0807: "Connected"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
LucasBrown
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:57 am UTC
Location: Poway, CA

0807: "Connected"

Postby LucasBrown » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:00 am UTC

Image
Alt text: "Or love in general, for that matter. It just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'."

Why romanticize at all? It's totally impractical.

black_hat_guy
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby black_hat_guy » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:02 am UTC

People just like to romanticize because it makes everything seem romanticized.
Billy was a chemist.
He isn't any more.
What he thought was H2O
was H2SO4.

HonoreDB
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:32 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby HonoreDB » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:03 am UTC

I like the reading of "Romeo and Juliet" as taking a typical romantic ballad and sticking actual teenagers into it, with kinda Pratchett-like results.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26519
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby SecondTalon » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:03 am UTC

.... For some reason, I can't shake the notion that this is the song they're talking about.

Because my brain is basic.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Icalasari
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 5:11 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Icalasari » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:04 am UTC

I believe in true love

However, it is never like in movies. You have to work at it, else you'll end up miserable :D

User avatar
cjmcjmcjmcjm
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 am UTC
Location: Anywhere the internet is strong

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby cjmcjmcjmcjm » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:12 am UTC

So, any hot ladies like "Fast Food Fuckin'" by the 1108 Thugz?
frezik wrote:Anti-photons move at the speed of dark

DemonDeluxe wrote:Paying to have laws written that allow you to do what you want, is a lot cheaper than paying off the judge every time you want to get away with something shady.

badmartialarts
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:51 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby badmartialarts » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:19 am UTC

cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:So, any hot ladies like "Fast Food Fuckin'" by the 1108 Thugz?


"Lenny Kravitz" by Electric Six? Anyone? Just me? :)

dragondave
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:46 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby dragondave » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:28 am UTC

cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:So, any hot ladies like "Fast Food Fuckin'" by the 1108 Thugz?

badmartialarts wrote:"Lenny Kravitz" by Electric Six? Anyone? Just me? :)

"Never Going To Give You Up", by Rick Astley? Obscure, I know, but...

User avatar
Ghavrel
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:51 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Ghavrel » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:29 am UTC

This comic, to me, comes across as more angst-ridden and less, well, funny. We romanticize love because it's one of the nicer things we experience in our lives, and we romanticize young love because it marks a period of intense and meaningful transition in our lives.
"Si ad naturam vives, numquam eris pauper; si ad opiniones, numquam eris dives."
Live rightly and you shall never be poor; live for fame and you shall never have wealth.
~Epicurus, via Seneca

User avatar
athelas
A Sophisticated Plagiarism Engine
Posts: 584
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 2:37 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby athelas » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:32 am UTC

I think it's pretty funny to step back and look at it from a Martian's eye view. But I do caution against both the pro-cynicism bias (wise folks must be cynical) and the idealism bias (good people are idealistic!)

dragondave
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:46 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby dragondave » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:33 am UTC

Ghavrel wrote: We romanticize love because it's one of the nicer things we experience in our lives, and we romanticize young love because it marks a period of intense and meaningful transition in our lives.


Young people aren't jaded, and don't have the experience to understand that things aren't as rosy as they expect. Hence we romanticize young love because deep down we wish that the world was as good as we remember thinking it was, and that to prematurely shatter someone's illusion and to spoil their perfect moment would be an appalling crime.

User avatar
syko_lozz
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:30 am UTC
Location: Oz

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby syko_lozz » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:39 am UTC

um, ok? if we can't romanticise love, what exactly CAN we romanticise?
Debate politics with a fern. If you lose, refuse to water it.

User avatar
Ghavrel
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:51 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Ghavrel » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:39 am UTC

dragondave wrote:Young people aren't jaded, and don't have the experience to understand that things aren't as rosy as they expect. Hence we romanticize young love because deep down we wish that the world was as good as we remember thinking it was, and that to prematurely shatter someone's illusion and to spoil their perfect moment would be an appalling crime.


