oh internet

< Back to OI:BB

ED Snapshots

The availabilty of ED snapshots is coming soon! We have some up already like at the reddit page: reddit/ED-archive. We're carefully combing through all the content to make sure that it gets treated right and is searchable within the semantic mediawiki software, making it easier to do searches and create queries. We need your help getting this ready and want you to participate.

• This will not be available for all pages
• This will be available for a SELECTION of pages.

.

 ^»»W^hat 17:22, 15 April 2011 (CDT)

• I don't even know why they are needed, Anon already has given us enough trouble. Why give them what they want? --Complaint Desk SLAVETONEFFY Homepage 21:33, 17 April 2011 (EDT)
  • It's not about what they want. It's about what we want. --JohnnyMak 02:29, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Wow... Is it perhaps because anon accounted for a huge amount of the people who read and edited ED? Perhaps because tossing out a massive portion of internet culture and drama would be a incredible waste? Or should I tell you about how if you decided not to included the snapshots any traffic you may have to this site would cut by 80% (that is after the rage dies down and people stop visiting to ask about ED and see whats up). Oh and it is not JUST anon who wants this, it seems that quite a few members of this site who are not anon want the snapshots of articles as well. Your logic is flawed as well; 10 or 11 anons ddosing the site or vandalizing articles does not count for the hundreds of thousand who don't want to or don't give a crap. If by "Given us enough trouble" you mean crap articles on ED then I can tell you that the same example stands true. While a few may have written trash the majority would either just read or contribute quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bv900 (talk • contribs)

• • • Wow dude relax

.

 ^»»W^hat 15:03, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• I know. When I saw that comment I could not help raging.--Bv900 17:39, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

Restoring Articles from ED

I tried to restore the Final Fantasy XIV article from Encyclopedia Dramatica to OhInternet by copying the article from Google Cache and reformatting it. Before I could finish it the page was deleted. Is copying articles from ED not allowed? Are people going to have to rewrite every article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legion (talk • contribs)

• you'll have to 'create with form', then use the info as necessary. you may find it easier to just use the old article for reference, rather than trying to copypaste. also, please sign your posts with four tildes. © hallenge

how to edit on iPad

Just for the guy who was wondering, to scroll in-page just use 2 fingers instead of 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbob (talk • contribs)

Drawing the line (& future concerns)

I'm not gonna start bitching about how much ED was about for teh lulz (because frankly the phrase has turned into a meaningless mantra just like "ANON IS LEGION") and OI is not and how everyone should run the Internet the way I want it to and blah blah. ED was full of protestfag wankery and general shitposting, and no doubt it needed to be put out of misery sooner or later. However, it's also a fact that this site currently sucks. It's not a definite step forward it wishes to be, it puts one foot forward and the other foot back, and I'll explain why. Bare with me because this is pretty tl;dr.

• All facts, no gut.

It gets the bare facts, but that's it. In a typical page (can't exactly find a "standard" on the account this is a pretty new site), you get the basic summary, origins, and "current" relevance, and a few bits of trivia. OK, but what if I already know who this is? Why should I care? This is where OI sucks at: making things interesting. If the majority of the pages are going to be like this, it's gonna turn into a dictionary. Not a wiki, but just a set of words with definitions. No one looks up random words in a dictionary for fun, do they? They do for Wikipedia, because it's got more than facts, and you find interesting trivia.

For an example of a good ED article, I'll use TV Tropes. The reason that article was good was because it's got the facts and the interesting tidbits. It thoroughly explained what the site is, summed up its demographic, and exposed the drama within the system. And that brings me to my next point.

• Lack of muckraking

Muckraking is probably the best word to describe ED's supposed goal; exposing the drama. ED was one of the few websites on the Internet with the balls to talk about why this or that sucks unfiltered, and I guess that was one of ED's appealing points. In one sense, drama was good because it caused people to turn heads, and expose the folly of its unfortunate target. It's especially funny when ED keeps records of deleted stuff. OI does nothing, or very little, to meet such ends. Like I said, it's all facts. The best we have here is the Tim Buckley article, but it's too brief. Maybe it's just me jumping into conclusions and the general quality of articles will improve in the future, but there needs to be some more. Why do we need to go lengths to not make someone feel butthurt when they most likely deserve it in some way?

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT DOX. Dox only calls for plain harassment and fake lulz. Having dozens of teenagers making meaningless death threats does not qualify as genuine comedy. Lulz zealots are what killed ED.

• Too much NPOV

Remember ED's old policy? "ED is not Wikipedia and no edit should be made for the sake of 'NPOV'." Or something like that. Obviously it went out of hand in ED, but we can't all be objective robots. If we did, the Internet would be a much more boring place. Like I said, hopefully OI doesn't turn into some lame Internet dictionary, and one of the ways I think would prevent that is if the site itself expresses some sort of personality. ED did a fine(?) job being overall cynical. Not saying we need to make every article follow along the lines of "Why This Sucks" like ED did, but more like give approvals and disapprovals where it's due. Just keep that in a close line, and not overinflate one category from the others, and not feed Anon's Homo Superior complex.

• Safeness(?)

Why the need to make the site so SFW? OK, it gets more ads to help generate revenue. But the amount is a little above the "Too Much" line. While we don't need to have a Rule 34 gallery for every anime/video game article, we don't need to post an irrelevant goatse just for shock value, and we certainly don't need the Offended page any more. I dunno, at least be more lenient with the curse words.

Why would ANYONE show this site to their grandmothers? (I hope you) Don't sell out just for a larger demographic.

Also, some random complaints:

• Make the page wider. What is this, Wikia? Wikia died once they forced everyone to use their "Web 2.0" skin.
• What's with the edit layout? Keeping a standard layout is one thing, but forcing it for every page can be too much.

That's all I have to say about it, really. This site has potential, but that line needs to be drawn fast if it wants to get there. --Peter Dactyl 03:26, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• Hi Peter. Thanks for the good insights! I would also like a larger content box! That's on the todo list but it involves designers which can sometimes mean it takes time to get finished. Only new users with few edits are forced to use the form. Everyone -should- use the form to keep things consistent, but approved writers can edit the wiki article source directly. SFW is important because so many of us literally edit from work. We aren't really interested in having our bosses see goatse on our screens when its supposed to be spreadsheets. Additionally, we'd like to keep OHi accessible and not blocked on filters at schools, offices and public wifi. That can be very frustrating for users. POV is fine, being an "insider's guide" is something we're good at! We'd like to keep it generally factual though, with editorial tidbits. Articles full of random lies for no reason don't make sense. Juicy gossip and drama is fine, but we are going to avoid attacking individual no-name internet users. There are plenty of other ways to write up mean attack articles about randoms. If the person isn't a significant presence on the internet, then it doesn't belong here. We're definitely in the process of finding our voice and want you to participate in that, but the sysops and myself won't allow content that sacrifices our personal safety or ability to freely and easily edit.
  

Sherrod 07:55, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

• I can't see muckraking coming up. But about the edit layout, that's really kind of essential for working with Semantic Wiki. If you don't want it for every page, and you edit enough, you can get writer privs and edit it like a regular wiki page. As for page width, that's for old monitors, smartphones/iPads and fitting everything on, I think. --GondorCanada 03:57, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Learn fluid layouts.Arflech 08:58, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• Also, nice to see you're actually thinking this through instead of complaining. You bring up some good points. --GondorCanada 04:02, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• As mentioned above it's nice to see someone think instead of just ranting aboout this new website. Can't agree more on the part of the muckraking. This doesn't have to be a new ED, exposing drama only and be a zealot of lulz, this would kill this site, indeed, again. But it does need a decrease in NPOV to eliminate this lack of muckraking. --BPM 04:40, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• This makes sense, and is a welcome change from people going "AAA I HAT U!!!" I agree a bit about the drama thing, i.e. especially if the general consensus of something is negative. The David Tanny page lightly touches on this. (The whole Internet thing about Tanny involves other comedy musicians disliking him because he whined about Dr. Demento, and most people on places like TVT, SA, or YouTube consider his stuff bad.) The Sonichu page also mentions that the comic is bad as well. (Because... it is.) Maybe some pages can be more in tone of the CWCki (which describe Chris' antics without devolving into name-calling.) Pink Poodle 04:57, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• I'll try to touch on some of the points you've brought up here. The articles you've found so far are essentially seed articles, and contain the bare minimum that we ported over (and were pretty much rewritten) and are most definitely not set in stone. You (and anyone else, since this is a wiki) can edit and add to them within reason. This isn't to say that every article needs to be filled with the garbage that turned ED to pure awful, but each page will (and should) evolve and grow. If you find an article that's not interesting enough, dig up some dirt, add your own experience with the subject, make it better. The lack of muckraking is related to this a bit, as most pages on ED had become ridiculously tl;dr (Chris-chan anyone?) and nobody could be expected to slog through a novel about some nobody from DeviantArt that got into a sissyfight with some other nobody. Again, if you find a subject who's propositioned little kids, or gotten caught with their pants down, etc. don't be afraid to add that to the article, but as you've pointed out yourself, don't make it all "HURR DURR LOL LULZ I TORLL U". It's more of the same with the NPOV. Things are starting out and the site hasn't yet found its voice. Here's hoping that voice isn't more of that "ANON IS LEEJUN" crap.

The issue of being SFW is a bit trickier. Not only do some of us have relatively respectable jobs from which we edit, we don't want the site to end up like ED and be "that racist website." While the subject matter may not be the most mature in the world, we'd still like to be able to have our work available as an example to others, rather than being ashamed of our association with it. When we started ED, it was to document some dumb fights on LiveJournal and make fun of this and that. It was certainly never intended to devolve into the racist memesheep garbage that it became and we know our laissez-faire moderation was partly to blame for that. Regardless, let's not spew goatse and not-at-all-clever "ironic" racism all over the new site, regardless of the subject matter.

I think the rest has been covered by others. If not, become agitated and shout at me.

.

 ^»»W^hat 10:29, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

A rather important question

What I don't understand is why you guys deleted ED utterly without providing any warning to the community? I mean what if someone donated on the last day that ED was up? Is that really fair to them? Also what is with no archive being released? From what I have seen there are 2 other sites with oldish archives trying to rebuild ED but apparently someone threatened a lawsuit if they tried to make them into a new ED. Why do this? Why don't some people want a Oh Internet AND a ED? ED was somewhat unique on the internet. What is the purpose of this new wiki when there are so many others like it (and much further along)? Finally, why has there been no real explanation as to what the heck happened? There is nothing except a redirect. More then a few questions I know but I and many other would really, really appreciate some answers. --Bv900 10:27, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• Imagine this as the biggest hardest improvement drive we could have. As for the warning, you've seen how ridiculously people have reacted already, imagine if we told them ahead of time that "ED sucks and we're killing it." Yeah, that would be just as bad. There was no winning. As for archives, we will be adding archives of popular and important ED pages as "ED Snapshots." This will not include everything and certainly won't be a compendium of stupid DeviantArt slapfights.

.

 ^»»W^hat 10:39, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• From what I understand those 'snapshots' are going to be edited over. Is this true? Also you did not address another of my questions: Why can't we have ED and Oh Internet? Why release snapshots when you can just have two separate sites? Also what about the issue of this site being a clone of other sites? --Bv900 12:49, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
  • I am not aware of any plans to edit or censor these snapshots. Who told you that? As for "being a clone of other sites" you couldn't be more wrong. We allow anyone to edit pages, not just a select few who've been hired on as "editors." We also cover a much wider array of topics, including various internet subcultures, personalities, websites, etc. We're basically continuing most of what ED did without all the unfunny racist garbage and other assorted crap that plagued the site.

.

 ^»»W^hat 14:38, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• Hi, different aggrieved ED user, here...I am willing to keep an open mind and engage with the new site. But I'm disturbed to learn of this lawsuit business. If other people want to shoulder the burden of keeping the old content alive, why not let them? And what grounds would even exist for a lawsuit? Your old copyright disclaimer was flimsy at best. Good luck finding a judge to enforce it against any of these ED clones. And honestly, why the hostility? If you're taking the position that the bawwwwing by the old user base is unwarranted, then why not demonstrate some comparative maturity by shrugging and saying, okay, let them have their site? Tallif 14:30, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
  • What is this about lawsuits now? Perceived legal drama aside, I think the people trying to create ED clones will soon find out just how much of a headache it is to manage such a site, from admin to vandalism prevention to dealing with attacks from various angles and they'll quickly fade away like so many of the doomed 4chan spinoffs. Adding the ED Snapshots is what we're doing to provide people with the old content. We'll just be trimming some of the fat beforehand. Do you really want 70 gigs of DeviantArt slapfights?

.

 ^»»W^hat 14:42, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• • • The guy above had posted: From what I have seen there are 2 other sites with oldish archives trying to rebuild ED but apparently someone threatened a lawsuit if they tried to make them into a new ED. I'd also visited one of these clone sites and seen something posted there about a DMCA takedown notice. If these rumors aren't true, then nevermind, and good for you. Of course the "DeviantArt slapfights" and the like are worthless, but I do think that you might be going a bit overboard keeping things entirely SFW. "Trimming the fat" seems like a good idea; censoring content purely for the sake of being inoffensive at the expense of being funny would sadden me. I would also seem unnecessary, since advertisers aren't afraid subsidize South Park, and I can visit the South Park website from work. I can only imagine the burdens entailed in running the old ED, and am truly respectful and grateful towards those who did it for so long. Tallif 14:56, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
• In address to the one who said that this site is without a doubt not a clone: Everything you mentioned I could find on Uncyclopedia. They are SFW, they don't do blatant racism and allow any user to edit almost all pages. In other words they do everything that you guys want to do, with the addition of stuff in RL (It was stated this site would focus on Internet only events) and not being so hardcore against racism and offensiveness. --Bv900 15:29, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
• I will DMCA any images of myself that I want. DMCAs are formal, boring technicalities. They aren't lawsuits, not even close. That's silly hysterics from internet tough guys acting like little girls. I literally received hundreds of DMCAs a month for the past 7 years. I honored every single one in order to keep my legal safe harbor.
  • Except uncyc is just stupid unfunny nonsense. It serves absolutely no purpose except to serve no purpose.

.

 ^»»W^hat 15:33, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• It seems that that is what you guys are trying to make Oh Internet into however. It may not be mortally 'stupid' but it is most definitely unfunny at the moment. Also I ask once again to anyone; why could we not have ED and Oh Internet? Also how is the snapshot system going to work? Is anyone going to be able to see these full articles? Are you going to release them in a mass? --Bv900 21:49, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Ohi is nothing like Uncyc except for the fact both are wikis. If you think our content of writing is similar, then you aren't reading articles on one of these sites.

Hopefully the snapshots will include the absolutely hilarious nigerian 419 page scams as well as all the pictures. Also the tone of you ohinternet people is soooooo serious good god lighten up, you are touting ohinternet as if its little baby jesus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcomx (talk • contribs)

• I've seen this question asked a number of times but never, I think I'm right in saying, answered: Why couldn't we have both ED and OI? Was it a cost thing? I think this switch-over has been handled badly. I want to like OI but I've been reading through its pages for about twenty minutes and haven't laughed once. The mods/sysops/whatever seem to be more concerned about making a website to put in their professional portfolios or show their friends than they do about creating a funny website.

Bfish 09:17, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Why does everyone think we're trying to be funny? We may try to be funny occasionally, but this site is far more information based at the moment.Truthillusion 16:09, 19 April 2011 (EDT)
• When are the snapshots going to be available is my main question atm. It would be nice if the admins are decision makers actually gave us some info. --Bv900 17:43, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

Preview

I'm having trouble getting a preview when I'm editing a form designed page.

10:28, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• It's not really working for anybody atm. You're just going to have assume the "Preview is for p***ies" attitude for now. LulzTroll 14:48, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
• Tip, if you're trying to preview it from the create from form section, your SOL. However, click "Show Changes." This'll show you a thing that just shows the changes in source code, then click the show preview, the preview should load correctly. The preview doesn't work on the form pages, but will work for source code pages. It's weird. Truthillusion 04:26, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

bots n' stuff

I'm still settling in here (I was Troll 2 on ED, some of y'all might remember me). Is there an equivalent to MysteryBot here? Are there plans for there to be an equivalent? Also, what exactly is the copyright situation? Are we going to be as anal about "fair use" as Wikipedia is, or are we going to be a bit more liberal with that? What I mean is: are we going to require a load of bureaucratic drudgery just to declare a screenshot "fair use," or are we going to just require an affirmation from the uploader? Ptime 14:54, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• We have some MediaWiki extensions we're configuring to combat vandalism etc. but I think WhiteMystery will be reintroducing MysteryBot some time in the future if these don't do what we're loking for. As for fair use and whatnot, we're not TOW, we're not going to make you jump through flaming hoops of fire to post a picture in an article.

.

 ^»»W^hat 14:58, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

Ok. That clears that up. Another thing: I'm still thinking in pre-Semantic MediaWiki. Not that there will ever be occasion to use it (the format seems to discourage it), but how would collapsing objects work in SMW? Is this just a stupid question? Ptime 23:22, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

IRC is busted

Tweaking the shell script I use for connecting to OHI's IRC didn't help get me reconnected to the IRC server. If there was a ban, I would have seen an error message stating that I was. But no. There is no connection to the server, period. What's up? --SadMonkey 18:17, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• i was having the same problem until i followed the link on the irc page. [1] should get you there. Bmben 18:58, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• • No Dice. Still hangs. --SadMonkey 20:54, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• • • well, now they've booted anyone without a registered nick. Bmben 22:03, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

• • • And we're back. :-) --SadMonkey 22:42, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

A note on deviantART articles

• I will be moving over many of the cream of the crap of dA in the future. Snapensnogger, the niggies girl, etc. Pink Poodle 19:15, 18 April 2011 (EDT)

table of contents

there seems to be no way to add __TOC__ and make it functional. is this an aspect of semantic wiki? -hipcrime 04:41, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

TOCs are set to display:none in the core skin CSS. Citrus 08:12, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

make redirects plz people

when you make an article, it is also a good idea to create redirects for common terms related to your article. for instance, Harmony (Robot Unicorn Attack) was created on april 17. on april 19, since no redirect was present, Robot Unicorn Attack was created. when you make a new article, plz remember to add wikilinks in other, related articles; and also make redirects for related terms. for instance, after these two are merged, redirects should be created for:

• Always
• Erasure
• Harmony (with a note at the top "not to be confused with e-Harmony

and so on.

i cant find anything in the primer about how to make redirects, so this is how you make one:

1. enter the search term in the search box
2. click the redlink that comes up
3. enter this in the blank edit field:

• #redirect [[your article]]
  • PLEASE NOTE: CAPITALIZATION MATTERS, see double redirect

im seeing a lot of good work and effort from you guys. good going, and keep it up. -hipcrime 06:33, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• I've been adding redirects to articles before I create them. I noticed you killed my VTEC redirect. Sorry I didn't get that done faster. Just watch out for me - if I'm making a dead redirect, I'm most likely doing it intentionally because I've got the article that's redirected to in the pipeline. Ptime 11:05, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• noted. ty ptime. -hipcrime 17:29, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

I actually don't like this website. Please restore the republic.

Ok, well I think it was pretty sad that the admins deleted ED. I tried to create a page here but then it got deleted by Killhamster because I didn't use some form. Forcing forms on new pages is another reason why this site is fail. It's pretty obvious that the admin/owners want to take the content that people make and profit/live off of it, which perhaps isn't too bad, but they didn't really need to kill ED in the way they did. You cannot swear on this website, you cannot make fun of people on this website, it seems almost like a wikipedia rip off because you even need sources in some cases. The amount of anti-lulz is annoying. ED started to fall apart because of the admins themselves who blocked any good articles and tried to demoralize contributors by deleting hard-worked at, great articles. Then they tried to blame anonymous/4chan for a decline in ED. Well I have to say that it worked, I did feel pretty demoralized when they deleted many articles which I contributed to. Then we find out that the TOS was designed as though the admins could take my work and present it as their own.

