The Internet Nobody Database Disturbs Me…
I just don’t know what to think about this site. Stumbled upon it by accident while researching the rise of internet game reviewers. To state the obvious, INDB is a parody of IMDB in Wiki form, only focusing on internet gamer celebrates and the like. From the tone of the articles I’ve read, it seems that it’s satirical in nature, yet a lot of them weave actual internet events into the picture, including screen captions for proof. Most of the write-ups are blunt, sarcastic, and/or hate-filled, albeit to a shocking degree. After reading stuff about the internet geeks I like to watch such as The Spoony Experiment, Lisa Foiles, The Angry Video Game Nerd, etc…I’m sort of scared to even try this sort of thing, yet in the same time these write-ups keep my ego in check for some warped reason. I really like watching these guys. But as we all know, the internet does not let anything go. One slip-up and the world knows.
The write-up about Noah a.k.a. SpoonyOne was particularly disturbing since it’s the longest and most detailed one in the site. It delves into his personal life so much…it must be affecting him in a way. I know one has to learn to shut out the negativity and focus on what he/she does best, but too much negativity and prying can reach an unhealthy boiling point. I think we can best compare this phenomena to the Paparazzi and focus on celebrity gossip more than the movies themselves. I truly believe that these are the reasons why big-names such as Britney Spears and Charile Sheen just crack. It’s the environment they’re in which makes these normal human beings do abnormal crap. The internet counterparts are of course the trolls, haters, and nitpicking nerds. It gets to a point when constructive criticism is merged with hate messages it becomes hard for our internet gamer celebrities to differentiate between them. Even when one offers blunt constructive criticism, it can be easily interpreted as hate or trolling because there’s too much focus. An unfortunate side-effect indeed.
In short, mad props go to these nerdy entertainers simply because they’re doing what they love while trying not to let the insane amount of hate affect their work. It’s obvious nobody’s perfect. It’s just very hard to ignore the hate in the internet, which causes certain repercussions on show quality and focus. Too much of a good thing may also turn sour, hence the longer certain gamer shows go, the more focus there will be in criticizing and comparing the older episodes with the new. The Angry Video Game Nerd is so far the only long-running show which has recognized this natural fault of burn-out and recently went for a hiatus, focusing on the film adaptation [finale] of AVGN with non-gaming side projects thrown in between.
It’s also interesting to note the most of these shows start on YouTube with little to no financial support. Even if they get popular on the tubes, fans consider them indie and underground. As soon as over-exposure or money comes into play, hardcore fans and onlookers start throwing the word “sell-out” and thus the hate begins. At least, that’s what INDB seems to imply. Reminds me of the case of indie music, most recently when I read up on Owl City. They were actually a long-running indie band with a unique sound. Finally gaining recognition through their album and hit single Fireflies (which I absolutely love), I notice many commenters who claim that old-school Owl City rocks but mainstream version sucks, demoting Fireflies in the process because it’s too over-exposed. Constructive criticism aside, this sadly has an unfortunate side-effect of turning the old-school hardcore fans into elitists. My point of view is that if you truly did love a certain show or popular person, wouldn’t you stick with your passion to the end, ignoring all the politics and overexposure bull-crap? You should be happy that the indie nobody that you liked is finally recognized by the general public. Sure, stick to your constructive criticism, but don’t take down the human behind the camera just because he or she isn’t good as before.
-
-
-
#3 written by Nevermore 1 year ago
-
-
#5 written by mr. mike 1 year ago
Mr. Mosly, they (and the “they” here originally was a nasty putdown piece in Encyclopedia Dramatica) hit Spoony because he was the near-breakout star of the That Guy crowd back in 2008-2010, that and he had loads of personal drama (the cop brother who shot a guy, the girlfriend who ditched him, the total control the girlfriend had over the Spoony Experiment forum) and he was breaking their code of asking for money. They also loathed his penchant for crossovers. As of 2011-2012, the almost-breakout star of That Guy With the Glasses is The Cinema Snob, and I’ve noticed nobody talks trash about Brad Jones because he has actually made real movies, not extended group sketches like Kickassia. That written, Jones himself has drama (the whole Jerrid thing, divorce between his friends) but it stays off camera, and it’s much grittier.
-
My point is that even if Spoony did something “immoral” or “broke the code” by asking for money, why bring his personal life into light and trash him? Yes, he did some stuff that were considered wrong, but does that make him a terrible person in real life to the degree that the internet makes it personal with him? Call him out on the things he did wrong, but his real life baggage shouldn’t be our concern. And regarding Brad, well…he’s more capable to make movies. Period. Spoony hasn’t and will never make movies as that’s not his profession. That’s not a bad thing. Spoony’s current limit is to entertain viewers in ways he knows how. We may never know if he can direct real movies unless he tries at some point in his life, but currently why should we compare him to Brad? Good for Brad for having more talent, but why put everyone else down?
-
-
#7 written by Anonymous 3 months ago
As a former editor of INDB, back when it was still called the Dead Horse Interchange (DHI) Wiki, I can say that a lot of the articles, at least the ones that I wrote, were not written with malevolent intentions. Writers for the wiki were encouraged to maintain a uniform writing style throughout the articles, and, from the onset, the general tone was fairly terse. Thus, even if I and my fellow writers had no personal objection to or bias toward a certain individual, we tended to maintain a disenfranchised, disdainful tone– a detached but negative diction– in our portrayal of those people and the events surrounding them. For instance, despite my being a long time viewer of The Spoony Experiment, I contributed to many of the sections in Noah Antwiler’s entry. Also, in a particularly misguided attempt to keep pace with Encyclopedia Dramatica’s investigation and coverage of internet personalities, particularly so in the case of the That Guy with The Glasses contributors, DHI began injecting more and more content about the personal escapades of internet reviewers into the wiki; finding and documenting personal information about internet personalities became a challenge to see who could ‘dig up the most dirt’ related to the most popular topics on the wiki. Additionally, while my contributions were largely focused on general cliches, absurdities, and trends in the internet reviewer phenomena, wiki infrastructure and cataloging, and citation research, I must admit that my more caustic contributions in the reviewer articles were largely fueled by misdirected anger due to an unideal personal life at the time. Likewise, I believe that I was not alone in my usage of the wiki to vent anger; having a very basic familiarity with my fellow editors, I can say wholeheartedly that there seemed to be an element of commiseration– of mutual internal strife– in our joint efforts. Nevertheless, I maintain that, at the time that I left as an editor, despite the negative bias of the site, DHI wiki did its best not to misrepresent facts and that one of our central arguments was that against what we perceived to be an excessive, rabid, uncontrollably loud internet personality fanbase, not against the personal lives of the content creators themselves. Right or wrong, many of us justified DHI by invoking the need for a counterbalance– an unfettered, critical, overblown opposing force– to the blind faith and praise of internet fanbases. I should mention that, after hundreds of edits and dozens of page creations, I left DHI after realizing that we were only fanning the flames and that I didn’t need the wiki to vent my frustrations anymore. So, yes, the DHI wiki was a bit overly critical in its heyday, and personal issues did, at least in my case, play a part in its negative outlook, but we meant no real harm; we were just a small gathering of angst ridden internet patrons shouting into a deaf void, not to be heard, but so that we could believe that we were not alone. Furthermore, my recollection and perception of the history of DHI and INDB is not meant to be definitive; I am certain that other DHI members acted for different reasons than my own and hold different views of the site and its actions.
-
Thanks so much for this very informative and well written reply. Indeed, the intentions seem to be parody in nature. Like you said though, it sometimes gets to a point in which venting and digging dirt to harm a certain internet celebrity overwhelming the original innocent intentions. Some articles, like Spoony’s, must be really bothersome to read through from his point of view. After all, he hasn’t done something so bad to warrant hatred. So he pissed off a couple of people. So he’s too harsh on some games and fan bases? So what? There are much worse people out there in the real world that need to be called out and trashed. Spoony’s definitely not one of them despite the mistakes he’s made.
-
#9 written by Anonymous 3 months ago
-
-
-
Leave a Reply
- Comment Feed for this Post
For me, it has gone beyond “satire” and become pure hate-spewing garbage. First of all, many of the people the site focuses on play a character, but the articles deliberately concentrate on the persons behind the characters.
Second, there’s a serious focus on That Guy With The Glasses contributors. I almost get the impression these articles were written by butthurt folks whose videos were rejected from TGWTG.
Third, there’s an severe emphasis on males. The only female I’ve noticed is Lindsay Ellis, and even her article is surprisingly tame compared to the others. It almost seems like the writers find it hard to come up with negative things about females while having a hard-on for them (haw haw). And since sexist jokes would be too blatant, and none of the female TGWTG contributors are particularly unattractive, there are no easy jokes to make about them, so INDB concentrates on the guys instead. Soooo obvious.
Also, the irony of people on the internet wasting time complaining about people on the internet, many of whom actually do it as a job, is just hilarious. It’s almost as if the INDB folks were envious of those who actually found a niche to make money.
Here’s a challenge for those of you out there who feel that INDB is a disturbingly mean-spirited site: Write an INDB-style article about INDB.