So you fap on the post count?
Eric, nice to meet you. You are a legend!
Cheers
This thread is useless and Fong isn’t really that awesome. He’s just some Asian guy who sometimes makes funny posts because of his twisted English.
Heretic!
Resulting in awesomeness. Therefore, your former statement is fallacious.
Hazzmat, you, me, outside, now.
Should the duel go sideways, I am in for a second.
Fong Rocks!
Leisure Suit Fong. Fund it.
Best. Idea. Ever.
anything with fong is obviously going to be win
The Fong-anator?
“Ahead go… Day my make!”
thought that ‘FONG’ will not come back again…
Brother…
Like all great legends, it is only a matter of time before he returns and rises to even greater hights of “Fongness”.
Can’t wait for the movie.
:awesome:
Did you guys get the latest “Fong” comic book? I hear it has a nifty ad at the end that makes you buy x-ray goggles.
You need the F-Ray goggles to see Fong properly.
and you need a dictionary to understand his posts
Don’t you mean a Fongctionary?
In consideration of the recent Eric FONG epicness, it is fitting that we try to fit this phenomenon into some sort of frame: questions must be asked. Questions such as, “How will this awesomeness affect society”? What changes are fitting to make to accommodate the social epiphany? Obviously, I mean these questions for the good. Still, any kind of change can have an impact on the general rank-and-file of society. That said then, we should proceed with thoughtful contemplation.
Perhaps the first foundational means of communication (the English language) is required to have a revision to match the proportional awesomeness. For instance, in terms of academia, standardized linguistic meter may well have to be changed. Under this new system would it be appropriate to say, that a person lacking the ability to appreciate the epicness that is Eric Fong, should they suddenly be labelled as being dis-fong-tional? It may well be appropriate, but there is a negative connotation - as such, is it appropriate even when describing an inability to appreciate epic awesomeness? Would we not be better off to use it for positive means in terms of description? If a person does appreciate the epic awesomeness that is Eric Fong, would we then claim that the person has “higher cognitive fong-tioning”?
And what of taxonomy; are we obligated to consider changing something rather traditional out of respect for Eric? A group of primates say Fongkeys? It is rather a simple thing, and does ring of respect to now say, the “Golden Fongkey spends the majority of its time in the upper canopy of the jungles”? Still, there is a societal impact regardless of intention.
What if we were to approach this from a position of more practical utility, such as that concerning sports? What would you change? Obviously, it is self-evident that the paddle game classic could easily handle the cognomen “Ping Fong”. Certainly it is a small change, but then we must ask, “Would it be epic enough to befit the purpose for which the idea is intended?”
Perhaps we would do well to consider the potential impact on literature and popular media. It is easily understandable how someone would want to honor Eric by changing an old classic - say Treasure Island. Not being sensitive to awesomeness, would they then try and rename the villain Long Fong Silver? Clearly that is not appropriate. What of more modern media? It could be inadvertently degrading for a well-intentioned fan to try to create a fictional Star Trek character named a Kling-Fong?
Regardless of the musings of this discourse, one thing is for sure: Eric will be with us for a very Fong time