The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
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.
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!!!...
And Latin aspirationist.
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.
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!! :)
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. :)
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.
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.
I think Venom will get it, but whether he deserves to is another matter. Mystique is in with a shout, and she does deserve it. Mr Happy as well, and maybe monkey_man. Mr Nice Guy deserves it, in my opinion, but he's not here enough. SonicRav will probably get a few votes. I'll get one or two, as will MoJoJoJo.
Hopefully Snuggly still loves me :(
Page: