<![CDATA[Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley]]>We got 3rd place with 6% of the votes. In-Forum.com got 80% and 123Fargo.com got 14%.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/topic/12017/fargostreet-3-best-site-in-the-valleyRSS for NodeThu, 28 May 2026 02:05:32 GMTSat, 29 Sep 2007 14:27:16 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sun, 30 Sep 2007 15:30:48 GMT]]>

KA-T_240;187773 wrote:
Do it! The numbers were probably fudged or some vote for us get a discount thing.

I meant for nominating their own website... not because it was rigged. Thats like having a "best forum on the internet award," and posting the poll on Fargostreet...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177188https://fargostreet.com/post/177188Sun, 30 Sep 2007 15:30:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sun, 30 Sep 2007 08:24:17 GMT]]>That would make a funny slogan for some shirts/decals over in the fargostreet gear thread.
FargoStreet.com. The 3rd Best website in the valley.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177183https://fargostreet.com/post/177183Sun, 30 Sep 2007 08:24:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:08:21 GMT]]>I'm sure it wasn't rigged, just sort of lame they can nominate thier own site.

Oh well, #3 isn't bad for such a niche site...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177132https://fargostreet.com/post/177132Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:08:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:22:56 GMT]]>Sometimes "the majority" means all the fools are on the same side.:icon_joker:

The way I see it.
1st = Yeah! We did it!
2nd = "The 1st loser"
3rd = Well, we did our best but it wasn't quite enough. We'll do better next time.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177121https://fargostreet.com/post/177121Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:22:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:11:28 GMT]]>I doubt it was rigged. I bet 95% of the people that voted for fargostreet were members of the site, and the other 5% thought it was fargostreetS.com. I'm sure people who voted for in-forum just checked it because that was the site they were on, or they'd never heard of the other two.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177087https://fargostreet.com/post/177087Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:11:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:19:47 GMT]]>haha imagine the site that held the poll wins by almost 5 times second places score

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177082https://fargostreet.com/post/177082Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:19:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:17:29 GMT]]>

wannabe;187772 wrote:
Letter to the editor anyone?

Do it! The numbers were probably fudged or some vote for us get a discount thing.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177078https://fargostreet.com/post/177078Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:17:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:03:34 GMT]]>Letter to the editor anyone?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177077https://fargostreet.com/post/177077Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:03:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:44:58 GMT]]>thats the fool-em for ya.

fuck em.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177075https://fargostreet.com/post/177075Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:44:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:41:24 GMT]]>It's pretty fucking lame they put thier own site as a nominee...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177073https://fargostreet.com/post/177073Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:41:24 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Fargostreet #3 Best Site In the Valley on Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:32:06 GMT]]>haha we dominate all

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/177072https://fargostreet.com/post/177072Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:32:06 GMT