Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    PEEL Vault    Poster of the Month    Poster Of The Month: "Official" Rule Discussion « previous next »
Author Topic: Poster Of The Month: "Official" Rule Discussion  (Read 14885 times)
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 10 Print
PEE Poll: Should we revamp POTM?
Put something up on the wiki   -30 (55.6%)
Continue with "no rules POTM"s   -9 (16.7%)
POTM? I don't care.   -15 (27.8%)
Total Voters: 54

i_c_weiner

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #40 on: 03-10-2011 19:12 »
« Last Edit on: 03-10-2011 19:17 »

Well and generously spoken, Winna. Here are the breakdowns on repeat winners etc:
Those who have won thrice:
  • DrThunder88 - Feb04, Sep08, Jan09 (four months later)
  • Ninaka - Oct02, Apr09, Aug09 (four months later)
  • km73 - Feb09, Jan10 (11 months later), Jun10 (five months later)
All three had their third repeat within a year of their second.

Those who have won twice:
  • The before mentioned three
  • Coldangel_1 - Jun08, May/Jun09 (within a year?)
  • Ralph Snart - Jan06, Sep09
  • any1else - Sep09, Oct09 (one month)
  • FYP - Mar09, Feb 10 (11 months)
  • Nasty Pasty - Feb05, Mar10
  • Svip - Jul09, Jul10 (one year, so legal under proposed new rules)
  • Bend-err - Jul04, Aug10
  • Morgan_G19 - Nov09, Oct10 (11 months)
  • Nutmeg1729 - Sep10, Dec 10 (two months)
  • futurefreak - Oct01, Jan 11
  • Xanfor - Sep07, Feb11

14 of 31 (45%) POTM winners since the new rules have been first time winners. Of those, half have gone onto win a second time, only Svip doing so within the parameters of the proposed rules.

Of those who have only won twice, 5 of 11 (45%) won twice within one year. If we add the stats from thrice winners (so between first and second, and then second and third), we have 9 of 17 (53%) winning within a year of their last win.


The facts of the stats:
  • There has been a noticeable drop off in new winners since the new rules.
  • Posters tend to repeat within a year of their last victory.
Svip

Space Pope
****
« Reply #41 on: 03-10-2011 19:16 »

I've been good.
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #42 on: 03-10-2011 21:09 »

Dammit winna I'm not nearly drujnk enough to read all that. -_-
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #43 on: 03-10-2011 21:13 »

weiner: came in handy that I put those statistics on the wiki, hm? wink
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #44 on: 03-10-2011 21:43 »

I mean, I'm inclined not to care how we run POTM, since I've already won once, and I shall carry that honor with me to the grave. I also never intend to win again, but such is life.

That said, I have noticed the problem with repeat winners, and I agree that there are a lot of deserving posters who have yet to win (there are also a lot of on-topic posters who have yet to win, which I feel is kind of a disgrace in and of itself; I wish there was a way for the process to be a bit less prejudicial, so that people who hang out strictly in off-topic would have some notion of who does the finest posting in, say, General Discussion or Human Resources (but maybe the "best on-topic poster" category for the PEELies is the closest we'll ever get)). I like the idea of a separate board for POTM, because in the past we haven't been too consistent when it comes to making a POTM thread at the end of the old month/beginning of the new one (the pattern seems to be something like this: Say it's the middle of February--we still haven't done nominations for January's POTM).

So, uh, yeah...I voted for the first option on this poll, in case that wasn't clear.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #45 on: 03-10-2011 21:46 »

Naaah, PotM is an offtopic award, so if you don't hang around here no chance really. Same with PEELies.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #46 on: 03-10-2011 21:47 »

We could always split POTM--have an on-topic and off-topic winner--but that would probably just get messy and kind of diminish the, uh, importance of the award in the first place.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #47 on: 03-10-2011 21:58 »

The thing is, in my view, that if the on-topic only people would want such an award they could easily create it and do it too, no one would stop them. But I don't really see that happening.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #48 on: 03-10-2011 22:00 »

People in on-topic do win POTM.  Sometimes it takes a while, and sometimes they have to migrate to off-topic before it happens.  POTM is also very open (since it runs off invisible hand economics) to being influenced especially high in the short term.  In theory, if someone believed that someone in on-topic really needed to win, then another person could campaign the shit out of that idea and make it profitable for other people to lend nominations/votes toward that cause either that month or the succeeding month.  The system does actually work itself out well when it's running efficiently.

