[Rabbit B.]

[ QUOTE ]
Rabbit,

You're completely missing Lazy's point. You can't argue that knowing the author has no effect on one's overall enjoyment of the story. It provides a context for the story that can change it for the better or the worse. Obviously.

Also, its "separate," not "seperate."

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the correction.

Listen, I understand this idea. You might also find knock, knock jokes hilarious, but that still doesn't make them good. The ability to differentiate what is good and bad isn't too complicated, but you seem to not understand it.

In this story you MIGHT see an underlying story which makes it funny. I personally don't see it, but you might. What makes the difference between a good story and a bad story is how they tell it. If this story had flowed well, left out distracting elements and been told in a good format, I could see how you could rank it as "Great" or "Awesome". But it didn't. You might think it was funny, but for people that read and appreciate things such as comedic timing and ability to build up climatic situations this story was atrocious.

I said he was a bad writer and that this was a badly written story. I’m not going to argue taste though.