Talk:Wise Beard Man
From Encyclopedia Dramatica
Seems like mostly ass-kissing. No one bothered to mention that he's obviously a fatass. A fatass with actual intelligence, but still a fatass. HedgeJew 19:08, 31 January 2008 (CST)
- plz to add haet then. i understand it being soft though as, unlike some others, this guy seems to be a more genuine hero of the revolution, so to speak. > < y ▪talk▪
19:39, 31 January 2008 (CST)
- Haet added. All I could think of is his Shameless self promotion and the whoring out of his DVDs. Chunkmunky 15:25, 1 February 2008 (CST)
- anon liek wise beard man - Serious Cat 01:29, 7 February 2008 (CST)
- Ebaums World approves of this fatass. Fishpaw 09:32, 7 February 2008 (CST)
- Let it be soft, at least until Anonymous gets over the postcoital bliss of Raeping Scientology. Lulz at the expense of fatasses comes later. --
For every piecethere is a puzzle 11:37, 23 February 2008 (CST)
wise beard man = God --El ron 04:54, 26 February 2008 (CST)
I can't help but notice the severe case of Asperger's Syndrome this entire article has. Is this what Anon has come to? - Joreal Conners 05:41, 28 June 2008 (CDT)
Suspended!
Wise beard man's Youtube account has been suspended once again!
http://forums.enturbulation.org/15-breaking-news/man-harpoons-again-xenutv1-channel-youtube-suspended-9726/
Infinitix 19:17, 17 April 2008 (CDT)
EPIC
Genius, what a guy, its men like him that make me happy to be a...thetan...trapped in a person, or whatever. :) O wise Beard! Darat lux nobis! :) Andronicus 13:21, 14 February 2008 (CST)
WRRRRYYYYY ARE YOU PROMOTING HIM?
Hes an massive faggot who should be killed with and should die by a heart-attack. I propose we turn this pro-fatass into anti-fatass. Or else go back 315chan or something. —The preceding comment was added by Lawlzy, who is too much of a fucking retard to sign his or her own posts. IT'S 4 TILDES (~), NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.
- OMG BAWWWWWWW! Jesus fucking christ, ED is not /i/, ED is not /b/, so just fucking deal with it. YES, he is a fatass, this is mentioned, but LIVE WITH IT. ED doesn't care about the battle between moralfags and oldfags. Burkaburka - piss off 10:58, 14 April 2008 (CDT)
- Burka is 100% right. The encyclopedia exists to document things, not take sides and turn articles into unfunny propaganda. Go whine somewhere else. If you touch this article after the ban wears off, you'll be getting a permanent vacation from ED. White•Mystery
- I second WhiteMystery's notion. I mean, if ED WAS completely pro-chan (as opposed to pro-lulz) the 4chan article would be pretty much a vanity page. Besides, Wise Beard is an awesome troll. He's been debating with Scifags for a long time, and consistently putting them in intellectual checkmate, no less; and IMHO, trolls that win because they genuinely outsmart their foe, rather than dump truckloads of copypasta on them are A++ in my book. HedgeJew 12:04, 14 April 2008 (CDT)
- Where the fuck are the lulz in this article? The internet has been at war with Scientology for a long time, and it was as unfunny in 1995 as it is in 2008 (unless watching self-righteous nerds butt heads with a self-righteous cult is your idea of hilarity, that is). This guy is just another fat, unlulzy moralfag, and his groupies should e-fellate him elsewhere on their own time. LULZ, OR GTFO --Netparrot 01:56, 7 May 2008 (CDT)
- Where the fuck are the lulz in this article? The internet has been at war with Scientology for a long time, and it was as unfunny in 1995 as it is in 2008 (unless watching self-righteous nerds butt heads with a self-righteous cult is your idea of hilarity, that is). This guy is just another fat, unlulzy moralfag, and his groupies should e-fellate him elsewhere on their own time. LULZ, OR GTFO --Netparrot 01:56, 7 May 2008 (CDT)
- I second WhiteMystery's notion. I mean, if ED WAS completely pro-chan (as opposed to pro-lulz) the 4chan article would be pretty much a vanity page. Besides, Wise Beard is an awesome troll. He's been debating with Scifags for a long time, and consistently putting them in intellectual checkmate, no less; and IMHO, trolls that win because they genuinely outsmart their foe, rather than dump truckloads of copypasta on them are A++ in my book. HedgeJew 12:04, 14 April 2008 (CDT)
- Burka is 100% right. The encyclopedia exists to document things, not take sides and turn articles into unfunny propaganda. Go whine somewhere else. If you touch this article after the ban wears off, you'll be getting a permanent vacation from ED. White•Mystery
- --Drunkenlazybastard 02:16, 7 May 2008 (CDT)
Behave scientologists!
WBM - the beard that launched 9000 internetz
note to youtube : "Previously the church of scientology was banned for ToS violations. One of their videos was located at ?v=XCB0HkaH0oU The Church of Scientology now has a paid account at youtube.com/ChurchofScientology - How much is YouTube's account restoration fee? I am interested in starting a collection to restore xenutv1 and would like to know my target."
