Talk:Loser

Definitions
A loser is kind of like someone who doesn't have many people in their life. Someone who doesn't have many friends. Someone who is always at the bottom of the social food chain. The word "Loser" has an important meaning in modern culture that has not been adequately described in the list of meanings of disambiguation of the word "Loser" on the Loser main page. "Failure" has been listed, but this is too wide and covers every form of failure, where as, "Loser" means specifically a social outcast, someone who through their personal attributes proves to be anticharismatic. Why hasnt this been included in the main page by those with the authority to change the page? I note there is the hand gesture "Loser" listed there - the hand symbol that relates to the meaning I describe above for "Loser", but the underlying cause of the gesture is not accomodated on the main page and it ought to be. www.anticharisma.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.211.153 (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC) The meaning of loser has yet to reach full maturity. However as time goes on, the public consciousness of loser will be realised. A loser is a person, and the notion of a Loser is a social phenomenon. Not simply abstractly the one who did not win. Many never try only to succeed and many never try and their fate is to fail. However when we talk of the loser, we deal with the experience of those unfortunate individuals: the losers, who try as they might can not succeed in their dreams. The main thing to bear in mind regarding a loser, is that a loser always does the right thing, always does their home work, always refrains from unhealthy living, but fails high school despite their best efforts and is diagnosed with cancer of the lung despite refraining from smoking. A loser tries hard but fails non the less. This ties in the notion of the try-hard. Try-hard is an insult used to describe someone who just doesnt have it just doesnt pull off the desired effect despite their best efforts. To avoid definition problems, can I just say that a loser is not someone who lives recklessly and suffers the consequences, as mentioned above a loser is the one who never smoked but got cancer anyway, the one who suffers from incessant bad fate bad luck and misfortune. A loser is someone without potential without noticeable talent, someone who is thouroughly average or below average and who is incapable of "making their own luck". This notion of making one's own luck is tied in with both winners, cool people, popular people, talented people, and those who have potential to rise either through physical attractiveness or by intelligence or a combination of the two factors. This topic of the loser ought to be placed in top priority in this loser catagory in the way that I have stated it here and it is a real thing it is not a fad or a whim, its the black dark side to the meritocracy in which we are emmerced, its the dark to the light its the skeleton in the closet that rarely gets a mention owing to its ultimate taboo in society. For a final example of this taboo, society in general will emphasise the importance of putting in maximum effort and "giving it a go" but the unspoken reality is that for the winner to win, many must fail and they by the rules of our society must remain quiet lest they brake the taboo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdstar loser no.1 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

There is an acronym for a coherent light source better know as "LASER." Laser as many already know is Light amplification of Light by stimulated emission of radiation. This is a great acronym but.... In 1959, a year before anyone had built a laser, physicist Arthur Schawlow pointed out that since the amplification is achieved by bouncing the photons back and forth within a resonant cavity, the process would be better described as "light oscillation." Soooooo... The acronym really should be "LOSER" Light Oscillation Stimulated emission of radiation. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.182.158.153 (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You need find a few reliable sources as references that says that. It sounds a bit fringe and apocryphal. Ttiotsw (talk) 20:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm a bit fed up seeing this page being vandalised all the time. So I've "vandalised" it myself. Wonder if this will help deter? Opinions anyone? --Plumbago 13:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the sentiment, but I don't think it will deter much vandalism, and it is probably not suitably NPOV. - SimonP 13:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * And more practically there's the whole thing about WP:POINT, but no harm done. Sirmob 12:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It's a fair cop. Especially the WP:POINT.  As it happens, my vandalism was removed by a vandal, answering my question (posed above) firmly in the negative.  Thanks for your comments though.  Cheers, --Plumbago 14:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * This is all actually an inappropriate topic for Wikipedia. Should we really be wasting our time explaining to others what a loser is? Let's just define it as the antonym of a winner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.209.129.131 (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC).

"Loser" song
Of course there's a reason to put the Beck song first, it's much more: Important, popular, critically accalaimed, and easily recognized. Oh, and of course they popularized the phase and started the whole slacker generation (accidentily). The 3 Doors Down song is nothing.

This page has an omission and error: Loser is a well-known song performed by the Grateful Dead written by Jerry Garcia and Robert Hunter. The listed "Loser" by Cracker is an (exceptional) cover of that song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.229.198.97 (talk) 02:48, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Beck's song should be on top of the list, the other songs are obscurein comparison. Just google 'loser' and see what comes up first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.104.87 (talk) 22:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)