home authors guest shorts graphical shorts
"Okay," said President Richard Milhous Nixon, "We're going to have this thing called Watergate."
"What is it?" John Dean said.
"It's where we steal some shit from the democrats, dummy. I don't know. It's going to be boss!"
"But won't the people resent the lie?" pointed out H.R. Haldeman.
"No, not as long as we cover it up. The people hate lies, but they love the cover-up."
"I really don't think this is such a hot idea," said John Ehrlichman.
"Who cares? I did that thing with China. That's all that matters. That's all that ever matters. I am not a crook."
"Why are you making the victory sign with both hands?" John Mitchell asked.
"What's that sound?" someone said.
"Nothing, nothing at all," replied the President of the United States of America, stepping on a concealed pedal imprinted with the words "Secret Nixon Tapes".
Date Written: August 26, 2004Comments:
Average Vote: 3.61538
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs (2): What the F?
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: I realize this is a self-conscious attempt at making stupid sketch comedy/farce even stupider and more farcical, but still, what the F? Don't we have values any more god damn it?
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow (5): Benny, what the F is wrong with you? That's the question. 4+ rounded up to compensate for Benny. This is classic short short gag comedy at its (almost) best.
09/1/2004 scoop (5): I have to agree with the retardo on this one, Maniacs. I mean the pedal is labeled for Christ sake.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Benny, I'd deduct three stars from your next short for this insult, but Disney hasn't built negative votes into the system yet.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Ha!
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: And scoop, of course you agree with yourself. That goes without saying. BUST-ED!
09/1/2004 scoop: No, no, dude. I agree with you. You.
09/1/2004 The Finch: Whistle, whistle!
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Good. I'm glad you agree with my assessment that you must have been referring to yourself.
09/1/2004 scoop: Excellent! I'm glad I agree with your assessment that I must have been referring to yourself.
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko (3): boring
09/1/2004 anonymous: You are an idiot.
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko: Wheee. Nope...still boring. Second rate snoozefest.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Shut the fuck up or i'll report you to INS. I'm not kidding.
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko: Listen, OSS, did you really have to one star an old short of mine for revenge? I'm sorry I hurt your feelings but really...that was despicable.
09/1/2004 anonymous: I believe you consistently lowball me as general revenge for my consistent, though heartfelt, low ratings of your substandard shorts. I also think you have terrible taste and don't know what you're talking about. But still friends, right?
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko: Lowball you? Are you out of your fucking mind!! Fuck you and I'm not kidding.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Dylan, you're out of your mind on this one. OSS, it's not nice to one-star Dylan's shorts. Scoop, no you, YOU!
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: Well this most recent short short certainly seems to have garnered extreme viewpoints from both corners. We'll keep you posted as things unfold throughout the day. Benny Maniacs, reporting from Acme Shorts, here on the internet. Back to you, OSS.
09/1/2004 anonymous: you're fucking next, maniacs. my revenge on you will be swift, cruel and unfair.
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: That's my impersonation of the sophmoric level of comedy writing on this one.
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: It reminds me of sketches we did in video/tech class in the tenth grade. I know I'm in last place on the author/stats list, but come on? Values?
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony (4): If anything, I think Dylan was overly generous. You can call it classic, but I think it's a fucking rehash. Yes, yes, dignified historical or literary figures, talking like teenage boys. That joke never gets old...Oh wait--It does! Characters doing their signature move out of context. Ha fucking ha. Reads like a fucking mad lib. A labeled pedal? Come on, they did that on the old Batman TV show (over and over, to boot). This boring piece of crap is barely two stars.
09/1/2004 anonymous: oh, the comedy's sophomoric on this maniacs? really? thanks! you fucking retard. you also don't know what the fuck you're talking about. go get your imbecile heartstrings pulled by spiderman 2, cunt.
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: Mr. Pony, you are a man of many contradictions.
09/1/2004 anonymous: pony, you son of a cunt, the talking like teenage boys isn't the only joke in there. open your four fucking eyes, retard. think!
09/1/2004 anonymous: i'm giving everybody ones from now on.
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: I think it's wounded. It lashes out at others when it's wounded.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: What? I mentioned the pedal.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Sophmoric? Who are you, Principal Skinner?
09/1/2004 anonymous: there's a larger, grander, overarching joke that deserves mention, if you're going to try to critique this.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: I'm really starting to hate this site.
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko: I'm mad as hell. I think i've had it with acme.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Mee too, but for the opposite reason.
09/1/2004 anonymous: YOU'VE had it? what about me??
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: I quit.
09/1/2004 Dylan Danko: Bye
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Listen, stupid author. I liked this short, and thought it was easily a solid four. To prove a point, I decided to come up with some real reasons to not like the short, reasons I could also get behind. See?
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Where did everybody go?
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: Yeah. I was just kidding too. I gave it a two just to prove a point. The point is, that I didn't like it, but I still like to kid around.
09/1/2004 anonymous: yeah, but your analysis was no good. since when is richard nixon regarded as a "dignified" figure? and as i said, the talking like teenage boys wasn't the main gag, it was window dressing.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: So are you saying that your "window dressing" was an undignified person talking in an undignified way? You know what I mean, right? The President of the United States, talking like a teenage boy? And my analysis was no good? Are you saying that we haven't seen that joke here before? Is it impossible that it could ever get a little stale?
09/1/2004 TheBuyer (4): 'The people hate lies, but they love the cover-up.'
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: Okay, Okay. I just gave it a reread, and it is funnier than I at first thought. My apologies. It has a subtle undermining force of comedy, that is hidden, but none-the-less, present. Just kidding! Ha ha ha! Two stars!
09/1/2004 Litcube (3): I have my cock inside Benny Maniacs.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Pony, I don't disagree with the part of your analysis that we've seen the joke of adults talking like kids before. But your analysis is to my mind crumby because it puts that joke at the center. The real joke, which I don't think we've seen before, is historical figures talking about an event as if it had already happened. And not only that, but in the vague generalities of popular memory. He did that thing with China. This thing called watergate. It wasn't the lie, it was the cover-up. et fucking cetera.
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: That's an interesting expression.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Danko: I apologize for saying you consistently lowball me. I checked the record and it isn't true. There've been a few recent ones by you that have stuck in my craw, which gave me this impression. I also apologize for saying you have terrible taste. I should have said questionable. However, I don't apologize for the one star. That was fucking fun. If it makes you feel any better, I'm also going to one star a Maniacs short, but I'm having trouble finding one I have yet voted on.
09/1/2004 anonymous: *haven't* yet voted on
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: I can't believe you needed to explain that, author.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Not the thing about danko, but the joke.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Yes, I got that. That, I really liked. I do actually think I've seen it in one or either Summer's or Ewan's shorts, but I don't think it was as much of a centerpiece as it was in this one. As for the characters talking the way they do, really, that's part of the same joke, right? An affected stupidty on the part of the author-character? The reason I put it at the center of my counter-analysis was that the fact that we have seen it so many times before. Keep in mind i wasn't trying to give you a balanced critique--I was trying to give you two opposed critiques. Sometimes the good totally excuses the bad. Sometimes the bad consumes the good. Point is, who the fuck are you to tell me how many stars a short deserves?
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: How many stars I should give it, rather.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Well, that's the thousand dollar question, isn't it, Pony? Isn't my opinion about how many stars you should give this short as valid as your opinion about how many stars you should give it? (Yes, I acknowledge that it's my opinion, but I get annoyed when people give a bad rating coupled with a wrongheaded analysis. To me, that means they voted incorrectly. Take yesterday's example. I gave Slocum a hard time not only for his low rating, but because everything he was saying was incorrect. When Matza offered a more correct critique, I took it, and would have taken a low vote along with it as well.)
09/1/2004 Benny Maniacs: According to my calculations, this short is still in the neighborhood of 1.71 stars over-rated.
09/1/2004 Will Disney (4): it's a pretty good gag - 4 stars!
09/1/2004 anonymous: By the way, if Slocum had given me a five yesterday, along with the same comments (sarcasm removed, of course), I still would have argued with him.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Also also, pony, I never told you how many stars to give this short. I simply argued with your analysis.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: True, and until you stoop to actually punishing people with retaliatory voting, it's really just irritating and embarrassing.
09/1/2004 anonymous: I didn't have to stoop, Pony. It was at eye-level. And what's irritating and embarrassing? My arguing with bad analyses like Benny's? How dare I.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Really, author? What about this? (Note: You may not be Summer, but if not, you're doing such a bang-up impression of him, I'm going to assume the argument's with him.)
09/1/2004 anonymous: I'm not sure what you're citing that as an example of, Pony. Please explain.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: What's irritating and embarrassing is that authors on this site so completely lack wit. What is the point of submitting shorts to this site if even the site's authors can't see this is funny, or find it "sophmoric"?
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: No. What's irritating and embarrassing is you freaking out, demanding better votes and more "accurate" comments, and insulting people's intelligence and taste when they don't agree with you. Once again, I'm not attacking your right to rant about these things. It's more of a "dude, we're in a crowded elevator, would you please stop farting" thing. It's an opinion. (The link was a recent example of you attacking me for giving you a low vote with a comment that contained absolutely no reference to the content of your short. You were telling me how to vote, no?)
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Ewan, I'm not sure nobody got the joke!
09/1/2004 anonymous: Yes I was telling you how to vote on that earlier short, Pony. If you look at my comment below, I said I never told you how to vote on THIS short. I don't think my attack on you in the earlier short could be characterized as freaking out. I called you fucking pinko, which is clearly tongue in cheek. There was some minor back and forth, and I basically relented because I didn't think the short was good enough to bother defending much. I think this one is. While I agree with your implicit argument that no rating could objectively be called "accurate," I don't think the same such relativism necessarily applies to comments. Again, let's take Slocum's comments for my short yesterday. He thought the short's punchline was "Donal Trump is rich." That is incorrect. It is inaccurate. Objectively. Ditto his presumption that Trump U. was a hypothetical entity. Is it irritating for me to point out such factual errors in someone's analysis? I put it to you, Pony: if someone gives a low rating coupled with one such inaccurate analysis, aren't I justified in being annoyed? Imagine someone saying, "Dune, which takes place on Earth, is a crappy book." Would you not assume that this reader's opinion is somewhat invalid, since he clearly made such a blatant misread?
09/1/2004 Principal Skinner: Dudes. Come on. We all got the joke. Some of us thought it was funny, some didn't. I didn't.
09/1/2004 Principal Skinner: Dudes. Snow. Oss. Come on. We all got the joke. Some of us laughed, some of us didn't.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Skinner, I could hardly assume that everyone got the joke when the second comment was
"I realize this is a self-conscious attempt at making stupid sketch comedy/farce even stupider and more farcical, but still, what the F?"
Such inane comments must be fought.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Point is, you got upset when I gave you an inaccurate vote. You know what I'm really saying? If you're going to boldly put your work out there in a forum where it can be criticized, don't get all tipped over when the feedback doesn't meet your approval. You're the author, and as I understand it, part of your job is to get the point across. IMHO.
09/1/2004 Jon Matza: Lot of pressure voting on this one...tempers running high...
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: SHUT UP YOU!
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Pony, I didn't say "nobody got the joke". But based on the comments, several people didn't. And yes, the author's job was to get the point across, which he did. The readers' job is to get the point, which many didn't.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: By the early comments, all I can see is that some people either a) didn't get the joke, or b) didn't find it as funny as some of us did. You're not saying that those two things are the same, are you? As for that "get the point across/get the point" thing you just did; well, that's the sort of evasive doubletalk I'd expect from me. You're not trying to swipe my act, are you?
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Not getting this joke means you're dense. Getting it, but not finding it funny means you have either no sense of humor or a sense of humor that has nothing to do with what acme is all about. And my comment wasn't double talk at all. You said the author's job is to get the point across. I was pointing out that the reader has a responsibility to get a point, once it is clearly made.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: In other words, a writer hasn't failed if a child/imbecile can't understand his work.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: So you're saying that that is the sort of joke we must enjoy, if we have any respect for the mission of the site. Okay.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: As for the evasive double-talk thing, I'm just saying that even in your clarification, there's a reflexive self-definition going on. The author's job is to create clearly make a point. The reader's job is to understand a clearly made point. Both sides, by their failure or success, help to define the other side. If the connection doesn't happen, how do we determine the fault? Surely not by a majority vote. Is the reader the imbecile, or the writer? I'm not criticizing. By navigating and eventually embracing these contradictions and paradoxes, we gain a deeper understanding of the Universe!
09/1/2004 Jon Matza: It's very simple, Pony--any author who didn't fully understand this short (and therefore, by definition, love it) is a stupid asshole child who doesn't understand acme (and all that is good in life), and should be demoted. Disney: demote anyone who gave this short less than five stars.
09/1/2004 Jon Matza: (Nothing against the short, incidentally)
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Yes, that's what I'm saying. But more specifically, if the general consensus has become that this type of joke is not funny and is "sophmoric", then this site is of no interest to me anymore. Like Benny says, what about our values? But unlike Benny says, this short more or less typifies acme's values.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: That comment was in response to Pony's from 2:23:17.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Poor Benny. First "Pentultimate", now this.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: As for you're next comment, pony, yes I understand that there are two sides and point of view comes into play. If you obsess over this, however, it becomes impossible to make a value judgment.
09/1/2004 Jon Matza: I'm going to side with the point of view that's stated with the most authoritative finality.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: I agree with Matza. Anybody who believes that a) there is such thing as a funny joke that people don't get, or b) acme has a historical aesthetic, is a stupid asshole child who is incapable of understanding that everyone has a right to their opinion. Good work, Matza!
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Of course. Completely ignoring the flexibility inherent the system, however, seems unwise to me. [See the point I tried to make with my first comment on this short.]
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Dammit! Didn't see Matza's comment! I restate: I AM RIGHT BECAUSE I AM ME.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: I wasn't completely ignoring it, buddy, hence my use of similar diction on both sides. Give me some fucking credit.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: No, no, no, no, no; I wasn't saying you were. Remember, this mini-thread started with the Author's implicit suggestion that anyone who couldn't see his clearly made points was something of a dummy. By the way, I give you way more credit than you deserve, so shut up!!
09/1/2004 Load File (1): I just came. Death To Historical Aesthetic!
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: No, I want considerably more credit. And, even given the "but everything's, like, relative" point you keep harping on, I still agree with the author's suggestion. The jokes were clear as day to me. It wasn't a coincidence that I happened to find the jokes funny for the precise reason they were intended to be funny. It was because they were plain old funny gags.
09/1/2004 Litcube: This joke gets funnier by the second!
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: I'm not harping. You're the one that's harping! I'm just saying that the word "is", when used in a certain way, has no meaning.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: Okay, I'm harping.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Pony, all's I'm saying is, this isn't about feedback not "meeting my approval". It's about feedback that's based on faulty premises. If someone gives me a low rating, I want a good explanation. What the hell is so error about that? The fact is, this isn't really "a self-conscious attempt at making stupid sketch comedy/farce even stupider and more farcical." (Why don't you jump down Benny's throat for presuming to know my intentions? Doesn't that usually get you really angry? It sure does when I do it to you.) And Danko's comment of "Boring" seemed deliberately inflammatory, especially given this short's brevity and preponderance of dialogue. So mission accomplished, Danko, I got inflamed.
Now Pony, you're saying I shouldn't get "all tipped over" here, that I should have a thicker skin if I'm going to post precious little pieces of my heart in a public forum. To that charge, I say this: my anger is confined to the site. It has quotes around it. I "leave it on the court," as thebuyer likes to say. Shouldn't thick skin also be expected from commentators? They're posting their comments in a public forum. So their comments are fair game for attack. Maybe you don't like the ad hominemity of my comments. Fair enough, I got pissed off and lashed out at humans. Sometimes it's not easy, being the type of guy who feels too much. From now on, I'll really try to only viciously attack the comments, not the terorist behind them.
But you're contradicting yourself a bit: you want to protect the free exchange of ideas by muzzling any expression that's too vehement, perhaps even obstinate and tipped over. Oh I know you don't want to ban such expression. You're all laissez-faire, I'll give you that. You want everyone to repudiate it willingly out of the pluralism of their hearts. I say all expression, even that which doesn't meet your phlegmatic standards, must be embraced here at Acme. Thank you, and God bless America.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: As a side note, author, I think the only misstep in this short is the line "but won't the people resent the lie?" I think it would have been cleaner if you had made it "But won't the people be mad if we commit a crime?" / "No, not as long as we cover it up." Robbery isn't a lie and the sentence comes off as a little awkward.
09/1/2004 Mr. Pony: You're right, I'm not trying to force you to stop attacking people. At no point have I suggested that you be institutionally silenced in any way (except with regard to your admin abilities to change other people's comments). I've done the equivalent of telling you to shut the fuck up, but that's very profoundly different, and there is no contradiction in what I'm saying. Your rabid attacks on people who don't understand/like/respond to your work are expression that should be protected and cherished. My preachy attempts to get you to take criticism like a man, and see the world the way I see it? Also expression, an expression of my disapproval of your savage and dog-like nature. In fact, I don't understand how the two are different. I fully understand that Acme benefits from me being a shining example of honor and nobility, and from you being a slithering grumpy monster. Simultaneously. So where is this accusation coming from?
By the way: I didn't jump down Benny's throat because I wasn't entirely sure what he meant. Also, I don't think I ever accused you of taking this "off the court", nor do I think you are guilty of it in the slightest.
09/1/2004 anonymous: snow, i must disagree. haldeman's leap to "resenting the lie," bypassing getting caught for stealing and then lying about it, is an extension of the joke's premise: characters in the midst of an event already having hindsight on the event, and therefore being able to make these fast-forwards. i'm not saying that this was my thinking when i wrote it, but viewed in that light, i think it's better as it stands.
09/1/2004 Ewan Snow: Yeah, but the cliche about Nixon and Watergate is "it wasn't the break-in that got Nixon in trouble, it was the cover-up." In fact sometimes I've heard "it wasn't the break-in that that got Nixon in trouble, it was lying about it." In other words, lie = cover-up, though Haldeman says lie=break-in; you have the "lie" on the wrong end of the cliche. The cleaner joke, in my opinion, would reflect the idea that the people won't stand for a "break-in", unless it get's covered up.
09/1/2004 anonymous: oh. yeah, ok.
09/1/2004 anonymous: Pony, you're twisting my accusation so that it makes no sense, predictably. You're guilty of something you frequently accuse me of: misrepresenting an opponent's position in foolish terms so that it's easy to attack. This, by the way, makes you guilty of something I always accuse you of: pinning your own faults on other people. You do it really well, too. Good work.
My argument was really very simple: the goal of your pluralistic inclusiveness seems to be a pleasant, unconfrontational experience for everyone at Acme. I'd prefer an inclusiveness that places more value intelligent commentary. Over and over, you've said that my (and in this case, Ewan's) comments amount to our saying, "If you don't agree with us, you're stupid." That's not my point of view. My point is that Danko's and Maniacs' negative comments on this short have been completely harebrained. Why should I answer such comments with anything but vicious attacks? They're stupid.
Your criticism of me has nothing to do with what I consider the subject. The subject is this short I wrote. Some people gave it low ratings and comments that (as you yourself acknowledge about Benny's comments in your last response) made little or no sense. I attacked them. Rabidly, you say. Well, rabid implies viciousness without cause or reason, and I've laid my reasons out over and fucking over again. Yet you continue to try to turn this into an argument about civility and good form.
Therein lies the difference between you and I: you'd prefer a pleasant dialogue where all points of view are respected, no matter how patently absurd, to a confrontational one. You get annoyed by incivility more than stupidity. I'm just the opposite. In short, to answer the question at the end of your last post, I'm not accusing you of trying to silence dissent (at least, that wasn't my intention); I'm accusing you of trying to Disnefy Acme (in the sense of the cartoon company, not the acme author/admin). I accuse you of overvaluing civility and undervaluing intelligent discourse. Finally, I accuse you of doing all this to further burnish your self-image as a cool, collected man of reason, which you cling to like floating wreckage on the roiling sea of your misanthropy and self-love.
09/1/2004 Jon Matza: Snow do you also "agree" with my statement that you can't have true sharing without true caring?
09/1/2004 John Slocum (3): I don't find this very funny. Disney - demote me this instant.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: My Dear Summer,
First of all, I'd like to congratulate you for successfully pinning your own faults on me in such a way that I have no recourse whatsoever.
I do acknowledge that I have been exaggerating my point, if only to compensate for your (and others') extreme stance. I should explain that. I have nothing against intelligent discourse, in fact, that's what I'm trying to achieve. I have no desire to see Acme become a happy little small town with a milkman and picket fences where everyone smiles cordially at one another, an do one gets any thinking done. What troubles me is the tone of certain arguments here, the essence of which can be boiled down to "I am right because you and your point of view is utterly dismissible. Furthermore, I am right because I am me." Maybe I'm not seeing that right, but that's how I see it.
But in an argument where each side believes the other is patently insane, one must wonder. Ordinarily, one would think that at least one of the combatants is an idiot, but at Acme, each one of us has proven themselves to be of at least servicable, if not reasonable intelligence, and furthermore, relatively thoughtful about the things they choose to talk about. In cases like this, surely it is reasonable to assume that the truth lies somewhere else--possibly in the middle, or possibly occupying several places at once, perhaps even contradicting itself. (Why that last bit gets me label a Communist, I suspect I'll never know, even if I were to read that Marx Commie Book.)
What I object to is the notion that truth, that Truth, that what "is"; especially with regards to matters of taste, can be so firmly nailed down. I understand that we, as beings with limited lifetimes, have to make value judgments, have to choose between one thing and another, have to discriminate. But to debate these matters of taste in such a way that we forget that we are talking about an opinion seems childish to me. Not necessarily bad, but extremely counter-productive. I don't understand the need to argue whether or not something is funny in the same way we'd argue about how many apples are in a bag. That's not entirely true. I do understand it, a little.
I understand that people want to win. People want to be smart. People want the world to know that they have been standing on a unique disk of truth all their lives. I am as guilty of this as any of us. I'm doing it now. I'm trying to win this argument. I could accuse you of things too. I could accuse you of believing that being bold was the same thing as being right; that declaring victory was the same thing as achieving it. I could accuse you of having a cartoon-like sense of truth, in which truth is a brick that you stand on, short stocky and cartoon-like, vigilantly guarding with your cartoon sword. I could accuse you of letting your self-image make all your decisions for you. I could accuse Mr. Joshua & Co. of stuffing you into one too many cardboard boxes and taping them shut. But I won't. I won't accuse you of any of these things. I won't even say them. Because they have nothing to do with the conversation we're having.
I remain your humble servant,
09/2/2004 qualcomm: pony, i enjoyed your response, except for grafs 3 & 4, which have little to do with what i said during this argument. of course "funny" is a subjective experience, but it is possible to back up your vote on a short with an intelligent comment. even slocum's comment here ("I don't find this very funny") is marginally acceptable, albeit frustrating to someone who completely disagrees with it.
equally frustrating is you directing your indignation at those of us who have what you consider to be inflexible views. i think your righteous condescension would be better directed at stupid comments. they are more damaging to Acme than my overheated responses to them. you say you are worried about authors taking the stance of "I am right because you and your point of view is utterly dismissible." i don't think that's what happened here in this comment thread. i reacted with anger to voters who had no coherent point of view. after all, what is maniacs' point of view? you yourself admitted you couldn't understand it. and danko's? the short is "boring." i'm supposed to respect this one-word point of view? why? it doesn't give the short the respect of elaborating. in other words, it's lazy, and i believe it was intended to be annoying and dismissive.
finally, pony, i don't understand why you like guzzling monkey cum so much. i just can't imagine it's as tasty and nutritious as you're always saying. i accepted your monkey cum guzzling at first as a quirky hobby, but when i came by last weekend and saw that you had an entire rice cooker full of simmering rhesus jizz, i knew this kick had gone too far.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: In my response, I wasn't confining my thoughts and viewpoints to this particular comment thread, and maybe that's where our apparent disconnect is happening. I agree with you that comments should be thoughtful. However, Danko did make it pretty clear that he thought the short was, in fact, boring. In his defense, I don't think he was doing it just to hurt your feelings, although maybe he was.
I take issue, however with your criticism of my drinking of clotted monkey cum. First of all, you'd be surprised how your menu dwindles when you go on South Beach. Second, I find your problem with my ingesting of rhesus semen quite disingenuous, as you are my sole supplier. Keep in mind that I am not criticizing your "home business" of jerking off monkeys, and I appreciate the sheer volume of monkey cum you generate, as you work night and day, and sometimes weekends, masturbating monkey after screaming monkey, just to "keep prices down". As far as I know, I'm your only customer, so I'd advise you to not be so critical just because I like to have a cup of monkey jizz before bed.
09/2/2004 qualcomm: that jizz was supposed to be used for science, you asshole. and i don't work night and day just to keep prices down, so i don't know who you're quoting there. i do it because i love my work, and you assured me that you and mrs. pony needed monkey semen to get pregnant. i don't know how it could possibly help you in your quest, but i trusted that you two had some kind of logical plan. now i come over and find out that not only have you boiled all the cum, killing all the sperm and denaturing its protein, but you are consuming it! you are an inscrutable monster.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: Oh dear. I was quoting you. I believe you have become unstuck again, and you monkey-jerking-off addled brain has once again separated from reality. While I had a chuckle at your ridiculous hallucination about my beloved wife and I needing monkey semen to conceive a child (indeed), I must insist that you resume your medication. Also, I believe the time has come (no pun intended) for you to retire from the "business" of masturbating monkeys. In addition to the sheer smell generated by the 27 monkeys running wild in your apartment, defecating on your designer furniture and anally molesting your two cats, I believe that you have come to rely on the monkeys too much, emotionally speaking. I hate to be the one to suggest this, but have you considered the possibility that you are mistaking the monkeys' eagerness to "take advantage of your services" for love? Just because they fight to be near you doesn't mean that they necessarily care about you and your feelings. I would be more than willing to forego my evening cup of monkey semen, if only because I don't want to see you get hurt.
09/2/2004 anonymous: OSS jerks off monkeys
09/2/2004 qualcomm: pony, it's time i made a confession. when you first appeared at my door holding a measuring cup in your hand and asking if you could borrow some monkey cum, i didn't know what to say. i didn't own any monkeys at the time, and i couldn't fathom why you'd driven all the way down from greenpoint to make this bizarre request. when you assured me that you and mrs. pony were using it for the noble cause of getting pregnant, i sympathized and played along, telling you i was fresh out and to come back in a few days. as soon as you'd left, i got on the internet and purchased 27 monkeys. and here's where i'm afraid you might be a little angry with me. i haven't been jerking off the monkeys. i've been supplying you with my own semen all this time, which i've been harvesting day and night whilst consuming untold amounts of internet porn. i figured you'd gone to the fertility doctor and found out that your 2,000mg-a-day caffeine habit had mutated your sperm beyond human recognition, and were therefore unable to reproduce. i further deduced that your request for monkey cum was a thinly-veiled compliment: you figured, "hey, if i'm going to need to a surrogate jizz donor, what better genes to pass on than OSS's?" but you were too proud to ask me directly, and completely delusional to boot. so i played along with your charade, purchased the monkeys, and even jerked some of them off in your presence to trick you. but those ziplocs from my freezer contained pure, unadulterated Sausage juice. now that you're eating it, i'm confused. did i make a mistake? was that which i construed to be your thinly-veiled desire to raise my children something much simpler? namely, a thinly-veiled desire to dine on my sea monkeys? please explain.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: It hurts me to see you this way.
09/2/2004 Ewan Snow: You jerk offs, you could have been arguing about the real point this whole time. The only thing I hate more than no argument is a fake argument. So, to kick it off, pony, my point yesterday wasn't that anybody who didn't like this short was (fill in whatever you said). It was that this short typifies the acme tradition of goofy gag comedy, and does it well, so if you don't like it, then why would you be interested in acme? Further, if current authors don't like this kind of gag, and prefer the more crafted fiction style shorts that have become common recently, then why would I be interested in acme? It isn't that people with different tastes are bad or wrong, it's that the acme community seems like it no longer is interested in the type of comedy that I like best. Beyond this, as OSS has said, it seems that a number of the criticisms of this short betrayed a lack of understanding of the short itself.
09/2/2004 qualcomm: perhaps acme needs to go through a protracted and painful (though necessary) culture war.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: Hasn't that already happened with The Monolith Discourse? Didn't that just prove the obvious fact that all of us are not of one mind about certain issues? I remember a lot of declarations of victory going on, but I don't recall anything being resolved, or anyone's mind being changed about anything.
09/2/2004 qualcomm: ah, what's the point, you're right. the only thing a fella can do is vote his conscience. and viciously attack stupid comments (and their attendant votes, if said comments seem to indicate a lack of understanding).
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: That, and drink monkey cum! Cheers!
09/2/2004 Ewan Snow: No, you can also give up on acme, which I more or less have done at this point.
09/2/2004 John Slocum: Nice to see this whole thing tied up so nicely. And how does a guy get some of that "monkey" cum?
09/2/2004 qualcomm: i don't want to give the bastards the satisfaction. we founded this form.
09/2/2004 John Slocum: Missed that last one by you snow, guess it's not tied up so nicely. You giving up on Acme doesn't seem so nice (not that you're doing something that isn't nice, but that it's not a good solution [I've been known to take what's called a 'solutions-oriented' approach, as has Matza]).
09/2/2004 scoop: Snow don't leave. Your (sic) funny. You fucking baby. Who else would I have to agree with?
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: I don't get it, Snow. Shorts in the classic style are still published (see above), and to suggest current authors don't like this sort of thing is kind of an over-generalization. And aside for competing for space and attention, I don't think that crafted fiction-style shorts are really hurting the shorts in the classic style in any unfair way. Some of us like both "styles" and are happy for the diversity. Like me. I like stuff that is funny.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: [unfair or destructive]
09/2/2004 Principal Skinner (4): This is an ode to Summer Sausage's piece on Nixon, and shouldn't be taken as a slap in the face. Possibly, it could help him to see the humourous ideas more objectively, since it uses similar comedic devices. Personally, it gave me an appreciaton for the self-conscious, farcical stupidity (I mean that in a good way) of his piece, especially the sophmoric, or juvenile, gaggery. I have now officially averaged my vote at three stars for his Nixon piece, between the four of this and the two of Benny Maniacs' yesterday. So I stand corrected.
"Okay," said Adolph Hitler, "We're going to have this thing called The Holocaust."
"What is it?" Heinrich Himmler said.
"It's where we kill six million Jews, dummy. I don't know. It's going to be cool!"
"But won't the people resent the murders?" pointed out Joseph Goebbels.
"No, not as long as we cover it up. The people hate murder, but they love the cover-up."
"I really don't think this is such a hot idea," said Hermann Göring.
"Who cares? I did that thing with Poland, Austria and Vienna. That's all that matters. That's all that ever matters. I am not Evil."
"Why are you goose-stepping around the room?" Karl Dönitz asked.
"Excuse me, is this room 507?", said Hitler's double, peeking in. "Someone's supposed to shoot me."
"Who the hell is that?" someone said.
"Nobody, nobody at all," replied the Führer & Chancellor of Germany, checking his holster to see if his gun inscribed "Führer Suicide Pistol" was loaded.
Again, no offense intended.
09/2/2004 Jon Matza (4): There, there.
09/2/2004 Ewan Snow: Who, exactly, are you condescending to with your comment, Matza? Please specify from now on.
09/2/2004 Mr. Pony: I hope it's me. I find that phrase comforting.
09/2/2004 Jon Matza: That was kind of a general, all-inclusive condescension. To quote your condescension, "I can't believe [I] needed to explain that."
09/3/2004 John Slocum: Snap!
09/3/2004 Ewan Snow: My apologies for being surprised that you needed an explanation for this complex and difficult joke.
09/3/2004 qualcomm: skinner, i don't understand your comment. what's it supposed to prove?
09/3/2004 Benny Maniacs: That once you saw your joke from afar, you would indeed agree that it is a three.
09/3/2004 Benny Maniacs: Or in this case 3.5.
09/3/2004 qualcomm: hm. no, it didn't work. maybe one day you'll come back to this one and see why you're wrong and i'm right. i don't want you to be too embarrassed to call me and apologize when that happens, by the way.
09/3/2004 Jon Matza: Snow: was that "you" all-inclusive? I didn't ask for, or need, an explanation of the short. My point was your irritation at my being condescending seemed preposterous, given your stupendous level of condescenscion throughout this discussion. In short, stop acting like a tangerine.
09/3/2004 Benny Maniacs: I still don't get the joke.
02/11/2005 Mr. Negative (5): Good stuff. But you're all a bunch of cunts.
08/30/2005 anonymous: I wonder if that was me.
08/30/2005 anonymous: It was! Ha!
08/30/2005 scoop: Hey Pony did you end up using monkey cum to make your baby or qualcomm's cum to make your baby? It's clear you made a baby. So obviously you used one or the other, of the cums that is. It would be nice to settle this dispute once and for all. So which one was it? And after you deciuded on one did you really it, or is qualcomm making that part up?And also, Snow: No you. Seriously.
08/30/2005 Mr. Pony: What? I used one of my own cums to manufacture Turbo. I sold qualcomm's cum to you for $45, remember? What did you do with it? I mean, you must have done something with it. For example, I bought a nice shirt with the $45 you gave me in exchange for qualcomm's cum. That's what I did with the $45, which, incidentally, I would have thought to be a higher price than the market would bear. Shows what I know about economics! What did you do with qualcomm's cum?
08/31/2005 scoop: Well, Pony, funny you should ask that. Shortly after Turbo was born, I went out and purchased a milk bottle identical to the ones you bought with your wife. I returned home and in private poured the cum into the milk bottle. "Pour" doesn't quite capture the lumbering, sloughing-action as his gunk dripped out. Actually it was more like watching rubber cement slowly sludge out of its container. When it finally collected in the bottle, I screwed the top back on and visited yopur house under the pretense of wanting to see the little fella. Once there, while you weren't looking, I secretly exchanged it with a bottle that had your wife's mother's milk in it. When I got home, I drank the milk, easily reimbursing my $45 investment. But I'm getting ahead of myself here. First I watched with glee, a glee worth far more than the paltry $45 I paid for the cum in the first place, as your son nursed on qulacomm's stale, dense geneshake. If memory serves he drank the whole thing. For the rapture I enjoyed wathcing your son lap up the whole bottle, I would have paid two, maybe three hundred bucks, easy. Think about the shirts you could have bought with that douhgh!
08/31/2005 Mr. Pony: I was wondering when you'd "reveal" that one. See this nose? I can tell if a woman is menstruating at fifty yards. Think I'd miss your "switcheroo"? qualcomm's semen has a pretty distinctive smell, as I'm sure you're aware, and I knew immediately what you were doing. Anyway, using sleight of hand tricks taught to me by Disney himself, I was able to switch back a fresh bottle of human milk with which to feed Turbo. The human milk that you had initially swapped, I couldn't get to, because it was in your bag. Did you know it was human milk that you drank? I ask, only because I seemed to have evinced a grimace from your already puckering face. So what happened to the semen, you ask? Well, I'll tell you. You know the home enema kit you're always wearing on your belt? Well, while you were busy appraising my keepsakes, I was able to add some of it to the bottle of sterile saline solution on your hip. You weren't kidding about the viscosity of qualcomm's cum. At this point it was the consistency of drywall joint compound, but I managed to get a good amount into your home enema kit's saline reservoir. Just out of curiosity, why does a home enema kit come in a wearable version (or did you make the belt enema holster yourself)? Anyway, I like to think that you discovered my little contamination in time, and didn't give yourself a qualcomm semen enema, but who knows? Maybe you got a rectum-full of qualcomm cum! As for the remainder of qualcomm's cum, I mixed it with fresh blackberries and ate it. You know what? It was pretty gross!
08/31/2005 scoop: Touche, Pony. I did not notice your ol' switcheroo. I did pump qualcomms thick love mud up my ass with my awesome handmade enema kit. Good one. So I guess that means it is qualcomm's ass baby I'm pregnant with. I was wondering, because I don't have any recollection of making male love recently. For months now I thought the little one gestating in my swollen hairy belly was an act of God, an anal Immaculate Conception. Looks like it was science after all.
PS -- I molested your baby.
08/31/2005 Mr. Pony: I can't believe you did that! You're a jerk!
08/31/2005 scoop: Pony, don't do this. Not here. Please.
08/31/2005 Mr. Pony: OKay, but it was mean of you to molest my kid.
08/31/2005 Ewan Snow: Stop trying so hard to be funny, you jerks. You'll give yourselves a pair of sweaty hernias. Also, screw you guys.
08/31/2005 scoop: F you Snow. I molested your kid too.
08/31/2005 Mr. Pony: I'd argue that what were doing is slightly better than being not funny without even trying.
08/31/2005 Ewan Snow: well said, pony.
08/31/2005 Mr. Pony: I thought the phrasing was a little awkward, but thanks!