• SmokeyDope@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Why does there gotta be so many psudo-scientific internet ‘laws’ of common human behavioral archetypes with a half baked Wikipedia entry? Can I have SmokeyDopes Law where if more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law”

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Tbf, Cunningham’s law doesn’t have a Wikipedia entry unto itself, just a subsection in the biography of the sort-of kind-of coiner of the aphorism. And it’s not trying to be scientific or academic; the law is just a light-hearted joke that people are less likely to answer questions on the Internet than they are to correct statements.

    • riquisimo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      15 hours ago

      “Why does there gotta be so many psudo-scientific internet ‘laws’ of common human behavioral archetypes with a half baked Wikipedia entry?”

      Because of SmokeyDope’s law.

      "If more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law” "

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Can I have SmokeyDopes Law where if more than two humans ever exhibit the same behavior or particular complex that eventually there will be some armchair academic undergrad who will attempt to needlessly define it just to get to say “complex-fancy-sirname’s law”

      No.