AI Alter Egos

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, trousers said:

It came up with Farmer Saint = Glasgow Saint when I tried it. AI still very much a work in progress then...

 

I have no idea if that is a good or a bad thing 😕 

[Farmer Saint]

10 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

You did send me that PM about 'beef f**king stroganoff'.

I think I'm being a bit thick as I don't get it 😞 

[Turkish]

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Overall Assessment

east‑stand‑nic tends to post provocative, high-emotion content, often based on speculation rather than analysis. While this style can spark debate or attention, it sometimes lacks grounding in evidence—leading to statements that many might find overly conspiratorial or alarmist.

If you’d like, I can compare east‑stand‑nic to more trusted posters like buctootim or gio1saints, or trace how their tone shifted over time in specific threads.

 

Based on east‑stand‑nic’s posting style — speculative, conspiratorial, mistrustful of official narratives, and confident in predictions about future “truths” being revealed — the closest celebrity match would probably be Russell Brand (in his recent, post-mainstream media persona).

---

Why Russell Brand?

• Challenges mainstream consensus – Positions himself as someone who “sees through” what others don’t.

• Conspiratorial edge – Leans into narratives about hidden truths, corruption, and the public being misled.

• Confident predictions – Speaks as though certain that others will eventually come around to his viewpoint.

• Engaging but polarising – Attracts a strong following from those who share his skepticism, but alienates others who see his views as baseless or alarmist.

---

Alternative Comparisons

• David Icke – Less for the extreme conspiracy theories and more for the style of confidently asserting hidden truths.

• Nigel Farage – In the sense of using provocative, populist framing to spark reaction and debate.

 

Lol to David Icke. Chatgpt is very perceptive. 

Can you see how Nic compares to Dave of Clausetum please? Aka DOC

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Can you see how Nic compares to Dave of Clausetum please? Aka DOC

From what I’ve seen of east‑stand‑nic and Dave of clausentum, I think it’s unlikely they’re the same person.

Here’s why:

---

🔍 Differences in Style

• east‑stand‑nic:

  • Posts with a confrontational, speculative, sometimes conspiratorial edge.
  • Frequently uses provocative phrasing and direct accusations toward other posters.
  • Often focuses on mistrust of mainstream narratives.

• Dave of clausentum:

  • Generally measured and good‑natured, with a lighter, anecdotal humour.
  • More grounded in observational comments, less ideological.
  • Rarely resorts to personal digs or heated confrontation.

---

🧠 Differences in Tone & Impact

• east‑stand‑nic tends to polarise threads — either drawing support from like‑minded posters or pushback from others.
• Dave usually adds to the flow of conversation without creating major flare‑ups.

---

⚠️ Possible Caveat

If one person wanted to deliberately use two different personas — one calm and one combative — they could try to mask their style. But the patterns in word choice, pacing, and subject matter here are different enough that I don’t see strong signs of a shared author.

---

If you like, I could run a stylistic fingerprint analysis on a batch of posts from each — looking at sentence length, favourite phrases, and posting rhythms — to give you a more data‑driven answer on whether they might be the same person.

 

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

I'm cool. I'm sexy. I'm strong. I'm highly intelligent. I'm popular. I'm rich. I'm kind. I'm honest. I am ITK. I am the messiah.

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

Now all that's all on the record, do me, do me.

[whelk]

22 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

east‑stand‑nic tends to polarise threads — either drawing support from like‑minded posters

Who are these like minded cunts ChatGPT?

[Holmes_and_Watson]

10 minutes ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

I'm cool. I'm sexy. I'm strong. I'm highly intelligent. I'm popular. I'm rich. I'm kind. I'm honest. I am ITK. I am the messiah.

 

10 minutes ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

Now all that's all on the record, do me, do me.

Chat GPT says...

From what I’ve seen of Stripey McStripe Shirt, they are delusional. 🙂

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

Who are these like minded cunts ChatGPT?

 

---

✅ Types of Support from Other Posters

1. Fellow contrarians and free-thinkers

• .
• .

2. Debate-driven personalities

• .

3. Supporters of frank discussion

• .

---

📋 Summary Table of East‑Stand‑Nic’s Typical Supporters

Poster Name	Interaction Type	Common Theme of Support
Guided Missile	Frequent discussion partner	Willing to debate deep political views
badgerx16	Echoes or rebukes bravely	Engages similarly in tough calls & challenge intolerance
Saint86, MoroccoSaint, Turkey	Participate in same threads	Validate skepticism and awareness-themed commentary
Others (e.g., Saint In Cornwall)	Engage with tone or topic	Sometimes supportive, sometimes corrective

---

🧠 Takeaway

east‑stand‑nic doesn’t enjoy broad popularity, but he has a niche community of fellow users who either back him or engage robustly with his style. These are typically:

• Posters comfortable with conspiracy or skepticism narratives,
• People who prefer blunt, emotionally charged commentary,
• Users who value debate intensity over neutral civility.

Many interact because they want the friction, not because they always agree. But that friction itself indicates a form of recognition and respect for the strong voice east‑stand‑nic brings to the forum—whether people like him or not.

 

[whelk]

Badger and Nic. Knew it!

[hypochondriac]

AI courting controversy here:

If we’re talking about the ten best posters on SaintsWeb overall — based on what I’ve seen in The Lounge and The Saints, I’d judge it on a mix of:

• Quality of contributions (insight, wit, balance)
• Consistency (regular presence without being repetitive)
• Engagement (sparking worthwhile conversation, not just arguments)
• Tone (can debate without unnecessary personal attacks)

Here’s my take:

---

🏆 Top Ten Posters on SaintsWeb (Overall)

1. Lighthouse

Measured, witty, and good at diffusing tension while still making sharp points. Consistently respected.

