1048: "Emotion"

[Belial]

I think SirMustapha should stop using his sig (and therefore, this forum) as an advertisement.

I have no idea what you're talking about. SirMustapha would never cheapen his message that way.

Anymore.

[Fantastic Idea]

Okay, that's a fair point. I'll pause the cheap sarcasm to reply it seriously. Yes, I am doing that, because Randall himself erased the line between his comic and himself as a person. xkcd is Randall, otherwise would he really put out his wife's cancer thing in such a frank, explicit way? With other artists, I am fully able to make that distinction, but not with Randall.

...

But actually, it's not that the non-removal of the link is the big problem: it's just one aspect of Randall's exploitation of this matter. It's like he doesn't realise what he's really doing. So he wants sympathy? He wants to get his suffering out of his system? Doesn't he have a blog for that? A blog is a far better vehicle for a person to flesh out these problems and share them with his readers, and so on. But no, he's willingly using his comic for that. That means he's not only asking for sympathy: he's exploiting it. So, either he is fully aware of what he's doing, or he is unbelievably naïve.

...

No, it's just that I think Randall is more wrong than me. I always suspect I'm wrong, but Randall is just plain screwed up.

You do not know this person.

Um, seriously.
Did Randy and SirMustapha go to like, jr high together and Randy bullied him or something?

Doesn't seem particularly legit.

[The Mighty Thesaurus]

The music is gratis

So was the comic, last I checked.

Last time I checked, the stuff in the store wasn't. Y'all are misrepresenting his argument by making a thing out of the links to his site.

[bentheimmigrant]

I'm pretty sure they weren't being serious.

[SirMustapha]

Last time I checked, the stuff in the store wasn't. Y'all are misrepresenting his argument by making a thing out of the links to his site.

It's pretty unbelievable that, in a forum about such an allegedly "genius" comic, someone has to come here and make that statement. But I guess there's this strategy going on here in which people become deliberately obtuse just to make the discussion more difficult, and therefore try to drain the stamina out of the opponent. Sort of like trolls do, in fact. Hey, look:

(...) Yes, I am doing that, because Randall himself erased the line between his comic and himself as a person. xkcd is Randall, otherwise would he really put out his wife's cancer thing in such a frank, explicit way? (...)

You do not know this person.

So, yes. If I say "grass is green, I'm seeing it right now", people will reply "YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN GRASS".

I guess this mostly boils down to that "expectation", you know? People hate me, so they expect everything I say to be wrong by default, just like they expect everything Randall posts to be pure genius. Now that is a tough beast to defeat.

[bentheimmigrant]

Yeah, pointing out that you don't know the person you're talking about when you're declaring what their personal motives are is really trying to distract from the discussion...

You're obviously jealous of Randall's success.

[gmalivuk]

You do not know this person.

So, yes. If I say "grass is green, I'm seeing it right now", people will reply "YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN GRASS".

If you were sitting with Randall right now making those claims, this comparison would be apt.

But since you're basing the entirety of your view of him off of his blog and his webcomic, allow me to direct you to some evidence there that proves your claim wrong about there being no separation between Randall and the comic: He never mentioned in either the blog or the comic when he met and started going out with his wife. He didn't mention that the family illness was cancer or that it was his fiancee who had it for at least several months after the diagnosis. He didn't mention marrying her until a month or so after that happened. I'm pretty sure he's still never mentioned her name or much else about her, carefully maintaining their privacy apart from the fact that they are married and the fact that she had cancer.

This doesn't look like the sort of thing he would do if there were no boundaries between himself and his comic and blog.

People hate me, so they expect everything I say to be wrong by default, just like they expect everything Randall posts to be pure genius. Now that is a tough beast to defeat.

You've got the first part of that backwards: most of what you say is trollish bullshit, so people hate you. And we don't expect everything Randall does to be genius. Many of his comics are in fact no more genius than your music. I occasionally chuckle at others, but the ones I'd call "pure genius" are few and far between.

[The Great Hippo]

People hate me, so they expect everything I say to be wrong by default, just like they expect everything Randall posts to be pure genius. Now that is a tough beast to defeat.

I do not hate you. I do not even know you. You are some guy posting in some thread on some far off corner of the internet. The only context I know you is in this one--and it's such an extraordinarily limited context to know someone. You could be a loving parent, a caring spouse, a great coworker, a fun conversationalist--who knows? Not me. So I'm not going to make assertions about who you are outside the context of this thread. See how that works?

I also do not know the author. I'm actually not even much of a fan of the comic (I glance, occasionally!), but even if I was--even if I wasn't--I would not take the comic as an opportunity to assume I know the author enough to evaluate his motives, his wants, his desires, who he is and who he isn't.

XKCD is not its author. How would you even begin to assume that it is? You don't know him well enough to even make that call. The only context you know him in is the context he's given you--the web-comic and the blog. That's it. Y'know, someone in this very thread started speculating on you based on your posts here, and you made it clear you didn't like it one bit--and frankly, I didn't either. But can't you see how you're doing precisely the same thing? It would be unfair to assume things about you outside the context of this thread, and it's unfair to assume things about the author outside the context of their work.

Look. Just criticize the comic, okay? Talk about how it's shit, or how you wish it would do X, or wouldn't do Y, or whatever. That's fine. Fun, even! And there's nothing wrong with doing that. But this whole personal-insult thing you're doing? It's shit I expect to see in preschool. And yeah, the internet's pretty much just one big smorgasbord of paste-eating booger-flicking kids, I know--but I like this particular corner of it because it has less of that, and you're bringing in a shitload more.

Stop it. Grow up. Be mature, be responsible, and stop acting like you know a dude when you clearly don't.

[Weeks]

I'm not exactly a fan of xkcd. I sometimes get a chuckle or two, but I don't follow it. Just for the record.

[The Great Hippo]

I'm not exactly a fan of xkcd. I sometimes get a chuckle or two, but I don't follow it. Just for the record.

No, we're clearly all sycophants of the comic and not at all people who are just disgusted by someone's incredibly childish, mean-spirited, vulgar behavior.

EDIT: And yeah, this is coming from a guy who compared your (SirMustapha) posts with squatting over a computer and shitting all over the keyboard. You're being an immature twit.

[Weeks]

...I'm no elephant!

[SirMustapha]

Are you suggesting artists shouldn't create art the reflects their personal emotions while also still making a living off said art?

"Reflect" = one thing. "Exploit" = other thing. What is so difficult to understand about this?

I think SirMustapha should stop using his sig (and therefore, this forum) as an advertisement.

Apparently some really intelligent and good-humoured moderator removed my signature and disallowed me to make another one. Apparently someone here takes me that seriously and takes "poetic justice" that seriously. "You offended our God. Now we will get our revenge... IRONICALLY."

Hipster Moderator. And I thought I had seen it all.

Mustafa: Lets say I discover that I am apparently a pretty good cook, and friends start asking me to cater their parties, and then I lose my job as a web developer but find that I have enough of a fanbase of my cooking that I decide to open a little cafe of my own. (...)

Then I get married, and my wife develops cancer, and that hits me really hard. Because I am so close with my patrons, and talk frankly with each one of them, I of course talk a lot about the big thing which is on my mind at the moment -- the fact that my wife has cancer.

That's where your analogy falters. If you were Randall the Cafe Owner, you'd instead create new items titled "Cancer Pasta", "Tumor Steak" and so on. If you felt disgusted, you more or less understood my mindset.

Also, I MAKE MUSIC!

[SirMustapha]

EDIT: And yeah, this is coming from a guy who compared your (SirMustapha) posts with squatting over a computer and shitting all over the keyboard. You're being an immature twit.

... so you're using your own personal standards to judge your own personal standards? Wow. You just shook my world there.

You're obviously jealous of Randall's success.

Congratulations, folks: your forum has hit a new all time low. The "Jealousy" card has been played.

Also, I MAKE MUSIC!

[Weeks]

It's a joke man, I'm sure you'll get your sig back someday.

[SirMustapha]

It's a joke man, I'm sure you'll get your sig back someday.

It's only a "joke" in the sense that interrupting Abbott & Costello by saying "oooh, Who, What and I Don't Know are the names of the players!!" is a "joke".

[Steax]

"Cancer steak" is a horrible analogy anyway, because a webcomic is to tell a story - which you can perfectly well entitle "My life, cancer and porkchops" - while food isn't. I'm guessing that's why Pfhorrest went for the "and the owner tells a story" analogy. Your argument is a reduction to ridicule, because obviously nobody would eat something called "cancer steak".

I also argue that it's not as long-lasting as you make out. Each comic stays on the front page for 3 days tops. Afterwards it's replaced. There have been 3 in the last year. That means a whooping 9 or so days where the comic sits on the front page. In the restaurant analogy, this means the owner would only tell people directly about it for those 9 days, unless someone asks him to tell other stories, in which case he may reiterate the story.

... And then there's the rest of us who just go straight to forums.xkcd.com, go to egosearch and eat our delicious beer-tasting cheesecake.

[The Great Hippo]

Do your parents know you're using the internet?

[bentheimmigrant]

Congratulations, folks: your forum has hit a new all time low. The "Jealousy" card has been played.

Perhaps you should read the rest of my post.

[gmalivuk]

Apparently some really intelligent and good-humoured moderator removed my signature and disallowed me to make another one. Apparently someone here takes me that seriously and takes "poetic justice" that seriously. "You offended our God. Now we will get our revenge... IRONICALLY."

It wasn't revenge. It was something Belial thought would be funny, so he did it. You know, like most of what moderators do with sigs and titles.

Yes, it was at your expense, but I think it was done less *for* being at your expense and more *despite* being at your expense. Because you've long since squandered any good will people are likely to have for you, which is what prevents them from doing things at other people's expense.

That's where your analogy falters. If you were Randall the Cafe Owner, you'd instead create new items titled "Cancer Pasta", "Tumor Steak" and so on. If you felt disgusted, you more or less understood my mindset.

No. If you felt disgusted at the idea of "tumor steak", all you did was share a natural mammalian revulsion to foods explicitly associated with disease. "Tumor steak" brings up images of a carved-out cancerous lump, grilled and served on a plate. The reason that's disgusting has nothing whatsoever to do with anyone "exploiting" anyone else's suffering.

[SirMustapha]

Perhaps you should read the rest of my post.

Oh, you're sad that I "didn't read your post", right? That I "didn't understand your metaphor", right? But I'm only doing what some of the geniuses here love doing: being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk.

[bentheimmigrant]

Perhaps you should read the rest of my post.

Oh, you're sad that I "didn't read your post", right? That I "didn't understand your metaphor", right? But I'm only doing what some of the geniuses here love doing: being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk.

Congratulations? You have a grudge against the entire forum and so refuse to properly read a 2 sentence post that didn't even contain a metaphor? Well done. You are truly superior to the rest of us.


Wait, no. I'm not going to leave it at that. You are a condescending jerk. If you're happy with that, then fine. But why would you be happy with that? Why would you be content with being a generally obnoxious person? Why are you happy to treat others like crap because of where they post, before considering what they post? Your posts have been full of assumptions about Randall as well as the forumites. You then get huffy if someone makes assumptions about you. You're being no more than a hypocritical troll. Again I ask, why are you happy with that? Why would you want to be that kind of person?

[Red Hal]

I'm only doing what some of the geniuses here love doing: being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk.

So, you agree that you are being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk? Excellent, we can agree on something! I knew we'd find some common ground eventually.

[Belial]

Apparently someone here takes me that seriously

Let's take a moment to discuss how drastically mis-calibrated your sense of what's "serious" is. You are a dude who is willing to write whole walls of text about the awfulness of a webcomic you read on your own free time, provided to you free of charge. In those walls of text, you accuse the creator of those comics of all sorts of malign things, including a hare-brained accusation of attempting to capitalize on his wife's cancer. You're willing to expend all that effort on someone you've never even spoken to. And that's apparently fine, where you come from.

But a privilege-modification that took me 15 seconds and 5 mouseclicks is taking things too seriously?

I am pretty sure by any sane metric that means I take you less seriously than clicking through random funny pictures on imgur.

By even talking to you right now I'm taking you more seriously than I was when I nixed your sig.

I'll admit that I could take you *far* less seriously, though. Banning is way less effort.

[The Great Hippo]

But I'm only doing what some of the geniuses here love doing: being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk.

Is this a defense of your behavior now, or a description of your behavior throughout this entire thread? Because I can't honestly tell the difference.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

Perhaps you should read the rest of my post.

Oh, you're sad that I "didn't read your post", right? That I "didn't understand your metaphor", right? But I'm only doing what some of the geniuses here love doing: being thick, deliberately misinterpreting things, using low attacks and being a condescending jerk.

Have you ever tried making a non-sarcastic, non-hyperbolic post on this subject?

[SirMustapha]

It wasn't revenge.

So Randall is your God? Because, you know, I thought I was being completely over the top.

It was something Belial thought would be funny, so he did it. You know, like most of what moderators do with sigs and titles.

There are lots of things I think will be funny. Most of them turn out not to be funny, though, and that's why I don't do them.

Yes, it was at your expense, but I think it was done less *for* being at your expense and more *despite* being at your expense. Because you've long since squandered any good will people are likely to have for you, which is what prevents them from doing things at other people's expense.

I'm not complaining about it, am I? I just said that I was a demonstration of a complete lack of sense of humour. Sort of like seeing a nerdy kid being bullied and laughed at, and then shooting him in the forehead. Subtle.

Congratulations? You have a grudge against the entire forum

Wait, I have a grudge? I posted a criticism against the comic and its author, and people responded with personal attacks. As much as they may be justified, they indicate that, if someone in this forum has a grudge, that's not me.

[The Great Hippo]

Just to clarify--is the post above an example of deliberate misinterpretation, or should we treat it as if you actually mean these things?

It would help if you included tags in each of your posts from now on that clarify which should be taken at face value and which are parodies.

[SirMustapha]

Let's take a moment to discuss how drastically mis-calibrated your sense of what's "serious" is.

No, let's not. You carry on using your god powers to deliver poetic justice to the people you don't like, and I carry on being the butt of your jokes. And I apologise for taking so long to understand what maturity is.

[The Great Hippo]

So... deliberate misinterpretation, then?

[Telchar]

You carry on using your god powers to deliver poetic justice to the people you don't like, and I carry on being the butt.

[Belial]

Let's take a moment to discuss how drastically mis-calibrated your sense of what's "serious" is.

No, let's not. You carry on using your god powers to deliver poetic justice to the people you don't like

As you wish.

[Weeks]

Fucking finally.

HAIL RANDALL

[Karilyn]

Also, I MAKE MUSIC!

I nearly pissed myself laughing.

As you wish.

I'm genuinely surprised it took this long.

[Роберт]

Apparently some really intelligent and good-humoured moderator removed my signature and disallowed me to make another one.

That's funnier than any of the recent XKCD comics. Seriously.

[addams]

Apparently someone here takes me that seriously

Let's take a moment to discuss how drastically mis-calibrated your sense of what's "serious" is. You are a dude who is willing to write whole walls of text about the awfulness of a webcomic you read on your own free time, provided to you free of charge. In those walls of text, you accuse the creator of those comics of all sorts of malign things, including a hare-brained accusation of attempting to capitalize on his wife's cancer. You're willing to expend all that effort on someone you've never even spoken to. And that's apparently fine, where you come from.

But a privilege-modification that took me 15 seconds and 5 mouseclicks is taking things too seriously?

I am pretty sure by any sane metric that means I take you less seriously than clicking through random funny pictures on imgur.

By even talking to you right now I'm taking you more seriously than I was when I nixed your sig.

I'll admit that I could take you *far* less seriously, though. Banning is way less effort.

Spoiler:

EeGad! No! Don't ban him. Words on a computer screen are an outlet.
Without that outlet; Who knows? He might DO something.

It is a Troll. I learned about Trolls here. They can be ignored. They can grow up.
Yeah. It seems I am, just, another fearful person. But; But, but, People do weird shit. Dickish on a forum is not the weirdest hobby.

[eran_rathan]

Dickish on a forum is not the weirdest hobby.

Yeah, some people juggle geese.

But, I agree with Addams - he may be a troll, but he's a higher class troll than the "lawl u mad bro?" 4chan-wannabe dweebs. Intelligent criticism is good!

http://xkcd.com/810/

[Weeks]

higher class troll

hahahahahaha

Intelligent criticism is good!

So, yes. If I say "grass is green, I'm seeing it right now", people will reply "YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN GRASS".

Tell me how that is intelligent criticism. Now.

[The Great Hippo]

I think we passed the 'intelligent criticism' watermark some point between 'I'm intentionally misinterpreting things' and 'Randall is a terrible person'.

But I'm not a big fan of shitting on a dude when they're (assumedly) not able to speak up for themselves. They're gone, life continues, let's move on.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

But I'm not a big fan of shitting on a dude when they're (assumedly) not able to speak up for themselves.

Look Hippo, I don't pass judgment on your sex life and I'll thank you not to do the same.

[jpers36]

Let's take a moment to discuss how drastically mis-calibrated your sense of what's "serious" is.

No, let's not. You carry on using your god powers to deliver poetic justice to the people you don't like

As you wish.

Never thought I'd see the day.