The thread about rating threads and posts

[Nathan]

It was stupid. Pretend like it never happened.

 

[tuc biscuit]

Could someone post a link to it for me please?

 

[Bullit]

I give that thread a 1 on the international 1 to 17 scale.

 

[the nature boy]

I give that thread a 1 on the international 1 to 17 scale.

lol

 

[Bullit]

NATHAN...you are now the controller of this thread! Delete it! This shit will go straight to Bullit's head and cause more lame ass postings.

17

 

[beastboy]

NATHAN...you are now the controller of this thread! Delete it! This shit will go straight to Bullit's head and cause more lame ass postings.

 

[tuc biscuit]

NATHAN...you are now the controller of this thread! Delete it! This shit will go straight to Bullit's head and cause more lame ass postings.

Don't do that boy or I'll tear you up like a kleenex at a snot party! Seriously I am curious to know the scale.

 

[Bullit]

If you would like a particular post rated please indicate with a [BULLIT], and I will be happy to oblige.

 

[Y_lifter]

1-17

1 being a Y_Lifter thread
17 being anything else pretty much

 

[Nathan]

So 1 is bad?

Yes. In fact, if bullit assings you a number at all it's bad news since it means he's probably reading what you wrote and picturing you naked, cock in hand.

 

[notoriousQQ]

[/B][/QUOTE]

to be totally honest it kind of hurt - but I couldn't let him know that. I just acted like it was funny.

 

[tuc biscuit]

1-17

1 being a Y_Lifter thread
17 being anything else pretty much

So 1 is bad?

 

[Bullit]

1 is GOOD, 17 is bad.

Jesus Christ.. its the official scale of the International Rating Association... I woulda thought you guys would be more familiar with it.

 

[Bullit]

Yes. In fact, if bullit assings you a number at all it's bad news since it means he's probably reading what you wrote and picturing you naked, cock in hand.

16

 

[Y_lifter]

So 1 is bad?

bada BING !

 

[Nathan]

16

You aren't a real cowboy and you never will be.

 

[tuc biscuit]

bada BING !

Yep. That joke was provided to me by Woodie Woodbine, I'll telegram you his pager number if you like.



Please could someone either explain it to me or point me to a link?



Pretty Please.

 

[Bullit]

Yep. That joke was provided to me by Woodie Woodbine, I'll telegram you his pager number if you like.



Please could someone either explain it to me or point me to a link?



Pretty Please.

Its probably in The Best of EF.

 

[tuc biscuit]

Honestly, if someone doesn't post a link I'm just gonna scream and scream until I burst.

 

[Y_lifter]

Well, I'd do a search for Bullit's thread, but with the way EF is
screwing things up lately, it's probably showing started by George Spellman.

 

[Lift Chief]

It was stupid. Pretend like it never happened.

 

[Bullit]

As Rodney Dangerfield would say:

I get no props, no props *adjusts tie*

 

[jackangel]

Its probably in The Best of EF.

3

 

[tuc biscuit]

I found it, and gave it my lowest score ever; 7 thumbs up.

 

[Bullit]

its *respect* ya tard.

No I'm pretty sure its "props".
It might be "accolades",but its definitely not "respect'.

 

[curling]

Bullit,

On average my threads usually rank better than nathans right. Now on the weirdness scale he would win.

 

[Bullit]

Bullit,

On average my threads usually rank better than nathans right. Now on the weirdness scale he would win.

Well I often find yours quite humorus... however most of the time you dont intend them to be.

In effect I am usually laughing at you, not with you.

 

[Nathan]

Bullit,

On average my threads usually rank better than nathans right. Now on the weirdness scale he would win.

That's right.

 

[bigschweeler]

Well I often find yours quite humorus... however most of the time you dont intend them to be.

In effect I am usually laughing at you, not with you.

What do you rate this gem?

 

[Bullit]

That wasn't very nice. You're not a nice person are you?

5.
Perfect example.

 

[Bullit]

What do you rate this gem?

On my "Scale of Hilarity" (patent pending)?

17.
Not funny, not really supposed to be.

 

[from zero]

Bullit hooked me up with a 5 earlier. What can I say? The man's got class.

 

[curling]

Well I often find yours quite humorus... however most of the time you dont intend them to be.

In effect I am usually laughing at you, not with you.

That wasn't very nice. You're not a nice person are you?

 

[alien amp pharm]

Hey, stop the hatin'.
I was skeptical about the Bullit Rating System too.

That was until I received a 4 on a post today.
http://boards.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=2808547#post2808547

 

[the nature boy]

On my "Scale of Hilarity" (patent pending)?

lol

2

 

[beastboy]

They have patents in Canada? So domesticated, eh?

 

[Bullit]

They have patents in Canada? So domesticated, eh?

17.

Talk to pharm... he can give you a couple pointers.

 

[argent]

Can you use decimals?

 

[Bullit]

Can you use decimals?

Are you asking do I have the ability to, or are you asking if the "Scale of Hilarity" (patent pending) allows their use?

In reference to the former, yes I know how to use decimals.
For instance: 4.2652

The standard, and internationally accepted "Scale of Hilarity" (patent pending) does not require the use of decimals.
The International Scalar Association (ISA) determined that a scale ranging from 1 through 17 provides the optimal amount of scalar granularity and thus decimals are not required.
You may still use decimals in non-formal situations but if you ever go to an ISA sanctioned event (for instance a Scale Off) then you will notice that anybody who uses a decimal is given a 5 minute gross misconduct penalty.

 

[argent]

so how would the commitee differentiate between 12 and 13?

 

[Bullit]

so how would the commitee differentiate between 12 and 13?

12 is better than 13.

 

[argent]

right, but what makes a post that much better that it would be a 12 rather than a 13, like criteria-wise?

 

[Bullit]

right, but what makes a post that much better that it would be a 12 rather than a 13, like criteria-wise?

Well, as with most scales used for judging, there is an inherent amount of subjectivity.

The ISA cannot control how its scales are used, it just provides funds for R&D into scalar optimization, and publishes guidlines for their use.

 

[argent]

I would like to propose that if someone mentions anything relatd to genetalia, a score of no higher than 15 can be given.

 

[Bullit]

I would like to propose that if someone mentions anything relatd to genetalia, a score of no higher than 15 can be given.

You'll have to run that past the ISA: www.InternationalScalarAssociation.com

Personally I dont think it will pass, they seem to be real fans of genetalia.
Plus, like I said above, judging is a personal, subjective activity.

Perhaps you could simply limit your own scores to 15 if genetalia is mentioned?

 

[argent]

alow me to rephrase: .....no worse than 15....