I think that 6, 28, 496, and 8,128 should be properly honored. It makes perfect sense.
Other than that, I give the rankings a thumbs up.
As long as you do away with BO Fodder.-- RWM
| New Scaratings http://www.scaratings.com/newScaratings/ |
|
| Ranks Worth Keeping? http://www.scaratings.com/newScaratings/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=1228 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Dante [ Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ranks Worth Keeping? |
Are the ranks here worth keeping? I have to spend a bit of time to keep adding them, and I'm curious whether it's anything anyone even cares about anyway. Currently there are about 65 unique ranks, ranging from 1 to a posting count that no one should ever get to. If you think they should continue to be added per each number, let me know. If you don't care, or especially think no ones cares, please let me know that, too. For those of you who have missed it, you have a rank under your name based on each post, depending on your post count. You can hypothetically see most the current rankings by looking at the members list. Thanks! Management (Sorta) |
|
| Author: | Akbar71 [ Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
Dante- I think they're kind of fun, but wouldn't want you to spend any huge amount of time on them. If there were more new people coming into this site, I'd think the rankings might keep them interested. |
|
| Author: | zog741 [ Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
I think that 6, 28, 496, and 8,128 should be properly honored. It makes perfect sense. Other than that, I give the rankings a thumbs up. As long as you do away with BO Fodder.-- RWM |
|
| Author: | Dante [ Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
zog741 wrote: I think that 6, 28, 496, and 8,128 should be properly honored. It makes perfect sense. Other than that, I give the rankings a thumbs up. As long as you do away with BO Fodder.-- RWM I believe -BO- Fodder was gone once I added ranks for those numbers. There is still one -BO- ranking, but not Fodder. 
|
|
| Author: | zog741 [ Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
Dante, with your current post count, you could be "Sultan of Swat." I guess "Bastille Day" would work too.But Akbar is likely right; it's already an impressive list, and hopefully it doesn't distract from other things. -- RWM |
|
| Author: | ANON [ Sat Aug 20, 2011 10:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
I agree with Akbar. I actually do check them out from time to time and enjoy them, but know you are pretty busy with other things, too. |
|
| Author: | teverett [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
The rankings are great but don't stress out over them.... |
|
| Author: | -BO- [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
I'm not happy that -BO- fodder has been done away with. Because of that I usually left the newbies alone, now that will change.....   BO |
|
| Author: | zzuupp [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
teverett wrote: The rankings are great but don't stress out over them.... my thoughts exactly |
|
| Author: | ranger [ Sun Aug 21, 2011 3:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
They can be a bit of fun, but not something worth a lot of your time. Personally, I wouldn't miss them much. |
|
| Author: | spotes [ Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. |
|
| Author: | zog741 [ Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I'll bite. What, if anything, is the significance of 1,326,894? |
|
| Author: | Brandyb [ Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
I'm guessing it's Spotes' phone number or IQ
|
|
| Author: | Dante [ Mon Aug 22, 2011 3:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. Every number above 1024 is now "DIE SPOTES"
|
|
| Author: | FOG [ Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
zog741 wrote: spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I'll bite. What, if anything, is the significance of 1,326,894? Too easy. The number of notches on BO's ewe belt. FOG |
|
| Author: | zog741 [ Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I think spotes has finally figured out the number of licks it takes to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop! And I'd gone for all these years thinking the answer was three! -- RWM |
|
| Author: | Dante [ Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
FOG wrote: zog741 wrote: spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I'll bite. What, if anything, is the significance of 1,326,894? Too easy. The number of notches on BO's ewe belt. I am so stealing that. |
|
| Author: | TOOTS [ Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
As long as rankings don't keep you from doing your most important daily task, beating me at Scramble, then I say keep on!
