modified

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 21 Sep 2002 23:08

mr fujitzu reporting on the shapes in 3d ?
despite lack of thorough familarity
w/interdimensional seasonal shifting
time a strand in the entire plaything
(translation: you think i could do a ducking 2d ?)

theories chafing and infinite possibility
infinity prooved by mathematical entities
an abstract complex metaphorical equivolent
equivicol from particals to centuries
(no really?)

as if that wasnt enough mess
sore wa totemo kuchi desu
all ootsu's get undresu
otosong knows where mommy likes it best
(bitches b hot)

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 22 Sep 2002 06:04

whats your question?
if its about 2d ducking then why is that not a poll option?

I think all things are 4d. Obviously they are all 3d, and then notice how everything is moving through time... Or you can explain to me why they are considered not.

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 22 Sep 2002 07:12

my purpose was simply to cause some comotion
a break in your mindless footbag devotion
your hit points go up like you just quaffed a potion
feels likes swimming in squishy sex lotion

ah but what i meant was triple ducking... 3d.. do you think its possible?
one answer.. 4d.. implies that pshhh 3d is of cours possible while the other, busta rhymes, and i quote.. "break yo neck"

in real life there are already 12 mathematically prooven dimensions and a predicted infinite number of them

Bono · Post by **Bono** » 22 Sep 2002 22:26

I voted fer 3d cuz you know its phat.
That triple ducking stuff would be tops like a hat.
Sam thinks he can rhyme;
That would be a feat.
To see techyes with words!
Wouldn't that be neat?

my iambic pantameter and heroic couplets are CRAAAAAP

sam, the day that you hit a 3d move, I'll... I dunno. Maybe I'll send you a big phat hug. And I'll call you Rubberneck. Which is cool. Rubberneck is a cool name. Rubberneck is in the mix. Rubberneck is to the max. Everybody loves a Rubberneck.

Crazylegs · Post by **Crazylegs** » 23 Sep 2002 17:30

i don't like double ducking let alone tripple ducking and quad ducking. FOOTbag.

Bono · Post by **Bono** » 23 Sep 2002 19:09

Ummm... so I'm guessing by your emphasis with the word FOOTbag you're trying to say that people should lonly use their feet... that would be a pretty boring activity. No spins, no leg dexterities, no flyers... what a drag.

Footbag uses the whole body. That's just the way it is.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 23 Sep 2002 19:53

you could do foot dexterities... swirl?

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 23 Sep 2002 21:09

i doubt ill actually every try double ducking... now that i can do 2d i dont do it too much.. mostly frontside and trying to learn symposium stuff right now... but thanks for the negative comment

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 23 Sep 2002 21:09

i meant i doubt ill ever try triple ducking

Crazylegs · Post by **Crazylegs** » 24 Sep 2002 09:02

Bono wrote:Ummm... so I'm guessing by your emphasis with the word FOOTbag you're trying to say that people should lonly use their feet... that would be a pretty boring activity. No spins, no leg dexterities, no flyers... what a drag.

Footbag uses the whole body. That's just the way it is.

never said we shouldn't use other body components. but i think 3d might be a bit out of hand. i'm gonna start circling the bag with my hands and start adding of extra adds.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 24 Sep 2002 13:04

good then you are an innovator...

Bono · Post by **Bono** » 24 Sep 2002 14:07

well yeah I think that hands stuff is pretty crappy. i mean, hooping looks good for style if that's what you're going for, but don't try to make it anything more than that. giving yourself adds for stuff like hooping and threading is just ridiculous.

max · Post by **max** » 24 Sep 2002 14:13

true, but you have to admit that when shredding for several hours doing [roughly] the same kind of tricks, it's allways a refreshing change to do a spinning arm-over hand stall to butterfly.. or maybe stall the bag in clipper, drop to the ground and hit a quick break-dance move...
Just for a laugh.

Crazylegs · Post by **Crazylegs** » 25 Sep 2002 23:32

Bono wrote:well yeah I think that hands stuff is pretty crappy. i mean, hooping looks good for style if that's what you're going for, but don't try to make it anything more than that. giving yourself adds for stuff like hooping and threading is just ridiculous.

it was scarcasim. i was referring to the add hunting. when the body to leg add ratio exceeds uh.. 1:1 i'd say that's where i personally find it to be a bit much.

Bono · Post by **Bono** » 26 Sep 2002 07:33

i know you were being sarcastic... and i was agreeing with you, not arguing with you.

stupid online communication

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 26 Sep 2002 07:41

heheh dont give me any adds for anything i do.. id be much more happy *no sarcasm*

Crazylegs · Post by **Crazylegs** » 26 Sep 2002 14:18

word word

FootbagginBum · Post by **FootbagginBum** » 03 Jan 2003 16:44

My best friend has proved me wrong once again.

First it was the concept of shooting ducking that was impossible, and in 2 weeks, I saw it on the net and a dude here hit shooting ducking butterfly. Then he said double ducking and I said no way, but I stand corrected once again. Looks like shooting doubleducking butterfly is a possible 8 adder.

Noah Jay-Bonn · Post by **Noah Jay-Bonn** » 03 Jan 2003 16:53

FootbagginBum wrote: Looks like shooting doubleducking butterfly is a possible 8 adder.

Lets see it Sam!

FootbagginBum · Post by **FootbagginBum** » 03 Jan 2003 17:09

I want video if he does!!!

modified

3d?

3d?

3d?