This Unworthy One seeks a word, ME Buckner

[elucidator]

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...9&page=2&pp=50

Wherein Your Humble Servent is rebuked:

Originally Posted by ME Buckner

...Given that posts of the "pulling up a lawn chair/I brought popcorn" genre aren't allowed in the BBQ Pit, is it really necessary that we waste valuable space on the front page with another sticky saying we don't want them in Great Debates either?...

Seems to me, though I might be mistaken, that the much esteemed Minty and Sevastapol were having a bit o' fun. In their badinage, I detected no real animosity or rancor, just a couple good ol' boys taking a jocular pose of mutual pomposity. (Pomposity? Come now, Minty is a Texas boy, the very idea is absurd!)

I would have thought that the line "the popcorn is a coincidence" would have tipped you off that I was having a bit of a jape. In a way, a form of applause, encouraging the sort of good-humored riposte demonstrated by the aforementioned esteemed.

Propriety is all very well, but isn't this sort of good-natured fun vastly superior, both in intent and content, to barely veiled contempt that skirts the rules, but violates the spirit? Are not the rules intended to promote civility and prudent discourse? Did you detect rancor and contempt that eluded me?

Now, if I was unclear, if, indeed, you sincerely believed that I was hoping to provoke bitterness and insult, I apologize. If you could misunderstand, so could another. I often depend on the reader's capacity to detect wry irony without being smacked in the face with a smilie, so that the humor impaired might be advised of my intent.

Is that it? Had I included a smilie with my "popcorn" comment, would that have passed muster? Personally, I loathe smilies, can't remember the last time I used one, if ever. But if such is needed to remain within the pale of your good graces, I suppose....

I took Minty and Sevastapol to be indulging in a bit of spoofery, as was my encouraging remark. I found thier conversation very informative. light-hearted, and respectful in the fashion that genial affection permits familiarity and eschews pomposity. Given that so many of our correspondents can skirt the rules of propriety while indulging themselves in barely masked contempt and calumny, I would have thought such refreshing.

I do not suggest that rules are made to be broken, but rules that cannot be tickled are petrified pomposities. Chains are not broken by such as these, nor ignorance dispelled, they are lifeless and deadening.

In no wise do I imply any disrespect for the difficulty of your task or the sincere effort clearly expended in pursuit of a worthy goal. I remain, as always,

Your humble servant,
e.

[minty green]

For the record, I deny the original accusation of insolence and the newer charge of pomposity, but plead inherently guilty to the lesser offense of smart-assery. It's a fair cop.

[Hamlet]

Originally Posted by minty green

For the record, I deny the original accusation of insolence and the newer charge of pomposity, but plead inherently guilty to the lesser offense of smart-assery. It's a fair cop.

Is smart-assery a felony or a misdemeanor? What kind of sentencing guidelines are you facing? Are there any factors in aggravation or mitigation? Would you like to make a statement on your behalf before sentence is imposed?

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by minty green

For the record, I deny the original accusation of insolence and the newer charge of pomposity, but plead inherently guilty to the lesser offense of smart-assery. It's a fair cop.

....but Society is to blame. When smart-assitude is outlawed, only outlaws will have any fun.

[Spavined Gelding]

It seems to me that once you suppress the smart-asses then you have to go after the dumb-shits, the hysterical, the sanctimonious, the pompous, the willfully obtuse, the dumb-insolent, the neurotic and the clueless. Once that pogrom is completed there won’t be anybody left to play with but the patently insane. It’ll be like any other message board.

I say until it gets out of hand, let ‘em play. All this unnecessary officiating just slows the game down.

[El_Kabong]

It seems to me that once you suppress the smart-asses then you have to go after the dumb-shits, the hysterical, the sanctimonious, the pompous, the willfully obtuse, the dumb-insolent, the neurotic and the clueless.

Alright, what did I do this time?

[Mtgman]

First they came for the smart-asses and I did not speak out because I was a dumb-ass.

Enjoy,
Steven

[elucidator]

Secure in the knowledge that I be represented by the firm of Gelding and Green, Esqs., I post bail with serene aplomb.

(What, this? An airline ticket, yes, but I was going to cash it in in order to buy drugs and porno.)

[Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Spavined Gelding

It seems to me that once you suppress the smart-asses then you have to go after the dumb-shits, the hysterical, the sanctimonious, the pompous, the willfully obtuse, the dumb-insolent, the neurotic and the clueless. Once that pogrom is completed there won’t be anybody left to play with but the patently insane.

What about the assholes? Won't somebody think of the assholes??

[Humble Servant]

Originally Posted by elucidator

Wherein Your Humble Servent is rebuked: ....

Your humble servant,

I just want to say that my vanity search results, while fruitless as far as my vanity goes, are often interesting.

[MEBuckner]

I don't like to get in to what might have been said using the "Report this post" function, but there evidently was some real animosity developing there. It was not all light-hearted tomfoolery. In such situations (not good-natured ribbing, but people actually causing each other to lose their tempers), "I'm bringing the popcorn" remarks are not constructive.

I don't want to stamp out smart-asses in Great Debates, but I would like to tone down the rancor a bit sometimes. There are good reasons for keeping all the flames and open attacks and highly creative musings on each other's ancestry and personal habits down here in the Pit and away from the rest of the board.

[minty green]

No feelings were intended to be hurt on my part. I mean, jeez, we're arguing about the interpretation and application of a treaty, not debating who's got the fattest head.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by Humble Servant

I just want to say that my vanity search results, while fruitless as far as my vanity goes, are often interesting.

"vanity search"?

[Frank]

Originally Posted by elucidator

"vanity search"?

Apparently Humble Servant has got the wrong name.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by minty green

No feelings were intended to be hurt on my part. I mean, jeez, we're arguing about the interpretation and application of a treaty, not debating who's got the fattest head.

Well, there you have it! I mean, if one cannot trust a lawyer, and a Texan! Seperately, each are known as the very paragons of propriety, modesty, and demure decorum, but combined in one person as they are, how can there be any question?

[Polycarp]

Having seen Buck's post to this thread, it becomes clear that my initial reaction that he was "heading trouble off at the pass" in his GD mod. chastisement is accurate. While elucidator may have thought it was good-natured raillery, it clearly ended up being a bit more serious. But on reading the OP and not having gotten to Buck's post yet, I'd thought of commenting to eluc that while probably nothing to sweat in that particular circumstance, it could be used to justify similar stuff in real flamewars -- something the Mods. seem dead set on stopping, for reasons that seem fairly obvious to me.

Originally Posted by minty green

For the record, I deny the original accusation of insolence and the newer charge of pomposity, but plead inherently guilty to the lesser offense of smart-assery. It's a fair cop.

Hey, you might always use the old standby, "I deny the allegations and defy the allegator."


And, Humble Servant? Didn't you see the initial caps. in eluc's OP here. Clearly what he's doing is passing the buck and claiming that you, not he, was the one being chastized!!

[SPOOFE]

I took Minty and Sevastapol to be indulging in a bit of spoofery

What's this? WHAT'S THIS?!? I demand royalties!!!

[minty green]

Not fuckin' likely.

[Bear_Nenno]

Ha!! SPOOFE gets diddley!!

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Polycarp

Hey, you might always use the old standby, "I deny the allegations and defy the allegator."

When you're up to your ass in allegators...

[Humble Servant]

Originally Posted by elucidator

"vanity search"?

See, if I were vain (and not Humble), I might think that people may have mentioned my name on the boards, and therefore I would do a search (a vanity search) on my user name, bringing up all threads where the words "humble" and "servant" appear, such as this one. Or, SPOOFE, if he searched on his name, might bring up a thread where the word "spoofery" appears, not that he would ever do anything like that.

[elucidator]

Oh. That introduces some problems, were I actually interested. I mean, got to search on elucidator and Elucidator. As well as 'luci, luc, shithead, scumbucket, fucktard....

Sure, I'm vain. But I'm lazy.

[Giraffe]

Don't forget asshole. You've got to search for that too!

Why, oh why, won't anybody think of the assholes??

[carrot]

Originally Posted by Giraffe

Why, oh why, won't anybody think of the assholes??

'Cause all they do is spew a bunch of shit.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by Spavined Gelding

It seems to me that once you suppress the smart-asses then you have to go after the dumb-shits, the hysterical, the sanctimonious, the pompous, the willfully obtuse, the dumb-insolent, the neurotic and the clueless. Once that pogrom is completed there won’t be anybody left to play with but the patently insane. It’ll be like any other message board.

We'd still have dolts, loonies, boneheads, knuckle-draggers, attack dogs, jackasses, and troglodytes, wouldn't we? Would that be enough, or would we have to import some leet-speakers and trolls?

[Spavined Gelding]

We'd still have dolts, loonies, boneheads, knuckle-draggers, attack dogs, jackasses, and troglodytes, wouldn't we? Would that be enough, or would we have to import some leet-speakers and trolls?

All subclasses of the general category ass holes. We have to have some diversity around here. We can’t all be rational, well informed and erudite thinkers of the sort contributing to this high-minded and generally elevated thread.

[kniz]

Originally Posted by elucidator

Come now, Minty is a Texas boy, the very idea is absurd!)[/b]

That may be explained by the fact that Minty is originally from Iowa.

[minty green]

Originally Posted by kniz

That may be explained by the fact that Minty is originally from Iowa.

Nope. I just went to law school there.

[elucidator]

Well, now, Minty, I'm sure he didn't mean nothin' by it.

[Spavined Gelding]

Originally Posted by minty green

Nope. I just went to law school there.

In the summer of 1967 the faculty of the University of Iowa College of Law got together for their annual post bar exam Bar-B-Q and self examination. The universal conclusion was that the class of 1967 was as sorry a bunch of underachievers and potential ne’er-do-wells as the college has seen in its long and proud history. “We can never let this happen again,” said the faculty “we must raise admission standards and promote diversity among out students or we are going to be the laughing stock of the legal educators club.”

The answer, to recruit students from other states, to include even the odd Texan who can’t get into UT Law, and give those people a world class legal education at a discount as a gift from the honest taxpayers of Iowa and then send these fine young people out into the world to stick a finger in the eye of justice, never to see the Tall Corn State again. And so it was done. The U of I Law School pulled itself into the top 25 of the Newsweek survey and out friend Minty Green came up from the coastal plains to become a real honest to God lawyer with an appreciation of mass produced Mid-western beer. All because the Iowa Law class of 1967 was a bunch of draft dodgers, rounders, pseudo-intellectuals and dullards. Our friend need to give credit where credit is deserved.

Spavined Gelding
Iowa Law, 1967

[pervert]

Originally Posted by carrot

'Cause all they do is spew a bunch of shit.

Well, yes, but they do have other uses....

[Desmostylus]

I can't imagine that you have any other use, pervert, or in fact any use at all.

[minty green]

There seems to be a quota of 2 entering 1L's with undergrad degrees from UT each year, and I can attest that both of us in my class never had to pay a dime in law school tuition. That's bad news for the student loan folks, but excellent news for my daughter and her own college fund. Thanks for underachieving, SG!

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Spavined Gelding

All subclasses of the general category ass holes. We have to have some diversity around here. We can’t all be rational, well informed and erudite thinkers of the sort contributing to this high-minded and generally elevated thread.

"Even the mediocre are entitled to a little representation." -- Sen. Roman Hruska (Rep., Nebr.) in the Senate hearings on the confirmation of G. Harrold Carswell

[Spavined Gelding]

It seems to me that the ass holes, and the mediocre, have more than adequate voice and representation, the late and not much lamented Senator Hruska’s opinion notwithstanding.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Spavined Gelding

It seems to me that the ass holes, and the mediocre, have more than adequate voice and representation, the late and not much lamented Senator Hruska’s opinion notwithstanding.

You and Minty may or may not find it humorous that I mis-recalled the quote, until I looked it up, as being by the late Hon. Bourke B. Hickenlooper, who was, I found, also an alumnus of U.I. Law (1922).

[Spavined Gelding]

I recall the line as coming from Hruska. It might well have come from old Burk, the only US Senator whose name sounded like a fart in a bathtub. We have had out share of reps for the mediocre and for the assholes in this state. H R Gross comes to mind, to say nothing of our current Congressmen Rep Nussle and Rep King.

[Spavined Gelding]

That should, of course, read "our share."

[ElvisL1ves]

Same here - it wasn't from an Iowan, but a neighbor from Nebraska. Anecdotage.com sez

On January 19, 1970, president Richard Nixon nominated G. Harrold Carswell to the Supreme Court. While Carswell's nomination was promptly rejected by the Senate, Nebraska Senator Roman Hruska presented a novel argument in his defense:

"Even if he was mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers," Hruska declared. "They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises and Cardozos and Frankfurters and stuff like that there."

Hruska, Roman Lee (1904- ) American politician, Congressman (1952-1955), U.S. Senator (Nebraska, 1955-1977)

[Sources: National Review, 22 Dec, 1997]