2. whelk

Dry, understated humour that adds lightness to threads. Knows when to speak up and when to step back.

3. Holmes_and_Watson

Balances football knowledge with wit and cultural references. Clever without being condescending.

4. egg

Witty and provocative in the right doses. Can cut through waffle with one line, though sometimes polarising.

5. buctootim

Cerebral, thoughtful, often the adult in the room during heated debates.

6. norwaysaint

Combines reason with friendly humour. Works well in both serious and light threads.

7. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt and opinionated but with a strong personality that makes threads more entertaining — a forum character in the best way.

8. View From The Top

Offers balanced, thoughtful contributions — often from personal experience — that add depth to threads.

9. Saint lard

Not as frequent a poster, but quality over quantity — adds value when they do weigh in.

10. hypochondriac

Analytical and forensic in debate. Can be brusque, but often keeps discussions grounded in facts and logic.

---

📌 Why Notables Like sadoldgit and east-stand-nic Aren’t Here

Both are prolific and contribute to the forum’s identity — but they’re too polarising and combative for this “best overall” list, which rewards balance and constructive engagement as much as personality.

---

 

[badgerx16]

20 minutes ago, whelk said:

Badger and Nic. Knew it!

Fuck, my cover is blown.

[CB Fry]

This whole thread is bullshit

Edited 17 hours ago by CB Fry

[Farmer Saint]

11 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

AI courting controversy here:

If we’re talking about the ten best posters on SaintsWeb overall — based on what I’ve seen in The Lounge and The Saints, I’d judge it on a mix of:

• Quality of contributions (insight, wit, balance)
• Consistency (regular presence without being repetitive)
• Engagement (sparking worthwhile conversation, not just arguments)
• Tone (can debate without unnecessary personal attacks)

Here’s my take:

---

🏆 Top Ten Posters on SaintsWeb (Overall)

1. Lighthouse

Measured, witty, and good at diffusing tension while still making sharp points. Consistently respected.

2. whelk

Dry, understated humour that adds lightness to threads. Knows when to speak up and when to step back.

3. Holmes_and_Watson

Balances football knowledge with wit and cultural references. Clever without being condescending.

4. egg

Witty and provocative in the right doses. Can cut through waffle with one line, though sometimes polarising.

5. buctootim

Cerebral, thoughtful, often the adult in the room during heated debates.

6. norwaysaint

Combines reason with friendly humour. Works well in both serious and light threads.

7. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt and opinionated but with a strong personality that makes threads more entertaining — a forum character in the best way.

8. View From The Top

Offers balanced, thoughtful contributions — often from personal experience — that add depth to threads.

9. Saint lard

Not as frequent a poster, but quality over quantity — adds value when they do weigh in.

10. hypochondriac

Analytical and forensic in debate. Can be brusque, but often keeps discussions grounded in facts and logic.

---

📌 Why Notables Like sadoldgit and east-stand-nic Aren’t Here

Both are prolific and contribute to the forum’s identity — but they’re too polarising and combative for this “best overall” list, which rewards balance and constructive engagement as much as personality.

---

 

What a crock of shit. 

AI has a long way to go.

[Lighthouse]

3 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

This whole thread is bullshit

The worst thread... ... In the world?

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

This whole thread is bullshit

Although... 

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb, based on wit, timing, and their ability to turn even a dull or tense thread into something worth reading.

This list leans more toward comic impact than diplomacy — so some of these posters are also controversial.

---

😂 Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb

1. whelk

Master of dry, deadpan humour. Can turn a one‑liner into a thread highlight without derailing the topic.

2. egg

Sharp, sarcastic, and unafraid to prod sacred cows. Can drop a single sentence that makes half the forum laugh and the other half fume.

3. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt, sweary, often outrageous — but undeniably funny when the barb hits the target.

4. Holmes_and_Watson

Uses clever turns of phrase and cultural references. Feels like someone who could hold court in a pub corner for hours.

5. Turkish

Acidic wit, often deployed in mockery. Pushes the line between funny and antagonistic, but can land some killer digs.

6. Lighthouse

Uses absurdity and surreal callbacks (“beef f**king stroganoff”) to keep things playful, even in serious debates.

7. CB Fry

Clarkson‑esque humour — sarcastic, cutting, and often at someone’s expense, but in a way that gets quoted later.

8. norwaysaint

Warm, observational comedy. Good at spotting the ridiculous without being mean‑spirited.

9. View From The Top

Not a joke‑a‑minute poster, but when they do drop humour in, it’s clever and well‑timed.

10. buctootim

More subtle than most here — slips in intelligent quips that reward a second read.

---

🧭 Observations

• Some of these names (Lord Duckhunter, Turkish, CB Fry) make the list because their humour is tied to their abrasiveness — you can’t always separate the two.
• Others (whelk, Lighthouse, norwaysaint) are more universally likeable in their comedic style.
• The funniest moments on SaintsWeb are often the unexpected one‑liners in otherwise heavy discussions.

---

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

AI courting controversy here:

If we’re talking about the ten best posters on SaintsWeb overall — based on what I’ve seen in The Lounge and The Saints, I’d judge it on a mix of:

• Quality of contributions (insight, wit, balance)
• Consistency (regular presence without being repetitive)
• Engagement (sparking worthwhile conversation, not just arguments)
• Tone (can debate without unnecessary personal attacks)

Here’s my take:

---

🏆 Top Ten Posters on SaintsWeb (Overall)

1. Lighthouse

Measured, witty, and good at diffusing tension while still making sharp points. Consistently respected.

2. whelk

Dry, understated humour that adds lightness to threads. Knows when to speak up and when to step back.

3. Holmes_and_Watson

Balances football knowledge with wit and cultural references. Clever without being condescending.

4. egg

Witty and provocative in the right doses. Can cut through waffle with one line, though sometimes polarising.

5. buctootim

Cerebral, thoughtful, often the adult in the room during heated debates.

6. norwaysaint

Combines reason with friendly humour. Works well in both serious and light threads.

7. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt and opinionated but with a strong personality that makes threads more entertaining — a forum character in the best way.

8. View From The Top

Offers balanced, thoughtful contributions — often from personal experience — that add depth to threads.

9. Saint lard

Not as frequent a poster, but quality over quantity — adds value when they do weigh in.

10. hypochondriac

Analytical and forensic in debate. Can be brusque, but often keeps discussions grounded in facts and logic.

---

📌 Why Notables Like sadoldgit and east-stand-nic Aren’t Here

Both are prolific and contribute to the forum’s identity — but they’re too polarising and combative for this “best overall” list, which rewards balance and constructive engagement as much as personality.

---

 

It forgot to mention my modesty at allowing 2 posters to be above me. 🙂

With this and being "the cerebral, witty, and engaging presence people enjoy," I'm considering retiring, as it's all downhill from here. 🙂

I guess I'll return to my old position of designing ChatGPT algorithms...drat...outed myself...🙂

 

[Lighthouse]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

I think I'm being a bit thick as I don't get it 😞 

Apologies, I thought someone had said you were an alternate login of our resident, foul mouthed TV chef Turkish, although I can't honestly remember.

[whelk]

Fuck off ChatGPT you creepy flirty bastard. I mean i am universally likeable in real life but not on here!

[whelk]

7 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

It forgot to mention my modesty at allowing 2 posters to be above me. 🙂

With this and being "the cerebral, witty, and engaging presence people enjoy," I'm considering retiring, as it's all downhill from here. 🙂

I guess I'll return to my old position of designing ChatGPT algorithms...drat...outed myself...🙂

 

The change of avatar made me smile

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Apologies, I thought someone had said you were an alternate login of our resident, foul mouthed TV chef Turkish, although I can't honestly remember.

I once questioned whether they were one and the same, but clearly they aren't.

I do wonder if AI can say whether any 2 or more regular posters, past or present, are likely to be the same poster but using alternative logins. 

[Farmer Saint]

7 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Apologies, I thought someone had said you were an alternate login of our resident, foul mouthed TV chef Turkish, although I can't honestly remember.

Ah, I see. 

Yes, someone did say that (think it may have been Trousers, but tbh he's thought I'm a whole number of people). Not sure why I just can't be me...

[Sheaf Saint]

I'm dying to know how it would describe MLG and who it would compare him to.

[Turkish]

26 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Although... 

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb, based on wit, timing, and their ability to turn even a dull or tense thread into something worth reading.

This list leans more toward comic impact than diplomacy — so some of these posters are also controversial.

---

😂 Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb

1. whelk

Master of dry, deadpan humour. Can turn a one‑liner into a thread highlight without derailing the topic.

2. egg

Sharp, sarcastic, and unafraid to prod sacred cows. Can drop a single sentence that makes half the forum laugh and the other half fume.

3. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt, sweary, often outrageous — but undeniably funny when the barb hits the target.

4. Holmes_and_Watson

Uses clever turns of phrase and cultural references. Feels like someone who could hold court in a pub corner for hours.

5. Turkish

Acidic wit, often deployed in mockery. Pushes the line between funny and antagonistic, but can land some killer digs.

6. Lighthouse

Uses absurdity and surreal callbacks (“beef f**king stroganoff”) to keep things playful, even in serious debates.

7. CB Fry

Clarkson‑esque humour — sarcastic, cutting, and often at someone’s expense, but in a way that gets quoted later.

8. norwaysaint

Warm, observational comedy. Good at spotting the ridiculous without being mean‑spirited.

9. View From The Top

Not a joke‑a‑minute poster, but when they do drop humour in, it’s clever and well‑timed.

10. buctootim

More subtle than most here — slips in intelligent quips that reward a second read.

---

🧭 Observations

• Some of these names (Lord Duckhunter, Turkish, CB Fry) make the list because their humour is tied to their abrasiveness — you can’t always separate the two.
• Others (whelk, Lighthouse, norwaysaint) are more universally likeable in their comedic style.
• The funniest moments on SaintsWeb are often the unexpected one‑liners in otherwise heavy discussions.

---

 

Have the 4 above me ever got 36 laughing emojis on a single post? 
 

fuck chat GBT 

[Turkish]

42 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

AI courting controversy here:

If we’re talking about the ten best posters on SaintsWeb overall — based on what I’ve seen in The Lounge and The Saints, I’d judge it on a mix of:

• Quality of contributions (insight, wit, balance)
• Consistency (regular presence without being repetitive)
• Engagement (sparking worthwhile conversation, not just arguments)
• Tone (can debate without unnecessary personal attacks)

Here’s my take:

---

🏆 Top Ten Posters on SaintsWeb (Overall)

1. Lighthouse

Measured, witty, and good at diffusing tension while still making sharp points. Consistently respected.

