Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:46 am
yeah, idk why but I have the same feelingRagnarok wrote:You know, it rather reminds me of your old avatar...
SpudFiles
Your Spud Cannon Community
https://www.spudfiles.com/
Page 9 of 14
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:49 am
Yeah, I think it's called "Déjà vu"... It usually means they've changed the Matrix.STHORNE wrote:yeah, idk why but I have the same feeling
Hey, 1500 posts! Time for the obligatory :wav: smily.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:52 am
CONGRATS ON 1500 RAGNAROK!!!! lol
this calls for some random smilies: :notworthy: :headbang: :tongue8: :booty: :tongue1: :sex:
this calls for some random smilies: :notworthy: :headbang: :tongue8: :booty: :tongue1: :sex:
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:53 am
In my original pst about rank idea i was talking about having a spudder of the month/year award. I think it would be cool to vote on it every month and get a badge.
I like the badge system much better than myroiginal idea. hope we can do it.
I like the badge system much better than myroiginal idea. hope we can do it.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:55 am
exactly... the matrix is changing.. we're trapped.. oh no.. lol.
i personally like the red better but the blu looks cool as well STHORNE
i personally like the red better but the blu looks cool as well STHORNE
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:35 pm
I can think of plenty of high ROF theories for small projectiles, but not many that have actually been built into working models, and I can't think of any that are easy to replicate. That is excluding vortex and cloud designs of course. Besides, with a big enough air supply any design could be scaled up. Get a jackhammer compressor or two and you can make a cloud golf ball gun.BC Pneumatics wrote:The problem I have with including any size mechanism in the ROF contest is that very small automatic systems already exist, and could very easily be duplicated...
That being said, I think the "death for a silly badge" problem practically takes care of itself...
If you ask me getting concerned about people hurting themselves "trying to earn a silly badge", and not getting concerned about them hurting themselves trying to earn... I don't know... say... a $100 grand prize?... is just a little stupid.
Besides I think it is far more difficult to replicate a high ROF gun big or small than to build a high energy gun. All that takes is a lot of money and space. Sure a high power gun is impressive and worthy of recognition, but it usually doesn't do anything to advance the hobby. It's just a normal gun built on a large scale.
---
True that if you think about it logically then it makes little sense to put your life on the line for a silly badge, but a lot of things people do are illogical...especially teenagers.
If someone offered a $100 grand prize for the most powerful launcher or, even worse, the most power/weight then I would be extremely concerned about people endangering themselves and others to get the prize.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have a badge for powerful launchers. I'm just saying we should be careful about how the system is implemented and have provisions in place to help make sure it is not a system that would incline people to put themselves in excess danger. For the record I do think power/weight would be a bad idea.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 1:35 pm
Rag- I know that we probably will not see a carbon fiber cannon for a long time, I was just using it to make the point that there are many lightweight materials that could be used to save weight, rather than using thinner PVC.
I also frankly think the ideas of negative badges is just terrible.
Sorry, just the way I feel. 
Clide- The "it can be done easily, it is just a matter of money and space" argument was made by Rag earlier in this thread. And yes it is true that high power guns usually do nothing to advance the hobby. You guys should know where I am going with this....
The hybrid of course. Many times smaller than a similarly powered combustion, and easily one of the 10 largest advancements in the history of spudding. That is what this badge thing is about. It is about producing radical new things, just like the first hybrid. Sure not every cannon the earn a badge will. Sure there are other ways to do it. There are more conventional channels that most people will follow. So? Great new ideas are one in a million... maybe these badges will knock it down to one in five hundred thou. Good enough for me.
In my last post I made mention of the people that will always do these illogical things. I am perfectly aware of them, but I am not going to advise everyone walk around in a suit of armor and a giant plastic bubble. I am not going to let other's stupidity stand in the way of logic and advancement.
We already do have safety precautions in place, talked about earlier in the thread. Since they do not seem to meet your requirements, do you have any suggestions to improve safety? I have to say that this theoretical badge system, and these forums in general, already decline people to do things that are not safe. I think you really should have said you would like provisions that would "widen the safety margins even more", since I would not be advocating anything that I thought put any 'real person' in any 'real danger'.
Perhaps adding "All cannons need a rated pressure 3 times that of working pressure to be considered safe" (or something along those lines) to the rules would help? (Since any submission to the contest has to follow all forum rules to qualify.) We could also throw in something about "any cannon the moderators feel is unsafe will be disqualified" to further encourage people checking with the staff before starting a potentially unsafe project.
Is there anyone else that is as concerned as Clide is about the power/weight thing? I mean everyone around here knows not to use "under rated" pipe on anything other than a basic combustions, and lots are a bit nervous about doing even that. Every time someone even mentions 'powerful cannon' materials Sch 80, copper, steel, aluminum- all these things enter my mind. Throwing weight into the equation doesn't drop it down to Sch40, it doesn't make me think of doubling the mix in a steel chamber, it just limits my options to the safe ones remaining. Teaching people to be safe goes much much much further than just keeping them away from dangerous things.
