The Page Formerly Known as Random Comments

This is an archived page, and cannot accept any new comments. The latest Random Comments page (2020) is here:

random comments imge

Please note that this was intended for public comic comments only: if you want to send me a CIDU, or a comic for some specific folder (Ewww, Oy, etc), or you want to inform me of a typo, please e-mail me at cidu email.

Also: A list of the site’s most recent comments can be found in the left sidebar. A database of all the comments, compiled by larK, is here; and the site’s FAQ is here:

faq image


  1. I was blocked yesterday, my first time to each comic I read there, then later I could get thru, but have to now scroll down to get to each comic.

  2. I never knew he was the ‘late’ B. Kliban. He died awf’ly young – 55 years old. Thanks for the links; I like his comics, even if they are mostly about c*ts.

  3. Just thanks in general. If I had to complain at all, it’s that the colors for followed and unfollowed links are a bit closer than I like. I often just switch Firefox to “No Style” to get the default link colors.

  4. Brian, is that comment for me? I always use incognito mode, so I don’t get followed links, and I just imported the old CIDU style-sheet. If that’s really a problem, I’ll look into it and write an overruling rule — got a color preference?

  5. I’ll join in thanking larK, and mention:
    — You can find a count of posted comments from each contributor — interesting silly feature!
    — As long as you might be fiddling with the operation, could I suggest giving the generated links all a “target” attribute, so they can open in a new tab from a simple click, and not lose the search results list

  6. OK, so it turns out I was controlling the visited color, I just don’t see it since I have the silly tick to always use incognito mode… Anyway, I changed it from grey to lightgrey, so it should make a bigger difference (maybe too much?)

    Mitch: I personally don’t like simple clicks to open a new window/tab, so I’m not going to be adding a target=”_blank” if that’s what you wanted 😦 but maybe you mean that by just adding a target attribute, it somehow helps you to middle click or something? I’ll happily add something to help you as long as it doesn’t interfere with my preferred behavior 🙂

    FYI: all search attributes get written to a short term cookie (it lasts 10 minutes or so?) so you can just go to the page as a GET rather than a POST and all the search results will be there… Yes, slight pain if you submit, click a link, and come back and it wants to resubmit the page, but if you remember to just go to the page after submitting a search (go to the url line and hit enter), then you can click forward and back without it asking to reconfirm the submit, thanks to the cookies…

  7. larK, we just have different preferences, but thank you for considering my suggestion and explaining why you won’t be going that way. I do know about selecting new tab or new window from a right-click context menu (on Windows), or for that matter holding a modifier key while left-clicking (I think it is Shift) — I just forget to do that sometimes.

  8. Yeah, but I like a challenge… So just for you Mitch, if you put “Mitch4” in a query string in the URL (either ?Mitch4 or &Mitch4 if there are other query strings you’re using (no =[something] needed)) it will behave like you want…

  9. (darn it!)

    Yes, I did in practice mean


    but there are other values besides the reserved ones that will work too, and will give some odd benefits (or I should just say “odd behavior” and leave it open what is good or bad!). If you just use any name you like, say


    the first time the user clicks on the link, the browser should create a new window or tab and open the referenced URL in it. But it will know this tab under that name. And when the user, returning to the original tab without closing “second” now clicks on another link which also uses target=”second”, the browser should not create an additional tab or window but instead just open the new URL in existing window “second”, replacing the content from the earlier click.
    This can spare the user from a confusing (and computer-slowing) proliferation of numerous new tabs.

  10. Would you like me to change the behavior to a named “Mitch4” window? Easily done… In fact — there, I did it. (Let me test it…)

  11. Wow, you are really so quick and nimble!

    And yes, it does seem to do that “single additional tab” behavior. I don’t recall actually seeing that demonstrated before.

  12. So it works for you? It doesn’t work for me… 😦 I’m wondering if it’s just because I’m using a weird edge case browser and no one else will see it not work? (I don’t like leaving it now that I’ve announced it if it might not work right…

  13. Anyway, I changed it from grey to lightgrey, so it should make a bigger difference (maybe too much?)

    It certainly distinguishes visited links now. From a UI perspective, it’s a bit close to the background color, but that’s not super important to me. Thanks for taking a look.

  14. Brian: hours and hours can be lost tweaking a color, so I purposely didn’t go there — you notice I use html color names and not rgb values as a way to keep from going down that rabbit hole; gray to lightgray was real easy and I can walk away… If you want to name me a color (or even an rgb value), I’ll gladly plug it in.

  15. Yes, the target tweak does work for me. Chrome on Windows 10 desktop.

    Andrea, some of the tweaks you will see automatically when you use larK’s scrape index site under a basic URL. There will be some additional features (or modifications, in any case) if you get there as … let’s see if this will just work as pasted … wait, I’ll use quotation marks …

  16. I tend to like plain defaults, which would be blue for an unvisited link, and purple for a visited one. Even if that may not conform to the rest of the colors on the page, it’s very recognizable, since there are tons of websites that do not change the default colors.

  17. I tend to like plain defaults

    And in most browsers allows the user to change the defaults. BUT, the new colors are a distinct improvement and for a volunteer, free, service I won’t complain.

  18. The stylesheet I rescued from the old CIDU site had both link and visited set to be the same color (shakes head about these so-called “designers”); this bugged me enough that I added an override outside the stylesheet to make visited links be “grey”. But I never see that because, as I’ve mentioned, I always use incognito mode, so it doesn’t remember where I’ve been so nothing is ever visited. I now made it “lightgrey”; it’s easy enough to change if anyone cares enough to name me a better html color, or even give me rgb values…

  19. Okay, NOW I see one can search replies one had posted.
    Useful if I can remember to find the link here.

  20. Following onto a comment that CIDU Bill made in late 2017, praising Pixar’s film “Coco“: I recently picked up a copy of “The Book of Life” on DVD. The two movies have some obvious similarities (being based on the same bit of cultural tradition), but the stories are clearly distinct, and each film has its own strengths. Even if you decide you like “Coco” better, “The Book of Life” is eminently worth watching.

  21. “What’s in it for you?” seems like an odd question, considering she’s his granddaughter and, according to him, his best friend.

    Also, is she wearing a bib, or is she cosplaying a Pilgrim woman?

  22. B.A., in the previous strip she said they’d have to make a deal. It’s proper to ask what she’s going to get out of it. Plus, of course, he’s used to dealing with his son.

    And it’s a two-tone shirt (or dress) – white with black sleeves. It would be more obvious except for the table in the way.

  23. Having learned that the seventh in line for the British throne has been named “Archie Harrison“, it seems logical to assume that the next royal baby will be called “Jughead Lennon“.

  24. My two British friends (cyber and IRL) are laffin’ up their sleeves . . . one had suggested the name would be “Tyrone”; this is pretty close . . .

  25. When i read about this new drain on the taxpayers of Britain, I wasted time and brainpower figuring out how many people would have to die (or abdicate, but I doubt that’ll ever happen again) before he’d become king. I love it – HAIL KING ARCHIE!!

  26. Arthur, I must disagree: if I do something for either my best friend or my grandparent, what I’m going to get out of it isn’t a factor. In fact, I’d be hurt if I were asked.

    Now, if Barney were doing something for somebody, that question would be valid.

  27. Given that the kid will likely one day be a duke, he needs to be kept far away from ostriches. As Baldrick noted, WWI started when “Some bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich ‘cos he was hungry.”

  28. Clearly should the kid ever be granted the crown, his reagent name will be “Cary”; meanwhile, he’ll just be a leach…

  29. PS: the reason they went with “Archy” and not “Archibald” is because they don’t want to temp fate, what with his follicly challenged uncle…

  30. Hey, larK, I’ve never been clear on that – is the entire royal family supported by taxpayers? Isn’t the queen one of the richest women in the world?

  31. Chak: this is all just a Charade; not to be Indiscreet, but The Awful Truth is I’m No Angel, I’m just making obscure puns and allusions — Only Angels Have Wings…

  32. Chak: The queen is pretty rich, but she doesn’t pay for the upkeep on Buckingham palace, royal security, royal travel, and so on, out of her own pocket. I think she also gets a sizable stipend.

  33. Wasn’t this same gag on the LOL page a few weeks ago?

    @Chak, I’m pretty sure I read that J.K. Rowling’s personal fortune is now greater than Queen Elizabeth’s. Then again, she earned hers..

Comments are closed.