Difference between revisions of "Talk:Encyclopædia Dramatica"

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 75: Line 75:
::::Are you saying the above is not true Conrad? It not "defamation" to quote the official U.S. Navy website about your activities. [[User:John66|John66]] ([[User talk:John66|talk]]) 18:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
::::Are you saying the above is not true Conrad? It not "defamation" to quote the official U.S. Navy website about your activities. [[User:John66|John66]] ([[User talk:John66|talk]]) 18:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
The Conrad account above is a clever impersonation. ED trolls are impersonating me. Please ignore that account. I couldn't care less about this website. [[User:Conrad Rock|Conrad Rock]] ([[User talk:Conrad Rock|talk]]) 18:37, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:38, 3 November 2019

Icon internet.svg

This internet related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Are You Guys Blocking ED Links Now?

I noticed on your furry page, you claimed that people who chanted the classic "anti-furry" meme: "KILL IT WITH FIRE!" were "bigots." I was trying to disprove that notion by citing all the different kinds of furries like Jay Naylor and JustinRPG who make up most of the Furry Fandom... And you were blocking my links! Did their affiliation with GamerGate really sour your mood so much, that you are going to play into lolcow victim complexes?RakortheTerrible1 (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
You can't "disprove" it. They're bigots. They hate all furries (even children) simply for living their lives the way they want to. That is the definition of bigotry. They are bigots. In fact, why are you defending horrible people like them? They have no right to be fought for and should be stigmatized for their actions. If you're saying that because of these particular furries that all furries deserve hatred and stigma over actions the majority of the community won't even do, then you need serious help. Honestly. ED hates furries so much that it's even gotten to the point where they write articles against people who didn't even do anything wrong. Why? Because they're furries, the most stereotyped subculture. How is that fair? 2001:67C:2660:425:1B:0:0:8F (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Well that was certainly coherent. (talk) 13:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
ED links have always been removed from RW for pornography if I'm not mistaken.Skeptical (talk) 15:24, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
I thought it was mainly the doxing, we still link to it where appropriate though (like this page). Christopher (talk) 18:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
They're bashing and attacking people for living their life differently from theirs. That's the definition of a bigot. So yes, they are in fact bigots, without the quotation marks. The term anti-furry also doesn't belong in quotation marks either because it's somewhat factual being as the meme is most commonly used to threaten people who are specifically members of the furry community. That includes minors as well. Only a very cowardly person would go around attacking young children when they're grown adults.DonutBandit (talk) 06:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

How about adding this to the links?

It's the ED page about RW. It's "automatically identified as harmful". http://bit.ly/2OAkbSl (talk) 20:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

You're mentioned on that page Mike: "Michael Coombs (aka Mikemikev), a neo-Nazi vandal who has for years created sockpuppets on RationalWiki to spam Holocaust denial and racism." Someone should probably expand your section.Punisher (talk) 07:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Their page on us

They hate us, a lot.Doublethink (talk) 20:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

I mean... yeah? Expecting a positive page on ED about anyone other than mass murderers is asking a lot. Asking it for another wiki is crazy talk. Asking for a wiki that isn't loaded with nazis, I don't even know how you'd get it in your head that it's possible. Not all of that is them being nazis. Most of it is irony poisoned idiots. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Also our article on them is out of date given they don't seem to have ads anymore. Nothing about all the times they have been taken down. It doesn't even mention Zaiger, or that time he was sued for 100k for an article there, and nothing about their strong affiliation with KiwiFarms. — Dysk (contribs) 20:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

What exactly makes ED an Alt-Right site?

I know that Kiwi Farms is listed under the alt-right category for reasons like the owner believing in the white genocide conspiracy and wanting genocide on migrants. Just out of curiosity, what makes ED as such. Then again, ED makes fun of everything, so take this with a large grain of salt.SDSD (talk) 01:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

From my observations, nothing specific. That said I'd assume that it's not much of a stretch to assume there's some crossover between their audiences. --Logos (talk) 02:19, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
-sorry for the late response- I think you should ask User:TheUmbilicalCordGuy about that since he was the one who (re-)added the page to the Authoritarian Wingnuttery category. SDSD (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I did not add the page to the Authoritarian wingnuttery category, the previous editor did. I added the categories for Ableism, Broflakes, Clogosphere, Internet hate sites, Internet kooks and Webshites. TheUmbilicalCordGuy (talk) 00:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Got busy so it took longer than I though. Yeah the person who added it to that category was an anonymous editor. Wonder what exactly makes ED a Brokflakes and Clogosphere article. Also Anti-LGBT Bigots is redundant with Homophobia and is supposed to refer to a person. SDSD (talk) 00:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Bull regarding ED's "freedom to insult"

I honestly think these guys are twisted and heartless. Encyclopedia Dramatica has been considered a bullying site and a hate group by a few outlets for several good reasons, some which I hate the most. They write articles against people who have clearly done nothing wrong, including one article made against a 7 year old child and another against a 14 year old, they bullied their victims to suicide and will either update their articles to mock the death of said victim or delete it if the police make mention of investigating this site, encourage the discrimination and murder of furries, what really made me mad is how demeaning and insulting they were towards the famous YouTube Pooper, Pie Pivot-O. He committed suicide and they made fun of the situation and insulted his death. They're truly messed up people. And they claim it's just satire? I'm sorry (no I'm not) but sending people after a single person over the internet to attack them, threaten them, draw pictures of them being killed, dox them, tell them to commit suicide, etc. is not "satire", it's harassment and also murder if that person actually does commit suicide. I'm honestly glad they're dying, but I think it should be taken a step further and they should be taken offline and banned from ever re-launching again. Just because their site belongs to a Ukrainian server doesn't actually mean it's protected by Ukrainian law. The founder of this site lives in the US and therefore must abide by US laws at all times. Sorry, Ukraine can't help you, buddy. Of course, it's not like they care anyway.

DonutBandit (talk) 06:17, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Conrad Rockenhaus

Conrad Rockenhaus is running ED [1], public Twitter convo from September 2019. There are public records that indicate he has been managing the website for a while, for example, right here. In 2018 he tried to use GoDaddy as a web host. John66 (talk) 01:29, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Nice catch. Rockenhaus is the owner of ED, I have seen conclusive documentation. They respond by saying he is only the hoster and not the owner because they will be facing upcoming lawsuits. (talk) 02:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC)


Entire article is a serious mess and needs to be re-written. May get round to this some time. John66 (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2019 (UTC)


This article actually contains defamatory information concerning me. You may say the truth is the absolute defense to defamation and I have a web link that says "X", however, you do not have my DD-214 or a copy of the Convening Authority's decision on the Court Martial. In the military justice system, the Convening Authority reviews the case and has the ultimate decision on accepting the decision and executing the sentence or, modifying it, or setting it aside.

He set mine aside because the crux of the case, that I was doing it for increased Veterans benefits, was proved to be wrong as the condition I was already being treated for, which was Epilepsy induced by a Traumatic Brain Injury, is already a 100% Service Connected Disability, quoting 38 CFR Book C, 4.124a:

General Rating Formula for Major and Minor Epileptic Seizures: Averaging at least 1 major seizure per month over the last year 100%

Anyway, so I have an honorable discharge, so I wasn't discharged from the Navy in "disgrace" as this article says. Additionally, what's more amazing is the arrest you note in here in Denton, TX was actually thrown out because I was able to prove I was passed out due to having a seizure (you secrete certain enzymes in your blood after you have a seizure.)

Finally, my involvement with ED was limited to recovering their server and setting up hosting. I understand that the author of this text may have a problem with them, but that doesn't give him the right to defame me. I'm not sure what he's referring to about trying to use GoDaddy as ED's host in 2018, especially since GoDaddy doesn't offer Dedicated Servers or Colocation, they are a Domain Name Registrar, so this kind of proves that this author's intent is kind of malicious. I am more than willing to send proof to a neutral third party, as I would rather this text be removed with your cooperation instead of having to resort to further means. Thank You. Conradrock (talk) 17:27, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

This ED website that you are hosting has ruined thousands of peoples lives, yet you come here complaining because your name has been tied to it? Your website glories serial killers, the holocaust and mass murderers and contains a lot of offensive (and probably illegal) imagery. You currently have an article at ED called "offended" it contains hundreds of violent images of animal abuse, rape, necrophilia, scat, self-mutilation, torture, and other depravity. So, are you actually happy you are hosting this website? Do you support animal abuse? There are photographs on your website of innocent cats, dogs and wolves being murdered or mutilated.
GoDaddy is a hosting provider, not just a domain registrar, they host many websites. You tried to use GoDaddy when one of your old hosting providers pulled the plug on your website. This is all public information. Many hosting providers have kicked you off because of your depraved "offended" article which you seem to think is great. The official ED Twitter released a statement last week Conrad Rockenhaus "hosts us through his hosting company". And another recent statement that they are moving to your hosting company GreyPonyIT. Your involvement with ED is neck deep. You are practically running the entire thing, lol. All links on our article are public information. None of it is being removed. John66 (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
It seems you have also been done for forgery John66 (talk) 18:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
@Conradrock Would you be willing to link a copy of your DD-214 so that we can review it? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 18:14, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
According to this public information at the official U.S. Navy website [2]

At a Special Court-Martial in Quantico, Virginia, IT1 Conrad Rockenhaus, USN was tried for attempted arson, making false official statements, swearing false oaths, hoax designed to cause panic, communicating a threat, and wearing unauthorized awards and qualifications. On 25 June 2013, the military judge dismissed the charges and specifications for attempted arson, swearing false oaths, hoax designed to cause panic, communicating a threat, and some of the false official statements, but returned a verdict of guilty for the remaining false official statements and wearing unauthorized awards and qualifications. The military judge sentenced him to a letter of reprimand, a Bad Conduct Discharge, and 157 days confinement.

Are you saying the above is not true Conrad? It not "defamation" to quote the official U.S. Navy website about your activities. John66 (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The Conrad account above is a clever impersonation. ED trolls are impersonating me. Please ignore that account. I couldn't care less about this website. Conrad Rock (talk) 18:37, 3 November 2019 (UTC)