Light a man a fire and you warm him for a day.
Light a man afire and you warm him for the rest of his life.
Turn a man away from danger and you save him for a day.
Teach a man to be safe and you save him for a lifetime.
I think that is most of what I wanted to say, but I really do not remember. It doesn't matter anyway. Everyone is bound to be sick of my long posts in this thread by now.
I am hoping we will get many more people chiming in with opinions on the Power:Weight thing. It seems to be one of the bigger issues we all need to sort out.
I also frankly think the ideas of negative badges is just terrible.
Sorry, just the way I feel. Clide- The "it can be done easily, it is just a matter of money and space" argument was made by Rag earlier in this thread. And yes it is true that high power guns usually do nothing to advance the hobby. You guys should know where I am going with this....
The hybrid of course. Many times smaller than a similarly powered combustion, and easily one of the 10 largest advancements in the history of spudding. That is what this badge thing is about. It is about producing radical new things, just like the first hybrid. Sure not every cannon the earn a badge will. Sure there are other ways to do it. There are more conventional channels that most people will follow. So? Great new ideas are one in a million... maybe these badges will knock it down to one in five hundred thou. Good enough for me.
In my last post I made mention of the people that will always do these illogical things. I am perfectly aware of them, but I am not going to advise everyone walk around in a suit of armor and a giant plastic bubble. I am not going to let other's stupidity stand in the way of logic and advancement.
We already do have safety precautions in place, talked about earlier in the thread. Since they do not seem to meet your requirements, do you have any suggestions to improve safety? I have to say that this theoretical badge system, and these forums in general, already decline people to do things that are not safe. I think you really should have said you would like provisions that would "widen the safety margins even more", since I would not be advocating anything that I thought put any 'real person' in any 'real danger'.
Perhaps adding "All cannons need a rated pressure 3 times that of working pressure to be considered safe" (or something along those lines) to the rules would help? (Since any submission to the contest has to follow all forum rules to qualify.) We could also throw in something about "any cannon the moderators feel is unsafe will be disqualified" to further encourage people checking with the staff before starting a potentially unsafe project.
Is there anyone else that is as concerned as Clide is about the power/weight thing? I mean everyone around here knows not to use "under rated" pipe on anything other than a basic combustions, and lots are a bit nervous about doing even that. Every time someone even mentions 'powerful cannon' materials Sch 80, copper, steel, aluminum- all these things enter my mind. Throwing weight into the equation doesn't drop it down to Sch40, it doesn't make me think of doubling the mix in a steel chamber, it just limits my options to the safe ones remaining. Teaching people to be safe goes much much much further than just keeping them away from dangerous things.
Light a man a fire and you warm him for a day.
Light a man afire and you warm him for the rest of his life.
Turn a man away from danger and you save him for a day.
Teach a man to be safe and you save him for a lifetime.
I think that is most of what I wanted to say, but I really do not remember. It doesn't matter anyway. Everyone is bound to be sick of my long posts in this thread by now.
I am hoping we will get many more people chiming in with opinions on the Power:Weight thing. It seems to be one of the bigger issues we all need to sort out.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 1:40 pm
I'm a big fan of the following ideas...
BBMG Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about different types of BBMG's such as clouds, vortex's and how to improve them.
Example: Neospud with his multiple creations as well as his helpful spreading of knowledge.
Pneumatic Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about pneumatics's and how to improve them.
Example: NoName with his helpful knowledge on sprinkler valve troubleshooting.
Hybrid Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about Hyrbrid's and how to improve them.
Example: D_Hall with his helpful spreading of knowledge and his recent new ideas.
Innovation Badge: A badge given to those who come up with a new innovative method or creation that helps advance the spudding hobby.
Example: Remote Activated land mine (sprinkler valve), or Vortex Cap design, etc...
MVP Badge: Given to those who are extremely helpful to new and exsisting members with general knowledge.
Example: judgment_arms as from I can see has been helping out a lot of members here recently and should get praised for it.
I have a couple more ideas but I have to go grocery shopping...
BBMG Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about different types of BBMG's such as clouds, vortex's and how to improve them.
Example: Neospud with his multiple creations as well as his helpful spreading of knowledge.
Pneumatic Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about pneumatics's and how to improve them.
Example: NoName with his helpful knowledge on sprinkler valve troubleshooting.
Hybrid Expert Badge: Shows a lot of knowledge and understanding about Hyrbrid's and how to improve them.
Example: D_Hall with his helpful spreading of knowledge and his recent new ideas.
Innovation Badge: A badge given to those who come up with a new innovative method or creation that helps advance the spudding hobby.
Example: Remote Activated land mine (sprinkler valve), or Vortex Cap design, etc...
MVP Badge: Given to those who are extremely helpful to new and exsisting members with general knowledge.
Example: judgment_arms as from I can see has been helping out a lot of members here recently and should get praised for it.
I have a couple more ideas but I have to go grocery shopping...
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:11 pm
It could be sooner then you think, if air cars become popular enough (probably in Europe) people may start stripping the two or three large 3000psi rated carbon fibre tanks from them for use on cannons.BC Pneumatics wrote:Rag- I know that we probably will not see a carbon fiber cannon for a long time, I was just using it to make the point that there are many lightweight materials that could be used to save weight, rather than using thinner PVC.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:23 pm
I guess I'll speak on the power / weight thing. I think clide's biggest concern is that of new members (less-experienced) will try to push the limits of their launcher and injure themselves (most established members know better). To kill the whole thing, why not begin badges at, say, 100 posts. This way, the member who receives the badge will be established here and that means they (should) know the safety precautions of seeking a badge.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:34 pm
I'm all up for leveled badges, powered by feedback.
For instance: JSR posts a pure epoxy automatic hammer valved gun that totally kicks ass.
Everyone could give a rating to that gun, (1-100 points for example) and that gun would redirect it's points to the total amount of expirience in that sector (pneumatic guns in this case) thus making JRS level up in pneumatics.
If the gun is a basic ball valve design You would not receive as much points, and thus will be lower level of expirience (wich you then most likely are).
This would indicate the skill level of the member the different areas of spudding.
You could have level based icons too.
It isn't too hard to implement I think, and would be better than to base rank on just the amount of guns you make.
*edit* this also has the bonus to see how much people really know about certain things and if you could blindly trust them, without actually knowing the person too well.
For instance: JSR posts a pure epoxy automatic hammer valved gun that totally kicks ass.
Everyone could give a rating to that gun, (1-100 points for example) and that gun would redirect it's points to the total amount of expirience in that sector (pneumatic guns in this case) thus making JRS level up in pneumatics.
If the gun is a basic ball valve design You would not receive as much points, and thus will be lower level of expirience (wich you then most likely are).
This would indicate the skill level of the member the different areas of spudding.
You could have level based icons too.
It isn't too hard to implement I think, and would be better than to base rank on just the amount of guns you make.
*edit* this also has the bonus to see how much people really know about certain things and if you could blindly trust them, without actually knowing the person too well.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:39 pm
Hubb, let us not forget that the power:weight badge would only be held by one person at any time. I do not think that any "noobs" will really think they can up their stock cannons to be the most powerful gun on the site. I thought the concern was more with people knowingly pushing safety limits, because they were tempted by a silly badge?
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:45 pm
That's right (it's hard to keep up with 9 pages of posts 
). Honestly, I don't see it as a problem, because the ones who will seek this badge are the ones who know better.
). Honestly, I don't see it as a problem, because the ones who will seek this badge are the ones who know better.Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:46 pm
That was exactly my mentality. I am still anxious to hear from others on the matter though.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:54 pm
BC -
Like I said, I don't have any problem with people being rewarded for building a high power launcher. I was simply pointing out that high power launchers typically aren't innovative, so why should we put a restriction on the caliber of high ROF guns just because small calibers may not be innovative? I would agree that large caliber rapid fire guns are typically more innovative than lower caliber ones, but there are plenty of innovations that can come from low caliber rapid fire guns, so why make a restriction on ammo size?
As for the safety precautions I think they would be fine if they could reasonably be applied. We could go with pressure rating for parts that have them, but what about those that don't have a listed pressure rating? How do you set a limit for what is safe?
The whole idea of power/weight means that you must push the materials to their limit. If you have a gun of a given size then the only way to get the highest power/weight out of it is to use the highest pressure possible or allowed by the rules. And again we have a problem with how do we set that limit for parts that don't have a clear rating?
Like I said, I don't have any problem with people being rewarded for building a high power launcher. I was simply pointing out that high power launchers typically aren't innovative, so why should we put a restriction on the caliber of high ROF guns just because small calibers may not be innovative? I would agree that large caliber rapid fire guns are typically more innovative than lower caliber ones, but there are plenty of innovations that can come from low caliber rapid fire guns, so why make a restriction on ammo size?
As for the safety precautions I think they would be fine if they could reasonably be applied. We could go with pressure rating for parts that have them, but what about those that don't have a listed pressure rating? How do you set a limit for what is safe?
The whole idea of power/weight means that you must push the materials to their limit. If you have a gun of a given size then the only way to get the highest power/weight out of it is to use the highest pressure possible or allowed by the rules. And again we have a problem with how do we set that limit for parts that don't have a clear rating?