The only reason ED succeeded in the first place was people like BluAardvark and now all their effort is trying to be reformed by what I believe are monetary fascists into some safe for work website.Protagonist 18:23, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

The forms are there to separate the wheat from the chaff. ED was becoming a ludicrous exhibition of puerile gibberish - which is why the change was necessary. If you want to be able to edit without the constraint of the forms, you need to prove that you can be witty and succinct within the parameters provided - or you could just piss off to the myriad of ED clones that are springing up ad nauseam and whine about nigras and jews there.

18:38, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• I stopped reading when he accused the admins of trying to live off this work. That was such an asinine claim and shows just how ignorant most people are about ED and Ohi.Truthillusion 18:43, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

ED was less about nigras and jews and far more about hacking events, trolling events, and satirical attacks in all directions. Will I learn about HBGary here? Will I learn about the latest exploits of Goatse security here? Probably, but it won't be as informative because the admin's are going to succumb to pathetic DMCA requests which can include blocking expressions on the content of acquired documents. This is not going to be a histories of the seedy underbelly of the internet, and more a safe for work description of events and things which don't agitate powerful organization. These articles may be succinct but they certainly aren't witty. That this isn't about money? Really. Why is the lollershop still running then? Shouldn't it redirect to ohinternet as well? Lets itemize the costs of a server: The server(s) themselves ($500 to $1,500 each), the electricity ($600 per year, per server), the physical storage (probably nothing), the high-speed connection (up to $500 per month for 1gbps, $6,000 per year). At most the annual cost of running a server of an ED caliber would be $8,100.Protagonist 19:14, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• Try again, pal. The server costs for hosting alone were between $3k and $5k a month. Multiply that by 12 and you get between $36,000 and $60,000 dollars a year. ED was never hosted on geocities. Stop making up geocities prices. Also, I'd like to know what you were talking about the first time around when you said "good articles that admins deleted." Admins never deleted a truly good, useful article.

• On top of that I'm tired of the people who say they were "contributors" and obviously only ever added "over 9000," "Last Thursday," or strikethrough to an article. Ptime 19:53, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

You enjoy attacking me stating that my math was off however what you really meant was that I had missed variables. Nice. I can't believe that there was a $3k per month hosting service cost. Perhaps you'd like to show me. You also dislike people who say they contributed. Well how about people who had their password hashes, password salts, and IP addresses leaked because of this fiasco? Yeah, I was also one of them. It's pretty bad that you deleted this response. Perhaps you should tell your users that they should change their passwords instead of hiding it... why do you have no compassion for your ex-users? I would also like it if you stopped with the weak ad hominem attacks.Protagonist 20:32, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

The amount of arrogance and USI displayed by several Oh Internet users in this bulletin is astonishing. Stop acting like assholes, it really makes you guys look bad.--Bv900 21:25, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• So quit coming to ohI and bitching. Atomic Joe 21:30, 19 April 2011 (EDT)
• So much hypocrisy in his statement.Truthillusion 00:00, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

Thanks

I was going to bitch about how the forms weren't displaying sub-headings, and then I saw that someone had already fixed the issue. Just throwing some love in to stem the tide of aimless vitriol.

18:40, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

• I had wondered what was up with that. I thought it was a problem on my end. Thanks to whoever fixed it. Ptime 19:54, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

God damn it.

This is the kind of website ED would have made a front page topic about, just to blast it to shit, and would have had an entire page section dedicated to pet peeves the site staff had so you could get under their skin. This is no better than KYM, trying to gain ad revenue from the internet at large. Whoever's idea this was, I hope you're proud of yourself, because I'm thoroughly disgusted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irrelevant (talk • contribs)

.

 ^»»W^hat 17:49, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

herp derp i think i kno evryting bout ed and ohi is turribl hurr durrTruthillusion 18:41, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

Intense amounts of rectal pain detected. Atomic Joe 19:28, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

• Can we just enforce a rule that anyone who comes here to complain about the death of ED get a 1-3 day ban? It's getting old. LulzTroll 19:39, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

• Most of them end up permabanned because they can't communicate without spewing hate, invective, and distended anus all over the place.

.

 ^»»W^hat 08:57, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Good night sweet prince. The internet will never be the same. Where shall we store all the lulz? King Reaper 22:03, 21 April 2011 (EDT)King_Reaper

Needed Pages

While I am sure the answer to this question is among the fifty pages of faqs and guidelines I've been accumulating, I just wanted to ask for expediencies sake, can the needed articles page be added to by anyone? I have a few I'd like to throw on there for my watchlist (to build a sort of to-do for myself. I am forgetful.) Bmben 10:03, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

Feel free to add your requests so long as they're notable and placed in the right category. --Teakettler 12:16, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

Oh really?

Who's great idea was it to remove seven years of hard labour, lulz and over 9000 articles and instead create a Wikipedia with ads? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chemowski (talk • contribs)

• • OMFG, I've been using Adblock Plus and I just loaded this site up in Internet Explorer and saw that indeed it is chock-a-block with ads; IMO the new site was made (instead of cleaning up the old one) precisely because æ was permab& from Google Adsense. -Arflech 23:07, 20 April 2011 (EDT)
• 

.

 ^»»W^hat 11:05, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

This is golden.Truthillusion 18:39, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

• This is what happens when you FIND a stranger in the ALPS. Also, when you pipe everything to redirect to (a racial slur referring to African-Americans) or (what British people call cigarettes) instead of writing something funny. #planbetter and such. DavidFailkips 16:39, 20 April 2011 (EDT)

Awwww

So last night I tried going to ED and found out it was gone. I had a giant hissy fit and left trollish comments on the Oh Internet Facebook page...and then checked out what Oh Internet is and thought "hey, this is kind of neat". So I joined today and made an article on John Kricfalusi, and just tried going back to the Facebook page to delete my comments. Apparantly I've been banned from the Facebook page. threestooges.jpg

• I don't moderate the Facebook Page, but I thank you for your contributions. :) --Teakettler 11:44, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
• I *do* moderate the Facebook Page. Glad you changed your mind about OHi - we're not sell-outs, I swear. Send me a message about who you are and I can unblock you, if you like. the finn 18:03, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

So ED is dead?

I have to admit I'm disappointed in what ED has become but instead of bitching like others I plan on attempting to improve this site, and I suggest those that bitch do the same. ED is dead, but instead of mourning over it's corpse, stand up and get back to work making the world a lulzier place. D Asimov 10:12, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

• Thank you for being reasonable and willing to move on and help. Go forth and edit!

.

 ^»»W^hat 10:23, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Where to discuss policies

Should specific policies of Oh Internet be discussed here, on each individual policy page's talk page, or elsewhere? --Tepples 13:33, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

Hope you like

The large gaping goatses I put in two articles.

How very clever of you.

14:55, 22 April 2011 (EDT) HAHAHA WOW I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING MORE CREATIVE. ty, sir. the finn 16:54, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

You CENSORED Make Me Sick

I ain't whining, cause I'm saying legit things, not asking moany bullshit questions. People like you lot make me sick. ED may have been the ugliest thing on the net, but to sell it out, for a cheap censored buck and not even back it up for the actual writers is far more sickening. What a FARCE. If you had just said, "hey, we're not actually comfortable with all this shock content any more, we're going on a seperate, SFW money making venture, here is the content from ED, do what you like" then it would have been better. But this is just a JOKE. Good thing we've got [CENSORED] back, lol, and there's nothing you idiots can DMCA at now. Islington Smiles

• All I hear is "BAWWW I'M BUTTHURT" F JUNK DUMP 17:54, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Yeah, that's all I'm getting too.

17:56, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Seconded. Motion passed. the finn 18:06, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

• lol you think we got paid for this? Retard.

.

 ^»»W^hat 18:06, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm getting paid for this. Bet that makes you all feel really silly, doesn't it? --Novelty Factor 18:12, 22 April 2011 (EDT)

I am giving this a title since you didn't

If I was willing to buy it, would you sell ED's namesake to me? I live for lulz and have no qualms about being irl b& for documenting it. King Reaper 03:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

• And miss out on all the precious rectal pains? - Truthillusion 16:09, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

I wasn't aware you lived for butthurt EDiots... --King Reaper 21:40, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Lived for it? Nah. It's more like a pass time. -Truthillusion 00:08, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

So when are the snapshots going to be available?

It would be nice if we were informed a bit. Also will the articles have all their old pictures? Will they be edited? --Bv900 14:39, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

• Snapshot availability will be about 7-10 days. Sorry for the delay. It's mainly due to dealing with things like people being huge babies. They will be edited to be generally SFW, images will be available that are SFW or edited to be SFW.
  

Sherrod 23:32, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

• So you are going to be editing the articles (the text) to make it SFW? ...Why even bother then? The only reason people would want to see the snapshots is to see the old, good ED articles the way they were, not cleaned up and made all pretty. --Bv900 15:32, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

• If you can't make something humorous without filling the page with expletives and slurs, you're not a very funny person. Maybe while you're waiting for the snapshots you could make some edits instead of whining?  MV Razzmatazz  talk  15:47, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

• • Already tried to get this guy to help, don't bother, he's just a whiner and nothing else. I bet if ED was brought back completely untouched he'd still whine. -Truthillusion 16:23, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
  • I think we should put a big banner of Bill Cosby at the top with a quote from him about "if you cuss so much to be funny you aren't working hard enough at your job." Well, that might not be the best idea, but it's certainly the sentiment I'm feeling now. Ptime 19:27, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
• Its just that I do not understand why you would edit the snapshots and then release them when that is more or less what you are doing with the normal articles here. Also, truthillusion, the only reason I am here is to look at the snapshots. I feel no urge to write articles here. --Bv900 22:50, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Except you joined and whined prior to ED Snapshots being announced. You're here just to whine. -Truthillusion 00:08, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Yet another "whining complainer"

I'm pretty sure I'm talking to a wall right now, but for the sake of wasting my time, I'm going to make a post in here anyway. The only thing I'm going to ask you (for real) is to at least stop complaining about complainers. You can't make this big of a change (even if it turns out to be good) and expect everyone to comply.

Anyway, you all know the drill, and some other guy posted a few days ago a much more complex post than I did about this issues. Everything is unbiased, politically correct, SFW to the point that kindergarden would find it boring and so on. Now I'm going to point why these issues are relevant:

1. The Internet is not SFW, politically correct, nor it is unbiased. That means that you're NEVER going to fully research it. How can you allow memes like "double n*****", or "happy n****" or any variation on the word "f*g"? This is a washed-down version of the Internet for the people who are never going to visit or take more interest in some of the websites and services that you are talking about in here. Making a wiki about the Internet without the shock and dark humor is as relevant as making a wiki about South Park with no insults from the show. Oh Internet is the equivalent of an alien spaceship researching our planet and culture in an scientific way. Which is okay, but it leads me to my second point.

2. It was already done. Wikipedia has articles on certain websites and memes, even KYM does. Encyclopedia Dramatica was a humour website, not a dictionary. It was about making people laugh, not about informing them of various internet traditions. Which brings me to my next point.

3. Humour CAN be done in a NSFW environment. In fact, that's the humour most people are going to enjoy anyway. South Park is NSFW, Happy Tree Friends is, Maddox was a ranting nerd making extremely NSFW and politically incorrect statements, and he had millions of hits on his website. Cyanide&Happiness is one of the most popular webcomics, so is theoatmeal (again, they're not SFW). Hell, some of the most popular stand up comediands like Carlin, Chapelle, Chris Rock and so on are using profanities. Chris Rock even made a video about n****** (as opposed to normal black people). Sure, there are many funny guys that never swear, but you can't deny that profanities are still a vital part in comedy. Besides, humour, unless you address the jokes to yourself, are always going to hurt someone. Which leads to my next point.

4. Hypocrisy. The worst thing about SFW/NSFW stuff is that it's a bunch of crap. Are you really telling me that by censoring some words a few lines earlier, didn't you really understood the message? When television bleeps the word "f**k", are we really not able to discern the word behind it? Come on... Speaking of politically correctness, how do you think the guy from the Cockmongler meme feels when you post images making fun of him? How about moot, Jessi Slaughter, Chris-chan and so many others? Personally, I'd feel "offended", I would file a DMCA and you would have to remove images of me.

Anyway, I have some nice images from your own website, and I have to ask you honestly if you'd really watch them at your work. Yes, technically they're safe for work because none of the persons are nude or none of the images are pornographic in content. But are you going to tell that to your boss when he sees the following?

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/7/7b/Cracky-Chan_12.jpg

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/6/6c/Disguise.jpg

http://ohinternet.com/images/e/ed/Beccabae_Umbrella_Angle.jpg

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/6/6e/Jessieslaughter2.png

What if he sees the article about Mr. Hands? Is he going to be perfectly okay with you reading about a guy getting raped by a horse?

Isn't this image sexist: http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/6/6b/Threadgirl.png ? Then why do you keep it around?

It's the hypocrisy that annoys me the most. To see a television program where people are fighting each one with other, swearing one to another yet the swears are bleeped, that just boils my blood. But hey, it's old media so I can't blame them. I can blame you, however. You, out of everyone on the Internet, would be the first to reckon that such censorship is useless. ED was the place where you got told to suck it up and accept the harsh reality, and now you're masking that reality even worse than other websites do.

Anyway, since I don't like just complaining, I will come with some suggestions:

1. Make a SFW/NSFW filer. For example, instead of completely disregarding a meme just because it is racist, why not make the meme and put a warning that it involves racism? Why not censor the word "n*****" instead of completely removing it? Yes, it's still hypocrisy and bad, but it would at least mean you're going to fully document the Internet drama and culture.

2. Why not change some things around? For example, one thing I really enjoyed about ED is that there wasn't a "template" on a article. You can still do that, you can still make every article be an individual read. You can still make fun at someone, without resorting to porn and gore. Even the template could be changed. The old one was just cool, or you can do it anything else different from the KYM-clone look.

3. Test your waters with mildly NSFW content. You don't need to go back to the offended page, just allow words like "f**k", "dumb" and allow people to insult. RayWilliamJohnson is one of the most popular YouTube users, and he tells us that we're adopted and that he's doing our mom. You're going to be much more popular if your humor is suited for teenagers/young adults than grandmas.

4. And this is the most important: release the fully uncensored archive, and let some other guys continue the old ED. People are already working on that, please don't harm them. At best, you can simply ask them to change the name of the website just so it doesn't have any connection with Oh Internet. Give them the archive, and everyone can mind their own business. Do not be another leech against freedom of speech, don't be hypocrites.

Okay, so this was it. Pretty long rant, but I still hope you're going to read and seriously consider my points. Also, sorry for any typos or grammar errors, English is not my first language. Kthy0056 03:39, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• tl;dr --JohnnyMak 03:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• It's nice of you to tell people who were involved with the running of ED what the purpose of ED was-Ket 03:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• I'd imagine running that website for so many years, they were at least agreeing with many of the things posted in there. For example, ED made a big deal that people being overly dramatic is funny and internet is not a serious business, which contradicts the way this website is formed. 90% of the articles in there contradicted this website, pretty much. Kthy0056 04:37, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• If they agreed with the site's direction why was it taken down and replaced with a new site? I'm not trying to be a prick but the 8000 or so bytes of information you've contributed to the bulletin board rehashing complaints made by previous people could have been used to make a couple of articles instead-Ket 04:50, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• I can't claim to know why they did it, but I do remember that the racist webpages were removed first because the advertisers weren't ok with them. So basically, the shock content was bad for providing revenue, thus the website was going down. And I can't really make an article in here with my hands tied (what can I really say anyway? An impersonal article narrating the Zangief Kid video? It's still better to talk about the way this website is going, for its own sake. Or even better, if my arguments were discussed before, make a page where you can at least defend yourself regarding this. Like I said, you can't really complain about people complaining, no matter how good or bad the intent of the admins was. Not everyone is prone to change so easily. Kthy0056 05:04, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• Since when are your hands tied? You can still write informative and snarky articles about things on the internet, just don't fill them with profanity and racism-Ket 05:12, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• Man, people always say they don't take the internet seriously and then start talking about what serious business the internet is when it applies to them. --GondorCanada 06:42, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• Hey, it's better thought-out than most of the complaints, though there are still some major flaws, namely that the people running ED now run this website and it's completely up to them what to do with ED now that it's gone. "Leeching against freedom of speech" is an absolutely ridiculous accusation and leaves me extremely disinclined to take you seriously. You can say whatever you want. If ED was your only vector for free speech, there's a far bigger issue at hand than a website. Please stop making such a big deal out of ED. Edit this website. Make it good. Otherwise, everyone here is sick and tired of hearing the same complaints rehashed over and over and over and over. Eta Carinae 03:59, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• How is it ridiculous? As far as I'm aware, shutting our mouths from saying insults is censorship and a strike against freedom of speech. It would be the same for South Park to be censored in regards to Muslims because ... hey, crime against religion! And like I said, it is hypocrisy. It's not okay to see the word "f*ck" but it is okay to see someone nicknamed "cockmongler"? I'd like you to address that part especially. I understand that shock for the sake of shocking is bad, but prudishness for its own sake is just as bad (sorry for this formatting mess, I'm not too good with the talking part of a wiki). Kthy0056 04:37, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• Moved this to the bottom

04:16, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Interesting discussion about wanting the old ED archives. You mean material that was made up of pages that were suppose to be of an ED user. In most instances they were not. In many instances personal information was posted without consent. Freedom of speech is one thing that is good, when you are informing with proven facts. But hiding behind satire to attack those you know nothing about has no merit, when the person is not seeking that Internet attention. Or creating a page because you have a personal vendetta against them. I want to congratulate Sherrod for launching this new site. It is giving me an opportunity to share my knowledge of the Internet with others. Back in the old days of Usenet we too had our fun. But we always gave someone an out, and even the lead. So now I bow my head and see if there is something else I might like to edit and contribute to this nice site.

• In response to: "It's not okay to see the word "f*ck" but it is okay to see someone nicknamed "cockmongler"?" Cockmongler is part of the information we're here to cover. Random profanity for no reason is not part of that. They are two very different things. And it's just a website. Is every SFW site on the internet a horrible strike against your precious freedom? --JohnnyMak 06:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

1) If you believe that things can't be documented in a SFW way, then you're an idiot who doesn't know shit about writing. The history of the world is very NSFW, yet somehow when you read history textbooks and encyclopedias, there's a lot of SFW. Just because the world is a rude place doesn't mean you can't write about it in a reasonable, unprofane way.

2) Wikipedia and KYM do not have as large portion of content, nor want to, involving the internet that Ohi currently does.

3) Humor can be done through NSFW means, but sadly we did't have Matt and Trey writing for ED, but rather we had 13 year old /b/tards who think it's amazingly funny to spam profanity. The NSFW element is what made ED become a shithole, and if you deny that it was a shithole in it's later years, then you're an ignorant dumbass who was part of the problem.

4) So, you somehow think that sticking to the mission statement of collecting all information internet related without major use of profane language in our writings is somehow contradicted by the fact that some articles are about negative topics? You're stretching, horribly. "IT IS HYPOCRITICAL THAT I CAN'T SAY THE N WORD BUT YOU HAVE AN IMAGE THAT SAYS TITS OR GTFO DESPITE IT HAS RELEVANCE TO AN ACTUAL MEME/VOCABULARY."

So, here are some suggestions for you:

I) Grow up

II) Learn how to properly research and write proper articles

III) Deal with it

If none of the above suits you, then there's always this:

IV) Go to an ED clone

Whatever suits you. Enjoy you're life.

inb4asshole/hypocrite/"holier than thou"/etc. - Truthillusion 18:30, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

This Whole Fake ED Thing

Is pretty damn hilarious, in my opinion. There's obviously an astronomical amount of butthurt over ED getting shut down, since the Sherrod article has the most views (and edits) of any page on the site, and every article even remotely related to OhInternet has at least one paragraph dedicated to exposing how Sherrod has "betrayed" ED (lol). The actual OhInternet article is so badly written that I'm actually tempted to write a better one for them.

But that would be letting the terrorists win.  MV Razzmatazz  talk  11:04, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

• OhInternet does not negotiate with dramacrats! </sarcasm> Ptime 11:30, 26 April 2011 (EDT)