This article is absolute shit. Its like the writer was having an epileptic fit while constructing it. It consists of poorly implemented and overused bad jokes that were never funny in the first place. Also take a look at the paragraph that tries to imitate Kant's writing style, frankly its nothing short of an embarrassment.
- Agreed, why don't you rewrite it since you have such a comprehensive knowledge of its flaws? -- 14:11, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for your inquiry. It is because (1) the word is offensive to millions of people in the Central USA and you can't make people laugh when they are storming up to the head librarian's office to get the website blacklisted; (2) changing "Kant" to "Cunt" everywhere was tried in a previous revision and boiled down to telling a toilet joke one hundred times. Not one hundred times as funny; not even clever; the name doesn't even make sense and surely has no clear relation to anything about Immanuel Kant. 14:33 26-Feb-16
You don't have to repeat this joke even twice, but use in one time in the begging (pronounced as "a manual cunt") is extremely funny. And you know, Central USA and their censorship (oh, are you serious? they can't get excess to a website with a dirty words?) is just a part of a word, not a center of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs)
- It is not "extremely funny," it is not original, and again it invites Anon to repeat the joke everywhere. Whatever I think of prudish readers, there is no bang for the buck here. 15:07 26-Feb-16