UnNews talk:UnFree UnNews more productive than Free UnNews

This article probably could be improved, so I won't be mad if someone edits it. --Mn-z 17:36, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Not only do I think sniping between the two sites is really a waste of time, 19 articles were written on .co 5-13th January, compared to 22 here. A difference of three, one of which is an article Aleister was set to transfer but hasn't yet for some tedious photo transfer reason. Hardly a notable discrepancy. And you realise if ninjas took me and you out UnNews would be pretty fucked on both sites right? I come back over here to read funny stuff, and I have also proof-read some of your work, (check your first sentence in your latest article for an error btw) and I'd ask you to be less antagonistic in the future. Aleister wrote the following in a forum and I really liked it. Notice how he confuses the names of the 'two' sites, [my brackets]:

I guess I have to be some kind of adult here from time to time, which is boring and takes time away from important things. But Puppy, go boy, go and sign up at Uncyclopedia [the new site], which has saved your account and did a damn good job in saving your pages from some kind of tantrum. That site is us, everyone, duh. You could put up the mother in hell page and probably get it featured, at least I'd vote for it - that night was so much fun, one of the best I've had here. Romartus too, please, everyone sign up, you too msnbc, you are turning out to be a hell of a writer and I am very impressed. Welcome back. But everyone, Uncyclopedia [the new or old site?] is our home, that other site [the new site] is home, dudes. But everyone there should haul ass back here once in awhile and help out with some of the admin at Uncyclopedia. This site, right here, is going to be uncyclopedia's search engine destination for a long time. New people will come here [the old site], hundreds if not thousands of them (wikia won't let us look at the site traffic numbers, WTF is that?), and they will see the best face of uncyclopedia [the new/old site?] we can give them while directing them in no uncertain terms if they're bright enough to catch it, where the site is that will be the most interesting form of uncyclopedia [the new site]. This place [the old site] has to shine like it always has, lights on and working. But telling them to go to the other site [the new site], duh, best of both worlds? This is our home [the new site?] too. So please, stop it, I need to do other things and write some stuff. Apology if I talked too much like I'm ordering people to do things, but someone has to do that for at least a few minutes or this place could fucking fall apart

--Leverage (talk) 13:25, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the posting Leverage. I saw Aleister's earlier comments. I think we are all better employed as UnNews writers to talk to the outside world and not engage in 'double navelism'. The first story was ok as it was a jokey way of reflecting on a real event, in the same way stories about ED's break up in April 2011 were newsworthy (because it happened). Same criteria applies now in my view. Let's make other people laugh otherwise both sites will lose a casual reader's interest. I can't remember what I read in December 2008 but it encouraged me to make an account. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:24, January 15, 2013 (UTC)