Forum:What the hell happened to IRC?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > What the hell happened to IRC?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5762 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Excuse me for any offensive language in this, but this has to be said. I am getting tired of all the nonsense, perversion, and trolling in #uncyclopedia! It seems like there is absolutely NO discussion of Uncyclopedia in that channel whatsoever! Didn't we create it to discuss Uncyclopedia? if so, then why the fuck is all this unrelated bullshit going on? I'd suggest that everyone who uses IRC reads freenode's channel guidelines and their policies. More importantly, we need to put a stop to all the crap and go back to discussing Uncyclopedia, and perhaps make another channel (like #uncyc-offtopic) for unrelated nonsense. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 23:53, Jan. 6, 2008

Sounds like work... --Mr. Alberto "Letters" ℜwg ☃ FU ☃ 23:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

From what I gather, #uncyclopedia is a place for people from Uncyclopedia to come there and have general discussion, either on Uncyclopedia related materials or not. I go there just to hang out, not just discuss Uncyclopedia. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 23:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a comedy encyclopedia. IRC is supposed to be a place for our writers to kick back, relax, and enjoy some harmless banter. As far as I know, it's always been like that. Uncyclopedians aren't supposed to somberly discuss "relevent" things, that's what people do in those other, awful communities. Nonsense and Perversion rule! --THE 23:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

If we turned the channel into an Uncyc discussion-only room, people would slowly stop coming until it died. There are some regulars on there that don't even visit Uncyclopedia anymore. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe not strictly Uncyclopedia-related, but we need to cut down on the stupidity and, if possible, make it for uncyclopedians only. There are way too many people who have no good reason to come to #uncyclopedia and a lot of them act like morons.--Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 00:02, Jan. 7, 2008

One thing I think we should start with is kickbanning Omni. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 00:09, Jan. 7, 2008

I really don't think we should be taking ourselves too seriously. It's a chatroom, the arrival of the occasional idiot only makes things more amusing. And how do you propose to "cut down on the stupidity"? Ban sex jokes? --THE 00:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Duh. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 00:13, Jan. 7, 2008

/me giggles. THE said sex. Also, if we scared everybody away from chat then we wouldn't be able to /me in the forums anymore! It's an outrage! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Our inanity, irreverence, and stupidity give us our character. Don't turn #uncyc into #wikipedia. There's a reason I don't visit #wikipedia, and it goes hand-in-hand with the reason that I don't go to Wikipedia that much. I don't do things with my free time that are no fun, and Wikipedia really is no fun. Hence, I chill at uncyc. I reiterate: Don't turn #uncyc into #wikipedia. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:18, Jan 7

I'm not saying that we make it #wikipedia. I'm saying we need to get rid of the people who aren't Uncyclopedians or are but never contribute. #uncyclopedia is supposed to be for Uncyclopedians, not everyone. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 00:22, Jan. 7, 2008

So what, will the admins automatically kick anyone whose name they don't recognize? Sounds like a military dictatorship!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! IRC, along with being a delightful chamber of zany, madcap antics, can also serve as a place for potential new writers to get acquainted with our community. So imagine this: some comedic genius stumbles across the site, goes on IRC, and gets immediately kicked off because he's not already an established community member. How festive! We lose a potential writer!! Yippie!!! I say leave IRC as it is, open, friendly, and lacking in taste, decency, or moral values of any kind. --THE 00:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hear hear! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

What is the definition of a 'moderator'?...I think this answers the question. Let the mod decide how the channel 'flows'...

Uncyclopedia is rarely on-topic; why would you expect its IRC channel to be any different? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I always got the impression that #uncyclopedia was mainly a way for users to keep in touch without the time delay involved with using the forums. Sure, it's useful for a lot of strictly site-related stuff, like reporting blanking sprees, but in the times (which is most of the time) when there isn't a major issue, I don't see what's wrong with a bit of chat. I think it builds a sense of community as much as the forums do - a lot of people wouldn't be as hooked on the site as they are without a place where something's always going on. You get to know people, have a laugh, wear other people's underwear on your head, set fire to your own hair... You know, all the usual stuff. But most of all, you make friends. Sure, it sometimes gets a bit too irritating, but I've never seen anything truly important slip under the radar because of people acting like dicks. It's a part of the site, and I think it would be a huge shame to get rid of it. End long, pointless comment. -- 19:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

As crotchety a bastard as I am, I honestly don't see any real issues with the chat. Could it be more uncyc related? Sure. Is it a problem that is isn't? Nah, I don't really think so. And also, if we limit its access to just active Uncyclopedians, we risk not allowing banned users plead their cases, and for funny numbskulls to come in and entertain us. Like Finnius said, onpoint moderation should be able to fix this preceived problem. --THINKER 19:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Quoth Misza: "epic meh". -- Jack Phoenix, professional killer admin (Whine?) • (Wikia ♥ ads) 13:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The channel is what we collectively make it, so go fuck yourself with something unpleasant -- Prof. Olipro KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 13:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, bollocks to that. IRC is great fun, many good ideas still come from it, and we have enough chanops to prevent excessive trolling. I have no idea why this non-issue is even being raised. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 13:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

If I want to type "COCKS COCKS COCKS" over and over in the chan, well you should probably let me or I'll pout. --

kingkitty ~Fuck you~

14:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly with Olipro and Codeine. You need to STFU and lighten up Starnes, before your head explodes. I was around on #uncyclopedia long before I created an account on here, and the sense of community spirit, laid back randomness and overall whore mongering of the channel is the reason I joined. Don't be so suprised the channel is populated with non-Uncyclopedians - it has a reputation on freenode (more so among Wikia channels) as the place to forward all random users who annoy the living crap out of everyone else. I think #uncyclopedia is doing just fine as it is. I still remember when I was new to IRC, and the only other channels I frequented had 2-3 users on at some times. Then I joined this quaint little channel called #uncyclopedia, and met the Fresh Prince of Bel Air. Now you want to take that away from me? FU! — Sir Manticore 14:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Well...I would kind of like to discuss Uncyc matters on chat. I will not try to use #uncyclopdia for that, though, because it is teh shite. Last time I visited it appeared to be populated by 12-year-olds with zucchini for brains, and I decided that would indeed be the last time I logged on. I dunno if there are others like me, but there it is. Now I need to go polish my crotchetiness, excuse me please. ----OEJ 16:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

From my experience, if you go into the chat and begin talking about legitimate Uncyc-related issues, the users who care will jump in and discuss. The zucchini-brained among us will not, and will probably continue to make penis jokes, but I mean.. well.. who is too high and mighty to laugh at a terrible penis joke? --THINKER 16:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Terrible penis jokes are another category entirely, and ought to be respected. What we're dealing with on unIRC is conversations interrupted every third minute by homoerotic (not even quality homoeroticism) /me statements, as seen below.

• [Schlub]: lol, that's like the third time you've whored that article.
• [Doofus]: 'Kay, i'll stop... for now
• Asshat cuts off Doofus's wang and shoves it up Schlub's left nostril.

--The Acceptable  Cainad  (Fnord) 18:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, yes...I have had a similiar problem. I wanted UN information, but it was getting lost in the general chatter of non-users. Unfortunately, what i had to do is wait a few hours for the channel to clear out of the un-Unpeople. It seems to me that during 'primetime', most of the UN-users just go 'away' intil the banality dies down. Like I said, let the MOD clean the room, thats why he has OPS in the first place....

Actually, to OEJ and Finnius, we've made a channel like that, and we often put it to great use. More than once those of us in the channel were the first ones to respond to a problem on Uncyclopedia. Few people other than me visit it anymore, as we don't advertise it in the main channel (to keep the general asshats that everybody's talking about out) but if you go to #uncyc-lite you may find somebody that you can talk to. However, now that I've listed the channel in the forums, I have to issue a warning: the channel is used either as an escape when #uncyclopedia gets to crazy or for Uncyc-related discussion. Those of us with ops in the channel will not hesitate to kickban you if you try to ruin that. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

That being said, that is not the cabal HQ, because there is no cabal. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 23:13, Jan 8

The only reason I went to IRC was to chat with the familiars, but they are usually not there, and instead theres people talking about complex sexual positions that could be less descriptive.--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 07:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually

We just had a lot of constructive discussion for the past two hours. Including the construction of a rather good article. It justs gets crazy when there's nothing good going on.     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   07:36, 10 January 2008  

Also. WHen it is getting crazy, and people want to go do stuff, they go into a side channel run by the Cabal. Which doesn't exist.     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   07:36, 10 January 2008  

This was by far the best experience I've ever had in the uncyc chat. Amazingness. --THINKER 07:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Once, some of us made a fort out of sofa cushions on IRC. That was the best. Mom made brownies 'n' everything. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and then later we made a snow fort! And even attempted to have a snowball fight! Oh, yes, but this is a perfect example of constructive uncyc IRC time. The truth is, yes there are less than desirable characters in IRC, but they're not taking your keyboard off your desk and smashing it on the wall, to keep you from editing. Work around it, it's what happens in real life anyways, and in real life you can't kick ban people. -RAHB 23:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that #uncyclopedia is in chaos most of the time, and i stopped going there after i got sick of the pre-adolescent ramblings, the sick sexual jokes and people in general acting stupid instead of funny, and turning assholeness into an artform. Serious questions about Uncyclopedia are met with comments like "because penis" or insults. I've been kickbanned twice for no reason at all, by a random op, and often comments are insulting or disgusting. I've seen people come on the channel, ask something three times and leave with a curse, surely never to come back or edit uncyclopedia again. The level of conversations is way below zero and the general comment from people that have joined (and left quickly) is that it is a disgusting channel, where you're not expected to ask a serious question, because it'll lead to nothing but frustration.

Surely, the channel can in no way be compared to the site, and i think it a shame.

So i would like to know: What is the uncyclopedia channel for? Is it for discussing uncyclopedia topics? Surely this can be done in a humorous way, instead of people screaming and cursing their heads off? Or is it for frustrated uncyclopedia-writers to blow off (polluted) steam? D.G.Neree 11:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not saying everyone is behaving like that. There are some people there that i like and can have constructive(and humorous) conversations with. D.G.Neree 12:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay then, so what the hell has this all achieved?

Nothing, that's what. It's human nature for people to want a laugh and a casual chat every once in a while. The problem with IRC is the same problem we have with Uncyc; different people have different ideas of humour, some people find sexual innuendo funny, some people like random sarcasm or more intelligent satirical jokes, and with everything else in life you have to accomodate other people's needs. If the conversation in the channel isn't something you approve of, go do something else for a while. That's what I do. If you don't like that someone is having a conversation about the finer points of anal fisting, we're not forcing you to be there, we're just having a good time and a laugh as friends, and people who start forums like this are undermining what this site and everything related to it should be. Shit like this simply starts arguments, leads to uncertanty and nothing gets done about it. Things like me constantly remind me of the fact that this site is going downhill and that we are in fact violating our own golden rule. We're not being funny, we're being dicks about this. (Bonner) (Talk) Jan 10, 16:49

How could the site be going downhill? I'm still writing for it! ;)

...and retaining my capacity as a person who can play both sides of the humor without seriousness / seriousness without humor fence. Surely I'm not the only person who can find a balance. And, if I'm not mistaken, I think thats the underlining plea of this whole, very long thread. --THINKER 16:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm turning this into a drinking game. Every time you see something along the lines of "...the fact that this site is going downhill...", take a shot. Secondly, /me takes a shot. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind sexual inuendo sometimes, but not ALL the time. And are:

If you don't like it, just stay away, and

This conversation is going nowhere, and people that complain are not funny, but stupid

really serious arguments? I'm not talking about the level of Uncyclopedia, but of the channel, and how the hell do topics like this undermine "everything Uncyclopedia stands for?" If you want people to stay away from the channel, fine with me, just go on. Furthermore: Yes, everyone has his/her sense of humour. But is it the purpose of 1 kind taking over everything? I don't think so. But i don't know, i don't know the people behind the names and they could all really be pre-adolescents with a sexual hang up for all i know. Anyway, if the above is the conclusion of this discussion, then i'll just take the advice and make it a habit to not join the channel. Maybe that is the purpose of a channel like that. D.G.Neree 17:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Join #wikipedia or #halopedia; they're all business over there. But, from my experience, #uncyc is rarely, if ever, as bad as you and others are making it out to be. You can pm ops to kick users who offend you, if you really think it's a problem, or you can have pm chats with users you can talk "seriously" with. I honestly can't see any problems with the channel as it is. Of course, I am extremely immature. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 17:58, Jan 10

