Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!
-
@hardwaregeek Some of them make sense just based on the score, but yeah a few were confusing. In round 2, the German Sweden one looks confusing, unless you knew that Sweden was in the lead, then German scored, and then scored again in overtime.
-
@thebread said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
and then scored again in overtime.
On a penalty, like 30 seconds before the game ended. I wasn't cheering for either team, really, but a tie would have been hilarious.
To be fair, the maneuver the German team pulled on that penalty was pretty ballsy, and something that even I -not normally a fan of football- can appreciate.
-
@cvi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
the maneuver the German team pulled on that penalty was pretty ballsy
What other sort of maneuver could one expect in a game of football?
-
@cvi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@thebread said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
and then scored again in overtime.
On a penalty, like 30 seconds before the game ended. I wasn't cheering for either team, really, but a tie would have been hilarious.
To be fair, the maneuver the German team pulled on that penalty was pretty ballsy, and something that even I -not normally a fan of football- can appreciate.
It was even closer. About 15 seconds, only.
-
@cvi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
On a penalty, like 30 seconds before the game ended. I wasn't cheering for either team, really, but a tie would have been hilarious.
Yesterday Iran tied with Portugal by scoring a goal at minute 93.
-
@thebread said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
Whoops, i mean Iceland get the win against Croatia.
NO WAI, WE NUMBER ONE!
Oh... Wait... Just remembered I don't care... Hell, if they lost it may mean less noise through my window sooner, the farther they get the longer I'll have to endure the madness...
-
@hardwaregeek said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
What other sort of maneuver could one expect in a game of football?
Have you seen some of the other teams play? Some of the maneuvers are more like ... cubey. Or, perhaps more apt, dicey (same shape, after all).
-
@cvi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
On a penalty, like 30 seconds before the game ended.
Free kick, just outside the penalty area.
-
-
@raceprouk said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
Quando providebo loqui Verbis?
SOON.
-
@pie_flavor The hat works.
-
@gribnit What?
Also, it's considered courtesy to quote a post when you're responding to it and I've posted in the thread since then and it's more than a couple days old.
-
@pie_flavor said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
more than a couple
daysyears old.
-
@luhmann Fine, fine. I'm running two threads for this forum, one of which is more or less current and the other one of which is catching up. Most of the time, I'm several years ago.
-
@gribnit said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
I'm running two threads for this forum, one of which is more or less current and the other one of which is catching up. Most of the time, I'm several years ago.
Same here. Though I tend to limit my interactions with old posts to up/down-voting.
-
@cartman82 I don't follow the world cup closely either, but these were hilarious. Do you have polandballs for the next rounds as well?
-
@remi Ask and ye shall receive. Round 3:
Russia is funny in this one. Apparently they either kick ass or get destroyed. Very suitable for their country.
-
For people not following the cup (or ) ...
Go !
-
I had to get Google's help for yesterday, the yelling frequency got too high so I was confused. Google then said 1-1 after 120 + 2mins... Ah, penalties!
Anyway, fucking Croatia got into quarters. Shit. That means more yelling
-
@onyx said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
Anyway, fucking Croatia got into quarters. Shit. That means more yelling
Better that than whining how referees stole the quarter finals from us, everything is against us, whine whine whine.
-
@cartman82 Yeah, thanks! I'm waiting for the end of next round to see the matching polandballs now...
Russia is funny in this one. Apparently they either kick ass or get destroyed. Very suitable for their country.
It's just a matter of whether they get their doping shots before the match or not.
-
@remi
Or whether they manage to park the bus and wait until PKs (and they would have won in regulation but for an own goal).At this point, I'm kind of rooting for Russia to manage to successfully park their way to the finals, just for the factor.
-
@izzion said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
At this point, I'm kind of rooting for Russia to manage to successfully park their way to the finals, just for the factor.
But but but... that means they have to beat England... which can't happen since IT'S COMING HOME LADS!
-
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
COMING HOME LADS
Well yes, eventually they will return to England. And when the Belgian players return you can even have some good players back
-
@luhmann I'm not particularly rooting for them, it's just hilarious to see the hype about it (much more than at previous events, IMO).
I base whoever I support on simple rules:
- I don't care and can switch support from one match to the next
- If I happen to be watching a match and a country I have ever been to plays, that one
- if I've been to both countries or none, I pick the underdog, or those that play well, or those that play nicely, or those that have a player with a funny name/hairdo/shirt/...
- but only if I actually kind of like them more than the other
- and only if I'm actually watching the match and not doing something else at the same time.
So, yeah. And whenever I want to troll someone, I remember that...
IT'S COMING HOME LADS!!!
-
@luhmann said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
For people not following the cup (or ) ...
Go !
If the ball goes into the net twice, does it count for two points?
-
-
-
-
-
@boomzilla Makes me think of something along the line of:
The year is -2017 BC. Europe is entirely occupied by the EU. Well, not entirely... One small island of indomitable Brits still holds out against the invaders.
-
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
The year is -2017 BC.
Double negation aside - when we go negative years, do we or do we not include year zero?
-
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla Makes me think of something along the line of:
The year is -2017 BC. Europe is entirely occupied by the EU. Well, not entirely... One small island of indomitable Brits still holds out against the invaders.
I've seen it, but no, not really familiar with it.
-
@Gąska There never was a year 0 (1 BC was followed by 1 AD), but that doesn't quite answer your question.
(and the double negation was intended to try and stay as close as possible to the original, but I didn't consider the 0 and picked 2017 as the year of the referendum but really do I need to butcher the joke by explaining it even more?)
-
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@Gąska There never was a year 0 (1 BC was followed by 1 AD)
That's exactly why I'm asking this. There was no year zero, but neither were there negative years. When you're at BC side but cross into the negative years, that's different from crossing into AD positive years - and handling of zero might be also different. I'm wondering whether this question has been already answered by some standarization/history writing authority.
(and the double negation was intended to try and stay as close as possible to the original
I figured as much. But to me, it sounds worse than "2017 AD". Maybe it's different in French.
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@Gąska There never was a year 0 (1 BC was followed by 1 AD)
That's exactly why I'm asking this. There was no year zero, but neither were there negative years. When you're at BC side but cross into the negative years, that's different from crossing into AD positive years - and handling of zero might be also different. I'm wondering whether this question has been already answered by some standarization/history writing authority.
Now we're definitely out of joke territory... Have a look at the Wikipedia page, they have some interesting considerations about it.
I'm not sure that really answers your question, but indeed you have to keep in mind that all this numbering stuff happened well after the fact (obviously nobody ever said they were living in year "minus something"!). And perhaps more importantly, that no one (or no one sane...) ever really does maths this way with years. You might add or substract X years from a date, you can have a date that is itself negative as in "42 BC" which you might possibly write as "-42" (or more likely "-41" i.e. "1 BC" = "0") but I don't think anyone would ever consider "-42 BC" as a valid date. It's probably in the same basket as "potato BC", it's just meaningless.
Now you can define new syntaxes to mean whatever you want ("potato BC" can be defined as meaning "the year the first potato was eaten by a human" or whatever) and then "-42 BC" can be defined as, basically, "42 AD" or "41 AD" or anything else. For example to extend a definition that works for usual dates, that could be "start at a notional 0 AD (which doesn't exist, but ignore that) and add as many years as your number, considering the opposite number if it's BC" (so 1 AD = 0 AD + 1 year = 1 AD, 1 BC = 0 AD - 1 year = 1 BC). In that case "-42 BC" becomes "0 AD - -42 = 42 AD".
But you're automatically answering the question by the definition itself, and I don't think there is any other way round since the original form simply has no pre-defined meaning (kind of like 0^0 where there is no obvious answer according to usual definitions, and essentially the answer is "whatever we define it to be").
(and the double negation was intended to try and stay as close as possible to the original
I figured as much. But to me, it sounds worse than "2017 AD". Maybe it's different in French.
It's not, and it does. (not different in French, and it does sounds worse). No one would ever say or write that normally, I just did it for the lulz.
-
@remi said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
But you're automatically answering the question by the definition itself, and I don't think there is any other way round since the original form simply has no pre-defined meaning (kind of like 0^0 where there is no obvious answer according to usual definitions, and essentially the answer is "whatever we define it to be").
That's why I asked not about a definite answer, but specifically about some authority that gave some answer. And sure enough, your link contains one - ISO 8601 defines year 1 as 1AD, and year 0 as 1 BC, and negative years as counting relative to 1 BC (-1 is 2 BC, -2 is 3 BC and so on). So despite your attempts to ridicule my post and bring this discussion into "how can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real" pseudophilosophical territory, you were still very helpful and I was able to find what I was looking for. Thanks!
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
That's exactly why I'm asking this. There was no year zero, but neither were there negative years. When you're at BC side but cross into the negative years, that's different from crossing into AD positive years - and handling of zero might be also different. I'm wondering whether this question has been already answered by some standarization/history writing authority.
Is this your impersonation of a Polandball?
-
@boomzilla do you see any kurwas in there? Or complaining about government?
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla do you see any kurwas in there? Or complaining about government?
Just a lack of any sense of humor. I thought you might be trying to be a German ball.
-
@boomzilla said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla do you see any kurwas in there? Or complaining about government?
Just a lack of any sense of humor.
Because any attempt at discussion on a topic related to the joke automatically means I haven't found the joke funny.
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla do you see any kurwas in there? Or complaining about government?
Just a lack of any sense of humor.
Because any attempt at discussion on a topic related to the joke automatically means I haven't found the joke funny.
When you take a silly throwaway joke like that and then beat it into the ground...yeah, that's the impression.
-
@boomzilla the joke was about Asterix. The minus year thing was just an aside.
-
@boomzilla if I can ask for a tip on English language usage (it ended very badly last time I did that, but whatever, I'm an optimist) - where's the line between discussing a related topic and beating the joke to the ground? How do I recognize that I'm going too far? Or are jokes like gender differences - something I simply shouldn't ever discuss if I don't want people to hate me?
-
@Gąska I dunno, man, but color me at least as upset about this as you are now that I'm acting like @blakeyrat. I will, however, remind everyone that threads are free.
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
kurwas
Ever since learning this word I've gained a new appreciation of the Portuguese expression "mandar ir dar uma curva".
(to tell someone to "go walk around the corner", much like telling someone in English to "take a long walk on a short pier") (where the word "curva" ["bend"/"turn"/"corner"] is pronounced much like the Polish "kurwa")
-
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
So despite your attempts to ridicule my post and bring this discussion into "how can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real" pseudophilosophical territory,
Uh, ??? This is gearing up nicely for a sub-thread, but really, I don't think there was anything of that in my post, which mostly was a lot of not-really-thought-out ing. Don't assume the worst of everyone when not in the garage, this is definitely not giving me any incentive to discuss nicely with you.
you were still very helpful and I was able to find what I was looking for.
I'm happy for you then.
-
@Zecc yes, this is a constant source of jokes when talking to Polish expats.
-
@boomzilla said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@Gąska said in Polandball appreciation of thread - now with added burgers!:
@boomzilla do you see any kurwas in there? Or complaining about government?
Just a lack of any sense of humor. I thought you might be trying to be a German ball.
Needs wörk.
-
@topspin Arbeit macht langweilig!