Optimism and Starscream believe that the games you play overall with someone else is what decides your skill level.
This is wrong; One can not be trying during random matches.
I'm getting tired of the way the PvPers act in this community. Star/Optimism who are both presumably "better" than me don't wish to prove it with 1vs1s, instead they consider "overall win to loss records" decide whether if you're better than someone else or not.
What do you think of this?
If you know your going to be pvp'ing a series of games, why not try?
That's stupid on your part. :-\
Quote from: zomniethe4 on October 02, 2010, 10:44:14 PM
If you know your going to be pvp'ing a series of games, why not try?
That's stupid on your part. :-\
That's where it's wrong. If you're pvping a series of games, you don't have the NEED to try since there is nothing you're pvping for. Why do you think tournaments exists?
If your gonna have a tournament have it then.
:\
Quote from: zomniethe4 on October 02, 2010, 10:49:23 PM
If your gonna have a tournament have it then.
:\
That wasn't the point I was making.
I believe in neither.
I do not believe there's a way to prove one person as the best, it's all opinions by how they fight against you.
Everyone PvPs differently against other people.
Obviously the ratio of wins/losses don't work because, as you said, people don't try on every single game, and people have good days and bad days.
A series of games that are set doesn't work because, as previously mentioned, people have good days and bad days, and good moods and bad moods, me and you PvPing is a GOOD example of this.
Then there's the simple, "best PvPer in the game".
This is not possible because, for example, if Opti could beat Nitex, Nitex can beat Star, and Star can beat Opti [example].
Quote from: Allie on October 02, 2010, 10:51:52 PM
I believe in neither.
I do not believe there's a way to prove one person as the best, it's all opinions by how they fight against you.
Everyone PvPs differently against other people.
Obviously the ratio of wins/losses don't work because, as you said, people don't try on every single game, and people have good days and bad days.
A series of games that are set doesn't work because, as previously mentioned, people have good days and bad days, and good moods and bad moods, me and you PvPing is a GOOD example of this.
Then there's the simple, "best PvPer in the game".
This is not possible because, for example, if Opti could beat Nitex, Nitex can beat Star, and Star can beat Opti [example].
Your theory is flawed. Say that one has more wins in Best of 3s overall than another, that person is clearly better.
Your logic is flawed.
Just because someone wins 3 games doesn't mean they were both at the peak of their game.
Quote from: Allie on October 02, 2010, 11:00:52 PM
Your logic is flawed.
Just because someone wins 3 games doesn't mean they were both at the peak of their game.
But that is what the series of 1vs1 is there to prove. The player accepted the 1vs1 on his/her own term.
You're theory is flawed.
You agree to a series of 1v1s, however that does not mean they were both at the top of their game during the 1v1s.
If you're saying a ratio of 1v1s, you're agreeing with Opti.
Thus, it's flawed because not everyone tries every single game during a ratio of 1v1s.
Quote from: Allie on October 02, 2010, 11:00:52 PM
Your logic is flawed.
Just because someone wins 3 games doesn't mean they were both at the peak of their game.
To be quite honest, there is no REAL way to say who is best. Cuz like Allie said, people have good and bad days. 1vs1's dont prove who is better, it only goes to show that you can beat eachother. So, the ideal of someone being the "best" is flawed in itself. For the simple fact of theres good pvpers, bad ones, and people that just pvp for the hell of it. And, anyone can be good at pvp if they actually try, so no one is really better then someone else.
The sole purpose of my 1v1 tournament rooms DAILY is to determine who is better. If you find yourself in this room, then prepare yourself and go as hard as possible for the victory. I could care less if you're not trying. You either snag the win, or you don't. Allie, the best pvpers win vs everyone***. As far as I know, no player that is better than another player can't beat another player at the top tier. For instance, I have a higher win ratio than anyone in the game at this point vs. any other player. Similarly, star has the second highest win ratio vs any other player at this point, aside from myself. And thirdly, you or Nitex have the next highest win ratio. I'm not saying that if I go up 1000-1, and then you win 20 straight, I won't say that you are better then me. If one manages to beat me 20 games in a row or even 10 for this matter, then the liklihood of you being better than me at that point in time is extremely high and I would concede to that player. I may have the win ratio (980+ on this person); however, players do improve and this needs to be taken into consideration. I won't gloat over wins three years ago vs. a player. The here and now is what matters. Nitex, if you want tournaments, I hold them every single day within my rooms to determine whose best. Join up and get to work.
Quote from: Allie on October 02, 2010, 11:03:36 PM
You agree to a series of 1v1s, however that does not mean they were both at the top of their game during the 1v1s.
If you're saying a ratio of 1v1s, you're agreeing with Opti.
Thus, it's flawed because not everyone tries every single game during a ratio of 1v1s.
If you're not good enough to posses the ability to BRING yourself to the peak of your metagame then you're simply NOT a good pvper.
Optimism and Starscream beleive in complete overall games to determine who's better. I won't consider neither have them better than me till they prove it in series consistently, while I do the same.
Quote from: Ray_Kalm on October 02, 2010, 11:10:37 PM
If you're not good enough to posses the ability to BRING yourself to the peak of your metagame then you're simply NOT a good pvper.
Optimism and Starscream beleive in complete overall games to determine who's better. I won't consider neither have them better than me till they prove it in series consistently, while I do the same.
Thank god you've admitted this. Why are you (faith) saying that it isn't possible to determine who is better? Of course it is...
One may have good and bad days; however, if the over-all average wins of the past 10 days are in my favor, then I am certainly considered the better player. You simply can't claim to have 10 bad days. This is why I've stated the over-all ratio determines who is best, not a series of 3 matches. This negates the proposition of "every dog has his day".
Understand? Great!
Quote from: Optimism on October 02, 2010, 11:13:42 PM
Thank god you've admitted this. Why are you (faith) saying that it isn't possible to determine who is better? Of course it is...
One may have good and bad days; however, if the over-all average wins of the past 10 days are in my favor, then I am certainly considered the better player. You simply can't claim to have 10 bad days. This is why I've stated the over-all ratio determines who is best, not a series of 3 matches. This negates the proposition of "every dog has his day".
Understand? Great!
Read the post you quoted more clearly. I completely said the opposite.
But more importantly, why is it that robots can't grow mustaches?
^ Gavin, Your logic yet again has left me speechless. +1 if I could Karma.
I still believe my several walls of text explaining my logic is good enough.
None of you can convince me otherwise: there cannot be a "best PvPer" because everyones tactics are different versus opponents, and everyone has strengths and weaknesses.
The only way to be the "best" is to have NO weaknesses at all, and be perfect in the game.
The chances of someone being like this is absolute 0.
Quote from: Allie on October 02, 2010, 11:40:12 PM
I still believe my several walls of text explaining my logic is good enough.
None of you can convince me otherwise: there cannot be a "best PvPer" because everyones tactics are different versus opponents, and everyone has strengths and weaknesses.
The only way to be the "best" is to have NO weaknesses at all, and be perfect in the game.
The chances of someone being like this is absolute 0.
You're trying to confuse yourself with 'best' by describing it with 'perfect'.
Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others
No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 12:35:14 AM
Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others
No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.
Some tall guy could. =O
Iunno.
That's one comment that didn't beat me, and I admit when I've been beaten by word play.
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 12:35:14 AM
Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others
No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.
What? This is a complete logical fallacy.
I'll make this simplistic parallel to facilitate your understanding. Certainly, there must be some context to gauge skill level. If your implications were indeed plausible, then there is nothing separating a level 1 from a level 200, is there? According to your logic, one wouldn't be able to separate the better player because both aren't infinitely skillful (lolwut?). There is always some tangible facet to gauge the ability of a player; thus, there is certainly a way to gauge who the best player is. To be the richest within this game, does that player have to have infinite gigas? No. There are facets used to gauge who is the richest player -- the aforesaid gigas. Similarly the player with the highest win ratio vs players is the better player.
I didn't read your paragraph because it has huge words in it.
Reply with smaller words please.
Quote from: Optimism on October 03, 2010, 12:41:44 AM
What? This is a complete logical fallacy.
I'll make this simplistic parallel to facilitate your understanding. Certainly, there must be some context to gauge skill level. If your implications were indeed plausible, then there is nothing separating a level 1 from a level 200, is there? According to your logic, one wouldn't be able to separate the better player because both aren't infinitely skillful (lolwut?). There is always some tangible facet to gauge the ability of a player; thus, there is certainly a way to gauge who the best player is. To be the richest within this game, does that player have to have infinite gigas? No. There are facets used to gauge who is the richest player -- the aforesaid gigas. Similarly the player with the highest win ratio vs players is the better player.
Stop using a thesaurus. D:<
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 12:42:39 AM
I didn't read your paragraph because it has huge words in it.
Reply with smaller words please.
Ughmm...
Someone else do it D:.
<3 allie.
I'm sorry, but you guys all need to get your panties out of a bunch, and be mature. Opti, you don't need to write paragraphs about how he sucks and you're officially #1. How about you play the game for the love of the game, and just have fun.
jeff wins
To me, being "the best" means to have never lost a single game, "the best" should have endless wins. no1 in the community is "the best" nor is anyone perfect.
Cept zom, cause he aint afraid of anything.
Quote from: zomniethe4 on October 03, 2010, 02:50:18 AM
Cept zom, cause he aint afraid of anything.
Cept4meta ::)
Nitex you fucking suck, Opti kicked your head in even though Opti has aids in his foot.
Now your head has aids. You're a loser.
I'm so dam jealous bro ;[...
You're a retard for not accepting defeat and overall behaviour, and opti's stupid for going in conflicts and such with you.
/thread
Opti..lrn2paragraph. I'm pretty sure whatever you said in those walls of text was accurate, but it's REALLY HARD to read. >.> <.<
Oh and also.
"Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others
No one can fit this description unless they are perfect."
Wrong, because there's no such thing as perfect. In order to top all others, your playing style needs to be not perfect, but less flawed than theirs.
And Nitex, a tournament/a set of 3-5 serious games does NOT prove you're better than someone else overall. Let's take our 1v1 for example. I won, 3-1. Does that mean I'm overall better? Nah, it just means I was better that day. To prove who really is better, I'm afraid a win-lose ratio in srs bsns games would be the decisive factor.
/yarly.
Edit: LOL TRICKY.
Win/Loss ratio within the past few weeks = Better player, /Serious
NITEX IS SHIT LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Sigh. What a bunch of kids.
the only way to say who is the best is if someone becomes godlike and never loses and has also already faced off against everyone whoever does it must also not have lost for a long time i'd say atleast a month or so to earn the title of best pvper and then of course they must never lose and retire undefeated until then there will be no such thing as the best pvper
Quote from: Painkiller on October 03, 2010, 07:47:18 PM
the only way to say who is the best is if someone becomes godlike and never loses and has also already faced off against everyone whoever does it must also not have lost for a long time i'd say atleast a month or so to earn the title of best pvper and then of course they must never lose and retire undefeated until then there will be no such thing as the best pvper
this post is the best post evah
No. Being the best is being better then everyone else.
-.- We're talking about the best, not an amazing awesome-o who could win a 1v7 on a lvl 1 acc.
Quote from: Tricky on October 03, 2010, 07:53:00 PM
No. Being the best is being better then everyone else.
-.- We're talking about the best, not an amazing awesome-o who could win a 1v7 on a lvl 1 acc.
i was just making it simple that becoming the best pvper ever is something impossible also its not about who has the best strategy but also the most flexible one if your opponent is beating the crap out of you and you change strategy you start beating the hell out of him until he changes strategy as well in the end if both players have flexible strategy the deciding factor will be who can change and adapt faster and do the most damage as soon as they changed if you changed into a defensive strategy and did 2500 damage then your opponent changed and did 4000 damage you would be at a loss of 1500 so the next strategy you adopt will have to do to iether kill him or do 1500 more damage than the strategy your opponent adopts in which case it would end up being simple luck.
Well that's not what we're talking about. "The best" is not the same as "The best ever foreverfrever"
And yeah, what you said is basically predictability, which plays a large part in pvp.
then if you want to chose the best take the players poeple recognize as candidates for this best position make a thread dedicated to it and then have the 3-5 of you meet up in the same room duke it out and the winner screenshots it and puts it in the thread then whoever beats him will gain his title the person who holds the title for the most time of the week (say starting monday to sunday) so if someone gets beaten the person who won screenshots it then post on the thread we count up how long the previous title holder held the title and add it up at the end of the week and that person gets the bragging rights i think thats fair enough its basically a king of the hill challenge.
Stop.
Writing.
Walls.
Of.
Text.
:-[ hmmm my mommy told me to never double space ;D unless the teacher told me the assignment was due double spaced >:(.
in which case i tell them double spaced is a format that essays were never meant to be written in.
i made this exception won't be making it again :)
i'm 19 and live by myself in college dormroom i go to classes thursday and saturday 9-12 get used to my sense of humor XD
Where in the world do you guys get these ridiculous ideas?
Quote from: Optimism on October 03, 2010, 08:43:01 PM
Where in the world do you guys get these ridiculous ideas?
oh god, its the "no.1 pvper" gonna critisize us, listen up guise or he will pvp u
Why doesnt the sector king get this big an ego/cult of dumbasses worshipping him
@Pain: Are you sure you can tell the difference between perfect and better? If not I could recommend you a very good dictionary. >: D
"In order to top all others, your playing style needs to be not perfect, but less flawed. " This is the basic idea, I'm pretty sure it's comprehensible. As for "What if player X changes his strategy" and all, well that's situational, and it's unrelated to our main point.
@Allie I only see one wall of text. Also Allie gave up on a debate amg amg amg. : O
@Opti NO U.
Debates are boring when someone can't understand your logic, and thus repeat the same things over and over thinking they're right.
Quote from: Tricky on October 03, 2010, 08:44:24 PM
oh god, its the "no.1 pvper" gonna critisize us, listen up guise or he will pvp u
Why doesnt the sector king get this big an ego/cult of dumbasses worshipping him
sector king doesn't have much to worship for except for leeching off him, we all know how much ross hates having a full room, heck..he even hates if one person just ONE person was in the room with him.
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 09:40:38 PM
Debates are boring when someone can't understand your logic, and thus repeat the same things over and over thinking they're right.
I wouldn't consider your POV logical in the least...
O'CMON.
I was referring to everyone except mihai and tricky earlier >.>.
the only way to win an argument is to kiss your opponents ass it happened when america decided to go to war with brittain and its happened in each and every debate if you want your opponent to falter and lose you would have to kiss their ass like this
i agree the strategy doesn't have to be perfect however if the strategy isn't perfect then that strategy fails completely because any other can defeat it if it aims at its weakpoints the only thing someone can do to win is to adapt and aim at their opponents weakpoints i'm not saying the person's strategy has to be perfect i'm saying they have to be able to adapt quickly and win those battles quickly adapting is the perfect strategy but it doesn't always guarentee a win.
notice i agreed with them then proved how they are wrong -.- and if they don't read this part they would agree with me or change their mind somewhat its how every debate is won profesionally and its also called "the gift of the tounge" its a gay part of society but its a part of it nonetheless.
Wut I tell you about long, boring paragraphs.
Quote from: Painkiller on October 03, 2010, 10:35:25 PM
the only way to win an argument is to kiss your opponents ass it happened when america decided to go to war with brittain and its happened in each and every debate if you want your opponent to falter and lose you would have to kiss their ass like this
i agree the strategy doesn't have to be perfect however if the strategy isn't perfect then that strategy fails completely because any other can defeat it if it aims at its weakpoints the only thing someone can do to win is to adapt and aim at their opponents weakpoints i'm not saying the person's strategy has to be perfect i'm saying they have to be able to adapt quickly and win those battles quickly adapting is the perfect strategy but it doesn't always guarentee a win.
notice i agreed with them then proved how they are wrong -.- and if they don't read this part they would agree with me or change their mind somewhat its how every debate is won profesionally and its also called "the gift of the tounge" its a gay part of society but its a part of it nonetheless.
You proved nothing other than you don't understand the intricacy of the pvp game. Your black and white spiel here falls short of proving much of anything -- find some shades of gray (many shades).
I win the arguement.
Gg losers.
XD w/e i was just making a point that debates are won by being the first to agree with your opponent if i hand't said all the unnecessary stuff you guys wouldn't have had anything to say i couldn't counter and allie get used to it....
I'm just going to go ahead and say that I'm the best PvP'er ever.
Bet you were looking for this eh? We'll theres no /jk. I was cereal >:O
we already kno that bro :P.
Zom is the only person who have ever beaten me in an argument.
Zom got happy and put my admittance in his sig.
wtf was my post deleted for it wasnt even a flame like my other posts
fucking bitches
Quote from: Tricky on October 03, 2010, 11:52:07 PM
wtf was my post deleted for it wasnt even a flame like my other posts
fucking bitches
I deleted it, Trick, why break soooo many rules...
Quote from: Allie on August 18, 2010, 08:49:59 PM
1. No swearing, or in any way bypassing the filter.
2. No flaming
3. No ****ography
6. No personal attacks against another person; a rant is allowed
*Any rules broken on your account will count as you breaking the rule yourself.
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 11:43:47 PM
Zom is the only person who have ever beaten me in an argument.
Zom got happy and put my admittance in his sig.
Zom won a trial too. :D
Quote from: FireyDevel on October 03, 2010, 11:55:07 PM
I deleted it, Trick, why break soooo many rules...
Allie dont delete it so why would the lesser rank delete it
Quote from: Tricky on October 04, 2010, 12:02:01 AM
Allie dont delete it so why would the lesser rank delete it
Tbh, Allie sorta let most of the crap on the forums go, hence why I asked to have the power to delete posts, so I can clear alot of it out.
I don't think I'm the only one who wouldn't mind a little less bull on these forums...
I don't think it matters.. At all..
Honestly, you're still doing this stuff?
You're going on 5 years of this, Nitex.
being the best at a kids' game does not make your eBoner any bigger.
kthxbai.
- Jewric ;).
Well Jewric, I only play games to become the best. So technically, that pretty much means that I don't give a **** about anything else. It's just something I do. I like something, I become the best at it, but at that same time, I want others to follow certain appropriate rules.
And Tricky, quit posting with two different accounts. You can fool others, but not me.
Quote from: Ray_Kalm on October 04, 2010, 01:13:37 AM
Well Jewric, I only play games to become the best. So technically, that pretty much means that I don't give a **** about anything else. It's just something I do. I like something, I become the best at it, but at that same time, I want others to follow certain appropriate rules.
And Tricky, quit posting with two different accounts. You can fool others, but not me.
Cool story bro.
Try this game out, internet hard ass.
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs055.snc1/4498_1037622755887_1685059396_75113_7446615_n.jpg)
GLHF, BRAH!
Quote from: Allie on October 03, 2010, 11:43:47 PM
Zom is the only person who has ever beaten me in an argument.
Sorry it started to bother me. Could you edi t it.
Quote from: Cornhl on October 04, 2010, 01:18:31 AM
Cool story bro.
Try this game out, internet hard ass.
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs055.snc1/4498_1037622755887_1685059396_75113_7446615_n.jpg)
GLHF, BRAH!
Link pls ::)
Quote from: Ray_Kalm on October 04, 2010, 01:13:37 AM
Well Jewric, I only play games to become the best. So technically, that pretty much means that I don't give a **** about anything else. It's just something I do. I like something, I become the best at it, but at that same time, I want others to follow certain appropriate rules.
And Tricky, quit posting with two different accounts. You can fool others, but not me.
wtf? this is my only acc you stupid jew -.-
speaking of jew... <_<!
Hey guys,
Just so we all know, i'm the best.
kthx for your time.
Quote from: 7ehNoob on October 04, 2010, 03:42:17 AM
Hey guys,
Just to let you all know, i'm the best.
kthx for your time.
best at coming in outta nowhere >.><.<
Quote from: 7ehNoob on October 04, 2010, 03:42:17 AM
Hey guys,
Just so we all know, i'm the best.
kthx for your time.
TehNoob for president!
An essay on being an ass about a video game
In this essay I will consider the social, economic and political factors of being an ass about a video game. There are many factors which influenced the development of being an ass about a video game. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, its influence on western cinema has not been given proper recognition. Often it is seen as both a help and a hinderence to socialists, many of whom blame the influence of television. Though I would rather be in bed I will now examine the primary causes of being an ass about a video game.
Social Factors
Society is a simple word with a very complex definition. When blues legend 'Bare Foot D' remarked 'awooooh eeee only my dawg understands me' [1] he globalised an issue which had remained buried in the hearts of our ancestors for centuries. Much has been said about the influence of the media on being an ass about a video game. Observers claim it demonstrates a coherent approach, something so lacking in our culture, that it is not recognised by all.
Status, Security, Fame - being an ass about a video game, all revolve around this 'golden fleece'. To put it simply, people like being an ass about a video game.
Economic Factors
Derived from 'oikonomikos,' which means skilled in household management, the word economics is synonymous with being an ass about a video game. We will begin by looking at the Lead-a-Duck-to-Water model, a classic economic system of analysis.
Interest
being an ass about a video game
Clearly the graphs demonstrates a strong correlation. Why is this? Clearly interest world wide are driven entirely by being an ass about a video game. Assumptions made by traders have caused uncertainty amongst the private sector.
Political Factors
Machiavellian politics is rife. Are our leaders justified in pursuing and maintaining political power? Comparing the ideals of the young with the reality felt by their elders is like contrasting being an ass about a video gameilisation, as it's become known, and one's own sense of morality.
It is always enlightening to consider the words of a legend in their own life time, Xaviera T. Time 'A man must have his cake and eat it in order to justify his actions.' [2] I argue that his insight into being an ass about a video game provided the inspiration for these great words. Perhaps the word which sums up the importance of being an ass about a video game to politics is 'participation'.
One thing's certain. The Human species liberally desires being an ass about a video game, and what's more human than politics?
Conclusion
We can say with certainty being an ass about a video game is, to use the language of the streets 'Super Cool.' It brings peace, influences the influencers, and figures show it's a winning formular.
I shall give the final word to star Elton Lopez: 'being an ass about a video game is the new rock and roll! And the new opera!' [3]
Quote from: Jeffalo13 on October 04, 2010, 09:32:14 AM
An essay on being an ass about a video game
In this essay I will consider the social, economic and political factors of being an ass about a video game. There are many factors which influenced the development of being an ass about a video game. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, its influence on western cinema has not been given proper recognition. Often it is seen as both a help and a hinderence to socialists, many of whom blame the influence of television. Though I would rather be in bed I will now examine the primary causes of being an ass about a video game.
Social Factors
Society is a simple word with a very complex definition. When blues legend 'Bare Foot D' remarked 'awooooh eeee only my dawg understands me' [1] he globalised an issue which had remained buried in the hearts of our ancestors for centuries. Much has been said about the influence of the media on being an ass about a video game. Observers claim it demonstrates a coherent approach, something so lacking in our culture, that it is not recognised by all.
Status, Security, Fame - being an ass about a video game, all revolve around this 'golden fleece'. To put it simply, people like being an ass about a video game.
Economic Factors
Derived from 'oikonomikos,' which means skilled in household management, the word economics is synonymous with being an ass about a video game. We will begin by looking at the Lead-a-Duck-to-Water model, a classic economic system of analysis.
Interest
being an ass about a video game
Clearly the graphs demonstrates a strong correlation. Why is this? Clearly interest world wide are driven entirely by being an ass about a video game. Assumptions made by traders have caused uncertainty amongst the private sector.
Political Factors
Machiavellian politics is rife. Are our leaders justified in pursuing and maintaining political power? Comparing the ideals of the young with the reality felt by their elders is like contrasting being an ass about a video gameilisation, as it's become known, and one's own sense of morality.
It is always enlightening to consider the words of a legend in their own life time, Xaviera T. Time 'A man must have his cake and eat it in order to justify his actions.' [2] I argue that his insight into being an ass about a video game provided the inspiration for these great words. Perhaps the word which sums up the importance of being an ass about a video game to politics is 'participation'.
One thing's certain. The Human species liberally desires being an ass about a video game, and what's more human than politics?
Conclusion
We can say with certainty being an ass about a video game is, to use the language of the streets 'Super Cool.' It brings peace, influences the influencers, and figures show it's a winning formular.
I shall give the final word to star Elton Lopez: 'being an ass about a video game is the new rock and roll! And the new opera!' [3]
cool story bra
^AMG, not these damn things again D:.
cool story bra
oohai
Quote from: Jeffalo13 on October 04, 2010, 09:32:14 AM
An essay on being an ass about a video game
In this essay I will consider the social, economic and political factors of being an ass about a video game. There are many factors which influenced the development of being an ass about a video game. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, its influence on western cinema has not been given proper recognition. Often it is seen as both a help and a hinderence to socialists, many of whom blame the influence of television. Though I would rather be in bed I will now examine the primary causes of being an ass about a video game.
yea i stopped right after this paragraph since you didn't spell hindrance correctly ^^
Quote from: Painkiller on October 04, 2010, 01:17:59 PM
yea i stopped right after this paragraph since you didn't spell hindrance correctly ^^
Oh no! I put all that work into that essay, and forgot to spell check!
Quote from: Jeffalo13 on October 04, 2010, 02:54:18 PM
Oh no! I put all that work into that essay, and forgot to spell check!
lmao.
My Jeffy still pways? :3
I'M STILL ONLY USING 1 ACC NITEX YA GIANT DOUCHE
Quote from: Cornhl on October 04, 2010, 07:34:34 PM
My Jeffy still pways? :3
Not much on BC. Lol at the link in your sig.
Quote from: Jeffalo13 on October 04, 2010, 10:57:08 PM
Not much on BC. Lol at the link in your sig.
you left us for evo :[
i love evo.
Mostly because my name has the word "One" in it though. OWNED BY SOMEONE