HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/Commandos in the Classroom

[edit] Oh-STUFF'd hundred hours

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 21:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• This is absolutely valid. It was under Explanations. There is no reason to STUFF this true fact.

Arguments against:

Additional comments:

• Why did you take it out? Explanations is a subcategory of Fun Facts.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] And Knowing Is Half the Battle!

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 12:07, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• TBC have referenced 80s TV show before (such as M*A*S*H)
• The old G.I. Joe show (which Cheat Commandos is based on) aired a 'and know you know' segment
• Other shows like Captain Planet and Mighty Morphin Power Rangers (the first one) also had segments like this so it's not one isolated incident.
• "Cheat Commandos" is intended as a parody of GI Joe, and has so far taken the majority of its jokes from direct shots at the show (blue lasers, scratchy-voiced leader, no dying, "buy all our playsets and toys"). The PSAs from that show are so well-known as being DIRECTLY from G.I. Joe that it's impossible for this NOT to be a parody of those segments.
• Gunhaver, the unoffical leader of the commandos, talks about the 'Peer-2-Teen' stuff just like Joe, the unoffical leader of the Joes, 'hosted' most of the 'And Now You Know' segments.

Arguments against:

• The fact is too broad and not necessarily accurate (i.e., The "Knowing is Half the Battle" segments had kids making poor choices or getting in trouble...then G.I. Joe saves the day. Here, poor Reynold didn't even get to make a poor choice - he just mentioned it).
• If TBC were really going to do this, they would have done a better job. The episode would have ended with all the Commandos spouting off some catch phrase. This did not happen.
• This seems more like a health class video. (Note the title.)
• There isn't enough proof to make this a fun fact.

Additional comments:

• Captain Planet and Power Rangers being mentioned in the arguments above greatly weakens this item's credibility. Is this a TTATOT on all '80s and '90s cartoons, or is it specifically G.I. Joe? It's too vague to be G.I. Joe, so what does that leave?

• This fact is based on the informational-segments which were common during the 80s, Joe was the first to have these and then they were 'copied' by other shows like Captain Planet.
  • Even more on point, Captain Planet was an educational show in and of itself, being very pro-environment.

• Not all segments were like the first Argument Against, some had kids tempted to do something, like smoke or drink beer, then Joe shows up and says something along the lines of "Wait kids, blah, blah..." which is exactly like the episode.
• The problem with TTOTOT is that it rules out the idea of a general reference. While this short might not be a parody of a specific "life lessons" type segment from any of the assorted listed shows (Ninja Turtles had them as well) it IS a reference to those types of episodes or sements. In a similiar vain, level 4 in the Stinkoman game references "protect the idiot" style games, but no one game specifically.
• If the fact isn't specific why not just change 'cartoons from the 80s and 90s' to G.I. Joe since that show was one of the firsts to have these.
• It isn't exactly TBC's 'style' to just rip-off other shows, this was probably intended as a subtle referance.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Noinch, Noinch, Noinch, Schmokin Candy...

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 01:03, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• True and not obvious.

Arguments against:

• Not necessarily true.
• It's more of a combination of two warnings ("Don't take candy from strangers" and "Don't smoke") plus a little non sequitur thrown in for good measure.
• The "inappropriate" thing (smoking candy) isn't replaced by any similar "appropriate" behavior, just a way to get rid of the enemy.
• It's just funnier to say "smoke some candy" then "smoke some cigarettes" or something like that. No referance to anything. Besides, there isn't enough proof to make this a fun fact.

Additional comments:

• It could be what it says and the combo. They both seem right.
  • They can't both be right.
• The site linked to doesn't really have any information relevant to the fact and should probably be removed/replaced.
• It's an astute observation, but argument against #2 is more in line with the TBC thought process.
• It's too general to be a reference. References should point to specific, clear-cut things.
• As mentioned on the talk page, this short has offended as caused multiple levels of concern for the "teen pregnant" comment. This could be a way to not shove too much mature themes down our throats at once.
• If this fact were true, we would expect to see a good guy, not Blue Laser, replacing smoking with candy. Argument against #2 fits Blue Laser's character much better.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Buy all our missing taglines

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 02:47, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• It's a major part of the other Commandos toons.

Arguments against:

• "All our playsets and toys" was mentioned in a very obvious way by Gunhaver, who listed them as a "positive thing" and then grinned broadly for the camera.
• The page title also references it: "Buy all our Teaching Aids and Filmstrips!"

Additional comments:

• Really, with the ending they used, sticking this phrase in there would have seemed forced.
• The remark has been added and removed several times to the page.
  • I'm the one who posted this fact [on the page], and I'm just wondering: how do facts get sucked into the STUFF process?
    • Several ways. In a case like this, when a questionable fact keeps being added to and deleted from a page, it gets moved here so that it can be put to a formal vote. See also HRWiki:STUFF/About.
    • In theory, the fun fact writer realises the fact might be disputed (I believe the wording is "if there is any doubt whatsoever" or something like that) and adds it to the STUFF page themself. In practice almost noone ever does, so fun facts just get added straight to the page, then someone else takes them off and puts them in STUFF. In cases like this one where one person thinks the fact is good enough to go straight to the page without discussion and someone else thinks its bad enough to be deleted without discussion, it keeps getting added and removed, and a third party (in this case me) has to notice and add it to STUFF if only to stop the bickering.
      • It's not necessarily a third party who STUFFs it. I was in the middle of it when I was beaten to the punch.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Classy cable

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 03:00, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• The phrasing is the same.
• The alliteration is the same.
• The purpose of the programming is the same.
• The logo is rather similar to the older logo which would run in the early 1990s, which was a pencil in a circle. Similar logo design.

Arguments against:

• It is a coincidence.

Additional comments:

• This sounds like a matter of opinion to me.
• Where can I see the old logo?
• Not even a coincidence, considering that one is a cable channel and one is a cartoon short. Similiar titles, NO CONNECTION whatsoever beyond that.
  • It's an organization, not a channel ... an organization that would definitely have an interest in an episode of a show like this (provided the show were actually real).
• click here - logo, similiar font, not much else (copy and paste the link to see).
  • That was never the official logo, except for USA programming. This is the logo I remember growing up.
    • That's not even remotely close to the Commandos in the Classroom logo.
      • Okay, so it should have been a response to the "Where can I ..." question. Still, quibbling over the logo seems a bit misguided, considering that the first three parts of the Reasons to Accept are true. I would think that should be enough.

[ Back to STUFF index ]

[edit] Rest & Relaxation

From: Commandos in the Classroom
Posted on: 04:19, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Arguments for:

• Explains what R&R is (part of this item was originally in Explanations).
• The phrase is certainly in both toons, which are both about Cheat Commandos.
• There is precedent for when a toon uses similar phrasing like this. See 50K Starrunner.

Arguments against:

• This isn't an inside joke, just a phrase used more than once.
• "R&R" is a common phrase that did not originate with Homestar Runner cartoons at all.

Additional comments:

• Whoever said it was an inside joke?
• The comparison to 50K Starrunner is not valid; it's not a common phrase to say "left, right, left, right, right" or somesuch, but R&R predates any connection to Homestar Runner by a longshot.
• Than how about:
• The R&R line IS an inside joke, whether people recognize it or not (c'mon, it's used in two CC cartoons and it's phrased nearly the same both times). It's as much a catchphrase as every mention of "our playsets and toys". That still doesn't mean we need a fact explaining what R&R means.
  • Such a comment is akin to claiming that, if H*R cartoons used the term "RSVP" in two different contexts, it's an inside joke.
    • It's not two different contexts. The line is near identical and used in Cheat Commando cartoons. As for "left, right", anyone ever hear of military marches? Or the dumb blonde joke where a girl is listening to a tape saying "breath in, breath out"? The joke in Trogdor Con was that Homestar is dumb (he isn't even walking like the 50K guy). I find it amazing that people can find a connection between those two quotes, but not with what is obviously meant to be a CC catch phrase of sorts.

Proposed revision:

Arguments for:

• No Strong Bad stuff.
• That sounds better.
  • The focus on the comment "R&R" should be just on its meaning, rather than trying to make it a "common" phrase.
• Not everyone knows what R&R means,
• People might know roughly what it means, but not what it stands for.
• Not everyone knows what it means. I mean, For example if walked up to someone not very good with english and say "R&R" they probbly wont know what your talking about. But with say, Oreo Cheesecake, they can assume it means Cheesecake with Oreos

Arguments against:

• From HRWiki:Standards: "[Explanations] should not explain anything even remotely obvious."
• As with Poached Eggs and Facts, this is a Wiki, not a dictionary. If anyone didn't know what R&R meant, they could just look it up on the internet.

Additional comments:

• What is obvious to one person might be obscure to the next. Is "R&R" known the world over?
• Word, I second that.
• Poached Eggs and Facts may be about a single word, but this is slang, not common knowledge.

[ Back to STUFF index ]