Good stuff

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

"Tonight we're gonna have 7.3 green beans each. To share between us and the kids. That translates to 1.7 napkins each. Easily. See you when you get home at 6:32pm est"

Posted by topdogggbm on 8/13/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

I think you’re starting to catch on.

Saying double the posts wouldn’t be accurate, because it’s significantly more than double. Saying triple the posts would also be inaccurate (and misleading). Saying significantly more than double the posts is a lot of extra keystrokes. Benis already moans about the length of my average post, and I’m not sure how much more my fragile psyche can take.

My wife teases me when I say things like “I’ll be back in about 7 minutes”. My GPS says ETA is 7. I understand there is some leeway, depending on traffic ahead, and lights. So I add “about”. She says normal people would just round to 5 or 10. I have never claimed to be normal.

Posted by topdogggbm on 8/13/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

I was going to ask why only 2.65? It's not precise enough for my liking. I definitely have 2.654321 times as many posts. Let's get specific here.

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 8/13/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

I was going to ask why only 2.65? It's not precise enough for my liking. I definitely have 2.654321 times as many posts. Let's get specific here.

I'm also very disappointed that he used 2 fewer years. TWO??? What kind of lazy *** math is this?

Try 2.347 fewer years. Get it right poopshoe.

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 6:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 8/12/2019 4:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 4:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/12/2019 3:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 8/12/2019 2:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Heyhowareya on 8/12/2019 2:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 1:58:00 PM (view original):
Point of order:

Poaching is a crime where one illegally hunts or catches some form of game on someone else’s territory. Since no one owns territory (or recruits) in this game, “poaching” is not a thing in HD, and any use of the term to describe HD gameplay actions (legal or otherwise) is nonsense.

Carry on.

Can you please walk around with me and do this whenever people abuse the definitions of words, especially the word literally?

im just glad that after 25 years of referring to a singular person of unknown sex as 'they', simply because my robot brain doesn't understand how the hell an unknown person would be referred to with a definitive gender (its just bad math), somebody came up with an accepted argument for actually using 'they'. if only all my teachers since the 3rd grade realized what bigots they were, they could have saved all that red ink!

i also would have accepted the replacement of he/she/it with sheeit, or just a checkbox at the bottom of each page that says '**** you and your words'.

Poach (verb)

take or acquire in an unfair or clandestine way.
"employers risk having their newly trained workers poached by other companies"

Synonyms:

steal, appropriate, purloin, misappropriate, take; informalnab, swipe; informalnick, pinch

Full disclosure, Benis took this definition from Google. It’s not actually the definition of “poach”, but rather a subsection of the definition that doesn’t refer to cooking eggs. For full context:

poach²
/poCH/
verb
verb: poach; 3rd person present: poaches; past tense: poached; past participle: poached; gerund or present participle: poaching

1. 
   illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own or in contravention of official protection.

   synonyms:

   hunt illegally, catch/trap/kill illegally, plunder "old Hector's been poaching salmon again"

   • take or acquire in an unfair or clandestine way.
     "employers risk having their newly trained workers poached by other companies"

     synonyms:

     steal, appropriate, purloin, misappropriate, take; More informalnab, swipe; informalnick, pinch "employers risk having their newly trained workers poached by other firms"

   • (in ball games) take a shot that a partner or teammate would have expected to take.
2. 
   (of an animal) trample or cut up (turf) with its hoofs.
   • (of land) become sodden by being trampled.

“Poach” is not a blanket term referring to stealing or cheating. It has a specific meaning. Even the example given under the subsection (“employers risk having their newly trained workers poached by other companies”) describes an encroachment on territory. The gripe described 6 years ago, referenced on the first page of this topic, was an issue of collusion, not of poaching.

Also using google as a dictionary is pretty lame.

1. benis is screwing with you

2. poaching in HD is 'game-slang' if you will, which i am not going to define because it is generally understood what that means. every game with a community has game slang, and more or less everybody accepts it. i am finally catching on to why you get in so many arguments about nothing - its because you get too concerned with semantics and are unwilling to look beyond, to the meaning behind the words. you want to argue that whining about poaching is silly and maybe even pathetic, i am with you. you want to argue that a player isn't yours if someone else is able to put more effort in than you, and thinking otherwise makes you a 21st century snowflake, i am with you. you want to hunt those people down and savagely murder them, i am with you. but denying that poaching is even an acceptable term in the HD game-slang lexicon, and you've gone too far. substance over semantics!

It isn’t semantics. Words mean things. This is why Benis’s bent toward obfuscation is damaging to the game, and why I am here to correct him, even though he pretends to have blocked me.

When someone says “he poached that recruit from me”, the term “poached” is supposed to imply the other guy did something wrong, bad, against the rules, etc. This is a faulty understanding of the game, and employing it, encouraging it, allowing it to pass without comment does a disservice to the whole community. What is actually being said is “he beat me for a recruit I thought I had in the bag”. But no one “owns” a recruit until the recruit signs. None of the definitions of “poach” that Benis tries to bold make any sense in HD, unless you mistakenly think you own a recruit before the recruit has signed with a team. This isn’t semantics, this is getting to the heart of a lot of dissatisfaction.

i disagree, and so would many others. poaching universally is understood to mean the jumping of a recruit at the last minute. to some, there is a negative connotation, and to others, there is not. i have often referred to myself as poaching a recruit from someone else, and half the community may have assumed a negative connotation, and half may not have. however, that has nothing to do with the word 'poaching', and everything to do with the substantive issue underneath.

if i said, i was a guy short but at the last cycle i jumped a guy and won, it would be the same story. half the community would take a negative connotation, and half would not. the use of the word poaching is just semantics.

it really is kind of frustrating, its almost like the rest of your posts in this thread after this one, are said ironically. but they aren't - like claiming rounding makes you inaccurate AS YOU YOURSELF ROUND. it just makes no sense. frankly, i wish you were either a little dumber or a little smarter. in both cases, this conversation would be unnecessary.

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 11:55:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 8/13/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

I think you’re starting to catch on.

Saying double the posts wouldn’t be accurate, because it’s significantly more than double. Saying triple the posts would also be inaccurate (and misleading). Saying significantly more than double the posts is a lot of extra keystrokes. Benis already moans about the length of my average post, and I’m not sure how much more my fragile psyche can take.

My wife teases me when I say things like “I’ll be back in about 7 minutes”. My GPS says ETA is 7. I understand there is some leeway, depending on traffic ahead, and lights. So I add “about”. She says normal people would just round to 5 or 10. I have never claimed to be normal.

even though you are often wrong, i have to take this opportunity to point out how unambiguous it is that you are in fact wrong.

you are saying 2.65 times the posts is fine to say, but triple is not - you call triple misleading and inaccurate. inaccurate, sure - just like 2.65 - neither is exactly accurate unless specified as exact values that are, in fact, the exact values in question. calling triple inaccurate is fine - calling it misleading, that is just factually incorrect. also, calling triple inaccurate, in the context of contrasting to your 2.65 - is actually textbook misleading, because your 2.65 is similarly accurate and similarly inaccurate (unless we are being loose here with the term accurate, which surely, you would not tolerate). both triple and 2.65 are of limited accuracy, they both are just rounded values, but both are nonetheless correct.

the entire field of science and mathematics has a standard definition of significant digits, which you are not allowed to tweak for your own purposes. saying something is 2.65, without applying the qualifier 'exact', means it is 2.65 to 3 significant digits. this is correct if and only if the exact value is greater than or equal to 2.645 and less than 2.655. i'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that is true - that the real value is in that range. if that is true, saying it is triple, aka 3 times higher, is equally correct. saying something is 3 times higher, without an exact qualifier ('exactly 3 times higher'), has a clear meaning - it is only correct if the value if greater than or equal to 2.5 and less than 3.5. which, if your 2.65 is correct, must be true.

therefore, you are confused and misleading in presenting your 2.65 as accurate while 3.0 is not, and are simply and unequivocally wrong to say the 'triple the posts' reference is misleading. both are correct, both are rounded values, neither is exact, and neither is misleading.

again... if only you were a little smarter or a little dumber... sigh

Posted by gillispie1 on 8/13/2019 5:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 11:55:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 8/13/2019 11:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/13/2019 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/13/2019 7:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 8/12/2019 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/12/2019 10:47:00 PM (view original):
Good stuff

Somebody has to say something interesting, hell I go out of town for 4 days, and people are resurrecting 4 year old boring threads to amuse themselves.

Wait. You've been gone FOUR days?!!

My god. Think of all the posts that have been "allowed to pass without comment".

So neglectful of your sworn duties to the HD forums.

LOL, says the guy with 2.65 times the number of posts in 2 fewer years. You are *literally* (you’re welcome, heyhowareya) the guy who calls someone else a name, thinking you’re making the other guy look like an *******.

The reason i laugh at you has nothing to do with the topics at hand. But more about..... "says the guy with 2.65 times the number....." hahaha!!!!!

You can't have normal conversations without making it a math problem! What's wrong with good ol "double the posts i have...."?! Is 2.65 that necessary to apply here?

I think you’re starting to catch on.

Saying double the posts wouldn’t be accurate, because it’s significantly more than double. Saying triple the posts would also be inaccurate (and misleading). Saying significantly more than double the posts is a lot of extra keystrokes. Benis already moans about the length of my average post, and I’m not sure how much more my fragile psyche can take.

My wife teases me when I say things like “I’ll be back in about 7 minutes”. My GPS says ETA is 7. I understand there is some leeway, depending on traffic ahead, and lights. So I add “about”. She says normal people would just round to 5 or 10. I have never claimed to be normal.

even though you are often wrong, i have to take this opportunity to point out how unambiguous it is that you are in fact wrong.

you are saying 2.65 times the posts is fine to say, but triple is not - you call triple misleading and inaccurate. inaccurate, sure - just like 2.65 - neither is exactly accurate unless specified as exact values that are, in fact, the exact values in question. calling triple inaccurate is fine - calling it misleading, that is just factually incorrect. also, calling triple inaccurate, in the context of contrasting to your 2.65 - is actually textbook misleading, because your 2.65 is similarly accurate and similarly inaccurate (unless we are being loose here with the term accurate, which surely, you would not tolerate). both triple and 2.65 are of limited accuracy, they both are just rounded values, but both are nonetheless correct.

the entire field of science and mathematics has a standard definition of significant digits, which you are not allowed to tweak for your own purposes. saying something is 2.65, without applying the qualifier 'exact', means it is 2.65 to 3 significant digits. this is correct if and only if the exact value is greater than or equal to 2.645 and less than 2.655. i'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that is true - that the real value is in that range. if that is true, saying it is triple, aka 3 times higher, is equally correct. saying something is 3 times higher, without an exact qualifier ('exactly 3 times higher'), has a clear meaning - it is only correct if the value if greater than or equal to 2.5 and less than 3.5. which, if your 2.65 is correct, must be true.

therefore, you are confused and misleading in presenting your 2.65 as accurate while 3.0 is not, and are simply and unequivocally wrong to say the 'triple the posts' reference is misleading. both are correct, both are rounded values, neither is exact, and neither is misleading.

again... if only you were a little smarter or a little dumber... sigh

This may be the silliest thing to argue over that I’ve ever encountered, and certainly the most energy somebody has ever put into attempting to explain the inconsequential. Only on the internet.....

What I really wanna know is - did poopshoe add in the posts from his other account when calculating the 2.65x

I'm not so smart so I had to use excel but here is the actual calculation