Keep |
|
Delete |
- It wasn't given a chance, Full-Protection - less than a single day, it is off VFD and temporarily locked. Than it is moved to a "petition." 13 users sign without a good reason, the best reason was "It's a joke, don't take it seriously", but how on earth is it a joke?? Meanwhile, the minority has "better" reasons to delete. And when it was on VFD, we reached "delete". I do not care that it was on for a long time, we've had things for long times, and eventually, we need to give them up. There is alternatives to deal with disruptive editors and this is not one of them, give it a fair trial, and delete--Sir Manforman 23:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- THIS WAS ALREADY DELETED TODAY We already voted, the page died. -- Le Cejak • <-> 23:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per previous vote. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per previous arguments. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 04:53, 21 Sep 2007
- While this page used to have a point, where someone who was bad enough to keep but not bad enough to ban got a jab in the ribs telling him or her to shape up, it has degenerated, rather consistently, into a page of bad vibes, drama and, yes, gobshitery. I never really liked this page, it's time for it to go. It's a bile-filled, festering trainwreck of a mixed metaphor and Uncyclopedia would be better off without it. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 06:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Give Dead Award status At least for a while, to give people a chance to calm down. Maybe reinstate it later if people promise to be good. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 08:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, it has become something we should not be encouraging at this site. ~Sir Rangeley GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 12:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Very strong delete What is the point of an award meant to put down other users? Isn't that a violation of our golden rule, "Don't be a dick"? Seriously, selecting a "Useless Gobshite of the Month" is just asking for bitter flamewars to break out. This website will be much better without UGotM.-- Phlegm Leoispotter * (garble! jank!) 20:42, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- De-1337 --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 00:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- $10 on TomMayfair's userspace. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 13:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Just because a couple of users can't take a joke doesn't mean this should die. There are many more users who want to keep this than delete or end it. Oh and regarding that "We already voted, the page died.", that was on VFD for a few hours and only a few VFD regulars even got a chance to vote on it before it was killed. That's just plain fucked up. --Dexter111344 13:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Discussion can go on at the forum topic, so as not to take up too much space here. As for not taking a joke, I think the first line here covers a lot of aspects of what UGotM has become. It might be a joke to you, but if the people who "can't take a joke" don't want the award, it's not funny to force it upon them like what happens now. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 05:16, 21 Sep 2007
- Acctaully, the first sentence of that page ("Bullying: what is it?") doesn't really apply to UGotM at all. It's more of a question, really. Also, nobody is forcing the award on anybody. I think since that one guy (who's username escapes me, at the moment) decided not to accept NotM, its become fairly accepted that you can choose not to accept an award, and instead give it to the person with the next highest score. Finnally, if anyone feels bullied, they should just talk to an admin who can solve the problem. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 21:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- You dodge any of my arguments against it with semantics about what is the first line of what I referenced, and then you say anyone is free to not accept the award after the debacle with manforman etc, when he clearly didn't want it? Ugh. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 03:14, 22 Sep 2007
- Cri moar plz. --Sir Flammable KUN (Na Naaaaa...) 15:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I'm afraid I have no idea what "the debacle with manforman" is. You're going to have to speak more clearly if you want me to continue to make you look silly. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 14:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to go ahead and jump right in here, regardless of how dangerous it might be to my "banned" status. Look, I don't particularly love UGotM. It's basically become a place where we borderline cyber-bully people, whether intentionally or otherwise. Part of the problem there is that people have lost track of what it's supposed to be. I don't think the "IT'S A DAMN JOKE!" is a sufficient reason to make people stop complaining that they got nommed. Another problem with it is that it seems to be pervaded with new people, which means people who don't know the concept behind it. It's not like it's very clear on the vote page. For all intents and purposes, reading it completely neutrally, it seems to be a legitimate page where users decide to mess around with people. I've been trying to cut down on my swearing lately, but this has become an absolute fucking nightmare. There has been a fair amount of controversy on the page as of late (at least two per month). Now, Zombiebaron (by the way, it was Anyone who declined NotM), don't make me go and link you to all the "debacles" that we've had so far. But they're there.
- I'm tired of watching this site, which I am very fond of, steeped in arbitrary controversy such as this. There is absolutely no reason why we should have to deal with all of this. As was the situation with Template:Featuredarticle the other night, sometimes the only way to fix a problem is to blank the source. And, as I've noted multiple times in this month alone, there has been a taut and somewhat unwelcoming atmosphere about the place recently. I don't know about any of you guys, but I think this could one of the major sources of the problem. I don't really like ranting the way I have, but I'm absolutely tired of this garbage.
- Bottom line, this is getting ridiculous. Currently, we have admins and users alike feuding rather heatedly over a page that is supposed to be a joke. All of them are users I consider to be useful. Therefore, we are tearing apart a tight-knit group of users that should be doing stuff that counts, not fighting over the fate of a vote page conceived in jest. I'm not expecting the adversity to go away, but I honestly don't think that this is helping matters at all. And that is simply unacceptable.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 15:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Very well put, Ljlego. Here's my two cents: We should unban Fonchezzz, let him win UGotM, infiniban him again, then put this silly award to death.-- Phlegm Leoispotter * (garble! jank!) 15:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- In all due respect Leoispotter, that's the worst idea I've ever heard. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Really? Worse than the idea of adding a small thermal exhaust port that leads straight to the reactor on the Death Star? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, that exhaust port had a purpose. Namely, to be at the end of a long, poorly defended, hallway-style ditch. It's like those "Do Not Enter" doors that took you an hour to find in the first place. Except you don't ussually blow up "Do Not Enter" doors. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 03:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- If you look really closely, there was a sign reading deus ex machina beside the port. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 04:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Spang says this should be given a full three days, and it has got a full three days. The keep response seems overwhelming. Kept?-- TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 06:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Kept, but be sure to make clarifications ont he apge as discussed.--Sir Flammable KUN (Na Naaaaa...) 12:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
|