Fling it like a Frisbee and see if anyone can be bothered to catch it (using a database of 360 rows to determine the direction relative to North to throw it)? Personally, I would only be concerned about being hit by it, not catching it. Flame on.

'bout time we had some legal sanity down here. Now all we need is for bloody Senator Conroy to drop the internet filtering bullshit and we'll all be happy campers.

Interesting, when I originally clicked the second definition link on the m-w page in question nothing happened, I couldn't get to the second one whatever I did so I presumed it to be an erroneous entry (naturally it works now though). I bow to your knowledge and apologise. However, I do still think the term to be uncommon, I've never heard it myself in Oz or the UK and continue to think it unwise for people to use colloquialisms when there are far more suitable words available that would not cause confusion - your own suggestion of "lots" for example.

Perhaps it is common where you live, but not in the UK or Australia; nor ironically does it mean that in the merriam-webster dictionary that the poster referred to.

Perhaps what the poster was trying to say was...

How does "any of several carangid fishes (especially of the genus Decapterus)" act in the role of a numerator in the context.

Perhaps the OP should also learn to use a dictionary too, I also thought WTF when I saw "scads" used as it was.