Forums → Forum Games → Count to 100: Garlic Appreciation Club
| 78431 | 47088104 |
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
2. Or we're just trying so hard that we ninja'd each other.
Time out. What rules need to be clarified with examples and pictures? I'm pretty sure it's spelled out clearly in writing, but pictures make it easier to understand.
2. red303 doesn't seem to understand the rule against back-to-back posting.
3. I checked the rules and saw where you may be confused, patrick. Apparently gantic wasn't specific enough Also, the time can be a different minute, but someone can edit within 30 seconds. Either that, or by the time i'm done typing this, gantic has posted a solution disproving me. Either way, I'm gonna go. Bye.
5. The rules are the same. He's just misinterpreting them.
7. (Looks above) I'll continue I guess. P1 refers to yourself,
Same user cannot post twice in a row. P1 can only post after P2 posts.
Two players cannot make four or more posts together/in a row. P1, P2, P1 cannot be followed by P2. You need a P3.
Finally, you can avoid being ninja'd if you reload your page before posting. Just write a post, reload the page and make changes as necessary before posting. Your post will remain there when you reload the page.(Does not work if you change pages).
Also, 1st page has been updated. Took me too long to write it all out.
Also, the time can be a different minute, but someone can edit within 30 seconds.
This shouldn't hold true either.
If you edit a post within 30 seconds you should not see the last edited tag appear at all. However, I don't know how the system looks at those 30 seconds (if the time crosses over a minute mark, example; 559 to 500, even though that's one second does the system see that as great than 30 seconds?). I also don't know the resolution of the systems timer and latency or lag type issues that may cause a less or greater than time of 30 seconds to produce the last edited by tag.
What I'm saying is, if you see last edited by under your post, that was more than 30 seconds.
Lastly,
Zero.
2. I didn't get ninja'd. Was just talking about some of the earlier pages.
4.
1. @Akatsuki_Kojou How did you not get ninja'd?
2. I didn't get ninja'd. Was just talking about some of the earlier pages.
3. I know. I was asking how you didn't.
um. . . . I don't undersand the question here, I guess
6. Sorry, I was working on a few things and thinking too much.
8. I'd point out a mistake, but the streak already contains a violation.
You must be logged in to post a reply!