frank, I've got to ask: For the Golden Bong, you give as criteria, "the most entertaining, the least credible bouncy, or bouncies." I think we need some clarification from the judges on this, and I refer specifically to the case of Sarah Iburruri. Her tale of the rethug boyfriend was clearly and highly entertaining, surely one of the most entertaining. But there are many of us who find her story to be at least mostly credible. Should that be taken into consideration?
What IS a "bouncy," precisely? Is it any supposedly real-life tale that we find interesting, whether factual, fictional, or highly embellished? I have always thought of it as one that is fictional or highly embellished. And so therefore I will probably not vote for SI for the GB.
What say you?
And then there is Dreamer Tatum's bouncy,which was an extremely entertaining send-up of the typical grocery-store bouncy, so good that it might deserve the award. It was meant to be satire, though, which puts it in a questionable place.
You know, sir, there used to be a
very strict and
limited definition for "bouncy;" it had to involve a cop jumping out of the bushes--that was
mandatory--and conversion of a conservative or a Republican to the primitive's point of view.
That was the original meaning.
But over time (and in fact in a very short time), the definition got blurred, and I myself, when at the old home, was somewhat to blame for that. I, along with many others, started using the term "bouncy" to describe just about any tale a primitive told that patently was a lie.
But then the definition tightened up again; now it seems to mean any tale created by a primitive that's probably a lie,
and involves making the primitive look good in some manner. This of course can include "conversions," but apparently conversion, while a nice touch, doesn't matter. Just a tale that makes a primitive look good.
On the matter of Sarah and the golden bong, I think it's up to the voter. If the voter believes it's a lie, or mostly a lie, and thinks it merits the golden bong, the voter should vote accordingly. If the voter believes it's true, or mostly true, then the voter should consider the other candidates.
This one's giving me the most distress, although at the moment I'm thinking of voting for Ms. Ed the unappellated eohippus, but that can change. I've already cast my votes for the top ten primitives, and for the Willie, but still have yet to vote for the other three special awards.
I'm still tug-of-warring with Tucker about the Willie.