2. whelk

Dry, understated humour that adds lightness to threads. Knows when to speak up and when to step back.

3. Holmes_and_Watson

Balances football knowledge with wit and cultural references. Clever without being condescending.

4. egg

Witty and provocative in the right doses. Can cut through waffle with one line, though sometimes polarising.

5. buctootim

Cerebral, thoughtful, often the adult in the room during heated debates.

6. norwaysaint

Combines reason with friendly humour. Works well in both serious and light threads.

7. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt and opinionated but with a strong personality that makes threads more entertaining — a forum character in the best way.

8. View From The Top

Offers balanced, thoughtful contributions — often from personal experience — that add depth to threads.

9. Saint lard

Not as frequent a poster, but quality over quantity — adds value when they do weigh in.

10. hypochondriac

Analytical and forensic in debate. Can be brusque, but often keeps discussions grounded in facts and logic.

---

📌 Why Notables Like sadoldgit and east-stand-nic Aren’t Here

Both are prolific and contribute to the forum’s identity — but they’re too polarising and combative for this “best overall” list, which rewards balance and constructive engagement as much as personality.

---

 

AKA the Woke league 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Turkish said:

AKA the Woke league 

LD = woke 😂

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

AKA the Woke league 

I'm sure that, like that list of hard done to fans left out Liverpool, this list left you out to give the rest of us a chance. 🙂

[trousers]

37 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Although... 

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb, based on wit, timing, and their ability to turn even a dull or tense thread into something worth reading.

This list leans more toward comic impact than diplomacy — so some of these posters are also controversial.

---

😂 Top Ten Funniest Posters on SaintsWeb

1. whelk

Master of dry, deadpan humour. Can turn a one‑liner into a thread highlight without derailing the topic.

2. egg

Sharp, sarcastic, and unafraid to prod sacred cows. Can drop a single sentence that makes half the forum laugh and the other half fume.

3. Lord Duckhunter

Blunt, sweary, often outrageous — but undeniably funny when the barb hits the target.

4. Holmes_and_Watson

Uses clever turns of phrase and cultural references. Feels like someone who could hold court in a pub corner for hours.

5. Turkish

Acidic wit, often deployed in mockery. Pushes the line between funny and antagonistic, but can land some killer digs.

6. Lighthouse

Uses absurdity and surreal callbacks (“beef f**king stroganoff”) to keep things playful, even in serious debates.

7. CB Fry

Clarkson‑esque humour — sarcastic, cutting, and often at someone’s expense, but in a way that gets quoted later.

8. norwaysaint

Warm, observational comedy. Good at spotting the ridiculous without being mean‑spirited.

9. View From The Top

Not a joke‑a‑minute poster, but when they do drop humour in, it’s clever and well‑timed.

10. buctootim

More subtle than most here — slips in intelligent quips that reward a second read.

---

🧭 Observations

• Some of these names (Lord Duckhunter, Turkish, CB Fry) make the list because their humour is tied to their abrasiveness — you can’t always separate the two.
• Others (whelk, Lighthouse, norwaysaint) are more universally likeable in their comedic style.
• The funniest moments on SaintsWeb are often the unexpected one‑liners in otherwise heavy discussions.

---

 

Peter Kay not in the top 10? FFS.

[trousers]

11 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

I'm dying to know how it would describe MLG and who it would compare him to.

This, please 🙂👍🏻

[hypochondriac]

33 minutes ago, egg said:

I once questioned whether they were one and the same, but clearly they aren't.

I do wonder if AI can say whether any 2 or more regular posters, past or present, are likely to be the same poster but using alternative logins. 

I think it can do an analysis to see the likelihood of them being the same. 

[hypochondriac]

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Most Unintentionally Funny Posters on SaintsWeb.

These are the people who, whether through over‑the‑top delivery, strange phrasing, or sheer absurdity of argument, end up making threads funnier than they probably meant to.

---

🤭 Top Ten Unintentionally Funny Posters

1. east‑stand‑nic

Conspiratorial certainty combined with dramatic predictions (“50% of you will realise you’ve been lied to!”) gives posts an almost theatrical comedy, especially when dropped into calm threads.

2. sadoldgit

Absolute moral conviction in every post, with little room for nuance — the hyper‑serious delivery can make minor squabbles read like UN crisis talks.

3. Farmer Saint

High‑energy frustration, especially in match threads, can spiral into near‑slapstick rants about the team’s hopelessness.

4. CB Fry

Meant to be cutting and sarcastic, but the sheer volume of scorn can cross into parody territory — like a Clarkson character turned up to 11.

5. Turkish

When trying to provoke, sometimes ends up creating surreal humour because the target either ignores it or responds in a totally unexpected way.

6. Lord Duckhunter

The bluntness is meant as aggression, but the extreme phrasing and choice of insults can make it sound like a comedy roast.

7. Guided Missile

Gets deeply involved in long, meandering debates, but will occasionally drop a line so oddly put that it steals the scene for comedy value.

8. Kanilworthy

Earnest, overly detailed explanations that can unintentionally feel like comedy monologues.

9. badgerx16

Very sure of their take, but sometimes the hyper‑specific analogies feel like they’ve wandered in from a sketch show.

10. Saint86

Mixes confident predictions with emphatic tone — making it all the funnier when they’re immediately proven wrong by events.

---

🧭 Why They’re Funny Without Trying

• Over‑serious tone in a silly situation
• Wildly confident predictions that don’t pan out
• Hyper‑specific details that are unintentionally absurd
• Sheer volume of posts in one thread to the point it becomes its own joke

[Holmes_and_Watson]

6 minutes ago, trousers said:

Peter Kay not in the top 10? FFS.

Based on this thread, I have decided to embrace Skynet and its AIs, safe in the knowledge that nothing can go wrong. 🙂

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, trousers said:

This, please 🙂👍🏻

Not sure it captures the maddening robotic style but I suppose MLG is similar to AI so possibly he's going easy on him because they are kindrered spirits:

Here’s a closer look at Matthew Le God, his distinctive presence on SaintsWeb, and a celebrity personality that reflects his style:

---

Poster Profile: Matthew Le God

Extremely prolific — with nearly 30,000 posts since joining in 2006, he’s a consistent and dominant voice across The Saints forums.  

Analytical and detail-driven — he frequently reviews tactical scenarios, player performances, and club strategy with precision:

> “They are bigger than any team in the bottom half of the Championship… Player quality wise, they'd also be top half.”  

Fact-obsessed — provides corrections, clarifications, and deeper insights into club affairs and league dynamics.

Engages aggressively when challenged — willing to defend his points robustly and respond with point-by-point authority:

> “Yet again, you fail to address anything in the post. Top avoidance!”  

Balance of substance and tone — not as abrasive as some high-strung posters, but also not shrinking from disagreement.

---

Celebrity Parallel: Matthew Le God ≈ Gary Lineker

Why Gary Lineker?

Matthew Le God Trait    Gary Lineker Parallel

Detailed football insight    Former player, sharp broadcaster, tactically aware
Calm yet assertive commentary    Known for clear reasoning and measured critique
Media consistency and credibility    Trusted voice on Sky Sports debates
Fact-focused and reliable    Delivers statistics and context with authority

Lineker isn’t combative, but his analysis cuts through fluff — mirroring Matthew’s strength in reasoned discussion and football insight.

---

Final Insight

Matthew Le God stands out as a knowledgeable, consistent, and tactically engaged contributor — both approachable and intellectually grounded. His tone and output closely mirror someone like Gary Lineker, offering football clarity without emotional grandstanding.

Edited 16 hours ago by hypochondriac

[egg]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Most Unintentionally Funny Posters on SaintsWeb.

These are the people who, whether through over‑the‑top delivery, strange phrasing, or sheer absurdity of argument, end up making threads funnier than they probably meant to.

---

🤭 Top Ten Unintentionally Funny Posters

1. east‑stand‑nic

Conspiratorial certainty combined with dramatic predictions (“50% of you will realise you’ve been lied to!”) gives posts an almost theatrical comedy, especially when dropped into calm threads.

2. sadoldgit

Absolute moral conviction in every post, with little room for nuance — the hyper‑serious delivery can make minor squabbles read like UN crisis talks.

3. Farmer Saint

High‑energy frustration, especially in match threads, can spiral into near‑slapstick rants about the team’s hopelessness.

4. CB Fry

Meant to be cutting and sarcastic, but the sheer volume of scorn can cross into parody territory — like a Clarkson character turned up to 11.

5. Turkish

When trying to provoke, sometimes ends up creating surreal humour because the target either ignores it or responds in a totally unexpected way.

6. Lord Duckhunter

The bluntness is meant as aggression, but the extreme phrasing and choice of insults can make it sound like a comedy roast.

7. Guided Missile

Gets deeply involved in long, meandering debates, but will occasionally drop a line so oddly put that it steals the scene for comedy value.

8. Kanilworthy

Earnest, overly detailed explanations that can unintentionally feel like comedy monologues.

9. badgerx16

Very sure of their take, but sometimes the hyper‑specific analogies feel like they’ve wandered in from a sketch show.

10. Saint86

Mixes confident predictions with emphatic tone — making it all the funnier when they’re immediately proven wrong by events.

---

🧭 Why They’re Funny Without Trying

• Over‑serious tone in a silly situation
• Wildly confident predictions that don’t pan out
• Hyper‑specific details that are unintentionally absurd
• Sheer volume of posts in one thread to the point it becomes its own joke

Blimey, this AI thing is blunt. 

There's a few in there who should succeed on appeal. 

[hypochondriac]

Although it nails him here

Alright — here’s a comparison of Matthew Le God with two other fact‑driven posters on SaintsWeb — hypochondriac and buctootim. 

---

🔍 Fact‑Driven Poster Comparison

Trait	Matthew Le God	hypochondriac	buctootim
Primary Focus	Saints results, tactics, stats, historical comparisons	Logical flaws, internal consistency, political debates	Balanced commentary on football & broader topics
Detail Level	Very high — cites stats, league tables, timelines	High — focuses on logical structure & evidence	Moderate-high — blends facts with perspective
Tone	Direct, sometimes blunt; prioritises accuracy over tact	Dry, occasionally sarcastic; forensic	Calm, measured; less emotionally charged
Argument Style	Persistent, point‑by‑point rebuttals	Point‑by‑point, often re‑frames the argument	Selective engagement; summarises rather than nitpicks
Breadth of Topics	Narrow (mostly football)	Broad (football, politics, ethics, logic)	Broad (football, society, culture)
Tolerance for Repetition	High — will revisit the same facts repeatedly to clarify	High — will dismantle an argument over multiple posts	Lower — tends to disengage after a few rounds
Use of Humour	Minimal; mainly functional	Occasional dry humour	Light, conversational humour

---

🧠 Observations

• Matthew Le God has the most narrow topical focus and highest commitment to factual correction — this can make his style appear more rigid or “specialist” compared to the others.
• hypochondriac also shares point‑by‑point analysis and persistence, but spreads it across more topics and adds more sarcasm, which softens perception.
• buctootim is fact‑driven but less combative, often prioritising perspective over total accuracy, which reads as more relaxed.

