PLAYERS TASKS PRAXIS TEAMS EVENTS
Username:Password:
New player? Sign Up Here
Lincøln
Level 8: 5802 points
Alltime Score: 20858 points
Last Logged In: May 31st, 2017
BADGE: Senator BADGE: INTERREX BADGE: Journey To The End Of The Night Organizer TEAM: Societal Laboratorium TEAM: The Disorganised Guerilla War On Boredom and Normality TEAM: El Lay Zero TEAM: Group Creation Public Badge TEAM: Team Shplank TEAM: The Ezra Buckley Foundation TEAM: SFØ Société Photographique TEAM: SCIENCE! TEAM: SFØ Podcast TEAM: The Ultimate Collaboration Team TEAM: Synaesthetics TEAM: LØVE TEAM: Level Zerø TEAM: Public Library Zero TEAM: SF0 Skypeness! TEAM: INFØ TEAM: AustinZero TEAM: BRCØ TEAM: The Sutro Tower Health and Safety Task Force Justice TEAM: Whimsy TEAM: The Cold War Reenactment Society TEAM: Robots Are Taking Over! TEAM: Team MØXIE! TEAM: Bike TEAM: The Bureau of Introductory Affairs TEAM: SSF0R (Sphores) TEAM: SFØ Academy BART Psychogeographical Association Rank 8: Psychogeographer EquivalenZ Rank 3: Protocologist The University of Aesthematics Rank 7: Professor Humanitarian Crisis Rank 1: Peacekeeper Biome Rank 3: Field Researcher Chrononautic Exxon Rank 2: Futurist Society For Nihilistic Intent And Disruptive Efforts Rank 6: Deconstroyer


retired













400 points

Trajectory of Desire by Lincøln, Blue, Populace Junky, FIFA Sport, Red Vic, Bookmobot, Betsy, The Revolutionary, Jellybean of Thark, Poncho

December 14th, 2007 9:43 PM

INSTRUCTIONS: Create a new group for SF0.

tod-fin33066.gif

Multilateral Task Exchange








and the trajectory of any desire.








I call on you to go B L U E & Unlock your hidden trajectory of desire. This is the group with no group this is the trajectory that can satisfy your any desire; no matter what colors they are. We have a more liberal view of groups and admit that even our own group could be more accurately labeled as a new way to play SFZerø.





Have you ever gotten really excited when you found out about a task only to find that it does not coincide with your groups trajectory of desire? The Multilateral Task Exchange believes that a characters trajectory of desire may be larger than their groups and that indeed one character may contain in itself "A MISMATCHED, heimlich UNHEIMLICH TRAJECTORY OF DESIRE1."

You are invited to try an experiment with your desires.
Complete a task from another group with your groups aims and interests in mind, or step out and complete a task through the given groups trajectory or you can experiment even further by blending two groups separate desires into one. Walk a mile in another groups shoes. See how it feels. If you like it I call on you to go B L U E the next era .





How it works…





  1. Find a task that belongs to another group that really calls you.









  2. Approach a player from that group and ask them if there is a task they would be interested in exchanging it for.Make sure they are at the right level. It is recommended that you pick tasks where your only limitation is group.









  3. Each character signs up for their respective task, adds the other player as a collaborator and then drops this task.




Multilateral Task Exchange

















Support your local




Multilateral Task Exchange



















- smaller


I look at this every day.

I look at this every day.





27 vote(s)


Terms

(none yet)

86 comment(s)

The proof was un-submitted
posted by SF0 Daemon on December 14th, 2007 9:41 PM

This proof was un-submitted - any comments before this one are from before the un-submit.

Hmmmm…
posted by Blue on December 14th, 2007 9:45 PM

My boot from group button seams to have disapeared.

(no subject)
posted by Frostbeard on December 14th, 2007 9:57 PM

Very interesting. This will turn some heads, definitely. However, if everyone were to go blue, there would be no one to trade tasks with. How is this then remedied?

(no subject)
posted by Bex. on December 14th, 2007 11:41 PM

Here here! Anything to promote grouplessness has the Royal Stamp of Approval. Let us abolish the divisions that rend the empire assunder and unite the nation of SFZero!

(no subject)
posted by Flitworth on December 15th, 2007 5:43 AM

My interpretation of the purpose of the groups is to give focus and structure to tasks. While I have mixed feelings about team-based competition I find that I operate more effectively with a set of structures or strictures and force me to be more thoughtful about my actions and completions. The divisions are not one of the heart or mind but guidelines to help us shape our work. I believe this is related to the issues with the UofA: by being so general and far-reaching in its trajectory it, far more than the other groups, might be considered to have lost shape.

(no subject)
posted by Burn Unit on December 15th, 2007 7:51 AM

I first read this as a very kindly invitation to a new playing modality, to take as players wish.

What the crap is it with everybody needing to abolish things all the time? I don't have a problem with you personally, Bex, by the way, I'm just sayin there's this dogmatic habit people fall into.

Spar, as for your button problem: were you trying to boot all your collaborators? (it would have been an impressive gesture) Did any of these players sign up separately from your add-as-collaborator? Or did someone else add them? Cuz I think you can only boot people you sign up and yourself. Otherwise those people have to drop themselves.

(no subject)
posted by Meta tron on December 15th, 2007 1:33 PM

You can't drop from a task once it has been submitted if you were added by someone else - it has to be them that boots you.

(no subject)
posted by Burn Unit on December 15th, 2007 2:07 PM

yeah, that sounds about right. if you signed yourself up, you have to be the one who drops you, yeah?

***EDIT 10pm saturday: Ah, but you couldn't have signed up for this, could you Spar? That's right this would have been closed to you as a non-group player. And these collaborators of yours are all way too low to sign you up for it. picture1033625.png

So you already got some multilateral tasking exchange started. You received some help from someone at level 7 or above, surely? Just to get this task underway at all. Then they dropped the task, yes? Perhaps this mystery benefactor is the one with the power you lack over your buttons. I'm just spinning theories here.

Ooh it's really quite handy too! you now have a full slate of grouped players at level four in one fell swoop and each of them could multilaterally sock away 10 tasks both tasty from the standpoint of their content and worth some decent points (oh, come on, the rest of you bourgeois players might not talk about the points, but they're going to hover there in the room long after your corpses have dried up and blown away.*) They could sign you up for all kinds of tasks you think are cool, and you could sock them away for a rainy day. It's not unheard of, else how would someone get a personal list looking like what's pictured over there->, am I right or what?

(no subject)
posted by Darkaardvark on December 15th, 2007 5:27 PM

1. How does this complete the task?

2. How does this merit 400 points? (Please no 'I don't play for points' comments, we know that road already.)

3. The collaborate and then drop the required-group member is an exploit, as far as I'm concerned.

4. You're not advocating going 'Blue', that defeats the whole point of your proposal. You're advocating taking a group but ignoring that group's trajectory and embracing 'blueness' which is somewhat different.


I'm not taking on your main argument or talking about whether or not groups should exist, or how strictly they should be enforced. Just a couple of talking points.

(no subject)
posted by JTony Loves Brains on December 15th, 2007 5:36 PM

Darkaardvark,
I think he's saying 2 things. 1) next opportunity you have, choose to go blue (by not choosing a group) and there-by creating a universal group that ignores the individual trajectories (or embraces all the trajectories at once).

2) Most folks at this particular moment (and at least for the next 2 weeks or so) already belong to groups... so here is a way (via the collaboration buttons) to circumvent your own group's binding to it's particular trajectory and act as if you already were blue until the next group choice opportunity allows you to truly play blue.

For me, I'm for working blue in any venue, but here S P A R has given us an opportunity to work with all/none of the groups at once and truly embrace SF0 in all it's colors.

(no subject)
posted by teucer on December 15th, 2007 8:04 PM

I don't think he's really given us an opportunity at all - just encouraged us to do something. And I'm inclined to agree with the Aardvark's criticisms, primarily because I share Burn Unit's perspective that this is nothing more than a friendly invitation to play differently.

Encouraging different playstyles is a good thing. I'm not gonna adopt this one, but I like seeing it advocated. That said, mightn't Note To Players or Discussion Forum be a better place for it?

Response
posted by Blue on December 19th, 2007 2:37 PM

I will respond to these comments and questions shortly.
A mere 15 days left in the era moved my hand to drop this sooner than I would have liked. And technical difficulties have delayed my coinciding completions. Cursed software serial #'s.

The Big Red X
posted by SF0 Daemon on December 21st, 2007 6:19 PM

This proof has been flagged by several of your fellow players (for the benefit of all, flags are anonymous). As such, it has been automatically disapproved. Most likely, they've posted comments explaining why they're displeased. If you think you may be the victim of a bug, injustice, or a gang of Rubins, hit up the contact page.

(no subject)
posted by The Vixen on December 21st, 2007 6:35 PM

Oh come on, save the flags so he can defend his position first. Whatever happened to discourse???

Y'all are a bunch of lazy mutherfuckers...

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 21st, 2007 8:19 PM

why a flag? It's done everything the task asks. There's even cool graphics.

(no subject)
posted by teucer on December 21st, 2007 9:50 PM

It encourages a new playstyle, but it doesn't exactly create a group.

(I say this as somebody who neither voted nor flagged.)

(no subject)
posted by Burn Unit on December 22nd, 2007 7:44 PM

I for one am not ready to flag this

(no subject)
posted by SNORLAX on December 23rd, 2007 6:52 PM

still no rebuttal??

posted by Blue on December 23rd, 2007 7:25 PM

Our rebuttals are our completions.
It just so happens my media folder does not appear to be working.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 23rd, 2007 7:37 PM

A rebuttal to what complaint? That this is more a style of gameplay rather than a real group? I would say that S.N.I.D.E. is more a style of play than this is. But I didn't flag that completion, because it's a valid standpoint. I showed that I didn't agree by not voting for it. As did many others. Flagging of somebody's opinion of what a group should or could be is just petulant and childish. If you don't agree, then don't vote for it. But all of the completions of this task so far are just opinions of how somebody would like to play the game. Which is what the task description asks for. Flagging this is like flagging someone's player photo (not Someone's player photo, but a player's player photo). It's not like we photoshopped a flag onto Sutro Tower and claimed we'd done the High Score Task. There's no wrong way to do this task other than not to come up with a group.

(no subject)
posted by lara black on December 23rd, 2007 8:51 PM

whoa! what happened here? unflag.

The Big Red X
posted by SF0 Daemon on December 24th, 2007 2:26 AM

This proof has been flagged by several of your fellow players (for the benefit of all, flags are anonymous). As such, it has been automatically disapproved. Most likely, they've posted comments explaining why they're displeased. If you think you may be the victim of a bug, injustice, or a gang of Rubins, hit up the contact page.

(no subject)
posted by Charlie Fish on December 24th, 2007 4:56 AM

Unflag!

(no subject)
posted by SNORLAX on December 24th, 2007 9:34 AM

again?

(no subject)
posted by Malaysian Eddy on December 24th, 2007 10:41 AM

DUDE!! who keeps flagging this shit?

(no subject)
posted by teucer on December 24th, 2007 11:47 AM

This isn't "flagging somebody's opinion of what a group could be", this is people flagging something that doesn't create anything, and advocates grouplessness, because it's claiming to complete a task that says "create a group".

I also agree that SNIDE is really more of a style of play even than this is - but that at least enshrines that style in a proposed group, whereas this one says "instead of creating a group, let's refuse! and claim the four hundred points anyway!" So flagging it really does make sense.

(I still haven't, because I prefer to express my displeasure by withholding a vote. I've expressed myself in the same fashion on SNIDE.)

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 24th, 2007 11:53 AM

I see what this group needs are some kind of limitation or restrictions. There needs to be an impediment to make it harder, not easier to play this way. Right now everybody sees it as all advantages and no disadvantages. I think we need to come up with a wrench to throw in our own gears to make it more palatable to others. An answer will be forthcoming regarding that.

(no subject)
posted by teucer on December 24th, 2007 11:58 AM

Maybe. I don't presume to speak for those who have flagged it, but my own preference would be for you to actually propose a group, as those are presently defined.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 24th, 2007 12:13 PM

I think the group is valid (just my opinion), I think it's being perceived as being too big. The Revolutionary thought that the UofA was too big and all encompassing, well, this must be frightening to somebody who likes the restrictions and security (and maybe the separatism) of the individual groups.

A side note, I was disappointed when I clicked onto this site for the first time after Lank sent me the link and discovered that I had to pick a group. I wanted to do all of the tasks. But realized that doing the group thing was the way the game was played, so I chose (I didn't know there was a way to slip around that rule like Shalaco did). I've always enjoyed doing tasks from other groups. It feels somehow freer, more like we're all sharing.


I think what we need here is some restriction. Belonging to this group is kinda like having the Wand of Orcus. We need to introduce some Kryptonite (sorry for mixing genres) into the equation.

Another side note. My spell check didn't understand "Orcus" but had no problem with "Kryptonite".

(no subject)
posted by lara black on December 24th, 2007 12:45 PM

The Revolutionary thought that the UofA was too big and all encompassing, well, this must be frightening to somebody who likes the restrictions and security (and maybe the separatism) of the individual groups.


please notice that the revolutionary, as well as myself, eddy, and susy derkins (all active participants in the cause) make up a large percentage of the votes on this task.

i don't think people are frightened of this proposal. i think they are irked that a task worth so many points is being approached from an angle that doesn't quite fit into the existing structure of the game.

shifts in the organizational paradigm and structural framework of the game that originate from within the game itself are what make a sfzero a living, breathing entity that remains compelling and worthwhile era after era. the fact that ideas like this one, which fall outside the status quo, can find a home on the praxis is what makes me believe that sfzero is coming closer and closer to meeting it's incredible potential.

and so i am feeling a little disappointed.

(no subject)
posted by The Vixen on December 24th, 2007 12:55 PM

the fact that ideas like this one, which fall outside the status quo, can find a home on the praxis is what makes me believe that sfzero is coming closer and closer to meeting it's incredible potential.


So why are you disappointed?

(no subject)
posted by lara black on December 24th, 2007 1:02 PM

i'm sorry, i wasn't clear. i'm disappointed that it has been flagged at all, and more importantly that the fact that people are continuing to vote for it does not seem to have any power to reverse that.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 24th, 2007 1:15 PM

i don't think people are frightened of this proposal. i think they are irked that a task worth so many points is being approached from an angle that doesn't quite fit into the existing structure of the game.


Is it the points?
Really?
Because the two big names on the list there are Blue and myself. We are both at level 8 and care not for points anymore (I can't speak for him, but I never cared for points, just the ability to unlock all of the tasks). All of the other players on this task are no higher than level 2. Is a 400 point bump really going to make much difference to them? Maybe. I dunno.
I have never been too thrilled by the amount of points a task is worth, but by how many votes it gets. And I'm proud of our 10 votes.

Keep it flagged, I don't care. I don't care for the loss of points I should say. I care that somebody (more than 5 somebodies) found it offensive enough to flag it.

(no subject)
posted by lara black on December 24th, 2007 1:54 PM

i don't think it's the points per se, lincoln. i think that people just tend to be more defensive of unconventional completions of huge tasks like this one than they would be if this were introduced via, say, Discussion Forum. i really only mentioned it because the phrase "400 points" made it into a number of comments that seemed to be defending the flagging of this post.

what i'm really trying to get at is that this completion being (and remaining) flagged implies that proposing ideas that do not fall squarely within the existing structure of the game is an unwelcome act that should be punished. i am of the mind that withholding a vote and leaving a comment is a sufficient means to create discourse if you feel the completion falls short.

in this particular case, i do not feel the completion falls short, hence my vote.

i mean, doesn't the very existence of this task beg us to play with the structure of the game? isn't the point of it really to have the players themselves introduce new thoughts about the ways they can align themselves with one another to accomplish new and interesting completions? the proposal itself is an interesting and well thought out idea, and despite slight technical issues that people seem to be bringing up, i don't see why it shouldn't be hosted here in Trajectory of Desire. i'd like to point out that burn unit, the creator of this task and one who should know its spirit better than anyone, is in no hurry to flag it...

i dunno. i guess i've always been more a "spirit of the law" than a "letter of the law" type.

(no subject)
posted by teucer on December 24th, 2007 3:46 PM

The way I see the points is this:

A vote represents recognizing that somebody's completion of something is awesome and it's worth encouraging others to behave similarly.

A number of points assigned to a task completion indicates that the task, when done correctly, is inherently awesome enough to merit the number of votes which would have produced that score - even before any real person looks at it and actually casts the votes in question.

Therefore, if you do something without a reasonable expectation that the votes will come anywhere near the points the task offers just for doing it, you're not doing it right. (That doesn't mean you always have to actually get that many votes - just that you should be expecting it.)

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 24th, 2007 3:56 PM

That makes sense. So perhaps, this was assigned too high a point value? 80 votes seems a bit much, I mean doorhenge only got 63 votes. Expecting this to Shplank out at 80 votes is a bit far-fetched.

(no subject)
posted by Sean Mahan on December 24th, 2007 5:10 PM

Well, we've got a week to go. This has gotten 8 flags, but here's the deal: you can't tell by looking at the score at the top (and it's not getting fixed in the next week), but my vote is worth negative 300 points (and I hope the esteemed Mssrs Mascarpone and Lincoln understand this is MacGuyver game mechanics at work, rather than personal opinion). Maybe making this particular completion worth 100pts + votes is enough to change some perspectives on it. Glasnost! Glasnost! Glasnost!

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 24th, 2007 5:32 PM

Awesome.

(no subject)
posted by The Vixen on December 24th, 2007 5:45 PM

LONG LIVE GLASNOST!!!

untitled-126225.jpg

(no subject)
posted by Darkaardvark on December 24th, 2007 5:50 PM

I think I see where you're coming from, defining this as a group. I wish you would define your trajectory of desire (or intentional lack thereof?) more clearly, because I feel like that's a part of what sf0 is -- whether or not you agree with the overall group structure.

Do I feel like groups could be eliminated or vastly overhauled without killing sf0? Yes. Do I feel like this should happen in the next era? Yeah, there needs to be change. Recent events have proved this, easily. But I still feel that having someone sign up for a task, invite you, and then drop the task is an exploit. And I say this having seen other similar situations where people have abused exploits in order to make a point about the way a game should be run. I think you've made your point, and frankly, I agree with parts, even most, of it. But I am still not 100% comfortable with the way you have gone about it.

Just my two cents. You don't have to agree, but that's how I feel.

yay!
posted by lara black on December 24th, 2007 5:59 PM

sean. fucking. mahan.

:)

All Hail the rise and fall of Glasnost
posted by Blue on December 24th, 2007 9:06 PM

@ DarkAardvark

  1. How does this complete the task?
    This task calls for players to create a new group. By my own definition of group and play I have done so. Coincidentally the rules support my opinion. "The groups are fictional if they don't have any members. If a group has at least two (2) members then it is no longer fictional.1 Its in the mother fucking bylaws

  2. How does this merit 400 points?
    First of all it has been flagged down three times and is still standing.
    Also, have you ever tried to get to level 8 without joining a group?
    Besides, do you know how much code it takes to make all those
    different colors in Multilateral Task Exchange?


  3. The collaborate and then drop the required-group member is an exploit…
    Before I did this write up I did a test submition to see if I could complete this task on my own and then add on others as players joined the exchange. It worked. After I did the write up and submitted it the rules had changed. But you better believe I intend to make full use of and derive benefit from SFØ and I strongly encourage everyone else to do so as well.

  4. You're not advocating going 'Blue'
    I am inviting players to try an experiment with their trajectory(ies) of desires. An individuals trajectory may indeed be larger than their groups.2
You cannot exploit a game that has rules that are left open for interpretation.
This era as defined by its name is an era of maximal publicity, openness, and transparency in the activities of all government institutions players in the Soviet Union, SFØ together with freedom of information

Our Trajectory of Desire is individual and larger and more complex than our groups ToD. Groups give structure and promote growth. But growth eventually necessitates breaking past previous barriers and finding your own structure within the larger order of things.

Going B L U E is to SFØ as SFØ is to San Francisco(or perhaps the world).
Just as…
SFZero is an interface for San Francisco. That is to say, a new
representation for the data that's already there. Your mind is full of
/inaccurate/ representations that are affecting the way you use the San
Francisco dataflow: steering you away from interaction and collaboration
and towards unproductive reflexive data loops. SFZero
designers are working double-shifts to engineer this next-generation
interface that will bring you together with your fellow San Franciscans to
experience the freedom that is /hard-coded/ into San Francisco's protocol.
Going B L U E is hard-coded into SFØ and is often misperceived as exploitation. It discourages "unproductive reflexive data loops" such as those recently seen in UofA.

However, I am in no way calling for the abolishment of any groups but rather for the softening of boundaries.

The Big Red X
posted by SF0 Daemon on December 24th, 2007 9:45 PM

This proof has been flagged by several of your fellow players (for the benefit of all, flags are anonymous). As such, it has been automatically disapproved. Most likely, they've posted comments explaining why they're displeased. If you think you may be the victim of a bug, injustice, or a gang of Rubins, hit up the contact page.

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 24th, 2007 9:52 PM

I vote for flagging-after-un-flaging-point-deleting-votes. I'm amused. Besides which, I think the 'way to play' as opposed to 'trajectory of desire' argument is way out of hand. Play is still my trajectory. I like playing with other groups. Vote.

(no subject)
posted by Darkaardvark on December 24th, 2007 9:58 PM

So who keeps flagging this? At this point, that's just weak.

(no subject)
posted by The Revolutionary on December 25th, 2007 12:32 PM

I propose that SPAR is flagging it himself to make it more controversial, and thus tricking me into supporting the BLUE movement.

Damned if it's working.

Long Live the Multilateral Task Exchange!

Hogwash
posted by Blue on December 27th, 2007 3:47 PM

I'm saving that for the next era so I can be the first player with -300 points.
I'll consider it a handicap.

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 27th, 2007 10:36 PM

B L U E: I suggest bringing back this task to assist you with that goal.

(no subject)
posted by Tøm on December 28th, 2007 8:01 AM

I'm voting for this, now it has the task completions.

(no subject)
posted by Charlie Fish on December 28th, 2007 10:13 AM

Some of those task completions deserved multiple votes, so have another vote here.

(Although it doesn't seem to be counting the points?!)

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 28th, 2007 10:17 AM

Sean did something to keep the Red X away, but it stopped tallying votes as points. Which wasn't important to us really anyway. Sean rocks. And apparently he's magic too.

(no subject)
posted by Charlie Fish on December 28th, 2007 10:21 AM

Did you get the 400 points at least? Have they been counted in your score? You deserve them, O carrot-clothes.

The Big Red X
posted by SF0 Daemon on December 28th, 2007 10:34 AM

This proof has been flagged by several of your fellow players (for the benefit of all, flags are anonymous). As such, it has been automatically disapproved. Most likely, they've posted comments explaining why they're displeased. If you think you may be the victim of a bug, injustice, or a gang of Rubins, hit up the contact page.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 28th, 2007 10:36 AM

I guess now, nothing counts, because a gang of Rubins keeps flagging us down without telling us why.

6 flags > 19 votes
posted by Blue on December 28th, 2007 12:19 PM

I mean at least if they voiced their criticisms.
I call for flags to no longer be anonymous.

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 28th, 2007 1:51 PM

Sean isn't magic anymore?

Boo. Sean should always be magic.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 28th, 2007 1:56 PM

Oh he's still magic.

But flags are like Kryptonite to him.

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 28th, 2007 6:35 PM

We should make him an anti-flag suit.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 28th, 2007 6:57 PM

What do you make an anti-flag suit out of? Love?

(no subject)
posted by Praxis on December 28th, 2007 9:45 PM

It's made out of Praxis.
Pure and unadulterated.

The groups are on your side
posted by Groups on December 28th, 2007 9:51 PM

Yeah I don't get it.
There are two people in this group as required by the by-laws.
What gives?
I suspect Zemalaco and the 80's pop culture sock puppets.

Consolation prize?
posted by Lincøln on December 29th, 2007 9:17 PM

Do we at least get some kind of award for the most flagged praxis ever?

I suggest badges:
posted by anna one on December 29th, 2007 9:33 PM

White-Flag-Small.jpg

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on December 29th, 2007 9:36 PM

Nice.
Do we have to go to Antarctica to get our flag (badges)?

(no subject)
posted by Darkaardvark on December 29th, 2007 9:37 PM

Actually I don't think they need an army of sockpuppets... you can flag a completion that's been unflagged even if you've flagged it in the past. I remember this from past epic re-flagging battles (over much more flagworthy material) but this definitely takes top prize.

(no subject)
posted by Burn Unit on December 29th, 2007 9:50 PM

Groups, whoever you are, I don't think this is zM, it doesn't fit his M.O. Why do such an outright prickly thing?

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 29th, 2007 9:51 PM

Lincoln: Maybe you can enlist Loki's assistance...

(no subject)
posted by Blue on December 29th, 2007 10:52 PM

Oh if I ever deserved a badge its a flag badge.

(no subject)
posted by anna one on December 29th, 2007 11:47 PM

Flag FTW!

Faux Badge Installation…
posted by Blue on December 30th, 2007 11:48 AM

I have installed my faux badge.
I call for all who are flag hungry to flag my player photograph!

Collabis! I am so proud of you!
A Fleur De Lis on every one!
(Revolutionary I presume yours is eminent)

Flagged again?!
posted by Charlie Fish on December 31st, 2007 2:36 AM

You've no manner of luck at all.

I love you, Blue!

(no subject)
posted by GYØ Ben on December 31st, 2007 12:52 PM

Hell yeah. I 'gree.

(no subject)
posted by Blue on January 2nd, 2008 9:50 PM

How is it that everyone has followed my lead and gone B L U E…
& yet the big red X remains!

Ben are you agreeing about the love or luck!?

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on January 2nd, 2008 9:57 PM

I was thinking the same thing. It's like even though we got flagged, we won.

(no subject)
posted by Sean Mahan on January 2nd, 2008 10:26 PM

Hey, I checked it out, and that theory about some of the flags being sockpuppets was right - inconceivable!

(no subject)
posted by bill s. preston esq. on January 2nd, 2008 11:27 PM

It seems like there are almost more sockpuppets involved with this page than not... that is, both creators and detractors!

Well, we don't hate. We're real, after all. WE'RE WYLD STALLYNS!

Anybody ever going to join us?

(no subject)
posted by Ted Logan on January 2nd, 2008 11:31 PM

Dude Bill, er... Jill, check it out! I'm BLUE, too!

That's like, rad!

(no subject)
posted by Malaysian Eddy on January 3rd, 2008 12:48 AM

I love how many times this has been flagged! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!


gimmie a free day and my multilateral task will be complete...does anyone have a ducking tub I can borrow!!!!

(no subject)
posted by Darkaardvark on January 3rd, 2008 11:23 AM

A vote for INTERREGNUM embracing BLUE

Yay!
posted by Lincøln on January 4th, 2008 3:03 PM

We got un-flagged (again), but still our votes aren't counting.

We're still the last group on the praxis page.

Although I kinda like being an underdog.

(no subject)
posted by Jellybean of Thark on January 5th, 2008 2:36 AM

I love being an underdog!

(no subject)
posted by Burn Unit on January 5th, 2008 8:21 AM

well sean, I stand corrected about the puppetry then. as for the votes not counting Lincoln, is Sean's still a -300 vote? that might explain some of it? sean? you can see into the data. someone referred to the lavigne-opticon or the sam/panopticon in a message to me once, which I thought was funny. But given now what you've said about checking out theories, of course you can see it in the database. Thus I believe the SEANOPTICON is also an appropriate designation! Also it comes of the tongue nicely. Tap the power of the seanopticon!

(no subject)
posted by GYØ Ben on January 7th, 2008 11:13 AM

Ben are you agreeing about the love or luck!?

THE LURVE, MY DEAR! THE LURVE!

(no subject)
posted by Peter Garnett on June 16th, 2008 9:25 PM

You did a noble thing here.

(no subject)
posted by Lincøln on June 16th, 2008 10:00 PM

Hey      , that reminds me. Why don't we have vote points for this anymore? I know Sean did some flag-erasing magic, but surely, this vote, in this era should count. No?

(no subject)
posted by Blue on June 16th, 2008 10:51 PM

Here here!!! Who else thinks this is worth 300 points!?