Kollega said:New people are always good, as long as they're not trolling. And they are definetly NOT trolling, as far as i can see.
From some people's vantage, you're a newb..Fniff said:I think we are in the middle of a member explosion. A lot of people joining us!
Good thing, or bad thing?
I'm a newbie and I fight against stupidity. Can I join that list?dududf said:We were all newbies once, if they act like trolls, then they will be dealt with like trolls.
Until they do something stupid, consider them one of us and embrace them.
But I swear to god, if they make MW2 threads I'm going to kill them. Kill them all.
Here's my list of people who MUST help.
Furburt
Shewolf
Max The reaper.
Idealist commy
Neonbob
simulord
Eatmorebabies
the Soviet connection
And Wicky 42.
We will SQUASH the newbies, if they break the rules and make non stop repeat threads! :<
To arms my bretheren!![]()
Actually, ~100 is the average IQ.. but IQ only measures school-type smarts. Theres so many different types of intelligence that the IQ really is a poor measure by which to judge people.Supreme Unleaded said:As long as they have an IQ of over 90 im fine with it. For those who don't know, arounf 90 is the avarage intelagence, so if you understand wht im saying your IQ is probably over 90. The people who don't have the smartness are probably coming from 4Chan, and we all know what happens then.
Or just people with common sence, that is really all we need.
So as long as the Newbies meet that criteria then their fine.
i agree with the date of join. Just because your points are valid doesnt mean that makes you a non newbie. You still have to get used to the site and both our written and unwritten rules that everyone seems to go by.canadamus_prime said:How is basing it on the date they joined childish? If they joined Dec. 8th 2009 and today is Dec. 9th 2009, obviously they just joined yesterday. Now any assumptions you make regarding that may or may not be childish however.Mr.Pandah said:If anything, I'd base it on actually just reading their posts. If their viewpoint is valid, if it makes sense, if they are actually typing somewhat coherently and so on. Basing it on the date that they joined, or the amount of posts seems....childish.canadamus_prime said:Agreed, I would think you'd base it more on the date they joined which very conveniently stated with every one of their posts.Mr.Pandah said:...Really? You base "newbness" on post count? Thats a terrible way to go about it.Fniff said:1-100 post.Rex Dark said:Starting from when do you consider someone a newbie?
As I had previously pointed out to me a while ago, it happens constantly and we only notice it periodically. Also, technically you're a newbie too, as you only joined like 5 months ago, just like me. I made a thread like this not even half a week ago and had it pointed out to me that this topic's way overdone. Search Bar please?Fniff said:I think we are in the middle of a member explosion. A lot of people joining us!
Good thing, or bad thing?
True, but what i meant was if the IQ is under 90 then its bad, if your over it then your alright. Guess i worded it wrong, but I also did add the common sence thing to counter the fact that IQ is school smarts only.Phyroxis said:Actually, ~100 is the average IQ.. but IQ only measures school-type smarts. Theres so many different types of intelligence that the IQ really is a poor measure by which to judge people.Supreme Unleaded said:As long as they have an IQ of over 90 im fine with it. For those who don't know, arounf 90 is the avarage intelagence, so if you understand wht im saying your IQ is probably over 90. The people who don't have the smartness are probably coming from 4Chan, and we all know what happens then.
Or just people with common sence, that is really all we need.
So as long as the Newbies meet that criteria then their fine.
*cough*Low Key said:It seems everyone in this thread except Ultrajoe have join dates in 2009. I'd say we're all "noobs". The other forums I visit I've had memebership on for 5+ years.
Okay, so not everyone. I just quickly scanned the second page, but you still get the idea.Phyroxis said:*cough*Low Key said:It seems everyone in this thread except Ultrajoe have join dates in 2009. I'd say we're all "noobs". The other forums I visit I've had memebership on for 5+ years.
That and there are quite a few <2009'ers in this thread, even a 2007'er.
What this guy said, completely.MaxChaos said:We were all newbies once. Some more knowledgeable than others, granted, but new nonetheless.
Give them the benefit of the doubt.
Oh, don't base newness on post count. It took me about 2 months to get into the groove of posting and get 100 posts, would I have been a "newb" then?Fniff said:1-100 post.Rex Dark said:Starting from when do you consider someone a newbie?
Quantity over quality, eh? If this point of view is prevalent, I'd think that it would stimulate more contentless, pointless posts just to get past that crucial judging factor.Fniff said:1-100 post.Rex Dark said:Starting from when do you consider someone a newbie?
Yous shouldn't consider people new from the number of posts.But rather the time they've had accounts on the Escapist.Fniff said:1-100 post.Rex Dark said:Starting from when do you consider someone a newbie?
Our army shall rise once again..OmegaXIII said:More Escapists can only be a good thing