Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Rotten.com

Rotten.com
June 15, 2010, 09:41:14 PM
The thread below of the archived old ANUS reminded me of this another old "cult" website. Back in 1996, Rotten epitomized the "shock" websites that could retrospectively be called the first-wave shocksites: the Web made the exchange of disturbing images far more convenient than ever before, but finding, obtaining and scanning them still required work and shock imagery wasn't so abundant until the second-wave shocksites like The Young News Channel(NSFW link, duh), which are founded on 2 of the more recent technical developments: streaming video and video recording on cellphone --> the shock content has become far more ubiquitious.

At the same time, Rotten has faded to the background; it still hosts only still-images and as of now, gets updated about once in a year. But there is another part of Rotten that probably isn't so well-known, its "library" section - there are a lot of incisive articles of various topics eschewed by the mainstream and the attitude is somewhat anusian. ANUS might have an article about Jenkem, but Rotten Library has an article about Kami, the HIV-positive muppet :)
Also, these Dilbert-comics had once been hosted in Rotten(as being stated in the incomplete compilation page).

There's a thing that bugs my mind: I have a vague memory of reading either from Wikipedia or The Text File Archive that the founder of Rotten might be aquainted with the arch-anusites(after all, he also used to be a BBS operator).

Re: Rotten.com
June 15, 2010, 10:51:11 PM
I really liked some of those articles. The one on French fries was particularly witty. I agree, though the attitude and viewpoints of the articles are similar to ANUS', they seem to be more purely satirical as opposed to providing possible solutions to problems. Still, this should provide for hours of solid reading. Thanks a lot.
No.

Having reviewed the thread, baby Jesus is most definitely weeping at this point.

Re: Rotten.com
June 15, 2010, 11:35:33 PM
http://rotten.com/legal/

I thought that was pretty enjoyable... a whole gaggle of butt hurt corporations sicking their scummy lawyer's after a website for hosting various imagery. I wonder if ANUS.com has ever had this sort of problem? Any legal implications like these ever arise? Besides Suck Shwaldnier's sister pissing her pants about bashing his 'good' name..

Re: Rotten.com
June 16, 2010, 01:34:13 AM
I don't think the editors of that website are necessarily complete imbeciles, but I really don't think "the additude and viewpoints of the articles are similar to ANUS", because after a cursory reading of a few controversial subjects in their library, namely: Untouchables (the Indian caste), Max Hardcore (a pornographer), Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden, virtually any article I could find on Christianity, Holocaust denial etc. I have to say, regardless of their wit, they more or less follow a liberal democratic agenda and have a juvenile grudge against authority in general. Not to mention such degenerate sections as "Pornopolis", "Famous Nudes", etc.

Re: Rotten.com
June 16, 2010, 02:15:27 AM
I don't think the editors of that website are necessarily complete imbeciles, but I really don't think "the additude and viewpoints of the articles are similar to ANUS", because after a cursory reading of a few controversial subjects in their library, namely: Untouchables (the Indian caste), Max Hardcore (a pornographer), Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden, virtually any article I could find on Christianity, Holocaust denial etc. I have to say, regardless of their wit, they more or less follow a liberal democratic agenda and have a juvenile grudge against authority in general. Not to mention such degenerate sections as "Pornopolis", "Famous Nudes", etc.

I should've clarified myself. I meant their dry, subtly mocking tone was reminiscent of how ANUS' articles present themselves sometimes. I don't see how the site's views are liberal at all, but then, I'm discovering that they aren't really right leaning either. It doesn't present itself as a site with solutions like ANUS does, but seems to be there purely for the shock value with a bit of truth mixed in.
No.

Having reviewed the thread, baby Jesus is most definitely weeping at this point.

Re: Rotten.com
June 16, 2010, 07:16:36 AM
The articles of the library are indeed pretty polemic, but many of them can make you think(and that is the presumable goal of the authors instead of directly proposing solutions). As for the "juvenile" content, it's good to remember that ANUS has a long tradition in trolling.

Re: Rotten.com
June 16, 2010, 04:10:44 PM
I wonder if ANUS.com has ever had this sort of problem? Any legal implications like these ever arise?
http://www.anus.com/zine/news/1015.html

Funny thing is, the image was taken down shortly after LOL.

Re: Rotten.com
June 17, 2010, 03:25:09 AM
I read every single article in the Rotten Library a few years ago before discovering the ANUS. There are many surprisingly interesting articles to be found there. They range from obscure 18th century philosophers to invasive plant species to chess. The articles tend to deviate from their stated purpose after a few paragraphs, but they usually deviate to useful information. There are a few articles intended only for humor, but even these have useful information because they deviate from the original joke. I don't want to say rotten.com changed my life, but I did get a few paradigm shifts from their articles that made me more perceptive to the deceit around me and the way the world really works. It's a similar effect to what this site accomplishes.

EDIT: I found this here. http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/mad-science/jakob-bohme/ Haven't seen this in about 3 years and still remember the article. There's a lot of hidden gems to be found here.


Re: Rotten.com
June 17, 2010, 04:32:19 AM
The articles of the library are indeed pretty polemic, but many of them can make you think(and that is the presumable goal of the authors instead of directly proposing solutions). As for the "juvenile" content, it's good to remember that ANUS has a long tradition in trolling.
It's not the juveliness that makes their writings loathsome, it's their bad attitude concerning leadership and authority.
I don't see how the site's views are liberal at all, but then, I'm discovering that they aren't really right leaning either
I'm sure they wouldn't describe themselves as liberals, but they are libertines who host pornography and believe that caste, race, and religion are outdated anachronisms.

Re: Rotten.com
June 20, 2010, 05:04:08 AM
It's not the juveliness that makes their writings loathsome, it's their bad attitude concerning leadership and authority.

That's true of the counter-culture as a whole. Where they could be constructive, instead they find someone else to blame.

Re: Rotten.com
June 21, 2010, 04:59:10 PM
Some of you sickos are probably adding stuff to deathfap.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Re: Rotten.com
June 25, 2010, 01:26:54 PM
http://rotten.com/library/crime/

I thought this was an interesting section of the library. The McDonald's article is particularly stomach turning.
No.

Having reviewed the thread, baby Jesus is most definitely weeping at this point.

Re: Rotten.com
June 29, 2010, 02:24:01 AM
The McDonald's article is particularly stomach turning.

There's nothing about fast food that isn't. It's crap and we all know it. Sometimes, there's not a better option, so you eat it, kind of like how if you're starving on Easter, you end up eating that whole 2lb chocolate-covered marshmallow bunny. Fine, exceptions occur.

But as a daily, weekly or even monthly part of life?

HELL FUCKING NO

Here's why I detest all fast food:

* Lots of disposable trash, not only with the meal but the packaging for the premade components
* They hire and cater to complete idiots, subsidizing the breeding of fools and the survival of morons
* They are ugly, and they dumb down the process of existing
* They fill the air with greasy stench and smoke
* The food is sugar food, mostly filler, and repellent once you analyze it. But it's sweet, always, and salty. Wonder why?
* Individuals buy fast food franchises to make profit, and spread the disease like AIDS
* Their advertising destroys the brains of any it touches, and makes idiots feel at home in an idiot society

Send 'em all to the flames, I say. If we lost all fast food tomorrow... we'd have to go back to buying sandwiches at deli counters.

OH NOES