I think really long statuses are pretty lame
or get another monitor and put it on top!
TOO MUCH YAKOV!!! MUST USE SCROLL-WHEEL!! AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it is actually annoying to scroll through all that. you're only proving kids' point
Do you really want to take this angle? Remember the noise debauchle(sp?)?
As far as the "it's been like that from Day1" bullshit. You're completely and utterly full of shit. This is just not true.
We started this board with the concept that there would be no set in stone rules. That the members would dictate how the board is run. We did not intend this to mean that people would have sig pics that take up half of the fucking internet. We intended instead to let people govern themselves.
I didn't start this thread. I simply agreed with it and supported the point. I also voluntarily change my sig and status to "lead by example".
I know I can argue any point into the ground. But, you have to admit that you'll take the opposite view just so you don't have to agree with me.
The bottom line, there is no argument for having all of the extraneous shit in everyone's status, sigs, etc.
In the beginning, statuses grew because mods wanted to add poignant phrases and/or statements to them without interfering with what other mods had previously put there. This point is moot today.
It's been a long standing tradition that stems from the rules at oa.com that no signatures should not contain more than one pic, more than 4 lines of text and that sig pics should be less than 500 pixels total dimension when adding width + height. We did not institute this rule when we started this board because we figured that people had accepted the standard.
Well, over time, people have pushed and stretched the limits and now sig pics are just huge.
Again, I'm not saying that we should make rules on sigpics. I'm asking that poeple willing reduce the size of their sig pics for the good of all.
You'll say that I just want it my way, and I'll remind you that I didn't start this thread, I just agree with it.
I'll state again that there is no valid argument for having such long single posts when the actual content of the post is one line.
Finally, this argument is far beyond tired simply because you refuse to accept reason for you choose to be stubborn for the simple reward of being stubborn.
I've dealt with it thus far, and I'll continue to do so. I'll find my content in the fact that I have won this argument by default because you have not offered any solid evidence or reason to the contrary.
Edited By Kid Afrika on 1081400288
in soviet russia, kid's points prove you
Kid Afrika Wrote:Do you really want to take this angle? Remember the noise debauchle(sp?)?
As far as the "it's been like that from Day1" bullshit. You're completely and utterly full of shit. This is just not true.
We started this board with the concept that there would be no set in stone rules. That the members would dictate how the board is run. We did not intend this to mean that people would have sig pics that take up half of the fucking internet. We intended instead to let people govern themselves.
I didn't start this thread. I simply agreed with it and supported the point. I also voluntarily change my sig and status to "lead by example".
I know I can argue any point into the ground. But, you have to admit that you'll take the opposite view just so you don't have to agree with me.
The bottom line, there is no argument for having all of the extraneous shit in everyone's status, sigs, etc.
In the beginning, statuses grew because mods wanted to add poignant phrases and/or statements to them without interfering with what other mods had previously put there. This point is moot today.
It's been a long standing tradition that stems from the rules at oa.com that no signatures should not contain more than one pic, more than 4 lines of text and that sig pics should be less than 500 pixels total dimension when adding width + height. We did not institute this rule when we started this board because we figured that people had accepted the standard.
Well, over time, people have pushed and stretched the limits and now sig pics are just huge.
Again, I'm not saying that we should make rules on sigpics. I'm asking that poeple willing reduce the size of their sig pics for the good of all.
You'll say that I just want it my way, and I'll remind you that I didn't start this thread, I just agree with it.
I'll state again that there is no valid argument for having such long single posts when the actual content of the post is one line.
Finally, this argument is far beyond tired simply because you refuse to accept reason for you choose to be stubborn for the simple reware of being stubborn.
I've dealt with it thus far, and I'll continue to do so. I'll find my content in the fact that I have won this argument by default because you have not offerend any solid evidence or reason to the contrary.
i scrolled so much cause of this post :17:
and i never complained about the noise in your sig
At least you were scrolling through a post, not a sig pic or a status trying to find the actual content of a post.
This thread is now about the 1927 Yankees, also known as "Murderer's Row".
![[Image: w_Ruth_web.jpg]](http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/history/images/w_Ruth_web.jpg)
(screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)}" onclick="javascript:if(this.width > (screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)} else {this.width = (this.width*2)}" border="0" alt='Posted image: Click to resize'>
Here is Lou Gehric and Babe Ruth.
That's what I said.
![[Image: murderers_row.jpg]](http://www.cardinalshistory.com/images/murderers_row.jpg)
(screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)}" onclick="javascript:if(this.width > (screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)} else {this.width = (this.width*2)}" border="0" alt='Posted image: Click to resize'>
Edited By AbeSapien on 1081400692
let's talk about the 1934 Cardinals instead, also known as "the gashouse gang" cause they were all such goofy characters
The Sleeper Wrote:let's talk about the 1934 Cardinals instead, also known as "the gashouse gang" cause they were all such goofy characters
Hey, they were pretty good too.
![[Image: ph_history_timeline_big_gashousegang.jpg]](http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/stl/photo/ph_history_timeline_big_gashousegang.jpg)
(screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)}" onclick="javascript:if(this.width > (screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)} else {this.width = (this.width*2)}" border="0" alt='Posted image: Click to resize'>
Quote:It's been a long standing tradition that stems from the rules at oa.com that no signatures should not contain more than one pic, more than 4 lines of text and that sig pics should be less than 500 pixels total dimension when adding width + height. We did not institute this rule when we started this board because we figured that people had accepted the standard.
pssst...kid...this isn't oa.com...
whatever "rules" were there are not and weren't here. I may not have been here "from the beginning", but I've been caught up for a while on everything that's happened as if I was here - so you can take your "this is how we started things" attitude and shove it up your ass. If you notice, the rest of the folks who "laid the first stones" have since departed...
you've won no argument because there wasn't one - you made suggestions, they were noted. you didn't start this thread but you've kept it going. if it makes you feel better to think you've won then fine - feel that way. Grumpy was much better at claiming message board victories, but even he seems to have given that up (after a brief renaissance at YMB)
and if people arent willing to reduce their sig pic sizes, what then? should we cell them maybe?? yeah, that's it!! we'll cell everyone!!
Quote:I've dealt with it thus far, and I'll continue to do so.
yes, yes you will - short of jack's skin and people wanting their statuses changed, nothing else will be touched.
AbeSapien Wrote:This thread is now about the 1927 Yankees, also known as "Murderer's Row".
(screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)}" onclick="javascript:if(this.width > (screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)} else {this.width = (this.width*2)}" border="0" alt='Posted image: Click to resize'>
Here is Lou Gehric and Babe Ruth.
my all-time favoUrite Yankee team :4:
Chicago Cubs infielders Joe Tinker, Johnny Evers, and Frank Chance formed the most memorable double-play combination in the history of baseball. Their consistently solid fielding and hitting led the Cubs to four National League pennants (1906-8, 1910) and two World Series wins (1907-8). The Hall of Fame inducted all three simultaneously in 1946. In 1910, New York newspaper columnist Franklin Pierce Adams immortalized the three ballplayers in a short verse entitled
"Baseball's Sad Lexicon"
These are the saddest of possible words:
"Tinker to Evers to Chance."
Trio of bear cubs, and fleeter than birds,
Tinker and Evers and Chance.
Ruthlessly pricking our gonfalon bubble,*
Making a Giant hit into a double--
Words that are heavy with nothing but trouble:
"Tinker to Evers to Chance."**
![[Image: tinkerseverschance.gif]](http://www.baseball-almanac.com/poetry/tinkerseverschance.gif)
(screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)}" onclick="javascript:if(this.width > (screen.width/2)){this.width = (this.width/2)} else {this.width = (this.width*2)}" border="0" alt='Posted image: Click to resize'>
They called them "Murderers' Row." In 1927, people weren't as finicky about metaphors glorifying violence or horror. Heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey was the "Manassa Mauler," and football star Red Grange was the "Galloping Ghost." A decade later, Joe Louis would be the "Brown Bomber," other great Yankee teams the "Bronx Bombers," and powerful Chicago Bear football teams the "Monsters of the Midway."
So the 1927 Yankees, because of their unmatchable batting power, became Murderers' Row, often delivering their fatal blows in the late innings as "five o'clock lightning," because ballgames started at 3:30 p.m. in those days and were usually over by six o'clock.
The 1927 team, which won 110 games, included Babe Ruth's 60 homers and a sweep of the World Series from the Pittsburgh Pirates, was only the apex of a three-year domination. It included the 1926 pennant and another four-game sweep in 1928. But it was followed immediately by the 1929-31 reign of the Philadelphia Athletics, and when the Yankees of 1936-39 won four World Series in a row, the comparisons solidified into conventional wisdom.
In 1969, when professional baseball celebrated its 100th anniversary with much fanfare and glamour, an "all-time" all-star team was named and the 1927 Yankee team was singled out "officially" as the all-time best. The twin explosions of statistical and historical research were just getting started then, but that designation has endured as established myth.
Well, how about it? Who were those Yankees? Were they really the greatest? If so, why? If not, who might have been?
The "who" starts with Ruth, whose 1926-28 home-run output was 47, 60 and 54. He played right field at home and left field in many other places, avoiding the sun field. His batting averages were .372, .356 and .323 and he batted in 452 runs. He hit third.
Behind him was Lou Gehrig. Nine years his junior, Gehrig hit 47 home runs in 1927 with a .373 average and 175 runs batted it. Only Ruth had ever hit more homers.
Behind Gehrig were two right-handed sluggers, Bob Meusel, the left or right fielder, and Tony Lazzeri, the second baseman. Lazzeri's 18 homers ranked third in the whole league. Meusel hit .337 and knocked in 103 runs, Lazzeri .309 with 102. Meusel's 24 stolen bases left him second only to George Sisler's 27 in the American League, and Lazzeri stole 22.
Those four could do all that damage because Earle Combs, the center fielder, led off, hit .356 and added 62 walks to his 231 hits (His on-base average was .414). Mark Koenig played shortstop and Joe Dugan third base, while Pat Collins and Johnny Grabowski shared the catching. The team batting average was .307.
But pitching, as we all know, is the real source of baseball success.
Manager Miller Huggins, who won six pennants in eight years from 1921-28, had a four-man rotation: right-handers Waite Hoyt and Urban Shocker and left-handers Herb Pennock and Dutch Ruether. A 30-year-old rookie, Wilcy Moore, was one of the earliest relief specialists, starting 12 times but relieving 38. He won 19 games and saved 13 others. Hoyt, Shocker and Moore ranked one-two-three in the league in winning percentage and two-three-one in earned run average. Hoyt won 22, Pennock 19, Shocker 18.
Needless to say, the fielding behind this group was first rate, especially in center, at short and at second.
So the won-lost record was 110-44. Their margin over the second-place Athletics was 19 games. Against the first-division teams -- the A's, Senators and Tigers - they went 14-8. They were 17-5 vs. the White Sox, 18-4 against the Red Sox and 21-1 vs. the St. Louis Browns (losing only the last one), but only 12-10 against sixth-place Cleveland.
Winning 110 games is not most of all-time. The 1906 Chicago Cubs won 116 (and lost only 36), the 1954 Cleveland Indians 111, the 1998 Yankees 114 (of 162) and, of course, the 2001 Seattle Mariners 116. But the Cubs and Indians lost the World Series that followed, and the Mariners didn't even reach the Series in the expanded postseason now used. The 1998 Yankees did win it, and in a four-game sweep, after winning two preceding playoff series to get there.
