home authors guest shorts graphical shorts

AcmeShorts

ďI think we need to strategize the refrigerator better. Thereís a lot of wasted space and I have difficulty putting things in. Often to my dismay I stand there with an item Ė a saran-wrapped half an onion or tomato, letís say, or a plate of leftover crispy-fried chicken feet Ė rooting around with my right hand, moving things to make space for the new addition and usually I find this course of action doesnít work; it doesnít work because the sloppy way in which the fridge had been inefficiently loaded doesnít allow for much one-handed maneuvering. Iíll have to put the new item down on the counter and completely re-work the shelf-space allocation of the fridge, an operation that requires a good four minutes. Imagine that, four minutes just to put one item in the fridge! Ridiculous to think about, I know. Thatís four minutes I could use to sandpaper my bunions or clip my nails. My nails are dirty and need attention but I donít have time because of all the work I need to do on the fridge. We as a family - a team - need to work on this. I mean, címon, how much time do you save by shoving things in the fridge willy-nilly? What - three, four seconds, ten seconds at the outside? If we each spend an extra ten seconds - ten seconds, itís nothing! - when we are putting an item in the fridge, each future instance of putting an item in the fridge will be more smooth and efficient. We will have more time to attend to other tasks and we will all be happier. That is except for our extreme family dysfunction, our excessive hand washing, our manias, psychoses, depressions, hallucinations, loose associative thinking, delusions of grandeur and our vigorous and robust incestuous/unhealthy sexual relations. Oh yah - also the intra-familial homicide/incest-necrophilia, the emotional/physical abuse, the excessive hand washing (did I say that already?), going outdoors naked, the biting, hair-pulling, giggling, the detrimental wound-inflicting/wound-fucking cycle and the sharing of chores. Wait, that last one contributes to our happiness, I forgot. Well let's get cracking, I know we can work together on this one."

Date Written: January 02, 2005
Author: John Slocum
Average Vote: 3.2

Comments:
01/2/2005 ALLAH: IS-SALAAM ALEIKUM,

DOES ANYONE WONDER HOW I WAS ABLE TO REPLY TO THIS SHORT WELL IN ADVANCE OF ITS PUBLISHING?

ALLAH OUT
01/7/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: F U, ALLAH!
01/7/2005 Ewan Snow (4): While this family has a number of "issues" to work out, "giggling" is the most serious, imho. This got a smirk out of me on several occasions, but not an out-loud HAR HAR HAR, hence a solid four, perhaps four plus...
01/7/2005 qualcomm: last few sentences almost knocked it down to two for me. welcome back, maniacs.
01/7/2005 qualcomm (3):
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko (3): Wine?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: i really should have twoed you, you lucky son of a bitch
01/7/2005 Ewan Snow: Two? Are you crazy? This is no lower than a three. What's your beef?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: the squeaky-clean, anal parent routine is nothing new and not particularly funny here. it's competently done, so i'd give it a three, barely. the last few sentences with the catalog of dysfunction... do i really need to explain why that sucks? it's like a flat surprise ending: turns out he's not such a squeaky clean dad (mom?) after all! why, just look at that list of dysfunctions and mental illness!
01/7/2005 qualcomm: it's no HIGHER than a three, 'swhat i'm saying.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: by the way, i liked the first sentence. the word strategize really nailed this type of jackoff. but that's about it.
01/7/2005 hagit mizrachy (3):
01/7/2005 TheBuyer (3): that whole list could have been Disnified into 'except for our extereme family dysfunction, or my other problems'.
01/7/2005 Ewan Snow: Yeah, it has been done, that's true. And the ending was not exactly value-pak, but I thought the bulk of it was well done. The particulars of the parent's fridge rant were good. A two vote seems to indicate that the short is terrible, and I don't think it is. Anyway...
01/7/2005 John Slocum (4): Maniacs: you're lucky qualcomm didn't 2 this you lucky son of a bitch. Lucky, do you hear me? You are so lucky it makes me sick. No one should be that lucky. It's unfair for such a high density of luck to be concentrated on one individual.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: ewan: i think 1 - terrible, 2 - subpar, 3 solid, 4 - very good, 5 - classic. slocum: i'll give your comment three point five stars, for which you too should count yourself among the lucky.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: i mean, if 2 is terrible, what's 1? insulting? not even worth looking at? i think there needs to be more of a difference between 1 and 2. and, as 3 is the middle number of 1-5, why shouldn't it be given to shorts that are average (i.e., the gentleman's 3).
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony (3): qualcomm, it's okay to just admit it when we're wrong about something, such as a vote. We don't need to obfuscate our mistakes with endless chatter about philosophies and tactics.
01/7/2005 The Rid (4): Well, QC, I'm gonna go with four. At first, this felt like a three. But as the short went on and the list of problems/neuroses lengthened (to the point where the narrator couldn't remember which ones he'd already listed), I began to chuckle, then laugh, and my mood improved and therefore: Four.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: yeah, you're right, pony, we don't. we should just stick to our guns without endless justification. now if you'll excuse us, we need to take a shit.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: While your on the loo I expect you to have a good think about what you've done, QC. There are no excuses for your sloppy reading of this short.
01/7/2005 John Slocum: Qualcomm, you're lucky you're taking a shit. Really lucky. You're so lucky you're shitting it makes me sick. No one should possess such a high quantity of luck in defecation. You're lucky.
01/7/2005 John Slocum: Come to think about it, I'm going to go shit too!
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: QC, should be back any second. His shits take as long as his tinkles.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: what the fuck is that comma doing there? Disney!!!
01/7/2005 qualcomm: ok, i'm back! am i supposed to say something now?
01/7/2005 John Slocum: How was your crap?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: 4 stars
01/7/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs (3): A three, a solid three.
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: That shit took longer than usual. Is there something you want to tell us?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: it was about a foot per minute. can you do any better?
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: Oh, QC! A foot per minute is so unmanly.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: let me explain: i have a very tight sphincter. it comes out like brown vermicelli. and anyone will tell you my farts are audible only to dogs.
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: Easily, but only about 15 seconds of that time is actual motion. The rest of the time is planning time.
01/7/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: Strategizing time?
01/7/2005 John Slocum: I think we need to strategize our shits better.
01/7/2005 John Slocum: I don't know if anyone cares, but my crap was very satisfying. It couldn 't be measured in feet/minute, but rather in diameter of spray. It exploded from my canal with immeasurable force. I found bits on the underside of the seat when I was done. It was great. 5 stars!

by the way, I think this short is very funny. I don't care if this has been done before (please point me to other shorts with this character, qualcomm, as I like this character). I agree that it's competent and since I thought it was funny, a four. Nothing deep here, or hilariously funny. I also like the twist at the end with the chores. It sounds like your vote, qualcomm, comes down to you not finding it funny. The last part you object to is also funny in an exagerrated way (as the Rid points out). It almost reads like a charicature of this kind of surprise ending, like the author is making fun of this ending by elongating and exagerrating the surprise. The list of dysfunctions is not there to point out the dad is not squeaky clean, but rather to blah blah erggrropbrfebghbfbfb, etc. Finally, qualcomm, are you crazy? There's no way this is Maniacs. What about this says maniacs to you? I'm not sure who it is, but there are some Matzaian touches. Could it be him? Not maniacs.
01/7/2005 John Slocum: Actually, except for the fact that Pony's not back in the author list, I might say it's one of his written pieces. It has his cold, calculated scientific evil.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: I'm saving mine up so I can spend some quality time in there reading something from Slate or Salon. I wonder if Maniacs is taking a shit?
01/7/2005 John Slocum: who the hell picked this as a controversy?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: yes, i'd say that any time i vote low (or in this case, average!), it's because i simply didn't find it funny. any explanation i give is basically an attempt to theorize/flesh out why i didn't react to the material (or reacted negatively). i'm not sure that i've seen this "joke" elsewhere on acme (though my jake kohler character seems pretty similar to dad here, and i think if i tried, i could find other examples); i meant that the idea of an anal dude making some anal case in a reasonable fashion is not new in general, outside of acme. that being said, i don't necessarily deduct points for a joke/character type not being new. but i would like the author to have some kind of original spin on it, you know? i gave matza's historical short today a five, even though it certainly isn't the first ever send-up of nautical jargon. but it was an original take on the form. i don't think this short is. the anal guy wants to keep the fridge neat. that's not really doing a lot with the character's possibilities. as for it being maniacs, i'unno. just something in my guttywuts tells me. a certain characteristic mundanity.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: How can you not know who the author is, QC? Must you be stripped of your Miss Acme crown?
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: Are you saying it's Slocum? It sounds like that's what you're saying, Dylan.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: All I'm saying is that between me and QC I'm better at being served wine!
01/7/2005 qualcomm: the word "dismay" indicates matza, but i'm sticking with my original prediction
01/7/2005 qualcomm: we've already gone over this, danko. i'm better at being served wine, and you're easier (meaning you won't complain about being served an off-year bordeaux in riesling stemware)
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: I think all you're saying is that it's Slocum.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: You can continue to intentionally misinterpret all you want but I am truly sorry for going over something we've already gone over. Pony, of course it's Slocum. A cursory reading would tell you that.
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: I just think it's pretty unlikely that qualcomm could be wrong twice on one short.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: No, no, you see it doesn't matter if he's right or wrong because sticking with his original guess demonstrates degrees of integrity and bravery not seen in anyone else on the site.
01/7/2005 Dick Vomit: Can we please for the love of christ come to an agreement here on the whole yeh-yeah-yah-jah thing?: The slangy affirmation we all know and love is spelled "Yeah." Unless author meant to say "jah." And Let's not use "Yeh" ever. Example 1: Wanna go to the movies? A: Yeah! Example 2: Are you a kraut? A: Jah! Example 3: 'Yeh'? What the fuck is 'yeh'?
01/7/2005 Barbara Boxer: Bwaaaa! Boo, hoo. BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!! Sniff.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: hey, danko, i'd like to make something clear once and for all (to correct a common illogical leap made in arguments on acme): just because i call you a fucking coward or intellectually dishonest doesn't mean i'm saying i'm brave. i just mean exactly what the words say. that goes for other stuff too.
01/7/2005 Dick Vomit: And watch out for this tricky little bastard: Yea.
01/7/2005 Barbara Boxer: You mean like when you say, "Man, it's lonely being the only brave, honest person on this site" you weren't refering to yourself? I'm sorry for being so illogical. And also, for trying to slip you the tongue the other night.
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: And "ya" is reserved for the King of the Canadians!
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: You mean like when you say, "Man, it's lonely being the only brave, honest person on this site" you weren't refering to yourself? I'm sorry for being so illogical. And also, for trying to slip you the tongue the other night.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: well, if i said that, i meant it (or maybe i was joking...). no, but your previous comment reminded me of a common salvo from the brookline team back in the heady days when the brookline/west hartford debate was young; namely, that we west hartfordites were painting ourselves as maverick geniuses. now, i can see how one might misunderstand. if someone called you a mindless sheep, you might assume your attacker sees himself as a maverick genius. similarly, my fondness for calling people intellectually dishonest seems to get me labeled a self-styled maverick of truth by a number of my detractors. but if you look at the record, i'm generally not saying that. i'm just calling everyone else a liar.
01/7/2005 Barbara Boxer: Why must this Danko guy mock me so? Doesn't he know my emotional state today?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: ugh. no more topical aliases, please. for the love of god. go write for the daily show.
01/7/2005 Barbara Boxer: I promise to stop crying if you suck on my titties.
01/7/2005 qualcomm: tree? is that you?
01/7/2005 TREE: That was low QC. The dog just wants a little titty suck. Give her what she wants.
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: Yes, QC, why don't you suck on Barbara Boxer's titties? After that can you tell me if by calling all of us on the site liars you are implying that you are not a liar? After that can I suck on your titties?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: why don't you try contributing something to the site, guy, instead of just being a parasitic, tucker carlsonesque talking head? your maunderings might carry a little more weight then.
01/7/2005 anonymous: Hey, Qualcomm, you're a jerk.
01/7/2005 Acme Shorts: who cares?
01/7/2005 qualcomm: my thoughts precisely, acme
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: You mean if I wrote more shorts my comments wouldn't be maunderings?
01/7/2005 Jon Matza: ped xing week for acme, all in all.
01/7/2005 Phony Millions (3): The mention of Tucker Carlson, a particularly stinging comparative pejorative...controversy brewing methinks.
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: What's a Maundering?
01/7/2005 Dylan Danko: Ok, I'm never wearing that bow tie again. Big mistake.
01/7/2005 Litcube:
01/7/2005 Mr. Pony: holy christ
01/8/2005 TheBuyer: slocum, dude, you are what you are. more degenerate behaviour and good wine, please.
01/8/2005 John Slocum: up your ass.
01/8/2005 Stomach Foot: Heeeellllllp.... meeeeeeee.......
01/8/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: I knew this was Slocums the moment I saw ALLAH's post. Why? The Message Board holds the answer, my friend.
01/8/2005 TheBuyer: That's the spirit!
01/11/2005 scoop (3):