AcmeShorts

home authors guest shorts graphical shorts

Deelon Dinko had stashed his time machine behind the old granary in the rustic little Spanish town. Deelon was sipping dry jerez with Pablo Picasso.

“Uhhhhhhhhh,” Deelon was saying, “I really don’t think that Guernica is very good.”

“But I think it really means a lot.”

“No, no.” Deelon shook his head. “It’s no good. Nobody likes it. God, I’m hungover.”

Date Written: October 04, 2004
Author: Will Disney
Average Vote: 3.375

Comments:
10/8/2004 Dick Vomit: Blacasso?
10/8/2004 The Rid (4): Genius. So much revealed in that last statement.
10/8/2004 anonymous: Thank you, The Rid.
10/8/2004 Dylan Danko (2): Shouldn't this be marked as an inside short?
10/8/2004 anonymous: What? Why?
10/8/2004 qualcomm: wow, dylan, that's really abusing your vote, giving something two stars just because it makes fun of you. disney, we better institute rules preventing dylan from doing this. look, he's doing something bad, let's use technology to legislate morality. assholes.
10/8/2004 Dylan Danko: If it were funny I would have given it high marks my slimy friend. I have honor where you have none.
10/8/2004 Dylan Danko: As it is, i added a star for the first line and the granary bit.
10/8/2004 scoop: Maybe your just hungover in real life and are having trouble, you know, with things.
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: So Summer, legislating morality is bad when it stops you from getting what you want and good when it helps you get what you want? You are the worst kind of hypocrite. I'm glad your html privileges are being taken away. It's really the right thing to do.
10/8/2004 The Foonch: Dylan Danko is not hungover. This short is not funny. The author's sexual identity crisis since meeting OSS is funny. Signed, The Foonch
10/8/2004 qualcomm: when did i ask for legislation to get what i want (i'm not saying i didn't, i'm actually asking when, because i truly don't remember)? and i wasn't aware there were different kinds of hypocrites, which you are able to arrange in order from bad to worst. can you tell me who is a better kind of hypocrite than i am? is dick cheney better or worse? how about lon cheney?
10/8/2004 anonymous: Or Don Chaney, the coach with the supposedly good resume who keeps tanking the Knicks.
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Yes, should be marked as inside. Why isn't it? Author: did Dinko actually espouse this viewpoint or is this imaginary?
10/8/2004 Dylan Danko: Of course not, Matza. How dare you!
10/8/2004 Will Disney: Danko, you can't speak for Dinko!
10/8/2004 John Slocum (3): I like this alright.
10/8/2004 anonymous: Thanks, Slocum!
10/8/2004 TheBuyer (4):
10/8/2004 qualcomm: man, imagine if deelon were actually capable of going back in time, and he said this to picasso?! THAT WOULD BE FUNNY! you just have to use your imagination, which is a wonderful tool we humans employ to model different scenarios, like this one. sort of like taking a little vacation without leaving your seat, no?
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: Summer, I was talking about the time you wanted to place a system-enforced limit the number of comments that people could post on shorts. As for my hypocrite comment, that was an unfortunate choice of words. There is, of course, a continuum of hypocrites; a three to five dimensional rainbow spectrum sea of fucking hypocrites that I wade through on my way to work. Dick Cheney is both a hypocrite and not a hypocrite, as you you. Oddly enough, Lon Chaney is the only human who ever existed who was neither.
10/8/2004 John Slocum: By the way, ladies of Brookline: I think I might have had David Geller in mind, at least partially, when I wrote this.
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: !
10/8/2004 John Slocum: oops, I put this comment on the wrong short! Hold on....
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Too late, too late, too late...!
10/8/2004 John Slocum: NO! IT'S NOT TOO LATE...AAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!
10/8/2004 John Slocum: Alright, goto hot shorts if you're from brookline.
10/8/2004 qualcomm: but pony, that system-enforced comment maximum i suggested was not for my own benefit. i was trying to add lustre to the site. this html crap is singling me out for legislated morality because i cornholed the site a couple days ago. my point is, i (and one other author) are responsible for making sure the site met its responsibilities to provide one short per business day in the past couple months. clearly, the short shortage is a more pressing acme problem than my one-day pop-up barrage, and yet the administrator is focusing his energy on the latter, while misguided pharisees like yourself applaud his efforts. "Old lady judges watch people in pairs / limited in sex they dare to push fake morals, insult and stare / while money doesn't talk, it swears / obscenity, who really cares / propaganda, all is phony." also, "the waitress he was handsome / he wore a powder blue cape / I ordered the suzette / I said, "Could you please make it crepe?"
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: Fair enough, I concede that you were trying to make the site better for all by taking all of the fun out of it. And now you say that we should stop focusing on you crapping up the home page, and focus on some other issue! But let's pretend for a moment that your diversionary tactic wasn't both transparent and idiotic. Are you really suggesting that a brand new visitor to the site would be more put off by content that's over a day old than by annoying javascript popups? Or a redirect to teencunt.com? I don't think you're actually saying that. That's not possible that you're saying that. And by the way, for the record, I don't really think that your html privileges should be taken away, or that you should be muzzled like the dog you seem to be in any way. You've contributed quite a lot to this web site, and I think that many of us here have, over time, come to see you as a valuable, if unreliable member of the community. You've really earned your place among the rest of us, and I think I speak for all of us here at Acme when I say how proud we are at how far you've come. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that we're all very disappointed at your surrealist, attention-grabbing outbursts and tantrums. Very disappointed indeed. Very very very disappointed indeed. We'd like to give you another chance, though; another chance to prove that you can walk upright with the rest of us, and bring true lustre to our community. Please don't let us down again.
10/8/2004 qualcomm: i'm not suggesting that a guest wouldn't be more annoyed by pop-ups than by days-old content. i am suggesting that i contribute more to the site than you and my other detractors combined. that's all.
10/8/2004 qualcomm: i'm also suggesting that rare contributors like yourself who make a big deal over my popup attack are like g. w. bush: "hey everyone, look up at Mars, we're going to land people on Mars in 10 years, don't look at the economy, look at Mars!"
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: See, that's what I was accusing you of doing. That is, in fact, what you're doing. The level of content production was never at issue until you brought it up to divert attention away from your shenanigans. Why do you always do that; accuse everyone of doing the very thing that you're doing? It's infuriating. Also, I wasn't making a big deal over your popup attack. I responded accordingly, with an attack of my own. You're the one who made a big deal about it. See, there you go again! What's wrong with you? Why are you so much like George W. Bush?
10/8/2004 Mr. Pony: This argument really belongs on the message board, and I'll take my answer there, please.
10/8/2004 qualcomm: ok, see message board.
10/8/2004 [Censored]: mmmf.... mmmmfff!
10/8/2004 Ewan Snow (4): hell, I chuckled.
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Hold the phone. Danko's back in the author rankings. Doesn't that mean this is his short? What devil(t)ry is this?
10/8/2004 TheBuyer: Well spotted, but he's been back on for a couple of days so it's either this one or one of the next two.
10/8/2004 Dylan Danko: glad to see my admirers are paying attention
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Disney: do demoted authors get reinstated to full status when they submit a short as the Buyer here is implying? Or does it happen when the short gets published?
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Answer the fucking question, Disney.
10/8/2004 Ewan Snow: when they submit, as I recall
10/8/2004 Benny Maniacs (3): I'm feeling hungover and I didn't even get drunk last night. Uuuuugh. 2.5 stars.
10/8/2004 Will Disney: They're re-instated when the guest short is accepted.
10/8/2004 Jon Matza: Thanks, computer friends. This knowledge increases my power sixfold!
10/8/2004 Dick Vomit: Something worth noting: when you authors get demoted you really shit up the Guest side of this place.
10/8/2004 anonymous: Ahahah! That was awesome.
10/8/2004 anonymous: I'm anonymous because I fear the wrath of the Authors.
10/8/2004 scoop: Fuck those gaybobs.
10/8/2004 scoop (2): This sucks too.
10/9/2004 Dylan Danko: well i'll be... Scoop, i owe you an apology.
10/9/2004 Dylan Danko: Disney, stop ripping off Scoop.
10/9/2004 anonymous: Hey, anon_b, you know the authors can see through the veil of anonymity, right?
10/9/2004 anonymous: Whatev. Rain your wrath.
10/10/2004 John Slocum: By the way Disney, props for 'Jerez'!
01/8/2005 hagit mizrachy (5):
01/8/2005 Dylan Danko: Stop trying to make up for what you did yesterday, Hagit.
01/8/2005 The Rid: This is still effin' funny.