Talk:Hremails
From Homestar Runner Wiki
| Hremails is a featured article, which means it showcases an important part of the Homestar Runner body of work and/or highlights the fine work of this wiki. We also might just think it's cool. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute. |
[edit] Auto-Reply
The page says the auto replies only happened before December 2008, but I sent one today (you never know) and can confirm I got one. Date: 7/23/2023. — Paharwell (Phil from AL)
[edit] Cleanup
Does anyone know how to make an email address be clickable in the article? I think this page is very organized because someone greatly improved my work. — MichaelXX2 
- Check the external links down at the bottom there. --DorianGray 20:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks! — MichaelXX2
- Okay, thanks! — MichaelXX2
[edit] Transcripts
Does anyone object to me moving the transcripts from email thunder to this page? 
BBG 21:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Article title
I think we should move this article to Homestar Runner Email, to make the article title match up with Strong Bad Email. "Hremail" is just short for "Homestar Runner Email" anyway, like how "sbemail" is short for "Strong Bad Email". Homestar-Winner (talk) 20:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's never actually referred to as "Homestar Runner Email", though. "HREmail" is consistently used throughout. However, I do see your point, and would not be opposed to it, should it happen. --DorianGray 21:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Done and done. — MichaelXX2 21:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- There was no consensus to move.
OptimisticFool 21:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I vote for move, and since there seems to be no evident resistance against moving... --Sysrq868 21:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Take it easy, fellas. This discussion has only been open for about an hour; give folks some time to weigh in. I myself am with DorianGray. OptimisticFool 22:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Aaaaand a consensus has not been made. — MichaelXX2 21:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- "HREmail" was what was said. "Homestar Runner Email" is what we infer that it means. No move. — Defender1031*Talk 21:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- But we have Strong Bad Email and we don't have the article named Sbemail now do we? What if we moved Strong Bad Email to Sbemail and let everyone infer that it's Strong Bad Emails, like you said we should do for this article?! We need to have the proper name for articles, not the abbreviation. Imagine what would happen if we did HR, SB, CZ, PP, ect. It's total madness! I vote move. — MichaelXX2 21:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- The difference is, they're CALLED "strong bad emaiuls" and just shortened to "sbemails". here, they're already called "hremails". — Defender1031*Talk 21:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- We still shouldn't have the abbreviation. — MichaelXX2 21:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- It was only called "HREmails" meaning that it's not an abbreviation. It's its name, until and unless we're shown otherwise. — Defender1031*Talk 21:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- We know that the proper word is Homestar Runner Emails. It makes no sense for us to have only an abbreviation when we KNOW what it is, regardless of what the characters call it or not. — MichaelXX2 21:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- We know that the proper word is Homestar Runner Emails. It makes no sense for us to have only an abbreviation when we KNOW what it is, regardless of what the characters call it or not. — MichaelXX2
- It was only called "HREmails" meaning that it's not an abbreviation. It's its name, until and unless we're shown otherwise. — Defender1031*Talk 21:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- We still shouldn't have the abbreviation. — MichaelXX2
- The difference is, they're CALLED "strong bad emaiuls" and just shortened to "sbemails". here, they're already called "hremails". — Defender1031*Talk 21:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- But we have Strong Bad Email and we don't have the article named Sbemail now do we? What if we moved Strong Bad Email to Sbemail and let everyone infer that it's Strong Bad Emails, like you said we should do for this article?! We need to have the proper name for articles, not the abbreviation. Imagine what would happen if we did HR, SB, CZ, PP, ect. It's total madness! I vote move. — MichaelXX2
- "HREmail" was what was said. "Homestar Runner Email" is what we infer that it means. No move. — Defender1031*Talk 21:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Aaaaand a consensus has not been made. — MichaelXX2
- Take it easy, fellas. This discussion has only been open for about an hour; give folks some time to weigh in. I myself am with DorianGray.
- I vote for move, and since there seems to be no evident resistance against moving... --Sysrq868 21:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- There was no consensus to move.
- Done and done. — MichaelXX2
We report things as they are, not as we "know" them to be. — Defender1031*Talk 21:42, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Fine. Let's keep it the bad way. It should at least be moved to Hremail without the s. Like Strong Bad Email. — MichaelXX2 21:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Wait, not yet. Remember, Homestar calls it "Hremails" referring to his email show and calls Strong Bad's email show "Sbemails" right afterwards. Sounds to me like Homestar just felt like abbreviating. If he had called his email show "Hremails" and then called Strong Bad's email show "Strong Bad Email" right after then that would prove that "Hremails" is the actual name. But Homestar calling it "Sbemails" proves that he was just shortening each of the names, right? Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
- I couldn't agree more. — MichaelXX2 01:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
- A consensus still hasn't been reached. — MichaelXX2 16:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- A consensus still hasn't been reached. — MichaelXX2
- I couldn't agree more. — MichaelXX2
- Wait, not yet. Remember, Homestar calls it "Hremails" referring to his email show and calls Strong Bad's email show "Sbemails" right afterwards. Sounds to me like Homestar just felt like abbreviating. If he had called his email show "Hremails" and then called Strong Bad's email show "Strong Bad Email" right after then that would prove that "Hremails" is the actual name. But Homestar calling it "Sbemails" proves that he was just shortening each of the names, right? Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
c'mon, guys! I even think it should be moved to Homestar Runner Email considering what homestarwinner said. i think it's a g-e-w-d GEWD idea. 74.193.237.18 18:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- The name "Homestar Runner Email" is, as of now, unofficial. Our article Strong Bad Email is named as such because of the site listed toon category. "Hremails" is the only way they've ever been reffered to as, therefore, the official name, until noted otherwise by TBC themselves, is "Hremails". That Game Dude 386
02:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- Why not just call the article "Hremail (Homestar Runner Email)" until the "official" name is announced? fuchsiania 04:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
- The point is, before Homestar said "Hremails," he said that Strong Bad had "Sbemails." Both of them are short, meaning that Homestar abbreviated both of them for time sake.
- Why not just call the article "Hremail (Homestar Runner Email)" until the "official" name is announced? fuchsiania 04:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
- The name "Homestar Runner Email" is, as of now, unofficial. Our article Strong Bad Email is named as such because of the site listed toon category. "Hremails" is the only way they've ever been reffered to as, therefore, the official name, until noted otherwise by TBC themselves, is "Hremails". That Game Dude 386
move to homestar runner email? michaelXX2 told me this on irc, and i agreed, and since he's blocked, i'll post it. i just think we should. need i say more?? 
Homsarstrongbad150
02:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it would help if you said more, because hearing an opinion is easier to base a page move on than just "Michael said something, I agreed...there ya' go". From what I hear, the "show" hasn't been referred to as "Homestar Runner Email"...only as "Hremails". So I think it makes sense to keep the article under this name. DevonM(talk·cont-ribs) 03:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Like I said, Homestar abbreviated "Sbemails." If he abbreviated "Sbemails," what makes you think he didn't abbreviate "Hremails?"
- Yes, but the correct title for "sbemail(s)" is/are "Strong Bad Email(s)", whereas for "hremails", there is no official title as far as we know (and we might never know). DevonM(talk·cont-ribs) 03:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- What in the world makes you think that Homestar didn't mean the same freakin' CONCEPT ABOUT HIS ABBREVIATION?! WHAT MAKES HIS DIFFERENT?!
- Yes, but the correct title for "sbemail(s)" is/are "Strong Bad Email(s)", whereas for "hremails", there is no official title as far as we know (and we might never know). DevonM(talk·cont-ribs) 03:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Like I said, Homestar abbreviated "Sbemails." If he abbreviated "Sbemails," what makes you think he didn't abbreviate "Hremails?"
