Talk:Ever and More

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


[edit] "Cold Ones Light" poster

In the background of when Homestar opens the meeting, there's a poster for "Cold Ones Light." The logo looks remarkably familiar but I can't put my thumb of what brand it's suppose to be parodying. Anyone know? I think it should go in the "Real World References" part, perhaps. --Champthom 07:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Reminds me of the Old Style beer logo, but that's a Wisconsin/Chicago area brew, so I'm not sure that TBC would be familiar with it. Trey56 08:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
On the other hand, it is very close — it has the red and blue diagonal background on a shield, a similar font, and a red ribbon coming from the bottom. I think this is too similar to be a coincidence, so I'm gonna add it. Trey56 08:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I personally think it's just a coincidence, but I don't mind leaving it for the time being; at least until further discussion is made regarding it. 0rion 13:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I dunno, they look too similar to me to pass it off as mere coincidence... -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 18:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gallery of Helmets

Should there be a gallery of the helmets the Brothers are wearing?— Bassbone (TALK Strong Mad Has a Posse CONT) 08:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I second that idea, but I haven't had much luck figuring out most out the helmets. גשמלדרברגן (Geshmalder) 21:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree; this is a good idea, though I think it could go Broternal Order of Different Helmets (which describes what each helmet is) Most (all?) of the helmets probably have pictures uploaded at pages like The Cheat Other Costumes, etc. Trey56 21:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Loading, Friend

Is there any reason why the loading screen for this toon is "loading, friend,". If there is, please post it here. Homestar-Winner (talk) 11:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Probably because this toon is about a type of Brotherhood. 0rion 13:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

It reminds me of Cheers, but thats probably just me.--~ SlipStream 10:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC) A general principle of fraternal organizations is that all the members are equal. To call someone by their "real world" title could break that illusion, so replacements like "friend", "brother", "comrade", "member" and others are substituted. -- Septyn

[edit] The Pants Lawsuit

I have severe doubts about that reference. For one, the dry cleaners lost his lucky pants, Bubs just can't fit in them. And for two, The Brothers Chaps very rarely make references to current news stories, one so innocuous as this one wouldn't be a prime candidate for an exception. We're really stretching it here.

I agree with your skepticism; here's the fact as I removed it, in case people disagree. Trey56 12:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Bubs's remark about being in a bad mood because he hasn't been able to fit his lucky pants might be a reference to a news story about a Washington DC Judge who sued a dry cleaner for $54 million dollars for losing his 'lucky' pants. The case was thrown out June 25, 2007 - one day before this toon was posted.

[edit] doodoo

The transcript currently says that Strong Bad says "that's horse pocky, you fools!" I'm 99.9% sure that it's actually "horse pucky", which is semi-obscure slang for horse poop, aka a variation on bullsh-t. Not only does this make more sense than "horse pocky", but one of the characters on M*A*S*H used to say it, and references to 70s/80s sitcoms are pretty standard on this site. - Ugliness Man 13:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. It should be changed. 0rion 13:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Also agreed; I changed it to "horse puckey". Trey56 13:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
The M*A*S*H character you're referring to is Colonel Potter. --Jnelson09 04:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
If memory serves, Colonel Potter's expression was "horse hockey." --BigScaryMike (Talk/Contrib) 16:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Potter does (well, did) indeed use the term "Horse hockey." However, Strong Bad clearly says "Pucky" on this toon. 0rion 02:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Could it also be a variation of bullhonkey? That's what I immediately thought of when I first heard it. --Kiwi 12:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Col. Potter had a wide variety of similar expressions. I'm sure there's a list somewhere. --Jnelson09 03:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Pucky (or "puckey," as it were) and Honkey I think in this case are interchangeable because it means all the same thing. (OT: I've taken to using "bullpuckey" lately a lot...blame Rachel Maddow, it's her fault.) --ISlayedTheKerrek 22:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BUBRUB!

Remember that news broadcast about the "whistle tips"? It's on YouTube. The guy's name on the news is Bubb Rubb. Maybe I'm just grasping at straws and the ointment is only named after Bubs himself, but when he held it up and I read the label, I immediately thought, "The whistles go whooooo!" William 14:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

-I don't think so. Rubs and ointments are a common theme through the Homestar Runner series, given that 'Bub(s)' rhymes with 'rub', I don't think any further explanation is needed. 14:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I'm willing to allow it, because it is a fairly well-known meme. It might be a coincidence, but I think it's fairly likely that it's not. I'd leave the fact, but make sure it says that it could be a reference rather than it is a reference. 0rion 17:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this reference and I think it should be STUFF'd, if not removed outright. Thank you. --BigScaryMike (Talk/Contrib) 19:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you disagree with it so strongly? The Bubb Rubb meme was, as 0rion pointed out, fairly popular, and even though rubs and ointments are a common occurrence in the H*R series, I think it's still likely to be an intentional reference. It's at least likely enough to warrant inclusion with the qualifier that it may possibly be a reference. If you feel so strongly against it, please explain your reasoning. 14:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I just felt the reference was a total stretch. Some folks are quick to call "real-world reference" just because it reminds them of something they've seen before, with no regard for relevance. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I see this was STUFF'd and declined unanimously before I even had a chance to vote, so obviously I wasn't alone on this. --BigScaryMike (Talk/Contrib) 16:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not a total stretch if it reminds people of the meme. The Brothers Chaps are very internet guys, and I'm sure they've seen it. If it makes it as a reference, here's a decent link to accompany it: -- Rueful 20:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
It didn't make it, though. It has already been declined in STUFF. --DorianGray 20:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I checked the STUFF page, and it was decided within five hours of being posted. I didn't even know it was on there until after it was already closed. It seems to me that it should be on there for at least a couple of days so that folks can know about it and discuss it. I'm not trying to be annoying about this, I just think that there are people who think that it is an intentional reference, and those people would have voted "Accept" if they'd known it was on the STUFF page. Even if the "Decline"'s still win, which I think they probably will, even with a longer vote, it seems unfair that there was such a brief window in which to actually vote. --Huitzilopochtli 21:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
This isn't the best place to discuss anyone's doubts in the STUFF process, but there were no supporting votes or arguments presented for that fact at all. The precedent in STUFF is that an item is "swiftly and unanimously declined" in that scenario. Surely someone would have supported it in that time frame if any numbers which could have outvoted at least 18 people were going to. I also want to point out that the STUFF notice was appropriately placed in the Fun Facts section. Anyone who wanted to review the STUFFed fact had that opportunity in that time frame - a high-activity time frame, as it happens. Again, out of all the registered users who could have, none supported it. Anyway, I think the fact was given a fair hearing and could never have achieved acceptance based on the way it went.
Additionally, there's no purpose in holding a vote open if the outcome is clear. This is not like a presidential election or anything, where our future and security ride in the balance, and stopping voting early because there's a clear outcome is a violation of voters' rights. This is a STUFF vote for the purpose of determining consensus. Once consensus is reached, there's no reason to continue the exercise. Not that others' votes are unwanted, but because they are unneeded. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 22:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
What you don't seem to understand is not everyone has nothing better to do with their time than check the HRWiki every two hours. I think this Wiki is pretty cool, and I do have an interest in what is and is not included on it, but I still only come here every week or so (about as often as a new sbemail goes up) because I have a very busy job. There’s probably many more like me. Maybe the majority of users who were online in that 5 hour window were against the Fun Fact, but that doesn't at all reflect that the majority of people who use this site at all are against it. I, for one, am for it. I'm not exactly up to date on all the latest trendy internet jokes, but if Bubb Rubb is a popular thing, it's certainly plausible that BUBRUB is a reference. It's at least worth a mention. It doesn't matter if it has anything to do with the cartoon. TBC makes non sequitur references all the time. ("Taster's Choice" comes to mind.)--Antisexy 06:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I also feel that the STUFF process should have longer voting windows; I had no idea that this process even existed, and by the time I found out, it was too late. In addition, I can't wait until someone hears from the Brothers Chaps that it was, in fact, a reference to Bubb Rubb.Maristredfox 21:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Duly noted. Almost all STUFF items are open for a minimum of 3-4 days, and even longer if there isn't at least a 10-vote difference by that point. In cases where there is about a 20-vote difference before then, however, they are promptly closed. These guidelines have worked well so far, so we'll keep following them. However, we'll try to be sensitive to ensuring that the minority has had a fair chance to voice their position.
Have you tried emailing the Brothers Chaps? I'm not sure that they'd respond about this, but it couldn't hurt... Trey56 21:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I fail to see how anyone could think that this is NOT a reference to the whistling muffler guy. There was no point to Bubs's story except to bring out the tube, that was the culmination of his story, and there was no reference after it. Either they went on his story diversion simply so they could say "the word 'Bubs' rhymes with 'rub' and for no apparent reason his name is on the label...." Or...since this is TBC, they made a diversion for an inside joke\cultural reference\past references. That's what they do. This is a reference.-- 22:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, it's possibly a reference. "Possible" references are not notable because they'd be innumerable -- limited only by our collective imagination. Hey, there was a dartboard in the "Cheers" bar, so the dartboard must be a Cheers reference! The fact is, none of us are mind readers (I think), and the BUBRUB joke still works even if you never heard of Bubb Rubb, so it's a superfluous reference at best. I doubt TBC will ever tell; they're too busy laughing at us. --BigScaryMike (Talk/Contrib) 00:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Some possible references make more sense than others. Any random dartboard being a Cheers reference is just crazygonuts, but considering the fact that Bubb Rubb and BUBRUB would be indistinguishable if we were speaking instead of typing, even if it weren't an intentional reference, it still seems like a pretty fun fact to me.--Antisexy 07:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Re the comment "I can't wait until someone hears from the Brothers Chaps that it was, in fact, a reference to Bubb Rubb" - this has indeed happened in the past, where a STUFFed fact's status was overturned by incontrovertible evidence. Of course, the STUFF process is not perfect. But, no amount of voting by us can accurately divine what TBC's intentions were. We do the best we can, and that's about all we can do. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 01:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I think that's perfectly reasonable. My main issue was really the idea of the HR wiki community, and making sure that things are done fairly. It's certainly true that lives do not hang in the balance of this decision. However, what is at stake is new members' perceptions of this community. This Fun Fact was my first contribution, and I had no idea what the "official" process was. The initial response to the fact seemed, to me, downright hostile. People pounced on it, held a vote for a few hours while I was offline, and declared it "swiftly and unanimously declined". It felt as though I'd just vandalized the site, which I hadn't since I honestly believe that the fact is valid. It also felt as though if I weren't one of the main and most active editors, nothing I do will matter. I realize now that's not the case, and for the most part, the membership here seems very reasonable and friendly. I do appreciate that the vote was re-opened. I knew it would be declined anyway, but the real issue was being able to contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way. By the same token, this is a community, and if the community declines the reference after hearing all arguments for and against it, then that's fair, pending any divine intervention from TBC. I realize how insignificant this one issue is. It does, however, have an effect upon those involved, and we should be aware of how our actions might snowball into trends that will turn people away. That said, I think this situation, all told, was handled reasonably. I, for one, will put it to bed and move on to more important and interesting things in my life :) Huitzilopochtli 15:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

There was no reason whatsoever that the vote should have been reopened, and shame on whoever decided to do it. 18 decline votes in one day is a pretty obvious thing meaning that the fact shouldn't stand. Facts have been closed in the past with fast accepts or fast declines, why was this particular one different? --ISlayedTheKerrek 19:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Not to point fingers or anything, but the vote's already been re-closed with the same consensus. --Jay (Talk) 20:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Looking back at the situation, I think it turned out well. When the fact was closed, there was a big disparity between this talk page discussion (4-1 people in favor of the fact) and the STUFF vote (18-0 against the fact). The reason for this is that seasoned users both know how the STUFF process works better and are more likely to decline a given fact. I entirely understand why Huitzilopochtli and others felt left out of the process, and the fact that he is satisfied with the process in the end makes its reopening worth it, in my eyes. We need the contributions of new users and don't want to turn them away.
At the same time, reopening of facts should be rare — I take this event not as precedent for regularly reopening facts in the future, but a strong reminder to give reasonable facts (as this one was) a little more time in the STUFF process, even when there's a majority of votes against them, and especially when there's good reason to believe that most of the supporters of the fact haven't had a chance to vote. Trey56 20:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Umm... "shame on whoever decided to do it"? That's completely unnecessary and unhelpful to say. It was opened to allow for a much clearer consensus (since five hours is, indeed, a very short window of opportunity), which is exactly what we got, and otherwise no change. Please don't demean others that way. Heimstern Läufer 23:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, shame on whoever decided to do it. I'm sorry, but that's the way I feel about this whole situation. Facts are closed faster than this one was if the votes are so much. And why bother to reopen it if the result is going to be the same no matter what? I could understand if there were people who could've voted yes and swung it in the other direction, but it didn't need to be done here. --ISlayedTheKerrek 05:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Chill. This type of language is neither appropriate in this situation, nor acceptable. There was no need for a personal attack, and really no need to repeat it. It's perfectly fine to disagree with the decision, but please say so in a mature and civil manner. The fact was re-opened as a courtesy, a concept that you might want to familiarize yourself with. Loafing 05:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Not cool, Loafing. Don't make assumptions about my character just because I don't agree with something. I drop it now. --ISlayedTheKerrek 05:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Did you read my post? I said it's perfectly fine to disagree with the decision. Nobody is judging you by your opinion on re-opening the STUFF, and I hope you don't judge or deride user who have a different opinion from you. There is a clear and important difference between someone's opinion and his person or character. If you keep that in mind, then future discussions will hopefully be more pleasant. And now I'll go and do something more fun. Loafing 05:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Reminder: this is a wiki about dumb animal characters. If not everything runs exactly as it should, it doesn't really need to. Let's all have a nice cup of tea and sit down. Heimstern Läufer 06:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not 100% sure how the voting process works exactly, but I don't understand why it has to end at all. I love the HRWiki, but I don't exactly check it every day. This is the first time I'm seeing any of this, and I agree with the fun fact. Does my opinion just not matter to anyone because I wasn't there when everyone decided to debate about it. Maybe this is unlikely, but what if 30 people came along within the next few weeks who, like me, saw this for the first time and agreed with the losing party? Would their opinions be worthless too?
Since there's a separate page for STUFF, with a nice little table showing votes for and votes against, couldn't that just be left open? And then a month or 3 from now, if it turns out that more people are for the change than against it, then we'll change it.
But if that wouldn't work for whatever reason, it still just seems grossly unfair to say that closed STUFFs can NEVER be reopened.
A 3-day window isn't much better than a 5-hour window, since the average user would have little reason to come here more ofen than once a week when is updated.--Antisexy 07:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

YOU PEOPLE ARE ALL IDIOTS!! That's the most obvious reference ever! There's a new Internet phenomenon about "Bubb Rubb", and while it's going on, Homestar makes a reference to "Bub Rub"... are you people retarded? --Anonymous Contributor

If we can say "The Cold Ones Light poster CLOSELY RESEMBLES the Old Style beer logo," why come we can't say "BUBRUB closely resembles Bubb Rubb?"--Antisexy 16:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I just checked this page again after many months. Dude!!! Look at the commentary transcript for this cartoon. When BUBRUB comes up, TBC shout "BUBRUB!!", and then says, "He makes it go OOOOOH!", similar to the Bubb Rubb quote, "The whistles go WOOOO!" If this were an ordinary reference to ointments and rubs as suggested earlier, they would not have singled it out as they did. And can anyone give a better explanation for what the "WOOO!" is in reference to if not that? The fact that they say it right after enthusiastically shouting "BUBRUB!" implies that it is certainly an outside reference to *something*. I was willing to give up this fight before, but now that TBC have outright referenced it, I have to pick it up again. Huitzilopochtli 16:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Not to belabor this argument, but I think the DVD commentary point may have merit. Should we reopen discussion? -DAGRON 04:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I guess I'm biased because I was so worked up about it before, but I REALLY think we should.--AntiSexy! talk cont

[edit] Coldson like Molson?

