The movie column in the meg

Something Fishy · 02 October, 2004, 12:41:13 AM

Just read it.

Now i'm not one for long rambling commentaries, so here are my thoughts:

I probably agree with him but it comes across as a load of self important shite "i've got a degree in something really useful so i must know more than you".

Well ,just my opinion anyway.

Something Fishy · 02 October, 2004, 12:43:57 AM

i should mention..

I do like a lof of the stuff he writes, though i think Bec and Kawl is crap.

I just didn't like the way he wrote that at all.

Floyd-the-k · 02 October, 2004, 05:58:53 AM

you`re far from being alone in your opinion there nebes. See the Megazine 224 thread

Something Fishy · 02 October, 2004, 04:09:09 PM

Thanks Floyd. I just looked and see what you mean.

Well, at least he's had the grace to respond (even if it contains a slightly ego-laden mini-flame).

The boy's got an ego.. that first went to his head methinks.

El Spurioso · 04 October, 2004, 04:32:26 AM

'Fraid I'm not entirely seeing how being annoyed when someone calls you a twat is an "ego-laden" flame.... But, yeah, you're probably right... What it is, ultimately, is me being this utterly corrupted and self-inflated egotistical monster, outrageously twisted by all this, y'know, fame and fortune I've accrued. I mean, you've only got to look through this messageboard to see that I'm surrounded by perpetual adoration, and that no one *ever* dares to disagree with anything I say or do. I can do now wrong, y'see, and I Truly Believe That.

Yep, it's all gone right to my head, just like you said. You really git the nail on the head there, matey.

Bico · 04 October, 2004, 04:57:51 AM

Jesus Christ, he's off again.
There's an old saying about sarcasm being the lowest form of wit, you know.

Bico · 04 October, 2004, 04:58:47 AM

Of course, it's probably worth pointing out that it's usually said by people with nothing funny or clever to say.

Bico · 04 October, 2004, 05:02:36 AM

In fact, I'll go so far as to say that sarcasm ISN'T the lowest form of wit, but verbatum regurgitation of a platitude IS. Sarcasm requires the use of insight and observation for the purposes of ridicule, while saying "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" betrays the presence of someone with no wit whatsoever.
So just ignore my post, I'm typing in my sleep here.

Conexus · 04 October, 2004, 05:14:55 AM

Sorry Si, about calling you a twat-my apology's there's a link to my proper apology here

Link: http://www.2000adonline.com/?zone=fan&page=messagethread&choice=11292&Replies=3" target="_blank">My Apology

Oddboy · 04 October, 2004, 05:33:53 PM

There's an old saying about sarcasm being the lowest form of wit, you know.

I disagree - the lowest form of wit is 'Allo 'Allo.

Something Fishy · 05 October, 2004, 02:47:46 PM

thanks.. i knew i had.

Something Fishy · 05 October, 2004, 02:50:04 PM

admissions:- i didn't understand half of the big words you used there... so i just pretended to agree.

i'm just a poor ordinary lad, not one of the educated elite.

someone help me out.. whats he going on about?

Conexus · 05 October, 2004, 05:07:09 PM

"In fact, I'll go so far as to say that sarcasm ISN'T the lowest form of wit, but verbatum regurgitation of a platitude IS. Sarcasm requires the use of insight and observation for the purposes of ridicule, while saying "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" betrays the presence of someone with no wit whatsoever.
So just ignore my post, I'm typing in my sleep here."

PB is saying that sarcasam isn't the lowest form of wit, repeating hackneyed sayings is, as using sarcasam at least requires you to understand the situation in order to use it.
e.g -Si knowing that people complain about him alot on this board, and knowing this being sarcastic and saying everybody loves him.

Therefore anyone who says "Sarcasam is the lowest form of wit" is a stupid idiot with no sense of humour talking bollocks - repeating hackneyed phrases being the lowest form of wit.

Hope that clears it up for you :)