I'll take Anal Bum Cover, Alex.
November 15, 2005 8:58 AM   Subscribe

Pitchfork's Worst Album Covers of All Time. (Previous discussions of worst and best album covers)
posted by XQUZYPHYR (106 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
I know the Worst Album Covers of All Time, and these, sir, are not the Worst Album Covers of All Time.
posted by thewittyname at 9:07 AM on November 15, 2005


I have trouble accepting the validity of any list that doesn't include Zip Zap Rap

on preview, damn
posted by eddydamascene at 9:07 AM on November 15, 2005


Dear Pitchfork, you had me at This was the "Orgy - Candyass" of 1996.
posted by bardic at 9:10 AM on November 15, 2005


You guys read my mind. Dusty is fucking hilarious.
posted by AllesKlar at 9:11 AM on November 15, 2005


Cool. Two of my favourite bands are on that list.
posted by terrapin at 9:13 AM on November 15, 2005


Bonus: Read the followup article on the #1 worst cover album
posted by thewittyname at 9:13 AM on November 15, 2005


"ooh! look how wacky this purple sky is! what an AWFUL album cover!"

I'm sorry to have generated revenue for Pitchfork by clicking on that link. There are waaaaay worse album covers out there. PF exists so that freelance indie record reviewers have something to argue about besides what thrift shops have better vintage army coats.

But seriously...no Zip Zap Rap?!
posted by plexiwatt at 9:19 AM on November 15, 2005


...make that 9.

The Lords of Acid cover is awesome. The Scorpions cover is disgusting.

The Jim O'Rourke cover might be a candidate for a MetaChat logo.

I had no clue that Corey Feldman or Martin Mull ever made an LP
posted by terrapin at 9:19 AM on November 15, 2005


That's not the worst, this is! No, this is!
Thread summary for those in a hurry
posted by Wolfdog at 9:22 AM on November 15, 2005


That list would barely qualify as a list of "Wacky Album Covers," never mind "Worst Album Covers of All Time."

I mean, OMG, the Japanese dude is wearing a dress.
posted by jtron at 9:23 AM on November 15, 2005


I had never been to Pitchfork before. Now I know what everyone was complaining about.

What a bunch of pretentious asshats.
posted by jorbs at 9:27 AM on November 15, 2005


The people at Pitchfork don't actually like music. And weren't hit enough as children.
posted by jonmc at 9:28 AM on November 15, 2005


man, pitchfork sucks.
posted by rxrfrx at 9:30 AM on November 15, 2005


There goes jonmc, always dismissing stuff he doesn't like in that folksy aw shucks denim jacket sort of honest way.

Good on you, jonmc.
posted by xmutex at 9:30 AM on November 15, 2005


I knew that Xiu Xiu cover would make the Pitchfork list. It has an interesting story behind it.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 9:32 AM on November 15, 2005


In what universe is this not one of the best album covers of all time:


posted by billysumday at 9:32 AM on November 15, 2005


Cool. Two of my favourite bands are on that list.

I know, I'm psyched they would mention Heintje and Corey Feldman too!
posted by tetsuo at 9:34 AM on November 15, 2005


I'm sorry but Tarkus, Music For Parties, and Bloodrock USA are not only great album covers, but they're great albums too (only Side 1 of Tarkus though).

I'd never seen that Pantera sleeve before though. That one was pretty hilarious.
posted by stinkycheese at 9:34 AM on November 15, 2005


xmutex, I'll admit that some of those covers are awful. But oddly, some of the worst ones, like Herbie Mann & Little Feat, actually house great records. Although it's really impossible to look like a badass carrying a flute, Herbie. Didn't Ian Anderson teach you anything, ya furry bastard?

(it's the snotty tone rather than the choices that put me off Pitchfork, like usual).
posted by jonmc at 9:35 AM on November 15, 2005


I...I...love Foxtrot. I think the album cover is cool.
posted by apis mellifera at 9:39 AM on November 15, 2005


A bitchy, snotty tone is the only acceptable way to review indie rock on the internet--if you want The Wire, go read Dusted or something. Really now. Some of you are put off by a music review site's joke piece? Because it's snotty? *boggle* If you want to read just how bad Pitchfork could be, read Stylus. It gets much, much worse.
posted by hototogisu at 9:41 AM on November 15, 2005


Speaking of Corey Feldman and Corey Haim...

From Corey Haim's video diary:

"I think maybe ten years from now, I'm hopefully going to be, in like, Tahiti or something. Kicking back like in my huge mansion, if everything goes right, it's all up to me. Just watching like the dolphins, and the porpoises and the sharks and the little sea horses and all that fun stuff go by in a whole different country, while things happen back here."
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 9:41 AM on November 15, 2005


(it's the snotty tone rather than the choices that put me off Pitchfork, like usual).

When you see snot everywhere you look, maybe you've just got snot in your eyes.
posted by ludwig_van at 9:44 AM on November 15, 2005


Is that a multiple choice question?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:45 AM on November 15, 2005


(on postview, um, that)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:45 AM on November 15, 2005


Really now. Some of you are put off by a music review site's joke piece? Because it's snotty? *boggle*

Dude, if this was the only time Pitchfork was snotty, then it all might be marginally amusing. But this is their standard tone of discourse. You get the feeling that these guys don't actually like music and would rather be at some bar ironically drinking pina coladas and trying to pick up some chick in rainbow sox and horn rims (who has 20/20 vision).
posted by jonmc at 9:46 AM on November 15, 2005


When you see snot everywhere you look, maybe you've just got snot in your eyes.

Which would seem to be coming from pitchforkmedia.com if you ask me.
posted by nervousfritz at 9:46 AM on November 15, 2005


ludwig_van, we've discussed Pitchfork with eachother before. I think you agreed that their reviews were kinda worthless.
posted by jonmc at 9:47 AM on November 15, 2005


Here, Photoshop stabs art with its little pixelated scalpel.

I'll be stealing that line . . .
posted by JeffK at 9:49 AM on November 15, 2005


But this is their standard tone of discourse. You get the feeling that these guys don't actually like music and would rather be at some bar ironically drinking pina coladas and trying to pick up some chick in rainbow sox and horn rims (who has 20/20 vision).

You do this same goddam schtick any time any recent music or music-related something or other gets mentioned though. It's such a tired act. You show no knowledge of the music or whatever at hand, you just dismiss it outright and then in other threads talk about how much you hate sophism. I don't get it.
posted by xmutex at 9:49 AM on November 15, 2005


No more worthless than anyone else's reviews, and probably less, since they've introduced me to plenty of good bands.

It's just that bashing pitchfork for being snotty is so incredibly tired, inane, and unnecessary. The site and its tone are not new. You're not drawing back the curtain on the Wizard of Oz. People who read pitchfork are well aware of their style. But don't let that stop you.
posted by ludwig_van at 9:52 AM on November 15, 2005


Jon, you didn't actually read the first line of that comment, did you?

This is their standard tone of discourse--how else would you like them to review things? Need a bit more Christgau in there? (snooze)

I mean, if we're going to talk about snotty, Lester Bangs called Gang of Four a bucket of shit--to their faces. The man could write passionately about things he loved, and so can many of the pitchfork reviewers. I can't vouch for them now, as I don't read every day anymore, but a good percentage of the staff a year ago was astoundingly knowledgeable and capable. This more than justifies any "snotty" tone you think they have (as if your promulgation of your own tastes if ever less than snotty).

A single sentence description and a number are more than enough to inform someone if they'll like the style or not--the rest is gravy, and Pitchfork has that in spades. It used to be hilarious, on occasion, and sometimes still is. What else would you like?

on preview, thank you ludwig_van and xmutex.
posted by hototogisu at 9:55 AM on November 15, 2005


Heh. I know one of the guys from Bloodrock. He's a librarian now.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 9:58 AM on November 15, 2005


I think that this should get at least in the top 100. . .
posted by Danf at 10:00 AM on November 15, 2005


Here, a massive phallus appears to sprout from the back of the crying gorilla which is eating cake and books.
The entire image is only of significance as it captures the turning point where heroin finally turned Keith's face from "Keith Richards" to "Dried Apple Head Doll."
posted by kirkaracha at 10:00 AM on November 15, 2005


I read the pitchfork piece earlier today and had a good chuckle. But those two pieces from Dusty Scott were absolute gold. Thanks, thewittyname.
posted by pardonyou? at 10:03 AM on November 15, 2005


What? None of my album cover work is on any of the linked lists. I've gotta try harder next time.
posted by effwerd at 10:04 AM on November 15, 2005


Lighten up, people. Most of those album covers were pretty awful, and reading the list was an amusing Tuesday afternoon diversion. That said, they forgot this one.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:06 AM on November 15, 2005


when did we turn into vh1?
posted by delmoi at 10:08 AM on November 15, 2005


There's some pretty bad stuff on there, but the only reason Terrapin Station made the list is pure prejudice.

How can you be against dancing turtles, fer chrissakes?
posted by clevershark at 10:14 AM on November 15, 2005


I know one of the guys from Bloodrock. He's a librarian now.

Right on (I work in a library too). I hope I'm not going to get anybody sued here, but a recent review of The Heads' album "At Last" written by Dr. Julian Cope mentions that the inner gatefold of the record exactly replicates the "Bloodrock USA" sleeve. Cope bashes on Bloodrock in the piece (calling it a "snoozathon"), which is disappointing, but anyways, such blatant appropriation (homage?) is kinda neat.

If only for "Don't Eat The Children" and "Abracadaver", that album's a stone keeper IMHO. I mean, c'mon - it's came out in 1971 & has lyrics like "Satan is my god". Tell your friend his band rocked. They rocked me right down to my corpusles.
posted by stinkycheese at 10:18 AM on November 15, 2005


I've always had a soft spot in my heart for NOFX's Heavy Petting Zoo. The dude isn't just fingering the sheep, he's making sweet love.
posted by togdon at 10:21 AM on November 15, 2005


I like pitchfork, but damn was that boring.
posted by deafmute at 10:28 AM on November 15, 2005


This was a very "holy crap" link for me, since my father was in Nantucket maaaaaaaaaany years ago.

I've got a copy of that record somewhere. Ridiculous cover. I wonder if the band actually saw it before it went to manufacturing. I can't imagine people standing around going, "Yeah, the denim-wearing lobster ROCKS!" without at least one person dissenting.
posted by Mikey-San at 10:33 AM on November 15, 2005


What else would you like?

Actual information on what the bands sounds like and whether I might like it or not.
posted by jonmc at 10:37 AM on November 15, 2005


I don't know, pitchfork can be fairly "Wadda ya mean you don't have the Slint 7 inch dude from the record store with the bad shit breath and the shaved head because he is going bald five o'clock head stubble", but some of the reviewers have put me on to some good stuff. The site design is like an indie rock porn site spam trap though, stop with the blinking please!

This thing has some jokes, though. It really should be called 40 funny looking album covers though because they aren't the worst ever. I guess that doesn't have as much impact though.
posted by Divine_Wino at 10:37 AM on November 15, 2005


It's lunchtime in Chicago right now. I hope the pitchfork clan is reading this thread laughing at all of us.

If you think PFM is too "snotty" or "negative", try this link to their "Best New" stuff. Not always on target, but they've gotten me into lots of stuff I wouldn't have picked up otherwise. Me likum the new Silver Jews and Animal Collective, probably going to take a chance on the new Sigur Ros as well. And if I need second opinions on this stuff, there's metacritic.com.

(Madonna at 6.2? That sounds fair.)
posted by bardic at 10:38 AM on November 15, 2005


From my personal collection:


posted by swift at 10:39 AM on November 15, 2005



posted by jonmc at 10:40 AM on November 15, 2005


I thought some of the descriptions were pretty funny, if I didn't agree with all the selections. I love that Quasi cover. And (though I've never heard the music) I think that Cocorosie cover is fantastic.

Fwiw, I thought it was much funnier than the Dusty Scott stuff. It's two totally different genres (popular v. obscure).

Somewhat related: I got to meet Gottfriend Helnwein (he of the Scorpions Blackout cover) last week. I have to believe he did that Virgin Killer cover. (Marilyn Manson was there too.)
posted by mrgrimm at 10:41 AM on November 15, 2005


wtf!
posted by swift at 10:41 AM on November 15, 2005


jonmc, they tend to focus on bands who've recorded after 1979.
posted by bardic at 10:42 AM on November 15, 2005


I'm willing to bet BST did it first, swift.
posted by jonmc at 10:42 AM on November 15, 2005


Yes, but which is worse?
posted by swift at 10:44 AM on November 15, 2005


jonmc, they tend to focus on bands who've recorded after 1979.

I know. I could still do without 'em. And Lester Bangs and Dave Marsh could be caustic, for sure, but I never doubted that they were fans. These guys, I'm not so sure.
posted by jonmc at 10:44 AM on November 15, 2005


Yes, but which is worse?

I'd have to say yours, because of the cheapness of it, and the BST album actually pretty good. I haven't heard yours.
posted by jonmc at 10:45 AM on November 15, 2005


Mine sounds, and smells, just like it looks.
posted by swift at 10:48 AM on November 15, 2005


Actual information on what the bands sounds like and whether I might like it or not.

But this is entirely not the point of the article. Why would this information be included?
posted by xmutex at 10:49 AM on November 15, 2005


I was speaking of their reviews in general, xmutex. But, even this article....I can practically hear them smirking. I hate smirkers.
posted by jonmc at 10:51 AM on November 15, 2005


I can practically hear them smirking. I hate smirkers.

That's kinda funny because whenever I read you talking about music I picture you smirking. Read nothing into that. It is just an observation that I wouldn't have otherwise mentioned had you not said it.

And what xmutex says. The article was about the covers not the music. If it were about the music, one might have a grudge because, as many have said, there is a lot of good music behind those crap covers.
posted by terrapin at 11:04 AM on November 15, 2005


That's kinda funny because whenever I read you talking about music I picture you smirking.

I'm incapable of smirking. I'm way too aware of my own limitations to feel superior enough to smirk.
posted by jonmc at 11:06 AM on November 15, 2005


I'm way too aware of my own limitations to feel superior enough to smirk.

How can you say that with a straight face?
posted by terrapin at 11:08 AM on November 15, 2005


And yet another innocuous music thread turns into a referendum on jonmc....
posted by you just lost the game at 11:10 AM on November 15, 2005


jonmc: You're so condescending to 95% of music and youth culture created after like 1995 that it's just one decade+ long smirk. C'mon. Fess up. It's like someone hit you on the back during one of your anti-youth screeds on MeFi and your face done froze like that.
posted by xmutex at 11:12 AM on November 15, 2005


Me likum the new Silver Jews

Me likum it too. Punks in the Beerlight!
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:12 AM on November 15, 2005


It's ok if you skip the commentary and just look at the covers. And I agree that there are a couple of good albums on there, despite the bad covers.

I don't know, pitchfork can be fairly "Wadda ya mean you don't have the Slint 7 inch dude from the record store with the bad shit breath and the shaved head because he is going bald five o'clock head stubble"

This doesn't have anything to do with the thread, but have you seen Dave Pajo's blog? He uses a schizophrenic narrative style which can be funny and even profound occasionally.
posted by Devils Slide at 11:13 AM on November 15, 2005


xmutex, the thing is, I don't get any satisfaction from not liking newer stuff. I wish I had more stuff to like, honestly. It's lonely and no fun being the guy who dosen't dig the latest craze. But I'd be dishonest if I pretended to.

