preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (07/09/85)
> For the amusement of many of you, and I hope the gross embarassment of > others, here is a list of the reviews posted by Kelvin Thompson in the > past month or so, and the followups they generated. ---------- What wit is there in posting something that makes you appear to be an idiot? There are enough seriously idiotic things posted on the net that we cannot be expected to recognize a posting as satirical when all it appears to be is stupid. Viewed as humor, the reviews were reasonably amusing -- if they had been posted in a fashion that made their humorous intent obvious (as, for example, if they had been posted as a group or marked with the traditional :-)) a lot of us would have been amused and appreciative. Posting them in the guise of serious reviews just made the author appear stupid. We all knew the reviews COULD be parodies, but I don't think anyone should be embarassed at not recognizing them as such. [Well, actually, everybody should have recognized the Star Wars review as parody, but I'm willing to believe there are people who haven;t read 1984]. I've always thought that playing on gullibility was a pretty juvenile and cruel form of humor: laughing at someone for trusting you doesn't say much for your sensitivity. -- scott preece uhnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece