Talk:Encyclopædia Dramatica (.com)

2005-10-17T17:25:53Z

62.253.96.42:

Good lord, man. Could you at least try for an NPOV? I'd say the majority of this article needs a rewrite (which I'd work on were I not at work...)--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 16:31, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Admin promotion and the "GreenReaper" section ==

I removed the part about admin promotion, as it was not specific. If you're thinking [[Verix]], he's from SA, not ED - or are you lumping "all people from websites like ED and SA" into the same category, like people lump "all furries" into one? And if you '''are''' aiming at Verix, I think you'll have a hard time denying that [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&hideminor=0&namespace=&target=Verix&limit=500&offset=0 his contributions] have value.

I'm not an "Encyclopedia Dramatican". I've not been involved with that site until people from it started coming on and I decided to correct the article they made about us. I've not been active on there outside that. Besides, if I was going to contribute to a site like that, I'd go for the [http://uncyclopedia.org/ Uncyclopedia], which is hosted by Wikia. Fortunately, I have better things to do than contribute to either. :-)

Also, do you have a source for that quote? I know I've said something like that (and the sentiment is correct), but I thought I phrased it differently, and I think I was talking about SA, not ED. If you're going to make quotes that make anyone look bad to some people, it's your job to ensure that they're a) verifiable, and b) relevant. '''*grin*'''

Frankly, I think that most of my actions are not particularly relevant to the ED article - they're more general "trying to make sure that people hear about WikiFur, even if some of them are people that are critical of furries". They may, of course, be worth talking about, and I encourage debate about whether or not my decisions are correct, but I don't think this is the best place.

(By the way - when people put a section marked "Criticisms", I instantly think "someone with a point to make". It's a dead ringer for trouble on Wikipedia, and it's just the same here. Having that section alone is probably NPOV - we should not '''state''' criticisms, but ''attribute'' them to others.) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:52, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:Hmm. So, it's OK to [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Encyclopedia_Dramatica&oldid=11006#GreenReaper put] a "These choices he has made are controversial, but nothing can be done about them.", but it's not OK to specify who the people who seem to think it controversial are, and it ''is'' OK to have a whole section on me, even considering the above? :-)

:I don't actually disagree with [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Encyclopedia_Dramatica&diff=next&oldid=12379 the removal] of that section of text, but then I don't think that the topic should have been there in the first place. It had nothing to do with ED. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 07:13, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Rollback ==
Oh, so that's what the Rollback link does. Whoops. Anyway to provide explanation - the laundry list of organizations which were listed here basically recapitulated Category:Anti-furries and were unrelated to the subject of the article.--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 22:07, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

i'm not the founder of encyclopedia dramatica. i don't even do anything on that site. you should check your facts. -jameth :)

:Do you have any URLs that you can point us to so that we can update the entry accordingly? Thanks, --[[User:Dmuth|Dmuth]] 22:53, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
::URLs for what? if you look at the domain registry and the admin information for ED , you could easily find out who runs the thing. and my name isn't on there. :) jameth
:::Oh wow. Mediacrat's arch nemesis comes up again in my life. Awesome. How ya been, Jameth? I remember you from the LJ Drama stuff. Guys, he didn't found ED, that was Sherrod DeGrippo. Jameth was the REASON why Sherrod created ED, but he's the creator of it, not Jameth[[User:Redcard|Redcard]] 23:22, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
::::hay epal :D -[[User:67.168.99.128|67.168.99.128]] 02:46, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC) (jameth)

== FurAffinity Shutdown ==

Being a security nut in the computer industry, I've heard a remarkably different version of the FurAffinity Shutdown story. From what I've heard, it was brought down due to its head of security not wishing to apply proper security, and someone who knew this suggested it was fair game. This type of manuever is done often by companies wishing to remove a site that is popular (it costs too much to maintain securely) or by employees who wish to point out vulernabilities without going through the proper chain of command (it's unsafe, so fix it.. we will when someone breaks it.. imagine that, someone broke it). Are we absolutely certain that ED intiated the attack, or should that be removed from the article?[[User:Redcard|Redcard]] 23:34, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
*Since I'm a regular countributor at ED, I doubt you people will belive me, but the attack against FurAffinity was not made by a person directly related to ED. Someone attacked FurAffinity and after the attack, that person started the FurAffinity article to brag about its crappy security. (Besides the edits on the FurAffinity article, he only made something like 10 other edits) It's quite common for people who start drama on the Internet to register on ED and write an article about it. That doesn't mean they were related to ED, however. Also, from what I remember, Redcard is right about one thing, FurAffinity had crappy security, since the passwords were all stored in plain text. Under normal circumstances, it's impossible to hack a site and retrieve all passwords like that, because passwords are either encrypted or hashed. Obviously, I'm all for misinformation, but since someone asked about the facts, I might as well tell you what I know. :p (I was online editing ED in the night the article was started) --[[User:213.146.205.145|213.146.205.145]] 16:02, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)
**No, they weren't stored in plain text. They were stored using (most likely) a one-way cryptographic hash. The attack consisted of obtaining the entire list of these hashes (though some sort of flaw), then throwing dictionary words through the hash function until the attacker found some matches. Still crappy security, but not in the same category as 'plain text passwords' crappy. --[[User:62.253.96.42|62.253.96.42]] 17:25, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)

WikiFur - User contributions [en]

Talk:Encyclopædia Dramatica (.com)