Scratch

alexpja · 2009-03-26 21:05:42

To talk in Gainsboro, just do this:

Code:

[color=gainsboro]BLAH BLAH BLAH[/color]

then highlight it and there ya go!

GO READ! I wrote a little note!
Hey there! Ya wanna talk in Gainsboro? Then go up there and read!

technoguyx · 2009-03-28 00:08:21

GAINSBORO! GENIUS NAME!

This is useful for secret messages, and hidden hints. :-)

alexpja · 2009-03-28 00:25:11

Yea! I just got a mini computer. I LOVE IT!

Last edited by alexpja (2009-03-28 00:26:39)

SmartIrishKid · 2009-04-02 22:27:19

I wouldn't exactly consider this a language. It reminds me of invisible ink. Speaking of which, can someone tell me where to find a blacklight? The fire didn't work.

GoogleplexPlus · 2009-05-10 22:29:08

I already knew about this. Seriously. And it is used commonly in things about videogames so people don't have to see spoilers.
Also, when making a quote, change the [color=gainsboro] in the quote to [color=white]. That preserves the invisible effect.

scratchisthebest · 2009-05-27 17:06:57

LOL I accidentally wrote clolr. See the lol?

fruit · 2009-06-02 21:36:01

scratchisthebest wrote:
LOL I accidentally wrote clolr. See the lol?

no

Last edited by fruit (2009-06-02 21:36:40)

scratchisthebest · 2009-06-07 11:40:30

You can't? It says: c"lol"r.

keikij · 2009-06-29 17:47:14

I don't blame you...
You would understand if you played Portal.

scratchfeat · 2009-07-06 11:41:32

chomcizka

KalinaStar · 2009-07-07 18:52:25

This is pwnably fun!

ihaveamac · 2009-07-08 00:44:32

How is this a language though? lol!!!!!!!!!

waveOSBeta · 2010-01-30 10:30:21

do

Code:

 [color=defdf] TEXT [/color]

technoguyx · 2010-01-30 11:25:04

[color=transparent] is much better. It's invisible, even when quoted.

waveOSBeta · 2010-01-30 16:30:39

it only works in firefox.

rdococ · 2010-02-19 16:17:38

technoguyx wrote:
[color=transparent] is much better. It's invisible, even when quoted.

...only in firefox.
I can see it.

Greenboi · 2010-02-19 18:31:40

Test text

Greenboi · 2010-02-19 18:32:41

Text

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-02-19 19:07:46

rdococ wrote:
technoguyx wrote:
[color=transparent] is much better. It's invisible, even when quoted.
...only in firefox.
I can see it.

Rdococ, please. If you see a topic that is over 2 months old and hasn't been used, please don't post in it. It is something called Necroposting or Necrobumping.

And no, a post does not need to have the word 'bump' in it to be a bump. Every time you reply, or post, it's a bump. Because it 'bumps' the topic up to the top of the page.

Last edited by Ace-of-Spades (2010-02-19 19:09:07)

Paddle2See · 2010-02-19 19:40:48

Ace-of-Spades wrote:
rdococ wrote:
technoguyx wrote:
[color=transparent] is much better. It's invisible, even when quoted.
...only in firefox.
I can see it.
Rdococ, please. If you see a topic that is over 2 months old and hasn't been used, please don't post in it. It is something called Necroposting or Necrobumping.

And no, a post does not need to have the word 'bump' in it to be a bump. Every time you reply, or post, it's a bump. Because it 'bumps' the topic up to the top of the page.

I think your math may be wrong here...the post is less than a month old smile

Greenboi · 2010-02-19 19:48:16

Paddle2See wrote:
Ace-of-Spades wrote:
rdococ wrote:

...only in firefox.
I can see it.
Rdococ, please. If you see a topic that is over 2 months old and hasn't been used, please don't post in it. It is something called Necroposting or Necrobumping.

And no, a post does not need to have the word 'bump' in it to be a bump. Every time you reply, or post, it's a bump. Because it 'bumps' the topic up to the top of the page.
I think your math may be wrong here...the post is less than a month old

lol

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-02-19 20:02:18

Paddle2See wrote:
Ace-of-Spades wrote:
rdococ wrote:

...only in firefox.
I can see it.
Rdococ, please. If you see a topic that is over 2 months old and hasn't been used, please don't post in it. It is something called Necroposting or Necrobumping.

And no, a post does not need to have the word 'bump' in it to be a bump. Every time you reply, or post, it's a bump. Because it 'bumps' the topic up to the top of the page.
I think your math may be wrong here...the post is less than a month old

My bad, I saw all 2009's and then I scrolled to the bottom to check if you-know-who was the bumper. But my post isn't just for this thread. It's for every other thread that's inactive.

But I'll also check the newest posts with all of the other posts from now on (in terms of date/time) instead of assuming it was 7 months inactive.

juststickman · 2010-02-20 15:51:20

Ace-of-Spades wrote:
Paddle2See wrote:
Ace-of-Spades wrote:
Rdococ, please. If you see a topic that is over 2 months old and hasn't been used, please don't post in it. It is something called Necroposting or Necrobumping.

And no, a post does not need to have the word 'bump' in it to be a bump. Every time you reply, or post, it's a bump. Because it 'bumps' the topic up to the top of the page.
I think your math may be wrong here...the post is less than a month old
My bad, I saw all 2009's and then I scrolled to the bottom to check if you-know-who was the bumper. But my post isn't just for this thread. It's for every other thread that's inactive.

But I'll also check the newest posts with all of the other posts from now on (in terms of date/time) instead of assuming it was 7 months inactive.

Are you trying to act like a mod or something for the mod elections?

Ace-of-Spades · 2010-02-20 19:22:35

No, I don't care about that. PLZ MAKE ME A MOD, PADDLE
Yep.. totally don't care about it.

(I'm mostly just annoyed by necroposting. My uncle was killed by a necroposter.)

Scratch

archived forums

#1 2009-03-26 21:05:42

Gainsboro!

Code:

#2 2009-03-28 00:08:21

Re: Gainsboro!

#3 2009-03-28 00:25:11

Re: Gainsboro!

#4 2009-04-02 22:27:19

Re: Gainsboro!

#5 2009-05-10 22:29:08

Re: Gainsboro!

#6 2009-05-27 17:06:57

Re: Gainsboro!

#7 2009-06-02 21:36:01

Re: Gainsboro!

scratchisthebest wrote:

#8 2009-06-07 11:40:30

Re: Gainsboro!

#9 2009-06-29 17:47:14

Re: Gainsboro!

#10 2009-07-06 11:41:32

Re: Gainsboro!

#11 2009-07-07 18:52:25

Re: Gainsboro!

#12 2009-07-08 00:44:32

Re: Gainsboro!

#13 2010-01-30 10:30:21

Re: Gainsboro!

Code:

#14 2010-01-30 11:25:04

Re: Gainsboro!

#15 2010-01-30 16:30:39

Re: Gainsboro!

#16 2010-02-19 16:17:38

Re: Gainsboro!

technoguyx wrote:

#17 2010-02-19 18:31:40

Re: Gainsboro!

#18 2010-02-19 18:32:41

Re: Gainsboro!

#19 2010-02-19 19:07:46

Re: Gainsboro!

rdococ wrote:

technoguyx wrote:

#20 2010-02-19 19:40:48

Re: Gainsboro!

Ace-of-Spades wrote:

rdococ wrote:

technoguyx wrote:

#21 2010-02-19 19:48:16

Re: Gainsboro!

Paddle2See wrote:

Ace-of-Spades wrote:

rdococ wrote:

#22 2010-02-19 20:02:18

Re: Gainsboro!

Paddle2See wrote:

Ace-of-Spades wrote:

rdococ wrote:

#23 2010-02-20 15:51:20

Re: Gainsboro!

Ace-of-Spades wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

Ace-of-Spades wrote:

#24 2010-02-20 19:22:35

Re: Gainsboro!

Board footer