HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/secret identity

Pseudofact

From: secret identity
Posted on: 04:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• It's true, and I didn't realize it.
• I think Homestar is most likely trying to say that he wants a pen name. When he signs "Mr. Dee Williams" at the "motel", that is an alias. Both of which are pseudonyms. The fact should probably be rewritten to reflect this pen name/alias difference.

Arguments against:

• This is too wishy-washy; Homestar's not the brightest bulb on the lamp.
• Even if the sentence is true, it's kind of obvious, and doesn't really need to be pointed out.
• Homestar constantly says things with plain obliviousness. He never referred to himself as "Mr. Dee Williams" so it's likely Bubs just gave him that one, as everyone else uses one.

Additional comments:

• There has been evidence of multiple homestar runners (ex: Senorial Day)
  • Even though I don't like this fact, I don't think that's the case here.
• I just realized something (even though the statements in this fact were not something I had thought of before I read it): it is entirely possible (and quite likely) that the events depicted by strong bad are entirely false. This would mean that the "dee williams" bit never really happened, and so Homestar wanting a pseudonym is a comic coincidence with regards to Strong Bad's accounts. Remember that most of Strong Bad's accounts like these are at best questionable in how real they are. And so their "non-existence" is a very really possible reality. :)
  • The only thing to refute this well-thought-out comment is that Homestar is still sitting on the couch with Marzipan and the Scarfgirl magazine when he mentions getting a "pseudoname". That shows continuity, so if the Cara Carabowditbowdit thing happened in Strong Bad's imagination, Homestar's line did also.
    • Further thought: This sort of conundrum is evidence, to my mind anyway, that we're taking things too seriously on this wiki. By trying to analyze the H*R universe and make sense of all the things that happen, we're tending to make these explanations too complex and are running into logical fallacies and dead-ends. I think we wouldn't be in that position so much if we didn't try to take it quite so seriously. :)
      • Ah! A very true observation! However, that there might be some reality about the Cara Carabowditbowdit story "arc" does not necessarily imply that the motel "arc" be real as well, it only suggests such a thing. It is not unlikely Strong Bad is exaggerating about one thing but not the other. Not that I have taken this way too far or anything... (Nope, I just took "far" and extended it to the bowels of near-infinite unbeleivability. Yes?)
      • Oh! But isn't this kind of what we try to do in this wiki? Take what makes no sense, and try to make whatever sense we can of it, and document our observations? We are indeed a living paradox if you will (I believe it's been mentioned before in a discussion): we take a completely hilarious and un-serious topic and make it more enjoyable and funny by treating the topic with complete and utter seriousness.
        • Okay, interview over. Commence beating!

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Dog and frog agog

From: secret identity
Posted on: 22:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• I think you should accept it. It's possible he might've been talking about those. Also, however, I concur with your replies down there about how in Nintendogs, you play as a person, not a dog. Star Fox DOES seem to contain both.

Arguments against:

• ... Because, of course, those are the only games ever in existence that feature frogs and dogs.
• Frogger isn't particularly effeminate.
• You don't play as a dog in Nintendogs.
• I doubt he's even referencing anything, except the very nature of "girly" games in general.

Additional comments:

• Come to think of it, in Star Fox, a frog and a dog are both main characters. As well as in Breath of Fire 2. While neither of those games strike me as particularly effeminate either, they are games that feature dogs and frogs besides those in the aforementioned fact.
  • Technically, the dog character in Star Fox is not a main character. The dog you're referring to is most likely General Pepper, who is a secondary character, and the only other canine is Fox himself (who is, of course, a fox).
    • Pssst... I was referring to General Pepper, and perhaps we are using different definitions of "main."
      • Generally speaking, a main character in a game is a character who is central to the plot, and/or who you either play as or interact with. Star Fox's main characters are Fox, Slippy, Peppy, Falco and Andross. Pepper's only function is to give you a synopsis of each level and congratulate you when you beat the game. (And this discussion is going off-topic.)
        • There are two dogs in the game, Pepper and Bill. Neither are playable.
          • Bill showed up in Star Fox 64, and he's DEFINITELY a secondary - even more so than Pepper. :)
          • Definitely. SFA aside, Pepper is probably the most important character in every game behind Fox, his teammates, and the respective villains.
  • More to the point, Star Fox is not generally considered a "girly" game.
  • If anything, I think he's referring to Animal Crossing.
    • I personally doubt that too.
      • Really? What about the following quote from this interview:

        MATT CHAPMAN: (to Patrick Clark) Melissa was way into Animal Crossing when it came out. I don't know if you heard that was the game where you like basically...my friend calls it "video crack" {Patrick laughs and Mike smiles}cuz it's one of those games where you start living in this village of animals as this thing and you really just kinda live and like buy stuff and you decorate your house so you have to play it every day and...

        • So? That doesn't mean that Strong Bad was referring to that game or any other specific single game at all. Though, yes, it does run contrary to the original fact.
          • That's true...there's nothing that Strong Bad says that necessarily implies that he's referring to Animal Crossing. Nonetheless, it certainly fits as a shining example of a game (a) in which you pretend to be a cutesy animal, (b) which appeals mainly to women, and (c) which TBC know about.
            • (a) You're a human in AC. (b) From my own experience, it appeals about equally to both sexes.
              • To be fair, before I ever got into Animal Crossing myself, I always thought you played as an animal. It wasn't until I actually sat down with the game that I realized you play as a human in a land of animals.
• What about the possibility that Strong Bad is referring to a MUD, MUCK or MMORPG such as Second Life? There are a number of furry-themed MUDs and MUCKs around, and Second Life allows you to create a character that is literally anything you want it to be. (It's unlikely that they referred to any of these things, but it's possible.)
  • Notice how many things people have come up with to which this could refer? I smell TTATOT.
    • I agree - this is why I voted to decline. There's no clear reference here.
• Strongbad has shown himself to be a less-than-reliable source of information. (pronunciation of "pwn", etc), so he doesn't need to be referencing a specific game. He probably is just saying that any game featuring playing as a dog or a frog would be too cutesy and girly to cut it.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Similarity? I think so!

From: secret identity
Posted on: 21:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

Arguments against:

• Dangeresque does not use a typewriter.
• The room is used in multiple different toons.
• It resembles the opening of The Interview more than Dangeresque.
• If it is mentioned in the "Places" section at the top of the page, we don't need to mention it again in the Inside References section.

Additional comments:

• I thought the Smoky Office was used in both Dangeresque and The Interview - it's the same location. In which case, we wouldn't need to mention the reference.
  • Hence the "multiple different toons" reference above.
  • I thought it was where Renaldo worked in the Dangeresque series.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Worst reference ever.

From: secret identity
Posted on: 14:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The tone is different because he's being thrown out of the house, much less can he do the pauses in such a short time. The comment is "random enough" to me that it fits as a reference.
• Wikipedia calls this phrase a neologism and attributes it to the The Simpsons. Click this link and scroll down to "Worst (insert word) Ever." What this means is that Wikipedia agrees that this term has either been coined or widely popularized by The Simpsons.
  • Not anymore, it doesn't. :) (I added the below info about "Valley Girl" talk to the article.)

Arguments against:

• Sure, it has "worst (something) ever", but's that where the similarity ends. It's not in the same tone or with the pauses.
• "Worst (something) ever" is a common phrase that predates the Simpsons. It's more commonly associated with "Valley Girl" - a general style of speaking that became popular in the '80s, characterized by phrases such as "Like, totally!" and "What-EVER!"
  • In fact, Comic Book Guy's use of the phrase on the Simpsons is itself a reference to this earlier speech style. While Comic Book Guy may have popularized the phrase for today's culture, this is not where the phrase originated.
    • Oh! That makes a LOT more sense. I'm not going to change my vote, but I think posting what you just mentioned as the fact would be a LOT more appropriate!
      • I don't think this warrants a Fun Fact - unless there is something very specific about it (like attributing it to a specific person), we usually don't include references to general styles of speech.

Additional comments:

• I think that for a very long time to come, the construction "worst (something) ever" (when it's a sentence standing alone like this one is (as opposed to being a part of a larger sentence or paragraph)) almost has to refer to Comic Book Guy, at least indirectly. It's too big a pop-culture reference not to be brought to mind. I'm not sure TBC meant to make a specific reference, but they had to be aware that people would jump to that conclusion.
  • This was my reason for voting "for" as well. In the unlikely event that TBC wrote that line without intending the reference, it's extremely unlikely that they didn't realize it afterwards when they heard/saw the line.
• Yes, but if TBC had intended a reference like this, they would have made it very, very clear. Intended meaning and Implied meaning are two entirely different things, and with the right mind-set, you can imply just about anything on this website.
  • I agree with you, which is why I didn't vote to accept. You have to admit, however, that the phrase itself is now a marked phrase.
    • Marked enough to show, I think, that TBC did it with intention.
• A similar fun fact was STUFF'd quite a bit ago and declined. You can find it here.
• While the Valley Girl thing might be true, I hadn't ever heard about it...I think might be appropriate at least to mention the Simpsons connection, since that's the context in which most people have heard the expression (at least in the last 15 years). What about a rewording of the fact like:

The King of Town's line, "Worst mayonnaise party ever," refers to a catchphrase common in "Valley Girl" speech and popularized by Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons.

• If anyone thinks it's worth the effort, feel free to submit this as a proposed revision.
  • I'll go along with that.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• Incorporates the "Valley Girl" origin and mentions that the phrase was popularized by Comic Book Guy.
• According to this Wikipedia page, the phrase "worst (insert word) ever" was widely popularized by The Simpsons.

Arguments against:

• The connection to the Simpsons may still not be strong enough, due to the fact that the KOT doesn't emphasize any spaces between his words.
• Is it really that much of a stretch to think that people actually use "Worst (whatever) ever" without referencing the Simpsons?

Additional comments:

• Is this revision really a reference, or is it just an explanation of where the phrase came from? It seems more like the latter to me, in which case, why is this notable at all?
  • The fact that the Simpsons popularized a phrase does not make its use a reference. How many people use "Worst (whatever) ever" offhand without ever thinking of the show? This proposal is doing nothing more than suggest that we start cataloguing the etymology of every phrase uttered by the characters. Adding the Valley Girl bit just adds another step to something that isn't needed in the first place.
    • Good point--I'm removing my vote.
• There have been so many 'fun facts' in the form of "WORST XXXXX EVER" in the past that I think they all need to deleted on sight unless it's abundantly clear that they're trying to mimic the comic book guy's style.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

Reference, or just coincidence?

From: secret identity
Posted on: 14:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• See secret identity#Easter Eggs. Both books were written by Beverly Sportsinterviews.
  • They also both won "Some Award".
  • The titles are also incredibly similar.
• Same author, similar presentation. Similar name. I don't consider that a coincidence.
• Completely identical jokes. I don't even know why this would be STUFFed.

Arguments against:

• The tone is completely different; I'd call this a coincidence rather than a deliberate reference.

Additional comments:

• Re first arg against: Just because a tone is different doesn't mean the context isn't similar enough.
• Actually, I'd suggest revising this fact - Strong Bad's mangling of the city and state in this email is almost identical to the way he did it in origins at the beginning of the email. The book followed as a joke based on that.
  • Whoops - realized I was talking about two different things. Nevermind.

[ Back to STUFF index ]