I don't need evidence, even the dimmest posters on this board can probably manage to type 'Leeds' into Twitter and see that what appears has very little to do with Leeds United.
Valid point. Someone could post something like, "Going Christmas shopping today in #Leeds! Surely the sports one should be #LUFC?
The official hashtag is #LUFC, but as I understand it they were only counting the usage of the word "Leeds" in tweets relating to Leeds United. Otherwise, as Exodus pointed out, I'm sure there would be a few cities placed above Leeds. EDIT: I don't see how this is so hard to believe anyway, whatever measure you may use to determine a "big" club, we've always had one of the biggest followings in the country (9th biggest in the UK, 7th in England last time I've seen an attempt at a measurement, in 2008) and it's one that's extremely active on twitter.
Wasn't one bit of "evidence" about Leeds to do with an estimate of shirts seen or some such nonsense? I still don't understand why you lot feel the need to try to prove leeds are 'big'. Even if one day one of you manages it, all they will have achieved is to demonstrate deep felt insecurity. The rest of us are happy following our Clubs because that's what we like doing. We don't need the comfort of thinking it must be right because others do it too. That'd just be sad wouldn't it. Which ever Leeds you count them as being, Leeds are a traditional second tier side, that's it.
It was a survey, not exactly scientific but I doubt there are many better measures, and I think there's only one person here showing insecurity. I merely pointed out that, with our fanbase, we could quite easily be the 4th most tweeted about club in the country. I personally don't care, you'll notice I quite specifically pointed out that people can measure how "big" a club is using whatever measures they like, and there's only one person who insists on shouting about our perceived club size and rightful place You love to shout about how much you don't care about club size, or us, yet I haven't seen anyone talk more about what level they think Leeds United AFC belongs in.
I told you they blub. I forgot about them mentioning that if you talk about them it's because they're massive and then they'll grossly exagerate how often you do it. They're even daft enough to claim I'm the ONLY one doing it, on a thread started by others. Clearly numbers, like facts confuse them something chronic. Little wonder people from Leeds distance themselves from the embarasment.
I've not said anything about how "big" we are. Doubtless you'll reply with some more ****e that isn't related to my actual comment and run back to the Hull board boasting about how you've destroyed the weeds/L**s/TWS fans again.
Do you have a link to me posting anything of the sort? If not, it'll just look like you're either confused, lying or both. If this is the sort of mindnumbing things going on on twitter, little wonder leeds are up there. They post ****e, someone points out it's ****e and receives mindless abuse and nonsense in reply. What a yardstick to use for a claim to fame.
I posted talking about the size of our fanbase, while explicitly pointing out that I wasn't making any statements about how "big" we may or may not be as a club and you replied with your generic "Leeds fans are so obsessed with how big they are" statement. I've very rarely had a straight reply from you about anything, you have the same cookie cutter response you use for every comment and claim you're some masterful WUM rather than an annoying one-note prick who gets a kick out of irritating people.
Nah, a prick would be someone that posts lies and then can't back them up, like reckoning I've claimed to be a WUM. Try the hat on, I bet it fits you. You may well find it irritating that someone pops the deluded bubble so many of you live in, but don't shoot the messenger, just get yourself into reality. I must have crystal balls, I said they'd blub and be abusive. Another trait is to answer points and questions you haven't raised and then accuse YOU of being evasive.
I can't seriously believe anyone is accepting this bollocks. You're telling me, that you lot are happy to accept that the Paralympics(that barely any ****er watched), was more tweeted about than the Olympics(which almost everyone watched)? It's like suggesting that re-runs of Howards Way were more tweeted about than Corronation Street. Utter madness.
Read the article properly FFS and it explains the way it's done. It's based mainly on spikes in activity, so yes, the Paralympics would come above the drawn-out Olympic competitions in that respect.
Ah, got ya, that makes far more sense. I didn't think about spikes of activity. I was thinking about Bradley Wiggins, Jessica Ennis and Mo Farah, I hadn't considered that there might have been millions of people tweeting jokes about dwarf swimmers. How silly do I feel now.
