Top Quotes by TL.net - Page 14

On August 20 2009 14:20 Archaic wrote:

Wow... That is brilliant, hahaha.

On June 28 2007 06:40 Tien wrote:


It's serious business.


The corrosive fluids burn the tip of the dick before it enters the vagine.


Not fun.

On September 05 2009 06:22 ghostWriter wrote:


That was excellent.

On August 26 2009 06:56 pheer wrote:

the blue pill

On October 05 2009 09:27 Flicky wrote:


WHO'S THE NON-ARTOSIS DUDE?

On September 23 2009 Chill wrote:
Fantastic thread my friend.

On October 17 2009 10:22 Mora wrote:
im on. name?

i'm moraelin_ca

On October 17 2009 10:24 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
oh I'm not online RIGHT NOWhehe

another time bro

On October 17 2009 10:28 Mora wrote:
you're gay.

go fuck a donkey.

On October 17 2009 10:45 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
I said not right now mora. Sorry.

On October 22 2009 13:27 qrs wrote:
In SC Training for Cash:

On December 16 2009 17:22 Spartan proposed:
I know I'm not exactly one of the top contributors or more active members, but I am a pretty experienced lurker. And what I've read/heard about the most is people saying that post counts are..
- Meaningless and can be spammed.
- Does not represent quality of the poster.
- Does not represent real "veterancy" of the poster.
- Encourages some people to post nonsense.

My idea is to have some sort of veteran level system....

[F]rom what I can deduce, the only worthy factors for a formula would be join date, post count, and average posts per week. I'd say use weekly average and not daily because it more accurately represents the users activity. I can't really think of a good formula just yet, but it's just a general idea...

On December 16 2009 21:21 Spartan elaborated with a tentative proposal:
a) Registered 45 days, 10 posts per day/week. --> Points = 450
b) Registered 90 days, 5 posts per day/week. --> Points = 450
c) Registered 180 days, 20 posts per day/week. --> Points = 3600
d) Registered 265 days, 5 posts per day/week. --> Points = 1325
e) Registered 730, 2 posts per day/week. --> Points = 1460

User C should be the highest level. He's been the most active and not necessarily one of the oldest members.

I guess the main flaw here is that it can fluctuate. A user that was high a year ago, but stops posting for a long time, would drop down because of their average. So yea, there's the flaw.. it kinda forgets about old posters that were great back in their day. o_O

There could also be some sort of bonus factor into play. Where staff could hand out extra points to users that contribute. Or every time someone posts a thread that gets a lot of activity they would get like 100 points. The extra points of course wouldn't go away and are added on top of the registered/average values.

Complicated.

On December 17 2009 07:39 SonuvBob wrote:

That's a brilliant solution! But instead of points we'll call them posts, and put them next to the name, location and post date.

For instance, I've been here for 1152 days, with an average of 12.11 posts per day. That gives me about 13957 "Points", which I'll call "Posts". And then it'll say something like

On December 31 2009 03:30 qrs wrote:
In Solution for TL "veterancy" (the whole first couple pages of the thread are pretty funny, btw)


<3 SonuvBob.

On September 05 2009 06:22 ghostWriter wrote:


That was excellent.

On December 31 2009 05:38 MasterReY wrote:


can anyone explain this pun to me?
i guess i dont get it since im not english speaking?
Or is it really premature-primadonna?
if yes im really disappointed TL^^