IC Forum Archive

cog · Posts: 108

the most interesting part of SA is the weekend web.

which they don't write for the most part.

ManekiNeko · Posts: 989

I've seen other quality sites listed on SA's Bad Site of the Day column. They can't possibly be running out of terrible sites to review, so the only conclusion one can come to is that they're mindlessly lashing out against random web pages in the hopes of eliciting laughter from their knuckle-dragging target audience.

Something Awful is just that. It's no different from any of the other cyber-bully sites on the Internet, though... when you've seen one, you've seen them all, and their repetitive, mean-spirited schtick grows old quickly.

JR

softlogic · Posts: 140

I think a lot of people miss the point that SA's hypocrisy is quite self-concsious...it's a website devoted to making fun of pretentious nerds, run by pretentious nerds. That in itself is meant to be funny (It isn't but that's the idea). It's really all self-deprecation. When they say things like "it shouldn't bother you, go outside," they're not only right, but its sort of like they're trying to convince themselves of it as well.

That being said, the site was a lot funnier when it made fun of things that truly were awful/incomprehensible. Now they just seem to pick random targets and come across like they hate everything life has to offer.

dark steve · Posts: 3002

Man. That photo.

doomquake · Posts: 765

The only things left on SA that I read are Weekend Web, and anything Dennis Farrell writes. If Dennis ever leaves SA.. I most likely will too.

Dark Age Iron Savior · Posts: 3148

ManekiNeko wrote:

Something Awful is just that.

well!

sethsez · Posts: 1977

Something Awful can be summed up by Your Band Sucks, an article that tears down popular (and unpopular) bands and insults the hell out of them.

But you know what? The writer likes most of the bands he insults. He tore the shit out of They Might Be Giants, but said in a post that the best aspect of writing that article was going back and listening to all his favorite TMBG albums.

Why do you think they review awful movies and pretend it was painful? It's clear that they really love watching these wretched things.

So, yeah, I'm in with the "you're taking SA too seriously" crowd. They probably don't really like Tim's writing, but I also doubt that any of the vitriol in the article was serious. And for people saying "well, that's what you do when you can't create," I guess you haven't noticed how successful SA is. That's... not really valid in any particular way. There are plenty of complaints that can be leveled against SA (I find the humor rather bland lately), but "failing to create something" isn't one.

James · Posts: 1735

ManekiNeko wrote:

Something Awful is just that. It's no different from any of the other cyber-bully sites on the Internet, though... when you've seen one, you've seen them all, and their repetitive, mean-spirited schtick grows old quickly.

JR

STOP SAYING CYBER BULLIES

JESUS

Do you really feel like MEAN FOLKS on the internet have the power to affect your life?

Sub · Posts: 696

It's kind of like an audience member standing up and leaving during a roast.

EDIT: I HAD IT WRONG

the vinculum gate · Posts: 2868

James wrote:

ManekiNeko wrote:

Something Awful is just that. It's no different from any of the other cyber-bully sites on the Internet, though... when you've seen one, you've seen them all, and their repetitive, mean-spirited schtick grows old quickly.

JR

STOP SAYING CYBER BULLIES

JESUS

Do you really feel like MEAN FOLKS on the internet have the power to affect your life?

i am xxcuttingxx because of your cyberbully tactics

James · Posts: 1735

I'm just like those horrible lowtax and redeye people!

Intentionally Wrong · Posts: 673

James wrote:

ManekiNeko wrote:

Something Awful is just that. It's no different from any of the other cyber-bully sites on the Internet, though... when you've seen one, you've seen them all, and their repetitive, mean-spirited schtick grows old quickly.

JR

STOP SAYING CYBER BULLIES

JESUS

Do you really feel like MEAN FOLKS on the internet have the power to affect your life?

How the hell do you think "emo" came into existence in the first place? By people being nice? It seems like every once in a while someone will say something completely inflammatory and when somebody of... let's say "delicate sensibilities"... takes offense, that first joker's quick to pull out the whole, "what, can't take a little ribbing? Grow a thicker skin! If you're worrying about this, you'll never hack it in the real world," et cetera, et cetera. The problem with this attitude is similar to the one friends of depressed people often have:

Sad Cindy: "I'm sad."
Jovial John: "You don't have anything to be sad about! Be happy!"
Sad Cindy: "I'd like to, but I'm sad! The fact that I have no reason to be doesn't change the fact that I am!"

So it is with "mean people on the Internet." I'm glad you've got the psychological fortitude to ignore web-based criticism, James, but that doesn't change the fact that some people--say, I'm guessing Lobst here--aren't so mentally fortunate.

Now. I'm not the kind of person who thinks we've got some sort of inaliable right to not be offended. Things that are offensive are as inevitable in this life as things that will kill you. People do need to learn to live with criticism, as it's inescapable.

That doesn't mean we need shit like Something Awful. Frankly, people are mean enough to each other inadvertantly that I don't see the merit in a site that goes out of their way for it, particularly in the service of weak comedy. And as for the notion that Something Awful serves a valuable purpose similar to that of medieval court jesters (which isn't an argument that's come up here but which has happened in previous conversations I've had on the subject), the problem with that is that the subjects of its barbs don't ever change their ways because of Something Awful. Look at Kieron Gillen. Look at Tim. Look at anybody they lampoon: either their targets aren't listening, don't care, or take offense and respond by becoming even MORE of what Something Awful is objecting to.

Lobst · Posts: 96

Intentionally Wrong wrote:

I'm glad you've got the psychological fortitude to ignore web-based criticism, James, but that doesn't change the fact that some people--say, I'm guessing Lobst here--aren't so mentally fortunate.

I'm mentally unfortunate ;_;

sethsez · Posts: 1977

Intentionally Wrong wrote:

That doesn't mean we need shit like Something Awful. Frankly, people are mean enough to each other inadvertantly that I don't see the merit in a site that goes out of their way for it, particularly in the service of weak comedy. And as for the notion that Something Awful serves a valuable purpose similar to that of medieval court jesters (which isn't an argument that's come up here but which has happened in previous conversations I've had on the subject), the problem with that is that the subjects of its barbs don't ever change their ways because of Something Awful. Look at Kieron Gillen. Look at Tim. Look at anybody they lampoon: either their targets aren't listening, don't care, or take offense and respond by becoming even MORE of what Something Awful is objecting to.

So any humor with a mean streak or an intent to point out someone or something's flaws is inherantly bad and should be ignored or condemned? Well shit, there goes most comedy ever.

I'm not saying that people need to lighten up because it's the internet. I'm saying people need to lighten up because nine times out of ten, the people who are offended are taking it more seriously than Something Awful meant it to be taken. In the rare case that there's some genuine vitriol, it's usually warranted (and blatantly obvious).

B coma · Posts: 1455

In case you didn't feel like browsing the SA forums:

Lowtax wrote:

And all the irate writers and webmasters from the mentioned pretentious video game review sites still don't seem to understand this and are trying to fire back insults by claiming SA is stupid and unfunny and we dont got the smarts like them.

Well Christ, we're a comedy site, we don't even take ourselves seriously. We write about furries and juggalos for crying out loud. If you're so pretentious that you get worked up about an irreverant / irrelevant comedy site making fun of you, you need to reexamine your life and priorities. Who gives a shit if somebody on the Internet doesn't like you?

To summarize: YOU WRITE "NEW YORKER"-ESQUE ARTICLES ABOUT VIDEO GAMES. WE WRITE "WEEKLY WORLD NEWS" ARTICLES ABOUT THE INTERNET. WHO CARES?

Pretty good summation there, although I'd like to know which webmasters/writers actually got irate and fired back over the article, except maybe Kieron who didn't have much of a reaction to my knowledge.

PS"LOL TOUCHY FAGOT"

TOLLMASTER · Posts: 1977

A lot of this thread has been about "cyberbullying", a term that may or may not exist. We seem to have a good grasp on what it means, though.

I think making fun of people is totally okay, as long as you have the fortitudue to recognize when to fucking stop. I think the reason people hate Something Awful so much is that they often have trouble recognizing when and where they've caused to much harm. Their front page stuff is usually pretty good, but the rest of it is either uninspired, or crosses a line I think most people are at least subconsciously aware of. Take the Weekend Web: they attack forums of people who, shall we say, are having difficult lives, and this seems like a low blow. I mean, when you make fun of people like President Bush or Tim Rogers, it's not like they're going to totally fucking break down and call it quits. I don't think Bush is going to say "okay, that's it, I GIVE UP ON IRAQ you COCKSUCKERS" and I don't think Tim Rogers is exactly shedding a tear that some idiot somewhere wasn't smart enough to understand his review and therefore made fun of it.

But people judge them by their attacks on the less fortunate, and I think that's why they are demonized.

kusanagi · Posts: 31

Honestly found SomethingAwful's opinion, worthless as shit.
Go petty someone else for a change. And least note what makes reading an article worthwhile. Dumbfucks

To tell the truth, Tim's way of writing has made me want to adapt an expressive writing style. It does not depend on a few sentences to make an entire paragraph, but words that are inter-connected with purpose. And to note that, whenever I read any of Tim's writings, I must have music playing. Its that compelling that needs music to make it feel whole.

Criticism is a harsh bitch. So SomethingAwful go drown yourself somewhere. I don't think anyone cares anymore.

IIOIOOIOO · Posts: 91

Something Awful is often funny... enough. If I throw it up on a saturday and plow through the front-page stuff I can usually find at least one thing that makes me laugh (well, laugh inside at least.) That puts it alongside or ahead of the rest of the internet in terms of general quality.

More confusing than the behavior on that website is watching you guys swinging around like apes on the tip of Tim Rogerseses wang. You're not him, why do you care? If he waxes do you wax? Do you wane in tandem as well? You come off as superfans on a mysterious corner of the USENET universe untravelled by mortals in recent years. Allow me to betray my geeky roots: alt.rec.sex.fetish.rogerses.tim anyone?

James · Posts: 1735

Look, it's like this:

Something Awful aren't cyber-bullies.

They're cyber-hecklers.

It's not like Biff "Lowtax" Tannen and his gang of goons are holding down Jess Regan for a Gary Busey-inflicted gutpunch outside the Enchantment Under The Sea Dance, christsakes.

Enough of this trail of tears, already.

dhex · Posts: 2963

cyberbully (or cyber-bully, though i would eschew the dash in this case) is a terribly stupid term.

the vinculum gate · Posts: 2868

james totally stole my lunch money

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

Never have a wanted a thread to end more than this...

dhex · Posts: 2963

don't make me cyber-bully (cyberbully) you!

it helps if you think of the thread title as "something lol-ful"

oh shit thought of the day: are there cyber-rapists (cyberrapists)?

Hot Stott Bot · Posts: 2097

dhex wrote:

oh shit thought of the day: are there cyber-rapists (cyberrapists)?

Yes!

the drunken samurai · Posts: 4645

FortNinety wrote:

Never have a wanted a thread to end more than this...

what about the girls thread?

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

That one got me mad, this one just plain fucking embarrassing.

the vinculum gate · Posts: 2868

don't be a party pooper fortninety

this was forum axe material halfway through page 2 anyway, i'm surprised it's still here

DeusJester · Posts: 1388

FortNinety wrote:

Never have a wanted a thread to end more than this...

Agreed. THREAD IS OVER.

aderack · Posts: 5018

Intentionally Wrong wrote:

Sad Cindy: "I'm sad."
Jovial John: "You don't have anything to be sad about! Be happy!"
Sad Cindy: "I'd like to, but I'm sad! The fact that I have no reason to be doesn't change the fact that I am!"

You got the colors backwards there.