Don't you hate it when the time it takes to explain a joke totally negates how funny it is? The longer it takes for you to explain it, the less funny the punch line is, in my opinion. So lots of times I just don't even try. Maybe we could make an equation?
y = the time it takes to tell the joke
x = the joke
if y > the value of x, then x = pleh.
My brother made me laugh a good one today, but I don't even want to start trying to explain it. I'm posting it as a good example of the principle above (while also saving a good gem):
me: if I need to change the styling, should I make a whole new style sheet, or should I just put the styling changes into the index pages themselves?
Adam: if it's styling that's only ever going to affect one page, then I'd probably just go with embedded styles
(that's styles declared in the < head > section)
me: remind me what the syntax is in the head section
Adam:
< style type="text/css" >
.Breanne { goggy:looooong; }
< /style >
This has to do with the fact that I just bought a basset hound.
We use the term "goggy" instead of "doggy" out of affection for lolcats and loldogs.
I thought I'd also throw in another part of our conversation:
me:I can never remember which one is greater than > or < ?
Adam: the first one
Adam: the expression is relative to the first operand
me: look at you using words like operand
me: if mathematical intelligence was sexy, you'd be fabio
Adam: I can't believe it's not an integer!
3 comments:
I can see the potential for this conversation to be funny if I even had a CLUE what you guys were talking about. Can we say computer geek? You know I think you're hillarious, so I trust this is funny, somehow.
The crazy thing is that you were concerned it wouldn't be funny because of how long it was.
Not exactly, I was talking about how if I explained why it was funny, the explanation would take so long that it wouldn't be funny anymore.
I think I must have been lost from the beginning. Sorry.
Post a Comment