- I'd like to chime in with a "who cares?". Seriously, this is among the more useless discussions I have ever encountered on a wiki. I hope you are proud of yourselves. That said, there are two main ideologies at stake here: should we go with the standard we are already using (Strong Bad Email --> Homestar Runner Email), or should we go by the name the characters use in the cartoon? I'm personally more enamored of the former, but quite frankly, it just doesn't matter. One will always redirect to the other. --Blu Aardvark (talk) (edits) 04:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Move then.
- I deliberately outdented my response, as I wasn't replying to any particular poster, but to my opinion on the dispute in its entirety. I don't oppose a move, nor do I oppose keeping it where it's at. What I do oppose is mindless bickering over an issue that, quite frankly, is entirely 100% meaningless. --Blu Aardvark (talk) (edits) 05:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- It's far from meaningless. The article has to be called something, and this page is where we decide what that should be. Regardless of whether you think some people are bickering, the issue raised is a legitimate one, and it deserves a hearing. Posting without giving an opinion just takes up space. I think we should stick with hremails as long as it's a one-off joke, since that's what it was called in the email. If they ever make real Homestar Runner Emails, then that might be another matter. — It's dot com 06:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I guess the new Hremail takes care of this discussion. I no longer feel angry that people went with the other name! Homestar-Winner (talk) 21:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's far from meaningless. The article has to be called something, and this page is where we decide what that should be. Regardless of whether you think some people are bickering, the issue raised is a legitimate one, and it deserves a hearing. Posting without giving an opinion just takes up space. I think we should stick with hremails as long as it's a one-off joke, since that's what it was called in the email. If they ever make real Homestar Runner Emails, then that might be another matter. — It's dot com 06:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I deliberately outdented my response, as I wasn't replying to any particular poster, but to my opinion on the dispute in its entirety. I don't oppose a move, nor do I oppose keeping it where it's at. What I do oppose is mindless bickering over an issue that, quite frankly, is entirely 100% meaningless. --Blu Aardvark (talk) (edits) 05:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Move then.
But now we have the issue as to whether or not the article title is pluralized or not. I believe that if Strong Bad Email is not pluralized, this shouldn't be either. But that reason is similar to my reason why I thought it should be moved to "Homestar Runner Email", and that idea of mind wasn't accepted. Homestar-Winner (talk) 01:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, my Hremails are dead. This almost never happens! (Translation: Since Hremails have been killed off in the 201st Strong Bad Email, hereafter known as "The Un-Hremail", we may never know. It is possible that Hremails will be forgotten know, or maybe not. Either way, we may never get an official name at this point. The name is fine when, and if Hremails come back. Yes, I know this is old. Just beating the dead horse. --Jellote wuz here 19:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC))
[edit] Sbemail 49 and Hremail 49
In Sbemail 49 Strong Bad talked about a theme party, and in Hremail 49 Homestar was having a pillow fight... am I the only one who notices that the latter might be referencing the former (sort of)?
- Uh...no. You have to go through a few steps to be able to correctly associate the two, and we don't play "Kevin Bacon" here (except in some situations, I'm sure). DevonM(talk·cont-ribs) 07:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- If you want to go those stretches, then Hremail 24, which was "banned for content" could be a reference to Sbemail 24, which contained quite a few people giving a pretty racy hand gesture... as for Hremail 62, I'm not sure how having an interview with Homsar could tie-in to it. —Guard Duck talk 07:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Really Continued?
Does anyone think this whole "hremails" thing is really going to start? And if so, do you think this could be a way TBC are trying to increace Homestar Runner's popularity after it has waned for the past few years? - Opus the Penguin 16:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- Um...no?
- Let's take this discussion to the forum. Heimstern Läufer
01:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Let's take this discussion to the forum. Heimstern Läufer
[edit] Um....
