A couple of years ago, I made an animation about Lauren Cleri, a lady who had an embarrassing appearance on the defunct Fox “reality” game show, Moment of Truth.  The show was a relatively hot topic on the internet at the time and has retained enough relevance in the land of memes for the video to still get views and comments to this day.  All in all, I’d say that about 97% of the comments that were ever left on that video were completely useless.

Before going into specifics, I’ll post the video here for the hyperlink-impaired:

Anyway, here are a few of the examples of comments nobody should ever, ever leave on a YouTube video.

1) “Hahahaha”:  Really any variation of this is unacceptable.  Hahahas, LOLs, ROFLs and LMAOs are all equally useless.  Congratulations, you laughed at something.  While I appreciate the sentiment of trying to inform me that you enjoyed my video, I really don’t need to know unless you have something a little less vague to say.  This isn’t a comedy club.  Video uploaders don’t feel bad if they don’t hear enough LOLing.

2) “wtf”:  All this means to me is that you’re easily confused.  I already know that most of the internet is comprised of idiots.  I don’t need more confirmation.

3) “mr.whiskers i knew it!”:  Yes…I know the video contains this line.  I wrote it.  Don’t ever comment with nothing more than a line from the video.

4) “fuck this vid can u say gay ?”:  On the other side of rule #1 above, I also could care less if you didn’t like the video.  However, if you insist on insulting a video, you could at least do your best to maximize your impact by not sounding like a complete moron.

5)  Over-reactive rants:   Perhaps my favorite useless comments are those where someone spends an entire paragraph explaining why I’m sexist, or how my video proves that America is “going down the toilet,” or about how I should be ashamed about how horrible and offensive I am.  I’m just a guy who made a pointless cartoon in his spare time.  Save your outrage for something that actually matters.

NB:  All of these rules go immediately out the window when dealing with the “vlog” community.  You know who I’m talking about.  Kids who spend 5 minutes talking about their feelings in front of a webcam every day.  These people feed off of your attention, no matter how useless your comment actually is.  So, feel free to throw a “wtflol” to them whenever you see them.  It just might stop them from crying that night.

The clueless texts keep rolling in:

• “Ok”
• “I am playin princessa”
• “I knoe im onr”
• “Yea”
• “Here in the hostipal”

While “playin princessa,” our friend appears to have landed himself in the “hostipal.”  Get well soon, buddy…get well soon.

Still getting unusual replies in text form to things I never sent:

• “I wont cuz u dont want me to smoke n i dont want u to get mad at me”
• “So wat u doin”
• “Wow wat”
• “A kien”

I wonder if I should tell him he’s got the wrong damned number at some point?  Although, it might be more fun to play along and start sending texts back.  Perhaps something along the lines of, “Wut r u wearing?”

First off, “texts” is really hard to say without a weird stilted pause.  Tex-t-s.

On to new business.

I’ve been getting a lot of texts recently from someone who obviously has the wrong number.  The odd part about this, though, is that these texts are somehow replies.  I’m not 100% sure how this works.  The only thing I can figure is that this person entered their friend’s number wrong and for some reason doesn’t know how to properly reply to a text, instead just starting a new text each time they want to respond.  Anyway, here is a list of the texts I’ve received and subsequently ignored.

• “Yea”
• “Yea”
• “Aaah pretty good i huess n how ur day”
• “Nomaz”
• “Aight”
• “Have u done that to me”

For some reason I imagine that the text that inspired that last response went something like this:

“Why the fuck don’t you ever respond to my texts?  Have you blocked my number?”

A friend of mine once coined the phrase “Audioslaving.”  It was meant to describe the act of combining two things that are awesome (e.g. Chris Cornell and Rage Against the Machine) and ending up with something horrendous (e.g. the phrase’s namesake).

It occurs to me that the opposite could also exist.  The Reverse-Audioslave, if you will.  I can’t think of any examples off the top of my head, but I’m willing to bet that countless food recipes are, to some extent, Reverse-Audioslaves.  Plenty of ingredients are pretty terrible on their own, yet somehow compliment eachother when mixed together.  It would be an interesting experiment to try combining awful artists to see what miraculous results could occur.

Similarly, I’ve recently been reminded of the existence of The Tyler Perry.  This is when two terrible things come together to make something astoundingly even more terrible.  If I might speak directly to Tyler Perry for a moment:  You aren’t good at comedy, nor are you good at drama.  Stop trying to combine these things into dramedies.  In fact…stop doing either, period.

Tyler Perry’s works are like Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, except made out of dead puppies and Jerry Lewis routines.

An incredibly loud and strange conversation between two obvious strangers at the grocery store had several people, including myself, watching and wondering what the hell was going on.

“…cottage cheese.”
“Oh, we’re not going there.”
“What’s wrong with cottage cheese?  Put a little pineapple or something on it.  Perfect!”
“Nah.”
“Oh, we wouldn’t get along then.”
“What about a nice steak?”
“See, I couldn’t do that because I don’t eat meat.”
“Houston, we have a problem.”

Godwin’s Law, as it’s called, states:  “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.”

When referring to a humorous observation as a law, people tend to take it much more seriously than they should.  Is the adage true?  Well, technically, but no more so than if you were to replace Nazis and Hitler with Puppies and Kittens (In fact, I now decree that version to be Cutaia’s Law).

However, the more widespread this supposed edict becomes, the more people misuse it.  Recently, I saw someone in an online discussion bring up the Nuremberg Trials in an attempt to illustrate that a state of war does not excuse dishonorable actions by those involved.  Immediately, some Wikipedia reading know-it-all showed up with this to say, “Thank you for invoking Godwin’s Law[…]It’s not like that besmirches the honor of the holocaust survivors or anything, you witless turd.”

In the mind of the Godwin’s Law devotees, any mention of Nazis or Hitler is automatically inappropriate to the conversation at hand and somehow belittles the terrible nature of the Holocaust.  It never crosses the minds of these folks that these analogies might possibly be common because, oh I don’t know…World War II was a really huge fucking event in our history about which everyone has a reasonable amount of knowledge?

That’s the issue with accepting the ramifications of such a broad aphorism as absolute truth.  It causes people to avoid actually thinking about what’s being said, instead simply jumping to their own conclusion immediately.

Even worse is when the same people make the leap to Godwin’s Law anytime someone mentions fascism itself.  Fascism, after all, is not a concept unique to Hitler.  It’s a political ideology that comes in many levels of extremity.

There are arguably times when governments and politicians do things that would quite literally be classified as fascist.  The danger behind Godwin’s Law is that its biggest proponents seemingly (and perhaps unknowingly) seek to frighten people out of ever mentioning that possibility.

The Nazis didn’t just appear out of thin air, after all.  There’s a build-up required in order to work a country into a nationalistic, Jew-hating fervor.  Understanding that fact and pointing out trends that hint even slightly towards that direction is in no way a bad thing.  If you ask me, the only thing that would “besmirch the honor of Holocaust survivors” would be to let fear silence you into ever allowing anything even remotely similar to happen again.

A far more useful adage than Godwin’s Law, I would think, is one from philosopher, George Santayana:  “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

People who wish to preserve the memory of the immense evil of the Nazis at the cost of squelching speech about the more minor evils of today’s leaders are doing their cause an incredible disservice.  They’re no more reasonable than puppies chasing their tails around in circles.

Oh, hey, look at that!  Cutaia’s Law…

Each Slurpee machine out there has 4 to 8 little lights on it…one for each flavor.  The machines always indicate that you should not pour any particular flavor when its light is lit.  Of course, whenever I want a cherry flavored Slurpee, the cherry light is always on.  It never fails.

I usually try waiting for a little while, hoping that the light will turn off before someone notices me staring at it, pretending I’m trying to figure out what flavor I want.  But I know what fucking flavor I want.  Cherry.

I’m guessing the lights just indicate when the mix isn’t properly frozen and I don’t really mind drinking a melted Slurpee as long as it’s still cold.  In all honestly, I could probably just pour away and enjoy the cherry goodness.

But then I think to myself, “What if it’s poisonous until the light turns off?”

“I guess I’ll just have banana.”

At 7-11 this morning, I saw a woman standing in the corner of the store, head down, holding a chocolate muffin to her face.  She licked and nibbled away at the top part of the muffin like a squirrel eating an unshelled peanut.  It was very odd.

That’s all I have to say right now.  Go about your business.

I’ve watched this video at least a dozen times since I discovered it two weeks ago and it never fails to make me giggle out loud. I finally decided it was time to pass this joy along to the viewers of my website (all two of you).

Source: Break.com