Thank you for the statistical breakdown weiner.  This clearly shows that there is a problem with the way we currently handle POTM.  I'm very certain the proposed one year rule would change this dramatically back to the original spirit of the award.  My evaluation is that once the rules were thrown out, people got really excited that POTM had changed and went in hell bent to vote for whoever they possibly could, especially looking forward to double winners.  Eventually, the excitement wore off or people got lives and less of these people participated in POTM.  The pool shrank on how many people were actually nominating in POTM and interest from most started to dwindle.  As the pool of individuals making nominations got smaller, the pool of possible nominees also got smaller.  People are also prone to fall into patterns, so the small subset of people still interested in POTM probably had similar nominations each month, thus ensuring that similar people would win multiple times.  This had a cyclical effect in that it killed interest, especially in new people participating in POTM because it seemed unfair that the same people kept winning and that no one else had a good chance of winning... negatively reinforcing the small subset of people who were still nominating due to high barriers of entry.  I'm rather certain that revamping POTM with some, if not all, of the aforementioned proposals would cultivate new interest in the tradition and work to casually guide the economy of POTM in a much fairer and balanced (Fox News) manner than previously.

I mean, I'm inclined not to care how we run POTM, since I've already won once, and I shall carry that honor with me to the grave. I also never intend to win again, but such is life.

That's PEEL tradition too.  Once you've won, all of the people who deserve to win POTM have won, and thus there is no reason to care about POTM further.  A good reason why I never wanted to win. roll eyes
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #49 on: 03-10-2011 22:02 »

Bend-err: But would that really be "On Topic"?

I had to go back and add your name because winna keeps interrupting me with his diatribes. looooveeeee yooooouuu love
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #50 on: 03-10-2011 22:09 »

We could always split POTM--have an on-topic and off-topic winner--but that would probably just get messy and kind of diminish the, uh, importance of the award in the first place.

You answered your own suggestion.

The thing is, in my view, that if the on-topic only people would want such an award they could easily create it and do it too, no one would stop them. But I don't really see that happening.

Agreed.  On-topic is much more likely to have newer members than off-topic.  If there are long time on-topicers only who want to create such a tradition, and that's actually all POTM is, then it's very likely they could do so without anyone stopping them.  With it being more likely that newish people will mostly converse in on-topic though, it would be difficult to keep such a tradition going on a consistent basis.  The other reason for not splitting potm into two awards is because there wouldn't be much reaction from people who only post on on-topic... which as I suggested is that most people who are here long enough will migrate to off-topic to varying degrees anyways.  

A third problem with this proposal Gorky is that on-topic itself is divided into several distinct groups of people.  The fan artists don't necessarily post in general discussion, for example.... and how would won evaluate the difference between somebody talented posting exceptional Futurama fan art to someone who makes an astute post about the nature of one of the episodes?  Also.... is posting captions to a frame grab, or voting on which episode is the very best (for the 739th time) really something that deserves people's attentions?  There are also people who generally thrive in the merchandise forum.... and to an even smaller and dying degree, people who enjoy spending time in the websites forum.   All roads generally lead to off-topic, however.  Also, off-topicers, generally descending from on-topic will still visit and have in the past nominated people they've considered worthy for POTM... sometimes causing riveting arguments about the nature of POTM.  Forcing people to nominate/vote on the two would just end up with people not nominating/voting on the on-topic category is my guess, and that's why it's not a sustainable alternative.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #51 on: 03-10-2011 22:16 »
« Last Edit on: 03-10-2011 22:20 »

Oh, I agree that the pattern tends to be that on-topic posters will eventually succumb to their curiosity (or their burning desire to be popular) and migrate to off-topic. And I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with that. It's just that my personal system for nominating posters takes into account their well-roundedness (I usually nominate folks like Svip and Tedward and i_c, who make a generous amount of posts in both on- and off-topic). It's also probably true that those people who post solely in on-topic have no desire to win POTM anyway. But there are tons of posters who, in my opinion, contribute more of worth solely in on-topic than the off-topic, POTM-winning posters do on any of the boards. POTM is, by its nature, kind of a popularity contest anyway, but it's boring when the same people keep winning just because we like them and feel the need to continuously, systematically affirm their likability.

