User talk:Multiliteralist/Rules of Good Humour

picked out the lines slowly...

"Churches of humour" is the main article

[06:25] <Multiliteralist> deviant vs standard

[06:26] <Multiliteralist> build them up into religions in it - and then have a religious war

rules on humour volume 1: emulation

This might be a good idea for this subpage

The rest of the chat

[06:26] <Multiliteralist> it can also grow afterwards since there will be spokesmen on both sides

[06:27] <Multiliteralist> they can go commenting on stuff on UnNews

[06:27] <Multiliteralist> based on how the news has been written

[06:27] <Multiliteralist> it's an easy platform to work on

[06:28] <Multiliteralist> so if you see some nonsense news piece you can then write another to complain about it - and link it to the Churches article

[06:37] <Multiliteralist> I know how to make the article appealing [06:37] <Multiliteralist> with headers [06:37] <Multiliteralist> =On cocks= [06:37] <Multiliteralist> and so forth

[06:38] <Multiliteralist> I would like to write the boring explanation to someone else's bollocks [06:38] <Multiliteralist> or [06:38] <Multiliteralist> if you want to pick apart one of my nonsenses [06:38] <Multiliteralist> or both [06:38] <Multiliteralist> rather both [06:38] <Multiliteralist> gives it scope [06:39] <Multiliteralist> now all the nonsense is mine which kinda shows [06:39] <Multiliteralist> anyway the construction is so: [06:39] <Fag|> so are some of the examples in the article parts of original works, or is it all written by one of you two? [06:40] <Multiliteralist> all ours [06:40] <Fag|> ah right [06:40] <Multiliteralist> the construction would be this: [06:40] <Multiliteralist> quotes all nonsense, explanations poker face, headers LOL COCKS-type [06:41] <Multiliteralist> images might be... hm what's good [06:41] <Multiliteralist> anything really [06:41] <Multiliteralist> I can draw some or whatever [06:41] <Fag|> maybe pictures from unrelated plays or forged novels to illustrate the extracts [06:42] <Multiliteralist> how about biblical all, to give it solemnity? [06:42] <Fag|> oh that's a good idea [06:42] <Multiliteralist> no gay jesuses or stuff but actual biblical paintings [06:42] <Fag|> yeah

[06:45] <Fag|> also : [1] [06:45] <Fag|> i think that one would work quite well somewhere [06:46] <Multiliteralist> yeah - "Friends of correct humour being persecuted by some heartless nonsense propagators"

[06:46] <Multiliteralist> we'll do it this way [06:47] <Multiliteralist> paint the nonsense people as tyrants who want to clamp down on those who follow the right path [06:47] <Multiliteralist> persecuting all along the way [06:47] <Multiliteralist> crucifixions, killing of male infants [06:47] <Multiliteralist> so then [06:48] <Multiliteralist> this article "rules of correct humour" - [06:48] <Multiliteralist> will be a prequel to the churches article [06:48] <Multiliteralist> in a disjointed way but nevertheless [06:48] <Fag|> [2] oh oh [06:49] <Multiliteralist> we'll get a biblical feel to the struggles of the Correct Humourist against the slavering threat of the Spawn of Hades itself, the DIVERGENTS. [06:50] <Multiliteralist> yeah [06:50] <Multiliteralist> great [06:50] <Fag|> haha i'm imagining an Inferno-style set of circles for the worst offenders

[06:52] <Multiliteralist> I have a proposal of proportion [06:52] <Multiliteralist> I paint so - [06:53] <Multiliteralist> let's figure a series of paintings which can also represent something else. Let's say 3-4 [06:53] <Multiliteralist> then [06:53] <Multiliteralist> we'll take this whole thing as a long project [06:53] <Multiliteralist> I mean - something that drops in the lap of Uncyc without warning [06:53] <Multiliteralist> some time during 2010 [06:54] <Fag|> haha yeah that could be a good idea [06:54] <Multiliteralist> I will paint those paintings with the idea of being able to sell them otherwise - so they must be a bit wide [06:54] <Multiliteralist> but some that can be explained as the struggle of divergent versus standard [06:55] <Multiliteralist> Colin is definitely a good writer in need of a good project to get him going, something worthwhile [06:55] <Multiliteralist> so I say keep him on [06:55] <Fag|> yeah [06:56] <Multiliteralist> and what else - we should write it quite long at first and then purge everything unnecessary [06:56] <Fag|> i'm definitely in need of a good project to get me going, though i can't say much for my writing skills :P [06:56] <Multiliteralist> maybe what we have now should be a sort of an aside, maybe references [06:56] <Fag|> hmm yeah [06:56] <Multiliteralist> nah you can write [06:56] <Multiliteralist> imagination is the main thing [06:56] <Multiliteralist> screw the rest [06:56] <Fag|> haha [06:57] <Multiliteralist> since you see [06:57] <Multiliteralist> now we have a perfect framework [06:57] <Multiliteralist> something that has never been done well [06:57] <Multiliteralist> explaining humour? BORING [06:57] <Multiliteralist> but if we explain it in this way we'll pull it off [06:58] <Multiliteralist> we gotta keep parts open so that it's not quite coherent [06:58] <Fag|> haha yes that is true [06:58] <Multiliteralist> let's keep the framework only as a starting point [06:58] <Fag|> yeah [06:58] <Multiliteralist> then it can trail off at places in some wicked way [06:58] <Fag|> :) [06:58] <Multiliteralist> and we'll need clever hints at one thing [06:59] <Multiliteralist> all those upholding the standards of good humour must have been housetrained far too young [07:00] <Multiliteralist> since that's what it boils down to: they have problems with their sexuality being unnecessarily strict, they're all repressing something [07:00] <Fag|> hahaha [07:01] <Multiliteralist> well it's a joke but there's enough truth in it [07:01] <Multiliteralist> it cannot be stupidity since a stupid person can laugh at anything [07:01] <Fag|> a big sign on the fridge: no pooping on the carpet, no sexual deviance, no slapstick

[07:04] <Multiliteralist> so, one rule only: let's keep it alive [07:04] <Multiliteralist> no unnecessary removing of stuff, not overworking except when funny

[07:07] <Multiliteralist> OK let's just plod on with it and decide afterwards. If you get ideas for paintings I'll start thinking about those [07:07] <Multiliteralist> and [07:07] <Multiliteralist> wait [07:08] <Fag|> ok [07:08] <Multiliteralist> http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Multiliteralist/Nonsense_dump add your nonsense here, it's easy to pick some from it then [07:09] <Multiliteralist> we'll get a collection of stuff we can sample while we go

[07:21] <Multiliteralist> "the rules..." - what if we made it into a subpage? [07:21] <Multiliteralist> I think that's the best idea [07:21] <Multiliteralist> so then [07:21] <Multiliteralist> first let's write that into what it turns into [07:21] <Multiliteralist> nonsense + deadpan bullshit + COCKS headers [07:22] <Multiliteralist> without rules [07:22] <Multiliteralist> then [07:22] <Multiliteralist> the main page of the article will be about the heroic fight between the churches [07:22] <Fag|> ok [07:23] <Multiliteralist> also now that there's the third article I showed you yesterday - [07:23] <Multiliteralist> let's add that to this Rules bit [07:23] <Multiliteralist> in fact there's enough material there then, we can rather start purging [07:23] <Multiliteralist> and ordering it [07:24] <Multiliteralist> all right - I'll do that later during today. What it needs now is [07:24] <Multiliteralist> some purging, some adding of material [07:24] <Multiliteralist> headers [07:24] <Multiliteralist> they don't need to be COCKS LOL type but [07:24] <Multiliteralist> yeah maybe not [07:25] <Multiliteralist> but what if they were of the type: "The truth about the humour in 'COCKS LOL'"? [07:25] <Fag|> ah yeah [07:26] <Multiliteralist> then we would have 3-level humour like this: [07:26] <Multiliteralist> the header is random humour "explaining" something ostensibly [07:27] <Multiliteralist> and what's under the header is out of whack with the header, introducing its own type of being out of joint as well [07:27] <Multiliteralist> is it 4 levels already? I don't know [07:27] <Multiliteralist> anyway just perfect for nitpickers to pick [07:27] <Fag|> haha yes [07:27] <Multiliteralist> oh yeah I have another idea you might want to keep in mind [07:28] <Fag|> lots of stuff to absorb haha [07:28] <Multiliteralist> let's pour all of our malice into this one as if it were The One Ring [07:28] <Fag|> hahaha :)

[07:31] <Multiliteralist> hey I got the killer idea now [07:32] <Multiliteralist> let's add another level by disguising the main article a bit [07:32] <Multiliteralist> let's use an euphemism for "humourist" [07:32] <Fag|> oh hmm [07:32] <Fag|> like what :P [07:32] <Multiliteralist> let's work that one out at some point before writing the main piece [07:32] <Multiliteralist> something like Mason, Carpenter, hmm [07:33] <Multiliteralist> OK I got it [07:33] <Multiliteralist> in the form of Cat Carpenter [07:33] <Multiliteralist> or Butterfly Mason [07:33] <Fag|> hmmm [07:33] <Multiliteralist> so we will have this: [07:33] <Multiliteralist> images and storyline ostensibly biblical [07:34] <Multiliteralist> about ostensibly nonsense something [07:34] <Multiliteralist> but written in deadpan [07:34] <Multiliteralist> while the whole thing will be about the stupid nitpicking round humour [07:34] <Fag|> :) [07:35] <Multiliteralist> so let's just write the whole thing like it started now - rules about good humour [07:35] <Multiliteralist> then in the end change it into something like Correct Butterfly Masonry [07:35] <Multiliteralist> hm no it won't work [07:36] <Multiliteralist> the "rules" article stays as it is [07:36] <Multiliteralist> but the main article will be ostensibly about something else [07:36] <Multiliteralist> then we reference the subpage in it

[07:43] <Multiliteralist> who else but a troll would come up with a really big car "crashing into their balls"?

[07:44] <Fag|> it would make me really angry if a really huge car manifested itself and crashed into my balls so i should argue with the guy who said it

[07:45] <Multiliteralist> yeah not to mention if you had someone with you and it crashed into both of your balls, and balls only [07:45] <Multiliteralist> totally missing other parts of your body [07:45] <Fag|> that would just devastate me and my friend [07:45] <Fag|> i have a strict set of beliefs that tell me that that should not happen [07:46] <Multiliteralist> what do you think should we break it apart like this in the article, towards the end? [07:46] <Multiliteralist> I mean [07:46] <Multiliteralist> the sentence is utterly the best I've read in a long time [07:46] <Multiliteralist> and so [07:46] <Fag|> haha perhaps [07:46] <Multiliteralist> or maybe somewhere in the middle? [07:47] <Multiliteralist> before the reader gets bored? [07:47] <Fag|> haha yes [07:47] <Multiliteralist> so after reading that I don't care if he's bored off his tits [07:47] <Multiliteralist> we can even bore him with the explanation [07:47] <Fag|> we have been taught not to believe in such ridiculous things, for someone to attempt to enumerate such a preposterous situation simply flies in the face of common sense [07:47] <Multiliteralist> and he can then pick nits about the explanation being too boring [07:48] <Multiliteralist> We have a strict set of beliefs that tells us that that should not happen [07:48] <Multiliteralist> that kind of thing, link it to lack of sense of humour [07:48] <Multiliteralist> so the nitpickers are sinking while they judge it

[07:49] <Multiliteralist> I'll need to change the images a bit [07:49] <Multiliteralist> they mess up the edit spots [07:49] <Fag|> okay [07:50] <Multiliteralist> so I'll add some character to each of them that they become red links [07:50] <Multiliteralist> we'll remove it when article is ready [07:54] <Multiliteralist> OK I made a subpage for them, easier to edit now

---

here um i wasn't sure how much to keep or whatever but I've cut out all the stuff that was unrelated and hopefully this will help :) —talk 08:09, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

For the main article about the churches

the next crusade which the Deviants conducted against the Utterly Serious accidentally mangled a joke or two in the Standard camp.

The one about Captain Kirk being a lap dancer ended up as: "Capstain Egg-my-butterfly was not sure whether his kindergarten :years had been in the you know what I'm saying, his lederhosen and emotional"

something better but that way

The Standards took this as a total insult and retorted in kind. They absolutely leveled a few of the Deviant's cities so that only a couple of hiccups were left where formerly there had been a serfdom capitalising innuendo.

something like this might be the start of the schism, what do you think?