Lol, paid informants!?!?! You really are ruthless!
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Prayer answered Praises!
- Thread starter The Revolting Man
- Start date
It has always been a competition, for the highest average number of children per woman, as that is the measure that most ensures the survival of our society, and I am pretty sure I beat you hands down @The Revolting Man.
Of course, you might want to say the judging criteria is actually "total number of children from any woman", or "total number of descendants", or something else, but that would just be you rewriting the rules to favour yourself in order to make yourself win, ignoring the societal damage that such a perspective could cause when taken to extreme. Just think what moron would win that competition if we put it over all of society - some sperm-donating wanker. So that doesn't count, and I win.
Of course, you might want to say the judging criteria is actually "total number of children from any woman", or "total number of descendants", or something else, but that would just be you rewriting the rules to favour yourself in order to make yourself win, ignoring the societal damage that such a perspective could cause when taken to extreme. Just think what moron would win that competition if we put it over all of society - some sperm-donating wanker. So that doesn't count, and I win.
I proposed the Per Woman Average statistic in a post on this site some years ago. Mine is a paltry 4.33333. If I could remove my baby mama from the stat it would be a much more respectable 6.5, if she had just matched the average of the other two I would actually have 19 children.It has always been a competition, for the highest average number of children per woman, as that is the measure that most ensures the survival of our society, and I am pretty sure I beat you hands down @The Revolting Man.
Of course, you might want to say the judging criteria is actually "total number of children from any woman", or "total number of descendants", or something else, but that would just be you rewriting the rules to favour yourself in order to make yourself win, ignoring the societal damage that such a perspective could cause when taken to extreme. Just think what moron would win that competition if we put it over all of society - some sperm-donating wanker. So that doesn't count, and I win.
For the purposes of these stats I’m not counting my step daughters. If I did I get back into a respectable PWA with a 5.3333.
Alas, I had a bad season and my stats got wrecked. Oh well. I got a son out of it anyway and if PWA gets in the way of LTO (lifetime total output) it ceases to be a meaningful statistic.
Remember, I’m not trying to reproduce society. I’m trying to reproduce me. Because I want you all to have beautiful things in your dull, hum drum lives. I’m a giver. You’re welcome.
If we could count the children that didn't make it..... I'd be hard to beat!
Now my hubby's average was higher before my dear sisterwife got added into the equation. It's at 5.5 counting the one on the way. I'm just loving the new adition...and looking forward to the next one!
Now my hubby's average was higher before my dear sisterwife got added into the equation. It's at 5.5 counting the one on the way. I'm just loving the new adition...and looking forward to the next one!
That’s the problem with PWA, it’s only a partial view of the player’s performance. It needs context.
They should put that in the dictionary under oxymoron. HOw does a wanker have children?
I count any child that’s conceived! Length of life doesn’t effect value of life.
I have as many that are treasure in heaven as I have living.
I agree with you and count them.
