Post: #1

He is the first member to reach 20 posts. That means he is now a Barback instead of a lowly Janitor like the rest of you.

For this incredible feat here is an emoticon

:giddyup:

Next upgrade is 100.

Post: #2

Woot! I couldn't stand being a Janitor any longer.

Post: #3

Well done, sir.

Post: #4

kind of a gay thread necro

Post: #5

*YeaaaY Speakeasy

xoxoxo

Post: #6

LOL!! UMMM..THAT WAS like 2.5 years ago!!!

Post: #7

Dueyz seems to be the king at dredging up old threads.

Dude, its bad forum etiquette to post on 2.5 year old threads, which you have done multiple times. Especially weak and irrelevant threads, which you have done multiple times.

Speakeasy will hit 2000 posts soon. This post was about his 20th.

Dueyz, come back and congratulate him on his 2000th.

Post: #8

You guys are creasing me up and have me in tears with some of your bullshytt hahahahah

Post: #9

Rumor has it there is a rank title change at 2,000 posts.

Post: #10

(04-13-2011 11:50 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Rumor has it there is a rank title change at 2,000 posts.

My only problem with rank changes at a certain number of posts is that you have rank-whore dudes that are obviously chasing the next level. I see one-word replies or, worse, replies with an arrow pointing up to the previous reply. I'm not saying everyone that does that is just trying to pad their numbers, but some dudes clearly are.

Post: #11

The ranking system is why I post on this forum.

Post: #12

Me too.

I love being able to tell girls, with a straight face, that I'm "VP of Operations" when they ask me what I do for living.

Post: #13

(04-13-2011 12:50 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(04-13-2011 11:50 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Rumor has it there is a rank title change at 2,000 posts.

My only problem with rank changes at a certain number of posts is that you have rank-whore dudes that are obviously chasing the next level. I see one-word replies or, worse, replies with an arrow pointing up to the previous reply. I'm not saying everyone that does that is just trying to pad their numbers, but some dudes clearly are.

Please list a few of these rank-whores ^^^^^ that you speak of...

Post: #14

^^^^ LOL. I guess I'm a disgruntled "cubicle peon."

Can I get you sirs a cup of coffee?
[....]
Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot that you don't drink "office coffee."
[....]
By the way, I think I'm going to need a day off next week.
[....]
I see. I'll tell my grandmother to wait another month for her mammogram.
[....]
Of course, I understand. I definitely want to be a "team player."
[....]
And, why is RooshVForum blocked on my work-computer now? I used access it with no problems.
[....]
Well, I didn't realize the IT department knew about that. Thanks for not firing me.


Thank god I'm not in the (real) corporate world.

Post: #15

(04-13-2011 01:42 PM)Moma Wrote:  Please list a few of these rank-whores ^^^^^ that you speak of...

Fuck that. I don't see any benefit in spitting that kind of fire. I have my suspicions, but not enough concrete evidence on any specific member to open that Pandora's Box. Besides, it's not really a big deal--even if it is true.

I'm sure you can identify them with a reasonably light perusal of a day's threads.

Post: #16

(04-13-2011 10:57 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  Dueyz seems to be the king at dredging up old threads.

Dude, its bad forum etiquette to post on 2.5 year old threads, which you have done multiple times. Especially weak and irrelevant threads, which you have done multiple times.

Speakeasy will hit 2000 posts soon. This post was about his 20th.

Dueyz, come back and congratulate him on his 2000th.

I have posted on old threads many times, and I don't think it's bad forum etiquette at all. Whether or not you personally find these threads interesting has nothing to do with why I post on them.

2.5 years ago, this forum was likely made up of a smaller group than it is now. And some of that group may no longer be here. Thus those threads faded away after that group said all they wanted to say. 2.5 years later, there are new people here. I wasn't on here then, and didn't have a chance to comment. But I'm on here now, so I look back from time to time when the current threads are very slow.

I may be commenting on threads that aren't current, but Speakeasy is still currently the first person in this forum to have hit 20 posts. Regardless of what his current number may be, I thought it was cool that Roosh threw him some props.

I don't tally, monitor, assess, or evaluate your posts. I don't presume to tell others on here how to post, why they should or shouldn't post, what they should find intersting and post about, or impart a rule system about the nature of their posts. I comment on here because I think it's an interesting group of people, even when I disagree.

Roosh seems to do a fine job of controlling his forum, and I'm sure he'll make it known if I'm doing things I shouldn't. All that I ask is that you extend the same curtousey to me that I inherently extend to you.

Post: #17

(04-13-2011 11:10 PM)Dueyz Wrote:  I have posted on old threads many times, and I don't think it's bad forum etiquette at all. Whether or not you personally find these threads interesting has nothing to do with why I post on them.

No disrespect, Dueyz, but I think what threw some guys for a loop was congratulating a member for getting his 20th post when his post total is up to 1,927, and it's going on three years since that happened. That's a little like wishing your friend a happy 20th birthday when he's almost 23 years old. Most people would wait till his next birthday and congratulate him then.

I think we all occasionally bump old threads, especially when it's still relevant. In fact, Roosh encourages us to to do that rather than start a new thread about something that's already been discussed (a problem that's been proliferating, incidentally, on the "Girls" board--take, for example, the multiple new threads on facebook or "short-guy game").

This thread just seemed like a strange one to bump, especially with no explanation.

Post: #18

Usually when cats gripe about trivial shyt, it means they need to up the ante on the amount of pussy they getting.

Let's get it in, fellas, summer is coming. Let's average one fresh notch every two weeks miniumum.

One love.

Post: #19

Quote:I have posted on old threads many times, and I don't think it's bad forum etiquette at all. Whether or not you personally find these threads interesting has nothing to do with why I post on them.

Unless Roosh specifically comes in and puts that it isn't bad forum etiquette to do that on his forum, then most people would disagree with you because it is generally held as bad forum etiquette on every single forum out there. You will get called out on other forums as well, and usually much faster and less diplomatically than I called you out.

I'm just informing you, and it really isn't that big a deal. I said something because this isn't the first time. The time sensitive nature of the thread made it especially strange, and is what prompted my response.

Quote:2.5 years ago, this forum was likely made up of a smaller group than it is now. And some of that group may no longer be here. Thus those threads faded away after that group said all they wanted to say. 2.5 years later, there are new people here. I wasn't on here then, and didn't have a chance to comment. But I'm on here now, so I look back from time to time when the current threads are very slow.

Okay. But this one had no current relevancy. It is so irrelevant that commenting on it is strange.

Quote:I may be commenting on threads that aren't current, but Speakeasy is still currently the first person in this forum to have hit 20 posts. Regardless of what his current number may be, I thought it was cool that Roosh threw him some props.

uh huh

Quote:I don't tally, monitor, assess, or evaluate your posts. I don't presume to tell others on here how to post, why they should or shouldn't post, what they should find interesting and post about, or impart a rule system about the nature of their posts. I comment on here because I think it's an interesting group of people, even when I disagree.

Etiquette is for everyone. I don't tell people not to fart in a elevator either, but that doesn't mean that they should do it. If someone did that repeatedly, I would tell them because they obviously aren't aware that its bad etiquette.

Quote: Roosh seems to do a fine job of controlling his forum, and I'm sure he'll make it known if I'm doing things I shouldn't. All that I ask is that you extend the same courtesy to me that I inherently extend to you.

Okay. I'm just informing you of something that maybe he wouldn't, but nevertheless is weird.

How was I discourteous to you?

(04-14-2011 12:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  I think we all occasionally bump old threads, especially when it's still relevant. In fact, Roosh encourages us to to do that rather than start a new thread about something that's already been discussed (a problem that's been proliferating, incidentally, on the "Girls" board--take, for example, the multiple new threads on facebook or "short-guy game").

Exactly. He talks about it in his forum guidelines. Go ahead and bump threads of there is a good reason to. It can be very useful especially when its redundant to start a new thread. But holy shit, Speakeasy has posted over 1900 times since then.

@Dueyz
Maybe you took my response as harsh? It was for your own good, seriously. But if you thought it harsh, then I'll just say that I think it was the irrelevancy of the thread that had me laughing, and therefore not being as diplomatic and even toned as I should have been. I did encourage you to come back and post at the end, though. But take it as you wish.

Post: #20

(04-14-2011 03:12 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

Quote:I have posted on old threads many times, and I don't think it's bad forum etiquette at all. Whether or not you personally find these threads interesting has nothing to do with why I post on them.

