So I see that higher posts give different title.

[AethirWeb]

As the title says, I'm wondering. When d you get the newt few forum titles. I want to look BAWSS.

[nikki.]

If you click on the FAQ link at the top of the screen, you'll see this (among other things):

 

Quote:

0 Initiate

50 Warrior

100 Watcher

150 Monitor

200 Shaman

400 Sorceress

600 Shadowwalker

800 Blademaster

1000 Hand of Avadon

2500 Eye of Avadon

4000 Heart of Avadon

6000 Hero

8000 Legend

10000 Postmaster General

15000 Your Postliness

25000 Postaroni, Pizzabella!

 

Some people also have custom titles, which are handed out for whatever the administration feel like. There is only one rule: ask for one, and you'll never recieve one.

[Lilith]

there is also another rule: do not post a lot just to get a new title

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

there is also another rule: do not post a lot just to get a new title

Protip: It doesn't really apply once you get around a one or two thousand posts. Most of the top posters post around 10 to 20 posts a day.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Protip: It doesn't really apply once you get around a one or two thousand posts. Most of the top posters post around 10 to 20 posts a day.

most of the top posters already have custom titles and thus cannot be posting just to get a new title

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Protip: It doesn't really apply once you get around a one or two thousand posts. Most of the top posters post around 10 to 20 posts a day.

most of the top posters already have custom titles and thus cannot be posting just to get a new title

I was thinking manly of Alorael when I made that post, since right now he's only like 600 posts away from a new title.

[keira]

Seriously, can we put this in a sticky or something. This is like the millionth time this has been asked.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Sylae

Seriously, can we put this in a sticky or something. This is like the millionth time this has been asked.

if people don't read the faq why would they read a sticky

[Randomizer]

Alorael needs 5667 posts to make the next level or about 2 years at his current rate.

 

Lilith crossed over to Alorael's level title a few days ago so congratulations.

[Dikiyoba]

Originally Posted By: Nikki

Edit Reason: Although, I asked Drakey for one at least twice, and probably moaned about it in a couple of threads,..

Well, at least we forget about the important stuff around here.

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Protip: It doesn't really apply once you get around a one or two thousand posts. Most of the top posters post around 10 to 20 posts a day.

Your own math proves you false. Posters who are almost always around have an average rate of 4-5 posts per day. Top posters have just been around and posting frequently for a long time.

That said, if someone wants to post 10 times a day in order to get a new title and all of those posts are of high quality, Dikiyoba couldn't care less. It's just really hard to make 5 quality posts a day, let alone 10.

[nikki.]

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

...could care less.

Gah, I hate when people use that expression, because they almost always use it when they mean they "couldn't care less".

And I don't want to be elitist about it, but it's predominantly Americans who do it.

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

Your own math proves you false. Posters who are almost always around have an average rate of 4-5 posts per day. Top posters have just been around and posting frequently for a long time.

That said, if someone wants to post 10 times a day in order to get a new title and all of those posts are of high quality, Dikiyoba could care less. It's just really hard to make 5 quality posts a day, let alone 10.

Not really. That math is just an average over the total registered time, which as Slarty so helpfully pointed out for me, often belies long periods of absence or inactivity. I'd be willing to bet that if you went over the average post s per day made over the past year for those users, the number would be from 5-10 instead of 1-5.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Nikki.

And I don't want to be elitist about it, but it's predominantly Americans who do it.

you just remember who's ass the french helped us kick back in the late 1700's.

[ĐªгŦĦ Єяŋϊε]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

Your own math proves you false. Posters who are almost always around have an average rate of 4-5 posts per day. Top posters have just been around and posting frequently for a long time.

That said, if someone wants to post 10 times a day in order to get a new title and all of those posts are of high quality, Dikiyoba could care less. It's just really hard to make 5 quality posts a day, let alone 10.

Not really. That math is just an average over the total registered time, which as Slarty so helpfully pointed out for me, often belies long periods of absence or inactivity. I'd be willing to bet that if you went over the average post s per day made over the past year for those users, the number would be from 5-10 instead of 1-5.

true that. on days that i post it can be up to 15 then there can be several days to weeks of no posts

[Dikiyoba]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

That math is just an average over the total registered time, which as Slarty so helpfully pointed out for me, often belies long periods of absence or inactivity.

