Relax. I had posts GIVING AWAY GAMES that got "low rated". Do you seriously pay attention to that anymore?
If it bothers you that badly, there are scripts to hide it with.

I did at first, but after the first -100 I don't.

Didn't you set yourself the target of deliberately getting -1000 rep a a few months back?

I think I remember that, but I may have just had too many hot Bovrils and be imagining it.

I did, but I want to go back, people judge me differently and discriminate against me.

I'd appreciate it if you can help a brother and +1 all my posts.

This sounded somewhat exotic and arousing, so I looked it up.

Looks like Vegemite with stock cubes mixed in, ewwwww.

And I hate Vegemite; I am, however, partial to other savoury spreads and condiments.

And that's your solution? You want to know why this forum sucks, it all the people being jerks to their fellow users. It's their fault as much as GoG's. But hey, let's blame it all on GoG as I watched another new poster get called a troll for asking a question. These forums are not a friendly place, and that part is not GoG's doing. And telling people how it's okay before one can hide rep and low rated posts with a script, is a pretty short-sighted solution.

What other solution do you expect?
"Excuse me, kind sirs! Please stop clicking the - button because of the poster rather than the post!"
Yeah, like anybody ever listens to those posts when people try them.
"Please stop using that downvoting script against me!"
Sure, Wakalo's offered to stop using it if somebody buys him a set of G2A games, "games" which he put up, meaning the money you spend goes directly to him. Would you like to be the one to pay him to get him to stop? How about the goodness-knows-how-many other people using it?
The only fix would be if GOG stepped in and did something, but they haven't for 8 years, so what else can we do besides make the best of it and ignore it?

I'm not disagreeing, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the derepping issue.

Today: 18 Dec 2016 - 32 days to office
First hour - Obama's birth certificate <span class="bold"><span class="podkreslenie">IS</span></span> a forgery. Psychologically inoculating viewers through lies (Kelly). Asimov and predictive programming. Data mining. . Australia and China censorship. Facebook develops censorship tool, NYT airs ad for fake news. Deception by incrementalism. State run DDOS attacks. Communist Chinese. Censorship: Zuckerberg and Merkel hot mic over Facebook racist (migrant) posts, China censoring the web, €500,000 fines for fake news. Zuckerberg lauds Socialism with China Internet Censorship Czar meets with him 14 times. Tight Chinese filters. So what happens when a country cracks down on Fake news? Just ask China. Who checks the fact checkers?. Conclusive proof Obama's certificate is fake/forged. China censorship involves arresting and killing. Beijing '<i>social credit</i>' system. Who to sue for rights violations. 'The government is rogue and out of control'. The purge. Certified report from IT about attack 'NEVER SEEN AN ATTACK THIS BIG'. Synthetic bandwidth.

Second hour - Saturday Night Live - Electors skit. Stealth gun-control program. Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Longest running Sheriff. Appealing in court. Soros 30 days pumping 3 Million to beat/overthrow him. 5 years ago told to investigate Obama's birth certificate. Why would Obama say he was from Kenya? 'I don't know and i could care less. From day one we were investigating a forged fraudulent document'. Top forensics labs, done by liberals who didn't want this to be true. 'We went across the pond in Italy, got experts and in Hawaii'. Mike Zullo: 'We put the nail in the coffin with this last Thursday. We have 9 points of verified forgery. Going back to 2011 your (Jones) video taking this layers apart was the first one i saw in a long time'. 'court recognized expert backing up what we did back then'. Pursuing under the radar. 'threw around the idea of a copy machine' Lucky break 'the problem with putting together a criminal case. Not just putting someone behind bars, how will this conclude? There was so much computer forensics involved you couldn't convince a jury'. Soros to run two groups who define what content is fake and not. Full sheriff investigation (??). Joe knew after meeting Trump that he would be President. 'Trump loves cops, military and people'. 'I'm angry from all this and the media, they are hiding all this'. 'I was an elector in 2000 and boy did they go after me, in AZ you can do that but why would i do that?' 'Hillary and that bunch can't accept defeat'. 'Sanders made some threats on me' 'When Soros came after me on illegal immigration, not legalize marijuana. He wanted me out of office because of the birth certificate'. Illegal immigration game. Border of Oppaso. 'I predicted a long time ago drugs are involved, i believe in the wall not just for immigration but for the drugs'. Marine core general. 'He'll be pretty good'. Severed heads. 'A lot of people are interested because of the media-blackout. When i closed the press conference i hope we can turn this over to congress and take hold of it, have hearings'. One of the largest frauds. If Arpaio was president: 'I would do what he (Trump) is doing, he has a great Attorney General, I've met him a few times. He's making some great choices, so i can't comment. I wish someone would look into the birth certificate, let congress know what's really going on'. Top labs Digital forensics and having the evidence lead them. Mark was making a video and realized the other certificate was off by about a degree and a half, and the document was collapsing on it's own weight. Old school & digital forensics both came to the same conclusion. 'Cut and paste digital lift'. Real birth certificates are yellowed (due to acid and time). More that wasn't covered, color combinations that shouldn't exist. Push for an investigation. Legislation to prevent this from happening again. Military & police leading the charge. Soros, BLM, DOJ. 'A very deep problem with the current DOJ' 'We got to do something about it'. Police to be run by UN advisory board. Transsexual movement, confusing children in school, National Geographic. 'Societies collapse when you go down this road'. 820,000 criminal aliens, 84% with felonies and/or serious misdemeanors. Michael Bloomberg's Anti-gun Crusade. China building weapons systems on man-made islands in south sea. Frace election looms. Homeless falling victim to Synthetic Marijuana, it's cheap but can cause kidney and/or brain damage. Ron Paul & CIA meddling in elections. <span class="bold">The Saddam interrogation: Ten years after the tyrant's execution, the CIA agent who grilled him reveals the shattering truth... that <i><span class="podkreslenie">everything the US thought it knew was WRONG</span></i></span>.

Full Audio Podcast (<i>1.5 hours</i>)
Full (<i>1.5 hours</i>)
Daily Headlines


Recommended videos:
Russia Hacking the Election

I always get this itch when I hear the cliché that the mainstream media somehow aren't capable of covering the real news or are keeping some kind of agenda as soon as an "independent" reporter comes along telling a different story. My question then is: What makes one choose this one reporter over dozens of on-the-scene reporters working for known news outlets?

I googled around a bit and quickly found that a couple of her very bold claims, claims you are referring to, are, as it seems, simply incorrect.

This is quite an eyeopener:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6miOTbk_GSU
(explicit)

I am sure Assad is no angel, but the funding of fringe radical groups with weapons and money, the training of these fringe members by a third state's military, the import of mercenaries or other extremists to fight with those fringe groups until a civil war breaks out challenging the current government of a country is not unheard of. And have you ever heard anything what comes after Assad is gone, a wonderful democratic secular state? That worked so good in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia.

Just look at South America in the 70s-90s, you really do not want to know what the CIA and other foreign ngo groups have pulled off in countries there.

And when you follow the development in Syria does it not sound familiar? Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia there is always a new Hitler on the horizon.

In my opinion this is not about Assad or the citizens of Syria, this is about pushing Russia out of the Middle East, trashing Russia gas pipeline plan and establishing a government(whatever that shit show will be) which won't help Iran in case the Israel/US want to march in there.

And the White Helmets are for sure not impartial like Snopes claims.

I'm sure there's just a slight crack in his angel wings, whatever Amnesty International and The Human Rights Watch may have been saying for 16 years.

Because Snopes is a comprehensive journalist news site?

oh that's right, run by a husband and wife...

I'm not sure I put a lot of faith in their 'fact checking'.

So you think between 312.000 and 470.000 dead is a price that has to be paid by the syrian people for the "freedom" that follows Assad?

You realize that the numerous factions there are very far from being "moderate" and can you imagine what would happen if they win? You think half a million dead would be a good price to pay what follows?

"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists." -Hannah Arendt

Basically cognitive dissonance, when a human is no longer able to fit contradictory information input in a coherent frame of his perceived reality and beliefs.

See the live reporting of CNN covering the 1990 Persian Gulf War:

Charles Jaco :).

I'm not sure why you want to lure me into a discussion about something I'm not arguing for or against. My point here is that this Canadian reporter made some pretty bold claims that turned out be untrue.

Considering how her observations were made out to be something big in the Syria debate on here (and common news agencies dragged through the dirt), I felt the need to interject. And to my knowledge the article on Snopes seems to be uncontested so far.

Oh sure: If you can't find anything wrong with the content, attack the source.

Let me know what's wrong with Snopes' factchecking regarding the claims made by the reporter, then get back at me like I did, you know, with your unproven vote fraud claims.