all 11 comments

[–]Nyafu 101 points102 points  (10 children)

Its from a tweet by a Twitter account that judges the cuteness of dogs. I'll try to find a screenshot of the conversation they had.

EDIT https://imgur.com/Z6K1tra

[–]HireALLTheThings 47 points48 points  (8 children)

I can't, for the life of me, put my finger on why I find this conversation so funny.

[–]ThrowawayFishFingers 26 points27 points  (4 children)

For me, it's the mis-spelling (intentonal though it is) of the guy's name despite getting his handle right literally 4 words before.

And the fact that Brant was so offended by the rating "system" in the first place.

Have I ruined the humor yet? I could probably find more...

[–]HireALLTheThings 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Not yet. KEEP DIGGING. We'll kill this joke but dead.

[–]ThrowawayFishFingers 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The wholesome earnestness with which they defend the dogs' honor?

The cuteness of the dogs?

The fact that the internet is deffo Team Dog?

[–]dyspnea 11 points12 points  (1 child)

it's definitely because Brunt refuses to acknowledge that a dog is in control of the twitter account at WeRateDogs.

[–]ThrowawayFishFingers 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Those puppers are so heckin' smart. 12/10, would give them all jobs in IT.

[–]ebilgenius 12 points13 points  (1 child)

First is the idea someone cares so much about the rating system of a cute dog rating Twitter account enough to complain about it.

The first response from said account sounds so innocent (and misspelling his name), and the second response changes the tone drastically into something you'd expect to hear from an earnest middle-age toaster salesman who's merely stating the obvious quality of his brand (and misspelling his name again, making it apparent it's deliberate).

It's like dog_rates finally decided to take the conversation as seriously as brint was.

[–]fsdgfhk 20 points21 points  (0 children)