Forum:USERNAME vote

Forums: Index > Village Dump > USERNAME vote

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6550 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

Yeah.

It seems like a lot of people are pretty pissed off about {{USERNAME}} going down the drain, and it looks like we need some kind of vote to sort things out. I don't know whether this'll actually count for anything, but if enough admins get involved in the discussion as well as users I guess there's a pretty good chance. So, basically, have your say here, but try not to set the carpet on fire. -- 14:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Bring it back

Without username my talkpage says, "Welcome to my talkpage, [insert your name here].", which makes me look like more of an asshole than I really am. Plus I used it on one other page, and only one other page, in a moderately humourous joke of the funny kind. --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Same here actually. See for yourself ~~I WAS HERE~~ -k j h f !- 15:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep voting in the poll.

I think it should just be policed more (by admins and users) to prevent causing n00bs more distress than is necessary. If it is, it's a great feature that I think needs to return.--<<>> 16:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't have strong feelings about this, but it's popular so I think it should be available. We need to decide when it is and isn't appropriate to use it though. I also think a clear and signed vote here is better than a poll. Unsigned votes are just far too.... democratic. <shudder> -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 19:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Bring it back. Why we go on crusades like this instead of careful culls I don't know. -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me) 19:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we did. If the link at the top is correct, twas a screw up, methinks. I certainly wouldn't vote to break something that I like. Except Megatron.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Just because a few people abused {{USERNAME}} doesn't mean that nobody should be allowed to use it any more. Let's start a list of things that got wrecked by the new lack of the template, I'll start: --User:Nintendorulez 20:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I never had a problem with it in the first place, but I supposed some regulation wouldn't hurt. Maybe a warning for "{{USERNAME}} is gay", and a ban if they do it again? Idk, it'd just be a shame to never see it again. t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 20:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
It has a lot of uses, and I don't see anything seriously wrong with people abusing it. We can just block them. -- Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 09:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
BIB I only used it, like, thrice. Sir Tooltroll, Esq. CUN • Eh? • Oh! • UnTunes! •• I my cat! 10:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

List of weapons that don't articles that had good uses for {{USERNAME}} and are now wrecked

Game:Game Online/Multi Player - Instead of logging into the server as youself, you now log in as Guest User, which is kind of contradictory.
HMS Potatore lost the joke where Gilbert blames <insert name here> for spreading redundant Wilde quotes.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
There were several Help/Tutorial pages that used it. t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 20:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
No noobs were harmed by FFS which had a hilarious instance of it. Several established users fell for it, and then jumped aboard. Sir Tooltroll, Esq. CUN • Eh? • Oh! • UnTunes! •• I my cat! 10:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Keep it gone

Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 10:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
It is quite annoying when overused. It was funny when it was used very rarely and for specific comedic purposes. It was taken away because people were using it all over the place, with effectively no value added, and you couldn't tell at a glance, so it became very annoying. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 08:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

I thought there was a vote going on. ~~I WAS HERE~~ -k j h f !- 15:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This is the forums; if something is worth saying, it's worth saying in ten different places.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

why not create a skin in which it works, one which it doesn't and allow people to choose on their preferences?--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 16:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The system we have now is fine; those who are tired of it can hack what it says. Crazyswordsma n...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 16:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The system we have now is broken so that NO ONE can see {{USERNAME}} properly.--<<

>> 16:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It works for me. Crazyswordsma n...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 20:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This is pathetic. It's just like politics but at least those fuckers don't pretent to be funny. fucking new year. bye -- Vosnul 00:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

So when are the admins going to pay attention to this vote? --User:Nintendorulez 20:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hahahah Whoaaahaahaaha.. . Pull the plug . -- Vosnul 23:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

<insert name here>?

You are not entitled to vote.
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.

Keep it dead.

Put it back.

Put it back, but go through Special:Whatlinkshere to get rid of unnecessary usage of it.

There were 0 votes since the poll was created on 04:11, 4 June 2021.

poll-id 60D390953E768C494D23C7E3AFBA67AA

{{USERNAME}} has returned from the dead

I've re-enabled it as it seems people were pretty clearly in favour of having it back. Remember to use it wisely, folks. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 03:13, 6 Jan 2007

Let me be the first to say "W00t!".--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 04:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

But what about <insert name here>?--Scott 04:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

No, bad. That's what got it disabled in the first place. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 04:54, 6 Jan 2007

YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

04:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yay! Now ban Sikon for wasting our time. --AAA! (AAAA) 05:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Sikon was responsible? If so, I say we not only ban but desysop (at least for a while if not permanently) him, since there was never a vote on this, or even a heads-up so people could object beforehand. And it took a whole month of objecting to get the template back. I mean, look at the overwhelming majority to bring it back. Also, <insert name here> should also be - *is shot* --User:Nintendorulez 20:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

/me slaps Scott

t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 20:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

/me suddenly realizes he i - Er, *suddenly realizes he isn't on #uncyclopedia* --User:Nintendorulez 20:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

really? are you sure?!

t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 20:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... *checks taskbar* Avant Browser... wait, maybe that is IRC. Dammit, I can't tell... --User:Nintendorulez 21:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

WTF?

It was working for awhile, right? Why is it showing <insert name here> now?--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Still works for me...

t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 02:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Odd, mine shows "<insert name here>", rather than whatever my name is.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hard refresh? --

08:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It's works on this computer. This computer that is not, I say again, not at work.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 14:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It's because the site-wide javascript was broken for a while before, and is fixed now. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 15:02, 16 Jan 2007