Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Blehahaha, excellent.
"Owning"
- Thread starter Woebot
- Start date
Blehahaha, excellent.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Aw cmon, "facepalm" has a certain charm. You're pretty fond of that one yourself. It works beautifully if you imagine it as a sticky, burning chemical weapon you want to drop on people when they say dumb things on the internet: "I love the smell of facepalm in the morning..."
Last edited:
woops
is not like other people
I like to convey a certain gaucheness.
Facepalm is funny yes but I would rather actually palm my face than say the word.
Fail is obnoxious I agree. Win is kind of funny though. Or am I just mindlessly positive?
I listened to Lil Wayne and Pharrell's 'Yes' radio edit and at one point Wayne says 'IMHO'
It was bleeped to 'im--'
Facepalm is funny yes but I would rather actually palm my face than say the word.
Fail is obnoxious I agree. Win is kind of funny though. Or am I just mindlessly positive?
I listened to Lil Wayne and Pharrell's 'Yes' radio edit and at one point Wayne says 'IMHO'
It was bleeped to 'im--'
4linehaiku
Repetitive
Yeah that's exactly why I do it. I never use LOL online, it's meaningless. Much more amusing when spoken.
Something I have noticed from some of the more internet-y / nerdy corners of the web is that the lol -> rofl -> lmao progression has reached a point of such over-saturation that people now say things like "I laughed IRL" as the next level of intensifier. I really enjoy this, and cannot wait until it is inevitable shortened to LIRL and the whole cycle can repeat.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Thing is, if you say "lol" out loud then you've "lolol'd", haven't you?
And there's nothing stopping you (other than innate human decency or the threat of a sound beating, I suppose) to stop you saying "lolol" out loud...it's an infinite regress.
Yes, you know where that particular hall of mirrors leads to don't you?.it's an infinite regress.
Or I LOL'd IRL.
Last edited:
4linehaiku
Repetitive
Exactly. Next step: ROFLIRLing.
nomadthethird
more issues than Time mag
From an economic/capitalist point-of-view, the geeks have a lot more power than some black men fighting over drug turf do.
Believe it or not.
Slothrop
Tight but Polite
Also, given that (probably like a lot of people on here) I'm culturally closer to being a spotty geek than being a gang member, I probably feel a bit less daft using the word 'owned' to describe something fairly stupid and immaterial that occurs in my daily life than I would appropriating something with a much darker and more, er, real reality to it...
nomadthethird
more issues than Time mag
Access to goods, services, capital, education, jobs, wealth, security, food, legal services, medical services, justice in court, respect, freedom from institutionalized racism...
I could go on forever.
nomadthethird
more issues than Time mag
It's still bullshit macho posturing, though.
I mean, I've said it myself. Plenty of times. It's also just a silly internet meme.
But it originates in macho posturing.
The idea that black men are some kind of dark and terrifying threat to us spotty geeks is sort of strange... I mean, to one another, because they have to fight for precious resources-- yes, sadly, that's probably true.
That Dizzee Rascal video from the MIA thread would fit here, too.
grizzleb
Well-known member
Not neccesarily true (not all of it anyway). Much of the geeks today, especially those who have grown up playing games/using the internet have found themselves heavily isolated and ostracized from much of social life - the japanese phenomenom of 'hikkikomori' has some relevance here. Of course, I don't mean that they aren't treated insitutionally differently in many ways, but access to capital, education, jobs, wealth, respect, security amongst white working-class geeks in britain at any rate isn't so obvious. I'm not trying to pick a tet a tet back and forth with you nomad, it's just that the problems that emerge out of 'pc/internet culture' as something that acts to isolate and ostracise people from mainstream society is something that I haven't really heard discussed anywhere at any length, I'm just trying to maybe probe and get some thoughts off other people. (another qualifying statement to avoid petty squabbling again - black people have had it much worse and still do!!!)
grizzleb
Well-known member
More generally there's a problem with saying that only one group is a victim of society, that you can only talk about one group being a victim as any others are less, it totally removes any of the subtleties and intricacies that societal problems entail and creates a situation where injustice generally is ignored, because only one problem is historically significant enough to warrant ones outrage.
It's like Israel and their implicit claim that no-one can know grief like them, that they are the sole owners of grief - it's a dangerous thing that creates a victimhood which dampens any other injustices that other peoples or groups have experienced, lessening their impact of whatever has happened - i.e the structure is - your injustice is less than ours (which may well be wholy true) and so your injustice is nothing (which is bullshit).
Just a thought.
It's like Israel and their implicit claim that no-one can know grief like them, that they are the sole owners of grief - it's a dangerous thing that creates a victimhood which dampens any other injustices that other peoples or groups have experienced, lessening their impact of whatever has happened - i.e the structure is - your injustice is less than ours (which may well be wholy true) and so your injustice is nothing (which is bullshit).
Just a thought.