So is it OK to use profanity on someone else's blog, that you would never ever allow on your own blog? Hmmmmm. Especially when you are the leader of another blog. Hmmmmm. Impeachable offense? Hmmmmm. Is it OK to talk trash about bewbs and saxxay hawt nawtiness, when you would never ever allow it on the blog you run? I dunno. Anything like that ever got posted to T&S would be deleted in 1.2 nanoseconds, on a slow day. So, what is the deal with that? Is it OK to cut loose on other people's blogs, or is it hypocritical? Is whats good for the goose good for the gander, or are some blogs more equal than others?


Anonymous said... @ January 19, 2006 at 7:46 AM

Why are you trying to raise some sort of a serious issue? I come to this blog to read petty vindictivness, not your two-bit attempts at profundity. If you want to try your hand at this non-sense, go to T&S.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 19, 2006 at 8:01 AM

OK, T&S Permabore.

Ann said... @ January 19, 2006 at 10:23 AM

Surely, snark, you can understand the desire to maintain a certain tone in one place that it is not necessary to maintain in another? What is perfectly acceptable behavior at a ballgame mightn't be appropriate at home, and what is acceptable at home might not fly in a chapel, and what is suitable for a chapel might not work in a temple.

People are allowed to define a level of decorum for their "place" that other "places" may not require. I don't swear on my blog; my momma might be reading. I don't swear on mormon blogs, because I like to think of the audience. But during my angry DAMU phase, I could cuss with the best of them...but only in places where that was explicitly permitted.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 19, 2006 at 10:32 AM

Ann, if we took context into account and looked at things in an even-handed and objective fashion, then there wouldn't be anything to snark. T&S is the bad guy this week, and last week too, so they get slagged.

Ann said... @ January 19, 2006 at 11:30 AM

OH! This is about T&S! THAT'S what I get for not following the links. Of course it's wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Hypocritical, evil and the sin next to murder. As I was saying, context is important, and since this is in the context of a T&S slam, then carry on!

Anonymous said... @ January 19, 2006 at 5:08 PM

Consistency from T&S? what the hell are you thinking?

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 19, 2006 at 6:30 PM

Thanks for that anonymous comment, Kaimi.

Anonymous said... @ January 19, 2006 at 6:44 PM

I must have a potty mind, but that pigs shadow looks a little dirty to me. Damn those piggies!

Sarebear said... @ January 19, 2006 at 11:11 PM

I thought pigs were supposed to be dirty?

Dangit. Now that's all I see when I look at it! Thanks!


NFlanders said... @ January 20, 2006 at 2:00 PM

Poor Kaimi can't get a break from the Snarker.

In his defense, it's probably not fair to attribute to one blogger the sins (and stuffiness) of an entire blog. I daresay if Kaimi ran T&S, they might let you say "ass."

For now, however, he is a tiny pocket of sanity (and horndoggedness) in a sea of uptight old people.

Kaimi said... @ January 20, 2006 at 6:06 PM


A Snarkernacle post that completely ignores a long and glorious tradition of T&S permabores and also commenters? Dude, you can kiss my . . .

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 23, 2006 at 7:44 AM

Oh, Kaimi, we here at the SNackle are so so so sorry to mischaracterize your esteemed and illustrious blog and non-edgy, staid, boring, and generally not profanity laden. We eagerly anticipate your profanity-laden posts about boobs, which are no doubt in the works.

Post a Comment