This is What Happens When You Beg For a New Post
Cautiously, Jimbo climbed the ladder at the back of his apartment block until he reached his back window. Jimbo walked onto a lead platform and, oblivious to the fact that he was a mouse, picked up a large rock. He then threw the rock at his window and in a bizarre twist of fate, it broke. Jimbo, still completely oblivious to the fact that he was a mouse, trotted inside and picked up the telephone to ring his insurance manager. After it was revealed to Jimbo that he had actually broken a prestige, one-of-a-kind window owned by the world's only trillionare and was required to pay damages in excess of 4 billion dollars, it dawned on Jimbo that perhaps he should have just used the door. Accompanying this realisation was the another realisation which involved Jimbo being slightly pissed off. Jimbo, tactful and subtle as always, decided that rather than take out his rage on his insurance manager, it would be quicker and simpler to kill an innocent pedestrian with a blunt object. And he did.
The gangsters of the town, affectionately known by locals as 'The Rampaging, Violent Fuckers', wanted to kill Jimbo. There was no real reason for this, they were just feeling a bit bored and decided that they should pick a random person (or mouse) from the phonebook and kill him, her or it. There was no real reason for this either, but they'd had a tedious week and wanted to make the local Mafia boss think that they were active members of the local crime community, which they weren't. Jimbo's first run-in with the thugs took place at the local greyhound track, where Jimbo was being used by a corrupt policeman as a dog substitute. As it turned out, the dog Jimbo was pretending to be was odds-on favourite and had such a strong following that nobody cared that it had shrunk to one thirteenth of its original size, was of an inferior species and would probably get lapped in a one lap race even if it had a V8 engine rammed up its arse. Anyhow, the gangsters were suspicious that something wasn't normal. After 3 hours of intense debate in their secret conference room in the middle of a busy street, they concluded that someone had spiked their orange juice and immediately rang the local hardware store and asked if they could put some CPVC pipe fittings on lay-by for the weekend.
Trains. Can we live without them? The answer, of course, is a resounding maybe. If you would be interested in a slightly more intelligible answer to this question, I suggest you pick up the phone and ring 'Graham's Home Shopping'. It is highly unlikely you will get an answer out of them, but Graham owes me 2 dollars and refuses to pay me back, so any inconvenience directed at him is greatly appreciated.
THE END
posted by Biggles @ 4:10 pm
21 Comments:
Jack really enjoyed that post.
Unfortunately Jack is now bored again.
Thanks for helping Jack.
Jack is curious though, did koskov write that 100% golden material, or did koskov google it?
God Jack is a bored, and boring person.
The last paragraph of the original post I found to be very funny. I would enjoy seeing more of it.
The rest was unimpressive in my opinion. It is remarkable only in that it managed to meander around pointlessly whilst also sounding trite.
Keep up the erratic work.
Without wanting to promote the competition at all - if anyone wants something to do inbetween reading the Russian's posts, have a look at http://www.uqls.com/index.php?id=126 and click on the link for the 2005, Edition 1.
Parts of it are extraordinarily funny. (The less scrupulous of you may wish to mine it for material if the need arises)
This material wasn't googled, nor was it written by me last night. It is in fact something I wrote in year 12 when I was supposed to be spending the afternoon studying in the library. It is trite - BUT that's "What Happens When You Beg For a New Post"
ciao
Jack accepts your apology, and expects further posts every 24 hours. If Jack does not recieve this, then Jack will be forced to remain loyal to Koskovs weBlog, by checking it every 24 hours.
Jacks says thank you.
Koskov, your post was excellent. You have the best post in the world, and I have checked the competition.
The 2005 edition 1 of the UQLS was not funny, and appeared to be written by law students who: scored an OP 1; are not very attractive; hold the worst, most conceited parties; feign interest in wine; argue that the music interests of their friends is 'eclectic'; hold formal conversations with each other even though they have known each other for 4 years; can rarely proceed past exchanging pleasantries; try to be like their parents; lie about their drinking capacity; measure their drinking capacity in terms of 'standard drinks'; would have to skull enormous amounts of alcohol in the matter of seconds and whilst retrieving their alcohol from behind a non-existant pillar to meet their professed amount of 'standard drinks'; and consider each other to be amazingly funny, public personalities.
Their brand of stale, self- referential, arrogant, conceited comedy does not measure up to your brilliant and inclusive humour Koskov.
I salute you,
regards
An evaluation of obiter is a matter of taste.
A saving grace of it though is that in the absence of a facility to post replies, it isn't perpetually hijacked by self-indulgent gentlemen like Mr Yail Bloor.
Neurotic rants fall short of being interesting, let alone amusing. Mr Bloor attempts to pass himself off as a patron of the Hunter S Thompson school of comedy. Yet in both substance and form the early days of Gretel Killeen is a far more adapt analogy.
As I said, an evaluation of obite is a matter of taste. On balance though, I would suggest Mr Bloor hasn't read it at all.
Mr Sinclair's bland, right wing, self-indulgent analysis of every paragraph of this blog is also a subject of taste.
It is interesting to compare this man's bland replies, and petty criticisms of Yuri's fine blog, and his hysterical championing of obiter.
Pehaps if Koskov was part of UQLS he would not be labelled "unimpressive" "pointless", and "trite", when he obviously is a genius.
Also, criticising someones original work and then advertising one's own favourite as an alternative is more "self-indulgent" than my response, which supports the little man.
Thanks Koskov,
Regards,
Mr Koskov's talent is not to be denied. But a shameless promotion of it, regardless of the content only renders your own compliments meaningless. If you never criticise, then it becomes painfully obvious that your kind words have no relationship with the actual material posted.
I am happy to confess that I have not always been the most complimentary of his work. But that doesn't detract from my words - in my opinion it is simply the hallmark of sincerity.
To call me right wing has no relationship with reality, and further detracts from your credibility, or at least ability to read.
To characterise what I write as "bland analysis" merely highlights the fact that what I write has some relationship with the actual post. It simply indicates that it something more than self-indulgent ramblings that appear only because the author can't figure out how to start their own blog.
And your accusation of me being self-indulgent is unexplained. To criticise someone elses work necessarily involves a consideration of their efforts. The mere fact that part of it might be negative only goes, as explained above, to the sincerity of the work. The very fact that I note the existence of another source of work (which I didn't write and have no direct connection to) doesn't detract from Mr Koskov's work at all.
If Mr Koskov is genuinly looking for nothing but fawning and positive repliess, then I am happy to cease posting further. If is actually interested in real opinions, then Mr Bloor doesn't have a leg to stand on.
you are both lovely.
Mr. Bloor's willingness to contribute additional (albeit generally irrelevant) humour to the comments has given the blog some much needed extra zest, particularly in this period where my ideas for articles is particularly dry.
J. Sinclair's extremely polar method of getting to the bottom of what i'm trying to say in a post and debating the effectiveness of the argument, as well as the validity of the argument itself ensures that this blog provokes genuine thought. Without it, the posts themselves would be rendered drivelly neurosis and the comments superflous garbage which would be better placed in a text message.
Sir,
I apologise if my comments towards Mr Sinclair have made him reconsider his excellent contributions to this, the best post in the world.
I was quite suprised that my attack on the law society's drivel was taken by Mr Sinclair as a personal attack on him, causing him to criticise my own contribution to this blog. I felt this unfair and harsh reaction made in imperative for me to defend myself.
I offer my full support to Koskov and Mr Sinclair.
Regards,
The abuse that comes out of these posts are amazing. Although I find the apologies that follow such abuse tends to ruin the electric astmosphere created by such comments. It is afterall a place to state ones opinion and have it open to a quick witted rebuttal if called for. On with the show! Keep up the good work Mr Bloor!
Jack yells "Look at Jack", "Look at Jack" ... Jacks says Don't ignore Jack.
Jack actually has nothing of extra value to contribute.
You are a super person Jack! All future comments i write will surely include you.
Stay in touch...
I think to stay involved Jack you have to launch an unprovoked, ruthless attack on another blogger. Then apologise for it, then a day later launch a stinging, bitter attack on another blogger.
I will never attack you as I respect your style. Koskov, however, slept with your father.
Regards,
I stand unified with Mr Bloor and Mr Koskov in this matter, and also extend my unreserved apologies for any offense caused.
Mr Koskov's tact and diplomacy is an example to us all.
Hi Koskov,
for those familiar with my flatmates mad (ex?)boyfriend..... as I was outside of Coles today contemplating purchasing a soothing packet of Malboro Reds, he yelled out "Traitor" from the other end of the street.
Is this man certifiable? Should we instititute some surveillance?..Why "traitor"?. Was I on his side originally? Very odd.
Regards,
Witchhunt.
Jack says lynch the mother-fucker.
After about 2 minutes of stalki... Jack means survallience, there should be enough circumstanial evidence to hang that mo-fo from a tree branch.
And write "Traitor" in his own blood on him. That should fit the bill.
I was going to ask you if the whole 'traitor' thing was actually true, but it occured to me that it must be as it was/is far too bizarre to make up.
This is getting out of control. Never trust a man called 'Daryl'. That's as much sense as I can make out of the situation
Thankyou bretheren,
We shall meet at the dark of the moon, at the place where the trees abound and the wild wind blows to the doomed song that we call...Zimmeth. I have come upon a cross and holy water, Mr Sinlair can obtain the garlic, Jack shall bring the crossbow, for it is prophesised, and Koskov, my warrior, you shall bring the sacrificial Ostrich that our Darryl will so enjoy being his last horrible sight before he descends into madness and delerium, and then into the hellmouth, where the wind will forever taunt our name: BRETHEREN.
Listen to the bell Darryl, it tolls for thee....
Post a Comment
<< Home