Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the free-comment dept

This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is a simple anonymous comment, saying something that shouldn't need to be repeated so often but for the weird anti-regulation absolutists who need to be reminded over and over:

Regulation isn't bad. It's a tool. Using the tool wrong is bad; Over-regulating and under-regulating are bad. The government shouldn't control what you see on the Internet (which isn't Net Neutrality, by the way), that would be bad regulation. Being able to enjoy a nice meal without having lethal amounts of harmful chemicals in it is good regulation.

For second place, we head to our post about the dispute between the San Diego and Salt Lake Comic-Cons, where one anonymous outside observer described how it all looks to someone with no horse in the race:

Hello. I'm a random asshole on the internet. :D

As far as I know, I have never had any connection of any kind with either party involved. I've no plans ever to visit the USA, much less either convention in the future. As far as I can recall, I've never so much as visited either of their websites. I have no particular interest in the case participants in any way at all.

They do not exist in my world. While I've heard of Comic Cons, this case is literally the only reason I now know they take place in either city.

Nonetheless, I'm rooting for SLCC. Not because of anything SLCC said, but simply because of what SDCC did.

SDCC started a legal fight on what seems - to the outside eye - to be very questionable grounds.

SDCC engaged in what seems - to the outside eye - to be behaviour designed to silence legitimate reporting.

SDCC has now successfully obtained a court order that seems - to the outside eye - to be little more than poorly-justified censorship.

Don't piss on the planet and tell us it's the Great Flood, SDCC - this is all your own damned fault. If you don't like the world calling you cunts, then stop acting like cunts, you daft fuckers.

It's not exactly rocket science, now, is it?

For editor's choice on the insightful side, we've got a pair of responses to the findings of the oversight board saying that NYPD officers are still violating the public's right to record them. First, we've got Discuss It, who noticed a pattern:

Odd this keeps happening with the people that are supposed to enforce the law. I know that when my employer tells me a policy and I violate it, the least I can expect is time off without pay at best, and termination is more likely.

Odd that a policeman can't grasp the concept. Perhaps they are too stupid to be allowed to carry a weapon. Those things are dangerious and if they can't understand "People can record you" then I would assume they are too stupid to understand the concept of fire lines, back stops, and "What is behind what you shoot at?".

Next, we've got That One Guy with some questions about how exactly this will be fixed:

"It's unrealistic to expect the number of violations to hit zero, but some disciplinary changes need to be made if these policies are going to have much effect on officer behavior."

If by that you mean 'heavily fine all first time violators, along with mandatory 'yes the public can record you, get over it' classes' and 'fire all repeat violators' then yes, this could be cleared up nicely with 'disciplinary changes'. The only way they'll stop is if they personally face penalties for their actions, until then they'll feel free to make up rules and laws on the spot to suit their own whims.

Over on the funny side, our first place comment comes in response to the glorious letter sent by Vincent Malone in response to threats from the Olive Garden over his blog. That letter ended with a request to respond in limerick form, and A Non-Mouse decided to take on that challenge:

There once was a man Branden Forcements
who confused some reviews for endorsements
His threats that came after
caused so much laughter
that perhaps he should seek new employments

In second place, we've got an anonymous comment on our article about the unique copyright story of George Romero's Night Of The Living Dead:

I just wish he’d hurry up and get on with the whole “reanimated corpse” thing, because we’ve been waiting for a couple of days now and I’m starting to think this whole “Romero is the father of zombies” thing doesn’t hold much weight.

For editor's choice on the funny side, we'll start out by throwing in one more limerick, this time from Doug:

Oh Vino, don't know what came over me
I wrote with such haste I just couldn't see
That to eat at our joint
Is kind of the point
Of your whole blog and your joie de vivre

And finally, we've got an anonymous response to our headline asking Is James Woods A Hypocritical Asshole?

This violates Betteridge's law of headlines

That's all for this week, folks!

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2017 @ 12:38pm

    "they'll feel free to make up rules and laws on the spot"

    Considering that the courts have essentially ruled that ignorance of the law is a valid excuse for cops, why not?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    David, 23 Jul 2017 @ 1:09pm

    Sigh.

    I’m starting to think this whole “Romero is the father of zombies” thing doesn’t hold much weight.

    People just don't know their Shakesbeer anymore. It wasn't Romero but Juliette who was zombified.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Jul 2017 @ 1:40pm

    Re: "they'll feel free to make up rules and laws on the spot"

    Have a 'Sad but true'/Insightful vote.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. icon
    DocGerbil100 (profile), 23 Jul 2017 @ 2:42pm

    Good lord! I really must remember to forget to sign in more often. :D

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Daydream, 23 Jul 2017 @ 4:54pm

    There was a trademark-obsessed prick,

    who saw an infringing limerick.

    While shaking his fist,

    he cried 'Cease and Desist!'

    [This line intentionally left blank.]

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. icon
    Bergman (profile), 23 Jul 2017 @ 11:59pm

    Re: "they'll feel free to make up rules and laws on the spot"

    The sickening thing is that cops can be ignorant of the law, panicky, terrified out of their minds to the extent of being clinically insane while on the job and as long as they meant well, the court gives them a pass.

    Private citizens are expected to know the law better than a veteran judge with 20 years on the bench, be perfectly calm at all times -- even with a gun in their face -- and if they do panic due to being untrained for the situation they find themselves in, the book gets thrown at them.

    And yet, the law is exactly the same with regards to what a cop can do and what any citizen can do. The difference is the cop is treated as innocent until proven guilty, while everyone else gets treated as guilty until proven innocent -- and sometimes even proving innocence doesn't save you from punishment!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. icon
    Ninja (profile), 24 Jul 2017 @ 6:58am

    I was sure that Romero comment was going to be the first place. He should have written it in limerick form :/

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.