Forums / Discussion / Meme Research

Would we keep the original article as evidence and make a whole new one based off of that, or just edit over the old one and preserve it via screenshots?

It's not a meme yet since it's a KYM exclusive fad, but who knows? It grows in power everyday. Suggestions?

The original article would serve as proof that we here at KYM are the ultimate hipsters and liked Super Robo Jesus before he was a popular meme. That being said, people (I mean internet people) would have to start liking KYM and not refer to us as cancer before they could see the glorious ways of Super Robo Jesus.

(But yeah. We would stick to the 1st article is the only article rule. No duplicates are accepted.)

KYM will condense into a black hole, since we made it and we're going to document how we made it.

We…
We must convert all non-believers to the Church of Deadpool!

All hail SRJ as the one true savior of all!

Chill. We don't want this thing to turn into circlejerk shit.

YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO RESEARCH MEMES, NOT MAKE THEM!

It was a joke.

There really is no reason that Super Robo Jesus would become a meme. There's nothing exploitable, notable or spreadable about it. It'd be like trying to put a picture of something completely idiotic (Idon'tknowsomethinglikemaybeAGOAT) everywhere and expecting it to be a meme.

Edit: With that said. Why was this thread made in Meme Research?

I mean, the thread's subject itself doesn't really sound like research. I'd say it would probably do better in Site Related. But I'll ask some other mods before making a decision.

Edit 2: Alright after discussing, we've come to an agreement. The description of Meme Research states "The topic is memes. Entry research, theories, trends, editing help, database maintenance & related." This would technically fall under theory so it'll stay here.

Someone actually tried making the Super Robo Jesus article look good by putting information about its meme status here on KYM.

Of course, the only reason the article is so well known is because it is the example listed in the editing rules of what not to do. If new users clicked that and were linked to a decent looking article, it would defeat the purpose, so the person's edits were reverted.

In short, we wouldn't let it become a meme, because that article has to look bad. So we wouldn't be able to document it anyway.

Let sleeping memes lie.

Wow that would be meta, if the entry referred to itself as the primary source.