Book 3 - Page 232

A mortal, a chortle, and a portal

Book 3 - Page 232
Comic - Book 3 - Page 232
Recent posts... (See full thread)
ArkenSaw wrote:

Each bundle seems to consist of two blue cables and a white cable.


I'm pretty sure they're all the same color; you're just seeing the highlight on one of them that makes it a little bit brighter.
zilfallon wrote:
Crisis21 wrote:
Don't forget the related paths that lead to "boys are evil", "children are evil", "adults are evil", and "elderly are evil".

We're past page 10, one of those paths has to lead to "Jillians are evil".


Grrrrr, the Jillian stuff gets on my nerves but i really have to give this a tip for awful joke points. I hate you :lol:.
Is anyone else's F5 finger getting tired, or is it just me?
BonGonjador wrote:
Is anyone else's F5 finger getting tired, or is it just me?


Personally, I just followed @erfworld on Twitter and keep a tab open to Twitter on Tuesdays and Fridays. Rob always posts a tweet announcing the new update. When there's tweets to download the number of them shows up in tab title. Since I follow very few people, that's not something that happens no more than a few times an hour and I'm not sucking up Erfword.com's resources by constantly reloading the page. If that strategy won't work for you because you follow too many people, I suggest you go to erfworld's twitter page and keep reloading that instead. You'll be informed within minutes of the update and you'll be sucking up Twitter's unlimited resources rather than erfworlds's finite ones.

Seriously, if enough people keep reloading the web page, it's effectively a denial of services attack on the website.
abb3w wrote:
That last image reminds me far too much of this one for comfort.

Spoiler: show
Image

Oooh, pretty.

Personally, when I see a large stone covered in glowing runes, I think of a Marker from Dead Space.
Earendil wrote:

BTW - you probably noticed (my spelling and stuff) English is not my first language either - more like my third.


Read many of your posts, with interest, and some engagement with your reasoning. NEVER thought there was the least question of your command of English. Surprised it isn't your first language, in fact. Well done, you !. :)
DeanXeL wrote:
I can understand the state of the cables in the last panel, but there is an art mistake in combination with the previous panels. Just looking at the last panel, we see, from left to right, shocked cables on the wall, shocked cabled connecting to the portal, the portal, half shocked cables connecting to the portal, a cut, unshocked cables following the far wall, shocked cables on the near wall. Seeing that the tracks bend to the right, one can assume that the tunnel continues in that direction. Since these cables are NOT being powered by the cables on the right side of the portal, as these are severed, they must get their power from yet another portal.

But to get back to the error: the cables on the right side of our duo are nowhere to be seen in the frames leading up to the reveal of the portal, even if the 'camera position' between the ultimate and penultimate frame is barely a zoom and a pan to get into the backs of our diade of casters.

Btw, the missing pieces of cable and track? I guess the golem created or tried to create a portal, but either after some time or because of some error, the portal became unstable and scattered itself in an explosion, sending everything it touched in bits and pieces to CC.

The cables to the right of the Duo were seen in the previous panels. They were to the LEFT of them.
The near wall swapped positions for dramatic effect to that we don't have two whole frames in a row of Bill and Tedd going "Woah", before we see what they are "Woahing" about.

Also it would be rather safe of an assumption that the cables to the right of Bill and Tedd are powered from the LEFT side of the portal, and that these cables are just very very long.
Metallicat wrote:

When the contract expires, the endless debate about it may finally be over. Good news, we're over halfway through its duration. Only question is, will the contract expire before the parties to the contract?

Isn't there an NDA clause that lasts longer than the truce?

EDIT:

Anomynous 167 wrote:
That's right, I used Homestuck logic to explain that Minecraft reference.

Must ... resist ... sigging ...

zilfallon wrote:
Crisis21 wrote:
Don't forget the related paths that lead to "boys are evil", "children are evil", "adults are evil", and "elderly are evil".

We're past page 10, one of those paths has to lead to "Jillians are evil".


Keep ... resisting ...
zilfallon wrote:
Crisis21 wrote:
Don't forget the related paths that lead to "boys are evil", "children are evil", "adults are evil", and "elderly are evil".
We're past page 10, one of those paths has to lead to "Jillians are evil".
Eh, it's just a standard formula. The problem is that it equates "investing time and money into a thing" with "time * money = that thing".

Going by the standard formula...
Charlie invested attention (usually time, but the reason for that change will be obvious later) and money into Jillian. Therefore, Jillian = Attention * Money.
Not, usually, here comes "time is money/time=money", but since this is Erfworld, I'm going to go with Charlie's rule 16: "Of the few things more important than money, Charlie's attention is the most scarce and valuable." Therefore, Attention = money * x, with x > 1. Attention is (worth) more than money.
Therefore, Jillian = Attention * Money = (x * money) * money = x * money^2, with X still greater than 1.
Now, money is the root of all evil, hence money^2 = (all) evil.
Therefore, Jillian = x * money^2 = x * (all) evil, with x (still) greater 1.
Therefore, Jillian is more (greater) than (all) evil.

Shaky in all its instances, particularly the "investing money and time into a preexisting thing = thing". At best, I'd say it'd equate to a relationship with said thing, not to the thing itself - which means the relationship is evil, not the thing.
And that is assuming it truly is a multiplier, not additive (time + money wouldn't work).

Did I just overanalyse a (poor) joke? Yes. But since I think my overanalysation is funnier than the original joke, I deem it worth it.
keybounce wrote:
Metallicat wrote:

When the contract expires, the endless debate about it may finally be over. Good news, we're over halfway through its duration. Only question is, will the contract expire before the parties to the contract?

Isn't there an NDA clause that lasts longer than the truce?

The NDA includes a clause which involves a punishment should someone breach the truce,,, actually. Apon reread of this contract it says that the NDA clause lasts for 90 turns following the expirery or termination of the truce.

Touche.