Counting 20 posts for word game

Worf

Vice Admiral
Those too lazy to count, here's the way to participate in the word game thread without counting and without getting banned by following the rules.

When you post, note the post number (e.g., mine was #10003). Add 20. Don't post until the last post count is equal to that number. Saves counting 20 posts up, especially if it crosses a page. And you write down the number so you don't have to keep scanning the thread - just check the last post.

Waiting until it goes to a new page either waits too long (default page length is 30 posts), or too little (if you happen to be the bottom of the page.

A little timesaver I found.

(I'm still waiting... #10015 was the last post when I checked).
 
perhaps we should move the word game to an other fourum......any one know of a fourum where we could take it to? I may start a yahoo group for it....
 
Since only about 20 people participate in the game on a regular basis, the rule slows it down a lot. So it isn't fun anymore to check the game every day and to see the associative patterns that emerged since your last contribution.

The argument that the game is a cheap way to raise your postcount may be seen as valid on first glance, but since we're comparing ourselves to a military organization, I tend to challenge that: I've done lots of repetitive stuff in the army myself, and still witnessed that guys with less brains and more situps got promoted faster.

If the game puts too much load on the servers, or if the admins decide that it has run its course, fulfilled its destiny, and should be closed down, then let's discuss. Maybe there are ways to restart, maybe someone has a more creative and challenging idea, maybe we're in trouble. Just stating "Email chatzone@wcnews.com instead of replying to the thread for any questions" goes against the principle of a forum.
 
criticalmass said:
Just stating "Email chatzone@wcnews.com instead of replying to the thread for any questions" goes against the principle of a forum.

You don't like it? Theres the door - no one is going to cry if you leave. No one cares how hard someone whines on the internet - right now, you're leaning into it so hard you must own a collection of fishnet shirts, aquanet hairspray and Robert Smith posters - and if you don't like fair, intelligent and pull-no-punches board moderation, than the CZ is really one of the last places you should ever want to be.
 
Just stating "Email chatzone@wcnews.com instead of replying to the thread for any questions" goes against the principle of a forum.

I think the point is twofold: one, he's trying to improve the word game (which is beyond me - it stopped being fun after about a page) and two, he's saying that the new rules *aren't* up for debate -- they have to be discussed privately.
 
yeah, the word game just sucks. I checked it a few times and no one cares for the no repetition rule, among other things.

even though I have a few posts there myself (not more than 10 or 20, i guess), I worked hard posting only when I had somthing to say to get these 2k+ posts. So screw all word games post whores (not all word game players, mind you).
 
Sayonara

Yep, time to put it 6 feet under :
 

Attachments

  • 17309[1].jpg
    17309[1].jpg
    9.1 KB · Views: 261
criticalmass said:
Since only about 20 people participate in the game on a regular basis, the rule slows it down a lot. So it isn't fun anymore to check the game every day and to see the associative patterns that emerged since your last contribution.

That's the whole thing. Lately there are no interesting "associative patterns." People just randomly blurt out a word and then do it again once there's been a single reply. Nobody reads the thread looking for patterns, most people didn't read the thread at all. People repeat words that were said a few lines up and already someone missed the obvious warning at the top of the last page. You can reread post #10,000 for more specifics. They all apply. A few people ruined it for everybody. The people who are most upset by it are the people that don't understand how they ruined it, which is why we said there wouldn't be a debate about it. There are plenty of much more creative things you guys can do here anyways.
 
the repeats were annoying....it was good when folks had to be creative which is why I figure it is dead.
 
I wish I could say I'm surprised at the reaction to a rather minor injection of reason where the participants refused to control themselves, but I can't. Thank you, Mr. INTARWEB, for making me the cynical bastard I am today.

(No, I wasn't born cynical, believe it or not.)
 
I don't remember making a bet, but I'm not one to turn down free cake.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I think the point is twofold: one, he's trying to improve the word game (which is beyond me - it stopped being fun after about a page) and two, he's saying that the new rules *aren't* up for debate -- they have to be discussed privately.

Of course, no one said that discussing efficient ways to abide by the rules wasn't allowed to be public. (Like this thread). (like always reading the word game thread first and posting to it first to avoid the 45-second floodpost limit.)

Sure it takes a few days for the word game to come around again, but heck, if I check everyday, it needn't take me 1 minute to count 20 posts. I just take my last post number, add 20, write it down. Go to the last post, and compare numbers. Takes 2 seconds, keeps one by the rules, and cuts down the whining on counting 20 posts.
 
I dont know what the big deal is. On average there used to be around 20 posts a day in the word game. I think worf has offered a valid way to quickly determine if your turn is up again. And at that, If twenty Different people post per day than you should be able to post to the game once a day. That isnt any slower than before except before it was like 3 people posting 6 times a day and one or two posting once.

Why did the word game need amending? Take this example for starters (9453-9458): Hollow - Man - woman - super - man - Hollow ...
 
I tend to agree to Chris, although *some* people tried to actually challenge others regularly by thinking up interesting options. But it's a mass phenomenon - people get careless in using something they've halfway understood and don't think about rules or tact, only about their benefit in gaining posts.
That's one half of the reason why those wordlist games are extremely popular - the other half still is the fun element. Forums specialized in language topics, like translation or etymology groups, still have great fun with them, while in other areas these word games tend to deteriorate quickly. That this particular one did run for 10k posts is quite an achievement - while quality is something else.

As for my comment towards the new 20-post rule, and the "No discussion"-disclaimer, I may have been a bit curt in pointing towards it. For me, it seemed like the good old bureaucratic way of dealing with complaints: You're not allowed to issue a complaint publicly, so nobody ever hears about the results - or if there ever was a complaint.
This has absolutely nothing to do with whining, haispray or Robert Smith - it's one thing to identify an issue and post a new rule, and another to be able to talk about it.
I'm fine with the rule itself, mind you. It maybe not the best rule in the world, but as it has been stated, it's easy to follow, practical and effective. My argument went against the way of instating it - which, in my humble opinion, fell a little short of " fair, intelligent and pull-no-punches board moderation". No offense intended, you will even find that I addressed a positive comment towards Hades for his statement - it was not until this thread that I even though about offering an opinion.

Since we have this thread now, I'm happy that people speak their mind and get answers.
 
Back
Top