[2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :?: :idea: :| (o~o) :geek: :[] :geek2: :][>:=~+:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Bronn » Tue Nov 28, 2023 2:33 pm

It doesn't matter what your business does. Problems begin when your customers cannot quickly get all the information they are interested in. I recommend considering AnswerMTI's bilingual answering service, including the funeral home answering service it provides. This is a 24/7 answering machine that will help you not lose contact with your clients.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Pitch Hitter » Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:11 pm

there's no point

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by DonRetrasado » Sat Dec 31, 2011 7:57 pm

I'm setting fire to the internet.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by sotic » Sat Dec 31, 2011 7:40 pm

We can observe the wild internet denizens' reactions to civilized life in this excellent example of an attempt to display dominance. Be careful not to make eye contact or loud noises; they may believe you to be a threat or target.

It is clear that they spend most of their time congratulating themselves on perceived victories in meaningless regions of their habitat. Since they do not spend any of this time mating, the question of how they reproduce has staggered biologists and anthropologists for decades.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Sahan » Sat Dec 31, 2011 4:31 pm

I did as you said. I found the task to be quite trivial and uninteresting. It's the last time I decide to play 'follow the leader' with you again.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Fucking Owned » Sat Dec 31, 2011 3:32 pm

Pitch Hitter wrote:I used to think I understood it pretty well, but your post has me thrown.

There's a dissonance between the fact that it's a parody of my post and that the author intends to cast doubt on my understanding of the English language. The idea my post was implying was meant by me to be seen as true, dmt has only read one comic and this is it. No irony or sarcasm is to be found in the post, although perhaps in the real world as it is unlikely that this is the first comic dmt has ever read. My post meant what it said.

Fucking Owned (herein referred to as FO), uses the same framework as "congratulations on reading your first comic", but changes it to say "congratulations on your understanding of the english language". FO is saying that I do not understand the English language, but his chosen method of conveying this makes it sound like he is truly saying that I do understand it and that to understand English is not a good thing. FO denigrates English rather than Pitch Hitter.

I believe what FO meant was that my lack of capitalisation and punctuation showed a lack of understanding of english. However, understanding a language and being able to express yourself within it are not the same thing. It is generally agreed that when a person can make themselves understood in English, they can understand others trivially.

I understand what has happened. FO is not a witty person. FO has chosen to "throw my words in my face", however FO has a very weak throwing arm and has inadvertently shown his lack of understanding of English, the very accusation he levelled against me! What a pity.

PS. There is a strong possibility that dmt and Fucking Owned are the same person. In which case I would say, Jesus, pick a name. Pick a fucking name.
Look at this drama then look at my name. That's right.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by GUTCHUCKER » Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:58 pm

Suddenly I hate you.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Danny Boy (London Derriere) » Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:48 pm

Sahan, do you think I was mostly about criticizing Pitch Hitter? You are aiming wrong here.
Sahan wrote:
DannyBoy wrote:Are you aware that the standard term from baseball is "pinch hitter"? That's not to say one can't use variants of fixed expressions, but your particular variant doesn't seem to do anything clever or special with the idea, and may even weaken it into something of a redundancy (in this context, it's always a pitch that gets hit, so a pitch hitter is not different from a hitter [tout court).
Are you aware that you're talking out of your arse, perhaps in the hope that maybe someone will come up to you, congratulate you and finally show you the respect you deserve as the fine intellectual you see yourself as? It's funny how you talked about context. I always thought context was something you grasped by actually seeing the bigger picture, but apparently you can observe the inner workings of an apparently lesser mind than yours just by looking at his username on a forum and nothing else, so I guess I must be wrong.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by GUTCHUCKER » Sat Dec 31, 2011 1:29 pm

London Derriere?

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Eisbreaker » Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:05 pm

And how! Do me next.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Sahan » Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:51 am

DannyBoy wrote:Are you aware that the standard term from baseball is "pinch hitter"? That's not to say one can't use variants of fixed expressions, but your particular variant doesn't seem to do anything clever or special with the idea, and may even weaken it into something of a redundancy (in this context, it's always a pitch that gets hit, so a pitch hitter is not different from a hitter [tout court).
Are you aware that you're talking out of your arse, perhaps in the hope that maybe someone will come up to you, congratulate you and finally show you the respect you deserve as the fine intellectual you see yourself as? It's funny how you talked about context. I always thought context was something you grasped by actually seeing the bigger picture, but apparently you can observe the inner workings of an apparently lesser mind than yours just by looking at his username on a forum and nothing else, so I guess I must be wrong.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Oldrac the Chitinous » Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:45 am

Hey Danny Boy.
The pipes called.
They want their Londonderry Air back.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by DannyBoy » Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:33 am

Pitch Hitter, I don't know why it sorts out like this, but the SMBC Forum is on the "unfriendly" side of the spectrum,relative to many other comics forums. So you may be doomed to dissatisfaction if you seek a lot of mutual respect and fairness.

If I may offer a suggestion, with the hope you will not see it as meanness, it was your choice of username that made me nod in agreement with the barb about understanding English. Actually, of course, it's not skills in the language generally that are in question, but only familiarity with the content area that your name is drawn from. Are you aware that the standard term from baseball is "pinch hitter"? That's not to say one can't use variants of fixed expressions, but your particular variant doesn't seem to do anything clever or special with the idea, and may even weaken it into something of a redundancy (in this context, it's always a pitch that gets hit, so a pitch hitter is not different from a hitter [tout court).

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by DonRetrasado » Sat Dec 31, 2011 7:18 am

Apples are an okay fruit. wrote:Huh, whether the comic was funny or not, and however weak an internet rebuttal might have been, you're still a prick.

And I'm a prick for pointing it out.

Ladies and Gentlemen: The Internet - Asshats all the way down.
I feel like you are probably a lousy individual in real life, too, and your attitude towards social norms is embarrassing to your friends.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

by Sahan » Sat Dec 31, 2011 7:10 am

Apples are an okay fruit. wrote:Huh, whether the comic was funny or not, and however weak an internet rebuttal might have been, you're still a prick.

And I'm a prick for pointing it out.

Ladies and Gentlemen: The Internet - Asshats all the way down.
Actually, you're mildly annoying more than anything else. Visiting this subforum is like walking out to the front lawn of your house and hearing people drive by confessing utter admiration, hateful vitriol, or giving pedantic criticisms about people I'm acquainted with. I feel like these people should at least bother to get to know me or give me a chance to respond if they want to give me their opinion.

Top