Poster Of The Month: "Official" Rule Discussion

[Reply #80 on:]

Well, you only just made that, so it doesn't count

[Reply #81 on:]

I'm pretty sure Jezzem's sig says something about both his POTM and PEELie wins. Arrogant bastard.

[Reply #82 on:]

Pft, I could list my awards, but I don't like to brag... That's what the Wiki's for!


Also, on topic, I haven't yet received a reply from mArc on the situation.

[Reply #83 on:]

   *ahem*



      POTM winner, April 2006.

   Winner of 11 PEELies.

   Captain, Scientist, and Cat Owner.

Wait, you're a cat owner?   

[Reply #84 on:]

It's amazing what people can learn from a signature.

[Reply #85 on:]

I thought cats owned him...

[Reply #86 on:]

Only in Soviet Russia.

[Reply #87 on:]

No, actually everywhere, Cats are above the laws of Soviet Russia jokes.

[Reply #88 on:]

Pft, I could list my awards, but I don't like to brag... That's what the Wiki's for!


Also, on topic, I haven't yet received a reply from mArc on the situation.

Me either.  I hope he bans POTM now.

[Reply #89 on:]

   *ahem*



      POTM winner, April 2006.

   Winner of 11 PEELies.

   Captain, Scientist, and Cat Owner.

Wait, you're a cat owner?   

And a cat pwner, occasionally.

[Reply #90 on:]

No one can pwn a cat, tnuk.

[Reply #91 on:]

I may be incorrect, but I think the ratio of female POTM winners to male POTM winners is ridiculously high for the past year.... which would make this, in fact, not a penis length contest.

Is there such a thing as a vagina depth contest then?

[Reply #92 on:]

Boob size contest probably...

[Reply #93 on:]

Hah. Hahaha. I just imagined some kind of newspaper advert for "Vagina depth measurers required. Decent pay plus bonuses "

Eww.

[Reply #94 on:]

Well, lets see the statistics for male/female ratio for each year, overall and before/after multiple winnings:

2001
male      2   66.6%
female    1   33.3%

2002
male      8   66.6%
female    4   33.3%

2003
male      9   69.2%
female    4   30.8%

2004
male      9   75%
female    3   25%

2005
male      8   61.5%
female    5   38.5%

2006
male     10   83.3%
female    2   16.6%

2007
male      9   75%
female    3   25%

2008
male     10   83.3%
female    2   16.6%

2009
male      7   53.8%
female    6   46.1%

2010
male      6   50%
female    6   50%

2011
male      1   50%
female    1   50%


male     78   67.8%
female   37   32.2%

before multiple-winning (2009)
male     65   73%
female   24   27%

after multiple-winning (2009)
male     14   51.8%
female   13   48.2%

tough both in 2009 and 2010 two females each had 2 wins that year. No guy had two wins in a single year

[Reply #95 on:]

March 2009
Feb 2010

That's less than a year.

Watch me caring though.

[Reply #96 on:]

I mean in a calender year, not within a 12-month period

[Reply #97 on:]

Hooray I'm the one female in 2011 (so far) and in 2001! Everything's coming up Randi.

[Reply #98 on:]

Is there such a thing as a vagina depth contest then?

Can anyone honestly say they've ever seen a dildo marked like a ruler? That's what you'd need, right? 

[Reply #99 on:]

[Reply #100 on:]

Some girls I knew at college said they did that... they didn't tell anybody else the results though

As to PotM, I'm not fussed how it is done; however it is done I think the poll should be given a time limit though, that way there is no accusation of bias when it gets closed.

[Reply #101 on:]

Excellent suggestion.

And I was right.... in recent times, the female ratio has been significantly higher.  Women might think this means that they have a right to equality now, which is rather unfair for us to let them assume.  Obviously because they don't have any rights.

[Reply #102 on:]

Everyone's coming up Randi.

Fixed. Think I might be channeling the spirit of iliketowankalot. Blame him, not me.

[Reply #103 on:]

Or my p***s.

[Reply #104 on:]

Hah. Hahaha. I just imagined some kind of newspaper advert for "Vagina depth measurers required. Decent pay plus bonuses "

Eww.

That gave me the best laugh I've had this week.

Well, El was right, wasn't he?

Now I'm waiting for the PEELer to come out and say he uses his manhood as a ruler.

Hello?  FYP?  We know you want to say it so bad...

[Reply #105 on:]

I use my manhood as a ruler. 

You can go ahead and check that off your waiting list.

[Reply #106 on:]

I wonder if Europeans feel better about themselves when they see the large number of centimeters their manhood is.

7" doesn't sound as intimidating as 18cm.

[Reply #107 on:]

Victories by continent

      With  multi-wins   Without multi-wins
America      59   50%      50   49.5%
Australia    18   15%      14   14%
Europe       39   33%      36   35.5%
Asia          2    2%       1    1%

· Morgs is the only Asian PEELer to ever win it so far.
· Only people from USA and Canada have won for America, no Mexicans or South Americans.
· Europeans from 5 different Countries have won so far (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, UK)

[Reply #108 on:]

Booze...did a radioactive Hobbitboy bite you recently...?

Just curious.

[Reply #109 on:]

No, I killed him and ate his heart trying to gain his courage and strength, sadly I only got some weird statistic ability


That reminds me...

· No New Zealanders have ever won POTM .

[Reply #110 on:]

Aww, that's sad. How many New Zealanders are on here, anyway? I can think of 2. I hope there are more than that. Go New Zealand! Smite your enemies!

[Reply #111 on:]

Going by wikipeelia statistics, 2 are set to New Zealand there.

[Reply #112 on:]

Go New Zealand! Smite your enemies!

There's peelers from the South Pole ?

[Reply #113 on:]

Says the man from the North Pole

[Reply #114 on:]

Santa?

[Reply #115 on:]

· No New Zealanders have ever won POTM .

Being nommed is best we can do so far. But it'll happen...

[Reply #116 on:]

It might happen if the no more multi-wins comes through, maybe some month will be an off month and we have to go back to nom you

[Reply #117 on:]

Now that we have our new sub-board (thanks again, [-mArc-]), I think we should finish deciding on the new PotM rules. I myself am in support of the "no multiple wins per 12-month period" idea. Are there any other suggestions that should be incorporated?

[Reply #118 on:]

Sometimes the number of nominations is stretched a bit. Shall we set an absolute limit on that? Or does it spoil some of the fun.

[Reply #119 on:]

Number of nominations should probably be set back to just 3, maybe 4. And multiple nominations should also be refused, I'd say.