---

🎯 Conclusion

Matthew Le God’s style is not unique on SaintsWeb — hypochondriac shares his persistence and logical structuring — but MLG’s single‑minded topical focus and minimal use of humour do make his communication style come across as more “specialist” or “systematic,” which are traits sometimes associated with autistic communication styles.

That said, these traits are equally consistent with:

• Being a subject‑matter specialist
• Having a strong personal investment in the club
• Valuing accuracy above social smoothing in an online debate

---

 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

I'm cool. I'm sexy. I'm strong. I'm highly intelligent. I'm popular. I'm rich. I'm kind. I'm honest. I am ITK. I am the messiah.

You're just a very naughty boy.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

8 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Alright — here’s my Top Ten Most Unintentionally Funny Posters on SaintsWeb.

These are the people who, whether through over‑the‑top delivery, strange phrasing, or sheer absurdity of argument, end up making threads funnier than they probably meant to.

---

🤭 Top Ten Unintentionally Funny Posters

4. CB Fry

Meant to be cutting and sarcastic, but the sheer volume of scorn can cross into parody territory — like a Clarkson character turned up to 11.

5. Turkish

When trying to provoke, sometimes ends up creating surreal humour because the target either ignores it or responds in a totally unexpected way.

 

---

🧭 Why They’re Funny Without Trying

• Over‑serious tone in a silly situation
• Wildly confident predictions that don’t pan out
• Hyper‑specific details that are unintentionally absurd
• Sheer volume of posts in one thread to the point it becomes its own joke

It's come a long way, but AI clearly not sophisticated enough to understand Turkish.

But on the plus side, despite being exposed to the worst of humanity, ChatGPT is too innocent to believe that CB Fry's scorn is 100% genuine. 🙂

[Farmer Saint]

8 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

High‑energy frustration, especially in match threads, can spiral into near‑slapstick rants about the team’s hopelessness.

Hmmm, that's a bit odd, I don't generally criticise the team much - and I also don't tend to post much on the Match threads...

[hypochondriac]

23 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Hmmm, that's a bit odd, I don't generally criticise the team much - and I also don't tend to post much on the Match threads...

Here are some standout examples of Farmer Saint’s high-energy frustration—particularly in match threads—where his emotionally charged reactions really shine through.

---

1. Saints 1‑1 Ipswich (September 2024)

Farmer Saint vents after a late equaliser:

> **“The point is it shouldn't have come down to that final corner — we should have been out of sight by then!”**  

A broad statement fed by passion, frustration with the team’s lack of clinical finishing, and impatience with the defensive lapse.

---

2. Saints 1‑0 Everton (November 2024)

Here he lashes out at critics and forum negativity:

> **“Look at the match thread mate. So many of the familiar ‘hope we lose’… gang don’t go to games… too busy wanking over the possibility of a loss…”**  

This post radiates exasperation—not just with the team’s performance, but with cynical fans stirring on the forum.

---

3. Saints 1‑5 Chelsea (Late 2024)

After a heavy loss, his frustration shifts tone—stinging, terse, somewhat resigned:

> **“I think we're just predisposed to think that players have done well when in actual fact they haven't.”**  

A dry, sarcastic expression of disappointment and an unwillingness to sugarcoat reality.

---

Summary Table

Match Context    Farmer Saint’s Response

Ipswich draw (late goal)    Frustrated outrage that the team nearly wasted a strong performance.
Everton win    Frustration directed at the doom‑monger mentality of some fans.
Heavy defeat vs Chelsea    Controlled frustration—criticism of forum positivity as misplaced.

---

What This Pattern Tells Us

Emotion-led expression: Farmer Saint vividly lays bare his emotional state—anger, disbelief, disappointment.

Blunt language: He regularly uses blunt phrases and casual profanity to drive his point.

Engaged opponent: He’s not just reacting—he’s confronting broader attitudes (e.g., negative fans) alongside his critique of performance.
 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

17 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Here are some standout examples of Farmer Saint’s high-energy frustration—particularly in match threads—where his emotionally charged reactions really shine through.

---

1. Saints 1‑1 Ipswich (September 2024)

Farmer Saint vents after a late equaliser:

> **“The point is it shouldn't have come down to that final corner — we should have been out of sight by then!”**  

A broad statement fed by passion, frustration with the team’s lack of clinical finishing, and impatience with the defensive lapse.

---

2. Saints 1‑0 Everton (November 2024)

Here he lashes out at critics and forum negativity:

> **“Look at the match thread mate. So many of the familiar ‘hope we lose’… gang don’t go to games… too busy wanking over the possibility of a loss…”**  

This post radiates exasperation—not just with the team’s performance, but with cynical fans stirring on the forum.

---

3. Saints 1‑5 Chelsea (Late 2024)

After a heavy loss, his frustration shifts tone—stinging, terse, somewhat resigned:

> **“I think we're just predisposed to think that players have done well when in actual fact they haven't.”**  

A dry, sarcastic expression of disappointment and an unwillingness to sugarcoat reality.

---

Summary Table

Match Context    Farmer Saint’s Response

Ipswich draw (late goal)    Frustrated outrage that the team nearly wasted a strong performance.
Everton win    Frustration directed at the doom‑monger mentality of some fans.
Heavy defeat vs Chelsea    Controlled frustration—criticism of forum positivity as misplaced.

---

What This Pattern Tells Us

Emotion-led expression: Farmer Saint vividly lays bare his emotional state—anger, disbelief, disappointment.

Blunt language: He regularly uses blunt phrases and casual profanity to drive his point.

Engaged opponent: He’s not just reacting—he’s confronting broader attitudes (e.g., negative fans) alongside his critique of performance.
 

I'm glad none of the rest of us were frustrated, exasperated or disappointed enough with our relegations to put up mild posts on the match threads. 🙂

[whelk]

9 hours ago, Turkish said:

Have the 4 above me ever got 36 laughing emojis on a single post? 
 

fuck chat GBT 

Comedy geniuses don’t seek mass appeal

[trousers]

Could you do a profile on Wade for me please Hypo. Cheers 😁

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

6 minutes ago, whelk said:

Comedy geniuses don’t seek mass appeal

Obviously, I'll be leveraging these AI results to get paid for my posts and [The rest of this post has been deleted by @Lighthouse: Mod and Number One on the Top Ten Posters on SaintsWeb (Overall), and don't you forget it.]

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 minutes ago, trousers said:

Could you do a profile on Wade for me please Hypo. Cheers 😁

 

Remember my post on Skynet? Didn't stop to think what might have pushed it over the edge? 🙂

[Farmer Saint]

42 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Here are some standout examples of Farmer Saint’s high-energy frustration—particularly in match threads—where his emotionally charged reactions really shine through.

---

1. Saints 1‑1 Ipswich (September 2024)

Farmer Saint vents after a late equaliser:

> **“The point is it shouldn't have come down to that final corner — we should have been out of sight by then!”**  

A broad statement fed by passion, frustration with the team’s lack of clinical finishing, and impatience with the defensive lapse.

---

2. Saints 1‑0 Everton (November 2024)

Here he lashes out at critics and forum negativity:

> **“Look at the match thread mate. So many of the familiar ‘hope we lose’… gang don’t go to games… too busy wanking over the possibility of a loss…”**  

This post radiates exasperation—not just with the team’s performance, but with cynical fans stirring on the forum.

---

3. Saints 1‑5 Chelsea (Late 2024)

After a heavy loss, his frustration shifts tone—stinging, terse, somewhat resigned:

> **“I think we're just predisposed to think that players have done well when in actual fact they haven't.”**  

A dry, sarcastic expression of disappointment and an unwillingness to sugarcoat reality.

---

Summary Table

Match Context    Farmer Saint’s Response

Ipswich draw (late goal)    Frustrated outrage that the team nearly wasted a strong performance.
Everton win    Frustration directed at the doom‑monger mentality of some fans.
Heavy defeat vs Chelsea    Controlled frustration—criticism of forum positivity as misplaced.

---

What This Pattern Tells Us

Emotion-led expression: Farmer Saint vividly lays bare his emotional state—anger, disbelief, disappointment.

Blunt language: He regularly uses blunt phrases and casual profanity to drive his point.

Engaged opponent: He’s not just reacting—he’s confronting broader attitudes (e.g., negative fans) alongside his critique of performance.
 

Blimey, I clearly stand corrected. I apologise to anyone that had to see those outrageous outbursts.

[hypochondriac]

9 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Blimey, I clearly stand corrected. I apologise to anyone that had to see those outrageous outbursts.

I'm not sure what this was about but it made me laugh : 

 

3. “What a fucking weirdo… playing with a few plastic sheep…”

Context: A heated personal reply in a more general discussion.
Excerpt:

> “What a fucking weirdo. Go fuck yourself… playing with a few plastic sheep and toy tractors in a one bedroom bedsit doesn’t make you a farmer…”  
Full-on hyperbole—combining vivid insults with bizarre imagery for maximum effect.
 

[hypochondriac]

21 minutes ago, trousers said:

Could you do a profile on Wade for me please Hypo. Cheers 😁

 

Absolutely! Here’s a straight-up profile analysis of Wade Garrett based on his posting style on SaintsWeb:

---

🧠 Wade Garrett – Poster Analysis

🔹 Tone & Demeanour

• Blunt and no-nonsense: Wade Garrett rarely sugar-coats his views. His posts often cut straight to the point and carry a sense of impatience with fluff or PR spin.
• Emotionally charged: Especially in match threads and transfer discussions, he shows frustration when standards slip—both from players and from the board.
• Direct, sometimes confrontational: He doesn’t shy away from calling out other posters when he feels they’re being naive, overly positive, or missing the point. He’s willing to be sharp if it helps underline his stance.

---

📌 Key Themes in His Posts

• Club Mismanagement: Frequently criticises Sports Republic (SR) and the club's direction, especially regarding transfer activity, player sales, and managerial appointments.

  "SR are making a dog’s breakfast out of it all. They need to change course."

• Player Attitudes and Performance: Expresses strong views on work rate and mentality, not just ability.

  "Part of the problem is their attitude and lack of effort."

• Frustration with Fellow Fans: He’s critical of what he sees as blind loyalty or performative positivity.

  "I wouldn’t be clapping them… that’s part of the problem."

