Uncyclopedia:VFH/Serious 2: Electric Boogaloo

Vote	Score: 2 ~~meerk~~ No I'm serious. No fucking scoretext joke here. Fuck off.
Nominated by:	RA HB 08:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
For: 8	NMFR Just as serious as I was last time. Donate. -RA HB 08:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC) For. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 09:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC) This isn't funny, guys. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC) 4 - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 08:08, Feb 15 ? I don't get this article, and yet at the same time, i'm compelled to vote for it. BrainwashingSaberwolf116 15:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC) For OK, there's clearly something wrong with me. I laughed more at this one than almost any other article I've seen here. I mean, I know humor is subjective, but seriously. How is this not as funny as hell? The joke does not dry out at all for me, it gets funnier. I must be a dork. Strong for. --TPLN 20:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Come on. It's Cajek. —Sir SysRq (talk) 22:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC) For. Mr N Fork you! 23:07, Feb 18
Against: 6	Against. Joke simply dries out after a paragraph or two. I think it could be applied to some more various areas rather than the "I'm serious, give to charity" gig, since that's a sensible thing to do anyway. --Nachlader 10:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Against. Per last time - just doesn't click for me - feels like it's trying too hard for too little return. --UU - natter 09:50, Feb 16 against. a cajek article i didn't love. weird. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC) But seriously... • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 17:09, Feb 17 Comment. Does this article render this nomination useless? ---kun "whisper sweet nothings into thine ear..." 18:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC) The two articles are also really nothing alike. They share a name. -RA HB 19:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Against. Rawrimabear 02:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC) no emoC It's fairly bland and repetitive - not a classic Cajek --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 13:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments:	Neh. I voted against at first. Simply because even if orphans and hunger can be made fun of at some point this concept didnt do it for me. I also realized Im really sick today snurggle so maybe Im a bit too serious so instead of voting against I'll stick with a comment and an abstain. --kit 12:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Abstain --Mnb'z 04:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Abstain.--Sycamore (Talk) 11:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)