Comedy

[kandrathe]

A mushroom walks into a bar and the bartender says "We don't serve your kind here." and the mushroom says - "Why not? I'm a fungi."

OK, I pondered and search and I still don't get it. Besides, shouldn't that be 'fungus'?

If the mushroom's name were "Gus", then he might say "Why not... I'm a fun Gus." But, abstractly he can call himself a fun guy.

My favorite "walks into a bar" joke is still... A termite walks into a bar and asks, "Is the bartender here?"

[--Pete]

Hi,

If the mushroom's name were "Gus", then he might say "Why not... I'm a fun Gus." But, abstractly he can call himself a fun guy.

Ah. The drawbacks of a classical education. While it is 'fun-gus' in the singular, it is 'fun-ji' in the plural. 'Fun-gi' and 'fun-guses' are also permitted, but only because the Vandals sacked Rome.

-Pete

[Jester]

My favorite "walks into a bar" joke is still... A termite walks into a bar and asks, "Is the bartender here?"

That's one of those jokes that loses some of its zest when you write it down.

How about the classic:

So, a man walks into a bar. He says, "ouch".

-Jester

[kandrathe]

My favorite "walks into a bar" joke is still... A termite walks into a bar and asks, "Is the bartender here?"

That's one of those jokes that loses some of its zest when you write it down.How about the classic:

So, a man walks into a bar. He says, "ouch".

Two guys walk into a bar, but the third one ducks.

{british accent}Knock, knock.

Who's there?

Economist.

Economist who?

Economist the financial crisis, but I promise to do better next time.

More!

[--Pete]

Hi,

How about the classic:

So, a man walks into a bar. He says, "ouch".

OK, since were into inanities:

A Rabi, a Minister, and a Priest walk into a bar. The bartender looks up and says, "What is this, some kinda joke?"

A few more chestnuts and we can look for an open fire.

--Pete

[Hammerskjold]

What do you make of Stormtroopers versus Nazis?

"Why, I can make a hat, a broach, a pterodactyl..."

[kandrathe]

A few more chestnuts and we can look for an open fire.

How do you kill a circus?

Go for the juggler!

[LennyLen]

What i think of this movie, i think is so stupid, i dislike eveything about it.

I think this is conclusive proof that queenofhearts is not a bot. Bots make more sense.

[kandrathe]

Not a bot..just a forum joker.

Who's been painting my roses red?

WHO'S BEEN PAINTING MY ROSES RED?

Who dares to taint
With vulgar paint
The royal flower bed?
For painting my roses red
Someone will lose his head!

[Chesspiece_face]

What do you make of Stormtroopers versus Nazis?

"Why, I can make a hat, a broach, a pterodactyl..."

"Roger Roger. Over Over. What's your vector Victor?"

P.S. Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

[Alram]

What do you make of Stormtroopers versus Nazis?

"Why, I can make a hat, a broach, a pterodactyl..."

Pterodactyls usually need to see a urologist. Silent P.


In the time of Noah, when the Lord told the animals to leave the ark, he commanded them to go forth and multiply. A pair of snakes remained behind. They were adders.
So Noah hewed timber from cedar trees which were there about in that land in which the ark came to rest. And from that timber he constructed himself a table: a half cubit was the length thereof, and a quarter cubit the breadth thereof.
Noah laid the adders upon that which he had made. And behold! The adders fulfilled the Lord's commandment going forth and multiplying.
Any adder can multiply on a log table.

[kandrathe]

Any adder can multiply on a log table.

Ah, the religious joke! My favorite is;

A pastor is making his rounds within the parish, visiting all the new people who had recently moved there. At one of the houses he rings the bell, hears some scuffling around inside and so he knows someone is home. He knocks loudly, and still more scuffling and he sees the drapes move. So, he leaves a card with his name, number and a bible verse: Revelation 3:20. The next Sunday, he is shocked to see his card in the offering plate, and below his bible verse is scribbled; Genesis 3:10.

Revelation 3:20 - Behold, I stand at the door and knock.

Genesis 3:10 - I heard you in the garden. I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.

[LennyLen]

Any adder can multiply on a log table.

Ah, the religious joke!

I didn't even see it as a religious joke, but just as a maths joke. I guess that makes it a doubly good joke.

[Vandiablo]

Ten years may not be long enough, but here goes...

Maybe your views have changed, and no longer view all humor as based on misfortune of others, but I have wanted to go back and answer this more in the way you wanted. So. We want to examine content by using other content, and not just ridicule a "point of view". Okay. First let me just condense things a bit.

Well, Van, I suppose ... my ... to ... my ... to ... of ... a ... that ... about ... the ... almost ... all ... of ... it ... what ... own ... and ... you’ve ... one ... to ... you ... now!

I assure you that was absolutely necessary.

I only looked at a few papers, and of those the only paper I saw that didn't make horrific overgeneralizations was this article in "Evolutionary Psychology" Volume 4, 2006: "The First Joke: Exploring the Evolutionary Origins of Humor" by Polimeni and Reiss.* Hopefully this link works: First Joke

My choice of quotes is aimed at countering the idea that humor evolved basically as a form of derision used in competition of social status. (What's true for American males in the last 50+ years, the span of my experience, is not necessarily true for all humans throughout history.)

Ramachandran’s (1998) “false alarm theory” suggests “the main purpose of laughter is for the individual to alert others in the social group that the anomaly detected by that individual is of trivial consequence”. The immediate social group would be close relatives who are likely to share similar genes. Ramachandran further speculates that the cognitive perspective necessary to distinguish between trivial and serious could have somehow evolved into a cognitive framework that classifies congruous and incongruous components of humor.

These anomalies may include the Schadenfreude-type putdown laughter you posited is the basis of humor, but note that it is only one part.

Nicely captured in Frans De Waal’s (1982) phrase “chimpanzee politics,” primate life is characterized by constant negotiations between empathic and aggressive tendencies. Grooming engenders pleasurable feelings that countervail aggressive tendencies. But with language replacing grooming, what mitigates aggressive tendencies between lesser-related individuals? Humor seems to inject positive feelings while hierarchal competition and other minor social quarrels are being worked out. Humor can’t control pernicious disputes but for the more mundane disagreements, it diminishes the risk of a contentious issue deteriorating to violence.

Here (above), primitive groups can and do use humor to diffuse stress of competition. Now let's look at cultures other than the "whiteUSA" culture that is very much over-represented in psychology...

Tribal clowns, from several different continents, are described in a variety of cultures. Turnbull noted, for example, that each Mbuti band seemed to have an unofficially designated clown. “His function is to act as a buff between disputants, deflecting the more serious disputes away from their original sources, absolving other individuals of blame by accepting it himself” (Turnbull, 1965, p. 183). The tribal clown, typically male, can also have a more formalized position, particularly in native North American tribes. Apte (1985) refers to them as “ritual clowns” and some descriptions cross over with shamanism. Since shamanistic experiences can resemble psychotic symptoms, one naturally wonders whether this reflects underlying mania in the individual. Ritual clowns have been known to act in an exaggerated feminine manner, spoof neighboring tribes, mock formal religious ceremonies and utter sexual or obscene humor (Apte, 1985).

(Wow, I coulda been a North American shaman! All from my underlying mania. My mania is so lazy, it's always underlying. And since I was raised in a barn, my mother never taught me exaggerated female manners.)

Anyway, the idea that humor is always "at someone's expense" is contrary to the ideas presented in the article. While that is present in many cultures it is not the only part of the culture's humor, and it's often not used as a social dominance weapon.

I'm not out to prove anything, especially about something as difficult to understand as humor. But if someone seriously posits something based on the idea that all humor is derisive, I have to disagree, and ... uh ... make fun of them. To show that it is of trivial consequence, of course.

One thing I did not respond to very well last time was your "I believe this is because of our nature as humans to like, enjoy, or even want to see others fail in some way". After 10 years, do you still consider this to be human nature?

-Van

* You may be pleased to discover Polimeni and Reiss when you visit southeast asian restaurants.

[Taem]

I was not expecting to come here and see any meaningful discussions taking place, as this site had died off years ago once FIT stopped posting his inflammatory (and yet fun to respond to) remarks. But even before that, it was slowly on it's way out with Doc passing, Ochi gone, then Pete passing, the heavy hitter debtors had left the arena. There has been many more that have left. What a pleasure it is to see someone dredge an old memory up from the bygone era.

Ten years may not be long enough, but here goes...

Maybe your views have changed, and no longer view all humor as based on misfortune of others,

I will have to ponder this. I had not given it any thought in the time since. Off the cuff, I find it to be a logical fallacy to not accept this as true when you can merely look up any joke ever invented and see how the humor is always the result of some negative aspect within us.

"What time is it when an elephant sits on your fence? Time to get a new fence." The humor is in both the misdirection, and the fact the fence is broken by an elephant, both being aspects of misfortune at either a direct lack of understanding due to ignorance, or the idiocy of an elephant sitting on a fence which now has to be repaired. Most jokes can be summed up in this fashion, exploiting the listeners ignorance of the context to provoke humor.... humor in their ignorance mind you.

"Why is 6 afraid of 7? Because 7, 8, 9!" So, seven has to 'eat' nine for the joke to be funny, combined with the obvious word-play misdirect makes for a classic joke.

"Why did the chicken cross the road? To get to the other side." Another classic misdirect glaringly obvious pointing to the listeners inability to get the joke upon first hearing it due to expectations of something else, which again makes the joke funny because why? Because our expectations were failed proving only a simple ineptitude... and once the joke is heard and understood, it fails to deliver thereafter because the listener can no longer be fooled. We revel in moments of self-realization (of stupidity) because this allows us intellectually to grow. So not a bad thing in my book, and yet still obviously based on a negative aspect of human nature. There is no humor that is not, since this is what we find funny to begin with. Ever seen "Fail Army"? How about the old "Jack Ass" show?

From your link: (a fascinating article btw, thank you)

There are several reasons to suppose humor and laughter could be evolutionarily adaptive. As previously mentioned, the complexity of humor implicates an established genetic substrate that in turn could suggest evolutionary adaptiveness. Given that even a simple joke can utilize language skills, theory-of-mind, symbolism, abstract thinking, and social perception, humor may arguably be humankind’s most complex cognitive attribute. Despite its ostensible complexity, humor is also paradoxically reflexive – people typically laugh without consciously appreciating all the causal factors.

Yes, most knee-jerk laugh-out-loud moments are when someone falls. It's even funnier when they stand up showing they weren't hurt. I think looking at humor from an evolutionary standpoint, it's fairly obvious it came about as a need to recognize failures and grow from them in a positive way. All of your quotes below only seem to verify this.

Anyway, the idea that humor is always "at someone's expense" is contrary to the ideas presented in the article.

You are thinking in terms of the misfortune being directed towards the actor in the joke, but by discounting the audience as the actual target of the joke. In the children's joke example I gave above, I attempted to show how even these jokes affect us on a primal level by stoking our misunderstanding, and we laugh at this because it helps us to grow! If anything, you accidentally proved my original point with the help of evolution.

But I didn't spend more than 30-minutes on this write-up, so I really haven't given it too much deep thought. Like I said in my opening, this answer is off-the-cuff. If my thought intrigue you, let me know and maybe I can take a day to fashion up a proper response.

One thing I did not respond to very well last time was your "I believe this is because of our nature as humans to like, enjoy, or even want to see others fail in some way". After 10 years, do you still consider this to be human nature?

No, not in that context. I do not believe every one of us revels in the failure of others, I really do not. However, upon reading your article, I am convinced what I originally wrote is correct, just poorly worded, and now with the evolutionary theory of humor you linked to back it up, I feel confident my original point still stands and that what it should have said was, "I believe this is because of our nature as humans to grow and adapt through adversity, and humor is what helps us see and define these negative faults within us and become cognitively more astute due to challenging us to think in different or unusual ways than we would have normally"

[Vandiablo]

... with Doc passing, Ochi gone, then Pete passing, the heavy hitter debtors had left the arena.

I knew about Pete, but I never saw anything about Doc. I had noticed his posts just suddenly stopped, but I never heard anything. It was right after discussion about Bugs Bunny and the term maroon, I thought maybe he just got PO'd and never came back. As for Occhi, I notice he posted about 1.5 years ago (I think) so maybe he's just very infrequent? Or did he make a goodbye post, or have a stroke, or live offline somewhere? As for me, I've gotten old, another five years and I'll probably be Totally Gone.

There has been many more that have left. What a pleasure it is to see someone dredge an old memory up from the bygone era.

Hah, well I am old enough that 10+ years is not a long time! I had three kids and they were young while I got a Masters (slowly, took 5.5 years) so Diablo and forum time had to be scuttled. To me, it's more like: "hey forum! where did everybody go??"

Social media has replaced a lot of the time and desire that these forums used to get. I'm pretty private, I've stayed off facebook and all that. Bah, kids these days.

"I believe this is because of our nature as humans to grow and adapt through adversity, and humor is what helps us see and define these negative faults within us and become cognitively more astute due to challenging us to think in different or unusual ways than we would have normally"

Ah, why didn't you say so in the first place? I can accept that. (... tho maybe we got there using different routes.)

-Van

[Bolty]

Social media has replaced a lot of the time and desire that these forums used to get. I'm pretty private, I've stayed off facebook and all that. Bah, kids these days.

This site is definitely a relic of a bygone era of the Internet when individual sites with forums were all the rage. If the Lounge were a "site" created in this modern era, it would simply be a Discord or some similar social media system.

Interestingly, while Discords are certainly searchable, they're not fantastic as repositories of easily referenced information. In a forum software like this, it's a bit easier to dredge up a 10-year-old conversation and continue it...as spambots enjoy doing on the regular.

Also, as social media shifts to different platforms from time to time, anything posted to such (e.g. a Discord) would get lost moving to a new platform.

At this point, the Lounge is mostly a site for several old-timers to check in with each other and reminisce. I've had countless users PM me thanking me for keeping it running and being surprised that their account is still around after 10+ years. I enjoy that aspect, as I too enjoy pouring through some old posts from time to time, remembering my much younger years.

[kandrathe]

The problem with the .Net is it is too ephemeral. We cannot trust that any content published to any site we don't control will be available tomorrow. The value of the LL is your impartial constancy.

[Tanker_54/55]

And that's exactly why the forum still gets actual newcomers (although I'm far from being one to the games discussed on it, I remember buying Diablo II when it came out) ; I've never liked facebook groups or Discord servers, especially since Discord is so dishearteningly slow as a program, and I'm taking an old forum with a couple old timers over a popular and responsive Facebook group any day of the week.

[Sir_Die_alot]

I keep getting mentions in my email from this thread. When they started, I was pleasantly surprised to find it was not from spam bots. That said I didn't have anything to add, but I saw this just now and figured "Hey, he is the expert!" https://youtu.be/d8HC9cO0M3w