I don't think we are at any significant disagreement, although I am not sure your dichotomy of young/idealistic and old/jaded is entirely accurate. There have always been poets.
"Si ad naturam vives, numquam eris pauper; si ad opiniones, numquam eris dives."
Live rightly and you shall never be poor; live for fame and you shall never have wealth.
~Epicurus, via Seneca

Uninfinity
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:25 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Uninfinity » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:44 am UTC

LucasBrown wrote:Image
Alt text: "Or love in general, for that matter. It just leads to the idea that either your love is pure, perfect, and eternal, and you are storybook-compatible in every way with no problems, or you're LYING when you say 'I love you'."
/rant? :/
A webcomic of sarcasm, math, and language?
I miss his older comics that embraced young love.
Last edited by Uninfinity on Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:48 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JohnTheWysard
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:38 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby JohnTheWysard » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:44 am UTC

By the time you swear you're his,
shivering and sighing;
And he swears his passion is
Infinite, undying:
Lady, make a note of this:
One of you is lying.

- Dorothy Parker, _Enough Rope_

Azkyroth
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:35 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Azkyroth » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:48 am UTC

And let's not even get started on the notion that it's not possible to "truly" love more than one person (ever, in your entire life), or that if you really loved someone you'd forgive anything and everything they did to you (and to your and their kid) and never, ever give up hope of them changing...

Dark Ragnarok
Posts: 1406
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 9:12 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Dark Ragnarok » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:10 am UTC

Man, I never though I'd post on XKCD again... but talk about perfect timing. I just got out of a two year relationship I was engaged in.

In fact it reminds me of this comic: http://xkcd.com/291/

I want to punch my screen in. It's too fucking true. Especially the line "I bet no two people in the history of the world..." I used to know better. I used to tell myself "Love isn't enough to work." But I wanted my last relationship to prove that wrong. It was the only factor making it work. Then she dropped the ball, and basically could have saved us a lot of heartache and grief if she would have just simply told herself and me that she wasn't ready to be serious. I told her a million times it's okay to wait. RAGE. Why woman... WHY!

Randall, I don't know how you fucking do it, but you mention things that at least I, and I'm sure thousands others, think about it on the same wavelength. At least I know I'm not alone there.

EDIT: My two cents... I believe Randall's point is, there's no reason to think your love is special and it's not going to make common relationship problems disappear. Love is just Love. Not special "for me" love. It's just love. This is why I think it's possible to love more than one person, and more than one person at the same time. It's all dependent on who you are. I know people who do it just fine. Love can be romanticized in the fact is it love. I walk away from my relationship upset, but not angry. I walk away knowing that she still had a very positive influence on my life, and just upset that it had to come down to something stupid and silly. For what it's worth a good loving relationship can work fine if you just accept love for what it is. It's not the most endearing thing in the world, but it definitely will aid in completing the other half of you that needs that affection and attention to say that someone does care about you and you are not alone.

Azbbb
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:05 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Azbbb » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:12 am UTC

Whatever boyfriend or girlfriend you currently have, you could probably do better. However, you know your current love pretty well and the search for a better love could be time-consuming, stressful, and may not bring that much of an improvement.

Your love is true if and only if the relationship you currently have is at least as good as anything you would be able to get by switching, taking into account adjustment periods and uncertainties. Your relationship is healthy if this is true for both sides.

XKCD4ME
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:02 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby XKCD4ME » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:24 am UTC

http://xkcd.com/162/

Today is a sad day for the Internet. Randall Monroe has grown up. :(

Shay Guy
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:36 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Shay Guy » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:32 am UTC

Azkyroth wrote:And let's not even get started on the notion that it's not possible to "truly" love more than one person (ever, in your entire life), or that if you really loved someone you'd forgive anything and everything they did to you (and to your and their kid) and never, ever give up hope of them changing...


One of the most acclaimed manga romances ever stars a widow as its female lead. And upon finding out, the male lead thought, not "ruined FOREVER," but "how the HELL do I compete with a memory?"

The words "love" and "romance" are probably the two words in the English language that I trust least. Mainly because it's a pain figuring out what they even mean. Even if you think you already know. All too often, the instinct is to define it as "You know, that thing!" I mean, "romance" ultimately comes from "Rome." What's that supposed to mean? (Working definitions: "something to do with someone's emotions regarding another person" and "something to do with stories.")

User avatar
Ghavrel
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:51 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Ghavrel » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:38 am UTC

Shay Guy wrote:I mean, "romance" ultimately comes from "Rome." What's that supposed to mean? (Working definitions: "something to do with someone's emotions regarding another person" and "something to do with stories.")


To quote the Online Etymology Dictionary...
c.1300, "story of a hero's adventures," also (early 14c.), "vernacular language of France" (as opposed to Latin), from O.Fr. romanz "verse narrative," originally an adverb, "in the vernacular language," from V.L. *romanice scribere "to write in a Romance language" (one developed from Latin instead of Frankish), from L. Romanicus "of or in the Roman style," from Romanus "Roman" (see Roman). The connecting notion is that medieval vernacular tales were usually about chivalric adventure. Literary sense extended by 1660s to "a love story." Extended 1610s to other modern languages derived from Latin (Spanish, Italian, etc.). Meaning "adventurous quality" first recorded 1801; that of "love affair, idealistic quality" is from 1916. The verb meaning "court as a lover" is from 1942.


I realize you probably were asking this rhetorically, but I can very rarely pass up an opportunity to deal with etymology.
"Si ad naturam vives, numquam eris pauper; si ad opiniones, numquam eris dives."
Live rightly and you shall never be poor; live for fame and you shall never have wealth.
~Epicurus, via Seneca

User avatar
The Scyphozoa
Posts: 2871
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Sector 5

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby The Scyphozoa » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:41 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:.... For some reason, I can't shake the notion that this is the song they're talking about.

Because my brain is basic.

I like to think that it's this song, so I have a way to feel smugly superior to them.
Image
3rdtry wrote:If there ever is another World War, I hope they at least have the decency to call it "World War 2: Episode One"

doogly wrote:murder is a subset of being mean

User avatar
joee
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:53 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby joee » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:45 am UTC

XKCD4ME wrote:http://xkcd.com/162/

Today is a sad day for the Internet. Randall Monroe has grown up. :(


So I have 2 more years to go before I have to grow up! Woohoo!

HI GLASNT!

Maybe it's only when you're young that you're dumb enough to believe it's perfect love instead of two people deciding they can probably stand each other enough not to kill each other in the other's sleep.
Hi glasnt.

hthall
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:40 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby hthall » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:47 am UTC

HonoreDB wrote:I like the reading of "Romeo and Juliet" as taking a typical romantic ballad and sticking actual teenagers into it, with kinda Pratchett-like results.


Good call. Anyone who hopes to learn something about true love from Romeo and Juliet is reading it wrong. It's a tragedy, for crying out loud. It's about what happens when young people are left without out any reasonable or trustworthy adults to rely on—when not one person in their lives with a fully developed brain can really be trusted or confided in. The nearest equivalent is Lord of the Flies.

Unfortunately, that kind of neglect has been inflicted on a lot of people—often the same ones who adulate the parody of love that Shakespeare so skillfully depicts (to its macabre end).
Look at me, still talking when there's Science to do.

User avatar
scottyb
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:30 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby scottyb » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:49 am UTC

dragondave wrote:
cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:So, any hot ladies like "Fast Food Fuckin'" by the 1108 Thugz?

badmartialarts wrote:"Lenny Kravitz" by Electric Six? Anyone? Just me? :)

"Never Going To Give You Up", by Rick Astley? Obscure, I know, but...

