Point taken. (Although 200 guests take up more bandwidth than 20, which seems closer to what we used to get years ago, so you can't deny that the number of viewing guests has gone up... is it relevant to your argument is another question. )

BTW, how do you perform surgery on a rocket?

BTW, how do you perform surgery on a rocket?

 

Use a saw?

Lies...

All lies!

~AA

Exactly. Guests have no signatures or avatars or premier images, thus they waste much less bandwidth.

Thanks for pointing this out, bones.

Not to mention people think it's so freaking easy to just "go to the sign up page and become a member!" >_>

Point taken. (Although 200 guests take up more bandwidth than 20, which seems closer to what we used to get years ago, so you can't deny that the number of viewing guests has gone up... is it relevant to your argument is another question. )

Not really.

BTW, how do you perform surgery on a rocket?

 

Aw, you already know the answer to that. "Very carefully." [Edit: Lol, beaten.]

I once saw over 1000 guests on at one time... <-<

What'd they do? Ban all guests forever? That's a surefire way to make sure that the site fails miserably and just sort of dies off in about a year or so, and even the people that stick around for that long'll all be sad miserable human beings who never meet anyone new. Or all the new people end up being completely baffled and making huge gaffs, and we'd have a bazillion more inactive accounts lying around from lurkers who just wanted to see if this site was for them, and decided that no, no it wasn't.

Lurkers. They are your frieeeeeends! You cannot see them, but they can see you. Wave hello!

*waves to all the lurkers*

Hm....may have to change my veiws against guests...

But wouldn't it be wise to make all these members with 0 posts become guests again? I think all they're doing as members is just to see signatures, avs, etc., or they're just not active anymore. Dealing with all these members would do greatly for the server, methinks....but please correct if wrong.

Amazing .

Just be glad we disabled the Guest Posting.

-Omi

Oh yeah, that was so awful, from the looks of it. Several posts I saw in GaliGee's old interview topics were so bad that it was hilarious.

Does that mean the admin take up more space than regular members? Maybe we should get rid of them instead....

Not to mention people think it's so freaking easy to just "go to the sign up page and become a member!" >_>

It isn't. It took me so long to actually get my membership to work.

Just be glad we disabled the Guest Posting.

 

-Omi

That would be terrible.

~Zhalath

Does that mean the admin take up more space than regular members? Maybe we should get rid of them instead....

I'll agree with you, except whenever I see 666 guests on at once.

(It's happened before. XD)

Were there only two topics with this issue in mind? That's not too many. But bah.

Way to go on wasting your weekly blog entrie on an already discussed point.

~EW~

Just be glad we disabled the Guest Posting.

 

-Omi

Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total blithering jerkwad.

That is the internet, and thus it shall be.

But noobs are our friends!

I'm hardly ever on as a guest. To much trouble to keep logging out to lurk and logging in to do stuff. I guess this makes me an accomplice to Evil Lord Survurlode's schemes, LOL.

-BC

Good tip bonesiii,it really changed my views on the so called 'Guests'.But does it mean we should view the topic first.sign it to post,then sign out again to view posts?

~Just Commenting

Good tip bonesiii,it really changed my views on the so called 'Guests'.But does it mean we should view the topic first.sign it to post,then sign out again to view posts?

 

~Just Commenting

That's a bit extreme -- and probably would cause more lag if you post alot.