|
|
| Author: | spotes [ Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
zog741 wrote: spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I'll bite. What, if anything, is the significance of 1,326,894? No significance. Merely arbitrary finger twirling on the number pad. But the numbers do add up to 33, so I imagine you'll see it make an appearance on The Bible Code at some point in the near future. BTW, the number of licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop is 1,326,891. You were way off... |
|
| Author: | FrankC [ Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
spotes wrote: zog741 wrote: spotes wrote: I demand that you create a whimsical ranking descriptor for every number up to 1,326,894. I'll bite. What, if anything, is the significance of 1,326,894? No significance. Merely arbitrary finger twirling on the number pad. But the numbers do add up to 33, so I imagine you'll see it make an appearance on The Bible Code at some point in the near future. BTW, the number of licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop is 1,326,891. You were way off... |
|
| Author: | scar [ Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
Dante wrote: Are the ranks here worth keeping? I have to spend a bit of time to keep adding them, and I'm curious whether it's anything anyone even cares about anyway. Currently there are about 65 unique ranks, ranging from 1 to a posting count that no one should ever get to. If you think they should continue to be added per each number, let me know. If you don't care, or especially think no ones cares, please let me know that, too. For those of you who have missed it, you have a rank under your name based on each post, depending on your post count. You can hypothetically see most the current rankings by looking at the members list. Thanks! Management (Sorta) Can't you just set ranges and be done with it ? |
|
| Author: | MitchWolf [ Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
scar wrote: Dante wrote: Are the ranks here worth keeping? I have to spend a bit of time to keep adding them, and I'm curious whether it's anything anyone even cares about anyway. Currently there are about 65 unique ranks, ranging from 1 to a posting count that no one should ever get to. If you think they should continue to be added per each number, let me know. If you don't care, or especially think no ones cares, please let me know that, too. For those of you who have missed it, you have a rank under your name based on each post, depending on your post count. You can hypothetically see most the current rankings by looking at the members list. Thanks! Management (Sorta) Can't you just set ranges and be done with it ? Yeah, Post the list of the ranges so people know what they are. |
|
| Author: | Dante [ Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ranks Worth Keeping? |
scar wrote: Dante wrote: Are the ranks here worth keeping? I have to spend a bit of time to keep adding them, and I'm curious whether it's anything anyone even cares about anyway. Currently there are about 65 unique ranks, ranging from 1 to a posting count that no one should ever get to. If you think they should continue to be added per each number, let me know. If you don't care, or especially think no ones cares, please let me know that, too. For those of you who have missed it, you have a rank under your name based on each post, depending on your post count. You can hypothetically see most the current rankings by looking at the members list. Thanks! Management (Sorta) Can't you just set ranges and be done with it ? Sure, but that misses the point. I've made ranks for a whole bunch of numbers, where each rank is a range of 1. I was more asking whether I should keep adding them; the ones that exist now don't require any maintenance. |
|
| Author: | Cloudy [ Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Sorry, I'm late to the meeting... |
Dante wrote: scar wrote: Dante wrote: Are the ranks here worth keeping? I have to spend a bit of time to keep adding them, and I'm curious whether it's anything anyone even cares about anyway. Currently there are about 65 unique ranks, ranging from 1 to a posting count that no one should ever get to. If you think they should continue to be added per each number, let me know. If you don't care, or especially think no ones cares, please let me know that, too. For those of you who have missed it, you have a rank under your name based on each post, depending on your post count. You can hypothetically see most the current rankings by looking at the members list. Thanks! Management (Sorta) Can't you just set ranges and be done with it ? Sure, but that misses the point. I've made ranks for a whole bunch of numbers, where each rank is a range of 1. I was more asking whether I should keep adding them; the ones that exist now don't require any maintenance. Sorry, I'm late to the meeting. Got caught in traffic, trying to get over the bridge...  I like your rankings. They are creative and funny. My only real concern is how much of your time does it take for you to create them, and keep them updated. I'd say that if it doesn't take too much of your time, and you enjoy doing it, keep it up. I think that most members of the "ScaRatings" enjoy them. p.s. Is there a list anywhere for members to see all of them, and the range of the number of posts for each ranking? |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|