Am I the only one who thinks it's kinda weird that TBC started with hremails 24, 49 and 62? Stark Traurig
- I fail to see a pattern. — Defender1031*Talk 22:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- The average of all the numbers are three. Other than that no. Though I am starting to think... --69.150.85.66 22:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- The Hexidecimal value of the sum of all three are 87! Too bad it's a stretch.--69.150.85.66 23:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- But if you subtract 49 from 62, and then subtract 24 from that, you get -11, an obvious reference to their $11.01 running gag!!! Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I think i has the solution! Width times height. — Defender1031*Talk 01:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure Stark Traurig meant that there was a pattern; I read her question as simply noting that it was odd to start 24, 49, 62 instead of 1, 2, 3 like one normally would. Heimstern Läufer 02:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, well I find that just as a cover-up for the "intermix" between some emails. Getting it to start off at one? That just makes it a little awkward, in my opinion. --69.150.85.66 03:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure Stark Traurig meant that there was a pattern; I read her question as simply noting that it was odd to start 24, 49, 62 instead of 1, 2, 3 like one normally would. Heimstern Läufer
- I think i has the solution! Width times height. — Defender1031*Talk 01:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- But if you subtract 49 from 62, and then subtract 24 from that, you get -11, an obvious reference to their $11.01 running gag!!! Homestar-Winner (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- The Hexidecimal value of the sum of all three are 87! Too bad it's a stretch.--69.150.85.66 23:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- The average of all the numbers are three. Other than that no. Though I am starting to think... --69.150.85.66 22:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Name change: Hremails-Hremail
I think we need to have this match up with Strong Bad Email as much as possible. We need to have it singular. — MichaelXX2 22:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me.
BBG 22:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Why not "Homestar runner email?"--Mariofan1000 18:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- See this post. Personally, I like the rename to "Hremail." —Guard Duck talk 18:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, we agreed that the show itself is called "Hremail" and that we don't need to change it to Homestar Runner Email, even though I think it should be. If the consensus was that we keep it as Hremails, why not have it singular like Strong Bad Email at the very least?!^$@(*&@!*%&@%starstar — MichaelXX2 02:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I also agree too. Omnisweater 02:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure. Specifically, I'm not sure these things should be thought of as a unit ("Hremail is...") as opposed to individual members of a group ("Hremails are..."). The two quotes from the source that best support this are from the email Easter egg ("Just sit tight and hremails will be back to normal before you know it") and the Strong Sad Easter egg ("Is the reign of Hremails at hand?"). — It's dot com 05:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with dot com. — Defender1031*Talk 19:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah well, It think it should just Be Homestar Runner Email and typing in hremail could be a redirect just like sbemail.-
Record307 Talk/Contribs 19:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- So, Dot com, you want to change Strong Bad Email to Strong Bad Emails because of thinking of them as a unit? Okay, let's rename Strong Bad Email to Strong Bad Emails! Because that seems to be the point you're making. — MichaelXX2 21:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I personally think Strong Bad Emails would sound better. But since it isn't, wouldn't keeping this article as Hremail be better for consistency? Homestar-Winner (talk) 22:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Dot com and Deffy. Hremails is the most fitting title. Hremails are not (yet) an institution like sbemails. There is no need for consistency between two articles that describe something rather different. Loafing
05:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- To clarify, I said nothing about Strong Bad Email. I realize that it might seem inconsistent, but, try as I might, I just don't think of Hremail in the collective sense that I do Strong Bad Email, so Hremails still seems the better fit. That may change, but so far it hasn't. — It's dot com 06:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- AH! But you are forgetting one thing. What do we have at the top of Hremail 62? "Hremail #62". Not "Hremails #62". We also have "Strong Bad Email #Whatever". Hence, Hremail should be the proper name, not Hremails. SBE-mail Checker Dan 03:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- well, would you expect them to have a title like "Hremails #62"? 62 is only one hremail, therefore it would always be in the singular. "Strong Bad Email" makes it sound more like a primary feature of the website, which is a level that "Homestar Runner Email" just doesn't live up to.
The Knights Who Say Ni 
05:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, hremails became a weekly feature... for two weeks in a row. Besides, SB_email isn't a primary feature anymore, so will it eventually be moved to Sbemails? SBE-mail Checker Dan 22:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- well, would you expect them to have a title like "Hremails #62"? 62 is only one hremail, therefore it would always be in the singular. "Strong Bad Email" makes it sound more like a primary feature of the website, which is a level that "Homestar Runner Email" just doesn't live up to.
