Epic Fail!
Hat tip to Mike the Mad Biologist for the spot. (Do follow that link, to read about Mike’s ideas for an FMT.)
Update: Yes, I know it’s actually correct. I’ve been told a few hundred times (well, five) in the comments already. You don’t need to add your voice to the echo chamber if that’s all you have to say.
Epic Fail! by Will Goring, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0 UK: England License.
Comments
Trackbacks
-
¿Rolex falso? [Humor]…
Quizas un día nos topemos con uno de estos… Espero no me lo cuelen :P…
IIII is actually a valid, if archaic, form of writing “4″ in roman numerals. IV was traditionally avoided as it was the abreviation for Jupiter and the Roman hoi polloi weren’t great fans of subtraction.
The Wikipedia page covers this in its own section (since it comes up a lot): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals
If they’re not fans of subtraction than why don’t they use VIIII ? :p
Probably didn’t stand for anything like he said “IV” did
K ROB!!!!
Actually you all fail, because on clocks and watches it’s okay, to write IIII instead of IV…
Wow, just … wow. Did you actually read the comment you were replying to?
yeah really wow! damn, he’s probably not reading >.<
noooob
Oh.
Well, I guess the title is still valid then. In an ironic sort of way.
By the way, if you haven’t already, you should head over and put the same comment at Mike’s site.
And, aren’t all Roman numerals, archaic? :)
This is extra-archaic ;)
I remember seeing this somehwere as an observation versus logical thought test. Most clocks using Roman numerals use IIII rather than IV, so you ask someone to look at a clock, hide the clock and ask them to draw it. When they put IV on (after having looking at the numbers, thinking “Roman numerals”, then just writing in 1-12) you go “well actually…”
They may be mildly interested. They may, alternatively, attack you.
epic fail to you ignorants.
i’m looking at the genuine ROLEX on my own arm with roman numeal IIII on it.
wtf?
epic fail to you ignorants.
i’m looking at the genuine ROLEX on my own arm with roman numeral IIII on it.
wtf?
OMFGOMFGOMFG
-.-
That’s normal on any Rolex and many other brands…you would know this if you were familiar with watches.
Yeah – I was corrected months ago, and admitted my mistake. You would know this if you’d bothered to read the other comments before posting one. ;)
you post something on the internet, and it opens you up to criticism.
you’re so ignorant.. shoulda double checked your shit with the Rolex site before calling out an error like that.
You’re not wrong Kitteh, but I’m not the only one here posting things on the internet; everyone who adds a comment is opening themselves up to exactly the same criticism.
I know I made a fool of myself, and I ate my humble pie months ago. The fact that this post and its attendant comments are still on the net, and getting hundreds of hits a week, should tell you something about how interested I am in covering up my mistakes, or pretending I’m some sort of genius (I’ll give you a clue: not at all.)
But if you’re going to call me ignorant for not checking my facts before reposting a “funny” picture, you really have to let me have a little (admittedly, puerile) fun with someone who doesn’t even read the whole page he’s commenting on before adding his two cents’ worth.
seeing that you’ve sprained your sense of humor, i leave you wih this:
1. i like to beat a dead horse – well because everytime someone else comments on this blog i get an email notification..:D
2. i like to rub it in that i HAVE a Rolex….and it’s got the IIII
3. i’ve read the whole page.. and all it does is reminds me of one of those irritating credit card advertisements.
Rolex…………………………………….$20,000
Blog…………………………………………$10
Beating a dead horse on the internet……….Priceless
oh and i LOVE the avatar!
The IIII is done purposely to counteract and mock symmetry with the VIII on the opposite side of the watch face…
That actually makes a lot of sense. I think I just learned something about design. :)
ZOMFG YOU NERDS YOU NEED TO GET LAID
i’m a happy rich nerd with my rolex.
gonna go home and get laid now
k thx bai
isnt a fail man, all the clockworkers use that numer to refer 4… its a long story, just investigate… cause that fail picture, its just your ingnorance
You suck IIII times.
BUT, kitteh, if he apologized for his error, then why are you still condenscending him about it? And still calling him ignorant? Honestly, even if you ARE a rich nerd, you should leave well enough alone. Tay? tay. omgwtfbbqkthnxbai
Hello,
http://google.com – google
lol poor bastard
You do know IIII can be used to represent 4 right?
What? Seriously? Shit, why didn’t somebody tell me?!
I think you all need to shut the fuck up ok you darrel coswok kids and leave the kid alone i had a laugh cos it dont LOOK right mk if u dont like it you leave the site dont vother commenting DERRRRR!!!
Yes you are an epic fail, moron!
Ooooh – served!
You fail. Ivpiter. Look it up. Then get rid of this page. WTF? Are you intentionally stupid such that, being told multiple times, you stil revel in your stupidity?
Revel in it? No, but I am prepared to own up to it. Everyone makes mistakes, this was one of mine (actually, I only reposted it, but there you go – on this site, it’s still my responsibility.)
This page gets a couple of hundred hits a day; that makes for a couple of hundred people a day who might be amused by my mistake, and who might learn something from it. More than enough reason for the page to stay.
Man people, STOP commenting on this he realised he was wrong months ago and admitted it
But most clocks do have IV and not IIII , therefore this is FUNNY also i learned that IIII can represent 4
So it is FUNNY and I LEARNED something. Thats more than enough reason to leave this page up
EPIC FAIL !
Trying to make fun of somthing and finally you discovert that you were ignorant.
I red the update, it makes it an even bigger FAIL!
You really though you were smarter than ROLEX??? HAHAHAHAHA!
Internet is all about disrespect and irony, so don’t blame the others for your mistake.
Congrats man !
To tell you the truth, the comments are even more entertaining than the pic. Thanks for the laugh.
The fail is that you guys actually got into an argument about it =D
Sadly, I think you’re right. :)
So, I think this will guy is pretty damn hilarious…Because he has admitted several times to his screw up, but yet people really want to come on and leave yet ANOTHER comment telling him he’s an epic failure? Think again dumbasses….like he said, the paget gets tons of hits, and i found it quite entertaining, even if the pic is correct.
And this guy….seriously?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! what the hell….can someone seriously be that stupid? guess so!
SwizzBeat says:
September 29, 2010 at 5:52 pm
EPIC FAIL !
Trying to make fun of somthing and finally you discovert that you were ignorant.
I red the update, it makes it an even bigger FAIL!
You really though you were smarter than ROLEX??? HAHAHAHAHA!
Internet is all about disrespect and irony, so don’t blame the others for your mistake.
Congrats man !
First of all, “SwizzBeat”, how can you call someone ignorant when you cannot spell at all…The word is discovered, not discovert. Read, not red. You seem like an illiterate asshole. He never said he was smarter than Rolex did he? And he didn’t blame anyone for anything. He simply posted a photo that was funny. even if it is correct to use IIII instead of IV, Like Will pointed out, It is visually funny regardless! Move on with yourself and stop looking like such a dumbass! Thanks much!
IIII is often found on watch or clock faces and I read somewhere about it from when the I, X and Vs were made of heavy metal and using IIII balanced better than IV…………….. or something like that.
But, I’ve never seen the 11 replaced with a single I before, always an XI.