So in terms of "most successful," the 1998 Yankee single season is supreme: 125 total victories through three postseason elimination series, in a population of 30 teams instead of 16.
But "greatest" must have another dimension. The Ruth-Gehrig combination has never been equaled. Combs, Lazzeri, Hoyt and Pennock were also Hall of Famers. The degree of superiority over their contemporaries, given the enormously different conditions of different eras, must be taken into account, and their supremacy was extreme.
Calling anything "the greatest" can never be free of challenge or argument. But to rank any team above the 1927 Yankees -which really means the 1926-28 Yankees -- one would have to make a case based on unimaginable factors.
So let's settle for the less glamorous, but more reasonable label: "No team has ever been any better."
Goatweed Wrote:Quote:It's been a long standing tradition that stems from the rules at oa.com that no signatures should not contain more than one pic, more than 4 lines of text and that sig pics should be less than 500 pixels total dimension when adding width + height. We did not institute this rule when we started this board because we figured that people had accepted the standard.
pssst...kid...this isn't oa.com...
whatever "rules" were there are not and weren't here. I may not have been here "from the beginning", but I've been caught up for a while on everything that's happened as if I was here - so you can take your "this is how we started things" attitude and shove it up your ass. If you notice, the rest of the folks who "laid the first stones" have since departed...
you've won no argument because there wasn't one - you made suggestions, they were noted. you didn't start this thread but you've kept it going. if it makes you feel better to think you've won then fine - feel that way. Grumpy was much better at claiming message board victories, but even he seems to have given that up (after a brief renaissance at YMB)
and if people arent willing to reduce their sig pic sizes, what then? should we cell them maybe?? yeah, that's it!! we'll cell everyone!!
Quote:I've dealt with it thus far, and I'll continue to do so.
yes, yes you will - short of jack's skin and people wanting their statuses changed, nothing else will be touched.
You cocksucking uppity prick. I distinctly said that there were no rules here. I never said that this was oa.com. It is however a fact that the people that came here came for oa.com and knew the rules that existed there. In fact, I would venture to guess that most of the people that were here in the beginning had their first message board experiences on oa.com.
You say that I've falsely claimed victory, but I say that you're still only arguing the point to be an adversary. You have offered no argument to dispute the claims laid forth. You keep saying that I'm trying to implement rules when I have been saying all along that no rule is needed.
If you choose to support the idiotic actions of some others in this thread (read: hedcold), you only further prove that you have no point other than to oppose me.
I'd say that the only reason that you could even rest on your feeble argument is that you are one of the many that are holding the keys.
I've tried reason. Others have agreed with the idea.
You've left me with no choice other than an equally ridiculous retort.
If once, you offered a valid counterpoint, I might have listened. Instead, you downplay my point by misconstruing it.
Enjoy your harvest.
Kid Afrika Wrote:You cocksucking uppity prick. I distinctly said that there were no rules here. I never said that this was oa.com. It is however a fact that the people that came here came for oa.com and knew the rules that existed there. In fact, I would venture to guess that most of the people that were here in the beginning had their first message board experiences on oa.com.
You say that I've falsely claimed victory, but I say that you're still only arguing the point to be an adversary. You have offered no argument to dispute the claims laid forth. You keep saying that I'm trying to implement rules when I have been saying all along that no rule is needed.
If you choose to support the idiotic actions of some others in this thread (read: hedcold), you only further prove that you have no point other than to oppose me.
I'd say that the only reason that you could even rest on your feeble argument is that you are one of the many that are holding the keys.
I've tried reason. Others have agreed with the idea.
You've left me with no choice other than an equally ridiculous retort.
If once, you offered a valid counterpoint, I might have listened. Instead, you downplay my point by misconstruing it.
Enjoy your harvest.
This post has nothing to do with the 1927 Yankees, or the 1938 Cardinals. Please stop posting in this thread if you cannot stay on topic.