Unless Roosh specifically comes in and puts that it isn't bad forum etiquette to do that on his forum, then most people would disagree with you because it is generally held as bad forum etiquette on every single forum out there. You will get called out on other forums as well, and usually much faster and less diplomatically than I called you out.

I'm just informing you, and it really isn't that big a deal. I said something because this isn't the first time. The time sensitive nature of the thread made it especially strange, and is what prompted my response.

Quote:2.5 years ago, this forum was likely made up of a smaller group than it is now. And some of that group may no longer be here. Thus those threads faded away after that group said all they wanted to say. 2.5 years later, there are new people here. I wasn't on here then, and didn't have a chance to comment. But I'm on here now, so I look back from time to time when the current threads are very slow.

Okay. But this one had no current relevancy. It is so irrelevant that commenting on it is strange.

Quote:I may be commenting on threads that aren't current, but Speakeasy is still currently the first person in this forum to have hit 20 posts. Regardless of what his current number may be, I thought it was cool that Roosh threw him some props.

uh huh

Quote:I don't tally, monitor, assess, or evaluate your posts. I don't presume to tell others on here how to post, why they should or shouldn't post, what they should find interesting and post about, or impart a rule system about the nature of their posts. I comment on here because I think it's an interesting group of people, even when I disagree.

Etiquette is for everyone. I don't tell people not to fart in a elevator either, but that doesn't mean that they should do it. If someone did that repeatedly, I would tell them because they obviously aren't aware that its bad etiquette.

Quote: Roosh seems to do a fine job of controlling his forum, and I'm sure he'll make it known if I'm doing things I shouldn't. All that I ask is that you extend the same courtesy to me that I inherently extend to you.

Okay. I'm just informing you of something that maybe he wouldn't, but nevertheless is weird.

How was I discourteous to you?

(04-14-2011 12:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  I think we all occasionally bump old threads, especially when it's still relevant. In fact, Roosh encourages us to to do that rather than start a new thread about something that's already been discussed (a problem that's been proliferating, incidentally, on the "Girls" board--take, for example, the multiple new threads on facebook or "short-guy game").

Exactly. He talks about it in his forum guidelines. Go ahead and bump threads of there is a good reason to. It can be very useful especially when its redundant to start a new thread. But holy shit, Speakeasy has posted over 1900 times since then.

@Dueyz
Maybe you took my response as harsh? It was for your own good, seriously. But if you thought it harsh, then I'll just say that I think it was the irrelevancy of the thread that had me laughing, and therefore not being as diplomatic and even toned as I should have been. I did encourage you to come back and post at the end, though. But take it as you wish.

Internet Forum: "An online public meeting place for open discussion".

(1) You don't speak for Roosh. You are Hydrogonian; you speak for Hydrogonian. Just because he didn't tag me for saying something, doesn't mean it was wrong but he was too busy to do so. That's called drawing a false conclusion. The sun is round; and orange is round; therefore the sun is an orange. You are also not 'people', nor are you the chair-person for their ideas. I didn't get called out by 'people' on other forums, I got called out by Hydrogonian on this forum.

(2) My 'position' requires no informing from you. There isn't supposed to be a 'time sensitive nature' of posts. This is an open forum.

(3) Is what you find 'currently relevant' supposed to be the rule for the rest of us?

(4) I have no response for "uh huh". That seems to speak for itself.

(5) Ettiquette is for everyone, true. You make a poor example here, though. Repeatedly farting in an elevator is quite different than me posting on older threads. The other persons in the elevator are subject to this disagreeable situation with little options to remove themselves. This is an OPEN FORUM! You can pass by my posts with no adverse affects to you, and so can anyone else. I've read dozens of posts that I find no interest in; I never feel the need to comment to these persons on why they should follow my version of "etiquette".

(6) What you find "weird", may be worth discussing to others. If you haven't yet learned that this should be ok to you, I'll let it go. You were "discourteous" to me because you felt the need to tell me how how I should post. As if this was a social clique with rules, rather than a place where all forms of open discussion were welcome.

(7) I was never focusing on how many posts Speakeasy has up to date. I was reminiscing on where it all started. The same way we all look at old pictures that remind us of the past. Speakeasy is one of the old school people on here. No matter who hits 500,000 posts first, he was around when this site was sometining that no one knew about.

(8) I didn't take your response as harsh; I took your response as unnecessary. Again, I think you missed my previous point. Live and let live.

I'll post as I wish, on what I wish, when I wish, and I encourage you and all others to to the same. Freedom of speech makes for the best conversations, even if uninteresting to some. If Roosh (the administrator) sees fit to revoke my privileges here, so be it. Short of that, I will defend my right to post as I wish against anyone who thinks they own some rule-book on what I can and cannot comment about. If you were minding all of your own business, you'd never have time to mind any of mine.

Post: #21

(04-15-2011 01:20 AM)Dueyz Wrote:  (1) You don't speak for Roosh. You are Hydrogonian; you speak for Hydrogonian. Just because he didn't tag me for saying something, doesn't mean it was wrong but he was too busy to do so. That's called drawing a false conclusion. The sun is round; and orange is round; therefore the sun is an orange. You are also not 'people', nor are you the chair-person for their ideas. I didn't get called out by 'people' on other forums, I got called out by Hydrogonian on this forum.

@Dueyz, I was with you for a little bit, but I think you may not realize that you're not only going against typical forum etiquette, but also Roosh's wishes (since that's the only person you seem to respect around here). He himself asked relatively new members--like yourself--to defer to more senior members.

See for yourself, from the Finalized Forum Rules by Roosh:

(01-05-2011 05:35 PM)Roosh Wrote:  5. Defer to the senior members, who helped make the forum what it is. Don't come out guns blazing trying to start petty arguments with everyone to show you're a baller who can get laid no matter the time, place, etc. Take it easy after you register until you get a feel for the flow of the forum.

Even though I've been around here longer than you (and following the blog for years), I still consider myself considerably more junior to guys like Hydrogonian, who have been around since pretty much the ground level. No moderator--Roosh included--can be expected to be on top of every infraction and nuisance. There's a certain degree of "self-policing" that senior members are entrusted to do.

I understand your defensiveness, given your several faux pas relative to your short tenure, but I'd advise to show a little more respect to people that have made way more contributions than you (and me, for that matter) to this board.

Post: #22

I don't see the problem of bumping ancient threads, but can it at least be a good thread that you are able to add to?

Post: #23

(04-15-2011 05:41 AM)Roosh Wrote:  I don't see the problem of bumping ancient threads, but can it at least be a good thread that you are able to add to?

I'll be more selective about bumping anything old, and make sure it's a thread that can be added to.

Post: #24

(04-15-2011 02:19 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(04-15-2011 01:20 AM)Dueyz Wrote:  (1) You don't speak for Roosh. You are Hydrogonian; you speak for Hydrogonian. Just because he didn't tag me for saying something, doesn't mean it was wrong but he was too busy to do so. That's called drawing a false conclusion. The sun is round; and orange is round; therefore the sun is an orange. You are also not 'people', nor are you the chair-person for their ideas. I didn't get called out by 'people' on other forums, I got called out by Hydrogonian on this forum.

@Dueyz, I was with you for a little bit, but I think you may not realize that you're not only going against typical forum etiquette, but also Roosh's wishes (since that's the only person you seem to respect around here). He himself asked relatively new members--like yourself--to defer to more senior members.

See for yourself, from the Finalized Forum Rules by Roosh:

(01-05-2011 05:35 PM)Roosh Wrote:  5. Defer to the senior members, who helped make the forum what it is. Don't come out guns blazing trying to start petty arguments with everyone to show you're a baller who can get laid no matter the time, place, etc. Take it easy after you register until you get a feel for the flow of the forum.

Even though I've been around here longer than you (and following the blog for years), I still consider myself considerably more junior to guys like Hydrogonian, who have been around since pretty much the ground level. No moderator--Roosh included--can be expected to be on top of every infraction and nuisance. There's a certain degree of "self-policing" that senior members are entrusted to do.

I understand your defensiveness, given your several faux pas relative to your short tenure, but I'd advise to show a little more respect to people that have made way more contributions than you (and me, for that matter) to this board.

Point well made, and taken. I will be sure to steer clear of this faux pas in the future.

Post: #25

If this isn't a circle jerk, I don't know what is.

It's Friday boys, time to kick back and enjoy the beautiful day...