Opinion on ED? I go out. I don't follow the conversation

A General discussion about everything other than South Park

Moderator: Big-Will

dvda92
Posts: 965
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby dvda92 » Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:03 pm

WTF? I've visited it and looked up TV series and it has a TV porn section? It also has images with children involved in them? Is it some kind of pedophilia site?
Samathou
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:13 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Samathou » Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:17 pm

dvda92 wrote:WTF? I've visited it and looked up TV series and it has a TV porn section? It also has images with children involved in them? Is it some kind of pedophilia site?

:shock:

Oh my god! :cartmanlaugh:

Are you serious?
In October, I already wanna wish you a Merry Christmas... mwahaha! ~~
furrybutch
Posts: 574
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:03 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby furrybutch » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:16 pm

dvda92 wrote:WTF? I've visited it and looked up TV series and it has a TV porn section? It also has images with children involved in them? Is it some kind of pedophilia site?



I'm there almost everyday,and yes on the side bar there are some adds to p0rn(which i guessed got you so hyped up that you jizzed instantaneously your pants and mistook the below pic with the girl from "You Dun Goofed UP" with p0rn).But try to keep focused here and maybe next you could past the front page .
Who wants a super delish candy with a superextracalifragilistic rapeinduhass?
stevesut1
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 6:30 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby stevesut1 » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:22 pm

You should see the stuff it said about me. On the other hand, no, you shouldn't.

It's fine for a parody site, as long as you don't take it seriously.
Samathou
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:13 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Samathou » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:29 pm

Cool! :D
In October, I already wanna wish you a Merry Christmas... mwahaha! ~~
dvda92
Posts: 965
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby dvda92 » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:17 pm

Samathou wrote:
dvda92 wrote:WTF? I've visited it and looked up TV series and it has a TV porn section? It also has images with children involved in them? Is it some kind of pedophilia site?

:shock:

Oh my god! :cartmanlaugh:

Are you serious?


Here an example, you go to the Simpsons page and what's there? It's definately Bart and Lisa seen doing sex/sex related stuff, and they are not older than 8 and 10. In my eyes it's simply pedophilia. That's funny? Is this site for pedopervs?
furrybutch
Posts: 574
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:03 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby furrybutch » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:36 pm

dvda92 wrote:
Here an example, you go to the Simpsons page and what's there? It's definately Bart and Lisa seen doing sex/sex related stuff, and they are not older than 8 and 10. In my eyes it's simply pedophilia. That's funny?


Maybe not,but your reaction sure is.Gettin' so butthurt over a pornographic picture in the year 2010 is Gary Coleman funny.

dvda92 wrote:My dick is up, lol.

I told him to keep focused,but he wouldn't listen.
Who wants a super delish candy with a superextracalifragilistic rapeinduhass?
dvda92
Posts: 965
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby dvda92 » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:40 pm

I'm not so sensitive about pornography but about child pornography. That's something different.

My dick is up for other stuff but not this. I love porn TBH but I don't like when people cover up child porn with their "but those are just cartoons" speeches, still a child is recognized doing sex and if normal people can like stuff like hentai, pedos can also like their drawn porn of children.
Wii fit man
Posts: 11153
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Wii fit man » Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:55 am

furrybutch wrote:
Wii fit man wrote:Fuck that stupid piece of shit. The fact that people call it humor is a sad, sad thing.

It is all shock value, stupid memes, and awful writing combined with cliches. If you can find one good page on that site, I will send you money.

Uncyclopedia is miles better because it is actually satire, not "this sux lol".

I'm not offended by it- it's just not funny at all. Just cursing and posting goatse isn't funny unless it's applied to a humorous situation. Think: if I posted a picture of line graph, and then said the word "at", would you laugh? No? Exactly.

Furthermore, its users go around vandalizing and fucking with other Wikis for "lulz". They are not funny, cool, or anything good whatsoever.

The people there are a bunch of 13 year old losers that think ranting about stuff is funny.

Take my advice: If you want to use that site, get a Livejournal instead. It's the same experience.


If you can find any article on Uncyclopedia that can steal from my face a smile at least,i will give YOU money.
Here's what i'm talking about:
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Kyle_Broflovski
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Puddle_of_shit
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Shemales
These are some of the many un-funny of un-cyclopedia,I dare you to find anything funny,or at least entertaining on these pages.I DARE YOU!
Ok,let's say that you don't like toilet-humour(though it'd just a lie,after all you're on SP) and you are from one of those who preffer a good,classy joke,let's put it that way!But,even so this is still ridiculous.
"Little did your mom know, this was one accidental pregnancy that could not be solved with a simple abortion"-wow,that made ME ROFLMAO s0o0 bad!
These are just forced words bombled up togheter to form a fail of a joke.This is not more mature than ED nor better better written material,this is just plain comedy garbage.

You're misreading what I'm saying. I am not saying Uncyclopedia has no bad pages; that's the fatal flaw of a Wiki that anyone can edit. Actually, you're using ED humor and memes in your posts and I think you sound like an idiot.

If you don't think Uncyclopedia is more mature, why don't you look at http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Homosexuality%20in%20the%20British%20military. ED would say "Lol they're gay and suck lol". The difference is that Uncyclopedia can take stupid topics and make them sound mature, or at least legitimate.

This is just one example. ED sucks in every way. Give me one mature page on ED. Show me one.

Edit:Hey, wait a minute. One of those pages is nominated for deletion, and another has a rewrite tag on it.
effses: Austin confirmed for turbo homosexual
furrybutch
Posts: 574
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:03 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby furrybutch » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:03 am

Wii fit man wrote:You're misreading what I'm saying. I am not saying Uncyclopedia has no bad pages; that's the fatal flaw of a Wiki that anyone can edit. Actually, you're using ED humor and memes in your posts and I think you sound like an idiot.

If you don't think Uncyclopedia is more mature, why don't you look at http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Homosexuality%20in%20the%20British%20military. ED would say "Lol they're gay and suck lol".

This is just one example. ED sucks in every way. Give me one mature page on ED. Show me one.

Edit:Hey, wait a minute. One of those pages is nominated for deletion, and another has a rewrite tag on it.


Wow,congratulations on your debating skills.
Wii fit man wrote:The difference is that Uncyclopedia can take stupid topics and make them sound mature, or at least legitimate.

Oh,this part is especially nice.So,you're saying that's ok to have basic cr*p material,but hey!If they at least make it sound intelligent/mature,it's most certainly better than other sites which have the exact same content,and I'll surely give them my props,because yeah,they SOUND intelligent and that's all that's all that matters for my pseudointellectual head .
Well,I've got news for you.Cr*p remains cr*p whatever form it takes,you'll still feel the cr*ppiness,the least that can you do is take is throw in someone else's eye.Immature?Yes,but funny.Because jokes came from the simplest things,then start like every other thing evolving.This is what Uncyclopedia often misses,the "funny throw".They're so preocuppied with readers like you,that would rather a half of page filled with nothing but bullsh*t ,than hear a good joke in one sentence.

Also,if ED has the possibility of having its pages deleted/corrected so does Uncyclopedia,as you've just said.
Wii fit man wrote: that's the fatal flaw of a Wiki that anyone can edit.



Wii fit man wrote:Actually, you're using ED humor and memes in your posts and I think you sound like an idiot.

And now anyone who uses memes should be considered stupid,just because you say/think so?
There was a reason why they became memes,in the first place.
1.They were funny
2.They were instruments used for/against trolls

I don't use much memes often,but when I do,it's only to make a more enjoyable and fun conversation.If you don't like them,that's your oppinion and,frankly, it should stay that way,I don't see a use in shoving down everyone's throat your beliefs,do you?
That's all.
Last edited by furrybutch on Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Who wants a super delish candy with a superextracalifragilistic rapeinduhass?
Samathou
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:13 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Samathou » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:58 am

dvda92 wrote:
Samathou wrote:
dvda92 wrote:WTF? I've visited it and looked up TV series and it has a TV porn section? It also has images with children involved in them? Is it some kind of pedophilia site?

:shock:

Oh my god! :cartmanlaugh:

Are you serious?


Here an example, you go to the Simpsons page and what's there? It's definately Bart and Lisa seen doing sex/sex related stuff, and they are not older than 8 and 10. In my eyes it's simply pedophilia. That's funny? Is this site for pedopervs?


:cartmanlaugh:
We can really find anything in Internet.

Anyway it's just a cartoon... simple drawings...
These are not photos of real people...
(personnally I didn't watch the link, then...)
In October, I already wanna wish you a Merry Christmas... mwahaha! ~~
Wii fit man
Posts: 11153
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Wii fit man » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:25 pm

furrybutch wrote:
Wii fit man wrote:You're misreading what I'm saying. I am not saying Uncyclopedia has no bad pages; that's the fatal flaw of a Wiki that anyone can edit. Actually, you're using ED humor and memes in your posts and I think you sound like an idiot.

If you don't think Uncyclopedia is more mature, why don't you look at http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Homosexuality%20in%20the%20British%20military. ED would say "Lol they're gay and suck lol".

This is just one example. ED sucks in every way. Give me one mature page on ED. Show me one.

Edit:Hey, wait a minute. One of those pages is nominated for deletion, and another has a rewrite tag on it.


Wow,congratulations on your debating skills.
Wii fit man wrote:The difference is that Uncyclopedia can take stupid topics and make them sound mature, or at least legitimate.

Oh,this part is especially nice.So,you're saying that's ok to have basic cr*p material,but hey!If they at least make it sound intelligent/mature,it's most certainly better than other sites which have the exact same content,and I'll surely give them my props,because yeah,they SOUND intelligent and that's all that's all that matters for my pseudointellectual head .
Well,I've got news for you.Cr*p remains cr*p whatever form it takes,you'll still feel the cr*ppiness,the least that can you do is take is throw in someone else's eye.Immature?Yes,but funny.Because jokes came from the simplest things,then start like every other thing evolving.This is what Uncyclopedia often misses,the "funny throw".They're so preocuppied with readers like you,that would rather a half of page filled with nothing but bullsh*t ,than hear a good joke in one sentence.

Also,if ED has the possibility of having its pages deleted/corrected so does Uncyclopedia,as you've just said.
Wii fit man wrote: that's the fatal flaw of a Wiki that anyone can edit.



Wii fit man wrote:Actually, you're using ED humor and memes in your posts and I think you sound like an idiot.

And now anyone who uses memes should be considered stupid,just because you say/think so?
There was a reason why they became memes,in the first place.
1.They were funny
2.They were instruments used for/against trolls

I don't use much memes often,but when I do,it's only to make a more enjoyable and fun conversation.If you don't like them,that's your oppinion and,frankly, it should stay that way,I don't see a use in shoving down everyone's throat your beliefs,do you?
That's all.

Number 1, your grammar is making your posts hard to read. No joke.

Now, back on topic. Your argument is full of holes. I never said that just sounding mature was funny; I said that sounding mature and not like a ranting dumbass made humor better. ED's biggest problem is the fact that they try to make everything a joke, which makes the quality of every joke go down. Also, not every single thing there is satirical and mature; but there's never "This sucks and is for f@ggots" passed off for humor.

What article on ED in specific makes you laugh? I don't like going there because I hate the goatse and I'm afraid of getting a virus, but I guess I can make an exception.

Also, ED's lovers are irritating. They f*ck with everyone who doesn't like it. They say "It was for the lulz" or "Internet not srs" or the best one "Don't get butthurt". The truth is, being an ass isn't funny. You can be funny while being an ass, but you can't be funny be being an ass.
effses: Austin confirmed for turbo homosexual
Samathou
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:13 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Samathou » Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:23 pm

I don't understand this theard. :lol:
In October, I already wanna wish you a Merry Christmas... mwahaha! ~~
Big-Will
Board Moderator
Posts: 18847
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 8:57 am

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Big-Will » Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:37 pm

We really don't need to discuss the merits of two competing parody Wikis, do we?
The South Park Scriptorium
The South Park Scriptorium on Facebook

Favorite Character: Butters
Need to look for something on the board? Use the search links below: US version
Peg
Posts: 2709
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:42 pm

Re: Oppinion on Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Postby Peg » Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:40 pm

As I said before: in the end they're all a bunch of losers who can't get any pussy.. or penis. :P
Oh hi. So, how are you holding up? Because I'm a potato.
*slow clap*

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest