The picks are in. (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)*
22 morans entered. (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
They selected 157 distinct celebrity targets. (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
2 (powen and ChuckD) selected themselves.
Average age: 67.8 years old (70.2 median)**
Youngest: Levi Johnston (19.66)
Oldest: John Wooden (99.21)
The increasingly convoluted point system factored in, possible individual point totals range from as low as 40 (Bonk) to as high as 110*** (powen), averaging at around 68.**
Most popular (and thus penalized) selections:
QuoteDick Clark 8
John Wooden 7
Fidel Castro 6
Bryant Gumbel 5
Artie Lange 3
Rush Limbaugh 3
Seve Ballesteros 3
Dick Cheney 3
Ron Santo 3
Hugh Hefner 3
Jimmy Carter 3
Andy Rooney 3
Betty Ford 3
Billy Graham 3
Ernie Harwell 3
Kirk Douglas 3
Robert Byrd 3
Amy Winehouse 2
Courtney Love 2
Tawny Kitaen 2
Tom Sizemore 2
Kirstie Alley 2
Steve Jobs 2
Muhammad Ali 2
Bobby Hull 2
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 2
Betty White 2
Joe Paterno 2
Mickey Rooney 2
Nancy Reagan 2
Pope Benedict XVI 2
Phil Cavarretta 2
Best email submission...
QuoteFrom: powen01[at]xxxxxxx.xxx
To: deadpool[at]xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: DEATH.
1. Hee Sop Choi - Mountaineering/Climbing/Kimchi accident
2. The entire cast of Jersey Shore - Venereal Disease (Specifically, the Butt Flu) I also don't care if I don't get points because of the amiguity of my choice, but I think the entire cast dying is a win/win for everyone.
3. powen01 - If I knew, I wouldn't be on here.
4. Michael Lohan - Suicide/Overdose
5. Travis Barker - Tour Bus Accident/Ambien OD
6. Rivers Cuomo - Anxiety attack on stage
7. Osama Bin Laden - Butt-raped to death by wild pack of boars
8. Alex Rodriguez - Butt Flu and/or Auto-erotic asphixiation
9. Lindsay Lohan - Need I say more?
10. Bob "The Voice of God" Sheppard - Dies of death.
11. Al Yellon - Chokes on bologna.
Runner up...
QuoteFrom: huecub[at]xxxxxxx.xxx
To: deadpool[at]xxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: Desipio Dead Pool
Huh?
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 12:39 PM, <deadpool[at]xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> WELCOME TO THUNDERDOME.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> > So what are the rules? Am I allowed to pick someone from my 2009 list?
> >
>
*If you spot any problems in the linked spreadsheets, let me know. In particular, take a look at your own picks to make sure I copied them faithfully. And let me know if I somehow missed any misspelled dupes on the celebrity list.
**Not accurate. I lack age and/or DOB info for 7 entries (Dan McNeil, Don Croft, Noreen Martin, Peggy O'Mara, Richard Heene, Steve Cokely and Torey Malatia)—5 of these, shockingly, Wheezer picks. All 7 appear in the spreadsheet as 110 years old until I have solid info, with no age bonus factored in.
***powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore as his number 2 pick. Given the low probability of the entire cast dying, I've been generous, scoring their collective "age" from the debut of the show December 3. Age bonus = 9 points.
What's this negative bonus point bullshit?
FUCK!
[/quote]
c) Deduct one penalty point for each person other than yourself who picked the same person
Also, Torey Malatia appears to be about 52, judging by his WBEZ bio. I suppose we could email him to confirm.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:04:26 AM
Also, Torey Malatia appears to be about 52, judging by his WBEZ bio. I suppose we could email him to confirm.
Don Croft claims to have been a teenager living in Guam in the "mid-sixties."
Quote from: Wheezer on January 02, 2010, 01:06:41 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:04:26 AM
Also, Torey Malatia appears to be about 52, judging by his WBEZ bio. I suppose we could email him to confirm.
Don Croft claims to have been a teenager living in Guam in the "mid-sixties."
That would explain quite a bit.
For McNeil, you can go with 45, probably. http://www.670thescore.com/Dan-McNeil/4542797
QuoteMcNeil, 45, was an original cast member of "The Score," for which he served as an afternoon host until his resignation in October of 2000. During Danny Mac's nine-year run, he developed a reputation as a well connected, college and pro football addict whose feel for radio production separated him from the pack.
