Forum:Was ED Funny?

original discussion was on TWIGO:CP

There are those that find ED to be unfunny, and they keep silent on the matter. Then there are those who feel the need to point it out in an effort to make themselves seem more mature and intelligent. Don't like it? Fine. What are you accomplishing by swishing around the stick up your ass?--Brxbrx (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Since you came to RW to broadcast your latest efforts, I wanted to make it clear that I agree with the others who don't find it funny. ED is the Internet equivalent of somebody shitting in their hand and flinging it as passers-by. I'm sure somebody, somewhere finds it funny, but people who either perform the action or find it funny are better pitied than encouraged. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 18:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ED is completely shit and you should feel fucking stupid for making this into a forum post, Brx. Jesus man. Your hubris and idiocy knows no bounds. Acei9 22:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I see this forum is 2 years old. Sorry for not noticing. On my phone and have spotty reception so wasn't paying attention. Carry on all. Acei9 22:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's kids playing in the sand: they grow up to use real tools soon enough: leave 'em alone. --Scream!! (talk) 19:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Every now and then ED is "South Park funny" - beneath all the scat and sex references the jokes are really good if you get them. Other times it's just stupid. Too much cussing, potty humor, and stupid 4chan "memes" that no one cares about - not enough actual humor.--69.149.249.149 (talk) 20:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC) (originally posted here)
 * Well, ED was one of my joke sources...and then Ohinternet arrived. Fuck you girlvinyl, fuck you. Tho Uncyclopedia has gotten better....Quackpack11! | Talk! Scream! Share! 03:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Mixed bag
ED was a mixed bag. It had a number of relatively funny pages (Unrealistic Expectations, for example). It also had a large of number of unfunny cancer pages. The main problem is that its articles are written by a bunch of people, some of whom are old and witty, whilst the rest are unfunny underageb&. ED itself admitted that this was a major problem.

Having said that, Uncyclopedia is the definition of unfunny, so anything else is hilarious by comparison.Forces (talk) 21:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)