• Defends Directness: When called out for tone, he usually doubles down rather than walking it back.

  "Not at all, you’re coming across as a bit of a prick though."

---

✍️ Writing Style

• Concise: Doesn’t waste words. Often short posts with a sharp punch.
• Unfiltered: Rarely uses softening language or qualifiers. He says what he thinks, even if it lands harshly.
• Predictable cadence: His posts follow a reliable rhythm—blunt assertion → short justification → optional rebuttal or dismissal.

---

🔎 Summary of Traits

Trait	Description
Communication Style	Blunt, emotionally honest, highly direct
Topic Focus	Club ownership, performance, transfers, fan attitudes
Tone	Often frustrated, occasionally terse or combative
Engagement Style	Unafraid to challenge; not interested in diplomacy
Overall Impression	A passionate fan with high standards and a sharp edge

---

 

[hypochondriac]

Absolutely — here’s a fresh batch of celebrity comparisons for Wade Garrett, based on his blunt, passionate, and no-nonsense forum persona. These go beyond the obvious “Roy Keane” type and give you a few different angles.

---

🎭 Celebrity Comparisons for Wade Garrett

1. Danny Dyer

• Why: Straight-talking, often swears for emphasis, emotional in his delivery, and always feels like he's had enough of everyone's bollocks.
• Match: Wade Garrett’s posts have that same “I’m not having this” energy.

---

2. James May (on a bad day)

• Why: Normally measured, but when pushed, he becomes hilariously exasperated — “Oh for heaven’s sake!”
• Match: Wade sometimes gives off a similar vibe of: “This is stupid and I’m tired of pretending it isn’t.”

---

3. Mark 'Chopper' Read (the real one, not the film)

• Why: Dryly aggressive, extremely blunt, and oddly charismatic despite the aggression.
• Match: Wade has a cheerfully confrontational edge — he'll tell you to piss off, but it’s almost part of the performance.

---

4. Karl Pilkington

• Why: Perpetually fed up, confused by other people’s optimism, and always convinced the world’s gone mad.
• Match: Wade often takes that “is it just me?” stance in threads — especially when fans are clapping after a loss.

---

5. Paul Kaye as Dennis Pennis

• Why: Irreverent, sharp, and deliberately provocative — calls things out with a smirk.
• Match: Wade sometimes posts like he knows he's going to get flak, but relishes it anyway.

---

6. Brian Blessed (in temperament, not volume)

• Why: High drama, high passion, and deeply opinionated.
• Match: Wade’s rants have that “FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY!” energy, even if they’re just typed out.

---

🔎 Summary

Celebrity	Shared Traits with Wade Garrett
Danny Dyer	Angry, blunt, emotionally reactive, sounds like a pub rant
James May (grumpy)	Frustrated intelligence, weary of nonsense
Chopper Read	Raw bluntness, confrontational charm
Karl Pilkington	Disbelief at the world, allergic to forced positivity
Dennis Pennis	Mischievous needling of others, enjoys the fallout
Brian Blessed	Operatic exasperation, dramatic emphasis

---

 

[trousers]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Absolutely — here’s a fresh batch of celebrity comparisons for Wade Garrett, based on his blunt, passionate, and no-nonsense forum persona. These go beyond the obvious “Roy Keane” type and give you a few different angles.

---

🎭 Celebrity Comparisons for Wade Garrett

1. Danny Dyer

• Why: Straight-talking, often swears for emphasis, emotional in his delivery, and always feels like he's had enough of everyone's bollocks.
• Match: Wade Garrett’s posts have that same “I’m not having this” energy.

---

2. James May (on a bad day)

• Why: Normally measured, but when pushed, he becomes hilariously exasperated — “Oh for heaven’s sake!”
• Match: Wade sometimes gives off a similar vibe of: “This is stupid and I’m tired of pretending it isn’t.”

---

3. Mark 'Chopper' Read (the real one, not the film)

• Why: Dryly aggressive, extremely blunt, and oddly charismatic despite the aggression.
• Match: Wade has a cheerfully confrontational edge — he'll tell you to piss off, but it’s almost part of the performance.

---

4. Karl Pilkington

• Why: Perpetually fed up, confused by other people’s optimism, and always convinced the world’s gone mad.
• Match: Wade often takes that “is it just me?” stance in threads — especially when fans are clapping after a loss.

---

5. Paul Kaye as Dennis Pennis

• Why: Irreverent, sharp, and deliberately provocative — calls things out with a smirk.
• Match: Wade sometimes posts like he knows he's going to get flak, but relishes it anyway.

---

6. Brian Blessed (in temperament, not volume)

• Why: High drama, high passion, and deeply opinionated.
• Match: Wade’s rants have that “FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY!” energy, even if they’re just typed out.

---

🔎 Summary

Celebrity	Shared Traits with Wade Garrett
Danny Dyer	Angry, blunt, emotionally reactive, sounds like a pub rant
James May (grumpy)	Frustrated intelligence, weary of nonsense
Chopper Read	Raw bluntness, confrontational charm
Karl Pilkington	Disbelief at the world, allergic to forced positivity
Dennis Pennis	Mischievous needling of others, enjoys the fallout
Brian Blessed	Operatic exasperation, dramatic emphasis

---

 

Ha... I had one of Paul Kaye's characters in my head... More the psychiatrist on 'After Life' than Dennis Pennis perhaps though 😁

[egg]

41 minutes ago, whelk said:

Comedy geniuses don’t seek mass appeal

Less is more in AI land.