I note that I’m pretty sure this is the exact same genre of humor as Villiam’s reply riffing off the same core concept (currently at +18 to my comment’s −6, and with no moderator commentary).
Which makes my primary hypothesis that people’s objection is not to the genre of joke, but to the amount of effort or the ambiguity or lack thereof or whatever. “You can tell this joke but only if you do it more skillfully.”
I wasn’t going to mention this but then your comment (which I upvoted) got a bunch of other upvotes, too, and I think there’s an inconsistency lurking somewhere around here.
On one hand, I was not scanning the rest of the thread for other stuff I might think is good or bad and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if I had ended up unfairly signaling you out. I also think the karma in these threads gets particularly wacky and I don’t know what to do about it (I think agree/disagree helps a little but can only do so much), so I expect the karma scores here to be more intensified than is normal/reasonable.
But also I’m not sure what you’re referring to in Villiam’s comment.? Villiam’s comment upthread is making an argument (as a bit of biting humor thrown in, which I think is probably also kinda bad, but the humor felt incidental to making a point), and the “Buddhist” comment wasn’t making an argument, and that seemed like a pretty important distinction.
(I don’t think of this as a particularly important subthread, I had intended to just give your comment a weak downvote and move on with my day, and when you replied about it I had intended to just write up a quick one-liner explaining my thoughts but also didn’t mean to be making a big deal about it)
[removing my own self-upvote so that this doesn’t show up in recent discussion]
(fyi I think this genre of humor isn’t very good, or at least requires a higher trust group of people for me to think it’s good)
I note that I’m pretty sure this is the exact same genre of humor as Villiam’s reply riffing off the same core concept (currently at +18 to my comment’s −6, and with no moderator commentary).
Which makes my primary hypothesis that people’s objection is not to the genre of joke, but to the amount of effort or the ambiguity or lack thereof or whatever. “You can tell this joke but only if you do it more skillfully.”
I wasn’t going to mention this but then your comment (which I upvoted) got a bunch of other upvotes, too, and I think there’s an inconsistency lurking somewhere around here.
On one hand, I was not scanning the rest of the thread for other stuff I might think is good or bad and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if I had ended up unfairly signaling you out. I also think the karma in these threads gets particularly wacky and I don’t know what to do about it (I think agree/disagree helps a little but can only do so much), so I expect the karma scores here to be more intensified than is normal/reasonable.
But also I’m not sure what you’re referring to in Villiam’s comment.? Villiam’s comment upthread is making an argument (as a bit of biting humor thrown in, which I think is probably also kinda bad, but the humor felt incidental to making a point), and the “Buddhist” comment wasn’t making an argument, and that seemed like a pretty important distinction.
(I don’t think of this as a particularly important subthread, I had intended to just give your comment a weak downvote and move on with my day, and when you replied about it I had intended to just write up a quick one-liner explaining my thoughts but also didn’t mean to be making a big deal about it)
[removing my own self-upvote so that this doesn’t show up in recent discussion]