- AH! But you are forgetting one thing. What do we have at the top of Hremail 62? "Hremail #62". Not "Hremails #62". We also have "Strong Bad Email #Whatever". Hence, Hremail should be the proper name, not Hremails. SBE-mail Checker Dan 03:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
- To clarify, I said nothing about Strong Bad Email. I realize that it might seem inconsistent, but, try as I might, I just don't think of Hremail in the collective sense that I do Strong Bad Email, so Hremails still seems the better fit. That may change, but so far it hasn't. — It's dot com 06:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Dot com and Deffy. Hremails is the most fitting title. Hremails are not (yet) an institution like sbemails. There is no need for consistency between two articles that describe something rather different. Loafing
- I personally think Strong Bad Emails would sound better. But since it isn't, wouldn't keeping this article as Hremail be better for consistency? Homestar-Winner (talk) 22:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- So, Dot com, you want to change Strong Bad Email to Strong Bad Emails because of thinking of them as a unit? Okay, let's rename Strong Bad Email to Strong Bad Emails! Because that seems to be the point you're making. — MichaelXX2
- Yeah well, It think it should just Be Homestar Runner Email and typing in hremail could be a redirect just like sbemail.-
- I agree with dot com. — Defender1031*Talk 19:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure. Specifically, I'm not sure these things should be thought of as a unit ("Hremail is...") as opposed to individual members of a group ("Hremails are..."). The two quotes from the source that best support this are from the email Easter egg ("Just sit tight and hremails will be back to normal before you know it") and the Strong Sad Easter egg ("Is the reign of Hremails at hand?"). — It's dot com 05:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I also agree too. Omnisweater 02:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, we agreed that the show itself is called "Hremail" and that we don't need to change it to Homestar Runner Email, even though I think it should be. If the consensus was that we keep it as Hremails, why not have it singular like Strong Bad Email at the very least?!^$@(*&@!*%&@%starstar — MichaelXX2
- See this post. Personally, I like the rename to "Hremail." —Guard Duck talk 18:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Why not "Homestar runner email?"--Mariofan1000 18:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Counting
Apparently, Homestar has no way of counting correctly, because in one week, he went from hremail 62 to hremail 2000. That's a difference of 1938! Should we mention anything about that on the article?--Crudely Drawn Cupcake 02:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- The implication is that we're not seeing all of the Hremails; after all, it started on 62, did it not? (well, okay, there are those two semi-Hremails.) --Jay (Gobble) 02:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. These are just snippets of the apparently extremely long-time running Hremail show. They're in no chronological order. —Guard Duck talk 02:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Or that's just how Homestar counts. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 05:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Or perhaps that Hremail 2000 isn't really the 2000th Hremail, just a way of it's advancement into a "regular" cartoon. For example, if I saw an extremely awesome cheese, i'd call it Cheese 3000. -User:FalconPuncher
- Or that's just how Homestar counts. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 05:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. These are just snippets of the apparently extremely long-time running Hremail show. They're in no chronological order. —Guard Duck talk 02:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Hremail 24 & 49
Should there be a seperate article explaining the Hremails mentioned in the headline (24 and 49)? We move the transcripts out, put Fun Facts from the Sbemail and transcripts in. Not seperate, (Hremail 24 and Hremail 49) but these two in one article. Meaty85203 21:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Image
Regarding this edit, I think we need to keep the image, until we get a blockquote something. I think it looks cute.
