and the things they leave behind. I suppose what we have from Fauxlaw is the tantrum throwing geezer who hates the "ignorant" membership, and who doesn't understand the fundamentals of the English language.
-->
@fauxlaw
I suggest getting an honorable mention as the debater in the top 20 with the most no-vote ties: 8 of 11 ties that no one, zip, nada, bothered to read and vote. Over 400 of you who are "active," which is one of the site activities, yeah?, cannot be bothered to read and vote. If I was not also in the top ten in voting [in fact, for my single year, plus presence, I've voted more often than just 7 of you], so I'm trying to contribute, and wish that more did, as well. Thanks, everybody for your ignorance. What is this site all about, anyway? It's apparently premature efactulation; a bunch of adolescents who have no idea what stuff is really all about [and yet, most of you are well. beyond the trustable age, and are not yet trustable. That's 30, by the way, to boomers]. I have two more debates in in voting with no votes; go ahead; make it a round 10. There happen to be two more in voting with no votes. Make it an even dozen no vote ties. Congratulations. I have a life and I'll get back to it.Au revoir.
Sorry about that man. You should vote bump your debates more, and maybe people will see them before they expire. I bump mine pretty often and I don't have a single no vote debate.