uh-oh

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:smile: :sad: :eek: :shock: :cool: :-x :razz: :oops: :evil: :twisted: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :mrgreen:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: uh-oh

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sun Aug 03, 2003 8:31 pm

My understanding is that if you jerk off before going to sleep at night, you won't have dreams where you have build a wonderful relationship based on mutual respect, admiration and love with some girl that, in reality, wouldn't try to get you to stop, drop and roll if you were burning and on fire unless there was an opportunity for her to sneak in a "quickie" during that time as well.

"We are the normals." -- Goo Goo Dolls

by pinback » Sun Aug 03, 2003 8:01 pm

You ever have one of those dreams where it seems like it just goes on for way longer than you think it should? Like you're only asleep for a few hours but it feels like you've been dreaming for a whole day? And while you were in the dream everything was just so clear and vivid, and it just felt like everything was perfect, and all your problems were solved, and life was, if only for that brief period, just what you wanted it to be? And after you wake up, the dream doesn't quite seem real, but you go through the rest of your day just wishing that you were back in the dream?

You know that feeling?

Because I do.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sun Aug 03, 2003 7:35 pm

True. True... Yeah, regular sex has robbed many a would-be sysop of a topic-enhancing retort.

Enjoy the taste and touch sensations, my friend. You have deserved it. I'll... I'll stick to pumping the dying heart of all of this.

by pinback » Sun Aug 03, 2003 6:21 pm

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Nobody getting sex constantly, like you for instance, can properly run a decent BBS. Just can't make the time investment, narmean?
Heh, wait... why? I mean, cuz...

Hold on, I forgot what I was gonna say.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:58 pm

pinback wrote:Really? How much effort DOES it take, exactly, to spend an entire day not posting or providing any other sort of content, nor doing any moderating worth mentioning, while your regulars strive to somehow keep the place alive?
It takes a lot of effort to know when to ask an appropriate question of somebody, or to "lay back" and wait a sec and see how the thread in question develops itself.

I submit that you don't have the talent for it.

Wears you out by the end of the day, does it?
Nobody getting sex constantly, like you for instance, can properly run a decent BBS. Just can't make the time investment, narmean?

by pinback » Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:48 pm

Really? How much effort DOES it take, exactly, to spend an entire day not posting or providing any other sort of content, nor doing any moderating worth mentioning, while your regulars strive to somehow keep the place alive?

Wears you out by the end of the day, does it?

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:40 pm

pinback wrote:No, I just like to make sure that people are careful about quoting statistics on my BBS.

Oh-- sorry, *your* BBS.
You couldn't handle running this place for a day, much less a week.

by pinback » Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:18 pm

No, I just like to make sure that people are careful about quoting statistics on my BBS.

Oh-- sorry, *your* BBS.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sun Aug 03, 2003 2:40 pm

"Captain America" sold 300,000 copies a month in 1985.

It sells, if it's lucky, 30,000 a month in 2003.

Once every 12 months there is a little rectangle in the comic where they have to list all the copies sold and so forth in the previous 12 months. I'm going off that.

Some comics, like Batman and the X-Men, aren't quite at 1/10th levels. I suspect, though, that the part you really have a problem with is that any comic sold 300,000 copies a month at any time, ever. I supposed that is what you want the cite for, right?

by pinback » Sun Aug 03, 2003 10:39 am

Please cite your sources with regard to that "1/10th" statistic.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:48 pm

They do claim that paper is hideously expensive.

It's not, of course. As someone who spent one and a half years in a "Paper Science & Engineering" program I can say that paper is like sausage: you'd never use it if you saw how it was made. I'd also say that it's highly questionable about how much it truly costs. CGW has many more pages and higher quality paper and it's about a buck more than a comic.

I guess I don't get the whole "sprinkle ads within the comic itself" as opposed to putting them at the end of the comic. Image (argh, I think it's Image who published "Powers") does that and I'll flip through them when I'm done -- if anything looks interesting I'll read it. I never read the ones in the middle of the comic because, hey, I'm busy reading a comic.

The fact that comics sell 1/10th of what they did 20 years ago doesn't help, I would imagine.

by Worm » Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:25 pm

Sure! Paper is cheap, help is cheap, art is cheap, so why the FUCK do these things cost five dollars when they are half ADs?

uh-oh

by comics boy » Fri Aug 01, 2003 4:46 pm

hey guys I hear that this base is in danger of getting destroyed. Let's talk cOMMMMMM-ICKKKKKS!!!

Top