Server Help :: View topic - Note: I will not read posts with subjects like 'help'

Server Help

Trash Talk - Note: I will not read posts with subjects like 'help'

Mr Ekted - Thu Jul 29, 2004 8:23 pm
Post subject: Note: I will not read posts with subjects like 'help'

Help
Help me
Help me please
Question
Quick question

FOAD!

Solo Ace - Thu Jul 29, 2004 8:26 pm
Post subject:

HELP ME EKTED!!1

Slowking Man - Fri Jul 30, 2004 2:29 am
Post subject:

Does that mean you're not reading this topic, then?

wEaViL - Fri Jul 30, 2004 2:38 am
Post subject:

so many smartasses.... look at it this way... most of us dont waste our times reading queastions that start with help.... so if you want your crap answered try using a title that tells up what the problem is.. Like Zone is red, or My ships wont move... and so on

Cyan~Fire - Fri Jul 30, 2004 9:44 am
Post subject:

weav wrote:

Zone is red

NOOO DON'T POST THAT ONE!

Anonymous - Fri Jul 30, 2004 6:35 pm
Post subject:

I have to agree with Cyan here.

CypherJF - Fri Jul 30, 2004 7:10 pm
Post subject:

Red zones have issues, that probably do need addressed..

But I agree, when you have just a 4 letter subject line; obviously it's prob. 1) a guest 2) a guest's attempt at a zone... who doesn't search the forums b4 asking questions..

Granted, I'm sure I've double posted a topic; but...

Slowking Man - Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:58 am
Post subject:

CypherJF wrote:

People who post topics with titles like "Red zone" have issues that probably do need to be addressed by competent psychologists..

It's better that way.

Anonymous - Sun Aug 08, 2004 2:20 pm
Post subject:

I think that instead of making an arrogant and disrespectful complaint, it would've been better to compose a post explaining what is the required proper form for submitting a post's subject from a user seeking troubleshooting assistance and why it is so.

Mr Ekted - Sun Aug 08, 2004 3:39 pm
Post subject:

If it is not obvious to someone what I mean, then they are beyond help.

SuSE - Sun Aug 08, 2004 8:38 pm
Post subject:

does anybody else think this thread has lasted much longer than it should have (which was already much longer than it should have [if you get me]) (this is a rhetorical question, dorks)

Mr Ekted - Sun Aug 08, 2004 10:25 pm
Post subject:

Does anyone else think SuSE is unqualified to measure anything?

SuSE - Sun Aug 08, 2004 11:08 pm
Post subject:

ahahh, Ekted thinks you cannot measure in pixels

here's some fun for you...
"measure in pixels": 292 results
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22measure+in+pixels%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&start=10&sa=N
"cannot measure in pixels": 0 results
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&q=%22cannot+measure+in+pixels%22&btnG=Search

which of course is all academic because it's completely obvious you can measure in pixels, but whatever, live in your fantasy world and make puzzle games

Dr Brain - Sun Aug 08, 2004 11:19 pm
Post subject:

You're still wrong, SuSE.

You can't weigh in CCs either.

Smithy101 - Sun Aug 08, 2004 11:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Note: I will not read posts with subjects like 'help'

Mr Ekted wrote:

Help
Help me
Help me please
Question
Quick question

FOAD!

Hey Mr. Ekted When guests come on these forums and the ask for help with there zone in anyway sometimes there names are 'HELP' Or 'HELP ME!!!' Will you read posts with guests names like help or something like that?

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:52 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

You're still wrong, SuSE.

You can't weigh in CCs either.

No, I'm still obviously right.

Since this is trash talk I'd love to hear your thoughts, though, if only so I can keep myself occupied while typing up what will hopefully set you all straight. I'm so bored lately.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:32 am
Post subject:

How tall are you in pixels?

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:22 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

How tall are you in pixels?

I couldn't say.

How tall are you in:

liters
seconds
degrees
cubic feet
decibels
candela/m2
machs

Ya, that's what I thought.

Anonymous - Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:44 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

If it is not obvious to someone what I mean, then they are beyond help.

Unfortunately, not everyone are as intelligent and knowledgeable as you are that they can also be a telepathic mind reader.
And if you are unwilling to help because they are not as great as you are, where as the entire purpose of this place is for the likes of you to educate the less gifted, then what purpose do you serve in a place such as this - a help site?

I would also like to inform you that indeed I did understood what you meant.
However as it would seem, you either have some high standards thinking that everyone are like you (and were they, then they would obviously have no need to adress here seeking for resolutions) as suggested above and/or that it is you who has failed to grasp the meaning of my own text.

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

[..]
Am I the only one who understands him? When helping multiple people, you don't always remember every little detail about their problem three days after you gave them some assistance. Thus, when a thread is....

That is precisely what should have been posted on the first place, instead of the initial innane dribble.
And, in addition, being put under a more proper title, the such as "How to name your help plea topic propery" or "Why not to post "I need help!" threads" and etc. and etc.

When you go about doing as you had, you not only have failed to achieve your purpose, you have infact counter-acted it.
Instead of listening to you, it would drive people away from it and you.

Anonymous - Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:53 am
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

[..]

I couldn't say.

How tall are you in:

liters
seconds
degrees
cubic feet
decibels
candela/m2
machs

Ya, that's what I thought.

I quoted all, although I did not check all, however, from the looks of it they're all mathematical units and as such are workable via equasions and, if needed, logic tests.
Of course, it'll not be the measurement-unit alone, but...IMHO, it's all legal, in mathematical aspect speaking.

Also, Mach and Seconds are practically the same (formula of Length = Velocity * Time).

For example, to answear how tall am I in seconds, I would say that: I am # speed-factor per # seconds tall (IE. approach in a vector for # speed and then stop - you got my height's length).

I'm pretty certain that through triagonometry you can measure height using degrees as well.

Decibels would be somewhat tricky to get an angle on them, or degrees for that matter, but maybe the ever so meliorated Mr. Ekted can come to a solution.

And so on and so on.

Dr Brain - Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:04 am
Post subject:

SuSE, none of those are measurements of distance.

You cannot measure distance in pixels. Pixels are a measure of "screen distance". You can convert screen distance to distance if AND ONLY IF you know the DPI of the monitor.

Just like you can convert CCs to grams if you know the density of the object.

You have to keep your units correct. Any decent science class will drill this into your head.

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:41 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

SuSE, none of those are measurements of distance.

Well, that's good to know...but who mentioned distance? You can of course measure distance in pixels, but atm I'm merely saying you can measure in pixels.

Dr Brain wrote:

You cannot measure distance in pixels. Pixels are a measure of "screen distance".

Pixels are a measure of...distance. Good job smarty pants.

Dr Brain wrote:

You can convert screen distance to distance if AND ONLY IF you know the DPI of the monitor.

I disagree, but it doesn't even matter, because noting the monitor's DPI (or whatever) is already acceptable.

Dr Brain wrote:

You have to keep your units correct.

No, I really don't. All I need to know (essentially, of course - I don't want to hear any bullshit about "OMFG You have to know how to comprehend the electrical signals your brain gets from your eyes, too!" - yes, you guys are being so ridiculous it doesn't seem weird adding that in) is the definition of 'measure' and 'pixel'.

Dr Brain wrote:

Any decent science class will drill this into your head.

Gee, a class that teaches you to be completely...(no kind way to put this, so I won't even bother) - I think I'll skip that.

Dr Brain - Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:44 am
Post subject:

You mentioned real distance when you "measured" a real CD in pixels.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:52 am
Post subject:

Is this gonna be a fight or is this post gonna be done and over with?

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:59 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

You mentioned real distance when you "measured" a real CD in pixels.

I may have said something like "you can measure distance in pixels" in chat, I don't remember. Not sure if it should've warranted another post, though, since I (and you, too, actually

) just said that distance can be measured in pixels.

Side: You seem to think I may have gotten out a ruler with one side marked "pixels", held it up to a CD and said "Yeeeeap, that thar CD is x pixels"; when actually I scanned a CD (at 300 dpi, I believe [not that it matters, I just figured given the ludicrousness of previous statements I may as well go ahead and mention it]) and then measured its dimensions in pixels whilst it was displayed upon my screen.

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:01 pm
Post subject:

Smithy101 wrote:

Is this gonna be a fight or is this post gonna be done and over with?

...this is Trash Talk and you of all people...sigh, just be silent, newb

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:19 pm
Post subject:

Sorry

Dr Brain - Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:48 pm
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

(and you, too, actually

)

I will use the term "screen distance" for lack of a better term.

I will prove it mathematicly:

Given: Inches * Pixels/Inch (DPI) = Pixels

Given: DPI isn't a universal constant (unlike cm/Inch).

Therefore, pixels and inch cannot be measuring the same thing.

QED

Hence, you cannot measure a real world object in pixels without a conversion factor (DPI).

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:23 pm
Post subject:

As soon as Akai is banned from posting, we will stop reminding him how much of a retard he is.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:28 pm
Post subject:

Xudikkor wrote:

I am not an admin here. I was serving my own interests, and those of people who would like my help. I don't really care what you think I should do.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:29 pm
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

QED

Hugs.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:43 pm
Post subject:

Charmin ultra less is more.

Edit: So ekted you want someone to get banned here? Just curios...

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:47 pm
Post subject:

Of course not. I would like Akai to admit he was wrong. It's the only way we can all move on with our lives.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:16 pm
Post subject:

Akai is SuSE right?

Mine GO BOOM - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:19 pm
Post subject:

Well, time to play the moderator again...

Solo Ace - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:19 pm
Post subject:

No, Akai and SuSE are my sex slaves. Hey, this is trash talk after all!

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:21 pm
Post subject:

There goes mine with his shanky girls.
And solo ace..... I cant think of anythiing to say to you yet.

Solo Ace - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:24 pm
Post subject:

Threads should be temporarily locked when I'm composing a message for it.

I'm not even waiting for a reply from you, so whatever.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:31 pm
Post subject:

I'll see your babe, and raise you a better one...

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:36 pm
Post subject:

NOOOO WE LOST EKTED!!!!

ZiGNoTZaG - Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:42 pm
Post subject:

measure....THIS!!!!

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:47 pm
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

Given: DPI isn't a universal constant (unlike cm/Inch).

Hrmmm? Are you implying that the amount of screen pixels my monitor's using is fluctuating?

Dr Brain wrote:

Therefore, pixels and inch cannot be measuring the same thing.

That's absurd. I used to think you two merely had incredibly limited scope of 'measure', but now I can tell it goes for 'pixel' as well. I think if you bother to look them up (I'm confident neither of you have [and I doubt you will at this point], or you wouldn't still be arguing your side) you'll, well, know what you're talking about.

(at the very least regarding pixels that have nothing to do with screen resolution - if I had to guess at this point you'll never drop the resolution bit, even though you [doc] have agreed with me twice and ekted must still be trying to figure out how to measure himself in machs)

Dr Brain wrote:

Hence, you cannot measure a real world object in pixels without a conversion factor (DPI).

You just said that you can measure in pixels again. Listen to yourself already.

You can measure something displayed on your screen by its pixels and you can measure something tangible with pixels (although I would agree, this is not so useful).

Oh and Charisma Carpenter owns strange, odd-looking Russian women any day.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:55 pm
Post subject:

You can look at an image on your screen and count the number of pixels wide it is. But this number is not a unit of distance. It does not relate to any real world measurement except on YOUR screen. Telling someone that this image is so many pixels wide does not help them in any real world situation.

Here's the ultimate test of a true unit of distance: To convert from one unit of distance to another, there is a FIXED conversion factor. Inches to cm, miles to km, light years to parsecs. There is NO direct conversion from pixels to anything, because they are arbitrary.

Mine GO BOOM - Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:58 pm
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

Are you implying that the amount of screen pixels my monitor's using is fluctuating?

Ever change resolutions? Whoops, that ruler on my desk that used to be 240 pixels long is now 450 pixels long.

Quote:

Pixel - The basic unit of the composition of an image on a television screen, computer monitor, or similar display.

Measure - Dimensions, quantity, or capacity as ascertained by comparison with a standard.

Pixels can be used as a measurement, but only if you state what standard you are using. Since pixels, by definition, are the basic unit of a display, if you increase the display while still keeping the same number of basic units, the size of a pixel is increased. Thus if you state something is 50 pixels long here, over there it maybe 70 pixels long to someone else.

Thus pixels are not an accepted form of measurement when dealing with lengths of real objects.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:05 pm
Post subject:

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Thus pixels are not an accepted form of measurement when dealing with lengths of real objects.

And that is the context of the original debate over on ssforums...which Akai lost by locking the thread and continuing to post.

Mine GO BOOM - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:14 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

And that is the context of the original debate over on ssforums...which Akai lost by locking the thread and continuing to post.

I'm sorry, I don't read SS forums and had no idea. Yet another reason why keeping threads opened is a good idea.

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:15 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

You can look at an image on your screen and count the number of pixels wide it is. But this number is not a unit of distance.

Just by saying that, it's apparent you have no idea what the word 'distance' means, either.

Mr Ekted wrote:

It does not relate to any real world measurement except on YOUR screen.

It doesn't have to.

Mr Ekted wrote:

Telling someone that this image is so many pixels wide does not help them in any real world situation.

No, why would it - pixels involve computers and digital images, not brooms and toilets. Nobody has disputed this. The fact remains that you can measure at least two different ways with what can be called pixels.

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Ever change resolutions?

Yes, indeed I have. What I haven't done is started to measure something in pixels, then changed my monitor's setup half-way through, then continued measuring. Without changing, of course, it's fine. (And again this only applies to screen pixels)

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Pixel - The basic unit of the composition of an image on a television screen, computer monitor, or similar display.

Not that this particular definition proves much of anything wrong, but there are several other definitions on that page.

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Measure - Dimensions, quantity, or capacity as ascertained by comparison with a standard.

Again with the many definitions. Also, I prefer at the very least Merriam-Webster over dictionary.com

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Pixels can be used as a measurement

like, thanks for the news flash

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Thus pixels are not an accepted form of measurement when dealing with lengths of real objects.

and once again, nobody said they were

So maybe you guys are just going blind...that'd explain why you keep repeating yourselves, keep contradicting yourselves and don't know what many words mean.

Solo Ace - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:21 pm
Post subject:

I'm going to make my proxy block GET viewtopic.php?p=24502 requests!

I CAN'T TAKE READING THIS ANYMORE.

STOP IT!

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:24 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

And that is the context of the original debate over on ssforums...which Akai lost by locking the thread and continuing to post.

That is not the context of the original debate over on ssforum
I did not lock it, Mike did - your memory is as good as your brain (or your eyes, whichever)
what you call a debate is you posting things like "OMFG you are teh retard I hope you're kidding, you can't measure in pixels even though you just gave Ancient Power some dimensions that were exactly what he was looking for which he completely understood"
it's interesting to note that even now you seem to think I made some giant essay or something proclaiming pixels a unit of measurement to rival the meter
I'd insult you now, but I don't want you on my conscience

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:49 pm
Post subject:

You are still a retard. Good luck with the fries and the drive-thru.

SuSE - Mon Aug 09, 2004 4:54 pm
Post subject:

lol

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:35 pm
Post subject:

Here comes another post with over 200 posts in it.

Cyan~Fire - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:38 pm
Post subject:

Well Akai, I saw your point of view until MGB posted the definition of mesaure. Oops.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:39 pm
Post subject:

Oooooh.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:42 pm
Post subject:

Akai's reply is just garbage text. I tried all browsers.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:44 pm
Post subject:

You really have issues with akai dont you ekted?

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:45 pm
Post subject:

Just this one...oh and maybe ssforum. But I got along with him until the pixel thing.

I hate retarded people.

Mine GO BOOM - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:46 pm
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

lol

Sorry, but these forums don't support HTML escape characters. For those of you who want to know what he typed, try this in a text editor of your choice. Hold ALT, and type 0108 on your number pad. Let go of alt and it should print out an 'l' on the screen. Repeat for ALT+0111 to get an 'o'.

Smithy101 wrote:

Here comes another post with over 200 posts in it.

Only because you are filling in 10% of them with smilies. Post girls if you want to do something more useful, people will like you more.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:47 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

Just this one...oh and maybe ssforum. But I got along with him until the pixel thing.

I hate retarded people.

I see.... I see....

Dr Brain - Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:00 pm
Post subject:

SuSE, you are obviously oblivious to the subtleties of what we are talking about. Take a college level physics or chemistry couse and come back.

Only three things in the universe can be measured. Distance, Mass, and Time. Every other physical measurement is derived from a combination of these three fundamental things.

Given: Pixels are not a measure of real distance. You have admitted this.

Given: DPI is not a universal constant. Hell, it changes every time you change resolution.

You draw the conclusion.

ZiGNoTZaG - Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:14 pm
Post subject:

This is a discussion of science versus reality, and the two are not the same.

science is mans atempt to put reason to things without reason. reality is what you acctualy percieve with your own senses.

think about this....

would "it", still be "it", if "it" wasnt named "it"

yes, you can measure by pixels. no, you arnt going to be doing it in math class. nuff said.

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:29 pm
Post subject:

Ziggy, you are missing the context. AP asks for dimensions of a CD in pixels so he can make a CD cover. Akai answers him with a a picture showing pixel "distances" of various parts of a CD. I laugh and initially think they are both just making a huge subtle joke, waiting for people to catch on.

Sadly, they were not.

ZiGNoTZaG - Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:53 pm
Post subject:

Well, ok, ill admit i dont know much about cd labels or DPI.

all i know is that when i tell my printer to print a 3.5 it prints a 3.212.

damn thing.

Bak - Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:00 pm
Post subject:

I took a gay web design class and one of the questions was how many pixels are there per inch, which I thought was the gayest question ever, so I proceeeded to write how this depends on the resolution and got it wrong.. see apparently the book assumes everyone's using 800x600 so DPI is a constant... gay class... gay...

Mine GO BOOM - Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:26 pm
Post subject:

Ok then, how many pixels are your eyes from the screen?

And now how many?

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:49 pm
Post subject:

AJ = yawn.

Solo Ace - Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:45 am
Post subject:

Agreed.

1stStrike - Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:13 am
Post subject:

Oh ekted, ekted you're so fine you blow my mind.

SuSE - Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:48 am
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire wrote:

Well Akai, I saw your point of view until MGB posted the definition of mesaure. Oops.

I guess you didn't even read my reply to that. And if you don't see my point anymore, then you never did.

Mr Ekted wrote:

Akai's reply is just garbage text. I tried all browsers.

Just one more thing you don't have a clue about.

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Sorry, but these forums don't support HTML escape characters.

duh

Dr Brain wrote:

SuSE, you are obviously oblivious to the subtleties of what we are talking about. Take a college level physics or chemistry couse and come back.

You are obviously lost in the world of physics and don't have enough time to understand what a simple word or two actually MEAN.

Dr Brain wrote:

Given: Pixels are not a measure of real distance. You have admitted this.

Pardon?

Dr Brain wrote:

Given: DPI is not a universal constant. Hell, it changes every time you change resolution.

Yes, but not inbetween when it is stable and allows plenty of time for measuring.

ZiGNoTZaG wrote:

yes, you can measure by pixels. no, you arnt going to be doing it in math class. nuff said.

I think Zig may be the only one here besides me that knew what the word 'measure' meant before he studied screen resolutions. Kudos.

Mr Ekted wrote:

Ziggy, you are missing the context.

No, you are.

Mr Ekted wrote:

AP asks for dimensions of a CD in pixels so he can make a CD cover. Akai answers him with a a picture showing pixel "distances" of various parts of a CD. I laugh and initially think they are both just making a huge subtle joke, waiting for people to catch on.

We didn't catch on because there was no joke. You can measure using pixels, especially when you are operating under the area of the definition that goes like this: "any of the small discrete elements that together constitute an image (as on a television screen)" - which would be obvious to anyone who has ever done very much image editing in virtually any program. (there's a decent writeup on pixels at wikipedia.org if you're bored)

Bak wrote:

very gay - classes are gay

Mr Ekted wrote:

AJ = yawn.

Don't be crazy...oh, wait, too late.

SuSE - Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:51 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

Akai's reply is just garbage text. I tried all browsers.

that's so priceless

Mr Ekted - Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:56 am
Post subject:

Akai, you are the 3rd grader who is ruining the math class for all the other kids. We will have to call your parents.

Actually, what's going on is that I am saying that 1+1=2 and you are saying that 2+2=4. We are not debating the same issue.

Dr Brain - Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:06 am
Post subject:

No, it's more like you're saying 1+1=2 and he's saying 2+2=5.

Smithy101 - Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:34 am
Post subject:

1stStrike wrote:

Oh ekted, ekted you're so fine you blow my mind.

LOL!

But it should have been:

Oh ekted, you're so fine,you're so fine you blow my mind oh ekted.. oh ekted....

Mr Ekted - Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:55 am
Post subject:

I'm not putting on a cheerleader outfit for you homos.

SuSE - Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:58 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

Actually, what's going on is that I am saying that 1+1=2 and you are saying that 2+2=4. We are not debating the same issue.

For the most part. Glad you finally caught on - maybe you'll stop yelling like a baby that I'm wrong now.

Smithy101 - Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:07 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

I'm not putting on a cheerleader outfit for you homos.

Im not a homo

Cyan~Fire - Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:22 pm
Post subject:

Akai wrote:

I guess you didn't even read my reply to that. And if you don't see my point anymore, then you never did.

I did before I knew the true definition of "measure". A pixel does not have a standard constant of conversion, and therefore is not a measurement of distance.

Dr Brain wrote:

Only three things in the universe can be measured. Distance, Mass, and Time. Every other physical measurement is derived from a combination of these three fundamental things.

Actually, the units are derived, but the measurements themselves are not. Take electrical current for example, there's some crazy definition for an amp like how much expansion force the current puts between the wires, but an amp's an amp.

SuSE - Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:32 pm
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

I guess you didn't even read my reply to that. And if you don't see my point anymore, then you never did.

Cyan~Fire wrote:

I did before I knew the true definition of "measure".

No...lol, if you didn't know the definition of measure (which you clearly still do not know), then you never did see my point (as I just said - not that I think you actually read that post or the one in reply to Mine's).

