50+ posts, am I officially an SDN loser?

[IgweEmeka]

So I officially hit the 50+ post mark...I feel like a complete loser considering I am not the kind of person to even surf websites like these let alone surf the net for more than 20 min at a time. This is all the damn mcats fault. Anyone else feel like this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Kazema]

Nah you're not yet. I think 500+ is the mark of an SDN loser.

Oh you have 50+ in less than a month. You're well on your way!

 

[DoctorFunk]

Mmm...this apple cobbler is delicious .

Hmm, what? Oh, you're still here? Sorry, you must have blended in with the wallpaper.

 

[sunnyjohn]

Nah,

500 is the magic number.

 

[liverotcod]

The magic number is n + 1, where n is my post count.

 

[Law2Doc]

So I officially hit the 50+ post mark...I feel like a complete loser considering I am not the kind of person to even surf websites like these let alone surf the net for more than 20 min at a time. This is all the damn mcats fault. Anyone else feel like this?

Admitting you have a problem is the first step.

 

[Kazema]

The magic number is n + 1, where n is my post count.

Prove by induction.

 

[liverotcod]

Prove by induction.

Case n=0, we have no posts to SDN, and axiomatically you have to post to SDN to be an SDN loser. Although, I suppose a lurker could get into trouble?

Also axiomatically, we know that when n=k, statement is true, because I'm not an SDN loser (Axiom 5.64: "liverotcod not a loser of any kind"). Therefore when n=k+1, I'm still not a loser. QED.

Somehow this doesn't seem as convincing as the ones we did for proofs class.

 

[kiki the alto]

lol, would a proof by contradiction work better in this case...If I'm not an SDN loser, I must have < Liverotcod's post count n. Oh yeah, and here's a new theorem...you are an SDN loser if your post count is congruent to mine mod p, p an odd prime (lol, I love number theory...Math minors rule!)

 

[Kazema]

Case n=0, we have no posts to SDN, and axiomatically you have to post to SDN to be an SDN loser. Although, I suppose a lurker could get into trouble?

Also axiomatically, we know that when n=k, statement is true, because I'm not an SDN loser (Axiom 5.64: "liverotcod not a loser of any kind"). Therefore when n=k+1, I'm still not a loser. QED.

Somehow this doesn't seem as convincing as the ones we did for proofs class.

That proof looks A-OK to me.

Then again I think I don't think I ever successfully proved anything by induction on any test. I either withdrew or failed all those classes .

 

[nicholonious]

Nah you're not yet. I think 500+ is the mark of an SDN loser.

Oh you have 50+ in less than a month. You're well on your way!

I think I just reached loserville!

 

[Kazema]

I think I just reached loserville!

Well done you loser.

 

[Phil Anthropist]

Well done you loser.

What does that make YOU (1,318 posts)?!

What does that make ME (3,868 posts)?!

What does that make DrMom (24,135 posts)?!

On second thought, don't answer that!

And one more thing,

 

[Medikit]

Anyone with 50+ posts is a total loser and should change their avatar accordingly

 

[45408]

This is all weaksauce. Visit a forum like Gaia or SomethingAwful if you want to see high post counts. There's people with over 100,000 posts in a year.

 

[DrB]

I post therefore I am...

Motion to move to everything forum...

 

[sacrament]

Having a lot of posts definitely makes you a loser, and I'm living proof, but I think even more telling is the posts/day average. This is what separates the truly ridiculous from the mildly lame. In this category, Dr. Mom is only modestly "impressive" with 21.37 posts per day. She's nudged out by the Master of the 100% Inane Post, fruitfly, who can boast of 22.86 posts per day. That's pretty sad, but nothing compared to the 34.78 very important posts per day that UNTlabrat manages to pound out. Surely it can't get worse, can it? Can it?

46.61 posts per day by bananaface. So sad. Want to cry.

 

[tank you]

Having a lot of posts definitely makes you a loser, and I'm living proof, but I think even more telling is the posts/day average. This is what separates the truly ridiculous from the mildly lame. In this category, Dr. Mom is only modestly "impressive" with 21.37 posts per day. She's nudged out by the Master of the 100% Inane Post, fruitfly, who can boast of 22.86 posts per day. That's pretty sad, but nothing compared to the 34.78 very important posts per day that UNTlabrat manages to pound out. Surely it can't get worse, can it? Can it?

46.61 posts per day by bananaface. So sad. Want to cry.

so who do you think has more free time? them for posting that many/day or you for actually looking their numbers up??

 

[sacrament]

so who do you think has more free time? them for posting that many/day or you for actually looking their numbers up??

It takes about 3 seconds, if you have a fast connection, to sort a list of the highest post counts. It takes approximately another 2 seconds per poster to find out their post/day average. Maybe 2 seconds to copy-and-paste each high number you see from the first handful of posters. So I probably spent, let's say, 30-60 seconds in total on that project. I'm a fairly busy guy but even I have 60 seconds to spare in the pursuit of making fun of people. In that span of time, if I was bananaface, I could have posted twelve times.

 

[DoctorV09]

c'mon let's admit it....aren't we all SDN losers?!

 

[nicholonious]

This is all weaksauce. Visit a forum like Gaia or SomethingAwful if you want to see high post counts. There's people with over 100,000 posts in a year.

That is insane.

We are mere novices...

 

[virilep]

So I officially hit the 50+ post mark...I feel like a complete loser considering I am not the kind of person to even surf websites like these let alone surf the net for more than 20 min at a time. This is all the damn mcats fault. Anyone else feel like this?

you're mom's a loser

 

[EvoDevo]

Well, according to sacrament, I'm a little less than a mildly impressive loser.



Anyone want 10,000 posts?

 

[deuist]

c'mon let's admit it....aren't we all SDN losers?!

No me!

 

[45408]

Having a lot of posts definitely makes you a loser, and I'm living proof, but I think even more telling is the posts/day average. This is what separates the truly ridiculous from the mildly lame. In this category, Dr. Mom is only modestly "impressive" with 21.37 posts per day. She's nudged out by the Master of the 100% Inane Post, fruitfly, who can boast of 22.86 posts per day. That's pretty sad, but nothing compared to the 34.78 very important posts per day that UNTlabrat manages to pound out. Surely it can't get worse, can it? Can it?

46.61 posts per day by bananaface. So sad. Want to cry.

Weak. I know guys who average over 100 posts a day.