Topic: FAO: The hundred of people who just got here!!!
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA started this discussion 8 years ago #70,358
There are over 400 people veiwing minichin atm, how the fuck did this happen?
Also, check out my blog.
Also, check out my blog.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 55 seconds later[^] [v] #849,014
Cuntbots.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,018
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 42 seconds later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,019
@849,014 (B)
Probably. Either that or we're getting raided, which is super unlikely considering how few regular posters there are here.
Probably. Either that or we're getting raided, which is super unlikely considering how few regular posters there are here.
INDY THE GREAT™ !OlQJDfNCjY joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,020
Suicidal maniacs.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 24 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,038
Whoever notified me of your reporting me, you have been reported for violating MC fule #7.
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,041
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
What is fule #7? Why are all the bots desperately trying to reply to your blog thread?
What is fule #7? Why are all the bots desperately trying to reply to your blog thread?
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,042
Anonymous E double-posted this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,043
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,045
Anonymous E replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,049
Anonymous F replied with this 8 years ago, 52 seconds later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,051
Anonymous E replied with this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,053
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,055
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #849,057
Anonymous F replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,058
@849,055 (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)Has it even occurred to you that what you see in Folks does not register in the visits Column
Keep your eye on the number of visits and see if you can reconcile why What you see in Folks'' does not register.
Anonymous E replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,059
Anonymous E double-posted this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,064
@849,057 (C)Yea, he's stupid enough to see that a ton of cunt bots are replying to his thread, but even dumber to notice that none showed up on his thread.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,065
@849,058 (F)
@previous (E)
Actually I did mention this in a reply in this exact thread, but it was deleted because I was "spamming my blog" (which, may I add, was ironic, so it shouldn't've been deleted, and I was not planning to continue that practice). I noted that, despite the dozens of extra people on the aluminum cans for currency topic, the total visits didn't go up from 196, which is where it was at pre-raid. I also pointed out that, despite the raided topic changing every few minutes, the number of people "checking out the latest bumps" never grew abnormally, which points to a raid being an unlikely source of the influx of users.
So, despite your assumptions otherwise, I do in fact know that the increased number of "Folks" is due to bots, and that it does not affect the "visits" counter. This means that, based on the evidence provided, we can safely conclude that, in this situation, I am not "dumb". Thanks.
@previous (E)
Actually I did mention this in a reply in this exact thread, but it was deleted because I was "spamming my blog" (which, may I add, was ironic, so it shouldn't've been deleted, and I was not planning to continue that practice). I noted that, despite the dozens of extra people on the aluminum cans for currency topic, the total visits didn't go up from 196, which is where it was at pre-raid. I also pointed out that, despite the raided topic changing every few minutes, the number of people "checking out the latest bumps" never grew abnormally, which points to a raid being an unlikely source of the influx of users.
So, despite your assumptions otherwise, I do in fact know that the increased number of "Folks" is due to bots, and that it does not affect the "visits" counter. This means that, based on the evidence provided, we can safely conclude that, in this situation, I am not "dumb". Thanks.
(Edited 46 seconds later.)
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,067
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
No its not bots. Folks is now back down to the normal number and well I have said enough.
And to the fyne quality Admins LoL
No its not bots. Folks is now back down to the normal number and well I have said enough.
And to the fyne quality Admins LoL
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,071
@849,064 (E)
Why aren't you responding? Are you forgetting that you deleted one of my replies which directly contradicts the statements you're making?
Why aren't you responding? Are you forgetting that you deleted one of my replies which directly contradicts the statements you're making?
Anonymous E replied with this 8 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,073
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
Oh, so sorry I didn't reply immediately. I forgot you don't have a life..... But anyway, I didn't delete your post, a mod did.
Its not contradicting my statement. You fully believe that all the bots were replying to your thread, when, in fact, they were not.
You're also convinced, that the number of visits to your thread, boosts its popularity, when it actually doesn't.
Oh, so sorry I didn't reply immediately. I forgot you don't have a life..... But anyway, I didn't delete your post, a mod did.
Its not contradicting my statement. You fully believe that all the bots were replying to your thread, when, in fact, they were not.
You're also convinced, that the number of visits to your thread, boosts its popularity, when it actually doesn't.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,075
@previous (E)
> But anyway, I didn't delete your post, a mod did.
You reported it. That's like swatting someone and saying you're not responsible because you weren't there.
> Its not contradicting my statement. You fully believe that all the bots were replying to your thread, when, in fact, they were not.
It did contradict your statement that I thought bots' visits counted onto the visit tally (which I don't). And I know the bots weren't replying to anything, but I noted that on the "Folks" tab all the bots showed up as "replying to topic", with several "(see above)"s below them.
> You're also convinced, that the number of visits to your thread, boosts its popularity, when it actually doesn't.
Indeed I was mistaken on this, as I did an "FAO: Mods" to determine it, and some namefag (don't remember who) said it was based on daily visits, but ro4r has since corrected me. Also, the first two commas in that sentence were unnecessary.
> But anyway, I didn't delete your post, a mod did.
You reported it. That's like swatting someone and saying you're not responsible because you weren't there.
> Its not contradicting my statement. You fully believe that all the bots were replying to your thread, when, in fact, they were not.
It did contradict your statement that I thought bots' visits counted onto the visit tally (which I don't). And I know the bots weren't replying to anything, but I noted that on the "Folks" tab all the bots showed up as "replying to topic", with several "(see above)"s below them.
> You're also convinced, that the number of visits to your thread, boosts its popularity, when it actually doesn't.
Indeed I was mistaken on this, as I did an "FAO: Mods" to determine it, and some namefag (don't remember who) said it was based on daily visits, but ro4r has since corrected me. Also, the first two commas in that sentence were unnecessary.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,076
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
I realize I am wasting my time but what the fuck.
Why on earth do you think anyone really wants to follow your life? I looked at what you have there and gave up. Watching grass grow has more value.
I realize I am wasting my time but what the fuck.
Why on earth do you think anyone really wants to follow your life? I looked at what you have there and gave up. Watching grass grow has more value.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,077
@previous (H)
I know nobody cares, and nobody should. It just gives me something to do, as I've been extremely bored the last few months.
I know nobody cares, and nobody should. It just gives me something to do, as I've been extremely bored the last few months.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) double-posted this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,078
Great, looks like the bots are back. I don't really understand the point.
Anonymous F replied with this 8 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #849,079
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)Kid really can you even read English. Look I am infamous for fucking up English yet I can read it.
Now notice all the Replying lol, now really Replying to a Topic all them folks replying to a topic - So ask yourself How come you do not see the front page filed with all those replies.
Kid let me tell you - Toys -
So anyway one funny Admin is just playing which is frankly rare - When you see lots of tiny itsy bitsy penis you know becky is just toying.
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,081
@previous (F)
I already covered this point earlier in the thread, thanks.
> And I know the bots weren't replying to anything, but I noted that on the "Folks" tab all the bots showed up as "replying to topic", with several "(see above)"s below them.
I already covered this point earlier in the thread, thanks.
> And I know the bots weren't replying to anything, but I noted that on the "Folks" tab all the bots showed up as "replying to topic", with several "(see above)"s below them.
Anonymous F replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,082
@849,079 (F)Grrrrrrrrr learn to read damnit
It says they are REPLYING REPLYING REPLYING -
If in fact they were the front page wood yes wood be filled up with 6 year old topics
Look now and all that is back to normal
Not a BOT got it - Something more close to server home
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,083
@previous (F)
First of all, your English in this reply makes absolutely no sense. And I'm assuming that you cited yourself instead of me. Clearly you aren't good at these kinds of things...
First of all, your English in this reply makes absolutely no sense. And I'm assuming that you cited yourself instead of me. Clearly you aren't good at these kinds of things...
Anonymous F replied with this 8 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,086
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
I am multitasking and doing this with low priority.
So from the reading list and it has topics no real person other than the playing Admin - I found one not locked and just drove it up just for you
Now you may return to your so called blog and C Ya later
I am multitasking and doing this with low priority.
So from the reading list and it has topics no real person other than the playing Admin - I found one not locked and just drove it up just for you
Now you may return to your so called blog and C Ya later
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,087
@previous (F)
> I am multitasking and doing this with low priority.
> So from the reading list and it has topics no real person other than the playing Admin - I found one not locked and just drove it up just for you
>
> Now you may return to your so called blog and C Ya later
I still didn't understand 20% of that, but I have enough data to confirm that I am the victor here. Thanks.
> I am multitasking and doing this with low priority.
> So from the reading list and it has topics no real person other than the playing Admin - I found one not locked and just drove it up just for you
>
> Now you may return to your so called blog and C Ya later
I still didn't understand 20% of that, but I have enough data to confirm that I am the victor here. Thanks.
Anon Z replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,088
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
> I still didn't understand 20% of that, but I have enough data to confirm that I am the FAGGOT here. Thanks.
ftfy
> I still didn't understand 20% of that, but I have enough data to confirm that I am the FAGGOT here. Thanks.
ftfy
Anonymous C replied with this 8 years ago, 2 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,089
You know you've fucked up somewhere if syntax is telling you that you need to learn to read.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 16 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,090
Syntax replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,091
16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,092
@849,088 (Anon Z)
@849,089 (C)
@849,090 (I)
I don't appreciate this unwarranted agresiveness. Pleas back the fuck off and have a nice evening.
@849,089 (C)
@849,090 (I)
I don't appreciate this unwarranted agresiveness. Pleas back the fuck off and have a nice evening.
Anon Z replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,093
@previous (16bitch !BMhSp1fpyA)
> I don't appreciate this unwarranted agresiveness. Pleas back the fuck off and have a nice evening.
What's wrong bitch? You gonna cry?
> I don't appreciate this unwarranted agresiveness. Pleas back the fuck off and have a nice evening.
What's wrong bitch? You gonna cry?
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,094
Anon Z replied with this 8 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,095
$anta joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #849,124
16 bitch, 16 egotistical nutsacks