(and I don't want this thread to be about me, either, just answering a question)
posted by jonmc at 11:15 AM on November 15, 2005


Admit it, jon. You're smirking right now, drinking a PBR, and listening to The Arcade Fire.
posted by xmutex at 11:16 AM on November 15, 2005


I just tried to look at it, but it seems his install of wordpress is also using a schizophrenic narrative style at the moment.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:18 AM on November 15, 2005


This reminds me of something I saw on Metafilter today.
posted by nervousfritz at 11:20 AM on November 15, 2005


I just tried to look at it, but it seems his install of wordpress is also using a schizophrenic narrative style at the moment.

LOL (we are allowed one "lol" per year, aren't we?)
posted by Devils Slide at 11:21 AM on November 15, 2005


Man, someone needs to revoke Brent's license to snark. He's just fuckin' weak on these selections, and his attempts at humor fall sub-VH1.
posted by klangklangston at 11:24 AM on November 15, 2005


Public Image, Ltd. That What Is Not :
"Yeah, it's a vagina. You win. Neat."

MY EXACT THOUGHTS when I bought that.
posted by dong_resin at 11:35 AM on November 15, 2005


the intentional opaqueness of their reviews, masking how little they have to actually say about music is not the worst thing about pitchfork, imo, it is the awfulness of the design of their website. on what planet is it still ok to bombard the the visitor with animated gifs from every angle?

it is actually the only site i check where i am forced to disable all images. their news is interesting though.
posted by 8 Bit at 11:38 AM on November 15, 2005


I'm way too aware of my own limitations to feel superior enough to smirk.

How can you say that with a straight face? ;)
posted by terrapin at 11:46 AM on November 15, 2005


The new Cocorosie album is really good even if there's a unicorn threesome on the cover.

It sounds like Tom Waits if Tom were spooky lesbian sisters with a dulcimer.
posted by fleetmouse at 11:56 AM on November 15, 2005


No, the new Cocorosie album is crap, even though there's a unicorn threesome. Faux-archaic twee bullshit that needs to be booted before more well-meaning mincers take it up under their flag of ironic suckitude.
And yet three different promo companies sent it to me under the theory that it was special and that I should like it.
posted by klangklangston at 12:36 PM on November 15, 2005


Reading music reviews makes you stupider.

Proven fact!
posted by wakko at 12:46 PM on November 15, 2005


And the third MeFi member said "The new Cocorosie album is not great, not crap, but JUST RIGHT."
posted by you just lost the game at 12:56 PM on November 15, 2005


"Your least favorite band is fucking brilliant."
posted by bardic at 1:00 PM on November 15, 2005


they're all just cribbing my man Nick Difonzo, who is so obssessive about bad album covers, he actually got paid to do a book on them.
posted by Hat Maui at 1:30 PM on November 15, 2005


They made a good point re: Genesis and Animal Collective, though.
posted by kenko at 1:30 PM on November 15, 2005


It's just that bashing pitchfork for being snotty is so incredibly tired, inane, and unnecessary.

All right. I'll bash them for pretending they actually know much about music while demonstrating apparent ignorance of huge swaths of it and being condescending all the while.

No more worthless than anyone else's reviews, and probably less, since they've introduced me to plenty of good bands.

I agree with the latter part of that statement -- Pitchfork works as an introduction to new material. Where they fail is as critics. They're far from unique in this failing, but that doesn't mean that criticism in general is worthless.
posted by weston at 2:02 PM on November 15, 2005


Any "worst" list that has Stanley Mouse's "Terrapin Station" on it, is a clueless list at that. I hate the Dead, and I've always liked that cover. If it weren't for Mouse and the other San Fran. poster artists of the 60s, posters would still be all type or just a picture of the band. If they wanted to be "cool" by picking a Dead album cover to make fun of, I'm sure there are much worse ones than that.

/Got a magnet of those silly turtles on my fridge at home
posted by inthe80s at 2:10 PM on November 15, 2005


There goes jonmc, always dismissing stuff he doesn't like in that folksy aw shucks denim jacket sort of honest way.

Wait, they took his flannel shirt away?

That Terrapin cover is the single worst Dead cover ever, and I'm a head. Skull and Roses? Excellent. Steal Your Face? Worst recording ever, best cover. Red, white, blue, skull, lightning bolt. Bear's Choice which those ridiculous bears and Terrapin with those stupid fucking turtles? Give me a break.
posted by fixedgear at 2:34 PM on November 15, 2005




I'm pleased to say that I have this on vinyl.

Death to false metal!
posted by cmonkey at 2:37 PM on November 15, 2005


Really, what's offensive about that article is that they didn't seem to even try. They just went around at 4:58 in the afternoon on a Friday and asked everyone who hadn't headed over to happy hour already to bring in a sucky album cover on Monday (which some of them misheard as bring in a sucky album, and others mis-remembered through their happy hour hangover as bring in a sumptuous albumin covering, and so they didn't have many to choose from).

Anyway, as thewittyname pointed out, any of the album coveres here are crappier than any of the ones in the linked article. I mean, really:
Hell, you want crappy album covers, just look through your parents' record collection. It's fish in a barrel.
posted by lodurr at 2:47 PM on November 15, 2005


Sure the winner, for its thirtieth consecutive year, is The Scorpions' Virgin Killer.

But Simpsons fans please give it up for:


posted by dgaicun at 3:34 PM on November 15, 2005


Really, what's offensive about that article is that they didn't seem to even try.

Dude, if you can write ~8,000 words without trying, you are a far better man than me. (I do not write for Pitchfork.)
posted by mrgrimm at 4:10 PM on November 15, 2005


looks like you added some characters ...


posted by mrgrimm at 5:21 PM on November 15, 2005


I don't get it.
posted by dgaicun at 5:28 PM on November 15, 2005


mrgrimm writes "Dude, if you can write ~8,000 words without trying, you are a far better man than me."

And yet they do manage to give that impression, don't they. Crafty!
posted by clevershark at 7:30 PM on November 15, 2005



some more contenders

posted by snoktruix at 10:34 PM on November 15, 2005


... ~8,000 words ...

Look! In the sky! It's a bird....it's a plane....no, it's.... LiteralMan!

Dude, I have to try to get out of bed in the morning. I'm going to have to try to hit the next key...and the next...and the next....am I trying hard enough for you?

fwiw, I can do 8K words pretty easily, thank you. My problem is holding it to 8K words. My last 'short story' ended up 20K...
posted by lodurr at 11:09 PM on November 15, 2005


I used to really like pitchfork, it's still ok but if you look at the best new music section more than half of the albums there are by bands that have previously been on the best new music section on pitchfork. It's like rollingstone where reviews are based on perceived legacy more than actual quality of the product. Points are given out more for track record than anything else it seems. That said I love the Jew's album and think JonMC would like it based on other things he likes.
posted by I Foody at 11:31 PM on November 15, 2005



posted by helios at 1:49 AM on November 16, 2005


You're so condescending to 95% of music and youth culture created after like 1995 that it's just one decade+ long smirk.

"Youth culture" isn't all that fascinating, not unless it's your youth culture and you're seeing it from the inside (or in retrospect). Otherwise, today's "youth culture" always turns out to be a lot like any other day's "youth culture" -- 95 percent forgettable crap, 4 percent unforgettable crap, and maybe 1 percent something lastingly interesting in an artistic or intellectual way that does not induce, when contemplated, a full smirk.

