Forums / Discussion / Meme Research

24,389 total conversations in 3,327 threads

+ New Thread


Locked Locked
A page for Know Your Meme in-jokes?

Last posted Nov 27, 2013 at 02:56PM EST. Added Nov 25, 2013 at 12:47AM EST
39 posts from 17 users

I noticed that we had a page for our own website, and I started thinking that, since the page seems to be pretty empty, it could be a good idea to use it to explain some of the in-jokes that are on this site (after it is updated with more information relating to the website itself, of course). I think it could work like a “Subculture” page, given that it would allow the in-jokes to be detailed and collected instead of being placed on another page, and that it could also prevent the creation of more Entries like I Need Blood and Goat-Tan, which won’t likely actually become Memetic.

Nov 25, 2013 at 12:47AM EST
Quote

…The blood article actually serves a different purpose than other injokes.

That purpose is to ensure that the blood does not clog up the cringeworthy gallery.

But sure, I’m all for an article explaining the injokes. It’ll be more newbie-friendly, after all.

Last edited Nov 25, 2013 at 01:29PM EST
Nov 25, 2013 at 01:29PM EST
Quote

Kung Fu Cthulhu wrote:

I noticed that we had a page for our own website, and I started thinking that, since the page seems to be pretty empty, it could be a good idea to use it to explain some of the in-jokes that are on this site (after it is updated with more information relating to the website itself, of course). I think it could work like a “Subculture” page, given that it would allow the in-jokes to be detailed and collected instead of being placed on another page, and that it could also prevent the creation of more Entries like I Need Blood and Goat-Tan, which won’t likely actually become Memetic.

I never thought of having it all on one page. That could actually work.

Nov 25, 2013 at 02:53PM EST
Quote

No. This site is about documenting ACTUAL memes. Making an entry about our own in-jokes would be self-centered and in direct opposition to the entire purpose of our site.

Last edited Nov 25, 2013 at 03:34PM EST
Nov 25, 2013 at 03:32PM EST
Quote

How about no. These are not a website inside joke. Those are inside jokes for a select few of people. People who clutter the image gallery with crap and edited gifs. Let me tell you, know one fucking cares about the KYM forums or their users. We’re here to report important events, memes and subcultures that matter. Not the idiocy of our varying age group of morons that clutter this site with fuckery.

In closing, don’t bother.

TL;DR: NO.

Nov 25, 2013 at 03:43PM EST
Quote

In their defense though, we commonly use website and fandom subculture entries to cover their in-jokes. So in that way, their suggestion is a good one.

Problem is that you really have to be certain something is a site-wide in-joke. Like Deadpool being used for rejected entries, or Super Robo Jesus. The Goat is still mostly restricted to a select number of users, and I Need Blood is already dying. The Cheeto is a doubt factor.

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 09:21PM EST
Nov 25, 2013 at 03:49PM EST
Quote

If we make the page, it will be the longest entry by 2015.

Nov 25, 2013 at 04:53PM EST
Quote

RandomMan wrote:

In their defense though, we commonly use website and fandom subculture entries to cover their in-jokes. So in that way, their suggestion is a good one.

Problem is that you really have to be certain something is a site-wide in-joke. Like Deadpool being used for rejected entries, or Super Robo Jesus. The Goat is still mostly restricted to a select number of users, and I Need Blood is already dying. The Cheeto is a doubt factor.

Those fandoms are relevant to Internet culture, however. KYM is actually not that important of a site.

Nov 25, 2013 at 04:58PM EST
Quote

I support this, for the sake of newbies to not be perplexed by them.
And really, what’s the problem with listing them on the KYM page? It won’t detract from other pages or anything like that so why oppose it? All NOT listing them accomplishes is confusing people who aren’t “in” on the joke. Plus it’ll be more manageable than manually explaining these jokes ot confused newbies.

