Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitchy)   Twitter suspends, reinstates, suspends, reinstates, suspends account of conservative activist's husband   (twitchy.com) divider line 227
    More: Fail, Dana Loesch, Chris Loesch  
•       •       •

3574 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Apr 2012 at 11:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



227 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-30 03:32:35 PM  

sweetmelissa31: 1. Twitter (impossible to befart).


You have to begina that one, not befart it. Twatter.
 
2012-04-30 03:33:30 PM  

Jackson Herring: sweetmelissa31: befart

Where did you ever hear such a silly word


Did someone say Beefheart?

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-04-30 03:33:52 PM  

Jackson Herring: Curse of the Goth Kids: Twitter is not going to sleep with you.

That's the difference between fark and twitter I suppose


You have to pay $5 a month if you want the really good stuff here.
 
2012-04-30 03:35:05 PM  

Fluorescent Testicle: begina


You mean "vajazzle"
 
2012-04-30 03:35:50 PM  

QU!RK1019: Dana Loesch, so hot yet so bad.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x349]
So very, very bad.


Ohhh my, I can see how she could trick some unsuspecting man into marrying her.
 
2012-04-30 03:43:33 PM  

sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: Seriously, the only difference between Fark and Twitter is post length. You've been around this tab long enough to know that.

The only way to validly judge how awesome a social networking site is is by how easy their name is befarted. A list from Greatest of All Time to The Worst:

1. Twitter (impossible to befart)
2. Fartbook
3. Fart dot com


4. Fartspace
5. Fartchan
6. FartUpon
 
2012-04-30 03:46:14 PM  

coeyagi: 6. FartUpon


leave your weird fetishes out of it
 
2012-04-30 03:46:41 PM  

coeyagi: sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: Seriously, the only difference between Fark and Twitter is post length. You've been around this tab long enough to know that.

The only way to validly judge how awesome a social networking site is is by how easy their name is befarted. A list from Greatest of All Time to The Worst:

1. Twitter (impossible to befart)
2. Fartbook
3. Fart dot com

4. Fartspace
5. Fartchan
6. FartUpon


img407.imageshack.us

The circle is complete.
 
2012-04-30 03:50:49 PM  
i.qkme.me
 
2012-04-30 03:54:44 PM  

qorkfiend: AnimateThis: qorkfiend: This must be the thread where I'm reminded why I avoid Twitter like the plague it is.

You sound old.

I'll be 30 this year.


You missed Nathan Fillion live tweeting a firefly marathon yesterday.
 
2012-04-30 03:55:41 PM  

coeyagi: [i.qkme.me image 500x382]


Hey, now she looks like John Oates.
 
2012-04-30 03:56:53 PM  

Curse of the Goth Kids: coeyagi: [i.qkme.me image 500x382]

Hey, now she looks like John Oates.


Feldman... Oates. The only difference is one got penised by Jackson, and the other one wanted to.
 
2012-04-30 04:04:38 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: C'mon. Fark is a "discussion" with "amusing" "pictures". Twitter is standing on a rooftop shouting at the top of your lungs.

Seriously, the only difference between Fark and Twitter is post length. You've been around this tab long enough to know that.


That's the thing that bothers me most about Twitter, though. In Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points. Twitter is sound bites.
 
2012-04-30 04:06:59 PM  

qorkfiend: Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: C'mon. Fark is a "discussion" with "amusing" "pictures". Twitter is standing on a rooftop shouting at the top of your lungs.

Seriously, the only difference between Fark and Twitter is post length. You've been around this tab long enough to know that.

That's the thing that bothers me most about Twitter, though. In Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points. Twitter is sound bites.


Exactly. 140 characters is not enough to develop an argument with facts. You can make some bold statements but they could be completely bullshiat. Twitter is seriously the worst thing ever.
 
2012-04-30 04:09:06 PM  
I'm fairly certain that Satan has spent the last twenty years construction an entire wing of Hell exclusively for Michelle Malkin. She is the evilest biatch to ever draw breath, and yes, that includes Ann Coulter.
 
2012-04-30 04:11:25 PM  

qorkfiend: Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points.


Ahhhh ok I thought you were being serious there for a minute there hahahahahah
 
2012-04-30 04:16:58 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points.

Ahhhh ok I thought you were being serious there for a minute there hahahahahah


Well, you can try... ._.
 
2012-04-30 04:18:22 PM  
FREE MARKET! FREE MARKET! HOW DARE YOU QUESTION A BUSINESS! FREE MARKET!

/Anyone do this one yet?
 
2012-04-30 04:24:54 PM  

qorkfiend: Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points.

Ahhhh ok I thought you were being serious there for a minute there hahahahahah

Well, you can try... ._.


Seriously, if you stripped out quoted text, I bet 90% or more of Fark posts fit in the 140-character limit, and there sure as hell isn't any less ignorance, self-importance, or painful unfunniness on Fark than on Twitter. What I am saying is, both Fark and Twitter are dumb, and if you post on one while crying about the other, well...
 
2012-04-30 04:28:52 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points.

Ahhhh ok I thought you were being serious there for a minute there hahahahahah

Well, you can try... ._.

Seriously, if you stripped out quoted text, I bet 90% or more of Fark posts fit in the 140-character limit, and there sure as hell isn't any less ignorance, self-importance, or painful unfunniness on Fark than on Twitter. What I am saying is, both Fark and Twitter are dumb, and if you post on one while crying about the other, well...


That was 340 characters of non-quoted text, FYI.
 
2012-04-30 04:30:38 PM  

coeyagi: @Coyegi Retweet: That was 340 characters of non-quoted text, FYI. Lennavan: LOL


/I don't really know how this twitter thing works, you get what I mean.
 
2012-04-30 04:35:00 PM  

coeyagi: That was 340 characters of non-quoted text, FYI.


Right, also it was much longer than 90% of my posts
 
2012-04-30 04:38:01 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Fark threads you can at least develop an argument and make a few points.

Ahhhh ok I thought you were being serious there for a minute there hahahahahah

Well, you can try... ._.

Seriously, if you stripped out quoted text, I bet 90% or more of Fark posts fit in the 140-character limit, and there sure as hell isn't any less ignorance, self-importance, or painful unfunniness on Fark than on Twitter. What I am saying is, both Fark and Twitter are dumb, and if you post on one while crying about the other, well...


Maybe it's the bulletin-board nature of Fark versus the broadcast nature of Twitter. The character count just serves to make some tweets just painful to read.
 
2012-04-30 04:39:21 PM  

meat0918: NeverDrunk23: Doesn't it lonely constantly putting yourself on that cross?

You know how some people gauge their ear lobes to an half an inch or more and put a big metal "tunnel" inserts in them?

These people have done something similar to their hands and feet. It makes setup and takedown far less painful than one might imagine.


Damn you. If I wasn't going to hell already, I am now for laughing at that.
 
2012-04-30 04:41:04 PM  

Jackson Herring: coeyagi: That was 340 characters of non-quoted text, FYI.

Right, also it was much longer than 90% of my posts


Which are presumably 1 or 2-liners responding to other posts and not actual proclamations, NTTAWWT. But you see my point about your calculation there.

Plus, you have the troll factor. Many posters are trolls. It would defeat the purpose of troll vanquishing to write a treatise on how they are a troll and should kill themselves.

In summation, you might be right, but not for the reasons you think you are.
 
2012-04-30 04:41:11 PM  

Don't Troll Me Bro!: This wasn't even close to political discourse; it was mental illness. This guy's rambling had many signs of schizophrenia. It had clanging, looseness of association, nonsensical logic, word salad, severe anxiety, hypersensitivity to criticism (he had a caller question his logic and he flew off the handle), delusions of grandeur (he stated that he was on a mission to save America from the socialists), thought blocking (he stopped mid-sentence at least 4 times and couldn't finish the sentence during the 5 minutes I listened). I'm sure there were more, but I'm not a psychiatrist.


Had to look that one up. Thanks for the prompt to learn something new.
 
2012-04-30 04:41:15 PM  

qorkfiend: Maybe it's the bulletin-board nature of Fark versus the broadcast nature of Twitter. The character count just serves to make some tweets just painful to read.


The flip side of that is on Twitter, you literally only have to read things from people you are interested in, rather then being inundated by for example threadshiatting trolls and terrible Fark memes. For example, the only tweets I read are Colbert and Nate Silver.

There are many differences between Fark and Twitter, and anyone who uses either while deriding the other is not only wrong, but wrong in a uniquely unselfaware way.
 
2012-04-30 04:42:22 PM  

coeyagi: It would defeat the purpose of troll vanquishing


Troll "vanquishing" is probably the worst part of Fark in fact. Like the fact that someone actually just typed those two words next to each other in earnest.
 
2012-04-30 04:42:57 PM  
I'm totally going to vanquish the guy who's posting just to get a lot of attention by replying to him a million times and giving him a lot of attention
 
2012-04-30 04:43:34 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Maybe it's the bulletin-board nature of Fark versus the broadcast nature of Twitter. The character count just serves to make some tweets just painful to read.

The flip side of that is on Twitter, you literally only have to read things from people you are interested in, rather then being inundated by for example threadshiatting trolls and terrible Fark memes. For example, the only tweets I read are Colbert and Nate Silver.

There are many differences between Fark and Twitter, and anyone who uses either while deriding the other is not only wrong, but wrong in a uniquely unselfaware way.


www.reddogspa.com

Wut?
 
2012-04-30 04:43:59 PM  

coeyagi: Wut?


wait do you like


know how twitter works?
 
2012-04-30 04:44:45 PM  
Oh I see what you are getting at. Yes, Fark with an ignore list and strong enough to have about 5 posts in every thread is actually a LOT like twitter
 
2012-04-30 04:45:17 PM  

Jackson Herring: I'm totally going to vanquish the guy who's posting just to get a lot of attention by replying to him a million times and giving him a lot of attention


Good luck with that bro.

//the beautiful part about this argument is how a) meta it is and b) trite and inconsequential in the grand scheme of anything in this universe. But keep it going! I want this post count to surpass your average WWE thread!
 
2012-04-30 04:47:52 PM  
aleheads.files.wordpress.com

Seriously, you could use one. This argument, it just isn't worth it.
 
2012-04-30 04:49:47 PM  

coeyagi: Seriously, you could use one. This argument, it just isn't worth it.


I don't know, you seem pretty invested in the idea that fark is like, totally way cooler than other forms of farking retarded social media
 
2012-04-30 04:52:43 PM  

Jackson Herring: The flip side of that is on Twitter, you literally only have to read things from people you are interested in, rather then being inundated by for example threadshiatting trolls and terrible Fark memes. For example, the only tweets I read are Colbert and Nate Silver.


Not entirely true. The tweets that come to you are limited to your subscriptions but if you're using a hashtag to follow a topic, someone can easily spam up that hashtag with unrelated information. I suspect that is what happened: some woman's hubby tried to score some points with the missus by trolling up twitter using hashtags unrelated to what he was saying to get a broader exposure for his tweets. It would be like me including the top trending hashtag in a tweet about how great my brother's rib shack is.
 
2012-04-30 04:53:13 PM  

Jackson Herring: coeyagi: Seriously, you could use one. This argument, it just isn't worth it.

I don't know, you seem pretty invested in the idea that fark is like, totally way cooler than other forms of farking retarded social media


Yeah, not in the slightest. They all have their highlights and lowlights. Twitter: cogent thoughts are ass farked by character limits. Fark: cogent thoughts are muddled in the quoted text, sodomized by trolls. Neither will make the annals of history. Maybe the anals though.
 
2012-04-30 04:54:38 PM  

coeyagi: Yeah, not in the slightest. They all have their highlights and lowlights.




coeyagi: Twitter is seriously the worst thing ever.

 
2012-04-30 04:55:14 PM  
Definitely anals though
 
2012-04-30 04:55:14 PM  
So is this the new conservative thing--annoy everybody so much they start reporting you for spam and then act like victims (and pick up lots more followers in the process) by getting the right wing twitter herd whining about it? For the last week or so, my Young Republican friend has been tweeting demanding that one user or another that I've never heard of but is supposedly oh so influential be unsuspended.
 
2012-04-30 04:58:10 PM  

Jackson Herring: coeyagi: Yeah, not in the slightest. They all have their highlights and lowlights.



coeyagi: Twitter is seriously the worst thing ever.



