Not signed in (Sign In)

Category Filter

Welcome, Guest

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthorroburrito
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2012
     
    ^^ UpdatedA few spokes shy of a wheel.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNuggetross
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2012
     
    hey guys, you realize that the main point of this game is fun, right? let's not get too bogged down in the details. yes, i know there are some things to be ironed out. want me to just be benevolent dictator?

    @chr|s sedition: next time, i'd say try to get it posted normally. that being said, this game is all INclusion not EXclusion. even people with smart phones can compete. and i'm not going to be a total ball buster.

    i'm also hoping to get a lot of people involved. let's not intimidate people thinking of participating, eh?
    •  
      CommentAuthortyler
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2012
     
    I wanna play but shit, you guys got like a 2 hour turn around on these!
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2012 edited
     
    Presuming it continues humming along I'm sure there'll be plenty of opportunity to jump in.

    As for games = fun and not deadly serious business, I suspect we all get that. It may have gotten lost in the moment, but I can say for certain that I was kidding about scooping.

    BTW, seeing I will now never have the opportunity to use any of my clues on the Copp's Hill Cemetery tag, I give you my punny-bad final clue "What's the mather, you still can't figure it out?"

    The Reverends Mather (e.g. Cotton, Increase) are buried at that cemetery.
  1.  
    Cheez, maybe it's a result of miscommunication over the Internets, but I took your post as (1) taking issue with my tag being too random/hard within a very short time of posting it (e.g. THAT was the 2.5 hours I was referring to), (2) rather than ask for a hint, jump to complain about it, and (3) stating you thought about trying to take a (re)tag that wasn't rightfully yours. I don't think I need to explain why any of those might raise an eyebrow. Clearly, it wasn't too random/hard. Someone tagged it rather quickly. Again, maybe this is all result of miscommunication over the internet. Please, correct me if I am wrong on something here. I've been on BFG since 2008 and I've *never* become involved in a on-line "tiff" with a single member of this forum. I certainly don't intend to do so now, over something that is as fun as this little tag game...so please don't read any type of ill-will or animosity into anything I just typed, or have previosuy said in this thread. Carry on.

    OH, and RE North End...no wonder I couldn't get that one. Despite living in Boston most of my life, the N.End is a black hole to me. It could have been right on Market St and I wouldn't have figured it out.

    The newest one has me a bit baffled, bit it's a funny pic.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    photo.JPG

    Dog statue in front of 21 Comm. Ave in the Back Bay.

    photo.JPG
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    chr|s sedition:Cheez, maybe it's a result of miscommunication over the Internets, but I took your post as (1) taking issue with my tag being too random/hard within a very short time of posting it (e.g. THAT was the 2.5 hours I was referring to), (2) rather than ask for a hint, jump to complain about it, and (3) stating you thought about trying to take a (re)tag that wasn't rightfully yours. I don't think I need to explain why any of those might raise an eyebrow. Clearly, it wasn't too random/hard. Someone tagged it rather quickly. Again, maybe this is all result of miscommunication over the internet. Please, correct me if I am wrong on something here. I've been on BFG since 2008 and I've *never* become involved in a on-line "tiff" with a single member of this forum. I certainly don't intend to do so now, over something that is as fun as this little tag game...so please don't read any type of ill-will or animosity into anything I just typed, or have previosuy said in this thread. Carry on.

    OH, and RE North End...no wonder I couldn't get that one. Despite living in Boston most of my life, the N.End is a black hole to me. It could have been right on Market St and I wouldn't have figured it out.

    The newest one has me a bit baffled, bit it's a funny pic.


    Ok, if we're going back to the enumerated list, I'll go along with it.

    1. You thought that because I was objecting to it being overly random (parking garage + construction signs + can look down on it from above), but what I was saying (and did in fact say) is that **I** wasn't going to bother with future tags of that ilk. I didn't even say anything like "judges, do you agree this is too random?" Nope, I said I wasn't going to bother with similar tags in the future because "too random is too random." I claim no authority to make an official judgment.

    2. I'm not going to ask for clues where I'm mostly looking for a parking garage, and I might well bitch about it (in the future I shall try to include a photo of a sulking child: "I'm taking my marbles and going home!!!")

    3. Before I address your third point, how effective is it, in attempting to end to a disagreement, to use terms like "rightfully"? Someone else said something about "stealing" the tag of Ted's shot of the T-viaduct and I said in passing that I **thought** about doing it. I can understand saying "trying to take a retag that wasn't rightfully yours" where I actually went ahead and took a photo and posted it (or arguably, even if I had said I re-shot that tag, but hadn't yet posted it, one could at least conclude that I had the ability to go ahead and do it), but I don't here. For lack of a better term, I'd say this is an issue that lacks ripeness.

    For the record I wasn't clear on what you were referring to when you originally said to wait 2.5 hours: I thought you were suggesting you should have 2.5 hours to update your post with html without anyone trying to scoop you, not that I should wait 2.5 hours until I ask for a clue. I have no objection to the latter, although yesterday it seemed early consensus was that 2.5 hours wasn't enough time to wait before asking (ETA: just to be clear, I think we can all agree that scooping would be dumb in this game, the first person already identified the first location, even if the attempted-scooper recognized the scene of the prior tag on their own, it would still be pretty dumb to attempt a scoop).
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    You two should have a law off!Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
  2.  
    BTW...so I can avoid that freaky twitter-round-about-photo-hosting, anyone have any suggestions for an app/hosting site that allows for pics to be uploaded from an iphone (and converts to HTML)? I use TinyPic on my desk top, but it doesn't seem to work on my phone. Thanks in advance!

    @nerdo, I'd much rather just have a beer with Cheez than a law off!All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  3.  
    Now we're talking...

    "You call this a pint? I object!"
  4.  
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

    Location: the only place in Boston I've ever been mugged...or, Ipswich Steet / Charlesgate.


    Image and video hosting by TinyPicAll you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  5.  
    chr|s sedition:BTW...so I can avoid that freaky twitter-round-about-photo-hosting, anyone have any suggestions for an app/hosting site that allows for pics to be uploaded from an iphone (and converts to HTML)? I use TinyPic on my desk top, but it doesn't seem to work on my phone. Thanks in advance!

    @nerdo, I'd much rather just have a beer with Cheez than a law off!


    imgur.com has an app iirc.clockwork ted: this is my favorite thread. sweet BJ alexi!
  6.  
    chr|s sedition:
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic


    Really... gonna make us take our wheels off... Thanks alot...clockwork ted: this is my favorite thread. sweet BJ alexi!
  7.  
    ^ hah. If you don't have tools (*wink*wink*) or quick release, the inversion alone will suffice.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  8.  
    wheels off or no points, creative shots are half the fun.

    also:
    tyler:I wanna play but shit, you guys got like a 2 hour turn around on these!

    for serious. and so far the ones at the end of my work day have been a complete mystery to me.You said time was infinite, so why the watch wrapped around your wrist?
  9.  
    ^ I've been really, really, lucky with time/location so far.

    Mural: Basically on my way home from work.
    Round House: like 1.5 miles from where I live
    Eternal Presence: Had to ride out to my mom's work in West Roxbury. Tag was like .75 mile out of way.
    Train Trestle: Had a 7pm meeting in Back Back. Tag was .50 mile out way
    Ipswich St: Had to drop something off at work (Back Bay) this morning. Tag .05 mile out of the way.

    I'm waiting for my luck to run out!All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    • CommentAuthorObo
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    Seriously, you guys move fast. Get a damn job Cheez! I also know none of these (though I had Russel field at the first instant)I ONLY WEAR CAMPY CONDOMS WITH WHITE WRAPS - joeyfresh
    • CommentAuthortfunkin
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    Have people been foiled by the wheel removal or what? I almost did this one at lunch but... didn't feel like taking my wheel off.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    photo.JPG

    Ft Washington Park, 95 Waverly St Cambridge

    photo.JPG

    Funny, I almost used Fort Washington Park before but ended up at Riverside Press Park instead. Also, tfunkin and I were just talking about it this morning prior to Chris posting. Love this one!

    Anyway, on to my next stop.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNuggetross
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    ^cheez! same post, both pics. c'mon, no "reservations".

    @obo: i know, taking your front wheel off is super hard. i'm still waiting for mid-coitus.
  10.  
    ZOMG. Helmet on middle soldier, hilarious. Wish I had thought of that!

    And following the Cheez lead, here is some historical info on that tag. It's a pretty cool/neat place.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Washington_(Massachusetts), it is "the he only surviving fortification from the Siege of Boston." That is pretty awesome.

    But yeah;
    Nuggetross:^cheez! same post, both pics. c'mon, no "reservations".
    All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  11.  
    Nuggetross:^cheez! same post, both pics. c'mon, no "reservations".

    @obo: i know, taking your front wheel off is super hard. i'm still waiting for mid-coitus.


    Having to post both shots at the same time is fine by me, but thus far that hasn't been common practice (a lot of people have posted the first photo, then rode to the second location, shot that, and edited the first post). I don't think it's strictly spelled-out in the rules, which state only that both images must appear in the same post, not that it be an unedited all-at-once-or-nothing post containing both photos and the info on the first one. And hey, it's not like someone else jumped in and posted both their version of Ft Washington Park and their new tag prior to me getting both up.

    As always, whatever people want in terms of rules is a-ok by me, but I think it should all be clearly spelled out in the original post... and I think it should be acknowledged that requiring both shots be posted at once will likely make it so people constantly post new tags that are near the old ones (to ensure that they get their photos in ahead of someone else who went less distance to grab the second shot).
  12.  
    Really? People were posting them at different intervals? I hadn't noticed that. Mine were always one-shot deals; that's how I interpreted the rules, at least.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    Yep... Epic and... Rob I want to say, both posted the first shot then updated later with the second shot.

    Technically speaking the rules don't say 1st tag, info on 1st tag, and 2nd tag must be posted all at the same time, only that they must all be in one post (and seeing we can edit posts, arguably that leaves open the possibility of the 2nd photo being added after 1st tag + info).

    I firmly believe clarifying the rules to require 1-3 be done all at the same time will stifle creativity (people will either shoot tag #2 on their way to tag #1 or choose something for tag #2 within spitting distance of tag #1, thus sharply curtailing movement). On the other hand, it will leave the first tag open for longer for someone else to try to grab, but I still think the chilling effect will be real.

    Anyway, whatever is fine by me, I'm just reading the rules as written. All I ask is that the rules be written so there's no question on this sort of thing. In this case I would also suggest a new post detailing further explication of the rules (because otherwise I suspect someone will post tag #1 and head off to do tag #2, get "scooped" by someone else, and end up pissed, particularly seeing they'll have given away the location of tag #1 in their post).
    • CommentAuthorroburrito
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    I had both shots when I put the tag up but I'm terrible with smartphones. It took my 15 minutes to figure out how to upload the first picture and post it. I said F it and figured it'd be faster just to ride home and edit in the second. Sorry, was probably a rule violation, if not spelled out, at the heart of the idea.A few spokes shy of a wheel.
  13.  
    A tag is not complete until the previous tag is "remade" and new one has been posted. Thus, it serves no purpose to post one without the other. And the rules say "on the same ride." It says NOTHING about before/after old tag was made (albeit, all of mine were after), just on the "same ride." Besides, creativity is always best "on the fly."All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    • CommentAuthorroburrito
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    But as a compromise between competitiveness and artistry and technology, how about you can post your smartphone pictures as long as they are posted within say 5 minutes of each other (for upload and copy/paste issues). And you can edit in a non-camera phone picture later as long as it is substantially the same image (I care about quality...)

    Edit: I guess I can upload the images separately and just leave the bfixed tab open with the post unsubmitted. Its sad, I'm an aerospace engineer who can build electronics from scratch but I fumble around with a smartphone like a virgin on prom night.A few spokes shy of a wheel.
  14.  
    EDIT: A tag is not complete until the previous tag is "remade" and new one has been posted. So, either

    (1) People are left in limbo if reproduction tag has been made, but not the new one (and people should not be left in limbo), OR

    (2) The tag is still open until the follow-up tag is made. In this case, it serves no purpose to post one without the other.

    Either way, it make sense that they both have to be posted at the same time.

    And the rules say "on the same ride." It says NOTHING about before/after old tag was made (albeit, all of mine were after), just on the "same ride." Besides, creativity is always best "on the fly," or requires a bit of planning before hand.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012 edited
     
    I don't think anyone's disagreeing that you can shoot the photo for tag #2 before you shoot the recreation of tag #1 (the rules definitely don't say otherwise, I pointed that out to Dave via whisper after Ted pointed it out to me).

    I'm also ok with the post not being complete until both shots are posted, I just think we need an official "THESE ARE THE RULES!!!" post making it absolutely clear to everyone so no one inadverdantly gives away the location of #1 and sets themselves up to get scooped. I wouldn't even say I was suggesting previously that posting the recreated tag #1 holds the point until you post #2, only that the rules don't appear to disqualify the whole post if you don't post every required element at the same time.

    Anyway, from now on I won't post #1 until I'm ready to post #2. 90% of the time I shouldn't have much to worry about in terms of someone beating me to both (I also figured out how to easily share the photos from flickr to bfixed via my phone, I could easily have everything up lickety-split, I have to some extent been taking advantage of a loophole in the rules to obscure where the second location is, but of course if everything gets posted at once I won't have to worry about people being able to guess distances based on how long it takes me to update).
  15.  
    Nuggetross:^yeah, that's all i meant. cheez tagged the mit monument with ted (nothing wrong there), but didn't tag the next spot with ted. in order to get a point, don't you think that peeps should have to be in both photos? i'm not going to consider taking away points retroactively on a new game. just wanna know if y'all agree.

    it seems like there could be foul play because say 2 peeps could get a tag, then only one posts a new one, and then the other person gets the tag. there is an incentive to share information with that back and forth. understand? that's why i think a group should have to be in both photos posted.


