Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 04, 2016, 08:37:43 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]  (Read 1431522 times)

Arizona Hot

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,792
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1676 on: May 29, 2013, 07:53:39 AM »
Here's an idea.. let's try not injecting politics into every thread.
Some tips:
Let's say you find yourself on a thread that has nothing to do with politics and you find yourself writing a post that is insulting to some political figure or party, or some religion.
Just as your about to click post, instead close the browser and go have a snack and take a break, and come back when you can resist the urge to make that post.
Or post it in the basement, or on some other forum.  Or tell it to your friends.  Or whatever.
Just resist injecting political/religious insults into a thread that has nothing to do with them.

   Was that seeming digression directed at me? Did you want to address that in this thread? If it was, and if you do, then my reply would be along these lines:
  • (a) To "political": that, if you are implying that the "Bush and Condoleezza battle plan" is a "political" joke, then I have to say that I do not see how it fits the definition of "political" at all. For example (my emphasis):
    Quote
    political
    · adj.
    1 of or relating to the government or public affairs of a country. Ø interested in or active in politics.
    (Concise Oxford Dictionary, 10th Ed.)
    (So my calling that last joke "political" was in itself a joke - we are in the "silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]", after all.)    ;)
       
       On the contrary, the only thing that could be construed as being "political" about it was that it mentioned the White House and names of US politicians, but you could put it in another country/time and change the names of the actors and it would still be amusing because it is classic black humour/satire about war and the inconvenient but civilised artificial constraints (e.g., minimising civilian casualties) that some Western warmongers peacemakers have to operate within.
       It would not be correct to call it insulting or disparaging, though there is presumably always the possibility that people who were "right-thinking" censors or overly sensitive or PC might infer that it was - for example, in places such as (say) the old USSR, or Iran or Egypt, where it could be a bit like walking on eggshells and you might find yourself up in court and sentenced to prison or being hung in doublequick time for risking saying/doing anything that could in any conceivable way be interpreted as being critical of the President or ruling Party.
       
       In any event, I am somewhat at a disadvantage here as you made your last post without answering the genuine question that I posed, viz: Which was the "political post"?
       I really was not entirely sure what you were referring to, you see, as I couldn't see that my posting the pictures of the "US presidents in uniform" (copied from a US website somewhere) was political. Was it insulting? No.
    I reckoned that the picture itself was childish and disrespectful - but that's no sin - and rather amusing as regards the last two pictures - Clinton and Obama, who both look rather silly. At least it was not as unnecessarily unkind as the "Reagan in drag" picture that someone else posted afterwards.
       
       Generally speaking, I am apolitical  and regard all politicians and their religio-political ideologies and systems for controlling/"governing" people with equal disdain, but am always very interested to understand how they got to be the way they were - e.g., including such as Slavery, Serfdom/Monarchy, Democracy, Fascism, Nazism, Secularism, Roman Catholicism (non-secular rule - e.g., as in Early Europe and the Vatican City), Islamism (non-secular rule - e.g., as in the Caliphate concept), Capitalism, Socialism, Marxism, Communism, Liberalism, Conservatism, and others.
       If I have any bias it is not so much for any particular system(s) but rather for the critical-rationalist and pragmatic approach (i.e., "What seems to have worked well in fact?"), but always based on sound theory and a few principles - including first and foremost, truth, reason, love and freedom.
    I do not insult
       Thus, I would not usually recommend, follow or criticise any particular politician, party or party line for what they are per se, but rather for what they have done and whether they had fewer identifiable flaws than the others, given the above approach.
       None of these things (or flaws) are beyond criticism, and always I would be able to see the human silliness and the often accidental humour in these things, and will point them out - warts an' all - if it seems relevant to making a valid point in the context of a given discussion.
       And there are so many flaws - but that is merely because we operate on artificial frameworks of reference constructed by us fallible humans. To paraphrase an old children's song:
       
    Quote
       "Anything I can do, God can do better.
       God can do anything better than me.
       Yes he can. No he can't.
       Yes he can. No he can't.
       Yes he can. Yes he can. Yes he can!"
       _____________________________
       
       
  • (b) To "insulting to some political figure or party, or some religion":
       That is a rather wide net to cast. Again, was this directed at me? I do not recall being unnecessarily or wrongly insulting/libellous/slanderous about any political figure, party, or religion - or at least, probably no more so than others on this forum, and more probably less (e.g., see thread link below). Certainly I do not make spurious political/religious insults as you would seem to be suggesting.
    I suggest that you may need to get your facts right, and I would point to the thread referred to below as a good starting-point in my case. You may be surprised to find that you might owe me an apology.
    I generally try to speak with reason and to the truth of the matter. Sometimes the truth may be unwanted. I expect others to speak with reason and to the truth as well - for example, when I defended a class of practitioners of one religion (Islamic imams) when they seemed to be being smeared by one party in a discussion in the DC forum: (I detest the use of logical fallacies and especially ad hominem attacks)
       
       …
       It would not be correct to call this a good example of a valid argument - for anything, really.
       Furthermore it is a smear - i.e., it makes an easy and deliberately unsubstantiated and fundamentally offensive allegation about the Mullahs - one which they are not here to defend themselves from. Regardless of what our opinion might be regarding Islamists, we do not know whether this allegation is true nor, if it is true, then to what extent it is true.
       …
    __________________________
       
        - and no, I didn't "report it to the moderator" - didn't see any need to, being quite capable of confronting the irrationality on my own, and so I addressed it in a rational and matter-of-fact manner, and without "putting anyone down".
       
       Otherwise it is possible that I might have made some well-founded criticisms or jokes, or identified some irrationality (it's not difficult!) in regard to those things, but inevitably and always to make a point - hurtful though it may have been to those who might have identified themselves with the things being analysed/critiqued.
       What can I say? I am surely not responsible if some people seem unable to accept reason or the truth about their pet foibles and and seem to be unable to take responsibility for thinking critically for themselves.
       Whilst we often cannot  control what happens to us in life, how we respond to those things is largely a matter of choice. "Taking offence" or "feeling insulted/hurt" would be a matter of choice, but it certainly is not a valid reason for avoiding taking responsibility for the (ir)rationality of your paradigms, or for setting fire to the odd witch or two. 
       ____________________________
       
   Similarly, I do not choose to feel offended by your comments, if they were indeed directed at me. However, I would take issue with them and - if they are serious - especially with the context and manner of their ad hoc delivery in the NSFW funnies section.
   I always wait for reason to prevail, but, if you really intend what you seem to be saying here, then I would suggest that as the MC you could do a lot worse than put your gratuitous advice (above) on these things, together with your gratuitous advice for "political" posts, as a set of definitive guidelines for posting for us all in the forum - e.g., as you seem to have started to do in the Basement section. (Or have you already done those things?)    :tellme:
You could post the guidelines in a pinned topic, so everybody would be able to easily find and familiarise themselves with the guidelines.
   
   It occurred to me that, if you didn't possess the patience or the intestinal fortitude to complete this tedious but perhaps necessary administrative task, then you could probably take a shortcut and at the same time relieve yourself of responsibility for doing it, by saying you had to do it "to align with the UN Constitution", or something, so the UN could then shoulder all the blame. As mentioned in the above thread reference, for some time now, the UN have apparently been working on defining a new world crime of "causing offence to or insulting a religion or a person's religious beliefs" or something, so you might be able save yourself some time and crib the wording of the text of whatever draft they may already have, and cobble something up together with a suitably ambiguously definition for "political" (say). I don't have the UN link, but you should be able to find it easily enough if you google it.
   If you were indeed aiming your comments at me, then I would have to object to the manner of being publicly stigmatised in the forum, apparently for no specific or valid reason, by being singled out quite unnecessarily and selected for this form of ad hoc homily, but I presume you did it so that people could see what you were saying and what my reply might be - though that by no means justifies it.

   By all means take responsibility as the MC and tell me to (say) "make no more posts" or something, or ban me from the forum altogether - whichever you would prefer. If you asked me, I might consider (say) just sticking to doing/maintaining the mini-reviews (which I quite enjoy doing and which you have paid me handsomely and quite unexpectedly for) and you could ban me from discussion on anything that could even remotely be considered as tendentious or upsetting to those of a highly sensitive or nervous disposition or with strongly-held religio-political ideologies/beliefs in fragile paradigms that might not be able to withstand reasoned scrutiny in daylight.

   In any event, I reckon that a good old-fashioned public witch-burning might be in order and could be just the ticket to help restore things to their former, whatever-passed-for-normal levels of rationality, and to let any aggrieved persons on DCF project and release their pent-up frustrations at being unable to substantiate or really believe their savaged/wounded beliefs/opinions.
Deliverance! Vindication! What could be a better release?   :tellme:
From panto days, I have a witch's costume, a ghoulish-green papier-maché mask with a warty nose, some rope and a papier-maché stake, and lots of fiery-looking flickery sparkled papers that look like flames when you shake them, all of which I keep for just such times of foul heresy. I have been set fire to (figuratively speaking) on many occasions, so I'm your man/witch of the moment, if you want.
We could have the burning held online via webcam, with the whole jolly "bonfire" being staged in the vacant carpark outside my apartment block.
I could offer alcoholic drinks as incentive payment to a friendly "mob" of people from the apartment blocks around and about, who would be well-rehearsed to stand round the fire chanting "Burn witch, burn!" with the appropriate level of hate and anger projected in their voices. It would be a super jape and a great live webinar/webshow.
This could be a rebirth and a cleansing experience for us all, but not necessarily for our livers.

(Please note that this has been posted deliberately and not by accident in the Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content] thread.)

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,405
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1677 on: May 29, 2013, 09:13:39 AM »
Can we just take this as a learning experience and get back to the silly humor rather than the rationalizations/explanations?  :huh:  We're never going to agree on everything- that's what makes DoCo cool in my book, the ability of such a homogenous group to let things go, and discuss the commonalities rather than argue about the differences.  And to let things go when it seems like we're heading down such a path.  I think that everyone has been on both sides at one point or another.  It takes a community to keep things together.

To help... a gif.

Life Imitates Art
lifeimitatesart.gif



IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1678 on: May 29, 2013, 10:25:23 AM »
Can we just take this as a learning experience and get back to the silly humor...
Wot, and not have the witch-burning you mean?    :tellme:
You're being no fun at all.

app103

  • That scary taskbar girl
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2006
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,666
    • View Profile
    • App's Apps
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member

mouser

  • First Author
  • Administrator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,406
    • View Profile
    • Mouser's Software Zone on DonationCoder.com
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1680 on: May 29, 2013, 05:21:55 PM »
Quote
Which was the "political post"?
   I really was not entirely sure what you were referring to, you see, as I couldn't see that my posting the pictures of the "US presidents in uniform" (copied from a US website somewhere) was political. Was it insulting? No.

the post of presidents in "uniform" was the post that jumped out at me -- it is clearly, explicitly, by design, an image intended to cast aspersions on the patriotism and suitability for office of obama and clinton.  it was unequivocally *created* in order to insult and demean clinton and obama.  it is indistinguishable from the partisan images used in political campaigns to damage the reputation of political figures.  Anyone familiar with american politics should be able to confirm that to you.

now whether *you* personally posted that with those intentions, or just saw it and thought it was silly and funny but didn't quite understand the political nature of it, i make no judgement and will take your word about.

please don't go anywhere -- you are as much a part of this community as anyone else.  but if you really can't tell that that image was meant to attack the character of those two men, perhaps you might consider staying clear of humor involving (american?) politicians.

the worst part about partisan political/religious posts is that they are like a virus -- one person posts something insulting to one side, and then people on the other side feel compelled to reply in turn, and soon everyone is angry.  that's why we ask that people refrain from such things.

now let's get back to being silly.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2013, 05:30:09 PM by mouser »

Target

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,605
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1681 on: May 29, 2013, 05:33:22 PM »
now let's get back to being silly.

finally something I'm qualified for ;D ;D ;D

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,405
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1682 on: May 29, 2013, 05:42:50 PM »
dailyshowballoons.gif

Arizona Hot

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,792
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1683 on: May 30, 2013, 09:54:24 PM »
Clipboard01.jpgsilly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]

Extreme Barbie Jeep Racing video goes viral

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1684 on: May 30, 2013, 11:12:19 PM »
Quote
Which was the "political post"?
   I really was not entirely sure what you were referring to, you see, as I couldn't see that my posting the pictures of the "US presidents in uniform" (copied from a US website somewhere) was political. Was it insulting? No.

the post of presidents in "uniform" was the post that jumped out at me -- it is clearly, explicitly, by design, an image intended to cast aspersions on the patriotism and suitability for office of obama and clinton.  it was unequivocally *created* in order to insult and demean clinton and obama.  it is indistinguishable from the partisan images used in political campaigns to damage the reputation of political figures.  Anyone familiar with american politics should be able to confirm that to you.
Ah, I understand now. That throws quite a different light on it. Thankyou for explaining that to me. So it was apparently unnacceptably insulting - or at least you found it so - and it would (it seems, from what you wrote) usually be the sort of insult handed out with a party-political bias, so it could be construed as being "political" at the very least.

Well then, I really do offer my most profuse apologies for that. I had absolutely no intention whatsoever of gratuitously denigrating or insulting any US politician when I put that picture up, and I did not perceive or intend that it would have had any political bias such as you describe. I thought it was just acceptable American humour covered by the free speech rule, as it came from a US website.
Certainly, I never wish to insult in general - it serves no useful purpose.
I can never understand the motivation for making gratuitous/unfounded or insulting statements about people, whether one knows them or not, and regardless of who they are, and regardless of whether they do or say something that I might not approve of or agree with. They might be, for example, politicians, or people one meets at a party, or someone whom you discover had just burgled your parked car - it wouldn't matter to me. I would have (correctly) called the burglar a "thief" though, as that would have been established as fact.

The thing is that I was brought up in the UK, where politicians are fair game for poking fun at, and they have all usually been pretty mercilessly satirised over the years, usually without evident, specific political bias. I was apolitical from an early age, and loved the satire where it was funny, clever and made a point, and it never seemed to influence my view of the MP or their policies. Some very good examples were the printed periodicals Punch magazine and Private Eye, and the TV current affairs satirical shows TWTWTW (That was the Week That Was), and Spitting Image. Then again, there was the long-running TV series, "Yes Minister", which was quite a clever satire about a UK Government Minister and his departmental Civil Servants (the latter are supposed to be apolitical).

However, I did think that Spitting Image went a tad too far when - as I recall - in a current affairs skit they depicted US President Reagan as taking his brain out and keeping it in a cup on his bedside table at night, or something. It was represented as a walnut-sized object, and in one episode he mislaid it and picked up a walnut off the floor, mistaking it for his brain, and inserted the walnut (rather than his brain) into his ear, and it made no apparent difference. I didn't know much about Reagan but I did consider that the skit was unnecessarily insulting and for no good reason that I could see. Similarly, I did not understand the later American penchant for making fun of Bush for his "Bushisms", though Clinton was probably fair game for his womanising - yet all three (Raegan, Bush, Clinton) seemed to generally perform the role of President to the people's satisfaction (unlike Nixon, for example).
Where such jokes about the presidents seemed to be ad hominem attacks, I would tend to disregard them as I despise the use of that logical fallacy - as it is usually found when people have no valid argument to make, so they attack an opposing debater's character, physical appearance, or speech impediment, or something, rather than the reasoning in the argument being made by that person.

It never occurred to me that I might be publishing something that you might find or that could be deemed insulting and in a political context, on your humour section, and I confess to having being completely mystified as to your accusation of my making political/religious insults. I don't even know what political party any US presidents belong/belonged to, nor do I care.
However, I am now confuzzled by something else - two things actually:
  • (a) if the picture of "US presidents in uniform" that I put up was insulting, was not the picture of Reagan in drag also insulting? (And my apologies if I spelt his name incorrectly before)   :tellme:
  • (b) where you say that "the post of presidents in "uniform" was the post that jumped out at me", I can now understand what you mean, but you earlier wrote "Just resist injecting political/religious insults into a thread", your language here indicating two categories of gratuitous offence, and your use of the plural both seeming to imply that I have done this on two or more occasions. However, I cannot for the life of me see where else I might have done that. Could you explain please - or have I misunderstood what you wrote?    :tellme:

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1685 on: May 30, 2013, 11:20:17 PM »
I don't know if this is true, or whether it has been posted before, but I found it rather funny/clever:
Improve police response time to crime.jpg

mouser

  • First Author
  • Administrator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,406
    • View Profile
    • Mouser's Software Zone on DonationCoder.com
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1686 on: May 30, 2013, 11:53:43 PM »
Quote
was not the picture of Reagan in drag also insulting?


yes -- i just read that post as an attempt to "retaliate" on the other side in response to the uniform one.  one could also make a good case that the reagan photo was, while not flattering, not really a politically partisan pointed attack in the same way that the uniform one was.

Quote
our language here indicating two categories of gratuitous offence, and your use of the plural both seeming to imply that I have done this on two or more occasions.

i didn't mean to suggest that, i was just taking the opportunity to lump politics and religion into one.

Quote
The thing is that I was brought up in the UK, where politicians are fair game for poking fun at,


well you see, to be honest, *personally* i think the healthier approach to politics and religion is to not take them very seriously and make fun of them all equally.  i do not have much respect for politicians.

but the prohibition we have here against politics and religion is a practical one not an ideological one.  experience has shown us that people very quickly take sides when such jokes are posted, and feel the need to have the last word and one up each other in insulting the other side, and it inevitably just spirals out of control.

so while you were thinking that you were just posting a silly picture that happened to involve politicians, people familiar with american politics would fairly have interpreted it as a partisan political insult that they would feel the need to respond in kind to.



to underline the point i'm trying to make..  if we had a thread that was titled something like: "Politician Insult thread", where everyone posted all sorts of jokes and insults about various politicians (akin to Spitting Image, etc.), i don't think your image would be out of place or cross the line.  it would be just one insulting image among many, and every side would get their shots in, and no one would view the thread as anything but a wide variety of views.  and that would be fine and i would have no problem with it.

the problem only comes when such insults are "snuck" into threads that are about other matters.. because it's at that point that people feel compelled (often for good reason) to respond in kind and rebut the partisan political claim, and before you know it the thread is derailed and the original topic becomes lost.



regarding the "this guy is a genius": HA!
« Last Edit: May 30, 2013, 11:58:48 PM by mouser »

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1687 on: May 31, 2013, 01:19:30 AM »
Quote
was not the picture of Reagan in drag also insulting?

yes -- i just read that post as an attempt to "retaliate" on the other side in response to the uniform one.  one could also make a good case that the reagan photo was, while not flattering, not really a politically partisan pointed attack in the same way that the uniform one was.
...

Oh, I get it (I think). Reagan is/was in another/opposing political party/side to whatever sides Clinton and Obama are on, right?  Sheesh.
Now I also understand this: (it made no sense at all to me when I read it)
^ Heh.  Good comeback.

How many parties are there?
In NZ currently we apparently have "about 7", according to my daughter Lily (I just asked her). She's not sure of all their names - neither am I, having lost interest some years ago when MMP came in.
Lily says she is thinking of becoming involved in politics...(currently age 11). I nearly choked on the coffee I was drinking at the time when she told me that.

Thanks for clarifying where you wrote:
Quote
"i didn't mean to suggest that, i was just taking the opportunity to lump politics and religion into one"
I am mightily relieved at this. I had been preparing to have to apologise for umpteen other unwitting sins/crimes and don sackcloth and ashes and walk around flagellating myself as penance and in an attempt to avoid being put to the test per The Malleus Maleficarum. People tended not to come out of that alive/intact.

Edvard

  • Coding Snacks Author
  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,888
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1688 on: May 31, 2013, 01:43:06 AM »
In the US, we functionally have two.  There are others, but they usually get slim-to-none in the polls and only serve (in many people's opinion) to steal votes away from a more dominant party with an almost-but-not-quite-entirely-unlike platform/agenda.  
Politics in America are a cut-throat business, and the farther away I am, the happier I am.  ;)

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1689 on: May 31, 2013, 06:25:40 AM »
^^ NZ used to be first-past-the post elections and functionally a two-party system as well, but fortunately for the voters, there was a proposal put forward by the Electoral Reform Commission for maintaining the status quo or moving to 1 of 2 alternative proportional representation systems. This was put to a referendum some years back, and the voters selected MMP. It was a victory for sanity and heralded the end of the Yo-Yo (extreme political swings).
We more recently held a referendum as to whether to change it again, and the voters said "No. Keep it the way it is at present".

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1690 on: May 31, 2013, 06:59:19 AM »
This is quite amusing. My favourite in here is the character being interviewed called "Shannynn". She's absolutely classic. Watch for her bubblegum-on-finger trick.
There's one bit in it that I don't find amusing though.
Dickheads - The Documentary. An in-depth look into the lives of dickheads - YouTube




Giampy

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 428
    • View Profile
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1691 on: May 31, 2013, 08:59:07 AM »

Politics again:

Gatto ed elezioni - 552809_3492299659045_2123520845_n.jpg
"A refrigerator without beer is like a body without soul"

kyrathaba

  • N.A.N.Y. Organizer
  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 3,120
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1692 on: May 31, 2013, 09:33:27 AM »
Quote
yes -- i just read that post as an attempt to "retaliate" on the other side in response to the uniform one.

Quote
Gee Mouser, don't hold back, tell us how you really feel!

The following in general commentary, folks, and NOT directed at any particular site member(s)...

This is WHY Mouser created the Basement, folks. I'll give you a parallel example: video-stores (some of them, at least) used to have a "back room" where the x-rated materials were kept. A sign above the door to that room clearly warned of the contents inside and for those under the age of 18, and those who find such material degrading/insulting, from entering. That was the responsible thing to do, just as using the Basement for religious/political satire/criticism/diatribes/"it seems harmlessly funny to me" posts is appropriate here.

I think the easiest way to avoid those oops, I didn't mean to offend... moments on threads is to ask yourself, "Is my post in any way about a religious figure or movement, or a political figure/movement/party/philosophy? Does it tease/mock/ridicule a sexual orientation? If so, just either don't post it at all, or at least post it in the Basement.

There is a prevailing attitude in the world today, in my opinion, that says, You don't like it? **** you and the horse you rode in on! We're aiming for a higher-caliber of consideration for others' sensibilities here at DoCo.  That notwithstanding, there will always be those who get angry and sarcastic whenever anyone dares to suggest that something they posted was inappropriate.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,405
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1693 on: May 31, 2013, 10:51:37 AM »
I'd actually petition that the whole conversation about what went wrong be moved to another thread... where things of this nature should probably be done from now on to keep the discussions out of the humor.

russianroulette.jpg
« Last Edit: May 31, 2013, 01:55:45 PM by wraith808 »

Stoic Joker

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,294
    • View Profile
    • www.StoicJoker.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1694 on: May 31, 2013, 11:52:44 AM »
(see attachment in previous post)

...and number 6 Gets A "Winner" Every Time! That is just so wrong...I love it!

4wd

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 4,473
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1695 on: May 31, 2013, 10:16:13 PM »
(see attachment in previous post)

...and number 6 Gets A "Winner" Every Time! That is just so wrong...I love it!

Statistically, in a round of Russian Roulette that is using a semi-automatic it's the first person who wins every time.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,405
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1696 on: May 31, 2013, 10:39:07 PM »
I think that's what he meant by #6... the picture was originally a lot smaller, so he might not have noticed that there were two semi-autos on there.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,137
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1697 on: May 31, 2013, 11:18:55 PM »
Confuzzled here. Sorry.
There are 5 revolvers (I can see that) - but are the other two what are called "semi-automatic pistols"?
That would be 5 out of 7 - no? Unless you say that you stop counting the first time one of the pistols is used, I suppose. Or was the author of the picture indeed simply mistaken?
I cannot read the writing on the labels attached to those guns, so do not know if it is relevant to the population of guns as a set.
5, 6 or 7 would be too small for a relevant statistical sample anyway, but I suppose it might
do for a joke that was not too pedantic, and anyway, as our stats lecturer always said:
Quote
"There are 3 kinds of people in this world: those who can count, and those who can't."

4wd

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 4,473
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1698 on: May 31, 2013, 11:39:53 PM »
I think that's what he meant by #6... the picture was originally a lot smaller, so he might not have noticed that there were two semi-autos on there.

I took SJ's comment to mean the 6th player in a round of Russian Roulette using the traditional 6 shot revolver, as I do with the tag beneath the image.

It's just that the person who put the tag there either has no knowledge of firearms, couldn't find an image depicting all 6 shot revolvers or, (most likely), couldn't give a !@#$!, thus making it confusing rather than witty.

But there I go, over-analysing silliness again.....time for a coffee methinks.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2013, 01:33:37 AM by 4wd, Reason: Too many rathers, I rather think. »

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]
« Reply #1699 on: June 01, 2013, 01:13:59 PM »
brd.jpg

I'd like to suggest Microsoft do something similar for their current Windows 8 owners. :P
« Last Edit: June 01, 2013, 02:18:53 PM by 40hz »