- Joined
- Apr 18, 2015
After a massive clusterfuck that metastasized to 10(?) talk pages, action against Ryulong was taken. And nothing of value was lost. So they do have a breaking point, it seems.
Infected RationalWiki - Whiny hugbox for spergs and a clusterfuck of neverending drama on a rapidly declining website.
- Thread starter chimpburgers
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
This isn't even a fucking tenth of it. That's a lot of sperg. The layout doesn't help its readability. Fuckin wiki layouts. How do regular users manage?
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
You have to be a certain kind of person to like and partake in talk pages and in-wiki bureaucracy. They either adapt really fast or go insane and lose interest.
If you'd like to work a job where you sit at a desk with a PC and have 23 rubber stamps, read over filled out forms and have the power to deny or accept requests at will but you don't actually want to work then a Wiki is just right for you.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2015
「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」
Accel_Rider
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
That image looks like a ship's bow
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2015
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Welcome to the Farms. I'm assuming you're not worried about being ostracized over on RW for posting here since you're already officially a Neo-Nazi for posting on a subreddit where somebody named themself after a German model of airplane, but I guess I should let you know that by signing up you're now personally responsible for online bullying, suicide baiting, doxxing, hacking, Donald Trump, nekoshota vore porn, online violence against women, recruitment drives for ISIS, transmisogyny, pokemon feminism, an attempted drive-by murder on a proud translatinx feminist and an attempted neo-nazi terrorist shooting in Halifax.
You really shouldn't worry so much about people offsite getting the wrong impression of Rational Wiki. We're only really interested in watching the incredibly ridiculous spergouts and drama, and WikiInAction only cares about their precious gamergate being smeared. We're probably not the kind of people you could provide a valuable resource for, and we're definitely not the kind of people you'd want showing up and contributing. Worry about the people who find RW by googling 'vaccination' or '9/11 truth' or whatever. They're the people who'll actually contribute to your site.
Personally the best advice I can give you for RW is to make a case for getting all the autistic fandom and social justice shit purged. That kind of stuff will never stop attracting people like Ryulong, and there's no reason RW should be educating us on digimons and my little ponies and no platforming in the first place. That said, I hope you never manage to do it, because you guys are hilarious to watch.
But if you and FuzzyCatPotato are serious about having gamergate spergs rewrite your gg page into something that isn't an unreadable spastic smear blog (and driving Ryulong into further conniptions as a happy side bonus) I'd suggest getting @Jaimas and possibly @Smutley on board, they both have extensive wiki experience and care about the subject matter, although I think Smutley might be burned out on the whole shitshow by now. If the dignity and reputation of RW was a priority for me I'd tell you it's an unsalvagable mess and should be nuked, but as a Kiwi I'd love to see the sheer unbridled autistic rage an actual content dispute there would bait out when you don't just ban anyone who isn't 100% on board the gamergate-are-literally-ISIS bandwagon.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2014
If you want an example of my articles on Lolcow Wiki, check out our Vade and Brianna Wu series.
I'm covering Ryulong right now along with a friend.
I'm covering Ryulong right now along with a friend.
We don't take sides here in the long run. We have pro/anti GGers here, but for the most part we just like to laugh at people who act like retards no matter what they believe in. Glad you could join us, please share any insights you have, and welcome to the Kiwi Farms.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2015
Not really; no. I used a different username here because the signup form said, in big bold letters, "do not use a username that you've used anywhere else". I briefly considered "hiding" my identity better by using different examples, phrasings, and refraining from "Carpetsmoker-isms", but that felt too, ehh, "dirty", so I figured I would be fingered sooner or later and I'm okay with that.
You forget Islamophobe.
I'm not overly worried about RW's reputation, but if I look at various site stats I am a little bit worried..
Another reason for me engaging in discussion is simply to understand why some people have such a hate-on for RW. When people say "RW is just the liberal version of Conservapedia" I would like to know why they think so. Some of the comments at WikiInAction were quite useful, IMHO. Unlike some people I am not philosophically opposed in engaging in dialogue with people I disagree with (In Ryulong's world, this is of course a crime in itself).
Well, in a way I'm glad it's not *entirely* useless, as I now know it's at least providing entertainment for you folk
But yeah, we should bin the Gamergate and MLP and whatnot as it's one big "he said/she said" game as near as I can tell. But this is not going to happen. "The mob" isn't going to allow it.(As an aside, no platform thing is somewhat interesting, by the way, as it also applies to things like 9/11 truthers, neo-Nazis like me, etc. There is also an interesting discussion to be had on freedom of speech, freedom of protest, civil disobedience, etc. I need to rewrite that page, but haven't gotten around to it yet);
Okay, thanks. I'll try and ping those people, and offer an invitation as I did on WikiInAction in a few days. I need some rest first >_<
Thanks for the post, by the way :-)
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
That's mainly just so when you piss off the wrong person and they decide to show your fetish-porn internet footprint to your mother we can say "told you so" if you complain about it. As long as 'carpetsmoker' can't be traced back to both your mother's facebook profile and internet activities you wouldn't want your mother to know about, it's fine (and really, anyone with a lick of sense should be compartmentalising their internet footprints, we're just more likely than your average forum to go digging into it for shits and giggles).
The "liberal fascist horseshoe theory" stuff is gaining a lot of traction in the anti-SJW crowd, mainly because of how folks like Ryulong act towards anyone who disagrees with them (or is willing to even listen to people who disagree with them). You'll definitely be getting better answers over on WikiInAction than here. We just like laughing at spergs, so our perception of RW is 99% "lol look at Ryulong chimping out again". It's RyulongWiki as far as we're concerned, and that's how we like it.
And yeah, I take your point on the No Platforming. It does have free speech ramifications that are relevant to the main drive of what Rational Wiki seems to be about. Just pretend I used something else as my silly overblown social-justice example ; microaggressions or tumblr shipping wars or what have you. Point remains that you can't talk about any of that stuff on the internets without inviting incredibly silly drama and the people who get hard-ons from perpetuating it, so there's probably a good argument to be made for avoiding controversies that don't fit with the primary goals of Rational Wiki.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
It's somewhat disturbing that the RW article on the subject all but endorses it, though, and even attempts to hand-wave away the free speech concerns presented by the practice. More disturbingly, though, considering the site's supposed rationalism, it doesn't note the real danger to rationality from such a practice, which is that it is now basically used to exclude any potential of dissenting thought.
Its current use against, say, Germaine Greer, is a far cry from its original use against supposedly far right fascists. Eventually, once you've excluded those, you flex your muscles to exclude the new "far right," which is apparently anyone who disagrees with current fashionable dogma in even the most minute way.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
Not to patronize, but that's why people say 'Listen and Believe' is really, really stupid.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2015
I'm not even sure what this means? A quick internet search reveals that this is another GamerGate speak for something, but, apparently, that different people mean something different by it? ugh...
Ryulong harms his cause far more than he helps it. I do think there is something to be said for *some* common Social Justice points, but for reasons I don't quite seem to understand, some people get so obsessed over it. I suspect it may be the lack of organized religion or other grand ideology (like communism), and they latch onto this as their raison d'être, and that's why they fight so fanatically over it.
Not Ryulong, of course. His raison d'être are buddyloids. Never let the buddyroids win!
Please don't judge it too harshly, kind sir. Not yet, anyway. It was quickly hijacked by Ryulong, Typhoon, Kitesunlaine, Hipocrite, and the rest of the gang of merry buddyloids. Drama ensued (as always). I eventually managed to get *some* sanity into it but it took a lot of battling and work. It's been almost 2 weeks, but since then I haven't had the energy to do more work on it, as it will likely lead to drama like this sort of helpful behaviour. I learned that this Hipocrite guy is like 50 or some such. Damn.
With luck, I can fix it up this weekend or some such.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2014
Not really; no. I used a different username here because the signup form said, in big bold letters, "do not use a username that you've used anywhere else". I briefly considered "hiding" my identity better by using different examples, phrasings, and refraining from "Carpetsmoker-isms", but that felt too, ehh, "dirty", so I figured I would be fingered sooner or later and I'm okay with that.
You forget Islamophobe.
I'm not overly worried about RW's reputation, but if I look at various site stats I am a little bit worried..
Another reason for me engaging in discussion is simply to understand why some people have such a hate-on for RW. When people say "RW is just the liberal version of Conservapedia" I would like to know why they think so. Some of the comments at WikiInAction were quite useful, IMHO. Unlike some people I am not philosophically opposed in engaging in dialogue with people I disagree with (In Ryulong's world, this is of course a crime in itself).
