SocialDeviancy.com
|
Description
Social Deviancy (or "SocDev", as it is often casually abbreviated) is a free, open, uncensored web community, which aims to provide a place where social taboos, cultural expectations, and political correctness have no place and hold no sway. The site is mainly comprised of a phpBB discussion forum, a live IRC chat room with Java console integrated into the site for convenient clientless usage, and a free-for-all anonymous "graffiti wall". Every part of the site is operated with a strong emphasis on freedom of speech - absolutely no topic whatsoever is considered taboo, "against the rules", or even in poor taste. As a result, typical conversations on the forum or chat room range from the most mundane chit-chat, to topics that most conservative people may consider extremely offensive to discuss openly. However the right to freedom of speech and freedom from censorship is the core principle of the website, and no user has ever had a forum post deleted, edited or censored, nor been banned or silenced from the chat room, for speaking their mind on any topic. Social Deviancy is a place where users can feel free to deviate from society's expectations and guidelines and say what's on their mind without fear of censorship, reprisal, punishment or retribution. The worst repercussion anybody can expect at Social Deviancy is that another user might disagree with their point as view with as much right as they had to state it.
The operator of and main contributor to Social Deviancy is "Venomous", a cynical 20-something guy with a jaded yet nihilistic view on life. His period articles and contributions to the forum portray a narcissistic, "I'm right, you're wrong, and in the unlikely event I'm proven wrong, I still stand by my statement because your opinion of me means nothing anyway!" attitude made popular by more well-known web writers such as Maddox of TheBestPageInTheUniverse.net, TuckerMax of TuckerMax.com, or Lowtax from SomethingAwful.com. In fact, to quote directly from the Social Deviancy site, Venomous describes Maddox as "a cooler, funnier me". This is typical of Venomous's attitude, which seems to be a strange blend of narcissism and nihilism - his writing is littered with self-deprecating humor, in contrast with the "nobody is better than me" attitudes of writers like Maddox, but he shares the same arrogant "you may not like me, but you're so unimportant to me I couldn't care less" perspective. It is clear that the Social Deviancy site was born from his own desire for a place online that he could openly say exactly what wanted to, and then formed a community of like-minded individuals around that concept.
The demographic of Social Deviancy's users is most predominantly single, white, 15-30 year old males, who are either unemployed, IT freelancers, or in other "geek" careers, with high levels of technical knowledge and poor real life social skills. Most are either virgins, or have been jaded by repeated poor experiences with women. In fact much of Venomous's writing contains deprecating comments towards women as a result of his own experiences with failed relationships, infidelity, and a general distrust of women and relationships as a result.
While not intentionally an "adult" or "shock" site, such as StileProject.com or Rotten.com, the open, uncensored nature of Social Deviancy results in some of the site's content not being suitable for minors, or in fact many conservative adults. To quote the site's main page, "We're not nice and conformist and clean, but nor are we hardcore and badass and tough. Like most things in life, we just exist. So don't expect to be impressed. And don't expect to be offended.".This is not to say that things like pornography, offensive images, or controversial topics are intentionally and deliberately published, only that if in the event that are brought up, they are respected by the site's free speech policies as opposed to being censored or removed like the majority of other "safe" web communities are likely to do. In fact, the administration/moderation of the site's forum and chat are generally limited to the removal of spam and spambots, and general maintenance (removing accidental double posts, etc.). No post or user is ever removed for the actual topical content of their post. As a result, SocDev is somewhat of a niche site, as this philosophy will be seen as vastly liberating to some people, and highly offensive to others. As a result, some conservative viewers may wish to block this site from minors using their preferred website blocking software.
Language
English
Contact
Please use the web-based contact form for all Social Deviancy enquiries/submissions.
Additional Information
Social Deviancy was originally launched in April 2001, but was forced to shut down in June 2002 due to web hosting difficulties. The site was revamped and relaunched in February 2005, and has been online steadily and growing in membership and content to this day. Since the relaunch several new interactive features have been added to the site, such as QuoteDB, a repository of user-submitted quotes from the chat room, similar to Bash.org. In March 2007, Venomous tentatively announced plans to possibly introduce a semi-regular podcast segment to the site.
Similar Websites
External Links
Discussion
Featured Page Nomination
SocialDeviancy.com has been nominated to be a featured wiki page. Please discuss this nomination below:
SocialDeviancy.com featured discussion
- Edit/Add to this Discussion
- Added to nomination process on 5 June 2007, from an old nomination that hadn't been processed.
- I for one, love that this page was nominated, in part because of the question it raises. Although the website is not pornographic in nature, it does carry and "adult" warning due to content, and I wonder whether it's appropriate to spotlight this kind of website given that AboutUs is a resource for some younger people as well as those who might be more conservative that this website might offend. While I don't personally have a problem with this stuff (and am pleased that such issues are address on the internet), is this something the AboutUs community feels should be spotlighted? --
TakKendrick | Talk
- Was this question ever resolved, Tak? It seems like an unusual amount of site for a nomination to sit idle without any resolution at all. Did the submission happen to slip through the cracks again? =( - Vaelor 23:29, 12 July 2007 (PDT)
- Hi Vaelor. Perhaps the purpose of my message last month here wasn't clear. This is the place for the discussion to take place on this. I'd been waiting for people from the community to come and discuss this here. I know that several AboutUs community members have looked at the nominees list, although no one has made a comment on this nomination or issue. And no, a month isn't an unusual amount of time on these, depending on buy-in from the community. Generally after two or three months, the discussion on featured nominations are "closed" to keep the nominees list paired down (although the option is always available to renominate pages that have been worked on).
- Was this question ever resolved, Tak? It seems like an unusual amount of site for a nomination to sit idle without any resolution at all. Did the submission happen to slip through the cracks again? =( - Vaelor 23:29, 12 July 2007 (PDT)
- I'm sorry if this has been confusing, with as many nominations as we get, once we've left a message with concerns or suggested actions to take the ball really is in the court of the WikiPage builder and community. I've been watching this page (both the main SocialDeviancy.com and the Feature Discussion) for several month and waiting for action or comment.
- If you'd like to see a good example of the kind of community discussion that can promote a page (with similar concerns), see: RFSHQ.com. -- TakKendrick | Talk 12:11, 13 July 2007 (PDT)
- Thanks for your prompt reply Tak. Obviously the community just isn't paying any attention to the nomination, or have decided it has not enough merit to even warrant a brief response. I guess it's out of my hands either way, but thanks for your consideration anyhow. - Vaelor 19:45, 13 July 2007 (PDT)
- I understand that Tak's concerns about this site's being appropriate or not to get featured are quite realistic, and also feel that some people might find it offensive. Personally however, I'd love to have it featured. Asad | *~talk~* 02:21, 24 October 2007 (PDT)
- No edits in quite some time, moving to LastChance today. TedErnst (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2008 (PST)
- Adult
- AdultChat
- Anti-Censorship
- Chat
- ChatAndForum
- ChatRoom
- Dirty
- DiscussionForum
- Forum
- FreeChat
- FreeChatRoom
- FreeDiscussionForum
- FreeForum
- FreeMessageBoard
- FreedomOfSpeech
- Fun
- MessageBoard
- NoCensorship
- OpenChat
- OpenForum
- SexChat
- Silly
- Smut
- Social
- SocialDeviancy
- Teen
- TeenChat
- Uncensored
- UncensoredChat
- UncensoredForum
- UnmoderatedChat
- UnmoderatedForum
- PossibleAdultContent