D1st0rt - Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:38 pm
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire - Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:55 pm
Post subject:

If you could point me to the post on ssforum, maybe I'd understand a bit more. However, I do believe that I do know the definition of measure now, since I just personally looked it up, and you cannot "measure" distance with pixels.

Smithy101 - Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:14 pm
Post subject:

D1st0rt wrote:

Heh Heh heheheheheheheheheheh.

Lemme try (not by ebaumsworld)

SuSE - Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:32 pm
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire wrote:

If you could point me to the post on ssforum, maybe I'd understand a bit more.

It's in this thread...y'know the one you're replying to that you should've already read.

Don't think it'll help you understand how to comprehend the word, though. I'd recommend m-w.com if you happen to be using dictionary.com.

Dr Brain - Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:04 pm
Post subject:

SuSE, where do you disagree?

1.) You can only measure things with the proper unit types.

2.) Pixels are not a unit of distance.

Add 1 and 2 and you get that you can't measure distance in pixels.

Anonymous - Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:05 am
Post subject:

CURSE YOU ALL!!!!! WITH YOUR PIXEL TALK AND CRAP

Solo Ace - Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:53 am
Post subject:

Haha.

1stStrike - Wed Aug 11, 2004 1:04 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

I'm not putting on a cheerleader outfit for you homos.

How about a large pair of pants, suspenders, knee high boots and a tattered baseball cap?

SuSE - Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:39 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

SuSE, where do you disagree?

1.) You can only measure things with the proper unit types.

2.) Pixels are not a unit of distance.

Add 1 and 2 and you get that you can't measure distance in pixels.

I would agree, if you didn't happen to be wrong about 1 & 2

Cyan~Fire - Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:06 pm
Post subject:

There are 1310720 pixels on my screen right now. Does this mean that my screen is 1310720 pixels long? No. A pixel is NOT a unit of distance.

Let's do some dimensional analysis here. You measure resolution in, let's say, pixels per inch. That's a amount over a length, which of course does tell you something. However, if a pixel was a measurement of length, then that would be length over length, which evalutates to 1. Saying 1=1 is a little useless.

Smithy101 - Wed Aug 11, 2004 8:28 pm
Post subject:

1stStrike wrote:

[..]

How about a large pair of pants, suspenders, knee high boots and a tattered baseball cap?

Id like to see a picture of anyone like that.

Cyan~Fire - Wed Aug 11, 2004 8:51 pm
Post subject:

Go away.

Smithy101 - Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:00 pm
Post subject:

WAAAAAH!!

SuSE - Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:08 am
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire wrote:

There are 1310720 pixels on my screen right now. Does this mean that my screen is 1310720 pixels long? No.

I agree. That'd be area, not length.

Cyan~Fire - Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:10 pm
Post subject:

So you're saying that a pixel is a unit of area now?

SuSE - Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:32 pm
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire wrote:

So you're saying that a pixel is a unit of area now?

No, I'm saying that you apparently don't know the difference between length and area and should probably be quiet.

But yes, of course if you can measure distance you can measure area.

1stStrike - Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:22 pm
Post subject:

My penis is 1 million pixels long. Sad, isn't it.

D1st0rt - Fri Aug 13, 2004 7:22 am
Post subject:

haha 1st, the resolution is 1,000,000,000 ppi

Smithy101 - Fri Aug 13, 2004 9:40 am
Post subject:

1stStrike wrote:

My penis is 1 million pixels long. Sad, isn't it.

AH!!!

ExplodyThingy - Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:16 pm
Post subject:

Ekted:

Smithy101 - Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:22 pm
Post subject:

OMG THATS NOT EKTED IS IT?!!?!?!?!

ExplodyThingy - Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:24 pm
Post subject:

do you do anything other than troll these forums? Thats from TV, Saturday Night Live specifically.

Smithy101 - Fri Aug 13, 2004 4:55 pm
Post subject:

<_<

1stStrike - Fri Aug 13, 2004 7:02 pm
Post subject:

ExplodyThingy wrote:

do you do anything other than troll these forums? Thats from TV, Saturday Night Live specifically.

Silly mortal, you still watch tv.

myke - Fri Aug 13, 2004 7:40 pm
Post subject:

Smithy101 wrote:

Im not a homo

Smithy101 - Fri Aug 13, 2004 9:41 pm
Post subject:

Right.....

Dr Brain - Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:03 pm
Post subject:

Smithy, go away. Nobody loves you anymore.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sat Aug 14, 2004 3:31 am
Post subject:

Cyan~Fire wrote:

right now, there are 1310720 pixels on my screen. when i hold this toycar up to the screen. length of carX = aprox 453454 of those pixels. therefore 453454 pixels according to zigs screen at 1024x768 = aprox length of car. and one could measure other objects against this scale and get a steady reliable result.

of course this is looking right past the obvious difficult of seeing, and lugging around a montor to measure shit. right to the point of weather or not it is physicaly possible to do so.

Dr Brain - Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:33 am
Post subject:

No, without the DPI, no one else could get that same result.

Lets say I have a 29" monitor. At 1024x768, there is no WAY I could get that same result.

SuSE - Sat Aug 14, 2004 9:18 am
Post subject:

it doesn't matter, get a dictionary

Smithy101 - Sat Aug 14, 2004 9:47 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

Smithy, go away. Nobody loves you anymore.

Cyan~Fire - Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:37 am
Post subject:

Even if Zig said his car was 453454 pixels long at 1024x786 on a 29" monitor, the pixel would still not be a unit of distance. Let's do some math again.

To convert from the amount of pixels in the length of a car to the actual length of a car you would use the formula pixels_car / (pixels_screen_x/distance_screen_x). I'm hoping everybody agrees with me there because if you don't, you're stupid. Now, putting that in units, it is P / (P / L) or P / P * L. Therefore, the P / P cancel out pixel units and only length is left. The length of your screen is the only measure of distance in that conversion. The amount of pixels in the length of the car is only a number in a fraction.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:44 am
Post subject:

Dr Brain wrote:

No, without the DPI, no one else could get that same result.

Lets say I have a 29" monitor. At 1024x768, there is no WAY I could get that same result.

they would get the same result if they used zigs monitor at 1024x768.

much like in early history when they ddint have a standard. and units of measure differed from one architect to the next, and a lenght of wood or string was often used as the standard.

so for example if my toy car is 454545 pixels long. i could send my monitor to someone else, and as long as they run it at 1024x768, they will be able to send me a peice of string, without ever seeing the car(just knwoing its size in pixels as i stated), that roughly equates to the lenght of the car. thus my monitor was just used as a unit of measure. just like someone in early history would have needed the pice of string of wood that the architect used when designing..... or an EXACT copy of it. (a monotr just like zigs at 1024x768)

all measurements are approximate. this could be even more accurate then a standard ruler.

Mine GO BOOM - Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:50 am
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

it doesn't matter, get a dictionary

Already did. Please specify which definition you are choosing for your 'pixel' and 'measurement' instead of regurgitating the same line.

Dr Brain - Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:23 pm
Post subject:

Zig, one pixel is still one pixel on any monitor. The problem you are seeing is that pixels are not a unit of real distance.

It's like measuing weight when using a unit of volume. When the density is the same (like when the DPI is the same on two monitors), you can compare two objects without problems, but you cannot *weigh* with volume, just like you cannot *measure distance* with pixels.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:54 pm
Post subject:

i can see your point of view, but i think your not understanding where im coming from. what is an inch? what is a meter? they are words, not some absolute godly thing. given to an occourance of space. so that people can talk about them and know what the other means.

so if your saying that you cannot, according to mans scientific theories and such, use pixels on a screen as a valid measurement. i will say that is correct. but only because a whole lot of men in white coats say it is so. not because it is in fact actually true. thats like saying the lengths of string used to contruct castles in mid-evil times where not valid forms of measure. which for all practical uses they are not valid by todays scientific standards. but remain forms of measure.

i guess in the end im not really saying anyone is right or wrong here, as i can see both sides of the argument. tho it has strayed some form the original threads and posts. i like discussing things that ppl take for granted as fact.

SuSE - Sat Aug 14, 2004 1:44 pm
Post subject:

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

SuSE wrote:

it doesn't matter, get a dictionary

Already did.

You already did, but he probably hasn't. Besides, you took only one of many definitions listed for the NOUN "measure". I hope you can realize that we've been discussing the action: to measure. (that's VERB to you)

Mr Ekted - Sat Aug 14, 2004 1:45 pm
Post subject:

Ziggy, you are trying to apply philosphy where it doesn't belong. An inch and a meter are fixed units of distance. They apply anywhere in the universe and are exactly the same all the time. A pixel is a thing with no associated unit of measurement. Stop trying to confuse the main issue.

If I asked 100 people to take a stick and cut it to exactly 1 meter, they would all be the same length (within the bounds of accuracy that we can measure). If I asked 100 people to take a stick and cut it to exactly 1000 pixels, not only would they all be different, but anyone who even made the attempt would have to be a retard (eg Akai).

ZiGNoTZaG - Sat Aug 14, 2004 2:08 pm
Post subject:

yeah im applying other apsects then just science. i cant help it.

i beg to differ on the last point tho, if asked 100 ppl to take a stick and cut it to exactly 1000 pixels. maybe first they would look at me like i was nuts. but if i paid them, and gave em all the same screens, and a nice big magnifying glass.... i would get no less of accurate result, as compared to lets say just a standard ruler. it would just take longer, and be genrealy a great big pain in the ass for anything you wanted to try and dimension properly. specialy if it was larger then the screen.

ill try to stop now. hehe

Mr Ekted - Sat Aug 14, 2004 2:55 pm
Post subject:

Yes, but by giving them the same screen, you are effectively supplying a conversion factor from pixels to real world measurements.

You can freely convert inches into meters, yards, furlongs, leagues, light years, etc. But you can't convert any of them into pixels.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sat Aug 14, 2004 4:45 pm
Post subject:

well then....weve found a nitch!! ok ekted, you figure out how, and WE'VE got it made. $$ Ekteds Distance to Pixel - Ator.

cant be done...Baaaa! thats what they said about the spork!! and i bet that guy is in a hot-tub right now, surrounded by hot females.

Mr Ekted - Sat Aug 14, 2004 5:06 pm
Post subject:

ROFL!

Mine GO BOOM - Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:23 pm
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

Ok, pick one of these and tell me which you like. If you want a different dictionary, please state which you are using. If a physical book, try and scan and/or take a legable digital picture of it, preferable at least 8,000 layers of coax cable insulation wide and 5,000 tall.

Quote:

From dictionary.com:

v. meas·ured, meas·ur·ing, meas·ures
v. tr.

To ascertain the dimensions, quantity, or capacity of: measured the height of the ceiling.
To mark, lay out, or establish dimensions for by measuring: measure off an area.
To estimate by evaluation or comparison: “I gave them an account... of the situation as far as I could measure it” (Winston S. Churchill).
To bring into comparison: She measured her power with that of a dangerous adversary.
1. To mark off or apportion, usually with reference to a given unit of measurement: measure out a pint of milk.
2. To allot or distribute as if by measuring; mete: The revolutionary tribunal measured out harsh justice.
To serve as a measure of: The inch measures length.
To consider or choose with care; weigh: He measures his words with caution.
Archaic. To travel over: “We must measure twenty miles today” (Shakespeare).

D1st0rt - Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:37 pm
Post subject:

<- Ekted wannabe, even though it sounds like "Misdirected", which means I might start calling you Miss Directed

Dr Brain - Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:37 am
Post subject:

ZiGNoTZaG wrote:

It's like giving them a stick and saying to cut it into lengths of exactly 15 seconds. You cannot define length in units other than length WITHOUT a stated conversion factor.

If you want to go philosophical, the ideal inch is a certain FIXED length that can never be acheived exactly. The ideal pixel has no length associated with it.

Bak - Sun Aug 15, 2004 1:22 am
Post subject:

In the world of subspace, a pixel is a unit of length, as saying i'm three feet from the enemy flagger will mean nothing... but saying you're 160 pixels (10 tiles) away will.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:24 am
Post subject:

It's like giving them a stick and saying to cut it into lengths of exactly 15 seconds.

-nope thats time, dont even get me started about time as some absolute godly device that everyone gets force fed....

You cannot define length in units other than length WITHOUT a stated conversion factor.

-according to who again? the men in white coats. im willing to accept it and use it, but im not willing to be blind to all the flaws in it. 1000 pixels on zigs screen is 1000 pixels on zigs screen anywhere in the universe

no "conversion" is needed tp percieve the distance. a conversion is only needed if you want to transform THAT TOTALY VALID measuremnt into one that everyone else that doesnt ahve a screen JUST LIKE ZIGS can understand.

If you want to go philosophical, the ideal inch is a certain FIXED length that can never be acheived exactly.

-your correct it cant

The ideal pixel has no length associated with it.

-no length can be "Ideal"

wooo!

sry ekted

haha

post thought: consider....your brain itself associates distance with pixles without you even having a real consious control over it. if youve been around pc's long enough someone can tell you an image size in pixles and you will instantly(weather its correct to do so or not) get an idea in your mind of how large the image will be when you display it on your screen. simply because you are comforatble with measuring device involved.

Dr Brain - Sun Aug 15, 2004 8:35 am
Post subject:

What exactly is the difference between cutting a stick into 15 seconds and cutting it into 1000 pixels? You can't do either without a non-fixed conversion factor.

Know those huge TVs they have at Best Buy and similar places? The ones that are made up of several smaller TVs? What's 1000 pixels on one of those? Answer: The same amount of pixels as on a 10" TV. The only difference is the real world length, which pixels can't be used to measure anyway.

Cyan~Fire - Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:01 am
Post subject:

Why the hay are you talking about men in white coats? We're talking about units of distance, which everybody recognizes. Ask anybody "what is a unit of distance?" and they might either say "an inch" or "a meter", depending where they live. Now they may not be able to tell exactly how long it is (that is the white coats' job), but they do recognize it as something that measures a length. The average person cannot measure something real-world in pixels.

And the only reason you can measure things in pixels in SS is that your LOS expands with a higher resolution, and therefore there is a conversion factor between length and pixels on your monitor. And there's where your last point is contradicted, Zig. Everybody has a 'pixel-sense' for their monitor at the resolution you normally use. Everybody also has a pixel-sense for their monitor no matter what resolution is Subspace. But that doesn't mean that a pixel means anything in the real world.

SuSE - Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:47 am
Post subject:

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Ok, pick one of these and tell me which you like.

Essentially any of those will work.

Cyan~Fire wrote:

you can measure things in pixels

Congratulations, you've just joined the ranks of other people on this thread that have accidentally agreed with me. Good job.

Mine GO BOOM - Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:38 am
Post subject:

SuSE wrote:

Essentially any of those will work.

Good, now pick which one is the size of a CD, since you know, normal CDs are all exactly the same size, and by any of those definitions you said are valid, any 1 says:

The Dictionary wrote:

To ascertain the dimensions, quantity, or capacity of

So, I just want to ascertain the dimensions of a CD in which I'll be able to directly hit 'PRINT' on any program of my computer to print out the size of a CD on any paper I place into my computer. Or if you don't like that, I could tell you I'll be using PSP 3.12 with glossy 8.5" by 11" paper, but you don't get a DPI since you didn't need one in the original SSForum post.

SuSE wrote:

Congratulations, you've just joined the ranks of other people on this thread that have accidentally agreed with me. Good job.

Please stop taking quotes out of context, and you'll stop sounding like a tabloid.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:05 pm
Post subject:

What exactly is the difference between cutting a stick into 15 seconds and cutting it into 1000 pixels?

-um, obviously one dimension is time, and since lenght is not associated with time (for the sake of this argument). they are very differant

You can't do either without a non-fixed conversion factor.

-at the risk of repeating myself. you only need to convert the distance if you want to know how long it is in other forms of measure.

Know those huge TVs they have at Best Buy and similar places? The ones that are made up of several smaller TVs? What's 1000 pixels on one of those? Answer: The same amount of pixels as on a 10" TV. The only difference is the real world length, which pixels can't be used to measure anyway.

-again at the risk of repeating myself.....1000 pixels on zigs screen = 1000 pixels on zigs screen anywhere in the universe.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:16 pm
Post subject:

Why the hay are you talking about men in white coats?

- the PEOPLe(not gods or perfect beings) that wrote all these rules you people seem to be taking for absolute gospel.

We're talking about units of distance, which everybody recognizes. Ask anybody "what is a unit of distance?" and they might either say "an inch" or "a meter", depending where they live. Now they may not be able to tell exactly how long it is (that is the white coats' job), but they do recognize it as something that measures a length. The average person cannot measure something real-world in pixels.

-not talking about averages or how many will understand. talking about possibility. is it possible? YES.

And the only reason you can measure things in pixels in SS is that your LOS expands with a higher resolution, and therefore there is a conversion factor between length and pixels on your monitor. And there's where your last point is contradicted, Zig.