That's why I specifically excluded anyone who has been absent for an extended period of time. Randomizer hasn't really ever been absent. Alorael, to my knowledge, is gone only on very rare occasions. You haven't ever been absent that I can remember, and I've only missed a few months here and there. None of our posts-per-day averages will change much if we're calculating only the time we've been present instead of the entire time since we've registered.

Dikiyoba.

[A less presumptuous name.]

Originally Posted By: Sylae

Edit Reason: true to SW form, this topic will now be about politics, philosophy, and/or science, with many gigantic posts every five seconds

The one redeeming factor is that most of those posts are either highly technical, in which case you can ignore them, or they consist of quotes, which you have already ignored.

[Sarachim]

Originally Posted By: Nikki.

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

...could care less.

Gah, I hate when people use that expression, because they almost always use it when they mean they "couldn't care less".

And I don't want to be elitist about it, but it's predominantly Americans who do it.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm

Quote:

Taken literally, if one could care less, then one must care at least a little, which is obviously the opposite of what is meant. It is so clearly logical nonsense that to condemn it for being so (as some commentators have done) misses the point. The intent is obviously sarcastic — the speaker is really saying, “As if there was something in the world that I care less about”. . . .

There’s a close link between the stress pattern of I could care less and the kind that appears in certain sarcastic or self-deprecatory phrases that are associated with the Yiddish heritage and (especially) New York Jewish speech. Perhaps the best known is I should be so lucky!, in which the real sense is often “I have no hope of being so lucky”, a closely similar stress pattern with the same sarcastic inversion of meaning. There’s no evidence to suggest that I could care less came directly from Yiddish, but the similarity is suggestive. There are other American expressions that have a similar sarcastic inversion of apparent sense, such as Tell me about it!, which usually means “Don’t tell me about it, because I know all about it already”. These may come from similar sources.

So it’s actually a very interesting linguistic development. But it is still regarded as slangy, and also has some social class stigma attached.[Emphasis added.]

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you elitist!

[Dintiradan]

Honestly, I have never once heard anyone use the phrase "I could care less" before. The correct phrase is always used instead.

 

That's right. I said "correct". It's on.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Sarachim

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you elitist!

i do not find the etymological argument entirely convincing but it's also beside the point: idioms don't have to make logical sense, and at this point the "could" form of the expression is used widely enough that the meaning is understood

[AethirWeb]

Hmmm....17 posts till Watcher........

 

 

 

Post on ALL THE THINGS!!!!!

[Sarachim]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

Originally Posted By: Sarachim

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you elitist!

i do not find the etymological argument entirely convincing but it's also beside the point: idioms don't have to make logical sense, and at this point the "could" form of the expression is used widely enough that the meaning is understood

Neither do I, but my point was basically the same as yours. I only included the other stuff because I found it interesting, and also because it provided an alternative to Nikki's apparent belief that Americans can't speak his language without supervision.

[Student of Trinity]

No doubt for most people the 'could care less' form is just a mistake, but I don't think there's ground to stand on for people who want to call it wrong. It makes perfect sense as a sarcastic statement, damning with faint praise: "I could (in principle) care less about this (just not very much)."

[Lilith]

really, as sarachim's article touches on, the important difference is not the meaning but the metre. "i could care less" reads most naturally as a minor ionic foot, while "i couldn't care less" is usually an amphibrach and an iamb. i'd suspect that differences in usage have more to do with a preference for a particular rhythm of conversation than an analysis, correct or otherwise, of the individual words comprising the idiom

[nikki.]

Originally Posted By: Sarachim

...and also because it provided an alternative to Nikki's apparent belief that Americans can't speak his language without supervision.

Haha. On the other hand, we all know that Americans do not get sarcasm.

Seriously, I suppose it never occured that to me that it could be sarcasm. I guess if I wanted to save face I'll point out that I did say "most" people get it wrong, but really I'm beat.

(It is still going to annoy me, I'll just be less vocal about it now )

[Student of Trinity]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

really, as sarachim's article touches on, the important difference is not the meaning but the metre. "i could care less" reads most naturally as a minor ionic foot, while "i couldn't care less" is usually an amphibrach and an iamb. i'd suspect that differences in usage have more to do with a preference for a particular rhythm of conversation than an analysis, correct or otherwise, of the individual words comprising the idiom

I agree that prosody probably rules. The consonant cluster in the middle of 'couldn't care' is also more awkward than the transition in 'could care', in which the 'd' is easily elided.

[Lilith]

also a minor ionic foot sounds like the sort of thing one should really see a podiatrist about

[Student of Trinity]

Or an electrician.

[Triumph]

Someone should defuse the highly charged rhetoric of this thread.

[Alorael at Large]

Perhaps it's a chemical burn?

 

—Alorael, whose posting rate is indeed between five and ten posts per day. It has been in that range for years. It was higher for about the first two years he was on Spiderweb, but he's been posting slowly and steadily. He'd argue that the same is true for most of the big posters. Look at how long everyone has been here, and there really aren't that many sustained spree posters.

[Cairo Jim]

I should spam more then. I always get excited when I know I'm close to a new title.

[Goldengirl]

Originally Posted By: Cairo Jim

I should spam more then. I always get excited when I know I'm close to a new title.

It really is true that if you post enough, you will get a new title.

That title may very well end up being BANNED, though.

[Callie]

Oh those good ol' days when people would get CANNED.

[Cairo Jim]

I was being sarcastic you know.

[Trenton.]

Banned? Canned? How would one get these titles?

[nikki.]

The administration used to give them out.

 

Canned was given to spammers (because, see, Spam comes in a can). People who continued to spam, or were idiots in other ways, got banned, and the title that went with that status.

[Trenton.]

Ha Ha! ... Where did the term "Spammer" come from anyway? what does spam have to do with computers?

[Dikiyoba]

Wikipedia is your friend.

 

Dikiyoba.

[Trenton.]

My teachers dont trust wikipedia, they say it gives false information

[keira]

They also say that glass is a slow-moving liquid.

[Sudanna]

. . . It does? I mean, I've seen glass left in a spot for at least 80 years that has begun to visibly sag and run.

[Trenton.]

...Maybe if molten lava melted it.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Space Between

. . . It does? I mean, I've seen glass left in a spot for at least 80 years that has begun to visibly sag and run.

That's because of how they made glass back then--one side was thicker, and they'd usually put the thick part of the pane down to prevent rain leakages or some such. So it just looks saggy.

[Dintiradan]

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

Wikipedia is your friend.

Dikiyoba.

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile.

My teachers dont trust wikipedia, they say it gives false information

So do friends. But like most friends, Wikipedia gives correct information more often than false information, and there are these nifty things called citations as well.

[Alorael at Large]

Wikipedia isn't absolutely correct, but it's actually pretty good at being mostly correct most of the time. I wouldn't go to it for minor details or highly specific information, but for general knowledge it's great.

 

—Alorael, who also finds it great for very different reasons for highly technical information. Generally, the information is either clearly too sparse to be useful, too technical to be usable to a layperson, or obviously lovingly explained by an expert. And you can find those loving experts in some surprisingly abstruse fields.

[Harehunter]

Spam spam spam

Spam spam spam

Wonderful spam

Wonderful spam

 

Ack!! Now I'll have that stupid tune in my head the rest of the week!

[The Ratt]

Someone had to do this. It turns out that glass is technically a super-cooled liquid, but it does not flow. Neat.

 

Edit: However, polystyrene and polypropylene do.

[Nicothodes]

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

Spam spam spam
Spam spam spam
Wonderful spam
Wonderful spam

Ack!! Now I'll have that stupid tune in my head the rest of the week!

should get it out for you.

[Harehunter]

Thank you. I appreciate the effort, but now I've got it worse; both songs playing incessantly side by side.

 

BTW My dad considered spam a four letter word, never to be uttered. Apparently he had had enough of the stuff in WWII to fill an LST.

[Harehunter]

Originally Posted By: The (Armored) Ratt

Someone had to do this. It turns out that glass is technically a super-cooled liquid, but it does not flow. Neat.

The fact that glass flows, but slowly, is readily seen in windows of homes that were built 100+ yrs ago. Visit places like Mount Vernon, Monticello or The Hermitage.

[The Ratt]

Did you even look at the link, Harehunter?