# Test



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Testing to check some of the features out

Edit test


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Hmmmm.....these boards don't tell us when someone has edited a post.

I'm not sure I like that.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Trying out the list feature:

Dwarves
Elves
Humans
Pixies
Munchkins
Smurfs--or is it Smurves


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Post Counts Appear to be Retroactive. 

Were they like that before?


----------



## graydoom (Jan 20, 2002)

Is it that hard to use one of the other 4-5 test thread we have?

Is there some sort of selective blindness that makes them impossible to see?


----------



## graydoom (Jan 20, 2002)

And yes, post counts were retroactive before.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Hmmmm......I GUESS so! 

I looked before starting this post,  BUT for some reason I missed them. 

I just checked again, and I saw at least two of them. I can't honestly explain how I missed them the first time. 

Sorry.  My bad. But I think we all _know_ that you're just posting to BUMP  up your post count, graydoom.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Checking.........OK, reset message undoes any edits before you resubmit.


----------



## graydoom (Jan 20, 2002)

Acmite said:
			
		

> *Sorry.  My bad. But I think we all know that you're just posting to BUMP  up your post count, graydoom.   *




And if I'm trying to boost my post count, what are you doing posting multiple messages in a seperate thread for a test when you could have used an already existing thread and only one post that you could edit multiple times?


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

Ummm...I don't care about post count?

I've been around the boards since Fall 2000, and I racked up an amazing 215 posts.

Post count couldn't matter less to me, unlike some other people on the boards.

I'd prefer to be known as someone who posts for a reason, someone who adds to discussion.  I'm not implying anything about you, or any other specific poster......I'm just saying that post count is comletely irrelevant to a person's worth as a poster.

I read Colonel Hardisson's posts because I find his posts generally well thought out and constructive (and I respect his opinion), same with Caliban, and several others.  Other posters I go out of my way to avoid because 99% of their posts are either off-topic or pointless (I won't name names, but a certain Swede who is not Psionicist comes to mind).  Many of the posters I avoid have been chastised for their off-topic posts.  It is quite obvious to most people on the boards who is trying to bump their post count, and who isn't.

With the advent of IC posts, and Fight Club, post counts have become an increasingly unreliable way to determine whose opinion can be lent weight.  The resetting of the post clock has increased this unreliableness.

I don't remember ever seeing you on the old boards, yet you now have the most posts (or fairly close).  Further evidence of the unreliableness of post counts.

Many nut-folk returned to the fold to help in testing the boards, and to see if anything had changed.  Their high post counts are indicative of beta-testing, nothing more.  I think I've made my point.  In fact, the horse is barely recognizable anymore.

BTW, By using multiple posts in one thread, I have essentially set up a mini-tutorial for myself on how all the features work.  By "editing" these posts, I can see how the vb code works if I want a refresher later, without having to use all the buttons.

Acmite


----------



## AmerginLiath (Jan 20, 2002)

*eh...*


----------



## graydoom (Jan 20, 2002)

> BTW, By using multiple posts in one thread, I have essentially set up a mini-tutorial for myself on how all the features work. By "editing" these posts, I can see how the vb code works if I want a refresher later, without having to use all the buttons.




True. Makes sense if you want to be able to easily single out one particular code type. I was just saying that you could have compiled all of those into just one post, that could be referenced if you needed to.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 20, 2002)

> I was just saying that you could have compiled all of those into just one post, that could be referenced if you needed to.




You're right.  It just seemed easier this way.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 21, 2002)

Avatar test 1....failed


----------



## XCorvis (Jan 21, 2002)

Just testing to get my post count above 0.


----------



## Acmite (Jan 21, 2002)

Avatar test 2


----------



## Darkness (Jan 21, 2002)

Acmite said:
			
		

> *But I think we all know that you're just posting to BUMP  up your post count, graydoom.   *



LOL. Heh. I wonder how much good it will do him if everybody knows that he's doing it...?


----------

