- #31
Andy
- 73
- 14
Ha i remember that, it was Dx, don't see him round much, and it was in the General discussion forum.
Guess Who Wrote This? - A PF Game
- Thread starter FZ+
- Start date
Click For Summary
A game was proposed where participants guess the author and forum of quotes from posts on a platform, specifically targeting well-known users to avoid obscure references. The initial quote provided was from a user named FZ+, and subsequent guesses led to discussions about refining the rules, including ensuring quotes are original and not sourced from elsewhere. Participants engaged in playful banter while attempting to identify quotes, with notable mentions of users like Iacchus32, eNtRopY, and Hurkyl. The conversation included humorous anecdotes and reflections on past posts, with some users recalling memorable quotes and their contexts. The game fostered a sense of nostalgia and community among participants as they navigated through various quotes and their origins.
Ha i remember that, it was Dx, don't see him round much, and it was in the General discussion forum.
- #32
eNtRopY
Yeah, it was him. After I made a joke about him taking himself out of the gene pool, he later added that he was just joking... but all know the truth!
Actually, I liked Dx. He was one my favorite posters. He was always posting the nerdiest things that one could possibly say. I always wondered if he was trying to be funny or if he was just a bit nerdy.
eNtRopY
- #33
zoobyshoe
- 6,506
- 1,268
Who said the Harry Potter thing
and is there a new quote, Andy?
and is there a new quote, Andy?
- #34
BoulderHead
It hasn't been guessed yet. Maybe Greg will post another quote from the same member, giving us another clue ??
- #35
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
While you're waiting, try this one...
- #36
Zantra
- 791
- 3
Entropy in general ?
- #37
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
In General DISCUSSION?
-or are you saying 'this just sounds like entropy in general'?
Peace, man.
- #38
Zantra
- 791
- 3
Originally posted by Tsunami
In General DISCUSSION?
-or are you saying 'this just sounds like entropy in general'?
Peace, man.
Both
- #39
BoulderHead
He was talking to me in that quote so I know it was eNtRopY.
- #40
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
Ah...
In that case, yes and no.
- #41
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
Yes, but... where?
(and with WHAT?
-Jus' kiddin'-God, I loved Clue as a kid!)- #42
Zantra
- 791
- 3
Originally posted by Tsunami
Yes, but... where?
(and with WHAT?
So I got that one right?
- #43
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
Correct. Now which forum was it in?
Dang! I didn't mean to snag the thread up like this! Do you want me to take it outta here to another thread? (Isn't there a Harry Potter thing hanging out there somewhere? Looking... YEAH! Greg! Are you out there? Zooby says Zantra!)
- #44
Zantra
- 791
- 3
It could only be said in general forum. No clue on the when
- #45
Gale
- 682
- 2
the answer to the harry potter thing is selfAdjoint in mystics and pseudo science, my thread about magic.
i haven't been around here long enough to think of any funny quotes like yall have found, so one of you other nice people can just post one for me
i haven't been around here long enough to think of any funny quotes like yall have found, so one of you other nice people can just post one for me
- #46
meteor
- 937
- 0
Who posted?:
"Electrons don't go to school to learn quantum mechanics"
"Electrons don't go to school to learn quantum mechanics"
- #47
zoobyshoe
- 6,506
- 1,268
Hmmmm...I'm going to guess Mr.Robin Parsons.
- #48
meteor
- 937
- 0
Nope. Hint: Was at PF2
- #49
FZ+
- 1,594
- 3
Let's see... got to be Philosophy Forum, replying to one of Alexander's everything is physics I think...
Gee, I'm scared it might be me.
I am guessing LW Sleeth, but could be LG..
Gee, I'm scared it might be me.
I am guessing LW Sleeth, but could be LG..
- #50
meteor
- 937
- 0
Oh, people, can't you remember him? A great hater of all that include the word quantum
- #51
FZ+
- 1,594
- 3
Ah! Morp! It's morp, the guy who thought QM was a conspiracy specifically designed to confuse him...
Presuming I am right...
"Given that this Mind fulfils the requirements of omnipotence; omnipresence; and omniscience, I conclude that this is the Mind of God."
Presuming I am right...
"Given that this Mind fulfils the requirements of omnipotence; omnipresence; and omniscience, I conclude that this is the Mind of God."
- #52
BoulderHead
In case you're right I'd have to laugh loudly and shout out loud: LIFEGAZER
If that is correct, try this one;
"Even so, the radio is only a receptacle. In which case how do we know that our mind is not just a receptacle either? Or, say part of a "grand stage," where everything is broadcast live? ... and we're just part of the "live" entertainment."
If that is correct, try this one;
"Even so, the radio is only a receptacle. In which case how do we know that our mind is not just a receptacle either? Or, say part of a "grand stage," where everything is broadcast live? ... and we're just part of the "live" entertainment."
- #53
zoobyshoe
- 6,506
- 1,268
Boulderhead, the answer to yours
is: Rene DesCartes.
is: Rene DesCartes.
- #54
meteor
- 937
- 0
Bingo! It was morp in theory development
- #55
BoulderHead
Ah, FZ was right and I'm nearly 100% certain the quote FZ posted had to be from LG, so it is possible that I've got the ball again.
Sorry zoobyshoe, but that was not the member I pulled the quote from.
Sorry zoobyshoe, but that was not the member I pulled the quote from.
- #56
BoulderHead
Here is another big, long, hint;
"As for the number 666, what it represents is two thirds, and hence the second of three degrees: the first being 0 to 333, the second being 334 to 666, and the third being 667 to 1000. Which would be about right, for if you portrayed a symmetrical cross, where the top, bottom, left and right (sections) were equal in length, then by adding "an extension" equal in length at the base, you would have these same three degrees portrayed by the height of the cross: where the first two degrees (666 and below) exist below the horizontal plane, or "cross beam," and the third degree (667 and above) exists above it. So in this respect the number 217 (as opposed to 216) would be similar to 667."
When I read this only one member comes to my mind. How about you?
"As for the number 666, what it represents is two thirds, and hence the second of three degrees: the first being 0 to 333, the second being 334 to 666, and the third being 667 to 1000. Which would be about right, for if you portrayed a symmetrical cross, where the top, bottom, left and right (sections) were equal in length, then by adding "an extension" equal in length at the base, you would have these same three degrees portrayed by the height of the cross: where the first two degrees (666 and below) exist below the horizontal plane, or "cross beam," and the third degree (667 and above) exists above it. So in this respect the number 217 (as opposed to 216) would be similar to 667."
When I read this only one member comes to my mind. How about you?
- #57
Zantra
- 791
- 3
Not to side track but going back to that entropy quote, I'll go with philophy forums- though I find that hard to believe- I didn't see him in there much- of course he left just as I was getting started
- #58
Artman
- 1,506
- 40
This sounds a little like Qantumcarl, except that he usually makes more sense and this thing is just bizzare.
- #59
Tsu
Gold Member
- 420
- 63
Nope. It was in How Stuff Works. Here's another of my favorites:
Who said this?
"I once got drunk with some illegal aliens. Then I think I lost my car for about six hours."
- #60
BoulderHead
Artman,
It was not QC.
It was not QC.