Conquer Club

Evil Semp wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:ive got a good stat

90% of the posts in this thread are not worth reading, and about 70% of those posts are made by people who aren't worth reading, 98.5% of the time

you're welcome

Hello Mr. 98%er

reported

it is when you may need a jackscrew to hold it up the pole,
it is then, sooner or later comes the last lullaby for you through your last and never ending sleep.

most of my missunderstandings are because of my tone of voice. Peep think i am angry even if i am just explaining my point.

iAmCaffeine wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:ive got a good stat

90% of the posts in this thread are not worth reading, and about 70% of those posts are made by people who aren't worth reading, 98.5% of the time

you're welcome

Hello Mr. 98%er

reported

Would this post be a part of the 90%, 70%, or 98.5% statistic you reference? Or is this a part of the 83.3% of all statistics that are made up on the fly?

3.6 roentgen

Not great not terrible

Jdsizzleslice wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:ive got a good stat

90% of the posts in this thread are not worth reading, and about 70% of those posts are made by people who aren't worth reading, 98.5% of the time

you're welcome

Hello Mr. 98%er

reported

Would this post be a part of the 90%, 70%, or 98.5% statistic you reference? Or is this a part of the 83.3% of all statistics that are made up on the fly?

i want to know who is in this mysterious 30% that Caff finds worthy of reading. so i have done some research. i believe this is a complete list of posters in this thread here so now, i'm going to take some guesses at what he thinks and let's see if we hit 70% of people not being worth reading... (no hard feelings folks, it's all in the name of fun!)

show

I've got it at best 12 out of 37, most likely 11 which puts us right at 70%. I believe that statistic, while definitely made up by Caff, proves to be accurate in his mind.

Nut Shot Scott wrote:

Jdsizzleslice wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:ive got a good stat

90% of the posts in this thread are not worth reading, and about 70% of those posts are made by people who aren't worth reading, 98.5% of the time

you're welcome

Hello Mr. 98%er

reported

Would this post be a part of the 90%, 70%, or 98.5% statistic you reference? Or is this a part of the 83.3% of all statistics that are made up on the fly?

i want to know who is in this mysterious 30% that Caff finds worthy of reading. so i have done some research. i believe this is a complete list of posters in this thread here so now, i'm going to take some guesses at what he thinks and let's see if we hit 70% of people not being worth reading... (no hard feelings folks, it's all in the name of fun!)

show

I've got it at best 12 out of 37, most likely 11 which puts us right at 70%. I believe that statistic, while definitely made up by Caff, proves to be accurate in his mind.

I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Evil semp wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Ah, but is it WORTH reading? I think this post alone would confirm that no, he does not think your posts are worth reading i jest, i jest

I am quite sure I am in the no list.

Nut Shot Scott wrote:

Evil semp wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Ah, but is it WORTH reading? I think this post alone would confirm that no, he does not think your posts are worth reading i jest, i jest

But, if Caff chooses to read it (and he is, as we know, the one who determines if something is worth reading), doesn't the very act of him reading it prove it is worth reading? And in addition, the paradox continues to unfold in that if he DIDN'T read it, wouldn't that mean he can't determine if its worth reading?

If not, then I must be forced to assume that Caff, by the very act of reading something which is not worth reading, invalidates his own throne. Therefore all things read by Caff either dethrone him or he must, in fact, say that all posts he does read, are worth reading.

In the end, I think he is just a fraud, and not actually the "post worth reading" definitive that I thought he was

Swimmerdude99 wrote:

Nut Shot Scott wrote:

Evil semp wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Ah, but is it WORTH reading? I think this post alone would confirm that no, he does not think your posts are worth reading i jest, i jest

But, if Caff chooses to read it (and he is, as we know, the one who determines if something is worth reading), doesn't the very act of him reading it prove it is worth reading? And in addition, the paradox continues to unfold in that if he DIDN'T read it, wouldn't that mean he can't determine if its worth reading?

If not, then I must be forced to assume that Caff, by the very act of reading something which is not worth reading, invalidates his own throne. Therefore all things read by Caff either dethrone him or he must, in fact, say that all posts he does read, are worth reading.

In the end, I think he is just a fraud, and not actually the "post worth reading" definitive that I thought he was

That is exactly what I said. lol

This thread:

You can read something and conclude it was not worth reading. I do not see why 'he read/responded to it so it was worth reading' is an argument.

I would also put Don in the 'no' list and instead put hop in the 'yes' list. I would also switch Doc with either Keefie or myself.

I can verify that I am definitely 'no' list material.

Caymanmew wrote:Umm Josko's record vs erazor is now 20 - 17...

Looks like Josko's going to win the Poly 4 Unlimited Zombie World 2.1 though

Still he will be under 50%

I now have positive head-to-head score versus erazor

Now I can claim that, to my knowledge, I have positive combined 1v1, Poly and team games score versus everyone on the site who scored 16 or more wins in these games versus me.

The closest to break this trend is Bariclaw who leads versus me 15-12, but he accepted my challenge to settle this injustice in July.

Swimmerdude99 wrote:

Nut Shot Scott wrote:

Evil semp wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Ah, but is it WORTH reading? I think this post alone would confirm that no, he does not think your posts are worth reading i jest, i jest

But, if Caff chooses to read it (and he is, as we know, the one who determines if something is worth reading), doesn't the very act of him reading it prove it is worth reading? And in addition, the paradox continues to unfold in that if he DIDN'T read it, wouldn't that mean he can't determine if its worth reading?

If not, then I must be forced to assume that Caff, by the very act of reading something which is not worth reading, invalidates his own throne. Therefore all things read by Caff either dethrone him or he must, in fact, say that all posts he does read, are worth reading.

In the end, I think he is just a fraud, and not actually the "post worth reading" definitive that I thought he was

he reads without reading

BabySasuke wrote:

Swimmerdude99 wrote:

Nut Shot Scott wrote:

Evil semp wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you putting me on the no list. The reason. I know he read my post.

Ah, but is it WORTH reading? I think this post alone would confirm that no, he does not think your posts are worth reading i jest, i jest

But, if Caff chooses to read it (and he is, as we know, the one who determines if something is worth reading), doesn't the very act of him reading it prove it is worth reading? And in addition, the paradox continues to unfold in that if he DIDN'T read it, wouldn't that mean he can't determine if its worth reading?

If not, then I must be forced to assume that Caff, by the very act of reading something which is not worth reading, invalidates his own throne. Therefore all things read by Caff either dethrone him or he must, in fact, say that all posts he does read, are worth reading.

In the end, I think he is just a fraud, and not actually the "post worth reading" definitive that I thought he was

he reads without reading

I have 15-1 record with mynameisjack in Baltics dubs, but negative one after he became a naruto wannabe.

This is injustice and should be handled by the admin team baby.

Free Jack from Sasuke's claws!!!

i-andrei wrote:
...after he became a naruto wannabe.

We used to call them narutards back in the day.
<3 Jack lol

mookiemcgee wrote:I feel confident the OP would do the exact same thing given the chance.

wasn't there already an official ruling on this? Why now an poor attempt at public shaming?

this exactly, he is just butthurt that he got outplayed by something he would do himself.

I sincerely apologize to Fyrdraca, JPlo64 and groovysmurf for opening this thread.

We all do mistakes sometimes and it is important to also apologize when one realizes that he was wrong in past.

In fact, playing Fyrdraca team in second set of games I have realized how excellent strategists their team are.

I was not aware about that before because, as I wrote, last time we defeated them 6-0 so I had thought that they are not skilled.

See for example Game 21005791 Hive triples that we are just playing.

I have undefeated lifetime record of 25-0 in Hive triples and my team got first win, yet Fyrdraca team outplayed us there so far.

Dice have been more or less equal to each side as far as I can remember, which means that their strategy outplayed us.

I am really exicited to have this best-of-7 matchup versus Fyrdraca, Jplo64, groovysmurf, Conchobar and Robespierre__.

I invite the Saucy Smurf team that we put all our games sunny from now on, so that all CC audience can follow the match and learn about top level strategy.

From Skillfull Croadians side, we will put all our remaining home sets sunny to support the above suggestion.

I am really enjoying great sportmanship of Saucy Smurf team and I changed my vote in this thread to "No".

Let the knowledge wins on the board.

It takes a big man to apologise

Josko redemption arc!

shut up and fight

let me put an end to the poor sportsmanship debate .

check the chat in any of my 1500 ,4 player world 2.0 battles

its the definition of poor sportsmanship

nuff said ?

some of us just seem to gravitate towards being a prick naturally

not mentioning any names of course !

Shannon Apple... "this thread" Brilliant!, that sticker needs posting at the start of this post, most other posts and all of my posts.