One easy example: pretty much all heavy metal album covers are funny because all heavy metal bands are funny, because heavy metal is funny. Some covers are funnier than others, but the whole idea of men with long curled hair and tights and high heels and makeup and screechy high-pitched voices and faux devil symbolism and so on, all combined in a pop band adored mainly by teenage boys, is all at least somewhat smirkworthy. Eventually, not one heavy metal band will be considered without at least half a mental smirk, not unless heavy metal was part of your youth.
posted by pracowity at 2:37 AM on November 16, 2005


well, now that i've had a chance to check in on what my man Nick DiFonzo is up to, i'd have to posit that you don't get more definitive in the realm of bad album covers than this (my man doesn't play! seriously!)
posted by Hat Maui at 4:11 AM on November 16, 2005


looks like you added some characters ... [picture inexplicably reposted]

I repeat: Huh?
posted by dgaicun at 9:20 AM on November 16, 2005


I repeat: Huh?

So exactly what the fuck do you want? He misposted a picture, I corrected it for him. Why? Because I liked it. If everybody else gets to post pictures, so do I.

Admit it, jon. You're smirking right now, drinking a PBR, and listening to The Arcade Fire.

I'm pretty sure jonmc's a Wolf Parade man.
posted by mrgrimm at 5:37 PM on November 16, 2005


Oh, sorry. You might have been honestly inquisitive.

"Can I Borrow a Feeling?" is the first single by Springfield sadsack Kirk Van Houten on The Simpsons.

Say "huh" one more time. I dare you.

i'd have to posit that you don't get more definitive in the realm of bad album covers than this (my man doesn't play! seriously!)

Those aren't bad. Those are "bizarre." Big difference.

The pitchfork list is the best I've seen so far.
posted by mrgrimm at 5:40 PM on November 16, 2005


So exactly what the fuck do you want? He misposted a picture, I corrected it for him . . . Oh, sorry. You might have been honestly inquisitive. "Can I Borrow a Feeling?" is the first single by Springfield sadsack Kirk Van Houten on The Simpsons. Say "huh" one more time. I dare you.

Christ almighty, are we at a bar circa 2 AM? That 'he' was me - look at the name, I posted the picture - and yes it was a Kirk Van Houten reference. Since I saw, and still see, the picture I posted fine on two different computers, I had no idea why the comment following mine said "looks like you added some characters" and then inexplicably re-posted the same picture again.

Did you mean I added Simpsons "characters"? That I added "Characters" (written text) on the album itself? These were the things that I could come up with trying to parse your comment. And I couldn't think of any possible way to interepret your comment so it that made any sense whatever to me - which is why I pressed for an answer.

Now it seems clear that you couldn't see the picture, for some reason, and what you meant was that I fucked up the code so the picture wasn't showing, and you reposted the picture so other people could see it. Your actions and words make sense now. Sorry for the misunderstanding (though Jesus, you do seem like a dick now with that "come get some, bitch" reply).

What still bugs me is why I can see the picture I posted fine at my home and at the library, while you can't see it. I wonder if its just your computer or if other people are getting the same thing.
posted by dgaicun at 8:13 PM on November 16, 2005


COME GET SOME!

my job sucks. let's leave it at that. sorry.
posted by mrgrimm at 1:43 PM on November 17, 2005


fwiw, your original image path shows as "http://images.thesun.co.uk/picture/0,,2005380617,00.jpg%3C/a" for me.

the "%3C/a" (which is ">/a") looks like the transposed end of an a href tag. the image doesn't show for me in IE or Firefox.

sorry again.
posted by mrgrimm at 1:50 PM on November 17, 2005


I finally got a chance to listen to some Cocorosie. It's not bad.
posted by mrgrimm at 10:03 AM on November 29, 2005


Youth culture killed my dog, and I don't think it's fair.
posted by klangklangston at 12:11 PM on November 29, 2005


« Older Hang Up and Drive   |   Target targeted for boycott? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments