Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hugLife

Earwolf Forum Topics Study Group

Recommended Posts

fastest tugboat speed = 14.9mph

 

fastest trolley speed = 9.5mph

 

fastest train speed = 270mph

 

Who has funded the over-development of the train, while neglecting the tugboats and trolleys? Was this what they were intending to discuss had they had the time to get to the last 20%??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmm, right. So interesting!

 

Are you asking who funded the First Transcontinental Railways?

Because I know you know who funded that. We've had many a discussion on this subject.

But for those reading, I'll do my best to elaborate.

 

I believe the massive amount of capital investment (over $100,000,000 in 1860 dollars) needed to build the railroad was obtained by selling government guaranteed bonds (granted per mile of completed track) and railroad company bonds and stock to interested private investors.

 

While the train is certainly a fast source of transportation, it does seem to be in decline, as noted by the steady removal of the once thriving railroad tracks and subsequent transformation to walking paths.

 

 

Well, after a heavy soul searching, mind expanding and investigatory retreat this past weekend, which incidentally landing me near Coconino County, it now seems so clear to me that M2 blatantly excluded what very well could be the last 20%, Tractor Trailers!

 

Which, I might add, completes the Trilogy of, "Trains, Trolleys, and Trailers", the lost ep.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think that I understand what may have played an influence in them diverting from your much better episode idea:

 

Exhibit A: marijuana

 

Share this post


Link to post

Exhibit B: munchies

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well played.

I do believe we are pushing past the 20% now, just as requested!

 

Perhaps it would've been more aptly titled:

"Mary Jane, Munchies, and Mikes"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think that we are now touching into some controversial waters here. As a fan of Mike & Tom Eat Snacks, I feel like MIB never had full closure to that podcast. It kind of just ended.

 

It seems that through all of our digging, we have been able to map out the subconscious of MIB, and I believe that we are approaching Inception-level deconstruction.

 

He seems to be yearning for something (maybe some snacks), and perhaps the trolley is really representing a streetcar... a streetcar named "desire."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I know the request was to keep pushing these topics, but I think we may have pushed this tug too far!

 

It looks like we should both be living up to your avatar's stance, and watch over our shoulders.

 

We've already made beef with the FTGs, and as much as I too feel the untimely demise of 'snacks' could've easily derailed this latest topic...crossing over the tracks of rival pods, are you crazy?!

 

Or maybe...we're just crazy enough to chain ourselves until we get the truth!

 

you-can-t-handle-the-truth-o.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wonderful use of GIF in that last post. It really punctuated the emotion and provided a potent visual of a scowling Jack Nickelsman.

 

Speaking of chaining our group together, I can't help but notice that we are the only 2 posting in here. It goes without saying that....well, I have to say it otherwise it wouldn't make sense... we are not the only people listening to the podcast.

 

How can we bolster EFTSG membership? It seems like a waste of chain to shackle two willing participants to one another. I think that we need to find a way to "track" down (that is a little reference to the trains, trolleys, and trac'tor trailers) more Topics fans to contribute to our discussions.

 

Perhaps tomorrow we will get the legendary "Double Michael bump" on air.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm, right. You make a very profound point there. So enriching!

 

A group, yes...as this latest ep mentions right out of the gates in some depth, is being of two or more figures forming a complete unit in a composition.

 

Two or more...but I'll like to unpack that a bit and say that I feel there seems to be 'more' emphasis...on the 'more', in that definition. More links on that proverbial chain that my fellow EFTSG member has mentioned so eloquently.

 

So, it would be safe to say that recruitment is currently going on for those who can share an enlightened look with these topics...and can follow the rules. Which, of course...there aren't any. But, there are strict guidelines.

Just like any Topics study group you may have been in, or are currently a part of.

I like to think of it as, "the 24/7 study group for when you're away from your physical study group®".

 

 

What an ep we have here folks, we're being treated to a live show!

This could do quite well, as 'Doug Loves Movies, etc.' has really taken off in the live realm. (not to cross pod-inate)

I feel I should mention that it seems that by no accident they are in SF, perhaps to study up a bit more on trolleys in their downtime?

 

As I listen to this, the first things that jump out at me are, I'm not sure what all the laughter is about?

I mean, I know it's fine, but it just seems to be a bit misdirected. As I've not heard anything 'funny' happen, yet there's laughter. Perhaps it's the nerves of being a first time Topics audience. And I have to admit, when I learned it was live, I couldn't help but to feel somewhat certain that it would've ended up being 'somewhere' in Arizona, but what a pleasant surprise.

 

And now back to the show for me!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm. Yes, this podcast is so full of giggles that I have had to pause several times to process all of the points being made. I think that this first time audience thinks that they are maybe in the audience for that Comedy Bag Bag show or something.

 

I will have a more comprehensive analysis of the "pet peeve" topic...but I think that part of my discussion of the 20% will be this disrespectful audience. I mean, Paul Rudd was rightfully taken to task for his lackadaisical disposition on the show, but so far neither Michael has asked the audience to remember that Topics is not a comedy show.

 

Perhaps these issues will be addressed before the podcast is over. I will try to harness my rage towards these Rice-a-Ronians, as they are now sinking down to Flagstaff levels of contempt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, this podcast is so full of giggles that I have had to pause several times to process all of the points being made.

 

You are so right, I found myself doing the same.

And how about a round of applause for the M's for acknowledging the distraction, yet being so professional in the way they were able to block it out and deliver another intellectual gem! Bravo!

 

 

I mean, Paul Rudd was rightfully taken to task for his lackadaisical disposition on the show, but so far neither Michael has asked the audience to remember that Topics is not a comedy show.

 

Yes, and I think it should be noted that Paul was an invited 'guest', not an observer like the attending San Fran Group (who really should know the rules/no rules/funny/ok, motto, if they are any kind of true TSG). And, within that white noise laughter was some very rich broth that they missed out on, so really, I guess the joke is on them. In fact, I'm having quite the belly laugh to myself about that!

 

 

I will try to harness my rage towards these Rice-a-Ronians, as they are now sinking down to Flagstaff levels of contempt.

 

Once again, I must agree. They were certainly NO San Fransisco treat!

And as it stands now, their conduct has landed them right on my 'pet peeves' list.

 

But, just as the M's did, I feel it's our duty to push past the distractions and really get to the meat of this chunky chowder!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If a peeve is an annoyance, why would one choose to keep it as a pet?

 

I think that aside from Showalker "ding ding ding-ing" out far before 80%, I would say that one of my biggest peeves is the phrase "pet peeve".

 

I don't believe that there is much of a demand for keeping pets that one would hate, otherwise more people would be raising their own mosquitos.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If a peeve is an annoyance, why would one choose to keep it as a pet?

 

Right, right....of course, this begs the question, what if the pet's name was in fact 'Peeve'?

For instance, "Why yes, this is my pet, Peeve."

 

I don't believe that there is much of a demand for keeping pets that one would hate, otherwise more people would be raising their own mosquitos.

 

Well, I was about to concur until I read the following...and now I'm urging all those in or near Coconino County to take up on the wonderful and rewarding hobby of mosquito farming!

 

"After an unusually dry spring, one of God’s most irritating creatures has taken to Flagstaff’s skies with a vengeance, thanks to the onset of monsoon season. Coconino County officials say they haven’t noticed an unusual level of mosquito activity, but in localized pockets across Flagstaff, residents say they are being eaten alive. - Courtesy ERIC BETZ, Arizona Daily Sun Staff Reporter"

 

* Has walking dead visual after reading, "eaten alive"

 

 

 

I'm always suspect of the aforementioned 'coy' nature of these two, especially when it comes to topics that they seem to go through with ease. Meaning, did they truly reach their 80%, or was this just another tease for us to discover that they nearly broke through the gelatinous layer that forms on a Topic chowder left sitting too long?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Mmm...astute observation there. I think that the Mikes are barely breaking the jelly too. I feel this way because in their previous seasons, it seemed like they expanded on the topics just a bit more than a creaky door and a loose roof.

