Re: [OT] dry humor
Ron Johnson put forth on 7/6/2010 1:33 PM:
> On 07/06/2010 01:40 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Mark put forth on 7/5/2010 11:51 PM:
>>
>>> I admire the OP's class in his response. Thought that comment about
>>> youtube
>>> and pr0n was completely unnecessary and unsolicited when I read it.
>>
>> Dry humor doesn't include emoticons.
>>
>
> "If you're that addicted to youtube and pr0n" is only dryly humorous
> among friends.
Youtube and pr0n are the stereotypical/archetypal Flash applications. If I'd
included a winky or tongue-out emoticon, no one would have said a word about
my post, just grinned slightly as they read it, or thought to themselves "that
wasn't really funny" and moved on.
This is why most people hate dry humor, and hate comics such as Steven Wright,
because they just can't "get it" without an external social queue telling them
it's funny (in this case an emoticon). This is why most/all sitcoms have
laugh tracks.
I know you'll attempt to rebut this Ron, so should I go ahead and dig up all
the sociology research that prove my point? ;) :P
Obviously Mark isn't a Steven Wright fan. Apparently you aren't either. From
now on I'll be damn sure to stick emoticons all over my comments intended to
be humorous lest I cause another row with the dry humor.
--
Stan
Reply to: