Infected RationalWiki - Whiny hugbox for spergs and a clusterfuck of neverending drama on a rapidly declining website.

Dynastia said:
Lol she also forked RationalWiki.

https://crankipedia.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page



I wonder what happens if I make an article about Ryulong or David Gerard? :ween:

edit ; https://crankipedia.miraheze.org/wiki/David_Gerard
Click to expand...

....Gerard is an admin on Uncyclopedia?

This just explains so fucking much.

Dynastia said:
idk how to wiki tbh
Click to expand...

AnOminous said:
Neither do I really. I just steal the code from an article that looks kind of normal for whatever site it is and fit whatever content into it that I want.
Click to expand...

Every single Wiki user worth a damn does this, until they've done it so many times they can do <ref> from memory.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: APerson, Splendid, lolwut and 1 other person
Adam starts chimping after Tielec removes protection from Anita Sarkeesian and Feminism articles.
(Protection log); 06:23 . . Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) protected "Talk:Anita Sarkeesian"‎ ‎[edit=autoconfirmed] (expires 06:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)) ‎[move=autoconfirmed] (expires 06:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)) ‎(Excessive vandalism: Screaming talking points obsessively without showing any reception to others counts, doesn't it?)

(Protection log); 06:45 . . Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) protected "Talk:Feminism"‎ ‎[edit=autoconfirmed] (expires 06:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)) ‎[move=autoconfirmed] (expires 06:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)) ‎(Excessive vandalism: May as well protect this too for good measure.)

(Protection log); 06:57 . . Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) removed protection from "Talk:Feminism" ‎(Don't protect pages unless they are subject to constant vandalism)

(Protection log); 06:58 . . Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) removed protection from "Talk:Anita Sarkeesian" ‎(As before.)

(Block log); 07:00 . . Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) blocked Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 0×π seconds (about right) (autoblock disabled) ‎(The BoN has been drive-by talk pointing the page for days and barely interacting with anyone. While not worthy of banning, we should take steps to let them know it isn't encouraged.)

(Block log); 07:01 . . Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) blocked Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 0×π seconds (about right) (autoblock disabled) ‎(Moreover, the people who tried to interact with them have given up, and yet the BoN is still posting, unprompted, with vitriol (especially dubious on the page of a real life person). If not this, then what should be done?)

(Block log); 07:07 . . Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) blocked Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 0×π seconds (about right) (account creation disabled) ‎(Read the community standards on page protection.)
Click to expand...

After being told to follow the rules, Adam continues to sperg over whatever this IP editor was doing to the Aneeda shrine:

(Block log); 07:10 . . Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) blocked Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 0×π seconds (about right) (autoblock disabled) ‎(So I should just block the BoN for a day instead then? I wanted to avoid them trying to proxy-hop, because I think they're being more than a bit disingenuous.)

(Block log); 07:18 . . Tielec01 (Talk | contribs) blocked Kitsunelaine (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 0×π seconds (about right) (account creation disabled) ‎(Since you asked; IMO you should have at least one expensive watch (your def. of expensive), drink fine wine with fine food, travel to the red light district in Amsterdam, try eating dog, use snus instead of smoking cigarettes and indulge annoying, stup...)
Click to expand...


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Anita_Sarkeesian Do any of the Conservapedia articles have a "living persons" warning on them?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Schlafly Not seeing it here, go figure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AnOminous
Hellfire said:
Adam starts chimping after Tielec removes protection from Anita Sarkeesian and Feminism articles.


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Anita_Sarkeesian Do any of the Conservapedia articles have a "living persons" warning on them?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Schlafly Not seeing it here, go figure.
Click to expand...

People who disagree with RW aren't "living persons." They're evil zombies!

It's kind of pathetic how they try to imitate Wikipedia's policies like BLP (Biographies of Living Persons) which, while often silly and ridiculous, actually would justify their retarded defense of Sick Nick. Just keep details like that out. About everyone. Like the real Wikipedia does.

But they can't really pretend they have such policies when their article on Assfly completely ignores it.

There are people and there are unpeople, and Assfly is obviously one of the unpeople.

I wouldn't blame them so much if they didn't portray themselves as being so high above CP.

David Gerard is completely aware of the odd and autistic Wikipedia ethics system, such as it is, and Wikipedia looks like a great shining city on a hill compared to the bullshit he's perpetrated at the inaptly-named "Rational" Wiki.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: fuehrer_dessler, chimpburgers and Hellfire
Hellfire said:
Adam starts chimping after Tielec removes protection from Anita Sarkeesian and Feminism articles.


After being told to follow the rules, Adam continues to sperg over whatever this IP editor was doing to the Aneeda shrine:




http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Anita_Sarkeesian Do any of the Conservapedia articles have a "living persons" warning on them?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Schlafly Not seeing it here, go figure.
Click to expand...

This is something I've always found really, really disturbing about the Antis, and indeed, Ryulong and his toadies in particular: This shameless fucking lionization of Anita Sarkeesian. It's not a fucking understatement to say that that they deify this woman:

At4yNYVp66NzyjXoGEbZvYr9d5OulufYbN9fm55z6Ns.png

I still can't believe this is real.

I need to ask: Where the hell does this come from? There's a line between white knighting and acting like any criticism of someone you center your life around is fucking heresy, and this kind of behavior with the defense of Anita is shockingly close to the latter.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: An Ounce of Vagina, Francis York Morgan, TheImportantFart and 1 other person
Jaimas said:
This is something I've always found really, really disturbing about the Antis, and indeed, Ryulong and his toadies in particular: This shameless fucking lionization of Anita Sarkeesian. It's not a fucking understatement to say that that they deify this woman:

At4yNYVp66NzyjXoGEbZvYr9d5OulufYbN9fm55z6Ns.png

I still can't believe this is real.

I need to ask: Where the hell does this come from? There's a line between white knighting and acting like any criticism of someone you center your life around is fucking heresy, and this kind of behavior with the defense of Anita is shockingly close to the latter.
Click to expand...
They are crusaders and trollshielders who want to fill in some void in their lives by obsessing over some random woman on the Internet. I've seen this shit with other figures, especially in politics.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Rou, An Ounce of Vagina, fuehrer_dessler and 1 other person
Jaimas said:
This is something I've always found really, really disturbing about the Antis, and indeed, Ryulong and his toadies in particular: This shameless fucking lionization of Anita Sarkeesian. It's not a fucking understatement to say that that they deify this woman:

At4yNYVp66NzyjXoGEbZvYr9d5OulufYbN9fm55z6Ns.png

I still can't believe this is real.

I need to ask: Where the hell does this come from? There's a line between white knighting and acting like any criticism of someone you center your life around is fucking heresy, and this kind of behavior with the defense of Anita is shockingly close to the latter.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of it started as exaggerated trolling to rile up the whining pissbabies but it sort of took on a life of it's own as people showed up who weren't privy to the joke and took it seriously. Kind of like SRS in general I suppose. Compare it to "Hitler did nothing wrong" on /pol/.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Rou, An Ounce of Vagina, seagull and 5 others
Dynastia said:
I think a lot of it started as exaggerated trolling to rile up the whining pissbabies but it sort of took on a life of it's own as people showed up who weren't privy to the joke and took it seriously. Kind of like SRS in general I suppose. Compare it to "Hitler did nothing wrong" on /pol/.
Click to expand...

Sort of analogous to what happened with SRS, then?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Rou and fuehrer_dessler
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Rou and Jaimas
Jaimas said:
This is something I've always found really, really disturbing about the Antis, and indeed, Ryulong and his toadies in particular: This shameless fucking lionization of Anita Sarkeesian. It's not a fucking understatement to say that that they deify this woman:

At4yNYVp66NzyjXoGEbZvYr9d5OulufYbN9fm55z6Ns.png

I still can't believe this is real.
Click to expand...

lol calm down
 
  • Agree
Reactions: seagull, Randall Fragg, Organic Fapcup and 7 others
Former sysop there. I left when I realized RW supports paedophiles (among other concerns). The "Shouniaisha" pedo thing is mentioned on the Encyclopaedia Dramatica page for Rationalwiki.

Shouniaisha on his user-page wrote he's a "self-diagnosed paedophile", and in other comments he has fantasies of having sex with children (as young as under 11). I first raised this issue on the community talk and called for him to be banned because Rationalwiki should have a zero-tolerance approach to pedos, only for myself to be blocked for 5 mins!
 
  • Informative
  • TMI
  • Feels
Reactions: Blatant hypocrite, Rou, APerson and 8 others
Dynastia said:
Here's David Gerard happily defending dox published on their own wiki. It's not even presented as a moral issue it's just "ha ha ha we sure doxed that racist good!"

0YXfuMA.png


The same David Gerard who got a case of the vapours and permabanned @systemlord_baal for the vicious crime of posting here.
Click to expand...

We're Suppressive Persons!

Clearly, even associating with us is cause for a ban.

David Gerard learned well from his master L. Ron Hubbard.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: From The Uncanny Valley, Adamska, Moexlibu and 2 others
Cuckstain has taken Men's Rights EXTREMEIST to the chicken coop to try and get him banned. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Chicken_coop

So, the general misogony and ludicrous essays were one thing. This little bit about how of course men would rape advocates mythical "rape instinct", that it's the women's fault for not putting out, that women need to not create situations that will get them raped, and yet more rape apologetics. It passes my personal line to tolerate. So, whether troll or serious, I think it's time for him to take an extended vacation. Vote? --Castaigne2 (talk) 05:04, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Click to expand...

Typical MRA Red Piller. We really don't need their ilk here. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 05:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Click to expand...
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Splendid, From The Uncanny Valley and chimpburgers
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back