Joined Feb 02, 2013 at 03:25PM EST
I found something that may potentially be of great interest to this article:
It’s an anti-anti-jew-organization that made a big report on this meme, and also this article, and debating how it should be removed from the internet. I don’t know if the organization itself is important enough to warrant a mention in the article, but it also makes some interesting statements about the origins of the meme, which the article currently is lacking.
The existence of the report, ironically, also provides additional support for this meme’s notability, and can be used to confirm that the meme has some spread.
It makes me so mad that the examples are doing it wrong. Okay, fine, mention the wrong use in the text, but don’t make the illustrating example wrong. Please.
It has nothing to do with LOTR
In 2010, minecraft generals on /v/ were usually named “autism general”. This shows that at that point, there were at least some labeling of tings as autistic. There was also that whole aspergite controversy.
A search for “autism general” in /a/ without quotation marks give no results that are not relating to actual autism in 2008, so at that point it was not very widespread if it existed at all. A search for “autism moe” gives results discussing if certain characters have autism.
So in 2008, the meme was not in use on /a/, and by 2010, it had started developing in /v/. Not very useful, but at least it’s something.
Maybe the article could include some info about things like goyim, oy vey and 6 trillion too? They are often used together with the le happy merchant reaction image.
The origins section is lackluster. Fluffy ponies were a thing already in 2011, in My Little Pony General on /co/. Here is an example:
If you browse the threads around that time, and a little later, you can see the development of fluffy ponies from their earliest origins and almost up to how they are today.
I don’t think Deviantart had much influence. They were created and evolved in My Little Pony General, and at an earlier date than this article claims.
@Ice Cream Yay!
What I’m thinking is that that is more about Le in general, while this is a popular hybrid meme. The Le article is about the word Le, while this is about a different meme that le happens to be a part of.
The use of le in parody images may be worth mentioning in the le article, but the act of vectorizing isn’t really related to that.
The set of vectorizing pictures combined with le and a wrong name given to the picture can be considered its own meme in my opinion.
I think we should leave the origin of “le” to the article about le, and let this article take care of the use in the vectorized images originally made to parody Reddit, and possibly how le became something to parody, but no earlier history than that.
Got an e-mail about adding you, but not sure how