- I think Hremails 24, 49, and Email Thunder need a Happy background. BBG 23:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think an image is very unnecessary. — Defender1031*Talk 23:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hold the phone. I can make a Hremail blockquote, but I'm using an iphone now. I'll try as soon as I get home. SO DONT MAKE ONE — MichaelXX2 00:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hold the phone. I can make a Hremail blockquote, but I'm using an iphone now. I'll try as soon as I get home. SO DONT MAKE ONE — MichaelXX2
- I think an image is very unnecessary. — Defender1031*Talk 23:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Email Response
The "oh dango..." response only happened one time of which we are aware (i.e. with mr_josh). So we don't know for sure whether this is the response for ALL chosen hremails, which of course there are only two of anyway. Also, do we know what Strong Bad's response was to his chosen emails? And if so, why isn't that on the Strong Bad Email page? If for some good reason, Strong Bad's response is not on the Strong Bad Email wiki page, then for that same good reason, Homestar's response should not be on the Hremail wiki page.
[edit] Soup, Not Subtitles
Do the (full length) HRemails subtitle language names appear double for everyone or is it just me? And somehow this page has the subtitles box for HRemail 49.
Here is a pic to see what I mean:
(It's from the Hremail 2000 page)
- Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. --DorianGray 19:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Hremails list
So rather than reverting again, i'm taking this to talk. The list of hremails as it is looks terrible IMO, and i think it looked far better in table form as it was in this revision. The reason the strong bad email page is done the way it is, is because that's how it looks on the website, and that one actually looks good, as opposed to this one which just has this ugly white block. Thoughts? — Defender1031*Talk 22:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed on all counts. --phlip TC 22:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree as well. Not much else I can say... DeFender's way looks better. -YK
22:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- To be fair, it's not MY way... i just advocate it. Omnisweater is the one who initially changed it. — Defender1031*Talk 22:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I prefer Omnisweater's way, which Defender and the rest are also supporting; I just don't think "I say version B looks prettier" is a legit enough reason. Now, I don't think there's any need for this article to have a block quote since Hremails is a much, much, much more minor feature than Strong Bad Email. (It doesn't even have a button!) I hope that reason's legit. BBG 22:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- In response to this summary, I don't recall ever saying, "I say version A looks prettier", did I? BBG 23:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't have a problem with the table, but I would like to state that the style similar to the Strong Bad Email list did not look terrible. — It's dot com 14:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- In response to this summary, I don't recall ever saying, "I say version A looks prettier", did I?
- Well, I prefer Omnisweater's way, which Defender and the rest are also supporting; I just don't think "I say version B looks prettier" is a legit enough reason. Now, I don't think there's any need for this article to have a block quote since Hremails is a much, much, much more minor feature than Strong Bad Email. (It doesn't even have a button!) I hope that reason's legit.
- To be fair, it's not MY way... i just advocate it. Omnisweater is the one who initially changed it. — Defender1031*Talk 22:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree as well. Not much else I can say... DeFender's way looks better. -YK
[edit] Chronically chronological
Should we list the Hremails in their actual order, or the hypothetical order they came out in (which would put Hremail 7 first)? I suppose it's more correct, but it was weird looking at the tables here going "62, 2000, 7". --Jay (Gobble) 21:12, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I say order in which they came out... the tables are already weird being that they skip numbers like crazy etc. — Defender1031*Talk 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I say number order, (7, 24, 49, 62, 2000) since if in order when they came out, that'd make 49 before 24. --User:FalconPuncher/sig 18:31, 4 May 2009
- No it wouldn't, they were out the same day. And it wouldn't matter if it was, we always list things chronologically, and i see no reason to stop now just because of homestar's funky numbering scheme. Think of it like this, do we list all the old-timey toons before the regular type? — Defender1031*Talk 23:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- Eh, ok, i guess you're right User:FalconPuncher
- No, we don't always list things chronologically. On Strong Bad Emails, where is sbemail_22 listed? --Jay (Gobble) 00:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- That's a very good point. BBG 00:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ooh... well, there goes my argument... i guess i'm neutral again. — Defender1031*Talk 00:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- That's a very good point.
