Forum:The In-joke From Way Out!
Nice marmot. I'd let you have a seat on the rug, but some chinaman peed on it. There is no dark side of the moon, really — matter of fact, it's all dark. Or I'm just piss drunk again and I've blacked out. Could be either really. You never know with me. Do I know what rhetorical means? Stinky britches.
Anyway, just wondering how people feel about in-jokes. Are some OK, but you can have too much of a good thing, like Jägerbombs and unprotected sex? Or are they never acceptable, like Hot Dog (or Sausage Buttie) Eating Competitions, which are just gluttonous and stupid? And this ain't no gripe neither ... I'm just wondering.
In conclusion, that is why Jesus was often referred to as the King of Kings... Queens. The King of Queens. -- Imrealized 00:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'll start :) — I like in-jokes, to a degree. I think when someone understands a joke that is catered to a particular spectrum of knowledge it makes them feel that they're a part of an exclusive club, like Mensa or Sam's Club. One of the first things I did when I got here was rounded up all the in-jokes I could find (Kitten Huffing, Euroipods, that funny black man with the mohawk and the questionable vocabulary who pities things) and made them all dinner. Then I drugged them. I'm keeping them all in my attic now, for safe keeping or something. That's how much I like in-jokes. -- Imrealized 13:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, I'm just offering my 2 cents cause I feel pity as I watch you converse with yourself. I like in-jokes when I get them, but when don't, it makes me feel stupid, as shown by this diagram:
| When I Get Em | When I Don't |
|---|---|
| Feel Good | Feel Stupid |
Do you see now? As a matter of fact, I still don't get what the big deal is with furries. --Señor DiZtheGreat 
CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 14:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I thank you for your pity, your time, and the handy in-joke chart. To thank you, I will steal your chart and make an in-joke out of it:
| Aestheticism | Fancy-Sounding Abacus |
|---|---|
| Ja. | Ja, auch. |
- See that? -- Magister Lugi 15:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- No, I don't speak ze Germaan, ja!!!! Assuming it is German. Jägerbombs!! The Taahgaarxians WILL eat you! See that, how easy it is to start an In-Joke? Döda Kommunisterna!!! DOWN WITH THE OPPRESSION!! --Señor DiZtheGreat
CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 15:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds like more material for Worst 100 Uncyclopedia In-Jokes of All Time... there can't be a single person on the whole of Uncyclopedia that can say they understand everything on that list. In conclusion, in-jokes are only funny if you get them, and like all humour, they are highly subject to whether the individual likes them. Personally, I try to keep away from them, because they are often too exclusive. --Hindleyite | PL | GUN | WOTM | Image Review - Use it | Converse 15:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Not exclusive, they're VIP...Like Imrealized said: "I think when someone understands a joke that is catered to a particular spectrum of knowledge it makes them feel that they're a part of an exclusive club". Like the cabal, or the Evil Atheist Conspiracy, two more in-jokes. Furthermore, fornicatewithagardenhose. --Señor DiZtheGreat CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 16:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Not exclusive, they're VIP...Like Imrealized said: "I think when someone understands a joke that is catered to a particular spectrum of knowledge it makes them feel that they're a part of an exclusive club". Like the cabal, or the Evil Atheist Conspiracy, two more in-jokes. Furthermore, fornicatewithagardenhose. --Señor DiZtheGreat
- Sounds like more material for Worst 100 Uncyclopedia In-Jokes of All Time... there can't be a single person on the whole of Uncyclopedia that can say they understand everything on that list. In conclusion, in-jokes are only funny if you get them, and like all humour, they are highly subject to whether the individual likes them. Personally, I try to keep away from them, because they are often too exclusive. --Hindleyite | PL | GUN | WOTM | Image Review - Use it | Converse 15:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- No, I don't speak ze Germaan, ja!!!! Assuming it is German. Jägerbombs!! The Taahgaarxians WILL eat you! See that, how easy it is to start an In-Joke? Döda Kommunisterna!!! DOWN WITH THE OPPRESSION!! --Señor DiZtheGreat
- I can only speak for myself, but what I often try to do is refer to an inside joke in such a way as to both exploit it and explain it at the same time. Furries are a good example - I almost never refer to them as "furries," but as something like "sexual deviants wearing full-body animal suits," and since the link is to Furries, it seems to kill two birds with one stone gag-wise. To put it more generally, I'd say the challenge with inside jokes is to make the humor work on both levels - in other words, use the inside joke, but in such a way as to be funny even if the reader doesn't get it, and also in such a way that the meaning completely changes when the reader does get it. Since it's difficult to do that, I don't usually try. Of course, I haven't been writing a lot of articles lately, either, but the last two I did write are actually fairly good examples of what I'm referring to. c • > • cunwapquc? 16:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I like to stick to the top crème de la crème (is that spelt right?, I don't speak French) of the in-jokes that everyone gets (ie. Oscar Wilde, kitten huffing, grues). When I do use a more exclusive one, I too provide a link. Links are our friends. I also prefer to use jokes that are somewhat relevant (i.e. nothing to do with) the article itself. --Señor DiZtheGreat CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 16:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I think that if more than three people at any given moment understand a joke, it's not exclusive enough. Then again, I thrive on obscurity. Or was that pornography? -- Imrealized 16:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I like to stick to the top crème de la crème (is that spelt right?, I don't speak French) of the in-jokes that everyone gets (ie. Oscar Wilde, kitten huffing, grues). When I do use a more exclusive one, I too provide a link. Links are our friends. I also prefer to use jokes that are somewhat relevant (i.e. nothing to do with) the article itself. --Señor DiZtheGreat
- I can only speak for myself, but what I often try to do is refer to an inside joke in such a way as to both exploit it and explain it at the same time. Furries are a good example - I almost never refer to them as "furries," but as something like "sexual deviants wearing full-body animal suits," and since the link is to Furries, it seems to kill two birds with one stone gag-wise. To put it more generally, I'd say the challenge with inside jokes is to make the humor work on both levels - in other words, use the inside joke, but in such a way as to be funny even if the reader doesn't get it, and also in such a way that the meaning completely changes when the reader does get it. Since it's difficult to do that, I don't usually try. Of course, I haven't been writing a lot of articles lately, either, but the last two I did write are actually fairly good examples of what I'm referring to. c • > • cunwapquc? 16:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
| Obscurity | Pornography |
|---|---|
| Jokes about G.I. Gurdjieff (Go Gurd!) | Gauguin, anything by Sappho |
Oops, another chart. -- Imrealized 16:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
| Obscure | Pornographic |
|---|---|
| Taahgaarxians, Eurgs, Snakes on a Plane | Left Behind:The Rapturing |
There you go...--Señor DiZtheGreat CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 17:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I find in-jokes funny, in fact I made Euroipens. Marshal Uncyclopedian! Talk to me! 17:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
The tour de force of in-jokes is Neuroipods. It's funny as a standalone, it's funny as an injoke, it's funny as a commentary on the injoke, and all in one relatively short article. That is to say, ideally an injoke should be amusing to people who don't get it and additionally amusing to people who do get it. Working on several levels at once is always good - David Gerard 00:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC):
- I agree with ya on the levels thing, but unfortunately it seems that my level system is slightly skewed, or just flatout broken. Or I just like writing for myself and five others. I think the chart will illustrate this better:
| Skewed | Skewered |
|---|---|
| Three dimensional, nonintersecting, unparallel lines | Dinner guests of Vlad's, Fish Balls, your Queen and Bishop |
What did we learn from this? When in Southeast Asia, ask for Fish Balls by name.-- Imrealized 14:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)