Nov 25, 2013 at 07:39PM EST
Quote

CrashGordon94 wrote:

I support this, for the sake of newbies to not be perplexed by them.
And really, what’s the problem with listing them on the KYM page? It won’t detract from other pages or anything like that so why oppose it? All NOT listing them accomplishes is confusing people who aren’t “in” on the joke. Plus it’ll be more manageable than manually explaining these jokes ot confused newbies.

I agree. There’s no reason to reject these things even if they aren’t officially memes. I think something like this would do them more justice than letting them rot in the Deadpool.

Nov 25, 2013 at 07:47PM EST
Quote

RandomMan wrote:

In their defense though, we commonly use website and fandom subculture entries to cover their in-jokes. So in that way, their suggestion is a good one.

Problem is that you really have to be certain something is a site-wide in-joke. Like Deadpool being used for rejected entries, or Super Robo Jesus. The Goat is still mostly restricted to a select number of users, and I Need Blood is already dying. The Cheeto is a doubt factor.

Agreed 100%. You have to be very judicious here.

But let me say this: the Deadpool entry will stay deadpooled for as long as I draw breath.

Nov 25, 2013 at 07:57PM EST
Quote

opspe wrote:

Agreed 100%. You have to be very judicious here.

But let me say this: the Deadpool entry will stay deadpooled for as long as I draw breath.

That works.

Nov 25, 2013 at 07:58PM EST
Quote

@Genesis’s first post: Yes, and let’s just say they WERE Deadpooled, but to have a DP’d article to explain the “failed” meme than to leave people confused about what’s going on.

Last edited Nov 25, 2013 at 08:05PM EST
Nov 25, 2013 at 08:03PM EST
Quote

CrashGordon94 wrote:

@Genesis’s first post: Yes, and let’s just say they WERE Deadpooled, but to have a DP’d article to explain the “failed” meme than to leave people confused about what’s going on.

Yeah. I didn’t understand the whole +1 system at first. I can appreciate this.

Nov 25, 2013 at 08:16PM EST
Quote

I don’t see the harm in this idea.

Adding KYM’s most popular fads in its history inside the KYM article as notable events/fads isn’t necessarily saying all of them are suddenly now memes. Nor is it narcissistically blowing KYM’s own horn. Not anymore than the article itself implies that KYM is a meme.

We have recorded notable fads that have occurred in other site pages which didn’t deserve articles of their own:

I don’t see why we cannot really do this for KYM’s own most prominent sub-memes. At the very least it would serve to clue in new users on some of the things that we ourselves propagate such as the Cheeto, SJR, and the goat.

Those three things in particular have resulted in tons of image macro’s and exploitables. And yet we refuse to have any background on them. It’s all content that originated straight from here and yet they clutter other entries, giving a false impression of how popular they actually are across other sites or they sit in no entry, obfuscating their origin when new users inevitably look them up once they find us posting them

Take the Goat for example. We have loads of content for it that would suggest that it spread further and was more popular on /v/ than it actually was. But in actual fact, a lot of that content came from here.

Why not set that record straight and throw all that stuff in the KYM KYM Gallery?

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 06:07AM EST
Nov 26, 2013 at 06:05AM EST
Quote

I doubt the first thing someone does on a site is research the inside jokes. Even if they have questions about it, they can simply just someone. It’s not that hard.
If you pull the “what if they’re to shy to ask” card, then they shouldn’t be on a forum. Plus, these inside jokes don’t have a deep and rooted past. It’s not like one day Don did something and then the whole forums followed.
While it may be “important” to some of the KYM users. It’s not for the people who browse this site for info and facts.

Though, if you insist on having KYM facts and such, it’ll be better if we just make a thread for the for them, instead of slapping it on an entry. Put in in site related or JFF.

Nov 26, 2013 at 06:18AM EST
Quote

It’s been unspoken for a long time that we do not document our own jokes – just professional courtesy I guess. It’s called a CAMOAWAM, and most people here would say that they aren’t worth documenting. Unlike a lot of website inside jokes, it’s unnecessary to the KYM experience.

Also I’m pretty sure the Cheeto is the only one that’s gotten any spread beyond the site, and it’s minimal at that. (although all the pics in the original thread are gone ;_;)

Nov 26, 2013 at 04:56PM EST
Quote

That’s really a terrible rule, as said before, all that does is perplex newbies for no reason.
As long as we don’t have separate articles for them all, then the only problem is fixed.

Nov 26, 2013 at 05:13PM EST
Quote

I don’t mind this idea, as it seems more positive than negative.

For those clearly hating the idea, what problems will arise if we actually do add to the article primarily for a useful effect? ‘Self centeredness’ doesn’t sound like a valid reason to me, everyone seems to hate KYM for no reason anyway

But look, the whole point here is making the inception-of-an-article we call it actually cleaned up to be helpful, so I wouldn’t mind it. A thread may be better though, but who knows.

Nov 26, 2013 at 05:16PM EST
Quote

Look, I think recording whatever that goes on with the site that involves regular users, shouldn’t be documented, unless it effect KYM in a significant way. How much I like Amanda B, I wouldn’t like to put her in the entry as the final boss of KYM. I like RandomMan, but I don’t want to put in the entry that he’s the rabbit god of KYM. There was an Osaka army on KYM, but just like the goat, it’ll fade into KYM history in a few months.

As for new users, the site is not run by inside jokes. If they have a question regarding anything, they can simply ask an older member. Really now, being a KYM newbie was not hard. It was awkward, but not hard. Plus, there’s a thread for newbies anyways.

If yall still onto the idea, I seriously suggest making a thread over anything.

Nov 26, 2013 at 06:55PM EST
Quote

Why a thread? What’s so terrible about just saying in the KYM entry? The newbies might not know to ask or might not be willing to, and so what if it’s an inside joke? We’ve had FULL ENTRIES about these in the past for dumping grounds or just as jokes themselves, and explaining these overly common inside jokes is a far more worthy purpose.
And really, what’s the REAL downside? All I see are we shouldn’t because “It’s not our job” or “It’s not a real meme”, neither of which really adequately shut down a perfectly good idea that would nicely explain these.
Honestly, I’d start drafting but I don’t know half of them, I’m busy and I’m bad at formatting.

Nov 26, 2013 at 08:10PM EST
Quote

I’m actually very opposed to the idea for reasons already listed here.

In their defense though, we commonly use website and fandom subculture entries to cover their in-jokes.

I don’t think…actually, I know for a fact, that Know Your Meme isn’t as big with regards to actual web culture as 4chan, Tumblr, or Newgrounds. We don’t spawn memes with any regularity like 4chan, Tumblr, or Newgrounds. There is no notable subculture here that doesn’t exist anywhere.

  • e.g., /v/ is its own entity as is /b/ and /co/. There is no notable subculture within the forums, the comments of the entries, or anywhere else on KYM. Any existing subcultures (the most notable being the bronies here) are part of a larger subculture anyway.

The only reason why I think any entry should be made is if it’s notable in a subculture. And The Cheeto, Goat-tan, or anything else specific to KYM simply is not. There is no argument here.
 
As for new users, I don’t think KYM’s population is so unfriendly that people can’t ask about what’s going on.

Just like with other smaller and larger sites, new users learn by participating, learning, and watching.

We don’t need an entry for that. That’s fairly basic human interaction. Watch and learn.


I think a stickied thread is an idea for Site-Related or maybe even General. But our own memes aren’t notable. If someone makes an entry, then I don’t see why it shouldn’t be immediately deadpooled. I haven’t read a reason for it that somehow argues that KYM is notable enough in webculture for its specific memes to be documented.


All I see are we shouldn’t because “It’s not our job” or “It’s not a real meme”, neither of which really adequately shut down a perfectly good idea that would nicely explain these.

Being completely frank here, you countered your own argument. It’s not a perfectly good idea, because it’s not in the aims of the site.

The entries are to document notable web culture and notable memetic phenomena. These aren’t notable.

 
I propose a stickied thread. Or just have new users ask. Again, we’re a friendly enough community so that people can ask about something they don’t understand.

Besides, what would you put in an entry anyway?


 
Also, I can’t really stop you, but don’t downvote your fellow users’ posts if they disagree with you.

Save downvotes for someone breaking the rules or are intentionally trying to cause trouble.

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 08:59PM EST
Nov 26, 2013 at 08:51PM EST
Quote

Verbose wrote:

The only reason why I think any entry should be made is if it’s notable in a subculture. And The Cheeto, Goat-tan, or anything else specific to KYM simply is not. There is no argument here.

You’re missing my point here. What I meant isn’t seperate non-deadpooled articles for these specific injokes. Meme articles are for, as you read it, memes, not this type of stuff.

The NeoGAF entry for example has a header for the “NeoGAF Asshole” advice animal, something that was created by NeoGAF members, but didn’t get the attention to consider it a meme. For a larger example, the Tumblr entry covers some of their acronyms. Stuff that stayed in Tumblr, but didn’t got the attention to get a meme.

We have a KYM article for Know Your Meme, in a similar way as Wikipedia has one for Wikipedia. Sure, we’re nothing compared to sites like Tumblr or 4chan, but we did manage to become a notable face within internet culture. And that’s what we cover: Internet culture. Using the top dogs as a standard measurement is just pointless, as nothing will ever reach up to them. You don’t say that we shouldn’t cover memes until they reached levels like Scumbag Steve, as it would result in no new articles ever, kinda destroying the reason KYM exists. Same for websites within internet culture. So a KYM entry for KYM is a fair deal.

Which is what brings me back to the coverage of some of these jokes. Sure, these in-jokes are no memes, but they managed to get some attention site-wide on KYM. Read that keyword again there: site-wide. I’m not aiming to start accepting seperate entries for jokes like I Need Blood. But something like a small header for Deadpool in the KYM entry for KYM, that’s an idea that can be dicussed.

Which then makes me repeat a part in my first post, which opspe worded nicely: You have to be very judicious here. Make requirements for these jokes, like having to be site-wide and actually receiving original content. I don’t wish to cover every shitty attempt at an “in-joke” as much as you, nor am I planning to promote astroturfing. But from an research point of view, some of these jokes have managed to leave their mark on the site’s history, so giving them a small mention in the KYM entry for KYM is something to consider (but not for all of the jokes this thread is thinking about).

But that’s just my two cents.

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 09:50PM EST
Nov 26, 2013 at 09:41PM EST
Quote

Note: Aimed mostly at Verbose’s post, as you might have figured. Random ninja’d me.

No, an entry is better.
It doesn’t matter HOW “friendly” anything is, at all, this is so much simply than having to ask EVERY SINGLE TIME some confusing little in-joke comes up, instead this would allow them to really easily find the answers they same way they do whenever they look up “real” memes. Why should they HAVE to “watch and learn”? That’s just making things harder and more confusing for the poor guys and girls for no good reason at all!
And no, being outside the site’s “aim” in a really strict and narrow sense is a fucking AWFUL reason to block this, having forums to discuss things in doesn’t fit that ridiculously tight definition either but we have them. Why? Because they serve a good purpose anyway! JUST LIKE THE PROPOSED ARTICLE DOES! Being flexible was good there, and it’s good here too, it’s the moronic zealotry and dogmatic dedication to the core ideal that’ll be harmful.
And no, I’m not okay with people disagreeing with this idea, because it does some good (quite a lot of good, I’d say but at least a little) and NO harm whatsoever in any way, shape or form! The only reason to oppose this is if you’re some kind of spiteful jerk who wants to withhold information from “out of the loop” newbies or some kind of zealot who holds absolutely to the strict dogma regardless of how much sense it makes.
And I speak from someone who was “out of the loop” on in-jokes in previous communities who refused to explain it no matter how much I wanted to just be told, I still am this way with a lot of these in-jokes because as it stands there’s NO documentation and NO way to figure out what the hell these people are going on about. I’d rather not have that nasty shit perpetrated when there’s a reasonable AND REALLY EASY (Like the same or less effort than explaining these manually or even just telling all these newbies to fuck off) route to avoiding it just because “not our job lol lurkmoar” and being forced to painstakingly track down some elite member and hoping they both know the exact in-joke you speak of AND are willing to explain it to you in a way that makes some sense at all is little better. And I can’t be certain a forum thread would even remotely work, it’s ridiculously counter-intuitive to be made to look for something IN THE WRONG PLACE by its very definition, really, what newbie would think to go scrounging around in the forums? And again, why force them to needlessly spin their wheels doing all this shit when putting in an article doesn’t inconvenience you in any way AND saves them trouble too, win-win!
In conclusion, to all you opposing this: STOP! Have a heart and if you don’t want to be involved, don’t actively stop and stifle the people who want to help out the newbies out of some petty nonsense (which both the elitism and the zealotry fall under) and if the article is a problem, there’s always just shoving it into the KYM article like some suggested (I’d say a separate umbrella article would work better but both would be ultimately fine)

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 09:51PM EST
Nov 26, 2013 at 09:42PM EST
Quote

CrashGordon wrote:

It doesn’t matter HOW “friendly” anything is, at all, this is so much simply than having to ask EVERY SINGLE TIME some confusing little in-joke comes up, instead this would allow them to really easily find the answers they same way they do whenever they look up “real” memes.

At whatever reason ever though, those things will remain in the deadpool forever.

Having a sort of deadpooled entry with an image gallery you guys can use to dump your content related to the joke, I don’t mind it. It’s a deadpooled entry, those can’t get trending, so it doesn’t kill the site’s focus.

But they are not, in whatever way, memes. They will receive the deadpool and stay there. And once people start spamming in-joke entries, I will look at it as spam, and judge it as such.

Should a moment arise that one of these in-jokes manages to get notable spread outside of KYM, it can be discussed if it should be undeadpooled, but that’s a case for then.

Nov 26, 2013 at 09:48PM EST
Quote

Alright, so. I guess it’s time I throw my opinion in here.

For what reason should we make an entry? If someone can give me a strong reason, I’d be willing to change my vote. But from where I’m standing, every reason for the entry is pretty poor. I’d go on to detail how poor the reasons are, but this is a thread for mature conversation so I’ll refrain.

it could also prevent the creation of more Entries like I Need Blood and Goat-Tan

No, no it wouldn’t. To believe that it could would mean that you believe we could control and direct every user from here until the site’s demise. Being as that is not the case, the idea that we can actually prevent these entries falls short.

It’ll be more newbie-friendly, after all.

I support this, for the sake of newbies to not be perplexed by them.

Because ALL users are just ecstatic to brush up on their mandatory reading, right?

If we make the page, it will be the longest entry by 2015.

Yours isn’t really a reason for the entry, but allow me to comment. The entry would open the floodgates to several in-jokes. All in an attempt to get on said page, no matter how poor. I believe some of us remember what happened after the first draw thread was made.

All NOT listing them accomplishes is confusing people who aren’t “in” on the joke.

And…? You sound as if you honestly believe this would create an existential crisis of cataclysmic proportions.

Plus it’ll be more manageable than manually explaining these jokes ot confused newbies.

An entire list… will be more manageable… than one line of text?… Just… what?

There’s no reason to reject these things even if they aren’t officially memes. I think something like this would do them more justice than letting them rot in the Deadpool

There’s really no reason to accept them either. I think something like this would be more of a nuisance than the current setup.

Yes, and let’s just say they WERE Deadpooled, but to have a DP’d article to explain the “failed” meme than to leave people confused about what’s going on.

So… we’d just be directing them to the deadpool’d entries? Then have a section for them to begin with? Wouldn’t that be just like having an entry that links to ED for all it’s information?

For those clearly hating the idea, what problems will arise if we actually do add to the article primarily for a useful effect?

I’ve already stated why it’s a bad idea. Also, for those basically jerking themselves to the idea. I ask why it should legitimately be favored over one line of text?

Why a thread? What’s so terrible about just saying in the KYM entry? The newbies might not know to ask or might not be willing to, and so what if it’s an inside joke?

Why an entry? What’s so terrible about explaining in a post? If the user isn’t willing to ask, there’s almost no chance he’ll be willing to look it up. Consider this, have you ever been in a conversation you had no knowledge of? Did you take the chance to look it up? Or did you stay quiet? I’ll bet the easier thing to do would have been to ask, whether you did or didn’t is all on you.

All I see are we shouldn’t because “It’s not our job” or “It’s not a real meme”, neither of which really adequately shut down a perfectly good idea that would nicely explain these.

Sorry, I think I actually suffered an aneurysm reading this. You want us to do something that isn’t our job because it isn’t our job? To document something on a site about internet culture when it has NO impact on internet culture? Please consider this for a bit. Also, ‘good’ is subjective. (Or is it objective? I forgot again… opspe, little help here.)

And now for some final thoughts.

@RM

I don’t think these should be included in the site’s entry because the entry is about the site’s impact on internet culture. If these forums were to disappear, it wouldn’t change the primary cause of the site at all. I have no idea how NeoGAF functions though, so some information there would be appreciated.

@Gordon

Calm down, man.

1) You don’t want to waste your time on explaining these jokes to everyone that asks yet you make a wall of text to explain why you don’t want to. Consider which of these would take up less of your time.

2) There’s no reason to lose your head over this. Rules are instated for a reason, without rules, I’d hate to imagine what would become of this site.

@RM’s last post

I say we should avoid it entirely, that way we can avoid the inevitable flood of users trying to get their in-jokes onto the entry. Of course, sitting back and judging their attempts would be great for some laughs.

Last edited Nov 26, 2013 at 11:00PM EST
Nov 26, 2013 at 10:51PM EST
Quote

@RM: That’s why I was only suggesting either a blanket article (Like “Pony re-imaginings” or “JC Denton catchphrases”) or stuffing them into the KYM article, not separate articles for each one.

And…? You sound as if you honestly believe this would create an existential crisis of cataclysmic proportions.

It doesn’t have to be to be worth fixing when it’s as easy as this.

An entire list… will be more manageable… than one line of text?… Just… what?

Yes, because it only has to be done once (plus any additions), compared to having to pull a brand new explanation out of your rear an unlimited number of times.

Why an entry? What’s so terrible about explaining in a post? If the user isn’t willing to ask, there’s almost no chance he’ll be willing to look it up. Consider this, have you ever been in a conversation you had no knowledge of? Did you take the chance to look it up? Or did you stay quiet? I’ll bet the easier thing to do would have been to ask, whether you did or didn’t is all on yo

I can say from experience and logic that there’s PLENTY of reason why asking just plain can’t work for this:
1) Looking it up is simpler, just a matter of searching the meme rather than spending ages trying to find someone who might know
2) Even if so, they might not know about the particular in-joke.
3) Even if they do, they might not be willing to explain, for any number of reasons, good or bad.
4) Even if they can as well, they might explain it badly or wrong because they don’t have all the details or don’t have all their facts straight.
Compare that to looking up an entry: Simple, easy and perfect every time!

Calm down, man.

I can’t, I find this literally angering and sickening that you and the people on your side seem to be so willing to casually fuck over the newbies and hide information from them for stupid reasons. Excuse me if I care more about helping them understand and engage in the way that’s best for everyone involved than enabling the elites to have the new users at their mercies and whims and supporting dogmatism about the letter of the law!

1) You don’t want to waste your time on explaining these jokes to everyone that asks yet you make a wall of text to explain why you don’t want to. Consider which of these would take up less of your time.

A) Not me, I couldn’t explain a single one of these besides “I need blood” and “Time to killed people!”. I’m actually one of the ones in need of the article/section for ALL the rest.
B) Even if that was the case, again it’s a one-time thing that ends when this argument does, compared to the unlimited number of times I would have to explain!

2) There’s no reason to lose your head over this. Rules are instated for a reason, without rules, I’d hate to imagine what would become of this site.

A) There’s every reason to lose my head! People seem to be intent on blocking this off and actively HIDING information from people for petty reasons even though they don;t need to personally do it if it were to go ahead, they have nothing to gain from stopping it AND it could only do good! This is a gross miscarriage of justice and reeks of malice and sadism (Because again, GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY to hurt these poor newbies, which kills all explanation of it just being benign laziness).
B) I never said NO rules! I was strongly arguing against the rigid adherence to the letter of the law when it makes no sense, which is what’s applying here. This could easily just be admitted under the “spirit of the law” or made an explicit and probably rare exception otherwise and it would only do good but instead the choice is being made to adhere 100% when it makes no sense!

If I missed something, it’s likely because I either couldn’t understand or couldn’t think of a counter, as I’m extremely tired and angry right now, and as such am not thinking straight.

Nov 26, 2013 at 11:39PM EST
Quote

Man, Cheetos survived 3 years of turmoil and survived and doesn’t even get an entry, and now y’all are proposing one for one that’s barely a year old that technically originated on /v/?

Nov 27, 2013 at 12:17AM EST
Quote

Bob wrote:

I say we should avoid it entirely, that way we can avoid the inevitable flood of users trying to get their in-jokes onto the entry. Of course, sitting back and judging their attempts would be great for some laughs.

Read again, very judicious. If things like that Goat or I Need Blood won’t make it, I’m fairly certain the next pitiful attempt won’t make it either. They can of course try to get their hi-la-ri-ous le funny in-joke xD on there, but I will do exactly what you’re suggesting here.

I’m not saying we should run with it, I just prefer to stay objective. As you read in my posts, the idea is only brought up there to keep open for discussion.


CrashGordon wrote:

I can’t, I find this literally angering and sickening that you and the people on your side seem to be so willing to casually fuck over the newbies and hide information from them for stupid reasons. Excuse me if I care more about helping them understand and engage in the way that’s best for everyone involved than enabling the elites to have the new users at their mercies and whims and supporting dogmatism about the letter of the law!

I’m fairly certain people don’t need to know about the Goat for the full KYM experience. People commonly visit KYM to learn about the exact thing we document: Memes. The site’s focus is covering internet phenomena, and I think we help them quite a bit on that topic. Sure, can do better on quite some areas, but none of those areas have anything to do with in-jokes.

What we like to avoid however, and what multiple people pointed out already, is that people start forcing more of these. Popular content causes hypetrain jumping and astroturfing. We don’t want to give users the idea KYM is a medium to launch their own original creations. Hell, we even cover articles shouldn’t be used to cover their own original creations. And once people notice these entries are quick ways to spread your in-jokes, they will start to force their in-jokes. Because we all know attention on an online medium is everything that matters in this world.

Last edited Nov 27, 2013 at 03:52AM EST
Nov 27, 2013 at 03:51AM EST
Quote
I’m fairly certain people don’t need to know about the Goat for the full KYM experience.

So what? They could very well want to know what it is and feel horribly put off when they can’t find out what it is.

As far as people forcing stuff, that’s easy! You don’t to be super judicious and shut out actual in-jokes, you just need to not give Editorship on whichever article is used for the job to people who are only wanting to force their own nonsense.

Nov 27, 2013 at 08:18AM EST
Quote

CrashGordon94 wrote:

I’m fairly certain people don’t need to know about the Goat for the full KYM experience.

So what? They could very well want to know what it is and feel horribly put off when they can’t find out what it is.

As far as people forcing stuff, that’s easy! You don’t to be super judicious and shut out actual in-jokes, you just need to not give Editorship on whichever article is used for the job to people who are only wanting to force their own nonsense.

Handing out editorship can only be done by mods and users who are already editors.

Making entries however can be done by everyone. That’s the risky factor here which we have to look out for. We wouldn’t deadpool/hide lame shit every day if users used entry creation correct and responsibly. But we do, so there’s risks.

