Monday, July 9th, 2007
|
|
5:08 pm
|
|
|
Saturday, June 30th, 2007
|
|
9:19 am - Scotsman's Law.
|
mcity
|
Whenever someone defines what does or does not qualify someone for inclusion in the set of Real Xs, ("No real gamer would play the Wii!") the set in question will always include them.
Title needed.
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Thursday, June 21st, 2007
|
|
9:01 am - My very first contribution!
|
|
|
Tuesday, June 19th, 2007
|
|
2:01 pm - A corollary to Azalais' Carousel Law
|
bishounenhideto
|
I'd like to suggest a corollary to Azalais' Carousel Law:
Anyone under the age of 22 who says that anyone over the age of 22 who is still interested in yaoi fandom must be a pedophile should be put on the carousel.
Anyone claiming they'll stop liking yaoi or other fannish interests as soon as they reach over 22 because to do otherwise is to be a sad and pathetic person (and/or a pedophile) should retroactively be put on the carousel at 15.
In short, fandom does not only belong to self-righteous 14 year olds.
current mood: Mildly Amused
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Saturday, June 16th, 2007
|
|
5:29 pm - The Gay & Slippery Slope
|
harrylovesron
|
Presented for your approval. The idea was put forth by ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif) pantyless_angel in this thread, and I reworded it. I searched the Wiki and couldn't find a law regarding this exact subject, but feel free to let me know if it's been done or you have a better name for it.
The Gay & Slippery Slope
In any discussion about homosexuality, gay relationships, and/or same-sex marriage, should one side compare one or more of those things to/argue that one of those things will lead to:
1. Rampant llegal and/or harmful activities such as illegal drug use, pedophilia, or bestiality
2. Legalizing marriage to one's close relatives, to pets/animals, or to inanimate objects
3. Threatening the rights of heterosexual couples and marriage
4. Destruction of the family unit in America
5. The eventual dying out or destruction of the human race;
The person who made the comparison automatically loses the argument and shall be thwacked over the head with (Link NSFW) this blunt instrument, wielded by a frothing, bug-eyed Lewis Black, until such time as sense is beaten into their head. Repeat beatings may be administered if the subject loses consciousness before sense enters. Actual penetration with said blunt instrument is permissable if the subject uses the "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" argument in their comparison or claims that equal rights for homosexuals are "special rights".
ETA: Punishment amended at the suggestions of pastri_archy, ladybirdsleeps, and sorchar.
ETA 2: Number 5 on the list added per firebad's suggestion.
|
|
(29 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Thursday, April 26th, 2007
|
|
12:49 am - Addendum to the Faux-Cred Card Ordinance.
|
tez
|
I need to add a corollary to The Faux-Cred Card Ordinance, courtesy of a rant my GF had about some people in her college classes. In a stunning instance of the stars coming into alignment, this exact situation just cropped up on otf_wank. Go figure. Therefore, I humbly present to the assembled of ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif) jurisimprudence for their consideration:
WAC 375.1.45.1. Faux-Authority Card Statute.
Anyone claiming to be an authority on the discrimination leveled towards a societal group by virtue of associating with/being descended from members of said group -- without actually being a member of the group themselves, or experiencing said discrimination firsthand -- will automatically lose the argument and be transported back to the 1800s for a crash course on segregation and racism.
Examples:
"I know all about homophobia. I have gay friends."
"I know all about racism. My boyfriend is half-black." (This was an actual argument point.)
"I know all about slavery! My ancestors were slaves!" (This was an actual argument point as well, by a girl with some Irish in her background.)
"I know all about discrimination! I'm descended from Pocahontas and a black slave!" (See wank mentioned.)
I consider it very eerie that I wrote this up in my JF a couple days ago and it suddenly became oh so apt.
current mood: *thud*
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Wednesday, April 25th, 2007
|
|
1:05 pm - Wiki Update!
|
lindentreeisle
|
Our delicious Jurisimprudence wiki is once again up to date. I also added some navigation links along the side to help you...navigate. If you have any suggestions for how to make the wiki better, please speak up!
Public editing is still open, so if you see mistakes or ommissions, feel free to fix them. Or if you don't want to, mention it to me or Tangentialone and we'll take care of it.
As a side note, there was apparently a problem where the search function was searching the page titles, but not the full text of pages. I got the Wikispaces staff to fix it, but this is evidently caused by an ongoing bug that they are still working on fixing. Bottom line, if you notice the search function going screwy again, please notify one of us so we can get it fixed.
current mood: Fantastico
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, April 23rd, 2007
|
|
8:53 pm - This one's probably been done...
|
isntitironic
|
The Laws of Uficuity:
1) No matter what subject is under discussion on a wank community, somebody will always find a way to relate it to a sexual fetish.
2) Once somebody has related the topic to a sexual fetish, somebody else will always claim they've read a fic like that.
|
|
(1 comment | comment on this)
|
|
Wednesday, April 18th, 2007
|
|
5:08 pm - Submitted for your approval
|
|
|
Wednesday, April 4th, 2007
|
|
9:28 am
|
t_boy
|
Because someone asked for it, and in case there isn’t a law for it, here’s my proposal.
The name for this particular proposed piece of jurisimprudence shall be known as misstyzek’s “cry rape” Substitution:
This is a variant of Godwin’s Law: therefore Godwin’s Conundrum and its subsequent corollaries apply as well. The substitution is as follows:
As per Godwin’s Law, but replace “Nazis or Hitler” with “rape”.
Included in this proposal is a formulation of Godwin’s Conundrum, which is as follows:
Is Godwin’s Law supposed to be observational or legislatory? In other words, do you break it, or does your behaviour conform to the law’s predicted observation?
This is followed with a Corollary, which could be called Godwin’s Conundrum’s Substitution, but for some reason strikes me as an extremely convoluted and stupid name. Suggestions for a better name are welcome:
This is a variant of Godwin’s Law: therefore Godwin’s Conundrum and its subsequent corollaries apply as well. The substitution is as follows:
As per Godwin’s Law, but replace “a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler” with “a pointless argument based on the premises of Godwin’s Conundrum”.
current mood: Meek
|
|
(2 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Thursday, March 29th, 2007
|
|
10:38 pm
|
isntitironic
|
I thought this one needed to be enshrined here:
BARRY'S 22nd LAW:
No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.
current mood: Bitter
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Tuesday, March 6th, 2007
|
|
10:33 am
|
mcity
|
The amount that a female character in an animated series, manga, or videogame will be despised by the fanbase is directly proportional to how strong (of character) she is and her proximity to the male lead.
Anyone got a name for this?
EDIT: Thanks for restoring my faith in humanity.
|
|
(58 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Sunday, February 11th, 2007
|
|
11:14 pm - Fair And Balanced Ordinance
|
kittikattie
|
Or the TTLY TRUFAX Convention.
Anyone who cites Fox News/CNN/Democracy Now!/Micheal Moore/Al Franken/Ayn Rynd/any other sort of political source as being "absolutely" right and trustworthy and the other side being absolutely wrong, simply based on nothing but political biases, loses the argument.
Violators will be made to...hell, never mind. I think they're doing enough to themselves and don't need our help.
current mood: Catty
|
|
(26 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Sunday, January 7th, 2007
|
|
12:13 pm - Internet Disease Fallacy (or, "Your mockery is making me sick!")
|
|
|
Wednesday, December 6th, 2006
|
|
12:38 pm - We're famous on the internets.
|
|
|
Thursday, November 30th, 2006
|
|
12:12 pm - WAC 375.1.45. "Faux-Cred Card" Use Ordinance
|
tez
|
I perused the newly-updated list and didn't find anything like this except for TBQ's Law, which only covers a specific circumstance. If this exists, I will proclaim myself a dork and fishbeat myself. So thus, I humbly present for your approval:
Wank Administrative Code (WAC) 375.1.45. "Faux-Cred Card" Use Ordinance.
Anyone disavowing their various prejudices by using the phrase "I'm not anti-_____, I have _____ friends!" or some variant thereof will summarily lose the argument and be subjected to a vicious fishbeating by members of the group in question. Double fishbeatings will be enforced if the "faux-cred card" is utilized more than once in one argument.
Examples:
Gay/Queer Cred Card: "I'm not homophobic, I have gay friends!"
Race Cred Card: "I'm not racist, I have black/Asian/etc. friends!"
Wank Cred Card: "I'm not wanky, I have wanka friends!"
Candy-Coating Cred Card: "I'm not anti-candy coating, I have friends who are M&Ms!" (Note: Anyone employing this particular "faux-cred card" instantly voids all ability to prevent said friends from being devoured by rabid chocoholics.)
current mood: Caffeinated
|
|
(8 comments | comment on this)
|
|
|
12:07 am - Wiki!
|
tangentialone
|
The list is now updated.
ALSO! lindentreeisle and I have put together a Jurisimprudence wiki, containing all the laws, which is replacing the del.icio.us thing. (ETA: It already has the laws, all three-hundred-something of them, in it.) It's officially open, and public editing is on, although if there's trolling/vandalism, it may be turned off.
Also also: Paging jpfbookworm and vanilla_tiger: the spammers are IN UR POSTS, USIN LARGE FONTS. There's probably some I missed--anyone who wants to check their posts can do a search on their name to find them, since wiki laws have author/poster listed.
|
|
(5 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Wednesday, November 22nd, 2006
|
|
10:35 am - The Martyred Messiah Maxim
|
lindentreeisle
|
(Please correct me if a law like this already exists- I browsed the list for duplicates but I didn't check every single entry.)
The Martyred Messiah Maxim
Any individual who compares criticism of his supposedly revolutionary and brilliant ideas to the persecution of Jesus must be nailed to a tree and left to die of gradual asphyxiation while onlookers mock him, gamble for his clothes, and poke him with sharp objects. The survival of his ideas beyond that point may be taken as conclusive evidence that the individual does or does not resemble Jesus.
Corollary: The Resurrection Rule
If the individual rises from the dead on the third day, all critics professing belief in the divinity of Christ Jesus must acknowledge that the individual's self-comparison to Jesus was accurate.
current mood: Sarcastic
|
|
(9 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Friday, November 10th, 2006
|
|
9:16 am - Kiri's Corollary:
|
honorh
|
Inspired by, among other things, this wank, this is a corollary to the Law of Scientific Relevance, as suggested by myself and beautifully phrased by seraphael:
"Should a wanker claim that his/her inability to carry on basic discourse in a reasonable manner is actually a byproduct of a grandiose-sounding social 'experiment,' said wanker's arguments shall be considered null, void, and false. And said wanker shall, furthermore, be soundly beaten about the head and shoulders with the APA Style Manual, exact edition to be chosen by the affected board-members."
Ladies and gentlemen, do we agree?
|
|
(10 comments | comment on this)
|
|
Monday, November 6th, 2006
|
|
12:23 pm
|
isntitironic
|
To Lose One's Shiney Pidgey - verb phrase (slang)
To enter into a period of extreme and/or irrational behavior as a result of a percieved slight or insult. EG: when we tried to tell her that Snape doesn't really exist, she really lost her shiney pidgey.
SYNONYMS: see 'freak out', 'spaz', 'lose one's shit'.
current mood: *sporfle!*
|
|
(3 comments | comment on this)
|
|