Thursday, January 28, 2010

Emergency Post

Penny Arcade is winning this contest. Don't let that happen.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Coming Up with Titles is Hard (TWSS)

xkcd # 689, xkcdsucks # 365, xkcdsucks: Overrated #10

So the comic. Clever. Not particularly funny, clearly not origional (as Carl points out), but one it sure could have been worse.

Mr. Wheeler takes some of his clearly precious time to explain FIRST to those lesser beings who have not heard of it (See Carl, you can fake talk down to people and I can fake be offended). But seriously, if there's one thing xkcdsucks is good for, that's explaining the joke in an obscure xkcd, and often that's quite a feat.

Carl actually gives a fairly interesting theory on why FIRST was chosen. Now I don't know anything about FIRST beyond it being a competition for robots, but maybe it's the most popular. Or maybe he was just talking about that one with a friend and had an idea. His theory makes sense, but I just thought in the interest of fair journalism maybe several nicer ideas should be provided (actually, I just had nothing else to say about this post. I wish either Randall or Carl would take a risk for greatness/horribleness so I can have something to say about one or the other. I guess both are just in a slump right now).

P.S. According to my calculations, new xkcdsucks: Overrated posts will dominate the front page with these posts.

P.P.S I'm starting to catch up with Carl now, dang busy beaver.

Friday, January 22, 2010

We have Neither a Motto Nor a Mascot

xkcd # NA, xkcdsucks# 364, xkcdsucks: Overrated # 9.

Reading this post was like watching one of those Gollum/Smeagol conversations in the LotR movies. I thought xkcdsucks still had some journalistic/blogtastic/general integrity left, but now I guess not.

The story's kinda funny I guess, if you like those kind of stories. The internet is a notoriously bad place to understand tone, but the argument came of as one of those sarchastic arguments that's supposed to be funny that just digresses into a slew of Napoleon Dynamite-level jokes and references made by people that people that annoy everybody else. Blah blah blah, Sean Connery... Scottish people.

Overall, lower quality that normal for xkcdsucks, the kind that would make me disregard the blog as a sad and pathetic place for people who have nothing better to do than complain about xkcd. And that's not what xkcdsucks is about, or usually is. I love xkcd, but I understand its flaws and shortcomings, and xkcdsucks is there talk about these. The over used themes, the bad jokes, the "what the heck" moments, the list just goes on and on. Carl's blog usually gets the job done complaining about these without becoming petty. This was just a sigh and move on moment.

xkcdsucks: Overrated: Live from Class

Because here at xkcdsucks: Overrated, we have class.

xkcd #688: Self Reference, xkcdsucks# 363: There Is No Title For My Post About Comic 688, xkcdsucks: Overrated #8: xkcdsucks: Overrated: Live from Class

Self reference. Not the newest or most original idea, but Randall always puts his own touch on these kinds of comics (Carl is nice enough to provide us with a selection of comics sharing this theme). I, for one, liked this one better than the SMBC, but that's not saying much. This comic had a good premise, but beyond that it was just, well, uninspired.

But on to xkcdsucks. So Carl starts onto the comic by nitpicking about specific wording. And sure, if you think about it there are ways to say these things better, but on the first read-through it was perfectly clear. More specific or technically accurate wording won't make the comic more funny, it would just satisfy the nitpickers (of which I am notoriously one). Now someone's going to argue that nitpicking is the point of a review, or that wasn't nitpicking, but it's not and it was (actually, no one's going to argue that, because the only people who read my blog are me, Carl, and my mother[she actually doesn't, if you're wondering]). You want to know if it's volume or area? What are you my math teacher?

Somewhere in there Carl says that he thinks the whole thing is just "acts like it is really clever and took a lot of hard work when it clearly didn't," especially the alt-text. Well, I think that may be basically true, except for bit about the alt-text. I thought that it was pretty clever, but after reading Carl's retort I guess it isn't (so good job Carl, I guess, but thanks for spoiling it for me).

Oh, and "pi" chart? I hope that was not intentional, because if you meant for that to be a pun... well, then you are a bad person.

P.S. Reading Carl's comments on the guest Dinosaur Comics comic made me feel sad. What is the world coming to? Dinosaur Comics is like one of those early evening sitcoms that knows it's not funny but still makes "jokes." Well, different tastes then, I guess.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Maybe [Where Ever Carl Lives] will Go Too

So, there are about four things I should be doing right now, but at the moment I am doing none (Your welcome, Carl.)

I don't know, I agree with the points Carl made. Like Carl said, the idea of using dimensional analysis to prove that England is going to float off to sea is pretty funny and has some potential. There is too much going on here.

Carl did a pretty good job with this post I think. He addressed the comic (hey, these days we can't take anything for granted), critiqued specific parts (he even added in some advice on how to fix it), and pretty much did a good job overall. I guess Carl's earned his rations for today.

Not just did Carl review the comic, he even added in something more, something for general blag atmosphere. Wow. Nice little story, helps us to relate to the poster.

So overall it was a good day for xkcdsucks. I don't know what else there is to say really. Carl found some complaints, backed them up, stayed reasonable, and made an effective blog post. Anyone have any other ideas for what to say in these posts? I don't think I can review xkcd (that would be taking xkcd's thunder) and its pretty hard to review blog posts in anything more than a few sentances. Not fancy, but functional.

Blogging isn't as glorious as I'd expected (or as tv made it out to be).

PS. Isn't a college degree basically what's needed to teach science? Or was that sarcasm?

Monday, January 18, 2010


Wow, one post and I'm already behind. I've been busy (and in Detroit), and Carl's been busy (at the computer) so I guess I owe you a few posts. I'll try to catch up over this week!

Monday, January 11, 2010

xkcdsucks: Overrated: The Pilot Post

(Before I start, I just have to say that I don't really get the punchline in the comic, or at least I don't see a joke, but maybe that is just my optimism that the joke isn't what I fear it is. But anyway...)

Wow. I know how Carl feels. Looking through the archives, I find so many posts that get me so mad I find myself shouting at the computer. But today, alas, was not one of those days. Instead of being filled with anger that could pass as rabies (or just as often the opposite, a resounding "word"), I found myself filled with the mediocrity spilling out of this post.

Our guest poster begins with a quite helpful explanation of zsh and the command line movement for those of you who are... less learned in the ways of the fairer operating system. The gust poster then gives a play by play of the comic, and begins to hate on, among other things, puns and .

I guess this post has succeeded in avoiding the main mistakes made by xkcdsucks. The joke was understood, and actually addressed the actual... punch line(?). There was no comment on the art (this must surely be xkcdsucks's post-punchline dialogue) and the points were valid.

That's not to say it was particularly good, either. When xkcd is terrible, I expect xkcdsucks to be good enough to make up for it. I guess when xkcd is solidly mediocre, so is xkcdsucks.

Oh, and that picture. I am scarred for life. Thanks for that. Although, a certain xkcd comes to mind for setting the president in that regard (Please, don't click on the link, you can't unsee that. Just read what Carl had to say).