Hello... Hello... Hello... Hello...
Is anybody there?... there... there... there...
Echo... Echo... Echo... Echo...
Quack
Goodbye... bye... bye... bye...
Saturday, July 30, 2005
Thursday, July 28, 2005
are you lonely?
A while back a flyer with the following text was posted in the kitchen at my office. I wish I could claim authorship for it, but I can't.
Are you lonely?
Do you hate making decisions?
Would you rather talk about it than do it?
Then why not
HOLD A MEETING
Are you lonely?
Do you hate making decisions?
Would you rather talk about it than do it?
Then why not
HOLD A MEETING
You can:All on company time!
- See other people
- Sleep in peace
- Offload decisions
- Learn to write volumes of meaningless notes
- Feel important
- Impress your colleagues
MEETINGS
The Practical Alternative to Work
The Practical Alternative to Work
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
a new version of you
Can you becomeDo you know what the lyrics above mean? I don't. Golden started watching Felicity on WE a few months ago, and now she is hooked. As a result I am guaranteed to hear the Felicity theme at least a couple of times every week.
Can you become
A new version of you
New wallpaper
New shoe leather
A new way home
I don't remember
New version of you
I need a new version of me
New version of you
I need a new version of me
I am not really drawn to the show so that probably taints my view of the theme lyrics. Even so, they simply don't make any sense to me. I also know songs for TV shows aren't always supposed to make sense, but these lyrics sound like they are supposed to make sense and still don't. That just makes the whole thing worse.
I think J.J. Abrams could learn a lot from the theme to another TV show that I enjoyed growing up regarding creativity in relaying the purpose of the show. Let me illustrate.
Isn't that so much better?Na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, Batman!
Na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, Batman!
Batman, Batman, Batman!
Monday, July 25, 2005
as if sarcasm is funny
I was speaking with BB yesterday about my comments on humor from last week and he pointed out that I neglected to mention sarcasm. This is one of the more appreciated versions of humor and so he wondered how I could have forgotten about it. Yeah, like people laugh at sarcasm.
Sarcasm is yet one more form of humor that works best for pessimists because they are used to deflating optimists' and idealists' dreams. All a pessimist has to do is adopt an exaggerated tone of voice and say what he or she is thinking. Like that's so hard.
Both BB and I have been known to use sarcasm for the occasional laugh. When listening to a conversation and nothing more witty comes to mind, a sarcastic remark will usually at least pick up a courtesy laugh (or moan). Yeah, apparently we'll both stoop to just about any level for attention.
I thought about writing a sarcastic post about our conversation, but I was concerned that some people might not pick up on the sarcasm given that I couldn't adopt the exaggerated tone of voice. As if someone is so dense they wouldn't pick up on that.
Sarcasm is yet one more form of humor that works best for pessimists because they are used to deflating optimists' and idealists' dreams. All a pessimist has to do is adopt an exaggerated tone of voice and say what he or she is thinking. Like that's so hard.
Both BB and I have been known to use sarcasm for the occasional laugh. When listening to a conversation and nothing more witty comes to mind, a sarcastic remark will usually at least pick up a courtesy laugh (or moan). Yeah, apparently we'll both stoop to just about any level for attention.
I thought about writing a sarcastic post about our conversation, but I was concerned that some people might not pick up on the sarcasm given that I couldn't adopt the exaggerated tone of voice. As if someone is so dense they wouldn't pick up on that.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
i wish i didn't tell
This past week we have been having a small Texas Hold 'em tournament at my office. I don't have too much experience with the game, but I like to think I can carry my own. We had a practice game on Monday, three preliminary games on Tuesday through Thursday, and the final on Friday. Anyone who won a preliminary game on the Tuesday through Thursday games got a pass into the final round. If you won on Tuesday or Wednesday you could still play in the other rounds as a kind of spoiler. Games were timed out at 50 minutes.
In a strange irony I lead in the games on Monday through Wednesday for the majority of the game, but lost to the exact same person on the very last hand. Things did not seem to be going my way. I was relatively confident in my abilities to win Thursday's game, though, so long as the cards would cooperate.
After my Wednesday game there were whispers that I had a tell. I had something that would make it obvious to others whether I have a strong or weak hand. I tried to think of anything that I could be possibly giving away. It had to be an unconscious tell because I could think of no conscious ones that matched what I knew of my behavior.
After some investigation I found that a lot of unconscious tells have to do with where a person looks after they get their cards. Look too long at the cards that were flopped and that means you have a bad hand. Glance at your chips immediately after the flop and that means you have a good hand. I decided to reverse these and see if I could confuse my foes.
Throughout the game I purposefully threw tells that said I had exactly the opposite of what I actually had, but this was to no avail. No one even looked my way when the tells were supposed to be noticed, and at least one person still could somewhat predict the strength of my hand.
After I went out I asked what my tell was. I hesitate to say in the case that I cannot control it in the future, but when I bluff my eyes apparently dart around quicker than when I have a strong hand. Now that I have given away the secret to anyone who is planning to play cards with me in the future, I will simply need to learn how to defeat it. I figure if I don't force myself to train the tell away I'll always have it, and that won't be good if I want to milk some chips out of you with my full house.
In a strange irony I lead in the games on Monday through Wednesday for the majority of the game, but lost to the exact same person on the very last hand. Things did not seem to be going my way. I was relatively confident in my abilities to win Thursday's game, though, so long as the cards would cooperate.
After my Wednesday game there were whispers that I had a tell. I had something that would make it obvious to others whether I have a strong or weak hand. I tried to think of anything that I could be possibly giving away. It had to be an unconscious tell because I could think of no conscious ones that matched what I knew of my behavior.
After some investigation I found that a lot of unconscious tells have to do with where a person looks after they get their cards. Look too long at the cards that were flopped and that means you have a bad hand. Glance at your chips immediately after the flop and that means you have a good hand. I decided to reverse these and see if I could confuse my foes.
Throughout the game I purposefully threw tells that said I had exactly the opposite of what I actually had, but this was to no avail. No one even looked my way when the tells were supposed to be noticed, and at least one person still could somewhat predict the strength of my hand.
After I went out I asked what my tell was. I hesitate to say in the case that I cannot control it in the future, but when I bluff my eyes apparently dart around quicker than when I have a strong hand. Now that I have given away the secret to anyone who is planning to play cards with me in the future, I will simply need to learn how to defeat it. I figure if I don't force myself to train the tell away I'll always have it, and that won't be good if I want to milk some chips out of you with my full house.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
if you like funny - part 2
This may appear off-topic for anyone who was drawn in by yesterday's post. Anyway, you've been warned.
As I said in part 1, I believe that a humorist must have at least a slightly skewed view of the world. Either that or the humorist must understand what is absurd in the world to present it as funny. I think this points to a certain type of person who has the potential to be funny, but hasn't taken that step yet.
In the formation of my humor I went through a long silly stage that lasted my entire childhood and slowly branched out of silly and into funny in high school and college. In some respects my humor is still silly rather than funny, but for the most part I have matured to funny. There seem to be a lot of people who are still at the silly stage.
Please don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with silly in the same way that there is nothing wrong with PB&J. It is fine once in a while, but it suited my tastes more frequently as a kid.
I think part of the reason that I notice so much silly humor is that I am a Christian and so a large percentage of the worlds I exist in are heavily populated by Christians. While I know plenty of Christians that are at the least much funnier than I, there is still a large percentage of the Christian population who are really lacking a sense of humor, though they excel in the silly.
I am honestly amazed at how well-done much of Christian children's entertainment is and how it contrasts with how lousy a lot of the other stuff is. The reason for that is that children's humor is not funny, but silly. We can handle silliness easier than real humor because it is absurd on a much shallower level. The difference is subtle, but the average adult can pick it up. If you aren't sure that you can, think about the difference between Full House and The Simpsons.
I used to think that the reason that a lot of Christians (and most of Christian entertainment) was not funny was because there was an unwritten standard of decency which could not be breached. I guess it is possible that this is the case, but I have serious doubts. I personally think some offensive humor is funny, but the best humor (and that which Christians do not excel at) is not offensive humor, but wit. The humor I most appreciate is that which most artfully illustrates absurdity. Most offensive humor lacks the art that I long for in comedy and rarely has any true wit involved.
I think the problem here is an extreme reliance on literalism of the world around us that leaves no room for absurdity. Furthermore, I think that some feel that there is a need to put on a good face. In my opinion, that prevents people from embracing the absurdity that they observe in life and become truly funny, and can lead to hypocrisy.
I say embrace the absurdities in your life and others' lives as well. Take note of them. Joke about them. Make your life a little more funny.
As I said in part 1, I believe that a humorist must have at least a slightly skewed view of the world. Either that or the humorist must understand what is absurd in the world to present it as funny. I think this points to a certain type of person who has the potential to be funny, but hasn't taken that step yet.
In the formation of my humor I went through a long silly stage that lasted my entire childhood and slowly branched out of silly and into funny in high school and college. In some respects my humor is still silly rather than funny, but for the most part I have matured to funny. There seem to be a lot of people who are still at the silly stage.
Please don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with silly in the same way that there is nothing wrong with PB&J. It is fine once in a while, but it suited my tastes more frequently as a kid.
I think part of the reason that I notice so much silly humor is that I am a Christian and so a large percentage of the worlds I exist in are heavily populated by Christians. While I know plenty of Christians that are at the least much funnier than I, there is still a large percentage of the Christian population who are really lacking a sense of humor, though they excel in the silly.
I am honestly amazed at how well-done much of Christian children's entertainment is and how it contrasts with how lousy a lot of the other stuff is. The reason for that is that children's humor is not funny, but silly. We can handle silliness easier than real humor because it is absurd on a much shallower level. The difference is subtle, but the average adult can pick it up. If you aren't sure that you can, think about the difference between Full House and The Simpsons.
I used to think that the reason that a lot of Christians (and most of Christian entertainment) was not funny was because there was an unwritten standard of decency which could not be breached. I guess it is possible that this is the case, but I have serious doubts. I personally think some offensive humor is funny, but the best humor (and that which Christians do not excel at) is not offensive humor, but wit. The humor I most appreciate is that which most artfully illustrates absurdity. Most offensive humor lacks the art that I long for in comedy and rarely has any true wit involved.
I think the problem here is an extreme reliance on literalism of the world around us that leaves no room for absurdity. Furthermore, I think that some feel that there is a need to put on a good face. In my opinion, that prevents people from embracing the absurdity that they observe in life and become truly funny, and can lead to hypocrisy.
I say embrace the absurdities in your life and others' lives as well. Take note of them. Joke about them. Make your life a little more funny.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
if you like funny - part 1
There seem to be as many different types of humor as there are types of people. I like to think that I have some understanding of humor, but truthfully I only really understand what I like. Some people like slapstick, some like satire, some like offensive humor, some like stuffy humor, and some (but not many) like puns.
It has occurred to me (partially because others have pointed it out) that humor happens when something absurd is presented to the brain. Therefore, people who care more about word usage would find puns funnier because the absurdity of the puns would be more acute.
I have a theory that most funny people are slightly disturbed in some way. The reason for this is that a theoretically normal person (no actual "normal" people exist) would not naturally have a point of view that picks out the absurd.
I also think that pessimists tend to be the funniest of people because the absurdity that they recognize is mostly negative. I am not sure why negative things are typically so funny, but they are. Optimists and Idealists can be funny, but they are usually better as the subjects of jokes rather than the creators or tellers of jokes. I don't know how realists play into this.
I have a further theory that you can figure out how a person is disturbed by the type of humor that they are drawn to. Please remember that I count myself among some of the dysfunctional descriptions described below. Please also remember that neither the list nor the descriptions are absolutely definitive.
It has occurred to me (partially because others have pointed it out) that humor happens when something absurd is presented to the brain. Therefore, people who care more about word usage would find puns funnier because the absurdity of the puns would be more acute.
I have a theory that most funny people are slightly disturbed in some way. The reason for this is that a theoretically normal person (no actual "normal" people exist) would not naturally have a point of view that picks out the absurd.
I also think that pessimists tend to be the funniest of people because the absurdity that they recognize is mostly negative. I am not sure why negative things are typically so funny, but they are. Optimists and Idealists can be funny, but they are usually better as the subjects of jokes rather than the creators or tellers of jokes. I don't know how realists play into this.
I have a further theory that you can figure out how a person is disturbed by the type of humor that they are drawn to. Please remember that I count myself among some of the dysfunctional descriptions described below. Please also remember that neither the list nor the descriptions are absolutely definitive.
- Slapstick will draw people who on some level enjoy others' discomfort.
- Satire will draw people who have a beef with someone or something and enjoy seeing it portrayed absurdly.
- Offensive humor will draw people who have a beef with someone or something and never mentally matured past the seventh grade.
- Stuffy humor will draw people who want to feel smarter than everyone else because they understand the subtle reference in the New Yorker comic that they just read.
- Puns will draw language nerds that are more concerned with how something is said than what is being said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
