"the most pompous, humourless message board"

[Catalogue Trousers]

Oh, leave Popbitch alone. It's by and large a good-humoured (if bitchy) sort of forum, and a few arseholes don't stop it from being entertaining and frequently genuinely funny.

Outpost Gallifrey, conversely, is by and large a haven for humourless, chip-on-shoulder RTD acolytes. And, should you dare even suggest that you don't spend at least three hours a day wanking over Billie Piper, then you may as well hang a sign reading "Pariah Dog" around your neck.

[jutl]

The CaB 'dour elitists' tag is spouted about on numerous forums.

I can recall around the time of N.Barley and I.T. Crowd, places like RllMuk/ C4Forums/ NTSC-UK/ ILXwh3rd and other messageboards saying the very same thing about CaB.

It's an acknowledged problem though, surely? People tend to arrive here on the back of a show they've enjoyed, and almost invariably we're whining about it when they get here. I think we'll just have to get used to it. In an effort to do so I've just posted something indefensibly smug and humourless in the Rob Newman thread.

[Neil]

When did that happen? I'm sure I visited GD a few times before I signed up.

I think it changed around the time of Nathan Barely

Yeah, I was in a major panic about bandwidth, and wanted to reduce the strain on the server  for when the first episode of Barley went out (lots of 'connection errors' back then.)  Closing registrations and then locking off the rest of the board to guests was one of the easiest (and most effective) ways of doing that.  Never bothered changing it back.  I'd love to make SE visible to guests too, but the mp3s mean I'm too nervous to do so.

[Mr. Analytical]

I don't think it IS a problem.

There are a number of shows that pretty much everyone has enjoyed.  It's just that when discussing shows we all tend to put our critical hats on and look at the shows in quite a bit of depth and discuss what worked and what didn't.  But there's a number of threads that have been overwhellmingly positive and the CC forum definitely has a few "darlings" (Peep Show and 15 Storeys High being but two).

What you WON'T get is wall to wall mindless positivity with people going "Oh i loved the bit when he went..." without any serious discussion behind it.

[John Self]

Now I'm writing a book about a magazine editor who murders celebrities. But if I had my time again, I would have become a lawyer because I would be enormously wealthy now - making money out of companies like Popbitch.

Is it just me, or does his writing have an oddly childlike quality?
"when I grow up I want to be a lawyer because I want to make a lot of money and buy a big house and a car like a BMW because I like those cars"

I've never read Popbitch, only the thing  that Panbaams quoted up there: his writing seemed, to me, fairly lucid, articulate and intelligent. Certainly much more so than your parody of it. Perhaps his purported avarice, and his apparent belief that going into law is an easy default way to make money, are childish, but maybe -given the nature of what he's talking about, being in the impossible situation of 'having his time again'- he's only joking?



Right: what's the topic again?

[Almost Yearly]

Oddly chidlike quality?

Ah, so that's why Popbitch is full of mean-spirited, pro-industry, on-message, faux-irrelevant shit! I'd often wondered.

[John Self]

I'm with Lalla on this one.


Hurrah for CaB, with its mean-spirited, anti-industry, off-message, truly-irrelevant shit!




DON'T BE ASHAMED 'WHORES, WE'RE THE BEST PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET

[Emergency Lalla Ward Ten]

Oh bollocks, that should have read 'faux-irreverant'.

[Emergency Lalla Ward Ten]

I'm with Lalla on this one.

Hurrah for CaB, with its mean-spirited, anti-industry, off-message, truly-irrelevant shit!

DON'T BE ASHAMED 'WHORES, WE'RE THE BEST PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET

You see, that sounds like sarcasm, and yet - even taking my irrelevant/irreverant mistake into account - I don't understand what you're ridiculing.

[Bogey]

Oh, I'm probably wrong, I've no idea who this gentleman is at all. It's just something that struck me. And because I wanted to be pompous and humourless and such as well.

[TJ]

Hey, here's a great idea - rather than answering back to criticism from outside, or just ignoring it, why not try attempting to start quarrels amongst ourselves by picking on other posters who you've seen other people have a go at in the past? Yeah, that'll *really* challenge the stereotypes!

[John Self]

I'm with Lalla on this one.

Hurrah for CaB, with its mean-spirited, anti-industry, off-message, truly-irrelevant shit!

DON'T BE ASHAMED 'WHORES, WE'RE THE BEST PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET

You see, that sounds like sarcasm, and yet - even taking my irrelevant/irreverant mistake into account - I don't understand what you're ridiculing.

Well not you, for one thing Lalla. Nor any one particular poster at all.

I do think, in my incredibly small internet experience, that this is the best place there is out there. And only really by virtue of the people here, and certain standards that are applied and maintained. And, leaving your accidental 'irreverent' thing, all  I was  doing was making a small throwaway satirical point by turning round 3 of your descriptions of Popbitch and leaving one intact, and then applying them to here, to try and show that being anti-industry and off-message needn't necessarily come from some form of artistic validity, intelligence, or any such rarefied and 'authentic' concern. I think it can -perhaps, sometimes- merely spring from another kind of mean-spiritedness. Because if there's one thing that gets me down sometimes about CaB (and it's a very trivial concern, not  even slightly a big deal), it's certain instances of the negativity here: I sometimes think people slag things off for purely personal and very irrational reasons that they don't actually give.

[slim]

I love the way they label us as humourless when this place has made me laugh more times and harder than any other on the web.

[Emergency Lalla Ward Ten]

it's certain instances of the negativity here: I sometimes think people slag things off for purely personal and very irrational reasons that they don't actually give.

I don't know whether it's possible to subtract the personal and the irrational, though - how would we define them? How do we know what's an acceptable reason for being pissed off and what isn't? And of course, to use my old chesnut, what about praise? Don't people often say positive things for personal/irrational reasons? Go to the C4 Green Wing forum and you'll find their rapture is based mainly around Julian Rhind-Tutt's eyes.

Rob Newman talks on his podcast about the absurdity of people's need for 'balance' in articles and debates, even when that balance really isn't appropriate. The way they can't debate global warming on the Today programme without including a spokesman from the oil industry to make it fair. Sometimes agendas are a good thing.

[Marv Orange]

Well while i was lurking, i did think the comedy chat was some of the most bitter, hateful and twisted shite i had ever read. And in some ways its still pisses me off. I like the way people here read articles by jornos that they know will piss them off then post here and complain about about it. Also sometimes you air an opinion and some dick takes that as an opportunity to look down on you and insult you in his reply.

Admittedly if you look pass those posters there are some good discussions. And the General Chat is quite nice.

[VegaLA]

Did'nt we upset the crowd in the Outpost Gallifrey board ?

CaB Vs The Net ? (Now there's a subject for mongs !!)

[aaaaaaaaaargh!]

Did'nt we upset the crowd in the Outpost Gallifrey board ?

CaB Vs The Net ? (Now there's a subject for mongs !!)

Vision mong or the other sort?

[Almost Yearly]

Hey, here's a great idea - rather than answering back to criticism from outside, or just ignoring it, why not try attempting to start quarrels amongst ourselves by picking on other posters who you've seen other people have a go at in the past? Yeah, that'll *really* challenge the stereotypes!

You're right, them outsiders have surely hit us on a fault line. Division equals defeat. Solidarity sisters!

[John Self]

it's certain instances of the negativity here: I sometimes think people slag things off for purely personal and very irrational reasons that they don't actually give.

I don't know whether it's possible to subtract the personal and the irrational, though - how would we define them? How do we know what's an acceptable reason for being pissed off and what isn't?

As I say, it's when people don't like things for purely personal reasons (or, for that matter, do like: your Green Wing ginger guy's eyes thing, for example), reasons that they don't give, preferring instead to hide behind more attractive-sounding concerns, such as artistic validity etc. Like I say, it really is a minor gripe for me, and one not confined to this board nor the internet in general either. Winds me up about people in general. And, again, it is of course, all my own surmising here, a cynical one and possibly often wrong as well. You know, me trying to diagnose peoples' hidden neuroses over the internet- not such a good idea, I know.

Hey, here's a great idea - rather than answering back to criticism from outside, or just ignoring it, why not try attempting to start quarrels amongst ourselves by picking on other posters who you've seen other people have a go at in the past?

Not sure if this is aimed at me or Yearly. Maybe it's both. Well, I can't speak for him (and I'm sure he'd hate for me to even try), but I can say personally that my 'mean-spirited, anti-industry etc.' joke would have been made in reply to anyone who had said something like that.

And secondly, you seem to be assume that if someone 'picks on' somebody who's had a long history of other posters doing so, it's because that person is- well, it's the old 'safety-in-numbers, gallery-playing' thing, yeah? Surely you know that with people who have had their posts picked on or ridiculed or satirised or whatever in the past, it's often because they're prolific and outspoken posters with opinions on lots of things, mainly all quite extreme, and that's why people picked on them in the past. Because those opinions annoy/anger/interest/challenge a lot of people. And that's why people still do. It's not necessarily to be 'fashionable' or to stand in the crowd and sneer.

Yeah, that'll *really* challenge the stereotypes!

So it that another stereotype about this board? Not only are we perceived as 'humourless' and 'pompous', but also as 'the kind of people who try to start quarrels amongst themselves by picking on other posters who they've seen other people have a go at in the past'? Christ, these stereotypes are getting more and more specific, aren't they?

[mayer]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Fucking Who fans never change, always criticising other people for their own exact failings.

So... they're Nathan Barley then?

Why give a fuck what Doctor Who nerds, Popbitch cokeheads, or whoever say about the internet messageboard you post on? Visibly giving a fuck and crying on and on about it on here surely confirms any accusations of pomposity and humourlessness.

Better all-round to get over oneselves, surely?

[TJ]

So... they're Nathan Barley then?

Why give a fuck what Doctor Who nerds, Popbitch cokeheads, or whoever say about the internet messageboard you post on? Visibly giving a fuck and crying on and on about it on here surely confirms any accusations of pomposity and humourlessness.

Better all-round to get over oneselves, surely?

"I agree with everyone, me!"

[mayer]

"I agree with everyone, me!"

What the fuck does that, mean, TJ?

[John Self]

He's just picking on you because he's seen a lot of other posters do so in the past.

[slim]

Well while i was lurking, i did think the comedy chat was some of the most bitter, hateful and twisted shite i had ever read.

Sorry, but anyone who thinks that obviously hasn't read the right threads. There's plenty of positivity and praise in there. I engage in it myself.

[VegaLA]

Did'nt we upset the crowd in the Outpost Gallifrey board ?

CaB Vs The Net ? (Now there's a subject for mongs !!)

Vision mong or the other sort?

Both. I'd like to see some vision mongs by mongs.

Cheers...

[Emergency Lalla Ward Ten]

Well while i was lurking, i did think the comedy chat was some of the most bitter, hateful and twisted shite i had ever read.

To be fair, though, most (all?) mainstream media sources are either on-message/unthreatening/gushing, or needlessly 'balanced'. Verbwhores is one of the few places that isn't like that. I like the mix of humour, bile and info.

Then again, I never know what people mean by the words 'bitter' and 'twisted'. How? In what way?

[Banana Woofwoof]

This board makes me laugh more than any other I read, so up yours, Popbitch!

There's my erudite argument...

[gazzyk1ns]

Well I think it's good; yeah, two tubes is a bit cumbersome, but the resulting join is very good.

That's my Araldite argument.

[Banana Woofwoof]

None of us should be using this internet stuff anyway.  What's wrong with pen and paper?

That's my luddite argument.

[John Self]

CaB: either you love us or you hate us.

That's my marmite argument.

Then again, I never know what people mean by the words 'bitter' and 'twisted'. How? In what way?

I think that one of the most common things 'outsiders' assume about Comedy Chat, and, for that matter, comedy criticism in general, is that the posters most commonly identified as 'bitter', 'twisted', 'bileful' etc., are in fact failed comedians/comic writers themselves, or perhaps those still in the process of failing. People who, when they watch comedy, are sat there sneering and thinking, "I can do better than this cunt, if only I'd had the breaks/balls/contacts/whatever." So, you know, their criticism is quite often based on hidden jealousy and regret.

I too first thought this, when I started reading CC a year ago: I don't now, certainly not to any significant effect, nor about a significant amount of posters.

I speak, incidentally, as someone currently failing as a comic writer, someone who is often consumed with bitter bile and sickening envy at the shite cluttering up our bookstores (it should be my shite!), and as someone who quite often really could do with upping his wank- and laqer-levels.