Saturday, February 26th, 2011
|
|
10:32 pm - Liberty's Law
|
|
|
Saturday, May 15th, 2010
|
|
3:08 am
|
big_bad_wolf
|
In response to the recent Diana Gabaldon wank, my sister offers the following law:
"As a conversation gets wankier, the probability of someone comparing rape to something nothing like rape approaches 1."
|
|
(comment on this)
|
|
Monday, September 21st, 2009
|
|
4:08 pm - Question!
|
hallidae
|
Hai guiz, I gotta know. Has there been an internet law made yet about people tossing out racist/sexist/orientation-derogatory terms while complaining about something that's none of the above? Like, for example, over in sf_drama, there's a kerfuffle going on where one guy's valiantly fighting back against the "bigotry and discrimination" of the term "weeaboo", yet seems to have no trouble referring to people who disagree with him as "fags" in the 4chan sense of the word.
|
|
(1 comment | comment on this)
|
|
Thursday, April 23rd, 2009
|
|
9:38 pm - phosfate's rule of thumb.
|
phosfate
|
If you ask, "Would it be trolling the wank to...?"
The answer is always: YES, IT WOULD BE TROLLING THE GODDAMN WANK.
current mood: *Snarl*
current music: a fan
|
|
(9 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, April 13th, 2009
|
|
12:58 pm - Proposed new law:
|
|
|
Sunday, March 22nd, 2009
|
|
10:32 pm - Communist China Corllary to Godwin's
|
|
|
Thursday, March 12th, 2009
|
|
9:18 am
|
isntitironic
|
CICERO'S CAVEAT ON CRITICISM:
True Story: Marcus Tullius Cicero, proud owner of an ego the size of Mt. Vesuvius, once overheard Julius Caesar discussing one of his (Cicero's) poems. Caesar was full of praise for the piece, but thought it could have been improved upon in small ways. Upon hearing this, Cicero asked his brother Quintus to go bring up the poem in conversation with Caesar and find out exactly how it could have been better, but then cheerfully added that Caesar's criticism had not made him a bit less pleased with his work.
ERGO: just because a reviewer finds something to criticize does not mean that they hated the whole piece, or that the creator should not be proud of his efforts.
|
|
(17 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Sunday, March 1st, 2009
|
|
1:24 pm - Internet Lawyering
|
sisterelwood
|
I bring forth to you a law that is long overdue- if someone has already written a law like this, please, let me know and I will remove this one. As it is, I have not seen anything addressing this issue.
The Theory of Internet Lawyering
Any wanker or wanka who asserts knowledge of the legal system and proceeds to try and tell others what the law is to the point of showing that they actually have no real knowledge of the law shall be beaten with a set of first year law school books.
Included among the books will be these standard titles-
Torts
Contracts
Criminal Law
Civil Procedure
Constitutional Law
Criminal Procedure
Beatings will continue until the offender understands that they are not a lawyer.
Inspired by this thread- http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/1197726.html?thread=194506654#t194506654
current mood: Brash
current music: people talking before class
|
|
(62 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, October 6th, 2008
|
|
11:48 pm - A Query
|
mariem_1
|
I have a question.
If Snapefen accuse their opponents of "being bullies just like the Marauders" or "hating them for existing", does it invoke Snacky's Law? And what about accusing the other side not of being bullies, but of rabidly defending bullying?
|
|
(6 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Sunday, September 14th, 2008
|
|
5:31 pm - I saw this "argument" three times yesterday.
|
mosellegreen
|
I couldn't find anything like this in this comm or the wiki, so:
Anyone who accuses a male opponent of 1) having a small penis or 2) not getting laid, automatically loses the argument.
|
|
(30 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Friday, August 8th, 2008
|
|
11:34 pm
|
stele3
|
I haven't seen this anywhere in the wiki, or in older posts... therefore I present it for your judgment.
The Comparing Wands Wank Decree
Anyone who, in the course of commenting on a wank in Fandom Y, claims that it "makes Fandom X look sane!" shall be forced to read every damned article in the Fandom Wank wiki. Thereby putting to rest that age-old question: Who Is the Wankiest Of Them All?
(So named because usually, X = Harry Potter.)
|
|
(17 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Thursday, July 31st, 2008
|
|
5:03 pm - The Sheeple Law
|
zee
|
Any use of the word "sheeple" in a serious context automatically disqualifies you from ever being taken seriously again.
|
|
(27 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, July 7th, 2008
|
|
10:16 pm
|
herongale
|
Herongale's First Law of TMI.
You're not a TRUE FAN unless you've beat off to the idea of your favourite character/characters at least once.
Herongale's Corollary.
All other activities of fandom are optional and are neither required nor rule out TRUE FANDOM.
*brought to you by fine IRC crack chat everywhere*
|
|
(7 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Tuesday, June 10th, 2008
|
|
5:49 pm - Ghandi's Corollary
|
|
|
Sunday, June 8th, 2008
|
|
5:27 pm - Peachespig's Rule of Entitlement
|
mcity
|
The first entry in a series that sucked was always the first one after you, whoever you are, got way too emotionally invested in an unreasonable outcome. Always.
Created by peachespig, modified and reposted with permission.
EDIT: Velvet_mace rephrased it better than I did.
Canon starts getting sucky the installment after fans get way too emotionally invested in an unreasonable outcome.
|
|
(20 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, May 19th, 2008
|
|
2:43 pm - Zee's Godwin Corollary
|
zee
|
Zee's Corollary to Godwin's Law:
In the context of Godwin's Law, George W. Bush is apparently the new Hitler. Therefore, the same rules apply to comparisons to G.W. as they do to comparisons to Hitler.
(Obvious exceptions for genuine comparisons of a politician or political candidate's policies to those of the Bush administration's.)
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Saturday, March 8th, 2008
|
|
12:35 pm - Axiom of Rose-Tinted Glasses
|
reeve
|
Didn't see anything like this in the wiki, so here goes:
The length of time that passes between actual consumption of a piece of media and the present is directly proportional to a fan's nostalgia for said media.
The formula:
media + (this year - year in which media was last consumed) / fan's initial love = fan's current nostalgia
Corollary: The inverse holds true if a fan consumes the same piece of media again after a length of time.
Thusly:
fan's initial love / media + (this year - year in which media was last consumed) = fan's current nostalgia
|
|
(4 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, March 3rd, 2008
|
|
9:20 am - Connor's Law
|
mcity
|
If someone is clearly using a term for an oppressive political system that is not Nazism to avoid activating Godwin's Law, Godwin's Law is immediately invoked.
You guys are Fascists.
-Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Tuesday, January 15th, 2008
|
|
8:42 pm
|
roachspit
|
Please excuse me for intruding, but I thought these would make nice additions. In a pointing-out-the-blindingly-obvious kind of way.
The Galileo Fallacy: The fact that everyone disagrees with you does not make you Galileo; just because an idea is unpopular doesn't make it right.
The Gadfly Corollary: The fact that other people are pissed off about what you've just said does not make your statement automatically correct; you may just be an asshole.
Both are paraphrases and originated in this blog post.
|
|
(4 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Saturday, December 22nd, 2007
|
|
8:51 pm
|
isntitironic
|
I discovered an exception to Rule #2 (the 'creators don't care about your ship war' rule). It amused me, so I thought we might start a post for:
DOCUMENTED EXCEPTIONS TO RULE #2:
The Justice League and Justice League Unlimited TV shows - there's stuff on the DVDs where the writers admit to doing a certain number of things just to mess with the shippers. In fact, they actually use the word 'shippers'.
current mood: amused
|
|
(29 comments | comment on this)
|
|
![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}