Rocksuperstar
Isn't this fun? Isn't fun the best thing to have?
- Jun 6, 2005
- 53,423
- 67,155
No, but i've seen a guy stabbed for it. Rough place, Romford, even Santas elves are carrying.
How to be ITK
- Thread starter archiewasking
- Start date
RickyVilla
Well-Known Member
- May 16, 2004
- 18,518
- 19,999
Someone was talking about you earlier on GGTH on Facebook mate and calling you an ITK!!! Is it true??? ;-)
Haha. Hes shite madrid spur.
Money has been put on the table and we have people out there now. Anyone fancy two south Americans? I understand we have four on the table and it may be a case of two out two in.
Any idea who?
Quote:
The answer is I don't know that is all I was told, but one is certainly Suarez and I did report a few days ago that we were in Portugal and Spain
Any idea who?
Quote:
The answer is I don't know that is all I was told, but one is certainly Suarez and I did report a few days ago that we were in Portugal and Spain
- May 21, 2004
- 25,468
- 2,409
- Admin
- #45
Ball not man fella. I'm watching.
BuffaloSid
Active Member
- May 23, 2004
- 1,533
- 68
ironically i was banned from the transfer room and itk for suggesting that most ITK was made up ..i made no reference to individuals ...so how about some consistancy mods ? no ? didnt think so ... the whole "ITk's are bullet proof " seriously undermines this website
- May 21, 2004
- 25,468
- 2,409
- Admin
- #47
You've made your stance clear on the concept BS which is why it's probably better for those that do enjoy a bit of light entertainment during the Transfer Window to indulge without others sniping away.
Which is why you no longer have access to those areas.
Rocksuperstar
Isn't this fun? Isn't fun the best thing to have?
- Jun 6, 2005
- 53,423
- 67,155
I wonder how long it'll be before a banning leads to someone tipping over the edge during the transfer window and deciding to prove that ITK's are certainly not bullet-proof? :lol:
I suppose it's good that the tension and over-excitement of the summer window is still six months away - i always find the winter window slightly subdued in comparison.
But, come the summer, it'll be a blood bath.
"And Tottenham we shall be
For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from every stand
your feet may swiftly strike past outstretched hand
So we shall flow a dirth of points to thee,
and teeming with goals shall it ever be
In nomeni Levy, et Harry, Spiritus Nicholson"
I suppose it's good that the tension and over-excitement of the summer window is still six months away - i always find the winter window slightly subdued in comparison.
But, come the summer, it'll be a blood bath.
"And Tottenham we shall be
For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from every stand
your feet may swiftly strike past outstretched hand
So we shall flow a dirth of points to thee,
and teeming with goals shall it ever be
In nomeni Levy, et Harry, Spiritus Nicholson"
- Aug 18, 2005
- 6,527
- 267
Seems about time I posted this again:
Verifying ITK Information
We can't validate In The Know (ITK) information. In almost every case, it's impossible to discover whether a particular piece is true, even after the transfer window has closed. Say Poster #1 mentions that his source has informed him we're in for Player A. How can we verify this statement? The best indication of our interest would be Tottenham actually signing Player A. However, if we don't sign Player A it doesn't mean we weren't interested in signing him. It doesn't even mean we didn't make a bid. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. Furthermore, if we do sign player A, it doesn't mean that Poster #1 didn't make it up based on what he's read elsewhere. The whole system is based on the faith we have in each individual ITK. This means it's open to abuse by Wind Up Merchants (WUMs).
Wind Up Merchants
A WUM is a poster who makes things up and posts them as facts. I've been trying to think of reasons as to why someone would fabricate ITK information. The most obvious one I've come up with is that the poster is an attention seeker. He will have seen the number of responses that ITK information generates, a lot of which are complementary, and want a piece of the action. Similarly, the poster may have once had genuine ITK information and after having lost his source may want to continue to be seen as ITK. This is not necessarily a malicious act and may stem from the poster wanting to be more accepted, respected or famous on a particular forum. However, it still involves stringing a lot of people along.
The second reason I can see is more mean spirited. If a poster develops the impression that ITK information is gospel they will be disappointed when the majority of it appears not to come to pass. They may decide to take revenge on the ITKs, who they themselves will believe to be WUMs (It's a moot point where they are or not), by making up ITK information.
