Internet law

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Commenting this out until the delete thing is settled)
Line 46: Line 46:
  
 
*'''[[Haig's Law]]''' - The worse a website looks, the more likely it was made by a crazy person.
 
*'''[[Haig's Law]]''' - The worse a website looks, the more likely it was made by a crazy person.
 
<!--*''' [[Verelst's Laws]]''' - Series of laws governing the probability that a creationist told a whopper, the occurrence of ''ad hominem'' attacks, and how to address creationists with doctorates in a given field. -->
 
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
Line 56: Line 54:
 
== See also ==
 
== See also ==
 
*[[Dickwad theory]]
 
*[[Dickwad theory]]
 
 
  
 
{{Internet laws}}
 
{{Internet laws}}
 
 
[[Category:Internet laws| ]]
 
[[Category:Internet laws| ]]

Revision as of 10:36, 1 August 2012

Someone is wrong on

The Internet

Icon internet.svg
Log in:

The Internet has led to the development of a burgeoning field of legislation wherein amateur lawmakers seek, in the manner of Murphy's Law, to glibly describe certain aspects or observations regarding internet behaviour in general and, more specifically, debates and discussions on usenet groups and internet forums.

Warning: Internet law tends neither to be logically rigorous nor evenly applied. It often commits fallacies. Invocation of individual laws is usually a time-saving device used to prevent one from being dragged into an argument with someone who will under no circumstance alter one's own opinion.

Internet law is not to be confused with the rules of the Internet, which are mostly about porn and memes.

Internet law is upheld by various people with sysop powers or similar. Oh shi-

Some of the Laws

You won't find them here, but they certainly exist.

This is a brief overview of the laws. For examples, see the main articles.

  • Godwin's Law - or reductio ad hitlerum, states that comparing something to the Nazis is inevitable.
  • Danth's Law - states that anyone who declares themselves victorious, has probably done so because they've lost.
  • DeMyer's Laws - an argument that consists primarily of rambling quotes isn't worth bothering with.
  • Pommer's Law - a person's mind can be changed by reading the internet; they'll go from "no opinion" to "the wrong opinion".
  • Cohen's Law - whoever resorts to the argument that whoever resorts to the argument that whoever resorts to the argument...
  • Poe's Law - without a blatant display of humour, it is impossible to make a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't take as real.
  • Timecube Law - the longer the page, the more lunatic the author.
  • Law of exclamation - the amount of truth is inversely proportional to the amount of exclamation and ALL CAPS used.
  • Skarka's Law - no matter how vile or indefensible it is, someone will post positively or in defense of it.
  • Grey's Law - any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil.
  • Skitt's Law - grammar is a bitch, and is likely to bite you on the arse at any time.
  • Shaker's Law - those who egregiously announce their imminent departure from an Internet discussion forum almost never actually leave.
  • The Dull-man Law - in any discussion involving science or medicine, being Dana Ullman loses you the argument immediately…and gets you laughed out of the room.
  • Muphry's Law - In any correction you make there is almost certainly bound to be an error.
  • Haig's Law - The worse a website looks, the more likely it was made by a crazy person.

External links

See also

Template:Internet laws

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support