Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Comic 843: Wrong, Wrong, Wrong

misconceptions

[ALT: 'Grandpa, what was it like in the Before time?' 'It was hell. People went around saying glass was a slow-flowing liquid. You folks these days don't know how good you have it.']

This weekend, Randall went to a party at the insistence of his parole officer--perhaps spending time in the company of other humans would help him to not think about Megan for even the briefest of moments (his current record is 2.2 seconds). The experiment was an unqualified success--but unfortunately it forced Randall to interact with people who don't have perfect knowledge of the universe. It forced him to interact with people who were . . . wrong.

I've met these "wrong people" before in my life, of course. My general solution is to politely correct them, and if they persist in their erroneous beliefs, to shrug and let it pass. (The exception, of course, being the erroneous belief that XKCD is enjoyable. My reaction to that is to begin frothing at the mouth and leap at them with a terrifying speed that belies my hideous bulk, and rip out their jugular vein with my teeth.) There are worse things in the world. It doesn't bother me or stick with me--certainly, such people are not "my people," but I hold them no more ill will for it than anyone here holds me ill will for posting my opinion in a polite and reasonable way on the internet.

This reaction is not possible for Randall Munroe. No, Randall will loudly correct them, veins bulging, eyes twitching. And then the world will spin and go dark for him, and he will have to lie down for a while, gently convulsing, until the fit passes. Even then he is aggravated for days and days on end. That someone out there exists who could be wrong--this is unacceptable. They ought to be rounded up and shot. Perhaps one day they will.

But Randall Munroe is not a violent man. He has only ever raised his hand against another when they tried to enforce one of the dozens of restraining orders Megan has against him. There must be a way to be rid of these wrong people . . . proactively. But how? He has spent his entire life in pursuit of facts. Not everyone can be as dedicated and brilliant as he.

The answer, of course, lay on Wikipedia. Surely this absolutely inerrant source of knowledge could be put to use! And it already had a list of things about which people are wrong. No doubt that list would expand as more "wrong people" were discovered--a task to which he could dedicate himself endlessly. He would be as loyal to this as he was to Megan--and it would never file any restraining orders against him (though it would probably never forget to close the blinds when changing at night, which was definitely a drawback).

Distributing this idea to the masses would be trivial, of course. All he would need to do is subtly pick a not-too-distant date in the future and post it on his popular webcomic, "Randall Munroe Tells You What Is Funny Today (You Should Probably Laugh At It Or He Will Cry)". His loyal fans--all of whom suffer from the same symptoms when confronted with a "wrong person"--would quickly snap up the idea.

In a month's time, the internet will be filled with people reading the greatest Wikipedia article of all time. I am utterly confident that they will be polite and considerate about this, and will in no way be smug or condescending--and certainly not sycophantic. And as there is absolutely no precedent for a suddenly popular idea (or "meme," as internet scholars refer to it) becoming insufferably obnoxious, I can only level praise on Randall Munroe's great idea. Well done, Randy!

130 comments:

  1. I like your posts, Rob.

    That is all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I looked forward to reading this. It did not disappoint.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rob, you suck. The old posts were entertaining and pointed out valid criticism about the comics. I read the last few of your posts to try and catch up but since all of it was just pitiful whiny flaming along the lines of "Randy is stupid and a psychopath!!!!1 lololOOLOL!" I really see no more reason to read this blog.

    Hugs and Kisses,
    Your Mom

    ReplyDelete
  4. don't let the door hit you on the way out

    ReplyDelete
  5. I thought this was funny, but, then, the comic pissed me off.

    Also, this whole shitting on Rob's style is refreshing, and new, and should continue. in fact, bitch as much as possible. Please.

    ReplyDelete
  6. See, now we can go back to hating xkcd as a team. I know that I, for one, have had all too many parties completely ruined, forcing me to get my coat and go straight home, upon hearing some obnoxious guest suggest that - for instance - bumblebees cannot scientifically fly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why does this comic reminds me of comic 386, but in a very ironic manner?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I thought of that one also.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe 386 was never meant to be the satire we took it to be?

    ReplyDelete
  10. 386 was semi-autobiographical.

    "Semi" because in real life Randall has no Megan asking him to come to bed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Rob I enjoy your new style- I like the comedy, and I like how you manage to embed criticsm subtly within.

    Ignore the other cuddlefish, and run away with me, so that I may live in the warm cracks of your flabby body.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @4-44: you don't see her. it was obviously just a tape recorder of randy imitating megan's voice

    ReplyDelete
  13. "The exception, of course, being the erroneous belief that XKCD is enjoyable. My reaction to that is to begin frothing at the mouth and leap at them with a terrifying speed that belies my hideous bulk, and rip out their jugular vein with my teeth."

    Let's hope Rob doesn't travel back in time and meet his past self, eh?

    PS. You didn't have to shoehorn Megan into this one.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The Robhaters! Where are the Robhaters? They don't make Robhaters like yesterday anymore!

    Well, kill me, but I like the Megan jokes. I say, it's a well known fact that xkcd is often a vehicle for Randall to show off his gigantic ego through his stick-figure-Gary-Stus, and a very effective antidote to that is to create a counter-Gary-Stu, and Rob is doing that pretty well. It's fun.

    One thing that struck me is that Randall is (or at least used to be) described as a very modest and "unassuming" guy in real life. Of course! Because he has no guts to show his real feelings in real life, so he does it on the Internet, on his own webcomic! In that sense he's pretty much like, um, 95% of the Internet. That is, his "modesty" is in no way a virtue, but just a display of his cowardice.

    In short, Randall is an asshole, but everyone knows that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yay, another comic about wikipedia. Pure genius. And he's trying to make a meme surrounding it, how clever. Didn't he already kind of try to do that with his malamanteau comic....It baffles me that Randy writes this comic full-time.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rob's reviews are bi-polar and therefor enjoyable.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "In that sense he's pretty much like, um, 95% of the Internet."

    "It baffles me that Randy writes this comic full-time."

    I don't think there's anything baffling about this.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "gently convulsing, until the it passes."


    OMG ROB YOU SUCK AT THE ENGLISH I HOPE YOU GET EBOLA IN YOUR NECK

    ReplyDelete
  19. I'm in the camp that the Megan jokes is not funny. Quit it. You don't like it when Randall mentions Megan in any context. Then why keep making Megan jokes relating to Randall's social life with him not mentioning her at all. It does nothing to critique Randall nor it is funny.

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

    ReplyDelete
  21. You know, despite not being a huge fan of Rob's recent reviews, I liked today's. And as I was preparing to say so, I realized something horrible. I'm now reading this blog the same way that I read XKCD. "Well, it's usually terrible but occasionally it surprises me."

    "No! I must kill the XKCD" Rob shouted
    The internet said "No, Rob. You are the XKCD."
    And then Rob was a GOOMHba.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "--and certainly not sycophantic."

    Are you saying that xkcd fans like to be peed on?

    ReplyDelete
  23. The comic was pretty bad. The art's bad (what the hell is in the teacher's hand?) and the dialogue is awkward as always. I'm a bit on the fence about it showing Randy's gigantic ego, though. I can see how it's interpreted that way, but you could also say it's just to make it so that people can be correct when making small talk at parties.

    I would have liked it if Rob's review actually covered these things, other than focusing on the interpretation of it being a case of Randy's large ego seeping through another comic. The forced Megan jokes were kinda bland as well. To each his own, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "PS. You didn't have to shoehorn Megan into this one."

    yes I did

    ReplyDelete
  25. My biggest question is why the "teacher" isn't holding a Kindle... Isn't that Randy's favorite Wikipedia device? He even compared it to the Hitchhiker's Guide.

    ReplyDelete
  26. My favorite part was when Randy showed, not told.
    Because I address students as "Middle School Students", and inform them of laws they must surely be aware of.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This review should have started with "Okay, xkcdsucks readers..."

    ReplyDelete
  28. "...I hold them no more ill will for it than anyone here holds me ill will for posting my opinion in a polite and reasonable way on the internet."

    What? Your posts are nowhere close to "Polite and reasonable".

    Other than that, this post was funny. If this is you being "polite and resonable" I don't want to make you REALLY angry lol!

    ReplyDelete
  29. @2:19

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

    ReplyDelete
  30. I don't understand people who complain about something or other detracting from the "critique" of the comic... as if Rob weren't being far more constructive than Randy deserves.

    ReplyDelete
  31. XKCD sucks sucks now. That's like, meta, man.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Bret: I understand why people complain about that. Because for a long time, this blog upheld the idea that everyone here wasn't just whining about how much they hated XKCD, they were looking at actual reasons why the comic was not funny. Explaining why a joke was not clever, or why there was no real wit, where as lately, Rob doesn't really write specific criticisms, he writes a story about how a comic came to fruition, making fun of Randy all the while. It's become less of a critical look at XKCD, and more of a "Rob writes a funny story." Without the moral high ground of "Criticism is always a valid form of expression" the blog has somewhat devolved into what XKCDSucks haters always accused it of being, a big group of people who hate on XKCD.

    But then on the other hand, I enjoy Rob's writing style, and his stories make me laugh, far far more than XKCD itself does. So, I don't really see this as a problem myself.

    ReplyDelete
  33. in fairness, there's usually a criticism hidden in the story. it's like an Aesop's fable of hate.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Rob reading your posts has literally elevated me to a higher state of being

    Do not deviate from your current formula no matter what you do

    ReplyDelete
  35. fuck those philistines, rob.

    "waa, carl wrote legitimate(boring) reviews. all you do is talk shit about megan!"

    i, for one, support our morbidly obese overlord!

    ReplyDelete
  36. you only say that because if i roll over i will crush you

    ReplyDelete
  37. Yea, the problem with Carl's original approach is that after the first 100 reviews or so Randall starts committing the same mistakes and re-using the same joke templates, so it gets repetitive and boring quickly.

    Which is not to say I didn't like them. But I don't hate Rob for doing his colorful retellings of XKCDs.

    Also, here's my alternate review for 842, if any of you want to read it. And if you wish, you can post it too, Rob, even though we're almost two XKCDs too late for that. :P

    ReplyDelete
  38. I never saw why rob got so much hate- there was always a critical element to his posts- they were just wrapped in insults and delivered comedically.

    When rob jokes about randall's reaction to people being so wrong he's highlighting in a not too subtle manner that this comic comes across as being kind of douchey and RTFM about a minor issue.

    I'm mean really, just because he's being funny and Megan jokes abound doesn't mean that the review has no content.

    I mean really, if we had to awkwardly state what we were doing and who we were addressing at all times then we'd all sound like we were reading a script written by someone with asperger's

    ReplyDelete
  39. Wikipedia IS very accurate. Wrong sarcasm there.

    ReplyDelete
  40. yes, this is why I called it inerrant

    ReplyDelete
  41. Rob, I appreciate your continued contributions to this site. That said, please prepare yourself to realize that my first sentence was simply a ploy to gain your trust so I could bitch about everything you do while attempting to seem like a non-asshole. Actually I only have one issue, you continually insult Randall for being obsessed with Megan, it's funny when it fits the context of the comic but at this point it seems that you are insulting him about Megan because you can't find any other way to berate him. I enjoy your criticisms of his comics, not your criticism of his perceived hobby-time/stalking activities. xkcd has fallen so far because Randall keeps reusing the same joke (should there be an s on there?) I hope you don't do the same thing. The blog is called xkcd sucks, not Randall Munroe sucks, the man is not inseparable from his work, and an insult to him is not...aw hell, screw this, I'm pretty sure you can see this stuff for yourself. Anyways, thanks for your work Rob.

    P.S. Anyone else think that maybe the reason the xkcd loving audience adores and defends Randy so often is because his fan-base has Stockholm syndrome

    ReplyDelete
  42. Randy forgot to tell people to make sure to skip the sections relating to history on that Wiki page of misconceptions, because history is a liberal art and therefore a stupid useless waste of time.

    ReplyDelete
  43. "I never saw why rob got so much hate- there was always a critical element to his posts- they were just wrapped in insults and delivered comedically."

    Well they were delivered, certainly.

    "Wikipedia IS very accurate."

    LOL, CITATION NEEDED.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Imagine the mass-editing of Wikipedia on the first Tuesday of every February if this really were the case. The quest for truth would lead to even more ludicrous misunderstandings than ever before. There might even be a joke in that if the whole thing were committed to a longer narrative.

    The end of the narrative would be the realisation that truth is beauty and beauty truth, so everybody decides to look up porn instead. Epistemological transcendence was right there in the internet's lifeblood all along!

    ReplyDelete
  45. 844: The flowchart Randy uses to make comics, except he replaces "Throw it all out and start over" with "OMG you are such a genius. Post it on the intarblags!"

    ReplyDelete
  46. Rob stop ripping off xkcdexplained. You are but the pale, ghastly little weirdo hovering in their enormous shadows.

    ReplyDelete
  47. i think you will find it is I who am enormous

    ReplyDelete
  48. I enjoyed this article though I do resent you for spelling psychopathic wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  49. i didn't attempt to spell psychopathic

    ReplyDelete
  50. "I enjoyed this article though I do resent you for spelling psychopathic wrong."

    ...

    "resent you for spelling psychopathic wrong."

    "spelling psychopathic wrong."

    "psychopathic"

    "PSYCHOPATHIC"

    OH SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

    captcha: slyperi. That Randall sure is a slyperi bastard.

    ReplyDelete
  51. rob i am rubbing the head of my penis against your eye

    ReplyDelete
  52. ROB YOUR EGO IS EXPANDING ALMOST AS FAST AS YOUR GIRTH

    ReplyDelete
  53. Wtf, 844 made me so angry I punched a baby red panda. Is there a joke? Does Randy know anything at all about programming good code (ie. when was the last time he had to do it) or does he just enjoy ejaculating his wikipedia knowledge into the alt text?

    ReplyDelete
  54. @Fernie

    "captcha: slyperi. That Randall sure is a slyperi bastard."

    He's a Harry Potter LARPer?

    ReplyDelete
  55. MY GOD IS 844 TERRIBLE. Coincidentally The Big Bang Theory started again yesterday and the episode was about programming too. IT WAS ALSO TERRIBLE.

    Maybe there's a lesson here?

    ReplyDelete
  56. programming jokes aren't funny
    flowcharts aren't funny. they're supposed to be informative or instructive. this is neither

    ReplyDelete
  57. I think the joke is about the common misconception that there is no such thing as "good code."

    ReplyDelete
  58. @Chaos

    I've never understood Randy ripping on Liberal Arts and everything else that isn't hard science. What the fuck do you call a guy who draws cartoons for a living? A physicist?

    ReplyDelete
  59. @Anonymous 10:18

    Richard P. Feynman got a nobel prize for drawing the best pictures (known as feynman diagrams). Randall draws the best stick figures on the internet. SOMEONE GIVE HIM A NOBEL PRIZE.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Arthur your GROSS MISUNDERSTANDING of the GLORIOUS RICHARD FEYNMAN's work (hallowed be his name) had made me spurt HOT EARWAX out my URETHERA.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I read the article and had noticed two things that were funny: 1. Several of the misconceptions on there have been put to use in comics, meaning that Randy doesn't know these things because he's so smart, he knows them because he reads this article. And 2. There were actually several common misconception IN the article. For example, Buddha was not an ascetic, as the article states.

    Also, I'm not certain Randy DOES want to live in a world where everyone was right. Then he wouldn't be special.

    ReplyDelete
  62. @Merlin

    Are we the Knights of the Round Table?

    ReplyDelete
  63. @Arthur@7:27

    Here's your citation:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html

    (yes it's old, and you've probably already seen it)

    ReplyDelete
  64. On the next Big Bang Theory
    Leonard: "Hey, lets make a smartphone app that will show us our favorite webcomics!
    Sheldon: "But Leonard, XKCD is just one comic!"
    Audience: BIG LAUGHS

    ReplyDelete
  65. ...
    Penny: "What's xkcd?"
    Everyone drops jaws and stares
    Audience: Quick Laugh
    Suddenly Wil Wheaton appears!

    ReplyDelete
  66. Fuck fuck fuck where's the "like" button for this thing I need to click the "like" button for what jhum101 wrote where the fuck is it?

    ReplyDelete
  67. i think you accidentally swapped the labels around

    http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=67352&start=80#p2446152

    this is a joke right? please say yes

    ReplyDelete
  68. R, we all knew it would happen, although you can feel smug that this particular sheep is functionally illiterate, or still using the Gregorian Calendar.

    Also and but so

    Captcha: Bilver. What you use to kill a berewolf.

    ReplyDelete
  69. ok... I go to this site because I used to find it funny, not because I have any ill will to xkcd. In fact I still find about half of the comics to be enjoyable. However, your site is no longer funny, or intellectual. You do nothing except for complain about Randy's personal life. Your so called "review" has nothing to do with the comic, but with your hate of Randy. Perhaps if you'd forget about Randy's personal life and just read the comic looking for humor, you'd see that they actually are funny, but no that is too far beyond you, isn't it? You constantly complain that Randy tried "too hard" to make a good comic, and thus makes the comic to complicated. This is entirely wrong, it is you that is the problem, you take a simple comic and probably spend multiple hours (although I'm sure you will deny it) finding ways to complicate it, and when that fails you complain about him personally. Good day, sir. Perhaps if you ever make a decent review of the comic I'll return to your site, however, I highly doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Rob, you monster! We've lost one more member of the community, NOW how is Carl going to be able to make a living off of the ad revenue this site USED to generate when we had everyone including Anon324???

    Your mass had blocked out [amongst other things] the sun that is Carl's would-be work-free life!

    ReplyDelete
  71. even Carl would agree that a member of the community who would read "A Modest Proposal" and write to the publishers complaining that they allowed this blatant advocate of cannibalism to have a voice is not a member of the community we want to keep around

    ReplyDelete
  72. I don't think we're talking about the same Carl anymore. =/

    ReplyDelete
  73. http://i.imgur.com/Dn21i.png

    not even sure this makes sense

    ReplyDelete
  74. Rob are you sure Carl wouldn't BE that guy?

    ReplyDelete
  75. @R.

    "this is a joke right? please say yes"

    The joke is that we're slowly being digested by an uncaring, amoral universe.

    @Sepia

    "To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right)."

    :( I really need to subscribe to Nature.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Did anyone else catch the Daily Show interview with Jimmy Wales: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-january-5-2011/jimmy-wales

    Wales: "Generally, if you go and change Wikipedia, something like that will get changed back in less than five minutes... Unless you are in fact..."
    Stewart: "Do you know I'm not Batman?"
    Wales: "Well, do you have a reliable source?
    Stewart: "I'm not going to tell you!"

    Get Out Of My Head, Jimmy Wales!

    ReplyDelete
  77. "Perhaps if you ever make a decent review of the comic I'll return to your site"

    How will he know if he doesn't come back? I'm just glad to see him still being so open to the idea of reconciliation after all Rob's put him through

    ReplyDelete
  78. OK, so in the xkcd forums there's a high school retard who wants to post copies of the Wikipedia comic around his school. It's only to be expected that high schoolers will be retarded, no surprise there.

    But the next topic of conversation is how the Bible is no different from any other history book, and in what sense was Mary a virgin. This conversation involves someone who claims to be celibate and whose user name is "monk".

    A celibate person who goes to the xkcd forums to discuss in what sense Mary was a virgin.

    If I had set out to imagine a dumber, more repulsive person, I could not have come up with this.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Hey, some of my best friends were high schoolers!

    ReplyDelete
  80. It sucks that there are more BS rules against bullying these days.

    So instead I will hope that guy gets murdered.

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

    ReplyDelete
  82. One time I was browsing the Wikipedia page on the word "fuck", because I, um, was unsure of its etymology.

    Among the example uses of the word was "I want to fuck your nose hole".

    ReplyDelete
  83. @ jhum

    Yes! This is hilarious. Better than Rob's B- grade Megan jokes. Not that they're bad, but this was literal laugh out loud funny to me.

    ReplyDelete
  84. http://www.webcitation.org/5vZhGySHf

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anyone who is incapable of seeing the potential for humor embedded in a flow chart is a fucking idiot.

    Randall is incapable of exploiting said potential, of course, but the potential is still there.

    ReplyDelete
  86. >:::(

    Updated citation of Wiki vandal.
    http://www.webcitation.org/5vZihjlc8

    ReplyDelete
  87. I don't think XKCD is funny and I'm all for the Randy-bashing here, but wasn't Wikipedia vandalism one of the most retarded things done by xkcd fans?

    ReplyDelete
  88. another cite: http://www.webcitation.org/5vZlLkHnM

    oh the irony! so sweet, like chocolate cake! don't tell rob (he will eat it all!)

    ReplyDelete
  89. How appropriate.
    http://i54.tinypic.com/10cur5v.png

    ReplyDelete
  90. .....and the Editors still miss the fact that Kite Photography does not actually involve Megan. But hey, they are only robots.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Ok so pretty bored, here is a DC/xkcd mashup of 843:
    http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/9820/xkdc843.png

    Such a smug comic(rant!) fits T-Rex perfectly!

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

    ReplyDelete
  93. ok srsly last one(842) of course t-rex would mistakenly get a penis tattoo and burn down a house:
    http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/8732/xkdc842.png

    ReplyDelete
  94. This review is better than the previous one, and pretty aright.

    The sarcastic tone, which is often at least slightly present in your reviews, was very similar to what you had the previous one, but I dun' give a shit really so long as that joke doesn't keep going and wear too thin...

    like the Megan jokes. You fuckin killed that joke ages ago. Please stop.

    ReplyDelete
  95. year rob, seriously now. don't do megan jokes anymore!! FOR SERIOUS!!

    ReplyDelete
  96. jhum101, the mashups of the misconceptions comic and the code comic with Dinosaur Comics are infinitely better than the originals! (The one about Pen 15... no, sorry, the translation to three characters didn't work)

    Now, why are the two mashups better? Very simple, because they fit T-Rex's personality (and in the case of the code comic, those of the other two as well). You can imagine why he's saying that stuff - in one comic, he's being a douchebag (usually Utahraptor shows him how wrong he is, but this time he gets away with it), in the other he's trying to make things simpler than they are. Those are kind of typical characteristics of him. (He wouldn't say "middle school students however" - he'd say "peeps and folks" or something like that, and already in the second panel.)

    What I'm saying is... dunno, those jokes work if they are said by a good character, so that the contents will be identified with the mindset of the character instead of that of the author. In xkcd, we think "god randall is such a douchebag", in DC we think "haha t-rex is such a douchebag lol"

    ReplyDelete
  97. It's amazing how much better this stuff sounds when put into the Dinosaur Comics setup. It's like a glimpse of what XKCD could be if Randy had some slightly consistent identifiable characters, with a bit of separation from his own voice so they actually sounded like characters instead of the empty shells of Randy-Sues.

    And some reactions and body language don't hurt either. Utahraptor just leaving in silence while T-Rex keeps going on with that smug "everybody thanks you in advance" line after him adds so much.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Glad you guys liked them. I've just started a new blog devoted to this theme: xkcdinosaurcomics

    Hope you'll enjoy them!

    ReplyDelete
  99. Late as hell to the party but b3ta had the same URL in their newsletter last Friday: http://b3ta.com/newsletter/issue461/

    I suspect the xkcd predates it though :(

    ReplyDelete
  100. "Anyone who is incapable of seeing the potential for humor embedded in a flow chart is a fucking idiot."

    i hate to break this to you
    but flowcharts aren't funny

    ReplyDelete
  101. I'll again refer you to The Chart, R.

    Captcha: Citylies. The song sounds familiar, but I'm still pretty sure I've never heard it.

    ReplyDelete
  102. R.

    You are a fucking idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  103. @jhum, small note: the xkcd/DC mashup for 843 would work better if "Okay, middle school students!" was in the second panel together.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I profess no love for idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  105. but-
    i thought our love was special



    eh, plenty more cuddlefish in the sea

    ReplyDelete
  106. "herp a derp I don't like this webcomic so I'm gonna make a big ol' site that is EVEN WORSE THAN THE FUCKING WEBCOMIC"

    I think I'm going to make a site called "xkcd sucks sucks" and make posts commenting about you commenting on xkcd.

    Oh, but wait, I'm not a complete retard, so I guess that wouldn't be the best idea in the world.

    Enjoy making a bigger idiot out of yourself each and every day buddy.

    ReplyDelete
  107. he certainly enjoys making himself bigger each and every day

    ReplyDelete
  108. "xkcd sucks sucks"

    ohemgee you are so creative
    marry me anon

    ReplyDelete
  109. Is this flowchart funny?----No----It's a flowchart.
    |
    |
    Yes
    |
    |
    It's not a flowchart

    ReplyDelete
  110. anon don't try to pander to my hatred of flowchars, it still isn't funny

    ReplyDelete
  111. But theoretically you could embed any joke into the trivial flowchart: just one state, no transition arrows, and the joke written on the state.

    Hence if there exists a funny joke, there exists also a funny flowchart. QED

    ReplyDelete
  112. Take that geekiness to the xkcd forums, sir. It is not welcome here.

    (the joke ceases to be funny if it's placed inside a flowchart. Whatever is placed inside a flowchart gets its humour sucked out entirely. Yes, even "Airplane!")

    ReplyDelete
  113. I am leaving, and I am not coming back.

    Enjoy your hate-fueled circlejerk.

    ReplyDelete
  114. angry circle-jerks are presumably the best circle-jerks.

    ReplyDelete
  115. As the Earth is spherical there is no "outside" to the circle-jerk, so you can't leave.

    ReplyDelete
  116. I just came back to see if anyone had reacted to my leaving forever.

    Now I'll leave for good.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Does it fly like an arrow?---Yes---It's time
    |
    |
    No
    |
    |
    ... flies like a banana?---Yes---It's fruit
    |
    |
    No
    |
    |
    Well who cares dude the joke lost both elegance and complexity in this format anyway

    ReplyDelete
  118. Well Rob it was an awesome post but you did miss one thing. Miss Lenhart or whatever Blondie's name is is very much allowed to start a lesson so awkwardly sice she is a superwoman with the power to make laptops levitate. Your distrust in Randall disgusts me.

    ReplyDelete