Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Izzy]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

In all seriousness, here's another stat: Foxes Talk currently has 22,724 members (just checked). How many ever post on the Politics thread? About 20? So, about 0.1%?

 

And out of those 20, only about 3 actually know what they’re talking about tbf 

[Alf Bentley]

15 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

And out of those 20, only about 3 actually know what they’re talking about tbf 

 

DT, Moose and Sharpe's Fox? 

[Finnegan]

54 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

In all seriousness, here's another stat: Foxes Talk currently has 22,724 members (just checked). How many ever post on the Politics thread? About 20? So, about 0.1%?

Granted, a lot will be extinct/lurker accounts, a lot of people are too busy to post but might have an interest in politics etc. Even so, only a small minority have much interest.

 

Sorry Alf but I have a few issues with this. 

 

Firstly, foxestalk doesn't have 22,724 active members. It probably doesn't even have 22,724 unique members, I bet there's a reasonable amount of duplication in there, either deliberate or people who signed up once, came back years later and signed up again. 

 

A lot of people sign up to discuss a specific incident, a sacking, a shock result, then never post again. There'll be a lot of accounts from away fans or temporary visitors who were either trolling or had genuine comments. 

 

A huge, huge bulk of the genuine and fairly active accounts will only ever really come on and use the LCFC section or occasionally general sport and won't venture in to General Chat at all. 

 

You'd want to really be looking at people with over 1000 posts who have about a minimum of 30-40% or so in Gen Chat to actually have a tidy sample pool to test. You'd probably be down to a couple hundred accounts by this point, maybe a few thousand at absolute tops and even then a huge bulk would be people who have left (including many who would post in this thread but aren't here anymore Daggers, Lisa, etc.) 

 

Then finally, you have to actually consider the thread itself. It's awful. It switches between stodgy, dry, dull monologues from highly informed but in no way entertaining posters (sorry) or alternatively bitchy cat fights between a few usual subjects. 

 

In both cases, there are two distinct teams, one each for entrenched left and right, and both have such extreme party political bias that the vast majority of posts are extremely predictable and nobody's views ever shift. 

 

Occasionally someone like Matt or yourself who are a little more nuanced in the arts of Internet debate will make a concession and offer praise (that's occasionally a backhanded compliment but sometimes a genuine one) to the opposite side but even then these come across more as a tactical move to say "it's not like I'm unreasonable, I can praise Labour/Tories" which then justifies a return to overwhelming bias for the next ten pages. 

 

It all adds up to a complete and total turn off that is in no way attractive to a casual poster, even if they have a huge genuine interest in politics and an overwhelming amount of knowledge. There are some folk who might have legitimate political interest but just simply don't come here to flex it and there'll be other folk that just take one look at the sheer density of this thread and think better of it. 

 

Reddit has endless political subs, r/Politics is one of the biggest going with over 4m subscribers. Then every nation has its own, Canadian politics, UK politics, German politics all with hundreds of thousands of subscribers and millions of comments. 

 

People are interested and are talking about it but people largely come to foxestalk for either football or light entertainment and most accounts aren't active, so this is really not any kind of metric to even vaguely measure public opinion. 

 

Let's say about 50 odd people have posted more than once in the Depression thread, would you say it's accurate to claim less than a fraction of one percent of the population have mental health issues? 

 

(Apologies I really thought this would be a two sentence post  you were probably only making a throw away comment haha) 

 

Oh and edit: I'm not suggesting this thread should stop or anyone should change how they use it, I'm not it's gatekeeper and clearly the clique in here like it how it is, that's fine. I'm only really looking to point out how it can't be used to measure really anything at all haha. 

Edited 28 September 2018 by Finnegan

[Alf Bentley]

13 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Sorry Alf but I have a few issues with this. 

 

Firstly, foxestalk doesn't have 22,724 active members. It probably doesn't even have 22,724 unique members, I bet there's a reasonable amount of duplication in there, either deliberate or people who signed up once, came back years later and signed up again. 

 

A lot of people sign up to discuss a specific incident, a sacking, a shock result, then never post again. There'll be a lot of accounts from away fans or temporary visitors who were either trolling or had genuine comments. 

 

A huge, huge bulk of the genuine and fairly active accounts will only ever really come on and use the LCFC section or occasionally general sport and won't venture in to General Chat at all. 

 

You'd want to really be looking at people with over 1000 posts who have about a minimum of 30-40% or so in Gen Chat to actually have a tidy sample pool to test. You'd probably be down to a couple hundred accounts by this point, maybe a few thousand at absolute tops and even then a huge bulk would be people who have left (including many who would post in this thread but aren't here anymore Daggers, Lisa, etc.) 

 

Then finally, you have to actually consider the thread itself. It's awful. It switches between stodgy, dry, dull monologues from highly informed but in no way entertaining posters (sorry) or alternatively bitchy cat fights between a few usual subjects. 

 

In both cases, there are two distinct teams, one each for entrenched left and right, and both have such extreme party political bias that the vast majority of posts are extremely predictable and nobody's views ever shift. 

 

Occasionally someone like Matt or yourself who are a little more nuanced in the arts of Internet debate will make a concession and offer praise (that's occasionally a backhanded compliment but sometimes a genuine one) to the opposite side but even then these come across more as a tactical move to say "it's not like I'm unreasonable, I can praise Labour/Tories" which then justifies a return to overwhelming bias for the next ten pages. 

 

It all adds up to a complete and total turn off that is in no way attractive to a casual poster, even if they have a huge genuine interest in politics and an overwhelming amount of knowledge. There are some folk who might have legitimate political interest but just simply don't come here to flex it and there'll be other folk that just take one look at the sheer density of this thread and think better of it. 

 

Reddit has endless political subs, r/Politics is one of the biggest going with over 4m subscribers. Then every nation has its own, Canadian politics, UK politics, German politics all with hundreds of thousands of subscribers and millions of comments. 

 

People are interested and are talking about it but people largely come to foxestalk for either football or light entertainment and most accounts aren't active, so this is really not any kind of metric to even vaguely measure public opinion. 

 

Let's say about 50 odd people have posted more than once in the Depression thread, would you say it's accurate to claim less than a fraction of one percent of the population have mental health issues? 

 

(Apologies I really thought this would be a two sentence post ) 

 

Oh and edit: I'm not suggesting this thread should stop or anyone should change how they use it, I'm not it's gatekeeper and clearly the clique in here like it how it is, that's fine. I'm only really looking to point out how it can't be used to measure really anything at all haha. 

 

Sorry, Finners, but my head has just exploded after reading this stodgy, dry, dull monologue from a highly informed but in no way entertaining poster (sorry). 

 

I'm going back to real life....

[Finnegan]

1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Sorry, Finners, but my head has just exploded after reading this stodgy, dry, dull monologue from a highly informed but in no way entertaining poster (sorry). 

 

I'm going back to real life....

 

Yeah I became well aware of the irony of that about a third of the way in. 

 

But I never made out I was an exception to any of the above

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

Firstly, foxestalk doesn't have 22,724 active members. It probably doesn't even have 22,724 unique members, I bet there's a reasonable amount of duplication in there, either deliberate or people who signed up once, came back years later and signed up again.  

Sorry to break this but aside from yourself me and Alf are the only two posters on here.

 

The other 22,722 are all different Moosebreath accounts.

Edited 28 September 2018 by MattP

[Finnegan]

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

Sorry to break this but aside from yourself me and Alf are the only two posters on here.

 

The other 22,722 are all different Moose breath accounts.

 

 

[Stadt]

There’s quite a lot of lurkers in this thread tbf, I’m very apathetic to politics, I was a bit more interested around when I turned 18 which coincided with the referendum and GEs. It’s an enjoyable read but I have basically nothing to add so leave it to the more we’ll versed posters.

 

What I will add though is that you actually get quite a balanced view overall from the contributions from both sides 

[davieG]

 

 

I've just ordered 22,722 

[Carl the Llama]

Shit lads we've been rumbled

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Shit lads we've been rumbled

 

"Rumbled"?

 

Is that when a certain poster gently but unequivocally points out the error of your ways, then signs off with a "X"?

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

37 minutes ago, Stadt said:

There’s quite a lot of lurkers in this thread tbf, I’m very apathetic to politics, I was a bit more interested around when I turned 18 which coincided with the referendum and GEs. It’s an enjoyable read but I have basically nothing to add so leave it to the more we’ll versed posters.

 

What I will add though is that you actually get quite a balanced view overall from the contributions from both sides 

Agree with this

 

My forays into this thread remind me of when Amartey comes on the pitch and gets 2 yellow cards in 10 minutes

[Guest MattP]

Leanne Wood removed as Plaid Cymru leader. Long overdue.

 

Adam Price takes over, know little about him.

[Finnegan]

57 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

"Rumbled"?

 

Is that when a certain poster gently but unequivocally points out the error of your ways, then signs off with a "X"?

 

You forgot to say your penis is small 

 

X

Edited 28 September 2018 by Finnegan

[Voll Blau]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Leanne Wood removed as Plaid Cymru leader. Long overdue.

 

Adam Price takes over, know little about him.

I'd imagine he was the one sub-editors across the land were hoping for. Headline writer's dream, a politician with a surname like that.

[Guest MattP]

Marr gave May an absolute roasting today, she was bad even for her. 

[Guest MattP]

Only positive is Labour polling seems to have tanked since after the conference. 

 

[lifted*fox]

 

 

[RumbleFox]

On 28/09/2018 at 09:51, Izzy Muzzett said:

And out of those 20, only about 3 actually know what they’re talking about tbf 

There's a fourth.  X

[RumbleFox]

On 28/09/2018 at 12:28, Alf Bentley said:

 

"Rumbled"?

 

Is that when a certain poster gently but unequivocally points out the error of your ways, then signs off with a "X"?

You rang?  X

[Dr The Singh]

5 hours ago, MattP said:

Marr gave May an absolute roasting today, she was bad even for her. 

She should have got up and danced.....well she isn't going to be pm for too long and with those dance moves, UK's top strip clubs will be chasing her

[Izzy]

5 hours ago, lifted*fox said:

 

 

Nice sensational headline but actually it's BS.

 

If you look closely you'll see that from the 60 odd people in the picture, there's at least 15 that are under 45 

 

Just saying 

Edited 30 September 2018 by Izzy Muzzett

[Salisbury Fox]

5 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Nice sensational headline but actually it's BS.

 

If you look closely you'll see that from the 60 odd people in the picture, there's at least 15 that are over 45 

 

Just saying 

And not a Palestinian flag in sight, the horror 

[Guest MattP]

47 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Nice sensational headline but actually it's BS.

 

If you look closely you'll see that from the 60 odd people in the picture, there's at least 15 that are over 45 

 

Just saying 

Prominent Corbyn supporter in can't count shocker. 

[Wymsey]

 

Could he do much worse though?..