HTMLGIANT

I should be very clear that I don’t care that the people who made this video ripped off the Onion piece that I linked to. I just thought that people might want to read the original piece since a lot of people on here seem to be interested in DFW.

Donald,

That’s a pretty snide comment. Do we know each other or are you just an asshole?

Kisses,

h hg

P.S. Your comment added nothing to the discussion.

P.P.S. I clicked on your link. If I posted the shit that you post on Twitter, I would not have the balls to comment on a stranger’s lack of originality. “Windows should be illegal”- yeah, my fourteen year old cousin mentioned something about that on her Facebook page.

July 8th, 2010 / 9:55 pm Donald—

Touché.

You’re right, of course — it was a bit snide. I apologise for that. And yes, I am, I suppose, an asshole at times. Still, I like to think that I’m not JUST an asshole.

I must say that I thought you were being fairly snide as well. If your motivation was genuinely as spotless as you suggest here, then I completely misread your post. I understood it as being yet another snarky internet dig.

I still disagree with what you wrote, by the way, or with the thought behind it. Do you really think that the people behind this video absolutely, undoubtedly “ripped off” the Onion? You assume that enough HTMLGiant commenters haven’t seen that piece for it to be worth posting. Can the same assumption — regarding prior knowledge, not postworthiness, obviously — not be extended to the video’s creators?

Moving back a little, do you really think that the Onion must have been the first people to come up with the idea of an author who (secretly, overtly) can’t read? I’m not suggesting that they weren’t, but I wouldn’t assume that they were, either. It’s a funny idea, and it makes sense. A whole range of thought processes could have led to it.

Do you have an idea of what I meant, now, by the way? My comment wasn’t directed personally at you. The fact that you took it that way could say something about the controversy you expected your post to produce. Then again, I suppose it could equally be a product of the same expectations that led me to receive your words in the way that I did. Anyway, I mean, I don’t want to go dropping the third-person “one” around on the internet. It’s not the Done Thing.

As for the Twitter business, well, the “balls to comment” thing has been covered, I think. Re: the Windows comment, what can I say? It was an honest remark. I had spent a good deal of frustrating time solving problems caused by basic flaws of design in software that, at that price, should know better. I was venting my angst. Any formulation of the sort of vague negative remark about Windows that I knew would scratch that particular itch at that particular moment in time will, inevitably, be clichéd. Millions of people have had decades to work out pretty much every possible variation on that theme. Sometimes there’s comfort in company.

I liked “Kisses”.

July 8th, 2010 / 10:23 pm drew kalbach—

‘guy from star trek write story?’

July 9th, 2010 / 2:23 am drew kalbach—

‘guy from star trek write story?’

July 9th, 2010 / 9:14 am h hg—

Donald,

No need to apologize. I did misinterpret your comment as being directed at me, rather than being a comment about the general impossibility of having original ideas. If you’d “dropp[ed] the third person ‘one'”, I would have understood better what you meant, but I agree that it would have been a bit affected for the internet.

h hg

July 9th, 2010 / 12:22 pm Catherine Lacey—

we are on internet!

July 9th, 2010 / 1:14 pm h hg—

Donald,

No need to apologize. I did misinterpret your comment as being directed at me, rather than being a comment about the general impossibility of having original ideas. If you’d “dropp[ed] the third person ‘one'”, I would have understood better what you meant, but I agree that it would have been a bit affected for the internet.

h hg

July 9th, 2010 / 5:08 pm Guest—

woooooooooooord

31 Comments

Archives

Meta