Difference between revisions of "CWCki talk:Sperging"
m |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*Maybe some screenshots of sperging in action are in order? --[[User:Old meme|Old meme]] 08:14, 22 November 2011 (PST) | *Maybe some screenshots of sperging in action are in order? --[[User:Old meme|Old meme]] 08:14, 22 November 2011 (PST) | ||
:*Not a bad idea. But I'd suggest editing out user names, you know, to protect the innocent and all that jazz.--[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 08:19, 22 November 2011 (PST) | :*Not a bad idea. But I'd suggest editing out user names, you know, to protect the innocent and all that jazz.--[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 08:19, 22 November 2011 (PST) | ||
::*HAHAHAHAHAHA! Innocent. You're a funny one Champy. Sure, we'll edit out names if it makes you feel better. Now the only problem left is getting some good examples. --[[User:Old meme|Old meme]] 08:47, 22 November 2011 (PST) | |||
:::Go to the [[Adult Swim]] talk page, I think there's some left over from a sperging moment. I could be wrong, though. Barring that, perhaps the earliest variations of [[Chris and art]] and [[Chris and writing]]. Whoo, boy, as much as I enjoyed reading (and writing) that bit, it was on the wrong side of sperging.--[[User:Blazer|Blazer]] 20:05, 22 November 2011 (PST) | |||
::::I've seen the pages, and they're spergtacular. Good work. I'll get to screencapping when I feel less lazy. --[[User:Old meme|Old meme]] 03:37, 24 November 2011 (PST) | |||
:Just a note to say I've been following discussion here which is good - I did just throw together the current policy late at night while bored, and obviously the great thing about Wikis is how things can be shaped and improved by others. On reflection, I agree that Scenario 2 needs fixing. --[[User:Anonymax|Anonymax]] 05:17, 24 November 2011 (PST) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:17, 24 November 2011
This is a good start, but I'm not sure if it really gets at what "sperging" is. Scenario 3 is totally sperging, no doubt, as is Scenario 1 for the most part. Scenario 2, I think while it's sort of a spergy question, it's a reasonable one. Sometimes little things can lead to new insights we haven't seen or noticed before.
To me, I've always considered "sperging" to be when people write long winded essays about Chris, particularly e-psychology sort of stuff. Like, someone might notice Chris mispronounces something and rewrites an entire page about how this mispronunciation somehow shows that Chris is actually a sleeper agent for the CIA or something crazy like that. Or another thing I've see is people spazzing out that Chris mentions an anime in passing and they assume he's a big fan of it to and they start to report the entire plot summary of the anime in question.
I think this is definitely a policy we need, as probably a common complaint about the CWCki is that there's too much "sperging", and I salute Anonymax for going to the trouble of writing it but I'm not sure if it really gets at what sperging actually is.--Champthom 08:11, 22 November 2011 (PST)
- Maybe some screenshots of sperging in action are in order? --Old meme 08:14, 22 November 2011 (PST)
- Not a bad idea. But I'd suggest editing out user names, you know, to protect the innocent and all that jazz.--Champthom 08:19, 22 November 2011 (PST)
- HAHAHAHAHAHA! Innocent. You're a funny one Champy. Sure, we'll edit out names if it makes you feel better. Now the only problem left is getting some good examples. --Old meme 08:47, 22 November 2011 (PST)
- Go to the Adult Swim talk page, I think there's some left over from a sperging moment. I could be wrong, though. Barring that, perhaps the earliest variations of Chris and art and Chris and writing. Whoo, boy, as much as I enjoyed reading (and writing) that bit, it was on the wrong side of sperging.--Blazer 20:05, 22 November 2011 (PST)
- I've seen the pages, and they're spergtacular. Good work. I'll get to screencapping when I feel less lazy. --Old meme 03:37, 24 November 2011 (PST)
- Just a note to say I've been following discussion here which is good - I did just throw together the current policy late at night while bored, and obviously the great thing about Wikis is how things can be shaped and improved by others. On reflection, I agree that Scenario 2 needs fixing. --Anonymax 05:17, 24 November 2011 (PST)