home authors guest shorts graphical shorts


"Can't we try to get along? Don't we have things in common that we should focus on? If any of you have issues that you think we should address, well I'm happy to listen. I'm always happy to listen."


"MEEWAAAHHH! MEEWAAHHH!" went the Giraffe.

"RAKKA-RAKKA, RAKKA-RAKKA!" went the Cockatiel.

"Bitch! Gimme ma money!" went the Ape.

"HOORAAMOO-MOO!" went the Camel.

"Shut up you varking Shvartze!," went the Tucan.


"Hey Yankee Sol-ja! Fie dolla! Sucky-sucky!" went the animal commonly associated with gooks.

Date Written: March 07, 2004
Author: Dylan Danko
Average Vote: 3.2222

03/11/2004 qualcomm: hooray, a new low for acme!
03/11/2004 Jon Matza: Is Feldspar talking quality or morality here?
03/11/2004 qualcomm: not sure this adds lustre
03/11/2004 Craig Lewis (3): I suppose it's true that this short kinda sucks -- pretty damn lowbrow -- but did laugh a few times: I liked the ridiculous animal sounds (especially "RAKKA-RAKKA!"), and the "Yankee Sol-ja" thing cracked me up.
03/11/2004 anonymous: If you laughed a few times it should be worth more than 3 stars. Surely the short doesn't suck simply because it's lowbrow.
03/11/2004 Craig Lewis: Dude: don't whinge at me. At least I dignified your work with a vote and some compliments! You should be giving stick to Feldspar and the rest of the "Authors."
03/11/2004 Craig Lewis: P.S. You're a racist. I'm calling Sharpton.
03/11/2004 anonymous: Vote from the heart, brother, and the mind will follow.
03/11/2004 qualcomm: what animal is commonly associated with gooks? and is the toucan really commonly associated with mockeys? what the hell?
03/11/2004 scoop: And what mysterious and handsome animlal is assocaited with people of asian-fusion persuasion?
03/11/2004 scoop: Dear Author: I don't vote with my heart and mind. I rely on the rigors of science, and I haven't gottne the tests back from the lab. Its run by a bunch of lazy mexicans, whose totem animal I believe are "knife-fighters."
03/11/2004 Ewan Snow: Yeah, author, you should thank Lewis for dignifying your short. Lewis, they didn't vote because they didn't like it (didn't laugh) but didn't feel like giving it a crappy vote (yet?). You laughed more than once and still gave it a crappy vote. How many times do you have to laugh at a short to give it more than three stars? What percentage of shorts do you laugh out loud at? Though as I may have mentioned I think you’re a douche bag, I’m asking these questions in earnest and in no way trying to pick a fight. Personally, I laugh out loud at maybe one in every fifteen or twenty shorts. Any short I laugh at several times is a strong candidate for a five in my book, and certainly earns a four. Do you feel a short not only has to keep you laughing, but also must be highbrow to earn more than a three? Why you laughed several times at this one is another question, but I think we’ve been over that...
03/11/2004 anonymous: I don't care what you cunts think, this one is kinda funny.
03/11/2004 Craig Lewis: Feldspar: Tonkin Snub-Nosed Langur?
03/11/2004 qualcomm: i don't think it's that bad. but i can feel my brain being manipulated by an extremely heavy hand while i read this, and that bothers me. also, of course, it rips off this one.
03/11/2004 scoop: The sun is shining, the birds are singing, gravity is working and Feldspar's crying rip-off.
03/11/2004 Craig Lewis: Snow: you're really, really, really boring. I'm completely uninterested in continuing our fight, and in no way intended to provoke any kind of debate about aesthetics with my comments. (If you truly weren't interested in picking a fight, you probably wouldn't have called me a douche bag.) I was merely joking around with the author, with whom I'd been speaking on the phone a couple of minutes before posting. Obviously, I don't have any highbrow/lowbrow litmus test, and think such distinctions are bullshit in the first place. To be fair, I should have said "3.5"; it would be nice if Disney could build in .5 voting capability.
03/11/2004 anonymous: Don't really understand the heavy hand comment, Jon.
03/11/2004 Ewan Snow: Oh you picked up on the douche bag thing? Can't get anything by you.
03/11/2004 qualcomm: author: serious?
03/11/2004 anonymous: yes
03/11/2004 qualcomm: i just meant that it's so blatantly inflammatory
03/11/2004 anonymous: Please read previous comment about heart and mind, Jon. Then flame my short. Just get it over with.
03/11/2004 qualcomm: yes, am trying to determine how i "feel"
03/11/2004 Benny Maniacs (4): What the fuck.
03/11/2004 anonymous: Thank you, good sir! Finally an honorable person steps up to the plate.
03/11/2004 Benny Maniacs: P.S. Due to the success of my cheap plea for sympathy, I am no longer resigning from acne, though I still hate you all and think you are morons.
03/11/2004 Ewan Snow (3): I thought the punch line was pretty funny, though not LOL funny, but up until then, I was thinking that I was really going to hate the short all around. Sorry, author. I do think Feldspar's question about the punch line is off base. The joke is more or less "whatever animal might be associated", not to say that there was a particular animal in mind. The reveal being that the previous ones were stereotypes as well. The problem was some weren’t (camel) and the others obviously were (ape). Or was this the point? Would it be better without the non-stereotype animals, the sea lion, giraffe, cockatiel and camel? Or would that make the whole thing completely obvious? I think it might be better actually, in classic joke form: example A (ape), example B (tucan), punch line. Three lines total. Or maybe you should rewrite it from the point of view of the zoo keeper and bring it back to next week's workshop. I dunno...
03/11/2004 Jon Matza (3): I'm not partial to this short. Too many sound effect-based gags these days for my taste. But that's just "me". I mean, that's who I am. For the record, I agree that a multiple-laugh short generally merits a four or better - but then again we all have our special voting systems, and who's to say that mine is the best or most accurate? You are.
03/11/2004 qualcomm: my question about the punchline was a pleasantry.
03/11/2004 Ewan Snow: Ah.
03/11/2004 qualcomm (5): the idea of this mediocrity getting a higher rating than my brilliant "Jibley" short really rankles my chancre. i mean, it totally cheeses my keyster. thing is, i kinda like said sensations!
03/11/2004 Ewan Snow: I wouldn’t want to bore you, Craig, so feel free to leave any time.
03/11/2004 scoop (2): Lab results are in!
03/11/2004 John Slocum (4): I liked the idea that some of the animals' languages we human readers could understand, and some we couldn't. Who knows what peoples could understand the ones that we couldn't. Are theses peoples from a different planet? Which system, galaxy, etc.? Very thought provoking short.
03/11/2004 Dylan Danko: Snow, your points are well taken. I considered just doing the stereotypes but thought that would be too obvious. Initially the short was just animals with very stupid and unrepresentative animal sounds responding to the (probably unfunny)zookeeper who thinks she can 'talk' to the animals. Yes the zookeeper is a she b/c obviously the ape is pimping her out, the jew is jealous and the gook, fearing the competition has to lower her prices.
03/11/2004 Mr. Pony (4): Scoop: Not all those of mixed European/Asian descent are the same animal! You, my friend, are a sleek and mighty tiger being ridden with a tiny saddle by an aardvark. I am a pig with tuna shoved up its butt.
03/11/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: Hey....I thought you were a pony, Mr. Pony! What's a girl to believe in anymore?
03/12/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum (1): I give one star for title.
03/12/2004 Ewan Snow: Ha!
03/12/2004 Dylan Danko: Jimson it was a loving tribute. Why do you always have to be so mean :(
03/12/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: You're right. I'm sorry.
03/12/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: I think I'm feeling a lot of pent-up anger due to acme shorts. I don't always feel that I'm in a safe place here. I don't say mean things about your shorts to be mean. I say them because I feel comfortable with you. I love you, Danko.
03/12/2004 Mr. Pony: Civilization: COMING SOON!!
03/12/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: I'm afraid that comment came off a little more earnest than I'd intended. But it's essentially true, I do love you , Danko.
03/12/2004 Dylan Danko: Aww shucks! I expect you to inflate the value of my next crappy short though.
03/12/2004 Jimson S. Sorghum: kay.