The point was to create a pun so forced and so obscure in terms of specialized info, that the groan-worthy “pleasure” was entirely removed, and that the chosen audience possibly wondered why someone thought the pun comprehensible without immediate explanation?
(Most of us are not going to know that name of the founder of the “Cynicism” school. Nor the bit about “way of the dog”. I certainly didn’t.
And I am not well educated in the schools of Greek philosophy, and, given that lack, I never, in my naively constructed POV, considered “cynicism” to be the opposite of “optimism”.)
Any of us who have knowledge in an area that is arcane to most persons could prob construct such a specialized-in-group-pun.
Easier for some, harder for others, but most could do it.
And if that pun were presented to a knowledge-peer-group, it might function as a pun normally functions:
either full of wit or humor, or causing groans, or both.
But, if that pun were presented to the general public, or to a group outside that special-knowledge-peer-group, and were then explained, the audience might possibly wonder at the motivation.
Was it Bateson who insisted that “all behavior is communication”? I forget. It’s been too long.
But even if Bateson is not the direct source of the quote, that fundamental idea is likely older that written communication itself.
Ah well. That pun has its virtues. Just, not for most of us who don’t specialize that way.
BTW, I like that you spent the time to create such a thing. That is the way of behavior/communication.