Maybe not a good solution, but better than a boot to the head.
Needfuldoer
And one for Jenny and the wimp.
(They get the last donut before Beef shows up and have to share.)
Cholma
“…and now, for Danny, who stood by me faithfully these many years, who cared, made me laugh, coded my Do-List …”
“Oh, I didn’t mind.”
“To Danny, I bequeath . . . a boot to the head. (And one more for Jenny & the Wimp.)”
David T. Shaw
How is it that there are at least three people on this site that recognize a 30 year old sketch from Canadian Radio?
Is it because The Frantics just made a bunch of pod casts from their CBC work, or is it a love of old vinyl?
neeks
I personally recognize it because of Radio KOL.
neeks
RKOL is also why I have a Pavlovian urge to say “that’s ridiculous, it’s not even funny” whenever I see or hear the number eleven in any context….
…which of course is ridiculous and not even funny.
I personally recognize it because I’m old. At the time it got wide play.
Needfuldoer
Oh man, I’m just getting back into KoL! It’s almost completely different than it was in 2008. I still remember the grey plague and when NS13 went live…
(It’s a free-to-play browser MMO based around stick figures, pop culture references, and silly logic. “Want a cottage for your campsite? Combine a bowl of cottage cheese with some anticheese.” That kind of logic.
I recognize it from 4 on the Floor – the CBC TV show that spotlighted The Frantics and their style of humor. Rick Green is on my list of celebrities that I am happy to have met.
That’s him, but Bill is by far his least work. His stuff with the Frantics, his TVO series, Prisoners of Gravity, and his writing for Steve Smith’s previous series (Smith & Smith, which costarred Steve’s wife, Morag) are all better.
Okay I gotta scour the innertubes for more.of his work. Thanks!
(i have far too many Red Green items, as US citizen, to pretend I’m not in that cult.)
GoldStarz
I know of it from a Ace Attorney fan video that has it, I imagine that’s how most people know it.
TachyonCode
^ This.
Nelly Dreadful
And a World of Warcraft machinima of the earlier sketch in the same series. It was pretty beloved by fanvidders for a time so it was distributed pretty widely via youtube in a few different fandoms. The Ace Attorney one was probably the best one though.
Hilzabub
It’s because the Frantics were the most amazing thing on the radio in Canada at the time.
Roborat
I remember listening to The Frantics on CBC Radio, along with Royal Canadian Air Farce. Then later Air Farce and Four on the Floor on television, followed later by Kids in the Hall.
hof1991
Doctor Demento.
EvilMidnightLurker
Same.
Dragotx
One of my friends in college back in the early 00’s found it online and fell in love, so we all were subjected to it constantly for about a month straight. And of course, in revenge, I still subject people to it on a fairly regular basis 😀
Ann Potter
Could be the comic has a wide age range of readers.
Fish
Dr Demento’s 20th anniversary CD
Cholma
1. I’m OLD.
2. I blame Dr. Demento (and my father) for putting all kinds of novelty bits into my head
Honestly if someone called me a six my reaction would be “yeah probably”
Unless they were friends in which case I’d pretend to be offended.
… Weird incongruity that.
Also the basis of human beauty is scientifically theorized to be a face and body closest to average in characteristics.
… So a six would either be above or below average. <o<
… Trying to imagine to what degree a six is on average along the bell curve of average human traits. I've taken this joke to far. …Oh cool it would be off by about 40%ish which is close to one standard deviation. Literally making a six just below the range of about 70% of the population… But that is treating the 40% offset as like an absolute value on the bell, with those deviations averaging 40% away from the average characteristic in either direction. Big or small nose. That makes more sense to me but you could make the case that that average deviation should only be 20% in either direction.
So like the average population is either comprised of 7+s' or like 3/4+s' depending on how you play with that.
I think 7+s' but hey that literally gives an outlook for positive and negative views of humanity.
This random tangent just informed my philosophical views on human beauty. Cool.
Here's a link to show a bell curve with standard deviations and what those numbers are. The bell curve is a representation of traits in a population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation
Jinxed44
I got that the traits would differ from the true average on the bell curve of human traits because that would be the ultimate in socially perceived human beauty according to a few studies. So like a “10” would be in the middle of the bell curve for every human trait. Eye distance, size, height, muscle tone in the butt, whatever, everyy part of that persons body would be perfectly average. So a 6 is missing 40% of 10 and their traits would differ from that perfect average by about 40% within any possible deviation that can happen on a living human being.
Sorry, I realized that my other comment was basically a jumble of numbers so I had to try to explain it just a bit with person words. 😛
Jinxed44
…And according to that, since that average of a 40% difference can work in either direction on the scale of traits, smaller or larger, bigger or smaller, with the distance from the MIDDLE of the bell curve counting, the number of people who are six or above should be double that at 80% of the population.
With that in mind no one person can have more than a 50% deviation from the average of any one trait, as even if that man has the largest nose someone else has the smallest!
Literally the lowest score a person can get is a 5!!!!
THATS AWESOME!!!
…yes this did keep me up until 4 am why do you ask?
Jinxed44
Course you account for that and adjust the scale so all numbers can be used and it all goes to shit.
Shut up let me have this.
First of all, the theory that as applied to woman specifically, beauty is conformance to average is complete nuts. The depiction of beautiful women skews strongly to the skinny side of average and to the low side of age and to abnormally symmetric features, and that’s just for openers. But let’s accept the theory and the implication that a 6 means 40% are closer and 60% are further away from average. Then one standard deviation from average should be the definition of a 5, not a 6, as 50% of the population is expected to lie within one standard deviation. Further, because the slope of the normal distribution decreases as you approach average, there is a far greater distance between a 5 and a 6 than there is between and 8 and a 9. Additionally, as you note, there are two sides to the curve, but you inexplicably use that as an excuse to double to get the erroneous conclusion that 80% of the population should be a 6 or better, whereas the fact there are two sides of the curve means that you should take half to get the number of people (20%) between a 6 and perfection. So a 6 corrosponds to what would be an 8 in a unimodal distribution. Because of the slope and the 2 sided distribution it can be seen that a 6 is actually a pretty decent rating. Of course beauty under your “scientific” definition would depend on multiple feature curves and not just one, but you seem to fail to realize that this would further undermine your conclusion.
Jinxed44
Ok, in the studies the general features of a person were found to be the things most appealing when average. That’s a scientific study, not a “scientific” one, and I’m pretty sure there was more than one. Doesn’t make it a law, but it still used the scientific process and a good data set.
I thought about the things like cultural skews, weight as an example, but really in the face of the sheer mountain of data unaffected by them decided not to overly focus on that. We do make mountains out of mole hills with that stuff, but we also are hyper aware of our own sensitivity to it. If you had a woman with the “perfect” face of sheer average of facial features she’d probably be a “10” even if her weight followed the population average instead of the cultural skew.
Secondly a standard deviation covers about 35% of the population on either side of the average, according to the wikipedia article on it I attached in the first comment.
Thirdly, I actually kind of cut the standard deviation out of the whole process, because if we include everyone who has an AVERAGE set of features that deviate by about 40% from the norm (all traits on their own curve, distance from the location of the human average divided by the total line (normalizing the two sides of the bell as its likely skewed), average of all the resulting percentage) You get 80% of the population. Or 40% of the population if we use the half distance of the bell as the base of the division in that calc. Basically that deviation from the norm includes all possible people within that deviation as all traits within the population would be accounted for.
Fourthly, I freely admit in both the first and final comment that you can end up using the 20% on either side of the average bell curve to identify the upper 40% of the population no mas, in this case by only using the half the bell in which the deviation occurs to average of every possible trait. If you want to use your ten scale as a ten scale you have to. I admit at the end that the first method stops making sense due to this, or at least imply that in my last comment, but don’t regret the process. It was fun using numbers to describe a subjective concept, and to use that to think more deeply on that concept.
Fifthly, look, I appreciate that you are willing to think this through with me, as math is fun and to be enjoyed. But when you write you sound really arrogant and down-putting. I could very well have missed something or gotten something wrong, but just because you don’t get something I said doesn’t mean you need to start j’accuse-ing me of idiocy. I don’t really care in the long run, but that sort of habit will end up burning you, man. Take care.
Jinxed44
Actually the guy below made a good point.
This is only focused on average-ness, which the studies linked below point out as a significant independent influencing factor, but there ARE other factors that influence societal beauty.
I am simplifying this to a certain extent.
Read the (last) article yourself to see to what extent!
We discussed this theory (albeit briefly) in art school in regards to portraiture/appeal and my understanding of it was that when they say “average” is considered beautiful they don’t mean in terms of statistics (as in the most common features) but rather “average” meaning “unremarkable” as in, the opposite of “extreme.” Average may not be the exact word choice (I don’t recall if it was used in our class discussion). A better one might be: undramatic or unextreme features. Basically what is being referred to is the idea that no one feature stands out in any significant way (no large nose, small eyes, large lips, etc…everything is just a sort of…middleground). Also symmetry but that’s already been discussed here.
Jinxed44
A. That’s a really interesting perspective from a different school.
B. That also sounds like its similar if not the same as statistical averageness? Why are big lips something that stand out, if we don’t have that normal middle ground in our social consciousness? If we all had larger lips those would be normal and thus not extreme, as the art world has apparently already figured out (again cool).
Of course we wouldn’t set un-obtrusive norms at a perfect statistical average, but social animals are actually sensitive enough to get really close.
C. Check out the links below for the studies. A really simple example is the first one which basically changed photos to make them closer to the statistic average for men, and those men rated the altered faces more attractive despite the changes being relatively small. (the link doesn’t have the best shots, but there are others that show great examples on the google. The second one is a huge review on a whole lot of studies on different factors of beauty. I’d love to hear the art perspective on all of that!
Macunaima
Uhm…. Not doubting you, but anthropologist here. The studies I’ve heard said symetricality is what gets judged as beautiful, not the average. If you’ve got a link to that study saying it’s some sort of average, I’d like that, please.
Jinxed44
Sure! Thanks for asking.
There’s evidence for both of those things.
Humans are complex.
Comment with the links awaiting moderation, but the second article in the link is the interesting! First one was just talking about the one I remembered
I dunno, I’d be super flattered to be called a six, considering what I imagine a 10 looks like. 4 points below *that* and above the average? Hell fricking yeah.
It’s above average if we’re working on a scale from 1 to 10. Considering Rachel was ranked 11, that implies either that Joe considered her so sexy that she broke the scale, or for all we know it could go from 1 to 15.
Aviana
He told her it was eleven out of ten.
Trolldrool
Alright. I must’ve missed that part. Thanks for the clarification.
I’m just glad Joe is choosing to be kinder, when he could be cruller.
Reltzik
“I’m sorry I tricked and manipulated women into sleeping with me. I’m a totally apologizing with these bae-gulls.”
“Uh….. wait…. was that a pun? These are donuts?”
“Donuts are bagels, from a certain point of view.”
Emperor Norton II
Is this going to be the new sandwich discussion?
Reltzik
Noooo….. but if you’re the sort to count wraps as a sandwich, what about chocolate-filled croissants?
Emperor Norton II
I think that whole thing got resolved when a fake Lord Sandwich appeared to say that “Is it the creation of a food with several separate ingredients specifically put together so I could be able to hold it all in one hand while I hold my cards in my other hand as I play cards with my friends? If yes, then put my name on it!”
Reltzik
Alas, there is no Lord Donut to set things awryt.
(Yes, that was on purpose.)
Nightsbridge
Listen, it’s easy! If you map your food onto a cube, and count how many sides have bread, you can sort all food into either a sandwich, a pizza, a taco, or a burrit—
Is brained by low-hanging fruit.
Reltzik
…… so, bearing in mind that you set this up as an either/or, what does a plain slice of bread count as?
neeks
@ reltzik: schroedinger’s sandwich. Or a pre-sandwich. Or both. Both is good.
jeffepp
Now I want a bagel dog. Do you know how long it’s been since I had a bagel dog?
Needfuldoer
Jelly donuts are a kind of ravioli.
Heavensrun
“Donuts are bagels”
…
(eyes narrow slowly)
NotPiffany
That works strangely well with your gravatar.
Victor
Who did he trick and/or manipulate?
Because the only woman I recall he actually had sex with so far in the comic was Roz. And given that she intended to bang somebody for the purpose of making a sex tape, I don’t think he was the one tricking and/or manipulating there.
Temperaryobsessor
And his teacher but getting mad at him for that would be victim blaming.
440 thoughts on “Beefed”
Ana Chronistic
well shit, *I’d* forgive him for a free doughnut
Joe: “I rated you a 6”
…FREE DOUGHNUT
Emperor Norton II
Better be a good donut, though.
Like the kind my mom used to make for Xmas. Those were some -real- donuts.
Clif
Maybe not a good solution, but better than a boot to the head.
Needfuldoer
And one for Jenny and the wimp.
(They get the last donut before Beef shows up and have to share.)
Cholma
“…and now, for Danny, who stood by me faithfully these many years, who cared, made me laugh, coded my Do-List …”
“Oh, I didn’t mind.”
“To Danny, I bequeath . . . a boot to the head. (And one more for Jenny & the Wimp.)”
David T. Shaw
How is it that there are at least three people on this site that recognize a 30 year old sketch from Canadian Radio?
Is it because The Frantics just made a bunch of pod casts from their CBC work, or is it a love of old vinyl?
neeks
I personally recognize it because of Radio KOL.
neeks
RKOL is also why I have a Pavlovian urge to say “that’s ridiculous, it’s not even funny” whenever I see or hear the number eleven in any context….
…which of course is ridiculous and not even funny.
Clif
I personally recognize it because I’m old. At the time it got wide play.
Needfuldoer
Oh man, I’m just getting back into KoL! It’s almost completely different than it was in 2008. I still remember the grey plague and when NS13 went live…
(It’s a free-to-play browser MMO based around stick figures, pop culture references, and silly logic. “Want a cottage for your campsite? Combine a bowl of cottage cheese with some anticheese.” That kind of logic.
Kamino Neko
It’s been a meme for years.
Also, they did it on their TV show, so it’s also on YouTube. Both in the form of the TV sketch, and several animations (mostly using the longer version), like the Phoenix Wright one, which is my favourite.
Andrew_C
Yeah, the Phoenix Wrong one is where I found it.
N0083rp00F
I recognize it from 4 on the Floor – the CBC TV show that spotlighted The Frantics and their style of humor. Rick Green is on my list of celebrities that I am happy to have met.
Kamino Neko
It didn’t really ‘spotlight’ them…it was their show.
ValdVin
Rick Green, aka “Adventures with Bill*” from The Red Green Show?
(*Obligatory <a href"http://classicredgreen.weebly.com/uploads/2/8/3/2/2832377/6943948.jpg" title="unreassuring thumbs-up goes here".)
Kamino Neko
That’s him, but Bill is by far his least work. His stuff with the Frantics, his TVO series, Prisoners of Gravity, and his writing for Steve Smith’s previous series (Smith & Smith, which costarred Steve’s wife, Morag) are all better.
ValdVin
Okay I gotta scour the innertubes for more.of his work. Thanks!
(i have far too many Red Green items, as US citizen, to pretend I’m not in that cult.)
GoldStarz
I know of it from a Ace Attorney fan video that has it, I imagine that’s how most people know it.
TachyonCode
^ This.
Nelly Dreadful
And a World of Warcraft machinima of the earlier sketch in the same series. It was pretty beloved by fanvidders for a time so it was distributed pretty widely via youtube in a few different fandoms. The Ace Attorney one was probably the best one though.
Hilzabub
It’s because the Frantics were the most amazing thing on the radio in Canada at the time.
Roborat
I remember listening to The Frantics on CBC Radio, along with Royal Canadian Air Farce. Then later Air Farce and Four on the Floor on television, followed later by Kids in the Hall.
hof1991
Doctor Demento.
EvilMidnightLurker
Same.
Dragotx
One of my friends in college back in the early 00’s found it online and fell in love, so we all were subjected to it constantly for about a month straight. And of course, in revenge, I still subject people to it on a fairly regular basis 😀
Ann Potter
Could be the comic has a wide age range of readers.
Fish
Dr Demento’s 20th anniversary CD
Cholma
1. I’m OLD.
2. I blame Dr. Demento (and my father) for putting all kinds of novelty bits into my head
LeftWingFox
I, too, am old and Canadian.
Resulli
Is there such a thing as a bad doughnut?
timemonkey
Six is above average…
Jinxed44
Honestly if someone called me a six my reaction would be “yeah probably”
Unless they were friends in which case I’d pretend to be offended.
… Weird incongruity that.
Still its a good start, donuts.
Jinxed44
Also the basis of human beauty is scientifically theorized to be a face and body closest to average in characteristics.
… So a six would either be above or below average. <o<
… Trying to imagine to what degree a six is on average along the bell curve of average human traits. I've taken this joke to far. …Oh cool it would be off by about 40%ish which is close to one standard deviation. Literally making a six just below the range of about 70% of the population… But that is treating the 40% offset as like an absolute value on the bell, with those deviations averaging 40% away from the average characteristic in either direction. Big or small nose. That makes more sense to me but you could make the case that that average deviation should only be 20% in either direction.
So like the average population is either comprised of 7+s' or like 3/4+s' depending on how you play with that.
I think 7+s' but hey that literally gives an outlook for positive and negative views of humanity.
This random tangent just informed my philosophical views on human beauty. Cool.
Here's a link to show a bell curve with standard deviations and what those numbers are. The bell curve is a representation of traits in a population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation
Jinxed44
I got that the traits would differ from the true average on the bell curve of human traits because that would be the ultimate in socially perceived human beauty according to a few studies. So like a “10” would be in the middle of the bell curve for every human trait. Eye distance, size, height, muscle tone in the butt, whatever, everyy part of that persons body would be perfectly average. So a 6 is missing 40% of 10 and their traits would differ from that perfect average by about 40% within any possible deviation that can happen on a living human being.
Sorry, I realized that my other comment was basically a jumble of numbers so I had to try to explain it just a bit with person words. 😛
Jinxed44
…And according to that, since that average of a 40% difference can work in either direction on the scale of traits, smaller or larger, bigger or smaller, with the distance from the MIDDLE of the bell curve counting, the number of people who are six or above should be double that at 80% of the population.
With that in mind no one person can have more than a 50% deviation from the average of any one trait, as even if that man has the largest nose someone else has the smallest!
Literally the lowest score a person can get is a 5!!!!
THATS AWESOME!!!
…yes this did keep me up until 4 am why do you ask?
Jinxed44
Course you account for that and adjust the scale so all numbers can be used and it all goes to shit.
Shut up let me have this.
Clif
First of all, the theory that as applied to woman specifically, beauty is conformance to average is complete nuts. The depiction of beautiful women skews strongly to the skinny side of average and to the low side of age and to abnormally symmetric features, and that’s just for openers. But let’s accept the theory and the implication that a 6 means 40% are closer and 60% are further away from average. Then one standard deviation from average should be the definition of a 5, not a 6, as 50% of the population is expected to lie within one standard deviation. Further, because the slope of the normal distribution decreases as you approach average, there is a far greater distance between a 5 and a 6 than there is between and 8 and a 9. Additionally, as you note, there are two sides to the curve, but you inexplicably use that as an excuse to double to get the erroneous conclusion that 80% of the population should be a 6 or better, whereas the fact there are two sides of the curve means that you should take half to get the number of people (20%) between a 6 and perfection. So a 6 corrosponds to what would be an 8 in a unimodal distribution. Because of the slope and the 2 sided distribution it can be seen that a 6 is actually a pretty decent rating. Of course beauty under your “scientific” definition would depend on multiple feature curves and not just one, but you seem to fail to realize that this would further undermine your conclusion.
Jinxed44
Ok, in the studies the general features of a person were found to be the things most appealing when average. That’s a scientific study, not a “scientific” one, and I’m pretty sure there was more than one. Doesn’t make it a law, but it still used the scientific process and a good data set.
I thought about the things like cultural skews, weight as an example, but really in the face of the sheer mountain of data unaffected by them decided not to overly focus on that. We do make mountains out of mole hills with that stuff, but we also are hyper aware of our own sensitivity to it. If you had a woman with the “perfect” face of sheer average of facial features she’d probably be a “10” even if her weight followed the population average instead of the cultural skew.
Secondly a standard deviation covers about 35% of the population on either side of the average, according to the wikipedia article on it I attached in the first comment.
Thirdly, I actually kind of cut the standard deviation out of the whole process, because if we include everyone who has an AVERAGE set of features that deviate by about 40% from the norm (all traits on their own curve, distance from the location of the human average divided by the total line (normalizing the two sides of the bell as its likely skewed), average of all the resulting percentage) You get 80% of the population. Or 40% of the population if we use the half distance of the bell as the base of the division in that calc. Basically that deviation from the norm includes all possible people within that deviation as all traits within the population would be accounted for.
Fourthly, I freely admit in both the first and final comment that you can end up using the 20% on either side of the average bell curve to identify the upper 40% of the population no mas, in this case by only using the half the bell in which the deviation occurs to average of every possible trait. If you want to use your ten scale as a ten scale you have to. I admit at the end that the first method stops making sense due to this, or at least imply that in my last comment, but don’t regret the process. It was fun using numbers to describe a subjective concept, and to use that to think more deeply on that concept.
Fifthly, look, I appreciate that you are willing to think this through with me, as math is fun and to be enjoyed. But when you write you sound really arrogant and down-putting. I could very well have missed something or gotten something wrong, but just because you don’t get something I said doesn’t mean you need to start j’accuse-ing me of idiocy. I don’t really care in the long run, but that sort of habit will end up burning you, man. Take care.
Jinxed44
Actually the guy below made a good point.
This is only focused on average-ness, which the studies linked below point out as a significant independent influencing factor, but there ARE other factors that influence societal beauty.
I am simplifying this to a certain extent.
Read the (last) article yourself to see to what extent!
autogatos
We discussed this theory (albeit briefly) in art school in regards to portraiture/appeal and my understanding of it was that when they say “average” is considered beautiful they don’t mean in terms of statistics (as in the most common features) but rather “average” meaning “unremarkable” as in, the opposite of “extreme.” Average may not be the exact word choice (I don’t recall if it was used in our class discussion). A better one might be: undramatic or unextreme features. Basically what is being referred to is the idea that no one feature stands out in any significant way (no large nose, small eyes, large lips, etc…everything is just a sort of…middleground). Also symmetry but that’s already been discussed here.
Jinxed44
A. That’s a really interesting perspective from a different school.
B. That also sounds like its similar if not the same as statistical averageness? Why are big lips something that stand out, if we don’t have that normal middle ground in our social consciousness? If we all had larger lips those would be normal and thus not extreme, as the art world has apparently already figured out (again cool).
Of course we wouldn’t set un-obtrusive norms at a perfect statistical average, but social animals are actually sensitive enough to get really close.
C. Check out the links below for the studies. A really simple example is the first one which basically changed photos to make them closer to the statistic average for men, and those men rated the altered faces more attractive despite the changes being relatively small. (the link doesn’t have the best shots, but there are others that show great examples on the google. The second one is a huge review on a whole lot of studies on different factors of beauty. I’d love to hear the art perspective on all of that!
