Montymash

[Ghoulish Delight]

www.montymash.com (http://www.montymash.com)

New internet Meme. No clue what the story behind this is, but it amuses.

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEc9cpgffR4m4NUQq_500.png

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEc991g0afBZ9uquW_500.png

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEcak4a0bMXSleT6r_500.png

The latest one is from CP and me (my idea, CP's execution) :D

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEcehjd4ylMh2zmyx_500.png

[Alex]

I looked at the site. I don't get its meaning, nor its amusement.

[3894]

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEccy148aJUv3BmXR_500.png

[mousepod]

www.montymash.com (http://www.montymash.com)

New internet Meme. No clue what the story behind this is, but it amuses.

You don't know about the Montauk Monster? You lucky person. I'm certainly not going provide any links...

[innerSpaceman]

Is it from Montauk, Long Island?


If so ... I never heard of it while I was growing up there.

[Ghoulish Delight]

It looked vaguely familiar and I figured it was something like that. But I was laughing at the images regardless of the monster's origin.

ETA: Interesting. Now it looks like Monty may have been a movie publicity stunt (story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2524385/Montauk-Monster-A-hoax-to-promote-a-film.html)). Makes me think that the emergence of this site just a few days before that was revealed is no coincidence. Oh well, still amuses.

[Kevy Baby]

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEccy148aJUv3BmXR_500.pngIt took me a long time to figure out what the connection was on this picture.

You don't know about the Montauk Monster? You lucky person. I'm certainly not going provide any links...Can yuo BRIEFLY explain what the... thing is?

[Ghoulish Delight]

It took me a long time to figure out what the connection was on this picture.

Can yuo BRIEFLY explain what the... thing is?Cryptozoological hoax (think Chupacabra without any of the interesting local legends) that turns out to be a movie publicity stunt.

[Capt Jack]

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEccy148aJUv3BmXR_500.png


yummo! :evil:

[BarTopDancer]

NSFW

[Capt Jack]

fixed....

[BarTopDancer]

Ya. To much skin + the pose = not good for someone walking by to see. Spoiler tags would be good.

[Capt Jack]

k. sorry....spoilered and relinked.

[innerSpaceman]

um, there's nothing wrong with that picture. There's more female skin shown by the Chinese Women Volleyball players in the Olympics thread.

Please stop making a fuss unless there are actual naughty bits shown. A sexy pose at an oven in admittedly skimpy baking outfit is NOT unsafe for work.

[BarTopDancer]

Thanks Jack. One thing I love about LoT is that we're all respectful of the differences in work places and what isn't the best to have on the screen that can be viewed from afar.

[Capt Jack]

um, there's nothing wrong with that picture. There's more female skin shown by the Chinese Women Volleyball players in the Olympics thread.

Please stop making a fuss unless there are actual naughty bits shown. A sexy pose at an oven in admittedly skimpy baking outfit is NOT unsafe for work.

kinda depends on ones work I think. I know some folks, let alone workplaces are incredibly (over)sensitive to some aspects of the human anatomy.
while I personally agree with you based on that particular picture, I also know that should one or two of the truly tight-sphinctured folk around me see it, they would have a heart attack over it and probably get me in deep feces

just sayin

[Ghoulish Delight]

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEc6j0zct22zLU1i2_500.png

[Alex]

Seriously, I know that dissecting humor is mostly pointless, but can anybody take a stab at explaining the humor in this? Is it just inherently funny to insert a picture into other pictures?

Something about most of these recent internet memes is just passing me by. I didn't get the funny in rickrolling either. I guess it is time to go protect my lawn from kids.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Bizarre image + familiar image = funny. That's about all there is to it.

[Disneyphile]

Seriously, I know that dissecting humor is mostly pointless, but can anybody take a stab at explaining the humor in this? Is it just inherently funny to insert a picture into other pictures?I'm generally very easily amused, even by the stupidest stuff, and I'm with you on this one.

[Kevy Baby]

um, there's nothing wrong with that picture. There's more female skin shown by the Chinese Women Volleyball players in the Olympics thread.

Please stop making a fuss unless there are actual naughty bits shown. A sexy pose at an oven in admittedly skimpy baking outfit is NOT unsafe for work.Well, CJ already said it, but I too want to add that some places are VERY uptight about what is seen. While I agree that this picture is not that bad, some places are just way too uptight for their own good.

While one may see more skin on the Chinese volleyball players, a secy pose such as the hottie in the kitchen would be considered much more risque (by some) than a picture of athletes in their standard "uniforms."

Seriously, I know that dissecting humor is mostly pointless, but can anybody take a stab at explaining the humor in this? Is it just inherently funny to insert a picture into other pictures?

Something about most of these recent internet memes is just passing me by. I didn't get the funny in rickrolling either. I guess it is time to go protect my lawn from kids.I'm with you on both of these (Montymash and rickrolling).

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Thanks Jack. One thing I love about LoT is that we're all respectful of the differences in work places and what isn't the best to have on the screen that can be viewed from afar.What she said. If I can't check the board at the library, then I am not a presence at the LoT.

That Full House one kills me for some reason.

I don't care if it's a movie tie-in, it's funny, and I'm totally going to make more of these...

[3894]

Oops, really sorry about not putting the Rachel Ray image in spoilers. I just didn't think. And now the editing window seems to have elapsed.

Can a mod do spoiler boxes for my Post #2?

[Alex]

Putting something NSFW into a spoiler tag does not really make it any safer for many workplaces.

Yes, it avoids the embarrassment of the over the shoulder glance but if you're being monitored at the proxy level it is just as problematic.

(Though at least for me, that Rachel Ray photo doesn't really qualify as NSFW)

[Motorboat Cruiser]

That Full House one kills me for some reason.


You are not alone. :)

[3894]

Putting something NSFW into a spoiler tag does not really make it any safer for many workplaces.


This I obviously did not know.

I feel terrible about this and hope no one gets nailed at work for looking at the photo. To me, it was just Rachel Ray in a bathing suit. I just saw the smile and the top and the dead gray thing on the tray.

[Alex]

No problem, in this case I'm on the "it really isn't that bad" side. It's just something I point out every time the response to NSFW is to put it in a spoiler.

[BarTopDancer]

This I obviously did not know.

I feel terrible about this and hope no one gets nailed at work for looking at the photo. To me, it was just Rachel Ray in a bathing suit. I just saw the smile and the top and the dead gray thing on the tray.

It's ok. I know I won't get busted if it's behind spoiler tags. I think what most of us are concerned about is the wrong person walking by at the wrong time and catching something in the wrong angle.

[Capt Jack]

anyone happen to know where the original for that pic came from?

yeah yeah, Im a food perv....lets move on ;)

[Kevy Baby]

No problem, in this case I'm on the "it really isn't that bad" side. It's just something I point out every time the response to NSFW is to put it in a spoiler.It bears making the distinction that there are two types of "NSFW":
Visual - making sure that if someone clicks on a thread and is scrolling past one's post that if someone were standing over one's shoulder, that that person might see that picture and consider it NSFW. I believe that most of us (try) to adhere to this guideline (and yes - I personally have been guilty of doing a poor job of this).
Proxy Level (Big Brother is Watching) - It is possible for persons to review your page-by-page internet activity (meaning a person from your corporation reviewing your travels on the internet on your work computer).I would say that if you are in a corporate environment where you are concerned that someone may be watching your internet activities, you shouldn't be checking LoT during work.

[Kevy Baby]

anyone happen to know where the original for that pic came from?I would guess a camera.

But that's just a guess.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I would say that if you are in a corporate environment where you are concerned that someone may be watching your internet activities, you should be checking LoT during work.

Sound advice. ;)

[Kevy Baby]

Sound advice. ;)I have no idea what you are talking about http://home.mindspring.com/%7Ekevin_elder/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/whistle.gif

[Alex]

It bears making the distinction that there are two types of "NSFW":
Visual - making sure that if someone clicks on a thread and is scrolling past one's post that if someone were standing over one's shoulder, that that person might see that picture and consider it NSFW. I believe that most of us (try) to adhere to this guideline (and yes - I personally have been guilty of doing a poor job of this).
Proxy Level (Big Brother is Watching) - It is possible for persons to review your page-by-page internet activity (meaning a person from your corporation reviewing your travels on the internet on your work computer).I would say that if you are in a corporate environment where you are concerned that someone may be watching your internet activities, you should be checking LoT during work.

First, I don't really buy into your distinction since a spoiler tag doesn't provide any better protection than a hyperlink. Frankly, the first one is less bothersome to me since my coworkers are far less likely to care about my online habits than distant management.

But as to the second, I'm really not concerned that somebody is reading every page I look at, however, they can easily be monitoring all (or random selections of) images that are transmitted over the network. In my brief stint as a network narc that was exactly one of my tasks, keeping a page reloaded that displayed the last 100 photos over the network. It took about all of 5 seconds to review them for porn or other objectionable content (it was much like the tools where you can view the last 100 photos included in all public LJ posts).

But really my point is, if you are going to be aware enough to say "hey, look at this but be warned that it may get some people in trouble at work" why not just provide a link to it rather than force its download by the person you are warning? Either behind a spoiler tag or a hyperlink they are going to have to click.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I have no idea what you are talking about http://home.mindspring.com/%7Ekevin_elder/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/whistle.gif

And if you could edit my posts as well, neither would anyone else. :)

[Kevy Baby]

First, I don't really buy into your distinction since a spoiler tag doesn't provide any better protection than a hyperlink. Frankly, the first one is less bothersome to me since my coworkers are far less likely to care about my online habits than distant management.The distinction is whether one is worried JUST about someone looking over your shoulder - that there is no concern of some IT person watching what you do over from across the network.

I myself am not concerned about a network nanny as in my small company, the boss doesn't even know this is possible. I am concerned about what someone might be seeing over my shoulder when they walk by.

I suspect that many people who read LoT at work fall into this same category (no worry of a network nanny). But it is good advice to those who do work for a larger corporation to be aware that they may be observable.

[Alex]

True, but my concern isn't over the worries of the person posting the picture but their acknowledgment that it might be a problem for other people viewing it (and presumably many of them work somewhere other than with the poster). So if one is going to acknowledge that worry, why not just go the safest route and provide a link rather than put the picture in a spoiler tag.

[Ghoulish Delight]

http://media.tumblr.com/U2hzH2zrEc92xiphBBeTlEqW_500.png

[lashbear]

ETA: Interesting. Now it looks like Monty may have been a movie publicity stunt (story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2524385/Montauk-Monster-A-hoax-to-promote-a-film.html)). .
aha !! I sense the hand of Doodle duck (I think that was his name?)

Caution, some bizarro exhibits contained within - you might scream !! (http://grindshow.com/GrindShow/Main_Exhibit_Hall.html)

[Disneyphile]

I'm with you on both of these (Montymash and rickrolling).

However, I'll find these funny, just because I personally know the "monster" invading each photo:

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b80/Disneyphile/Funny/KBTink.jpg

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b80/Disneyphile/Funny/KBThurston.jpg

But, some random monster... not really funny in my book. ;)

[Kevy Baby]

The scary part is that the first one is close to something that once happened.

[Not Afraid]

Per usual. I don't get it.