Well, in a way I'm glad it's not *entirely* useless, as I now know it's at least providing entertainment for you folk
(As an aside, no platform thing is somewhat interesting, by the way, as it also applies to things like 9/11 truthers, neo-Nazis like me, etc. There is also an interesting discussion to be had on freedom of speech, freedom of protest, civil disobedience, etc. I need to rewrite that page, but haven't gotten around to it yet);
Okay, thanks. I'll try and ping those people, and offer an invitation as I did on WikiInAction in a few days. I need some rest first >_<
Thanks for the post, by the way :-)
I don't want to waste too much of your time here, so I'll keep this brief (by Jaimas standards at least). On a site like RationalWiki, all that should matter for an article is data. Cold, hard, unbiased, and unabashed. I mention this because as far as Pro/Anti GG goes, there is one side in it that flat-out does not have the benefit of facts on its side, and even a cursory look at general information regarding both sides can prove this:
1. On Receptivity to Outside Ideas
Anti-Gamergate generally believes in "deplatforming" and denying any viewpoint not their own any time or traction. A cursory look, using two communities as a control group, shows that KotakuInAction - a mainstay pro-GG community on Reddit - will openly discuss issues with both neutral parties and even Gamergate opponents as long as they remain respectful.
Conversely, merely posting on KiA can get you banned from multiple Reddits due to Anti-GG's abuse of bots. Daring to even tangentially disagree with a narrative on Gamerghazi - Anti-GG's mainstay Reddit community - will get you ostracized and banned.
Similarly, Anti-GG's treatment of female and minority dissenters is appalling; they will traditionally treat them as traitors, if not pretend outright that they are sockpuppets and/or do not exist.
2. On Open Discourse and Debate
Second only to Anti-GG's espousing of deplatforming is Anti-GG's insular nature - they will not allow themselves to be questioned, asked for evidence, or for elaboration on a given subject. Only four times has any discussion or debate been had with main-line Anti-GGers: Arthur Chu and Brianna Wu's interviews with David Pakman, Chris Kluwe's debate with Mercedes Carerra, and Brianna Wu's debate with Hotwheels. Every single one of these discussions went disastrously for the Antis - Brianna Wu looked absolutely unhinged in her debate with Brennan and later her interview by Pakman; Arthur Chu could barely put together an argument beyond giving Gamergate a chance to say its piece was somehow automatic harassment, and to say Kluwe got schooled in the debate with Mercedes is an understatement.
Since these, no main-line Anti-GGer has allowed themselves to be interviewed by anyone who will ask them actual questions, or allow the other side to speak in any capacity. During the SPJ Airplay event, Anti-GG refused to show because Gamergate supporters had a chance to speak. In any forum where the other side might be allowed to speak, the Anti-GGers cancel in droves. During the setup for SXSW, Anti-GGers pushed hard to have the Gamergate panel shut down, to the point where SXSW closed both panels entirely, only to reinstate them later; the Antis started to back off en masse because once more, the Gamergate supporters had a chance to speak.
This is on top of things like GG Meetups being repeatedly harassed by Anti-GGers and/or sent bomb threats (which happened at SPJ airplay). the Anti-GGers do not want any discussion in which the other side has a voice. The Gamergate supporters, meanwhile, welcome discussion. Any question towards GG on communities like KIA will be met with legitimate discourse as long as whoever subscribes to the rules of discussion.
3. On Harassment and Death Threats
Anti-Gamergate has claimed since day one that Gamergate's sole purpose for existence is harassment, and indeed, to hear several tell it, terrorism. Yet there's something that pretty much everyone remotely familiar with has noticed about Gamergate since the first claims of threats were made by Anti-GG's rank and file - there is a curiously low number of legitimate, actual provable cases of actual, legitimate, provable harassment on the part of Gamergate supporters. In fact, since I started chronicling data for this subject as part of the Brianna Wu article, I have yet to find one single credible example of a death threat directed at an Anti-GGer that was not either from an obvious troll account, that was later taken credit for by third-party trolls, was false-flagging by an Anti-GGer, or was done via a one-off sock account. Of the countless times Brianna Wu's claimed to have been harassed or threatened, every major one has been either a false-flag she claimed was real, completely fabricated, or both.
And believe me, in doing research for the aforementioned Wu article, I have fucking tried, digging through thousands of tweets across dozens of accounts. Almost every case of what an Anti-GGer considers harassment is, most commonly, someone demanding evidence for a ridiculous claim, someone responding to an inflammatory tweet, or someone obviously trolling. Apparently I wasn't the only one to notice this, because Women Action Media! (WAM!), a feminist media investigation group, looked into harassment claims on Twitter, using the Gamergate Autoblocker as a control device. Of these, less than 0.70% of "Harassing" accounts were indeed, actually credible harassment.
In sharp contrast, I can find thousands of death threats, threats of violence, doxxings, attempts to get Gamergate supporters removed from communities, attempts to get Gamergate supporters fired, and worse done by Gamergate opponents.
It's completely disproportionate. Anyone who tells you "Both sides are just as bad" in this regard is being willfully misleading.
Anti-GG is, in fact, notorious for going after neutral parties, as well as Gamergate supporters. As Boogie once said: "I had only one side doxx me repeatedly, and it wasn't Gamergate." If you want to see some examples, I'll be glad to link them if you'd like. From Geordie "Gamergaters Should be Sent to Auschwitz" Tait to Arthur "I'll Attack a Rape Victim Because She's Friends With A GGer," There are literally countless examples of Anti-GGers proposing harassment, engaging in harassment, or condoning harassment. Randi Harper is so notorious about it that Breitbart was able to do a three part article on the crap she's done. Brianna Wu alone I was able to write about the attacks of for almost 10 pages. TotalBiscuit recieved repeated cheers for his death, death threats towards his family, and statements that it was hoped the cancer killed him faster by Gamergate opponents. This is extensively documented, and not up for debate.
Anti-Gamergate generally believes in "deplatforming" and denying any viewpoint not their own any time or traction. A cursory look, using two communities as a control group, shows that KotakuInAction - a mainstay pro-GG community on Reddit - will openly discuss issues with both neutral parties and even Gamergate opponents as long as they remain respectful.
Conversely, merely posting on KiA can get you banned from multiple Reddits due to Anti-GG's abuse of bots. Daring to even tangentially disagree with a narrative on Gamerghazi - Anti-GG's mainstay Reddit community - will get you ostracized and banned.
Similarly, Anti-GG's treatment of female and minority dissenters is appalling; they will traditionally treat them as traitors, if not pretend outright that they are sockpuppets and/or do not exist.
2. On Open Discourse and Debate
Second only to Anti-GG's espousing of deplatforming is Anti-GG's insular nature - they will not allow themselves to be questioned, asked for evidence, or for elaboration on a given subject. Only four times has any discussion or debate been had with main-line Anti-GGers: Arthur Chu and Brianna Wu's interviews with David Pakman, Chris Kluwe's debate with Mercedes Carerra, and Brianna Wu's debate with Hotwheels. Every single one of these discussions went disastrously for the Antis - Brianna Wu looked absolutely unhinged in her debate with Brennan and later her interview by Pakman; Arthur Chu could barely put together an argument beyond giving Gamergate a chance to say its piece was somehow automatic harassment, and to say Kluwe got schooled in the debate with Mercedes is an understatement.
Since these, no main-line Anti-GGer has allowed themselves to be interviewed by anyone who will ask them actual questions, or allow the other side to speak in any capacity. During the SPJ Airplay event, Anti-GG refused to show because Gamergate supporters had a chance to speak. In any forum where the other side might be allowed to speak, the Anti-GGers cancel in droves. During the setup for SXSW, Anti-GGers pushed hard to have the Gamergate panel shut down, to the point where SXSW closed both panels entirely, only to reinstate them later; the Antis started to back off en masse because once more, the Gamergate supporters had a chance to speak.
This is on top of things like GG Meetups being repeatedly harassed by Anti-GGers and/or sent bomb threats (which happened at SPJ airplay). the Anti-GGers do not want any discussion in which the other side has a voice. The Gamergate supporters, meanwhile, welcome discussion. Any question towards GG on communities like KIA will be met with legitimate discourse as long as whoever subscribes to the rules of discussion.
3. On Harassment and Death Threats
Anti-Gamergate has claimed since day one that Gamergate's sole purpose for existence is harassment, and indeed, to hear several tell it, terrorism. Yet there's something that pretty much everyone remotely familiar with has noticed about Gamergate since the first claims of threats were made by Anti-GG's rank and file - there is a curiously low number of legitimate, actual provable cases of actual, legitimate, provable harassment on the part of Gamergate supporters. In fact, since I started chronicling data for this subject as part of the Brianna Wu article, I have yet to find one single credible example of a death threat directed at an Anti-GGer that was not either from an obvious troll account, that was later taken credit for by third-party trolls, was false-flagging by an Anti-GGer, or was done via a one-off sock account. Of the countless times Brianna Wu's claimed to have been harassed or threatened, every major one has been either a false-flag she claimed was real, completely fabricated, or both.
And believe me, in doing research for the aforementioned Wu article, I have fucking tried, digging through thousands of tweets across dozens of accounts. Almost every case of what an Anti-GGer considers harassment is, most commonly, someone demanding evidence for a ridiculous claim, someone responding to an inflammatory tweet, or someone obviously trolling. Apparently I wasn't the only one to notice this, because Women Action Media! (WAM!), a feminist media investigation group, looked into harassment claims on Twitter, using the Gamergate Autoblocker as a control device. Of these, less than 0.70% of "Harassing" accounts were indeed, actually credible harassment.
In sharp contrast, I can find thousands of death threats, threats of violence, doxxings, attempts to get Gamergate supporters removed from communities, attempts to get Gamergate supporters fired, and worse done by Gamergate opponents.
It's completely disproportionate. Anyone who tells you "Both sides are just as bad" in this regard is being willfully misleading.
Anti-GG is, in fact, notorious for going after neutral parties, as well as Gamergate supporters. As Boogie once said: "I had only one side doxx me repeatedly, and it wasn't Gamergate." If you want to see some examples, I'll be glad to link them if you'd like. From Geordie "Gamergaters Should be Sent to Auschwitz" Tait to Arthur "I'll Attack a Rape Victim Because She's Friends With A GGer," There are literally countless examples of Anti-GGers proposing harassment, engaging in harassment, or condoning harassment. Randi Harper is so notorious about it that Breitbart was able to do a three part article on the crap she's done. Brianna Wu alone I was able to write about the attacks of for almost 10 pages. TotalBiscuit recieved repeated cheers for his death, death threats towards his family, and statements that it was hoped the cancer killed him faster by Gamergate opponents. This is extensively documented, and not up for debate.
That's just three bullet points, and rest assured: those familiar with my work on this forum will confirm that I could just as easily go on for a hundred - and if I did, I would citation the ever-loving shit out of every single one. That's the beautiful thing about raw data: It gives zero fucks and respects no authorities. It is the ultimate arbiter of impartiality. Yet there's groups right now who, if I added any of the above to that article under a pseudonym account, I'd have people advocating me to be banned fucking instantaneously.
Assholes like Ryulong have single-handedly made a complete mockery of your site's claim to be about rational discourse, and if you really do want to take it back, you'd better be prepared for internet war: Facts no longer have sway over petty ideals and appeals to emotion; they are instead shunned. Ryulong getting shit-canned may be the best thing that's happened to your site in the last five years, but the Gamergate article is a perfect microcosm of how users like him have been allowed to eviscerate RationalWiki's mission statement.
I don't think things are hopeless for your site, but you guys certainly have your work cut out for you if you genuinely want to take it back from the crazies. Fortunately, if you do want to, you won't be alone. You'll know where to look to for help - Spoiler Alert: it'll be among the groups these people don't want you talking to - comic fans, metalheads, Gamergate supporters, feminists disgusted by third-wave feminism, left-wingers forced out by the rise of Social Justice, independents, right-wingers with good ideas - the list goes on. You need your help, and appeal to the right communities - you'll find it. Enforce NPOV and demand a facts-first approach, and you'll be fucking golden. A strong oversight process for your mods and admins will be necessary as well to avoid bullshit.
I, for one, think doing it would be a worthy, if long-winded endeavor - one worth it solely because the sheer volume of salt that would emanate from RationalWiki taking its shit back would sate our thirst for fucking years, and give a giant middle finger to the Ryulongs of the internet. Is there any more noble a goal?
Just one old wikier's opine. Take care, and god bless.
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it DO IT FAGGOT
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
Long Story Short: "Listen and Believe" is one of those sentences that should make sense but does not.
"Listen and Believe", in itself, means that when a victim declares that something bad has happened to them, you have to believe them. That's fair, in the sense that if someone's been victimized, they need support in some fashion, at least from trusted peers.
The problem is when you try to apply this to everybody.
Just look at the Nicholas Nyberg case. We have a man who preyed on his younger cousin for years, talking about it online and basically saying 'I want to molest her'. He posted pictures of her. There's unadulterated chat logs about it that even he admits are true.
But because 'she' is trans and anti-#GamerGate, we suddenly get a rush of people defending Sarah Nyberg because 'she was just being an edgy tryhard teenager' and not responsible, because that's what she said, and you must Listen and Believe. It doesn't matter if you're someone completely uninvolved who finds reasons to find fault with Sick Nick 2, you MUST believe what they say because they are the REAL victims here, and that was years ago and
FUCK ALL RAPISTS FOR FUCK'S SAKE ARGH
So yeah. That's what it means, and that's why it's stupid. Due process exists for a reason and, if evidence comes out to prove something is wrong, then it should at least be analyzed and considered. What Ryulong does is demand that his views be listened to and nobody can even dare to disagree, and that's how it relates to what I said.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2015
I don't have much time now, and I'm out for a few days; but a quick note:
"Cold, hard, unbiased, and unabashed" data can be very very difficulty, even in hard sciences like physics. Data on its own is rarely useful; it needs interpretation, comparison, context, etc. and this is where is bias sneaks in... We should definitely *try*, be the way.