    Ok, thinking about this more, there is no way that the a group should have to be required in BOTH pics. If that were the case, then there is no way to DECREASE the number of bikes in future tags (e.g. couldn't go from a group tag to a indidual tag without a violation). Instead, I would say that if a SECOND group tag is made, everyone in the second pic gets another points for making the new group tag. This would be the only way to earn a point for JUST putting up a tag.All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  16.  
    PS: I didn't really intend for my latest tag to be as difficult as it seemingly is. I sorta suspect someone here will know it, but as always I'm happy to give clues should that be necessary.

    Speaking of which, is everyone happy with Chris's suggestion that there be a 2.5 hour window before any clues are given, or do people want more time than that? I can imagine some people who would like to get in on the fun could stand to be given a little more time, what with work and all.
  17.  
    ^ I'd say 24 hours, actually....gives people time to suss it out, may not log on all that often, etc. Sure, you snooze you loose, but there should be something reasonable. A few hours is a VERY short period of time (which was my original point mentioning 2.5 hours).All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  18.  
    That sounds fair. I have to admit I've had some luck trying different search terms on le google (the dog statue was a pain, although I suspected correctly that it was either on Comm or Beacon in the Back Bay, and I figured out Ft Washington Park using the halberd-fence).
  19.  
    Only give hints if asked for, and no sooner than 24 hours.You said time was infinite, so why the watch wrapped around your wrist?
    •  
      CommentAuthornerdo
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    Less talk, more tags!Worstcase I'll just zip tie on a seat... but i'd rather not. —Zev (who else)
    • CommentAuthortristan
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    holy crap you guys.ascott430 - "Was going to build it up into a fixed gear until I realized I'd rather spend money and time on mountain bikes."
  20.  
    nerdo:Less talk, more tags!


    If we talk enough maybe you'll all be lulled to sleep and Chris and I can hog all of the points for ourselves?

    But yeah, the most recent tag is up the page, somebody get on that!
  21.  
    tristan:holy crap you guys.
    i mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
    • CommentAuthorObo
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2012
     
    tinyhonkshus:
    tristan:holy crap you guys.
    I ONLY WEAR CAMPY CONDOMS WITH WHITE WRAPS - joeyfresh
  22.  
    BTW, sorry if I broke the game! I really didn't intend to make the most recent tag as hard as it is (although I suspect many of you have ridden right by the pictured little house before). Even knowing where it is I can't seem to find it via google search, and google streetview you would have to know it's there to find it (blends into the shrubs and semi-hidden behind trashcans). Pretty sure it or a predecessor has been there at least 20 years, you'd think someone would've taken a photo of it at some point in the last decade+.

    Anyway, I think I have the first clue figured out for later today, should anyone ask.
    •  
      CommentAuthorStinky Cheez
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2012 edited
     
    Thinking about it a little more, and talking to other people, I'm going to go ahead and post my fantabulous cryptic hint now, and I'll start giving more direct hints a little later (if requested).

    So, here we go... the mea culpa hint #1 that might not actually give away the cake:

    "Muddy River, on high"

    ETA: with something this random you can rest assured that there's something notable within spitting distance. If you figure out the right general location (hint might lead you there), look behind the shrub-border with the property to the right side, just off the sidewalk.
  23.  
    'MO HINTS!All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  24.  
    Gotta be somewhere on the emerald necklace. I know I've seen that somewhere but I can't think of where.Naaaah, too uncool for the #messlyfe. I just like to hang out in loading docks and pretend to talk on my radio so that people will like me. - Mfratt
  25.  
    Craigglesofdoom:Gotta be somewhere on the emerald necklace. I know I've seen that somewhere but I can't think of where.
    All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
  26.  
    that hint is good enough, quit whiningi mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
    • CommentAuthorslowski
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2012
     
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

    that ones kinda tough to notice when you're seeing stars at the top of summit ave.

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

    this ones pretty easy but i didn't really go anywhere interesting today.If at first you don't succeed... you fail.
  27.  
    okay if that tiny house is on top of Summit, I rescind my previous statement. I for some reason thought it was Tim, not Chris, who had qft'd Emerald Necklace.i mean that looks like a 10 cat bag, easy
  28.  
    Where the hell is Summit Ave!?!All you white kids look alike when you're still covered in baby fat, so I was getting bored with the non-stop WASP parade.
    • CommentAuthortfunkin
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2012
     
    Oh man, everybody should ride up Summit at least once.
  29.  
    I did mention Muddy River, but I never said I meant the actual river (Brookline was at one point known as Muddy River), and I did say it was a cryptic clue, which I think suggests that one shouldn't taken it too literally.