Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:01 pm
by jb
Something is "broken" when it doesn't work as intended. Song Fight works as intended.
Nothing is stopping anyone at any time from writing a song and taking as long as they want to finish.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:18 pm
by Jim of Seattle
Oh, chill. It's just an expression. Of course it works as intended. This is a special area called "Complaints and Suggestions". It's also not broken.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:18 pm
by Adam!
starfinger wrote:I guess NaNoWriMo is broken, since I can't write a novel in a month.
What a perfect analogy. From two nearly identical threads I vote this the clearest, least biased response.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:27 pm
by erik
The word "broken" isn't really an expression.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:32 pm
by Leaf
15-16 puzzle wrote:The word "broken" isn't really an expression.
all you need is 9 more posts to hit trouble stick man... an apt title I think!!
Broken is the wrong term here. Really, you seem to be saying, damn my life sucks I don't have time to prioritize songfight submissions... but JOS, you've solved that problem, so now we can revel in a cool side fight, in which Generic will calim to be involved only to drop out of sight (site?) at the last minute....(obligatory shot).
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:32 pm
by Jim of Seattle
AAAAaaaahhhh!!!! My own penchant for nitpicking has turned around to haunt me!!!!!!
OKOKOKOK,
<font color=red size=3>I DON'T THINK SONGFIGHT IS BROKEN</font>
<font size=1>but I also don't think I should sit back passively if I see room for improvement</font>
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:34 pm
by jb
Jim of Seattle wrote:but I also don't think I should sit back passively if I see room for improvement</font>
I don't think you should either. Just don't call it broken when it's not.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:15 pm
by jack
this thread maybe should be renamed the "arguing semantics" thread.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:15 pm
by Leaf
Hey admin... here's a question... since we can't get a link to the songfight.org put up in the top heading, could we at least get a spellchecker?????
....maybe grammar too....
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:20 pm
by bz£
jack shite wrote:this thread maybe should be renamed the "arguing semantics" thread.
You misspelled "every."
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 3:09 pm
by thehipcola
that was nice.
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 3:47 pm
by Eric Y.
Hoblit wrote:We don't want to come off as a bunch of A-Holes
you really ought not try to speak for everybody. i, for one, have been trying to come across as an asshole for months, but nobody seems to be buying into it. guess i'd better start trying harder.
Activity in a thread is good, I hear...
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2004 2:52 am
by Oracle
I'm certainly glad that I was able to generate some traffic, especially with my first post. In the past on the message boards I've seen you have to hit people with a shovel painted like a nude model to get any attention.
So, Jim Of Seattle, do you want to colaborate on coming up with the title for this little endeavour?
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2004 5:11 am
by john m
Negative attention, maybe. It's not terribly hard to get good attention around here as a newbie. Write and record songs, and try your best.
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:24 pm
by Leaf
john m wrote:Negative attention, maybe. It's not terribly hard to get good attention around here as a newbie. Write and record songs, and try your best.
it's easier to get negative attention though. Probably more likely someone will piss someone off than the otherway around....