.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-comments.cgi?__mode=red&id=1474">Jeff G at October 18, 2002 11:41 PM

"Fish don't have buttocks, do they Jim?"

That makes me think of the "Is Spongebob gay?" stuff in the press. He's a sponge. Aren't they asexual or something?

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 19, 2002 12:22 AM

Cosh is absolutely correct. There's another reason to reject the word, though he doesn't mention it: guilt by association. I've seen so many crappy "fiskings" by now that I would be really embarrassed to see the word attached to something I wrote.

As for whether Cosh is the only one who's bored with the phrase, it seems to me that the blog world is presently pulsating with people attacking "fisking," both the word and the practice. Some sort of dam has burst. It burst about 9 months too late, but at least the water's flowing.

Posted by: Jesse Walker at October 21, 2002 12:24 PM

Cosh isn't absolutely correct. There is an activity that is not specifically decribed by any other word other than "fisk." Even if only a few people in the world know what that activity is, it is still a useful word. Now, maybe there should be a different word that isn't aimed at a particular person, and maybe the activity is useless, but for now at least the word is useful.

Posted by: JB at October 23, 2002 01:59 PM

Unfortunately I can't remember which blogger wrote it but s/he pointed out that "Fisking" cannot be judged by its worst examples. There are some great ones out there, starting with what I consider the original by Layne (though I don't know if he would call it that).

Posted by: Henry Hanks at October 28, 2002 10:38 PM

What a bozo-blatherionic.

Posted by: Beerzie Boy at September 23, 2003 01:04 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






/body> ents_form.bakecookie[1].checked = true; } //--> /body> e { document.comments_form.bakecookie[1].checked = true; } //--> /body>