Page 367 of 2665

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:19 pm UTC
by mojacardave
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


I wouldn't be surprised if you were right, but people have made predictions before.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:19 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


And their world on which to build keeps getting smaller...

I like this analogy/metaphor!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:27 pm UTC
by HAL9000
StratPlayer wrote:
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


And their world on which to build keeps getting smaller...

I like this analogy/metaphor!

It's definitely a good one. I think it's the first metaphor explanation that I've agreed with.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:33 pm UTC
by cmyk
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.


Too cool! I'm a lovely celedon color, thank you. It's always reassuring to see a carefully tallied graph depicting precisely how much time I waste in an arbitrary period. 8-)

Wow, I don't know how Blitzgirl does it. I take one day off from Time, and there's a dozen new pages when I return. And I admit, I only skimmed to catch up. I'm a very slacking, slacky kind of Knight... Until I get me my damn whistle!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:36 pm UTC
by AluisioASG
Caswallon wrote:I coma for just 15 newpix, and now I'm 6 newpages behind!

Beginning my noble miniquest to return to the present...

Shortly after I joined, the rate was 30 newpages per 16 newpix.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:40 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
cmyk wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.


Too cool! I'm a lovely celedon color, thank you. It's always reassuring to see a carefully tallied graph depicting precisely how much time I waste in an arbitrary period. 8-)

Wow, I don't know how Blitzgirl does it. I take one day off from Time, and there's a dozen new pages when I return. And I admit, I only skimmed to catch up. I'm a very slacking, slacky kind of Knight... Until I get me my damn whistle!


I'm not sure about your whistle, but you did get a nice cape, oh.. um, mphghrhpfft NewPages ago. It's back there. Somewhere.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:41 pm UTC
by cmyk
StratPlayer wrote:
cmyk wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.


Too cool! I'm a lovely celedon color, thank you. It's always reassuring to see a carefully tallied graph depicting precisely how much time I waste in an arbitrary period. 8-)

Wow, I don't know how Blitzgirl does it. I take one day off from Time, and there's a dozen new pages when I return. And I admit, I only skimmed to catch up. I'm a very slacking, slacky kind of Knight... Until I get me my damn whistle!


I'm not sure about your whistle, but you did get a nice cape, oh.. um, mphghrhpfft NewPages ago. It's back there. Somewhere.


Yes! I did see that, thanks! In fact, I'm wearing it now. But that's all I'm wearing.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:43 pm UTC
by tman2nd
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:46 pm UTC
by airdrik
People keep mentioning that it is a domed building. That is just the shape the sand fell when she dumped the last bucket of sand on it. She isn't finished with it and we don't know what shape it will be when she finishes. I predict that it will probably be another crenelated square, possibly with another triangle-topped tower in the midst.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:52 pm UTC
by cmyk
tman2nd wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...


It is interesting. And now that you mention it... I never see the two of them in the same room together at the same time!... hrmmmm...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:53 pm UTC
by AluisioASG
cmyk wrote:
tman2nd wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...


It is interesting. And now that you mention it... I never see the two of them in the same room together at the same time!... hrmmmm...

Of course it is interesting. We wouldn't be here otherwise…

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:54 pm UTC
by airdrik
cmyk wrote:
tman2nd wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...


It is interesting. And now that you mention it... I never see the two of them in the same room together at the same time!... hrmmmm...

So you've never been with Helper in a room with a mirror then?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:55 pm UTC
by cmyk
AluisioASG wrote:
cmyk wrote:
tman2nd wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...


It is interesting. And now that you mention it... I never see the two of them in the same room together at the same time!... hrmmmm...

Of course it is interesting. We wouldn't be here otherwise…


cmyk is an imposter! Everyone... let's get him!

*runs out the back*


ETA: Oh, "it"... I see whatchya done did there.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:55 pm UTC
by cmyk
airdrik wrote:
cmyk wrote:
tman2nd wrote:
mojacardave wrote:Tracker of the top ten posters on this thread (up to TimeFrame 720). This graph is corrected for the period shift at TimeFrame 240, and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. Looks like none of the top ten posters were present on the forum in the first day.

EDIT TO ADD: The top ten are in reverse order on the legend. It's fixable but faffy, and I really couldn't be bothered.

I just noticed that cmyk joined soon after Helper left. Interesting ...


It is interesting. And now that you mention it... I never see the two of them in the same room together at the same time!... hrmmmm...

So you've never been with Helper in a room with a mirror then?


We, we have, but I don't like to brag...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:00 pm UTC
by mscha
CLONG:
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:02 pm UTC
by cmyk
mscha wrote:CLONG:
Image


I'm getting really worried about Megan.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:06 pm UTC
by histrion
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


Count me among those who are thumbing this up.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:09 pm UTC
by Valarya
mojacardave wrote:If anybody else wants a graph, this should work in Excel 2007 and later (possibly earlier versions as well, but I don't guarantee that).
It only contains data up to TimeFrame 720.


I wasn't going to bother anyone, but since you're offering!!! Do mine, doo miiine!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:10 pm UTC
by Eutychus
histrion wrote:
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


Count me among those who are thumbing this up.


They don't seem to be very aware of how heavy wet sand is.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:18 pm UTC
by SWO Crash
Eutychus wrote:
histrion wrote:
Asthanius wrote:Alright, I think that we can all see that the progression of what is being built is (at least) similar to the progression of mankind's architecture through the ages. Thus, I feel that I can safely assume that not only will Cueball and Megan build skyscrapers and such, but will also gain knowledge of the world around them as time goes on. At the beginning, they were clumsy (falling into the sandcastles), barbaric (deriving joy from destroying the structures), but also curious (Cueball tasting the seawater). We could see that they were progressing, though, when they began building more intricate structures such as the small trebuchet and the scaffolding. At this point, they were shown to have little knowledge of the world around them ("I don't know how anything works"), but resourceful (using the bucket and rope to haul sand up to the scaffolding), even if they were still clumsy (Megan falling into the sandcastle). However, once the seawall was breached, Cueball and Megan didn't waste much time. They built more intricate structures on the scaffolding (thin towers and a domed building), indicating that they have moved on from the larger rough castles below.


Count me among those who are thumbing this up.


They don't seem to be very aware of how heavy wet sand is.


That's why Megan and Cueball braced up the platform a few newpix ago.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:19 pm UTC
by histrion
Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:32 pm UTC
by JPhi1618
So, not sure if this has been discussed yet, but I'm pretty certain that they are putting up rolls of tarp that they will unroll to fill in the areas between the posts to create one huge castle. I thought this might happen after the second story was installed, and now I'm quite certain that what Cue Ball has recently installed is a roll or two.

I'm sure someone can post a picture of what the castle will look like with all the whitespace filled in. I'm at work...

[EDIT] So, I just saw that what was added were support beams, but I'm still sticking with my theory... Might take longer for it to happen, but it's coming.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:38 pm UTC
by AluisioASG
histrion wrote:Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Wouldn't that be beautiful… just like Lord Randall intended.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:44 pm UTC
by Mycroft_147
I propose THIS is already happening: A trifurcated approach towards interpreting Time.

1) Analysis of individual newpix as they progress into the macroscopic storyline.
B) Analysis of the evolution of this needle-pulled-thing and the society within
III) Exploring the possible intention of Lord Randall to have 1 influence B or....perhaps B influenceing 1 (whoah, imagine the implications of THAT!)

Should we include include somewhere a study of the quality, quality, and distribution of hats?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:48 pm UTC
by cmyk
AluisioASG wrote:
histrion wrote:Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Wouldn't that be beautiful… just like Lord Randall intended.


I'm tellin' all you nay-sayers — the Knights Who Say Nay — that BHG will show up being all Plainview-like with "I DRINK UR MILKSHAKE!", just as soon their battlements happen to be fully deployed.

Cue the trebuchets!

And, why yes, I do relate everything I see to a movie.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:50 pm UTC
by Caswallon
cmyk wrote:
AluisioASG wrote:
histrion wrote:Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Wouldn't that be beautiful… just like Lord Randall intended.
I'm tellin' all you nay-sayers — the Knights Who Say Nay — that BHG will show up being all Plainview-like with "I DRINK UR MILKSHAKE!", just as soon their battlements happen to be fully deployed.

Cue the trebuchets!

What we have been missing is the entirely violent raiding parties on the IKEA next door, hence testing the Trebuchet on defenses earlier!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:54 pm UTC
by cmyk
Caswallon wrote:
cmyk wrote:
AluisioASG wrote:
histrion wrote:Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Wouldn't that be beautiful… just like Lord Randall intended.
I'm tellin' all you nay-sayers — the Knights Who Say Nay — that BHG will show up being all Plainview-like with "I DRINK UR MILKSHAKE!", just as soon their battlements happen to be fully deployed.

Cue the trebuchets!

What we have been missing is the entirely violent raiding parties on the IKEA next door, hence testing the Trebuchet on defenses earlier!


Dear lord, the carcinogenic clouds of particle board debris, Allen Wrench shrapnel, and Swedish Meatball splash damage, would be a bloodbath. Broke college students and young, new-homeowning couples wandering around picking up their own limbs...

The horror.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:02 pm UTC
by histrion
THRONG!
Image

Also: I've passed the 500/3 post count threshold!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:04 pm UTC
by HAL9000
cmyk wrote:
Caswallon wrote:
cmyk wrote:
AluisioASG wrote:
histrion wrote:Of course, the downside to this interpretation is the notion that we could reduce civilization to a metaphorical two individuals who aren't at war with each other. I mean, yes, there was a trebuchet, but hardly anything qualifying as hostilities.

Wouldn't that be beautiful… just like Lord Randall intended.
I'm tellin' all you nay-sayers — the Knights Who Say Nay — that BHG will show up being all Plainview-like with "I DRINK UR MILKSHAKE!", just as soon their battlements happen to be fully deployed.

Cue the trebuchets!

What we have been missing is the entirely violent raiding parties on the IKEA next door, hence testing the Trebuchet on defenses earlier!


Dear lord, the carcinogenic clouds of particle board debris, Allen Wrench shrapnel, and Swedish Meatball splash damage, would be a bloodbath. Broke college students and young, new-homeowning couples wandering around picking up their own limbs...

The horror.

Especially since the IKEA limb-reattachment instructions are completely incomprehensible.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:10 pm UTC
by buffygirl
mscha wrote:
Spoiler:
mojacardave wrote:
mscha wrote:
Asthanius wrote:
mscha wrote:
mojacardave wrote:..., and so is grouped by total number of posts in a ten hour period. ...

Hours? Heresy!

Is it, though? An hour is merely the term given to a two newpic period, is it not?

It is now, it wasn't for the first 240 newpix. Since the graph includes entirety of Time, it can't use “hour” as a unit of measure, since its meaning changed midway.

That's precisely the reason I DID use hours as a unit of measure. The definition of a newpix/TimeFrame changed at frame 240, so I made the necessary corrections to the data, and used 'real-world' hours, for uniform block sizes.

And that, exactly, is heresy!

Edit: I don't know if there are any commandments yet (there certainly should be), but if so, one of them will definitely be: thou shalt only measure time in newpix (or timeframes), as these are constant, and any other measures of Outside and Inside time are variable and unreliable.

Well spoken, mscha. The main tenet of Timewaiters is that they exclusively use TimeFrames as their unit of measuring time. Any other method of referring to the passage of / waiting for Time is heresy.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:15 pm UTC
by airdrik
histrion wrote:THRONG!

Also: I've passed the 500/3 post count threshold!


I see posts like this and I just want to think of an xkcd-esque My Hobby is: finding significance in the most insignificant of numbers - 466 is 1234 in base 7, woot!
(I'd use my current post count, but let's face it: 36 is a pretty cool number!)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:19 pm UTC
by Caswallon
HAL9000 wrote:
cmyk wrote:
Caswallon wrote:<snip>
What we have been missing is the entirely violent raiding parties on the IKEA next door, hence testing the Trebuchet on defenses earlier!

Dear lord, the carcinogenic clouds of particle board debris, Allen Wrench shrapnel, and Swedish Meatball splash damage, would be a bloodbath. Broke college students and young, new-homeowning couples wandering around picking up their own limbs...

The horror.

Especially since the IKEA limb-reattachment instructions are completely incomprehensible.

The beach is actually discarded particle board debris, Swedish fish, and meat balls. While the sea is entirely composed of lingonberry juice, and blood.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:21 pm UTC
by histrion
Caswallon wrote:The beach is actually discarded particle board debris, Swedish fish, and meat balls. While the sea is entirely composed of lingonberry juice, and blood.


Lingonberry juice and blood are much more similar than many people realize.

Although not as similar as Lindenberry juice and virtual blood.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:22 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
airdrik wrote:
histrion wrote:THRONG!

Also: I've passed the 500/3 post count threshold!


I see posts like this and I just want to think of an xkcd-esque My Hobby is: finding significance in the most insignificant of numbers - 466 is 1234 in base 7, woot!
(I'd use my current post count, but let's face it: 36 is a pretty cool number!)


Pfffttt... 36 is only a cool number if you're a triophile.* But 5 is such a handier number, so number like 125 are WAYYY cooler.

Just sayin'...


*Fan of the number 3 and its multiplicative factors



ETA: Good thing mscha disbanded the papacy last NewPage. That "Pope-of-the-page" schtick was getting a bit stale anyway. Although I am a a little disappointed no-one ever commented on my Papal Magnum Opus. C'mon, Opus was a very cool character!!! And the "Mental Floss" bit? Classic!

Plus, put it together with the "page 357" (i.e. "Magnum .357") and dish it out as a "Magnum Opus???" Hey, that's choice material right there...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:25 pm UTC
by mojacardave
Valarya wrote:
mojacardave wrote:If anybody else wants a graph, this should work in Excel 2007 and later (possibly earlier versions as well, but I don't guarantee that).
It only contains data up to TimeFrame 720.


I wasn't going to bother anyone, but since you're offering!!! Do mine, doo miiine!


I wasn't actually offering to do more - I was providing a downloadable tool to produce your own, but since it takes about 5 seconds, here you go:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:27 pm UTC
by histrion
StratPlayer wrote:
Spoiler:
airdrik wrote:
histrion wrote:THRONG!

Also: I've passed the 500/3 post count threshold!


I see posts like this and I just want to think of an xkcd-esque My Hobby is: finding significance in the most insignificant of numbers - 466 is 1234 in base 7, woot!
(I'd use my current post count, but let's face it: 36 is a pretty cool number!)


Pfffttt... 36 is only a cool number if you're a triophile.* But 5 is such a handier number, so number like 125 are WAYYY cooler.

Just sayin'...


*Fan of the number 3 and its multiplicative factors


Heh. "Handier."

I'm considering joining the Dozenal Society of America, myself.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:31 pm UTC
by thirds
StratPlayer wrote:Pfffttt... 36 is only a cool number if you're a triophile.*

*Fan of the number 3 and its multiplicative factors



And whats wrong with that? (my first post was #3 on page 333)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:31 pm UTC
by lassehp
StratPlayer wrote:
airdrik wrote:Pfffttt... 36 is only a cool number if you're a triophile.* But 5 is such a handier number, so number like 125 are WAYYY cooler.

Just sayin'...


*Fan of the number 3 and its multiplicative factors



So being a fan of cubic numbers is not a form of triophilia? How surprising!

Edit: Just noticed that 216 is quite amusing. 61+2 = (2+1)*6*(2*1)*6. Well, maybe I just have a weird sense of humour.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:33 pm UTC
by StratPlayer
histrion wrote:
StratPlayer wrote:
Spoiler:
airdrik wrote:
histrion wrote:THRONG!

Also: I've passed the 500/3 post count threshold!


I see posts like this and I just want to think of an xkcd-esque My Hobby is: finding significance in the most insignificant of numbers - 466 is 1234 in base 7, woot!
(I'd use my current post count, but let's face it: 36 is a pretty cool number!)


Pfffttt... 36 is only a cool number if you're a triophile.* But 5 is such a handier number, so number like 125 are WAYYY cooler.

Just sayin'...


*Fan of the number 3 and its multiplicative factors


Heh. "Handier."

I'm considering joining the Dozenal Society of America, myself.


You musta been Little Twelve Toes

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:34 pm UTC
by VoronX
StratPlayer wrote:"Wait for It."

IT is the true source of all! But IT is mysterious, and in many ways, ultimately unknowable...


And yet, isn't it so odd that I, and probably many of you work in the IT department...