If they had a dick, they'd go get laid
Created on: April 9th, 2009
NSFW image hider
Welcome to YTMND.

Sponsorships:

Vote metrics:

rating total votes favorites comments
(4.29) 177 18 67

View metrics:

today yesterday this week this month all time
1 2 4 0 8,087

Inbound links:

views url
85 https://www.bing.com
27 http://newusers.ytmnsfw.com/
6 http://www.google.com.hk
3 http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/
3 http://216.18.188.175:80

Add a comment

Please login or register to comment.
April 9th, 2009
(4)
lol
(5)
April 9th, 2009
(5)
You magnificent bastard.
April 9th, 2009
(4)
Yes it's true, this man has no dick. (http://ytmnd.com/assets/59b6ee8b09f3b542556a013edc859256)
(6)
LMFAO
April 9th, 2009
(5)
DOWNVOTE
April 9th, 2009
(6)
DOWVOAT
April 10th, 2009
(1)
Haha, no, not you.
April 9th, 2009
(6)
What's the point of living if you don't have a dick?
April 9th, 2009
(11)
to vote 1 of course
April 10th, 2009
(0)
If not having a dick makes you vote 1 then what makes you vote 5?
April 10th, 2009
(3)
kfc jokes
April 10th, 2009
(2)
To get a dick in you.
April 9th, 2009
(6)
No, not you...
April 9th, 2009
(0)
Lol, i liked that scene originally
April 9th, 2009
(9)
i liked you originally
April 9th, 2009
(4)
Dogma = auto 5'd
April 10th, 2009
(2)
lol, great stuff
April 10th, 2009
(0)
in before downvoters with no dick
April 10th, 2009
(0)
You charismatic stallion! :D
April 10th, 2009
(0)
[ comment (and 5 replies) is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(0)
I Fav'd because I actually have two dicks. They branch off at right angles from the stem at about an inch down, and remain exactly parallel, like darth maul's lightsaber.
April 10th, 2009
(0)
You solved the mystery of downvoters. Well done.
April 10th, 2009
(0)
you glorious prick!
April 10th, 2009
(0)
i'm gettin laid
April 10th, 2009
(0)
haha, dogma = awesome.
April 10th, 2009
(7)
If downvoters were a problem right now then it wouldn't require a rating of 4.2 to get on the U&C.
April 10th, 2009
(-1)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(-1)
want me to zinc your downvoters?
April 10th, 2009
(-1)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(-1)
want to -1 my sniffer?
April 10th, 2009
(2)
I didn't - your comments.
April 10th, 2009
(-1)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(-1)
less talk, more phil hartman ytmnds
April 10th, 2009
(0)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(0)
The problem is the lack of voters. A 4.2 score is nothing out of the ordinary, but we've got a back up of higher rated sites because they aren't dropping off up and coming for a week.
April 10th, 2009
(0)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(0)
Plus ratings don't matter: exposure does. Up and coming is clogged. We need to draino that sh*t every once in a while, or get more voting users.
April 10th, 2009
(2)
Max dropped the requirements to 200 votes or three (or four) days to get off the U&C. Plus most people vote 5 no matter how dumb the site is.
April 10th, 2009
(0)
Yeah I remember it being lowered but now most sites don't even get 200 anymore. The situation is getting progressively worse...
April 10th, 2009
(0)
[ comment is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(0)
IF we just raised everyone's standards and reduced the number of upvoters, up and coming would still be just as stuck as it is now. The only difference is that they would be all rated 3.9 instead of 4.2
April 11th, 2009
(1)
"IF we just raised everyone's standards and reduced the number of upvoters..." And IF pigs had wings, they would fly.
April 11th, 2009
(0)
I was saying that in a mock tone because I know it would be impossible, and I don't care to change anyone's standards anyway. I was just trying to show why its silly to criticize ratings when we should be finding better ways to expose sites. You can say that I am just justifying a huge average, but I have explained before that averages mean nothing if you don't vote on every site you watch, which I don't. I vote on sites that are on up and coming or sites that I think should be on up and coming. It's skewed
April 11th, 2009
(0)
If you think its only due to upvoting, then you are mistaken. None of my recent sites are rated as high as yours Stephens, so maybe you just hit the jackpot this time? I don't understand why everyone makes such a big deal about ratings anyway. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on how high a site is supposed to be rated. And its proven that the democratic process doesn't work. Do you search youtube for the highest rated sites? No. Most of it is sh*t you don't care about.
April 12th, 2009
(0)
IF'N YOU DOAN LIEK OUAH DEMO-CRATTIC SISTIM RED, YOU KIN GO ABCK TUH RUSHA
April 12th, 2009
(2)
Some sites just aren't worth voting on (or even viewing). You should also stop trying to interpret why someone voted on a site. People have different taste.
April 12th, 2009
(0)
LOL Longestpants. I meant that democracy doesn't work on the internet, but just for the lols I'm going to condescend you; the U.S. isn't a true democracy. Also Stephens, ironically you say everyone should vote on every site they watch, but you haven't voted on this one lol. Like hank said: it's a waste of time to vote on everything, and even you know it deep down.
April 13th, 2009
(0)
I was trying to be funny
April 13th, 2009
(0)
I wonder why you are the only one that thinks I am dragging ytmnd down, umfuld. You seem to have this crazy delusion where every five is a reach around to a secret cult of internet friends. You seem fixated on equating selective voting, to upvoting. Maybe some people just vote on sites that they like? I give fours all the time. Hey, does that mean “I’m not afraid to give my real opinion?”As if the vote meant anything beyond “it could be better”.You extrapolate insane theories out of nothing.
April 13th, 2009
(0)
Votes aren’t what you look to for people’s opinions. Comments are. Numbers are way to vague to express opinions. I don’t get your reasoning. People got fed up and left because other people left, not because a lot of users gave fives. There was always a minor concern in the community about downvoters, but never upvoters. Even if your conspiracy held true, and if we had more users, “extra” high votes or low votes would be canceled out by the sheer number of “true” voters. We need more voters period.
April 13th, 2009
(0)
5
October 21st, 2010
(0)
liar
April 13th, 2009
(1)
ytmnd reader's digest.
April 13th, 2009
(0)
I am not giving advice that I don't use. I don't care about how people vote as long as they aren't specifically downvoters. I follow that rule. There is a difference between voting on every site, and not being registered and not contributing at all. That's the userbase we need. Just because I don't waste my time doesn't mean I don't I contribute enough. And the reason I don't vote more is due to the lack of quality sites. Even if we had 100 more that voted like me, ytmnd would be in much better shape.
April 13th, 2009
(0)
There have always been people who only 1 or 5 everything. All I'm saying is you can't sit there and judge why people vote the way they. Sure there are people like dmaz and fourest who admitted they only give fives to get fives back, but then there are people like bloodypython and coconutman, who just like everything, no matter how dumb we may think it is. Christ, you admitted you vote on people's names not the quality of their site. So everything you say is null and void anyway.
April 18th, 2009
(0)
tl;dr
April 10th, 2009
(0)
5'd for truth and justice. Also, they filmed Dogma in my birthplace and the church I got baptized in as a baby.
April 10th, 2009
(0)
BAT DAD KNOWS NO FEAR
April 10th, 2009
(-2)
[ comment (and 2 replies) is below rating threshold and has been hidden ]
(-2)
"he downvoted my site, i hate him"
April 10th, 2009
(0)
lol tts
April 11th, 2009
(2)
Matt Damon has one site and it's a "test site."
April 11th, 2009
(0)
DOWNVOTE
April 11th, 2009
(1)
5
April 11th, 2009
(0)
hahahah
April 12th, 2009
(0)
I wanna get some lays
April 3rd, 2011
(1)
7