My friend and I were quite bored one day when we decided to rank women using an interestingly new scale. It was spawned from some of my other friends (who were women) using the clock as a scale with 1 being the lowest and 12 being the highest. For example "So (after pointing to a certain guy) how about we get together at 12 o'clock and have lunch?" meaning "Wow, that guy is hot!" After hearing of this me and my friend laughed and decided to modify it test it out on the table. Eventually this simple scale expanded into a complex almost code language that only a few that were around during our discussion understood. It works like this John Doe: Hey (A), we need to work on that project so I'll drop by at (B)C) at (D)'s place in (E) days. Is that all right? Jack Buck: (No (B)C) is better for me.)/(Yeah that's fine.) A-Person you're talking to B-Direction (12 o'clock being right in front of you, 3 o'clock being right, 9 o'clock being left, 6 o'clock being right in back) C-Scale (1 being lowest 59 being highest) D-Point of View for clock (usually your place or my place) E-People over from the point of in case there are more than one person in a line. (you will probably rarly use this) Anyways that's how it goes so you guys can use this to rate women with your friends in front of your significant other without getting in trouble. PS In case you're wondering, I was bored.
I've heard of a much better rating system. Basically, you rate women based on how many beers you'd need to drink before you'd sleep with her.
Ooo, that sounds pretty good jar. Only problem is you would have very different results if one of you is huge and the other is tiny... like what might take the bigger guy 5 beers may only be 2 or 3 for the smaller guy.
Good point, Ct. How about we modify it so that we rank women based on the number of beers we'd have to buy them for them to consider sleeping with the creepy pervert dude at the bar who's been leering at her all night as though he were evaluating her, ie you and/or me?
What is wrong with a single, well-placed "Damn!"? With the longer its said meaning the hotter they are. IE, Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn! is better than Daaaamn!
And now it's time for the post that f**ks the thread width Or in Snowmane's case: Da*200amn!!! I think I got a bit carried away. Just a bit.
Seems like I set DU up perfectly for that. Why oh why didn't I think about something like that before I posted?
Hehe today we had a woman here at my school that was going to have a lecture about EU, the funny thing is that NO boys fell asleep. The reason for this was that the girl was the hottest little thing you can imagine. So how about a scale where we see how many boys that fall asleep when the hot woman holds a theory lecture about how to use microsoft acsess.
Yeah, Just A Geek, could you fix it please? It's damned annoying. It really fucks the post width unneseccarily. I hate when people think that's funny. :roll: It's not. So would you fix it NOW please? Thanks.
But what about all those car commercials that say 'wider is better'? Were they lying to me? Why would there ever be something on TV that wasnt true?
Yeah, but I've stopped now, once I realised how bad it was. It's nice to see you've fixed Just a Geek's thread. That bastard was never going to fix that himself, with him being a bastard and all.
Well, first off, I'm PROUD to be a bastard. Secondly, would be kinda hard for me to fix it since I'm currently having trouble with the board loading up very slowly for me and all. I mean, when you go away for 10 mins, come back, and the page still hasn't loaded, you tend to lose your patience... :evil:
