Picking up were part 2 left off:

After defining the top level of the classification system, Humor, as whether the joke is to be funny or not, we move down to the next level. Originally the levels were defined as

  • Humor
  • Content
  • Style
  • Type

However, at further consideration, content is perhaps to detailed or specific to by the second level. Instead I have made the bold and presumptutious desicion to make style second.

Style could mean several different things, from structure such as knock-knock, question/answer, story, and so on. Or it could be as simple as content rating. Further consideration makes me wonder if style and type are not to similar. After such carefull consideration, I flipped a coin and decided to drop type and add rating and to make rating the second level.

Having changed the second level of the classification system several times now, I am fairly satisfied if not ready to just move on. Besides, its not like anyone is really paying attention to me anyways.

So the rating is very much like movie or tv ratings. It is a simple way to classify the content and language of a joke. For example jokes about sex would be adult, jokes about bodily functions would be crude, jokes with foul language could be consider graphic. In most cases there is no place for violence in a joke, although it does happen especially in cases of accidental humor situations, ie stupid human actions and so on. THen there are the benign kid jokes, and the regular pg jokes.

In summation, the rating of a joke should fit one of the following:

  • Adult
  • Crude
  • Accident
  • Family
  • Kid/G
  • PG

Sounds good to me, and I should know. I have a degree from a Technical Institute and I am an authority on what is funny. Everyone will be using my classification system in no time, so you might as well start now.

How many GA Tech grads does it take to change a light bulb?
None, they call maintenance and wait for the UGA student to do it.