No, that's not a typo. It's an 'encyclopedia project' with information about people who are dicks.

Dickipedia.

Pretty funny. I see the domain's registered to somebody with a Huffington Post (also a funny site) email address.

It's been regularly seen on Huff Post for a while.

Many of them are perfect dicks, that's for sure. Some, like Hillary Clinton, I disagreed with, but I suppose I could understand that opposing view.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

For another Huff Post word-related offering, see this article on names.

Uncyclopedia is kind of fun too. The link takes you to its entry for Carlos Mencia, one of the "Comedian Dicks" on Dickipedia. Whereas Dicki more or less gives you the straight poop on why Carlos is a dick, Un takes it way over the top.

Oh, Proof, I loved those names! When I developed exams for students, I always appreciated fun names. Shu just came up with one the other day, Mya Pologese.

Dickipedia is probably the most extreme manifestation I have yet seen of the modern habit of being gratuitously rude to, and about, people.

I am surprised that the perpetrators of these kinds of offensive items don't get sued - is it the perceived anonymity of the internet that prompts people to be so rude about those whom they believe can't get back at them?

I suspect we will never get back to those days when good manners were considered something to be proud about, rather than being some kind of eccentricity.

I thought it was funny, even when I disagreed with it (as with Hillary).

However, my mother always said there was a fine line between humor and really meaning it. I don't consider it rude though. And as for suing, at least in the U.S., there are high standards for defamation of character suits. This site wouldn't reach that level.

I think they're funny too. I went straight to the one on Richard Boehner, House Minority Leader. Richard, I've seen equal rudeness on our C-Span channel among MPs in the Q & A session with your Prime Ministers. The thing you must remember with these 'pedia entries, Richard, is that they're all about public figures, who, under our libel laws, are fair game for satire, which this is. I think throughout history satire has been both "rude" and funny.

Wordmatic

quote:

the modern habit of being gratuitously rude to, and about, people

Gratuitous rudeness is in fact quite modern, having been invented in 1952, in New Jersey.

quote:

Originally posted by wordmatic:
I think they're funny too. I went straight to the one on Richard Boehner, House Minority Leader. Richard, I've seen equal rudeness on our C-Span channel among MPs in the Q & A session with your Prime Ministers. The thing you must remember with these 'pedia entries, Richard, is that they're all about public figures, who, under our libel laws, are fair game for satire, which this is. I think throughout history satire has been both "rude" and funny. Wordmatic

Several points:

Most things said in Parliament are protected by Parliamentary Privilege - so no matter how rude you are, the recipient of your rudeness can't sue you. The same thing applies to things said in a court of Law in England. Mind you, I still don't agree with gratuitous rudeness for the sake of it.

English libel laws are much stricter than those of most other countries (including the USA's) and there is now a phenomenon known as "libel tourism", where people wishing to sue for libel travel to England and get their cases tried here. The introduction in 1995 of the US-based system of suing for a specific amount has led to an explosive growth in "no-win, no-fee" lawyers here, and of course they all want to sue for the most they can so as to maximise their earnings. In many people's view, the pendulum has swung far too far towards preserving the plaintiff's rights at the expense of the defendant's. A critical article on this very topic appeared in yesterday's "Times" - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...s/article6910168.ece -

Many people these days think that satire and rudeness are one and the same thing. Many of the things in Dickipedia (and many other similar kinds of publication) are just insulting and not in the least bit satirical. Satire requires the use of witty language to demonstrate a failing; although I didn't read all of Dickipedia (most of the entries were about people I'd not heard of) I didn't see much evidence of wit in the entries I did read. As you say, satire throughout history has been both rude and funny - but the humour should come from the quality of the writing not simply its rudeness. It's a bit like jokes - there are plenty of funny jokes that are clean and plenty that are smutty - but the humour need to be there; only the most childish laugh at a joke simply because it contain a rude word.

It's easy to say that public figures are "fair game" - but how would you like it were someone to write something like this about you? Nonetheless, for the last 16 years, Nader has made a quadrennial habit of thrusting his wrinkled self into an election for a position he is clearly not qualified to hold, and clearly has no chances of winning, just to screw with people and be on TV. Whether you approve or disapprove of Ralph Nader's campaigning, this sentence is just offensive and would be offensive no matter whom it was written about.

quote:

English libel laws are much stricter than those of most other countries (including the USA's) and there is now a phenomenon known as "libel tourism", where people wishing to sue for libel travel to England and get their cases tried here.

I read about a current court case where a Chinese software manufacturer is suing an English blogger for a bad review of his games and business practices. However, the plaintiff hired an Australian law firm who incorporated the business in Delaware (one of the states where laws are most liberal -- or nonexistent), thus forcing the blogger to engage in international travel to defend his case. And the libel is based on comments made BEFORE the incorporation so it's hard to see how that can work. But it will still be extremely expensive for the blogger.

quote:

explosive growth in "no-win, no-fee" lawyers here,

In the U.S. contingency fees only occur in personal injury and malpractice lawsuits, so the losing plaintiff would have to pay his attorney.

quote:

Satire requires the use of witty language to demonstrate a failing;

Of course, who defines "witty?" I thought the article on Tom Cruise very witty; yet, I am sure Scientologists don't.

quote:

Whether you approve or disapprove of Ralph Nader's campaigning, this sentence is just offensive and would be offensive no matter whom it was written about.

I didn't find it that bad; take out the words "wrinkled self," and possibly "screw" (for the more conservative) and it's good to go. It's all factually true.

Proof, these global courts are all agreeing to this? They often don't. If so, I believe our courts would call that "harassment" and would throw it out.

quote:

In the U.S. contingency fees only occur in personal injury and malpractice lawsuits, so the losing plaintiff would have to pay his attorney.

Then it would seem that we have not only adopted the dubious practice of "no win, no fee" but we have failed to incorporate some of the safeguards that prevail in the USA.

quote:

I didn't find it that bad; take out the words "wrinkled self," and possibly "screw" (for the more conservative) and it's good to go. It's all factually true.

Factually true or not, it is gratuitously offensive. Of course, taking out some of the insults would make it less offensive - but that would be true of many statements. Were I to suggest that a worker was lazy, that may or may not be true, but it would not be insulting. But were I to say that a certain worker were a ****, ****, ****, son of a ****, then that statement although equally true, would certainly be more insulting.

Rudeness and foul language have no place in proper commentary and I, for one, will certainly not bother to ever log on again to this childishly offensive website.

quote:

Rudeness and foul language have no place in proper commentary and I, for one, will certainly not bother to ever log on again to this childishly offensive website.

I'm sure they'll miss you, Richard, and I'm sure the dicks included there applaud you.

My only complaint about the site is that it's US-centric. The majority of dicks shown I'd hardly or never heard of.

Yes, I noticed the Web site was US-centric, as are many, unfortunately. That's why I value Wordcraft so much. We definitely aren't.

quote:

My only complaint about the site is that it's US-centric. The majority of dicks shown I'd hardly or never heard of.

Possibly a good thing. Just imagine the fun the compilers would have in being unfairly and gratuitously rude about some of our British personalities.

Not that I'll ever clap eyes on their childish scribbles.

Is it a publically accesible wiki? You could always add your own entries for Britdicks.

Is it a publically accesible wiki?

No, Bob. There seems to be no way to register, and all the articles aere written by one user. It looks to be a solo work masquerading as a wiki. While I grant that it is written from a US perspective, some of the entries (e.g., the president of Iran and the Glorious Leader of North Korea) are foreigners whom I hazard have been heard of even in the UK. Others are legendary creatures, e.g., leprechauns. (The site's a one trick pony, so to speak.)

A final thought: RE, you might have understood the humo(u)r of the entries had you known and understood the total Dickishness they were guilty of.

Wordmatic

Wow, this 'pedia is really dated.

WM

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
For another Huff Post word-related offering, see this article on names.

Actually once knew a woman named Neva M. Wright. What were her parents thinking?

WM

I knew her brother Alois R.

quote:

some of the entries (e.g., the president of Iran and the Glorious Leader of North Korea) are foreigners whom I hazard have been heard of even in the UK.

Yes, of course. But the majority will only have been heard of by people in the USA.

quote:

Dickipedia is a production of Huffington Post Comedy.

It's not open to editing by the public.

quote:

If this were a real wiki, you would be able to edit posts. But since it's not, you can't. We might let you edit sometime in the near future, but only if you promise to be good.

quote:

We might let you edit sometime in the near future, but only if you promise to be good.

You have to prove you're not a dick.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <Proofreader>,

quote:

Actually once knew a woman named Neva M. Wright. What were her parents thinking?

Oh, that's funny.

quote:

A final thought: RE, you might have understood the humo(u)r of the entries had you known and understood the total Dickishness they were guilty of.

Some might well have been guilty of stupid behaviour; I can't comment on the US characters about whom I knew nothing. But the ones that I had heard of and whose entries I took the trouble to read, did not deserve the childish, facile and offensive commentary they had received.

Sense of humour is perhaps the most personal and inexplicable of all human traits. My dad laughs out loud at "Keeping Up Appearances", a program I find repetitive and dreary in the extreme. I think "League of Gentleman" is the best comedy I have ever seen but he thinks it's unwatchable. Yet, we both like the current series of "Armstrong and Miller".

There is no accounting for anyone's sense of humour and therefore no point in criticising it.

There is no accounting for anyone's sense of humour and therefore no point in criticising it.

Yes, yet we all of us engage in this sort of criticism constantly. For another Wikipedia-parody take on humour, see the Uncyclopedia entry for Johnny Foreigner's Guide to British Humour (link).

Clearly a well-researched and accurate document, as this statement shows by its linguistic and geographical accuracy:

"The funniest parts of the UK other than Cornwall are Wales, closely followed by Ireland."

Oh, z, according to my humor barometer, that site is so funny! Then I clicked "British" in it, and it said

quote:

British \Brɪ'ti:ʃ\, a. Variant of brutish. A lesser spotted type of person(s) found situated on a small island off the coast of Europe. The British people are known round the world as a tea drinking, French hating society, however, there is more to British society than first meet the eye (or the ear, or the foot). The British are believed to have first arrived on their small Island by way of Dover and the P&O ferry service bringing "cheep booze and fags" over from their hated enemy, the French.

But never fear, dear Britons, here is what it says about American:

quote:

America is the name of the world's largest fast food restaurant. Covering about 40% of the North American continent (and constituting the sole part of it that is cared about), it is known primarily for its greasy food.

according to my humor barometer, that site is so funny!

If one has the time, I suggest one reads and compares the three article on Rush Limbaugh in Wikipedia, Uncyclopedia, and Dicikpedia. None of the three is for the squeamish.

I don't have time tonight, but I will do so. As I was driving my dad to Arizona recently, we had time to burn so I wanted to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Because I take the train to work, I am not often in the car for long periods of time, but this was a golden opportunity.

The funny part was, as soon as we started looking for the program, we found it. Obviously my dad listens to him as he recognized his voice first thing. Oh. My. It was worse than I had ever imagined. He was ranting and raving about Obama being narcissistic, and I kept talking back to him in the car. It was really kind of funny, and finally I had to turn him off. I just think it's important to hear all perspectives, but I can tell you, it's painful!