Close
Chortle Spam
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Winterlight said:
What is all this chortle spam?
I understand that it's not one of the chortle owners, but why would anyone else want to promote their website?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, SPAM said:
THIS WEBSITE IS SHIT USE CHORTLE IT IS BETTER http://forums.chortle.co.uk
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Are you actually retarded? 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
He/She comes from Chortle they are retarded.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, James Williams said:
Perhaps it is less to do with promoting Chortle but more to do with disrupting things on here.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, F Green said:
Having recently joined this forum, and having read the Chortle pages
(and posted)for the past twelve months, it is clear to me that they are both very different with different members. Why anyone should want to deface the BSGF is a bit of a puzzle?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
I have said it before and I will say it again the BSG is 10000 times better then Chortle.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, SPAM 2 CHORTLE said:
THIS WEBSITE IS SHIT USE CHORTLE IT IS BETTER http://forums.chortle.co.uk
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
It's quite sweet that he's sticking to his own threads.
And that he's from a comedy site but has no concept of irony.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, F Green said:
I am getting confused, is this Spammer a Borg?
Has he or she assimilated into this forum?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
I think it's the ghost of Bernard Manning.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
It can't use punctuation... I find it quite hard to understand.
THIS WEBSITE IS!!!! SHIT USE CHORTLE. IT IS BETTER?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Winterlight @ March 25, 2008, 6:13 PMWhat is all this chortle spam?
I understand that it's not one of the chortle owners, but why would anyone else want to promote their website?
View original
Basically, it appears that one particular Chortle member is retarded, and has it in their head that we spammed them, so they're spamming us back. My life will never be the same again. I am hurt. HURT TO THE CORE.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, F Green said:
Don't do anything hasty, stay calm and breathe deeply.
You will get over this.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
It just pure jealousy. BSG has a 14" penis, and Chortle a 4.6 incher.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
It's true! 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
You knows it baby. 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Quote: Aaron @ March 25, 2008, 7:39 PMIt just pure jealousy. BSG has a 14" penis, and Chortle a 4.6 incher.
View original
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
BSG IS SHIT JOIN CHORTLE!
What? Everyones doing it?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
France is shit, but I wouldn't suggest that they all come here.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Aaron @ March 25, 2008, 8:28 PMFrance is shit, but I wouldn't suggest that they all come here.
View original
France is ace.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Seefacts @ March 25, 2008, 8:29 PMFrance is ace.
View original
Is that a first warning Aaron?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I don't know. He's obviously a mental, so I should probably be a bit lenient...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Aaron @ March 25, 2008, 8:34 PMI don't know. He's obviously a mental, so I should probably be a bit lenient...
View original
Head mental?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Evidently.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Come on!
It's not as nice as Italy, but France is a good place.
Ahh, it's no use trying - you're obviously a big racist.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Seefacts @ March 25, 2008, 8:49 PMCome on!
It's not as nice as Italy, but France is a good place.
View original
Apart from the weather in the south, the culture, the language, the food, much of the architecture, the political climate, the people...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Gavin said:
but the land could be used for good like cementing ovr it all and turning it into a giant carpark.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
We should build a big wall around it, then turn all the taps on.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
That would be a dyke then. Lots of them in Holland but constructed the other way round. Only here to help.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Aaron @ March 25, 2008, 8:53 PMApart from the weather in the south, the culture, the language, the food, much of the architecture, the political climate, the people...
View original
Better food, better climate, the people are more cultured in terms of languages spoken and they don't anally penetrate buying band new cars like us Brits.
The architecture is equal in the most parts, I'd say.
The language is better than ours.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
*shakes head slowly and takes off cap*
There's no saving some people. 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: F Green @ March 25, 2008, 6:29 PMHaving recently joined this forum, and having read the Chortle pages
(and posted)for the past twelve months, it is clear to me that they are both very different with different members. Why anyone should want to deface the BSGF is a bit of a puzzle?
View original
HERE HERE!
Very diplomatically put considering what I've witnessed so far. I've just joined this site having only just found it and neither do I see any reason for it to be at odds with the other useful resource, Chortle. I'll be using both for whatever things each is most useful for.
I'm not convinced anyone spamming this site was a 'chortler' - the fact that someone chose to claim so stinks in itself; All too obvious.
Chortle was spammed repeatedly last week, presumably a similar time to this site? The spammers repeatedly tried to direct people to a new forum ''Comedy Talk'' but not in a nice way - just saying Chortle was ''shit''. At one point there were over 40 posts in less than an hour.
From names that then appeared on the Comedytalk site it seems that some Chortle members responded likewise but a/ anyone could have used those names and b/ who started what is a mystery. Very childish playground fight.
There is something of a clue in that the Comedytalk site only opened very shortly before the spamming started so it seems unlikely that anyone from Chortle would even have been aware of it. Dare I suggest it started the other way round - who cares now - just stop it and grow up!
Has it escaped everyone's attention that Chortle is again being slated in this thread and the BSG members doing so are - SURPRISE, SURPRISE - listed as moderators/members of Comedytalk. Again, anyone can use those names but it does seem that one person in particular has an axe to grind - why?
BSG seems a useful, well run and well resourced site as far as I can see so far, as is Chortle: Let it all stop please.
now can I get on with finding more about what this site has to offer re comedy!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Oh my Lord, it's even more complex, long and frustrating than that! Short story though, there are some very sad people in this world.
P.S. Good moaning.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, jdubya said:
The stories I could tell you about the shit that goes down on Chortle forums...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Leevil said:
I've seen it, I've swam in it, I got the t-shirt - smelt of spam.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: jdubya @ March 26, 2008, 12:45 AMThe stories I could tell you about the shit that goes down on Chortle forums...
View original
Indeed. I took one look (before I was involved in the BSG, and a long time before we had our own message board) and never visited again.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Mark said:
Quote: thing @ March 26, 2008, 12:32 AMVery diplomatically put considering what I've witnessed so far. I've just joined this site having only just found it and neither do I see any reason for it to be at odds with the other useful resource, Chortle. I'll be using both for whatever things each is most useful for.
View original
Hi... um... "thing". Thanks for joining up here as well.
You're right. Chortle and this site are here to serve very different audiences - Chortle is obviously mainly focused on live comedy and comedy news - two things which we don't really do here.
Like you say, Chortle has also been attacked by a vicious round of spam in the last few days (much heavier than we have actually). My thinking is that it is either therefore someone out to attack British comedy sites in general, or someone who has wrongly assumed this website is to blame for the Chortle attack and is now looking to 'exact revenge' (although how they have come to that conclusion when the spam was advertising a different website I don't know)
Either way, they're a very sad loser who needs to get a life. We do have a delete button you know!
To save the spammer having to post any more: I'm happy to recommend on his or her behalf that if you're interested in live comedy (either watching or performing) Chortle is the place to discuss it!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, KJSmyling said:
Quote: thing @ March 26, 2008, 12:32 AMnow can I get on with finding more about what this site has to offer re comedy!
View original
This thread...
kjs
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Leevil said:
An endorsement by Mark - what more can they ask for?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Gold bullion?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Leevil said:
They'd probably think there was chocolate inside - which in my opinion would be better anyway.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Nice one Mark! I'm sure I'll find this site just as useful for various comedy interests.
If anyone does choose to use Chortle be aware that they don't readily take prisoners! It can seem a bit causticly witty at times but if anyone posts anything seemingly vicious it is normally a spoof - if you rise to it - well - -
Just a different style to here (so this is a refreshing change) where you have to remember that many of the posters are stand-ups themselves and show that nature clearly at times.
I was gonna leave it there but back to the spam - >
If I might speculate > my theory is that whilst there might have been some retaliation from all parties it was indeed started by someone or some group who had an interest in damaging or causing problems to both BSG and Chortle.
You pretty much summed it up when you said you didn't understand why retaliation was aimed at BSG when the spamming of Chortle linked to the new site. So isn't it more likely that one person or group was doing it all? - in both directions.
Most interesting of all is that within minutes of my first post on the subject here response came from several people who are ALL listed on said new site and all slightly mocking? Same names being used elsewhere? - or same people?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: thing @ March 26, 2008, 1:29 AMMost interesting of all is that within minutes of my first post on the subject here response came from several people
View original
I wouldn't read anything into that - we just have nothing better to do with our time than sit on here!
P.S. Even sadder, I was being sincere then. :-/
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Writer2K said:
Quote: Seefacts @ March 25, 2008, 8:49 PM
It's not as nice as Italy, but France is a good place.
View original
Just got back from Florence, brilliant place!
Couldn't get over the different prices of coffee if you sit or stand.
Standing 1.5 Euros
Sitting 4.5 Euros!!!
I asked what price they would charge if I hovered or squatted
Barista replied "If you can hover you have free coffee! If you squat, I throw you out!"
(so Italians also have a better sense of humour)
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Writer2K @ March 26, 2008, 8:54 AMJust got back from Florence, brilliant place!
Couldn't get over the different prices of coffee if you sit or stand.
Standing 1.5 Euros
Sitting 4.5 Euros!!!
I asked what price they would charge if I hovered or squatted
Barista replied "If you can hover you have free coffee! If you squat, I throw you out!"
(so Italians also have a better sense of humour)
View original
I was there last year. Lovely place.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: thing @ March 26, 2008, 1:29 AM
you have to remember that many of the posters are stand-ups themselves and show that nature clearly at times.
View original
Not really an excuse in my books, A lot of stand up are on this site too, (Raises hand) but I don't go around calling people cunts.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
But to be fair, it is a fabulous word.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Ok thanks for all that - positive and err, negative.
Having researched a bit I now understand the basic story: If I seemed to suggest in previous posts that some established members of this site had a hand in that debacle then I now see how that was not the case. Clearly just one individual but curious why you couldn't all just say so in the first place?
Thanks
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I can't speak for the others, but I'm too polite (no, really) and impeccably English to want to single anyone out. Particularly so in what you'll have no doubt now seen is an intricate, and at times somewhat delicate situation.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Thanks.
Understood except the bit about delicate? Is he something special? Just seems like a twat with a personality disorder to me. Given his apparent IT skills, as another member said, potentially ''dangerous''. ?
Thankfully it seems to have stopped but a bit worried about how he got hold of some of those details in the first place? - and what happens to them now!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
To my knowledge, no details have been used which weren't "given" to the concerned party elsewhere.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Wildjesusfishkid said:
Right what have you got then?
We've got:-
France and Chortle
France, chortle and spam
Spam France chortle spam and discussion forums.
Spam, spam, spam etc.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Quote: Wildjesusfishkid @ March 27, 2008, 10:31 AMRight what have you got then?
We've got:-
France and Chortle
France, chortle and spam
Spam France chortle spam and discussion forums.
Spam, spam, spam etc.
View original
Pretty on topic for this site
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, ian_w said:
Actually, I feel like I recognise the style in some of the posts - even in such short sentences!
Nuff said.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: thing @ March 26, 2008, 1:29 AM
Most interesting of all is that within minutes of my first post on the subject here response came from several people who are ALL listed on said new site and all slightly mocking? Same names being used elsewhere? - or same people?
View original
Does this mean that the Twat has been posting on Chortle in our names as he clearly opened accounts for us on hius site or used us to slag off Chortle on his site.
This is potentially very dangerous and I'm sure an offence must have been committed.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Leevil said:
I'm already registered on Chortle, so if he has I'm not Leevil How/Jones.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: David Chapman @ March 27, 2008, 1:34 PMDoes this mean that the Twat has been posting on Chortle in our names as he clearly opened accounts for us on hius site or used us to slag off Chortle on his site.
This is potentially very dangerous and I'm sure an offence must have been committed.
View original
No.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: David Chapman @ March 27, 2008, 1:34 PMDoes this mean that the Twat has been posting on Chortle in our names as he clearly opened accounts for us on hius site or used us to slag off Chortle on his site.
This is potentially very dangerous and I'm sure an offence must have been committed.
View original
No, none of the names I now undertand were nicked from here appeared on the Chortle site - but only as far as I know - I didn't look that often!
The names i remember were ''Ryan55'' whose post is still there and notably says the link is to ''my'' site.
The other was ''chris.g'' who posted in excess of 40 times within an hour.
There were others but I'm really not so sad as to have written them down! he's probably loving all of this and I don't want to give him a perky.
Don't recall any of the names that seem to have been stolen appearing on Chortle.
Still, I agree it's all potentially dangerous David.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, ian_w said:
'Chris.g'
Someone once spelt my name Ian.w 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Leevil said:
I think we'd appreciate it if you stopped bumping this thread now.
We have not and as far as I know would never attack Chortles, as our leader, sorry boss, sorry the site owner Mark would much rather have the two sites work WITH each other, rather then against.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, thing said:
Quote: Leevil @ March 27, 2008, 4:29 PMI think we'd appreciate it if you stopped bumping this thread now.
We have not and as far as I know would never attack Chortles, as our leader, sorry boss, sorry the site owner Mark would much rather have the two sites work WITH each other, rather then against.
View original
Likewise.
I presume Mark here and Steve there have already played a big part in sorting the problem behind the scenes and we all appreciate it.
I only posted cos I was asked a specific question.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I'd just like to clarify that no names were "nicked from here". The names and details used were given elsewhere, on a seperate site, and transferred by that site's owner - who happens to be a member here - when he moved his site to another provider. Said member has now apologised for transferring the data and removed it from the new version of his site.
And with all due respect to that particular person, a soggy cucumber sandwich poses more danger.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Spike said:
Someone keeps spamming Chortle again.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Yes, so we see.
Is it you?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Spike said:
Yes of course it is me.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Quote: Spike @ April 4 2008, 11:53 AM BSTSomeone keeps spamming Chortle again.
View original
Look I am not spamming Chortle and I have done all I can to stop the spamming, so please leave this site alone.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Jake How @ April 4 2008, 12:51 PM BSTLook I am not spamming Chortle and I have done all I can to stop the spamming, so please leave this site alone.
View original
Jake, we are looking into it, there is no more evidence pointing to you, than anyone else.
But keep in mind Jake you are on VERY thin ice at the moment.
Chortle are pissed at you to say the least.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Quote: Paul W @ April 4 2008, 1:00 PM BSTJake, we are looking into it, there is no more evidence pointing to you, than anyone else.
But keep in mind Jake you are on VERY thin ice at the moment.
Chortle are pissed at you to say the least.
View original
Ok but I have not spammed Chortle.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Jake How @ April 4 2008, 1:01 PM BSTOk but I have not spammed Chortle.
View original
I'm not convinced personally, let's just keep it that way ok Jake?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jake How said:
Yes ok I think it is time I take a break.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Jake How @ April 4 2008, 1:04 PM BSTYes ok I think it is time I take a break . . .
View original
From spamming, yes.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Seefacts, that really doesn't help. Just leave it, everyone.