Talk:Emails Taken in a Different Direction

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(In addition: Couple more. PLUS speaking of consensus.)
Line 80: Line 80:
:::::If anything, I thing "emails" in the title needs to be capitalized. {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 23:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
:::::If anything, I thing "emails" in the title needs to be capitalized. {{User:Homestar-winner/sig}} 23:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
::::::But of course. We're still left without an actual name... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
::::::But of course. We're still left without an actual name... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 +
:::::::How 'bout "Strong Bad forgetting the task in an email"? {{User:Don't say jorb 101/sig}}
== Unanswered? ==
== Unanswered? ==

Revision as of 00:33, 10 December 2007

Contents

More than 2 problems?

There are a couple issues with this article before it is cleaned up. First, the title should be clearer. The idea is fine, but I don't immediately think of "twisting emails" when I am considering the idea of using an email for a tangental idea. Secondly, the page needs to follow standard format:

*Email [[email]] — blah blah blah

Thirdly, examples of where Strong Bad goes off on a tangent should be moved beyond the Tandy 400 era and sectioned appropriately. Finally, some entries need to be cleaned up. For example, the bird doesn't fit, since "giving somebody the bird" is slang for flipping people off, which is the subject of the email and Strong Bad's response. wbwolf (t | ed) 15:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

What should we do about emails like long pants and the paper where he tried to twist the email, but the email twisted itself back onto the topic? Bad Bad Guy 17:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Removed Facts

The DeFender1031 says: I removed a bunch of facts from this page, here's the removed facts and why:

i love you

  • In the email i love you, Strong Bad mentions nothing about anything in the email besides his/her name.

There wasn't anything more to the email except "i love you" and he replies that the feeling isn't mutual before going off on the majority of the email (as the name is longer than the email itself). — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

credit card

  • In the email credit card, he receives an email from John and some people trying to steal Strong Bad's credit card number, he shifts the email to be about "Homestar" and uses his credit card information to buy things on "the_coolest_things_ever.com"

How is this twisting? He's responding to the email by using it to his advantage. — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

i she be

  • In i she be, Strong Bad is sent a phony email saying a girl was named great looking girl. After he plays along with it, he yells at her saying he gets a lot of emails like that and from "ladies with proper grammar" but then feels sorry for her. Thinking that he shouldn't let the email go to waste, he sends it to "The Cheat", later they text each other on an I.M.

What part of this is twisting? — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

trevor the vampire

  • In the email trevor the vampire, since Trevor doesn't finish the sentence, Strong Bad tries to make an email in his honor, thinking that "they" got him.

How is he supposed to respond to a half-finished email? Trevor didn't even say anything for Strong Bad to twist! — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

studying

  • Email studying — he "advises" Roy to stop studying and spend time with his girlfriend. He later tries to steal his girlfriend, but he says that doesn't know her name or where she lives.

Again, not twisting anything. — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

stand-up

  • In stand-up, Joe p. wants him to do stand-up comedy. He repeatedly states "no", trying to avoid telling about an embarrassing thing that had happened to him before. "Strong Sad" comes in shortly after to show a tape of Lil' Strong Bad doing stand-up, somehow ending up in his pants falling for no real reason.

This is a blatant lie, not a twisting of an email. — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

CGNU

  • In the email CGNU, Strong Bad, instead of telling how to graduate at CGNU, he ends up making an advertisement for it. Also revealing that CGNU is not a real college an applying for it is just to make fun of you.

He is asked how someone can graduate from CGNU and he responds with an ad about getting your degree from CGNU, makes sense to me... (the disclaimer at the end is a throwaway one-liner, and could also be construed as a "you can't" response to the email. either way, it's not a twist.) — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

flag day

  • In flag day Strong Bad goes immediately from introducing the flag to singing the Strong Badia song.

He shows everybody the flag, what more do you want? Is it not proper to sing one's national anthem as you raise the flag? — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

property of ones

He responds. Then goes into his bogus theorum. Not twisting, elaborating. — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

little questions

  • In little questions Strong Bad gets an email from a Swedish person, misspelling things and making grammatical errors throughout. Strong Bad responds in what he knows of how the Swedish talk, instead of answering without leaving a big question on what just happened.

He responds to gibberish with gibberish, as best he can. What's the problem here? — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

marzipan

  • In marzipan Strong Bad goes from Emily's question about how nobody ever sees him with any girls. She mentions that the only girl she's ever seen even near him is Marzipan. Strong Bad then starts ranting that Marzipan can't keep her "hands" offa me (although this is entirely untrue).

Again, a blatant lie, not a twist.

In addition

There are a few that I left in that aren't blatantly going against the subject of the email, but still don't answer it entirely, which raises the question, what is the scope of this page? Is it about instances like big white face and homsar where the intent is clearly one thing but he does the complete opposite, or should it include instances like retirement and rough copy, where strong bad sort of does what's asked but not really, or goes off on some unrelated tangent without first answering the email? (ones where he does first answer it definitely don't count, and i removed a bunch of those above.) The ones that are still there that I am referring to in particular are:

Thoughts? — Defender1031*Talk 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it could be those that aren't blantantly going against the email, but still don't answer it completely, about instances like big white face and homsar, and include instances like retirement and rough copy. KlingOnMyDreams 16:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been invited to add old comics and no loafing to the list here. While I'm at it, Defender, can I ask, what consensus are you talking about? Barely 2 hours ago you undid my own removal of these from the article, but all of a sudden you've been convinced of a consensus and you've gone ahead with these removals and more? Where was any of it discussed and who participated? I'm just wondering because it's not clear to me what makes action acceptable, since mine was not (to you) but your own (nearly identical one) apparently is. 76.254.87.139 00:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Email tags?

Since this page can only have appearances in emails, is it necessary to write "Email" at the beginning of each line? — Defender1031*Talk 16:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Rename

I think it needs a new name. No ideas though. Anyone else got any? — Defender1031*Talk 16:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

How 'bout Ignored emails. KlingOnMyDreams 16:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Nah, that sounds like it's just talking about the unused emails. He's not ignoring them, he's doing the opposite. — Defender1031*Talk 16:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Oppisite? KlingOnMyDreams 16:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, thanks DeFender for taking care of three of the four issues I identified and it looks like there are still plenty of content there. How about "Tangental responses"? wbwolf (t | ed) 19:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, i think that the scope of the page needs to be clearly defined before we can come up with a name. — Defender1031*Talk 20:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
If anything, I thing "emails" in the title needs to be capitalized. Homestar-Winner (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
But of course. We're still left without an actual name... — Defender1031*Talk 00:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
How 'bout "Strong Bad forgetting the task in an email"? He can't say job. Don't say jorb 101 Seriously, he can't say job!

Unanswered?

Let's not allow this to go un-answered, then: Under what scope do belong emails in which the question in fact was answered, at least to the best of SB's ability? I'm talking specifically about no loafing and old comics which didn't before seem to fit in any proposed or imagined scope, but I was instructed to hold my horses and not delete those until a re-name was decided upon. For reference's sake, the history including justifying comments is here: http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Twisting_emails&dir=prev&offset=20071209223947&limit=3&action=history As you can see, I've stated why the emails were in fact not un-answered.76.247.46.146 23:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

You can also see that neither of these emails are among the examples where Defender is calling attention to, and attempting a discussion of, the scope of the page. Why not? Is it because an answer, or at least a genuine attempt at an answer, is present in each of those emails? 76.247.46.146 23:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
No, it's because i didn't notice those, you're welcome to add them to that list. Personally, i think that the scope of this page should be only the times where strong bad specifically does the opposite of what the sender is asking, like big white face or 12:00. — Defender1031*Talk 23:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Personal tools