[Niamh.]

Can we discuss? According to twitter that's a fake tweet as twitter wouldn't have allowed that many characters in 2014.Upon googling, It seems up until 2015 only 140 characters per tweet were allowed. Bit unfair to spread such a false quote like that.

[The Slim Reaper]

I'll have a look into it.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I'll have a look into it.

Thanks

[Swan]

The time of the tweet stands out a bit as well. I have no idea if real or not, but "i had to send my daughter's friend home today", at 7:09am? Who has friends round at 7am lol.

Could have been captured by someone in a different timezone tbf.

[arista]

Typical.

I do not view Sigs

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Swan

The time of the tweet stands out a bit as well. I have no idea if real or not, but "i had to send my daughter's friend home today", at 7:09am? Who has friends round at 7am lol.

Could have been captured by someone in a different timezone tbf.

Well I imagine the idea that it's a "bad taste paedo joke" rather than something that he actually thought. Surely.

[Swan]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Well I imagine the idea that it's a "bad taste paedo joke" rather than something that he actually thought. Surely.

Yeah, thinking about it, the time means nothing.

[Niamh.]

Actually it was increased to 280 characters from 140 in 2017 so it has to be fake.

https://www.wired.com/story/a-brief-...panding-tweet/

[The Slim Reaper]

I've had so many instant mod/admin alterations to my sigs including numerous deletions that I'm surprised this required a thread. I kid you not, a quote of a poster saying something nice about me that was behind spoilers was even removed, which was especially weird as the same poster that made the nice quote about me also had a quote in their sig of a different poster attacking someone else's personality. Strange...

Delete it if you want, Niamh, and I'll find something else. As I can't find definitive proof either way, it will be staying up as my choice, but obviously others have the power to overrule that.

Genuinely NBD if you do - he's a lovely man, so I won't have to look very far.

[Swan]

Real or not, the Steph Curry sig was better anyway

[Niamh.]

I mean it's quite clearly fake as it exceeds the character count that would have been allowed back in 2014. I didn't want to remove it because I don't want to come across as biased. I don't know what other sigs you're talking about that had been removed before but they don't have anything to do with this now. I made a thread because I think as this is clearly a fake tweet, people on here who read it should know that and not think Graham Linehan had actually said that, fair is fair.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Swan

Real or not, the Steph Curry sig was better anyway

Unfortunately, your Boston boys are winning it all this year, so that sig only had another 5 months left

[Liam-]

Could have done this via pm or whatever, rather than making this public so you could conveniently defend a known bigot

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Could have done this via pm or whatever, rather than making this public so you could conveniently defend a known bigot

Even known bigots don't deserve false words to be put into their mouths if he's truly that bigoted, it won't be hard for someone to find a bigoted quote of his

[Swan]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Unfortunately, your Boston boys are winning it all this year, so that sig only had another 5 months left

Tbf, i always followed OKC, and they're not winning anything in a hurry.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Could have done this via pm or whatever, rather than making this public so you could conveniently defend a known bigot

I did it publicly so anyone who read it would know it's fake and he didn't say that. Why do you not want people to know that he didn't actually say that? You dislike the man so lies about him are OK?

[Liam-]

I mean, let’s just see if you keep the same energy in other circumstances, I can’t seem to remember any public questioning of other people having words put in their mouth on here before now

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I mean, let’s just see if you keep the same energy in other circumstances, I can’t seem to remember any public questioning of other people having words put in their mouth on here before now

I don't even know how I'm supposed to reply to this hypothetical future fake words in mouths situation.........I'll do my best I guess....?

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I did it publicly so anyone who read it would know it's fake and he didn't say that. Why do you not want people to know that he didn't actually say that? You dislike the man so lies about him are OK?

There is no definitive proof either way, but I think you're absolutely correct that if he definitely didn't tweet it, it should be no more than common sense that it isn't fair to ascribe those words to him, without this disclaimer. I'll look further into it.

I've seen numerous new rules come in since the queen died, so forgive me if i struggle to keep up with them all, so say for instance, that a poster had a quote in their sig, quoting a former poster tell another poster they downloaded their personality in PDF, would that need to be factchecked, or was the discussion that happened in, considered fair game?

For the record, we all make offhand, bitchy comments like that and I don't see anything wrong with that either, but I'm just looking for the parameters, so I understand how to avoid stepping over the line every time I go into user CP.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I mean, let’s just see if you keep the same energy in other circumstances, I can’t seem to remember any public questioning of other people having words put in their mouth on here before now

Niamh is a good friend of slims so there is no other agenda behind the thread only to clarify the facts.

[arista]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Niamh is a good friend of slims so there is other agenda behind he thread only to clarify the facts.

how nice

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Swan

Tbf, i always followed OKC, and they're not winning anything in a hurry.

I thought you were Boston? Shai is balling at the mo

[bots]

i hide signatures in my preferences, so i havent a clue whats going on

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

There is no definitive proof either way, but I think you're absolutely correct that if he definitely didn't tweet it, it should be no more than common sense that it isn't fair to ascribe those words to him, without this disclaimer. I'll look further into it.

I've seen numerous new rules come in since the queen died, so forgive me if i struggle to keep up with them all, so say for instance, that a poster had a quote in their sig, quoting a former poster tell another poster they downloaded their personality in PDF, would that need to be factchecked, or was the discussion that happened in, considered fair game?

For the record, we all make offhand, bitchy comments like that and I don't see anything wrong with that either, but I'm just looking for the parameters, so I understand how to avoid stepping over the line every time I go into user CP.

I don't know what you mean about new rules since the Queen died.

I haven't asked you to remove the sig or done that for you. I'm simply telling you that the tweet is fake (again easily fact checked by counting the 140+ characters in the tweet that wouldn't have been possible in 2014) What you choose to do about that is your choice however I feel that people on this forum that read it should be aware that it is a fake tweet

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i hide signatures in my preferences, so i havent a clue whats going on

Slim is the only one to have sigs fact checked, and Swan supports OKC basketball team, when I previously thought he supported Boston.