YTMND Search

 (0.00)

Based on the novel "Throw" by Sage.

 (0.00)

It's based on the novel Push by Sapphire.

 (0.00)

Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they suck. Also you simply auto-1 my sites based on the user. I know this because there are several old sites I have that both of you gave good ratings to before you started this petty vendetta for no reason.

 (0.00)

I am torn here. I want to vote 5 based on the message but can't bring myself to do it because I despise Eric Bischoff for his part in bring down WCW.

 (0.00)

That's a classic gag. It's always funny. Although most of the humor from those actually comes from the title and citations. If you titled them something like "square wave sites #1 - 5" I would find it boring and probably not vote on them. And I am not a troll. A troll is someone who votes with alts, auto-1s sites based on the user, and deliberately makes inflammatory comments. Aka you.

 (1.00)

I'll openly admit to doing that. I've been here far too long and can tell what a site is going to be based on the title. I only come here for the comments, not the sites.

 (1.00)

and yet you [i]insist[/i] (persist? wtf?) on assuming you know what motivates me. if you think i'm worried about revenge votes, you're delewded. <br /><br />on the off chance that you're literate enough to read for a change:<br /><br />i don't like this site, i don't hate this site. i nothing it, and won't be bullied into some feebly impotent attempt to police the community with minuses and ones. i like this stolen pic and am glad its around. if you want to "punish" this guy for posting it and ruining his one chance at "success" (damn that word around here cracks me consistently up), g'head. afterall, he only made it for his friend and waaaa, he might not be visiting here for a while. he's taking his ball and going home.<br /><br />my voting sucks. i get it. now stop being a bitchy busybody about it. because the only reason you give a shit so much is you think it tarnishes the validity of your own "success."<br /><br />the site you are most proud of is a bad pun based on a pop reference, and you told all your friends about it. i liked it too, but you went out and pinned your laptop to your fridge so your mom could see. <br /><br />Ummy has character, gr33ny has intelligence, and you have After Effects.

 (0.00)

Ace of Fucking Base. BITCH

 (5.00)

Ah man, the special guest star bit was the best thing about the show. I always liked that Shatner had a sense of humor about himself, too. I'll admit, however, that I still prefer the first Naked Gun movie the show it's based on.

 (5.00)

@shizzle<br />thanks for your admiration and support. there are several reasons why i turned into such a dick. i won't go into them here, but if i did you then you might pick up that it was because, as a user, i've exhibited actual growth, something certain users seem to know little about. users like umfuld, lurg and superdreamwhatever because they persist to do everything they can but what? [i]grow[/i]. because instead of maybe focusing on atually improving skills, it's apparently more important to focus on what everyone else is doing and then fall into reactionary patterns of behavior<br /><br />[i]like the psychotic analysis of vote patterns or making 20 plus alts based off other users[/i]<br /><br />i

 (1.00)

What's wrong with upvoting sites if you genuinely like them? Vote based on the site, not the user. I've even upvoted sites by you, and I fucking hate you.

 (3.00)

so I can't tell if this is hash-induced or based off that crazy shit about quantum brainwaves.

 (5.00)

+2 for use of foreground/background.<br /><br />let me take this opportunity to remind us all that you have explicitly stated you vote based on what you believe the status quo will like. you seem to not think for yourself very well, and the generic-ness of sites like these reflect that.

 (4.00)

Easily one of the best Ring-based sites I've seen. I haven't seen very many, though, so that isn't saying much.

 (5.00)

This is pretty cool. Besides, why would you downvote this based on some previous fad?

 (0.00)

It had occurred to me just before I saved it and thought "maybe this isnt a good idea" but it seemed real odd to me that nobody had done it yet anyway. So I kinda feel like you cant fight the universe because if I did not make it chances are someday a YTMND user would be looking for a picture of Tipper Gore for a Pro infidelity/anti-environment Al Gore based site, see the picture of that fat whore with Levar next to her and make a simple yet obvious geordi site instead. So I had too do it basically. Otherwise there would be another creator. And since I am already the creator that would mean there would be two of me walking on this earth and the delicate balance of the space time continuum would be destroyed because not enough dimensions exist to hold that much "badassness" so in short I saved your life, wikipedia is actually God, and whenever you see a fat white chick chances are that a black guy is behind her checkin out "all that ass". Your welcome.

 (0.00)

This fad is not supposed to be a good fad, it's supposed to mock those that make crappy sites based on current trends...BP Oil spills, KFC jokes, pop culture like Mel Gibson, attempt to make a dead ytmnd fad...oh yeah, ytmnd's dead

 (0.00)

I never really found the allure of this fad... Oh well, to each his own. I personally love the Lando and Spanish Inquisition sites, which are based on the same "surprise" concept...

 (0.00)

their suggestions aren't based on the films/shows being similar. they are predicated on the fact that people who liked column A also enjoyed column B.

 (0.00)

Yes, based on a corruption of the highwaymen who worked the Hash Road, but coined for the English by Shakespeare who, if he were still alive, would be well over four hundred years old.

 (0.00)

If he blows on it enough it will get fixed eventually based on my experience.

 (1.00)

if you did a drum and base remix.. this woulda been awesome.. or edit a mic in front of him for a live mouth beat boxer.

 (3.00)

I'm only going to vote this decently based on the fact that it actually makes me laugh. 3'd

 (5.00)

5 just for the "epic domain grab" ; Must admit I was expecting Sir Edward Elgar based on your site title. <br /><br />We've had Adams, Handel, Dvorak and now Khachaturian in the last 2 weeks... :)

 (5.00)

What the fuck is Rob Base doing with these fucking clowns. I should not have watched the youtube link, I woke up angry this morning thinking about shanking juggalos with a hunting knife.

 (4.00)

this mostly sucks, but i've decided to base my votes more on their relative quality to the current ytmnd, rather than voting based on some pretension of what they "deserve" to get.<br /><br />the joke for this site is that the song is a smooth, cool song with ice in the lyrics, creating a contrasting theme to the image of someone getting their mother fucking head bashed against some damn ice trick fool.

 (0.00)

....have no sense of what this place is about, and then click the 1-star button because they don't get it or it wasn't lulzy enough for them.<br /><br />Holy shit, this is already the longest comment I've ever written, so let me try to wrap this up. I didn't vote on either site because I didn't like it. It's just a clip from an old Captain America serial, and I guess this is playing off the fact that a new Captain America movie is coming, but it's unfunny. You know there's gonna be an abrupt change in tone after the Marvel logo, and the three Stooges clips add no comedy value, they merely reference comedy. <br /><br />However, the site is competently executed, so I'd probably end up giving this a 3, [i]if[/i] I still used the full voting scale. Lately, I've been only voting 5 on sites that I feel deserve them. If I kinda liked a site, but I didn't feel it was 5-worthy: no vote. If I fucking hated it: no vote. (full disclosure: Your Deniro site would have gotten a 4, your Boy Wonder site would've gotten a 2.)<br /><br />Why am I doing this? I don't fully know. Ultimately, I don't give a fuck about downvotes and e-venging e-tards - just check ChuckMangione's votes if you need proof. I guess I just feel like there's too much bullshit here, and I only feel like rewarding sites that I know I love. I don't really know what the point of giving people a 4 is. Or what the difference between a 1-vote and a 2-vote is. I used to have a scale in my head where every site starts at 3 and moves up or down based on things like humor value, cleverness, technical merit (yes, I reward effort).<br /><br />But what's the point? YTMND has always had VOTE 5 armies and 1-star abusers that end up fucking the system. So what if little old GordonFremen decides to take a stand for fairness and integrity? What am I doing it for? The good of YTMND? So i can feel good about my stance o

 (0.00)

I keep doing it cause it's fun to make site names based off already existing sites.

 (0.00)

I didnt even see this until today..you can blast your web words but you have no traction in this place..your argument as always is based off your obsessiveness and assumptions<br />and to think you use to call others obsessed<br /><br />according to you..a fair vote is based off of who votes first..when you have your sociopolitical episodes then you pick your target and the rounds start

 (5.00)

i would have sex with you based on this site alone.