Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:56 pm
Go back to the Telecaster thread, you're doing much better in that one.
yes sir.Mike wrote:Go back to the Telecaster thread, you're doing much better in that one.
Page 4 of 7
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:00 pm
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:01 pm
hot
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:03 pm
Hurb wrote:hot
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:06 pm
he almost looks a bit like mike, no?
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:08 pm
no, actually.
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:53 pm
Seeing as someone nice has got this thread going again, I will add a photo of my shitty strat:
It was my first ever guitar which I got when I was 9! A Tanglewood something in a trans green colour. Looked the part but sounded shit.
It was my first ever guitar which I got when I was 9! A Tanglewood something in a trans green colour. Looked the part but sounded shit.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:33 am
ughhhh.
that green is GRIM.
9 though, that thing must have seemed HUGE.
that green is GRIM.
9 though, that thing must have seemed HUGE.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:25 am
can we start a voting system, where if more than 40% of members with 300 or more posts particularly dont want someone around, they are just banhammered no questions asked?
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:46 am
gotta totally agree with the guy here. this is one strat I totally cannot standjoshua wrote:it just seems like fucking everyone plays them, and it's always black with a white pickguard
so. fucking. played. out.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:50 am
dont you think that's kind of unfair?william wrote:can we start a voting system, where if more than 40% of members with 300 or more posts particularly dont want someone around, they are just banhammered no questions asked?
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
but good system to an extent.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:55 am
no i dont.the_dude wrote:dont you think that's kind of unfair?william wrote:can we start a voting system, where if more than 40% of members with 300 or more posts particularly dont want someone around, they are just banhammered no questions asked?
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
but good system to an extent.
please explain how its unfair, bearing in mind the definition of "fair," please.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:20 am
William, I think you're the last person that should be blethering on about the worth of others to the forum. And shortscale will never have a system like that, any Ban talk from Hurb in this thread was tongue firmly in cheek, we do not roll like that.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:43 pm
Why three hundred? You've contributed nothing much to the fourm beyond odd conjecture about what makes mega tone and how good your guitars are. You are also a bit of a noob. I don't remember you from Jag-stang and I don't really care.william wrote:no i dont.the_dude wrote:dont you think that's kind of unfair?william wrote:can we start a voting system, where if more than 40% of members with 300 or more posts particularly dont want someone around, they are just banhammered no questions asked?
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
but good system to an extent.
please explain how its unfair, bearing in mind the definition of "fair," please.
If you want to change things around here you need to up your game and give the rest of shortscale a reason to listen to you. We don't have a reason yet.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:48 pm
if you're gonna set a post count it should be more like 5,000.
300 isn't much, there are a ton of people who've got 300 posts or more. i still class myself as a noob and i've been here a year.
that system would be ridiculous to implement too. you'd need some sort of poll topic limited to members with enough posts and then you'd need to decide on a time frame for the poll and it would overall take alot longer than a few mods agreeing someone is a twat and needs a good kicking.
if we have a system like that we're moving closer to the NO FUN ALLOWED policy half the forums on the internet seem to have in place.
300 isn't much, there are a ton of people who've got 300 posts or more. i still class myself as a noob and i've been here a year.
that system would be ridiculous to implement too. you'd need some sort of poll topic limited to members with enough posts and then you'd need to decide on a time frame for the poll and it would overall take alot longer than a few mods agreeing someone is a twat and needs a good kicking.
if we have a system like that we're moving closer to the NO FUN ALLOWED policy half the forums on the internet seem to have in place.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:11 pm
hahah yeah. I remember at the time I went to get it we tried it out expecting to get a half size one or 3/4 sized.. but for some reason a full size one was fine.Zaphod wrote:ughhhh.
that green is GRIM.
9 though, that thing must have seemed HUGE.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:05 pm
because, "they are just banhammered no questions" is no reason to ban anyone on here. say 40% of people hated you and you had 299 posts and you just got banned out of the blue. would'nt you say it was unfair?william wrote:no i dont.the_dude wrote:dont you think that's kind of unfair?william wrote:can we start a voting system, where if more than 40% of members with 300 or more posts particularly dont want someone around, they are just banhammered no questions asked?
im modelling this on whole foods, where i work. the place is shit but ive always been a fan of this policy.
but good system to an extent.
please explain how its unfair, bearing in mind the definition of "fair," please.
and the definition of fair being we all have a right to post here and not be banned. some people like tribi9 post here and a lot of people dont like him but wasn't banned because he did nothing wrong.
this may work where you work but i dont think dots, mike, or any admin/mods will agree with this here.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:24 pm
I was with you on the middle pup issue before I actually got the strat (going on the experience of my old squier), but now I seem to be using it loads. Sounds great.robert(original) wrote: the 3 singles are a plus tho(altho i never find a use for the middle pup)
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:40 pm
i think you might want to double check that one, i'm fairly sure he's been zapped.the_dude wrote:some people like tribi9 post here and a lot of people dont like him but wasn't banned because he did nothing wrong.
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:42 pm
ahem
whether or not tribi9 did something wrong is open to debate i think you'll find. he broke a sort of unwritten rule about getting deals on shortscale and then flipping them without asking.
whether or not tribi9 did something wrong is open to debate i think you'll find. he broke a sort of unwritten rule about getting deals on shortscale and then flipping them without asking.