No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Magistrates, Prelates, Moderators General

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:56 pm UTC

Nlelith wrote:Am I the only one who thinks plenty of the recent comics are "classics" (or will become classics)?

No. I foresee in six months or so people longing for the classic days of comics like Kindle and Density, or the clever deconstruction of Westley's a Dick.

Because they're getting sick of all these grep puns.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 23009
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby sparkyb » Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:14 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
Nlelith wrote:Am I the only one who thinks plenty of the recent comics are "classics" (or will become classics)?

No. I foresee in six months or so people longing for the classic days of comics like Kindle and Density, or the clever deconstruction of Westley's a Dick.

I appreciate a lot of the recent ones about as much as I ever have, but I don't know about all of those being considered classics. I certainly think Kindle could be, and I think today's, Correlation, absolutely is.
User avatar
sparkyb
 
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:30 pm UTC
Location: Camberville proper!

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Anathema » Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:26 am UTC

sparkyb wrote:The problem with the xkcdsucks blog is that the conclusion is in the title. There's no room for a reasoned analysis or the chance that there could occasionally be a gem (even if you mostly hate the new stuff) if you must always conclude that it sucks. Also, if it really sucks that much, why waste your time reading it and then even more time complaining about it?


He does like some of the gems from time to time. For example, he liked the Discovery Channel song even though I consider it among the worst examples of pretentious ironic nerd self-rejoicing ever perpetuated against the entirety of the internet.
User avatar
Anathema
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:11 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby ConMan » Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:40 am UTC

Given that at some point he changed the title of the blog from the reasonable (and defensible) "xkcd: overrated" to "xkcd sucks", I'm going to assume he's given up all pretense of trying to counteract rabid fans who say "but the comic is always awesome!" and is just trying to be the next guy who posts endless rants on a single topic as a form of entertainment (as exemplified by ZP, the Angry Video Game Nerd, and Fox News).
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.
User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Chfan » Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:48 pm UTC

Why does everyone draw an immediate comparison between this and ZP? There's a big difference: ZP is good.
Just FYI, the guy isn't avatar isn't me. But he seems pretty cool.
User avatar
Chfan
 
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:26 pm UTC
Location: American East Coast

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Comic JK » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:10 pm UTC

One of the biggest problems is that it's always more fun to read through the archives of a good webcomic, devouring the strips at several per minute, than to reach the end and then have to wait days for another one.

In every webcomic I've read, by far the most fun part has been the days after initial discovery, when the pages seemed unlimited. Five hundred strips are an afternoon's read--it's no surprise that they're less fun when you have to wait, and can't skip over the bad ones.
Image
A webcomic funnier than life itself. Updated Monday-Friday.
Comic JK
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby King of Frogs » Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:20 pm UTC

I have recently been alerted to the existence of this blog called "xkcdsucks", which seeks to find fault with any and every xkcd comic, and the occasional one from other comics. It's negative tone and borderline bullying attitude really got to me, so I did perhaps the most effective thing ever and anonymously posted a comment.

I know, I have probably brought it to its knees now.

I thought I would share what I posted here for your perusal and curiosity. This has probably been ninja'd to hell, but I don't think the bullying aspect has really been brought to light.

The constant tone of trying to get the webcomic reading community to turn against, not just xkcd, but Randall himself seems to me to be a kind of cyber-bullying. The purpose of the blog seems to be a lot like playground politics - "Hey, we don't like Randall, so let's make a little clubhouse for ourselves and talk about him behind his back!" This comic is his livlihood, and "xkcdsucks" just seems to be trying to pull it out from under his feet, whether the critisisms are valid or not.

The recurrance of the shortening of his name to "Randy" also seems to smack of a distinct lack of respect and an intent to be mock hurtfully.

Also, the pattern of criticism I see there seems to just to be comprised of "I don't find this immediatly laugh-out-loud funny and neither do some other people, therefore it fails as a comic" and "I will explain how the humour works here to make it seems unfunny (whether it was or not) and than claim victory." Because xkcd is seen as a legitimate comic, a critic of it will seem legitiamte by association.

So, essentially, the blog's role is parasitic. It's only got a readership because xckd is successful, and if xkcd stopped, so would the blog. The guy who runs it, Carl, has worked himself into a niche that he won't be able to get out of. If xkcd comes back to the higher standards of the past, then the critisism will just begin to ring hollow and its redundancy will be shown.

Or perhaps, I'm getting too worked up about haters on the internet...
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:32 pm UTC

The constant tone of trying to get the webcomic reading community to turn against, not just xkcd, but Randall himself seems to me to be a kind of cyber-bullying.


Which is really, really funny. Because, to paraphrase Randy:

"I don't read a lot of criticism of the comic online, because it's kindof crazymaking and confidence-damaging. But I read that blog once, and...honestly? I feel pretty okay about it."
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby King of Frogs » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:36 pm UTC

Oh right. That's better, I thought he would take it relativly well, I was just trying to imagine how I would feel had I been the recipient of that kind of criticism. Of course, the sentiment behind it still stands, whether he's alright with it or not, it's a pretty nasty project nontheless.
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:37 pm UTC

Oh, I don't disagree. I just think it's funny how *badly* they've failed at their cyber-bullying.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby King of Frogs » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:38 pm UTC

Lol, yeah, good point. Makes me feel a little less worked up about it, ahh...
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby pseudoidiot » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:39 pm UTC

Don't tell them that, though. They might focus their attention on you. What then?!
Derailed : Gaming Outside the Box.
SecondTalon wrote:*swoons* I love you, all powerful pseudoidiot!
ShootTheChicken wrote:I can't stop thinking about pseudoidiot's penis.
User avatar
pseudoidiot
Sexy Beard Man
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:30 pm UTC
Location: Kansas City

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby King of Frogs » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:40 pm UTC

Oh dear, that would not be good - though I don't know how well a "we hate King of Frogs" blog would do. I don't think I'm that relevant on the internet.
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:43 pm UTC

pseudoidiot wrote:Don't tell them that, though. They might focus their attention on you. What then?!


Then I might have long, poorly worded, awkward diatribes dedicated to discussing how much I suck!

OH WAIT
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Julien » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:01 pm UTC

I think they should create a political party whose base would be "XKCD sucks and its readers are loosers". Then they should run for office and find sponsors. And if the democracy doesn't work, they should turn into a revolutionnary movement and take arms. Because sincerely, the existence of a bad webcomic is something so important, it's the doom of mankind, it's a plague that ruins our world, come on, there are people actually reading lame webcomics, this is horrible, this should be banned. When I'll be president of the United-States, I'll declare total war to XKCD and I'll forcely draft everyone who actually enjoys it : this will put an end to the Middle-East crisis, save our economy, and solve the Global Warming problem.

It's very important, sincerely, it's serious : lame webcomics are the true face of evil.

Hitler read xkcd.
Do not conquer. Do not fight back. Do not give up.
(One cookie for each person who recognizes the guy on my avatar. And no, it's not me. Clue : he's not a former american president.)
User avatar
Julien
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 12:31 pm UTC
Location: Brussels, Belgium

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Ren » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:38 pm UTC

So I spent some time reading the xkcdsucks blog and...I am okay with it. Some of you are being a little unfair ripping into it. The guy is a critic, are you going to rip into all critics? Some of his points are valid and defensible--lists of posts that fall under one subheading or another and are growing, reasonable layout comments, removing a word or two to create a far better effect...so it's not all "Whyisitsoterribleomg". As for why the guy still reads the comic? For the same reason I do, I'm sure. For that occasional jewel.
It has never been a secret that Randy panders to specific audience--the warning at the bottom of his website makes that clear (even if it is somewhat in jest), but I think part of what Carl is getting at is that the better comics are those all of xkcd's fans can connect with. Lately I've been laughing less and less at the comics, feeling less warm and fuzzy when I'm supposed to, and yeah, I know, it's so pretentious to be like, 'it was better before', and I'm sure there are people who think it's the best it's ever been, but the comics I connect with these days are few and far between.

All this to say: Guys, don't hate. It's one dude's critical opinions on a comic. He doesn't take himself as seriously as you are taking him. He *realizes* that he could just stop reading, and that it's silly to pick at something silly that doesn't hurt anyone, but he is having *fun*. What's wrong with that?
I'm not emo, I'm oboe.

MotleyJesster (12:34:04 PM): Better than moping around being all "I do not need love, I have indie music and a wind instrument!"
User avatar
Ren
Rockin' Robin
 
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:06 pm UTC
Location: Kitchener, Ontario

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby King of Frogs » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:34 pm UTC

I would disagree, I think he's revelling in the fact that he's rebelling against a comic which has become mainstream and his stock and trade is a very negative approach.

Now, I don't hate critics, they fulfill an important role. I love Yahtzee and I find his approach funny, but it works because he's consistant. If Carl was like this towards all the major webcomics I wouldn't mind so much, it would be his thing. The fact is, the blog is focussed solely on xkcd, with the occasional exception. That isn't being a fair critic, you don't get music critics who make their living out of only writing scathing articles about Coldplay albums, and rightly so.

The blog isn't about fair and constructive critisism. It may well have started out that way, and I'm sure that's what they tell themselves they're doing, but the approach is all wrong, from what I've read it's almost never constructive and is more interested in making fun of xkcd. Though I will say that some of the points it makes are good I can't get it out my head that it's just turned into a clubhouse for people who hate xkcd instead of a helpful and positive critical device.
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Gears » Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:27 am UTC

General_Norris wrote:I notice a lack of counter-arguments and a lot of fisting.
User avatar
Gears
Bulletproof
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:31 am UTC
Location: Japan

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Anathema » Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:56 am UTC

King of Frogs wrote:I would disagree, I think he's revelling in the fact that he's rebelling against a comic which has become mainstream and his stock and trade is a very negative approach.

Now, I don't hate critics, they fulfill an important role. I love Yahtzee and I find his approach funny, but it works because he's consistant. If Carl was like this towards all the major webcomics I wouldn't mind so much, it would be his thing. The fact is, the blog is focussed solely on xkcd, with the occasional exception. That isn't being a fair critic, you don't get music critics who make their living out of only writing scathing articles about Coldplay albums, and rightly so.

The blog isn't about fair and constructive critisism. It may well have started out that way, and I'm sure that's what they tell themselves they're doing, but the approach is all wrong, from what I've read it's almost never constructive and is more interested in making fun of xkcd. Though I will say that some of the points it makes are good I can't get it out my head that it's just turned into a clubhouse for people who hate xkcd instead of a helpful and positive critical device.


Sorry, but trolling is an art form on the classless place we know as the internet. You really should look up John Solomon's blog sometime. And xkcdsucks isn't even trolling, it's merely giving voice to a perspective that has been unacknowledged on the internet (and in collegiate engineering departments throughout America) for far too long. Besides, the blog's focus on xkcd alone is in fact flattering to xkcd because it suggests that the webcomc has enough content and depth (and a large enough audience) to merit scathing, point-by-point vivisection for each strip. Also, there are scads of constructive criticism on the blog, if you can't find any of it all you're simply allowing your biases to cloud your judgment of criticism.

CAD is also a mainstream webcomic but it is terrible as fuck. Being "mainstream" does not shield anything from criticism, at all.
User avatar
Anathema
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:11 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Lord Aurora » Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:05 pm UTC

Haven't been following this discussion, so we might have gone over this already, but one of the posters on the xkcd sucks blog doesn't seem to have understood the "dammit" reference in the alt-text of No Pun Intended to be another fun little troll:
The Alt-Text:
FUCKING RAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.

OH GOD I RAGED.

IT IS NOT SPELLED DAMMIT.

IT IS A CONTRACTION OF "DAMN" AND "IT".

THEREFORE - DAMNIT.

NO MATTER WHAT BLINK-182 TOLD YOU.

RANDALL I HATE YOU SO MUCH.

Yes, this whole post is really just a build up to that rage about the alt-text.
So shoot me.
I can't take anyone that stupid seriously.
Decker wrote:Children! Children! There's no need to fight. You're ALL stupid.
User avatar
Lord Aurora
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:14 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Cheese » Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:31 pm UTC

I subscribed to that one's RSS to check if it was just a "hey I don't like this so I'm going to dismiss it out of hand" or if there was someone manually typing "NO" on the days when they thought it wasn't shitty. I think I got a weeks' worth of posts from a year or two ago, and nowt else.
hermaj wrote:No-one. Will. Be. Taking. Cheese's. Spot.
Spoiler:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Cheese is utterly correct on all fronts.
SecondTalon wrote:That thing that Cheese just said. Do that.
Meaux_Pas wrote:I hereby disagree and declare Cheese to be brilliant.
Image
User avatar
Cheese
and spam. (Euggh)
 
Posts: 3908
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:04 pm UTC
Location: ¿burning you?

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby lesliesage » Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:37 pm UTC

puzzle
Last edited by lesliesage on Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:31 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
lesliesage
 
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 8:07 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Anathema » Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:50 pm UTC

It didn't feature charts, 4chan memes, embarassing/creepy love fiction, or Mr. Hat, so it definitely qualifies as such.

And yeah it really is good by itself.
User avatar
Anathema
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:11 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Gears » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:46 pm UTC

The recent ones have sucked. I like the newest one though. That's a keeper.
General_Norris wrote:I notice a lack of counter-arguments and a lot of fisting.
User avatar
Gears
Bulletproof
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:31 am UTC
Location: Japan

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Kalos » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:29 pm UTC

ITT: People who don't understand xkcdsucks and/or take the internet way too seriously.
Kalos
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:38 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:ITT: People who don't understand xkcdsucks


Oh my.

Do enlighten us, oh superior one.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Whelan » Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:14 pm UTC

xkcdsucks wrote:Oh by the way - if there is ever a time when the first say, 10 posts on the xkcd thread for an individual comic say it sucks, my job will be done and I'll end this blog.


Could we organise this, just to shut him up?
"I like to be understood whenever I open my mouth; I have a horror of blinding people with science"- Richard Dawkins
Weeks wrote:
TaintedDeity wrote:And all I get is this tame space dragon. Where's my recognition?!
A tame dragon is its own reward.
User avatar
Whelan
 
Posts: 2217
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:16 pm UTC
Location: Londonshire.

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby SirMustapha » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:43 pm UTC

Whelan wrote:
xkcdsucks wrote:Oh by the way - if there is ever a time when the first say, 10 posts on the xkcd thread for an individual comic say it sucks, my job will be done and I'll end this blog.


Could we organise this, just to shut him up?


Nah. Let the guy waste his time if he wants to. Besides, his blog is often very effective: even when the strip in question is disappointing, his rants are usually so inane and ridiculous they make the strip seem way, way better. Yes, that happens all the time (with a few, very jarring exceptions, like The Race -- I found myself agreeing with about 90% of what he said).

Sometimes I even think he does exactly that, on purpose -- but then the next post turns out to be so jarringly stupid that my theory is readily proven wrong.
User avatar
SirMustapha
 
Posts: 1303
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Kalos » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:14 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Kalos wrote:ITT: People who don't understand xkcdsucks


Oh my.

Do enlighten us, oh superior one.

Well, if most of this people in the thread bothered to read more than one post before coming in here for an orgy of nerdrage and fanwank, they'd realize that the project doesn't take itself very seriously. (for a quick example, I direct you to the "meta" section)

Hell, almost all of my posts are shameless rephrasing of criticisms from xkcdsucks if not outright copypasta (except the Twilight/4chan one, that was just a godawful comic). To me it's kind of like AVGN or Nostalgia Critic, sometimes it's nitpicking and weaker criticism, but negativity is the name of the game.

Thank you for finally recognizing my superiority, btw, I'll take my tribute in gold coins and Swedish bikini teams.
Last edited by Kalos on Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:21 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Kalos
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby sje46 » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:18 pm UTC

I read every entry and most of the comments. I have even made a few comments. They enjoy hating xkcd and criticizing it, which makes them quite biased.
Like the shark strip is supposed to be ripping off Up and Landshark from SNL. :roll:
General_Norris: Taking pride in your nation is taking pride in the division of humanity.
Pirate.Bondage: Let's get married. Right now.
sje46
 
Posts: 4724
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:41 am UTC
Location: New Hampshire

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Hell, almost all of my posts are shameless rephrasing of criticisms from xkcdsucks if not outright copypasta (except the Twilight/4chan one, that was just a godawful comic). To me it's kind of like AVGN or Nostalgia Critic, sometimes it's nitpicking and weaker criticism, but negativity is the name of the game.


Okay. And?

Piss poor criticism doesn't get better just because you're failing on purpose. It just adds an extra level of stupid to the mix.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Kalos » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:32 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Hell, almost all of my posts are shameless rephrasing of criticisms from xkcdsucks if not outright copypasta (except the Twilight/4chan one, that was just a godawful comic). To me it's kind of like AVGN or Nostalgia Critic, sometimes it's nitpicking and weaker criticism, but negativity is the name of the game.


Okay. And?

Piss poor criticism doesn't get better just because you're failing on purpose. It just adds an extra level of stupid to the mix.

Entertainment value?

I'm pretty sure Carl didn't expect Randall to ever e-mail him and say "I've learned the error of my ways due to your blogspot prowess, thank you internet messiah."
Kalos
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:33 pm UTC

Of course not.

I suppose entertainment value is valid, I find the general flailing and idiocy entertaining enough that I keep going back, so there must be something to that.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Kalos » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:40 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Of course not.

I suppose entertainment value is valid, I find the general flailing and idiocy entertaining enough that I keep going back, so there must be something to that.

See? You didn't need me to explain it to you :P

Another example: the fact that criticism of his blog is so rampant that there was once discussion on categorizing the types of hatedom members (xkcdsucks calling them "cuddlefish") as opposed to bothering to address said feeback is also a pretty good implication that he's not in this to make everyone think he's cool.

Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure Carl has even mentioned it's for his own personal entertainment over anything else.
Kalos
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:44 pm UTC

But, again, the fact that the flailing idiocy is entertaining doesn't make it less flailing idiocy. Which means I'm not going to fault people, my self included, for commenting on how idiotic it all is. Possibly in great detail.

All's fair.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Kalos » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:53 pm UTC

Belial wrote:But, again, the fact that the flailing idiocy is entertaining doesn't make it less flailing idiocy. Which means I'm not going to fault people, my self included, for commenting on how idiotic it all is. Possibly in great detail.

All's fair.

You're more than welcome to do so, but faulting something that doesn't take itself very seriously for not taking itself very seriously is like complaining about questionable physics and an overabundance exploding helicopters in an action movie. I suppose it is technically a fault... but to the people who enjoy it, it just sounds like you're missing the point.
Kalos
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby SocialSceneRepairman » Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:41 am UTC

I would say "Friends" was a bit of an instant classic. And...okay, that's probably the most recent. Maybe "Converting to Metric."

And that guy calls the fact that electrons have a negative charge an "in-joke." I mean, come on...why not just preface with "I'm a dropout"?
SocialSceneRepairman
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:17 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Clamburger » Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:56 am UTC

SocialSceneRepairman wrote:I would say "Friends" was a bit of an instant classic. And...okay, that's probably the most recent. Maybe "Converting to Metric."

And that guy calls the fact that electrons have a negative charge an "in-joke." I mean, come on...why not just preface with "I'm a dropout"?

Because obviously every degree/course/unit/subject that somebody could possibly do is chemistry-based.
User avatar
Clamburger
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 10:43 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Belial » Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:03 pm UTC

That's kindof highschool stuff. I'm a humanities type and I got that.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.
User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
 
Posts: 30227
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC

Re: No more "classics" (xkcdsucks.com discussion)

Postby Random832 » Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:43 pm UTC

Um - it's not immediately obvious why electrons shouldn't be negative.

I swear I even remember hearing something in high school that it turns out the math works out better that way even though it seems paradoxical at first.
Random832
 
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addams, Oliverobi, Sidneynho and 23 guests