# Research respondents needed from Brighton- nightlife/lapdance survey



## sushilover (Feb 25, 2012)

Hi folks.

I'm a researcher based at the University of Kent and if you are based in Brighton, I'd like to invite you to complete a short online survey at  <FUCK OFF>- we are trying to gather public perceptions of nightlife in these areas with a particular focus on lap-dancing clubs. 

There's a chance to win a £50 shopping voucher - all responses are anonymous and you are not obligated to leave your email address.

The survey will be live till 1st September 2012 and is open to everyone over the age of 18.

Thank you for reading!

Billie Lister


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

ohoh! 

you better start running!


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2012)

Oh dear - posted it twice too.


----------



## sushilover (Feb 25, 2012)

Argh! Are you not allowed to ask for survey participants on this site? I know some places are funny bout that...


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

FAQ is not obvious anymore!
'terms and rules' indeed
hidden away under help too


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> Argh! Are you not allowed to ask for survey participants on this site? I know some places are funny bout that...


Not moments after you've joined.

and when you have no intention to join the community.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Feb 25, 2012)

Thanks for the SPAM. We are all a bit hungry at the moment and will make a sandwich out of it. Afterwards we will eat you for desert. Yes, get your trainers on PDQ.


----------



## sushilover (Feb 25, 2012)

Oh dear....but its not for profit, I'm just trying to get the word out!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 25, 2012)




----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> Argh! Are you not allowed to ask for survey participants on this site? I know some places are funny bout that...


 



> *Please read the boards for a while before posting.* Use the search function to see if your topic has already been discussed to save repeating questions/threads that already exist. Please note that these are discussion boards and not a free resource for journalists/students/market researchers.


----------



## sushilover (Feb 25, 2012)

Sorry guys


----------



## sushilover (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm an academic friend of nosos by the way....if that validates me any!!


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> Sorry guys


awww, your apology and backpeddling might work, you never know
have an opinion? will you stay? what do you think of Nick Clegg? etc


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> I'm an academic friend of nosos by the way....if that validates me any!!


ahhhhhhhhhh Nawty Nosos!


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> Sorry guys


 
I like that you're sorry


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> I'm an academic friend of nosos by the way....if that validates me any!!


Oh dear, I wonder if that means that nosos will also get banned when the mods wake up. That seems rather harsh though.


----------



## toggle (Feb 25, 2012)

sushilover said:


> I'm an academic friend of nosos by the way....if that validates me any!!


 
it might well stop the lions getting their expected supper


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

^^^ silly over-reaction ^^^


----------



## twentythreedom (Feb 25, 2012)

i like lapdancers fwiw


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> ^^^ silly over-reaction ^^^


 
If only more students filled these forums with their requests instead of paying attention in their Survey Research Methods courses.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Why are you being such a dick? She's not a student doing a 'research methods course', she's doing a funded research project on an important social issue.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

She's not a journalist / student or market researcher and it's VERY easy to miss that disclaimer - SO: why are you all being such dicks?


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

How did anyone know that?


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Why are you being such a dick? She's not a student doing a 'research methods course', she's doing a funded research project on an important social issue.


 
You're coming across as a sanctimonious arse TBH

All the surveys posted here have massive failings in their design and implementation, it's kind of forgiveable for students I guess...


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> She's not a journalist / student or market researcher and it's VERY easy to miss that disclaimer - SO: why are you all being such dicks?


urban75 is not a free resource to be used for researchers, students or anyone else. It's a discussion board.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> it's VERY easy to miss that disclaimer


 
It's impossible to sign up without having it shoved in your face


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> How did anyone know that?


because she said it in her first post?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> It's impossible to sign up without having it shoved in your face


and it's a disclaimer which doesn't actually exclude her


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> You're coming across as a sanctimonious arse TBH
> 
> All the surveys posted here have massive failings in their design and implementation, it's kind of forgiveable for students I guess...


I have no idea what these other surveys have been like but unless you have some expertise in social research, it's clearly you who's being the sanctimonious arse.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

editor said:


> urban75 is not a free resource to be used for researchers, students or anyone else. It's a discussion board.


I get that though I think you need to broaden the definition of what's excluded. I'm just a bit more taken aback by the needless hostility in people's reactions.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> and it's a disclaimer which doesn't actually exclude her


 
It's pretty damn obvious what it means


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> It's pretty damn obvious what it means


"_journalists/students/market researchers." - she is neither of these three things._


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

come on! 
"i am a researcher" in the first post

splitting hairs now dude


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> "_journalists/students/market researchers." - she is neither of these three things._


 
the multiple "/" kind of imply an "etc" don't you think?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

I am a researcher based at the University of Kent = I am not a student & I am not a market researcher

And then goes on to describe funded research into the social dimensions to a topic which many here would, I thought, have supported us knowing more about.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> the multiple "/" kind of imply an "etc" don't you think?


Er no not really. 

I mean if you want to tell a group they're not welcome then ffs actually explicitly tell them.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

How about asking some people who live near lap dancing clubs? Or is that too much like hard work?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

I only vaguely know about this project but there's multiple strands to it and I'm fairly certain that's one of them. Don't be a presumptuous dickhead.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

Did the ESRC funding application seriously say "we will invite responses to the survey on random internet forums"?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Did you write that just to taunt me because I asked you not to be a presumptuous dickhead in my last post?

Or more politely: why do you think it's 'wrong' to conduct research online?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

calm down now you'll blow a gasket


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

OK, it's only state funded research with apparently poor methodology, best let them carry on spending the money.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Explain 'apparently poor methodology'? What do you know about the project beyond what you've (wrongly) inferred from the opening post that offended you ever so much?


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> What do you know about the project beyond what you've (wrongly) inferred from the opening post that offended you ever so much?


 
I actually did they survey FWIW. I'm too overcome with presumptuous offence to go into detail on its deficiencies right now.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

You did the survey!! But it was _forbidden! You must leave!_


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Follow that interloper out of the door or you be punished


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Or if you stay, perhaps go as far as to say what the glaringly obvious inadequacies were to you that the project term missed when they developed it? Given you were so rude to one of them, I think the least you could do is give them the benefit of your insight, no?


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Given you were so rude to one of them


 
Sorry what? 

You're winding me up aren't you?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

No, in all seriousness, I think you were rude to her. The rest is 50% wind up 50% angry prodding with words.


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> I get that though I think you need to broaden the definition of what's excluded. I'm just a bit more taken aback by the needless hostility in people's reactions.


The definition is simple. These are community discussion boards. Rocking up to invite people to participate on unrelated, off board, paid surveys has nothing to do with discussion or community.

From the FAQ: "Please note that these are discussion boards and not a free resource for journalists/students/market researchers."

I'll put an 'etc' in there if it bothers you that much.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Plus the arrogance of saying "_massive failings in their design and implementation" and "apparently poor methodology" _when I've yet to see any evidence that you have any real knowledge about these things. If you do then by all means explain what the problem was. If you don't then do you not think it's a bit fucking rude to write off a year of someone's work like that on the basis of something you know fuck all about?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Feb 25, 2012)

It's not nice to pick on OP.

B Lister

He/She's probably been called Blister all their lives


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> No, in all seriousness, I think you were rude to her.


 
The only person I've responded to on this thread is you, by directly quoting your posts, so I don't know where you got that idea from.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

editor said:


> The definition is simple. These are community discussion boards. Rocking up to invite people to participate on unrelated, off board, paid surveys has nothing to do with discussion or community.
> 
> From the FAQ: "Please note that these are discussion boards and not a free resource for journalists/students/market researchers."
> 
> I'll put an 'etc' in there if it bothers you that much.


Please don't imply I'm being prissy, a friend came to post on here with good intentions and got a really unpleasant reaction. I do think that's a problem with the disclaimer as stands. How about add "/ academic researchers /" in as well to make clear that applies? I honestly don't think it's obvious that it does unless you, well, actually say it.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> The only person I've responded to on this thread is you, by directly quoting your posts, so I don't know where you got that idea from.


You've dissed the project repeatedly without one offering a reason for it. You implied she was a lazy studente. You also said that every survey ever posted on urban is severely deficient.

This is why I've been called you a presumptuous dickhead for the last 20 minutes. Does that make more sense now?


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> She's not a journalist / student or market researcher and it's VERY easy to miss that disclaimer - SO: why are you all being such dicks?


Are you new here or something?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)

heh


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Corax said:


> Are you new here or something?


er, yeah, kind of - the last time i was a regular poster here it didn't seem like the place was filled with such a high portion of dickheads

like you, good sir, who unless my memory fails me i used to send stuff to you in the post years ago


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Please don't imply I'm being prissy, a friend came to post on here with good intentions and got a really unpleasant reaction. I do think that's a problem with the disclaimer as stands. How about add "/ academic researchers /" in as well to make clear that applies? I honestly don't think it's obvious that it does unless you, well, actually say it.


It says read the forums before posting anything. The complete absence of similar threads should make it apparent that this is not a place to post up a cheap trawl for info.


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

I am a bit curious what the answers of people living in Brighton have to do with the lap dancing industry in Scotland though?


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2012)

The same FAQ busting post was slammed up in two forums. That makes it spam.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> You've dissed the project repeatedly without one offering a reason for it. You implied she was a lazy studente. You also said that every survey ever posted on urban is severely deficient.
> 
> This is why I've been called you a presumptuous dickhead for the last 20 minutes. Does that make more sense now?


 
You're the one waving your willy around


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

editor said:


> It says read the forums before posting anything. The complete absence of similar threads should make it apparent that this is not a place to post up a cheap trawl for info.


But it's *not* a 'cheap trawl for info'. Yes, she should be read the forums and contributed before posting. But the disclaimer about surveys made no mention of applying to her. If you want to make it obvious that academic researchers shouldn't post requests for research participants then YOU NEED TO SAY IT. Because otherwise it won't be obvious.


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> er, yeah, kind of - the last time i was a regular poster here it didn't seem like the place was filled with such a high portion of dickheads


Your memory's playing tricks on you. 



nosos said:


> like you, good sir, who unless my memory fails me i used to send stuff to you in the post years ago


IIRC we talked about it but it never happened in the end.

I think I came round your gaff at the end of some evening or other once though. Was it through a train station?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> You're the one waving your willy around


How so?


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> But it's *not* a 'cheap trawl for info'. Yes, she should be read the forums and contributed before posting. But the disclaimer about surveys made no mention of applying to her. If you want to make it obvious that academic researchers shouldn't post requests for research participants then YOU NEED TO SAY IT. Because otherwise it won't be obvious.


No I don't because I'm not going to list every possible scenario. The FAQ and the content of the boards make it obvious that research posts across multiple forums is not acceptable.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Corax said:


> Your memory's playing tricks on you.
> 
> 
> IIRC we talked about it but it never happened in the end.
> ...


It was. Memories from that of my life are somewhat Fuzzy


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Please don't imply I'm being prissy, a friend came to post on here with good intentions and got a really unpleasant reaction. I do think that's a problem with the disclaimer as stands. How about add "/ academic researchers /" in as well to make clear that applies? I honestly don't think it's obvious that it does unless you, well, actually say it.


 


What a load of bollocks. You MUST be able to see the problem here.

You're just feeling like a dick for suggesting she post it here, whatever research anyone I knew for whatever reason was doing the following would be my advice...........

Don't, whatever you do go to urban75 and ask for help with research (especially as the first thing you say), they'll just rip the piss out of you.

Everyone here knows that.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

editor said:


> No I don't because I'm not going to list every possible scenario.


Yeah because the only options are to make one addition (which this threads proves is needed) or 'include every scenario'


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> What a load of bollocks. You MUST be able to see the problem here.
> 
> You're just feeling like a dick for suggesting she post it here, whatever research anyone I knew for whatever reason was doing the following would be my advice...........
> 
> ...


Er, I didn't suggest she posted it here. I suggested she looked for flat shares here, which is when I found the other thread.


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> It was. Memories from that of my life are somewhat Fuzzy


Yep, equally so.  Thanks for your hospitality though!


----------



## stuff_it (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Yeah because the only options are to make one addition (which this threads proves is needed) or 'include every scenario'


Um, dunno - maybe you should have told her to ask first and miss out the spammy stuff, just for in here y'know.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Yeah because the only options are to make one addition (which this threads proves is needed) or 'include every scenario'


 
This thread proves the exact opposite. You and the OP are the only people here that don't get it, and the OP couldn't have known any better.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes my point being the disclaimer doesn't list academic researchers & therefore academic researchers might not realise that they are not welcome. Hence good idea to add one more sentence to solve the problem?


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Yes my point being the disclaimer doesn't list academic researchers & therefore academic researchers might not realise that they are not welcome. Hence good idea to add one more sentence to solve the problem?


 
What about supermarket managers?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

EH?


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

Well they might want to start a thread here, to research shopping habits.

If they're not mentioned how would they know it was frowned upon?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

market researchers are already covered the disclaimer. If you don't include academic researchers specifically, they won't recognise that they're excluded. therefore they still post and get chased about the braying mob by that by this point constitutes a community in these parts. add two words to disclaimer easy solved.


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

She is quite hot though, so maybe we should help.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> Well they might want to start a thread here, to research shopping habits.
> 
> If they're not mentioned how would they know it was frowned upon?


because the market researcher they paid to do it would recognise the disclaimer said they weren't welcome...


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> because the market researcher they paid to do it would recognise the disclaimer said they weren't welcome...


 
See my point though? Christ.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

No I clearly don't


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Is it the list of potential topics people might want to study is long that you can't include them all in the disclaimer?


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

This is like swimming in fucking treacle. I don't believe you can't see my point.

It's beyond obvious.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Feb 25, 2012)

I was in Brighton last weekend for the half marathon. When we got back to our hotel on Saturday night the lobby was full of Welsh women going on a hen do. OK, it's not quite a lap-dancing club, so I'll accept a £20 voucher instead.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Is it the list of potential topics people might want to study is long that you can't include them all in the disclaimer?


 
No the list of people (journalists, students, market researchers, supermarket managers, librarians, penguin ticklers, child minders, teachers..............................................) doing research, that could be anyone.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

I promise you the list of people who might end up doing research (in the formal sense involving structured methods) is not going to very long.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> I promise you the list of people who might end up doing research (in the formal sense involving structured methods) is not going to very long.


 
Only YOU don't understand the FAQs, just you.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

supermarketers would pay market researchers
librarians would (usually) commossion academics (unless they were doing it internally)
child minders & teachers would be more likely to chat about their experience (as opposed to CONDUCT research on child minding and teaching). teacher training college are staffed by academic educationalists who do the research that gets taught.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> Only YOU don't understand the FAQs, just you.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I understand the FAQ fine, I just think there's an obvious exception to it which, given the excipted group in question aren't welcome, it would be nice to actually say this explicitly rather than just start rounding on people when they get here.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> supermarketers would pay market researchers
> librarians would (usually) commossion academics (unless they were doing it internally)
> child minders & teachers would be more likely to chat about their experience (as opposed to CONDUCT research on child minding and teaching). teacher training college are staffed by academic educationalists who do the research that gets taught.


 
I'm now doing that thing I used to do in primary school, you know, when you shove your tongue in between your teeth and lip, not terribly constructive but you have backed my brain into a small tucked away dark place right at the back of my head.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> I have no idea what you're talking about. I understand the FAQ fine, I just think there's an obvious exception to it which, given the excipted group in question aren't welcome, it would be nice to actually say this explicitly rather than just start rounding on people when they get here.


 
What happens if someone else not on the (new updated) list does the same thing?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Er, ok...


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> What happens if someone else not on the (new updated) list does the same thing?


You mean someone who isn't on the list?


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

OH MY GOD! 

*RUNS AWAY, SCREAMING*


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm sorry I clearly didn't understand your far from clear question. If you explain what you were asking I can try again...?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Or alternatively you could just tell me what the fuck your point is because I have no idee and I've stated many continuously.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

You smell.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> I'm sorry I clearly didn't understand your far from clear question. If you explain what you were asking I can try again...?


 
How about those people who think they aren't posting spam but a great opportunity to make genuine product savings, should we specifically exclude that in the FAQ?

What about those people who don't even read the FAQ that is displayed when signing up, as I suspect was the case with the OP, despite your best efforts to convince yourself otherwise.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Nope of course I'm saying they should be excluded from the FAQ. I'm saying academic researchers should be *included*_ in the FAQ. They're not welcome so make it explicitly clear._


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)




----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Yeah I really can't give a shit by this point in the conversation. Sigh.


----------



## Corax (Feb 25, 2012)

Any idea why she wants to ask people in Brighton about the Scottish lapdancing industry though nosos?  It has me intrigued.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Nope of course I'm saying they should be excluded from the FAQ. I'm saying academic researchers should be *included*_ in the FAQ. They're not welcome so make it explicitly clear._


 
Did the OP actually read it anyway? I presume not or they would have noticed the bit about hanging around to get a feel of the place before posting.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes. And given this thread I have absolutely no desire to reveal personal information her or about the project.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Yes. And given this thread I have absolutely no desire to reveal personal information her or about the project.


 
But she comes on here asking for our postcodes


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> Did the OP actually read it anyway? I presume not or they would have noticed the bit about hanging around to get a feel of the place before posting.


Speculating about what a new poster you all scared off did or didn't do has zero relevance to my suggestion about the slight change to the FAQ.


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Speculating about what a new poster you all scared off did or didn't do has zero relevance to my suggestion about the slight change to the FAQ.


 
It does, because your suggestion is based on the premise that she read the FAQ but didn't understand it.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

My suggestion is that (a) urban75 doesn't want academic researchers posting requests for participants on their boards (b) the current FAQ does not explicitly say this (c) therefore it's addition would be helpful for the cohesion of the community.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

And I'm really fucking bored of this stupid tit-for-tat argument we have got sucked into. It's exactly the reason I stopped posting here in the first fucking place. I got pissed you were rude to my friend but let's agree to disagree about how justified that was. The suggestion in post above is meant in good faith. I do think this'll happen again unless you make the fact academics are excluded more explicit.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)




----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> And I'm really fucking bored of this stupid tit-for-tat argument we have got sucked into. It's exactly the reason I stopped posting here in the first fucking place. I got pissed you were rude to my friend but let's agree to disagree about how justified that was. The suggestion in post above is meant in good faith. I do think this'll happen again unless you make the fact academics are excluded more explicit.


 
See post 66


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

yeah as i said that time, listing the one other group likely to turn up with surveys is not the same thing as having to list any possible scenario


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

/thread


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

It's obvious from the FAQs that wouldn't be welcome, only an idiot wouldn't be able to suss that out from what is already there.

Did your mate read the FAQs?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

The FAQ doesn't include academic research in the list of things that aren't welcome - how therefore is it obvious that this isn't welcome?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Fwiw I teach students to ALWAYS approach the moderator of a site before posting a request. Not everyone has been taught this and not everyone is familiar with online culture.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2012)




----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> The FAQ doesn't include academic research in the list of things that aren't welcome - how therefore is it obvious that this isn't welcome?


 
It's obvious that lazy reasearch isn't welcome.

By whoever, whatever job they do.

*Loses the will to live*

You HAVE to be on a wind up here.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm starting to feel like I've had opiates.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Or you're a fucking idiot?


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Not everyone has been taught this and not everyone is familiar with online culture.


 
we'll soon learn 'em.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm the idiot?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

How the fuck do you know it was 'lazy research'? How the fuck do you know anything about the project beyond what was posted?

FINAL POINT: _The FAQ doesn't include academic research in the list of things that aren't welcome - how therefore is it obvious that this isn't welcome?_


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> How the fuck do you know it was 'lazy research'? How the fuck do you know anything about the project beyond what was posted?
> 
> FINAL POINT: _The FAQ doesn't include academic research in the list of things that aren't welcome - how therefore is it obvious that this isn't welcome?_


 
It doesn't include "homophobes" along with racists and sexists. Do you think homophobes are welcome here?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> It doesn't include "homophobes" along with racists and sexists. Do you think homophobes are welcome here?


No, I think the fact that homophobes aren't welcome here means it's a good to put in the FAQ. This isn't complex stuff.


----------



## lizzieloo (Feb 25, 2012)

It's a wind up. No way it isn't.

You got me good and proper there nosos


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

He keeps missing words out, obviously off his head.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Sigh


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Fwiw I'm stone cold sobre


----------



## goldenecitrone (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> Fwiw I'm stone cold sobre


 
I preferred you on acid.


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

I have no idea who the fuck you are so I have no preference either way, ta


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> sobre


 
You keep saying that. It's French.

Are you really sober?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Er, yes. Why?


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

And on earth do you mean 'you keep saying that'?


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 25, 2012)

nosos said:


> And on earth do you mean 'you keep saying that'?


 
You did it again, you missed a word out.

And failed to get a simple point


----------



## nosos (Feb 25, 2012)

Good night  xxx


----------



## spliff (Feb 26, 2012)

nosos, if you had posted a thread with .. . "a friend/colleague/student of mine is researching blah,blah,blah" here's a link (there may be some freebies in it) *(*with an image of a lapdancing banana obviously*)*




It would have slipped through a treat.
Instead you seem to have spent all Saturday evening winding people up with your inability to grasp basic concepts.
I'm sombre as a moose btw.


----------



## Termite Man (Feb 26, 2012)

spliff said:


> nosos, if you had posted a thread with .. . "a friend/colleague/student of mine is researching blah,blah,blah" here's a link (there may be some freebies in it) *(*with an image of a lapdancing banana obviously*)*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I hate to break it to you but that banana isn't lapdancing.


----------



## spliff (Feb 26, 2012)

Depends on the lap


----------



## Termite Man (Feb 26, 2012)




----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 26, 2012)

surely academic researcher is just another word for student?


----------



## Maggot (Feb 26, 2012)

nosos said:


> Nope of course I'm saying they should be excluded from the FAQ. I'm saying academic researchers should be *included*_ in the FAQ. They're not welcome so make it explicitly clear._


Oh dear nosos.



> Please note that these are discussion boards and not a free resource for journalists/students/market researchers.


Anyone who reads that and thinks that it implies it *is *a free resource for academic researchers, is clearly too thick to be in academia in the first place.


----------



## fractionMan (Feb 26, 2012)

thread of the day imo


----------



## bi0boy (Feb 26, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> surely academic researcher is just another word for student?


 
When you go from "graduate student" to "post doctoral research associate" all your wrongs become rights.


----------



## Celt (Feb 26, 2012)

there have been occasions that established board members have had research surveys, the last I remember had asked the mods if it was ok, and posted a link to it which people either did or didn't complete.


----------



## Schmetterling (Feb 27, 2012)

Termite Man said:


>


I am  strangely and embarrassingly amused by this!  They are not  eight copies of the same banana man are they?  They are a proper little troupe, aren't they?  Who have practised really well!


----------



## sim667 (Feb 27, 2012)

The ironic thing is that if nosos posted it on her behalf that he's enough of a regular user to have got away with it....

There's lots of poster who have done it for freinds/family before without any problems.


----------



## editor (Feb 27, 2012)

sim667 said:


> The ironic thing is that if nosos posted it on her behalf that he's enough of a regular user to have got away with it....
> 
> There's lots of poster who have done it for freinds/family before without any problems.


Those people almost always ask first but, as a rule, any kind of request for research is turned down unless there's some kind of meaningful connection with the site.


----------



## sim667 (Feb 27, 2012)

editor said:


> Those people almost always ask first but, as a rule, any kind of request for research is turned down unless there's some kind of meaningful connection with the site.



I think I put one up on urban about drugs. I did ask though....


----------



## sam/phallocrat (Feb 27, 2012)

fantastic thread


----------

