YOU ARE NOT THE LAW.
The Moleman9000 FAQ -
- Thread starter Judge Willow Giovanna
- Start date
THIS IS PHONE SPAM. THAT IS NOT RIGHT. THIS IS WRONG. YOU ARE KILLING ME.
B
BT 075
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Shoulda called it Moleman9000 FAG instead of FAQ. 
Give me a response over private message, need to know in case I have to form some kind of 'University Watch' program to protect the campus from Gabe.
He had that two-week internship program at Dominguez Hills, but I guess he never went back?
No no no. He's failed to correct glaring issues with his art skills because of the degree to which he has psychologically blotted out criticism and the world beyond himself in general oh dear god it is autism.
That is kind of weird--typically people only use screen names if they DON'T want to be ID'd. I don't know how or when Gabe got dox'd, but first off, don't people in real life call him that? And secondly, I've always thought that the few that use their real, unadulterated name on the 'Net seemed more respectable. And barring that, he should just change it entirely.
But...Don't heroes usually go through a process of change in most good stories?
B
BT 075
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Don't forget: >Implying Molay would change his ways which requires seeing what is wrong with himself or at least what is wrong with his methods.>implying the story of Moley's life would make a good series
That epic battles thing almost comes off as intentionally bad. It was funny, just not in the way Gabe intended.
Yeah some sort of short movie project or something.
Looks like his head's about to come off.
"This is cyberbullying! Explain how it's no---" POP, thud, roll roll roll ....
"When I first discovered Wikipedia, around, I don't know, 2006, it was a fun place that covered everything, namely my favorite shows such as those on Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon, in–depth, with articles on all the major characters that gave full biographies and exhaustive trivia. It covered (almost) ALL topics mostly fairly. Though the site was far from perfect, errors and stupid statements could easily be corrected. I could spend hours reading and gushing about my favorite works, and learning new things about them and their histories.
But around 2008–ish, things started changing for the worse. Wikipedia got the brilliant idea to start acting like an old, archaic encyclopedia, and only covering in–depth things that were "sourced" by any one of a handful of sources they considered "reliable". In other words, if something wasn't covered by mainstream sources, Wikipedia would refuse to cover it, no matter how popular it was! Case in point: Youtube Poop. I tried to talk about it on the Zelda CD–i article, and they wouldn't let me. I then tried to give it its own article, and it was deleted, with one user flat–out telling me that it couldn't be mentioned on the site whatsoever unless it was talked about by a source Wikipedia considered notable."
Also, why does anyone like to edit wikis, it makes them feel smarter that they're sharing information that other people will read and learn from.
DrChristianTroy
kiwifarms.net
"They wanted to have reliable sources. What old fuddy duddies."
Because that's bad. Idjit.
Because that's bad. Idjit.
It was more about notability I believe. Because everyone wants to read a Wikipedia article about a specific kind of Youtube video only targeted towards a niche circle of basement dwelling fans.
