- ::: snort :::*
That was hopelessly unattainable beginning with the OP of the thread that spawned this thread.
TYM, are you unable to distinguish, what to me and I suspect many others, obvious hyperbole? That’s what I read in Clothahump’s post. Maybe I’m wrong and he was being literal, but I doubt it. I don’t think it needs a Destupidizer[sup]TM[/sup]. What the board needs is a way for regular users of sarcasm and hyperbole (which I am one) to distinguish themselves as protection from the literalists.
Trust me…it ain’t just the straight heroes with bad costumes. Seen the Pied Piper lately?
John Belushi was a vigilante?
I go away for a day, and look at this place! Someone’s going to clean up all those doughnuts, and it’s not me!
Just trying to understand why the fuck this is continuing. Unless it’s just so that we can say “fuck”. Because kylerayner1 has demonstrated that he is a new college freshman with little tolerance for alcohol, no logic, no research skills, and precious little capacity to compose a coherent sentence. And some serious issues concerning the death of his father.
The original thread in GD touched on some serious issues as to morality and the law, with some thoughtful posts by serious contributors. It had the beginnings of a Great Debate. This is just shooting fish in a barrel.
But maybe something good can come from this…
Move ahead twenty years: A new graphic novel has arrived on the stands.
Panel 1: A pale face emerging from the glow of an old style computer monitor.
Panel 2: Pushes his glasses back. “They mock me. They mock my FATHER!”
Panel 3: Sweeps the monitor to the floor.
Panel 4: “It’s time someone did something!”
Panel 5: Floor level view of Kyle from behind, silhouetted against a backlit doorway, illuminating a Dunkin’ Donuts box on the floor. “They’ll know my name soon enough! They’ll know…”
Panel 6: Same view. "The KYLENATOR!!!"
Dear God. What have we started?
Wait 'til he starts trying to swing from buildings.
tom: I think you’re confusing which thread was the prompt for this one. It was Kyle’s responses in Cervaise’s thread, not Kyle’s silly thread about masked crusaders. (The only thing amusing I saw in the latter thread was someone using sanctimony when they meant sanctity regarding a religious rite.)
Slight hijack: When did people start calling “giant comics” “graphic novels?”
Will Eisner, creator of the Spirit used the term back in the 70s, I think. I know this thanks to another poster who’s name I can not recall right now.
We’re safe for a while: he has to go and train in a Tibetan monastery for ten years. Anyone want to kick in for airfare?
My curiosity is compelling me to ask this question: Which two posts of Kyle’s in this thread are the most likely candidates for the ones he says he posted while drunk?
I’ve apparently read more of Clothahump’s posts than you have.
I decided that since he’s been dead a while, it was safe to finally reveal his dark secret. I’m surprised somebody as quick as you didn’t figure it out based on the many clues he deliberately embedded in his movie and TV roles.
We’ve unleashed Hell, Plynck. Hell in a toga.
Hold me. I’m scared.
For this question, we need to redefine the definition of “two.”
Anyone want to take bets on whether Kyle drops out (or flunks out) before he makes it to sophomore?
OK, now I’m seeing him as an undead demon rejected from Hell and cast back to this life to right wrongs and punish Illinois Nazis. Like Spawn, only fatter, sporting RayBans and a swirling toga instead of a cape, and more prone to drunken regurgitation. They call him…Spewn.
Monty, did you miss the part where I stated drugs should be legal and a vigilante should not bother with capturing dealers or addicts? Of course I think under age drinking should be legal.
Under-age drinking is just another example to trump up charges against the poor (the rich too but these stupid laws really hit the poor).
Well, yea, but the problem there is that you want the vigilante to conform to your sense of justice, and inevitably, he’s going to conform to his own sense of justice. In comic book terms, you may want Batman, but you’re going to wind up with Rorschach. 
Didn’t miss it. I was asking about your adherence to the law.
Ah, but at the moment under-age drinking is illegal.
Please be so kind as to provide some proof of these two assertions.
What you really seem to want is someone to go punish those people you think are breaking the laws you approve of but at the same time give you a free pass to do whatever you like.
Look, you think I’m being mean. This is nothing compared to what your professors–and your competent classmates–will do when you pontificate at college as drunkenly and irrationally as you have here.
Someone above posted that to determine which two of your posts are the best candidates for those you posted drunk we would have to redefine the meaning of the word “two.” Every post you’ve made so far as forced that redefinition to include “+1 more.”