Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

Katya wrote:http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/69118/

You may not know this, but President Uchtdorf likes planes.

Ha!

I don't know how this question didn't get Editor's Choice. I mean, besides the fact that it was ridiculously overhours.

I know, right? MSJ is a champion.

This interview was fabulous, especially since I actually met Genuine at a Board Booth a while ago. Trust me, it helped.

Heh. Hehe. That was my question. I thought that answer was fantastic.

C is for wrote:This interview was fabulous, especially since I actually met Genuine at a Board Booth a while ago. Trust me, it helped.

This question needs just a couple more votes to make it into the all time most popular questions. (It would be nice if it could live there with the other Petra and Optimistic. question.)

I don't think any questions have broken 40 votes since I started reading the Board about a year ago. We can always hope, though. (And I suppose a "get out the vote" campaign wouldn't hurt either.)

yayfulness wrote:(And I suppose a "get out the vote" campaign wouldn't hurt either.)

I bet whoever's in charge of the FB page could help with that. ^_-

I'd like to see the ten highest-ranked questions after the current top ten, actually. I wonder if presence in the top 10 is a self-reinforcing position, where they keep getting votes even after years because they're still visible. Just food for curiosity.

yayfulness wrote:I'd like to see the ten highest-ranked questions after the current top ten, actually. I wonder if presence in the top 10 is a self-reinforcing position, where they keep getting votes even after years because they're still visible. Just food for curiosity.

It totally is, the numbers on there are going up faster than you'd expect for old questions. There's actually a really old thread on the writer's forum discussing this.

Zedability wrote:

yayfulness wrote:I'd like to see the ten highest-ranked questions after the current top ten, actually. I wonder if presence in the top 10 is a self-reinforcing position, where they keep getting votes even after years because they're still visible. Just food for curiosity.

It totally is, the numbers on there are going up faster than you'd expect for old questions. There's actually a really old thread on the writer's forum discussing this.

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing that when I was a wee probie exploring the forum for the first time. I'm just curious as to whether there are any questions with between 40 and 50 votes, or whether we've created an insurmountable artificial threshold.

Here is my confession: I like the old ones there. It's nice that one of my old questions is still well loved.

At the same time, maybe a "10 most popular by year" would let the old ones still have some love and let the new writers have their own day in the sun too.

UffishThought wrote:Here is my confession: I like the old ones there. It's nice that one of my old questions is still well loved.

At the same time, maybe a "10 most popular by year" would let the old ones still have some love and let the new writers have their own day in the sun too.

I definitely like this idea.

https://theboard.byu.edu/questions/popular/recent/year/

I would like to reiterate that that was my question.

Also, I miss the powdered sugar question.

Dude... That question is totally #1 in the last year now.

This question had the potential to cause so much controversy! I love MSJ's two line response, although it so easily could have opened the doors to many many more questions. I do wonder if there will be any follow up questions or if the Q&A was so quick that no one will think twice.

I think there is a reason MSJ was terse about it - the only answer we can give is that it isn't an official Church policy and from there, everything is up to individual people. Not much more to say.

On a related note, I don't know if I have linked to it before, but I SERIOUSLY love this blog: http://ldsmarriagebed.blogspot.com . Since it is discussing intimacy in a "LDS Married" context, he has a filter that you click saying that you understand the content before you get to the site. But his last post was on masturbation, and I really like a lot about what he has to say.

Not that I want to derail this thread into another discussion on that topic, but . . . in general, I think it is a really insightful blog.

TheAnswerIs42 wrote:I think there is a reason MSJ was terse about it - the only answer we can give is that it isn't an official Church policy and from there, everything is up to individual people. Not much more to say.

Well that certainly hasn't stopped many people before. I understand, I was still amused. Interesting blog, by the way.

MSJ's evil overlord link in response to http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/70439/ is hilarious. I like these:

When I've captured my adversary and he says, "Look, before you kill me, will you at least tell me what this is all about?" I'll say, "No." and shoot him. No, on second thought I'll shoot him then say "No."

After I kidnap the beautiful princess, we will be married immediately in a quiet civil ceremony, not a lavish spectacle in three weeks' time during which the final phase of my plan will be carried out.

I will not include a self-destruct mechanism unless absolutely necessary. If it is necessary, it will not be a large red button labelled "Danger: Do Not Push". The big red button marked "Do Not Push" will instead trigger a spray of bullets on anyone stupid enough to disregard it. Similarly, the ON/OFF switch will not clearly be labelled as such.

If I build a bomb, I will simply remember which wire to cut if it has to be deactivated and make every wire red.

My favorite is from the extended list:

Whatever my one vulnerability is, I will fake a different one. For example, ordering all mirrors removed from the palace, screaming and flinching whenever someone accidentally holds up a mirror, etc. In the climax when the hero whips out a mirror and thrusts it at my face, my reaction will be "Hmm...I think I need a shave."