"Whenever You Need Somebody" is my favorite Rick Astley song.

... cue "he has other songs?"

User avatar
glasnt
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:18 am UTC
Location: SQUEE!

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby glasnt » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:50 am UTC

Wait, how old is all growed up? <_< I'm scared, am I old yet ? >_>
HI JOEE AM I OLD YET?

ninjaofdeath30
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:57 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby ninjaofdeath30 » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:52 am UTC

what song is this really about? the one by the judds?

Ego
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:29 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Ego » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:55 am UTC

A,B - logical expressions, i.e. could be true or false, couldn't be 'cheese' or 'burn'
what does construction "either A or B" mean? A and B; A or B; A xor B ?

User avatar
from canada
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:05 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby from canada » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:07 am UTC

translation: randall can't get any pussy

User avatar
rdnetto
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:54 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby rdnetto » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:17 am UTC

XKCD4ME wrote:http://xkcd.com/162/

Today is a sad day for the Internet. Randall Monroe has grown up. :(

No, no, I'm sure he's just feeling a bit jaded right now... /denial
I liked the old ones like that. Oh well, back to Megatokyo...

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Eternal Density » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:25 am UTC

I don't get this at all.

/lying
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

H.H
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:31 am UTC
Location: 31.7;35.2
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby H.H » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:36 am UTC

Romantic love as depicted in today's pop culture is a product of the Romantic period. Prior to the late 18th century, love was perceived in a totally different, and much more realistic, sense. Attempts to approach the matter seriously and as objectively as possible started with the philosophical tradition of Plato's Symposium.

Then came the middle ages, and the concept of chivalry (which was forced into existence as a way to reconcile the violent nature of the times with Christianity, not as a real philosophical development of any sort) fucked everything up. Although the deists of the 16th and 17th centuries tried to bring the discussion back to reasonable lines, the likes of Walter Scott clinched on the notion of simplistic romantic love as a populist tool that generates interest, in lieu of meaningful insights on the matter.

This continued to our day, Romanticism going hand in hand with Consumerism, as a way of selling weekend trips to Paris and romantic comedies.

Ironically, despite Romanticism's claim of propelling social progress, it gradually became less and less relevant because of it, since societal norms now limit arranged marriages to fundamental, almost exclusively non-western societies.


The short version: there's no such thing as romantic love as seen in movies, it was created as an artistic device to sell cheap French romance novels.



PS
Romeo and Juliet was part of the above problem, only a few centuries earlier. On the other hand, Shakespeare did manage to masterfully deconstruct the illusion of young romance in A Midsummer Night's Dream. The former play was just a way to make a buck, the same reason he went into theatre in the first place, abandoning poetry altogether since it was completely unprofitable.
.

NotAllThere
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 12:54 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby NotAllThere » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:42 am UTC

What I find fascinating about my ex-fiancée is how different we are. That's what's made our twenty year marriage (and continuing) so much fun.

Thinking about it in terms of set theory, the more connected you are, the more you have in common, the bigger the area of intersection in the Venn diagrams of your lives. But the smaller the union. Now, you've got to have some intersection, otherwise there is no relationship. The trick is to have the minimal intersection, so to obtain the maximum union.

To find the minimal intersection, we need to find the derivitive(s). Presumably looking at the children will help here.

Could some kind soul please translate the above into suitable set theoretic notation? :mrgreen:
yangosplat wrote:So many amazing quotes, so little room in 300 characters!

User avatar
darknut
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:40 am UTC
Location: here

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby darknut » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:50 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:.... For some reason, I can't shake the notion that this is the song they're talking about.

Because my brain is basic.


that was the first song i thought of too. I still don't know what song they're actually talking about, google isn't helping
poxic wrote: Take a source of light and cook it up until it lases -- now you have a laser.

sliverstorm
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 11:10 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby sliverstorm » Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:52 am UTC

H.H wrote:Ironically, despite Romanticism's claim of propelling social progress, it gradually became less and less relevant because of it, since societal norms now limit arranged marriages to fundamental, almost exclusively non-western societies.


The short version: there's no such thing as romantic love as seen in movies, it was created as an artistic device to sell cheap French romance novels.


Wait. Did you just argue that the loss of arranged marriages slows social progress? :?


I dunno about that. I mean, it's not 'love'- I'd call it passion or infatuation or something like that- but I'm pretty sure a lot of it is founded in reality. Wouldn't hold together a long term relationship, but it's not like it doesn't exist...?

User avatar
Amarantha
Posts: 1638
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Amarantha » Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:13 am UTC

As a teen, I used to avoid letting on if I liked a bloke or had a boyfriend. Because the adults didn't so much swoon as snigger. It was very condescending and patronising, like "Oh look, young people in love lol." I was like, bugger that. Just because one is a callow youth inexperienced in love, doesn't mean what love one has shouldn't be taken seriously. Sure, it won't last, but they're feeling it right now, yer bastids.
Last edited by Amarantha on Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:17 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Mjauti
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 10:07 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Mjauti » Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:14 am UTC

I can't help believing there is some sort of ironic undertone in today's comic. Not that I don't see the point of the young ridiculously thinking their experience is unique and above all other's. If the only message of the comic wass the straigh-forward stated one, however, it wouldn't be very artistic. It looks more as if he's mainly trying to provoke us into thinking about the comic's theme.

H.H
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:31 am UTC
Location: 31.7;35.2
Contact:

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby H.H » Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:17 am UTC

sliverstorm wrote:
H.H wrote:Ironically, despite Romanticism's claim of propelling social progress, it gradually became less and less relevant because of it, since societal norms now limit arranged marriages to fundamental, almost exclusively non-western societies.


The short version: there's no such thing as romantic love as seen in movies, it was created as an artistic device to sell cheap French romance novels.


Wait. Did you just argue that the loss of arranged marriages slows social progress? :?


I dunno about that. I mean, it's not 'love'- I'd call it passion or infatuation or something like that- but I'm pretty sure a lot of it is founded in reality. Wouldn't hold together a long term relationship, but it's not like it doesn't exist...?


I wasn't clear, I guess. I meant that social progress, which made society less paternalistic and prude and allowed for young people to choose their own spouses, made arranged marriages a thing of the past.

Regarding romantic love, or infatuation, however one wishes to call it: the emotional side of it has always existed, since it is rooted in human psychology.
The perception of it has changed dramatically over the last two hundred years.

The famous opening line of Anna Karenina, "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way", illustrates this point. Most modern readers will fail to make the association the author was hoping for, unless they are familiar with the general plot, since we take marriage as the rational step of people who love each other. This was far from the norm in Early 19th century Russia, where marriages was a social need, and romance was something looked for in affairs and "fallen women", as they were called. In fact, all of upper-class Europe was awash with adultery (in this sense of the word), due to the strict social codes.

Getting back to our point, romance (as opposed to non-intimate love, as in between family) is more a reflection of one's ideals on another person than any kind of insight into the object of the desire.
.

Lucia
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 1:35 am UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Lucia » Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:43 am UTC

dragondave wrote:
cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:So, any hot ladies like "Fast Food Fuckin'" by the 1108 Thugz?

badmartialarts wrote:"Lenny Kravitz" by Electric Six? Anyone? Just me? :)

"Never Going To Give You Up", by Rick Astley? Obscure, I know, but...

Hey, we're so connected! This is crazy... (am I onyl the only person in the world who actualy likes it as a song and not just a prank?)
Wildhound wrote:Nobody ever sigs me. I think it's because I never say anything clever.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0807: Connected

Postby Kalos » Mon Oct 18, 2010 7:53 am UTC

...wow, never would I have thought that XKCD would start getting its inspiration from the whiny LiveJournal rants of frustrated 14 year-olds.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests