That tearing sound was me ripping him a new asshole. I was bored and not sober enough for online gaming that night.
Yes, because of this thread I thought I’d check myself out. I’m at 22 threads started: 2,289 posts made. Comparing you and me it’s 0.05% : 0.1%.
BrainGlutton’s stats are hard for us mortals to calculate: He maxes out the search at 750 on “Find Threads Started by User - Any Date” versus his 21,087 total posts. He also maxes out “Find Posts by User - A Year Ago - and Newer” to match against his 493 threads started this year. However, not being a big GD reader nowadays, I haven’t noticed his thread starting craziness.
I have seen the reliable references to his own threads though. A little off-putting, IMHO. Plenty of your threads are interesting enough topics to not need the pimping, be happy with that, dude. 
Your link didn’t work, but I did do the search and found that the same number as you did. Having done the search, I have to say that I’m pretty impressed at how many responses those 48 threads received. Only a handful got less than 5 responses. I’ve started a couple threads before and it wasn’t easy for me. Picking a topic with enough interest to gain a response but not so much to get railed is somewhat of an art, I think. If nothing else, BrainGlutton gets a lot of people to post.
And to be fair, he doesn’t just start threads in GD, he starts them everywhere. I did the same search for the month and he had started 67 threads, 48 of which were in GD. Of course, some of them were really necessary. Like this one: I can’t find pants in my size! He couldn’t find pants his size. What was he gonna do? 
OK, I’ll be waiting. But you’d better hurry. If you take too long, you’ll never catch up with BrainGlutton. 
There was a battle going on? I had no idea. I really was disappointed not to see as many threads as I thought I would. I enjoy those strange but true events.
Thanks for the additional info. on poster stats.
I’m so ashamed that link displayed as having been “viewed”. 
I am guilty of loose usage of a weak metaphor, but I am glad you enjoyed the stats at least.
Jim
I’ve considered starting a thread as a tribute for us non-OPers, but I probably won’t do it.
You are easy to impress AND disappoint, lol. OK, here’s one for you: how many threads do you think **SentientMeat ** started where the OP was a single question lifted from that Political Compass website? (hint: there are 61 questions on the poll) All those had more than 5 responses too.
That’s a pretty disingenuous presentation of the way Sentient ran those threads, and the effort he put in.
I agree. Once the plan was set up, there was no reason to repeat it in every thread. But, **SM **did (IIRC) always post a long discussion of his own views on the question if not in the OP immediately thereafter.
Yeah, search links often don’t work. “5” responses is a pretty low threhsold. Look at how many had fewer than 20, and of those threads how many of those 20 posts were BG’s.
And it’s not just the serial thread starting, but the bumping of those threads. That’s what tends to push other threads off the front page.
This thread includes about 6 new reasons to avoid great debates. BrainGlutton is at least 3 of them.
I didn’t mean to imply that SentientMeat didn’t put in any effort, any more than people in this thread have accused BrainGlutton of a lack of effort. But come on, 63 threads? One for every single question and then 2 general threads about the poll? I just thought that level of fixation would impress old Heffalump and Roo.
IMO, the need for a new thread in GD is, “This is an interesting topic on which there are strong differences of opinion, which has either (A) not been addressed before, or (B) not been examined from this slant, which I feel may provoke some interesting viewpoints different than what has already been done to death. That said, here’s my opinion on it, in three or more paragraphs of argumentation, with supporting cites if applicable.” Some people’s minds are very fertile along these lines, and I don’t have a problem with OPs that meet those criteria. I find that part of the charm of this place is that no matter what the question, you’ll find someone prepared to argue a specific viewpoint you have never considered, with resultant fighting of ignorance – no matter who is right in the last analysis.
One thing that has not yet been picked up on in this thread is self-referencing to avoid repetition. If you spent the greater part of an hour setting forth a rather arcane and nuanced line of thought in a post to thread X, why should you be expected to rewrite the same complex statement a week later in thread Y, where the comment from thread X is fully relevant to the question as it has evolved? Self-referencing in such circumstances is saving everyone a lot of effort – including those who might disagree with said arcane and nuanced statement and whose arguments have already been given in response to the post in thread X.
But what totally pisses me off is something that people feel licensed to do lately. I cite a thread started in the last 24 hours as example:
[quote]
OP: “If God the Father is spirit, what’s the need or purpose of a separate Holy Spirit?” Comment: a legitimate question, perhaps a bit GQ-ish but asked in GD as clearly likely to lead to religious debate.
Response: “There’s absolutely no evidence in the Bible for the Trinity.” *Comment: Yeah, we understand you’re non-Trinitarian. We got that the first 150 times you found occasion to say so. *
Response: “Well, there’s absolutely no reason to believe in God, either, since the Bible is a mass of unreliable myth and legend.” Comment: same comment, only more so. Fuckin’ Helen Keller has figured out you don’t believe in God or the Bible, and she’s both dead and never owned a computer!
Response: “Wasn’t there a fight about whether the Holy Spirit came from God or Jesus sent it, that was part of why the Catholics and Orthodox split?” Comment: Good question. And it has an interesting answer – but I’d rather jump into a pit of spitting cobras than try to answer it in that thread.
Response: “Good point that no sane person would believe in God or the Bible. I’m an atheist, and I’m sooooo abused!” Comment: Yep, we noticed. Especially because you make a point of noting how unfair tomndebb is at holding you to the same standard as those evil Christians you hate.
And on and on…
That one was about Christianity and atheism, but the point is the same if it’s Republicans and Democrats, or whatever. We get the message, dammit. There is no need to start 100 threads, or hijack 250, to make the same damn point in every one of them.
Sorry…we now return you to the pitting of Brain Glutton’s thread-starting proclivities, already in progress. The temperature in Havana is a pleasant 68 degrees; we will be landing in just a few minutes. Your friendly thread hijackers hope you have had a pleasant flight.