- No, we don't always list things chronologically. On Strong Bad Emails, where is sbemail_22 listed? --Jay (Gobble) 00:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Eh, ok, i guess you're right User:FalconPuncher
- No it wouldn't, they were out the same day. And it wouldn't matter if it was, we always list things chronologically, and i see no reason to stop now just because of homestar's funky numbering scheme. Think of it like this, do we list all the old-timey toons before the regular type? — Defender1031*Talk 23:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I say number order, (7, 24, 49, 62, 2000) since if in order when they came out, that'd make 49 before 24. --User:FalconPuncher/sig 18:31, 4 May 2009
[edit] It Starts With C and Rhymes With...Bontext...
During which part of "8-Bit is Enough" does Homestar mention Hremails? Searching "Hremail" didn't really help. BBG 16:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's a random hint given by Homestar around the time you need to visit Stinkoman, if you have hints turned on. --Jay (Gobble) 16:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- See here. --Jay (Gobble) 16:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Sent
I tryed somewere around 156 times to email Homestar. all that came up was some guy from Gmail saying "there is no email address by that name" Now I am really POed. Help? User:Origonalname
[edit] Hremail 3184 Screenshot - Bashing or Boredom?
I recently added Hremail 3184 to the list, and the picture I chose got replaced with a better one (of the garden-weasel bashing) from the Hremail segment. Since then, another image - one of Homestar looking bored - has been added to the top of the hremail3184 wiki page. I thought of replacing the garden-weasel image with that one, but I decided to ask you guys. Which would be better? BiggerJ 03:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- The garden weasel beating one is probably better. I only put the bored one on that page because it previously has a spoiler picture of the desk after the explosion. — Defender1031*Talk 03:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Hremails going extinct
Seeing how Hremails only appear on the New Stuff menu, and were until recenlty a feature, does that mean that once enough toons and such are made they will dissapear from the site (not counting finding them via urls or wiki pages)? I mean, how is anyone supposed to know about them after they are gone? Unless they work for/know of the wiki, Hremails are gonna be toast. Is that gonna happen? --Jellote wuz here 19:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- Doubt it. Hremails were likely used as a filler while Stro Bro was in E-tirement. But I haven't seen anything put up and linked to on the website that was taken down, except for Marshmallow's Last Stand, A Jumping Jack Contest and Stinkoman 20X6 briefly. Besides, weren't Hremails mentioned in email thunder? Obviously anyone who sees that Sbemail will look for Hremails, right?
That'sBupkis! 20:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- We have toons from '07 on the New Stuff menu, so I think Hremails should be there at least until 2011, and by then, maybe more will have been made. SBE-mail Checker Dan 20:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Numbered Hremails
A section with the title "Numbered Hremails" was recently added to the page with the following text:
The numbers used for the hremails are very strange. Hremails have seemingly randomly picked numbers. However, the first sbemail was released on August 22nd, 2001, or when 2014 strikes, 644.4285714285714 weeks and 4511 days. If there were hremails every week, the hremails might have to be answered at the same time, as there's only 3184 hremails known, which might explain why the start of sbemail 201/hremail 3184, Homestar Runner is looks tired.
I'm not entirely sure what it's trying to say, so I removed it and put it here until we can decipher it and decide if the message is worthwhile or not. — Defender1031*Talk 20:33, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
- Pure speculation, but my thought on what he's saying:
The amount of time between the first sbemail on August 22nd, 2001, and January 1, 2014 is 644.429... weeks, or 4,511 days. Since the majority of hremails were produced during this time, and assuming that hremails would most likely be a weekly event and that the last known hremail (3184) is the latest, about five emails have to be answered at a time (which would likely be a new show per hremail). This might explain why at the start of sbemail 201/hremail 3184, Homestar Runner looks so tired.
I didn't check if the amount of weeks/days is correct, but running 13 * 365 on a calculator shows close enough. Although, if this is actually followed, it should only go to when hremail 3184 was posted, not to 2014. Atari 02:05, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. That seems wildly speculative. We can't assume that SBemails started at the same time as HRemails, we can't assume that the HRemails go in order, or that indeed, there are any more than the 6 we know about, and yes, calculating it to January 2014 is kinda silly. — Defender1031*Talk 02:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
