Talk:slumber party

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 22:21, 3 October 2007 by (Talk)
Jump to: navigation, search


Who's Gary?

I can't help but wonder... who's Gary? I can only hope that his existence will be explained in the next email. Maybe I wasn't paying attention to the last email... --Chiron 11:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a reference to Limozeen Gary? Dementedc 11:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking it was Gary Palaroncini as well, with all the Limozeen and sloshy appearances as of late. jrgilby
I doubt it's reference to anything. It's just a random guy, a nobody. That's how I interpret it. Especially as it's not really stated anywhere why Strong Bad would be expecting an e-mail from Limozeen. --Sysrq868 16:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I was just going to say this would be a reference to a character if anything from Spongebob, not an episode. (Gary is a snail). But since Gary is a common name this seems a very tenuous link at best. I removed that line. --Foolster41 18:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I assume when TBC were planning this email, Matt/Mike just started singing a random song about Gary and they decided to put it in. It could have very easily been Larry, Paul, Dan, Fred, George, Tom, Dick or Harry. – The Chort 18:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
There was an episode of Spongebob where he and Gary were separated somehow and Spongebob missed him alot. Awexome 20:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Coulomb's law?

I don't think "Coolguy's Law" is a direct reference to Coulomb's law, even if it was mentioned in "4 branches". "Coolguy's Law" is a throwback to "Prof. Tor Coolguy" from the Strong Bad Is In Jail Cartoon. The fact that "Coolguy" sounds like "Coulomb" is just a coincidence. Not to mention there's no similarity whatsoever between the two actual equations, nor any compelling reason to write out and explain Coulomb's law in this article instead of just linking to it.

Amen, amen, a thousand times amen -Jdhannan 15:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree as well. Besides, Coulomb's law is an inverse square law anyway, not an inverse proportional law. --Crazyswordsman 15:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I disagree, i think it IS a reference. — Defender1031*Talk 15:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree, this is NOT a reference. Where is STUFF when you need it.-racerx_is_alive
OK DeFender, some of us have actually taken Physics courses (not to mention very basic mathematics) and
realize that Coulomb's law does not actually have an inverse relationship - it is an inverse square law. Come now.
Do you have any basis for making the claim other than the distant phonetic similarity?
It's gone. Mycroft Holmes 17:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree with defender, i thought of coulomb's law before i even remembered strong bad is in jail, it sounds completely the same, and i don't think tbc would go as so far to make the equations or whatever similar, but i don't really know much about physics and such considering i'm kinda young. --Kanjiro talk 02:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Inverse square and inverse proprotionality are rather different. I'd say that any ref to Coloumb's Law would be weak. I'm not so sure it's a reference to Tor Coolguy, but it's a better chance than Coloumb. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I doubt that any joke would be made that would explictly require the viewer to be aware that Coulomb's Law is an inverse square. Why would they specifically refer to Tor Coolguy? Because they're formulating a mathematical Law and they have a name that works as a parody of Coulomb. To my eyes, it's a clear reference to both. Johnny Ord'nary 12:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
DeFender1031, why did you say "We don't really do this", when I was trying to list the formula? Makes you seem like a bit of a knob, seeing as someone put the same formula in, in a different place. But hey, whatever wikimaster.


Is it just me or is the animation for Strong Bad clearing the text on his computer different in this e-mail? I would check another one, but I don't have time. Dementedc 11:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Still looks like the same fwoosh-up to me. suǝʇʇıʞ ƃuıɥɔund 12:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
It does look like video-games -> food clears to the upper-left corner rather than going straight up. Could someone with a decompiler frame-by-frame it? 12:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I thought the same thing when I was watching it. If you frame by frame it though it's just scrolling off the screen in the normal way. Must the the shape of the text on the screen that makes the illusion. 15:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Slumber Party Dance

Can anyone make out what Homestar is singing? It's incoherent to me, but he's definitely not just saying "Party! Slumber Party!" as the transcript currently reads. 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

He most certainly is just saying that actually. — Defender1031*Talk 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
He certainly says that, he most certainly does not say just that. 17:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
That's basically what he's saying, but after "Party! Slumber party!" he says something noticeably different. I can't make out one word, but he sings "Listen to some something! At my slumber party!" Despite my attempts to understand that one word where he sings "Listen to some..." I can't make it out.
Nevermind, this is sort of moot now, someone has updated the transcript... 17:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

This is my email!!

