 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
"A jargon term, used to agree with the parent post and show support. The use stems from moderation tactics of some forums in which points are awarded to posts as a way of rating them. Also used to denote a message board post made for no other reason than to raise the user's post count." -- a question about another related piece of Internet Lingo: ">" -- it's almost like the new "owned!" -- I've noticed on the Internet (forums, chat rooms, online gaming chats, etc.) that a lot of people, when they witness someone getting insulted or one-upped or proven wrong, say simply: "Winner>Loser", for example if Dave has just embarrassed, or totally destroyed an argument of, Mike, then a witness to this may simply type: "Dave>Mike" (usually followed by others saying simply "+1" in agreement etc.) I'm curious where on Wikipedia this kind of "casual 'Net lingo" should be located (if not already on here). 199.214.28.241 22:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- List of Internet slang phrases is probably your best bet. — lensovet– talk – 23:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I visited this page looking for information on the use of +1 for voting in Open Source projects. Is there is certain amount of +1's needed to pass a proposal? Is there a formal system? or is the system as simple as +1 if you agree, and that's about it? 216.54.240.227 21:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- +1
- +1+1+1+1+1(1 200.63.44.92 ( talk) 06:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- +1 +1+1+1+1(1(1+1 200.63.44.92 ( talk) 06:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
What about UTC+01:00? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimplyIrresistible ( talk • contribs) 00:08, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
- Sure; I added it. In the future, you could go ahead and BE BOLD and add such things yourself (unless of course you work for Big Time, in which case it could be considered conflict of interest).-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 03:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
|
| This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
"A jargon term, used to agree with the parent post and show support. The use stems from moderation tactics of some forums in which points are awarded to posts as a way of rating them. Also used to denote a message board post made for no other reason than to raise the user's post count." -- a question about another related piece of Internet Lingo: ">" -- it's almost like the new "owned!" -- I've noticed on the Internet (forums, chat rooms, online gaming chats, etc.) that a lot of people, when they witness someone getting insulted or one-upped or proven wrong, say simply: "Winner>Loser", for example if Dave has just embarrassed, or totally destroyed an argument of, Mike, then a witness to this may simply type: "Dave>Mike" (usually followed by others saying simply "+1" in agreement etc.) I'm curious where on Wikipedia this kind of "casual 'Net lingo" should be located (if not already on here). 199.214.28.241 22:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- List of Internet slang phrases is probably your best bet. — lensovet– talk – 23:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I visited this page looking for information on the use of +1 for voting in Open Source projects. Is there is certain amount of +1's needed to pass a proposal? Is there a formal system? or is the system as simple as +1 if you agree, and that's about it? 216.54.240.227 21:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- +1
- +1+1+1+1+1(1 200.63.44.92 ( talk) 06:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- +1 +1+1+1+1(1(1+1 200.63.44.92 ( talk) 06:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
What about UTC+01:00? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimplyIrresistible ( talk • contribs) 00:08, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
- Sure; I added it. In the future, you could go ahead and BE BOLD and add such things yourself (unless of course you work for Big Time, in which case it could be considered conflict of interest).-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 03:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)