I saw a few folks complaining that having people knowing and being warned of what was going on yesterday somehow ruined it. I am of the exact opposite opinion - that's what kept it from being an aggravation. People like being in on a joke rather than having the joke be on them. I am only guessing, but I suspect that the folks who didn't want anyone to know what was going on are the same folks who don't like it when someone "breaks the fourth wall" and perhaps like the practical joke over the shenanigan (the difference: even the target enjoys the shenanigan, whereas the practical joke is simply cruel in its effect). How much does anyone like the April Fooler who commits the foolery on a later date?
Anyway, if someone seems to go all goofy in the future, it'd likely be a good check to see what they posted yesterday about yesterday.
no subject
Date: 28 Jan 2005 16:05 (UTC)no subject
Date: 28 Jan 2005 17:16 (UTC)no subject
Date: 28 Jan 2005 17:37 (UTC)No, I haven't read that one.
no subject
Date: 28 Jan 2005 17:44 (UTC)no subject
Date: 28 Jan 2005 17:58 (UTC)Ah, yes. I understood the intended meaning. I am also amused by some of the possibilities of the unintended meaning. Okkay, I'd best stop now.
??
Date: 28 Jan 2005 19:08 (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 28 Jan 2005 19:44 (UTC)no subject
Date: 29 Jan 2005 01:55 (UTC)As is, it let me skip a bunch of entries because I knew they weren't "real entries" immediately and save them until I get back home and have time to read them, but the enjoyment of seeing them fresh and not knowing what was going on will be gone.
So if I was home, I'd be sad it was spoiled, but here it turned out for the better.