Longest time as the last post

[eggdudeguy]

*sigh*

I'm starting to get bored of this game, now that it's just "..." every 4 minutes. Why don't we make it so that every week, the person on top of the leaderboard gets 10 points, 2nd gets 6 (Like F1 racing) and so on, and each week the leaderboard resets, and we have a points tally? I think that would make it much more fun, because every week you have a chance to win, as everyone is on a level playing field, yet there is still a continuous leaderboard that you can strive towards.

That would certainly be interesting, but at this point, you might as well make a thread restart for it.

[sellyme]

True, but there really shouldn't be two going at once. There are, in reality, only 4 people playing this game. Who would like to do a restart, with modofied rules? I do, and I presume eggy does, so we'd just need 1 more vote to get a majority (If you include Kai, who's stopped playing, we still only need 1 more vote).

I'd be happy to start the new thread, but I'm not going to do anything if the people don't want it.

[oagersnap]

I think it might make the game too complicated...

[sellyme]

I don't really see how... I mean, if I set it out properly, it should be pretty clear. I mean, just "Longest Time as Last Post at end of week Wins!" should suffice as an explanation for casual posters, and let's face it, this is XKCD. Most people on here should know that kind of stuff XD

So to be clear, what's your vote? (And so you don't become biased because of your first place in this round, I'll put up a hall of fame wih your name in it)

[oagersnap]

I don't really know... I'll see what the others say.

[sellyme]

It's me, you, eggy and chridd. Eggy and I have already voted for a new one. So yeah, that's pretty much what "the others" have to say.

[oagersnap]

Eggdudeguy didn't really vote for a new one, as far as I can see. He just said it would be interesting to make a new thread with those rules, but he didn't agree to change this one.

[sellyme]

Well, I doubt he'd bring up the idea if he didn't support it, but we might as well wait until tomorrow, when I have more time.

[oagersnap]

You were the one who brought up the idea...

[sellyme]

He brought up the ida of abandoning this topic and just creating a new one, whereas I was thinking about just turning this topic into the new one, to some extent.

[oagersnap]

Yeah, okay... But three very similar threads at once would be too much IMO.

[sellyme]

No, what I'm suggesting is to completely end this one (With a memorial thingy in the first post of the new one) and replace it with a bigger and better version.

[oagersnap]

Yes, I know, I'm just saying thst eggdudeguy hasn't agreed to that.

[sellyme]

Well then, what did you mean by three similar threads?

[oagersnap]

I mean this thread, the thread necromancy game and the new, changed version of this thread. Eggdudeguy suggested opening a new thread with the rules you suggested, he hasn't agreed to closing this thread.

[sellyme]

It was never my intention to open a new thread while keeping this one, as they are (in all essence) identical.

[oagersnap]

Okay, but then I'd prefer to see what the others say first.

[sellyme]

I don't think saying "the others" is applicable to 1 or 2 people...

[oagersnap]

Why not? They are others...

[sellyme]

"Others" implies a definitive, which, when used in conjunction with "the" and underlying the metaphorical categories of implicated importance define a group and/or collection of something(s) that exceeds the number 2.

[oagersnap]

I disagree. What else would you call them?

[sellyme]

I'd call them "Chridd (and eggy)"

[oagersnap]

"The others" is shorter.

[sellyme]

But incorect, and incessently frustrating to a OCD pedantic nit-picker.

[oagersnap]

Why do they have to be more than two people to be called "the others"? I think you're making up a rule here...

[sellyme]

I'm not making the rule, the English language is enforcing it.

[oagersnap]

Well, all I'm saying is [citation needed].

[sellyme]

You cite something explicitly saying your usage of collective pronouns isn't improper!

[oagersnap]

No no no. You are the one who corrected me, so I'm innocent until proven guilty. "The others", being plural, obviously refers to more than one person, but I don't see why it has to refer to more than two. Why not more than three, or more than four, then? It seems completely counterintuitive to me that it has to refer to three or more people. I have never heard that definition before, so I think it's your job to prove it.

[sellyme]

I was not stipulating that it was incorrect usage, just that another term(s) may be more useful and clearer to others.

(Also, if you haven't noticed, I'm pretty much just screwing around here, and am almost completely quoting Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy)

[oagersnap]

Aha...

[eggdudeguy]

Oagersnap is right. I never did explicitly say I was in favour of it.

But to clarify, I'll be in favour of:

True, but there really shouldn't be two going at once. There are, in reality, only 4 people playing this game. Who would like to do a restart, with modofied rules? I do, and I presume eggy does, so we'd just need 1 more vote to get a majority (If you include Kai, who's stopped playing, we still only need 1 more vote).

I'd be happy to start the new thread, but I'm not going to do anything if the people don't want it.

aka starting a new thread assuming a majority is in favour of it.

[oagersnap]

And closing this thread as well?

[eggdudeguy]

And closing this thread as well?

Correct.

[oagersnap]

...

[eggdudeguy]

True, but there really shouldn't be two going at once. There are, in reality, only 4 people playing this game. Who would like to do a restart, with modofied rules? I do, and I presume eggy does, so we'd just need 1 more vote to get a majority (If you include Kai, who's stopped playing, we still only need 1 more vote).

I'd be happy to start the new thread, but I'm not going to do anything if the people don't want it.

[oagersnap]

...

[eggdudeguy]

True, but there really shouldn't be two going at once. There are, in reality, only 4 people playing this game. Who would like to do a restart, with modofied rules? I do, and I presume eggy does, so we'd just need 1 more vote to get a majority (If you include Kai, who's stopped playing, we still only need 1 more vote).

I'd be happy to start the new thread, but I'm not going to do anything if the people don't want it.

[oagersnap]

...

[eggdudeguy]

True, but there really shouldn't be two going at once. There are, in reality, only 4 people playing this game. Who would like to do a restart, with modofied rules? I do, and I presume eggy does, so we'd just need 1 more vote to get a majority (If you include Kai, who's stopped playing, we still only need 1 more vote).

I'd be happy to start the new thread, but I'm not going to do anything if the people don't want it.