Pedro Martínez: What conversation is this?

playBunny: It got me to check the link, and now after all these years my BrainKing.com discussion board count is zero after getting it to over 9000. Nice job Pedro! :) At least Feature requests is still at 4163.

After reading it I am not sure if Pedro is being sarcastic towards Fencer or is taking Fencer's side about the percentage of morons and miscreants on this site. With the count at zero, perhaps I will begin to read the board again, but I'm not planning on it. The linked thread is over 1½ years old.

Walter Montego: Lol. I also checked that link and had a large count drop to zero. ;o)

But what I meant was which paully post was he replying to? There isn't one in sight so there's also no "him". Similarly speachless' post is rather mysterious. It's shown as being in the same thread as Pedro's yet without the pgt post that she's responding to.

playBunny: He snared us both, did he? He's still got the touch even with the long hiatus. I've plenty of time to kill in this truck stop today, so maybe I'll check into it in awhile. If I do, I'll report my findings.

As for the question about the bug, I thought you had said a few things about that some time ago. I remember the identical roll business, but that's fixed. What's the other deal?

playBunny: oh, that's funny. i replied to the user pgt, but maybe he just deleted his previews post... :-) actually pgt wanted fencer to delete a user from brainking, because pgt meant a user, which is on position 1 on the ranking of a backgammon variation game - would have probably played against a fake user account to reach the 1st place. Pedro replied then to pgt with the link to the ones who wanted fencer to delete this user ...

so that's all about :-)

playBunny: The beginning of the conversation was removed, possibly by a GM. As usual, no word has been posted as an explanation thereof…

Pedro Martínez: why should a GM remove a post? the post wasn't problematic i think... funny as well...

speachless: Because you cannot mention a name here… names are bad. Nicknames are bad, too. It doesn't matter that naming names is not prohibited in the User Agreement, the GMs just decided that you can't do that.
http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=1&plla=1130884

Pedro Martínez: oh, I understand... and yes, it makes sense...

Pedro Martínez: Because you cannot mention a name here…

Ah, I see. I don't see why the GM didn't just bleep the name out of the post.

If the name was happyjuggler then I suggest that anyone who doubts his skills goes to play him on FIBS where they'll have a good fight on their hands. Note that he also only plays long matches, which is the best way of maximising an already considerable skill advantage.

If it's the unnameable player placed second, who has demonstrated a fantastic ability to copy moves from GnuBg into a BrainKing game page, well, he's been getting away with that for years. Just pretend that you're playing GnuBg when you play him and be suitably pleased and impressed with yourself if you win. ;o)

playBunny: pgt didn't mean happyjuggler.... pgt wrote about hyper backgammon

speachless: Glad to hear that.

I'm not going to pretend to understand this thread, but I will say that I'm glad to hear that I am innocent of whatever I wasn't accused of doing.

:)

happyjuggler0: LOL - it's almost impossible to understand the treat 'cause the initial post of pgt were deleted :-)

happyjuggler0: lol :)

pgt: i just wouldn't care... if someone is so sick to play against himself, only to get to the first rate, he's just wretched. so who cares about people that wastes their own time... i just wouldn't give a sh... about this player :-)