I love taking the polls! I have to admit that sometimes I miss the Thursday deadline, because I save the Invitational for weekend reading when I can really enjoy all the great wit! This is such a terrific bunch of smart people! I will be sure to take Thursday's poll, and then read the rest later! Thanks for the Gene Pool - it is keeping me sane!
I don’t always vote in the “which is best” polls because it’s not always easy to determine favorites (that’s a job for Pat/Gene). Odds are I found them all funny in different ways but don’t feel like ranking them. Unless one is mine - I always mark that sucker as superior in that case.
If you're not willing to do the hypothetical "suppose you had to choose one" in the poll, I hope you'll start taking the opportunity to compliment the writers of entries you found particularly good.
First of all, it establishes that people often have different reactions to jokes -- something might resonate in your own life and made you really laugh at that one -- and that we're happy to have you mention your own view.
Second, it's going to make the writer of that joke feel good today.
Third, if you're a regular Loser, as you are, you get to look gracious in complimenting the work of a fellow Loser.
(I refuse to believe that there are many contestants out there who are so convinced of their own superiority that they couldn't enjoy others' humor. I know that there have been a few, and a commenter who wrote on this page today seems to feel that way, but much more often I hear absolutely fanboy-type compliments from one Loser to another, as we've seen in both posts in the Style Invitational Devotees group on Facebook, and in live meetings like the Flushies. )
Per Gene's question, it is a matter of sheer numbers, not a question of whether there are or aren't disgruntled (or less than gruntled) entrants. I would hazard a guess there are a sufficient number (apart from the purely indifferent) in your now Substack universe to make the difference, your admirably sanguine view of human nature notwithstanding. Not so much a matter of "enjoying" other entries as it is the process of "ranking" them. I would also suggest, the self-selected and very limited sample of Devotees or the Flushed ("Flushies" attendees) is not representative. Further suggest you have a poll asking about non-participation. You might well be surprised by not only the higher-than-normal participation that Thursday, but the results as well.
Easy (and facile) answer to why the drop-off in poll responses on Thursday is that once an Invitee's self-esteem is dinged by going inkless yet again, there is little motivation to take part in ranking what are obviously inferior entries. True, they have paid to Lose, but not to be masochistic about it. Either that, or the Thursday polls cosmically suck.
As if the clueless legacy media will be allowed to cover a dystopian, authoritarian second Orange 1 presidency as it chooses. "Just the facts, ma'am" Sure.
Um...problem with the Biden/Harris Escher loop scenario (fanciful though it may be) is that under the 25th Amendment, each time the veep spot comes open, the "new" president's nomination for his/her replacement is subject to confirmation by majority votes of both Houses of Congress.
This is actually why even the straightforward Biden resigns/ Harris runs as incumbent is problematic. The House Rs would absolutely refuse to confirm a new VP to leave Speaker Johnson holding the next spot in line.
My favorites (in no particular order) were Kip's "great wall" and "good head", Mark's banks, and Gary's mosquitos.
"Kip" is referring to the Facebook alias (part of an anagram) for Kevin Dopart.
I love taking the polls! I have to admit that sometimes I miss the Thursday deadline, because I save the Invitational for weekend reading when I can really enjoy all the great wit! This is such a terrific bunch of smart people! I will be sure to take Thursday's poll, and then read the rest later! Thanks for the Gene Pool - it is keeping me sane!
I don’t always vote in the “which is best” polls because it’s not always easy to determine favorites (that’s a job for Pat/Gene). Odds are I found them all funny in different ways but don’t feel like ranking them. Unless one is mine - I always mark that sucker as superior in that case.
If you're not willing to do the hypothetical "suppose you had to choose one" in the poll, I hope you'll start taking the opportunity to compliment the writers of entries you found particularly good.
First of all, it establishes that people often have different reactions to jokes -- something might resonate in your own life and made you really laugh at that one -- and that we're happy to have you mention your own view.
Second, it's going to make the writer of that joke feel good today.
Third, if you're a regular Loser, as you are, you get to look gracious in complimenting the work of a fellow Loser.
(I refuse to believe that there are many contestants out there who are so convinced of their own superiority that they couldn't enjoy others' humor. I know that there have been a few, and a commenter who wrote on this page today seems to feel that way, but much more often I hear absolutely fanboy-type compliments from one Loser to another, as we've seen in both posts in the Style Invitational Devotees group on Facebook, and in live meetings like the Flushies. )
Per Gene's question, it is a matter of sheer numbers, not a question of whether there are or aren't disgruntled (or less than gruntled) entrants. I would hazard a guess there are a sufficient number (apart from the purely indifferent) in your now Substack universe to make the difference, your admirably sanguine view of human nature notwithstanding. Not so much a matter of "enjoying" other entries as it is the process of "ranking" them. I would also suggest, the self-selected and very limited sample of Devotees or the Flushed ("Flushies" attendees) is not representative. Further suggest you have a poll asking about non-participation. You might well be surprised by not only the higher-than-normal participation that Thursday, but the results as well.
A free link that hopefully works, to a searing NYT Editorial "Donald Trump Is Unfit to Lead" https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/07/11/opinion/editorials/donald-trump-2024-unfit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6U0.cuT4._9CMrt8oRLbl&smid=url-share
I really love that the guy with four hamsters in his pants is named Michael Pancake.
Paul being Revered made Bissell fume,
But Paul’s name ain’t on a vacuum.
7 inks, Frank Osen? Now you’re just showing off. ;-)
Dave Prevar is 8 inks ahead of me on the all-time list (Correction--9 with today's prize ink).
And of note to an anagrammer like me, he now needs 34 inks to my 43.
"Is that a hamster in your pocket, or are you just not pleased to see me?"
Easy (and facile) answer to why the drop-off in poll responses on Thursday is that once an Invitee's self-esteem is dinged by going inkless yet again, there is little motivation to take part in ranking what are obviously inferior entries. True, they have paid to Lose, but not to be masochistic about it. Either that, or the Thursday polls cosmically suck.
As if the clueless legacy media will be allowed to cover a dystopian, authoritarian second Orange 1 presidency as it chooses. "Just the facts, ma'am" Sure.
Um...problem with the Biden/Harris Escher loop scenario (fanciful though it may be) is that under the 25th Amendment, each time the veep spot comes open, the "new" president's nomination for his/her replacement is subject to confirmation by majority votes of both Houses of Congress.
This is actually why even the straightforward Biden resigns/ Harris runs as incumbent is problematic. The House Rs would absolutely refuse to confirm a new VP to leave Speaker Johnson holding the next spot in line.
Oh shit. 😳