ForumsForum GamesCount to 100: This is a dog. ARF!

71065 28291005
Gantic
offline
Gantic
11,928 posts
King

The original "This Thread is Currently About" is back! Yes, it's Count to 100!

HOW TO PLAY

1. Count by ones from 1 to 100 in 100 consecutive posts according to the Core Rules.
2. Restart the count from 1 after:
a. a Moderator (or an Administrator) posts if users and Knights are counting..
b. a user or Knight or Warden posts if Moderators and Administrators are counting.
c. breaking a core rule, spamming, or cheating.
d. reaching 100.
3. Announce why you restart the count so other counters don't get confused.

CORE RULES

No mistakes. A count must start from 1 and increase by ones up to 100, save for exceptions noted.
No double-counting. No counter may count two consecutive numbers.
No back-to-back counting. No two counters may alternate for more than three consecutive numbers.
Okay: P1 P2 P1 P3
Not Okay: P1 P2 P1 P2
Okay: P1 P2 reset P1 P2
No editing. No counter may edit their post. If an edit tag shows on a count, the attempt is forfeit.

ADDiTiONAL RULES

No "spamming". Please don't post only the number and please don't post gibberish, either.
Multiple one- or two-word counts may also disqualify a count.
No "cheating". This shouldn't need to be said. Counting to 100 doesn't count if you cheat.
This is an exercise in teamwork, not rule bending.
No "spoiling". Don't mess with the count. Posts should start with the correct number.
Posts with no numbers should be ignored. See also: No non-counts.
Posts with intentional mistakes should be ignored.
No "spilping". If this is your first post in this thread, please post "I'm new and here to count to 100!"
No non-counts. No counter may post without a counting number or make a post without bolding that number if that counting number is not at the start of the post.

COMPLETE SET OF RULES
Please refer to the complete set of rules for additional information and examples of what is valid or invalid.
DiSCUSSiON THREAD
Please also check out the discussion thread for new gameplay or rule proposals or general discussion on the gameplay and rules of "Count to 100".

END GAME

Once you reach 100, you start this Sisyphean task all over again back at 1. Users should notify the Commissioner of the Count (HahiHa) that the count reached 100 and the Commissioner will review it to make sure there were no mistakes or cheating. If there were no mistakes or cheating, then the users who took part in the successful count to 100 will get a shiny new Quest!

SCOREBOARD

bold = counted 100, italics = previous winning participant, [#] = # of total wins, (#) = # of times counted 100
FULL SCOREBOARD

MODS - 2 WINS
Highest Count: 15!
1. 9! - 3865 (2533) pages / 286 days, Feb 13, '15 at 5:49pm, 3 users, 6 minutes.
Gantic, Ferret, weirdlike
Note: Earned by handicap.

2. 14! - 2135 pages / 937 days, Sep 08, '17 at 1:25pm, 3 users, 6 mins.
Moegreche, nichodemus, UnleashedUponMankind
Note: Earned by handicap.

USERS - 32 WINS
1. 100! - 537 (355) pages / 94 days, Aug 6, '14 at 9:28pm, 16 users, 14 hrs 33 mins.
apldeap123, Azywng, Crickster, Chryosten (as Darkfire45), Darktroop07, evilsweetblock, JACKinbigletters, kalkanadam, Loop_Stratos, MPH_Complexity, Omegap12, Patrick2011, R2D21999, Snag618, Tactical_Fish, Voyage2

LAST TWO WINS

31. 100! - 78 pages / 21 days. Sep 2, '17 at 12:15pm, 10 users, 13 hours 47 mins.
LordLazyLeopard, Hellica, Chryosten (3)[26], Majestic_Fish [5], kalisenpai [4], Coral42, PLGuy (1)[5], Hardstrike [4], DiamondHunterZ, helpo1 (9)[28]

32. 100! - 43 pages / 26 days. Sept 28, '17 at 4:25pm, 17 users, 6 days 22 hours 18 mins.
helpo1 (10)[29], Chryosten (3)[27], kalisenpai [5], PLGuy (1)[6], armorplayergc [15], oyaji3211, catlover192, KatPryde [8], Majestic_Fish [6], Hardstrike [5], DiamondHunterZ [2], Swarmlord2 [2], Anatheron, LordLazyLeopard [2], GhostOfMatrix, Eldunari17 (1)[4], zdrk [2]

  • 71,065 Replies
Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

008. And another. Wow, we are on a roll with short posts.

sciller45
offline
sciller45
402 posts
Treasurer

8. Did somebody say "short"? Cause I don't have anything like that. Except for this post.

sciller45
offline
sciller45
402 posts
Treasurer

1. Restart because Yellowcat is a ninja. Let's see, soon-to-be-overthrown-ninja-sun-god-emperor. Well, at least we weren't that far in.

PHLHimself
online
PHLHimself
198 posts
Prince

2. Yeah that's one of the more nastier tricks here in this game is to overlook a new page

perin106
offline
perin106
96 posts
Treasurer

3. Another short post for Yellowcat

Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

004. Short? This is short.

Random three words.

armorplayergc
online
armorplayergc
15,554 posts
King

(5) short posts? Up to how many words can a short post have?
I want to make the longest short post possible
YAY!

Majestic_Fish
offline
Majestic_Fish
1,155 posts
Chamberlain

6. Sometimes, I go and admire the CT100 that took almost a week to win.

PHLHimself
online
PHLHimself
198 posts
Prince

7. Is this short?

Majestic_Fish
offline
Majestic_Fish
1,155 posts
Chamberlain

8. Probably, but don't over do it.

Over Rated Tournament.

sciller45
offline
sciller45
402 posts
Treasurer

9. Short post, short post. Shortest post possible.

PLGuy
online
PLGuy
1,488 posts
King

10. Now a short one... sorry.

@kalisenpai

And, honestly, the only real solution for this problem is natural selection: you don't have access to food, you die. I know it's really harsh to hear/read this (it's really harsh for me to think about it, actually), but it's the only true solution I found for both, poverty and overpopulation.

Money is nothing if there won't be resources. Money is nothing if amassing number of starving people grab weapons to strike at choking with food aristocracy. Look what happened in 1789-1799 in France for instance (one of many over the centuries). If the gulf in number between poor masses and obscenely rich few will extend to extreme level the history might repeat. This time the only difference would be that army can stand in defence of aristocracy. But as I said if there's too huge gulf, and until robots don't replace labour in 100%, aristocracy would have to kill a great part of food industry workers.

Instead of wasting money people also can put it into technologies that provide food (and other resources) and better existence on the whole. It is being made all the time - that is because there are actually people both smart and rich that have a huge influence. A great example is the solar power industry.

Charity + constantly developing technology and organisation = fall in the number of hungry people in the world ( statistics ). And that isn't caused by their deaths due to starvation, because in these regions where the poverty and hunger were the most significant natality was the greatest, not to mention that the number of people is constantly growing in these regions, like on whole planet. It is the help of smart and wealthy people that know that it is important to keep the balance in the world at the very least. And adding some more to "keeping the balance" they know that it is important to help people that are less fortunate.

The Mars - it will start with tours of wealthy people. Enormous amounts of resources need to be used to make our way into the space. And in world as it is resources = money. Rich people will pay for the future colonisation of other planets by making their trips and buying territories on them.

And, honestly, the only real solution for this problem is natural selection: you don't have access to food, you die. I know it's really harsh to hear/read this (it's really harsh for me to think about it, actually), but it's the only true solution I found for both, poverty and overpopulation.

That seems like a point of view right from the Middle Ages. Optimal natality in places where the poverty and hunger are the most significant seems like a better solution than: "you don't have access to food, you die." Also now it's more like "you don't have access to food, we will help you producing it." That's what being made: developed countries are today instead of giving fish, giving the fishing rod. Look they are cooking fish and chips themselves:

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/1/2/1325512330738/Fish-and-Chips-general-st-007.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=0adce8aa675c0d3ca4d69ec398cb8e2a.png

There would be poor people on Earth and Mars (for instance), always.

That's obvious. And to fill this thought with what I argumented by this point: enough balance = extremely rich, wealth and poor people. It's not possible to skip this fracture of society. But not enough balance = starving people and extremely rich people – that’s something that would happen if your dystopian view of colonizing other planets would start to materialize. Smart and influential people will try to prevent that from happening.

Regarding this point, smart people, sadly, are nothing if they're not rich or have a patron.

Being smart is a very wide concept, don't you think? "I'm smart, because I know every single word in Klingon language and I'm nothing." Said once a nerdy nerd.

HahiHa
online
HahiHa
7,725 posts
Grand Duke

To add to PLGuy's reply on this comment:

[...]: rich people would have access to resources, and poor people will starve till death. There would be poor people on Earth and Mars (for instance), always. And, honestly, the only real solution for this problem is natural selection: you don't have access to food, you die. I know it's really harsh to hear/read this (it's really harsh for me to think about it, actually), but it's the only true solution I found for both, poverty and overpopulation

1) "You don't have access to food, you die": what you are describing here is the problem; a solution would be something that resolves that issue. I can actually see no attempt at any kind of solution in your post.

2) This kind of social darwinist thinking has little to do with actual natural selection, given that being born in a rich or poor environment, or an environment that favors being rich or poor, has nothing to do with your actual aptitude in life.
armorplayergc
online
armorplayergc
15,554 posts
King

1. Wow, discussion is getting interesting

given that being born in a rich or poor environment, or an environment that favors being rich or poor, has nothing to do with your actual aptitude in life.

I agree with that part, I mean, most of the things that you get in life come from your personal effort in my opinion (or the lack of it), I do believe in that because of things that have happened in my own family even before I was born

Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

002. I disagree with everything stated, they are all false assumptions.

Showing 70396-70410 of 71065