Translate

Sunday, 13 April 2014

The Rites of Reply.........

The response so far to Textusa's Maths PhD, where she attempted to alter the physical laws, has been a muted one.

It's perfectly clear that either her ''readers'' * are too embarrassed to point out to her that she is all over the shop like a madwoman's shite, or - horror of horrors - they haven't actually read it.

I should think her tame lackey, Helenmeg, who seems to have self-appointed as Textusa's representative on Planet Earth, is probably still trying to work out how to sell this one to the still dim but slightly more skeptical troops on Havern's, where she has quickly gained a reputation for being a total and utter pain in the arse

So, there are 15 published replies to this seminal work by their glorious leader - let's break them down, shall we?

Reply 1 is the standard ''Oh Textusa, you are wonderful. I haven't got a fucking clue what you are on about, but I'm an extremely suggestible slave to my hormones with my finger firmly planted on the exclamation mark, so bring it on , motherfuckers'' response

Reply 2 is me taking the piss out of Reply 1

Reply 3 is Textusa, trying to be hard, telling me off for reply 2 and demanding my dinner money before warning me as to my future conduct. It is about as effective as the student teacher trying to get smart with the class and being handed her arse in a carrier bag

Reply 4 is standard textaloon fodder, trotting out a few well-worn platitudes and studiously avoiding any reference to Textusa's ''If I could turn back time'' tribute act further up the page.

Reply 5 is from someone who skipped the entire maths section and made a non sequitur about a blanket

Reply 6 is from someone who not only hasn't read Textusa's post but also appears not to have read anything at all since about October 2007, except possibly the instructions on how to remove the childproof cap with her feet in order to save undoing the buckles.

Reply 7 is from me, pouring cold water over another flaming conspiraloon. Well, it's for their own good

Reply 8 is from another sensible person, making the same point as myself, and probably wondering how responder 6 manages to get through the day and if she knows that the war is over yet.

Reply 9 is from someone who clearly took one look at the maths lesson, thought ''Fuck that for a game of soldiers'' and tossed in a story about another missing child, to avoid having to say ''Thank you for those pictures with the arrows on, Textusa, they were great'' and risk bursting into flames at the sheer size of the fib.

Reply 10 is me again, basically saying to Poster No 8 ''Oh no you don't get out of it that easily - stop changing the subject, you wee shite''

Reply 11 is Textusa, using the royal ''We'' and latching onto the the traditional ''crooked government/black ops cobblers, whilst secretly thinking ''But they didn't mention my graphs, the bastards.....''

Reply 12 is one of Textusa's official House Elves, pissed to the gills at nine in the morning, who has no chance of understanding anything with big words in, but is trotted out occasionally because of the exceptional length of her tongue

Reply 13 is respondent No1 again, who still hasn't read the post, couldn't count that high even if she had, and struggles anyway, what with her hands operating the duodecimal system. It's not easy working in Base 12 in a Base 10 world. Still, that extra finger comes in handy, as she can simply leave it permanently planted on the exclamation mark.

Reply 14 is another poster desperately and randomly throwing questions into the pot, in the hope that no-one will notice that she hasn't read the post either

Reply 15 is the poster I think of as ''Double Tap'' as every single sentence is punctuated with a double exclamation mark. She makes no mention of Textusa's Maths thesis but auditions for Loony of the week by slobbering over Textusa and praising her for knocking up three quarters of a million page views.

Yep - three quarters of a million. And not one of them has read that post.
 
Textusa, what you see as your razor-sharp analysis is actually the biggest waste of time ever. They don't read them, pet. And not just because some of them can't read.
 
You're like a forlorn goose, Textusa, farting in the fog. They know you are out there somewhere, but provided they hear the occasional trump it's enough to keep them happy. You could fill a post with pages taken at random from a Haynes manual for a Ford Capri and not one of them would even notice..............
 
 
 
*we use the term ''readers'' loosely,  to describe all users of Textusa's site. This includes the ones who can't, but who like to look at the pretty arrows

2 comments:

  1. "the still dim but slightly more skeptical troops on Havern's"

    So what makes everyone at Jill Havern's site dim then?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Inbreeding?

    Genetic testing?

    Poor diet?

    Difficult to say without further study. Probably a combination of the above.

    ReplyDelete

Leave a message. If you're a conspiraloon, we might publish it, but we reserve the right to take the piss mercilessly. Have a nice day.