Nov 27, 2013 at 08:25AM EST
Quote

Then that’s no different than normally snuffing out bad entries, really.

Nov 27, 2013 at 08:28AM EST
Quote

This thread is really long and I didn’t read all of it but can someone give me a tldr version of why we can’t just put this info in a stickied forum thread?

Nov 27, 2013 at 08:52AM EST
Quote

I got one.

And I can’t be certain a forum thread would even remotely work, it’s ridiculously counter-intuitive to be made to look for something IN THE WRONG PLACE by its very definition, really, what newbie would think to go scrounging around in the forums? And again, why force them to needlessly spin their wheels doing all this shit when putting in an article doesn’t inconvenience you in any way AND saves them trouble too, win-win!
Nov 27, 2013 at 09:08AM EST
Quote

amanda b. wrote:

This thread is really long and I didn’t read all of it but can someone give me a tldr version of why we can’t just put this info in a stickied forum thread?

tl;dr: CAMOAWAM 2013 edition with goats

Nov 27, 2013 at 10:53AM EST
Quote

CrashGordon94 wrote:

I got one.

And I can’t be certain a forum thread would even remotely work, it’s ridiculously counter-intuitive to be made to look for something IN THE WRONG PLACE by its very definition, really, what newbie would think to go scrounging around in the forums? And again, why force them to needlessly spin their wheels doing all this shit when putting in an article doesn’t inconvenience you in any way AND saves them trouble too, win-win!

Situation: New member is curious about these in-jokes, so they ask someone about them. The asked member redirects the new member to a thread about them. What’s the difference between that and an entry besides the fact that an entry wouldn’t be justified for most of these jokes.

Nov 27, 2013 at 10:54AM EST
Quote

CrashGordon94 wrote:

I got one.

And I can’t be certain a forum thread would even remotely work, it’s ridiculously counter-intuitive to be made to look for something IN THE WRONG PLACE by its very definition, really, what newbie would think to go scrounging around in the forums? And again, why force them to needlessly spin their wheels doing all this shit when putting in an article doesn’t inconvenience you in any way AND saves them trouble too, win-win!

How’s that a tl;dr of this entire thread? That’s only a quoted paragraph from one of your own posts. A post that, if I may point out, hardly got the support you hoped for.

Last edited Nov 27, 2013 at 11:02AM EST
Nov 27, 2013 at 11:02AM EST
Quote
Situation: New member is curious about these in-jokes, so they ask someone about them. The asked member redirects the new member to a thread about them. What’s the difference between that and an entry besides the fact that an entry wouldn’t be justified for most of these jokes.

And that’s bad. It forces the poor new member to put themselves at the mercy of the elite member that they likely spent ages looking for, hoping that member will actually explain it (in this case, linking the thread) rather just going “lel lurkmoar le brand new faggot”, which could very well be the likely outcome of a newbie “daring” to ask someone about this stuff.
Whereas if you get an article they can bypass all this shit altogether, never being at the risk of being brushed off by an elite.
Also a thread will either be impossible to update (if it’s all in the first post) or nigh-impossible to navigate (if it’s the whole thread) and an article has neither problem.
And the “article is unjustified” thing is invalid because ONCE AGAIN, it’s a blanket article/section that’s being suggested, not one for every different in-joke.

How’s that a tl;dr of this entire thread? That’s only a quoted paragraph from one of your own posts. A post that, if I may point out, hardly got the support you hoped for.

Because that’s not what she asked for, she asked for a tl;dr of why a thread wouldn’t work, which is what I gave.

Nov 27, 2013 at 11:46AM EST
Quote

I sense a strong vein of butthurt.

You’ve made your proposal, and the mods have responded. Your proposal has been rejected. We’ve provided rationale and a reasonable alternative, both of which you have rejected.

There’s not much else to be said, so I’m going to lock this before the circular logic and shit-flinging gets even worse.

Nov 27, 2013 at 02:56PM EST
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

This thread was locked by an administrator.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Word Up! You must login or signup first!