ForumsForum GamesCount to 100: Garlic Appreciation Club

78431 47071781
Gantic
offline
Gantic
11,892 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) makes a stopping post (post without counting) if users and Knights are counting..
b. a user or Knight or Warden makes a stopping post (post without counting) 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.
NOTE: For the time being, Moderators are allowed to help Users count, so as long as the other rules are observed you do not need to restart the count if you see a mod count. However, if a Moderator makes a stopping post, i.e. a post without counting (not the same as a non-count post since they're technically different teams), it is considered an interruption and the count will restart.

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 - 51 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

50. 100! - February 12, '24, 11 users, 52 days.
sciller45 (5)[17], HalRazor [5], saint_of_gaming [5], JimSlaps (1)[2], TheMostManlyMan (1)[14], Solas128 [3], nichodemus (2)[9], Widestsinger [5], SirLegendary (2)[22], skater_kid_who_pwns, disastermaster30 (3)[5]

51. 100! - March 17, '24, 11 users, 35 days.
JimSlaps (1)[3], sciller45 (5)[18], saint_of_gaming [6], TheMostManlyMan (1)[15], Strop, skater_kid_who_pwns [2], GhostOfMatrix [4], WidestSinger (1)[6], HalRazor [6], SirLegendary (2)[23], Solas128 [4]

  • 78,431 Replies
Chryosten
offline
Chryosten
17,384 posts
Herald

8. What on earth are you taking about?

Andelhofs
offline
Andelhofs
743 posts
King

9. still counting here.. will will never made 100 ever again..

SirPuddington
offline
SirPuddington
202 posts
Treasurer

10.
We'll make it again, just not anytime soon.

Gogotank
offline
Gogotank
3,165 posts
Lord

11. Unless we have support by other people too. Just wait for a weekend.

red303
offline
red303
7,571 posts
Shepherd

ne::two12) IT will happen someday. Maybe.

SirPuddington
offline
SirPuddington
202 posts
Treasurer

13.
We probably could do 1 - 100 in under 30 minutes if there are 3 active people,
So there's that.
Unfortunately, however. It seems people are somewhat lazy.

helpo1
offline
helpo1
3,778 posts
King

ne: (14) -

We probably could do 1 - 100 in under 30 minutes if there are 3 active people.

Hmm, not quite sure about that if you either don't have the whole "conversation" part written before or you don't want the count to be dismissed (or discounted :P) because of spamming.
For ~30 mins, I think that about 5 users is the best.
red303
offline
red303
7,571 posts
Shepherd

ne::five15) Maybe if we planned something. Usually we can do it if a bunch of people are on at once and nobody else joins halfway through who doesn't edit.

SirPuddington
offline
SirPuddington
202 posts
Treasurer

16.
Maybe not 30, that'd mean 3 posts (ish) every minute, which might be a little difficult.

Maybe a couple of hours. But yeah, planning would help a lot too. ^-^

Chryosten
offline
Chryosten
17,384 posts
Herald

17. But still, there's the off chance that there might be some random new user who might just ruin it all for us.

SirPuddington
offline
SirPuddington
202 posts
Treasurer

18.
How are they be new, not knowing the rules and wanting being apart of this site
Shame on THEM.

SirLegendary
offline
SirLegendary
16,583 posts
Duke

1. How ironic.

This was this count's destiny

helpo1
offline
helpo1
3,778 posts
King

(2) - oh, I remember that me, @ChapZ and two (?) other users have once counted 70 numbers in ~20 minutes.

SirPuddington
offline
SirPuddington
202 posts
Treasurer

3.
We were doing fine until you came along.
As usual, Legend ruins the fun. Why are you so mean?

SirLegendary
offline
SirLegendary
16,583 posts
Duke

4. Did I ruin the fun?

Showing 43921-43935 of 78431