|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Dec 10, 2006 12:42:16 GMT
I've read the article and would like to argue against the attempted logic contained within. And I have to ask who actually wrote this article. James quoted Michael Crichton at the beginning of this, but--if that is who we're supposed to credit with this--it doesn't sound like his writing. I've read both Jurassic Park and The Lost World cover to cover six times, but this doesn't have the same style. Who's the writer since I can't find a name? The author's name is David Wong. I only mentioned Michael Crichton because he's expressed similar views.
|
|
|
Post by cybra on Dec 10, 2006 13:13:20 GMT
@number 0xFF
Thank you for the critique and for being kind enough to read through all of that. My hat's off to you for slogging through that admittedly long post.
If it was supposed to be satire-esque, then you're right about two things: (1) Mr. Wong did a poor job of it and therefore (2) I and others took it unnecessarily seriously. I'll freely admit to a misunderstanding if that's the case.
@james
Thank you for clarifying on the writer and your citation of Michael Crichton. Mr. Wong didn't have any information about himself--not even a name--so I was a bit confused as to who penned the article. I like to have even Internet pseudonyms to address someone--or their writing--by with this sort of thing.
|
|
|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Dec 10, 2006 15:10:50 GMT
If it was supposed to be satire-esque, then you're right about two things: (1) Mr. Wong did a poor job of it and therefore (2) I and others took it unnecessarily seriously. I'll freely admit to a misunderstanding if that's the case. I agree that the satire seems to have not been interpreted well, but personally I tend to think it had more to do with the mindset of this forum than with any problems with the article itself. No offense to this forum as a whole, but in all the years I've been here, this forum has shown the lowest capacity for humor that I've seen anywhere on the internet. Everything is so serious--there's no sense of "fun." I just dug up a post from way back in the day that proves my point. The original post is obviously a joke, but only a few people get it. Others got so offended that they wanted to have the post deleted. I think what Tako said on page four sums up the entire problem with this forum: The problem here is that somehow, this forum has gotten into a mindset where everything that's posted here gets taken 100% literally, seriously, unless the poster comes out and SAYS "this was a joke." Frankly, that's sad. Most of you are pretty intelligent when you're not being dopes, so you should be able to tell what's a joke and what isn't without there having to be a notice. Let's face it: If you thought David Wong literally sent a dead rat to his friend, then you're the one that has problems[1]. This forum is the biggest collection of insecure emo girls I've ever seen. You're too jaded, you're incapable of having a little bit of fun. When you're online, you guard yourselves way too closely. Open up a bit. Let some warmth into your hearts. If you don't, you become a goth. Science has proven it. [1] Especially since the article makes it sound like he packed the supposed dead rat inside an envelope, which is physically impossible. Seriously, there's no way you could've thought he was serious unless you were high at the time.
|
|
|
Post by Numbuh 0xFF on Dec 10, 2006 15:37:27 GMT
Open up a bit. Let some warmth into your hearts. If you don't, you become a goth. Science has proven it. <dr-house> But science can't prove tha--oh, snap! You got me again! </dr-house> Seriously, though, the post you linked to is hillariously funny -- can't imagine that it got treated as it did. However this forum does have a sense of humour -- I remember an insane ZERO theories thread we both participated in a while back that was fairly well received. cybraPleasure to be of service.
|
|
|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Dec 10, 2006 15:43:46 GMT
The ZERO Theories topic probably didn't cause anyone to question their life's meaning. If it did, it would've been the end of the world.
If someone had said Three and Four weren't going to kiss, ditto.
|
|
|
Post by hoagiegal1970 on Dec 10, 2006 15:46:45 GMT
Maybe it's the TYPE of humor that's causing it to be not well received, y'know?
I think I have a mighty fine sense of humor, when I'm not being crabby. ;D Hey Professor--you can answer this one. How about all those loopy "discussions" we have from time to time? It's well understood that we're TEASING each other.
Or maybe that's because the Samurai are pretty tightly bonded as a whole?
|
|
|
Post by cybra on Dec 10, 2006 16:29:18 GMT
No offense to this forum as a whole, but in all the years I've been here, this forum has shown the lowest capacity for humor that I've seen anywhere on the internet. Everything is so serious--there's no sense of "fun." James, I see your point of view that people can have problems determining satire from somebody being serious on the Internet. As I stated before, I am a human being; I can misinterpret. However, please bear in mind that this is mostly a forum where the kind of humor that's enjoyed is silly, fun, and you don't need to go into the "deep and insightful" meanings behind the satire. If that annoys you, I'd suggest you go elsewhere. So-called "high brow" humor just isn't what a lot of the people on this board are into so misunderstandings will arise. First, as stated above, most people on this forum are into silly humor as opposed to satire. I'll refrain from repeating my earlier comments on the subject to save us all the time of reading it again. Second, it's fandom. It's not just here but in other fandoms you see the rampant "seriousness" of it all. People want to argue different points of the show, book, movie, etc., that they love with other people who love that same thing. They want to look more in-depth into the characters because they care about them and want to know more. To me, that is a fandom forum. We may make jokes that nobody gets or get into fights over different points of view, but it's like real life in the sense that you're talking to people of various backgrounds on one subject, their personal opinions coloring their responses. Quite frankly, I am insulted by this statement and I'm appalled that you decided to phrase your point in such a manner, James. I thought you would be perhaps a bit more respectful. First, let's return to that section of the original article, shall we? Note: This does not imply that Mr. Wong packed the fictional dead rat inside the envelope. As a college student who lives far from home, my family sends any mail I personally receive, unopened, in a package or a larger envelope as opposed to forwarding it since then they can send me things that I might need or that I forgot at home. Thus, it is entirely possible to send back an unread letter with more than enough space to include something as vile as a dead rat. If you're going to state that science has proven how a human being becomes a goth, I'd like to read where you obtained such knowledge from. Science is a subject that fascinates me, and I'd like to look over this study.
|
|
|
Post by iguana on Dec 10, 2006 19:21:17 GMT
About this forum not being into satire... that actually sort of surprises me. KND does have some social satire at times, even though it's mostly silly humour.
As for being offended by some of the article's comments (such as the "grabs your head and shoves your face into her boobs" comment); I figured anyone, even the most simple-minded people who think "LOL SQUIRREL DOOM CHEESE MONKEY RANDOM HAHAH" qualifies as humour, would get the point and not take stuff like that seriously.
No offence, but I just fail to see why so many people take an article off a site named "pointless waste of time" seriously, after said article mentions mailing dead rats and how science proves that introverts turn goth.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the main point of the article was that spending too much time on the Internet, blocking off all your fears and annoyances, actually prevents you from ever getting used to such annoyances and facing them head on in real life.
You aregoing to be forced to face them at various points in your life. You just can't spend your whole life in front of a computer screen, only having discussions with people that (supposedly) think the same as you. Arguments are inevitable, even with people who have the same interests or hobbies as you. In order to have a proper life, you're forced to go out, get some education, go to work and make a living. All of these involve meeting annoying people and facing them without going on a violent rampage or punching them in the face.
I thought the point was quite blatant: get used to minor annoyances instead of trying to block them off; you'll be forced to face them evantually and you should get used to them.
|
|
|
Post by diala on Dec 10, 2006 20:51:51 GMT
This forum is the biggest collection of insecure emo girls I've ever seen. You're too jaded, you're incapable of having a little bit of fun. When you're online, you guard yourselves way too closely. If that is supposed to be a joke, it is a VERY poorly done one, James. We're sorry this forum's sense of humor isn't up to par with what you consider "normal." We have our sense of humor, but sorry if we don't find what you consider "funny" hilarious. Call me a stupid "insecure emo goth" for not seeing your little comment as a joke, but it isn't. Humor is not "I'm going to give you some insults, but I don't mean them! Honest! I'll just make them sound serious so only those of a higher sense of humor can get them, you stupid emo bitches."
|
|
|
Post by valerie on Dec 10, 2006 21:04:35 GMT
This forum is the biggest collection of insecure emo girls I've ever seen. You're too jaded, you're incapable of having a little bit of fun. When you're online, you guard yourselves way too closely. Then WHY do you still linger here? My god! Is your life that boring that you need to get off on harassing them when you already know they can't take your humor? If you're so open-minded, intelligent and whatever the hell you think you are, why do you insist on hanging around a forum about a CHILDREN'S SHOW? To prove that you're better than everyone else? You're a sad person if the highlight of your day is one-upping an "insecure emo girl."
|
|
|
Post by cybra on Dec 10, 2006 21:33:14 GMT
About this forum not being into satire... that actually sort of surprises me. KND does have some social satire at times, even though it's mostly silly humour. You bring up an excellent point, Iguana. Those movie and TV spoofs that they do on the show can be counted as satire. I concede the point.
|
|
|
Post by iguana on Dec 10, 2006 22:09:06 GMT
Jesus, this is like the homosexuality thread argument all over again.
Edit: If you insist on arguing, at least try to argue with people's statements, instead of just brining up Livejournal, people being 'emo' and stuff like that. I'm not taking sides, but I think some people here misunderstood the point of the article. IMO, It didn't mean to say that things were better back in the "good ol' days", but that life was actually harder, yet people were facing everything without complaning or getting depressed as much as they do now.
Which could be true.
|
|
|
Post by diala on Dec 10, 2006 22:26:58 GMT
IMO, It didn't mean to say that things were better back in the "good ol' days", but that life was actually harder, yet people were facing everything without complaning or getting depressed as much as they do now. Look, I have already admitted to that mistake. Do you want me to admit to it again? Okay, I sorry I ever opened my mouth and made that statement. Happy?
|
|
|
Post by iguana on Dec 10, 2006 22:33:58 GMT
Look, I have already admitted to that mistake. Do you want me to admit to it again? Okay, I sorry I ever opened my mouth and made that statement. Happy? I never even noticed you were the one who brought it up first; I just looked through the thread a bit and noticed the argument seemed to revolve around that.
|
|
|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Dec 11, 2006 0:10:35 GMT
If you're so open-minded, intelligent and whatever the hell you think you are, why do you insist on hanging around a forum about a CHILDREN'S SHOW? To prove that you're better than everyone else? I love how people keep bringing up that KND is a Children's Show as if it somehow means they're free to make mistakes and never admit to them. Granted, Diala's admitted to hers (in a half-baked "Well it was a mistake but I'm still right" kinda way, but still), you, on the other hand, just continue to confound yours. Here's a hint, Valerie: Instead of carrying yourself entirely on the strength of your PMS, why don't you try actually THINKING? It's not that hard, and you'll be able to come up with something a little more meaningful then "OMG this guy made a lame commenr LOL LOSER!"
|
|