Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Literate Chaotic => Topic started by: Rococo Modem Basilisk on August 08, 2009, 10:22:46 pm

Title: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Rococo Modem Basilisk on August 08, 2009, 10:22:46 pm
In almost every case, unless X has publically admitted it, the answer is: "Maybe, how the hell should we know?" That is, unless the person died prior to the 1950s, in which case almost certainly not.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 08, 2009, 10:27:59 pm
X is the roman numeral for 10, which is two times five.

Hence, X is discordian.

QED
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Rococo Modem Basilisk on August 08, 2009, 10:32:21 pm
X is the roman numeral for 10, which is two times five.

Hence, X two discordians.

QED

Fixed. [/pedant]
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 09, 2009, 03:12:19 am
X is the roman numeral for 10, which is two times five.

Hence, X two discordians.

QED

Fixed. [/pedant]

If you're going to be pedantic, you should try to be RIGHT. Your correction makes no sense.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Epimetheus on August 09, 2009, 04:05:47 am
I think Enki meant "X is two discordians," but forgot the "is".
Such a conclusion was derived from the fact that ten was said to be two times five.
Two fives = two Discordians.
Clear enough?
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 09, 2009, 04:18:51 am
The question is "is X a discordian?"

Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Epimetheus on August 09, 2009, 05:57:57 am
Well  :monkeydance: :monkeydance: :monkeydance: :monkeydance: :monkeydance:!!!


How's the semantic structure of THAT? HUH? :argh!:


















 :asshat:
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on August 09, 2009, 07:25:03 am
Well, that was dumb.

In almost every case, unless X has publically admitted it, the answer is: "Maybe, how the hell should we know?" That is, unless the person died prior to the 1950s, in which case almost certainly not.
Is it ok to say that people who have Erisian tendencies in recent times are Discordianesque ("in the style or manner of Discordians") and people that died before the 1950s were proto-Discordians ("the earliest form of Discordians")? For example, George Carlin and Douglas Adams would be Discordianesque while Heraclitus and Albert Camus would be proto-Discordians.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on August 09, 2009, 08:19:02 am
This thread confirms my (very) low opinion of Enki's intellect.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 09, 2009, 09:44:14 am
Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.

I actually thought it was funny as well. Your pedantry, not so much ...
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: hirley0 on August 09, 2009, 11:34:07 am
20100308 11:50PM psT I seriously doubt this was posted by me GIrl

 :?
 TNM 1 2 3 4  hirley0  50  3040   Today at 02:28:44 AM
by hirley0  
    Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread   Enki v. 2.0  9  111   Today at 12:44:14 AM
by Triple Zero  
 :?


X is the roman numeral for 10, which is two times five.

Hence, X two discordians.

QED

Fixed. [/pedant]

If you're going to be pedantic, you should try to be RIGHT. Your correction makes no sense.



 :oops:

Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread  Enki v. 2.0  10  114   Today at 02:34:07 AM
by hirley0  
    TNM 1 2 3 4  hirley0  50  3040   Today at 02:28:44 AM
by hirley0  

 :oops:
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 09, 2009, 01:29:17 pm
The question is "is X a discordian?"

Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.

actually I got his joke

it is evident that X was being treated as a roman numeral, hence two fives, hence two discordians.



this is a tough crowd!
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 09, 2009, 04:43:17 pm
The question is "is X a discordian?"

Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.

actually I got his joke

it is evident that X was being treated as a roman numeral, hence two fives, hence two discordians.



this is a tough crowd!

Oh, I got it just fine, I just thought it was ruined in delivery because it was presented as pedantry, but was semantically incorrect.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 09, 2009, 04:44:22 pm
Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.

I actually thought it was funny as well. Your pedantry, not so much ...

I am out-pedanting him.

LAST LAUGH'S ON ME, MOTHERFUCKERS.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Rococo Modem Basilisk on August 09, 2009, 05:56:17 pm
Since the question is posed with the subject in singular, it is evident that "X" stands for the name of an individual. When you Lo5 "X", the answer to the question posed is evidently yes.

In other words, 000's joke was totally funny, and Enki's attempt at pedantry was not only unfunny, but also semantically incorrect.

I actually thought it was funny as well. Your pedantry, not so much ...

I am out-pedanting him.

LAST LAUGH'S ON ME, MOTHERFUCKERS.

Bartender, another round of laughs for everyone. Nigel will foot the bill.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 09, 2009, 06:27:59 pm
"to pedant" is not a verb, neither is "to out-pedant", however, the dictionary says "fussy" is a synonym for "pedantic", so you could say you are "out-fussing him", and that therefore the last laugh is on you.
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 09, 2009, 06:32:44 pm
"to pedant" is not a verb, neither is "to out-pedant", however, the dictionary says "fussy" is a synonym for "pedantic", so you could say you are "out-fussing him", and that therefore the last laugh is on you.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: Unofficial "Is X a discordian" thread
Post by: WyrdKitten on August 09, 2009, 08:36:46 pm
I was going to make my post's title:

"Would you call the philosophy and worldview laid out in the Discworld series a 'Discordian' one or at least similar to Discordianism? Anyone know if Terry Pratchett has ever happened to publically claim he's a Discordian?"

But long titles kinda were last in during Darwin's era and I wouldn't want to be embarrasingly out of date.

( :fuckmittens: )