HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/lady fan

[edit] Office Space redux

From: lady fan
Posted on: 17:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Arguments for:

1. The combination of "I'm gonna go ahead" and "need you to" is unusual (and also makes not much sense).
2. Re against #2 The underlings fact isn't a fair comparison — the line in that toon, "We're going to need you to flush twice!" was only loosely similar to Lumbergh's actual lines. (His actual line is "I'm gonna need you to go ahead and...")
3. Re against #1 Invalid. Everything said in the HR universe (aside from like, pfargtl and fhqwhgads) are ordinary english words. What's your point? If you're trying to say it's a normal way of speaking, it's not. "I'm gonna go ahead..." and "I'm gonna need you to..." both are, but their combination like this is not ordinary speech.
4. Re arg against #1: If they're just ordinary English words, wouldn't there be some grammatical sense to them? If the quote had normal grammer in it, then i would agree with you, but the mess up with the whole quote makes it a remote possiblity that it is TTATOT.

Arguments against:

1. Just ordinary English words.
2. A similar fact based on the same wording was recently declined from underlings (see first comment).

Additional comments:

• No opinion on the value of this fact. It was removed after having been on the page for about a year, and is currently affirmed by this article. The reasoning for removing it is based on the recent declining of an Office Space ref in underlings. Bringing this here for community input. Presumably the Office Space article should follow the result of this STUFFing, as well.
• Here are Lumbergh's quotes from the above IMDb link:
  1. "Ahh, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too... "
  2. "Milt, we're gonna need to go ahead and move you downstairs into storage B."
  3. "You can just go ahead and move a little bit to the left."
• The first two demonstrate the combination of "I'm gonna need" and "go ahead and", and the third quote is connected (but lacks the "I'm gonna need you to" part).
  • That third one doesn't really fit at all.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] I'm legally required to STUFF this

From: lady fan
Posted on: 00:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• It's true, Strong Bad did make a comment like this before.
• An interesting counterpoint to the original claim.
• Not something one would necessarily notice just by watching the toon.
• Regardless of whether he was sincere when he said he was legally required, whether he purposely answered Sibbie's request, etc., this remark shows a definite contradicition in what Strong Bad says, which may be of interest to visitors of the site.

Arguments against:

• However, this may not be so much a contradiction as a result of the passage of time. SB may not have been required to do that back then.
  • Laws do change, you know.
    • I don't think Strong Bad truly believes that there is such a law; he's speaking facetiously. This comment, therefore, points out a fundamental change in his attitude toward fan requests.
      • Not necessarily: "I'm not here to fulfill your every freakin' whim!" is direct. "Since I'm legally obligated to do anything I'm asked to do in a stupid email..." sounds rather sarcastic. His attitude would be the same in both cases - it's just how he expresses it.
• Despite his protests, Strong Bad did, in fact, end up making a song about Sibbie, therefore fulfilling her freakin' whim.
  • Maybe it's not so much whether he wants to do what the email say as much as he must do what it says
    • That's it. It's both sarcasm—saying that he doesn't really have to do what the email says—and a humorous acknowledgement of the frequency with which he does. As such, sibbie does come to mind, but so does your friends and, to a lesser degree, dragon, comic, crazy cartoon, 1 step ahead, band names, theme party... In other words, there's a connection to sibbie, but it's sort of a TTATOT-Inside-Reference.
• Strong Bad has been known to break the law before.

Additional comments:

• "Despite his protests, Strong Bad did, in fact, end up making a song about Sibbie, therefore fulfilling her freakin' whim.": How about a revision to reflect that?
• (1) This version would be apropos only at sibbie, and (2) once there, would be pretty unnecessary (simply stating the obvious point of the email)
• You know, these sort of facts would probably be more noteworthy if there was any real continuity at all in H*R. Sure, old events are "remembered", but only loosely. It seems like TBC just go with what sounds good at the time, not really bothering to go back over their earlier works to see if it contradicts something. Point being, these sort of facts are the definitive sign that we're taking things *waaaay* too seriously here. Many things like this are indeed interesting, and are great talk page material, but aren't really article-worthy.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• Gets rid of questionable statement regarding whether or not it's a contradiction.
• Still mentions the interesting tie in, which is not easily noticible to the average user.

Arguments against:

Additional comments:

• This seems to indicate that Strong Bad is being tongue-in-cheek self-referential as well as being mildly sarcastic about his actions in the emails.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] The case of the missing stand

From: lady fan
Posted on: 21:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• All the list says it she doesn't have the stand. It doesn't say she needs one. Therefore, it is true.

Arguments against:

• The gun seems to not even be plugged in. Clearly it's cold and no stand is required.
• It's also not 100% necessary to have a glue gun on a stand. It's dangerous to lay it down hot, but technically you can get away with that.
  • Oh. Well, then... I was mistaken. I've only seen good-quality hot glue guns, then.

Additional comments:

• Maybe it's resting on the trigger.
• Re: 1st Arg For: May be true, but is it actually noteworthy?
  • Did YOU notice it?
    • No. I didn't see anything wrong with the scene, actually.
      • Then it's not too obvious to accept.
        • I'm saying it's not worth noting in the first place, on the grounds that there's really nothing that extraordinary about the stand missing. It's quite reasonable to say that Marzipan either forgot the stand or doesn't have one, and that she just laid the glue gun down on the table (regardless of how dangerous that is).
          • She DIDN'T forget the stand. Hot glue guns COME with stands, attached even. There's no way to forget it.
            • Not all of them. There are some cheap glue guns that have separate stands or don't come with any at all. Check your local hardware store or art supply store.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Ned Lichtensteinerson

From: lady fan
Posted on: 07:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• This fact is indeed true, see this link and this link and this link for a few of many examples.
• The emphasis of the fact is on the painting technique, with the Lichtenstein bit as supplementary information.

Arguments against:

• There's no clear connection between Lichtenstein and this toon. They're both referencing the same source, which is inexpensively printed and melodramatic color comic books/strips. Lichtenstein's only known for the technique because he exaggerated it and introduced it to high art. It had already been in use for decades.
• As for mentioning the Benday dots themselves, I don't see the point. Any artist trying to evoke a comic strip feel would be likely to use a similar effect. Note that they did it before on The Castlefunnies in old comics.
• Why is it a reference to an artist who emulated comic dot printing, and not simply the source? The style simply is that of old comics, and further extension of that is silly.
• I agree with the above--Lichtenstein and TBC are both paying homage to the same source material.

Additional comments:

• Is there a difference between Benday dots and halftoning? Wikipedia didn't give any real clues, and we linked to Halftone in old comics.
  • Benday dots are one particular method (the original method?) of halftoning. You will still see it used, but you'll also see newer methods such as dithering.
• This could work for or against the fact, depending on how you look at it: The effect used here and on The Castlefunnies is not actually Benday dots. Benday dots are each of a single one of a small number of colors (generally four to six), with combination colors created by their overlap, and with the dots being the only source of color on the page, aside from the (generally) white paper and (generally) black outlining. TBC drew their pictures in solid colors, then applied an overlay with a fake dot "texture" to it. Check out Image:Castle funnies1.png, and you'll see how the dots appear even in the pure white regions; this wouldn't happen with a real Benday process. So it argues that the comic doesn't use Benday dots at all, but on the other hand it argues that they were intentionally going for a Benday-type look.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• Just because they use a similar style doesn't mean they are referencing a previous cartoon. That's like saying Schenectady Crispies are a reference to Strong Bad's EGGS because they're both cereals.

Additional comments:

• And then move into "Inside References"
  • I disagree. I think that, if anything, it should be in Explanations.
  • Agreed, Explanations.
• Added "simulated" to FF due to comment above.
  • I tweaked the wording a bit more. The comic isn't really utilizing Benday dots per se; rather, the pattern of dots is intended to simulate them.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Dry The Cheat

From: lady fan
Posted on: 21:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• Both The Cheat and Hobbes have been in a dryer, mainly for cleaning purposes.
• Strong Bad said that The Cheat could go "back in the wash," proving that he had been in the washing machine prior.

Arguments against:

• The email does not mention giving The Cheat a bath by putting him in the dryer. The main reasons why Hobbes and The Cheat are in a dryer are different, i.e., The Cheat is mainly in the dryer so that he can be nice and fluffy. The main reason why Hobbes is in the dryer is so he can be cleaned.
• Given The Cheat's condition after throwing up, who in the world would want to give him a normal bath anyways?
• I'm sure this joke has been used in other comedies before.
• Hobbes gets washed with a washer and dryer because he's a stuffed toy, and that would be where one normally washes stuffed toys. The Cheat, meanwhile, is a little animal, so putting him in the dryer is completely abnormal and can be considered a gag on its own.

Additional comments:

• A "reference" means TBC knowingly did something in order to parody or mention something in some way, not that something they did happens to resemble something else by coincidence. We should bear that in mind when considering what is a reference.
• Wasn't there another toon where The Cheat was in a dryer? This may just be a reference to that.
  • The cheat is in the dryer in 2 years--
    • ...and that is already mentioned on the page.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] PikaCheat, I choose you!

From: lady fan
Posted on: 18:20, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• TBC are aware of The Cheat's resemblance to Pikachu, and have used this as a joke in the past (see The Cheat Theme Song and Homestar Quiz).

Arguments against:

• That's really reaching. Most things after getting spun in the dryer contain static electricity; a vague resemblance to an electric creature probably doesn't play into it.
  • Additionally, Strong Bad makes a direct reference to the static electricity issue: "Use a dryer sheet, man!" Dryer sheets are designed to reduce static build-up.
• The similarity between The Cheat and Pikachu was unintentional (see NYU Talk - 1 Mar 2005), so this and any other behavioral similarities between the two are probably coincidences.

Additional comments:

• yea, and pikachu's other power is vomit blast, obviously. no, seriously, i would vote for this if the cheat made some kind of pikachu sound before the zap, but, ... no.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Twees vs. Preowww

From: lady fan
Posted on: 16:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The spelling (give or take a few e's) seems to be a running gag of sorts. Running gags are mentioned on every toon they appear.
• This is specific to the email in that it is displayed on the page with The Paper.

Arguments against:

• This really isn't specific to the email.
• A stretch.
  • How is it a stretch? Everything in the item is true, as we have shown for a while now.

Additional comments:

• Just a note: there are identical or related fun facts on autobiography, haircut, part-time job, and garage sale. When the fate of this fact is decided, some of those should be changed accordingly for consistency.
  • This is a running gag. This item should be automatically accepted per our practice of listing running gags on each page where they occur.
    • If it is, then it should be added to the Running Gags category.
      • It already is in the running gags category. (That is, the category it's in is a subcategory of running gags.)
• A question on argument for #1, "all up-ons" has been a gag since suntan and it has been mentioned as many times as "Preeeow". Why isn't this mentioned as well?
  • Never mind, someone just added it.
• Is "Preeeeow" really an onomatopoeia, or just a sound effect? Doesn't a word have to start enjoying use as, well, an actual word in order to become an onomatopoeia?
  • Given the examples on the Wikipedia page ("vroom", "clickety-clack", etc.), I would have to say that yes, within the context of H*R it really is an onomatopoeia.
• Seeing as how this is probably the forty-leventh email to use "Preeow" either as a character line or text, haven't most people assumed that it's supposed to be The Paper's coming-down sound?
  • Forty-leven is a very small number.
• Could this one be reworded a bit, to let people know that this isn't the first reference to preeow? Please?
  • Well, it does have the link associated with it. Surely that would let someone know that more information exists.
    • However, mentioning that this isn't the first appearance may make it more likely for someone to look at the link. I knew it has been referenced before, but didn't really think to check until this discussion, and it's been a little more common than I thought.
      • I agree. Revision proposed.
        • Note: Trying to propose a revision when it's being accepted so overwhelmingly is unproductive. Besides, that's just a rewording of the original. I went ahead and merged the revision with the original.
          • I wouldn't have called that a "reword" - the original form of the fact was "This is onamotapeioa", and the new version is "This has occurred before." Sounds like two different (but related) facts to me.
            • Still, the heart of the matter is that preeeow = onomatopoeia for teh p. Noting the appearances just kind of fleshes it out a bit more. Doesn't really change it. (Doesn't really matter, either.)
• LePorello voted to ACCEPT the original and DECLINE the former revision, so I have moved his vote.

[ Back to STUFF index ]