Currently viewing  
 
ClownPuncher's profile:

Last Online:November 11
Member Since:2005-08-25

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

 ClownPuncher's most recent sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  Angst747
(2.86)
?  SOMA HOLIDAY2447
(1.57)
?  Pill Poppin Animals985
(2.20)
?  Pills for Thrills967
(2.00)
?  Dr-Pizza is the man now dog97833
(3.88)

 ClownPuncher's highest rated sites:
Title Views Votes Rating
?  Sweet MS Paint Graphics11,751475
(4.08)
?  YTMND Radio (Animated, with NEDM)23,634609
(4.01)
?  Jackie Chan has ONE weakness41,854370
(3.99)
?  Bauman stole my YTMND20,396641
(3.99)
?  Blue Ball Factory: Tree Machine UPDATED!18,500179
(3.98)

 ClownPuncher's most recent comments:
Site When Comment
?  Angst
2009-11-11 23:34:39
 
ah, i see your point, and it's a mighty good one too, but you must realize that even for the time they were made, I still did not find the sites to be quite creative. I did not just downvote them a half hour ago; it was at least a few months or so. If i changed my vote for some reason i'm sorry I cannot remember why, but i can assure you that I did not hold their value up to the standards of how "well varnished" and "creative" sites were back then vs now.
+0 [replies: 0]
?  Angst
2009-11-11 23:14:01
 
I'm sorry if it offends you but what do you mean taken out of context. also, this is the first time i logged on in months so i downvoted those a while ago.
+0 [replies: 2]
?  Angst
2009-11-11 23:06:54
 
I just didn't think they were that creative :(
+0 [replies: 1]
?  pigs
2009-11-11 23:03:22
 
pink floyd!
-1 [replies: 0]
?  Angst
2009-11-11 23:00:58
 
lol yeah i understand it's very annoying but that's the entire intention :P And if you want to judge something based solely on how much work was put into it, that's fine. I just think if a site meets the intended point in a witty or creative fashion it should get a descent vote.
+0 [replies: 1]