Currently viewing  
 
victz's profile:

Last Online:June 21
Member Since:2006-06-01

Sponsorships this user has made:$0.00 ($0.00 in fees)
Sponsorships their sites have received:$0.00 ($0.00 in fees)

 victz's most recent sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  That's a Lot of Womprat1644
(2.25)
?  CCTMND: Vol. 047444
(3.91)
?  CCTMND: For the Hearing Impaired18518
(3.72)
?  Kitchen Chair Serenade36332
(4.03)
?  President Barack Obama: Day 14,31372
(3.74)

 victz's highest rated sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  C for Cyberman9,855469
(4.37)
?  (nsfw) New Geico Ad21,657510
(4.27)
?  Kitchen Chair Serenade36332
(4.03)
?  Canned eggs?68822
(3.95)
?  Mark Wahlberg needs more practice5,692302
(3.95)

 victz's most recent comments:
Site When Comment
2008-11-02 23:51:08
 
gablee
+2 [replies: 0]
2008-08-27 00:46:21
 
Keep an EYE out for my series of YTMNDs for the vision impaired.
+0 [replies: 0]
2008-08-13 17:54:34
 
I'm so sorry, Rafe. I shouldn't have snapped at you like that. I'm continuing this is a new comment, by mistake.
+0 [replies: 0]
2008-08-13 17:31:06
 
But, here, let me even up the tally by borrowing a little for myself: http://www.xkcd.com/386/ (Ugh, there's almost as much blue on this page as a gr33nsc33n site.)
+0 [replies: 0]
2008-08-13 17:28:17
 
Also, your tally is a tad off. I made ONE main point in my first reply, and it wasn't even for debate. So 0 for 1 or 0 for 0 would be more correct. However, if we were really keeping score, it would be closer to -120 to -130; there is inherently no winning this debate, but you lose an extra 10 points for borrowing someone else's wit. Not only that, but that article could as easily be applied to you. Besides, I refuse to read the Onion online so long as I am paying to receive it in print. You f*cking f*ggot.
+0 [replies: 2]