Difference between revisions of "Talk:Relics of Fail"

From CWCki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 26: Line 26:
::The point is, whatever the outcome of this discussion is, we need to agree that a relic is a physical object that a troll could in theory obtain and destroy. I think when I started the current classification, it was more or less based on the sentimental value that it would be to Chris. Chris would freak out if someone destroyed his high school ring. His Wii Remote, probably not. CWCki serves to not only to document Chris but also to aid trolls who wish to troll him and I think if people want to take the Blanca route of taking something precious to Chris and destroy it, we might as well give people an idea of what would make Chris crash into slumber. --[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 00:58, 16 November 2009 (CET)
::The point is, whatever the outcome of this discussion is, we need to agree that a relic is a physical object that a troll could in theory obtain and destroy. I think when I started the current classification, it was more or less based on the sentimental value that it would be to Chris. Chris would freak out if someone destroyed his high school ring. His Wii Remote, probably not. CWCki serves to not only to document Chris but also to aid trolls who wish to troll him and I think if people want to take the Blanca route of taking something precious to Chris and destroy it, we might as well give people an idea of what would make Chris crash into slumber. --[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 00:58, 16 November 2009 (CET)
:::As a base, I have to agree that the term "Relic" must describe a physical object. If not, every single thing Chris made and/or do can fit as a relic. Maybe adding the "Will cause emotional stress if lost/destroyed (Read: Target)" is enough. I am not inclined to create a fourth super-relic class, it would make the page looks silly. My goal here, and I hope it is shared, is to create a simple relic classification system where the simple beginner can use. Three or four questions should suffice to dictate where the object belongs. In example: Do the object appear in the comic? Do the object got a name? Do the object got a sentimental value for Chris? Do Chris use the object to exalt his "Virtues"? On the same idea, I have a hard time understanding why the PSEye is a major relic. Chris dint name it, dint decorated it and doesn't even care about it. Why it's a major relic? it makes no sense! [[User:Griffintown|Griffintown]] 08:22, 16 November 2009 (CET)
:::As a base, I have to agree that the term "Relic" must describe a physical object. If not, every single thing Chris made and/or do can fit as a relic. Maybe adding the "Will cause emotional stress if lost/destroyed (Read: Target)" is enough. I am not inclined to create a fourth super-relic class, it would make the page looks silly. My goal here, and I hope it is shared, is to create a simple relic classification system where the simple beginner can use. Three or four questions should suffice to dictate where the object belongs. In example: Do the object appear in the comic? Do the object got a name? Do the object got a sentimental value for Chris? Do Chris use the object to exalt his "Virtues"? On the same idea, I have a hard time understanding why the PSEye is a major relic. Chris dint name it, dint decorated it and doesn't even care about it. Why it's a major relic? it makes no sense! [[User:Griffintown|Griffintown]] 08:22, 16 November 2009 (CET)
::::*I agree with you there about a simple system that a newfag can use, as that's something we need to definitely aim for. As for the PSeye, probably because it's his means of communication to us, the Internet public, not to mention that it's cured his autism as he's practiced making eye contact with it and he magically overcame his autism (see the PSEye article on that. If it's not there, then we should mention it). --[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 08:26, 16 November 2009 (CET)

Revision as of 03:26, 16 November 2009

A Taxonomy of Fail

While I'm flattered that people have caught onto my taxonomy of referring to Chris's personal items as relics of fail with the suffix "Of Fail" (in the spirit of the Spear of Destiny), there's some confusion about what constitutes a relic. I'd like to chime in based on what I understand from the Catholic opinion of Christian relics.

Things that Chris have touched are relics (the medallion, his gitar, etc.) These are personal items that have significance to Chris and in some cases, even factor into the comics. Analogous real world relics would be the Spear of Destiny, the Shroud of Turin, the Holy Grail, etc. These are items that are significant to the lore of Jesus of Nazareth in a similar fashion to Chris's relics factor into the lore of Chris. Any sort of part of Chris's body that can be collected, like hair or toenails, would be considered a relic in the same way that Muslims revere locks of hair or footprints of the Prophet Muhammad so when we get more stuff about the locks of hair Chris sent to his TRUE and LOYAL Mexican fan, we can document more on that (in fact, we actually do have that! I need to find the pics though. I should be getting my locks of hair soon).

So, what's not a relic? A stare is not a relic - you cannot obtain a stare. As long as Chris is alive, a finger is not a relic. While limbs of saints are considered holy relics (from what I understand, in Medieval times they had problems of pilgrims ripping off fingers and toes of saints), as long as Chris is alive you cannot obtain his oversized finger (unless you somehow convince Chris to chop off his finger, which he might seriously consider if china is involved).

I'm iffy about the oversized straw being a relic, as it's more of a graphic exaggeration that trolls find amusing than an actual, single straw that Chris uses to drink (though there's been some postulation lately that due to Chris's comments about how he slobbers, he might have a special straw he uses which explains the huge ass straw in the comic). While The Wall of Originals and Megan Shrine are mega important to Chris, they're not quite a single relic but more of a place or collection of relics, so I've considered them as Shrines.

tl;dr - if you can obtain it and it's of some significance to Chris, it's probably a relic. If not, then it's not a relic. --Champthom 18:19, 7 April 2009 (CEST)

  • I'm going to try to re-organize the relics into three categories: "major", "minor", and (I suppose I'll bring back) "lesser". Right now, there seem (to me) to be too many "major" relics, some of which are much more important than others. The less important "major" relics should be demoted to "minor" relics, and a few relics that are currently "minor" should in turn be demoted to "lesser". I don't foresee many complaints with the shuffle that I've got in mind, but I'm posting this here ahead of my actual page edit later today as a heads-up. Llort 13:45, 1 October 2009 (CEST)

Guideline for Relic classification

Let's take a religious approach to the current situation. Let's say that Chris is the "Messiah-of-Fail" and his comic is his gospel. If he's set to becoming a full-flegged religion (please refrain from barfing) after his death, how his relics would be rated? Here's my idea:

Do I have something here? Any comments? Griffintown 21:04, 15 November 2009 (CET)

  • But wouldn't that system make those stupid wing hair clips a major relic, since they've been both in real life and a plot point in the comic? Not that it's not complete and utter failure to act like he did about things meant for a (rather young) girl, but they were a minor thing which hardly qualify to be listed as major. --LizardPie 00:47, 16 November 2009 (CET)
  • Good point. But the major point of the original taxonomy was that we were getting things like "The Oversized Finger of Fail", "The Creepy Stare of Fail", and things that aren't really relics. It's like saying that the look on the face of Jesus is a relic which isn't the same thing as the Holy Grail or the Shroud of Turin.
The point is, whatever the outcome of this discussion is, we need to agree that a relic is a physical object that a troll could in theory obtain and destroy. I think when I started the current classification, it was more or less based on the sentimental value that it would be to Chris. Chris would freak out if someone destroyed his high school ring. His Wii Remote, probably not. CWCki serves to not only to document Chris but also to aid trolls who wish to troll him and I think if people want to take the Blanca route of taking something precious to Chris and destroy it, we might as well give people an idea of what would make Chris crash into slumber. --Champthom 00:58, 16 November 2009 (CET)
As a base, I have to agree that the term "Relic" must describe a physical object. If not, every single thing Chris made and/or do can fit as a relic. Maybe adding the "Will cause emotional stress if lost/destroyed (Read: Target)" is enough. I am not inclined to create a fourth super-relic class, it would make the page looks silly. My goal here, and I hope it is shared, is to create a simple relic classification system where the simple beginner can use. Three or four questions should suffice to dictate where the object belongs. In example: Do the object appear in the comic? Do the object got a name? Do the object got a sentimental value for Chris? Do Chris use the object to exalt his "Virtues"? On the same idea, I have a hard time understanding why the PSEye is a major relic. Chris dint name it, dint decorated it and doesn't even care about it. Why it's a major relic? it makes no sense! Griffintown 08:22, 16 November 2009 (CET)
  • I agree with you there about a simple system that a newfag can use, as that's something we need to definitely aim for. As for the PSeye, probably because it's his means of communication to us, the Internet public, not to mention that it's cured his autism as he's practiced making eye contact with it and he magically overcame his autism (see the PSEye article on that. If it's not there, then we should mention it). --Champthom 08:26, 16 November 2009 (CET)