What I thought was a worthwhile endeavor is turning into a TMZ-like cluster fuck.
"BOOBS FRIDAY? Oh wait, that’s my ass. Post nice shit about my ass. I fucking love you guys. I’m not a dude. Barry and Jereme –say nice things about my ass."
On Tony O'Neill: "That’s hot, right? Dude puts it in the back door (there’s also nice pussy eating references..yeah)! My kind of guy. And has an English accent? And writes poetry and has a real book deal? Anyway, Tony, if you are out there, do you know the saying, “show me a beautiful woman and I’ll show you a man sick of fucking her”? If you are sufffering from this common phenomen, come on over and get yourself some strange!"
"i did not enjoy reading THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS but i will not say anything else because if Camus finds out he will blog in a mean way about me and htmlgiant will fire me and spit on me all at once (that’s how htmlgiant fires people at meetings, a group spitting)."
How is any of this shit useful? Right now it seems like they have way too many contributors and very few of them have a filter. That kind of shit is what your personal blog is for. Don't subject the rest of us who subscribe to HTMLGIANT's feed to your boring personal observations on whether you want to fuck an author or not. It's a waste of physical energy for you and a waste of physical energy for me. Here's what you should do when you feel like writing something stupid like that on HTMLGIANT: go masturbate.
I don't expect HTMLGIANT to be some kind of high brow publication, but it would be nice to have some way to separate the actually useful stuff (of which there is plenty) from the bullshit that people have been putting up in abundance lately. Shun inclusivity in favor of actually creating worthwhile content. Make some "editorial decisions." Have some "standards."
Having said that, I'm excited to be a part of the HTMLGIANT Secret Santa extravaganza, and I frequently find interesting things on there (e.g. it's nice to know when a journal's submissions are open).