Pitchfork readers, go check out the best record label in the world at www.subpop.com. Really funny.

"Pitchfork staffer says 'hi' to real life woman."

"6.0-6.9: Maybe we should put together a book of all our reviews because they're way too hard to find on our website. Paper is the new internet!"

liked the little blurb in the "featured review" section:

Toby Keith: Shock'n Y'all What the f--k?

God knows i thought same thing when i saw the album title for the 1st time

That's pretty funny. The Deans List is good.

I spit on you & your lemur. Stop it.

Pitchfork blows.

that is hilarious. Pitchfork has the worst reviews ever, they are so damn indie cool hip shique it hurts. They made me buy The Rapture's echoes, which was pure crap

In comparison to other web publications in the same vein? No, pfm just happens to be the most popular.

Yes, I'm quite sure they made you.

I'm surprised at how much time they actually spent on the template. It really does look just like their title page.

**convinced. Since it was easily the best release of 2003. Because they know all that is good and mighty about music these days.

I haven't visited pitchfork since

I think some of those were making fun of music zines in general.

It's pretty funny to me, but I wonder how long it took to do that.

Maybe you don't understand how they form those year-end lists. Ryan Schrieber isn't deciding all of the lists and then recruiting his writers for the blurbs; it is a list-by-committee.

Do you have the same regard for Pazz 'n' Jop, SPIN, Tiny Mix Tapes, and year-end lists in general? Or only PFM? Seems that the only person who thought the 'Fork knew "all that is good and mighty about music these days" is you. After all, you did buy the disc on their sole (?) recommendation.

Penny Lane, did TMT purposely avoid Echoes? I was surprised to see that it was never reviewed and noticed a little slap at them in the year-end feature (will(oma on BSS).

I'm really not sure what happened there. Chances are, it got sent to one of our writers that didn't think it deserved attention. The way it works is that writers pretty much choose which of the discs they are sent that they want to review. That's why I'm thinking that it was overlooked.

This record in particular probably just slipped through the cracks.

No kidding. Very well done parody.

fallow, do you have any personal affiliation with pitchfork?

I have a friend that is a newswriter for them but that is my only connection.

Neat! I didn't know that. They don't think what Sub Pop did was mean-spirited, do they? We would love it if they had done it to us, but (of course) Pitchfork is the most well known indie zine. We're always making fun of ourselves, so they might've given us some new ideas.

2.) No self-titled records unless it is your first record. Don't be a ***. You blew your chance.

Amen.

He hasn't said anything about the staff being upset, and I dug around on Hipinion (the pfm board) and ILM (pfm's biggest critic/boner ) without seeing any tension. And for all the reaming of Vagrant, Matador, et al, that the 'Fork does, if they were to make a public statement about the cruelty of this, it'd be funny enough for crying.

I love you guys at TMT for yr self-deprecation!