I believe this topic has been brought up before, though I'm not looking through the nearly 50 pages on this board to find it.

What has prompted this thread is this parody posted today:

http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/johnlennon63.shtml

(why do I defend these things?...)

Which currently stands with 9 votes, all 111s. I saw it and commented; IMO the pacing is a 3 at worst. I realize every vote is subjective, and that no one need defend any vote they give, but a lot of authors here get torqued up when the pacing is not rated on merit, but rather on what some reader sees as objectionable content.

Also IMO, this particular parody is so poorly-written (from a logic standpoint) to be offensive; my first reaction was more like "WTF?"  I think, in this case, a 1 for funny and overall isn't questionable at all, but consider this: If this parody was side-splitting hilarious and paced the same, would it have any 1s on pacing? My guess is no; maybe a few 4s at the worst, the rest 5s.

If anyone can explain to me how that parody paces an honest 1, then I'm all eyes.

I don't know except that I'm not one of them  . . . I don't vote on a song unless I am familiar enough with the original.  What I find interesting is that there are 9 votes against that one, and another negative one that had 7 votes against it (The In The Navy Parody-or space taker) and Yet most the songs have zero or one vote. . .I think that while I did not find this song (OR the In The Navy song) funny at-all, someone may be voting from multiple computers that was really offended by this song.

We've received 111s before from people who found our parodies offensive.  It's just a spite vote. 

I'll argue the pacing, Jack: he (and I'm making an assumption with the "he", but wtf) has read through the OS changing some words in each line, with no thought to tying lines together and making even a whole verse, let alone a parody; even then, he's not managed to keep syllable count or "singability".  It's grammatically as well as aesthetically challenged and has no positive points whatsoever - IMO there is no way that such a lack of thought and effort should rate more than a 2 for pacing, and got dragged down to a 1 because there's no way of voting negative numbers in the other two categories.

It is also the only parody on amiright to which I've given triple 1s (as far as I can remember).  Rice - this wasn't a "spite" vote, it was a measured response to a worthless, objectionable pathetic attempt at a parody.

I HATE when there is Triple 1's just because of content. FTR, I thought it paced 100% and gave a 522.

EDIT: I see this ProudAmerican fella has added a few more atrocities today. Please everyone, if you don't like it, simply leave your votes as you see fit--or don't vote at all--and DON'T encourage him further with your outrage in the comments box. Trolls are best left ignored.

I don't know except that I'm not one of them  . . . I don't vote on a song unless I am familiar enough with the original.  What I find interesting is that there are 9 votes against that one, and another negative one that had 7 votes against it (The In The Navy Parody-or space taker) and Yet most the songs have zero or one vote. . .I think that while I did not find this song (OR the In The Navy song) funny at-all, someone may be voting from multiple computers that was really offended by this song.


Chain voting is pretty rare these days, Dave. I would bet that all of those votes are legitimate; the (negative) comments back them up.

As for other parodies, like yours, picking up only a vote, give it time for people to know your work, and comment on others' works when you can. Besides, I'd rather have only 1 555 than 9 111 anyday.

To Phil: you didn't really explain to me how the pacing is an honest 1, but I see your point. I, too, have voted a 111 once on a parody that paced better than a one, but deserved negative numbers in the other 2 categories. I'd give you the URL, but it was deleted for containing, among other things, explicitly sexual content. I will say it was at least twice as offensive to me as Adam Moses most notorious work.

I've "1d" approx. 4 other parodies, out of the thousands I've read, in my time here as well. I'd give you those URLs too but they also have been removed due to being either horrifically incomplete (like 90%) or blatant plagiaries (100% word-for-word rip-offs).

Agrimorfee - trolls can be killed by fire, at least that's how it is in the D&D ruleset.  :D

I hadn't looked at the comments, and no--I'm perfectly happy with one or two good reviews:)  I just notice the negative ones seem to attract the most attention.  You are deffinitely right though---there are a hord of negative comments to back up those votes.  I am up to 3 parodies on here, I have many more to release. . .mine take longer because I actually perform them too, just for fun of course.  I enjoy writing parodies and sharing them, if people enjoy them great--that's just an added bonus--so I'm glad just that I finally have a place to share them.  Most sites out there, including Soundclick where I host them, don't understand the Comedy/Parody genre fully, this site obviously does as it is nothing but Parodies, Funny Songs, and Misheard Lyrics--my favorite things in music--Thank you for welcoming me by the way. . .I really appreciate it.  I have left comments on a few boards on songs I know, there are a lot that I don't which surprises me because I consider myself flexible in genre taste/preference, but whenever I see one I recognize I read it over and I've seen a few good ones here, and a few bad ones--ones that try to hard, and one that was funny--but poorly paced that I really wish the author would redo because I can actually see Beyonce saying something like "I Shake my Booty, Make Lots of Money. . ."  It was funny--anyhow--rambling now. . .see you around. . .I'll become a regular over time, I hope, I need to know how the whole Karma works, because I wanted to give you some today, but I don't know how.

Sincerely,
Below Average Dave