Exhibit A: I make an argument that Twitter is used to make a bold statement without evidence.
Exhibit B (bold): I make a bold statement without any evidence.

See?
 
2012-04-30 05:00:11 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: Maybe it's the bulletin-board nature of Fark versus the broadcast nature of Twitter. The character count just serves to make some tweets just painful to read.

The flip side of that is on Twitter, you literally only have to read things from people you are interested in, rather then being inundated by for example threadshiatting trolls and terrible Fark memes. For example, the only tweets I read are Colbert and Nate Silver.

There are many differences between Fark and Twitter, and anyone who uses either while deriding the other is not only wrong, but wrong in a uniquely unselfaware way.


What, since I post on Fark, I'm not allowed to express any sort of dissatisfaction with any other Internet communication channel?
 
2012-04-30 05:00:25 PM  

Jackson Herring: What I am saying is, both Fark and Twitter are dumb, and if you post on one while crying about the other, well...


Right then, I'm off to post a breathless headline that some "real serious shiat is going down" in a Fark thread.
 
2012-04-30 05:00:33 PM  

rynthetyn: So is this the new conservative thing--annoy everybody so much they start reporting you for spam and then act like victims (and pick up lots more followers in the process) by getting the right wing twitter herd whining about it? For the last week or so, my Young Republican friend has been tweeting demanding that one user or another that I've never heard of but is supposedly oh so influential be unsuspended.


I'm sure there are a lot of angry people with no particular qualifications that are looking to bootstrap themselves up to "right wing media personality" status since you so obviously don't need to know what the fark you're talking about, don't need to edit or fact check, and it's so obviously lucrative once you reach a certain level. I've seen a number of people revitalize or essentially invent their careers solely through self promotion over the past few years. Once you hit a critical number of eyes it feeds on itself.
 
2012-04-30 05:02:41 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: rynthetyn: So is this the new conservative thing--annoy everybody so much they start reporting you for spam and then act like victims (and pick up lots more followers in the process) by getting the right wing twitter herd whining about it? For the last week or so, my Young Republican friend has been tweeting demanding that one user or another that I've never heard of but is supposedly oh so influential be unsuspended.

I'm sure there are a lot of angry people with no particular qualifications that are looking to bootstrap themselves up to "right wing media personality" status since you so obviously don't need to know what the fark you're talking about, don't need to edit or fact check, and it's so obviously lucrative once you reach a certain level. I've seen a number of people revitalize or essentially invent their careers solely through self promotion over the past few years. Once you hit a critical number of eyes it feeds on itself.


Right on, brotha!

www-deadline-com.vimg.net
 
2012-04-30 05:02:53 PM  

coeyagi: [aleheads.files.wordpress.com image 300x778]

Seriously, you could use one. This argument, it just isn't worth it.


Mmmmmm lager...
 
2012-04-30 05:09:21 PM  

Curse of the Goth Kids: coeyagi: [i.qkme.me image 500x382]

Hey, now she looks like John Oates.


Loesch and Oates...

Oates and Loesch...

Loesch... *IS* Oates!

*burns clothes and crouches in the shower*
 
2012-04-30 05:10:40 PM  

QU!RK1019: Curse of the Goth Kids: coeyagi: [i.qkme.me image 500x382]

Hey, now she looks like John Oates.

Loesch and Oates...

Oates and Loesch...

Loesch... *IS* Oates!

*burns clothes and crouches in the shower*


Damn it! Now I have the music from the Crying Game in my head!
 
2012-04-30 05:11:22 PM  

qorkfiend: What, since I post on Fark, I'm not allowed to express any sort of dissatisfaction with any other Internet communication channel?


I mean in the same way that if you are Justin Bieber fan, you might sound a little silly talking about how Ke$ha fans ARE THE WORST
 
2012-04-30 05:12:18 PM  

Jackson Herring: qorkfiend: What, since I post on Fark, I'm not allowed to express any sort of dissatisfaction with any other Internet communication channel?

I mean in the same way that if you are Justin Bieber fan, you might sound a little silly talking about how Ke$ha fans ARE THE WORST


Ke$ha fans are the worst.
 
Displayed 50 of 227 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report