-not very well it isnt. there is no conversion taking place. if there was no such thing as inches or pixels. 1000 pixels on zigs screen still = 1000 pixels on zigs screen, so if im to belive you guys, then if i dont convert that distance to some real world unit....it doesnt have dimesion at all.

OMG the laws of reality have been repealed, there is no such thing as an inch or a meter. all zig can see is pixels, the laws of perspective are screwed...with no way to convert how long everything is, zig cant tell if hes pissin inside the rim or not!!! oh noooo....is it far away or close. I CANT TELL!!!... rofl

Everybody has a 'pixel-sense' for their monitor at the resolution you normally use. Everybody also has a pixel-sense for their monitor no matter what resolution is Subspace. But that doesn't mean that a pixel means anything in the real world.

-doesnt it? or it just doesnt mean anything beacuse other ppl tell you it doesnt.

ZiGNoTZaG - Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:17 pm
Post subject:

<DP>

Bak - Sun Aug 15, 2004 1:23 pm
Post subject:

10 seconds = 1 meter

gimme a stick 10 seconds long

1000 pixels = 2 feet

gimme a stick 1000 pixels long

Mr Ekted - Sun Aug 15, 2004 1:59 pm
Post subject:

Ok let's just end this thread.

Summary: Akai is a retard. Anyone who stood up for Akai is a retard.

Next...

ZiGNoTZaG - Sun Aug 15, 2004 2:15 pm
Post subject:

yeah good idea, if were just going to reduce ourselves to calling names. i cant see any further point in pursuing it either. theres plenty of other threads for that.

anyone that that brought this up in the first place as a big deal is a retard.

i88gerbils - Sun Aug 15, 2004 4:08 pm
Post subject:

Zig's got it. Maybe you should read his posts again.

A pixel can be a measure of distance, but based on the rules setup in modern society and that there is no relativity to what a pixel is a pixel is not a measure of distance.

End of discussion.

SuSE - Sun Aug 15, 2004 4:19 pm
Post subject:

Mine GO BOOM wrote:

Please stop taking quotes out of context, and you'll stop sounding like a tabloid.

It was the only relevant part. It's not like he said "btw this is incorrect: {insert what I quoted}". I hope you don't expect me to argue against people that already agree with me (regardless if they've noticed it or not).

ExplodyThingy - Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:39 pm
Post subject:

HOW MANY PIXELS IS SHE?

How many pixels is the tounge?

Dr Brain - Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:41 pm
Post subject:

Not enough on the first.

Too many on the second.

Smithy101 - Mon Aug 16, 2004 12:52 am
Post subject:

Mr Ekted wrote:

Ok let's just end this thread.

Summary: Akai is a retard. Anyone who stood up for Akai is a retard.

Next...

Um.. Um.. Whos whos.... side should i be on ekted the server help squatter or SuSE's the moderators?

Solo Ace - Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:06 am
Post subject:

Nobody cares whose side you're on.

SuSE - Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:24 am
Post subject:

ExplodyThingy wrote:

HOW MANY PIXELS IS SHE?
How many pixels is the tounge?

Shall we assume you mean screen pixels?

1stStrike - Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:30 am
Post subject:

*kills everyone*

I win.

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:36 am
Post subject:

Noes i win <_<

ZiGNoTZaG - Mon Aug 16, 2004 9:28 am
Post subject:

thanks 1rst, we all needed to die for that little display.

D1st0rt - Mon Aug 16, 2004 10:41 am
Post subject:

its not an absolute measurement, however. It's a relative unit and can only be applied to measurements within subspace (ie pixel to tile, neither of which can be converted to an external unit such as inches without knowing a resolution)

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 12:41 pm
Post subject:

ZiGNoTZaG wrote:

thanks 1rst, we all needed to die for that little display.

Yes,Yes in fact we did.

myke - Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:47 pm
Post subject:

Smithy101 wrote:

Um.. Um.. Whos whos.... side should i be on ekted the server help squatter or SuSE's the moderators?

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:10 pm
Post subject:

Lol.

Cyan~Fire - Mon Aug 16, 2004 6:24 pm
Post subject:

OK, as long as you guys are going to be idiots and not actually read what I say and think about it, I'm not going to post in reply. Goodbye.

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:36 pm
Post subject:

Dont leave us were desperate.
Dont look at me i only replied to this a couple times.

Dr Brain - Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:30 pm
Post subject:

I proved it verbally.

I proved it mathematicly.

I proved it philosophically.

MGB proved it with a dictionary and real examples.

Ekted proved it by calling everyone who disagreed names.

The discussion is over.

SuSE - Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:48 pm
Post subject:

yawn

Mr Ekted - Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:55 pm
Post subject:

Dr Brain = c00l

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 9:56 pm
Post subject:

Mr Ekted and Dr Brain and Mine Go BOOM and shamnky and snark (I like his name) ect. ect. are cool.
(Excuse me if i read the member list.)

Shanky - Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:15 pm
Post subject:

Anonymous - Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:32 pm
Post subject:

Oh Noes!!1!

Solo Ace - Tue Aug 17, 2004 5:55 am
Post subject:

Yeah, "shamnky" is cool.

D1st0rt - Tue Aug 17, 2004 6:25 am
Post subject:

X-Raider - Tue Aug 17, 2004 2:43 pm
Post subject:

Solo Ace wrote:

Yeah, "shamnky" is cool.

No no no this is how you do oit
Shamnky ies veree coo

Solo Ace - Tue Aug 17, 2004 3:40 pm
Post subject:

Shut up idiot, it was a quote...

Smithy101 - Tue Aug 17, 2004 4:44 pm
Post subject:

YEAH!!!1