DeadJournal

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
No Wikipedia.png
Wikipedia doesn't have a proper article about DeadJournal. It really wouldn't help those so-called experts by writing one either.

A DeadJournal is basically what a LiveJournal becomes when it dies. The first documented LiveJournal death occurred in May of the year 2001 B.C., when Frank Precissi, in a drunken rage, tore open the body of his LiveJournal, exposing its source code to the pale light of a full moon. Instead of ceasing to function, it became a creature of the dark , known now as a DeadJournal.

How to Kill a LiveJournal[edit]

Besides the aforementioned tearing out of source code, several other methods exist for killing a LiveJournal:

  • Write hurtful comments in all of its entries, poisoning the Journal with apathy.
  • Write no comments at all; without them, the Journal will die due to an attention deficiency.
  • Write so many comments that the Journal chokes on them.
  • Write a single comment that contains extreme sarcasm. Writing any more would just be overkill.
  • Leave the Journal alone in the dark; it is likely to be eaten by a Grue.
  • Get the Journal addicted to huffing kittens, but don't allow it to cough up the resulting hairballs; the buildup of hair will choke it just as much as a buildup of comments.
  • Shove a machete into its groinjourmal.
  • Feature the Journal on a credible news source, embarrassing the Journal to death.
  • Just wait for a while. Steve Ballmer will get around to fucking killing it eventually. (Just make sure that he doesn't kill you first.)

NOTE: Do NOT attempt to kill your LiveJournal by going back in time and stopping the Journal from being born. Stopping its birth does not kill the Journal, it simply stops it from existing. Furthermore, if you happen to be related to your LiveJournal, there is a chance you will undo yourself as well. Best to leave time travel to the experts.

Differences Between a LiveJournal and a DeadJournal[edit]

One might expect a LiveJournal and a DeadJournal to be as different as their names imply; this is not necessarily so. The quality of spelling and grammar of a DeadJournal is no better than that of a LiveJournal, and in some cases can be much worse. However, there are some notable differences.

For starters, the layout of a DeadJournal changes much more frequently than that of a LiveJournal. This could be the DeadJournal's attempt at emulating decomposition, as each layout change makes the journal harder and harder to read.

Also worth mentioning is the content of a DeadJournal. Whereas the Goth population on LiveJournal makes up a minuscule 42 percent of the overall users, on DeadJournal, that number increases to an almost frightening 95 percent. No one is quite sure where the other 5 percent is, but it would appear that they are all Journals updated by Doctor Doom.

UndeadJournals[edit]

Currently, there is no known method for turning a DeadJournal back into a LiveJournal. In fact, the study of attempting to bring Journals back to life has been outlawed in most countries, including the United States of America, due to the resulting UndeadJournals.[1]

An UndeadJournal is the common result of all previous attempts to revive DeadJournals, and are incredibly dangerous. Though they still move like a Journal, they are basically brain dead, only able to fulfill their basic needs of sustenance; posting comments in the Journals of others.

If your Journal is commented on by an UndeadJournal, you must act quickly to save it. Quickly amputate the infected entry, keeping bleeding to minimum if possible. The entry must be doused in gasoline and then set on fire. If you are unable to save the Journal, the infection will spread to all other entries, and it will become an UndeadJournal itself. At this point, the only moral thing to do is shoot the zombified Journal in its header, to keep it from spreading the plague of the undead to others.

Notes[edit]

^ Recently there has been some controversy among top Journal scientists concerning the accuracy of the term 'UndeadJournal'. The side against the term argues that DeadJournals could also be considered UndeadJournals, since they are not considered to be alive, yet function as though they do. The side for the term counters these arguments on the grounds of 'I know you are, but what am I?'

See Also[edit]