(I think this is actually more a complaint that there aren't enough posters in on-topic to satiate my need to discuss endlessly discuss Futurama, and that the longer I stay away from off-topic, the harder it is to get back into the groove of things...)
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #52 on: 03-10-2011 22:33 »

All of those things you just said are generally true and I agree with them.  The proposed rules for POTM in this thread, would in my expert opinion, curve the outcome of future POTM contests towards a more fair and balanced approach and make it more likely that on-topic people could win in the future.... as long as there are people in on-topic who are aware of POTM and take weight to such considerations as you just suggested.  Note that Svip, Tedward, and i_c all have presences on the off-topic.  Also note that between the three of those suggested people, they collectively have won 3 potm awards.  Tedward would probably be one of those people who might take a long time to win, but when he does it would be thunderously exciting.  I think the record is Javier though.... who totally deserved to win a long long long long long long long time before he did.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #53 on: 03-10-2011 22:37 »

As somebody who ventures into on-topic occasionally, I would find it a little odd to see people who spend the majority of their time in there being suddenly nominated for accolades and general approval. I tend to see off-topic as the "community" section of the board, and where the real life of it is.

But it'd be nice to get fresh blood, and it might even encourage me (and others) to go into on-topic more frequently. To hunt and kill people for their fresh blood.
Nutmeg1729

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #54 on: 03-10-2011 22:42 »

Mmm fresh blood.

I do agree that the same people keep being nominated though, and a lot of the time it's sheer favouritism it would appear. Especially if the person who's being nominated has barely posted that month.

But people will do what they will. I've won POTM twice, both in my first year, and although I thought it was nice, I don't think it's the be all and end all of life on this board. I come here to enjoy myself away from real life and to talk to like minded folk about stuff, and to rant about my real life. It's not about being the best poster, though if everyone posted consistently shitty stuff I think I'd get bored and run away, fast.

But yeah, people who constantly make a big deal about being nominated? I don't see the need for it. I was nominated my second month here, and I was gobsmacked... I didn't really think my posts were worth shit - and perhaps they aren't - but people seem to like me enough and like the stuff I post enough to nominate me, and that's their prerogative at the end of the day.

I try to make my nominations based on stuff that I remember from the month previous. Like my last ones for Xanfor were all based on the fact that he had made me choke laughing more times than I could count last month.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #55 on: 03-10-2011 22:44 »
« Last Edit on: 03-10-2011 22:56 »

I agree that off-topic is its own community, and that it's much livelier than the on-topic boards. My gripe is mostly that, from the outside (being either a newbie who's afraid to venture into off-topic, or an established poster who occasionally falls off the face of the earth and stops posting for months at a time (like me)), it's kind of intimidating and impenetrable. So you don't often have new people venturing into off-topic, which is why we have such a small pool of people to nominate for POTM. Which is kind of the problem in the first place, right?

Edited because winna was right...
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #56 on: 03-10-2011 22:44 »

What would encourage you to do that exactly?  Nominating people each month for a separate on-topic recognition each month?  I find it more likely that you, as with most other people, would lose interest and not nominate for that award, if not just stop nominating for any of the awards all together.  You're probably keenly aware of how difficult it is to get people to nominate for things after all; not like nominating people for stuff is even that difficult.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #57 on: 03-10-2011 22:53 »

I'll be honest and suggest that part of the reason people like you Nutmeg1729 is because you're female.  To be completely honest, this is the internet, and the internet is sexist.  I don't think that it's unfair that you've won POTM though, even if twice in the same year.  It did take you seven months for a win though, and this shows that it takes time to win and consistency.  You wouldn't have won twice under the old social norms though, and I think somebody else just as deserving could have had that opportunity.  Your comment on what PEEL is and what PEEL isn't is especially true.... it's just a place for communicating with neat people.... people who eventually become your friends, your family... people whose addresses you find and follow them home on a dark evening.

Gorky, I'm going to assume that you meant to say off-topic the last two times you said on-topic.  With that being the case, you're absolutely right.  A lot happens on PEEL in a very short period of time, and it's difficult to keep track unless you're on all the time.  In my experience, I eventually just drop the trying to catch up thing and start conversing about what people are conversing about in the present.  As to your problems with how POTM operates in light of this information, I believe I've already addressed it with my economical analysis of how POTM has been working under its newest set of customs.  I also stand by my assertion that the proposed changes would correct this problem to a significant degree.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #58 on: 03-10-2011 22:56 »
« Last Edit on: 03-10-2011 22:58 »

What would encourage you to do that exactly?  Nominating people each month for a separate on-topic recognition each month?  I find it more likely that you, as with most other people, would lose interest and not nominate for that award, if not just stop nominating for any of the awards all together.  You're probably keenly aware of how difficult it is to get people to nominate for things after all; not like nominating people for stuff is even that difficult.

I was kind of suggesting a split POTM to be funny (I see that I got not even a chuckle; I have been shamed). I really just think that on-topic and off-topic are so far removed from one another that it makes it hard to find new people to nominate. There is a fixed group of posters who I would consider "on-topic posters" and a fixed (probably larger) group of posters who I would consider "off-topic posters." There are very few posters who flit comfortably from group to group (I devote somewhat equal amounts of attention to on- and off-topic--as do posters like Svip or Tedward or (recently) Randi--but that's more the exception than the rule), which is why the group of people being nominated for POTM is so static, unchanging.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #59 on: 03-10-2011 22:57 »

I was 99% doing a POTM list like the Liquid Emperor list for the wiki AND updating POTM winners avatars (or adding them at all) when I accidentally closed my browser and all work was gone... dammit for doing in browser edits.

Now I am in no mood any more to do it, maybe some other day.
But yeah, I noticed a lot of people need to get their avatars updated. It's a quick job if everyone does it themselves.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #60 on: 03-10-2011 23:13 »

What would encourage you to do that exactly?  Nominating people each month for a separate on-topic recognition each month?  I find it more likely that you, as with most other people, would lose interest and not nominate for that award, if not just stop nominating for any of the awards all together.  You're probably keenly aware of how difficult it is to get people to nominate for things after all; not like nominating people for stuff is even that difficult.

I was kind of suggesting a split POTM to be funny (I see that I got not even a chuckle; I have been shamed). I really just think that on-topic and off-topic are so far removed from one another that it makes it hard to find new people to nominate. There is a fixed group of posters who I would consider "on-topic posters" and a fixed (probably larger) group of posters who I would consider "off-topic posters." There are very few posters who flit comfortably from group to group (I devote somewhat equal amounts of attention to on- and off-topic--as do posters like Svip or Tedward or (recently) Randi--but that's more the exception than the rule), which is why the group of people being nominated for POTM is so static, unchanging.

Oh.  I was chuckling.  I thought it would be funny to play along and make quasi-serious super long posts in response; kind of like A Modest Proposal.  I guess I thought wrong. hmpf
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #61 on: 03-10-2011 23:35 »

This thread hurts my brain.

I might attack it tonight when I get home, definitely not during work hours.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #62 on: 03-10-2011 23:38 »

Oh.  I was chuckling.  I thought it would be funny to play along and make quasi-serious super long posts in response; kind of like A Modest Proposal.  I guess I thought wrong. hmpf

No, you thought correctly; I'm enjoying bandying about these ideas, regardless of the spirit in which these missives are intended (be it sarcastic or earnest or something in between). The irony here is that your posts in this thread will probably earn you a lot of nominations come the March POTM contest. wink
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #63 on: 03-10-2011 23:38 »

I have a new army of fake accounts to quell such an uprising. mad
Tedward

Professor
*
« Reply #64 on: 03-11-2011 02:14 »

People are talking about me! This is unbelievably gratifying.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #65 on: 03-11-2011 02:18 »

Personally, I like your avatar.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #66 on: 03-11-2011 02:19 »

People are talking about me! This is unbelievably gratifying.

Calling me and winna people might be a bit of a stretch...
Tedward

Professor
*
« Reply #67 on: 03-11-2011 02:27 »

Sigh...good point. tongue

Personally, I like your avatar.

That's a stupid avatar! You're stupid! Thank you kindly; I personally like it too (and thanks to SoS for making it).
Prowla RX7

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #68 on: 03-11-2011 02:53 »

Just throwing in a suggestion off the top of my head.

*time skips*

Everyone's doing the conga!... I have no clue how this was supposed to work frown
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #69 on: 03-11-2011 02:56 »

See, folks, this is what I'm talking about: Prowla here, through his inspired use of a Futurama quote, has merged the world of on-topic with the world of off-topic. Severely reduced pay POTM nominations all around!
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #70 on: 03-11-2011 02:58 »

In theory, if someone believed that someone in on-topic really needed to win, then another person could campaign the shit out of that idea and make it profitable for other people to lend nominations/votes toward that cause either that month or the succeeding month.  The system does actually work itself out well when it's running efficiently.

Actually, my campaign for Shiny was a spectacular flop. With the might of every single on-topic denizen that not-so-fateful September, we still only got her onto the poll, no further.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #71 on: 03-11-2011 03:15 »
« Last Edit on: 03-11-2011 03:16 »

That's kind of the problem I'm talking about, and I think it's all just a matter of what people look for in a POTM candidate. Shiny was a Super Shipper and an excellent fanfic writer and one of the more pleasant people in on-topic--but she rarely if ever ventured into off-topic. So, though on a post-by-post basis, she was thoughtful and engaging and a constructive contributor, she wasn't a big enough presence in off-topic to win any votes for POTM.

The POTM winner isn't necessarily making the best posts--or at least that "best" is highly subjective and determined by different criteria from voter to voter. Which is fine and all, but it does kind of suck that we don't recognize as many posters as we should--especially when there are plenty of on-topic posters (FistfulOfAwesome comes to mind) whose posts are just as enjoyable to read (granted, perhaps in a different way) as the posts of the folks in off-topic. But, again, this is just a personal complaint of mine; I get that POTM is more or less something awarded to denizens of off-topic.
i_c_weiner

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #72 on: 03-11-2011 06:56 »

But here's a key thing to remember, which you've already pointed out: if somebody like me, who actually won the PEELie for Most Valuable Poster last year, took two years to win the first time (after getting most nominations for about 5 straight months but never winning) and has yet to repeat in the 4 years since, what are the odds that an on-topic'er will win outright? Mind you I'm not trying to be egotistical and say I've deserved a repeat win, but saying that, as you said, if "cross-over" candidates that have a huge footprint in off-topic can't win twice, what are the odds that somebody who doesn't have that will win?

And I'm not saying they don't deserve it. They certainly do. I've seen FistfulOfAwesome and Shiny and all the others you've mentioned and feel like they could be potential POTM winners, but most people in the POTM community have no idea who the hell they are. I feel like if more old-school and new wave PEELers (pre-2003 and 2004-2005, respectively) were still around, those sorts of people would've won by now.


Point is, the proposed changes would probably be a step towards getting more "parity" with POTM. And, Booze, I used the list that was posted in last month's POTM as a reference, not the stats posted on the Wiki. Although I have seen them and commend you big time for what you've done!
FYP

New Tester
Urban Legend
***
« Reply #73 on: 03-11-2011 07:30 »

Keep things as they are, i'm so conservative!
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #74 on: 03-11-2011 07:54 »
« Last Edit on: 03-11-2011 08:06 »

Having read this thread sober (mad) I agree with everything winna said. In your first speech though you mentioned that I have a problem with people in charge. I do not actually, and I'm not voicing any complaint because I had just as much right to be on PEELies council as well, but I chose not to because I knew I wouldn't be able to dedicate myself to that. You may have picked up on my posts about there being cliques, which is true, they exist. I love everyone here, you are my closest friends without a doubt. I am not complaining about anyone because the PEELies council did a fantastic job this year. It would be interesting though in the future if we pick people from different areas of the board to head up the council (those who are familiar with the Offtopic rules). Some suggestions would include posters like Tachyon or CommanderZapp, who in recent months have slowly migrated to Offtopic but remain consistent in General. I think it gives us a broader perspective on how to run the awards as a whole.

But again, not complaining. I've made some cracks about you guys throwing yourselves in the awards categories, but hopefully you know I wasn't totally serious. It is rather suspicious though. shifty Hehehe.  

edit: As to people requesting to be on certain things continuously, it doesn't work. In fact it works against your favor. When I was new to IRC I asked either marc or slimmy if i could have ops. I ALWAYS asked and begged them. And look at it now, ten years later, I still go to the chatroom and I'm perfectly fine not having a @ next to my name.

Coming from their viewpoint, it is rather annoying for someone to ask for that kind of power to be handed down to them. I know this from my own experience with a Futurama group I created on Facebook, which now has 20,000 members. I've been asked if people could be admin or whatever and it's just so aggravating, I understand completely where admins are coming from.
DrThunder88

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #75 on: 03-11-2011 10:28 »

I haven't won in two years?  Is that how long I've been shit?
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #76 on: 03-11-2011 14:01 »

In theory, if someone believed that someone in on-topic really needed to win, then another person could campaign the shit out of that idea and make it profitable for other people to lend nominations/votes toward that cause either that month or the succeeding month.  The system does actually work itself out well when it's running efficiently.

Actually, my campaign for Shiny was a spectacular flop. With the might of every single on-topic denizen that not-so-fateful September, we still only got her onto the poll, no further.

How long did this campaign run..? I seem to slightly recall, and I know I've researched the Shiny before around the advent of wikipeelia.  The campaign to get me POTM took something like 11 months... and as I said, I only won because I got super banned from PEEL.  That's my experience, and I think it's rather common.  In fact, that was the exciting part of POTM is that everyone was usually trying to get somebody a win that they felt deserved it a long time ago.  Also, your campaign for Shiny didn't include me and the secret powers of #fc.  I haven't talked about this in a long while....... but sorry to tell everyone, #futuramachat has and always will run everything; it's certainly backed by my legion of fake account.

Gorky, your points are valid; I just don't think they're quite as prominent as you perceive them.  Try looking through the list of POTM winners (especially before weiner ruined POTM) and see how many of those individuals did not have a huge presence on on-topic.... usually around the time they won POTM even. 

I don't read fanfiction. shifty

Having read this thread sober (mad) I agree with everything winna said. In your first speech though you mentioned that I have a problem with people in charge.

I don't remember saying that. confused

You're not FreeHotMeal, are you? hmpf

Anyways... I think one of the councils I headed up, I tried some what fervently to include as much on-topicness as humanly possibly.... that was probably the year I decided that we should nominate the nominees and get five nominations each.... also probably the year that we had like 40+ awards.......  It was a really complicated fiasco, and it took me a long time to organization random stuff.  I believe this year tnuk went with a quick & dirty streamlined approach.... but I'm under the impression that SoS was on the council and I know that Xanfor helped out.... That's at least three people working on/with the council that in recent memory visit on-topic rather regularly.

I haven't won in two years?  Is that how long I've been shit?

What the hell are you talking about DrT?  confused

* winna tries to breathe.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #77 on: 03-14-2011 01:36 »

Hm. Something has occurred to me. How many POTM winners actually refer to their win in their signature, I wonder?
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #78 on: 03-14-2011 01:46 »

Do any?
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #79 on: 03-14-2011 01:58 »

*ahem*

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 10 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.179 seconds with 21 queries.