Introducing a new SBBS feature: the Loon-Off – like the regular mentalist-spotting, but with an Added Interactive Element (PRESS RED BUTTON NOW).
Today, we have two easy and cheap sources of utter mentalitry: the Samizdata comments vs grouphug.us. Who’s the least sane?
Samizdatista: "I understand the Jews walked voluntarily into the gas chambers. I will not and never have used a cell phone because it enables tracking of the owner / user…"
Grouphugger: "One time i stuck my penis in a tub of my mom’s crisco in order to get off. I creamed in it and made it look undisturbed like before I had my way with it. I never told anyone and my family probably ate it many times in a batch of cookies."
Vote in comments.
#1 by default – because everyone’s done #2 at least once, haven’t they?
OK, I think we should get together a few chaps and play a game of Samizdata Comments Poker across the blogs. The rules are simple;
1) John can start us off with something relatively sane. 2) The next player to go has to find a comment which is either a) by the same person or b) on the same general subject and post a link to it.
3) Every card played has to be, in the opinion of the crowd, loonier than the previous one.
4) You are eliminated if it is your turn to play and you cannot find a legal move under rules 2) and 3)
5) Last man standing, obviously, wins.
I think we might have to broaden it out a bit beyond the Samizdata comments section, though there would be obvious kudos for someone who could win without once resorting to a Melanie Phillips post.
Actually, I think it might be better played in a sort of "King of the hill" fashion; ie, you can claim bragging rights as champion until someone tops with a legal move under rules 2 and 3, and the king of the hill when some time limit is reached is the winner. The advantage is that we wouldn’t need to have limited numbers of players, but it does open up lots of avenues for tactical play. We might need to recruit a referee.
You would need a further rule to prevent an immediate escalation to Loon-Con 5. Otherwise, the game reduces very quickly to ‘who can find the maddest comment in the blogosphere’, which, frankly, isn’t that difficult.
I think that rule 2) is meant to slow down the progress to LC5. Also this would be a good argument in favour of the king-of-the-hill style rather than an elimination tournament, as you wouldn’t want to shoot your bolt too early.
For what it’s worth, I adapted the rules from "Furry Porn Poker" which they used to play on the "Something Awful" website.
Hmm. You seem to be working under the assumption that the relation "is loonier than" defines a total order on the set of comments posted on the internet (or at least on the quotient of that set by the equivalence relation "is exactly as loony as"). I don’t I accept this hypothesis.
The best way to get around this problem would be to appoint a referee who does accept it. This could well entail the referee being a madman, which may also have other advantages. If you appoint a raving mad a referee and then go on to win the game with a sensible comment of your own, then you be allowed to keep the trophy for ever.
I don’t think 1) is *so* weird.
Within the context of being held against their will in a brutal concentration camp, the [first ones at least] Jews may have walked voluntarily if the stories that they were told the chambers were showers are true. It wouldn’t be voluntarily like "hey, nice gas chamber! Let’s go take a look inside", but the walking bit wouldn’t strictly speaking be against their will.
Also, you can be tracked by your mobile phone. Can’t they triangulate the signals and place you within a certain area at a certain time?
Hmm. The madness comes in the writer’s implication that the two points are somehow related, and the fact that he’s scared of being tracked by his mobile (whereas for anyone sane, the correct attitude is ‘Bothered. If I need to do anything really dodgy, I can always switch it off beforehand.’)
That didn’t work for Ian Huntley.
I think that poster was joking though, hence the remark directly after about being the CEO of AQ. Either that or I didn’t get the joke.
I got the impression he appended the AQ joke to an otherwise serious comment (hence all the stuff about CCTV riddling the minds of the people of Rochdale). The whole thing [*] might be satire, but I don’t think it is.
[*] either the comment or Samizdata.
If someone hasn’t done a satire version of that site, they really should… PROJECT PLAN!
Who won, then?
Everybody has won, and all must have prizes.
I’ve found the dumbest article ever (not a blog though, does a quote count)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4617139.stm
Hello anyone home!?!?!? People buy Mac’s ‘cos they like the styling and the attached lifesytle statement not ‘cos of the individual components. It’s like saying Apple will have an ipod sales issue by ‘confusing’ consumers if they changed HDD supplier from Seagate to Fujitsu (BTW does anyone know who makes the Ipod HDD’s?)
Toshiba, I’m fairly certain.
I think the minis are Hitachi and the big ones Toshiba…
One quick Google later: yes, they are.
"This could well entail the referee being a madman, which may also have other advantages. If you appoint a raving mad a referee.."
So John B won’t be allowed to actually play the game then?