Shouldn't Artie Lange have a negative bonus?
Ixnay on the at-thay.
Quote from: Wheezer on January 02, 2010, 01:34:23 AM
Shouldn't Artie Lange have a negative bonus?
His popularity penalty of -2 is offset by his age bonus (42 years old: +5). (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 01, 2010, 11:47:16 PM
2 (powen and ChuckD) selected themselves.
Can you claim points for yourself if you commit suicide?
I vote yes.
Quote from: Pre on January 02, 2010, 12:06:24 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 01, 2010, 11:47:16 PM
2 (powen and ChuckD) selected themselves.
Can you claim points for yourself if you commit suicide?
I vote yes.
I'm obviously all for it, although I assumed that was a no-go.
Quote from: Slack-E on December 18, 2009, 03:19:20 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on December 18, 2009, 12:34:34 PM
Bump.
13 shopping days until DEAD POOL.
So far, I've got picks from TJ, RV, Yeti and Pen.
PM me for the submission email if you haven't already.
And remember: we can't all pick Carlos Silva.
It doesn't count if you off the people on your own list.
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:15:31 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 02, 2010, 12:06:24 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 01, 2010, 11:47:16 PM
2 (powen and ChuckD) selected themselves.
Can you claim points for yourself if you commit suicide?
I vote yes.
I'm obviously all for it, although I assumed that was a no-go.
Quote from: Slack-E on December 18, 2009, 03:19:20 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on December 18, 2009, 12:34:34 PM
Bump.
13 shopping days until DEAD POOL.
So far, I've got picks from TJ, RV, Yeti and Pen.
PM me for the submission email if you haven't already.
And remember: we can't all pick Carlos Silva.
It doesn't count if you off the people on your own list.
I figure that with my usual activities from week to week, it wouldn't be a surprise to see me bite it at some point. I figured if I died, I might as well go out a winner. I don't think I should get the points if I out and out kill myself. That would be a cheap win.
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
The motion is tabled until December then.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
And I find it extremely suspicious that you want to change a rule just to benefit Powen. I think the two of you may be related, or at least in cahoots.
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 04:23:16 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
And I find it extremely suspicious that you want to change a rule just to benefit Powen. I think the two of you may be related, or at least in cahoots.
Dig too deep into how the illuminati runs this dead pool and you're going to end up on my list for next year.
Quote from: powen01 on January 02, 2010, 08:18:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 04:23:16 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
And I find it extremely suspicious that you want to change a rule just to benefit Powen. I think the two of you may be related, or at least in cahoots.
Dig too deep into how the illuminati runs this dead pool and you're going to end up on my list for next year.
You better mean this or else Paul is going to call you on it.
Quote from: flannj on January 03, 2010, 01:10:18 AM
Quote from: powen01 on January 02, 2010, 08:18:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 04:23:16 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 02, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 12:39:21 PM
I propose that for a given slot on your list, you can select more than one person so long as they are related/connected to one another in a logical fashion. Points would be awarded for each individual separately. However, points would only be awarded if every person specified for the slot died (AND not OR logic). And the slot bonus should only be awarded once. This would provide for additional risk/reward behavior.
I'll provide an example:
Powen selected the entire cast of Jersey Shore--presumably, the eight housemates-- for his #2 slot.
Let's say the cast dies in a housefire. There are eight cast members; all are in their twenties (Age Bonus: 9); nobody else has selected any of them (Pick Penalty: 0). Thus each of the eight cast members carries a bonus of +9.
8 members * 9 bonus per member + slot bonus (9) = 81
Now, like I said, it needs to use AND logic to encourage risk/reward behavior. So if DJ Pauly D is down the street filling his Valtrex script when the house goes up in flames, then Powen receives no points. Every person specified has to die for any points to be awarded.*
*Note that this would be incentive for Powen to pack his favorite balaclava and Louisville Slugger and pay DJ Pauly D a visit before the year runs out.
I propose that you can't propose new rules 1 day into the fricken contest.
I vote to strike the remarks from the distinguished gentleman from ... who are you again?
Also, it would only affect Powen under an extremely unlikely set of circumstances, but it would be something to consider for next year.
And I find it extremely suspicious that you want to change a rule just to benefit Powen. I think the two of you may be related, or at least in cahoots.
Dig too deep into how the illuminati runs this dead pool and you're going to end up on my list for next year.
You better mean this or else Paul is going to call you on it.
How dare you speak His name.
I'm surprised two others picked Artie, but it might be a wise choice (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2010/01/howard-stern-sidekick-artie-lange-hospitalized/1).
Ed McMahon is DEAD???
I suck at this.
Okay, so Chuck—the same guy, mind you, who posted this about a month ago:
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 08, 2009, 02:38:05 PM
In.
Entries due by 11:59 PM on 12/31/09.
—just sent me his dead pool picks this morning.
QuoteAdd me or ignore me at your discretion.
As always, choice 'b' is rather tempting. But I think I'll just put the question to you guys.
What will it be, Desipio?
In, but -5 points for lateness
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 09:52:10 AM
Okay, so Chuck—the same guy, mind you, who posted this about a month ago:
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 08, 2009, 02:38:05 PM
In.
Entries due by 11:59 PM on 12/31/09.
—just sent me his dead pool picks this morning.
QuoteAdd me or ignore me at your discretion.
As always, choice 'b' is rather tempting. But I think I'll just put the question to you guys.
What will it be, Desipio?
In, but pays for even more drinks than he did last year at Shitty's.
Quote from: Yeti on January 05, 2010, 10:06:21 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 09:52:10 AM
Okay, so Chuck—the same guy, mind you, who posted this about a month ago:
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 08, 2009, 02:38:05 PM
In.
Entries due by 11:59 PM on 12/31/09.
—just sent me his dead pool picks this morning.
QuoteAdd me or ignore me at your discretion.
As always, choice 'b' is rather tempting. But I think I'll just put the question to you guys.
What will it be, Desipio?
In, but pays for even more drinks than he did last year at Shitty's.
If we can turn in late entries, I want in then. Didn't get a chance to do one over the break.
Quote from: Yeti on January 05, 2010, 10:06:21 AM
In, but pays for even more drinks than he did last year at Shitty's.
Is that possible?
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on January 05, 2010, 10:11:46 AM
Quote from: Yeti on January 05, 2010, 10:06:21 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 09:52:10 AM
Okay, so Chuck—the same guy, mind you, who posted this about a month ago:
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 08, 2009, 02:38:05 PM
In.
Entries due by 11:59 PM on 12/31/09.
—just sent me his dead pool picks this morning.
QuoteAdd me or ignore me at your discretion.
As always, choice 'b' is rather tempting. But I think I'll just put the question to you guys.
What will it be, Desipio?
In, but pays for even more drinks than he did last year at Shitty's.
If we can turn in late entries, I want in then. Didn't get a chance to do one over the break.
This slope is getting slippery.
(Notracist.)
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Intrepid Reader: Oleg, on New Years Eve:Fuck. I forgot to send my Dead Pool picks to Thrill.
Also, why doesn't Grand Poobah Andy play? Too good for his own messageboard's dead pool?
Quote from: MAD on January 05, 2010, 11:26:12 AM
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Intrepid Reader: Oleg, on New Years Eve:
Fuck. I forgot to send my Dead Pool picks to Thrill.
Also, why doesn't Grand Poobah Andy play? Too good for his own messageboard's dead pool?
I don't think he reads the message board.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 05, 2010, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Yeti on January 05, 2010, 10:06:21 AM
In, but pays for even more drinks than he did last year at Shitty's.
Is that possible?
Yeah, if I don't show up.
Quote from: MAD on January 05, 2010, 11:26:12 AM
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Intrepid Reader: Oleg, on New Years Eve:
Fuck. I forgot to send my Dead Pool picks to Thrill.
Also, why doesn't Grand Poobah Andy play? Too good for his own messageboard's dead pool?
I just assume it's too late.
But damn, I do love Ford trucks and Tostitos.
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Got some pushback in the shoutbox against this scheme.
How does a simple flat penalty of -5 for anyone with late picks sound? Final deadline the end of the day tomorrow?
(I already have late picks from Chuck and TDubbs via PM.)
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 12:20:35 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Got some pushback in the shoutbox against this scheme.
How does a simple flat penalty of -5 for anyone with late picks sound? Final deadline the end of the day tomorrow?
(I already have late picks from Chuck and TDubbs via PM.)
Does this mean I don't have to buy drinks?
I can't believe only one person picked abe vagoda vigoda
Quote from: gehradam on January 05, 2010, 02:19:07 PM
I can't believe only one person picked abe vagoda
Sap, y'all misspelled Vigoda.
Dang!
so I did.
Everyone must have thought that everyone else was going to pick him.
http://www.abevigoda.com/
further research reveals: vagoda (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=vagoda)
Quote from: ChuckD on January 02, 2010, 01:04:26 AM
Also, Torey Malatia appears to be about 52, judging by his WBEZ bio. I suppose we could email him to confirm.
According to the January 31, 2005, Crain's (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?page_id=1697), Malatia was 53. He is thus now likely either 57 or 58, perhaps 59 if the reporting failed to account for publication lead time.
And, from the jacket copy (http://www.amazon.com/Life-Etheric-Carol-Croft/dp/1412095654) of The Life Etheric, "born in Kansas City, Missouri, in 1949, Croft derived a lot of pleasure and education from foreign travel in his teens and in his later years." So, he's either 60 or 61.
Impressive work.
I think that leaves only Peggy O'Mara unaccounted for.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 05:41:23 PM
I think that leaves only Peggy O'Mara unaccounted for.
Yah, she's a tough nut to crack. I don't suppose anyone has ready access to New Mexico state court records.
If it's that hard to find a DOB, does she qualify as a celebrity?
Quote from: Shooter on January 05, 2010, 09:17:54 PM
If it's that hard to find a DOB, does she qualify as a celebrity?
Albert Pujoles would qualify.
Quote from: Wheezer on January 05, 2010, 07:05:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 05:41:23 PM
I think that leaves only Peggy O'Mara unaccounted for.
Yah, she's a tough nut to crack. I don't suppose anyone has ready access to New Mexico state court records.
Yes, but it's not listed. (http://www.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=dl0&page=SearchDetail&service=direct&session=T)
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 12:20:35 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 05, 2010, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 10:39:25 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: Pre on January 05, 2010, 10:02:42 AM
In, but -5 points for lateness
Seconded.
-5 for lateness for Chuck, -10 for the second person to submit late picks (be it TDubbs or anyone else), -15 for the third, and so on?
I like it.
Got some pushback in the shoutbox against this scheme.
How does a simple flat penalty of -5 for anyone with late picks sound? Final deadline the end of the day tomorrow?
(I already have late picks from Chuck and TDubbs via PM.)
Since there have been no objections, late picks in to me by personal message by the end of the day Wednesday.
I'm looking at you, Oleg.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 05, 2010, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on January 05, 2010, 07:05:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 05:41:23 PM
I think that leaves only Peggy O'Mara unaccounted for.
Yah, she's a tough nut to crack. I don't suppose anyone has ready access to New Mexico state court records.
Yes, but it's not listed. (http://www.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=dl0&page=SearchDetail&service=direct&session=T)
Got it, from "Marquis Who's Who on the Web":
Quoteeditor, publisher; b. Kenosha, Wisconsin, May 14, 1947; daughter of Oliver Edward and Ruth Helen (Slater) O'M.; married John William McMahon, May 27, 1973 (div. August 1989); children– Lally, Finnie, Bram, Nora. B.S., University Wis.-Milw., 1970. Teacher high school Alamogordo High School, New Mexico, 1971-72; teacher special education Zia School, Alamogordo, 1972-73; M.B.A. coordinator University Utah, Holloman AFB, New Mexico, 1973; free-lance writer, 1973-77; associate editor Mothering Magazine, Albuquerque, 1978-80, editor, pub., Santa Fe, 1980– ; leader La Leche League, Franklin Park, Illinois, 1975-82. Author: The Way Back Home; editor: Mother Poet, 1983, Schooling at Home: Parents, Kids, and Learning, 1990, Being a Father: Family, Work, and Self, 1990. Board directors Midwifery Training Institute, Albuquerque, 1983-86 , New Mexico State Midwifery Adv. Board, Santa Fe, 1984-89. Member Midwives Alliance North America, International Childbirth Education Association, National Federation Press Women (1st pl. award 1984), National Association Safe Alternatives in Birth, New Mexico Press Women (1st pl. awards 1984), New Mexico Press Association Avocations: herb gardening, ornithology, alternative health. Home: RR 7 Box 124K Santa Fe NM 87505-9803 Office: Mothering Publs PO Box 1690 Santa Fe NM 87504-1690
Quote from: Wheezer on January 06, 2010, 01:07:52 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 05, 2010, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: Wheezer on January 05, 2010, 07:05:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 05, 2010, 05:41:23 PM
I think that leaves only Peggy O'Mara unaccounted for.
Yah, she's a tough nut to crack. I don't suppose anyone has ready access to New Mexico state court records.
Yes, but it's not listed. (http://www.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=dl0&page=SearchDetail&service=direct&session=T)
Got it, from "Marquis Who's Who on the Web":
Quoteeditor, publisher; b. Kenosha, Wisconsin, May 14, 1947; daughter of Oliver Edward and Ruth Helen (Slater) O'M.; married John William McMahon, May 27, 1973 (div. August 1989); children– Lally, Finnie, Bram, Nora. B.S., University Wis.-Milw., 1970. Teacher high school Alamogordo High School, New Mexico, 1971-72; teacher special education Zia School, Alamogordo, 1972-73; M.B.A. coordinator University Utah, Holloman AFB, New Mexico, 1973; free-lance writer, 1973-77; associate editor Mothering Magazine, Albuquerque, 1978-80, editor, pub., Santa Fe, 1980– ; leader La Leche League, Franklin Park, Illinois, 1975-82. Author: The Way Back Home; editor: Mother Poet, 1983, Schooling at Home: Parents, Kids, and Learning, 1990, Being a Father: Family, Work, and Self, 1990. Board directors Midwifery Training Institute, Albuquerque, 1983-86 , New Mexico State Midwifery Adv. Board, Santa Fe, 1984-89. Member Midwives Alliance North America, International Childbirth Education Association, National Federation Press Women (1st pl. award 1984), National Association Safe Alternatives in Birth, New Mexico Press Women (1st pl. awards 1984), New Mexico Press Association Avocations: herb gardening, ornithology, alternative health. Home: RR 7 Box 124K Santa Fe NM 87505-9803 Office: Mothering Publs PO Box 1690 Santa Fe NM 87504-1690
Jason or De Sade?
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 04, 2010, 12:23:40 PM
Ed McMahon is DEAD???
I suck at this.
I'm immensely pleased to discover that Bill Saluga seems still to be kicking.
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 04, 2010, 09:39:23 AM
I'm surprised two others picked Artie, but it might be a wise choice (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2010/01/howard-stern-sidekick-artie-lange-hospitalized/1).
Attempted suicide by stabbing (http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/stern_sidekick_in_suicide_try_5m9Hwhn1OvpONlzbsiW3oJ). Yikes.
Quote from: Shooter on January 07, 2010, 11:27:06 AM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 04, 2010, 09:39:23 AM
I'm surprised two others picked Artie, but it might be a wise choice (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2010/01/howard-stern-sidekick-artie-lange-hospitalized/1).
Attempted suicide by stabbing (http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/stern_sidekick_in_suicide_try_5m9Hwhn1OvpONlzbsiW3oJ). Yikes.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/stern_sidekick_in_suicide_try_5m9Hwhn1OvpONlzbsiW3oJ#ixzz0bwvA8JOt
Quote
Finally, proof that Artery Lange can cut it as a comedian! The perfect role model for anyone who wants to take a stab at comedy. Now Artery has a few more cuts he can use on his next DVD. Sure hope this doesn't jack-knife his career! Does this make him a hack? Maybe he just realized it was time for some new blood on the Stern Show?
Is anybody going to actually die this year?
BOOORRRRRRRING.
Quote from: Shooter on January 07, 2010, 11:27:06 AM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 04, 2010, 09:39:23 AM
I'm surprised two others picked Artie, but it might be a wise choice (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2010/01/howard-stern-sidekick-artie-lange-hospitalized/1).
Attempted suicide by stabbing (http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/stern_sidekick_in_suicide_try_5m9Hwhn1OvpONlzbsiW3oJ). Yikes.
That fat fuck can't even kill himself right? What a loser. I sure hope this doesn't make him "see the light" or some shit.
Hesitation wounds? What a pussy.
anyone check the knife for Jackie Martling's prints?
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Damn you Oleg! JD Salinger was my pick!!!!
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 07, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Damn you Oleg! JD Salinger was my pick!!!!
How the hell is anyone going to know when he dies? He definitely won't tell anyone.
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 07, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Damn you Oleg! JD Salinger was my pick!!!!
You can't OWN dead people, man.
Quote from: CT III on January 07, 2010, 09:48:54 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 07, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Damn you Oleg! JD Salinger was my pick!!!!
You can't OWN dead people, man.
Michael Jackson used to own the Elephant Man.
Maybe it's, "You can't OWN dead people forever, man."
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 07, 2010, 09:59:55 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 07, 2010, 09:48:54 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 07, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
Damn you Oleg! JD Salinger was my pick!!!!
You can't OWN dead people, man.
Michael Jackson used to own the Elephant Man.
Maybe it's, "You can't OWN dead people forever, man."
Michael Jackson wasn't a penniless hippie.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has eating paste special.
Screw that. Poaching picks is ungentlemanly. I suggest that the late duplicates be replaced by fiat with random living picks from whomever had the worst record last year.
Quote from: Wheezer on January 08, 2010, 07:19:18 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has eating paste special.
Screw that. Poaching picks is ungentlemanly. I suggest that the late duplicates be replaced by fiat with random living picks from whomever had the worst record last year.
I understand this Wheezer post and fully support it.
Also, thank you, Tank.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
I hear the complaints, and I'm considering them.
Does everyone else agree?
(FWIW, I don't think "paste values" is necessary in this context, as I don't believe you're able to paste formulas between different documents on Google anyways.)
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
Updated with late entries from Chuck, TDubbs and Oleg...
Picks (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=5&output=html)
Scoreboard (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=3&output=html)
Status Board (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tEvra8aPSTDmrRGJT9-vybQ&single=true&gid=4&output=html)
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
I'm proud to see Pre picked up my Horatio Sanz torch. I rooted for that turd for two years before moving on to Artie Lang.
DPD, but after last night, I'm pretty pissed I didn't pick Corso. Jee-ZUZZ.
Quote from: CT III on January 08, 2010, 08:18:17 AM
Quote from: Wheezer on January 08, 2010, 07:19:18 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has eating paste special.
Screw that. Poaching picks is ungentlemanly. I suggest that the late duplicates be replaced by fiat with random living picks from whomever had the worst record last year.
I understand this Wheezer post and fully support it.
Also, thank you, Tank.
For this reason alone, I support it.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
I hear the complaints, and I'm considering them.
Does everyone else agree?
(FWIW, I don't think "paste values" is necessary in this context, as I don't believe you're able to paste formulas between different documents on Google anyways.)
Would it be easier to replace Salinger with my wild card pick?
How about those of us that submitted duplicate picks have to come up with unique replacement picks that accrue no bonuses for being unique?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 08, 2010, 11:21:49 AM
How about those of us that submitted duplicate picks have to come up with unique replacement picks that accrue no bonuses for being unique?
Ah, the old Yul Brynner gambit.
Quote from: Oleg on January 08, 2010, 10:40:15 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
I hear the complaints, and I'm considering them.
Does everyone else agree?
(FWIW, I don't think "paste values" is necessary in this context, as I don't believe you're able to paste formulas between different documents on Google anyways.)
Would it be easier to replace Salinger with my wild card pick?
It's not always about YOU, Oleg. Or your 2 duplicate picks.
It's more about Chuck and TDubbs and their combined 11 duplicates.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 08, 2010, 11:21:49 AM
How about those of us that submitted duplicate picks have to come up with unique replacement picks that accrue no bonuses for being unique?
That's not how it works. There are no bonus points for unique picks that we can deny you, just penalty deductions for picking the same people as other players.
THIS WHOLE THING IS GOING TO HELL AND IT'S ONLY THE 8TH OF JANUARY.
Way to go, Desipio.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 08, 2010, 10:40:15 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
I hear the complaints, and I'm considering them.
Does everyone else agree?
(FWIW, I don't think "paste values" is necessary in this context, as I don't believe you're able to paste formulas between different documents on Google anyways.)
Would it be easier to replace Salinger with my wild card pick?
It's not always about YOU, Oleg. Or your 2 duplicate picks.
It's more about Chuck and TDubbs and their combined 11 duplicates.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 08, 2010, 11:21:49 AM
How about those of us that submitted duplicate picks have to come up with unique replacement picks that accrue no bonuses for being unique?
That's not how it works. There are no bonus points for unique picks that we can deny you, just penalty deductions for picking the same people as other players.
