urbanignoramus

lastly, cl-ssification number 5:

5.) someone whose made-up word pertains only to that individual or is most obviously an inside joke that only they are their friends will care about. while many of the words submitted to this website are created from your own life experiences, when submitting it, you should be focused of submitting your word so that others whom you do not know may laugh and enjoy the definition as well. sure your word may be derived from “that one night at jenna’s house,” yet do not submit it if you are not willing to explain the meaning in a way that others will care about. also, while many words may be defining a specific individual you know or the definition may contain their name, instead of doing this, rather explain traits attributed to that person so others can relate. instead of saying that (completely made up example) a defaugh is when someone acts like jane doe smith (perhaps this is a girl you know that is incredibly attractive, but has gross habits of picking her nose in public), then say just that. a defaugh is when a really attractive female commits gross habits in public. there, now everyone can laugh.
i think you are turning into an urbanignoramus.
cl-ssifications 2 and 3:

2.) someone who feels the need to post the same definition of an already over defined word with no new or interesting information to speak of on it. some words have more than one meaning and at times the previous definition(s) may not be fully explained or could have more substance to further enhance its meaning; however, once all aspects have been discussed, you need to stop. there are only so many times someone can post bondage as kinky s-x, s-x that is kinky, rough s-x involving kinky toys or a qweef as a p-ssy fart, c-nt fart, or v-g-n-l flatulence before you really start to just look desperate to get a word in edgewise (pun intended) on this site so that to yourself you appear “so original and inquisitive.”

3.) someone who tends to spend more time defining words with their own personal opinions rather than “facts.” (the word facts is in quotations, because although some words on here are real, many are fict-tious; however, that should not interfere with your ability to define to others what you take that word to mean, without stating how “awesome” or “disgusting” you think the word is.) for example, instead of defining -n-l s-x as “something that is repulsive and only meant for queers,” you should rather be focusing on what it actually is: “penetration of one’s -n-s performed on both men/women that can involve the use of a p-n-s or any numerous s-x toys.”
stop being an urbanignoramus!
a person who frequently misuses urbandictionary.com. i.e. any individual who falls under one or more of the following cl-ssifications (there are 5 main cl-ssifications to define this word, yet due to the character limit on definitions, another post(s) will show the rest):

1.) someone who posts a definition where there are spelling and grammar errors. though this site is meant to be “just for fun,” it really is also meant to be informative and enlightening. it is incredibly obnoxious to attempt to simply look up a few new words here and there and have to first decipher the submitters words before you can even begin to understand the definition they are trying to explain. urbandictionary.com gives you 3 chances when submitting a new word to edit it, so why not take an extra minute of your time (especially since you are already committing a few minutes to even submit a word), and proof read it.
if one more urbanignoramus feels the need to define the acronym dtf as “down to f-ck” i’ll flip!
cl-ssification 4:

4.) someone who hardly defines a word. though it is not necessary to type out a novel (as with this definition), especially since most people who visit this site are just looking for a few brief moments of a good laugh, you should still clearly state exactly what your word means so that others are not left with only part of the words definition. this also causes the annoying act of urbanignoramus cl-ssification number 2. if one person can just thoroughly define a word the first time, maybe then others will stop feeling the need to incessantly resubmit yet another replica of the definition.
what is with this chick being an urbanignoramus?