Grand Prix Rejects

I wonder where all of that ridicoulous kid's comments have gone...

legendari25 wrote:I wonder where all of that ridicoulous kid's comments have gone...

He was banned.

pi314159 wrote:

legendari25 wrote:I wonder where all of that ridicoulous kid's comments have gone...

He was banned.

why?

legendari25 wrote:

pi314159 wrote:

legendari25 wrote:I wonder where all of that ridicoulous kid's comments have gone...

He was banned.

why?

He got pissed because people were hating on Paul Di Resta and decided to create around 100 spam threads. He then created even more spam the next day but he should be IP banned now so he can't come back.

assuming he doesn't have dynamic ip... he was 12, if I recall properly. he spammed here too, defending tilke like it was his father

legendari25 wrote:assuming he doesn't have dynamic ip... he was 12, if I recall properly. he spammed here too, defending tilke like it was his father

I read through all of his ( Joey Zyla's ) posts an in one of them he said the year of his birth was 1990 making him 22-23 so on that basis I think Joey is a dead cert for Spambot of the year
BTW thanks for pointing that out about my Shanghai because when I first saw Joey's, I didn't think he had done anything

roblomas52 wrote:

legendari25 wrote:assuming he doesn't have dynamic ip... he was 12, if I recall properly. he spammed here too, defending tilke like it was his father

I read through all of his ( Joey Zyla's ) posts an in one of them he said the year of his birth was 1990 making him 22-23 so on that basis I think Joey is a dead cert for Spambot of the year

... except he wasn't a spambot ...

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:

legendari25 wrote:assuming he doesn't have dynamic ip... he was 12, if I recall properly. he spammed here too, defending tilke like it was his father

I read through all of his ( Joey Zyla's ) posts an in one of them he said the year of his birth was 1990 making him 22-23 so on that basis I think Joey is a dead cert for Spambot of the year

... except he wasn't a spambot ...

No, he was just an asshat...

roblomas52 wrote:

legendari25 wrote:assuming he doesn't have dynamic ip... he was 12, if I recall properly. he spammed here too, defending tilke like it was his father

I read through all of his ( Joey Zyla's ) posts an in one of them he said the year of his birth was 1990 making him 22-23 so on that basis I think Joey is a dead cert for Spambot of the year
BTW thanks for pointing that out about my Shanghai because when I first saw Joey's, I didn't think he had done anything

You're welcome: whatever his age, its easy to use someone else's ideas and claim they're yours. i may be controversial with my comments, remarks and ideas (for racetracks) but I admitted C. Hammer's use of Nordschleife backwards as an extra loop for the Nürburgring was brilliant, and I made it very clear it was his idea when I posted my layout that incorporated it.

He was so unpleasant...

However, I'm still expecting the feedback by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's feed back (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

I will update more tracks tonight, I haven't had the time to do detailed designs.

By the way, Rob, I sent you a PM twice, but no answer. Please tell me how to reach you.

I'll write one of the turn-by-turn things I do about this Singapore since you asked for something.

First thing I want to mention is that I love how you actually specified the runoff areas to show that everything's at least vaguely practical, that's pretty cool. The first two turns remind me of Abu Dhabi's 2 and 3, Melbourne's 1 and 2, Gilles Villeneuve's 8/9, that kind of thing. I don't know whether it's better or worse than the original driving-wise and I'm not sure whether it would solve the "cars running off the track at the start" problem the current Singapore or not. The first turn is slightly less severe, so it might help marginally, but the straight is longer. With both those changes, I guess it flows a little better, at least. The hairpin you put after it is nice for two reasons: first, your extension has two challenges compared to what feels like the one Singaore has, and the hairpin adds an overtaking point for the ridiculously desperate. Watching overtakes that may or may not work out is really fun; after all, that's why everyone hates DRS. So I would definitely prefer to see this instead of what Singapore has currently.

After a Valencia-style "straight" which is sadly kind of unavoidable (not that turn 5 is an overtaking place anyway), you have a slower turn 5. I guess it'd be harder to brake for, which is good. Then the tight chicane you have looks like it'd be somewhat challenging, and it's definitely way better than just a couple more angular 90-degree corners. I also really like the tight turn with the severely curved braking zone afterward. Severely curved braking zones are awesome. After that part that's the same because there's no room to change anything, the final change you made is removing the chicanes for the grandstand gimmick. Personally I think those chicanes are fun from a driving perspective, but with the extension you made they're not necessary for laptime, plus the third chicane gets slightly more interesting to drive and potentially becomes an overtaking point as a result of removing the first two.

So except for those grandstand chicanes which I like (and that's probably an unpopular opinion anyway), you made Singapore way better by giving it more corner variety and adding a couple overtaking points. I want to complain about something, but you did a great job. If this is actually a practical thing to do, then they should do it.

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:I'll write one of the turn-by-turn things I do about this Singapore since you asked for something.

First thing I want to mention is that I love how you actually specified the runoff areas to show that everything's at least vaguely practical, that's pretty cool. The first two turns remind me of Abu Dhabi's 2 and 3, Melbourne's 1 and 2, Gilles Villeneuve's 8/9, that kind of thing. I don't know whether it's better or worse than the original driving-wise and I'm not sure whether it would solve the "cars running off the track at the start" problem the current Singapore or not. The first turn is slightly less severe, so it might help marginally, but the straight is longer. With both those changes, I guess it flows a little better, at least. The hairpin you put after it is nice for two reasons: first, your extension has two challenges compared to what feels like the one Singaore has, and the hairpin adds an overtaking point for the ridiculously desperate. Watching overtakes that may or may not work out is really fun; after all, that's why everyone hates DRS. So I would definitely prefer to see this instead of what Singapore has currently.

After a Valencia-style "straight" which is sadly kind of unavoidable (not that turn 5 is an overtaking place anyway), you have a slower turn 5. I guess it'd be harder to brake for, which is good. Then the tight chicane you have looks like it'd be somewhat challenging, and it's definitely way better than just a couple more angular 90-degree corners. I also really like the tight turn with the severely curved braking zone afterward. Severely curved braking zones are awesome. After that part that's the same because there's no room to change anything, the final change you made is removing the chicanes for the grandstand gimmick. Personally I think those chicanes are fun from a driving perspective, but with the extension you made they're not necessary for laptime, plus the third chicane gets slightly more interesting to drive and potentially becomes an overtaking point as a result of removing the first two.

So except for those grandstand chicanes which I like (and that's probably an unpopular opinion anyway), you made Singapore way better by giving it more corner variety and adding a couple overtaking points. I want to complain about something, but you did a great job. If this is actually a practical thing to do, then they should do it.

HEHEHE welcome to the (my) dark side.

Seriously, thank you. I'll upload something shortly.

some more tracks
Grobnik
http://gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5798488
a longer, hillyer version of moto gp track

Buckmore park kart circuit
http://gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5798499
how to convert one of the best karting tracks to a GP track

nurburgring nordschlife F1
http://gmap-pedometer.com/?r=5799544
the greatest track made slightly more suitable for F1

legendari25 wrote:However, I'm still expecting the Bathplug by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's Bathplug (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

dr-baker wrote:

legendari25 wrote:However, I'm still expecting the Bathplug by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's Bathplug (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

This is most curious...it appears that words like feed.back and f.lick and some other words are being unnecessarily censored...(dots in there to avoid it)

Ataxia [BacLettNinj] wrote:

dr-baker wrote:

legendari25 wrote:However, I'm still expecting the Bathplug by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's Bathplug (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

This is most curious...it appears that words like feed.back and fl.ick and some other words are being unnecessarily censored...(dots in there to avoid it)

I wonder why? I just took the dots out and they do indeed revert to Bathplug...

dr-baker wrote:

Ataxia [BacLettNinj] wrote:

dr-baker wrote:Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

This is most curious...it appears that words like feed.back and fl.ick and some other words are being unnecessarily censored...(dots in there to avoid it)

I wonder why? I just took the dots out and they do indeed revert to Bathplug...

Just searched those words. it would appear that they've been censored to Bathplug since the forum was started. It's only taken us 4 years to notice!

East Londoner wrote:

dr-baker wrote:

Ataxia [BacLettNinj] wrote:This is most curious...it appears that words like feed.back and fl.ick and some other words are being unnecessarily censored...(dots in there to avoid it)

I wonder why? I just took the dots out and they do indeed revert to Bathplug...

Just searched those words. it would appear that they've been censored to Bathplug since the forum was started. It's only taken us 4 years to notice!

But that makes no sense. What is wrong about constructive feed.back? And there's nothing wrong with fliccking stuff, is there? Unless they are Australian slang terms for something?

And it seems that if you replace the dot in feed.back with a hyphen (-), that also reverts to Bathplug. Feed-back.

We should really give Jaenoch some feedback on this.Otherwise they will receive a flick in the ear.

On the other hand,that is the best and most obscure forum Easter eggs I have ever seen.

Ataxia [BacLettNinj] wrote:

dr-baker wrote:

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

This is most curious...it appears that words like feed.back and f.lick and some other words are being unnecessarily censored...(dots in there to avoid it)[/quote]
That may explain why I got pissed in LGPS because I couldn't call by aristocratic British driver Fred.rik

I think I've figured out the system how it works. Every word which starts with f and ends with ck is turned into Bathplug.

flock of sheep

That's fantastic.

dr-baker wrote:

legendari25 wrote:However, I'm still expecting the Bathplug by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's Bathplug (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

Of course it doesn't make any sense. Rob, please don't think I assumed you and your dad share a Bathplug, nor was I thanking you for it. I swear I wrote f e e d b a c k.
This is serious, don't laugh. This could start a diplomatic conflict between the UK and Argentina. Bathplugging censorsihp... Its going to Bathplug everything up. Henry Ford is a massive peach.

What the hell is a bathplug, anyway?
--
"I think women and seamen don't mix" -- Smithers.

Some people use flick knives to slit the tyres on a firetruck.

Hours of laughter.

Well this is just ridiculous! Whose ear do I have to flick to get them fix this? I have a firetruck and a flock of geese, surely that will be enough to get me to them. Hell, I'll wear a frock if need be, and have a fullback help me out. Because not only does this just not make a fleck of sense, it's giving this site some bad flack. And feedback. Oh man, now I'm having a flashback back to the Zyla incident...

bathplug.

Now, if anyone can figure out what words I was actually using there, well, then they're awesome.

Also, legandari, I'll try and give some feedback-- whoops, I mean, constructive criticism over the weekend.

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:Also, legandari, I'll try and give some feedback-- whoops, I mean, constructive criticism over the weekend.

He's done it! Whoop, whoop!

legendari25 wrote:What the hell is a bathplug, anyway?
--
"I think women and seamen don't mix" -- Smithers.

What's a bathplug? This is a bathplug:



By the way, this image of a bathplug appears on page 1 of images of "bathplugs" on Google.co.uk and is accredited to... f1rejects.com!

You're STILL using IE, Baker? I am disappoint. Especially since you have Chrome on your laptop.

East Londoner wrote:You're STILL using IE, Baker? I am disappoint. Especially since you have Chrome on your laptop.

Yeah. Embarrassing, isn't it?

Oh, and I only downloaded Chrome as my uni email would no longer work with IE, you could probably figure that out from the above image...

legendari25 wrote:

dr-baker wrote:

legendari25 wrote:However, I'm still expecting the Bathplug by ugncreativeugnsername and blind cave salamander on my reprofiling of singapore. Thank you Rob on you and your dad's Bathplug (and someone else too, I don't remember who, sorry).

Is this Bathplug censoring the four-letter 'F' word? Because to me, this sentence doesn't quite make sense with either Bathplug or F*** in it...

Of course it doesn't make any sense. Rob, please don't think I assumed you and your dad share a Bathplug, nor was I thanking you for it. I swear I wrote f e e d b a c k.
This is serious, don't laugh. This could start a diplomatic conflict between the UK and Argentina. Bathplugging censorsihp... Its going to Bathplug everything up. Henry Ford is a massive peach.

What the hell is a bathplug, anyway?
--
"I think women and seamen don't mix" -- Smithers.

nah i never assumed that me and my dad shared a bathplug and i knew what you were on about

In the F1RMGP: WEC '15 thread, I also get the same problem (word in question was "fully black"). I have mailed Jamie/Enoch about this.

dr-baker wrote:Oh, and I only downloaded Chrome as my uni email would no longer work with IE, you could probably figure that out from the above image...

Seriously, you should use Chrome exclusively. There's literally no reason not to. It's better than Internet Explorer in every single way.

This is a 6.99 km long Bathplug. It's a Bathplugwise race track. The pit-lane is on the horizontal Bathplug straight on the top of the image, on the left hand (below the straight in the graph). Entrance at the chicane before the final bathplug. Many bits of road used for this Bahtplug are narrow because they are Bathway acceleration ramps, so they are not suited for Formula 1 racing. Therefore, they could be Bathplugged, shortening the length, avoiding a few dangerous corners and making the Bathplug look less like a horribly damaged duck.

Remember to drive this with ForceBathplug on for maximum feel.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/775871_4219530921887_466842155_o.jpg

I'll work on a more serious approach to this race track later on.

we've been substituting "bathplug" in place of the F-word(or so has been my understanding since i've joined).
there aren't too many restrictions on this site, but language appears to be one of them

Regarding the bathplug problem, it seems to be a case of what they call the "clbuttic problem" in computer circles - an over-zealous language filter which needs recalibration. This is a place where I'd be thinking about strait-jacketing the regular expressions, trying something that would look in BASH terms like f[u,e]ck rather than f*ck.

RAK wrote:Regarding the bathplug problem, it seems to be a case of what they call the "clbuttic problem" in computer circles - an over-zealous language filter which needs recalibration. This is a place where I'd be thinking about strait-jacketing the regular expressions, trying something that would look in BASH terms like f[u,e]ck rather than f*ck.

Perhaps f?ck would be the best solution.

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:

RAK wrote:Regarding the bathplug problem, it seems to be a case of what they call the "clbuttic problem" in computer circles - an over-zealous language filter which needs recalibration. This is a place where I'd be thinking about strait-jacketing the regular expressions, trying something that would look in BASH terms like f[u,e]ck rather than f*ck.

Perhaps f?ck would be the best solution.

We'd still have a problem with the question mark if, for some reason, the conversation drifted into quantum mechanics, and we had a particularly pedantic contributor who was adamant that no, it is not valid to use the Hamiltonian operator when more than one electron is involved in the system and this is what we need instead...

...which I have never forgotten from my undergrad days.

Reading through this thread reminded me of one of my few visualisations of a track as a child, an insane Reims-esque blast around my home town that would also involve shutting off part of the UK's M6 for 3 days

Probably doesn't do much to disprove the OP but, its fun in my own mind anyway!