I'm not about to go into a deconstruction of Phil's jokes, because ultimately whatever I say you can respond with "yeah those jokes still aren't funny".

My point is though it's easy to paraphrase any comedian's work in a simple summation to make them sound less worthy than they are e.g. Stewart Lee, oh he just makes jokes about jokes and repeats stuff over and over again - NOT FUNNY!!! Pub bore etc. etc. but that doesn't actually encapsulate what makes Stewart Lee funny, but it's very easy for someone to do and pass it off as actual criticism.

In the end though, you may not find him funny, but a lot of people do, and you will be hard pressed to find many other people who were shamed by him. (Seriously, "stop shaming us", "artistic failure"? Wtf is this? Get off your high horse)

All because people from Cambridge have heard his jokes doesn't mean he shouldn't use them for the 1.49 million who haven't.

And if you think those are the crux of his jokes you are missing the point. You should apply for Senior Comedy Critic.

Well done. All because most people wouldn't consider this an achievement, doesn't make it any less of one.

All frapes of this kind should be changed to "I'm gay, not that there's anything wrong with it."

Agree that Charlotte was very good. She has a lot of funny ideas and definitely has a lot of potential.

[youtube 7ixQr7-3hyI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ixQr7-3hyI youtube]

Yeah, but how much did you lose, Joe?

That makes him less of a sexist than if he managed to emphasise both words.

This is not a good haiku.

I was disappointed that instead of the transcript of the famous deductive reasoning game, it was just Phil talking about himself.