11 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHuser PORSCHE EXTREMIST.....Get a life.
Reported or suspected cause
bit harsh
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause · Original poster
I was probably a bit harsh on the guy, but after I think about it...we don't need people like that in this board.
Leading evidence: 'bit harsh' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'bit harsh' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
11 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T105141Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Is there any reason you felt the need to add a worthless response to EVERY thread you could possibly open?
Is there any reason you felt the need to ask questions that are ALL OVER this board that a simple search of the archives would yield?
You have got to have the worst identity crisis I have ever come across to have to start and answer as many threads as possible to see you name up and down the board.
MOST IMPORTANTLY.....
And above all you have really disrespected the others on this board by pulling your little stunt since now there are NEW POSTINGS that willultimately get lost in the shuffle since they were bumped down the list.
Bad Porsche Extremist
LVDell
A question was asked on the turbo forum where everyone went. Maybe it's guys like you that drove them off. I don't know enthusiast, but I read the responses and saw nothing wrong with them. It's jackasses like you that make people apprehensive about responding to posts. Your assertion that new posts would get bumped is wrong unless he/she only chose to respond to old posts. I don't know if it was a trick, but if it was, and you have to write the email you wrote, I would suggest you're the one who needs a life.
You have got to be kidding me OH996. You must be blind. Besides, any reason to start calling people names. Who's the jackass now...what a tool.
It's people like that who drive themselves off a board not the the other way around like you insinuate when they pull stunts like that. I will give you this....there are a couple credible posts. BUt for the most part...just a simple chime in to get the name on the board. To wake up a log on and see his name all the way down 2 1/2 pages...you have to be kidding me right?
Read ALL the posts and you will understand. If not, there you have a serious problem to think that answering/posting 100+ times is NORMAL behavior.
I admit I only read about 5 or 6 of the top posts before I responded. I also appologize for taking what you percieve as a cheap shot. I did not take the time to read 4 pages of posts to see the extent of his work. Still wouldn't have bothered me though. I guess that is my only point.
No need to apologize (but thank you). It is not that is bothered me as much as it got me thinkning about how much I enjoy the conversations I have on this board as well as read the posts. There are legitimate posts that people have needs (answers) and it was just selfish of one user to essentially knock the new posts all the way to page 3 or 4 where they will probably never get read or answered. I was probably a bit harsh on the guy, but after I think about it...we don't need people like that in this board.
Thanks for the response!
Too funny Kirb......I would read all of yours though! Especially ones involving all your mods. Those are the ones that keep most of us dreaming (or in trouble with the Mrs.)
Great. Sounds like everyone is chilled..
LVDell - if you have a problem with some folks posts - simply select this icon:
and simply let the moderators know, rather then start a thread that intentionally flames someone....
Some folks post more then others. Some do not.
Thanks....
This is closed...
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
