![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I admit it--I'm jealous.
The fact remains that, despite being incredibly funny and cute (as seen here) I have never gotten 86 comments on my journal about how to make a cup of tea*. In fact, I have never received 86 comments on one entry about anything, ever! I haven't even broken the big five-o (which is such a pain in the ass to read, but still a point of pride). Even my most hilarious posts, such as the parody anti-feminist article and my adventures with the film crew of doom (doooooooooooooooom!) haven't got nearly enough play, in my opinion. At this rate I'll never get a badly-animated, falsettoed Emily Dickinson to talk trash about me.
In my quest to throw a comment party that brings all the posters to the yard**, I have decided that any really popular post that I would have a chance of making must contain the following elements:
- humour
- erudition
- pathos
- sexy results
- at least a few metaquoteable lines
- pie
I also know that in the past, mathematics have been used to predict earthquakes, hit songs, and the continued popularity of e.e. cummings***. So I will now attempt to mathematically determine the funny.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
halfacricket, and anyone else out there who does numbers, you may want to cover your eyes, because my sheer mathematical brilliance**** may cause you to go temporarily insane.
Humour (h) is one of three elements needed to calculate the shape of a multi-faceted post such as this one, the other two being the reaction to the humour, or laughter (l), and the degree to which real events are exaggerated in order to obtain the humour, or bullshit (b). The post being naturally mutifaceted, it can be best represented by a prism, or
Erudition is (in my opinion at least) twice as essential as humour when it comes to entertainment; however, erudition is at its best when multiplied through the use of humour. Thus:
h(e²) or more vernacularly h(ee)
Pathos (p) really only works if the readership is similar enough to the author’s state of mind to be able to recognize and empathize. On Livejournal, one must therefore depend on the Compassion of Strangers (cos). The author must avoid, at all costs, descending into bathos. The best way to do this is to be loveably upbeat and quirky (q) about one’s own situation. All things being equal:
cos(q) = cos(q + 2p)
Sexy results... well. If you apply mathematical precision***** to your own Livejournal exploits, I can guarantee those. After all, what is sexier than the ultimate result, pie (π)?
Of course, there must be enough pie to go around. Fortunately, π*r^2 (pie are square), which means you can easily cut it into much smaller pieces.
Pie for all!
*Although there was a lengthy thread about Jean-Luc Picard. Still.
**Damn right, it's better than etc.
***Just kidding. No one could have predicted that. He's been writing the same damn poem for years and no one's noticed.
****Brilliance, assmilinery, whatever.
*****Do not post or e-mail correcting my math. I am woefully aware of the fact that I am not a mathematician. I have had moments in my life where it took me five or even ten minutes to calculate a tip at ten percent. In fact, it took me three tries to count the number of asterisks this footnote was supposed to have.
In my quest to throw a comment party that brings all the posters to the yard**, I have decided that any really popular post that I would have a chance of making must contain the following elements:
- humour
- erudition
- pathos
- sexy results
- at least a few metaquoteable lines
- pie
I also know that in the past, mathematics have been used to predict earthquakes, hit songs, and the continued popularity of e.e. cummings***. So I will now attempt to mathematically determine the funny.
halfacricket, and anyone else out there who does numbers, you may want to cover your eyes, because my sheer mathematical brilliance**** may cause you to go temporarily insane.Humour (h) is one of three elements needed to calculate the shape of a multi-faceted post such as this one, the other two being the reaction to the humour, or laughter (l), and the degree to which real events are exaggerated in order to obtain the humour, or bullshit (b). The post being naturally mutifaceted, it can be best represented by a prism, or
Erudition is (in my opinion at least) twice as essential as humour when it comes to entertainment; however, erudition is at its best when multiplied through the use of humour. Thus:
h(e²) or more vernacularly h(ee)
Pathos (p) really only works if the readership is similar enough to the author’s state of mind to be able to recognize and empathize. On Livejournal, one must therefore depend on the Compassion of Strangers (cos). The author must avoid, at all costs, descending into bathos. The best way to do this is to be loveably upbeat and quirky (q) about one’s own situation. All things being equal:
cos(q) = cos(q + 2p)
Sexy results... well. If you apply mathematical precision***** to your own Livejournal exploits, I can guarantee those. After all, what is sexier than the ultimate result, pie (π)?
Of course, there must be enough pie to go around. Fortunately, π*r^2 (pie are square), which means you can easily cut it into much smaller pieces.
Pie for all!
*Although there was a lengthy thread about Jean-Luc Picard. Still.
**Damn right, it's better than etc.
***Just kidding. No one could have predicted that. He's been writing the same damn poem for years and no one's noticed.
****Brilliance, assmilinery, whatever.
*****Do not post or e-mail correcting my math. I am woefully aware of the fact that I am not a mathematician. I have had moments in my life where it took me five or even ten minutes to calculate a tip at ten percent. In fact, it took me three tries to count the number of asterisks this footnote was supposed to have.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Violated in the name of pie... sounds kinky.
no subject
no subject
no subject
they were actually pretty funny, but man, you never look at a pie quite the same way again.