THIS WHOLE THING IS GOING TO HELL AND IT'S ONLY THE 8TH OF JANUARY.
Way to go, Desipio.
You guys are ruining my love affair with other people dying.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 08, 2010, 10:40:15 AM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 07, 2010, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Pre on January 07, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
Quote from: Slack-E on January 07, 2010, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 07, 2010, 07:19:19 PM
A few people saw their bonus points drop, as there were only 17 new unique picks out of the 30 added.
Slak, in particular, saw 2 points shaved off of his formerly unique Liz Taylor pick.
You sons of bitches.
It might be a spreadsheet bitch, but I don't think on time peoples should be penalized
for late peoples stealing their picks.
I'm think Google Docs has paste special. If so, and if we're all done with new entrants, just save a copy of the new sheet, remove the new entrants from one of them, and then hard code the bonuses for all the on-time entrants on to the new copy w/ paste special->values. It doesn't need to be dynamic beyond doing the one lookup to check on the person's status and awarding bonus points.
I'm drunk. Does that make any sense?
I hear the complaints, and I'm considering them.
Does everyone else agree?
(FWIW, I don't think "paste values" is necessary in this context, as I don't believe you're able to paste formulas between different documents on Google anyways.)
Would it be easier to replace Salinger with my wild card pick?
It's not always about YOU, Oleg. Or your 2 duplicate picks.
It's more about Chuck and TDubbs and their combined 11 duplicates.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 08, 2010, 11:21:49 AM
How about those of us that submitted duplicate picks have to come up with unique replacement picks that accrue no bonuses for being unique?
That's not how it works. There are no bonus points for unique picks that we can deny you, just penalty deductions for picking the same people as other players.
THIS WHOLE THING IS GOING TO HELL AND IT'S ONLY THE 8TH OF JANUARY.
Way to go, Desipio.
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
Powen is right! All you statfagitos are ruining the joy of death with your spreadsheets and math.
Quote from: Jon on January 08, 2010, 11:57:09 AM
Powen is right! All you statfagitos are ruining the joy of death with your spreadsheets and math.
Yeah*!
*Actually, the spreadsheets makes my clock strike "Bonertime!"; I'm just trying to get other people kicked out to increase my own odds of winning.
Quote from: powen01 on January 08, 2010, 11:59:24 AM
Quote from: Jon on January 08, 2010, 11:57:09 AM
Powen is right! All you statfagitos are ruining the joy of death with your spreadsheets and math.
Yeah*!
*Actually, the spreadsheets makes my clock strike "Bonertime!"; I'm just trying to get other people kicked out to increase my own odds of winning.
Seconded. Those spreadsheets are awesome. Thanks for putting this together, ThrillStatHomo.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 08, 2010, 11:55:20 AM
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
There's a difference between the pillory and the stocks.
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 08, 2010, 11:55:20 AM
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
Okay... but do the late entrants' duplicate picks get docked that same amount (as if their picks didn't exist)?
More specifically, do Chuck and TDubbs both get full credit for picking Liz Taylor (0 points deducted) even though she was picked more times than 88% of the field?
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 12:07:27 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 08, 2010, 11:55:20 AM
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
Okay... but do the late entrants' duplicate picks get docked that same amount (as if their picks didn't exist)?
More specifically, do Chuck and TDubbs both get full credit for picking Liz Taylor (0 points deducted) even though she was picked more times than 88% of the field?
I think the late entrants should be penalized the same amount that they would be if all entrants were submitted blind. The on-time entrants should be penalized as much as they were prior to Oleg, Chuck, and TDubbs' entries.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 08, 2010, 12:10:43 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 12:07:27 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 08, 2010, 11:55:20 AM
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
Okay... but do the late entrants' duplicate picks get docked that same amount (as if their picks didn't exist)?
More specifically, do Chuck and TDubbs both get full credit for picking Liz Taylor (0 points deducted) even though she was picked more times than 88% of the field?
I think the late entrants should be penalized the same amount that they would be if all entrants were submitted blind. The on-time entrants should be penalized as much as they were prior to Oleg, Chuck, and TDubbs' entries.
I think Thrill should just come up with a very Draconian rule for this and let's move on and start hoping for people to die.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 08, 2010, 12:54:16 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 08, 2010, 12:10:43 PM
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on January 08, 2010, 12:07:27 PM
Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 08, 2010, 11:55:20 AM
Just penalize the late entries and do not reduce any point totals for those who were on-time. QED.
