Re: Let's Play
There have been a lot of accusations made with arbitrarily chosen pieces of evidence regarding dates of joining of users, number of woots, sales, etc. But rather than just say that these are dumb accusations, I figured I'd instead compile some numbers for you:
1. Everyone who leaves positive comments on my shirts joined after I did, and so they must all be me.
So this entry, 2/3 of the positive comments came from people who joined in Sept2008 or later (which is when I joined, which is why it's the magic start point). For my other entry this week, half of the positive comments were from people who joined at that date or later. (If we include seki's shirt in this, only 40% of the comments are from users who joined in Sept or later).
Now to compare, drakxxx's entry has received half of its comments from users who joined in Sept08 or later, and Deadfrog 2/3. Are these numbers any different? No. Why did I choose these as my comparison point? Because they are the two entries to which mine have been most compared. Simple really.
2. Everyone who likes my shirts has a yellow box, which is suspicious.
So let's look at those numbers. For my two shirts combined (only looking at positive comments):
1 blank box, 5 yellow boxes, 3 orange boxes, 23 blue bloxes, 13 red boxes, 5 black boxes.
So, for every user who commented that they liked the shirt who had only 1 woot, there was one who had 25 or more. (And if you think that number is suspiciously high for my TWO entries combined, drakxxx's one entry alone has 6 comments from people with just a single purchase).
3. My shirts don't actually sell that well anyway, so who is voting on them?
My shirts, on average, have each sold 1000 more than the average for derby winners since I joined (if you include dailies in that number, it's a much larger difference even, but I think comparing to derby entries only is fair).
So please don't try to argue with me that the people who like my shirts are sketchy, or that they can't be real, or that they don't actually make purchases without actually looking into the numbers. These things are very easy to look up, but people instead choose to blurt out whatever they think will cast doubt on me without taking two seconds to actually think it through or see if there is any validity in their claims.
I'm sick of responding to these stupid claims and was planning to just ignore it because it's pointless to respond, but since I was called out for not defending myself, I decided I might as well. Not like it matters either way- I can present undeniable proof and people will still say that it's impossible that people vote on something they don't personally like.
Oh, and as a sidenote, don't tell me to wikipedia search steampunk. If you are going by wikipedia, it says "Since the 1990s, the application of the steampunk label has expanded beyond works set in recognizable historical periods (usually the 19th century) to works set in fantasy worlds that rely heavily on steam- or spring-powered technology," which negates 90% of the comments about why various things within the derby aren't steampunk.