The internet is full of people doing a bit and then ruining it by explaining the bit.
They make the weird account.
They pick the stupid name.
They post three times.
Then they panic and write a thread explaining the brand strategy behind it.
Dead.
A lot of internet culture only works because somebody commits long enough for everyone else to accept the premise.
The parody account keeps talking like that even when a post flops. The meme page keeps using the same ugly format. The anonymous character never suddenly appears on LinkedIn explaining their personal journey.
There is something powerful about consistency past the point where it is reasonable.
Not because repetition is automatically good. Plenty of bad jokes stay bad forever.
But once a thing has its own rules, continuing to obey those rules makes the world feel real.
Think about the accounts where the username, replies, posts, vocabulary and random little recurring jokes all seem to come from the same brain. You can drop into the feed halfway through and immediately understand there is a whole thing happening here.
Nobody hands you the manual.
That is better.
The best bits accumulate evidence.
One post is a joke. Fifty posts is a character. Two years of it starts looking suspiciously like a real person.
This is probably why people get attached to absurd internet personas. At some point the performance has been maintained for so long that asking whether it is “real” stops being useful.
The commitment became the real part.
And the opposite is painfully obvious too.
You can feel when somebody is checking the room after every post.
Was that funny?
Did you get the reference?
Should I explain what this account is?
No.
Keep going or kill it.
The internet has a very high tolerance for weirdness and a very low tolerance for somebody nervously explaining their own weirdness.