Does Humour Have a Place on SFN?

[CharonY]

The internet is a magical place full of people waiting to be offended by something.

 

That's offensive. Also, I sense a consensus that most would appreciate humor. If we really had a stringent objective and humorless board, we would have a board with almost not members that take themselves far too seriously.

[ajb]

In a slightly wider context, I would be very careful using humor in a paper or at a conference presentation. These are serious things. That said, my boss likes to make jokes at seminars if he sees or hears something that will set up his joke. The first rule of seminar club is that we do talk about it, and the second rule is laugh at the boss's jokes.

 

I have heard some rude jokes at the bar after conferences, which of course I added to. I cannot repeat the jokes here, we have young reader here and I don't want to get banded!

Edited June 14, 2014 by ajb

[Nicholas Kang]

Humour can be a disadvantage too sometime.

[KenBrace]

In a current thread a member made a lighthearted comment.

 

Another member took exception to it, since it did have a political slant, and asked the first member to keep "the political hogwash" out of the forum as it diluted the quality of the discussion.

 

I posted a suggestion that the member lighten up - a little humour is not out of place here.

 

 

I don't want to discuss that specific example - it's just what triggered this observation. I think occasional humour in the forum is a good thing. Now, am I right? Is it acceptable, occasionally to inject a pun, a quick, relevant joke, a witty observation, or should we stay objective and humourless at all times?

All stiff and no humor makes for a stringent and easily annoyed community. A little humor is needed. It shouldn't be too often or excessive though.

[iNow]

Humour can be a disadvantage too sometime.

Laughter is the best medicine... Unless you have diarrhea.

[imatfaal]

Alpher Bethe Gamow? If a seriously important paper (by a PhD candidate!) can take the mickey then surely we all can - just a tiny bit, and in a non-distracting way but it adds immeasurably to life and enjoyment

[Bill Angel]

You can be humour but it depends on the context. It depends on the surrounding situation. Therefore, you must be wise enough to think of when should I be humour and when it is not suitable.

 

That's a good point. I had thought up what I felt was a humorous rejoinder to another member's post at SFN, but in thinking about it decided not to post it, as this other member could have been irritated by my post in a way that I had not intended my post to be taken.

[Nicholas Kang]

With all do respect, do not tell me what to do.

 

Imagination was given to people to compensate them for what they are not; a sense of humor to console them for what they are. ~ Francis Bacon

source

 

No problem, I don`t think I should apologize according to Mr.Ophiolite`s law. Yet, anyway, I should say sorry if my earlier post hurt you. Sorry.

 

Dear Bill Angel,

 

You mean my post had irritate others?

[arc]

If humorous content was not allowed here I would never have joined SFN. It is a stress relieving device in many instances and the well timed punch line or self deprecating joke can break down barriers between opponents and avert what could have been a potentially argumentative incident.

 

Science and humor are both creative pursuits, both an attempt to describe something in a new and unique way and both providing a degree of joy if successful. Humor just requires a surprising punch line to work its magic. While science requires accuracy.

[ajb]

Laughter is the best medicine... Unless you have diarrhea.

Hereditary diarrhea is no laughing matter, it is awful to have it in your jeans.

[Nicholas Kang]

In conclusion, Humour have a place on SFN in every corner of your screen, you can decide whether humour or not, it is up to you. Neither anyone will force you to be humour but if you take it, don`t misuse it or you will irritate others.

[Phi for All]

Hereditary diarrhea is no laughing matter, it is awful to have it in your jeans.

 

I hope you don't have allergies as well. Sneezing must be... complicated.

[dimreepr]

 

I hope you don't have allergies as well. Sneezing must be... complicated.

 

 

Complicated, is the equation “how fast do I have to walk, to: a/ maintain the illusion that ‘I’m fine’ and b/ get to a toilet before the pressure reaches critical”. What you mean, I think, is explosive.

[Acme]

Do you know the difference between humor & odor?

Humor is a shift of wit.

 

 

You are right. I am not any of them. So, quit.

With all do respect, do not tell me what to do.

 

No problem, I don`t think I should apologize according to Mr.Ophiolite`s law. Yet, anyway, I should say sorry if my earlier post hurt you. Sorry.

 

No need to apologize Nick. You see, I was making a humorous remark in that I did exactly what I suggested you not do, i.e. 'don't tell me what to do' is telling you what to do.

 

Humor can be a subtle thing and some people can't tell a joke and some people can't get a joke. My original post on the difference between humor and odor is in fact a joke that points up that very truism.

 

Add to that the fact that humor varies widely by culture and age and there is no end of opportunity for misunderstanding. But as the old saying goes, nothing ventured, nothing gained and as there is much to be gained in humor one can, as you conclude, just try and use their best judgment before throwing out an intended witticism.

 

Let the jocularity resume!

[Sato]

Humor I think is usually good as it makes the discussion less combative and more interpersonally comfortable, and I think most SFN members would concede to this. But when it's ambiguous internet sarcasm that makes a false assertion directly pertinent to the discussion, as was the case in Ophiolite's anecdotal example if I recall the contents of that thread correctly, it does not have a place besides the end of a DELETE command.

[Acme]

Humor I think is usually good as it makes the discussion less combative and more interpersonally comfortable, and I think most SFN members would concede to this. But when it's ambiguous internet sarcasm that makes a false assertion directly pertinent to the discussion, as was the case in Ophiolite's anecdotal example if I recall the contents of that thread correctly, it does not have a place besides the end of a DELETE command.

I thought the anecdotal example was not funny as well, but as I just said, there is such a wide variance in what people consider funny that attempting to institute humor police is an exorcise in fertility.

[dimreepr]

I thought the anecdotal example was not funny as well, but as I just said, there is such a wide variance in what people consider funny that attempting to institute humor police is an exorcise in fertility.

 

 

One born every minute.

[Phi for All]

an exorcise in fertility

 

We can't figure out what   possessed you to get pregnant.

[Unity+]

In a current thread a member made a lighthearted comment.

 

Another member took exception to it, since it did have a political slant, and asked the first member to keep "the political hogwash" out of the forum as it diluted the quality of the discussion.

 

I posted a suggestion that the member lighten up - a little humour is not out of place here.

 

 

I don't want to discuss that specific example - it's just what triggered this observation. I think occasional humour in the forum is a good thing. Now, am I right? Is it acceptable, occasionally to inject a pun, a quick, relevant joke, a witty observation, or should we stay objective and humourless at all times?

Oh, are we talking about the post I made? Don't be shy, point me out when necessary.

 

I misinterpreted the joke as taking advantage to get a political point across and injecting political agendas. I get offended by this because science and politics, in my opinion, don't mix. I keep them separate and when someone does so I call them out for it.

[Sato]

I thought the anecdotal example was not funny as well, but as I just said, there is such a wide variance in what people consider funny that attempting to institute humor police is an exorcise in fertility.

 

More than unfunny, it was detrimental; as I said, it made a spurious, possibly sarcastic but if so ambiguously so, assertion directly towards the discussion/debate. It slipped over from a bad joke to potential misinformation. A portion of my own sense of humor is most often discomforting to others, I have found, and as such I believe it suitable to generally omit its manifest jokes when not with others who share it, and the same principle applies to "jokes" at that anecdotal example's end of the spectrum.

[Acme]

More than unfunny, it was detrimental; as I said, it made a spurious, possibly sarcastic but if so ambiguously so, assertion directly towards the discussion/debate. It slipped over from a bad joke to potential misinformation. A portion of my own sense of humor is most often discomforting to others, I have found, and as such I believe it suitable to generally omit its manifest jokes when not with others who share it, and the same principle applies to "jokes" at that anecdotal example's end of the spectrum.

This is where our other current hot topic may come to bear, that of the neg rep. In cases such as we have under discussion, use it & move on. Bad putty tat!

.

 

...exorcise in fertility...

One born every minute.

 

You callin' me a sucker!?

 

...

We can't figure out what   possessed you to get pregnant.

 

What would I do?

Edited June 15, 2014 by Acme

[Ophiolite]

 

More than unfunny, it was detrimental; as I said, it made a spurious, possibly sarcastic but if so ambiguously so, assertion directly towards the discussion/debate. It slipped over from a bad joke to potential misinformation. A portion of my own sense of humor is most often discomforting to others, I have found, and as such I believe it suitable to generally omit its manifest jokes when not with others who share it, and the same principle applies to "jokes" at that anecdotal example's end of the spectrum.

My advice remains the same: lighten up.

[Strange]

Alpher Bethe Gamow? If a seriously important paper (by a PhD candidate!) can take the mickey then surely we all can - just a tiny bit, and in a non-distracting way but it adds immeasurably to life and enjoyment

 

The paper "Can apparent superluminal neutrino speeds be explained as a quantum weak measurement?" by M V Berry, N Brunner, S Popescu and P Shukla has the abstract:

 

Probably not.

[Ophiolite]

That is not only humorous, it is near perfect eloquent writing. Pithy, precise and gloriously short.

 

I should love to read a text book by them.

[Strange]

And:

Guaranteed Margins for LQG Regulators, John C. Doyle, IEEE Transactions on Automa C Control, Vol. vol. 23, no. 4, August 1978, pp. 756-7.

ABSTRACT: There are none.