The Cracked Thread

Is is wrong of me to expect EA to be up there?

Huh. Could have sworn Mc Donalds was a surprisingly well-paid job. Must depend on the country.

Hey, while it's not the most respectable job in the world, think of it this way: Get a job there, prove yourself to be a diligent worker, and then if you're anywhere in the world, short of cash, you have a ready-made reference with the company.

It is in Australia.

Considering what stuff costs in Australia, it has to be.

It's not just that (big part of it), but from what I understand you can live easier off a McDonald's wage in Australia than you can in America. The pay is that much better even with the higher cost of living.

In America, do McDonald's workers get tips at all?

Cashiers never get tips. Tips are for waiters and waitresses which Mc Donalds doesn't employ.

Sometimes the cashier might get some change if it isn't very much, but occasionally fast food places will try and discourage it.

In almost every fast food restaurant I've been to, employees aren't actually allowed to accept tips. As in their managers will scold and/or punish them for it. I have no idea why.

Anybody read Wong's article on movie lessons? Pretty shitty. The comments section tears it a new one.

Yeah, I'm a big fan of Wong, but that one's just bad.

Of course The Incredibles would be number 1 in that article.

The first one is painful because ANYONE who watched Toy Story 3's ending, " knows that he ends up giving the toys to a little girl which sends the message, "don't cling to your past, send happiness to the next generation".

And once again, I don't think we're supposed to take the message "LOL don't use tech to make people better" It shows how completely and utterly obsessed Syndrome is. For anyone else selling the technology he has would be a victory in and of himself, but to Syndrome it's still about getting back at the supers. As pointed out by another commenter, a very similar line is said by the very immature Dash, who learns to control himself and hold back by the end of the movie.

edited 11th Apr '14 1:41:51 PM by RhymeBeat

There's two characters in After Hours I don't particularly like: the bald guy who's always pausing in the middle of sentences , and the goofball character. They're just so annoying !

Today on "So what's that you were saying about 'kids these days' ... ?"

edited 17th Apr '14 8:33:28 AM by Pachylad

This Photoplasty contest looks like it's shaping up to be rather hilarious. (Some of the entries, anyway.)

Oh man, the Captain Confederacy one is great.

Do yourself a favor and read the comments afterwards. I haven't laughed this hard in ages.

edited 20th Apr '14 8:01:38 PM by Robotnik

See this is why I want to be a dad. Mom's generally don't make cool jokes like that. (well that and moms have to do the incubation thing but, another topic.)

But yes, good comment section is good.

edited 20th Apr '14 7:44:07 PM by Robotnik

You know what really irritates me about the Photoplasty contests? They give a theme, they collect the submissions, and then they put up the results with a completely different title that would've invalidated half the listed entries. (So what else is new?)

edited 25th Apr '14 1:52:42 AM by Pyrite

Alright... Cracked fans... I need to know something:

Am I reading/interpreting something wrong? And by that, I mean a specific columnist.

I just came over from the Christian Troper Coven, where a discussion of the philosophy of faith lead me to cite one of David Wong's articles. I just got a reply back that someone there would have taken the point more seriously if they didn't think Wong was anti-Christian. This felt like news to me, as I never interpreted the guy as being specifically anti-Christian, but kind-of the opposite.

Cracked is snarky in regards to religion in general. Being a modern humor site, this is to be expected, but with with a few exceptions (like the horrible hidden messages in movies piece), I've always seen Wong's articles that touch on that as being more or less an *oasis* because he seems to like to point out how humans tend to veer toward believing in one thing or another and seems to like to point out where similarities in us all outweigh differences. In other words, I've got the impression from most of his articles that "Yes, it's okay to believe in something." - Unlike most of the articles by most of the other writers there.

And apparently, someone else gets the impression that what he's saying is that "It's okay to believe in something, as long as it's not Jesus" which is an impression *I've never gotten.*

Am I stupid for this? Is there something I'm missing in Wong's articles whereby I'm *supposed* to not come away with "it's okay to believe in something" but "it's okay to believe in something as long as it's not this?"

I've seen him accused of having "Christian bias" in the comments section on his work before. So, I don't know. Maybe it's different people reading into things?

I've always read him as something of an "in-between" who wants the overly vocal on both sides to shut up and try to get along... Am I reading in? Am oblivious?