- Portals
- The Current Year
- ED in the News
- Admins
- Help ED Rebuild
- Archive
- ED Bookmarklet
- Donate Bitcoin
Contact an admin on Discord or EDF if you want an account. Also fuck bots.
Werdna/Chat logs
< Werdna
Nice way to introduce yourself on ED IRC
* Werdnum ([email protected]) has joined #ed showMeDoMoney see, i care deeply Werdnum hey guys Aardvark|Gone Hai2u pathogen hai Werdnum I just quit wikipedia last week :-) Werdnum it's been coming for a while. Aardvark|Gone Oh? I just forcibly quit Wikipedia today. showMeDoMoney I am on wikia patches. Do they work? Werdnum Aardvark|Gone: eh? Aardvark|Gone Raul got happy and banned my ISP for six months. Anon and AC only, but... wee Werdnum whee * soap has quit (Quit: leaving) Aardvark|Gone No more trolling for a while. Well, I could haul out my two-dozen sockpuppets, but they'd fall too quickly to piss around with. Werdnum I've been doing some actually useful stuff pathogen useful = vandalism? * Einsidler wants a .co.ck domain name Aardvark|Gone I've been doing some useful stuff as well. Well, depending on how you define "useful". Werdnum shrug, they rejected my tor blocker bot because "OMG KILLER ROBOTS" (that was Jimbo's summary of why it was opposed), so you can use Tor to create some puppets. Werdnum heh, I've got some fun disruption planned. Aardvark|Gone My trolling and vandalism was primarily experimental. To poke Wikipedia and see how, why, and where it reacted. Werdnum well, today I've been coding for mediawiki pathogen seems a bit batshit insane to block an entire isp Werdnum which is far more rewarding, and doesn't involve unqualified opinions being shouted at you. Aardvark|Gone I've discovered three or for effective techniques that are hard to prevent. They could be fixed on the software level, naturally, but the current setup is easily manipulated Aardvark|Gone /s/for/four pathogen how would you go about setting up your own isp? showMeDoMoney buy some space in a datacentre Aardvark|Gone First (and easiest to prevent) is the username creation troll. Werdnum heh, if I wanted to vandalise and puppet, wikimedia couldn't stop me if they tried * Drop has quit (Ping timeout) Werdnum I have so many proxies and shell accounts and VPSes that the point would be completely moot Aardvark|Gone There are already extensions available that could be installed to block accounts "on wheels" and other such nonsense, but they've never actually been implemented on Wikipedia. Werdnum if I wanted to, I could probably throw together a zombie botnet, but I don't want to break the law. Aardvark|Gone Indeed. Werdnum I've already coded most of the software anyway Werdnum I don't care what wikipedia says, I really like most of ED Werdnum it's funny as fuck, and mostly true. Aardvark|Gone Another technique is the forced page protection troll. Quite effective with an attack account, as it can force an attack to be displayed in search results. Can't be deleted, can't be oversighted, because blocked users can edit talk pages, and if they can't, well, it will show up anyway. Aardvark|Gone Easily fixed by allowing pages to be truly protected deleted. As it is, a page has to have some content for protection to work Werdnum yes, I know. Werdnum I could fix that in software. * pathogen is now known as TOW_smells_funny Einsidler lol Werdnum but it's bothersome, because you need an entry in the page table to set permissions Aardvark|Gone One of my Wikipedia sockpuppets displays in the top ten google search results for "JEWS DID WTC". Or at least, it did last week. Werdnum s/permissions/restrictions/g Aardvark|Gone Ah, I see. Werdnum I suppose you could have a page with no revision data. Werdnum but that's quite a PITA change. Werdnum it's really not that effective, anyway. You can create the same shit at a different location. Aardvark|Gone A third technique which I have never employed, and don't intend to because it is positively evil, is the [[Special:Emailuser]] spam attack. By creating an account, letting it sit until CheckUser data expires, tying it to a gmail account, and running a bot via proxy, one can mass spam any Wikipedians with email enabled. Easily prevented via CAPTCHA, but CAPTCHA hasn't been implemented for that yet. Werdnum Whoever did the publicgirluk thing was a fucking genius Werdnum generated well over thirty-to-fifty pages of discussion. Aardvark|Gone Heh. I didn't read about it on Wikipedia, but I followed it a bit on WikiTruth. Werdnum funny as fuck Werdnum I was there at the time Aardvark|Gone Seemed quite amusing, although I positively lolled at the cookie deletion spree Werdnum trying to get everybody to calm down, shut up, and get along with their lives. Aardvark|Gone That's pretty much the way of it. Werdnum it took a Jimborder to shut everybody the fuck up. Aardvark|Gone I've come to realize that Wikipedia relies on drama in order to function. Without a troll to ban or something to argue about, Wikipedia would quite simply cease to function. Werdnum I know Werdnum I've been trying to classify the different people who hang out on Wikipedia Werdnum there are Werdnum 1. Article writers who snub everybody else. Werdnum 2. Idiots who spend their whole times commenting on shit, running edits that could be done by a bot, and commenting on shit Werdnum 3. Developers Werdnum type 2 is very interesting Werdnum they're generally the admin wannabes Werdnum and all they do is what they think the RfA voters will like Werdnum which, at the moment is - running bot-like edits Werdnum hence my Evil Plan[tm] Einsidler what about pedos who use wikipedia to network with 15yo girls? Werdnum they're more a minority Werdnum heh, I'm sure they exist Werdnum *cough*nathanrdotcom*cough* Aardvark|Gone I made the mistake of holding my own opinions. I never could have fallen into the "inclusionist" or "deletionist" camps, because I was more of an "evaluationist". Something has to be decided on it's merits, not on some preset opinion about an issue. Werdnum yeah, that's a big mistake Werdnum I think it's funny to watch the dynamics of an RfA Werdnum do it sometime Werdnum any decent nomination goes through the following process Werdnum 1. Nomination Werdnum 2. 20 opposes from the RfA-stalkers. Werdnum erm, supports Werdnum 3. Somebody puts up an objection in the oppose part Werdnum 4. BIG BIG STONY SILENCE -- it's at this point that all the RfA-dwellers STOP in their tracks Werdnum 5. All the RfA-dwellers scurry about to see where the flock is on this one. Werdnum 6. Pile-on support || Oppose Werdnum 7. Nomination is closed, votes (or !votes) are counted and the person is possibly promoted. Werdnum 8. Bitching on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship || IRC about the result. Werdnum The End TOW_smells_funny and then the one who opposed gets b& from trolling TOW_smells_funny for* Aardvark|Gone I love it when the closer is "bold" in making a decision. "Well, there was no consensus, but this isn't a vote, so I'm going to say there was consensus, because I like these arguments better" Werdnum yeah Werdnum it's a fucking vote, admit it Werdnum seriously dudes Werdnum step off your high horse and either make it not a vote, or say it is. Aardvark|Gone Generally speaking, it is a straight vote. Saying it isn't is usually reserved for making a controversial decision that goes against the common sense test or the clear community consensus Werdnum heh, I should create an account Aardvark|Gone The common sense test is a test I apply to AFD. If it is likely that a user would search Wikipedia and expect that information to be there, the article should be kept. Werdnum yeah Werdnum as opposed to the google test or the [[WP:BIO]] test or the [[WP:HUIGHJ]] test Aardvark|Gone If it is unlikely that a user would search Wikipedia and expect to find that information, the article is probably best deleted. Aardvark|Gone Exactly Werdnum the WP:NOT page needs updating too Werdnum it is a bureaucratic democracy. Werdnum there is no doubt about that. Aardvark|Gone My opinion is that Wikipedia is best described as an MMORPG gone horribly wrong rather than an online encyclopedia. Einsidler lol Werdnum I use it for reference Werdnum but I won't get involved in the politics of it. Einsidler imo [[WP:AEIIIGD]] is annoying Aardvark|Gone Oh, I do as well. It's handy as a quick reference. Aardvark|Gone WP:DNLAED Einsidler AEIIIGDL anything Einsidler is interested in gets deleted Werdnum Imagine if you could take all of the energy put into stupid shit on Wikipedia showMeDoMoney heh Einsidler lol DNLAED lol Werdnum and channel it into, you know, those things called Articles. Werdnum or that Software thing, you know, the thing that runs the site? Einsidler LOL Werdnum that'd be super. Werdnum reckon it's possible? showMeDoMoney no way Aardvark|Gone Probably not. showMeDoMoney if you could get everybody working together Aardvark|Gone First, almost everyone on Wikipedia has an agenda to push. Even if all they are doing is editing articles, they are trying to make sure that it is their point of view that is expressed. NPOV is important to Wikipedia, but it is a failure in implementation. showMeDoMoney for a common good showMeDoMoney the soviets would have won the cold war Werdnum Aardvark|Gone: right. Werdnum everybody is there for a reason, and most of them are not "to help the kids in africa lol" Werdnum mostly it's ego that brings them there. Aardvark|Gone It's easy to game. "Oops, this newbie's edit isn't NPOV, revert". Rather than, "Oops, this newbie's edit isn't NPOV, rewrite and incorporate" Werdnum yeah Werdnum I had a brief stint editing anonymously Werdnum what I discovered was intriguing Aardvark|Gone The second option is more work, which is why few people do it. It's easier to click "rollback" or use your custom JS to revert or even to just revert manually than it is to improve things. Werdnum People are so quick to shout at anonymous users, yet they're the future administrators of the site Aardvark|Gone Wikipedia undergoes hundreds of edits every second. I'd estimate that over half of those edits are reverts of some type. Werdnum see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:138.130.165.178&oldid=82617617 Einsidler lol fgtry * TOW_smells_funny has quit (Ping timeout) Aardvark|Gone Anyway, I gotta get heading off again. Werdnum I basically told him to shove the vandal-warning up his ass Werdnum alright, later Werdnum expect to see me around here more often :-) Aardvark|Gone Alrighty. I'll look forward to it. Werdnum :-) Einsidler bye Werdnum you guys got services here? * pathogen ([email protected]) has joined #ed feem no feem die Werdnum yeah, you do. * paxo ([email protected]) has joined #ed Einsidler lol feem shut the fuck up, cunt Werdnum ... right * showMeDoMoney has quit (Quit: Today on Oprah: Wikipedia fucked my child up and now he won't shut up about his schemes of REVENGE) Werdnum what services are you running here? Werdnum --- Anope-1.7.13 (951) immunitysec.services :UnrealIRCd 3.2.x - TM -- build #1, compiled Jun 2 2006 22:41:53 Werdnum hmm.. can't say I've ever used anope or unrealircd Werdnum alright I gotta take off, too Werdnum see you guys later Einsidler bye wattagecat lol aspie * Werdnum has quit (Ping timeout) wattagecat :-) feem god what a fucking idiot
lol, feem. I approve of this cuntpasta, it is very interesing. --Einsteinler 13:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Werdna/Chat logs is part of a series on Chat Logs
[copypasta]
Logs by Person |
1guy1jar Interview • Alex Wuori • Boxxy • Bravesgirl5 • ChibaQ • Crossmack • Cyndre • DangerDan • DJ Skeptik • Djdlikesxbox • Duke Otterland • EmiNet • James Cordone • Jimbo Wales • John Field • JuggaletteJenny • Kazantzakis • Laurelai • LittleCloud • Mark Foley • Mikevirus • Neo • Skype Con Leaks • Tablecow • Typhon • Werdna |
Related Topics |
IRC • Bash.org • Get on irc fgt • Gay.pl • Irssi • QuoteBucket.org |