^ copypasta title from forums (ie not me)
scientology has a previously banned account. anonymousfacts banned for revealing personal information. WMB got his account banned because he had a previous account that had been suspended.
below is a copypast from enturbulation ◄ € Zenophile ﮚ ► æ ◄ Ǽ Talk ► 20:15, 29 April 2008 (CDT) contacts:
editor@youtube.com
suggestions@youtube.com
legal-support@google.com
copyright@youtube.com
estreich@youtube.com
650-343-2960 650-253-0000
also from this
Youtube tries very hard to hide these email addresses, but hell hath no fury like Anonymous scorned. editor@youtube.com editors@youtube.com service@youtube.com suggestions@youtube.com ads@youtube.com legal-support@google.com streamsfeedback@youtube.com rss@youtube.com estreich@youtube.com mrd@youtube.com copyright@youtube.com ukcopyright@youtube.com activesharingfeedback@youtube.com filmz@youtube.com citizentube@youtube.com audioswapfeedback@youtube.com security@youtube.com howto@youtube.com citizensteve@youtube.com comedy@youtube.com
Alternative format (but same addresses as above). It might be convenient to copy/paste this string in the address section of most email programs:
editor@youtube.com; editors@youtube.com; service@youtube.com; suggestions@youtube.com; ads@youtube.com; legal-support@google.com; streamsfeedback@youtube.com; rss@youtube.com; estreich@youtube.com; mrd@youtube.com; copyright@youtube.com; ukcopyright@youtube.com; activesharingfeedback@youtube.com; filmz@youtube.com; citizentube@youtube.com; audioswapfeedback@youtube.com; security@youtube.com; howto@youtube.com; citizensteve@youtube.com; comedy@youtube.com
NY Post article: Church spokesperson confirms that Scientology made the ToS violating videos and did put them on Youtube- TOM'S CHURCH COUNTERATTACKS - New York Post
To Whom It May Concern:
I’m sure you are receiving many comments on this today but I figured I would be one more voice in the chorus. Back in March, the user “Anonymous Facts” was banned for posting videos revealing personal information and slandering them by calling them terrorists, violating YouTube’s ToS.
Through this article in the New York Post the user name “Anonymous Facts” can be linked to the Church of Scientology:
TOM'S CHURCH COUNTERATTACKS - New York Post http://www.nypost.com/seven/03152008/gossip/pagesix/toms_church_counterattacks_101990.htm
A few key quotes from the article:
“But now the church has counterattacked by posting YouTube videos under the title, "Anonymous Facts," detailing the death threats from Anonymous and identifying its members, who are labeled "terrorists" although they look more like frat boys. “
“The narrator goes on and on, then names men they claim are members of the group.”
” A spokesperson for the Church of Scientology said, "We absolutely made the videos."
The reason this is coming up now is the Church of Scientology released a press release recently promoting their new YouTube channel YouTube - ChurchofScientology's Channel
This would be a non-issue except that YouTube banned long time Scientology critic Mark Bunker’s account (XenuTV1) because a previous account he had (XenuTV) had been banned due to violating the ToS. Please note that XenuTV1 in no way violated the YouTube ToS. It was merely the fact that he had a previous banned account that resulted in the second account being banned. That was the policy stated to him at the time of his banning, 1 account banned means all accounts banned, regardless of if the individual accounts violate the ToS or not. This was accepted and we moved on until it came to my and others attention that Scientology is violating the same rule.
With that in mind, I respectfully request that YouTube remove the channel found at YouTube - ChurchofScientology's Channel , as they say, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If it is truly the policy of YouTube that any user with a banned account can not operate additional accounts then that policy should hold true regardless of who that person or organization is.
I understand that there will be complications with this issue as the Church of Scientology is currently paying for that channel but the linked article clearly shows that “Anonymous Facts” was not an individual but the Church of Scientology acting as a corporate entity, and therefore should be treated as any other YouTube user in this case. I would be disappointed to find out that one can circumvent the rules laid down on the average YouTube user if enough money is on the line. I look forward to your response.
Thank you,
Guys, Mark Bunker is not that great.
All the Moralfags just adore this guy. But Moralfags are lame. All Mark Bunker does is fuck around with Scientology, which most people don't really give a shit about. If Mark Bunker ever found out what Anonymous REALLY does, he'd probably hate the Moralfags that still support him. --Orly44
- Bunker is in fact awesome. but the goal of this article is trivial. the point of this article to make fun of his lack of notability. regardless, Bunker is a good guy - but i agree with you Orly over all Weatherman 22:00, 9 August 2008 (CDT)
SLANDER... y/n?
yeah, so this guy turned countless anon into boring moralfag dweebs. i'd like to fag up his page a bit, but alas i ph33r the b&hammer. --Blackfish711 18:15, 30 August 2008 (CDT)
- As long as you don't constantly cross things out and go "HAHA DISREGARD THAT I SUCK COCKS" over and over again, I don't think anyone Gives a shit. --Orly44 02:27, 31 August 2008 (CDT)
LOL!!!111!!1!11oneoneoneone
Oh that is so funny i almost (did) crapped myself. Its so original chuck norris jokes with WBM instead of chuck norris. Hey if you think THAT is funny there is this super neat new site that nobody knows about but it's the best in the world its called Gaia Online. Fireass 22:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
