All right, then. You guys are my latest blog-crush. Three cheers for you, and all that.
I haven't commented here because it seemed like you had such a nice party going already, and I didn't want to crash it. Also, I don't know very many cock jokes.
It is too early in the morning for this, really (even by my standards. OK, well, maybe not) but I did a web search for "cock jokes" to help Chris out and found this NOT WORK OR CHILD FRIENDLY site, about cocks
I know I *shouldn't* be surprised, and yet ...
and what rating criteria should we be using, anyway? This could be so subjective! And do we look ONLY at the cock or consider the full context?
do we look ONLY at the cock
Of course. It's all about specialization. If you feel the need to branch out, we could start scaring up the venture capital to launch ratemynutsack.com.
Oh dear. Those pictures did make me blush. But I don't really get it - why are the candidate weenies flaccid? I've never entered such a contest, but I've always assumed that the right thing to do is to work up a bit more . . . enthusiasm first.
At any rate, I stumbled across this link just moments ago. I proudly submit it, as my first cock-link to Unfogged. Since my mom reads my blog, I think it's the first cock-link I've posted anywhere.
Well then, I'll add this one (work-safe and very funny) that I'd never have read were it not for the name-your-fave-shebloggers thread.
Also, I don't know very many cock jokes.
Chris, you'll fit right in. The ratio of actually making cock jokes to talking about them and referencing old ones is about a million to one.
One to a million, cw. (That's the other thing we do here, Chris. Well, w-lfs-n and me. w-lfs-n started it.)
And the cock, though not exceptional, was large enough to crash the computer.
Unfogged ... enough cock to crash your computer.
Shouldn't that be "w-lfs-n and I"?
Don't you go all grammar on me too now. But Weiner: busted. Probably time for some self-punishment.
Weiner's self-punishment: a cock joke?
Pffft. I bet I can find twenty linguists who would say "w-lfs-n and me" is OK there. It's not really an elliptical sentence. You had me on "pround" but this one just rolls on by. (Note: I am not actually going to bother trying to find twenty linguists.)
Those linguists would probably also say that your other corrections (and mine too) were misguided. Languagehat, for example, would. "Elliptical sentence" won't fly; are you saying it's elliptical for "that's the other thing w-lfs-n and me do here"? Am you bizarro Weiner, or what?
twenty linguists
Descriptivist heretics, the lot of them.
Nah, I'm saying it's not elliptical at all. "We do this?" "Who?" "w-lfs-n and me." Actually that probably is elliptical. Shit. Was the cock joke a description of the phrase "Weiner's punishment," or is it like doing a Hail Mary and three Our Fathers?
Well at first I thought "self-punishment" -> "self-abuse", and then, you know, your name is homophonous with wiener, so I was trying to imply that your self-punishment, ie, masturbation, ie, WANKING, is itself a cock joke, because you have a small wang, or something.
I love visiting Unfogged! I can always count on a good laugh, especially in the comments. Someone here recently noted the blog's mix of high- and low-brow material; I think that's what I like most about it. You guys don't take yourselves too seriously.
I do wonder, however, what you all - commenters, included - do for a living that you're able to post and comment throughout the day.
Re: the cock jokes: Well, I love a good cock joke as much as the next person, so I've been expecting to have some good laughs here. I've noted, along with cw, the discrepancy between the amount of talk about cock jokes versus actually telling cock jokes. But since I don't have any to contribute - and I have been on the lookout! - I suppose I'm not helping Unfogged's cock-joke-challenged situation.
cw wasn't supposed to say what he said; that was unfogged's big secret. Everyone please go back to thinking it's a cock-joke-a-minute around here. And let's not mention the fact that the topic that occupies most of our time is grammar.
Comment #8 was about sense, not grammar! I prefer the broader nitpicking.