Forum:Exactly As Much Voting As We Have Now
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Exactly As Much Voting As We Have Now
Note: This topic has been unedited for 5619 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.
Everything's fine. Zombiebaron's full of shit. Also, this will be a no admins vote. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 01:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Just to make sure everybody is clear about the facts here, I'm not full of shit, I'm just a forward thinking pragmatist. You should read my position on this matter before you let Ape's insults and exclusionary tactics sway you towards not making things change. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 05:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly! Change is what we need, but Zombiebaron is trying to steer you in the wrong direction! If you want change for the better, vote for voting! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 05:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- If I were trying to "steer [them] in the wrong direction" I would have placed a banner on the Main Page or something lame like that, Boomer. I just want these people to hear what I have to say. And what I have to say is that we should all stop wasting our time with silly ass votes and just get out there and do whatever feels right. If all these stupid conversations and decidings were left in the hands of a few capable individuals, the rest of you would be free to do as you pleased. Doesn't that sound like change you can believe in (but can't vote for, because I've protected the page where the vote for not voting is)? -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 05:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- But what we please is to vote! There's no other reason for the immense number of votes required for this site to function! We vote to feature articles and we vote to delete articles! We vote to create sysops and we vote to bitch at Wikia! We vote for every award ever conceived in the mind of a misguided user! I'd say the people have already spoken, and they want votes! Trying to remove votes is trying to remove the very lifeblood of Uncyclopedia! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 05:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- What you are forgetting is the that I am not proposing a total lack of voting. Part of my final solution to all our problems includes holding one annual vote for that year's "President of Uncyclopedia". This person would then choose "Cabinet Members" who would get to be the sole voters in the various preexisting voting areas of the wiki. Without competition, these capable members would be able to make the right decisions on their own, while still keeping the overall look and feel of "voting" as we now know it. Perhaps in time cabinet members would work in teams of three or five, but they would be mandated to all vote the same way, in order to eliminate petty bickering and feelings of false hope among the rest of the population. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 06:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, but what would the "leftovers" be left with in the aftermath? Sure, with nothing to vote on they may go back to writing for a month or two, but soon after they, we, will realize what it is we've truly lost. Without voting, what's the point? You see it as a meaningless distraction, but we see it as meaning. When we lose voting, we lose everything. The empty hours of our empty days are filled with votes, whether they be in VFH, VFD, -otM, or even VFS! The only result of your elitist scheme will be to turn this into an Uncyclopedia devoid of life, devoid of the very soul that keeps the site functioning! And even then, the kicker is that you'll be creating exactly the same vote-only system that I have proposed, simply limiting it to the "President" and his cabinet of lackeys. After all, how will they ever have time to do anything else while they're running Uncyclopedia with an iron grip? It will only serve to create a rift between your upper-crust bourgeois and the writers of the proletariat! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 06:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I never really thought of it like that. I guess what you're saying is that everybody likes feeling like they have a voice in the community. They like to feel like they matter (even though, truthfully, none of us matter). This is a place where we can all come and vote on things and each and every vote counts the same, and we can see the results of most of those votes directly. We may not all wield the same power when it comes to final decisions, but everybody's vote on VFH and VFP are worth the same. I respect and concede that fact. I also concede that this matter is serious. I may have started out kidding around a little, and then maybe I started kidding around a bit more. I don't think any of the three solutions currently on the table address the issue as I see it though. As I see it, the focus is too much on voting. Not every article needs to be a featured article. Not every article needs to even be close to a featured article, and I think many people have lost sight of that fact because featured articles are usually the first thing people see when they first come to Uncyclopedia, and they think to themselves "Oh boy, all I gotta do is think of something funny and these folks will put me on their front page!" That's only one side of our addiction to voting though. The other side is the Village Dump. I would like to see more people expressing their opinions with paragraphs and reason instead of votes (that goes for everywhere on the site). There is no way to promote that other than awareness though. We must all be the change. Therefore, we must all stop voting. Just stop and boycott it entirely. I know I'm boycotting voting right now. And if we all start boycotting voting, voting will end, and everybody will be forced to turn voting powers over those few still willing to vote. So, cast your vote for not voting by not voting, and if you want to vote you should vote, but while you vote you should be aware that some of us are boycotting what you stand for and believe in. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 06:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- No! Don't you see, this is what he's wanted all along! He's trying to abolish voting altogether! We must not give in to his seductive words and move in the opposite direction! Users and admins alike, we must unite and lock all non-voting pages! When Uncyclopedia turns only to voting, then the Golden Age will come! People from all around will flock to the majesty that is Uncyclopedia, confident that they can vote just like anybody else on whatever they want! Our name will be known! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 07:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- "What [I've] wanted all along," is freedom from worry for the commonfolk of this corner of the internet. Everybody should be able to work on their articles, and create their manipulated pictures in an environment of equality and understanding. Voting gets in the way of that. The other thing that I wanted all along was for less conversation and more action. I could talk some more about how everybody should boycott voting, but I've already done that and I'm kind of tired of repeating myself. This solution has become the problem. Therefore, from this moment forward I am also starting the boycott against sitting down with people that don't share your point of view and trying to calmly reason with them. I mean, we all know Boomer is secretly a member of a secret organization who's membership and existence are both secretive. We all know that he consistently speaks on their behalf to further their pro-voting agenda. We all know that they pay him large sums of sandwiches for this service. We all know these things and yet we still pretend to like him, and be his friend, and find some of the things he says to be funny. But it is all lies and we are lieing to ourselves when we believe in lies. Therefore, I urge you all one last time not to vote, and not to try to explain why you aren't voting to these democracy-pushing-socialists that seem to support voting as much as they support bestiality and eating each other's poop. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 07:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's obviously an astroturf campaign. Boomer's a shill for Big Voter. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- What? Astroturf? Lets play 5-a-side. But not soccer. 5-a-side jousting. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 11:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- I may be late to the debate, but I'd like to reference first that time I nearly voted during my sojourn to democracy. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 15:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- It's obviously an astroturf campaign. Boomer's a shill for Big Voter. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- "What [I've] wanted all along," is freedom from worry for the commonfolk of this corner of the internet. Everybody should be able to work on their articles, and create their manipulated pictures in an environment of equality and understanding. Voting gets in the way of that. The other thing that I wanted all along was for less conversation and more action. I could talk some more about how everybody should boycott voting, but I've already done that and I'm kind of tired of repeating myself. This solution has become the problem. Therefore, from this moment forward I am also starting the boycott against sitting down with people that don't share your point of view and trying to calmly reason with them. I mean, we all know Boomer is secretly a member of a secret organization who's membership and existence are both secretive. We all know that he consistently speaks on their behalf to further their pro-voting agenda. We all know that they pay him large sums of sandwiches for this service. We all know these things and yet we still pretend to like him, and be his friend, and find some of the things he says to be funny. But it is all lies and we are lieing to ourselves when we believe in lies. Therefore, I urge you all one last time not to vote, and not to try to explain why you aren't voting to these democracy-pushing-socialists that seem to support voting as much as they support bestiality and eating each other's poop. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 07:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- No! Don't you see, this is what he's wanted all along! He's trying to abolish voting altogether! We must not give in to his seductive words and move in the opposite direction! Users and admins alike, we must unite and lock all non-voting pages! When Uncyclopedia turns only to voting, then the Golden Age will come! People from all around will flock to the majesty that is Uncyclopedia, confident that they can vote just like anybody else on whatever they want! Our name will be known! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 07:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I never really thought of it like that. I guess what you're saying is that everybody likes feeling like they have a voice in the community. They like to feel like they matter (even though, truthfully, none of us matter). This is a place where we can all come and vote on things and each and every vote counts the same, and we can see the results of most of those votes directly. We may not all wield the same power when it comes to final decisions, but everybody's vote on VFH and VFP are worth the same. I respect and concede that fact. I also concede that this matter is serious. I may have started out kidding around a little, and then maybe I started kidding around a bit more. I don't think any of the three solutions currently on the table address the issue as I see it though. As I see it, the focus is too much on voting. Not every article needs to be a featured article. Not every article needs to even be close to a featured article, and I think many people have lost sight of that fact because featured articles are usually the first thing people see when they first come to Uncyclopedia, and they think to themselves "Oh boy, all I gotta do is think of something funny and these folks will put me on their front page!" That's only one side of our addiction to voting though. The other side is the Village Dump. I would like to see more people expressing their opinions with paragraphs and reason instead of votes (that goes for everywhere on the site). There is no way to promote that other than awareness though. We must all be the change. Therefore, we must all stop voting. Just stop and boycott it entirely. I know I'm boycotting voting right now. And if we all start boycotting voting, voting will end, and everybody will be forced to turn voting powers over those few still willing to vote. So, cast your vote for not voting by not voting, and if you want to vote you should vote, but while you vote you should be aware that some of us are boycotting what you stand for and believe in. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 06:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, but what would the "leftovers" be left with in the aftermath? Sure, with nothing to vote on they may go back to writing for a month or two, but soon after they, we, will realize what it is we've truly lost. Without voting, what's the point? You see it as a meaningless distraction, but we see it as meaning. When we lose voting, we lose everything. The empty hours of our empty days are filled with votes, whether they be in VFH, VFD, -otM, or even VFS! The only result of your elitist scheme will be to turn this into an Uncyclopedia devoid of life, devoid of the very soul that keeps the site functioning! And even then, the kicker is that you'll be creating exactly the same vote-only system that I have proposed, simply limiting it to the "President" and his cabinet of lackeys. After all, how will they ever have time to do anything else while they're running Uncyclopedia with an iron grip? It will only serve to create a rift between your upper-crust bourgeois and the writers of the proletariat! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 06:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- What you are forgetting is the that I am not proposing a total lack of voting. Part of my final solution to all our problems includes holding one annual vote for that year's "President of Uncyclopedia". This person would then choose "Cabinet Members" who would get to be the sole voters in the various preexisting voting areas of the wiki. Without competition, these capable members would be able to make the right decisions on their own, while still keeping the overall look and feel of "voting" as we now know it. Perhaps in time cabinet members would work in teams of three or five, but they would be mandated to all vote the same way, in order to eliminate petty bickering and feelings of false hope among the rest of the population. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 06:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- But what we please is to vote! There's no other reason for the immense number of votes required for this site to function! We vote to feature articles and we vote to delete articles! We vote to create sysops and we vote to bitch at Wikia! We vote for every award ever conceived in the mind of a misguided user! I'd say the people have already spoken, and they want votes! Trying to remove votes is trying to remove the very lifeblood of Uncyclopedia! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 05:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- If I were trying to "steer [them] in the wrong direction" I would have placed a banner on the Main Page or something lame like that, Boomer. I just want these people to hear what I have to say. And what I have to say is that we should all stop wasting our time with silly ass votes and just get out there and do whatever feels right. If all these stupid conversations and decidings were left in the hands of a few capable individuals, the rest of you would be free to do as you pleased. Doesn't that sound like change you can believe in (but can't vote for, because I've protected the page where the vote for not voting is)? -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 05:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly! Change is what we need, but Zombiebaron is trying to steer you in the wrong direction! If you want change for the better, vote for voting! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 05:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, having a bunch of people deciding on one thing is hard enough already, so why not have one person deciding everything just for kicks? Sure this president/pope/chairman/supreme leader guy isn't going to take breaks, laze away or just disappear for no apparent reason, right? People don't get paid to do anything here, sunshine, and the only result this great plan of yours brings will be one that is seen in countless Open Source projects - an utter failure. -- The Colonel (talk) 00:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- You mean the rest of you guys aren't getting paid? Haha, oh wow, what a bunch of saps. - T.L.B.
WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 04:37, Aug 3
- You mean the rest of you guys aren't getting paid? Haha, oh wow, what a bunch of saps. - T.L.B.
The Vote
Score: 77 fat people in a circle makes a fat circle
- 1 For - the rest of us like having input. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 01:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- So i herd u liek mudkipz MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 01:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- lolwut --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 01:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm
voting, and there's nothing you can do to stop me! Muahahahaha! - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 02:21, Jul 30
- Admin votes don't count, but if i strike I'll get banned again. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 02:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- What was that? I didn't hear you over the sound of my vote counting. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 02:46, Jul 30
- This vote is not for you establishment types. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 02:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- To be the Man you've got to beat the Man. Wooo! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 03:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- This vote is not for you establishment types. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 02:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- What was that? I didn't hear you over the sound of my vote counting. - T.L.B.
- Admin votes don't count, but if i strike I'll get banned again. -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 02:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Exercising my rights. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 02:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Everything's Fine. I really don't understand how anyone can think otherwise. And, for the love of God, take down that stupid fucking banner on the main page. It's embarrassing, especially seeing as it's addressing a nonexistent problem. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 04:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Upon reading the forum topics below this, I realize this is referring to something other than I thought it was. However, my vote still stands. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 04:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Voting is a waste of time. --Mn-z 04:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Abstain. Meh. --UU - natter
08:53, Jul 30 - Maybe tl;dr. -OptyC Sucks!
CUN16:08, 30 Jul 
Opinion! —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk)
GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)- egon, you said crossing the streams was bad. 17:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Zombiebaron because having less voting is less not good. Also, more efficient, etc. Go ZB • <6:04 Jul 31, 2009>
- 9. And that is all I have to say on the matter. Nameable • mumble? • (UnScr:PWotM) 17:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
For. and Against. I cancel out my own vote. --
RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 17:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Lol. Worst voter ever! XD -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 18:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Ape. Zombiebaron is an oilygark with this mad idea but I can't decide what is worse. Oilygarks or Demomobsters. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 08:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Ape. Zombiebaron is an oilygark with this mad idea but I can't decide what is worse. Oilygarks or Demomobsters. --
- Lol. Worst voter ever! XD -- uninviting Ape (reduce) (Riot Porn) 18:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Question? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 10:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)- Answer Nameable • mumble? • (UnScr:PWotM) 10:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
