Comment on no ragrets

• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Cunningham’s Law, where are you?

  source

  • Smokeydope@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Why does there gotta be so many psudo-scientific internet ‘laws’ of common human behavioral archetypes with a half baked Wikipedia entry? Can I have SmokeyDopes Law where if more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law”

    source

    • riquisimo@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      “Why does there gotta be so many psudo-scientific internet ‘laws’ of common human behavioral archetypes with a half baked Wikipedia entry?”

      Because of SmokeyDope’s law.

      "If more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law” "

      source
    • foofiepie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Smokeydope’s law right there. Typical telltale signs.

      source
    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Can I have SmokeyDopes Law where if more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law”

      No.

      source
    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Tbf, Cunningham’s law doesn’t have a Wikipedia entry unto itself, just a subsection in the biography of the sort-of kind-of coiner of the aphorism. And it’s not trying to be scientific or academic; the law is just a light-hearted joke that people are less likely to answer questions on the Internet than they are to correct statements.

      source
• sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I heard about it in Bill Nye

  source