Saturday, April 3, 2010

You Wouldn't Admit It Even If You Did Like One!

This one will be brief, because fuck you.

One of the common cuddlefish claims is that we wouldn't admit to liking an XKCD even if it was funny. It varies from "you wouldn't notice even if one was funny," which is fairly uncommon (because most fanboys believe that all XKCD is funny, so they inherently believe we're in denial) to "you'd just lie about it if you liked one."

There's one problem with this: we admit to liking them all the time. It's certainly not frequent (there is a reason we have a hate blog for XKCD, after all), but there are times when there is one that we think is at least moderately okay. I've done it, Carl has done it, most people who comment here regularly have done it.

The "you wouldn't notice" one deals with the problems of bias &c, which I've already written about elsewhere, but, again: if we like some of them clearly that's not true, now is it?

Here's a thought to leave you with: when XKCD was still good, it could have made a comic and most of us here would agree that this one was funny. Now it will get at best a handful of people to say they liked it.

123 comments:

  1. Boring rant. Previous one is pretty dull too. I guess you must really need the writing practice? You said your motivations for posting here were fun and practice, and I can't imagine that you had any fun writing this tripe.

    I think XKCD is crap too, but at least it allows itself the freedom to treat more than one topic.

    ReplyDelete
  2. why should the quality of someone's work affect how much fun they have writing it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I will admit, though, that there is also a sense of audience loyalty that keeps one blogging on a high-traffic blog such as this one. it is why you make shitty short posts like this one in five minutes!

    the original just had like five words, but I decided that would just be annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think there's maybe like one "cuddlefish" here that's trolling you guys, and that's why there are so many ridiculous claims which you keep writing essays about.

    PS At first it looked like you're a pretty cool guy in that picture. But I zoomed in and it scares me now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. so you're saying that large masses of people, when presented with a blog which features prominently in google's search results and gets 1000+ hits/day, are not prone to making stupid, predictable arguments?

    ReplyDelete
  6. also are you the one cuddlefish that's trolling us, or are you a different one?

    ReplyDelete
  7. This doesn't really add anything that "You're Just Biased" already covered, and the final thought is just an inverted Appeal to Popularity.

    What I think would be interesting to refute is the false dichotomy several users (like the first Anon) have tried to bring up, that you're doing something of little overall worth and enjoyment because you're constraining yourself to a treatment on a subject you don't like.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yeah, it would be interesting, AKA..... if he hadn't already covered it in his rants anyway, of "No One Is Forcing Yiou To Read XKCD" and "Don't You Have Anything Better To Do With Your Time"

    And really, there's only so many times one can link the same thing over and over before they lose hope for humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I really liked the woodpecker one

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Yeah, it would be interesting, AKA..... if he hadn't already covered it in his rants anyway, of 'No One Is Forcing Yiou To Read XKCD' and 'Don't You Have Anything Better To Do With Your Time'"

    He *ever so vaguely* touched on it in the first rant, and the second rant worked from the premise that *all* criticism leveled at XKCD was *pointless*, which is different.

    I stand by my assertion.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think I've ever seen either of those complaints ever.

    What was the point of this rant?
    Seriously?

    ReplyDelete
  12. These complaints show up pretty frequently in this blog's comments. It's cool if you don't read any of the comments, but we would appreciate it if you didn't act like you know what's going on despite never paying attention.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is this about my post in the last thread? You're being silly.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Complaints like "You're biased" and "You just look for things to hate" pop up all the time, but things like "You wouldn't admit it even if you did like it" barely ever pops up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. irt. AKA The Schust:

    "What I think would be interesting to refute is the false dichotomy several users (like the first Anon) have tried to bring up, that you're doing something of little overall worth and enjoyment because you're constraining yourself to a treatment on a subject you don't like."

    The enormous (still, I guess) audience of stuff like Zero Punctuation, or RedLetterMedia's reviews of The Phantom Menace etc, suggests that plenty of people do find enjoyment seeing someone tear something else to shreds.

    So I guess that's all the refutation needed: it is possible to make entertaining/interesting/relevant material that many other people will seek out, even when harping on stuff you hate.

    It even has its TVTropes page.

    And that's not even going into any "objective worth" beyond entertainment value (and that is supposed to not be enough?!) things like ZP, RLM or this very blog may have, in terms of analysing stuff that is bad and pointing out why.

    Finally, there really is no contradiction in a critic enjoying to bash something they don't like.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Exactly, it's possible to enjoy it, therefore it's not a contradiction. But HOW CAN THIS BE? It's such a paradox. If only someone would, you know, explain it to me. *cough*

    ReplyDelete
  17. "I don't think I've ever seen either of those complaints ever.

    What was the point of this rant?
    Seriously?"

    I made it literally ten minutes after someone posted this exact complaint on a recent thread.

    ReplyDelete
  18. schust are you suggesting I should write a rant about how it is possible to enjoy reading criticism? I don't want to overlap too much with earlier things.

    ReplyDelete
  19. rob write a rant about how much you like dongs

    ReplyDelete
  20. every rant I write is about how much I like dongs

    ReplyDelete
  21. "He that writes may be considered as a kind of general challenger, whom every one has a right to attack; since he quits the common rank of life, steps forward beyond the lists, and offers his merit to the public judgement. To commence author is to claim praise, and no man can justly aspire to honour, but at the hazard of disgrace."
    -Samuel Johnson

    ReplyDelete
  22. I guess that Johnson quote would have been more apropos on the "No one has the right not to be offended" post. Whoops.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hell, I just had someone I know in RL make this argument to me not too long ago. What would really be nice is a little sidebar link to the list of favorites, along with any strips that were said to be okay. Having to scan through the archives trying to remember where those top ten XKCD's were was annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  24. You are twisted, therefore you will not make a very good candle.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I based my assertion on the recent posts where it looks like you are trying too hard to find little things to overreact to in his comics, like the artwork.

    Randall is trying too hard to be funny.
    You are trying too hard to be funny.
    You are Randall Munroe.
    xkcdsuckssuckssucks.blogspot

    ReplyDelete
  26. and your assertion is clearly and demonstrably false.

    ReplyDelete
  27. But surely you are overreacting. No one gets that mad over the quality of a multi-panel tri-weekly comic with stick figure characters.

    cyanideandhappinesssucks.blogspot

    ReplyDelete
  28. http://xkcdsucks.blogspot.com/2010/01/dont-you-have-anything-better-to-do.html

    ReplyDelete
  29. That isn't the argument I'm attempting to make at all.

    ReplyDelete
  30. and apparently you aren't literate, because it addresses your concerns. read it again. keep reading until you get it. if you never get it, don't give up! don't sleep or eat or drink until you do.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Oh, I understand what you think I'm arguing now. That isn't what I meant at all. I don't mean that you're putting a lot of time and effort into this blog. I mean that you are taking minuscule, unimportant aspects of xkcd that don't necessitate a lengthy emotional rant and doing just that with them.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand now, and don't care enough to read it again.

    ReplyDelete
  33. then perhaps you should stop bitching

    ReplyDelete
  34. Sorry, I live under a bridge.

    ReplyDelete
  35. http://lol.i.trollyou.com/

    ReplyDelete
  36. so um guys

    I think you're doing a Good Thing here but you're kinda dancing around a HUUUUGE elephant in the room and I thought considering how critical you are of XKCD you'd notice it.

    i.e. Randall Munroe is totally a pedophile.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Randall is trying too hard to be funny.
    You are trying too hard to be funny.
    You are Randall Munroe."

    Not a valid syllogism.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thanks, I don't think anyone would've noticed that wasn't legitimate until you pointed out.

    But can you explain why it's not a valid syllogism?

    Distribution of terms. The middle term, "trying too hard to be funny", is the term shared between the major and minor premises, and according to Irving Copi and Carl Cohen a valid syllogism must have its middle term distributed in at least one premise.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Let me restate what you said so the person it was directed at can actually understand it: just because two persons have a similar quality does not make them identical.

    It'd be like me saying "water is a liquid, soda is a liquid, therefore water is soda."

    ReplyDelete
  40. Please make it even more obvious why that syllogism is invalid, I don't think any of us quite get it yet.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Mal, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. in the event you are, let me remind you that you are suggesting that the commenters here are remotely intelligent and capable of grasping basic logic.

    ReplyDelete
  42. NP: Amon Amarth - "3. Asator" - [(2006) With Oden On Our Side] - (00:21/03:04)
    this song is pretty good, i don't like a whole lot of Amon Amarth but i like this song

    ReplyDelete
  43. Meh it's not really any better than most Amon Amarth (which I generally consider decent to meh, tolerable if it's on at a party or something but nothing I'd ever have in my playlist) I guess it just fits your style preference a bit more.

    Mal we should talk about metal it would give me great erections.

    ReplyDelete
  44. So when are you gonna make one for "Your rants SUCK you attention-whoring loser?"

    Cause honestly, that seems to be most popular complaint around here lately, for some reason :)

    ReplyDelete
  45. So when are you gonna make one of these for "Your rants SUCK, you attention-whoring loser" ?

    Cause that's the one that really seems to be the most popular complaint around here lately, for some reason :)

    ReplyDelete
  46. So about the new XKCD...

    -There was an earthquake in mexico today.
    -People were tweeting about it.
    -People ON TWITTER were saying "tweeting during an earthquake, whats wrong with you?"
    -Randall saw these tweets.
    -Put up a comic saying the exact same thing.
    -Tossed in some numbers and units to wow his fans.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Cause that's the one that really seems to be the most popular complaint around here lately, for some reason :)"

    I would hate to deprive you of your mindless trolling.

    ReplyDelete
  48. @ Anon 4:56

    Randall may be a lot of things but I don't think he's a pedo. You may be confusing him with Tim B^Uckley, who showed his penis to a 14 year old girl on the internet. Randall's just obsessed with Megan and there's really no reason to assume she's not around the same age as him.

    And anon 9:46 is pretty much spot-on. Today's comic doesn't have a joke, just "Yep, this is something that happened today."

    ReplyDelete
  49. At least the comic was about something that actually happened recently, instead of something that happened weeks or months ago.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Rob why are you in Mexico?

    ReplyDelete
  51. D-did you cause the earthquake?
    You know you're not supposed to jump.

    ReplyDelete
  52. (M is for Mason and 163 is the weight in lb he was born as)

    ReplyDelete
  53. Honestly Scott I just like "Asator" better because it's faster

    Latest comic is very informative, and I can't remember if he did a similar one about the CDC using facebook for epidemiological studies but yeah. It's just "What a neat phenomenon!"

    Which, okay, whatever, at least it's inoffensive.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Today's comic was factually accurate, made sense and had competent artwork. Now if only it had a joke.

    Nitpicking, "find shelter" is a strange phrase to use for earthquakes since you want to be outside when an earthquake hits.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Except for the fact that there are definitely members that never like any of them (I can't remember the name, but the member I remember claimed that looking at a girl's netbook on her lap was creepy and sexually deviant). Also, just because you occasionally like one doesn't mean you appreciate every one that is good. That said, recently they've been horrible non-jokes.

    ReplyDelete
  56. "Mal, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. in the event you are, let me remind you that you are suggesting that the commenters here are remotely intelligent and capable of grasping basic logic."

    While I applaud izam for trying to use a logical tool to make a point, he screwed it up so badly that I refuse to believe he's capable of understanding logic.

    "Also, just because you occasionally like one doesn't mean you appreciate every one that is good."

    No, but it is proof that he's open to the possibility that there can be good comics (even if the standard for which ones are good has been left purposefully nebulous).

    ReplyDelete
  57. "(I can't remember the name, but the member I remember claimed that looking at a girl's netbook on her lap was creepy and sexually deviant)."

    Fernie Canto?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Latest one reminds me of this:

    http://www.bash.org/?60469

    It's funny in a sort of observational standup way.

    ReplyDelete
  59. funny how you don't, oh, I don't know, provide any links to the times you "did" think it was funny. Almost like you couldn't find them, hmm...

    ReplyDelete
  60. Links or it didn't happen.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Latest strip is the best candidate for a picto-blog I've seen yet.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I'm willing to admit that I liked 723. I thought it was going to be some sort of picto-blog thing about waves and stuff, but then Randall totally surprised me by PUTTING IN A PUNCHLINE! I did not see that coming. The punchline was also amusing and not gross, which added further to my surprise.

    ReplyDelete
  63. CARL

    WHEN WILL WE SEE THE CONTEST FINALISTS

    ReplyDelete
  64. WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE

    ReplyDelete
  65. do your own fucking homework

    ReplyDelete
  66. '"(I can't remember the name, but the member I remember claimed that looking at a girl's netbook on her lap was creepy and sexually deviant)."

    Fernie Canto?'

    Yep, that was me alright -- though I only said that (okay, I truly threw a fit) because I *do* live in a place where, if you hear something like that in a bus or a train, you're really fucked.

    I was going to say that today's comic is, at least, sort of clever. It drives home the absurds of "Twitter culture" without being obnoxious or stupid; and it's better for a comic to have no joke and be clever, than having no joke and being awfully dumb (722).

    ReplyDelete
  67. "Latest strip is the best candidate for a picto-blog I've seen yet."

    This. Still, it was in its pictobloggy way vaguely interesting, so?

    ReplyDelete
  68. it would have been a great pictoblag entry. it is the single most boring comic ever made.

    but at least Randy finally proves that he makes his comics the day of.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "funny how you don't, oh, I don't know, provide any links to the times you "did" think it was funny. Almost like you couldn't find them, hmm..."

    You don't actually read, do you? I bet you just pound a keyboard until something barely coherent shows up.

    ReplyDelete
  70. "Still, it was in its pictobloggy way vaguely interesting, so?"

    It certainly was.

    CAPTCHA: trama, much like what happened to Baja California.

    ReplyDelete
  71. still not seeing any links to these supposed comics you liked...

    ReplyDelete
  72. Um rob when you linked to izam, i really don't understand what the hell you meant. could you like, oh i dunno, explain maybe? So that, you know, izam can get your point? Maybe?

    Also yeah my complaint is also "Rob, you fucking whiny loser, go fuck a gay cat then photoshop abs onto your Facebook picture. Then destroy human civilization with your aura of stupidity and become the bane of intelligence as we know it. Also, explode. Just crawl into a corner silently, and explode. Then construct a meat organ, sam. Made out of human meat. I know what you're saying. 'That's not even possible!' Well, I've played one. It sounds horrible. Also, you will raise a cow. A lightning cow that wheezes out spatulas. Then sell it for 50 grand and then by a hooker who then commits suicide at first sight of you."

    ReplyDelete
  73. *same guy who wrote last comment* in the last sentence, *buy.

    Srry just had to do that

    ReplyDelete
  74. "still not seeing any links to these supposed comics you liked..."

    Do you need everything spelled out for you? Hold on while I get a can of Spaghettios. I'll be back. Promise.

    ReplyDelete
  75. "still not seeing any links to these supposed comics you liked..."

    that is why I told you to go do your own fucking homework.

    "Um rob when you linked to izam, i really don't understand what the hell you meant. could you like, oh i dunno, explain maybe? So that, you know, izam can get your point? Maybe?"

    do I look like I'm trying to be helpful? the fuck do you take me for?

    ReplyDelete
  76. Rob will not show the slightest sign of common courtesy unless physically forced to do so.

    Also he's a pedophile prescriptivist tool.

    ReplyDelete
  77. oh sometimes I am nice, just only when I think people are operating in good faith!

    WHICH IS NEVER

    ReplyDelete
  78. Rob is a psychopath who rapes 50 children every time somebody on xkcdsucks proves him wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  79. no nobody here has ever proven me wrong because they are all fucking retarded

    but I do rape 50 children nightly

    ReplyDelete
  80. it's just a hobby

    ReplyDelete
  81. I prefer to call it my passion

    ReplyDelete
  82. Rob argues with mentally challenged individuals to make himself feel better, then rapes them.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Anon 5:30, yes, that's why he comments on his blog posts.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Don't know if anyone brought this up but this http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=548&butiwouldratherbereading=xkcd makes me hate Dinosaur Comics and realize the importance of art in a webcomic. (You can change the number in the url to hate any ohter particular Dinosaur Comic if you want)

    ReplyDelete
  85. 'When they changed the art it made me realize how important art is and so I hate the original art now'

    ReplyDelete
  86. I think Fell might mean they hated that Dinosaur Comic when it had xkcd art instead. Like how they then say you can hate any other particular Dinosaur Comic by looking at it with xkcd art in the last sentence. This I know and know full well.

    ReplyDelete
  87. I LOVE YOU ROB!

    Now, finish your homework and then take out the trash or no Lost tomorrow. Rules is rules.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Well... thanks to anon 9:15 PM. I just lost The Game.

    ReplyDelete
  89. XKCD taught me the game and now XKCD Sucks lost me the game.

    ReplyDelete
  90. "http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1482&butiwouldratherbereading=xkcd"
    ^ This comic is much more interesting than the other comics.

    Anyway, Rob, this rant is actually highly tied to the one saying "You're biased towards hating XKCD."

    I found that rant subverted the argument. Their argument isn't that the flaws you find are invalid, it's that the flaws you find aren't as bad as they seem to be. To try looking at something, noticing the same elements but in entirely different lights can hugely affect the end outcome.

    Anyway, this one connects to that because people who come here see you judging XKCD harshly on most occasions. This causes some sense of prejudice to the reader, and therefore you couldn't admit you like XKCD on any occasion. In my opinion, this argument could have worked a lot better in place of the other.

    Also, to all of you people who keep losing the game. I just massed carriers and won. QED /memespam.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Yes, I meant what Ann said. I don't hate the original Dinosaur Comics. I just think that if you exchange the art for xkcd art, it gets way worse.

    ReplyDelete
  92. oh my god you people. You like Dinosaur Comics? Really? After all the time you say shit about the heads not being attached in XKCD, you like a shitty copy-and-paste comic? Wow. I don't really know what to say to that.

    ReplyDelete
  93. @Anon 4:21

    "copy-and-paste comic" doesn't mean what you think it does.

    ReplyDelete
  94. This seems unnecessarily defensive.
    So you don't like XKCD. Well you don't have to. But bear in mind that since you have a blog called "XKCD sucks" you can expect some accusations of bias. I mean writing about hating XKCD can't exactly be unbiased can it? So don't bother downplaying your biases. I don't think anyone is about to come here for a balanced review anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  95. i love the "you're biased" argument so much.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Ha yeah Dino Comics is rubbish. Now THERE's a picto-blog, if you will. Hey guys, here's this thing I just found on Wikipedia. Oh but it's not me telling you about this boring Wikipedia thing, it's a T-Rex so I have NERD CRED and I can call it a COMIC.

    ReplyDelete
  97. "[S]ince you have a blog called "XKCD sucks" you can expect some accusations of bias. I mean writing about hating XKCD can't exactly be unbiased can it? So don't bother downplaying your biases. I don't think anyone is about to come here for a balanced review anyway."

    You can have a bias without letting it affect your ability to objectively assess something.

    Besides, I've never seen Rob downplay his bias towards anything. If he hates it, he lets you know. A lot.

    ReplyDelete
  98. "I don't really know what to say to that."

    Say nothing. Spare us.

    ReplyDelete
  99. 723's first panel: "Look at this person standing around posting messages on the internet during an earthquake."
    723's last panel: "Haha, look at these people standing around posting messages on the internet during an earthquake! Bet you didn't see that one coming!"

    I mean I get that the joke is meant to be "they could have used that time to prepare instead of posting on the internet" but I don't really know what they could've actually done if the amount of time between the warning and the earthquake wasn't even long enough to repost something on Twitter.

    I think there's a vaguely interesting idea in there, that technology allows for greater safety but we're too busy being dazzled by it to take advantage, but the example here's so weak it gets completely lost.

    ReplyDelete
  100. "Besides, I've never seen Rob downplay his bias towards anything. If he hates it, he lets you know. A lot."

    one of my favorite paradoxical bits of common wisdom goes something like this: the best way to find an objective journalist is to find one who admits his biases. the best way to find a biased journalist is finding one who claims to be objective.

    this is true when it comes to people who pretend to be objective all the time, since they try to hide their agenda and the bias ends up being much more insidious. the paradox comes in when people start saying that they are objective because they admit their biases.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Short of hiring someone from the Neutral Planet you're pretty much not going to get an unbiased account of anything.

    ReplyDelete
  102. the Neutral Planet has pretty fair rates

    ReplyDelete
  103. Hey Rob, think you could do your next rant on why xkcd art is bullshit and not "just his style"? I think prime examples of this are the honesty in the media one and the "I'd have to kill you sooner" one.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I probably could, yeah. I'll look into it.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Hey Rob, think you could do your next rant on what a sanctimonious fuckwit you are? I think prime examples of this are pretty much every post you make.

    ReplyDelete
  106. that's not what sanctimonious means, so no. you can write that one if it makes you feel better about yourself though

    ReplyDelete
  107. Hey Rob, think you could do your next rant on what a fat pedophile you are? I think prime examples of this are those pictures you posted in chat last night.

    ReplyDelete
  108. what the fuck are we paying carl for if he can't ever update the blog

    ReplyDelete
  109. hey i've noticed the new comic isn't funny and its new is this thr

    ReplyDelete
  110. oh my god randall is a time traveller from 1984

    ReplyDelete
  111. if the new one is supposed to be a "gamer's hell" one, then yes I get it, but that's not actually as scary as you may think. Unfortunately, since everything is subjective, one person's idea of hell can be completely different than another person's, like Randal's idea of hell could be Mario games where you can't reach the stars whereas my idea of hell would be playing those freaking Barbie games all the time

    ReplyDelete
  112. You're a very clever guy, Cam. Here I was thinking that the comic epitomised the very image of Hell for all people, but now I realise that even to people who really like Tetris it would only be a nuisance. Somebody must email Randall about his error immediately!

    ReplyDelete
  113. "what the fuck are we paying carl for if he can't ever update the blog"

    The man needs his drug- and gambling-money. You think bookies and dealers pay themselves?

    Well, they do - at the cost of your shins.

    ReplyDelete