Slashdot Habits: Removing foes - Slashdot

Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

×

Journal Chacham's Journal: Slashdot Habits: Removing foes 13

Journal by Chacham on Saturday December 04, 2004 @08:51PM

I guess it had to happen at some point. I removed all my foes. Since i no longer read slashdot stories, the main point of my foe list has been obviated. Plus, a general cleaning is good once in a while.

If i got it correct, here's the removed list by first character:

A 27
B 25
c 21
d 29
e 13
f 12
g 15
h 12
i 9
j 18
k 7
l 12
m 27
n 14
o 8
p 11
q 3
r 15
s 37
t 16
u 3
v 2
w 9
x 4
y 2
z 5
_ 1

which is a total of 357.

I did it all much too quickly though.

Also removed friends with no JEs since November.

If required, foe rules start again with the next JE. Hopefully though, i won't need it.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashdot Habits: Removing foes

Load All Comments

Search 13 Comments Log In/Create an Account

Comments Filter:

Whew (Score:2)

by mskfisher ( 22425 ) * writes:

I just barely squeaked in there:

http://slashdot.org/~mskfisher/journal/89010 [slashdot.org]

2004.11.02

w00t...
- Re:Whew (Score:1)
  
  by Chacham ( 981 ) * writes:
  
  :)
  
  Though, that anyone would care that i read their JE is beyond me.
  
  I'll probably clear JEs once more in January, and then maybe start adding people with "interesting" JEs. Just a thought though. I am not sure why i even read slashdot anymore.
  - Re:Whew (Score:2)
    
    by bettiwettiwoo ( 239665 ) writes:
    
    I am not sure why i even read slashdot anymore.
    
    Force of habit? Or pure addiction?
    - Re:Whew (Score:1)
      
      by Chacham ( 981 ) * writes:
      
      Actually, i think it's the hope that i'll find some really neat thoughts here.
      
      Hmm... i seem to have AC and recent posts set to negative 1. I wonder if i should reset that.
      - Re:Whew (Score:2)
        
        by bettiwettiwoo ( 239665 ) writes:
        
        The problem with ACs is that most of them fall into two, distinct categories:
        
        1. Your standard goatse type, the comments of which are not so much offensive as they are puerile and completely not worthwhile. An easy way to avoid them is, naturally, to set ACs at -1 and never read at that level.
        
        2. Someone who's trying to protect their karma when posting an opinion they deem upsetting for majority of the frail-of-heart slashdotters who get so upset when someone isn't toeing the party line ... which, of course
        
        Re:Whew (Score:1)
        
        by Chacham ( 981 ) * writes:
        
        Heh. I think you're correct. :)
WTF? (Score:1)

by Profane MuthaFucka ( 574406 ) writes:

I'm not sure what the fuck this is all about. Is it a red state/blue state thing?
Why were you my foe at first place? (Score:1)

by NaveWeiss ( 567082 ) writes:

n/t
- Re:Why were you my foe at first place? (Score:1)
  
  by Chacham ( 981 ) * writes:
  
  You probably mused an expletive at one point.
  - Re:Why were you my foe at first place? (Score:1)
    
    by NaveWeiss ( 567082 ) writes:
    
    Aval kulam osim et ze. Betakh biglal ze nigmar lekha hamakom bareshima. ;)
    
    Ata dati?
    - Re:Why were you my foe at first place? (Score:1)
      
      by Chacham ( 981 ) * writes:
      
      Aval kulam osim et ze.
      
      Yesh yechidei segulah shehaynum osim zeh, afelu po.
      
      Betakh biglal ze nigmar lekha hamakom bareshima. ;)
      
      Eh. :)
      
      Ata dati?
      
      Charedi.
im a big fan (Score:1)

by CuntKNOB ( 841537 ) writes:

and i wish to subscribeto your newsletter?

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall