I don't know if this thread's been made yet. But something had to be said. And no, it's not what you think.
http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=178961Are people really this stupid? This is among the most inept, inaccurate, unfunny attempts at a wiseass "drinking game" concept I've come across (which is usually used as a tired, phony satirical device in any case). Have they ever read a Pitchfork review? Have any of these chowderheaded little backlash morons even read one?
There's another post about ten or so down who makes a much better attempt (the reissue scoring higher thing was on-point). But honestly.
How about for one, who the fuck is going to sit around your iBook while you search the archives and you all read together "lol this one has that pretentious thing...i think...take a drink dude" - WORST PARTY EVER. Worst people ever.
I've got to lay it flat for anyone who is still confused:
You might not even realize it yourself, but you are attempting to denigrate Pitchfork in an attempt to seem cool. I did it myself during my freshman year of college. Stop it.Ask me what I'd choose if I had to have only one source for music reviews for the rest of forever(well, one like...one publication/website) it's Pitchfork. Before you even finish the question, HANDS DOWN it's Pitchfork. Anyone who would pick anything else (wtf would it be? Spin magazine? Tiny Mix Tapes?) hates music. Pitchfork is just more relevant, cleverer, more up-to-the-minute, and more often correct than anyone else out there. Five fucking new fleshed-out, thoughtful album reviews DAILY. I've disagreed with them. Many times. In many ways. But that hardly affects the final decision.
I just can't fucking stand - I just. I can't respond to the people who made that asinine drinking game post thing and it's frustrating. Maybe I will here anyway: GOD DAMN IT, you are so far off. And you didn't even make it funny. Shame on you.