I renounce my voting rights and invite my fellow voters to do the same

Last week we had a first post from an Irish poster. The system made a mistake and flagged this as spam. Five posters myself included voted him off without double checking. .. Since then there have been calls for our voting rights to be removed and an admonition from Ed to be more careful. Who needs it.....I renounce my voting rights.

I think the system will always mark any poster as spam. It then requires 5 votes to be confirmed- before removing. 2 posts were created to warn others about clicking on spam button, but still people clicked on the vote button.....

"The system made a mistake and flagged this as spam."
What?
The system didn't make a mistake. You should lose your voting rights for not understanding how the system works.
The "system" or "software" as you call it makes no claims to knowing if it's a spammer or a genuine poster. If it could, why would Ed need our intervention?
Huh chump?
No-one ever claimed the software could recognise a real poster from a spammer. Anyone posting here for the first time - be it a spammer or a genuine poster - shows up with cross for his/her first five posts. (This info is all in the original post when Ed gave us voting rights by the way). Your only duty as a poster with more than however many posts is to ascertain whether it's a real poster or whether it's spam. That's all. If you think that you have to click every time you see a cross then I'm very glad you're renouncing your votes because you're too stupid to know how this thing works.
For everyone else, please either go back and familiarise yourself with the spam voting process  or else join Moffie and simply stop voting because you're as stupid as he is.
Thanks!

Yes, the last vote was made after a warning from both myself and Sharkbok that a genuine poster was about to be deleted.
Please everyone, if you're as stupid as Moffie and his Gimps are then do what Moffie claims he'll do in future and leave the spam voting for those posters with a double digit IQ.

Tell you what.....give me one good reason any poster on here would deliberately eliminate a legitimate posting from a new poster keen to talk rugby. Just one will do.

The only person I know on here who distorts margins, has deliberately eliminated a poster and really enjoys doing that is you Urinal: ... Rooinek salivating at the opportunity to deep six a poster.: . Status: Rugby Legend Posts: 5998 RE: Ruckers Forum Update - Controlling the bull[removed] March 01, 2017, 13:11:11 . Great news. My finger is on the trigger

SB these are the rules: .. 'Seniors and Hall Of Famers will notice a cross icon (x) next to new posters names. If you decide that the new poster appears to be a spammer, simply click on the cross (x). After 5 Seniors, Rugby Legends or Hall of Famers have marked a new user as spam, they will automatically be removed from the forum. A few rules which we have put in place are: Only posters with less than 5 posts are eligible to be [removed], so act fast! We're relying on our regulars to keep the forum tidy. Please could we ask that you act responsibly in this regard, when choosing who to delete. You may only vote once on each spammer." .. Note that only posters with less than 5 posts are eligible for removal so we are told to 'act fast'. But after the only case I know where a poster was incorrectly removed....suddenly there is a disapproving tone. Unnecessary and enough to discourage me, others can push the buttons.

 It's just so typical of the drama queen to jump into overdrive by directing his vitriol towards the posters who are his enemies, milking the opportunity for it's last drop.
Ed, the owner of the site is satisfied with the way things are working, our Board Bully though.....isn't. He insults the Ed's intelligence by demanding posters should lose their voting rights. Who runs the show here UrineRooi....you or the ED?
It kinda says it all when one considers that in over 6000 spams there's only been one poster who has inadvertently been deleted.
Get a life will you!

 System works fine, but voters need to be a bit careful. 

 System works fine, but voters need to be a bit careful
Exzerkillee

The system works fine, but voters need to be more careful? Gosh. Ed says 6000 spammer attempts have been eliminated vs 1 case where a legitimate poster was eliminated.......That's a 99.98% success rate. . How does that square with Chaballs: . 'This sadly ended briefly...these oafs here sent him back like they have done many in the past." ... Or Urinal's: .. 'Yes, we're losing posters because of self-important twats like Moffie". . The answer is it doesn't. Truth vs lies. .

 Here UrineRooi, straight from the owners mouth....suck it up!
The current system we have has wiped away over 6000 spammers. With the single legitimate hiccup with our new Irishman last week, the current system has worked a great.

Game, set and march again.....man this thing has worked so well, perhaps I should recant. ... LMAOFY!

 easypeasy...thanks to our Board Bully . What a Loser .....gets himself into an almighty knot, thrashes away, stomps his tiny feet.....calls out posters.....rants....sets up his own rules......gosh, I'd hate to imagine how he carries on when something truly affects him.

Wehe, Moffie and the Gimps are getting themselves into a bit of a frenzy but all that they've really come up with is voters need to be a bit more careful when clicking on the cross . . . so it's taken these red-faced ranting crybabies all this time to come up with exactly what I said a week ago.
LMAO!

 
No ... I don't agree, Stipid.

Mistakes are made by us all. I doubt you would have deliberately voted him off. You were just trigger happy. 

We just have to be more careful in future. Besides ... you owned up to your mistake. You could have hidden it. You didn't. That gets a thumbs up from me.

 Please bare in mind there was a helluva lot of spam occurring at the time. My guess is that I'm to be blamed as well for assuming spam brought about by the volume of spam.

 
Aren't we all.

It's as if that "X" has me fixated ... totally mesmerized .. like looking into the eyes of Ka (jungle book) ... lose all self control ... where one just has to click on it, and to hell with the consequences. 

Been there ... done that.

Everybody and his grand daddy has agreed that it was an honest mistake and/or some folk being to quick with the voting. Some have realised that a week ago. So why are you all still wailing like an old lady who has given birth to a roll of barbed wire and that over spilled milk/water under the bridge/etc? Get over it and move on, and stop regurgitating this crap, for crying out loud. Geez, grow up. It is this kind of childish crap that is driving posters away. Not one mistake in 6,000.

 
Look into my eyes ... errr ... eye!!!

You are feeling sleepyyyyyyyy ....

 There's a horse running tomorrow that I'm going to back, it ran a couple of weeks ago and placed second, I'd backed it for a win. In tomorrow's race it's showing the juicy fixed odds of 10/1 and the reason is probably because it's drawn the car park. Still....

And then, of course, we have the feeble minded who has found a new toy.

 Chuck Norris had nothing to do with the founding of the Texas Rangers.

OMG

 

Then there is, of course, the burning question....... If it takes and ant a week to walk a day, how many seeds are there in a papaya?

 Per Draad - System works fine, but voters need to be a bit careful. 
The spam was wrecking the board so being able to largely stop this is great. It just means one must read the post and take care. Nothing more needs to be said.

OK. Seems there was some sort of order, that I missed, that requires everybody to repeat the same observation. So just to be on the safe side, let me get cracking and make sure that I also repeat it. The system works fine but we need to be a bit more careful when we vote. There. That's done then.

 Ag Look, let's just ask Beeno to tell us one more time hey? 
Come on Beens, do us the "favour"...the floor is yours(sic).

So Ed isn't going to remove the voting rights of the dirty dozen er filthy five? But it should be noted that the system works fine, posters just have to be a little more careful. .. Ed I would offer this product to the purveyors of computer security like Symantec, I can't recall anything else that works 99.98% of the time. ... By the way I hope the Irish chappie comes back, I did manage to squeeze in a nice post recognizing their win over the ABs in Chicago before the dirty, dirty five nailed him.

 Case closed oaks. Onto the next yaaaawn!