- 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.
Wikipedia Review/I'm researching Encyclopedia Dramatica/Page 1
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
I'm trying to collect real-world info on Encyclopedia Dramatica — the cabal, their webhosting, bandwidth limits, overage fees, T-shirt income, etc. I'm logging their IRC channels in order to collect hostmasks, but many of those aren't all that useful. The discussions on those channels are even less useful.
I'm aiming to get my ED bio taken down. They frequently use real names on articles about living people, and Google tends to rank these at number one. Bing, on the other hand, seems to skip such articles entirely, and so should Google (and Yahoo).
The reason I'm posting this research notice in the 300 Club is because otherwise I'd end up with a pile of bogus info ("in lulz we trust"). I got some of that with wikipedia-watch in the early days, but with ED that's all they know how to do.
I can be reached at [email protected]
Give em hell, Daniel.
"Hell" is an untamed recursion. You might want to take GBG's suggestion under advisement and consult with Allie to devise a strategy more likely to converge to a mutually agreeable solution within your finite lifetime.
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
If your hard-on for them lasts more than 8 hours, seek medical attention.
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
Does that mean she's no longer on Hivemind?
Still there!
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html#317
Alison isn't on Hivemind. That link goes to SlimVirgin's listing.
I thought he was talking about Slim Virgin. Mea maxima maxima culpa. :sad:
You'd have far better luck getting Google to sandbox the entire site than getting them to delete the article, though I suppose bribery might work. Of course, you'd be doing the rest of the world a disservice by giving them money.
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Isn't she still an ED admin?
Why aren't you editing other people's posts and suchlike in that Annex??
ED is ultimately controlled by two people in Kalamazoo. According to county property records, they co-own a house. Here's a Google street view:
By the way, Joseph Evers, the claimed owner, is a myth, a false flag — whatever they call it.
"Joseph Evers" has an account here with email enabled.
The number one google search result for the cohabitants of that house is this WR thread.
Hell, why should I be coy? Those two are cyber misfits of the worst order, in my opinion. They hurt people and then laugh about it.
No argument from me. Although I find some ED content amusing, they are clearly walking a fine line wrt "defamation" and outright antisocial abuse. If they were in the UK they'd be in the dock already.
This might end up being a test-case, and since it's costly and difficult to pursue such things (especially as a civil tort claim), they are probably safe from legal attacks--in the US. I'm not a lawyer either, but they just don't seem like a target of enough importance to spend hundreds of thousands or millions on legal work to shut them down.
ED has "satire" written all over it....unlike, say, Wikipedia.
ED has "satire" written all over it....unlike, say, Wikipedia.
ED should have "satire" written all over it. So should all the ED links in the search engines. Better yet, don't index ED at all.
If you are applying for a job and your ED bio comes up as number one, you won't get the job. It's that simple. I once heard from a journalist who wanted to talk about one of my sites. He couldn't wrap his head around the ED bio, and I had to explain that I had no control over that. We never got around to discussing my site; his brain was already nuked by ED because he was trying to figure out what was plausible, what was outrageous, what was silly, and what was irrelevant in that ED bio.
Alison deleted it on the 1st.
Yes, thank you Alison. But the more familiar I became with Encyclopedia Dramatica, the more convinced I was that the entireshit site has no right to exist. It's an affront to civil society.
I support civil society. It keeps us from blowing ourselves up (so far).
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
Airman Coffee
Predator
Try to keep up.
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
And had it been Airman Coffee, he probably would have bombed downtown Boise, Idaho, instead of his intended target. :)
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
Fat chance! I happen to know that Greater K'zoo is under the personal protection of Sigourney Weaver — and she'll kick both their alien arses.
Jon :P
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.
I'm all for free speech and expression and I don't have any objection if adults want to make some art form out of shocking and annoying each other.
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go. It's like Wikipedianism. I actually like Wikipedia in many ways, but there are places (like business and government), where it does not belong. Wikipedians seem to think you need to act the same and think the same and use the same tools no matter where you are.
And it's tiresome to have to retrain these people to act normally in situations outside their respective playpens. Maybe if I understood it better I could devise better control systems for Encyc.
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
Is that a joke? :)
It is pitch black.
...
You have been eaten by a grue.
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
Is that a joke? :)
Assume good faith.
while I do read wikipedia review, I can't say I'm an avid follower of wikipedia-watch, so do cut me some slack.
I even did an Internet search and was met with a bunch of pages about coffee mugs.
Become Aware
Two years ago, Mattathias Schwartz of The New York Times wrote a feature-length Sunday Supplement story on Weev, Sherrod deGrippo, and their notable brand of Malwebolent Ubertrollery.
I blogged about the the NY Times story and appended a song parody to my commentary.
See what you can make out of Haha, Sherrod You Are.
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go. It's like Wikipedianism. I actually like Wikipedia in many ways, but there are places (like business and government), where it does not belong. Wikipedians seem to think you need to act the same and think the same and use the same tools no matter where you are.
That is a very important observation (which has been referred to quite a few times on this site), and the best I can come up with is that it is that Wikipedia has created this image of a brave new world, has come up with some rules which have been gifted from on high. They are not real world rules yet they are forcefully applied so as one is part of the movement, immersed, they become a creed for living. Doc was a little miffed that I'd picked on him for using the terminology of Wikipedia elsewhere, but it is exactly this blurring that is at issue.
There is no evidence that Wikipedia's rule-set actually works, yet people seem to assume because they have been playing the game for some time without being defeated that it does. As they believe Wikipedia's rules work, and they are the rules of the really modern world, Web 2.x, then they must, as they are newer rules, be better rules than the real world. The real world has lots of real life examples where you can show there are all sorts of problems being consistent with them so they must be bad rules, especially if they tend to tell you you shouldn't be doing what you want to do.
In the end though, the fundamental issue is that for all the intellectual academic pontificating, we live in a world where people are not on the verge of becoming the super-moral human race idolised on Star Trek TNG but we are all pretty dumb and so are happy to believe that complex problems are better dealt with by vacuous approaches like Objectivism or Libertarianism or anarchism where you opt out of even trying to deal with the tricky detail of life.
We're doomed!*
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
That show never gained much traction on this side of the Atlantic. :(
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
That show never gained much traction on this side of the Atlantic. :(
I thought as much. Shame that Are You Being Served? did, which was much the same genre (it was of course the same writing team) but the innuendo was cranked up 1000% and the pathos set to 10%. Watched an episode last week and it still is sound comedy. They both rely on relentless use of running gags to the extent that, what?, 30 years after the last show was made you can still say "Don't panic!" or "We're doomed!" and anyone over about 25 will know exactly what you mean. I most relate to Godfrey these days.
There is no evidence that Wikipedia's rule-set actually works, yet people seem to assume because they have been playing the game for some time without being defeated that it does.
Agreed. The rule-set works very well at aggregating huge amounts of encyclopedia-like content, but not much else. I have an example, I might get around to posting in the public areas.
In the end though, the fundamental issue is that for all the intellectual academic pontificating, we live in a world where people are not on the verge of becoming the super-moral human race idolised on Star Trek TNG but we are all pretty dumb and so are happy to believe that complex problems are better dealt with by vacuous approaches like Objectivism or Libertarianism or anarchism where you opt out of even trying to deal with the tricky detail of life.
Most people can't explain what Objectivism or Libertarianism are. I don't mind that. It's these edumicated types running around Wikipedia spouting Greek and shit.... my education is bigger than your education... embarrassing for anyone older than 10. The funnest part of the game is the never ending battles of wits.
And here you are, on WR, talking to a whole passel of massively-degreed Greek-spewing geeks.
(Try saying that fast 3 times. :P )
And here you are, on WR, talking to a whole passel of massively-degreed Greek-spewing geeks.
(Try saying that fast 3 times. :P )
I tried the guitar forums but all they do is make me want to buy stuff. This place is cheaper, and requires no soldering ability.
Full Version: I'm researching Encyclopedia Dramatica
Daniel Brandt
Wed 18th August 2010, 6:30pm
I'm trying to collect real-world info on Encyclopedia Dramatica; I'm aiming to get my ED bio taken down. They frequently use real full names for the title on articles about living people, and Google tends to rank these at number one. Bing, on the other hand, seems to skip such articles entirely, and so should Google (and Yahoo).
The reason I'm posting this research notice in the 300 Club is because otherwise I'd end up with a pile of bogus info ("in lulz we trust"). I got some of that with wikipedia-watch in the early days, but with ED that's all they know how to do.
I can be reached at [email protected]
Moulton
Wed 18th August 2010, 6:38pm
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Daniel Brandt
Wed 18th August 2010, 6:41pm
QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 18th August 2010, 5:38pm) *
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
GlassBeadGame
Wed 18th August 2010, 6:48pm
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 18th August 2010, 5:30pm) *
I'm trying to collect real-world info on Encyclopedia Dramatica — the cabal, their webhosting, bandwidth limits, overage fees, T-shirt income, etc. I'm logging their IRC channels in order to collect hostmasks, but many of those aren't all that useful. The discussions on those channels are even less useful.
I'm aiming to get my ED bio taken down. They frequently use real names on articles about living people, and Google tends to rank these at number one. Bing, on the other hand, seems to skip such articles entirely, and so should Google (and Yahoo).
The reason I'm posting this research notice in the 300 Club is because otherwise I'd end up with a pile of bogus info ("in lulz we trust"). I got some of that with wikipedia-watch in the early days, but with ED that's all they know how to do.
I can be reached at [email protected]
Give em hell, Daniel.
Moulton
Wed 18th August 2010, 7:22pm
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Wed 18th August 2010, 7:48pm) *
Give em hell, Daniel.
"Hell" is an untamed recursion. You might want to take GBG's suggestion under advisement and consult with Allie to devise a strategy more likely to converge to a mutually agreeable solution within your finite lifetime.
Obesity
Wed 18th August 2010, 7:28pm
good luck with that
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Milton Roe
Wed 18th August 2010, 10:19pm
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 18th August 2010, 4:41pm) *
QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 18th August 2010, 5:38pm) *
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
If your hard-on for them lasts more than 8 hours, seek medical attention.
Heat
Wed 18th August 2010, 10:51pm
The Joy
Wed 18th August 2010, 11:03pm
QUOTE(Heat @ Wed 18th August 2010, 11:51pm) *
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 18th August 2010, 11:41pm) *
QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 18th August 2010, 5:38pm) *
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Yes, we're friendly. She knows I'm interested in ED.
Does that mean she's no longer on Hivemind?
Still there!
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html#317
Moulton
Wed 18th August 2010, 11:07pm
Alison isn't on Hivemind. That link goes to SlimVirgin's listing.
The Joy
Wed 18th August 2010, 11:13pm
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 19th August 2010, 12:07am) *
Alison isn't on Hivemind. That link goes to SlimVirgin's listing.
I thought he was talking about Slim Virgin. Mea maxima maxima culpa. :sad:
Somey
Wed 18th August 2010, 11:20pm
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 18th August 2010, 6:30pm) *
I'm aiming to get my ED bio taken down. They frequently use real full names for the title on articles about living people, and Google tends to rank these at number one. Bing, on the other hand, seems to skip such articles entirely, and so should Google (and Yahoo).
You'd have far better luck getting Google to sandbox the entire site than getting them to delete the article, though I suppose bribery might work. Of course, you'd be doing the rest of the world a disservice by giving them money.
everyking
Thu 19th August 2010, 12:08am
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 19th August 2010, 12:38am) *
Probably your most competent ally would be Allison.
Are you on friendly terms with her?
Isn't she still an ED admin?
EricBarbour
Thu 19th August 2010, 8:29pm
QUOTE(Obesity @ Wed 18th August 2010, 5:28pm) *
good luck with that
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Why aren't you editing other people's posts and suchlike in that Annex??
Daniel Brandt
Thu 2nd September 2010, 11:38pm
ED is ultimately controlled by two people in Kalamazoo. According to county property records, they co-own a house. Here's a Google street view:
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
By the way, Joseph Evers, the claimed owner, is a myth, a false flag — whatever they call it.
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
By the way, Joseph Evers, the claimed owner, is a myth, a false flag — whatever they call it.
tarantino
Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:08am
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 4:38am) *
ED is ultimately controlled by two people in Kalamazoo. According to county property records, they co-own a house. Here's a Google street view:
By the way, Joseph Evers, the claimed owner, is a myth, a false flag — whatever they call it.
"Joseph Evers" has an account here with email enabled.
The number one google search result for the cohabitants of that house is this WR thread.
Daniel Brandt
Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:56am
Hell, why should I be coy? Those two are cyber misfits of the worst order, in my opinion. They hurt people and then laugh about it.
Andrew John Thornton, DoB 1974-03-01
Sherrod Ellen DeGrippo, DoB 1978-02-05
6170 Thunder Bluff Rd, Kalamazoo MI 49009
They have been associated since at least early 2003 when both were living separately in Las Vegas (Sherrod was also in Reno), but both working for the Department of Energy. Their web activities in these early years appear to be U.S.-government sponsored to some extent, based on circumstantial evidence, and also based on Sherrod's lulz-laden admission. They attended Defcon and hacker conferences. Sherrod has hundreds of pics and names from the many conferences and meet-ups she has attended.
IP address at home: 24.176.16.143 (Charter.com cable)
They have a 6-u colocation based in Chicago with a subnet of 32 IPs for the big traffic, and a shared hosting account at Dreamhost.com for their minor, low-traffic domains. All of their domain registrations are hidden behind the Dreamhost proxy service. They run several IRC chatrooms that amount to a constant stream of the worst vulgarity you can imagine. If you thought #wikipedia was bad, you've seen nothing yet.
There are hundreds of pictures of Sherrod on her girlvinyl.com site, and also some at girlvinyl.livejournal.com. Andrew is more elusive, but I have a few of him too. (Just in case some process server needs them someday.)
They are the final arbiters of all content on ED, and make no bones about it. That means they probably cannot claim Section 230 immunity as easily as they might presume. Their corporation is Edrama LLC in Delaware. Since their operations are in Chicago and Kalamazoo, they would presumably also need to register as a foreign corporation doing business in Illinois and Michigan. The corporate details of their operation have not been researched, and I don't know if it's airtight. I'm also not a lawyer.
EricBarbour
Fri 3rd September 2010, 2:51am
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 2nd September 2010, 10:56pm) *
Hell, why should I be coy? Those two are cyber misfits of the worst order, in my opinion. They hurt people and then laugh about it.
No argument from me. Although I find some ED content amusing, they are clearly walking a fine line wrt "defamation" and outright antisocial abuse. If they were in the UK they'd be in the dock already.
QUOTE
They are the final arbiters of all content on ED, and make no bones about it. That means they probably cannot claim Section 230 immunity as easily as they might presume.
This might end up being a test-case, and since it's costly and difficult to pursue such things (especially as a civil tort claim), they are probably safe from legal attacks--in the US. I'm not a lawyer either, but they just don't seem like a target of enough importance to spend hundreds of thousands or millions on legal work to shut them down.
ED has "satire" written all over it....unlike, say, Wikipedia.
Daniel Brandt
Fri 3rd September 2010, 7:01am
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 1:51am) *
ED has "satire" written all over it....unlike, say, Wikipedia.
ED should have "satire" written all over it. So should all the ED links in the search engines. Better yet, don't index ED at all.
If you are applying for a job and your ED bio comes up as number one, you won't get the job. It's that simple. I once heard from a journalist who wanted to talk about one of my sites. He couldn't wrap his head around the ED bio, and I had to explain that I had no control over that. We never got around to discussing my site; his brain was already nuked by ED because he was trying to figure out what was plausible, what was outrageous, what was silly, and what was irrelevant in that ED bio.
The couple at DefCon XIII in Las Vegas, 2005, and a more recent picture of Andrew.
(I think she's been a bad influence on him.)
Image
Image
(I think she's been a bad influence on him.)
Image
Image
Heat
Fri 3rd September 2010, 8:21am
Interesting. How long before Moulton produces an "I've got a troll in Kalamazoo" parody?
Cla68
Tue 14th September 2010, 3:14am
I think Daniel Brandt and Tarantino could make livings as private investigators. It's amazing the detailed information you two can find and how quick you can find it.
Daniel Brandt
Wed 15th September 2010, 9:41pm
Encyclopedia Dramatica laughs at Australian law
Now that Australia knows better than to try and chase down a non-existent Joseph Evers, it seems to me that this matter should be revisited.
EricBarbour
Wed 15th September 2010, 11:13pm
Alison deleted it on the 1st.
(Still no ED articles on Tiptoety, Risker, or many other Arbcommies and CU/BCs.)
Daniel Brandt
Wed 15th September 2010, 11:19pm
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 15th September 2010, 10:13pm) *
Alison deleted it on the 1st.
Yes, thank you Alison. But the more familiar I became with Encyclopedia Dramatica, the more convinced I was that the entire
I support civil society. It keeps us from blowing ourselves up (so far).
Anonymous editor
Wed 15th September 2010, 11:21pm
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:38am) *
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
Daniel Brandt
Wed 15th September 2010, 11:28pm
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Wed 15th September 2010, 10:21pm) *
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:38am) *
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
Airman Coffee
Predator
Try to keep up.
The Joy
Wed 15th September 2010, 11:31pm
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:21am) *
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:38am) *
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
A Horse With No Name
Thu 16th September 2010, 7:59am
QUOTE(The Joy @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:31am) *
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:21am) *
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:38am) *
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
And had it been Airman Coffee, he probably would have bombed downtown Boise, Idaho, instead of his intended target. :)
Emperor
Thu 16th September 2010, 8:18am
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
dogbiscuit
Thu 16th September 2010, 9:05am
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 2:18pm) *
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.
Kelly Martin
Thu 16th September 2010, 9:08am
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 9:05am) *
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.
Not even morally acceptable, but in fact morally desirable. Remember the guy who was here a while back advocating for more anonymity in Wikipedia, citing the "success" of 4chan as evidence for why anonymity is good?Jon Awbrey
Thu 16th September 2010, 9:26am
QUOTE(The Joy @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:31am) *
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:21am) *
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 12:38am) *
Airman Coffee's Predator wasn't busy looking for wedding parties in Afghanistan this week, so he diverted it for me and snapped these two photos of the same house:
What?
I believe Daniel was joking. Had it been an actual Predator drone, that house would be a smoking crater by now. :wtf:
Fat chance! I happen to know that Greater K'zoo is under the personal protection of Sigourney Weaver — and she'll kick both their alien arses.
Jon :P
Emperor
Thu 16th September 2010, 10:10am
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 10:05am) *
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 2:18pm) *
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.
I'm all for free speech and expression and I don't have any objection if adults want to make some art form out of shocking and annoying each other.
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go. It's like Wikipedianism. I actually like Wikipedia in many ways, but there are places (like business and government), where it does not belong. Wikipedians seem to think you need to act the same and think the same and use the same tools no matter where you are.
And it's tiresome to have to retrain these people to act normally in situations outside their respective playpens. Maybe if I understood it better I could devise better control systems for Encyc.
anthony
Thu 16th September 2010, 10:16am
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 3:10pm) *
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
Emperor
Thu 16th September 2010, 10:29am
Zoloft
Thu 16th September 2010, 10:49am
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 8:29am) *
QUOTE(anthony @ Thu 16th September 2010, 11:16am) *
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 3:10pm) *
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
Is that a joke? :)
It is pitch black.
...
You have been eaten by a grue.
Emperor
Thu 16th September 2010, 11:01am
Daniel Brandt
Thu 16th September 2010, 11:09am
One of the most prominent insiders at ED calls himself "weev" (among other things). He was recently arrested.
Here are the domains at Dreamhost.com:
attorneyatlol.com (this is a picture of "weev", by the way)
girlvinyl.com
links.encyclopediadramatica.com
lulzcon.com
shutdowned.org
www.atlantagoth.com
www.blog.encyclopediadramatica.com
thorntonindustries.com
lolandorder.com (coming soon on Dreamhost; owned by DeGrippo)
donuttowne.com (coming soon on Dreamhost; owned by DeGrippo)
The domains below are hosted at Chicago, 208.99.87.128-159. This 32-IP address subnet is apparently leased from Reflected Networks, Inc., 209 West Jackson, Suite 700, Chicago, IL 60606. In 2007 DeGrippo was living in an apartment in Chicago, and she donated $300 to the Ron Paul presidential campaign. The house was most likely purchased in 2008.
.131 whatport80.com
.132 whatport80.com, whatrumors.com
.139 https://clickbangpop.com (they try to sell ads here)
.133 encyclopediadramatica.com
.140 forums.encyclopediadramatica.com
.143 decori.st (DeGrippo is interested in interior design)
Their image server is from Vitelity.net; I'm not familiar with how that works.
Here Sherrod DeGrippo shows her T-shirt operation in the Kalamazoo house they bought.
anthony
Thu 16th September 2010, 11:36am
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 3:29pm) *
QUOTE(anthony @ Thu 16th September 2010, 11:16am) *
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 3:10pm) *
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go.
{{citation needed}}
Is that a joke? :)
Assume good faith.
Moulton
Thu 16th September 2010, 12:22pm
Become Aware
Two years ago, Mattathias Schwartz of The New York Times wrote a feature-length Sunday Supplement story on Weev, Sherrod deGrippo, and their notable brand of Malwebolent Ubertrollery.
I blogged about the the NY Times story and appended a song parody to my commentary.
Not even morally acceptable, but in fact morally desirable.
Some of the trash talking borders on sociopathy, a recurring aspect of Wikiculture that we've also explored before, at some length. At the time, I proposed calling it Oblivious Personality Disorder.
QUOTE(Heat @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 9:21am) *
Interesting. How long before Moulton produces an "I've got a troll in Kalamazoo" parody?
Two years ago, Mattathias Schwartz of The New York Times wrote a feature-length Sunday Supplement story on Weev, Sherrod deGrippo, and their notable brand of Malwebolent Ubertrollery.
I blogged about the the NY Times story and appended a song parody to my commentary.
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Thu 16th September 2010, 10:08am) *
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 10:05am) *
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 2:18pm) *
What I find most shocking about ED is how the people involved quickly lose any concept of exactly how offensive it is. It's like the part of their brain that is socially aware simply turns itself off.
To be fair, that is not unique to ED - it seems to be a common InterWeb culture. 4Chan is another example where people think "Because we can" makes it morally acceptable.Some of the trash talking borders on sociopathy, a recurring aspect of Wikiculture that we've also explored before, at some length. At the time, I proposed calling it Oblivious Personality Disorder.
MZMcBride
Thu 16th September 2010, 1:18pm
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:13am) *
Alison deleted it on the 1st.
(Still no ED articles on Tiptoety, Risker, or many other Arbcommies and CU/BCs.)
Moved it and deleted the redirect, you mean.
(Still no ED articles on Tiptoety, Risker, or many other Arbcommies and CU/BCs.)
Anonymous editor
Thu 16th September 2010, 2:38pm
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 16th September 2010, 12:28am) *
while I do read wikipedia review, I can't say I'm an avid follower of wikipedia-watch, so do cut me some slack.
I even did an Internet search and was met with a bunch of pages about coffee mugs.
CharlotteWebb
Thu 16th September 2010, 4:36pm
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 16th September 2010, 5:22pm) *
Become Aware
QUOTE(Heat @ Fri 3rd September 2010, 9:21am) *
Interesting. How long before Moulton produces an "I've got a troll in Kalamazoo" parody?
Two years ago, Mattathias Schwartz of The New York Times wrote a feature-length Sunday Supplement story on Weev, Sherrod deGrippo, and their notable brand of Malwebolent Ubertrollery.
I blogged about the the NY Times story and appended a song parody to my commentary.
See what you can make out of Haha, Sherrod You Are.
dogbiscuit
Thu 16th September 2010, 4:55pm
QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 16th September 2010, 4:10pm) *
I've just been perplexed by how participants in these websites seem to quickly adapt to the culture and export it everywhere they go. It's like Wikipedianism. I actually like Wikipedia in many ways, but there are places (like business and government), where it does not belong. Wikipedians seem to think you need to act the same and think the same and use the same tools no matter where you are.
That is a very important observation (which has been referred to quite a few times on this site), and the best I can come up with is that it is that Wikipedia has created this image of a brave new world, has come up with some rules which have been gifted from on high. They are not real world rules yet they are forcefully applied so as one is part of the movement, immersed, they become a creed for living. Doc was a little miffed that I'd picked on him for using the terminology of Wikipedia elsewhere, but it is exactly this blurring that is at issue.
There is no evidence that Wikipedia's rule-set actually works, yet people seem to assume because they have been playing the game for some time without being defeated that it does. As they believe Wikipedia's rules work, and they are the rules of the really modern world, Web 2.x, then they must, as they are newer rules, be better rules than the real world. The real world has lots of real life examples where you can show there are all sorts of problems being consistent with them so they must be bad rules, especially if they tend to tell you you shouldn't be doing what you want to do.
In the end though, the fundamental issue is that for all the intellectual academic pontificating, we live in a world where people are not on the verge of becoming the super-moral human race idolised on Star Trek TNG but we are all pretty dumb and so are happy to believe that complex problems are better dealt with by vacuous approaches like Objectivism or Libertarianism or anarchism where you opt out of even trying to deal with the tricky detail of life.
We're doomed!*
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
A Horse With No Name
Thu 16th September 2010, 8:47pm
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 5:55pm) *
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
That show never gained much traction on this side of the Atlantic. :(
dogbiscuit
Fri 17th September 2010, 2:47am
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 17th September 2010, 2:47am) *
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 5:55pm) *
*You really need to be a Dad's Army fan to appreciate how to read that.
That show never gained much traction on this side of the Atlantic. :(
I thought as much. Shame that Are You Being Served? did, which was much the same genre (it was of course the same writing team) but the innuendo was cranked up 1000% and the pathos set to 10%. Watched an episode last week and it still is sound comedy. They both rely on relentless use of running gags to the extent that, what?, 30 years after the last show was made you can still say "Don't panic!" or "We're doomed!" and anyone over about 25 will know exactly what you mean. I most relate to Godfrey these days.
Emperor
Fri 17th September 2010, 10:35am
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 5:55pm) *
There is no evidence that Wikipedia's rule-set actually works, yet people seem to assume because they have been playing the game for some time without being defeated that it does.
Agreed. The rule-set works very well at aggregating huge amounts of encyclopedia-like content, but not much else. I have an example, I might get around to posting in the public areas.
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Thu 16th September 2010, 5:55pm) *
In the end though, the fundamental issue is that for all the intellectual academic pontificating, we live in a world where people are not on the verge of becoming the super-moral human race idolised on Star Trek TNG but we are all pretty dumb and so are happy to believe that complex problems are better dealt with by vacuous approaches like Objectivism or Libertarianism or anarchism where you opt out of even trying to deal with the tricky detail of life.
Most people can't explain what Objectivism or Libertarianism are. I don't mind that. It's these edumicated types running around Wikipedia spouting Greek and shit.... my education is bigger than your education... embarrassing for anyone older than 10. The funnest part of the game is the never ending battles of wits.
EricBarbour
Fri 17th September 2010, 8:00pm
QUOTE(Emperor @ Fri 17th September 2010, 8:35am) *
Most people can't explain what Objectivism or Libertarianism are. I don't mind that. It's these edumicated types running around Wikipedia spouting Greek and shit.... my education is bigger than your education... embarrassing for anyone older than 10. The funnest part of the game is the never ending battles of wits.
And here you are, on WR, talking to a whole passel of massively-degreed Greek-spewing geeks.
(Try saying that fast 3 times. :P )
Herschelkrustofsky
Fri 17th September 2010, 11:26pm
Man, if I had a nickel for every time I've passively, meekly agreed with the screeds of these massively-degreed Greek-spewing geeks.
Emperor
Fri 17th September 2010, 11:32pm
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 17th September 2010, 9:00pm) *
QUOTE(Emperor @ Fri 17th September 2010, 8:35am) *
Most people can't explain what Objectivism or Libertarianism are. I don't mind that. It's these edumicated types running around Wikipedia spouting Greek and shit.... my education is bigger than your education... embarrassing for anyone older than 10. The funnest part of the game is the never ending battles of wits.
And here you are, on WR, talking to a whole passel of massively-degreed Greek-spewing geeks.
(Try saying that fast 3 times. :P )
I tried the guitar forums but all they do is make me want to buy stuff. This place is cheaper, and requires no soldering ability.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.