It's #uncyclopedia. What'd you expect? All the serious discussion takes place here, with forums and talkpages. #uncyclopedia is a hangout. If you don't like it, stick to communication here. Teh end. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 19:38 Jan 10, 2008

For. -- 20:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

For     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   22:36, 10 January 2008  

How about this?

Rather than make it for Uncyclopedia only, I think IRC should follow the two golden rules

1. Be Funny and Not Just Stupid
2. Don't be a dick

To me, it seems like all the crap going on in #uncyclopedia that I hate is being caused by these rules not being followed or enforced. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 23:22, Jan. 10, 2008

Against. We need to get the stupid out somewhere — better IRC than here. And pretty much any real dicks get banned. So, that's that. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:24 Jan 10, 2008

Rebuttal: I'm not saying stupidity is always bad. It's only bad if the stupidity outweighs the funny. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 23:26, Jan. 10, 2008

Re-rebuttal: Erm... So, people are supposed to be funny in conversation? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:29 Jan 10, 2008

Against. Meh. Most of the time it's funny on there. When it's stupid, it's stupid in a strangely funny way. What's next, rules for "funny only" conversation in BHOP? We can't have kwality control in IRC. What, would someone get kickbanned because their jokes aren't funny enough? --THE 23:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision: Being funny is not required, but excessive stupidity and dickery are bad. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 23:36, Jan. 10, 2008

<Starnestommy> PENIS!
<Starnestommy> PENIS IN YOUR BUTTHOLE!

I rest my case. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:39 Jan 10, 2008

See, I have the opposite problem that Dr S and THE seem to have. Despite being hilarious, I am an asshole. Would you ban me? - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 23:41, Jan 10

Penis', dicks and assholes? All sounds a bit Gay to me. I have generally found that asking an actual question relating to Uncyc in IRC usually (ok sometimes) gets a sensible answer, and that's all that matters. I'm really not sure what we can do to change it. MrN 23:54, Jan 10

Partial For We've always operated on the DBAD rule. Society operates on it. Not everybody follows it, but it's a generally excepted mode of operations for the intelligent members of society. As for being funny, the point of IRC is not to be funny. The point of IRC isn't to make a literary masterpiece out of a conversation. It's a chat. If I wanted to write something funny, I'd put it in an article, on the website, to make actual progress. If I want to take part in inane chatter, I go to IRC. Keeps the site cleaner, gives us all something to do and a way to associate with each other. I don't see what the problem is with just talking about the weather, or what we did at school/work today, or something, and in the time I've spent in IRC, I've actually seen both of those topics, and many like them, take off into humorous discussions. Also, as per Led, somewhere on here, the IRC "situation" is rarely as bad as it's made out to be. People talk. What do you expect them to do, just shut the hell up if they've got something to say that isn't within 1Hz of your own brainwaves? Sounds a little demanding to me. (damn you and your edit conflicting Led) -RAHB 23:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Five. Dickery = bad. Stupidity = fine by me. The stupid's gotta go somewhere, best keep it off-site. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:47 Jan 10, 2008

Partial Agree - I'm usually fine with stupidity, unless it's just annoying stupidity. As long as other chatters are fine with someone being an idiot, it's fine, but if the population in general doesn't like the idiocy, it should be curbstomped. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 23:48, Jan. 10, 2008

Ah, I see your point, though I'm pretty sure nobody actually cares. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:13 Jan 11, 2008

Well, in the case that EVERYBODY in chat know the guy is a blatant dick and nuisance, one of two things happens:

1) If we're bored and nothing else is going on, we humor him for a little while, before banning him.

2) We ban him.

Other then that, everything is just good fun. -RAHB 00:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Plus, there's always /ignore Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

All of yous'...STFU and get back to work. These non-productive minutes will be duly noted on your timecards.