|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Dec 3, 2013 12:42:15 GMT
Well, I didn't see anything against it in the rules, and there's no devoted 'off-topic' board, so here goes.
It's pretty simple, just give the person who posted above you (me, for the first replier) a rating of [0.000-.999] [0-10] on their signature.
EDIT: It's cool if you do it with avatars, also.
Huzzah!
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 13:52:36 GMT
Let the circlejerk continue  I give you 6/10. It's kind of a cliché by now, but you have the original wording, don't you? That's a big plus side even if I don't read it. And then you have this reference(?) I think it's wrong though, and I don't quite get it, but I feel it adds something to it, maybe precisely because I don't quite get it. Let me note, 6/10 is good where I hail from. 5 is okay, 7 is excellent, 8 great, 9 or 10 would be outright exceptional and should not be given easily. 0-4 is more or less crappy. |
|
|
|
Post by thshrkpnchr on Dec 3, 2013 14:02:18 GMT
Your avatar is cropped from the comic , right? I find it very familiar...
And I think I'll give the rate to the one below since I don't even have a signature(yeah, and avatar too)
And for zimmyhoo, maybe Google Translate is broken, or I can't get it at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 14:03:46 GMT
zimmyzims, your signature is unobtrusive, concise, informative and truthful. The only thing that is missing is evidence for the claim, like a link to the original posting. 6/10?
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 14:43:03 GMT
zimmyzims, your signature is unobtrusive, concise, informative and truthful. The only thing that is missing is evidence for the claim, like a link to the original posting. 6/10? Point taken. Yours is... quite incomprehensible as I don't seem to read that language, but I like the look of it, 7/10. |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 14:59:38 GMT
zimmyzims, your signature is unobtrusive, concise, informative and truthful. The only thing that is missing is evidence for the claim, like a link to the original posting. 6/10? Point taken. Yours is... quite incomprehensible as I don't seem to read that language, but I like the look of it, 7/10. It's a mathematical formula, that I discussed around here, and it is typeset with the LaTeX code "\Box\bot". Technically, this makes my signature terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 15:07:05 GMT
Point taken. Yours is... quite incomprehensible as I don't seem to read that language, but I like the look of it, 7/10. It's a mathematical formula, that I discussed around here, and it is typeset with the LaTeX code "\Box\bot". Technically, this makes my signature terrible. Gee.... how much can context do.  Without awareness of the context, I just thought this is some Polynesian whakamambo. Oh dear. So embarrassing. I actually do formal logics, if not everyday, enough to read this kind of phrasing (which, however, is somewhat nonsensical). But I'm very unused to read it on screen, and not familiar with coding. LaTex, for example, never heard of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 15:16:37 GMT
I actually do formal logics LaTex, for example, never heard of it. Seriously though, I know it's mostly nonsensical, but I found it funny. |
|
|
|
Post by Gotolei on Dec 3, 2013 15:30:42 GMT
Forum games? Hm. Distinct, yet in a small amount of space. No discernible meaning without given context. 7/10 It's a mathematical formula, that I discussed around here, and it is typeset with the LaTeX code "\Box\bot". Technically, this makes my signature terrible. 0/10 |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 15:52:51 GMT
I actually do formal logics LaTex, for example, never heard of it. Maybe we have different concept of formal logic? To me, it's a particular organon used in some fields of philosophy (and science to some extent). I know it is used in coding as well, but am completely unfamiliar with that stuff. You should take in account the possibility that a person you meet does not approach formal logic from coding. I know helluvalot of people doing formal logic, but I don't think any of them does LaTex. They do books. Seriously though, I know it's mostly nonsensical, but I found it funny. I fully understand why. And in a way, if you force it, it makes an interesting claim in basically necessitating contradiction. That's, of course, against the formal logic in that no system should imply a contradiction, so if you can in some universe prove that contradiction is necessitated we should usually just say that the system is thoroughly false. Yet it is possible to argue that all actually true systems necessitate contradiction. There are other interesting arguments related to this, but I leave it there. It would be way off-topic for all true topics in this universe. |
|
|
|
Post by quinkgirl on Dec 3, 2013 15:55:17 GMT
Gotlei is 7.63/10, because you must've put effort to make it. And the rip is cool, as it blends with the back. 0.63 was added because not quite an 8, where I'd expect a party hat. But its Renard, so...
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 16:01:25 GMT
Gotlei is 7.63/10, because you must've put effort to make it. And the rip is cool, as it blends with the back. 0.63 was added because not quite an 8, where I'd expect a party hat. But its Renard, so... Ummm... we're rating signatures. |
|
|
|
Post by quinkgirl on Dec 3, 2013 16:04:56 GMT
Gotlei is 7.63/10, because you must've put effort to make it. And the rip is cool, as it blends with the back. 0.63 was added because not quite an 8, where I'd expect a party hat. But its Renard, so... Ummm... we're rating signatures. Poop. I need to really read things carefully. Sorry about that, Disregard my last post. |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 16:05:52 GMT
Maybe we have different concept of formal logic? To me, it's a particular organon used in some fields of philosophy (and science to some extent). I know it is used in coding as well, but am completely unfamiliar with that stuff. You should take in account the possibility that a person you meet does not approach formal logic from coding. I know helluvalot of people doing formal logic, but I don't think any of them does LaTex. They do books. Ah, philosophy! That explains it. I was thinking mathematical formal logic. LaTeX is a de-facto tool for scientific writing in mathematics and computer science fields, but this might not apply to philosophy, as it's usually not formula-heavy. It's not about coding (though LaTeX itself is a Turing-complete programming language), it's about typesetting books and articles, and it's almost the only viable solution for math markup. Seriously though, I know it's mostly nonsensical, but I found it funny. I fully understand why. And in a way, if you force it, it makes an interesting claim in basically necessitating contradiction. That's, of course, against the formal logic in that no system should imply a contradiction, so if you can in some universe prove that contradiction is necessitated we should usually just say that the system is thoroughly false. Yet it is possible to argue that all actually true systems necessitate contradiction. There are other interesting arguments related to this, but I leave it there. It would be way off-topic for all true topics in this universe. While interpreting the box as necessity or knowledge, it indeed makes no sense to allow it. In fact, axiom systems typically include its negation. But if we start thinking about the box as belief, then an agent's beliefs MAY be incorrect or simply internally inconsistent. Also, zimmyhoo, sorry for hijacking the thread! We also made a loop with appraisals. Oops. |
|
|
|
Post by Gotolei on Dec 3, 2013 16:08:44 GMT
Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page  |
|
|
|
Post by quinkgirl on Dec 3, 2013 16:16:42 GMT
Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page I feel like here, everybody gets temporary ADHD. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 16:16:49 GMT
Maybe we have different concept of formal logic? To me, it's a particular organon used in some fields of philosophy (and science to some extent). I know it is used in coding as well, but am completely unfamiliar with that stuff. You should take in account the possibility that a person you meet does not approach formal logic from coding. I know helluvalot of people doing formal logic, but I don't think any of them does LaTex. They do books. Ah, philosophy! That explains it. I was thinking mathematical formal logic. LaTeX is a de-facto tool for scientific writing in mathematics and computer science fields, but this might not apply to philosophy, as it's usually not formula-heavy. It's not about coding (though LaTeX itself is a Turing-complete programming language), it's about typesetting books and articles, and it's almost the only viable solution for math markup. The symbols ain't that different though, as there's a lot of shared history. And I actually do maths too, but again, no mathematical sciences, so I don't use these tools at all. I'm not much involved with counting. Let's drop this subject here. We're boring the hell out of 'hoo's thread. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Dec 3, 2013 16:18:04 GMT
Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page 5th reply. That must be a record of some sort. ...no, it must not. I'm sure somewhere it has been the first reply. Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page I feel like here, everybody gets temporary ADHD. Here, as in the general internets, or....? |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 16:21:39 GMT
Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page 5th reply. That must be a record of some sort. ...no, it must not. I'm sure somewhere it has been the first reply. Come on, one can make a topic title and go off-topic in the original post. |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Dec 3, 2013 16:33:39 GMT
Heheh, even in a forum game we go off-topic in less than half a page I feel like here, everybody gets temporary ADHD. Your signature reminds me of an attitude my friends and I had in 11th grade: we agreed that when we all died, we'd meet up in Hell, stage a coup, and take control. Then we'd turn it around and make it a nice place. |
|
|
|
Post by quinkgirl on Dec 3, 2013 16:42:27 GMT
I feel like here, everybody gets temporary ADHD. Your signature reminds me of an attitude my friends and I had in 11th grade: we agreed that when we all died, we'd meet up in Hell, stage a coup, and take control. Then we'd turn it around and make it a nice place. ...what kind of attitude is that?! xD |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 16:46:13 GMT
Your signature reminds me of an attitude my friends and I had in 11th grade: we agreed that when we all died, we'd meet up in Hell, stage a coup, and take control. Then we'd turn it around and make it a nice place. ...what kind of attitude is that?! xD Apparently the only right one? Assuming Christian afterlife beliefs, it's the best strategy.. On-topic, Señor Goose's signature is very signaturey, but suffers from lack of originality. 5/10 |
|
|
|
Post by quinkgirl on Dec 3, 2013 16:49:18 GMT
...what kind of attitude is that?! xD Apparently the only right one? Assuming Christian afterlife beliefs, it's the best strategy.. On-topic, Señor Goose's signature is very signaturey, but suffers from lack of originality. 5/10 Oh PFFFFF I was thinking in profile pics again. Also, O really shouldn't be on this thread right now because I can't see signatures in the mobile format. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Dec 3, 2013 16:54:53 GMT
.___. Woah this blew up fast AND HOW THE HELL DID YOU MANAGE TO DERAIL THIS? That's incredible. I like rating avatars. Do continue. quinkgirlAvt: Looks... familiar, but I don't recognize it. 6/10. Sig: Funny, small, not obtrusive. 7/10 |
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 17:13:30 GMT
quinkgirlAvt: Looks... familiar, but I don't recognize it. 6/10. I'd also love to know where is it from. I'd rate it 8/10 though. It's very pleasant to the eye, quite avatarish, and associates well with the user! |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Dec 3, 2013 17:35:03 GMT
...what kind of attitude is that?! xD Apparently the only right one? Assuming Christian afterlife beliefs, it's the best strategy.. On-topic, Señor Goose's signature is very signaturey, but suffers from lack of originality. 5/10 I'LL SHOW YOU ORIGINAL |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Dec 3, 2013 17:38:17 GMT
quinkgirlAvt: Looks... familiar, but I don't recognize it. 6/10. I'd also love to know where is it from. I'd rate it 8/10 though. It's very pleasant to the eye, quite avatarish, and associates well with the user! In our mind you're Scott Pilgrim eating pizza. In my mind, she's Knives eating nachos. |
|
|
|
Post by philman on Dec 3, 2013 17:45:30 GMT
That IS original... and hurts my eyes. 4/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 3, 2013 17:45:59 GMT
Apparently the only right one? Assuming Christian afterlife beliefs, it's the best strategy.. On-topic, Señor Goose's signature is very signaturey, but suffers from lack of originality. 5/10 I'LL SHOW YOU ORIGINAL
I'LL SHOW YOU ORIGINAL
I'LL SHOW YOU ORIGINAL
I'LL SHOW YOU ORIGINAL |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Dec 3, 2013 17:49:57 GMT
Can you use LaTex in your signature? I tried a bit but it didn't work. Is there a trick?
|
|