Could the Coldson Lite can be a reference to Molson beer?

Yes. The connection is already mentioned on the Cold Ones page, actually. -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 18:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Name

The name should be changed. I think something like "B.O.D.H." or "The Helmet Club" would be better until it shows up on the main page. I don't think ever and more was at all a significant part of the toon. D&d greg 20:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

We usually use the names as they appear on the official toons menu. Trey56 20:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh yeah sorry. I hadn't cleared my cache and I didn't see anything on the toons menu. D&d greg 21:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Homsar in the cast?

Should Homsar be in the Cast of Characters? It's a picture of him, not the actual Homsar, after all. Nsayer 22:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Yup, he's not there, and neither should he be. Linked in the stage directions is fine. --DorianGray 22:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Only characters who actually are "acting" in the toon are in the cast, just like in real life. If you see a picture of the president on the wall of an office in a movie, is the president a cast member? Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legs??

Did anyone watch this and think that Homestar's legs should have been visible a few times but were absent? Look at his...... waist, when he's backing away from the KoT, and also when they're doing the secret handshake. It's like they're not there. SaltyTalk! 22:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, freaky! Good eye, I'd add it, but you saw it first. |\|/[_}-Elkmiester-{_]\|/| 00:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't see a problem at all. His legs are not as wide as his torso, and they are usually more to the back of his body. See pictures. I'm gonna remove the fact. Loafing 11:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
O.K., you're the sysoperson. |\|/[_}-Elkmiester-{_]\|/| 22:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Erm, sysops aren't all-knowing, you know... Don't just accept my opinion because I'm a sysop. Loafing 22:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I know, I just wanted to joke a little. And say Sysoperson. Sorry, I know you're normal people. |\|/[_}-Elkmiester-{_]\|/|

[edit] The bar in the basement

Just a note: in this toon, a stairway leading upwards from the bar is revealed. So, it's likely that the bar is in the basement of some other building.

  1. Perhaps the most logical building for it to be the basement of is Bubs' Concession Stand, as it is a commercial establishment and TBC alluded to the possibility of exploring it further after Bubs descended into it in geddup noise (see the DVD commentary).
  2. Another possibility is that Homestar leaves the meeting to go take a bath in what appears to be the Bathroom of the Brothers Strong (in which we have previously seen an old-fashioned bathtub. So, it might seem that the bar is in the basement of the House of the Brothers Strong. However, this seems unlikely since we have seen much of that basement already (Strong Bad's Basement, Strong Bad's Room).
  3. Finally, it's possible that the bar is in the basement of Homestar Runner's House. In this case, it would seem that the bathroom Homestar goes to is his own, and that he, like Strong Bad has both an old-fashioned bathtub and a shower in his bathroom. Facts supporting this point of view are (a) Homestar has been seen most of the other appearances of the bar with Pom Pom, (b) it would make sense for Homestar to take a bath in his own tub, and (c) if Homestar is the Supreme Overlord of the Broternal Order, it would make sense (though is not necessary) that he would hold meetings in his basement.

I think that one of these is intended, since they took the time to draw the staircase, but I'm not sure which one it is (I lean toward #1 and #3). Perhaps we'll have to wait for more data in future toons to decide. Trey56 00:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to go with numbah one. It's a cool idea and makes perfect sense...Well, as much as a bald guy with no arms or pants. (Strong Mad) |\|/[_}-Elkmiester-{_]\|/|

It's too easy to poke holes in these arguments though. Couldn't The Bar just be on X floor and the stairs lead up to X+1 floor? Why assume a basement? And why assume the bathroom is in the same building? -- Tom 01:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, there are too many unknowns to say anything for sure. It does seem like a basement though, as it lacks windows all around the room, and it's common for homes to have small bars or masculine-looking dens in their basements. Nevertheless, like you said, the arguments don't hold water on their own. We'll have to see if TBC ever address it. Trey56 01:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Until such time as we have a shred of evidence to go on, I've termed it "The Meetingplace of the Broternal Order" and left it at that. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
No, it's still The Bar that they're in. The same one as Theme Song Video and Summer Short Shorts. It's the same wood paneling, the same lamp, the same dartboard, and the same pennant on the wall. -- Tom 03:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] tricycle recipe

here is a recipe for a tricycle fron

  • Tricycle (TX Shooter)
    • Equal parts:
    • Midori
    • Malibu
    • Banana Liquer
    • Milk
    • Do not over pour milk or drink will suck!

ive never heard of a tricycle recipe, but here one is... csours 01:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] songs

That club song is a recycled tune. The last time we heard it (last email) Homestar was hanging upside down singing "blacking out, blacking out, blacking out." & the easter egg song was from Disney's 'Duck Tales'.

"The NeverEnding Story"? Don't think that's so. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 09:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, "blacking out, blacking out, blacking out" does sound kinda like "ever and more, ever and more, ever and more". --DorianGray 09:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it does. They sound somepletely different to me. The only similarity is repeating a phrase three times. 0rion 02:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Homestar sang The "Neverending Story" theme for the first time, IIRC, when pouring Mountain Dew on the Compy 386. In the cartoon, he was pouring, and the effect looped for a while, prompting Homestar to sing "The NeverEnding Soda." He then used the same tune when hanging upside down, because it was in the same context, i.e., pouring Mountain Dew on SB's computer, only to be stopped by The Paper this time. So it makes sense that he'd be singing the tune then. It would be out of context if the tune were used in the "Ever and More" song. Huitzilopochtli 17:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Homestar in the bathtub is a reference to DuckTales, and Homestar hanging upside down is a reference to The Never Ending Story. Ever and More was last used in the movies and should be mentioned under songs. |\|/[_}-Elkmiester-{_]\|/|

[edit] Pirates of the Carribean

If it was checkable, I'd bet money that the brothers chaps had that new pirates of the carribean movie as inspiration here. Anyone know what I'm talking about? 02:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Not me, but fraternal organizations are a common entity in the US, so likely not a direct reference to any one film. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Having seen the movie, I see absolutely no connection whatsoever, but maybe that's just me. Not only is there no seen in the movie where there is a bathtub of gold, but none of the storyline or names are represented at all. No multiple manifestations of the main character, Marzipan is not used to represent either of the two major female characters who make the movie. Besides the fact that there is a closeknit brotherhood, drinking, group singing, and gold-- all reminiscent of virtually every pirate show since Pirates of Penzance, what part here makes you think of Pirates?-- 17:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I really doubt it. It reminds me of the Flintstones more than PotC (after all, the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes wear funny helmets). Plus, this wasn't a group of bellicose chieftains trying to save their kind: it was a meeting of a fraternal organization. If it were checkable, I'd bet money that they didn't have PotC in mind. :) Pensivepoet.babblingbard 18:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
My grandfather was a member of the Loyal Order of Moose, and although I never attended a meeting, I always imagined the proceedings to be very similar to what we saw here. --BigScaryMike (Talk/Contrib) 03:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Don't forget the Stonecutters from The Simpsons! They were a secret fraternal organization who, although only the leader wore a silly hat, had a frothy/frosty, shanty/shaky chant too: Who contols the British clown? / Who keeps the metric system down? / WE DO! / WE DO! (ect). – The Chort 15:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brother of Town

This is like the first time that anyone's ever treated the King of Town with any respect at all. Homestar invited him up to demonstrate a secret handshake with them. Maybe this is just cuz he's the only one who could actually DO a 'secret handshake' since neither of em have hands. --Abelhawk 04:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Seems fairly obvious, to me, that the KoT was simply chosen for the joke - he's the only main character present besides Homestar with no hands. --Jay (Talk) 06:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
My first thought when Homestar said "handshake" was that Marzipan'd turn up, but I guess she wouldn't be in a brotherhood, what with the whole "female" thing and such... and I doubt Homsar would be able to pull off the whole handshake thing... so yeah, that only leaves KoT, out of the main 12. --phlip TC 10:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
When Strong Bad and The Cheat practice it, they don't use their hands/arms, even though they clearly have them. A lack of visible arms is apparently not a factor. Neox
I think the joke is the have no visible arms, and then we see Strong Bad and The Cheat practice as if they also had no visible arms. Bluebry 17:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The other reason the King of Town actually gets treated with respect is because within fraternal organizations like the Masons, everyone is equal, regardless of their profession or position in the outside world. This is also, in my opinion, the reason Homestar can be in charge (and it also makes that fact even funnier; even though he's the dim light bulb of the group, everybody has to respect him within the walls of the Order). Maristredfox 01:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rollover Minutes

It has been suggested we discuss this before STUFFing it. What do you think about keeping this as a reference to at&t (formerly Cingular) Wireless' Rollover feature? It is obviously true, but it could be taken by some readers as an advertisement for the company. Thoughts? I am for keeping it personally. PlasticDiverGuy 06:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Who, precisely, are you arguing with? I don't see that there's any disagreement over this fact. --Jay (Talk) 06:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the advertising factor is a problem — we're listing factual information to help explain the toon and linking to a non-commercial website. So, I think it should be okay. Trey56 06:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
PDG, I notice that you put on the STUFF page that this fact was added and removed. It was not removed; it was moved to a different place in Fun Facts. I think that might be the source of any confusion. --Jay (Talk) 06:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't think to look to see if it had been moved first. My bad guys for pouring Fweska over the entry. PlasticDiverGuy 16:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coach Z's Helmet

I have serious doubts on calling Coach Z's helmet a "Gladiator Helmet." The only distinctly gladiator helmet I know of is the Murmillo (fishman) helmet, and that certainly wasn't one. It kinda looks Greek (300 reference maybe?), but I'd guess it's either that or an early middle ages helmet (Saxon is what comes into my head). It's the nose guard. Not prevalent in a lot of roman helmets. I'm not extremely well informed on the subject, but it's just my thoughts, and I think it should probably just be called an iron war helmet or something.

It's a barbute. Google it for pictures. Closest medieval helmet I could find, but the shape is distinct enough that I can say, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Coach Z's helmet was a barbute -- and therefore I edited this page and the Order's page.
I disagree. Wikipedia provides pictures way different from Coach Z's helmet. Although, I also have no idea what it could be. First thing I think of is knights of the medieval times... Nope, nevermind. Wikipedia's description definitely shows Coach Z's helmet is a barbute. Bluebry 17:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

looks like darth vader's helmet to me,

[edit] Burping video game music

Strong Bad's comment about burping video game music reminded me immediately of Wakko Warner from Animaniacs's performances burping out various songs, enough that I thought it could be a reference. I don't know if such a gag was specific to Wakko, though, so I thought I'd bring it up here first. Heimstern Läufer 19:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure belching out songs is a very generic, if crude, joke. TTATOT. – The Chort 17:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Power Play

power play could be a reference to fox news's power player of the week — Atomic1fire (Talk | contribs) 06:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC) (left unsigned)

Maybe. Maybe not. --Jnelson09 03:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Definitely, definitely not. Probably the most famous usage of the word power play is in hockey where one team has one (or two) less players. But in this case, the word power play is a "play" for more "power". Strong Bad wants to have the power/responsibility of running the BODH. -JamesDean 21:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] URGENT: "last's"?????

I turned up the volume and it sounded more like "last". --Addict 2006 07:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree — I think it was just a typo. I fixed it in the transcript. Trey56 07:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brotherstar Runnerbrother's Helmet

Would it be of any importance to note that, unlike the helmet's appearance in "the movies", there's no propeller cap underneath?

[edit] Closed STUFF

[edit] Lone voice

When the King of Town is called forward to demonstrate the secret handshake, Strong Sad is the only one to yell 'yay'. This may be a reference to impression, where the King of Town is the only one to yell 'boo' when Strong Sad is introduced.

Posted on: 10:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Closed: 20:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

VERDICT: This item was unanimously declined, 14–0. The votes and arguments have been moved to HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/Ever and More!.

[edit] Bubs Rubb

Bubs holds up a tube of ointment labeled "BUBRUB". This is likely a reference to Bubb Rubb, a man featured on a viral video news clip from KRON-TV in San Francisco. The man's antics on-camera became a fairly well-known Internet phenomenon.

Posted on: 21:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Closed: 17:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

VERDICT: This item was overwhelmingly declined, 29–5. The votes and arguments have been moved to HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/Ever and More!.

[edit] A frothy/frosty, shanty/shaky chant?

There are four possibilities here. Personally I hear "Frothy, Shaky". Anyone else? — Defender1031*Talk 03:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

That's what I hear as well. Shwoo 04:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I hear "Frothy, Shanty" NightDaemon 06:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I can hear a /θ/ in "frothy", but I can hear a /æ/ in "shanty". According to the International Phonetic Alphabet. DEI DAT VMdatvm center\super contra 10:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I definitely hear "frothy, shanty". Has Matt? (talk) 12:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I thought it was "frothy, shaky" at first, but after playing it back several times I hear "shanty". -ReverendTed 15:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Last Exit to Springfield

Does anyone think that the scene when Homestar gets everyone to vote on whether or not Strong Sad believes in the message is a reference to the Simpson's episode Last Exit to Springfield? In the episode, Carl gets everyone at the power plant to vote on different things, and each time, he would say "All in favor of ______" and everyone would go "AYE!" and then he would say "All opposed?" and each time one man would say "Nay". Does anyone think there's any reference? Homestar-Winner (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that gag is as old as the hills. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 22:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About this organization

I know about an organization known as the Knights of Columbus. Could it be that the B.O.D.H. was made to be similar to organizations like that?

I would have thought that was obivously the case. Evil Egg 16:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright Violation?

Is the DuckTales Easter Egg with Homestar bathing in gold coins still accessible on DVD or did Disney make them remove it? Bad Bad Guy 03:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

That Easter egg is present and intact. Dude, buy the DVD! =] OptimisticFool 04:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jalapeno on Nacho

The single sliced jalapeno on a single nacho is featured in Strong Bad's facial in looking old and is depicted (albeit differently) on Strong Mad's helmet as well as mentioned in the commentary. An inside reference, or not? Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 04:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] odd number of members

In remarks there is this statement:

"Homestar tells everyone to "buddy up" and practice the secret handshake. When he leaves the room, there are an odd number of characters left. If everyone did get in groups of twos, there would be four groups and an odd man out."

Although it is true that there are an odd number of characters left, one of said characters is The King of Town, who already knew the handshake as he was part of the demonstration. The McArby! 03:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] is it just me

or does Strong Bad's line "That's horse puckey, you fools!" sound a little to close like a swear word, the word puckey I mean?

Cheers Nikolce Kocovski 04:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not supposed to be close to a swear word. It's just a word. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 04:31, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
sorry about that; i wonder how that happened. i meant to just blank this one section of the talk page. anyway, as i said in the edit summary of the unfortunate edit, the P sound is quite definitive. thanks for catching me, EL The Knights Who Say Ni 04:36, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey. No harm done. I knew you didn't mean to :). Keep on doing the job. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 05:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Monty Python

Is their name a reference to Monty Python? Such as the "Order of Putting Things On Top of Other Things". Wolf O'Donnel 00:34, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Personal tools