Moderator: Community Team
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Buzz Killington is, in fact, 47.jrh_cardinal wrote:ljex (he may be 20 now, idk)Robinette wrote:it is very hard to fathom someone in their teens being good enough to be on this short list...
You're not 14 anymore??!?Fircoal wrote:I may only be 17 but surely my score of 19588 is good enough to transcend that problem, and put me on this list.
InkL0sed wrote: I can read. I don't see how being smarter than him isn't good enough.
However, as I said before, I think your lack of understanding of logical arguments means you are non bonus satis.


A herp-a-derp o' burnin' darp.jrh_cardinal wrote:ljex (he may be 20 now, idk)Robinette wrote:it is very hard to fathom someone in their teens being good enough to be on this short list...
I really hope this was because I have said like 5 times this thread is about peoples win percentage not age.jrh_cardinal wrote:ljex (he may be 20 now, idk)Robinette wrote:it is very hard to fathom someone in their teens being good enough to be on this short list...


wow, you thought that other thread was about "CC's stupidest things?" Get a clue, and try reading the first post once in awhile.Pirlo wrote:I enjoyed posting in cc's stupidest things but some mod locked it so i have to try here
yes yes,,, top of page 5 you'll find a revised list where i added blockhead,, but not the other name you mentioned...Leehar wrote:So anyway, to continue with the topic, I submitted a few names on the first page rob, have you looked at them?
Geniuses,,, each and every one!Leehar wrote: Also, are you comfortable going on the assumption that there's a direct correlation between intelligence, a low winning percentage, and a high score. I'm sure we can assume they are good risk players, but I think saying that the iq is similarly high may be stretching the mark a bit



Outside the top 250 I guess.Robinette wrote:yes yes,,, top of page 5 you'll find a revised list where i added blockhead,, but not the other name you mentioned...Leehar wrote:So anyway, to continue with the topic, I submitted a few names on the first page rob, have you looked at them?
Actually, you're a quite ancient 71. I don't know how you're still around.TheBro wrote:I'm 19, but I'm currently learning how to do this:
My score ain't terribad, I can be pricky, and I love attention. I really think I should make the cut.

well sure, but i was just making a point that i'm too nice to actually say that it would be easy to make fun of people here, and that i myself would never actually say anything like that... no no, not me, you see... like i said... i'm too nice for that...Leehar wrote:Except you just said it
What do you mean? You're not being very nice you know... and if i wasn't so nice i might say something mean like you just did... but I am simply to nice to point out how rude and selfish you are being, so i'll just have to hope that someones throws a blanket over you and pounds on your head,,, but it won't be me, because i'm too nice for that....Leehar wrote: And don't act like it wasn't your intention to deceive everyone who came along when you decided to name this thread.

I thought they got a pill for that...from some sort of farm? Was I wrong?Robinette wrote: But one thing is for certain,,, none of them can get it up anymore...
Someone didn't read the threadrdsrds2120 wrote:In three years from next Friday, I'll bother to post here again as being in my 20's and amazing
Until then, I envy thee.
-rd