http://kevan.org/catfishing.php is one of the most delightful uses of Wikipedia I've ever found.
Probably not a reason to maintain some of the stupider categories (which tend to be the ones that make the game the most fun), but a pleasant diversion, if nothing else, and, as I said, one of the best uses of Wikipedia content I've seen yet.
-Phil
On 27/04/07, Phil Sandifer Snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
http://kevan.org/catfishing.php is one of the most delightful uses of Wikipedia I've ever found.
Very nice. Especially when the game managed to catch some vandalism... [[J. Jonah Jameson]]: [[Category:Fictional donkeys]] :)
On 4/27/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
That's very cool. I'm going to waste hours on this.
-Matt
What brilliant fun. KP
On 4/28/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Matthew Brown wrote:
That's very cool. I'm going to waste hours on this.
I already did....
-- Jossi
Me too, but I'm at negative 850 or so. :-( ~~~~
On 4/28/07, gjzilla@gmail.com gjzilla@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Matthew Brown wrote:
That's very cool. I'm going to waste hours on this.
I already did....
-- Jossi
Me too, but I'm at negative 850 or so. :-(
I highly suspect most of the players cheat, because if you play honestly, it's hard to get anywhere close to a positive score.
Johnleemk
On 4/28/07, John Lee johnleemk@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, gjzilla@gmail.com gjzilla@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Matthew Brown wrote:
That's very cool. I'm going to waste hours on this.
I already did....
-- Jossi
Me too, but I'm at negative 850 or so. :-(
I highly suspect most of the players cheat, because if you play honestly, it's hard to get anywhere close to a positive score.
Johnleemk
850? Well, I have a positive score of 10. And, yes, I cheated by ignoring the porno ones in my count, but I only did 15, got one porno, and missed 4. A lot of them were science or organism articles, which made them easy, and I gave myself a point for someone I knew but whose name I could not think of. It's not Jeopardy, subtle cheating is allowed.
What a brilliant and fun game, though. Geeze.
KP
On 4/28/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, John Lee johnleemk@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, gjzilla@gmail.com gjzilla@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/28/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Matthew Brown wrote:
That's very cool. I'm going to waste hours on this.
I already did....
-- Jossi
Me too, but I'm at negative 850 or so. :-(
I highly suspect most of the players cheat, because if you play honestly, it's hard to get anywhere close to a positive score.
Johnleemk
850? Well, I have a positive score of 10. And, yes, I cheated by ignoring the porno ones in my count, but I only did 15, got one porno, and missed 4. A lot of them were science or organism articles, which made them easy, and I gave myself a point for someone I knew but whose name I could not think of. It's not Jeopardy, subtle cheating is allowed.
What a brilliant and fun game, though. Geeze.
Not to boast... much; but I stabilized somewhere between 200 and 50 on the positive side. Which just means that I probably should get out a bit more.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
G'day John,
I highly suspect most of the players cheat, because if you play honestly, it's hard to get anywhere close to a positive score.
I was over 300-odd at one point, but as the game wore on I got progressively worse. Sometimes you just get lucky.
(What a great game, though!)