I sent this email in! I can't believe it got answered! --ThomasO 16:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

That's really cool, way to go! So UNO invited you to a party, huh? — Defender1031*Talk 16:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh no. There was a "slumber party" in the dorm lounge, and the only activity was a game of Uno. After one game everyone was bored and the "party" was over. --ThomasO 16:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, i see... they need to get more interesting games... like filthy rich, hedbanz, ticket to ride, guillotine, things nobody's ever heard of... (Those are all fun games) I'm actually gonna be playing filthy rich with my friends tonight... — Defender1031*Talk 16:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

In case any of you don't believe me, I have the original email still saved, which I just took a screenshot of. Hmm, I just noticed that they edited out "at a nearby dorm". Here --ThomasO 16:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the club Thomas O. How is that girl's night out party kit treating you ;) PlasticDiverGuy 16:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
That's awesome, ThomasO — congrats! Trey56 16:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Congrats ThomasO. I wish I had my email answered by Strong Bad. User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man 20:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Me too. Heck, I've emailed Strong Bad SEVERAL TIMES and STILL NO ANSWER. CAPITALZ. but, a buttdanceNeox ONION BUBS!YOU WILL RESPECT MAH AUTHORI-TAH!!!
Good to know they'll edit it a bit, now I don't have to be paranoid about making sure everything's completely good-sounding and relevant :)

In response to you posting a pic of the email, i believed it beforehand... it WAS signed "ThomasO"... — Defender1031*Talk 22:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC) If any of you are interested, I wrote a story describing the events of that "slumber party" on my user page. --ThomasO 00:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Load Bearer

In traditional home construction, a load-bearing wall is one which is part of the basic structure of the house, and the studs in it support the roof. Normally it's the wall directly below the peak of the roof. Those studs, and therefore that wall, bear the load of the roof beam. This is opposed to a non-load-bearing wall, whose studs do not support any weight and simply divide the floor into rooms. Destroying a non-load-bearing wall won't affect the structural intecrity of a house; destroying a load-bearing wall can cause the roof to collapse. (Note that in steel buildings a steel beam is supported on either side and there is no need for a load-bearing wall, as the steel is stronger and does not require mid-beam support as wood does. However, homes built this way are more expensive.)

Now, is that what they're playing? Looking for a wall to destroy that bears the roof load? I didn't want to go and change the fact right off, as it at present also makes sense. Thought it merited discussion. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 21:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Stops abruptly

Um...this e-mail will just stop abruptly in the middle and not go on, around the part about Coolguy's Law. I've even tried using a seek bar, but it won't even go past that part. I've cleared my cache, refreshed, viewed the flash file, EVERYTHING I know. Help! --Color Printer 22:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't encountered that issue. Do you have other programs running which m ight be using up proccesing speed? I'd try clearing the cache and all that again, a full reboot, open just a browser, and try it then. Another question: does the Flash load completely? I mean, if you open it in Firefox with the Greasemonkey, does the bar fill completely, or does it not download the whole file? Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 22:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
It looks like it fully loads. When it stops, the seek bar isn't at the end, it's where it should be. Lemme try going to IE. --Color Printer 22:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Huh, it works in IE. Weird. Let me try giving the Greasemonkey thing the bed axe and see if it works. --Color Printer 22:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Ugh. Still stopping. I'll try rebooting it later, I have homework to do. --Color Printer 22:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, it works now. Don't know how, though. --Color Printer 01:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


I can't believe none of you guys put up the fact that Homestar can't play Clapping Party WITHOUT ARMS! User:WeirdAl 22:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

PS:I saw Weird Al a second time in Aug!!!

