Images in threadpostsseem to be on the rise. They used to be rather pleasantly nonexistent, and I was under the impression that they were traditionally frowned on here.
posted by es_de_bah to etiquette/policy at 8:43 PM (166 comments total)
It may seem like elitism or nit-picking, but I always thought that a lot of mefi's charm, humor, and high-caliber discussion was do due its all-text (and hypertext) format. None of these images were necessary. posted by es_de_bah at 8:48 PM on November 26, 2005
Honestly, that's the point. Images like that help to kill discussion in other forums. Or grab unwarranted attention. Or reduce conversation to infantile levels.
(i laughed though) posted by es_de_bah at 8:53 PM on November 26, 2005
What IS that, phbc? Hand to god, I'm interested, I've never seen a condom like that (I'm in the sexual health field). Email in profile if not a total FARK joke....if so, I'm just a N00B. posted by tristeza at 9:05 PM on November 26, 2005
Oldie But Goodie... posted by Dreamghost at 9:07 PM on November 26, 2005
Heh. It's real, but I'll have to check the MetaChat archives for the thread I found it at. It is, as you probably guessed, a "no-touch" package with which one may apply a condom. posted by yhbc at 9:08 PM on November 26, 2005
That was easier than I thought. Here you go, tristeza. posted by yhbc at 9:11 PM on November 26, 2005
Because I've had a wad of sand up my vagina for the past few days for some reason, I've been thinking about posting a thread asking if it was time to ban the <img> tag myself. I think you're right, and MeTa in particular has gotten even more inane lately, thanks mostly to tired and unfunny inline images.
If it were up for a vote, I'd say kill it.
I have noticed that it's mostly a small handful of users that abuse it, though. Fuck them for dragging the whole site into Stupidville. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:12 PM on November 26, 2005
I am the Mad Arab, poet of Sanaá, in Yemen, who flourished during the period of the Ommiade caliphs, circa 700 A.D. I visited the ruins of Babylon and the subterranean secrets of Memphis and spent ten years alone in the great southern desert of Arabia — the Roba el Khaliyeh or "Empty Space" of the ancients — and "Dahna" or "Crimson" desert of the modern Arabs, which is held to be inhabited by protective evil spirits and monsters of death. Of this desert many strange and unbelievable marvels are told by those who would claim to have penetrated it. I have seen fabulous Irem City of Pillars, and to have found beneath the ruins of a certain nameless desert town the shocking annals and secrets of a race older than mankind. In Damascus I authored al Azif Necronomicon as testament to the godhead Yog-Sothoth Cthulhu. Of my final death or disappearance (738 A.D.) many terrible and conflicting things are told. I am said by Ibn Khallikan (13th century biographer) to have been seized by an invisible monster in broad daylight and devoured horribly before a large number of fright-frozen witnesses.
I think this sort of thing requires inline images posted by ab'd al'Hazred at 9:15 PM on November 26, 2005
I've noticed the place getting more image-heavy and I've been having a "What is this, Fark?" reaction. They're pretty much frowned upon in AskMe, unless they're necessary. Elsewhere it's hit or miss. I'd love to see an "images on/off" option myself. posted by jessamyn at 9:20 PM on November 26, 2005
That sounds reasonable if it was user controlled. posted by Dreamghost at 9:21 PM on November 26, 2005
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know all that. I mean, which other username did you abandon to use the ab'd al'Hazred username instead? posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:25 PM on November 26, 2005
I'd love to see an "images on/off" option myself.
That'd make the situation that much worse, I think, particularly for those many out there who have not ponied up their 5 bucks to get in, and just like to read the site.
Wrong solution, I think, even if it does line up with the laissez-faire self-policing ideal of the site.
I'd start by just banning everyone who's posted an image in this thread. (Including quonsar. Again.) That'd solve 75% of the problem in one go. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:25 PM on November 26, 2005
I'd start by just banning everyone who's posted an image in this thread. (Including quonsar. Again.) That'd solve 75% of the problem in one go.
Fuck, Do you ever do anything but complain? Every single thread all you do is bitch & moan. Maybe for the communitys sake you need to pick-up the bottle again. posted by Dreamghost at 9:29 PM on November 26, 2005
Where a picture is worth a thousand words (like in the examples cited in this callout), the img tag is both appropriate and appreciated; where it's piling on (like in this thread) the same tag is juvenile and annoying.
The same can also be said for the bold, small, strike-out and italic tag, for that matter. Fuck, it can also be said for the letters of the English alphabet. Ban them too; they can all be used for no good. posted by yhbc at 9:33 PM on November 26, 2005
Banning people isn't the answer. A "no image" preference is only kind of a solution. Honestly, I'd like people to just be more conscious of it. That's why I posted this, even though I knew there'd be an inevitable hail of images. I admit that it's funny (a bit) in this thread, and it was funny (a bit) in the Untitled States thread. I think most of you would agree that you don't want to the majority of the threads here turn out like this. posted by es_de_bah at 9:34 PM on November 26, 2005
Of course not, but it was inevitable (as you admit). That's why I did it, and that's why everyone else did, too. But not every thread gets filled up with images, and they shouldn't - why? Because we're self-policing adults, capable of behaving appropriately (for the most part), but also trusted to use an occasional image where it might be appropriate. posted by yhbc at 9:38 PM on November 26, 2005
Every single thread all you do is bitch & moan.
And all you do is post stupid fucking images, over and over and over again. You may not be 12 years old, but you give a damn fine impression of it.
A hearty 'fuck you' for wiping your sticky Stupid all over what used to be my favorite place on the internet.
Maybe for the communitys sake you need to pick-up the bottle again.
Classy.
Banning people isn't the answer.
Of course not. Like I've said many times before, it's good I have no power here (beyond what is apparently incessant bitching and moaning), because I'd wield the banhammer with fucking abandon. Saying that I'd do it doesn't mean that I'm suggesting it be done. Just that I'd do it.
mathowie, for better or worse, is a more reasonable and pacific individual.
It is a mystery.
Leave SA at SA, please, for fuck's sakes. It's not even funny there anymore, and will probably be a catchphrase-probation offense soon enough on the SA Forums.
Because we're self-policing adults, capable of behaving appropriately (for the most part), but also trusted to use an occasional image where it might be appropriate.
Many of us are, a smaller group clearly are not. That's the problem. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:40 PM on November 26, 2005
I agree wholeheartedly, yhbc. But you can't argue that each of the instances I linked to was really a good use of image. And all of them could have been done (more effectively in my mind) as links. I made this post in the interest of raising my voice in the spirit of self-policing adults. I've just noticed an increase, and I thought I'd bring it up. Hell, maybe images it's just because of the long weekend, ya know? posted by es_de_bah at 9:44 PM on November 26, 2005
Hell, maybe my editing skills have reacehd an all time low. (Since it's my thread I guess I get to pick, and Jairus has made me laugh the most so far, so he wins. It might be tired in SA, but I've never seen it.) posted by es_de_bah at 9:50 PM on November 26, 2005
es-de-bah, the only one of your examples that I think was gratuitous and unnecessary was the "shooting ducks" image that is under your "posts" link. After looking at them all again, and reading through the threads, I submit that each of the others was a one-off use of an image to convey an immediate thought that could not otherwise be easily communicated in words. Plus, they didn't turn the threads they were in into "image-fests" (like this thread!)
In other words, I feel they were appropriate uses of the img tag, but that's just my opinion. I don't run the place, after all. posted by yhbc at 9:52 PM on November 26, 2005
Metafilter: said by Ibn Khallikan (13th century biographer) to have been seized by an invisible monster in broad daylight and devoured horribly before a large number of fright-frozen witnesses.
(that frog thing still makes me sad) posted by amberglow at 9:55 PM on November 26, 2005
Wow dreamghost, step away from they keyboard. posted by justgary at 9:59 PM on November 26, 2005
jesus on a moped is easy. sand in stav's vagina, well, that's going to require a real photoshop expert. posted by quonsar at 10:07 PM on November 26, 2005
I posted that December 29th, 2004. Pointing to it (as an attempt to portray me as a hypocrite, I can only assume) is pretty fucking weak, sunshine. And it's a little creepy that you'd take the time to comb through 11 months of my comments to find it.
Maybe he just agreed with the sentiment, stavros? posted by interrobang at 10:42 PM on November 26, 2005
Er, OK. Got my hackles up thanks to Dreamghost, swinging at shadows. If so, I apologize. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:48 PM on November 26, 2005
I posted that December 29th, 2004. Pointing to it (as an attempt to portray me as a hypocrite, I can only assume) is pretty fucking weak, sunshine. And it's a little creepy that you'd take the time to comb through 11 months of my comments to find it.
See also: what yhbc said.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:38 PM PST on November 26 [!]
I found it first crack under stavrosthewonderchicken on Google Images. Took 10 seconds. Kinda flyin' off the handle, aren't ya? posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 10:52 PM on November 26, 2005
Could we force all images to be 100x100 (or smaller) pixels with a link to the full-size version if someone actually wants to look at it? posted by blue_beetle at 10:55 PM on November 26, 2005
Here's a bookmarklet that changes images to links and breaks the live preview. I might make it better later who knows :itisamystery: You don't need greasemonkey or anything just drag and drop level dexterity. posted by moift at 11:05 PM on November 26, 2005
This thread crashed my browser. posted by odinsdream at 11:07 PM on November 26, 2005
Why doesn't that eternally moaning chicken fucker just fuck off and GHOB? You'ld think he owned the place? Go on, git! posted by Joeforking at 12:27 AM on November 27, 2005
I agree with pretty much everything stavrosthewonderchicken has said. I'd probably feel differently if a single one of these had made me laugh in the past six months
Mu suggestion would be to ban images in MetaFilter and MetaTalk, but allow them in AskMe where, so far, this isn't a problem and they could potentially be very useful for both asking and answering questions. posted by nthdegx at 12:30 AM on November 27, 2005
It's official. posted by tweak at 12:42 AM on November 27, 2005
I'd probably feel differently if a single one of these had made me laugh in the past six months
Plenty have made me laugh. Does that even things out or add perspective for people like nthdegx, who say they haven't laughed at them in six months? All things being equal, right? Or does negativity always trump positivity?
Or should it be the other way around? You can block img tags with a script, but once the img tag is banned we can't unblock it with a similar script and go on enjoying ourselves.
I love the off-kilter ironic and sarcastic use of images here. I've laughed so hard and so many times I can put neither price nor quantity upon it.
Though, I'm generally not too fond of the non-ironic ones - namely the shock value images. But the reactions to them are pretty good. But I wouldn't call for their banning. If it really bothered me I could just block all imgs outright on the client side, or them to anchors with that bookmarklet.
Look, we lost the big tag. Ok, granted, that was probably at least partially my fault for making a period the size of a small moon. I didn't think that it was going to break the formatting that badly.
So anyway, next lets say we lose the img tag. What's next? The small tag? The blink tag?
Imagine all the lost humor. Imagine MeFi without the original 9622 thread - a thread that spawned a whole site, or imagine never having had the fun that was 9622v2 in MeTa.
I'm all for self policing. But self policing doesn't automatically equate to zero assgrabbery and shenanigans. Sure, I love me some snark and some grab assing. But I also spend a lot of time voluntarily self-policing and giving sound, clear advice - proof that I and others like me aren't all noise. I email people off-thread fairly often with calm, rational and helpful explanations of why their thread was deleted, or why it's filling up with snark, or why people are jumping down their throats when they get too serious and defensive.
This place isn't Fark, and it never will be - the mere fact that I can type a tolerably coherent comment with itemized salient points using at least average debating techniques while utilizing decent grammar attests to that.
Of course, who knows what would happen if all the fun got sucked out of this place and it was nothing but newsfilter and political debates, driving off even more users.
Not that I expect nor would I care if anyone would miss me or not - but when the humor, joy and value of being part of MetaFilter is gone for me, I'm gone.
I often wonder why it's not so simple for others. posted by loquacious at 1:16 AM on November 27, 2005
*bites stavrosthewonderchicken, makes an icky face*
Dude-bro. Please take a hot shower. I think I just got salmonella poisoning. posted by loquacious at 1:18 AM on November 27, 2005
Pretty much what loquacious said. It's not like every thread has become a copy of the caplocks day thread, and we're in no danger of becoming Fark. The only way I could see it as becoming a real problem is if people started posting tubgirl or goatse. That would defiantly earn a banning
Ok, kosher_jenny's pic just made me laugh. It would be funny even without Darth Vader.
What the hell? A whole herd of narcoleptic goats? That's fantastic! That guy should charge admission! I don't think I could ever get tired of that. I'd just raise goats and sit on my back porch all day watching them fall into jumbled piles of zombie-goats. posted by loquacious at 2:21 AM on November 27, 2005
Thank you loquacious for your reasoned argument. Stavros. - for you. posted by adamvasco at 2:39 AM on November 27, 2005
my wife, stavros, asked me to take her someplace she'd never been. i said, "try the kitchen." posted by Hat Maui at 2:42 AM on November 27, 2005
Loquacious, as it so happens, I also have the original :)
I've heard that the purpose of these goats are to be placed amongst flocks of sheep in case of wolf attack. No idea if that's true or not. posted by kosher_jenny at 2:55 AM on November 27, 2005
we're in no danger of becoming Fark.
Which is a little like saying that because I've gotten smallpox, I'm in no danger of becoming the elephant man. I'm going to suffer, but it could be worse.
'Becoming Fark,' whatever that may mean to those who worry about it, is not the concern.
Losing what is special about Metafilter by becoming just like any other be-avatared and sig-filed .php message board, ass-deep in the misspelled empty threats of sophomoric internet toughguys and topheavy with 5th-hand images stolen from all the other boards, infantilized and dragged by its collective collar down to the lowest common denominator ('teh funney pichurs! huh huh lookie!'), where love of language is beshitted and devalued by look-at-me oneupmanship and image-macro met-tooing... that's the concern. It's my concern, anyway.
Yeah, I know: imminent demise of Metafilter predicted. Nothing new. I'm not such a fool as to think it's all going to go to shit instantly, or inevitably. But I don't think, contrary to what loquacious has said upthread, that what has been happening with inline images, in this thread and too many others, is anything but destructive to the things that many (and fewer today, because we have lost a lot of people over the years with thinner skins and less endurance in the face of thuddullardry) value about Metafilter.
But self policing doesn't automatically equate to zero assgrabbery and shenanigans.
Of course it doesn't. We've had this conversation before, I don't know how many times. The funny is good. The funny is the most important damn part of life.
This place isn't Fark, and it never will be - the mere fact that I can type a tolerably coherent comment with itemized salient points using at least average debating techniques while utilizing decent grammar attests to that.
It doesn't matter if you can or not. More than 30,000 people have registered at this site, and probably better than 10% of those actively participate. What's important is how our behaviour contributes to something becoming commonplace and accepted, whether it's good or bad, reaching that critical mass of everydayness. What's important is not that you can express yourself clearly and well, but that you do.
Look, I'm probably losing my mind, but I've gotten the feeling there's a cadre of people who are deliberately trying to wreck Metafilter (or at least Metatalk) these days, to turn it into something that they want it to be, something different and far less special than it once was. I'd gladly (metaphorically) rip their guts out with my (metaphorical) teeth. It makes me both angry and sad, because the unclever and unimaginative will emulate anyone who grabs their attention. And they are emulating, because it's a hell of a lot easier to post a borrowed image file than it is to write well, or just from the heart, or at all, for that matter.
I apologize for the length. Feel free to continue to take shots at me, goodnatured or not. It's all good. But I do care about this place, still, and that's why I gibber and moan. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:10 AM on November 27, 2005
tennessee fainting goat - "The goats of this breed have a host of names: Myotonic, Tennessee Fainting, Tennessee Meat, Texas Wooden Leg, Stiff, Nervous, and Scare goats. The names refer to a breed characteristic known as myotonia congenita, a condition in which the muscle cells experience prolonged contraction when the goat is startled. The transitory stiffness associated with these contractions can cause the goat to fall down. This is not a true faint, but a muscular phenomenon unrelated to the nervous system. The degree of stiffness varies from goat to goat, with some showing a consistently stiff response and others exhibiting stiffness only rarely."
(sorry, it seems less funny now; i still can't believe my first google search of the day was "narcoleptic goat"). posted by andrew cooke at 3:10 AM on November 27, 2005
This page crashed my browser. I'm impressed. posted by chrismear at 3:12 AM on November 27, 2005
(I can't believe, by the way, that Hat Maui has the freaking stones to leech an image from my own site and post it in this thread.
Images in thread posts seem to be on the rise. They used to be rather pleasantly nonexistent, and I was under the impression that they were traditionally frowned on here.
It's only been 3 days since Thanksgiving, and the chicken's gone off. I hope you're all happy now. posted by Smart Dalek at 4:18 AM on November 27, 2005
I think images are okay when a thread has basically descended into general larking about. But as a normal comment, humourous images aren't really what MeFi's about. posted by chrismear at 4:24 AM on November 27, 2005
chrismear: I came in here to post that too.
