tpaine posted:

whoa krinch those are YOUR books??

kinch posted:

thats not my freaking books you idiots

Yes, I thought, clearly what is in that picture is an object of ridicule, now why would this poster be proud of that. Then I thought, perhaps I am not intended to associate the poster with the content of the post - that in fact the books in the picture belonged to someone other than the person who posted it. Now you are on to something, I thought, to myself, and began to research how pictures get from cameras to web pages, to see if this were possible. It turns out that a modern day camera does not produce a single picture, like a Polaroid might, or even a single negative that can be turned into many pictures by using it over and over again to develop film. Rather, they produce what is essentially a set of instructions. These instructions tell computers how to display the picture that the camera took. Because the instructions can be replicated quickly, many computers can use them at once, and computers can even share the instructions one to another by communicating electronically through a widespread infrastructure that was apparently built in the United States in the last century. So, somebody can have the "file" as the instructions are called, they can have the file that contains a picture that was taken by a camera owned by someone they don't even know, who is quite geographically remote from them. Now I was beginning to seize and choke on the truth. In fact, this poster had probably done exactly this - put a picture taken by somebody else - to alert our attention not to the merits of the picture's subject but its blithe absurdity. As awareness dawned across my sweaty complexion I had a devilish impulse. Now would be an opportunity to play the buffoon, but in so doing, to lampoon that idiotic assemblage of blithely Amerikan "cinema classics," The Criterion Collection. From there the tale unfolds predictably. I determined how to make posts, how to edit them in case I should want to make further changes later on, and for years studied the social mores of angrily apathetic forums and worked my way into their inner circles, an enormously complex process that I might not have time to relate to you in detail at the moment. Suffice it to say that I became known as the smartest, best poster, who made the best posts and was universally adored as a genius and guru. At that point, I unleashed my reply, but it was here I made a fatal misstep. You see, I'd forgotten to first publically declare my awareness of the very fact that I'd previously unearthed, that these pictures aren't yours. This oversight has nearly cost me my great reputation and cheerful demeanor. It has already cost me hundreds of moments of sleep. For how can I effectively call attention to the academically juvenile and certainly counterrevolutionary content of the Criterion Collection when my own motives are unclear to even the most observant of onlookers? I have been working at cross purposes with myself, I thought as I gazed across the windswept stuff and the animals and shit, my head aching with rue. I died there at the scenic place, but stipulated in my will that this post be dictated to my mom who is typing this post. (Mom note: Hello!) Thanks for reading.

swampman posted:

so you understand theyre not mine?

swampman posted:

there's no post that can't be improved by the inclusion of the word guru

i can state this with certitude, being a posting guru of no small means myself