THREAD POSTERS PLEASE READ THIS -URGENT

**ONEDUNME** · #1 (**permalink**) 15-11-2006, 16:38

Whilst we welcome discussion on all types of betting events on this forum, we do get an awful lot of.....how can I put it sensitively?....spamming bastards, who post one tip a month and leave a link to their sites in it.

Whilst links within posts are not absolutely banned, we feel it only fair to protect our membership that we make some effort to ensure that people offering tips are.......how can I put it.......not shit.

With this in mind, please be aware that until you have proven that your tips are indeed worth following and not a one-off stick a pin in a paper job, any links may well be removed and, in the event of persistant posting, deleted altogether.

On a purely personal level I'm usually more impressed if a tipster service doesn't offer me a string of bets at 1/2 that my dead gran (or even Mark Lawrensen) could offer me for free.

Thank you for reading this.

Oh and you may like to read this too.

SPAMMERS PLEASE READ

Where a thread hasn't been updated for two weeks without prior notice, we reserve the right to remove all links or just delete it like the sack of shit that most of these tipster proofing bag of bollox really are.

rcgills · #2 (**permalink**) 15-11-2006, 16:49

Originally Posted by ONEDUNME

(or even Mark Lawrensen)

Whoa there, ODM, let's not get too silly now.

**ONEDUNME** · #3 (**permalink**) 02-02-2007, 17:32

Well judging by the standard of tips we get in here, if some of these clowns are actually charging people for this information then there are some awfully stupid people around.

**Bigkegman** · #4 (**permalink**) 02-02-2007, 17:35

aye - the tipsters

rene · #5 (**permalink**) 02-02-2007, 20:34

can´t understand the problems. That´s registered members and they aren´t spamming if they have a link in their signature or their profile and post some stuff to fill out TDP.

TDP isn´t in that position to strengthen the rules imo.

Hope you don´t delete my link ....

**ONEDUNME** · #6 (**permalink**) 02-02-2007, 23:09

Thanks for you contribution Gerry. I'm looking forward to one that I'll actually understand.

No rush.

rene · #7 (**permalink**) 03-02-2007, 12:17

Originally Posted by ONEDUNME

Thanks for you contribution Gerry. I'm looking forward to one that I'll actually understand.

No rush.

it´s easy to understand...

You wrote that tipsters have to stop to come in Daily Punt and add the links to their private sites haven´t you?

And I answered that my opinion is that we can´t strengthen the rules.Why do you interdict that tipsters can add their link to their profils or in their signature?
The main is that they post in TDP and hold the forum alive...

If you make one after one rule nobody would like to be here ... that´s what I said and I hope you understand me better with this declaration

**ONEDUNME** · #8 (**permalink**) 03-02-2007, 20:28

Nope. I have no idea what interdict means for a start. It may well be an English word but I've never heard an Englishman use it, ever. Logic dictates that your English should be getting better,not worse. It isn't.

Likewise, the stuff we are getting in the Tipster Proofing is full of chancing cunts who post shit and then change their sign up name to post some more shit.

The idea of Tipster Proofing is to make people believe that you know what you're talking about, whilst the truth is that if you followed all these pricks with hard cash then you'd be backrupt within a month.

I'm seriously starting to think that this section should be closed down altogether as it's full of shit.

collette · #9 (**permalink**) 03-02-2007, 20:48

Originally Posted by ONEDUNME

Nope. I have no idea what interdict means for a start. It may well be an English word but I've never heard an Englishman use it, ever. Logic dictates that your English should be getting better,not worse. It isn't.

in·ter·dict

(

n

t

r-d

kt

) tr.v. in·ter·dict·ed, in·ter·dict·ing, in·ter·dicts 1. To prohibit or place under an ecclesiastical or legal sanction.
2. To forbid or debar, especially authoritatively. See Synonyms at forbid.
3. a. To cut or destroy (a line of communication) by firepower so as to halt an enemy's advance.
b. To confront and halt the activities, advance, or entry of: "the role of the FBI in interdicting spies attempting to pass US secrets to the Soviet Union" Christian Science Monitor.

n. (

n

t

r-d

kt

)

Looks like the German's english is better than yours

**ONEDUNME** · #10 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 08:51

Collette that really hurts

As I said, it may well be an English word but it's an English word that is never, ever used so don't you pretend that it is

collette · #11 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 09:42

Onedumme, i'm just sorry i had to be the first member to tell you, but i'm the type that has to disclose if you have a crumb around your mouth or a candle hanging from your nose..

I'm sure you're not a pleb really, after all it wasn't until i was about 7 years old that i realised that the term "precocious" was actually a compliment

rene · #12 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 13:42

@collette

THANKS!

I'm sure you're not a pleb really

are you sure about this...

sry odm I´m not a native english speaker but I do my best to be understandable for you. But your comments from time to time ....

Logic dictates that your English should be getting better,not worse. It isn't.

If you wanna dismiss me you need more than the old phrase that my english is bad mate. We wanna push TDP not only you. And if you find mistakes in my posts don´t hesitate to tell me the mistakes .. and I´ll learn it.

The idea of Tipster Proofing is to make people believe that you know what you're talking about, whilst the truth is that if you followed all these pricks with hard cash then you'd be backrupt within a month.

You wrote that you´ll have not longer the posters in here who post once a month to show their link to their private page.. But that´s no point at your Tipster Proofing declaration. ... // but I know odm you understand nothing again ... right?

traeth · #13 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 14:01

I'm on ODM side here , having sentences with interdict in them may be correct but it would not be used in any day to day discussion.

German from your post have you understood what ODM said in his first post , my impressions is :

SOME people use tipster proofing as a "permitted " spamming without contibuting to the forum , the tips are rarely any good and we should be warning members of these people rather than endorsing them.

Please note that I have bolded the word some at the start and it is not all.

Grga · #14 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 14:58

My view of this situation:

There are some people who are fair,they worked on their sites for long time and they deserve some respect.But we usually know their sites or places where they post,do some research about them and we don't bother them.

But there are large number of cunts who build new sites presumably for paid services with "their record of picks".The stats are usually good, let say 80% of picks won(equivalent to 80 win picks out of 100) and then they use forums for advertise.In next 100 picks they have 50% of their picks won.With 2 picks per day he has 50 days free advertisment for his site and there is always someone who will be foolish enough and pay him for his picks.After 200 picks he will have 130 picks won(or 65%) wich still can bring him good yield(if his bets are with bigger odds,around 2.00) and more fools to give him their cash.

Personaly anyone who joins TDP is rookie in my eyes.

rene · #15 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 17:36

in my eyes it´s an interpretation thing what odm said. I understood it as attack against folks who post in TDP and notice their link on their post like me.
But I can´t follow.... We have only 25 users online at the moment,but we have just 70 guests. We have to discuss how we welcome the guests as members and not how we drive away other members... but that could be my opinion only...

I´m out of this discussion - the moderator of this can´t understand me...