For me, images are often loud and obnoxious like an ALL CAPS post. So they can be funny but timing is everything and you folks don't have timing, like Fark.
And if you're going to use SA's fapping gif, at least tweak the colours so it works on blue, dumbass. posted by holloway at 4:32 AM on November 27, 2005
And if you're going to use SA's fapping gif, at least tweak the colours so it works on blue, dumbass.
I can't believe, by the way, that Hat Maui has the freaking stones to leech an image from my own site and post it in this thread
yeah, crazy that. someone posting a wonderchicken image in a dumb debate about inline images, in which starvos is whinging. look, i know your site images are sacrosanct, guy, but i'm so impressed with all your kvetching, i was desperate to attract your attention. i'm actually keeping all your witty rejoinders on file (i know, i know, The Stupid is strong in that comment).
if the past was so freakin' awesome, beanbag, then why do you insist on bothering those of us in the present? i bet there's hundreds of threads from back in the Days Without Inline Images that even you haven't read, and back then in the past, no one's yet tired of all your bitching.
The Strong is Stupid in this Thread. posted by Hat Maui at 4:38 AM on November 27, 2005
I love the off-kilter ironic and sarcastic use of images here. I've laughed so hard and so many times I can put neither price nor quantity upon it.
Yeah, I gotta agree with this. As far as I can see, the only problem with images would be if they caused Matt serious problems of some kind, in which case he'd ban them. If he does, I'll be sorry (and think harsh thoughts about whoever pushed him over the line), but I'll respect his right to do it. Meanwhile, I enjoy the fun and shake my head over the imminent-demise folks.
stavros, you're one of my all-time favorite MeFites and I share your love for language well used, but you really do seem to have gotten bit by a dead bee lately. Korea getting to you? Too much Sapir-Whorf in the water? posted by languagehat at 4:49 AM on November 27, 2005
i'm actually keeping all your witty rejoinders on file
How... odd.
look, i know your site images are sacrosanct
Nope, but image leeching is an internet cardinal sin. My suspicion is that you weren't trying to 'attract my attention' (for some mysterious reason), you were just being a big wobbly dumbass.
if the past was so freakin' awesome, beanbag, then why do you insist on bothering those of us in the present?
Because you suck. And you're pissing on my lawn.
Beanbag.
Too much Sapir-Whorf in the water?
Like I said upthread, LH, sand in the (metaphorical) vagina. It's all good fun, either way. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:57 AM on November 27, 2005
Metafilter = written discussion
Fark = funny otrageous pictures
Freerepublic = republitards
DailiyKos = librulz
Why change ? That equations are working well for many except for a few that just can't help not being contrarian or
the way they say it in the elite circles, iwhiny annoying assholes. posted by elpapacito at 5:04 AM on November 27, 2005
I did have a point when I posted this. Banning images is not going to solve anything. C'mon, people, self-policers don't need to ban tags; MeFites swing the mighty hammers of ridicule and public shaming better than anyone on the internets. If someone has gotten out of hand with the inline imags, call that person out. Don't ruin them for everybody.
And stavros really has turned into Old Man Jenkins. posted by If I Had An Anus at 5:11 AM on November 27, 2005
Don't post images unless
a) the thread sucked before it was posted
or
b) the thread has spun out into la-la land
and
c) the image is appropriate to the points being made
It's been fun, friends and neighbours. Let's do it again sometime. posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:22 AM on November 27, 2005
My internet humour is at the cutting edge, and lately mefi has not been as funny.
Like contemporary Simpsons, it's schizophrenically off-topic and contrived laughs, rather than anything that flows in the conversation.
So please be funnier, mefi.
With love, posted by holloway at 5:31 AM on November 27, 2005
Holloway, you have to be more aggressive with MeFi:
*pokes MeFi in ribs* MAKE ME LAUGH DAMN YOU!!!! posted by wheelieman at 6:18 AM on November 27, 2005
I have never been more angry with you mefi! I'm steaming at the ears and stomping my feet! Angry! Rage! Oooooh! posted by holloway at 6:28 AM on November 27, 2005
I think probably the most helpful solution would be a simple user preference that has three states:
a) no inlined images
b) inlined images converted to URLs
c) inlined images
With the default state as c) until images until/unless images become far more of a problem than they are now. posted by Ryvar at 7:20 AM on November 27, 2005
minus first 'until images.' *gropes blindly for Excedrin and morning coffee* posted by Ryvar at 7:21 AM on November 27, 2005
Sorry if I called you names stav, I can tend to go off the deep end, and you didn't deserve it. My personal opinion is the same as yours, that inline images should certainly be deprecated, but They have on occasion given me great pleasure, and I would like the freedom to use them when I feel frisky, and wouldn't want them banned.
I vote for what Ryvar said above. posted by Joeforking at 7:55 AM on November 27, 2005
I didn't even know you 2 were a couple. posted by peacay at 8:22 AM on November 27, 2005
I didn't read this thread. I just looked at the pictures. posted by WolfDaddy at 8:37 AM on November 27, 2005
There have been cases in the past where a well judged image has made me laugh, but recently any thread with one image has been followed by another ten. There's nothing ironic about it and there's nothing funny about it. posted by nthdegx at 8:41 AM on November 27, 2005
Um . . . why was my comment and stupid picture deleted? I really don't appreciate that. posted by dgaicun at 8:47 AM on November 27, 2005
Because you fucked it up*.
* Your img tag was broken, so the picture didn't display. Don't worry, I saw your mucus picture, and it was very good. posted by chrismear at 8:58 AM on November 27, 2005
The images bother me not at all. But I'm with stav and holloway. We have a similar problem at work: there are a group of us who are legitimately Very Funny People (and no, I don't play this person online). The problem is there's another group of people who think they're part of our subset. And they're not. It's like this wonderful jazz combo interrupted by someone who picks up the nearest instrument and begins man-handling it however they best see fit. Not only is it off-key, grating and embarrasing, but it ruins the actual funny.
People can contribute in other ways, but everyone insists on trying to be amusing/ clever/ droll, as if it were worth something. I can't unstuff you from your high school locker, so stop trying to make up for lost experiences.
To some extent, it's just a matter of evolution. There's a larger active user base and the site is easier to find. There are less people working to seek it out, less outliers, etc. I was recently involved in a discussion of the merits of Arrested Development vs. King of Queens. We're all being mainstreamed. posted by yerfatma at 9:06 AM on November 27, 2005
Your workplace sounds fun. Do they hand out the 'Very Funny Person' badges, or do you have to make them yourselves? posted by chrismear at 9:19 AM on November 27, 2005
yerfatma:
do you laugh at your own jokes? posted by dash_slot- at 9:25 AM on November 27, 2005
Wow, I went scrolling through looking at the funny pictures and it was great. Then I read the nasty vitriolic comments and it was like a totally different and awful place. From now on I suggest that we ban all text from posts to MeFi, images only. posted by Nelson at 10:56 AM on November 27, 2005
You only win because I can't count past 3. Curse you and your debating abacus, mischief. posted by NinjaPirate at 11:15 AM on November 27, 2005
The images mostly suck, but are far less corrosive to the site than people who can't find the shift key. posted by LarryC at 12:03 PM on November 27, 2005
Oh I get it now. No one actually thinks they're being funny but they're intentionally emulating shitty posters, all over the site, all the time.
This must be that new meta-humour that I've read so much about. posted by holloway at 12:14 PM on November 27, 2005
Sometimes the pictures are fun, if they're in a thread that's too far gone to save with mere text.
But I have to know: What the hell is this? posted by maryh at 5:17 AM on November 28, 2005
i think it's a woman. disclaimer - i'm a nerd and don't get out much. posted by andrew cooke at 5:21 AM on November 28, 2005
I see your woman, and raise you one Beyonce.
According to the filename. posted by chrismear at 6:51 AM on November 28, 2005
if you're right, i have to say that's quite the cutest little invested interest in the capitalist/fascist military industrial complex megacorp cluster-fuck i've seen. posted by andrew cooke at 10:04 AM on November 28, 2005
on reflection, that's probably truer than i thought. posted by andrew cooke at 10:05 AM on November 28, 2005
FYI, fark is not the site for funny pictures. The king of daily images IMHO is ilovebacon. posted by nomisxid at 12:20 PM on November 28, 2005
Subscribe
posted by es_de_bah at 8:48 PM on November 26, 2005