The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I only set this up so that people DON'Y CHAT IN THE VOTING THREAD!
Also, we seem to get about a million of these on elecetion day, which is pointless, so try and keep it all in here. Cheers.
Chat about the election in here, who's going to win? Who doesn't deserve any votes? Who deserves more votes.
Also, we seem to get about a million of these on elecetion day, which is pointless, so try and keep it all in here. Cheers.
Chat about the election in here, who's going to win? Who doesn't deserve any votes? Who deserves more votes.
Page:
Rakuga wrote:
...I don't think anyone whos been here under 250 days should be allowed to be notable, but that's just my opinion.
But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve to be a Notable.
...I don't think anyone whos been here under 250 days should be allowed to be notable, but that's just my opinion.
But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve to be a Notable.
Undead wrote:
> But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post
> anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a
> Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve
> to be a Notable.
Are you talking about me? Probably not, but I have no aspirations for notable status anyway. My views are too controversial, and posting style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a "lofty" position.
> But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post
> anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a
> Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve
> to be a Notable.
Are you talking about me? Probably not, but I have no aspirations for notable status anyway. My views are too controversial, and posting style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a "lofty" position.
Undead wrote:
> Rakuga wrote:
> ...I don't think anyone whos been here under 250 days should be
> allowed to be notable, but that's just my opinion.
>
> But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post
> anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a
> Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve
> to be a Notable.
Er.. i also said
"All I know is it should be someone whos been on the forums for a long time and uses the forums alot"
250 for just a kind of outline as well as the uses the forum a lot. :)
> Rakuga wrote:
> ...I don't think anyone whos been here under 250 days should be
> allowed to be notable, but that's just my opinion.
>
> But what if someone joined about 6 months ago, and didn't post
> anything. And recently, he decides to start posting, and becomes a
> Regular. He's been here for 250+ days, yet he doesn't really deserve
> to be a Notable.
Er.. i also said
"All I know is it should be someone whos been on the forums for a long time and uses the forums alot"
250 for just a kind of outline as well as the uses the forum a lot. :)
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Are you talking about me? Probably not, but I have no aspirations for
> notable status anyway. My views are too controversial, and posting
> style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a
> "lofty" position.
So modest!! :)
> Are you talking about me? Probably not, but I have no aspirations for
> notable status anyway. My views are too controversial, and posting
> style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a
> "lofty" position.
So modest!! :)
Insane Bartender wrote:
My views are too controversial, and posting
> style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a
> "lofty" position.
--
No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek of 2nd-rate trolling.
And you dress funny.
My views are too controversial, and posting
> style to incompatible with the soft masses to be put in such a
> "lofty" position.
--
No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek of 2nd-rate trolling.
And you dress funny.
And Latin aspirationist.
Goatboy wrote:
> No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek
> of 2nd-rate trolling.
> And you dress funny.
*takes deep breath* HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! *takes another breath* HAHAHAHAHA!!!...
> No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek
> of 2nd-rate trolling.
> And you dress funny.
*takes deep breath* HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! *takes another breath* HAHAHAHAHA!!!...
Goatboy wrote:
> No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek
> of 2nd-rate trolling.
> And you dress funny.
Ideally, my posts should make you think in terms that you normally don't. The fact that most of you dismiss it as trolling just points towards your own ignorance. Or at least your paranoia and fears that your life isn't as sweet and lovely as you'd like. But yes, I do dress funny.
> No, your posts are pointlessly combative for the sake of it and reek
> of 2nd-rate trolling.
> And you dress funny.
Ideally, my posts should make you think in terms that you normally don't. The fact that most of you dismiss it as trolling just points towards your own ignorance. Or at least your paranoia and fears that your life isn't as sweet and lovely as you'd like. But yes, I do dress funny.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Ideally, my posts should make you think in terms that you normally
> don't. The fact that most of you dismiss it as trolling just points
> towards your own ignorance. Or at least your paranoia and fears that
> your life isn't as sweet and lovely as you'd like. But yes, I do dress
> funny.
Oooh, Luvverly an argument. No handbags allowed, take ten paces apart....
> Ideally, my posts should make you think in terms that you normally
> don't. The fact that most of you dismiss it as trolling just points
> towards your own ignorance. Or at least your paranoia and fears that
> your life isn't as sweet and lovely as you'd like. But yes, I do dress
> funny.
Oooh, Luvverly an argument. No handbags allowed, take ten paces apart....
Can we stop the bickering please children?
Current voting (as of 10:43) as is as follows (God knows why I'm doing this):
Monkey_man 4
Mojojojo 2
Venombyte 1
Cooky 1
RM18 1
Mystique 1
Monkey_man has an early lead, but some big names with no votes, most notably ('scuse the pun) SonivRav and Stryke yet to get any.
Still early days though, with a possible 80+ votes still to come in.
Remeber, all the notables are worth 24 votes together.
Current voting (as of 10:43) as is as follows (God knows why I'm doing this):
Monkey_man 4
Mojojojo 2
Venombyte 1
Cooky 1
RM18 1
Mystique 1
Monkey_man has an early lead, but some big names with no votes, most notably ('scuse the pun) SonivRav and Stryke yet to get any.
Still early days though, with a possible 80+ votes still to come in.
Remeber, all the notables are worth 24 votes together.
Page: