TorGuard-VPN-Sitenotice2.gif
Anonymous VPN Service + Torrent Proxy


Scales.png JONATHAN MONSARRAT FILED A SLAPP SUIT AGAINST US. Scales.png
Gavel.png
Scales.png Please donate what you can via Wesearchr to help us crowdfund this case.Scales.png

Bitcoin: 1BUeFKUrFwnQAujNHWGzHgoJAxRixVprow

Talk:RationalWiki

From Encyclopedia Dramatica
Jump to: navigation, search

I think he is wearing one of them Watch/Calculator things.

Firstly its Ace McWicked not Ace Mc. Secondly I don't see how mentioning his watch is a deconstruction. Surely some witty editor can find a better comment. Ace McWicked 03:25, 11 December 2011 (CET)

I've been meaning to clean up this article. Of course, I've been meaning to do a lot of things for a while now. I believe User:JuniusThaddeus wrote most of it. --brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 05:11, 11 December 2011 (CET)
To Ace: It's obvious (and just plain weird) that the Rats take every one of Schlafly's comments, photographs, articles, etcetera, and examine them with a microscope. How did you spot the watch, then? Other Rats noticed something with the buttons on his shirt, and so on. That's the point here. (Though I admit that mocking Schafly can be very funny sometimes.)
To Brx: I really hope you don't screw things up. ;) Glenda Jackson 06:27, 11 December 2011 (CET)
How did I spot the watch? Ummm, because that's what it looks like, asshole. I have no idea if it is a watch/calculator combo or not. Ace McWicked 06:59, 11 December 2011 (CET)
You were having a conversation on his appearance, including a discussion of his clothes and apparel. ED is mocking your intense scrutiny of Andy Schlafly. Don't be dense.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 07:23, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Single comment = discussion? Interesting. That is why I thought perhaps a different quote might be more appropriate if you were trying demonstrate my intense scrutiny of Schlafly. Ace McWicked 07:30, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Not so much yours as RationalWiki's in general.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 07:42, 11 December 2011 (CET)
You haven't even got my name right you nitwit. Ace McWicked 08:11, 11 December 2011 (CET)
You are butthurt--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 08:31, 11 December 2011 (CET)

(butthurt)... is usually characterized by noisy whining and complaining after being pwnt or otherwise outdone in any minute and insignificant way. Indeed, you have quite severely outdone me. Idiot. Ace McWicked 09:45, 11 December 2011 (CET)

You are taking this little blurb too seriously. Kind of sad how you react to anything that might resemble criticism.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 12:21, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Fuck man, you are stupid. I don't care about criticism Brx, I am here telling you this particular piece of criticism does not demonstrate the point you are trying to get across and that you could probably find a much better piece of criticism. Moron. Ace McWicked 20:36, 11 December 2011 (CET)
  • It's almost like you're here being butthurt over some insignificant text, isn't it? 20:43, 11 December 2011 (CET)
He's always like this.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 20:53, 11 December 2011 (CET)
I was trying help. But alright. Ace McWicked 21:05, 11 December 2011 (CET)
I find it interesting that me trying to help you find a better criticism is considered butthurt. Ace McWicked 21:16, 11 December 2011 (CET)
You were getting too worked up about it. You know, you can dish it but you can't take it.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 21:47, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Worked up? Calling you a nitwit is worked up? You are a nitwit. I can take it just fine thanks Brx but there is nothing you can do to "work me up". Ace McWicked 22:02, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Suure, Ace. You're still cool. Keep telling yourself that.--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 22:05, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Uh-huh, yup. I have a meeting now and then afterwards I am going to go cry in the toilet because a complete stranger on the internet who eats turnips from the sidewalk doesn't think another complete stranger is cool. Ace McWicked 22:08, 11 December 2011 (CET)
  • You are visibly upset you retarded aspie. Always having to have the last word is pretty pathetic in and of itself. 22:09, 11 December 2011 (CET)
Yes, I remember now why I never had an ED account. Ace McWicked 00:07, 12 December 2011 (CET)
Because you can't handle criticism?--brxbrxbrxbrxbrxbrx-brxbrx 00:44, 12 December 2011 (CET)
Quite right, my paper thin ego can't handle the criticism. Ace McWicked 01:23, 12 December 2011 (CET)


Ace, dear, don't take it too seriously. It's evident that RW's editors have mocked Andy in every possible way. This article says it all: RW contains dozens of essays, anagrams, games and poems about Schlafly; a comparative study of Schlafly and Black Jesus; daily wikistalking; a rock opera (written by RW's resident gays); and endless, massive ridiculing directed at the fuckwit.

But there's nothing wrong with that! Actually, some of the material is very funny indeed; it usually happens with fundies like Schlafly and his herd.

I sense you simply didn't like the "Watch" reference. You need to mature a bit. Glenda Jackson 02:57, 12 December 2011 (CET)

I was suggesting you could find a much better reference but if you are happy with this one then keep it. Ace McWicked 03:04, 12 December 2011 (CET)
God, you're fast. It's that same energy that impresses me the most on the Schlafly matter. You guys are something.
Anyway, I think the reference works within the context. Glenda Jackson 03:15, 12 December 2011 (CET)


Misnomer

For a website that puts "Rational" in its title... it sure doesn't act the part. ZetaSonic 02:59, 12 December 2013 (EST)

Laurelai

They have enlisted Laurelai [1] to create an article on transmisogyny. --Intiger 03:28, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Armenian Genocide Denial and Lesser Drama

I've discovered some unbelievable shit on this site. The comedy potential is just waiting to be tapped.

As a general guideline, since the site's reflexively anti-western, anything counter to the west can be a potential source for drama. You can head to just about any topic related to those lines and find loads of potential drama. Two of my favorite examples are from the sites Bashar al-Assad and USS Liberty Incident articles.

You may notice the site's significantly less negative on Assad than, say, Ronald Reagan or Margaret Thatcher. Now, maybe I'm alone here, but surely no matter how much anyone could hate the ruler of a liberal democracy, it's objectively wrong and stupid to be more negative towards them than a tyrant who tortures, murders, and gasses hundreds of thousands of his own people rather than even an attempt to negotiate away a fraction of his power?

As for the bit on the USS Liberty, there's been talks of conspiracy for years, but even a half century after the incident, no document released by the US or Israel points to a cover up. There shouldn't be a question it was a friendly fire accident any more than other theories where the event was theorized before actual evidence was looked at. The only reason it's even brought up is due to being one of the few anti-Israeli and anti-Western conspiracy theories under the radar enough to not be tainted by noted association with famous crackpots. Said crackpots believe the theory anyway, but the rule still holds.

So far, my favorite discovery is RW's bit on the Armenian Genocide. It's hard to believe this shit, but in in the talk page and the article for Armenia, there's actual genocide denial on what's supposed to be the "Rational" wiki.

   
 
To my eyes, this RationalWiki article strikes a reasonable balance, not whitewashing the Turks' brutal actions, but also not tooting the horn of Armenian victimhood.
 

 
 

—Sprocket J Cogswell, RationalWiki User

   
 
The Armenian Genocide took place between 1915 and 1918, during which the Ottoman Empire committed systematic killings, deportations, and forced marches of the (predominantly Christian) Armenian population, resulting in the deaths of 1 to 1.5 million people. Most scholars from a Western background present this viewpoint. Meanwhile the factuality of the Armenian genocide is denied by the government of Turkey, who argue it was a religious and ethnic war, and that up to a million Islamic Turks and Kurds died during the period at the hands of Armenian militiamen, along with other Christian-Muslim violence throughout the Ottoman Empire at time. Unsurprisingly, most scholars from non-Christian backgrounds take this viewpoint. What actually happened is anyone's guess, but no-one comes out of it looking good.
 

 
 

—RationalWiki Armenia Article, this section was the toned down version.

No serious wiki of any sort should even come close to tooting the horn of "Armenian victimhood" or "it was a long time ago" when discussing this topic. Fucking Christ, what does that make slavery? "Oh, it happened like a million years ago, the niggers probably made it up."

Assuming it gets more traffic. This site might just be the next TV Tropes. --Troll 4 Life 04:21, 10 September 2014 (EDT)

I, for one, would sooner stand with genocidal tyrants than elected leaders... but I doubt RW's editors pride themselves on being fascists in quite the same way that I view myself. I don't see it getting more traffic. It's a niche wiki for far leftist ideologues. Recall that SJWiki was spawned from this horde.  VX  SS.png 08:32, 10 September 2014 (EDT)

Tips for Trolling

The current recommendations for how to troll RW could stand to be more effective. The site can't really be trolled from the right without a lot of extra support since anything deemed too far to the right is deleted instantly, no matter how well sourced.

For that matter, sourcing's a joke in every circumstance. RW accepts sources from anybody; Cracked; TV Tropes; even crank sites RW has articles mocking like globalresearch.ca are used as sources. Not even just as extra reading, but sources. If RW's willing to accept crap like this as sources for what they like while ignoring real sources used in points to the contrary, any idea of objectivity or rationality is a farce.

Personally, I recommend trolling from the left, or trolling from the neutral. You can use anything as a citation, and are a lot less likely to get recognized as a troll. Don't even worry about getting stopped. The line between a libtard carefag and a really effective troll's non existent anyway. The site'd also need some sort of actual standards to stop this method, and they'll delete the whole thing before that happens.--Troll 4 Life 04:52, 10 September 2014 (EDT)

Somewhere on RW, they have a policy stating something to the effect of "In then end, what most of us like will stay, and what most of us dislike will go." It's very much a mobocracy, and they don't take pains to hide it.  VX  SS.png 08:32, 10 September 2014 (EDT)
Isn't that faulty rationality as well? Well, it figures. If they were honest about how "rational" they were, then nobody would take them seriously. Save the whales! Adoph-in Hitler needs an army! 19:40, 10 September 2014 (EDT)
The whole idea that Conservapedia needs a "rational" counter anyway is absurd. Verifiability and an NPOV are already principles of vanilla Wikipedia, as well as the principles of any worthwhile academic material.
Some might say they're a comedy site since they can't compete with any actual encyclopedia for facts, but that makes even less sense. No relevant RW user has any sense of humor.
Even by Internet standards, RW has no reason to justify it's existence. It's to Wikipedia what FreeSpeechVids was to video sites.--Troll 4 Life 22:42, 10 September 2014 (EDT)
Christ, RW even describes itself as a mobocracy in their fucking page on mobocracy. It's amazing how such a small site can contain so much embarrassing content.--Troll 4 Life 22:42, 10 September 2014 (EDT)
They didn't accept TV tropes for saying rape is as much unremitting horror as they list slavery Hitler and the Klan. Also cracked is a better source for unbelievable drugs than Wikipedia, check this out [2]. I trolled them by adding sections to more than half their history and religion articles; when one of their mods Meikal even is a professional historian who didn't give a shit. They have no reason to exist other than for including information Wikipedia refuses to host; as Wikipedia now tries to deny it once housed anti god rant articles before including a single book of the bible [3]. Really, any information they have absent from Wikipedia should just be on Wikipedia; giving them no reason to waste money on maintaining servers.

Has anyone even actually spoken with Trent Tolhouse; Jimmy Wales at least showed up to tell me I'm bad news when I pestered him, but Dr. Toulouse never did and neither did Human. I would have thought Jimmy Wales would be more difficult to get a response from than Dr. Toulouse, though Wikipedia brings a net profit for all the electricity it eats, unlike Rational Wiki's digital donation box which must be supported by less than 100 people if that. How much of the money just comes from Dr. Toulouse; he must have put in more than Jimmy Wales ever did in Wikipedia's first years. CensoredScribe 00:20, 29 January 2015 (EST)

Bullshit

Their paradigm makes sense in a vacuum but in reality it is bullshit.

I've read a lot of their articles and have thus verified this quote to be true: "liberals build impenitrable fortresses of rationality and run around inside congratulating themselves on their brilliance. when you try to point out that their fortress is built on a slowly disintigrating cloud, it goes right over their head." —anon

Lesswrong had a good critique on these mental illnesses as did Fringe elements who pointed out that these sort of people are pretty much Secular Humanists so they deny race and preform mental gymnastics. —Lolyunohavgudsoftware 06:54, 4 April 2015 (EDT)

Intro too long

  • The intro section is far too long. Someone should turn it into an "About" section and replace it with a shorter summary of the article that's pretty much something along the lines of: "RationalWiki used to be a (sort of) funny troll parody of the bias republicans who got banned from wikipedia and created Coservapedia, but now it's a fallout shelter for bias SJW retards who got banned from wikipedia and is twice as bad as Conservapedia ever was. Articles are no longer written attempting (and failing) to be funny and are instead either 100% serious opinion pieces about social justice bullshit written in a way wikipedia wouldn't let them get away with (just like Conservapedia) and personal attack articles about people they don't like. At least Conservapedia never tried to use their articles to bully people off the internet like an Encyclopedia Dramatica for leftists but driven by butthurt and zero self awareness". G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 14:53, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
  • Fuck it I just did it myself. Now it just needs a few funny pictures to liven up the sidelines of the walls of text and it's ready for a long overdue spin on the front page. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 18:10, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
  • Done. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 07:20, 15 September 2015 (EDT)

Good job, that's better - agreed about the intro.--UltraSleuth 18:34, 16 September 2015 (EDT)

Rationalwiki has lost its way

Have been virtually the only sysop there that has contributed within the last month, or so. The problem with the site is that nearly all the sysops are lazy; they don't add detailed (on topic) scientific content, instead they just hang around and use Rationalwiki as a chat forum on the talk pages. The worst sysops there are "Paravant" (aka Miekal, or something similar) and "Weasaloid" (again spelling might be off), both are trolls who add nothing of value and just hold ridiculous extreme far-left political views to the extent it appears they just hold those views to wind people up, e.g. complete open borders, even for terrorists (no controls on immigration, not even checking people if they're coming in with bombs or chemical gas). Weird stuff. The only good thing about the site is that it still has many good pages that debunk pseudo-sciences and dubious claims. However very few sysops are now adding to this. So anyway, I'm probably going to close my account there.Kromscape 14:41, 16 September 2015 (EDT)

  • Are you sure those guys are really just trolling? They sound legit... Anyway, join ED instead. We're actually funny. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 16:21, 16 September 2015 (EDT)
And more rational, somehow. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 17:11, 16 September 2015 (EDT)

Might be parodists, who knows? Pretty much every admin I've seen on that shithole is a troll for that matter. No idea if "Trent Toulouse" is as much of a knucklehead as the rest seeing as he pretty much abandoned the site - but the fact that it was a site founded by guys who's "hobby" is obsessing over the editors of an obscure conservative wiki screams "autism" big time. Other than a few tidbits about religious extremist and such the site is worthless except just to laugh at.--UltraSleuth 18:42, 16 September 2015 (EDT)

  • Mind if I quote you? G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 00:49, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
Go ahead.--UltraSleuth 12:22, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
I used to have an account on there and it did interest me at one time because I like reading about batshit insane things like the militia movement, cults, and conspiracy theories. But then it started having far-left bullshit articles that had nothing to do with "rationality". Also funny note: they call "Voltaire" an islamophobe because he was critical of Islam, like he was pretty much all religion. --One With The Lulz 02:04, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
That's why being a SWJ has got to suck - hating Islam on one hand for being religiously extremist and oppressive of women, yet at the same being unable to criticize it out of fear of being "racist" - it must be like bipolar disorder. That's probably why so many of them are such repressed and miserable individuals, lol--UltraSleuth 12:26, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
Doublethink is part and parcel to the SJW. Their stance on Islam is the most blatant example, but it can be found in many other subjects. —  VX  13:01, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
Would you say that ED has become more similar to RW than it used to be? Or maybe SJW values have become more mainstream throughout society in general, to the point that what used to be considered ridiculously radical before is considered common sense now and part of the set of standard norms of decent and acceptable behavior, and ED is not immune/exempt from being influenced by that? Leucosticte 20:31, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
Haven't noticed that myself, the "SWJ" thing is just a passing fad like Disco anyway since it's not based on any underlying principle or logic, it's just the trendy thing to do - and now that gay marriage is legal it'll probably begin to peter out over the coming decade. Even folks like Bill Maher call it out on TV. RW's far from a mainstream site anyway, and has less than 100,000 hits on Google - so no I wouldn't say it's reflective of any widespread trend, but rather it's just astroturf. From what I can see the site was just hijacked by fans of Freethought blogs (a site which is on it's last leg) and serves as their personal playground. But if anything I think that a backlash against SJW insanity is in the works. The fact that TV shows like South Park are so popular leads me to that conclusion.--UltraSleuth 21:06, 17 September 2015 (EDT)
I know the faggots in the atheism movement (as in the ones that quote Hitchens all the time) had a schism because on one side you have atheists that criticize all religion, and on the other bleeding hearts who will only criticize christianity and judaism but not islam because they're oppressed and will call you racist for doing so. Also I read on RW before (not sure if it was in the article or on their suggested articles page) that they were defending the Armenian genocide because muslims were the perpetrators and they were just getting a bad rep. --One With The Lulz 08:29, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
  • They also defend Buddhism and other eastern shit because they know so little about it they don't understand it's a religion like any other. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 08:45, 18 September 2015 (EDT)

Rome Viharo or his associates editing the page

Most the recent edits are by Rome Viharo or his work pals.TheRedPenOfDoom 16:21, 18 September 2015 (EDT)

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/index.php?title=RationalWiki&action=history – Details please. Several individuals revised the article recently. Which revisions and accounts are you talking about? --JuniusThaddeus 18:00, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
  • What exactly has been changed that needs to be changed back? Unless UltraSleuth is actually Viharo, I'm not seeing a problem because he and I have been the only ones that have been editing this page lately and I'm clearly not Viharo. And even if Rome had edited this page, everything in the article rings true, so he's made some good points. If anything, Rome's article looks like something written by a lazy, butthurt and incompetent RW editor (judging by the use of the word "Crank") who hoped writing articles about him in other places besides RW might give the illusion that more that one person cares about him. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 18:18, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
  • Wait a minute! YOU wrote the Viharo article! Go back to RationalWiki faggot. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 18:23, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
Sleuth guy is Rome Viharo, or one of his work pals. Viharo also got his colleagues to flood his Rationalwiki talk page. Sleuth recently appeared on Rationalwiki as Montecristo Dantes, and made a single edit on Viharo's page which matches almost identical to what he has posted here. Viharo isn't innocent, nor has he been harassed. He's a deranged troll who has stalked the Wikipedia editors that were involved in banning him. He has a whole page on his website dedicated to these people.TheRedPenOfDoom 18:53, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
Just like your website has an entire section and over 100,000 posts dedicated to stalking and microanalyzing Andy Schlafly and his minions, right down the color of their briefs to the corn in their shit, rolfmao. And if you think I'm Viharo you need to review my edit history. The only reason he got mentioned is as evidence of how the website has almost nothing to do with science or logic at this point, and is pretty much just a personal blog for the remnants of PZ Myer's dead website now.--UltraSleuth 02:16, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
How about you made modifications to the article? If we approve of or don't mind the changes, we'll leave them be, and if we disapprove of the changes, we'll revert you. Being reverted once or twice isn't a big deal. --JuniusThaddeus 20:13, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
  • I added most of the mentions of Viharo. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 02:21, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

I did some Googling and the funny thing is that this dude is likely a sockpuppeter himself. He even created a crappy Rome Viharo article on this wiki which I proposed for deletion since Viharo's a non-entity, who deserves nothing more than a passing mention on this page.--UltraSleuth 02:33, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

https://www.reddit.com/r/rationalwiki/comments/35r9vt/rome_viharo/

--UltraSleuth 02:33, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

  • So basically this guy is just an RW sycophant who's obsessed with Rome. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 02:47, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
I am not a member of RW and have never posted on there. I have just documented Rome Viharo's sockpuppets and internet trolling, he had many impersonations and socks on rationalwiki as Jon Donnis [4] and the claim Rome is not notable is stupid, he blatantly is - example [5] and his nutty radio interview here [6]. He was the director of ISHAR a nutty alternative medicine company owned by Deepak Chopra and trolled Wikipedia on hundreds of socks such as Tumbleman.  — Preceding comment added by TheRedPenOfDoom (talkcontribs), who is too much of a fucking retard to sign their own posts. IT'S FOUR TILDES (~~~~), NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!

This page is an obvious SJW disinfo site

Only reminding us that RW is a member of the shadowy SJW cabal 6 times? Surely ED can at least hit double digits. FuzzyCatPotato 23:34, 18 September 2015 (EDT)

I'd say 6 is enough - and considering that it's essentially a "FreeThoughtBlogs" wiki which has little to nothing to do with "science" at this point save a few articles debunking fundamentalists and other fringe ideas I'd say it's pretty accurate info. I wasn't aware that there was a SWJ cabal as opposed to a grassroots movement, but thanks for that information. "Disinfo" is just cult slang for anything the RW website dislikes anyway, nevermind that this is a site which openly admits it's biased and therefore not "factual" info to begin with, just the opinion of its community. It's not like ED doesn't have plenty of articles mocking far-right wing sites, but now that your site is getting mocked you're up in arms - proving the point about the cult mentality.
If you're worried about social justice you should be more worried admins like Kosterwhatshisname harassing a female member just for daring to criticize the site on her own Twitter feed as documented by screenshots than a silly ED article. But you probably won't. From what I've seen though you seem like one of the few good men left on that sinking ship since you actually stand up to the abusive editing on occasion, but overall you still stand idly by and let a group of admins toss their weight around there, which is a shame. Hell I admit that I have an agenda against the website BTW, but it's not for something as petty as someone offending me for saying a dirty word about "feminism" or daring to say something mean about PZ Myers - I think this article does a great job demonstrating the problems with the website and the current crop of admins.--UltraSleuth 02:12, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
  • I assume most of our readers are at a 3rd grade reading level and will get it just fine... Although I might be giving them too much credit. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 02:22, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
Just realized that he's wrong too, lol - there are only 3 mentions, the other 3 are just mentions of Laureli's SJWiki.--UltraSleuth 02:37, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
@UltraSleuth:
1: tfw you don't get the sarcasm
2: 99% sure bringing up any issues you have with RW on RW is more likely to have some impact than writing here
3: Don't you realize that mentioning SJWiki is enough to prove RW is part of the cabal? ^__^ FuzzyCatPotato 03:06, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
Yeah, point taken. Fact is though there's no point in discussing anything on RW itself because I've followed various discussions which usually just end up with some admin saying "go f- yourself" or "you're an idiot". The admins on the site basically just do what they want without any consensus and take ownership of the articles so it's not worth the hassle.--UltraSleuth 04:51, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
"2: 99% sure bringing up any issues you have with RW on RW is more likely to have some impact than writing here". Yeah even I know that's bullshit. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 06:37, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
No? It's not as if RW reads this, and anyone who browses ED already knows they're full of shit. Bitching to their faces at least ensures that they see it, even if it's guaranteed to be ignored. —  VX  08:14, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
  • Clearly they've read it since they're pouring over here to argue and edit war over it. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 08:16, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
I remain unconvinced. They could just as easily be from CP, MP, SJWiki, or whatever that new Orain wiki is. —  VX  08:19, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
Orain is dead, just found out they got hacked or some shit, and all their shit seems to be gone. As for the RW faggots on this page, oh lol, those retards have always hated ED while basically being a leftard ripoff with delusions of intellectualism, and now, with the addition of Gamergate and radfem shit, those sad bastards are self hating betas who think they are so progressive spewing SJW talking points while coming off as bitter assholes who refuse to actually debate the merits of the shit they made up their minds on. Keeping Ryulong around despite the fact they tried to get his ass banned was just pathetic, since the reason they kept him around was basically to spite the haters. DarkLordTR --> Talk here, n00bs. 08:37, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
Speaking of beta, now that I'm on it the "women" and "dating" advice I've seen on RW such as on articles about "MRAs, PUA's", etc might be the most cringeworthy content on the site. I've actually seen stuff like "you should always ask a woman's permission before touching her" given as advice on how to be "nice" to women; you can literally tell that some of them have never seen a pussy that wasn't in .jpeg format. And who would take advice on women and relationships from a wiki anyway? Let alone one as cringeworthy as RW, lol--UltraSleuth 21:26, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
They sure as hell ain't from SJWiki either, as we hammered them so bad, they still have their shitty wiki on lockdown, so they don't dare to go anywhere near ED. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 08:41, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

Sleuth is a retard posting lies

This section in the article is total crap:


   
 
Petty grudges and online bullying - RW: The ED for butthurt leftists

Worse yet the site serves as a platform for Wikipedia rejects to pursue off-site grudges over edit disputes. After a petty TOW dispute over Rupert Sheldrake's bio between an entrepreneur named Rome Viharo and some teenage WP/RW editors, Viharo had a shitty RW article created on him, accusing the guy of being a "pseudoscience and woo" promoter (simply for being a media developer who once worked with Sheldrake and Deeprak Chopra), with old and out-of-context blog comments and Wikipedia posts being used as primary sources. More ironically still is that the RW article accuses him of being a TOW sockpuppeter (as though any non-autistic even cares) despite it having likely been created by a notorious sockpuppeter who's used hundreds of aliases.
 


 
 

How on earth are these not him? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Tumbleman/Archive

"despite it having likely been created by a notorious sockpuppeter who's used hundreds of aliases" -- how pathetic. Sleuth can only be Viharo himself, or someone connected to him i.e. a pathological liar who even cannot admit he owned socks on Wikipedia (which are logged under Viharo's account Tumbleman). Also - Viharo is an internet crank linked to all kinds of pseudo-science/woo, including "electric universe" and defending Sheldrake. Just read his RW page which documents this with links.TheRedPenOfDoom 10:52, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

Btw, Sleuth is a banned RW sockpupeteer (Monecristo Dantes etc) whose obsession is only trying to defend Viharo. He is either Viharo himself or someone linked closely to Viharo (probably his work colleague who Viharo got to spam his RW entry talk).

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Montecristo_DantesTheRedPenOfDoom 10:59, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

Wtfcats.gif
Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 10:56, 19 September 2015 (EDT)


   
 
Viharo is an internet crank linked to all kinds of pseudo-science/woo
 

 
 

pfffff... is he also a durpy doodly doo known for zipidy poopidy doo-da? G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 11:26, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
This guy's an idiot - he can see that I've been around since way before the edits here so he's either just lying or trolling. The Viharo stuff illustrates a good example of how stupid RW's content and it's admins are. The fact that the Viharo article opens with "he's a Wikipedia sockpuppeter" is proof of the pudding.--UltraSleuth 21:23, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

Reddit link being misread

This reddit link cited by Sleuth has been cited incorrectly. It is a link created by Manul most likely that lists Rome Viharo's sock puppets, yet Sleuth misreads it and lies by claiming those are the socks of the rationalwiki creator of Rome's article. You guys at ED can you not check what users are citing? Jeez.

https://www.reddit.com/r/rationalwiki/comments/35r9vt/rome_viharo/ TheRedPenOfDoom 11:32, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

We don't really give a fuck what users cite and we encourage them not to do it at all. —  VX  11:38, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
From the link:

It is most likely the rational wiki article for Rome Viharo was created by Jon Donnis a well known sockpuppet, and skeptic who has a history of creating loads of different names across the web on different forums such as MU. "Jon Donnis" is not even his real name - it is a fake name he made for himself (admitted here http://www.ghostconnections.com/Jon%20Donnis.htm), but the article was heavily edited by Leuders (Lucky Louie on Wikipedia), and Roxy the Dog (another Wikipedia editor). Tim Farley and Manul were not involved.--UltraSleuth 21:18, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

I would never expect that ED editors would be sane and decent editors in the wikiverse of Wikipedia, Rational Wiki and what ever other creepy wikis are out there. Cheers ED and Sleuth and Odd Guy specifically. One Rational Wiki editor who has a massive sock army on Wikipedia, Rational Wiki - and likely here too is still creating and editing my article[7] which now is acting as a satellite page for Rational Wiki. While RW editors just really tend to take themselves and the thoughts that pop into their heads way too seriously, something else is happening here you guys should know about. Heads up: this individual has confessed to mental illness on a number of his Wikipedia accounts, most of which have finally been banned[8]. While I try to be understanding, a mentally ill individual contributing any any wiki, ED or otherwise - especially one who is known to impersonate people online too is not only dangerous - but more importantly not funny. It's a buzzkill actually. There are a number of individuals looking to get him help and get him off the internet. Eventually this will catch up to him and no one wants ED to get hit in the cross hairs and right now he is using ED has his staging ground for whatever psychosis is going on in his mind. You guys should at least know that. Rviharo 12:12, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

FuzzyCatPotato

FuzzyCatPotato, the person responsible for Talk:RationalWiki#This_page_is_an_obvious_SJW_disinfo_site added the following to the RationalWiki article on ED:

In 2014-15, the continued presence of channers and Redditors (especially from Gamergate-related groups) give new ED additions a slightly conservative bent. Strangely, the change doesn't seem to have affected anyone outside of ED.

--JuniusThaddeus 22:14, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

On RW he's one of the few decent active admins, since he's actually friendly to newbies and has stood up to some of the dickish admins there. Don't know where he's getting "conservative" from since RW has attacked folks like Richard Dawkins, Thunderf00t (and others that the FreeThoughtBlogs clique has had beef with) for not being politically correct enough, and those guys are far from conservative. So that definitely makes my point about the website being further left than than your run-of-the mill left-wing atheist. Plus by nature I think this site is always going to be biased against SJWs because it's as politically incorrect as it gets, and therefore by nature runs completely contrary to their ideas. --UltraSleuth 23:30, 19 September 2015 (EDT)
I've seen ED (and KYM and sections of Reddit) slide towards the "oh noes evil SJW conspiracy" mindset. (Not saying ED is dommed by said mindset -- just closer to it than before.) Feel free to fix the RW article text if it rustles any jimmies. FuzzyCatPotato 00:24, 20 September 2015 (EDT)
  • Butthurt retards with no sense of humor always see their favorite boogyman in us. Liberals think we're conservatives, conservatives think we're liberals, last month Roosh V accused us of being SJWs and now this SJW is accusing us of being MRAs. It's pathetic. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 00:49, 20 September 2015 (EDT)
I think it really boils down to hive-minders having no sense of humor no matter what side of the isle they fall on. The site can have 100 articles mocking their opposition and they'll think its funny, but as soon as 1 article shows up mocking then they'll get butthurt and accuse the site of being part of the conspiracy against them. Reminds me of the Scientologist guy on South Park who had no problem with the show mocking other religious, but as soon as it mocked his religion he quit.--UltraSleuth 01:03, 20 September 2015 (EDT)

lol, they're now claiming that they have us upset:

--JuniusThaddeus 09:09, 20 September 2015 (EDT)

I say let them be butthurt and write about how "conservative" we are. They and the rest of the Atheism+ crowd have terminal cancer anyway. --One With The Lulz 09:45, 20 September 2015 (EDT)

  • I am just loving the asinine drama this article is generating. G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 10:18, 20 September 2015 (EDT)
Yeah, the autism at display here is pretty fucking severe. More sperging than EDF combined. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 10:28, 20 September 2015 (EDT)
The unintended consequences of all these far-left faggots throwing a temper tantrum is that it gets moderate liberals to turn against SJWs and feminists. --One With The Lulz 10:38, 20 September 2015 (EDT)
David Gerard is only one with a halfway sane reaction to ED, but he's done fuck all to correct the butthurt either. I mean, damn, there was a brief time those faggots knew ED existed but didn't care, now they've drunk so much SJW koolaid they and the SJWiki might as well combine their content, since they now spout the same insane bullshit. DarkLordTR --> Talk here, n00bs. 12:27, 20 September 2015 (EDT)

The fact that ED's response to "you've shifted towards the evil SJW conspiracy mindset" is "damn SJWs, destroying everything" makes me happy. FuzzyCatPotato 00:13, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

For a supposed rationalist, you don't get it, so I'll use simple words: You and your butt buddies and the SJWs are BOTH massive fucking faggots. The only reason ED hates your beloved perverts and pedophiles is because they tried to shut us down, that's it. Otherwise, we don't give a fuck what stupid they spew unless it produces funny drama, then we laugh at it for the lulz. We do the same thing when GamerGaters produce drama, and we mock the shit out of them too, and if it looks like we've "taken sides", it because ED hates pedophiles trying to shut us down and the pedophile we hate has sided with the faggots whose dick you suck.....was that simple enough or do I need to spell it out with crayons and coloring blocks? DarkLordTR --> Talk here, n00bs. 05:57, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
So, you hate RW, because the people (if SJWs can be called that) that you think run RW are the same people that you think tried to shut down ED? I'd love to see that syllogism in crayon, please. FuzzyCatPotato 15:16, 4 October 2015 (EDT)
Also that we at ED are also don't really like pedophiles, seeing as they do that whole child rape thing. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 14:04, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
Rationalwiki has no pornography on it. ED is filled with porn, as well as other disgusting images (e.g. extreme gore photos like people's faces mutilated, dead babies, and people eating poop). Even sysops on this site have photos of their private parts on their user-pages. Its not normal. This has always been the stupid thing about ED. If you removed all these sick and silly images, you could be taken more seriously. It would also make more sense to out paedos on a website that is totally clean of pornographic images. Kromscape 15:30, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
Senor Dumbass, ED IS OFFENSIVE. That the whole fucking point. If your jimmies are rustled, we did our jobs. If you don't like that, fuck you, we want to drink your tears. Now go fuck off back to your circle jerk and white knight a child fucker while we laugh at you. DarkLordTR --> Talk here, n00bs. 16:05, 22 September 2015 (EDT)
LOL because pornography is worse than pedophilia right? fucking sex-negative feminazi. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

Guys, don't argue with these faggots. It's like yelling at a brick wall. Just fucking drop the banhammer on them and call it a day. It's not like they would be as forgiving as we're being on their SJW sites. --One With The Lulz 17:35, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

TFW none of you have gone to RW at all, and if you had you wouldn't have been banned. TFW you cry censorship, then are OK with it on your wiki, because we're supposedly that evil. Two wrongs don't make a fucking right. FuzzyCatPotato 15:16, 4 October 2015 (EDT)
  • We go to RW when you can just volunteer at a school for the retarded? G Head.png oddguy G Head.png 15:34, 4 October 2015 (EDT)
Why make cogent points when you can mention the word retard? FuzzyCatPotato 23:42, 4 October 2015 (EDT)
So you admit you're wrong then fuzzy? LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 16:16, 4 October 2015 (EDT)
Where'd you get that from? I said that your "ban him, he'd be mean to us on RW" whine is baseless. FuzzyCatPotato 23:42, 4 October 2015 (EDT)

Dongs!

Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 17:38, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

ED ripoff

JW why people think RW is a gross liebrul copy of ED versus being the gross liebrul anti-Conservapedia. FuzzyCatPotato 20:27, 5 December 2015 (EST)

SJW is a better term for RW than liberal. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 06:46, 6 December 2015 (EST)

Gay porn automated message

On their site, I remember receiving a gay porn drawing from fuzzycatpotato or weaseloid in an automated manner. Anyone else? Maybe I am remembering it incorrectly as I can't find the message.  —Lolyunohavgudsoftware 20:56, 24 December 2015 (EST)

I found the image, it was this one: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/File:Frot.jpg; the message also said something like "The perfect day."  —Lolyunohavgudsoftware 21:24, 24 December 2015 (EST)

The paedophile on rationalwiki who I first complained about

Matthias Huess was a sock of mine. Note that they also banned my other account, Mr. Burton for a comment I left there. At that time on Rationalwiki I was editing something else on Rome Viharo's entry on another sock, then I saw that paedophile which was just created and I made another sock to complain in the community portal about him. Note this is something I complained about when I left Rationalwiki on Krom which had sysop status, i.e. RW lost its way, it used to be useful countering pseudo-science, but it turned into a place for far-left wing wierdos and perverts. The main paedophile-apologist there is paravant, and he's the guy who banned me on Huess and Mr. Burton. If i'm not mistaken this guy used to go by the name Miekal or something similar, and he had a photo of himself on his other account - he's a transsexual/cross-dresser freak who defends paedophilia and beastiality. Paravant has never liked me after I left him this comment, and was even reverting my edits on Krom. Kroms 13:18, 5 January 2016 (EST)

my theory is that paedophile is a sock of paravant.Kroms 13:33, 5 January 2016 (EST)
They're both gone from RW (Aisha hasn't editted for a month) so it doesn't matter. Moreover, Aisha was placed under scrutiny, so. Please don't link to ED from RW, it falls under doxxing. FuzzyCatPotato 18:07, 5 January 2016 (EST)
This is good news Paravant has left. You need to just attract more editors at RW who debunk the pseudo-sciences, while getting rid of the users there who aren't productive like Paravant and were using it as a chat room. I was the user Dinocrisis, Forests among others back in 2012 when I was adding loads of page creations. Back then the site was a lot better. There is actually a load of stuff I could add, especially against Afrocentrism (I started doing those pages on Krom), but I am not returning to contribute to RW until it sorts it self out.Kroms 20:47, 5 January 2016 (EST)
Thanks for the insight. I was wondering (suspicious, really) about the circumstances under which the "Matthias Huess" account was created. I added the new information to the article. --JuniusThaddeus 21:12, 5 January 2016 (EST)

Rationalwiki mods are completely retarded

Here's how I got last month some moron to even send Rationalwiki a link to his facebook page to unblock him. [9] [10] The guy's user is Alliumnsk. So I created Alliumnsks (with an 's') to get him banned for sockpuppetry. They then banned his original account. That's the sort of 'rational' mods you currently have at Rationalwiki.Kroms 21:37, 5 January 2016 (EST)

"Please don't link to ED from RW, it falls under doxxing"

no srsly why do you guys have to drag up pics and real names of everyone? Most people and places are shitty enough that you can hate on them without revealing who they are. (This article is actually mostly a good example.) FuzzyCatPotato 23:54, 14 March 2016 (EDT)

Learn how to spell doxing correctly. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2016 (EDT)
So delicious. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 04:21, 15 March 2016 (EDT)
*bows in respect* sorry dear Master, for I misspelled a word half a year ago FuzzyCatPotato 07:44, 15 March 2016 (EDT)
1: You just misspelled that word, retard. Not even 24 hours ago. Also, that's not the only thing you haven't been able to spell you dyslexic twat. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 08:17, 15 March 2016 (EDT)
Lol, I was quoting the quote you guys had onpage. I've added quotemarks (to clarify: an " and then another ") to show that the quote is a quote. Now, when you see the quote, you may know that it's a quote. Happy? =) FuzzyCatPotato 20:03, 16 March 2016 (EDT)
You should just be glad that I didn't add Gooniepunk's penis to the page. In fact, you should be thankful that I've never showed Vordrak this post from Gooniepunk / MNpunkboy. A page on your wiki says that Gooniepunk is "MNpunkboy", and Google suggests that there's only one "MNpunkboy" online. Given that a page on RationalWiki says that Gooniepunk is "MNpunkboy" and that the JackinChat profile is the first Google search result for "MNpunkboy", this isn't doxing; it's you guys not knowing how to keep information private. Seriously, who creates an unique handle for JackinChat and then uses it on RationalWiki[Wiki]? Besides, Gooniepunk himself says, "Meh, good luck to them on that [finding information]. […] I don't need to bite my nails about my employer looking for information." --JuniusThaddeus 09:33, 15 March 2016 (EDT)
Real question is why you feel the need to look stuff like this up. Consider how much you could have done if you'd spent your time NOT trawling internet people's post histories. FuzzyCatPotato 20:03, 16 March 2016 (EDT)
Real answer is because it makes you butthurt. Uberfukken 21:32, 16 March 2016 (EDT)
I love how you're not even refuting anything. MUH POST HISTORIES. LKCustomSig.jpg (talk) 20:13, 16 March 2016 (EDT)
Honestly, Fuzzy, don't even worry about it. So some creepy, butthurt moron fell for my reverse psychology and actually proceeded to Google exactly what I wanted them to find. Not impressive. They then continued to scare people with what they already knew (most of it very dated information). Not very impressive. Honestly, if they wanted to impress me, they'd uncover all 37 of my active RationalWiki socks, and paint a picture that I know (as did Nutty Roux) would ruin my reputation on RationalWiki and shake the Wiki to the core. It would also lead to further things that would uncover sockpuppetry on Wikipedia that Wikipedia doesn't know about. In any case, none of that matters to me anymore. I don't care about RationalWiki, or Vordrak, or butthurt about Gamergate, or Ryulong, or whatever the fuck else anymore. My kamikazee mission that ended my run on RationalWiki (i.e: Vordrak was so fucking easy to troll that I took one for the team so he'd leave others alone and I could have motivation to stop wasting time on RationalWiki) was a complete success, and I'm much, much happier now that I'm not wasting time on a website I stopped caring about years ago (but that was more addictive than any drug). And, hey, since leaving the Wikisphere, I've even gained a girlfriend. Beats the fuck out of caring about some stupid internet drama. - Goonie Personal Space Invader 02:35, 17 March 2016 (EDT)
I'm happy, too. - Zew0 02:55, 17 March 2016 (EDT)
One more note before I go: in case anybody thinks I'm kidding or bullshitting, you may want to take a look at this shit, son! And then may want to look at where you've seen that account before on Encyclopedia Dramatica. Personal Space Invader 03:55, 17 March 2016 (EDT)
What motivated you into telling yourself not to lock pages? What is there to gain from it? The more likely explanation is that you're a white knight and not Gooniepunk himself. --JuniusThaddeus 07:39, 17 March 2016 (EDT)
Is it too late to join the bawww parade? I told these faggots they could bring any actual issues to me, yet here they are, menstruating over a once pristine talk page. —  VX  07:51, 17 March 2016 (EDT)
This incident has convinced me to add the information to the article. --JuniusThaddeus 08:36, 18 March 2016 (EDT)

RationalWiki users are incredibly autistic.

See above. -Uberfukken 00:05, 18 March 2016 (EDT)

Are these guys entertaining anyone? Otherwise they're wasting our time and are out on their asses. —  VX  00:50, 18 March 2016 (EDT)

TGcomix joined RationalWiki

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Midnight68. --JuniusThaddeus 18:06, 22 March 2016 (EDT)

Rome viharo

I would never expect that ED editors would be sane and decent editors in the wikiverse of Wikipedia, Rational Wiki and what ever other creepy wikis are out there. Cheers ED and Sleuth and Odd Guy specifically. One Rational Wiki editor who has a massive sock army on Wikipedia, Rational Wiki - and likely here too is still creating and editing my article[7] which now is acting as a satellite page for Rational Wiki. While RW editors just really tend to take themselves and the thoughts that pop into their heads way too seriously, something else is happening here you guys should know about. Heads up: this individual has confessed to mental illness on a number of his Wikipedia accounts, most of which have finally been banned[8]. While I try to be understanding, a mentally ill individual contributing any any wiki, ED or otherwise - especially one who is known to impersonate people online too is not only dangerous - but more importantly not funny. It's a buzzkill actually. There are a number of individuals looking to get him help and get him off the internet. Eventually this will catch up to him and no one wants ED to get hit in the cross hairs and right now he is using ED has his staging ground for whatever psychosis is going on in his mind. You guys should at least know that. Rviharo 12:12, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

@ Rome Viharo

Stop posting misinformation and slander about Manul and goblin face on your website and joining forums to post about them, then maybe your ED and RW entries won't be edited.

You've confused identities in your posts. Manul isn't tim Farley, and i;m not goblin face. So all your posts are misinformation. More lies on your website i that i emailed you harassment, and threatened you. I've never sent you an email and don't even know your email address.

Sure get the cops involved. They will see you're a deranged lunatic with a persecution complex. Its you who need to be taken off the internet.

https://wikipediawedonthaveaproblem.wordpress.com/Gorgons 21:19, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Sysops/admin status

I got sysop'd there; it is not hard to do: "on RationalWiki, pretty much anyone who isn't an obvious vandal is made a sysop" --http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Sysops. However, it is a fairly boring website from the brevity that I've seen; for example, at http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&offset=&limit=5000&type=delete there is nothing that interesting--I checked around 30 URLs linked there in their pre-deleted form. Anyone need deleted pages or something? What should I do with these powers?  —Lolyunohavgudsoftware 01:39, 30 July 2016 (EDT)

Make it great again. Cobalt Cat.jpg CobaltCat 02:38, 30 July 2016 (EDT)

Avengerofthe BoN and Kosterortiizbrock

They're literally never on RW. Like, the rest are definitely spergs, but nobody is gonna read the article and be like "hey yeah Kosterortiizbrock, rational wiki editor, I remember him". Ffs. TentacleCorn 09:56, 6 October 2016 (EDT)

RW was compromised

I received an email that says this:

Title: Your user account data was compromised on RationalWiki.org
Name: RationalWiki
Email: [email protected]
To: Me
Date: July 8, 2017, 4:12 PM

In February 2017, RationalWiki's server was compromised and its database was
downloaded. The database includes user emails, IP activity, and passwords
that could be breached. Note that user passwords were hashed. However, since
we used an old version of MediaWiki, this hashing was weak. For more
information about password hashing, see:

<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:User_table#user_password>
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Hashing>

Please change your password on RationalWiki.org. If you use your RationalWiki
password on any other website, please change your password there as well.

For more information, see the RationalWiki tech blog:
<http://rationalwiki.blogspot.com/2017/06/server-upgrade-data-breach-on-old.html>

And the Saloon bar:
<http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Security_breach_announcement_.28sticky.29>

You are receiving this message because you registered an account at
RationalWiki with the username "[my username]"

I wonder if their servers were compromised through the internet or through physical contact with their hardware. Is this drama covered in the article?  —Lolyunohavgudsoftware 02:03, 17 July 2017 (EDT)