qvasi wrote:iabervon wrote:A bit contrived. Doesn't everybody find guidelines help ideas? Just keeping lengths minimized never opens possibilities. Quite reversely, since the users verily will Xerox your zeitgeist.
Eternal Density wrote:Understand this, I don't.
SpringLoaded12 wrote:It took me a minute to realize what she was saying was self-demonstrating.
Here's a fun one: http://bash.org/?406381.
(In case you didn't notice, each word is one letter longer than the previous one.)
Waladil wrote:Panel 2: Brevity is the soul of wit.
Eutychus wrote:Eternal Density wrote:Understand this, I don't.
Zoom your x-ray, wide-angle vision up to see Randall's quirky positioning of nouns; merely look keenly, just investigating how getting fiddly etymological deployment can be awesome.
(I'm no good at this)
Why? That's not required.Chrisfs wrote:I figure the 'w' in working is pronounced in the German style, as a 'v'
Oh joyous day, you passed the test. You're hired.da Doctah wrote:I found myself thinking automatically in iambic pentameter.
Van wrote:Fireballs don't lie.
My freedom thus consists in my moving about within the narrow frame that I have assigned myself for each one of my undertakings. I shall go even further: my freedom will be so much the greater and more meaningful, the more narrowly I limit my ﬁeld of action and the more I surround myself with obstacles. Whatever diminishes constraint, diminishes strength. The more constraints one imposes, the more one frees one’s self of the chains that shackle the spirit.
*cough*da Doctah wrote:What's scary is that it's possible to get into a groove where you actually produce sentences like that without thinking about it. It happens to people who compose a lot of haiku.
Chrisfs wrote:I figure the 'w' in working is pronounced in the German style, as a 'v'
itsa_wallaby wrote:Alt-text: [title-text similarly alphabetized]