Getting flashbacks to the people who thought the GameStop guy was a leftist

https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1go1ndu/rsuperstonk_in_the_midst_of_a_political_civil_war/

RationalWiki really hits that sweetspot where everybody hates it and you know that means it’s doing something right:

From Prolewiki:

RationalWiki is an online encyclopedia created in 2007. Although it was created to debunk Conservapedia and Christian fundamentalism,[1] it is also very liberal and promotes anti-communist propaganda. It spreads imperialist lies and about socialist states including the USSR[2] and Korea[3] while uncritically promoting narratives from the CIA and U.S. State Department.

From Conservapedia:

RationalWiki.org is largely a pro-SJW atheists website.

[ . . . ]

RationalWikians have become very angry and have displayed such behavior as using profanity and angrily typing in all cap letters when their ideas are questioned by others and/or concern trolls (see: Atheism and intolerance and Atheism and anger and Atheism and dogmatism and Atheism and profanity).[33]

From WikiSpooks (with RationalWiki’s invitation for anyone to collaborate highlighted with an emotionally vulnerable red box for emphasis):

Although inviting readers to “register and engage in constructive dialogue”, RationalWiki appears not to welcome essays critical of RationalWiki[3] or of certain official narratives. For example, it is dismissive of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, terming it, as of 2017, it a “peer- crank-reviewed, online, open source pseudojournal”.[4]

And a little bonus:

“Can I have Google discount my rationalwiki entry, has errors posted out of spite 10 years ago”

https://support.google.com/websearch/thread/106033064/can-i-have-google-discount-my-rationalwiki-entry-has-errors-posted-out-of-spite-10-years-ago?hl=en

My site questions Darwinism but that’s become quite mainstream. But my rationalwiki page has over 20 references to me being a creationist, and is tagged “pseudoscience.” Untrue

Chiming in with my own find!

https://archiveofourown.org/works/38590803/chapters/96467457

I’ve seen this person around a lot with crazy takes on AI. They have a couple quotes that might inflict psychic damage:

If I had the skill to pull it off, a Buddhist cultivation book would’ve thus been the single most rationalist xianxia in existence.

My acquaintance asks for rational-adjacent books suitable for 8-11 years old children that heavily feature training, self-improvement, etc. The acquaintance specifically asks that said hard work is not merely mentioned, but rather is actively shown in the story. The kid herself mostly wants stories “about magic” and with protagonists of about her age.

They had a long diatribe I don’t have a copy of, but they were gloating about having masterful writing despite not reading any books besides non-fiction and HPMoR, their favorite book of all time.

There’s also a whole subreddit from hell about this subgenre of fiction: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/

I’ve seen people say that /uj is essential to keeping communities healthy. If you only allow ‘reasonable discussion’, you allow all kinds of awful people in as long as they’re not too obvious, while regular people get reprimanded for responding to it. But if you only allow shitposting and no genuine discussion, it’s going to become genuine whether you want it to or not (see: Gamers Rise Up or similar)

On here, you can see people write earnestly on a bunch of different topics, but you can also see them just tell a promptfan “you can’t get it up unless the fingers are wrong, can you” and ban them. It’s great

I don’t even want to watch that video because I know I’m going to get annoyed by it. Veritasium’s video on self-driving cars was so awful, it was enough for me to just sort them into the Sketchy Pop-Sci YouTube Channels bucket for good. I’ve heard that their videos on electricity and that one physics bet were also pretty shaky.