Tired of Bhimaprasad Maiti's poor quality entries

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
abiquiuense Contributing Member • Posts: 855
Fair enough; and, now that I've got your attention . . .

By standing on the Shoulders of Giants wrote:

Yuge accusation ... but just like "the Russian" conspiracy theory, its all fake news and slander.

But, yet, there it is.


Or, are there two "By standing on the Shoulders of Giants?"

Glad to see that you didn't give yourself a high 5.0. But, you did score a bit on the left side. I really don't see why any one would have given you those 1,5s to ,05. Sad.

Anyway, good photo. Now, how do you account for the apparent "Host-Hosts-Honestly Good-Entry?

But, whoa there Nellie, don't break a sweat on my account. Frankly, I don't think anybody on this thread cares one way or another whether hosts get to cheat. Sure goes a long way for establishing credibility for the site.

Those are the facts. I make no judgement.

My response to your OP says it all. You bringing your subject out on the streets, amounts to bullying. You owe him a bigly apology.  At the least, you could have given him some constructive criticism, and some immediate feed back.  But, no.  You threw him out the saloon doors so fast I could have sworn I saw Eastwood holding his lips and saying OMG.  Oh, wait a minute, he probably is saying that right about now.

And, inasmuch as your wounded diatribe is concerned, it just amounts to a bunch of snow on my shoulders, honestly Mr. Flake, this ain't no fake accusation.

Visit the link. " Lordy, it looks like there really is a negative."


I'd like to know how you did that.  I think you just "hijacked" your integrity.  I don't know.  I could be wrong.

But, it happened long ago, and it's only once; right?

Now, could you tell us what you mean by not allowing any hint of a political statement in our entries?  Is that some sort of dictatorship and not evident in Hong Kong?

Abiquiuense signing out and asking you to help root out those sandbaggers.

Start with an anonymized list of how everybody voted in that challenge and highlight your anonymous number.

Read the comments on the link below.


Way to put your Hong Kong feet into your mouth, bad hombre. FY ignorant brain's information, DPR's codings made it technically impossible for a host to enter her own challenges. (A fantasy which have kept you awake and aroused for nights, as you lay on your cell's bunk frothing in the mouth, I could imagine)

BTW. .. it's rude to hijack another member's thread. But we, as in the rest of the world gets it. Merica is half full of rude yanks like you. But I don't hold it against you, as I wouldn't against people who went off their meds.

Enough for now, attention-thirsty Ah Bi.

abiquiuense wrote:

By standing on the Shoulders of Giants wrote:

The member above have periodically entered photo challenges. However, I'm so tired of his photos. I consistently find his pics either off coloured (some magenta hue), or poorly focussed with huge amount of blur as shown in this one. Composition is poor too. Sometimes I wonder if he purposely find the worst shots he have to enter my challenges.

I'm not making fun nor being mean spirited of any physical problems he might be experiencing, but for the love of God, he need to step up his game, esp when it comes to photo IQ. I find it astonishing his pics came out of the Nikon D610. I just don't buy that fact.

"You just don't have to put them down in public."*1

You were doing so well in your post to RuthC (who is taking a break)*2 in re your opinion of "repeat entrants." What happened to you?

fn #1

fn #2 (Comment Section for the Challenge)

RuthC is taking a well-deserved break, I might add, what with all those challenges hosted, and those 129,554 votes that she has cast. That is a resume.

A look at your current voting practices reveals that you seldom look at the other challenges with the intent to vote. Fair observation?

Now, a few threads back, I raised the motion that hosts should not enter challenges. I backed off. Now, you've given me proof. We should reconsider the motion.

I apply a cursive investigation to your record. I'm floored by the beauty of your bird (great composition; btw)
which caused me to look at the eye-catching, upside down bird (Great delivery!)
and, "Lordy; I hope there is a negative," what do I find?

A host entering his own challenge. Sad.
A host, very kindly supplied an anonymized listing of how members voted in one of my entries. I didn't want to know that. I wanted to know how a host could use my votes cast to project a method by which I could evaluate my photographs.
That host has inadvertently given me a reason by which I can ask you, legitimately, how did you get to enter your own challenge, and, please show us how you voted in your contra-challengers' entries. Give us an anonymized report, and highlight your own.

As I look through the record, I find that, not unlike "Max Iso," in the OffTopic, you've changed avatars. That would account for how it appears that you don't vote. Sometimes the scandal is worse than the affliction.

RuthC votes; and votes often. You are an enigma.
Now we can move on to eliminating sandbaggers.
Now you are subpoened duces ticum.
You have the floor.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow