On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:17:32 -0400 David Robinow <drobi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I found said joke rather funny :P > Perhaps, as a retired amateur comedian, my standards are too high,
How does one retire from amateur status? Do you suddenly start charging for telling jokes? :-) > but I don't think adding a smilie to a stupid post suddenly turns it > into a joke. Nevertheless, the quality of the attempt is not really > the issue here. The would-be humorist did not need to quote the spam. Well, exactly. I don't think that anyone made any comment about the quality of the joke when talking about the first posting. The only thing that people said was that he shouldn't have repeated the spam. Everyone, including the original poster, who defended the post did so on the grounds that it was funny. That's certainly debatable but no one was telling him not to post until he gets funnier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man Whether the post was funny or not is a judgment call. No one is saying not to post unfunny jokes because no one is the arbiter of what's funny. If you want to argue with the complainers, argue with their actual complaint. Tell us why it is OK to repeat spam with all the spammy URLS intact By the way, my joke above is hilarious. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
