Sunday, June 21, 2009

Comic 599: Begrudgingly Enjoyed

wait what
Finally, finally, a half-decent comic. The road has been long and the enemies have been fierce, but we have finally found ourselves with an xkcd that, by current standards, is not terrible.

I can't complain about the art thanks to wacky colored-in meteor panel 1. I can't complain that the joke is old (though the concept, 'monumental moment in human history spent on nerd thing' is old) though apparently I'm the only one who saw it comic. I guessed it was an Erdos thing at the 7th panel, but I guess I am just a nerd like that. It's an obscure joke, yes, but obscure at least differently from how most of his stupid references are. Sure, most readers still probably won't get it, but at least it's something new.

Of course, a nitpicker might say (not that I would, but someone might) that an Erdos number is clearly based on co-authoring a paper with Mr. Erdos, not based on him signing the same friggin piece of paper. That's obviously cheating; why not just get him (while he was alive, of course) to write you a check, then write your name on it?

Oh and I've said this before but just to be clear: Just putting a beret on a stick figure is not enough to make him a recurring character. He has to have some amount of character, he has to be in some way consistent from time to time. Mr. Beret utterly fails this test.


Why am I so sure that the next comic will make me angry as usual? I don't know. Actually, I'm posting this after midnight so I can just go check! Hey, it's going to be 600! Hope it's not self-congratulatory, as he does not deserve that.
....
....
....
Yeah we're going to have to have some talking to do about this one.

78 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What. The. Fuck.

    He spent his 600th comic on YET ANOTHER sex joke? And this one by far the most disturbing of them all? I really, REALLY hope this is a prank, and that when I wake up tomorrow and check the site again it will be a multi-line, amazingly-drawn masterpiece of humor, which will vindicate the last several hundred comics. But I am all too certain that this piece of shit will still be here in 8 hours, and in 80, and onwards, as if to proclaim: Randall Munroe needs to get a fucking girlfriend.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And again, because honestly one comment cannot even begin to contain my disgust at being forced to picture (and by a supposedly-intellectual comic!) the image of a vibrator stuck in a fleshlight, and particularly imagining it on the *ahem* artist's mantelpiece:

    Randall Munroe, WHAT. THE. FUCK. Die in a fire.

    Does anyone else think that maybe he reads this site daily and the last two weeks have just been him fucking with us?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Furl, all i could think about when i read comic 600 was how creepy randle is. Like ok, sex with robots, thats really wierd because of how srs he apparently takes it. It is not that hard to talk to people, at least not as difficult as it is to build a human analog. This HAS to be a joke/troll comic. Otherwise its just too creepy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I liked 599 a lot. Too bad he wasted 600 on something terrible.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I find it fitting that a landmark comic like 600 is complete trash.

    ReplyDelete
  7. GAH! What is it with all the "creepy" comments? It's not a very funny joke in 600--if indeed it can be called a joke at all--but TAHT is where the comic fails. Not in the alleged "creepiness." I don't even see how it could be creepy. Is sex so taboo that it's creepy even when there are no people--no living beings, even--involved?

    The idea that a male sex toy and a female one would naturally interlock similarly to human intercourse (whether those toys are the props listed in the alt-text or the full automations presented in the comic proper) is obvious, juvenile, and boring. But it's not creepy! Creepy is when something causes your spine to tingle in fear--is that honestly a reaction you had to this comic?

    The concept is the opposite of creepy, or indeed any other reaction--it evokes no emotion whatsoever, save perhaps dissapointment. It reminds me of something middle-schoolers on a field trip might find hilarious, but which would be met dismissive grunts by anyone over the age of twelve. And even the middle-schoolers would probably only laugh with the actual props present for the demonstration.

    So 600 is sad, and quite the letdown after the well-done 599, but PLEASE stop calling it creepy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, I was entertained that he decided to follow-up on the issue of sex-crazed robots. Logical conclusion, almost. Their manufacturer is in for a world of legal troubles, though...

    I thought the fleshlight/vibrator analogy was a bit too easy, though the notion of the combination as a mantelpiece partially ameliorates this. Weren't we just discussing the humor value of authenticity?

    Of course, if one views it as creepy, authenticity only makes it more creepy. I'm somewhat jaded on that dimension, it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I thought the alt text was kind of funny, because I think Randall would be the kind of guy with a vibrator in a fleshlight as a mantlepiece.

    ReplyDelete
  10. XKCD: a comic of sex, sex, sex, and old memes.

    I'd say he needs to get laid, but that would require some poor woman to have sex with him.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Challenge: Find the last time Randall had a week of comics without mentioning sex.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The return of robotgirlfriend brings up a question was Maegen always a robot? That would explain a lot...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Obviously a website like this lives and dies on criticism, it's nice to see that you're good at being ridiculous. I think every webcomic has this person, every sizable one at least.

    But, because it'd gnaw at me otherwise, examining something so closely obviously shows cracks. Expecting more from a frequently updated stick figure based comic is silly, obviously. I mean, we all know this. Just let me get it out so I can sleep at night having made sure.

    ReplyDelete
  14. On #599: I agree with Carl.

    On #600: What a worthless piece of shit. And his comic's really bad too.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Looking forward to your rant on Wednesday Carl, hopefully it will contain levels of rage worthy of sidebar-inclusion.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Gentlemen, I do believe it's time to carry out the final solution.
    It's time to kill Randall Munroe. Preferably with some sort of maniacal sexbot.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 600 - Two people meet. The first thing they do: Fuck in public.

    Randall, you are disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I can't complain about the art thanks to wacky colored-in meteor panel 1. I can't complain that the joke is old (though the concept, 'monumental moment in human history spent on nerd thing' is old) though apparently I'm the only one who saw it comic.

    also hey carl um both i and someone else in the comments section pointed it out, as well as an earlier instance of it in like the low 100s

    ReplyDelete
  20. I kinda liked this one; I think it's my favourite xkcd for quite some time. The artwork in panel 1 was pretty cool, and I liked the Erdos joke, mainly because I wish I had an Erdos number myself.

    600 sucks though, yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 600 isn't creepy, but man does it suck. Randall: If you have to do sex jokes, at least make them good sex jokes. It's not like it's that hard to get a laugh out of penis humor.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The reason I think #600 is so creepy is because of the mantlepiece comment. It just squicks me out that someone would advertise having fleshligh+dildo intercourse as a centrally displayed piece of "artwork." I don't think it would have been as bad if the caption was different.

    ReplyDelete
  23. xkcd: A webcomic of creepiness, sex, nerd-culture references, and Megan.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 600 made me sad a little. =( What the hell with all the sex obsession? This was supposed to be a nerd comic by a nerd for nerds. Last time I checked, nerds mostly talked about space elevators, not sex. I mean, yeah, seems part of being a nerd is a deficiency of the latter, but dude! Since when are we obsessed with it like a bunch of retarded 13 year olds?

    I agree with above anonymous about why it's creepy. While I do recall being amused at absurdist approaches to sex in similar vein (ooh you can use interlocking hermaphrodites like lego blocks!) somehow Randall's joke is just... Creepy. Granted, my example does creep me out a little too. I guess ignoring the sex in sex and talking about other aspects of it is what's so hilarious, because it's rare for people to avoid being totally focused on that bit of sex which deals with... You know. If so, Randy kinda failed because by the time he gets to the "hey look I'm talking about sex BUT pretend I don't have any interest in participating in it myself!" bit, he's already demonstrated a pathetic inability to not be obsessed by it.

    Reminds me of an OCD example, in fact. Speaking of which, why isn't "OMG BUTTSECKZ LOL" a repeat offender yet?
    I agree with above anonymous about why it's creepy. While I do recall being amused at absurdist approaches to sex in similar vein (ooh you can use interlocking hermaphrodites like lego blocks!) somehow Randall's joke is just... Creepy. Granted, my example does creep me out a little too. I guess ignoring the sex in sex and talking about other aspects of it is what's so hilarious, because it's rare for people to avoid being totally focused on that bit of sex which deals with... You know. If so, Randy kinda failed because by the time he gets to the "hey look I'm talking about sex BUT pretend I don't have any interest in participating in it myself!" bit, he's already demonstrated a pathetic inability to not be obsessed by it.

    Reminds me of an OCD example, in fact. Speaking of which, why isn't "OMG BUTTSECKZ LOL" a repeat offender yet?

    ReplyDelete
  25. By the way, Generic Geek did give me a very scary idea. So the girl sexbot looks like Megan, right? And Megan has long been indifferent to Randall's infatuation? And how's he get the idea of writing about sexbots, anyway, right?

    Or did he... Was he... Fantasizing about making a Megan-bot?

    Creepy enough for you, Chris?

    ReplyDelete
  26. 600? Jesus what a slap in the fucking face to his fans.

    Where's the epic 20 panel math or sarcasm cartoon? I knocked on the erdos one pretty hard, but man at least he tried with that.

    This is a stupid continuation of a cartoon that failed. And the only joke here is that two android's are having sex with each other. Because they're sex bots.

    I feel this to be a slow painful death for xkcd throughout the 600s.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Actually you guys, this one is not as creepy as many recent ones, and its not as bad as I thought it would be when I saw the title show up on my RSS feed.

    It's still horrible, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I'm sort of wondering now whether Randall is REALLY just fucking around with this site; it's not possible for him to unwittingly make a comic you genuinely enjoy (and which, interestingly, I didn't find *that* amusing) and immediately follow it up with a piece of trash like that. Oh, yeah, also it should be said that this is NOT the 600th comic, because comic 404 didn't exist, and yeah, there are people in the forums stating that VERY loudly and self-importantly because it obviouslt means a lot (roll-eyes).

    I agree, though, with the comment that said this is not "creepy". It's just bad. xkcd recently has been making me sick of sex. I mean, how is that even possible??

    ReplyDelete
  29. The sexbot Meagen theory could explain how Meagen went from the one girl who's weird to a character who's only used for sex and relationship angst fodder. Something is going wrong with her programing...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actual comment for 599:

    I didn't get it. I looked it up, and I still didn't think it was funny.

    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 599 is much better-done than most of his stuff lately, now that I get the joke.

    ReplyDelete
  32. By the way, I've caught Randall RED-HANDED -If only I had taken a screencap as proof!- but he fucked up the spelling of the guy's name. See, in the original version he posted, he had scribbled it as "Erdös", and has since edited it to read as the correct "Erdős". Nitpicky, perhaps, but clearly he cared enough to silently fix it!

    ReplyDelete
  33. The thing is, I didn't find 599 that funny. The jokes is pretty lame to me. But the joke is at least in the vein of what xkcd is supposed to be about. And I like the art. 599 would probably fit reasonably well in the 200s, and that's a compliment.

    Meanwhile, I actually laughed at 600. Laughed more than I have at an xkcd in a long while. Not about the strip, but it made me laugh that this is what Randall came up with following what I thought was a more traditional 599. This is horrible. Absolutely terrible.

    It's not especially worse than the other lame sex joke strips we've seen the past few weeks, but after following a reasonable xkcd for once, it just highlights the disparity.

    I genuinely question how Randall can keep pumping strips like this out. He has to know they're crap and not the kind of strips xkcd is supposed to be about. At least with say CAD, there's a good reason the author makes terrible strips and doesn't seem to care, namely that Buckley is a horrible person. So what's the deal here?

    ReplyDelete
  34. On an unrelated note:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqEF9il53JM

    This is what the xkcd forums are like in real life. Just look at these sycophants eating up Randall's every word. Ugh.

    ReplyDelete
  35. @John: my god, i couldn't even make it through that 2 minute video clip. the classic geek laughter that seems so forced, and the guys wearing the black fedoras.

    and lol @ buckley being a horrible person. just curious how you know that.

    ReplyDelete
  36. That's common knowledge, dawg. Look it up.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Since Randall seems fascinated with the act of coitus lately, allow me to explain this comic using a suitable analogy:

    599 is like bad sex - too much build-up for an unsatisfying release.

    I hated this comic, and this is coming form someone who has, on multiple occasions, told people that Natalie Portman's hotness is enhanced by the fact that she has an Erdős-Bacon number (though I'm sure some Anon will probably claim that I still wasn't part of the "target audience" and that's why I didn't like the joke).

    This is just another example of a random nerdy reference that's not an actual joke. Just because it's a more obscure reference, and isn't a meme, doesn't mean it's not a shitty "ha ha, I know something nerdy" comic that's more about pandering to a specific subset of xkcd readers than actually crafting a joke. The timing is horrific, and there punchline is more like a girly-slap-line.

    I think the comic would be funnier if there were a few more panels after the last one where Erdős zombie just stares at the guy, and then the final panel is him eating the guy's brain. You know, because that's what zombies do (I'll admit, this idea seemed much better in my head than it does on paper).

    Also, 600: Robot sex is not inherently funny. A dildo in a fleshlight is similarly not funny. It's not really that creepy (unless Randall actually has that on mantle, and then it's super wierd). It's just not funny. It's kind of retarded.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You know, I just realized, its probably not just lately he's been fascinated with it. He owns http://cu.nniling.us which be bought at the infancy of xkcd as a traffic boost to his site (which just redirects to xkcd.com). Who knows whats going on over there. Weird though.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "I didn't get it. I looked it up, and I still didn't think it was funny."

    Same.

    @Lint of Death:

    It originally said "cemetary," but was similarly ninja'd to the correct spelling. RNAE.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Of course, there's the joke that Hank Aaron has Erdos number 1 since they both signed the same baseball at an honorary doctorate ceremony...

    My favorite part of this: originally, I remember Erdos being spelled with just an umlaut over the "o." Apparently the forums got riled up around this, and Randall actually went back and changed it. It's a webcomic, Munroe, not Knuth's AoCP. It doesn't have to be perfect in every way.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Blah, Lint of Death beat me, but I still hope it's because nitpicky fans bitched Randall out.

    Also, comic 600 bluhhhh. At least we haven't seen any Firefly references since the Storyline of Doom

    ReplyDelete
  42. @ Mike G

    The only stories I've ever heard about Buckley have been terrible ones. Such stories are probably easily found on Google if you're that interested.

    @ poore

    I've found that true for basically xkcd as a whole, namely references to something nerdy being tantamount to a joke. But I'll take that any day to a strip like 600.

    Also, I think 599 would have been legitimitely funny if it had the guy getting his brains eaten instead at the end.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Cuddlefish PrimeJune 22, 2009 at 9:03 AM

    Okay so I read #600 last night when I was really tired and had been drinking, and I thought it was fairly (but not unusually) bad. Now that I've read it again after a good night's sleep, I can honestly say it's one of the worst xkcds in recent memory, maybe of all time. I'd go so far as to say it's even worse than "Mr. Hat Meets Guy With Two Hats And Then Starts Moonwalking Or Something."

    FUCK YOU RANDALL; and Carl, I hope to see a new "angriest rants" candidate out of this one.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Seriously? I thought "oh, that's not particuarly funny". I didn't die. This certainly isn't the worst ever. It's just bland, but inoffensively so.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Cuddlefish PrimeJune 22, 2009 at 9:33 AM

    Bah, I dunno. Leave me alone. You kids get off my lawn. >:|

    ReplyDelete
  46. It may not really be "cheating" to get Erdos to sign a paper. Sad to say, but there are "authors" on papers whose main contribution is to sign their name to the article's submission form. Which is sufficient to be officially a co-author.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I would like to point out, however, that "...Huh" really doesn't fit there at all. It's just stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  48. OK, I'm falling for the 'early discussion' bait, but I thought 600 was just so dull and poorly executed that it doesn't merit strong feelings. Maybe that just means I'm graduating from xkcdsucks U, with a phD in 'not caring about the comic at all anymore'.

    ReplyDelete
  49. People should not care about more stuff. Ain't nothing on this Earth worth getting bothered about, 'cept maybe cake.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Technically, comic 600 is only the 599th, since there was no 404 because he is OMG SO ZANY, but he wasn't nerdy enough to start them at 0.

    So he still has a chance to do something special for his 600th comic, but I'm not holding my breath.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Also technically Erdős doesn't have an umlaut over the o but some weird Hungarian diacritic which looks sort of umlauty but isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I liked 599. Legitimately. Not just in comparison to the recent horrible ones; I thought it was better than a lot of the old ones as well. The jokoe actually surprised me (that's never, ever happened in an xkcd before) and the set-up was just ridiculous enough. I don't know why I thought it was so funny, since some people above seem to think it's just as bad as 600, but I did.

    On the other hand, 600, of course, was probably the worst one I've ever read.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Wow. Did you actually look at the comic? In the panel where he is scribbling, he is obviously authoring a paper. Then, a bunch of people add their names as coauthors(cheating, sure, but they're still technically coauthors). Then, he gets Erdos to sign his name as a coauthor as well. If he signed as a coauthor of the paper, stick figure man and everyone else would have an Erdos number of 1. Was that so hard? You really show how obtuse you are when you don't understand the comic. This takes away from your credibility as a critic and makes you look like a fucking idiot.

    As I've said before(anonymously), stop reaching, there is plenty of material you can safely criticize without making yourself look clueless.

    ReplyDelete
  54. ABOOHOOHOO LEAVE RANDALL ALONE!

    ReplyDelete
  55. Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait....

    I get the whole Erdos number thing, but doesn't anyone else feel like this is just another comic where Randall finds a way to get an autograph from someone famous? This one seems like it's just another one of those fanfic comics about him and celebrities.

    ReplyDelete
  56. He's not "authoring a paper" if all he's doing is writing down random math-esque shit. Do you actually know what a math paper is?

    You really show how obtuse you are when you don't understand the comic. This takes away from your credibility as a critic and makes you look like a fucking idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Guys guys guys guys GUYS GUYS GUYS

    I watched the Randy video and he's not... bad looking. by which I mean I HATE MYSELF. I AM FILLED WITH SELF LOATHING.

    ReplyDelete
  58. There needs to be a repeat offenders category for things like 600.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I didn't get the impression at all that he was "writing down random math-esque shit" from the comic. There is limited space in a panel; the stuff that he's writing down is meant to make the reader realize "Oh, it has to do with math".

    ReplyDelete
  60. @Malethoth K.

    "if all he's doing is writing down random math-esque shit"

    Jesus, that's a big if. Do you actually know what a comic is? All we see are a few math-esque things that REPRESENT an entire paper. One can then look back afterwards and realize that a paper was written and decide if they think this is funny. See, it's a device commonly used by writers because it would be nearly impossible to put an entire math paper in the comic, let alone one panel. Blame it on the medium. But, conveying the idea is sufficient to understanding the joke.

    Unfortunately, neither you nor Carl seem to understand that.

    Anon 11:53

    ReplyDelete
  61. malethoth, breathe, BREATHE. i met him at a comic festival here like 3 weeks ago. still a weird dude.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Breathe, breathe in the air
    Don't be afraid to care


    or not care, as I said earlier.

    ReplyDelete
  63. @Ann Apolis:

    Peddle your peace-loving, communist bullshit somewhere else, hippie. If we all had the "fuck it - let people suck if they want to" attitude, we'd never progress as a species. You can take your laid-back attitude and cram up your laid-back ass.

    </sarcasm>

    Seriously, though. If we enjoy "worrying" about the comic, shouldn't you take your own advice and leave us alone to bitch? I mean, if Randy's just doing his thing because he enjoys it, then why can't we just do our thing because we enjoy it? That goes for all you Anonymous concerned-trolls out there - I'm tired of your self-righteous double standards, and you can all blow me if you think your carefully-worded reposts of the same tired, self-indulgent bullshit are falling on anything other than deaf ears.

    To paraphrase South Park: "Either everything's okay, or nothing is." Suck my left nut, Cuddlefish.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Only one criticism: for some reason, in "...double standards, and you can all blow me if you think your...", I can't read "blow me" as anything but the 1920s British foppy expression of mild surprise. "Well, blow me, Clarence! I thought Aunt Jessie said she was engaged to the fellow!"

    (I am P. G. Wodehouse and I claim my five pounds.)

    CAPTCHA: "proingab". This sounds painful.

    ReplyDelete
  65. It may not really be "cheating" to get Erdos to sign a paper. Sad to say, but there are "authors" on papers whose main contribution is to sign their name to the article's submission form. Which is sufficient to be officially a co-author.

    Very true. One of the seminal papers on Big Bang theory was written by physicists Ralph Alpher and George Gamow, who then got their friend Hans Bethe to sign it as a joke.

    From now on, every time I write a paper I will ask my co-authors for their Erdos numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Comic JK: You can't have their Erdos numbers! You can only have their Erdos numbers plus one!

    ReplyDelete
  67. @11:53 Anonymous: what you fail to recognise is the fact that
    a) Carl did get the joke
    b) Lots of other people got the joke
    c) Most people thought the comic was at the very least decent (and even good)
    d) You're a dick.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Crandall Munwheeler is trolling us with sex jokes again...

    ReplyDelete
  69. It's Crandarl Munwheelroe actually

    ReplyDelete
  70. (or Crandarl Z. Munwheelroe I guess. Crandy for short)

    ReplyDelete
  71. Cuddlefish PrimeJune 22, 2009 at 5:25 PM

    "I get the whole Erdos number thing, but doesn't anyone else feel like this is just another comic where Randall finds a way to get an autograph from someone famous? This one seems like it's just another one of those fanfic comics about him and celebrities."

    It's pretty hard to read it that way, considering

    a) Dude's been dead for 12 years
    b) Most non-mathematicians have never heard of him
    c) The joke was a reference to a pre-existing concept. Most of the other "life-imitates-xkcd" moments have been based on things he made up out of whole cloth: Richard Stallman's katana, Cory Doctorow's hot-air balloon, etc. The most recent and egregious example, the Race series, would have been the same way if anything had come of it (as Randall obviously hoped it would).

    ReplyDelete
  72. Excuse ME for expecting Randall to be able to at least half-ass an actual math paper. At least give a thesis statement or a title or anything beyond half-baked high school algebra problems.

    Yes, both "log(n)" and Paul Erdos have to do with math. No, a few random scribbles connecting the two do not equal a math paper.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Hey Malethoth, remember you are talking about a LAZY dude, that already was able to misrepresent /b/ as twitter. Perfectly explainable, not in any way justifiable.

    ReplyDelete
  74. That description satisfies me, Cuddlefish 5:52.

    ReplyDelete
  75. @Sam Horn

    a) I know Carl got the joke, I never said he didn't.
    b) I never said anything about anyone except Carl and Malethoth K.
    c) I never said anything about the quality of the comic.
    d) You don't have reasoning skills.

    Seriously, do you people* try to eat pictures of food you see in magazines?

    Malethoth still fails to understand a part(even an extremely small part) can represent a whole. If you were to replace the "authoring" panel with a panel depicting a thesis statement or title, the quality of the joke would remain unchanged. The comic's success or failure does not depend on an accurate representation of a math paper. But, ultimately, I don't fucking care. I originally posted to tell Carl that he is an idiot because he thought they were just writing their names on a piece of paper. That interpretation does not make sense when the "authoring" panel is taken into account. Excuse ME for thinking that Carl actually reads and understands the comic before posting. I could not care less as to how well Randall represents a math paper, as it only matters that he represents it somehow. And he clearly did represent it here. Carl was wrong.

    I suppose I'm still Anon 11:53.

    * - to clarify for Sam Horn, "you people" refers to Carl, Malethoth K., and Sam Horn

    ReplyDelete
  76. http://www.xkcd.com/403/ also references Erdos Numbers (in the title text).

    TRiG.

    ReplyDelete
  77. When is the internet going to anonymously author the Book of Anon? I like the timestamping in replies, but it also seems like you're quoting 4chan scripture.

    I'm guessing Jesus is a meme that everyone kills but it becomes funny after 3 days of being ignored?

    ReplyDelete