Macunaima
Uhm…. Not doubting you, but anthropologist here. The studies I’ve heard said symetricality is what gets judged as beautiful, not the average. If you’ve got a link to that study saying it’s some sort of average, I’d like that, please.
Jinxed44
Sure! Thanks for asking.
There’s evidence for both of those things.
Humans are complex.
I focused on one factor for the sake of simplicity (and because I was only thinking of this study particularly http://www.medicaldaily.com/science-attraction-men-perceive-women-average-youthful-facial-features-beautiful-342688 as well as some other stuff) but thats a good point!
This article covers a lot of the factors
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3130383/
Jinxed44
Comment with the links awaiting moderation, but the second article in the link is the interesting! First one was just talking about the one I remembered
FacelessDeviant
Yeah. And five…is just MEAN *finger guns*
AriBerri
I dunno, I’d be super flattered to be called a six, considering what I imagine a 10 looks like. 4 points below *that* and above the average? Hell fricking yeah.
Trolldrool
It’s above average if we’re working on a scale from 1 to 10. Considering Rachel was ranked 11, that implies either that Joe considered her so sexy that she broke the scale, or for all we know it could go from 1 to 15.
Aviana
He told her it was eleven out of ten.
Trolldrool
Alright. I must’ve missed that part. Thanks for the clarification.
Aeron
In that case, take two doughnuts. And a bearclaw.
Roborat
Wow, well then what would you do for a Klondike bar?
Ana Chronistic
not a lot, I don’t like shell on my ice cream ?
Emperor Daniel
Do or donut, there is no try.
iforgetwhatiputhere
Donut underestimate the power of the jam side
Emperor Daniel
Be careful not to choke on your glazepirations.
Doctor_Who
I’m just glad Joe is choosing to be kinder, when he could be cruller.
Reltzik
“I’m sorry I tricked and manipulated women into sleeping with me. I’m a totally apologizing with these bae-gulls.”
“Uh….. wait…. was that a pun? These are donuts?”
“Donuts are bagels, from a certain point of view.”
Emperor Norton II
Is this going to be the new sandwich discussion?
Reltzik
Noooo….. but if you’re the sort to count wraps as a sandwich, what about chocolate-filled croissants?
Emperor Norton II
I think that whole thing got resolved when a fake Lord Sandwich appeared to say that “Is it the creation of a food with several separate ingredients specifically put together so I could be able to hold it all in one hand while I hold my cards in my other hand as I play cards with my friends? If yes, then put my name on it!”
Reltzik
Alas, there is no Lord Donut to set things awryt.
(Yes, that was on purpose.)
Nightsbridge
Listen, it’s easy! If you map your food onto a cube, and count how many sides have bread, you can sort all food into either a sandwich, a pizza, a taco, or a burrit—
Is brained by low-hanging fruit.
Reltzik
…… so, bearing in mind that you set this up as an either/or, what does a plain slice of bread count as?
neeks
@ reltzik: schroedinger’s sandwich. Or a pre-sandwich. Or both. Both is good.
jeffepp
Now I want a bagel dog. Do you know how long it’s been since I had a bagel dog?
Needfuldoer
Jelly donuts are a kind of ravioli.
Heavensrun
“Donuts are bagels”
…
(eyes narrow slowly)
NotPiffany
That works strangely well with your gravatar.
Victor
Who did he trick and/or manipulate?
Because the only woman I recall he actually had sex with so far in the comic was Roz. And given that she intended to bang somebody for the purpose of making a sex tape, I don’t think he was the one tricking and/or manipulating there.
Temperaryobsessor
And his teacher but getting mad at him for that would be victim blaming.
Yumi
If we donut try, we donut do; and if we donut do, then why are we here?
adjudicus
I donut know
Roborat
I have an overpowering urge to pelt you all with Timbits.
Halpful
mmmm, timbits. (damnit, now I want timbits. but I bought an excessive quantity of grapes, and feel obligated to eat them first.)
Emperor Norton II
https://youtu.be/qD2rU7cMSEs?t=456
SDGlyph
Dunk them in coffee or tea – napkins are always free!