S skier_dude_1831 Active member Jun 2, 2007 #1 pages in NSG it sucked having to clikc next 40 1438 times
zepscratch Active member Jun 2, 2007 #2 i never thought id say this but you should get WOW, it will eat up all your free time
Ben. Active member Jun 2, 2007 #5 haha you can just go to the top and type in the page number its part fo the url
zepscratch Active member Jun 2, 2007 #6 im just trying to think of a hobby for you man because obviously you have no life
S skier_dude_1831 Active member Jun 2, 2007 #7 wow i feel like crap hearing that i wasted like 2 hours of my time for something that could have taken 2 seconds
wow i feel like crap hearing that i wasted like 2 hours of my time for something that could have taken 2 seconds
SlickRick. Active member Jun 2, 2007 #10 russ buss, you are well on your way to becoming widely hated on this site.
D dammitmike Active member Jun 2, 2007 #13 nah he was right. you can also just look at the top of the page where it says "Showing threads 1 to 40 of 57539" then divide 57539 total threads by 40 threads per page and you get 1438.475 pages
nah he was right. you can also just look at the top of the page where it says "Showing threads 1 to 40 of 57539" then divide 57539 total threads by 40 threads per page and you get 1438.475 pages
SteezePatrol Active member Jun 2, 2007 #18 yea there's no way he actually did he just divided the totaly by 40
S skier_dude_1831 Active member Jun 2, 2007 #20 haha jk i just did that thing in the url but u all believed except for 1 guy that was smart i think it was steezepatrol
haha jk i just did that thing in the url but u all believed except for 1 guy that was smart i think it was steezepatrol
S skier_dude_1831 Active member Jun 2, 2007 #28 look above i was jking i just switched the page number in the url i went 1000 2000 1500 1300 1400 1450 1425 1440 1435 1438 1439 so it took like a minute
look above i was jking i just switched the page number in the url i went 1000 2000 1500 1300 1400 1450 1425 1440 1435 1438 1439 so it took like a minute
keystoner1 Active member Jun 3, 2007 #34 p.s. u couldve taken a calculator and divided the number at the bottom of the page. it wouldve taken about 5 seconds
p.s. u couldve taken a calculator and divided the number at the bottom of the page. it wouldve taken about 5 seconds