Page 25 of 46

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sat June 18, 2016 12:48 am
by bart
tragabigzanda wrote:
bart wrote:You could donate some of your profits to St Jude's or something if you feel so bad about it.
1% of profits are earmarked for environmental and food security groups
You're that worried about people stealing your ice cream?

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sat June 18, 2016 12:52 am
by tragabigzanda
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 11:20 am
by stip
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Oh my god, no. Guys. Come on.

If Homer were referencing the incident he just witnessed, that would mean he is making a quip. Homer is an oblivious buffoon and nowhere near clever or aware enough to make a joke like that.

This is an absurdist joke. The joke is that it's a silly, extremely specific question that would obviously warrant a negative response, but Homer does the unexpected and, ridiculously, answers positively.

Jesus, guys.
Maybe this has already blown over, but LV is correct. Otherwise it's a terrible joke

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 5:05 pm
by Jorge
There was a Duff Girl at the bar last night

Image

(I'm not friends with the guy in the back. He was a douche.)

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 5:54 pm
by Norah
theplatypus wrote:There was a Duff Girl at the bar last night

Image

(I'm not friends with the guy in the back. He was a douche.)
How aggressively were people trying to pick her up?

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 6:55 pm
by Mecca
stip wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Oh my god, no. Guys. Come on.

If Homer were referencing the incident he just witnessed, that would mean he is making a quip. Homer is an oblivious buffoon and nowhere near clever or aware enough to make a joke like that.

This is an absurdist joke. The joke is that it's a silly, extremely specific question that would obviously warrant a negative response, but Homer does the unexpected and, ridiculously, answers positively.

Jesus, guys.
Maybe this has already blown over, but LV is correct. Otherwise it's a terrible joke
the problem being that LV is wrong in the sense that Homer is not making a joke. Homer is being quite literal, which makes the absurdist humor the fact that Homer is referencing literally what he just saw, which is what no one would do, because Homer is simple.

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 7:42 pm
by LoathedVermin72
you are simple

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Sun June 19, 2016 7:55 pm
by Mecca
LoathedVermin72 wrote:you are simple
At least I'm willing to understand your perspective

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 10:02 am
by stip
Mecca wrote:
stip wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Oh my god, no. Guys. Come on.

If Homer were referencing the incident he just witnessed, that would mean he is making a quip. Homer is an oblivious buffoon and nowhere near clever or aware enough to make a joke like that.

This is an absurdist joke. The joke is that it's a silly, extremely specific question that would obviously warrant a negative response, but Homer does the unexpected and, ridiculously, answers positively.

Jesus, guys.
Maybe this has already blown over, but LV is correct. Otherwise it's a terrible joke
the problem being that LV is wrong in the sense that Homer is not making a joke. Homer is being quite literal, which makes the absurdist humor the fact that Homer is referencing literally what he just saw, which is what no one would do, because Homer is simple.

I'm gonna farm this question out to other people

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 3:15 pm
by Jorge
This is like the great wiping controversy of 2009 where it was revealed that half of the population stands up to wipe their butts and the other half remains seated and neither group was aware of each other's existence until then.

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 3:27 pm
by tragabigzanda
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 3:28 pm
by E.H. Ruddock
oh boy

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 4:26 pm
by Mecca
theplatypus wrote:This is like the great wiping controversy of 2009 where it was revealed that half of the population stands up to wipe their butts and the other half remains seated and neither group was aware of each other's existence until then.
Even worse that it's on something comedic; explaining a joke is a sure way to make sure no one laughs at it and the argument requires you to explain your interpretation of the comedic blueprint

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 4:28 pm
by Jorge
Wiping butts is comedic

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 4:32 pm
by Mecca
theplatypus wrote:Wiping butts is comedic
Duh

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 6:15 pm
by Norah
I farmed this debate out to a fellow Simpsons die hard and he firmly took the same side as Mecca and I.

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 6:18 pm
by BurtReynolds
people remain seated? How does that work?

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 6:30 pm
by E.H. Ruddock
BurtReynolds wrote:people remain seated? How does that work?
you lean forward you rube

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 6:33 pm
by Mecca
cutuphalfdead wrote:I farmed this debate out to a fellow Simpsons die hard and he firmly took the same side as Mecca and I.
My research has yielded the same results

Re: The Simpsons

Posted: Mon June 20, 2016 6:34 pm
by Jorge
Breaking: dummies who are friends with dummies are also dummies