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

70878 28260435
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]

  • 70,878 Replies
PLGuy
offline
PLGuy
1,431 posts
King

3. @HahiHa I think that these are great points. I wanna add an example to 2) that is from my country from times of Romanticism. I'll try to keep it short xD

Poland wasn't independent at that time - it's territory was divided between 3 countries. So there were two poets living in the same time. To be exact born in the same year, living in the same city: Warsaw. Their names were Juliusz Słowacki and Adam Mickiewicz. First was a son of a rich professor of literature. Rich professor of Polish literature under annexation, right? It was obvious he does anything what annexationists want with curriculum, stifling young rebellious students. And at that time literature was a very powerful medium.

Adam Mickiewicz on the other hand derives from a very poor family. Juliusz Słowacki and Adam Mickiewicz had the same goal: to become the most patriotic poets, in meantime becoming super famous. Juliusz Słowacki due to his background was always in the shadow of Mickiewicz. Moreover he was judged negatively without reading of his works. There’s much to talk but I’ll go to the essence. Mickiewicz achieved his goal. He was extremely successful, he died as a happy and fulfilled person with a great fortune in his manor in Constantinopole. And Juliusz… died alone in an asylum in Paris, in complete poverty, on tuberculosis. After he died nurses threw his manuscripts to a furnace. He wasn’t known at all at that time – only decades after his death people appreciated his poems, most of them signed with a nickname.

So what I mean is that background is for sure influential but the wealth in which people are born doesn’t determine how their lifes go. Mickiewicz from poverty to wealth and Słowacki opposite. There are many factors which determined what happened and yet look how Słowacki's life wasn't determined from the beginning. He could have stayed with his father, how much easier his life would have panned out. But he didn't he tried and he failed. That's life. Now he has an eternal fame in Poland and aficionados of his poetry regret that they can't go back in time to stop the nurses but... if only he could have known about that when he was about to die...

Maybe saying that environment has nothing to do with aptitude is a bit extremal, but it's much closer than saying that upbringing in a rich family gives a warranty for a success.

Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

004. WALL OF TEXT

Majestic_Fish
offline
Majestic_Fish
1,141 posts
Chamberlain

5. I don't know what you are talking about but I will say this: scions of rich families have way too many responsibilities, man, a lot of stress they have.
Yellowcat, I do not understand.

sciller45
offline
sciller45
376 posts
Treasurer

6. This is slowly becoming more and more intense.

PHLHimself
offline
PHLHimself
185 posts
Prince

7. ^ Drama, suspense, what more do you need?

PLGuy
offline
PLGuy
1,431 posts
King

8. ^ Maybe winning a count to 100 would be a nice addition?

Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

009. That was supposed to say Wall of Text but I made the font size too large.

kalisenpai
offline
kalisenpai
1,325 posts
Lady

10. @PLGuy, okay, that was way too much info XD.
First of all, I'd like to clarify that I don't want people to die because they're poor. Maybe I sounded cruel in my first post

developed countries are today instead of giving fish, giving the fishing rod

Wouldn't this contribute to overpopulation? For instance, look at Africa: its harsh conditions (weather, natural lack of water, diseases...) make it hard to survive in it. Africa's problems (nowadays problems) come from when it was colonised (is that the word?) by Europeans. When the "helped" them with vaccines against the common diseases there, more African people survived and, therefore, their population increased. This, by itslef wouldn't be a great deal.
The thing is that Africa was well-balanced before the vaccines things: you couldn't produce much food, but as not so many people survived, it wasn´t a problem. All the people had access to food. When the population increased, the production of food didn't and, therefore, people started to starve (which is the problem now).
Now, my point is that if people survive, the need of food will increase. However, there is a limit in the food production.
Instead of wasting money people also can put it into technologies that provide food (and other resources) and better existence on the whole.

We'll reach a point in which there will not be enough food, unless you invent something that creates food out of nothing. I'm not sure if that's even possible, to be honest.

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.

I wasn't thinking on that kind of smart people, tho XD
PLGuy
offline
PLGuy
1,431 posts
King

11. @kalisenpai I answered before that extending food production and keeping the optimal natality are two solutions that are being implemented in Third World countries.

When family is very poor it often includes many children. In Third World countries that is often caused by seeing an opportunity: bigger family = more hands to work. The problem is that it often gets out of control. To implement "keeping the optimal natality" there is family life education that teaches to ... keep the balance in the number of children.

Wouldn't this contribute to overpopulation? For instance, look at Africa: its harsh conditions (weather, natural lack of water, diseases...) make it hard to survive in it. Africa's problems (nowadays problems) come from when it was colonised (is that the word?) by Europeans. When the "helped" them with vaccines against the common diseases there, more African people survived and, therefore, their population increased. This, by itslef wouldn't be a great deal.

When Africa was being colonised by Europeans enormous number of people were taken into slavery. It's kinda recent that we really help them. Overall conditions of living are getting better so more people survive. New type of virus kills people - developed countries make vaccines and help to save as many people as possible. That's how it works - there's problem so people try to find out the solution.

We'll reach a point in which there will not be enough food, unless you invent something that creates food out of nothing. I'm not sure if that's even possible, to be honest.

Making something out of literally nothing is most certainly impossible. By 2050 there should be 60 to 100% more production of crops even if the number of people should grow by about 2/7 ( estimations ). The technology will help to satisfy this demand. Oh btw that's to the previous arguments - 60-100% vs 2/7. If the demand grows twice as much as the number of people that means that overall existence of people will get better according to these estimations. I hope that you see the relationship here. And also, can you support this claim:

We'll reach a point in which there will not be enough food,

... with any source? If you mean the finite resources of water we're talking about a long period of time. And here comes colonizing other planets with the solution.

kalisenpai
offline
kalisenpai
1,325 posts
Lady

12. @PLGuy

I answered before that extending food production and keeping the optimal natality are two solutions that are being implemented in Third World countries.

Whoops, I totally didn't read that paragrah. My apologies.

And also, can you support this claim

Here, I know it's kinda old (and warning, it's in Spanish), but it makes an interesting point (in the part which says "Dimensiones de la producción alimentaria&quot. If there are more people, there is more need of food and space (physical space to live, I mean). So, or you use your available space to harvest crops or you use it so that people can live in it (e.g. houses). This leads us to my point that we'll reach a point in which there will no be enough food. Now, I think, it's clearer?

Making something out of literally nothing is most certainly impossible. By 2050 there should be 60 to 100% more production of crops even if the number of people should grow by about 2/7

Can't argue against this point, it's quite clear.

When Africa was being colonised by Europeans enormous number of people were taken into slavery.

Actually, I was thinking about the beginning of the 20th century (or the end of the 19th century). As far as I know (and I may be wrong), Europeans colonised Africa because its resources, but the only true slavery was done by King Leopold II of Belgium (quite horrible: here)

And here comes colonizing other planets with the solution.

Do you really think we can harvest anything in other planets? Maybe if we found sth very similar to Earth, but if you come to think of Mars (Atmosphere I don't think it'd be possible.
BalkanRenegades
offline
BalkanRenegades
819 posts
Templar

13. Really people? We are just trying to have a nice forum games here, don't ruin it by making huge posts about poverty (regardless of how serious that topic is and). Besides you have WERP for such things. Okay

sciller45
offline
sciller45
376 posts
Treasurer

14. Yeah, you DO have WEPR for that. Then again, it's not like anyone's going to take their discussion there.

kalisenpai
offline
kalisenpai
1,325 posts
Lady

15. Well, sorry if it has bothered you. It wasn't our intention in any moment

Yellowcat
offline
Yellowcat
1,700 posts
Constable

016. Take your serious conversation out of our non-serious space.

PLGuy
offline
PLGuy
1,431 posts
King

17. I'll just answer last time.

1) ... and prevent a false fact from promulgating. First paragraphs: Slavery surely wasn't done by one king. Taking into slavery began much earlier, and obviously more countries than just Belgium took part in it.

2) Last paragraph: On Mars biomes need to be made to enable harvesting of the crops. Visualisation:

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/marsdome-3-370x215.jpg

But in my previous post I meant only the water that was discovered there. Nevertheless the whole planet consists of many resources.

So, or you use your available space to harvest crops or you use it so that people can live in it (e.g. houses). This leads us to my point that we'll reach a point in which there will no be enough food. Now, I think, it's clearer?

3) once again provided solutions (being implemented while we're debating on this) might prevent overpopulation, related to the lack of space, from happening.

I also apologise for disturbing your non-serious Idyll dear counters. Obviously I'm too lazy too search on WEPR for a nice discussion. That's actually the only thread from this forum, that I have on tab most of the time and throwing everything that's on my mind here doesn't seem like the best idea ;-)

Showing 70411-70425 of 70878