The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Is WONDERFUL.
Fín.
Fín.
Page:
Tanoy wrote:
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
Ahaahahha
The fact that I forgot the 'had' gives it the lasting appeal I crave.
Bloody brilliant!
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
Ahaahahha
The fact that I forgot the 'had' gives it the lasting appeal I crave.
Bloody brilliant!
I think what made it so lip smacking bone crunchingly funny is the fact aht you forgot the word had.
"Maybe you to be there"
Hahaha.
Fool.
"Maybe you to be there"
Hahaha.
Fool.
munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it sounds
> like utter toss.
That's not remotely funny.
But "Maybe you had to be there!" is bone-crunchingly, lip-smackingly funny.
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it sounds
> like utter toss.
That's not remotely funny.
But "Maybe you had to be there!" is bone-crunchingly, lip-smackingly funny.
Tanoy wrote:
> Tanoy wrote:
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Now that's funny because it's generally used when something funny
> happens in real life, and when you explain it later on, it comes out
> sounding pretty rubbish.
>
> I twisted this tired formula so that it now about something that
> happened on TV. Obviously you can't 'be there' with TV. Thus the
> impossibility of my superbly-timed statement renders my joke
> hilarious.
But that's not funny becasue I'd already stated teh samething. So now you just look even more toolish, and it's not funny either.
> Tanoy wrote:
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Now that's funny because it's generally used when something funny
> happens in real life, and when you explain it later on, it comes out
> sounding pretty rubbish.
>
> I twisted this tired formula so that it now about something that
> happened on TV. Obviously you can't 'be there' with TV. Thus the
> impossibility of my superbly-timed statement renders my joke
> hilarious.
But that's not funny becasue I'd already stated teh samething. So now you just look even more toolish, and it's not funny either.
I can see you acting stupid towards the topic, but it's not the same style.
To me it looks more like you're playing stupid to something he said, then telling him to edit it before people see him looking stupid, which can also be applied to your post. That's what made your post funny (if youcan call it funny, I find it mildly entertaining)
So it's loosely related, but not quite.
To me it looks more like you're playing stupid to something he said, then telling him to edit it before people see him looking stupid, which can also be applied to your post. That's what made your post funny (if youcan call it funny, I find it mildly entertaining)
So it's loosely related, but not quite.
Aaah - so you're saying you tried to be funny by playing the idiot?
Apologies for not finding it even remotely amusing.
Apologies for not finding it even remotely amusing.
Azul wrote:
> Tanoy wrote:
> this Madden 2005 topic
>
> Woah woah woah - this Madden 2005 topic. Exactly. What's the
> topic? Madden 2005.
>
> Muh, you're an idiot.
Yes, I KNEW about this topic being about Madden 2005, but played dumb.
In the same way that Xander KNEW he was in a library, yet still claimed ignorance.
Does ANYONE get it yet?
> Tanoy wrote:
> this Madden 2005 topic
>
> Woah woah woah - this Madden 2005 topic. Exactly. What's the
> topic? Madden 2005.
>
> Muh, you're an idiot.
Yes, I KNEW about this topic being about Madden 2005, but played dumb.
In the same way that Xander KNEW he was in a library, yet still claimed ignorance.
Does ANYONE get it yet?
Tanoy wrote:
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
^^^^^^^^^
Now that's funny because it's generally used when something funny happens in real life, and when you explain it later on, it comes out sounding pretty rubbish.
I twisted this tired formula so that it now about something that happened on TV. Obviously you can't 'be there' with TV. Thus the impossibility of my superbly-timed statement renders my joke hilarious.
> munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it
> sounds
> like utter toss.
>
>
> Maybe you to be there.
^^^^^^^^^
Now that's funny because it's generally used when something funny happens in real life, and when you explain it later on, it comes out sounding pretty rubbish.
I twisted this tired formula so that it now about something that happened on TV. Obviously you can't 'be there' with TV. Thus the impossibility of my superbly-timed statement renders my joke hilarious.
Tanoy wrote:
> this Madden 2005 topic
Woah woah woah - this Madden 2005 topic. Exactly. What's the topic? Madden 2005.
Muh, you're an idiot.
> this Madden 2005 topic
Woah woah woah - this Madden 2005 topic. Exactly. What's the topic? Madden 2005.
Muh, you're an idiot.
munn wrote:
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it sounds
> like utter toss.
Maybe you to be there.
> Maybe it's funny if you see it, but from him explaining it. it sounds
> like utter toss.
Maybe you to be there.
Page: