tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post1053999884507815543..comments2024-03-17T05:03:46.056-07:00Comments on xkcd sucks: Comic 601: You LoseCarlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comBlogger131125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-71143289544100349412009-10-06T12:02:52.854-07:002009-10-06T12:02:52.854-07:00i bet you could extend that metaphor in some fun w...i bet you could extend that metaphor in some fun ways. <br /><br />-You expect things to change but it ends up being the same basic layout every time.<br /><br />-the only practical solution is just to eat more.<br /><br />etcCarlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-83890462170808479612009-10-03T13:43:51.706-07:002009-10-03T13:43:51.706-07:00tl;dr IF YOUR WIFE DIES IN A CAR ACCIDENT YOU WIN ...tl;dr IF YOUR WIFE DIES IN A CAR ACCIDENT YOU WIN AT LOVE!<br />_________<br />I consider death the ultimate loss, and in no way a win. You'll lose one way or another, it's only a matter of time.<br /><br />Even if you had the best relationship that the world has ever experienced, it's not a win when they're dead and six feet under... with their body decomposing.<br /><br />Love is like Pac Man. You can win only for so long.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-8963992936542484682009-06-27T18:38:15.834-07:002009-06-27T18:38:15.834-07:00"You Lose". Good day sir?"You Lose". Good day sir?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-68902536930951734262009-06-27T16:53:55.098-07:002009-06-27T16:53:55.098-07:00xkcd killed Michael Jackson.xkcd killed Michael Jackson.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-33080246935598078512009-06-27T16:23:58.173-07:002009-06-27T16:23:58.173-07:00It sucks because of what popularity did to it, not...It sucks because of what popularity did to it, not because it's popular. It's like how Elvis Presley was awesome until he became a drug-abusing mess due to the pressure of having a gigantic fanbase. Hell, same thing happened to Michael Jackson.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-83173748718758644352009-06-27T16:17:54.927-07:002009-06-27T16:17:54.927-07:00So ItsPopularNowItSucks?
Nah, I'm messing. To...So ItsPopularNowItSucks?<br /><br />Nah, I'm messing. To quote F.F.: "This fire is out of control, it's gonna burn this city, BURN THIS CITY."<br /><br />EDIT: Damn < s > tag don't work.Ann Apolishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08566528013026340201noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-60740681013485732942009-06-27T15:43:51.869-07:002009-06-27T15:43:51.869-07:00xkcd used to be an unassuming, occasionally-funny,...xkcd used to be an unassuming, occasionally-funny, sporadically-updated sketchblog with random observations from an introverted but romantic point of view. Now it's a pretentious, almost-never-funny, regularly-updated Internet powerhouse that a lot of people somehow think is the alpha and omega of humor.<br /><br />THAT is what changed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-53275655260525457592009-06-27T15:28:54.870-07:002009-06-27T15:28:54.870-07:00Anyway, nobody is claiming that every golden-age x...Anyway, nobody is claiming that every golden-age xkcd is <i>good.</i> Just because whiny observational humor cropped up alongside genuinely funny stuff doesn't mean it, too, was good.John Magnumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04416392917805723793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-11000297991043727912009-06-27T13:25:15.652-07:002009-06-27T13:25:15.652-07:00#40 was sort of single-chuckle funny, too.#40 was sort of single-chuckle funny, too.Adamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-85311700870577187722009-06-27T11:24:49.678-07:002009-06-27T11:24:49.678-07:00most likely what happened between randall and mega...most likely what happened between randall and megan is this:<br /><br />she finally got married and therefor is permanently unattainable<br /><br />his years long unrequited crush is now completely doomedjsohttp://www.caltrops.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-48933376761326718062009-06-27T10:25:28.688-07:002009-06-27T10:25:28.688-07:00@Anon 9:38
The difference between those strips an...@Anon 9:38<br /><br />The difference between those strips and this is that, at least in 3 of the first 4 you mention (40, 48, 52), a highly <em>positive</em> image of human relationship is presented.<br /><br />Carl has made the point repeatedly that Munroe has begun, in the past one or two hundred strips, to take a decidedly and far more negative outlook on human relations, speculating that it has something to do with the bad termination of a romantic relationship. This doesn't trouble me as much as it does some other readers; but you have to admit that his outlook on love and relationships is growing far more depressive.jglchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13017375649006769250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-60696916799653001452009-06-27T09:38:27.279-07:002009-06-27T09:38:27.279-07:00After 602, I'm sure you guys just want to bitc...After 602, I'm sure you guys just want to bitch. xkcd has had shit like this from the beginning. What golden days of awesomeness do you remember when the comic was free of this sort of thing? Most people on here say they used to like xkcd but hate it now. So, how is this any different from 40, 46, 48, 52, 55, 59, 60, 62, 69, 77 ... The whole archive is full of these kinds of moments. There is a lot of crap these days, but there was always a lot of crap.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-90429043112415319092009-06-27T08:02:35.779-07:002009-06-27T08:02:35.779-07:00@format:
Years of practice.@format:<br /><br />Years of practice.David Poorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10173847419796847573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-87521777032341898922009-06-27T05:29:53.639-07:002009-06-27T05:29:53.639-07:00602 is classical randall-style observational humor...602 is classical randall-style observational humor. Observe something, skip the humor.Person #1noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-40561711420545380292009-06-27T02:22:39.793-07:002009-06-27T02:22:39.793-07:00@Anon at 1:51
I think you're misreading the a...@Anon at 1:51<br /><br />I think you're misreading the alt-text. Most of the comments have been assuming that Randall is speaking sarcastically when he says he enjoys doing so.<br /><br />I must admit, I rather prefer your reading: in that case, he's admitting his own hypocrisy and saying "Well gee guys, I know why that sort of situation arises."<br /><br />But he's not. It's absolutely inconsistent with his pattern of stubbornly refusing to do anything approaching the social norm except to deride them and say "hey, look at my better quirkier way!"jglchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13017375649006769250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-11845853300731854932009-06-27T01:51:59.054-07:002009-06-27T01:51:59.054-07:00601 is bad, but I disagree with your reasons. It&...601 is bad, but I disagree with your reasons. It's just an internet meme poorly done.<br /><br />602, well... I liked it. The shallow nature of the gathering is necessary as it gives us the reason the protagonist prefers his studies. The repetition conveys the protagonist is finding it tedious. You'll also note he almost apologises for the petty depiction of the socialites in the alt-text.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-13684473746544209332009-06-27T01:36:34.027-07:002009-06-27T01:36:34.027-07:00you know what's even worse than the "Rand...you know what's even worse than the "Randall in the Room" at parties?<br />being at a party of ALL "Randall in the Room"s.<br /><br />I DON'T SEE RANDALL DOING A GOOMH COMIC ABOUT THAT HUH.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-61898523346438509352009-06-27T00:08:20.726-07:002009-06-27T00:08:20.726-07:00poore is like unto a god
a god of booze and anger...poore is like unto a god<br /><br />a god of booze and angerrshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-58299061814174221372009-06-26T22:29:19.475-07:002009-06-26T22:29:19.475-07:00i have a question.
how are you so reliably awesom...i have a question.<br /><br />how are you so reliably awesome?formatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-68716954773387351282009-06-26T21:51:05.183-07:002009-06-26T21:51:05.183-07:00I'm sick of everyone's bullshit politeness...I'm sick of everyone's bullshit politeness. <br /><br />602 is bad because Randall sucks at writing dialog that is both believable AND appropriate for setting up a given situation.<br /><br />602 is bad because it reinforces the negative stereotype that all people who are not "nerds" are shallow, petty socialites.<br /><br />602 is bad because it reinforces the stereotype that all people who are "nerds" do not enjoy large social gatherings.<br /><br />602 is bad because it's punchline (yes, there is one - it's just shitty) is unfunny and poorly delivered.<br /><br />602 is bad because the alt-text a preachy, sanctimonious one-liner that passes judgement on people who judge others (protip: that's called hypocracy).<br /><br />602 is bad because it is not funny, clever, amusing, original, or insightful in any way.<br /><br />602 is bad because Randall Munroe is a terrible artist, a terrible writer, and a terrible comedian.<br /><br />Any questions?David Poorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10173847419796847573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-39468306936541400512009-06-26T18:55:23.173-07:002009-06-26T18:55:23.173-07:00602 is Randy defending himself. He's saying:
...602 is Randy defending himself. He's saying:<br /><br />When I'm stand around socially awkwardly like a fucking idiot, I'm actually being a genius thinking up maths and shit. Oh and it's not because I'm a geek (which I am), it's because I'm such a busy guy working on all those papers all day long. Oh wait. I don't do that. I just draw shitty webcomics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-83879768920559204782009-06-26T18:10:47.130-07:002009-06-26T18:10:47.130-07:00@ Chris "There is nowhere in the comic an imp...@ Chris "There is nowhere in the comic an implication that all gatherings are like this"<br /><br />uhh the alt text?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-34780483088519346392009-06-26T17:58:17.926-07:002009-06-26T17:58:17.926-07:00Anyway, if he IS talking about just one scenario, ...Anyway, if he IS talking about just one scenario, maybe he could've picked a scenario that didn't cast all his friends as bitchy idiots. I think everyone agrees that it would've worked just as well, EXCEPT it would highlight the "Randall is a functioning autistic" aspect instead of the "Randall's friends are terrible people" aspect.<br /><br />So, changing it to be less spiteful may make it more revelatory than he intended.John Magnumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04416392917805723793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-75440372341226693002009-06-26T17:55:12.907-07:002009-06-26T17:55:12.907-07:00EITHER
Randy is bitching about his friends being ...EITHER<br /><br />Randy is bitching about his friends being gossipy stressful nags that create drama<br /><br />OR<br /><br />Randy is bitching about how all social gatherings suck and are stressful and drama-filled.<br /><br />BOTH OF THESE SCENARIOS ARE SHIT.<br /><br />He isn't just talking about one scenario. This is meant to be representative of a trend. It's a contrast presented between "getting out and relaxing" (viz, socializing with his friends) and math. This contrast does not work at all if it's just a random vignette about some dude who zoned out when his friends got catty once.<br /><br />Now, whether he is trying to say that everyone is like this, or if it's just his friends, is unclear. What is clear is he is bitching about drama.rshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-18039349829078750042009-06-26T17:47:49.949-07:002009-06-26T17:47:49.949-07:00Chris, have you considered that this might be a re...Chris, have you considered that this might be a reaction to a SPECIFIC pattern of behavior expressed by Randall and not about nerd behavior in general?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com