Okay... but do the late entrants' duplicate picks get docked that same amount (as if their picks didn't exist)?
More specifically, do Chuck and TDubbs both get full credit for picking Liz Taylor (0 points deducted) even though she was picked more times than 88% of the field?
I think the late entrants should be penalized the same amount that they would be if all entrants were submitted blind. The on-time entrants should be penalized as much as they were prior to Oleg, Chuck, and TDubbs' entries.
I think Thrill should just come up with a very Draconian rule for this and let's move on and start hoping for people to die.
Oh, "Draconian" this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eqGTJoRiLI).
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 08, 2010, 01:33:05 PM
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
What the fuck did I do to deserve that shit?
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:35:13 PM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 08, 2010, 01:33:05 PM
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
What the fuck did I do to deserve that shit?
You know what you did.
Quote from: CT III on January 08, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:35:13 PM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 08, 2010, 01:33:05 PM
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
What the fuck did I do to deserve that shit?
You know what you did.
I touched a lot of people?
Quote from: Jon on January 08, 2010, 11:57:09 AM
Powen is right! All you statfagitos are ruining the joy of death with your spreadsheets and math.
Screw that, I've had more emotional investment in Artie Lang's inability to properly stab himself
than anything since, well, I better put my wedding in case the wife sees this...
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:39:37 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 08, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:35:13 PM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 08, 2010, 01:33:05 PM
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
What the fuck did I do to deserve that shit?
You know what you did.
I touched a lot of people?
Sucked at life.
I have no idea what the rules are for the Dead Pool. I just picked 10 people that I thought would die. Who gives a shit? Just die already.
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on January 08, 2010, 02:13:01 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:39:37 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 08, 2010, 01:38:26 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 08, 2010, 01:35:13 PM
Quote from: Kermit IV on January 08, 2010, 01:33:05 PM
I think TDubbs should have to spend an hour next Friday at Shitty's talking to Fork.
What the fuck did I do to deserve that shit?
You know what you did.
I touched a lot of people?
Sucked at life.
I have no idea what the rules are for the Dead Pool. I just picked 10 people that I thought would die. Who gives a shit? Just die already.
I'm still waiting on that sandwich, bitch.
How about all late entry duplicate picks get replaced with Dick Clark, and we proceed as normal from there.
Quote from: gehradam on January 09, 2010, 10:28:40 AM
How about all late entry duplicate picks get replaced with Dick Clark, and we proceed as normal from there.
Or George Clooney...
Quote from: powen01 on January 09, 2010, 10:37:00 AM
Quote from: gehradam on January 09, 2010, 10:28:40 AM
How about all late entry duplicate picks get replaced with Dick Clark, and we proceed as normal from there.
Or George Clooney...
Or RDJ...
Quote from: Yeti on January 09, 2010, 10:41:40 AM
Quote from: powen01 on January 09, 2010, 10:37:00 AM
Quote from: gehradam on January 09, 2010, 10:28:40 AM
How about all late entry duplicate picks get replaced with Dick Clark, and we proceed as normal from there.
Or George Clooney...
Or RDJ...
or Carrie Muskat...
Damn, and I was so going to put "thousands of haitians" as my #1...
Looks like no one had Dennis Hopper. Get your creative subject titles ready.
Quote from: Slaky on March 26, 2010, 09:08:23 AM
Looks like no one had Dennis Hopper. Get your creative subject titles ready.
I hope the bastard hangs out until next year. It may be "cheating" like someone had an issue with a couple months ago, but I wanna score some points dammit.
Well three of you bastids got points today.
Quote from: thehawk on May 04, 2010, 07:35:23 PM
Well three of you bastids got points today.
Huey's a perennial overachieving underachiever.
The only player with more than one kill, but still not in first place.
Also: Welcome, RV and TJ.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on May 04, 2010, 07:45:56 PM
Quote from: thehawk on May 04, 2010, 07:35:23 PM
Well three of you bastids got points today.
Huey's a perennial overachieving underachiever.
The only player with more than one kill, but still not in first place.
Also: Welcome, RV and TJ.
Boom. You're next, Gumbel.
Bump?
So what'd I win? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDVQu_a_p9c)