Sending private messages on this site is currently disabled due to abuse by spammers.
Please use the forum to send private messages instead.
This Week | Last Week | All Time | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quota | Added | Score | Rank | Added | Score | Rank | Added | Score | Rank | |
Captions | 66 | 40 | 83 | #1 | 66 | 164 | #1 | 17767 | 42953 | #1 |
Photos | 2 | #6 | 8 | #6 | 74 | 253 | #11 | |||
Comments | 10 | 1 | 3 | #4 | 1006 | 793 | #11 | |||
Suggested Edits | 10 | 1 | 1 | #2 | 52 | 59 | #2 | |||
Forum Posts | 213 | |||||||||
Tips |
This Week | Last Week | All Time | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Voted | Rank | Voted | Rank | Voted | Rank | |
Captions | 44 | #4 | 66 | #3 | 18611 | #9 |
Photos | 2193 | #10 | ||||
Comments | 3 | #6 | 1030 | #9 | ||
Suggested Edits | 17 | #6 | ||||
Forum Posts | ||||||
Tips | 4 | #2 |
captions
|
||
26/02/20 12:00:54 |
||
I'd already decided if I won I wanted to use the money to help caption.me. I've asked Chris if he might consider putting my winnings towards a second prize of £25 for Feb, and a second prize of £25 for March, and otherwise put it towards the c... --Stephen Bean
|
||
|
||
12/12/22 12:18:34 |
||
Well done Stephen for a great caption which was really on point --Mr Dome
|
||
31/03/23 20:00:07 |
||
Sometimes you just have to bow down to a higher order --Mr Dome
|
||
03/08/23 20:00:25 |
||
|
||
21/04/20 12:00:17 |
||
12/01/24 8:15:24 |
||
02/01/24 20:04:08, edited: 02/01/24 20:10:54, suggested edits |
||
Thank you so much for the suggestion Kathleen. You really improved it! --Stephen Bean
|
||
11/09/22 12:03:29 |
||
|
||
08/07/20 12:00:09 |
||
02/04/24 8:03:31 |
||
10/01/24 12:09:59, suggested edits |
||
07/01/24 8:00:12 |
||
03/12/23 8:13:31 |
||
20/08/23 12:01:05 |
||
11/10/24 20:02:24 |
||
20/04/24 8:07:52 |
||
12/03/24 8:37:11 |
||
09/02/24 8:04:44 |
||
27/10/23 20:00:32 |
||
17/05/23 12:11:43, edited: 17/05/23 12:14:10 |
||
|
||
01/04/22 12:10:36 |
||
Well done Stephen, you certainly rose to that challenge. --John Glover
|
||
|
||
07/10/18 12:00:09 |
||
Still better than Vista. --Mauris Iocus
|
||
05/08/24 12:17:45 |
||
21/04/24 8:05:18 |
||
22/12/23 8:13:58 |
||
19/11/23 20:03:29 |
||
20/07/23 12:08:41 |
||
21/12/22 12:04:04 |
||
29/11/22 12:00:05 |
||
I only recently found out that Lucy Davis (The Office, Shaun of the Dead) is Jasper Carrot's daughter. You all in the UK probably know this already but I felt compelled to share. --James Lennox
|
||
16/07/22 20:00:37 |
||
04/10/19 20:02:43 |
||
16/08/24 20:24:01 |
||
15/04/24 20:28:54 |
||
23/01/24 12:29:49 |
||
07/09/23 12:04:20 |
||
30/07/23 12:00:19 |
||
09/04/23 8:35:27 |
||
08/02/23 20:17:03 |
||
10/10/22 12:15:56 |
||
24/06/22 8:02:43 |
||
31/03/22 12:45:46 |
||
01/11/20 8:03:12 |
||
12/07/24 8:00:57 |
||
This contest is over. --Scrijjy Doo
|
||
10/05/24 12:01:52 |
||
08/04/24 12:11:07 |
||
05/04/24 8:23:38, edited: 05/04/24 8:38:26 |
||
11/02/24 20:02:12 |
||
Just out of interest, which tree is the right one? --Mr Dome
|
||
04/01/24 8:04:07 |
||
13/12/23 12:01:27 |
||
Looking for entiques? --John Glover
|
||
29/01/23 20:00:10 |
||
14/12/22 20:00:40 |
||
24/10/22 12:09:38 |
||
08/09/22 8:37:19, edited: 08/09/22 8:38:57 |
||
Brilliant! Got me back again though 😂 --Ethy
|
||
24/04/22 20:21:16 |
||
12/07/21 12:03:54 |
||
25/09/24 12:00:39 |
||
14/06/24 12:00:24 |
||
09/06/24 8:33:36 |
||
06/05/24 12:00:19 |
||
24/04/24 12:01:46, edited: 24/04/24 12:02:20 |
||
21/02/24 20:03:30, edited: 21/02/24 20:07:16 |
||
18/02/24 12:10:16 |
||
04/02/24 20:42:26 |
||
29/12/23 8:09:24 |
||
14/12/23 20:00:28 |
||
22/10/23 20:29:21 |
||
Yes, I do but I have to do terrible things to support my habit. They're called puns --Glyn Evans
|
||
12/09/23 12:07:14 |
||
We have our winner! Also, get off the site. -Anon --Peter Houle
|
||
21/06/23 8:01:38 |
||
11/05/23 12:00:53 |
||
04/04/23 12:00:07 |
||
29/06/22 12:49:59 |
||
"I just hope I can remember the combination." --Willie Johnson
|
||
17/10/21 20:44:34 |
||
20/07/21 12:28:58 |
||
21/04/20 8:01:37 |
||
07/04/20 12:12:18 |
||
05/04/20 8:25:13 |
||
"Hey guys, 6 feet!" --Scrijjy Doo
|
||
01/01/20 8:09:43 |
||
02/07/19 12:00:14 |
||
Lol --sandeep chahal
|
||
18/03/19 8:00:04 |
||
Fri 12:01:09 |
||
12/10/24 8:14:50 |
||
13/05/24 8:32:10 |
||
09/04/24 8:04:59 |
||
28/03/24 12:02:03 |
||
08/03/24 8:08:34 |
||
04/01/24 20:05:46 |
||
04/05/23 12:00:06 |
||
15/01/23 20:16:00 |
||
07/01/23 8:00:06 |
||
Yew have inspired many! 👍 --Julia Kinsey
|
||
26/11/22 20:00:11 |
||
24/10/22 8:02:56 |
||
07/10/22 20:58:12 |
||
02/10/22 12:00:08 |
||
14/09/22 12:20:48 |
||
09/09/22 12:04:45, edited: 09/09/22 12:08:25 |
||
06/05/22 20:23:58 |
||
09/08/21 20:00:20 |
||
02/06/21 8:00:05 |
||
Springer? But I don't even know her. --Willie Johnson
|
||
04/04/21 20:06:38 |
||
21/01/21 20:00:04 |
||
L'Orange & Peking, a crowd favorite, but roasted by the judges --Mauris Iocus
|
Thanks Steve. I know we've all made worthy captions which have gone unappreciated. I think timing has a lot to do with it. In the first minute or so when so many captions are posted almost simultaneously I think some can go unnoticed. The same is true if they're posted the following day.
2:05am
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
Since the forum has come here, let's continue. For perhaps the first time, I have to disagree with you Karyn, but on a totally subjective level, and I still rate you as one of the best voters on this site :)
My argument actually mirrors yours. Let's say the jokes you find funny on Friends had already been made on Cheers 10 years earlier. Would they still be funny on Friends? For me a joke is only original once, and it will be funny in that specific situation. Yes, I can revisit that specific place over and over again and find it funny each time (I could watch Fawlty Towers continuously), but if it's taken from that place and reused elsewhere, the humour is stripped (for me).
And (again, for me) the same applies to captions. I want to read original captions, not see the same captions reapplied to other similar photos. Because (yet again, for me) I don't see this as a skill, but merely an easy way to garner votes.
To be clear, I'm not attacking Stephen here, his original captions are among the best this site has seen, I just don't like, and won't vote for, recycled captions, unless they are being used in a new and original way.
And, as you've both pointed out, the more captions that are written, the harder and harder it is to be original, but logically it follows that it is becoming easier and easier to be repetitive. In my opinion this is all the more reason we should reward originality.
5:45am
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
However, we have (thankfully) a regular influx of new members, and they cannot be expected to spend days reading through every caption which has already been posted! And there is no way that somebody can search to see whether an idea they have has already been used. Even captioneers who have been around for years may very well not have perfect memories for every caption they have ever seen; something pops into the head, and who knows where it came from? If a caption is funny in the context of the photo, whether or not it has been used before, I think we should be tolerant of the repetition. (Although I could certainly do with no more of the "outstanding in his field" ones...)
7:28am
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
I was just about to write something and then I read Molly's post and it comes close to summing up my own thoughts on the subject (and no, she didn't pay me to say that). Stephen, anon, Mauris, Karyn, James and The Wolf have all made several good points as well. In the end, we all have no control over who votes for what, or how many times. We can withhold our vote for the ones we don't like or don't agree with, but others (sometimes many)may vote for it anyway.
The bottom line is that we do this all for someone else and if they don't respond the way we'd like them to, it can be frustrating and even disheartening. All we can do is enjoy the victories that we have, and know deep within that our failures don't mean that we're not funny. That said, it's still worth it to try and level the playing field, that's why we have the forums (and yes, the comments) as well as Mr. Chris Beach's close attention.
When all is said and done, what really counts is when we're able to make someone laugh or smile. And that's something I think all of us can feel good about.
9:10am
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
This is a really insightful discussion with everyone making good points. I've added a link to it on a thread started by James on the same topic at https://www.caption.me/forum/discussion/2219/using-previous-captions#latest
10:32am
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
I think to a certain extent captioneers have a weekly dilemna. They can either try and collect as many votes as possible or retain their integrity. By the latter, I mean only post captions they genuinely think are original and funny. I would say this limits me to no more than 20 a week. Have I ever been able to stick to this limit? No.
Incidentally, The Wolf makes a very good point about the importance of voting. Not only is it unfair to post a large number of captions and give out only a few votes, it is also incredibly arrogant. i.e. I believe I've posted 40 captions which are worth voting for but the combined wit of the rest of the site is only worth half a dozen votes.
12:47pm
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
RE: James Lennox : today 5:45am
You've managed to sum up perfectly in a just few lines, what I was attempting to express with my clumsy verbosity. Of course there will always be new members, but the custodians of the captioning culture, those of you who have been awarded here for your genius wit, have the option to exercise restraint for edification of the site.
The clever use of an old caption in a new way, is funny because it's still original. Using it exactly the same way, isn't, exactly as James pointed out.
As for Stephen wondering why I didn't vote for his closet caption or the other one, as there were 3 he posted on this photo. Not sure if it's "ironic," but in my profile I describe how I vote. My votes on this photo as with all others, are along those lines, if it makes me laugh, or amazes me, I vote. Many of Stephen's captions on this site, as James also mentioned, are the best. Just not on this skeleton pic. Remember, I don't know who I'm voting for, we just go with what we like.
Not sure if you've been to many other sites with similar types of voting, likes, thumbs up, etc. No one has mentioned what I said about group-think being kryptonite for creatives, but when people put in their time & energy into building a site, recommending it to their lists, they're invested.
Karyn mentioned the first minute out of the gate, when a flurry of captions are posted. The other day, on that roofing tile pic, I was seconds behind someone mentioning Homes Under the Hammer, my caption also mentioned the UK show, & even though I'd planned this one in advance, had perfected it, & believe me, it was much funnier than the one that got posted, I had to use restraint, I pulled it. We were only 2 seconds apart. Yes, many go up which are similar, but if there's no honor code, then no one will know when they've crossed it.
12:47pm
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
When I posted this photo I didn't imagine it would provoke such heated debate. I spend a lot of my free time trying to find photos which are either funny or unusual or, preferably, both. It isn't easy. Some are not dissimilar to previously featured photos and are going to attract similar captions, but they do also inspire more original and creative ones. I can see both sides of this argument, and while I do believe that originality should be rewarded isn't this site more about just being able to have a laugh? It takes me a long while to tire of a good caption and if I see the same one repeated on a different photo and it still makes me laugh I'll vote for it even if it's not used in an original way. I wish there was a way of saving our favourite captions on here because they're difficult to locate, especially if you can't remember who made them. I don't see recycled captions going into Room 101 anytime soon and there would be fewer laughs if they did. Having said that though if someone won fifty quid using one of mine I'd be more than a little miffed. I don't know what the answer is. Would be interested to hear Chris's opinion.
3:27pm
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
Oh yes, just noticed at the bottom of the photo, your name. Never looked there before. Good call, it's certainly a funny photo.
In the States there's an expression you've probably heard as it's popular in music culture; "That's played out." Meaning, it's fully exhausted its value.
The reason "Get a tomb" was originally so funny is because it rides on the back of the previously funny & now fully exhausted "Get a room." When I say it's a worn out slogan, I mean in it's original sense of catcalling an amorous couple. Which wouldn't get the amused public response it would have years ago. However, as mentioned, someone resurrected "Get a room!" to great effect with the homeless guy photo. It's so obvious, that it's probably been done before, but not anywhere with the regularity that "Get a tomb" has with dead or dying people. As I suggested, a simple search will show this appearing in memes & cartoons in magazines & newspapers for over ten years.
One of the reasons I stopped watching American late night shows, is they run the exact same joke for several years! Every night in the monologue, year after year it was the same dull tired routine, & since they add fake recorded laughter, the whole process is an insidious form of stupefying viewers. For years it was Bill Clinton (horny), George Bush (stupid), Obama (smart & sexy), Trump (the devil).
If creativity & originality can be developed as a form of brain exercise, then surely beating a dead horse forever by repeating a slogan can have the opposite effect?
Orwell & Huxley thought so ...
4:03pm
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]
I would never ascribe ownership to any of my captions. There are a lot of similar creative minds on this site. I remember deciding not to post 'Luke, I am your farmer.' (how daft is that!) only to see James some time later posting it and receiving about 26 votes. I also decided not to post 'Bucket and spade' on a photo of a dog with a bucket only to see The Wolf get about 16 votes for it. Not long ago I was about to post the Dali Llama only to see stoneface beat me to it. About a year ago I decided to do a longer version of RIP tide on a photo thinking that this caption had been done very recently and everyone would be bored with it, only to see Welsh Rarebit do the short version and get about 18 votes. I think often good ideas have or are being considered by many captioneers. I've lost count of the number of times someone beat me to an idea while I was trying to improve on a caption. When it comes to longer captions however I think it is ok for different versions to co-exist as long as subsequent authors haven't seen the original and are willing to edit if the first author isn't happy. I don't think Mauris needed to delete her long version of 'Homes Under the Hammer' even if it had been identical as 2 seconds is too small a gap for it to have been copied anyway and I think the site has moved to being more forgiving and favouring allowing creativity. I remember asking Crunchy Chords to put her Mary Poppins caption back on after Crunchy realised someone else had posted a Mary Poppins caption. I too had been working on a Mary Poppins caption (not as good as Crunchies which ending up winning). I always think it is sad when a good caption never gets to see the light of day. This is one of reasons I favour the blind submission idea.
4:50pm
comment on caption:
"Get a tomb!" [Stephen Bean]