Forum:You seriously featured that?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > You seriously featured that?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4923 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Hey, look guys. I'm not one to judge very negatively much for features and stuff. Obviously, you guys thought the Twister thing was funny enough to feature it, fair enough. But, I have to vent and I want to see if there is something we can learn from this.

First, I'm a huge fan of Ape's work, and what he wrote was funny. Second, this is something coming from the guy who nominated User:TOAST for feature.

The reasons I'm personally not very happy with this feature are as follows:

1) We've had people before who criticized UnNews for being a "cheap rip-off of the onion". I even parodied it with this article. Now we've really given those naysayers ammunition. Now, they're going to say that we can't even come up with our own material. Yes, the article was an original twist, funnier wording, whatever, but that's not how the average internet junkie will perceive it. They'll see it as well, a "cheap rip-off of the onion."

2) If you're going to write an article that is very similar to something hugely published (like the onion), that's fine I guess because as a wiki we have a little more license to do those things. When you feature it, however, you're saying to the world that "this is the best of our best", and apparently the best of our best is a joke that's already been done. I'm not hating on anybody, I just have Uncyclopedia's image in mind, because frankly this article makes us look bad, like we're hacks.

I know the same argument could probably be made for a wizard did it, or any of our other one-liner frontpages, but this isn't our joke. I can't help but feel like we committed highway robbery here.

That's all. I hope this doesn't piss off too many people, but I had to say it. It really felt like a bad move, unless there's some in-joke here that I'm missing out on. User:Mrthejazz/sig 01:08, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly had no idea Onion had done that. Regardless, I'm pretty sure this joke has been done in every way shape and form before, so seeing it yet again on Uncyclopedia shouldn't exactly make people accuse us of being copy cats, as this concept is everywhere anyway. Personally, I thought it was funny, and, even if someone has got the gag before, it is the best of Uncyclopedia, and it deserves it's highlight. ~ Readmesoon 01:21, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Well the onion article is the first result for "twister sexual" (and the only similar thing in the results), and they are pretty similar.

... "Tina [Richter] spun a 'right foot blue' and was on top of me in almost a '69' position," Astbury said. "It was pretty obvious to me that we were in a sexual position, but she seemed totally oblivious...

...as they attempted to move their arms and legs around the game mat - including "a definite 69" - the game failed to provoke an outpouring of previously unspoken sexual desire and lust...

In conclusion, plagiarism is bad. Especially from the onion. I mean, come on. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 01:32, 12 Jun 2010

The thing that makes me think it's one of those high-concept "the article's the joke, see we're SATIRIZING plagiarism" things is that in the history, when an I.P. tried to edit on a reference to the onion article, it kept getting edited out by people, including chief justice, and then it was protected from I.Ps. What's even weirder is that it got featured in like a day, so there was little time to say no. I'm just totally baffled here. If it's a joke, it can't be one that will turn out good for us. So...to echo Spang, plagiarism is bad. User:Mrthejazz/sig 02:49, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

• Edit* Okay, so I've backed off a little, thought about it, and it's not plagiarism. It's very similar, and people will complain, but technically yes, not plagiarism. It's a fine line and hard to draw. I personally would never write that, without at least putting in a reference to the article. If it was totally coincidental, disregard this, but damn if it doesn't push a few ethical boundaries otherwise. Yeah, the onion has done a lot.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitleo00tgxbo As the link says, it's been done. Everything is derivative. I think the line is when you copy both ideas and words, and you did word things differently, so I'm sorry I was a jackass is what I'm really trying to say here. User:Mrthejazz/sig 04:08, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

1. As Mrthejazz mentioned, comedy (like music and art and fashion and culture in general) is derivative. You could come up with a joke that's in no way built on the foundation of everything that came before, but no one would get it.
2. Not having read the page, off the top of my head there are two Twister jokes. Both involve sex (those being "sex" and "not sex").
3. We aren't supposed to be a cheap ripoff of The Onion. If only. Provided it's accidental, it's merely an unfortunate coincidence. I mean, c'mon, it's The Onion! If you're going to be accidentally derivative, that's the way to go.
4. We're supposed to be a cheap ripoff of Wikipedia. That bar is lower and considerably easier to achieve, as Wikipedia isn't funny at all, which is good as we're lazy and being derivative of not-funny requires no thought at all. All you have to do is read their pages on four presidents and then make a page about the time they started a band.
5. Speaking of derivative, I was the real Radioactive Man (The Simpsons was derivative of me), but I had to give it up. You know, on account of the cancer. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 07:14, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

In short, Simpsons Did It.--<<>> 23:31, June 14, 2010 (UTC)

You know what I miss?

I miss how we once made actually newspapers. I remember when Malaysia banned us, how the Video Professor threatened to sue us. Things like that. God you people have destroyed the site. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here

To be fair, Uncyclopedia was never any good. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 07:26, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. Chron didn't intend it to last over a year. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 07:29, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Bad ideas never die. They just get sold to Wikia. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 07:36, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by you people? User:Mrthejazz/sig 12:32, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Right

Ok, since I'm now being outright accused of plagarism, I have two points:

1. Those of you who are saying I ripped of the Onion are basing your opinions on a very shallow reading of both texts. "Oh look they both said Twister is about sex. PLAGARISM!" If one actually takes the time to examine both texts you will notice that the underlying idea is the same, but that we come at it from two very different angles. The Onion's is a tale of a guy who came to a Twister party expecting an orgy of casual sex; mine is a tale of unrequited lust with an underlying element of sexual menace.
2. I only became aware that the Onion article existed about halfway through writing when I thought "Hold on, I wonder if the Onion has done anything like this" when I found that article from back in 2001.

So, in conclusion. Fuck all of you. -- obscure Ape (plagiarise) (Riot Porn) 11:43, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

"...mine is a tale of unrequited lust with an underlying element of sexual menace"?! So you did steal it! You took my life and added Twister! You monster! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:53, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

It's a well deserved "fuck you" and I'll be the first to accept it with stupid, humiliated, outstretched arms. I promise I'm backing off on this and apologize for the accusation. I. Was. An. Ass. User:Mrthejazz/sig 12:35, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

I thought I saw sexual allusions humour from Twister from sources indifferent or designed before the internet (like, from the 20th century). Oh well. --nldr 16:42, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Weak! 98.246.183.207 15:02, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

Man if I had a nickle for every time I went to an casual sex orgy with an underlying element of sexual menace topped with unrequited lust! You kids today; so silly.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  19 Jun 2010 ~ 00:36 (UTC)

WAIT!!!

Are you people making an in-joke about people who accuse people of making an in-joke about those who accuse others of parodying people who plagiarise in-jokes??? If so, FUCK YOU!! -- Style  Guide 19:39, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

FUCK YOU ALL!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 21:16, June 16, 2010 (UTC)

Most definitely. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:16, 16 June 2010

And how! -- Style  Guide 06:35, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

May I interject? --SadisticWolf 15:16, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

Only if you clean it up afterwards. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:57, June 17, 2010 (UTC)