Talk:Vote for me!

AAAAAAAAA beats this page. <-Admiral06 21:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)->

so, AAAAAAA! is a lot older and is featured, so it doesn't have those advantages--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 16:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

From Pee Review

What do you think, feel free to try and add a testimonial, its all just harmless fun after all.--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 13:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I like it, how about a tansparent gif/png over the down arrow so people cant click it? --Tt22 13:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Special:VoteForArticle?article=Vote_for_me!&vote=down --Sultanofsurreal 14:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

ha ha ha, but thats hardly constructive criticism is it--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 14:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Just letting you know there were ways to circumvent the clever blocking of the arrow. I know that the placement of the arrow definitely is what pushed me to figure out a way to vote down for it -- I think it'll have the same effect on others, too.--Sultanofsurreal 14:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

now its pritty much as it started.--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 14:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it supposed to be just a bit left of the down arrow, because I can still see it. Also how about moving it to the Why: namespace, it fits the format. But still keep the Vote for me! redirect.--—Braydie 14:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

yeah, its where its supposed to be now, sultanofsurreal highlighted a good point about putting it over the down arrow, i'm not too sure about the Why namespace though, its supposed to be a bit more offensive than why:vote for me, that turns the title into a question and then it looses its forward attitude.--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 16:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, as soon as it's a bit older and out there it should get to the top. But it'l have a hard time getting past AAAAAAAAA! --—Braydie 16:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

yeah i know, 50 something already, 5 in a day isnt bad though. one can hope.--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 16:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

what about another idea, a image version of the down arrow - on top of the real down arrow which links to http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Special:VoteForArticle?article=Vote_for_me!&vote=up. Or is that cheating? --Tt22 Talk 17:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC) not thought of that, it may be possible to make it so that they both add to the score, or they are both up arrows, ill have to think about it, what do you think would be better?--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 17:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I reckon either way would work. --—Braydie 17:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking good in IE & Firefox, could be a one or two pixels lower Looks weird in opera but nobody uses that anyway. --Tt22 Talk 17:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

hows that now?--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 17:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

perfect I'd love to hear what someone who hasn't noticed what you've done say.... oh and totally off topic, anyone know why when I sign anything it leaves a barrel of toxic waste over the page source.--Tt22 Talk 19:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It is looking pritty good now, still if there is anything more people can suggest,what trick where?--Sir Silent Penguin "your site makes no sence" The illusion is complete 21:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)