@Rpground
One way kills the joke, the other does not actully kill it.
Hell, explaining a joke can be part of a joke, but that is when we have more then one person in the act, so the one that tells it makes the joke then the other explains it and in a way that adds to the joke or makes it a second joke.
The only time the one telling the joke and explaining it works as a joke is if the joke is actully in them explaining it.
If the logic really was to never explain it the nothing can be a joke unless you know already everyone will get it, and that ends up making jokes very restrictive and kills them quicker.
So, the logic is actully sound, it’s misunderstanding that logic that is it seems like a fallacy is the.
It’s simply, when you are the one telling a joke, don’t explain it.
@Prof.NightJack
I don’t see the difference if the one who told the joke had to explain it or someone else does. The joke still needed to be explained, thus by the presented logic; it is not a joke…
@Rpground
It’s about how having the one telling the joke being the one to explain it end up killing the jokes.
If someone doesn’t understand the joke and needs someone to explain something for them to get it, it has to be someone else, not the one telling the joke.
The fallacy only comes about when you use the line wrong or think that explaining the joke at all is the problem.
@Background Pony #3D84
I know that, was just pointing out the fallacy in that quote from the Joker. So many people use it, but don’t really understand the implications of stating such a thing…
@SFant
A fallacy to this;
Anyone could, in theory, NOT know the joke. I doubt anyone who lives in the jungle would know why the chicken crossed the road. Leading to a paradox…
One way kills the joke, the other does not actully kill it.
Hell, explaining a joke can be part of a joke, but that is when we have more then one person in the act, so the one that tells it makes the joke then the other explains it and in a way that adds to the joke or makes it a second joke.
The only time the one telling the joke and explaining it works as a joke is if the joke is actully in them explaining it.
If the logic really was to never explain it the nothing can be a joke unless you know already everyone will get it, and that ends up making jokes very restrictive and kills them quicker.
So, the logic is actully sound, it’s misunderstanding that logic that is it seems like a fallacy is the.
It’s simply, when you are the one telling a joke, don’t explain it.
Edited
I don’t see the difference if the one who told the joke had to explain it or someone else does. The joke still needed to be explained, thus by the presented logic; it is not a joke…
It’s about how having the one telling the joke being the one to explain it end up killing the jokes.
If someone doesn’t understand the joke and needs someone to explain something for them to get it, it has to be someone else, not the one telling the joke.
The fallacy only comes about when you use the line wrong or think that explaining the joke at all is the problem.
I know that, was just pointing out the fallacy in that quote from the Joker. So many people use it, but don’t really understand the implications of stating such a thing…
It wasn’t explaining the joke anyway. It was the setup, the puns were the punchline.
@SFant
A fallacy to this;
Anyone could, in theory, NOT know the joke. I doubt anyone who lives in the jungle would know why the chicken crossed the road. Leading to a paradox…
Thank you. I lost my syay at Pinkie’s pun.
Rimshot time!
A mannequin wearing a dress.
The vast majority of the emotes he uses are from the Reddit subforum. I believe the one you want is ‘ppreally’ from here.
Hah. Pinkie pyrite. I made a funny.
Edited