The third, similarly asocial, reason is that the poster wants to feel clever by pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. If they can convince fellow posters and moderators that they are ITK, they feel more intelligent by comparison. They may try and justify this by insisting that they are 'teaching' others about ITKs but in reality they are very much part of the problem rather than the solution. The irony here is that, as we cannot validate ITK information, it isn't actually hard to pretend to be ITK so their act shows far less intelligence than they have led themselves to believe.
So if we can't validate ITK information, and it's very easy for WUMs to pose as ITKs, is there any way we can spot a WUM? Probably not, but one approach we can take is to consider how we ourselves would fabricate ITK information and see whether ITK from a particular source frequently shares these characteristics.
How to be a Wind Up Merchant
One way to make your false ITK information appear to be true is to base it on pre-conceived notions. For example, suggest that Harry's not happy with Keane as Keane has been moaning at him. We've seen Keane moan on the pitch so we know its true he moans sometimes. This doesn't mean the ITK information is true but it makes it that much easier to swallow. It's not hard to extrapolate from Keane moaning at referees to Keane moaning at Harry. This step is even easier to make if you don't like Keane and are actively looking for another reason for him to be moved on.
A similar tactic is to base your false ITK information on something that has been in the papers recently. If we're linked to a particular player in the press, the chances are that the rumour will rumble around, appearing in a few different papers over the following weeks and months. If you post your false ITK information early enough in the cycle, it will be 'confirmed' by other media sources repeating the story. If you follow this method, you could continue to release more false ITK information as the saga continues. The resulting buzz from your ITK may even form some kind of resonance with the internet ITK information and the press information feeding each other. You may even luck out if the player actually signs for us as all your ITK information may appear to be confirmed.
Another approach to posting false ITK information is the nudge-wink style. When someone says we're linked to a player, write a non-committal reply implying, but not definitely stating, that we are in for that player. If it's not definitely even meant to be ITK information it can't be wrong. If this information is repeated from another source, which could even be another WUM, your info has been validated and your reputation as an ITK further developed. If the information isn't repeated and doesn't come to pass, then it will probably be forgotten anyway.
If you want to make up some false ITK information, they why not chose something that can never be proved wrong. This is true of almost all ITK information anyway, except 'done deal' claims. If you want to be a bit more risky then why not play the percentages. Crouch seemed like a very decent bet this summer and saying we're interested rather than we want to sign is non-committal enough. If your worried your playing it too safe by mentioning too many media suggested targets or safe bets, mention more exotic targets that 'couldn't possibly be made up'.
There are many more tactics which you could use to string people along with false ITK information. Basically, it's easy to be a WUM. That is, unless you've just written an article on 'How to be a WUM'. In that case people might get a bit suspicious.
ITK Abuse
As it's so easy to be a WUM, why don't we try and out them more often? Just because a piece of ITK information shares qualities with the false ITK theories I've mentioned doesn't means the poster is a WUM. I keep coming back to it but it's very difficult to validate the best of the ITKs. If we start to attack ITKs we believe to be WUMs then we risk attacking people who do have contacts. Unless these people are thick skinned individuals, this will probably lead to them not posting any valid information they have in the future. I'd rather have the option of seeing the information and making up my own mind, as opposed to not getting the information at all. This doesn't mean we have to sycophantically praise ITKs for passing on their information. We can thank them for the information and still express doubt that it is true, especially if we come up with a sensible argument. This can be summarized by the quotation 'Play the ball, not the man'.
Why Bother with ITK Information?
I know not every piece of ITK information will lead to something. Spurs Community has recorded some 400 pieces of ITK information during the transfer window, the majority of which have mentioned the possibility of one or more players joining us. In reality, Tottenham's main business has been to sign only five players (Crouch, Naughton, Walker, Kranjcar and Bassong) and sell four (Zokora, Bent, Gilberto, Boateng). Further to this, all these incomings were first mentioned in the press before any ITKs released any information on them.
Despite this reality, I find ITK information enjoyable because it gives me the opportunity to imagine what might be. If we sign a new player, especially a player I have seen little of, I can imagine that he's going to be amazing. Why else would we pay so much for them unless they are going to come in and solve our striker/winger/defender problems? I can build them up to be the panacea that solves all the teams' ills and takes us from our mid-table finishes to the heights of the Champions League. In fact, the less I have seen of the player the better as I'm not limited in my fantasies. That's why someone like Negredo will always be a more attractive signing than someone like Crouch and certainly a better option than one of our current players whose faults I know to a tee. I want to believe (so long as the piece of ITK information doesn't concern our favourite player leaving the club).
This opportunity to dream isn't diminished by information passed on by WUMs. I'm not arguing that false ITK information is a good thing but, if we're looking at the information as a chance to imagine what could be, then it doesn't matter if it's based in reality or not. However, if we try to judge ITK information by whether things come to pass, there is a good chance we will be equally frustrated by true ITK information and false ITK information. Therefore, we shouldn't get too worried by the prospect that some ITK actually know FA. We just have to make sure that our philosophy on ITK information is one that allows us to enjoy it; otherwise it's probably something we should just ignore altogether.
Verifying ITK Information
We can't validate In The Know (ITK) information. In almost every case, it's impossible to discover whether a particular piece is true, even after the transfer window has closed. Say Poster #1 mentions that his source has informed him we're in for Player A. How can we verify this statement? The best indication of our interest would be Tottenham actually signing Player A. However, if we don't sign Player A it doesn't mean we weren't interested in signing him. It doesn't even mean we didn't make a bid. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. Furthermore, if we do sign player A, it doesn't mean that Poster #1 didn't make it up based on what he's read elsewhere. The whole system is based on the faith we have in each individual ITK. This means it's open to abuse by Wind Up Merchants (WUMs).
Wind Up Merchants
A WUM is a poster who makes things up and posts them as facts. I've been trying to think of reasons as to why someone would fabricate ITK information. The most obvious one I've come up with is that the poster is an attention seeker. He will have seen the number of responses that ITK information generates, a lot of which are complementary, and want a piece of the action. Similarly, the poster may have once had genuine ITK information and after having lost his source may want to continue to be seen as ITK. This is not necessarily a malicious act and may stem from the poster wanting to be more accepted, respected or famous on a particular forum. However, it still involves stringing a lot of people along.
The second reason I can see is more mean spirited. If a poster develops the impression that ITK information is gospel they will be disappointed when the majority of it appears not to come to pass. They may decide to take revenge on the ITKs, who they themselves will believe to be WUMs (It's a moot point where they are or not), by making up ITK information.
The third, similarly asocial, reason is that the poster wants to feel clever by pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. If they can convince fellow posters and moderators that they are ITK, they feel more intelligent by comparison. They may try and justify this by insisting that they are 'teaching' others about ITKs but in reality they are very much part of the problem rather than the solution. The irony here is that, as we cannot validate ITK information, it isn't actually hard to pretend to be ITK so their act shows far less intelligence than they have led themselves to believe.
So if we can't validate ITK information, and it's very easy for WUMs to pose as ITKs, is there any way we can spot a WUM? Probably not, but one approach we can take is to consider how we ourselves would fabricate ITK information and see whether ITK from a particular source frequently shares these characteristics.
How to be a Wind Up Merchant
One way to make your false ITK information appear to be true is to base it on pre-conceived notions. For example, suggest that Harry's not happy with Keane as Keane has been moaning at him. We've seen Keane moan on the pitch so we know its true he moans sometimes. This doesn't mean the ITK information is true but it makes it that much easier to swallow. It's not hard to extrapolate from Keane moaning at referees to Keane moaning at Harry. This step is even easier to make if you don't like Keane and are actively looking for another reason for him to be moved on.
A similar tactic is to base your false ITK information on something that has been in the papers recently. If we're linked to a particular player in the press, the chances are that the rumour will rumble around, appearing in a few different papers over the following weeks and months. If you post your false ITK information early enough in the cycle, it will be 'confirmed' by other media sources repeating the story. If you follow this method, you could continue to release more false ITK information as the saga continues. The resulting buzz from your ITK may even form some kind of resonance with the internet ITK information and the press information feeding each other. You may even luck out if the player actually signs for us as all your ITK information may appear to be confirmed.
Another approach to posting false ITK information is the nudge-wink style. When someone says we're linked to a player, write a non-committal reply implying, but not definitely stating, that we are in for that player. If it's not definitely even meant to be ITK information it can't be wrong. If this information is repeated from another source, which could even be another WUM, your info has been validated and your reputation as an ITK further developed. If the information isn't repeated and doesn't come to pass, then it will probably be forgotten anyway.
If you want to make up some false ITK information, they why not chose something that can never be proved wrong. This is true of almost all ITK information anyway, except 'done deal' claims. If you want to be a bit more risky then why not play the percentages. Crouch seemed like a very decent bet this summer and saying we're interested rather than we want to sign is non-committal enough. If your worried your playing it too safe by mentioning too many media suggested targets or safe bets, mention more exotic targets that 'couldn't possibly be made up'.
There are many more tactics which you could use to string people along with false ITK information. Basically, it's easy to be a WUM. That is, unless you've just written an article on 'How to be a WUM'. In that case people might get a bit suspicious.
ITK Abuse
As it's so easy to be a WUM, why don't we try and out them more often? Just because a piece of ITK information shares qualities with the false ITK theories I've mentioned doesn't means the poster is a WUM. I keep coming back to it but it's very difficult to validate the best of the ITKs. If we start to attack ITKs we believe to be WUMs then we risk attacking people who do have contacts. Unless these people are thick skinned individuals, this will probably lead to them not posting any valid information they have in the future. I'd rather have the option of seeing the information and making up my own mind, as opposed to not getting the information at all. This doesn't mean we have to sycophantically praise ITKs for passing on their information. We can thank them for the information and still express doubt that it is true, especially if we come up with a sensible argument. This can be summarized by the quotation 'Play the ball, not the man'.
Why Bother with ITK Information?
I know not every piece of ITK information will lead to something. Spurs Community has recorded some 400 pieces of ITK information during the transfer window, the majority of which have mentioned the possibility of one or more players joining us. In reality, Tottenham's main business has been to sign only five players (Crouch, Naughton, Walker, Kranjcar and Bassong) and sell four (Zokora, Bent, Gilberto, Boateng). Further to this, all these incomings were first mentioned in the press before any ITKs released any information on them.
Despite this reality, I find ITK information enjoyable because it gives me the opportunity to imagine what might be. If we sign a new player, especially a player I have seen little of, I can imagine that he's going to be amazing. Why else would we pay so much for them unless they are going to come in and solve our striker/winger/defender problems? I can build them up to be the panacea that solves all the teams' ills and takes us from our mid-table finishes to the heights of the Champions League. In fact, the less I have seen of the player the better as I'm not limited in my fantasies. That's why someone like Negredo will always be a more attractive signing than someone like Crouch and certainly a better option than one of our current players whose faults I know to a tee. I want to believe (so long as the piece of ITK information doesn't concern our favourite player leaving the club).
This opportunity to dream isn't diminished by information passed on by WUMs. I'm not arguing that false ITK information is a good thing but, if we're looking at the information as a chance to imagine what could be, then it doesn't matter if it's based in reality or not. However, if we try to judge ITK information by whether things come to pass, there is a good chance we will be equally frustrated by true ITK information and false ITK information. Therefore, we shouldn't get too worried by the prospect that some ITK actually know FA. We just have to make sure that our philosophy on ITK information is one that allows us to enjoy it; otherwise it's probably something we should just ignore altogether.
brendanb50
Well-Known Member
- Jul 21, 2005
- 4,488
- 3,896
I enjoyed the article and I enjoy ITK info. Is there something wrong with me? :-|
JUSTINSIGNAL
Well-Known Member
- Jul 10, 2008
- 16,038
- 48,795
It seems to me alot of people just enjoy ITK even it is blantantly obvious 90% of the time it is made up. Each to there own I suppose.
Rocksuperstar
Isn't this fun? Isn't fun the best thing to have?
- Jun 6, 2005
- 53,423
- 67,155
ITK's should never be offended when their info is bought into question - by its nature it relys on trust and belief and all that other horse shit, but to release info expecting to not have at least one person question you, whatever form that disbelief takes, is just foolish and should be taken with as much salt as is advised for the information therein.
It's human nature on forums - someone could come on and declare, with irrefutable proof, that they have managed to develop a pill that cures cancer, AIDS and heart disease in one crack, yet someone would come on and just post "lolz" or something, then proceed to declare it's rubbish because it doesn't come orange flavoured.
It's human nature on forums - someone could come on and declare, with irrefutable proof, that they have managed to develop a pill that cures cancer, AIDS and heart disease in one crack, yet someone would come on and just post "lolz" or something, then proceed to declare it's rubbish because it doesn't come orange flavoured.
The Apprentice
Charles Big Potatoes
- Mar 10, 2005
- 11,149
- 15,656
Truth's a bitch ain't it?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
