• Rin@lemm.ee
    15·
    2 days ago

    How the fuck is this still relatable 100 years later? Wtf

    • Rolando@lemmy.worldOP
      7·
      2 days ago

      Partly because it describes a longstanding tension: the needs of the drivers (to see as much as possible at night) vs the needs of pedestrians (to not be blinded.)

      And also because of selection bias: for every relatable cartoon, there are 3-4 that rely on obsolete details, 2-3 where the joke falls flat, etc. When we pick a cartoon to post, we tend to favor those that are still relatable.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        3·
        2 days ago

        any of the shitty ones to share just to let us know how much awesome work you are doing for curation?

        • Rolando@lemmy.worldOP
          4·
          1 day ago

          Here are a couple that have amusing lore, but that I didn’t think were worth posting. I wouldn’ call them “shitty”, just not as relateable and because of that they’re not as amusing. For example, the first one involves mailing a photo, which isn’t something we do much any more; the equivalent would be maybe something like sending a friend request:

          • Everett True has a nephew called “J. Basil True”, who is pictured in the Daily East Oregonian on Sept 27 1919.
          • there’s a comic from The Day Book of September 27 1915 that doesn’t seem to show Everett at all… unless Everett is the baby! This is one of Everett’s earliest Outbursts.
          • Everett True was skinny when he got married, according to The Seattle Star of Oct 1, 1916.
          • Evertt True has a cousin from Kokomo, according to The Daily East Oregonian of October 7, 1919.