Subject: Re: TAN: Bonehead Reply Form Questions (Was: Re: TAN: Flame Response Form) Date: 9 Jul 98 18:10:27 GMT From: tshenkel@rs6a.wln.com (*bunnyTshens*) Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan Troy Terry (troyt@eventus.com) wrote: : Sing, O Muse, of the wrath of Paul Raj Khangure, who wrote: : > I take it you've not seen the rasfwrj bonehead form? : > : > I'll enclose a blank one below. : > : > STANDARDIZED RASFWRJ BONEHEAD REPLY FORM V1.3 : > (adapted from the STANDARDIZED BONEHEAD REPLY FORM by Joe Shaw) : > (integrating some of Karl-Johan Noren's rogue modifications to V1.0) : Though by and large I do like the BRF V1.3, there are a few : questionable spots. Hark! How about my sub-version? It's a tad briefer, but it has some of those warm, homey touches that you can't find in other forms of righteous retribution. **************************************************************************** THE WRATH-OF-*BUNNYTSHENS* CHECKLIST & IDIOT PLANKER, v 2.1 (Originally inspired by the STANDARDIZED BONEHEAD REPLY FORM by Joe Shaw) (sanitized and spel-checked for you're protection) Your recent post to rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan bunched my undies. It was: ___ moronic. ___ tedious. ___ redundant. ___ childish. ___ unfunny. ___ smarmy. ___ excessive. ___ obsequious. ___ loquatious. ___ ubiquitous. ___ incomprehensible. ___ unjustifiably self-righteous. ___ indicative of the decline in school standards. ___ tactlessly repulsive ___ which wouldn't have been bad if you posessed either wit or style. ___ high in cholesterol. ___ trollish without any hint of flair or subtlety. ___ tersely inane. ___ going on long past the point where your only quasi-clue stopped. ___ a bazillion lines long. Compounding this is your [ ] obvious, [ ] willful, [ ] uncorrectable ignorance of: ___ decorum ___ netiquette ___ tact ___ groove ___ speling and, or grammar ___ logic ___ humor ___ substance ___ hygiene ___ relevance ___ your own unimportance In reference to Frequently Asked Questions: ___ You obviously have a different definition of "frequently" than everyone else who posts here. ___ Your disdain for reading FAQs does not show a dedication to intellectual freedom so much as it suggests that you have the emotional maturity of a four-year-old. ___ "Those that can't do, preach." ___ It is sad to see one claiming such expertise be so woefully and thoroughly incorrect. ___ "FAQ" is _not_ a swearword. ___ The answer to your question is in a FAQ, specifically: ___ in the rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan FAQ, Section _._. ___ in the Wheel of Time FAQ, Section __.___. ___ in the alt.sex.dylan FAQ ___ under the heading "50 Ways to Ease Your Badger". As to your posts originality: ___ We've seen this done before ___ with significantly more skill and intellegence ___ too many times to count ___ and we FAQed it long ago ___ and it hasn't improved with age ___ and you haven't improved with age either ___ but _last_ time it was on the *proper* newsgroup ___ and, yes, the world *did* end, smarty-mouth! ___ This is a woefully bungled imitation of _______________ ___ though it could be passable if it had included ___ wit ___ charm ___ irony ___ which is like rain on your wedding day ___ coherency ___ gratuitous nudity ___ content ___ un raison d'etre ___ countless apologies ___ a promise that you'll never post again ___ eschewing capital letters was *never* original, and is _only acceptable for posters with legitimate physiological handicaps (e.g., cerebral palsy, paralysis, etc.) ___ SWITCH OFF THE CAPS LOCK KEY, MORON. ___ "K3WL d00d" spelling was original for exactly 57 attoseconds back in the days of punchcards. ___ Wheel-of-Time based nicknames have all been used a zillion times ___ not that they were original the _first_ time either. ___ but the least you could have done was spell it right. ___ Newbieness if not a sin, but: ___ whining about it _is_ ___ especially after you been given FAQ pointers ___ purporting that we are mean to newbies is baseless ___ unless they are really begging for it ___ like you ___ at least for regulars ___ except for _________, who should be ignored Following up on your follow-ups: ___ You quoted the entire acticle you were responding to ___ including all the parts you did not address ___ including the .sig ___ and the things you said in response to the parts you _did_ need to quote were not relevant anyway ___ You cut off the attributions, so now no one knows who you were reponding to. ___ which is just as well, because what you said was not worth noting ___ You didn't quote a damned word of the post you responded to ___ and being on AOL is no excuse (nor is it excusable) ___ and had you quoted, your response would still be nonsensical ___ Your complete, inane respose consisted merely of the word(s): ___ "Me, too!!!" ___ "No." ___ "Yes." ___ "@#$%!" ___ "Pleez send dirty pixx too me!!!" ___ which would _still_ be idiotic, even if this was a .binaries group Because you do not work and play well with others: ___ your reputation has nowhere to go but up. ___ you have alienated an entire gender, and most of the other. ___ you will soon be talking only to yourself, killfiles or no killfiles ___ though my personal vote is for killfiles in this case but you can still salvage the situation if you ___ {[ ] propmtly [ ] sincerely [ ] humbly [ ] publically} apologize ___ to ________ ___ and to _______ ___ and to the entire newsgroup ___ learn how your @#$%ing software works ___ go back to lurking ___ for a few days ___ for a month or so ___ indefinately ___ learn how to speak English better ___ after all it _is_ your mother tounge ___ pretend that this never happened ___ start acting your age ___ stop entering contests of wits unarmed ___ start doing your research _before_ you open your mouth ___ stop acting like you're persecuted and start acting like you belong ___ send me ______ U.S. dollars for punitive damages ___ knock that chip off your shoulder before someone brains you with it In conclusion: --Tshen Qodaxti Institute, 87th stratum