 

Furthermore, this topic seemed to flow a little bit too smoothly, making it seem like a rehearsed, or "cooked", ordeal. It is ironic that a cooked topic is represented by cold dusty Topic chowder, while a raw topic leaves us with a savory treat to ruminate over in our study groups... So, I think that the inauthenticity of this particular episode is a peeve of mine as well.

 

I know, I know..."they were probably nervous to be in front of such a wretched audience," you would say. But, all I am saying is if they consider congealed oils and fats to be the 80% of a chowder....what expectation are they setting for the 20% beneath it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, yes! Illuminating view!

 

There really did seem to be an unusual amount of chowder and not so much of the salty broth we've all come to expect from Topics.

 

I would hope at this point in their careers as performers, the jitters would be gone.

Although, one could hypothesize that this canned cranberry sauce they served us was a backup plan for if the audience was not a particularly perspicacious one, which clearly was the case.

* Sound of canned cranberry sauce sliding out of said can = pet peeve

 

 

It seems they've left us no choice but to dig our studious spoons into that congealed oily surface and hope that it yields the fine salty 20% golden bouillon beneath.

 

ChickenStock20-1024x682.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

That picture made me hungry! It reminded me of a more savory version of fresh pudding skins (a delicacy where I grew up).

 

I am still a bit apprehensive to swan dive into this topic because I would really hate to come across as a complainer. I feel like the premise of airing out pet peeves was the entire concept of stand-up comedy in the 90s. I know that observational humor may have a certain hipster chic, but my mustache may not be big enough to pull that off.

 

Therefore, what is there to talk about? Should we just exchange lists? Should we try to rank out the most universal peeves of all time? Should we mention a peeve that could undercut another Earwolf podcast?

 

There are no rules, but there is such a thing as proper etiquette. I don't want to sully the good name of our study group.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ah, yes...the pudding skin delicacy.

A fine treat, once carefully crafted with love by my dear Uncle Lennox, until corporate greed turned his simple gift into a multi-billion dollar industry that pushed him over the edge...literally. We will still gather at the sidewalk where poor Lennox and his charitable desires coagulated.

* Corporate greed = Pet Peeve

 

 

I hear and agree with what you are saying about this topic and the consequences. It certainly presents a quandary.

If we 'do' engage, we stand to chance a reputation degeneration, but if we 'do not', are we doing ourselves, the study group and the M's all a disservice by not pushing through that pudding skin to our allotted intellectual dessert?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Fine... I'll say it to keep the integrity of the EFTSG...

 

I hate Howard Kremer's voice, and it is the only reason that I can't listen to Who Charted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Mmmmhmmm....riveting...yes!

I wasn't quite sure where you were going with the following.

 

Should we mention a peeve that could undercut another Earwolf podcast?

 

Not only do I share this peeve, I also share the opinion of the MANY EFTSG Reader Mail PM's I received this past weekend who all praise your bravery and forthrightness! So courageous.

 

If our 20% was a combination lock, I would say I just heard the second...click...click...!

 

80-20_rule.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

Subconscious, live...here we go!

 

Which is very on point with my fellow EFTSG member's unexplained absence.

Is it just my subconscious, is 'he' still live?

 

Hmmm...I hope this ep with shed some light on all of this.

Share this post


Link to post

Eh hem...here we go again.

Mailing Topics mugs and T-shirts to study groups 'all the time'?

I guess 'we' don't qualify?

 

Excuse me, I need to enter my subconscious for a moment.

psychedelic+spiral+trippy.jpg

 

 

Ok...wow...that was intense.

 

With guest David Wain, I anticipated a bit more 'purvey' such as in the 'Technology' ep, though, I'm not disappointed with the amount supplied.

 

There was really SO much of this topic covered comparative to the previous two, that it makes me wonder if this was another one of those 'Mike's Study Group Hidden Challenge' eps.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm beginning to suspect a 'True Crime' has occurred to my study group partner.

My suspect list starts with, Howard Kremer.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×