He can't carry around a bag of four grapes without arms either. Nor can he carry a fondue set. Nor can he wrap a Deep Impact DVD and bring it to a party. He can't do any of these things without arms, can he? Well, turns out he in fact can. We don't know how really. But he can. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 22:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Altough, you have to admit, it is pretty ironic that the only game he can play is one about clapping your hands. Still, not relevant enough to make a mention.-- DongleGoblin 01:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Really? You don't think this is a reference to non-visible arms? 03:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, any use of the non-arms can be a reference to that. The original poster supposed that he could not do that because he had no arms. Quite a different question. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
But obviously playing "clapping party" without arms is a lot more amusing and ironic than picking up a bag of grapes. Maybe it's not worth a mention, but it's still a valid point and a clever choice of game, so no need to rag on the OP.
FWIW i think it maaay deserve a mention, but that comes very very close to explaining the joke


There's some kinda time vortex going on. Retro games with the very modern concept of being rated.

I disagree. Many retro-style games are being made nowadays for old systems (at one point there was even going to be a Homestar 2600 game) and, so far as I know, they are given ratings. Even re-releases of old pre-rating titles are rated. ¡ɯooz + 02:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Do we even know Strong Bad's finds are retro games? There may be another console besides Homestar's Super Funmachine or whatever he's playing. Evil Egg 12:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Rhythm Action Games

Anyone else think "Clapping Party" is a reference to games like DDR and Guitar Hero? They both share the idea of not using the traditional controller. 02:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Not familiar with DDR, but Guitar Hero is so much more complex it's silly. You cannot compare the two. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
By DDR I believe he's refrring to Dance Dance Revolution.
Ok. In both thess games, temporal accuracy is required. In Clapping Party you need clap 3 times. That's not a comparison to a game requiring rhythmic presicion. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Note also that there's nothing to indicate that Homestar isn't using a traditional controller, as all we see is a black cord leading to where he's sitting. Heimstern Läufer 04:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
i think it's donkey conga referance. aguy
I was also thinking Donkey Konga (I think that's the right spelling) - it has a clapping element to it. Another possibility, though less likely, is a reference to the emerging market in motion-capture games - the PS2 and Xbox 360 already have camera-enabled games that track your movements, and the PS3 is about to see a peripheral that enables more advanced camera gaming (the "Eye"). A simple game based on this concept could simply require players to do really simple movements like clapping their hands, without any other sort of plot. (Side note: I can't decide if this idea would have any merit or not, considering the ongoing running gag about Homestar's Lack of visible arms.)
Keep in mind also that TBC deliberately make their Easter-egg games INCREDIBLY simple. Clapping Party is just as likely to be an inside reference to their much older Flash games as it is to anything in the real world. — Image:kskunk_fstandby.gif KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Not made fun of New Paper

Should we maybe mention that this is the first occasion since New Papes's introduction that SB hasn't made fun of it? ~ CoachZ(talk · contribs)~ 03:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that was the last email. --DorianGray 03:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Ohhh...right, right...My bad...I swear, one of these days I'll do something right! ~ CoachZ(talk · contribs)~ 19:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I thought that Bike Thief was the first time Strong Bad didn't insult the new paper.-- DongleGoblin 19:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
No, he expressed displeasure at its attempting to emulate The Real Paper. --DorianGray 20:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but that's not a direct insult.-- DongleGoblin 20:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Let's just say that last e-mail was the first time for the New Paper to come down with no notice by any of the characters, and nothing is said at it. SuperfieldCreditUnion
Yeah and then next time we can say that two emails ago was the first time that no one said anything about it! and then the one after that we can say it was three emails ago! A brilliant addition to each page. -Jdhannan 14:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Dancing Homestar

Hey, I'm just curious, how many times does a joke have to be done to be considered a running gag. Because between this, Pizza Joint, and the orginal headless version one on mile, Homestar's dance has been done three times.-- DongleGoblin 20:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I would think we should wait until it makes another normal appearance that can be seen through normal viewing and/or clicking. In other words, the first one in mile shouldn't exactly count as a full fledged appearance.--.Johnny Jupiter! talk cont 22:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


When Homestar says that "we're only allowed to play Clapping Party", it sounded as though he was referring to him and his siblings, perhaps? SuperfieldCreditUnion

I'm pretty sure he was talking about Strong Bad and himself.-- DongleGoblin 21:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
When you go to a slumber party, you tell your friends that the games are off-limits to your brothers and sisters, not your guests. Your parents can't tell them what to do, and you know your dad is just going to play with them later. SuperfieldCreditUnion
Riiiight... its not your friends' house, so they can do whatever they like? It definitely means that SB wasn't allowed to play it, and thus his friends wouldn't be allowed to either. Assuming the game was too violent, watching it wouldn't be any less 'damaging' than playing it. Also, (theoretically) SB may have OLDER siblings that would be allowed to play it. -Jdhannan 14:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

bogus mathematical theorems

I don't know about the above-mentioned Coulomb's law, but this is the third appearance of Strong Bad's bogus mathematical theorems. Is it time for them to get their own page?--.Johnny Jupiter! talk cont 21:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering how often something has to be mentioned to get it's own page too. I say yes, but that's just my opinion.-- DongleGoblin 21:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd say it should be made. I think the rule of thumb is three appearances. And it's not like this is the very last quasimathematical pseudotheory Strong Bad's ever going to make. --Sysrq868 15:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I definitely think this should get its own page — Strong Bad even acknowledges it as a legitimate running gag in property of ones. I'll get the page started at Bogus Mathematical Theorems. Trey56 16:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


The words "Typical Slumber Party Fare" are written in either Huxtable or Hurry Up.

Strong Sad's arm?

Is it ever explained exactly why his arm is in a sling? Thrashmeister 02:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Strong Bad explains it by saying "let me relieve you of that located shoulder", and don't forget that he said "you can trash the place and dislocate all the younger siblings shoulders you want. As Strong Sad is the youngest of the Brothers Strong, and that he is bullied often, it is more than likely that he got his arm dislocated. SuperfieldCreditUnion
Ah, that makes sense. I guess I missed that. Well, I didn't. I just didn't comprehend it in relation to the sling. Thanks! Thrashmeister 02:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

tilted pixels

"The pixels in the hands during Clapping Party are tilted" What the heck does this mean? -Jdhannan 14:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Means this. The pixels in the hand are diagonal, unlike they would appear on a real screen. However, tilted and off-placed pixels (as well as LED-fields and such) are very common with TBC (whether it's style or just overall laziness), and as such this remark is pretty redundant. --Sysrq868 14:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Inversely vs. Directly Proportional

This needs some addressing here on the talk page, since people are perpetually changing this back and forth. Strong Bad is making the point that "the popularity of the host is inversely proportional to the amount of fun you can have at their house." This is not a goof! It is inversely proportional! Thus he can go to Homestar's house (because Homestar is NOT popular), and do fun things like "tear that place apart" (by playing games like "Find The Load-Bearer" and "Bed Axe") because, after all, it's "not like you're ever going back there again" -- why would you ever go back to an unpopular person's house? Furthermore, he talks about playing video games that "unpopular kids' dads" have stashed away. Like "Blood Bleeder" (whoa, does that one sound awesome!). The implication is that popular kids' dads are not as likely to have such "fun" video games. Inversely proportional is correct. Are we all agreed?? OptimisticFool 15:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

To dumb it down, if it's inversely proportional, it means: the more popular the host, the less fun you'll have at their house. If it's directly proportional, it means: the more popular the host, the more fun you'll have at their house. OptimisticFool 16:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. user:haldo

Tured a new leaf?

At the end of the email, strong sad is all, "how do you know this?" Don't you agree that this is WAY more outgoing than the usual strong sad? [user:haldo]Haldo 21:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools