Foofoo

I'll post in yours if you post in mine.

why are there so many subforums

im going to add one category and possibly several boards each day. thats my aim.

Fredrik said:

Play one of your own damn WADs.

heh yeah. i should make 'Solve All Your Problems Wad'. like in the first level you shoot your parents and in the second one you have sex with a woman type and in the third one you collect money and buy a house for future security etc.

Foofoo said:

heh yeah. i should make 'Solve All Your Problems Wad'. like in the first level you shoot your parents and in the second one you have sex with a woman type and in the third one you collect money and buy a house for future security etc.

AutoBiography wad? ;)

It's their loss if they don't give you a chance imo.

well the dudey guy probly couldnt get through cause im on the damn net all the time but ehhh whatevfdfaweawfaddssfff im tiresd

Linguica said:

I was thinking of applying for this job as a scripter at this game company and using http://www.doomworld.com/linguica/gravgun.avi as an example of my experience. Maybe I should...

Also did you mention that you were Doomworld's 2004 mapmaker of the year????

Holy shit Ling!

/me droolz

people have attraction to other people since thier born. I was attracted to plenty girls as well. And also, I wasnt attracted to Hanson, but I remember staring at thier picture for long periods of time trying to figure out if they were boys or girls.

insertwackynamehere said:

people have attraction to other people since thier born. I was attracted to plenty girls as well. And also, I wasnt attracted to Hanson, but I remember staring at thier picture for long periods of time trying to figure out if they were boys or girls.

You're not the only one. But it's not like anyone wanted to hump them.

gargoylol said:

At least it will pwn your favorite wad

Just because I like something doesn't mean I like that wad. Waste of space, and nothing fun to it. Besides... low quality = no no. :/

Grazza said:

It's cleared now, thankfully. We don't get that sort of thing too often round here (at least not for prolonged periods). I remember it being quite common around this time of year in the part of Denmark I lived in some years back.

Ah cool. :D It makes everything look like a game with bad graphics and all. :D The fog like devours everything after a few metres ahead. It's pretty cool to see something disappear or appear out of nowhere. :D

OMG THE WEEKEND YAYYYYYY!
*caps off my weekend happiness by downloading the newest version of doom builder*
*installs it*
*trys it*
*fucker doesnt work :(*

shit. back to square one with the emotions then. o<#:-(

Bah, you guys even get the weekend before the rest of us, and you still complain. :P

Man: "Hey, that little boy is playing three games at once!"
Opponent 1: "Checkmate."
Opponent 2: "Checkmate."
Opponent 3: "Checkmate."
Bart: "Dang..."

Janderson said:

Yea but did you win any of them? :-P

A few. 431 wins, 25 draws, and 54 losses, against opponents with an average Elo rating (or equivalent) of about 1850.

They were consecutive games, not simultaneous. Simuls in general aren't difficult, but one of this scale would have been logistically awkward.

BTW, the rules allow for five minutes' break each hour, and these can be accumulated, so I could take a few very short naps during the 72 hours.

My longest sleep-deprived time is 2.5 hours.

Gokuma said:

When you make a topic like this I tend to expect something like you went to a lesbian birthday sleepover party.

I had the same impression when I saw the title.

The closest I got to making board games was doing a paper version of Battleships.

You know, that's what the gamer world really needs: a paper-based wargame. For those of us who are poor or don't have the spending habits of a crack addict, something like this would be really fun. Fuck you, Games Workshop! Fuck you in your stupid asses!

Sadly, the only game remotely like this is that one pirate ship game, which looks kind of fun but I've never had the chance to try it.

Numbermind said:

Awesome. Who else is in the Dorks Making Homemade Board Games Club?

Well there was one time in Algebra that me and my friend Stacy drew a board game up for no reason and played it with our friend Jesse. All I can remember is that it was really simple and retarded and that it sparked this odd conversation where I jokingly called Stacy a skank and Jesse was like "what's a skank?" and me and Stacy laughed at him.

Man, I wonder where these people are now?

I think that once I made those weird Zelda papergames too. I also once tried to make a Warhammer-esque tabletop game made out of printouts of the unit icons from the Game Boy Color game Warlocked. A former friend of mine made a wargame involving Little Green Army Men, as well as Lego Battlebots.

Oh, and I decided after futily trying to get into Warhammer 40k that Games Workshop is an evil, price-jacking bitch. Except for the Lord of the Rings game. The miniatures for that are actually affordable.

Ralphis said:

I often play with myself.

I liked the Windows 98 defrag screen better since it was more informative, and watching the pieces move around for a long time sure did help me doze off. I don't like the Windows XP disk defragmenter because if you analyze the hard drive to see if it needs to be defragged it'll analyze it again if you decide to defragment it.

Janderson said:

Also, I have no friends in my area.

make friends with trivial pursuit! :D :(

O.o

Xenphire said:

Stimutax: It's like a koala crapped a rainbow on your brain.

Eat more pills, pillhead!

Foofoo said:

lets go >:E

*punches self in the face*

*Gets out a shotgun but eats it*

Go ahead and do it, I dare you. Or are you gonna go back on your word and wuss out...like all those other times?

yeah probably. shitshitshitshitshit.
ahh well. there'll be other lifetimes!

What is this shit? Why are Dante Alighieri and The Bible being mentioned here?

And why is excrement being mentioned here?

Edit: heh, my postcount is now in the 6660's.

myk said:

What is this shit? Why are Dante Alighieri and The Bible being mentioned here?

I don't know. I was on the train the other day, and these two people were talking about Cindy Lauper.
Cindy Lauper! oi paloi! :(

so whats up with Cindy these days anyway? is she still trying to get some kind of career going?

Dr. Zin said:

Eye witness accounts are notoriously unreliable. I forget the exact words, but a prosecutor once said that the ideal case would be based solely on physical evidence, with no witness testimony. When you see something out of the ordinary your mind goes into overdrive and tries to figure out what it is, and it often makes wrong guesses. This is really well documented by people in the hunting industry, mainly because it is one of the causes of hunting accidents. Joe Blow is in his treestand sees something brown walking through some bushes. Since he can't really make up what it is he automatically assumes it is a deer. He shoots at it and finds he just killed his hunting partner! Thats one of the reasons flourescent orange is required in most states. A suspiciously large number of cryptid sightings occur in poor viewing conditions, likely because of this fact.

Yes, I agree with the fact that eyewitness accounts alone are unreliable. There are many incidents of people seeing bubbles in a lake or bears wandering through a thicket and they go "OMG Ogopogo!" or "OMG Bigfoot!". There are also quite a few accounts of people seeing sasquatches or thylacaines or orang pendeks or whatever in plain sight though. I'm not saying these aren't from bored attention seekers but not all reported sightings are that vague. Also, while there are many cryptids such as the Loch Ness Monster in which there is no evidence for support besides extremely vague or blurry photos and a few strange accounts by bored locals looking to get more tourists into town (funny that the most detailed Nessie sightings seem to be by hotel owners), there are others, such as sasquatches where they also have not only eyewitness accounts, but also rather clear photo and video evidecne, plus casts, possibe nests, and mystery hair samples.

This fact isn't helped by the fact that virtually everyone in cryptozoology is an amature. The people analyzing these accounts often have no real biological or even basic scientific training. For example, there was a series of recordings floating around the internet that were supposedly sasquatch vocalizations. The text provided with them even proclaimed that they had been acoustically analyzed and didn't match any know animals. Low and behold, some people who actuall had had experience with animal calls said they were all relativly common sound from animals like raccoons.

True, but there are a few cryptozoologists with biology degrees and they are considered the foremost experts in the field. The reason there are so few though is probably because there aren't very many great opportunities to get any kind of respect if you enter the field since 90% of the world considers it a joke. I suppose the whole thing is an vicious cycle. However, there have actualy been some rather prominent people from other fields who do suport it. For instance, Jane Godall once said that it's possible the sasquatch exists and she believes in it's existance. There have alos been non-scientsits such as Teddy Roosevelt who have believes in bigfoot.

Many cryptids supposedly have old sightings that help confirm the validity of the claims. Often these are completly false, or at least extremely distorted. A famous example is the Jacko case, a series of newspaper articles describing how in the late 1800's a train crew captured a young sasquatch. Through out the years this story has appeared in countless books. When historians started digging into it they realized that it was really a publicity stunt of a small town newspaper trying to upstage its competitor. This was confirmed by the fact that neighboring towns papers made no mention of any "Jacko".

Heh, I never heard of that incident. But it should be noted that while there are a lot of folk tales that are complete crap, a few turn out to actualy be accounts of real animals that are subsequently documented by western science. A few examples are:

• The Okapi, which natives knew about for years but white explorers discounted as being too silly until they actualy foudn one.
  
  
• The Coelecanth, which native fishermen in Africa and Asia had been catching for years but western science had thought they had gone extinct with the dinosaurs.
  
  
• The Platypus, which was captured and killed by one explorer and brought back to England. All the biologists there said it was an obvious hoax and stuck with that until someone actualy got a live specimen.
  
  
• The Mountain Gorilla was considered a folk tale of local African tribes until a European expidition actualy stumbled across a troop of them.
  
  
• A gilled antelope was thought to be a myth among natives in an area in southeast asia until one was actualy found (along with another species of antelope or deer) about 6 years ago.
  

Though most such stories printed by small town newspapers and such are hoaxes (they still get printed all the time in Africa and India if Fark is any kind of indicator), some of what locals say is true.

In a similar thread, alot of the stuff is just plain crap. The most obvious are outright fabrications, but often folklore is transformed into a beast. The best example of this is the Chucacabra (sp?), an old Puerto Rican legend. There are accounts of animals "sucked completely dry of blood" (evidently some people don't realize that blood in a several day old carcass has congealed) and photos of Chucacabra's "shot by farmers" (these are almost always feral dogs or coyotes that have died in an arid area and have dessicated before the could really rot, leaving behind a fierce looking monstrosity).

I agree. Stuff like the Chupacabra, the Mothman, the Jersey Devil, and that florida lizardman are a bunch of crap that are most likely cases of mass hysteria. But one thing a good crytozoologist should do is try to weed out the crap cases from stuff that could actualy be real.

The latest scourge of CZ is image manipulation. Again, there are people making outright forgeries, but there are also good intentioned people that accidentally distort an image and create something that wasn't there.

Yeah, it seems like about 90% of all ghost, UFO, or "rod" pictures are smudges on the camera or film or errant insects.

I was really into cryptozoology for a while, and there are definitely some aspects that bear more research (like thylacines still surviving in remote parts of Tasmania), but an unfortunatly large porportion of the material is utter garbage.

Yeah, I don't believe 90% of all crytozoology cases. You have to keep an open mind, but you also have to be rational at the same time.

On the subject of the thylacine, there have been two rather similar cases in the news recently. One is the re-discovery of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker which was thought to have been extinct for years. They thought the last one had died in the 50s or so but there had been sightings every few years ever since then so every once in a while someone would send out an expidition to look for them. Finaly, it looks like they've located at least one.

Secondly, there is the Bondo Mystery Ape in the Congo which has been known by natives since forever, but excepting a German expidition in the 30s which discovered a couple odd skulls, there hasn't been any interest in it up until recently. This recent expedition was able to come up with some photographs which seem to confirm it's really out there. This new ape looks like a cross between a gorilla and a chimpanzee. Wether it's a new species entirely or a hybrid gorilla/chimpanzee is unknown, but hopefully they'll find out.

Oh, and I think the social and psychological sciences aren't as widely accepted is because they often rely on personal interpretation and philosophy in their use. Also, alot of the people who created many of the basic theories of these fields had strange personal beliefs that they freely mixed with their science.

I rather disagree with you (except maybe with psychology which I have a personal grudge against), but I have things to do right now that I have to get working on so can't really explain my stance.

Foofoo said:

If you find evidence that cant be explained you think "ahhh well its probably just so and so" and then ignore it :S fucken hell man. that isnt science either.

Um, what evidence? What evidence for ghosts has there been that hasn't or can't be explained? Christ dude, people make a living trying to find conclusive proof and haven't found any.

I think we agree on more than we disagree danarchy. I guess I'll list these by points since I doubt anyone wants to read 5 pages of imbedded quotes.



1. I think we agree for the most part here. All I have to add is that actual physical evidence is a molehill compared to the mountain of eyewitness reports on most cryptids. Of course sometimes the physical evidence is suspect too.


2. Maybe I forgot to say that although there are people who are qualified working in cryptozoology they tend to be few and far between. Part of the reason for this is that qualified people tend to get burnt out by all of the hoaxers, grandstanders and know-it-alls they have to deal with in cryptozoology.


3. I agree that locals often have knowledge of unknown species. The point I'm really trying to make is that entire cases for cryptids are often built off of old stories and "sightings", which are often just local fokelore.

4. Total agreement here. Cryptozoology has become infested with this kind of garbage.

5. Again we agree.


6. Its sad that cases like the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker, thylacine, and Bondo-Ape get lumped together with mothman. There needs to be a split in cryptozoology between creatures with real evidence and fantasy land.




On sociology and the like,

I think that they are very important sciences, it's just that sometimes bad science was applied by the people who were supposed to be progressing the field, and this has hurt them in other scientific field's view.

Today I followed Smugula down the hole in my back yard. He's been taking my mushrooms as of late.

StG (Start to Grove reference): 16 posts. Not bad. 14 if you count my oblique reference.

Scuba Steve said:

Today I followed Smugula down the hole in my back yard. He's been taking my mushrooms as of late.

Dude! you spelt his name wrong!!!
you're like my only fan of that wad of mine and you spelt that guy's name wrong!!
*crys like a woman*