Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 626

1 members and 625 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,912
Threads: 249,118
Posts: 2,572,195
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, coda

1.0 2.0 .1

Printable View

  • 08-20-2008, 03:30 PM
    littleindiangirl
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Spaniard View Post
    1.2.3

    Male.Female.Unknown
    So the number above would mean 1 female, 2 males, and 3 snakes of unknown sex

    LOL, Rich you had it right the first time, then you flipped her around!
  • 08-20-2008, 04:07 PM
    Spaniard
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    Hehe...I know, when I was writing the second example I spoke it out loud the right way and wrote it the wrong way. The brain does funny things sometimes :)
  • 08-20-2008, 08:47 PM
    kid_mustango02
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    Heh, now you gotta flip all the numbers around in your sig :D
  • 08-20-2008, 11:50 PM
    kc261
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    What drives me crazy is when there is a list of names in someone's signature, but they aren't in the right order for the sexes.

    Example:
    1.2 normals (Sally, Tom, Mary)

    Since males are listed first in the decimal listing... shouldn't Tom's name come first too? Or is Sally the male? LOL!

    This hurts my head less:
    1.2 normals (Tom, Sally, Mary)
  • 08-21-2008, 12:13 AM
    sg1trogdor
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    THe names dont really have to coincide with the numbers. :). After all its your sig.
  • 08-21-2008, 12:29 PM
    kc261
    Re: 1.0 2.0 .1
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sg1trogdor View Post
    THe names dont really have to coincide with the numbers. :). After all its your sig.

    Yeah, I know they don't HAVE to. I just said it makes my head hurt less when they do! :P
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1