Forum:I guess Uncyclopedia can't be offensive anymore

Forums: Index > Village Dump > I guess Uncyclopedia can't be offensive anymore

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5112 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I came online this morning and found a discussion here about the deletion of an image that a few people find offensive. Browsing the various points being made back and forth, I noticed that one person was citing Wikia's terms of use as justification for removing the image. Those ToU state that 'we may not "Post, upload, transmit, share, or store content which is unlawful, defamatory, infringing, obscene, or invasive of another's right to privacy or publicity."' I can't imagine that most people would consider those ToU to be overly restrictive or unfair on a normal website.

Here's the problem. This is Uncyclopedia, a parody wiki. We have boatloads of content that could potentially break the ToU, specifically the defamatory, infringing and obscene bits. I spoke to sannse about this in IRC and she implied that all of that also violates the ToU and that if she saw it, she'd delete it. Sannse, we love you and know you're just doing your job, but I think this is an issue that ought to be considered by the community at large. If so much of our content violates Wikia's terms of use, then what are the implications that this could have for the entire wiki?

Disclaimer: I don't actually care (personally) about the image that was deleted. I care about Uncyclopedia's freedom of expression. I don't think the image should have been deleted, but that's because of the larger point at hand. --Andorin Kato 22:39, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

All wikis on Wikia are subject to the Terms of Use. I was shown an obscene image, I deleted it as a ToU violation. This has happened several times over the last four years I've been working for Wikia and editing Uncyclopedia, it will happen again. Please don't make this in to a big drama. -- sannse (talk) 22:46, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

This whole thing bothers me. The reasons for deleting it seem to fall into the Wikipedia:WP:IDONTLIKEIT category, but the "official" reason is that it's obscene. What are we calling obscene nowadays? Is something obscene if it's unfit to be printed in a newspaper? That's all of Uncyclopedia. Is it obscene if it offends a religion? Arch-conservative religious types can be offended by anything. Is it obscene if it has a penis? {{penis}}? Penispenispenis? HowTo:Rob A Bank With Your Penis? --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 22:49, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Sannse, for once I'm very much against that action. First, because you actions went directly against what myself, as an admin of the wiki, asked people to do. I've asked to deal with it via VFD, there was a discussion going in which there was no majority still for the deletion. Second, if Wikia decides to start deleting pictures which are against wikia policy, you might as well start deleting our whole image database, which consists of obscene pictures, copyright violations and other bits and bytes. You, as wikia, managed to protect us in the past against legal issues with regards to pictures copyright issues, so why is that you feel you need to interfere as staff, not as a fellow admin, in this issue? ~ 22:55, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

As I've said above, this is not "starting" anything. I've deleted obscene images that have been complained of before, and I expect I will do so again. This was an image that I had a direct complaint about, and that was outside the Wikia ToU. As I said on IRC: I won't apologize for that, sorry! -- sannse (talk) 23:17, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, who delivered the direct complaint you mentioned? I am the one who brought it up to you on IRC, but I most certainly did not complain. I simply mentioned it, giving no particular opinion either way until I said that I personally (note personally) do not think the image should be deleted. Also, I only brought up the deletion in the context of Wikia's terms of use, which I originally asked you about. --Andorin Kato 23:19, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I did. Way before the POTR's talk page started getting into heated discussion mode. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 23:34, 11 Nov

Well congratulations. But I have to say, it seems a little underhanded to goad a staff into deleting something when you knew it was on VFD and was already being addressed (although maybe not with the outcome you would have liked). --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 23:51, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Check the timestamps on those edits before you start pointing your fingers you half-wit. But great, as a result, this is truly the last edit I'll make in a very, very, very long while. Colin was friendly enough to inform me that my edits here aren't appreciated and Opty echoed by RAHB says I'm a condescending bitch. Gee, thanks for the appreciation. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 02:56, 12 Nov

Unhappy.

I for one am incredibly pissed off over this. Not because I loved that picture - I didn't - but because if Sansse's just going to arbitraily delete anything she finds to be "Adult or mature content" or "Content related to racial intolerance or advocacy against any individual, group or organisation," or "defamatory, infringing, obscene, or invasive of another's right to privacy or publicity", then basically half of what I write is subject to deletion. Is Pontius Pilates or UnNews:God Rewrites the Bible "defamatory" to Christians? Does it constitute advocacy against them? Is Fan service obscene? Is UnScripts:X-Men Origins: Wolverine infringing? There's a consensus that they're okay, but apparently consensus ain't worth shit, because Sannse can just make up her own mind and delete them at any moment. Doesn't make me too fucking inclined to continue to contribute. pillow talk 23:18, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Seconded and signed. -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:19, 11 Nov

Then baibai. It's sincerely not amusing, and wasn't contributing a single scrap of humour value to the site. Unless your idea of humour is fart-haha-he-pooped -inclined. I'd have just let my one post to sannse sit there nicely and discreetly on her talk page, it'd have gotten deleted, no-one would have noticed it that much. Except perhaps opty, but too bad. But since there was a heated debate on another talk page already, I VFD:d it to get rid of it. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 23:34, 11 Nov

Hey, I'm glad you can decide for everybody else what's funny and what isn't. And thanks for insinuating that I can only appreciate toilet humor, not too conceited at all, no sir. And poo-poo bai bai-ing a user's opinion who's contibuted far more funny stuff to this wiki than you have or probably ever will is just LOL. -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:39, 11 Nov

I used baibai as a figurative term for; get offline, take a breath or two, have a beer, go walk the dog, wank, whatever makes you feel better, and then come back after a good night's rest and re-evaluate the situation. And true, I haven't gotten a single article I wrote featured, but on the other hand, haven't had much time to be around a lot, either. If you get into comparing contributions, then I'll just let you rant on, I'm off to sleep. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 23:46, 11 Nov

Good advice that. Get off the net, step back, ask yourself is it worth it? Too bad you couldn't be bothered to follow it yourself, we could have avoided this whole drama. -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:48, 11 Nov

Yeah... keep on blaming me. And I will go to sleep. But my hair dye's not gonna rinse itself out, and it still needs to set for a good 10 mins. So I'll get there soon enough. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 23:56, 11 Nov

What, you weren't responsible? You didn't feel the need to go running to sannse? Tell me, who should I blame then? -OptyC Sucks! CUN00:07, 12 Nov

Sannse. pillow talk 00:08, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

No, no! Blame it on society. Or blame it on Hitler. Or Big Brother. Or the Weatherman. Or... the Jews? Whatever you do, don't blame it on real people! —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:13, 12 November 2009

No you git, I really mean literally, blame me. I do write something else than sarcasm, you know? I went to Sannse, and she saw the image there first. I'm not even sure she was conscious about the pic being in VFD. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 00:22, 12 Nov

In an hour, when I get off work, I think I will indeed get offline and have a beer. Whether I'll come back while Uncyclopedia is still under Wikia's thumb, I haven't decided. pillow talk 23:52, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Who cares if it was amusing? Its deletion was arbitrary and unjustified. And who cares how it was deleted? Some people found it amusing. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 23:44, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I for one find that "ripped Jesus" picture hilarious. Especially with the caption. :) • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Wednesday, 23:28, Nov 11 2009

If there's anything we should be afraid of, it's a worldwide penis removal. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:55, 11 November 2009

Might not be a bad thing. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 23:58, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me...

...or has the deletion of that image caused a great deal more harm and ill will and hurt feelings than it being there ever did in the first place? (Kind of ironic, isn't it?) —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 04:37, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Apology to Mordillo and other admins

So, while I do feel that the image violated the Wikia Terms of Use and so needed to go, I should have slowed down and talked to an admin first. I hadn't read all the conversations, and wasn't aware that Mordillo was looking at the problem already. It was rash of me to jump in rather than take it to one of the local admins first. Sorry Mordillo -- sannse (talk) 23:59, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

So, like, can we restore it and pretend it never happened? --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 00:30, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

I very seriously doubt this will happen. It would make no sense to restore it and continue the VFD discussion, as the image will end up deleted anyway. The damage from the arbitrary deletion can't really be undone. --Andorin Kato 00:31, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

The vote would go where the community decides because that's how votes work (although it looked like keep to me), and that's how it should be. It would be nice to see Wikia say that they won't be overbearing on issues of content, instead of just "sorry you don't like what we're doing to you". --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 00:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

My point is that regardless of the vote, sannse (or someone else, for all we know) would probably vape it anyway for ToS violation, since it's actually been brought into public scrutiny now. --Andorin Kato 00:46, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

I guess Uncyclopedia can't be funny anymore

Actually, scratch that. It was never funny to begin with. I think Uncyclopedia is a ToS violation. --EMC ^[TALK] 02:17 Nov 12 2009

All the good humourists write for Conservapedia. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:21, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia Black List of Images that aren't allowed

Instead of creating a White List of allowed images, it would be easier to create a Black List of images that are not allowed. I recall admins deleting offensive images before, as some idiot uploaded Kiddie Porn and due to Federal and International Laws, it has to be removed or Uncyclopedia/Wikia has to face fines or criminal charges. On the web proxies that block Uncyclopedia they use the category "Nudity" as one of the reasons why they block the site. I suppose showing gentiles wouldn't be so bad if someone sanitized the images and pixelated them like they do in the Cop shows to people's faces, or use a low tech solution of the black dot or black bar over the offensive areas. I am assuming that the offending image had a picture of a religious person and a penis in it or something like that, which Wikia finds offensive. We really need to create an "Uncyclopedia Jr." sub-wiki for the non-offensive, non-nude images, etc for the younger generation and then when someone finds the adult version of Uncyclopedia offensive, just say use the Uncyclopedia Jr. version which is less offensive. Can we get an uncyclopediajr.wikia.com domain for that or something? Also the offensive images need to be told in HTBFANJS what Wikia does not allow for images, so that everyone knows what is allowed and what isn't. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 03:09, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

When a younger person thinks Uncyclopedia is offensive, I link them to Encyclopedia Dramatica. When they come back ranting about how their eyeballs exploded, I point out how much nicer Uncyclopedia is by comparison. Works every time. --Andorin Kato 03:21, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

On a more serious note, I hope you realize how many people here, including myself, don't want the wiki to be censored by a third party, even if it is the provider. Uncyclopedia has a history of valuing humor over appropriateness, and most editors understand that different people have different definitions of what constitutes funny and what constitutes appropriate. Considering that few people to my knowledge have left the wiki because of the loose image policies, I doubt that the latter is particularly varied. If we started to police our content and remove anything that was deemed offensive, we would end up with a very small and unhappy wiki because many of our articles either deal with sensitive topics or include some sort of profanity/controversy/boobs. --Andorin Kato 03:27, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

*sigh* Andorin's right. Uncyclopedia is not censored. By any means. This is a sad fact I have to deal with. But I deal with it. And sometimes (sometimes) I even laugh at the stuff on this place. In conclusion, UN:W. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Thursday, 03:31, Nov 12 2009

Also, UN:R. Uncyclopedia has two rules, and they go in order. You can be a dick within reason as long as you're being funny and not just stupid. Chronarion said that in an interview somewhere. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 03:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Didn't Chronarion also sell Uncyc to Wikia behind our backs? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Thursday, 03:49, Nov 12 2009

Luvvy

So essentially anything's okay as long as you can insult other users in the process without even agreeing to consider different points of view?

I posted a link to the deleted image on Sannse's talk page YESTERDAY.

I was also the person who put up the VFD of the file in the first place. TODAY.

AFTER I found out the VFD is not only for article deletion discussion.

So I put it up for discussion.

My best guess is that Sannse logged on, saw she had comments on her talk page as a notice before seeing anything else, and did the natural reaction and deleted the goddamned thing.

Then someone told her what the drama was by mostly shouting at the poor woman who likely was acting in good faith. As was I.

But apparently my contributions aren't worth anything to anyone. I wonder if anyone even notices them. So this is a friendly note of goodbye in the form of more aggressive than I'd usually allow myself to do vandalism. I know this is wrong, but to get you cretins back on track. It's not a freedom of speech or expression thing. This is just something that escalated out of hand due to unforeseeable circumstances.

Thanks to the people in irc being the regular assholes they are, it was by no means a fair debate. There were at best six people telling me at once that I'm an inferior human being and that all the time I've put into this site over two years is by no means anything near that of someone else, and not worth even the paper they wipe their pretty fat arses with.

Insults, abuse and hostility is what I got from a place I thought would be a nice, relaxing leisure activity. You guys really, really caused me to rethink my interest in uncyc.

Sure, you guys think "good riddens to the bitch", but there may be at least one or two who perhaps miss me. Maybe.

Next time you want to insult me, please, come to my town, we can argue over a cup of coffee and I can break your arm if you tap into the abusive vocabulary. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Luvvy (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure how you could be so wrong about how the issue came to Sannse's attention in the first place, considering you were right there in IRC when I first mentioned it to her. Also, keep erasing discussions and see how far that gets you. --Andorin Kato 05:39, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Shut up wannabe-admin. (You don't like it when people rub it in your face, do you?). I may have been there, but the rest of uncyclopedia who among other things accuse me of having run to sannse behind VFD's back need to know this wasn't exactly the order in which things happened. So Andorin, just go back to giving sexual favours to admins and arse-licking whoever you think might notice you to vote you to UotM or VFS or whatever and stop bugging me. You started off as a nice guy, but one can only tolerate you waving your vapestick and anti-vandalism shrines about for so long before it just gets plain annoying. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 12:38, 12 Nov

Note to self

Muhammad giving head, deletion. Muhammad's head, feature. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 10:55, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

:) • FreddAin't Dedd • • • 11:50, November 12, 2009 (UTC)