Uncyclopedia talk:Useless Gobshite of the Month

		This article was nominated for deletion on September 20, 2007. The result of the discussion was No Consensus.

		This article was nominated for deletion on September 20, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

September 2006

Since I can't self-nominate then I would like to point that I suck at writing and have no talent yet I keep on adding and editting shit. Vote for me this September. --User:Tom mayfair/Sig 18:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No. It takes a special kind of numbskullery to earn the coveted UGotM, it takes more than your simple, nay, naive kind of dumbassitude to get it. The most you can hope for is a ban for whoring yourself out for a badge that most people try to avoid.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 18:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

• Against. Voting on VFD and even just being here is useful. You haven't done enough to counteract that. --Sbluen 18:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well if a ban is all I can get then you can vote for me at FFS -- 19:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

You know that's not real, right? You'd be better off putting away childish things like UGotM, and picking up adult things like "humour". That way, someday, you'll be in the running for one of the good badges, VFH, VFP, PotM WotM, UotM, etc.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

*sigh* I'll never amount to anything.-- 19:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I have a theory that everyone knows enough about something to make a funny page about something. Start there (not with the theory, but with the page).--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Tom, other than your apparent aversion to commas and other forms of non-period punctuation, I'd say your material is really not all that bad. Besides, I was thinking of nominating User:Frinko this month... If you're just looking for a monthly award of some sort, maybe we could set up something at Unquotable or Uncycloversity that could be rigged in your favor? Particularly the latter, since I'm giving it a communist theme.  c • > • cunwapquc? 20:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't blame you guys for seeing how well I do write because my work is good great but I do have some crappy articles and some pointless edits. Just because I don't run around vandalizing and adding pointless shit doesn't make them anyless worthless to Uncyclopedia. My feelings are hurt. Especially because this is being tooken WAY too seriously. It'll be okay. You can withdraw my nomination if it's that much of a problem. You know you can. You're Administrators. Sorry for all the havoc.-- 06:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually nobody who has responded to this topic is an administrator (well, until my response)... —rc (t) 06:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, took me a mintue to realize that. Sorry.-- 06:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry - I've been mistaken for an admin on more than one previous occasion, no doubt due to my imperious demeanor and general overarching tendency towards pretentiously overworded statements (this one, for example). I should probably preface my talk-page entries with "IANAA" or something to that effect. My bad! But back to the point, is there any way, Tom, that I could, perhaps with, say, some promise of an accolade, however small, convince you, as a writer, to use, shall we say, commas?  c • > • cunwapquc? 16:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Removal from UGoTM

I'm tired of this, I want my name removed from UGotM, I'm not kidding, I have improved, I have changed, And if you little shits think that I haven't changed, You are wrong, I have changed, I am not trying to be admin, I am not doing anything wrong, I am doing what's right for me and what's right for me is being a member. You fuckers listening?, Good!, I will go to drastic lenghts to see my name removed from UGotM, I will even defend myself, But if any of you assholes have been listening, Then you would remove your nominations now!. --SU182 00:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you knock it off. You've pretty much got the award in the bag, and if you yank it off your userpage you're probably going to see something along the lines of a thing you're already familiar with- BANSTICK. Further, I'd suggest you calm down, as your above post could be construed as a threat. For someone coming off of a ban so recently, you're making an awful lot of noise. You got the award. The end. If you keep it up, I guarantee you're headed for infiniban. Just let it slide, and prove that you're not so useless in a way that really counts- like getting a featured article or image. --SarinZero (blabber ) 00:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And so it goes...Famine blocked this idiot forever. So much for a second chance, he clearly proved he didnt deserve one. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 01:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

He was banned too recently to get a UGotM award, anyway. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 01:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It was my understanding that they were going to give it to him anyway, but now that he's toast, who ends up getting it? Me? --SarinZero (blabber ) 01:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll offer myself up for it. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 03:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

All things told, though, this was wonderfully entertaining. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 17:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Yah, reading his rambaling "You are wrong" memo was fucking hilarious. --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 23:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

November

Now taking Nominations for the month of November. Put your nominations below this line.

Scrotum (Talk • Contribs (del) • Editcount • Block (rem-lst-all) • Logs • Groups • Checkuser) I'd like to nominate and offer my vote to Scrotum, not only for the stirling work done on the "it's vs its" debate but also for singlehandedly attacking every Admin. Great work! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

For As the only holder so far of this illustriouse award, I have to say this is outstanding work Bravo!--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 17:00, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)

For In the spirit of the whole ludicrous episode. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 17:00, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)

For its a no-brainer --Willy on wheels! 21:35, 29 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Support. He's been quiet recently, but still gets talked about anyway. It has kind of developed a mystique... The Legend of Scrotum, if you will. And what an apt username. -- T. (talk) 19:45, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

For, because I wanna be part of the cool crew.--Myronic 22:11, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Kerry's_big_sex (Talk • Contribs (del) • Editcount • Block (rem-lst-all) • Logs • Groups • Checkuser) Nomination & Vote for Kerry's big sex, who seems like an entirely reasonable person, BUT has created some content this month that has (a) been deleted multiple times by admins and (b) been re-born from the ashes of burnination in a state only marginally less-worse than before. It's a combination of ineptitude and diligence that really caught my interest (though I don't get the articles at all). -- T. (talk) 18:32, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC) Withdrawn. -- T. (talk) 19:41, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Against. If only for the contribution on Simon Schama (UK TV Historian Dude, just in case you wondered?) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Considering the month of November is over and Powershot dude (Talk • Contribs (del) • Editcount • Block (rem-lst-all) • Logs • Groups • Checkuser) got the most votes, I guess we can conclude that he won the award? --General Insineratehymn 02:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

He sure did, but nobody cares. *Ding* Next please! --AAA! (AAAA) 09:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

October

Now taking Nominations for the month of October. Put your nominations below this line.

I vote for User:127.0.0.1 who, despite been a member since April 2005, hasn't added a single article or contributed in any way. Thats worse than writing shite in my book -- Mhaille 17:40, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately that doesn't jive with the award's (must) "Consistantly write crap" rule. What we need is another award entirely devoted to (dis)honouring people that register and (a) do absolutely nothing or (b) contribute no original content and make inconsequential edits to other people's stuff. -- T. (talk) 17:47, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Are you plugging for a nomination? :) -- Mhaille 17:55, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Me? I deliver top quality excrement. It's been hard shovelling, too. :P So... no. I don't know. My spelling is too good anyway, and I depend on others (nod/wink) for my MS Paint artwork. :) --T. (talk) 18:15, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Can I self nominate? --The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 17:56, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Nope. But I'm happy to nominate you. You're just after the fancydan new template aren't u? -- Mhaille 17:57, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Someome, please nominate me. All my articles are worthless crap. Even my userpage says so. --Nintendorulez 00:45, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure you're at the right level of crapicity, but I'll give you a provisional VOTE in favour for the longest continous introduction paragraph known to man for Black Jesus (though the accompanying image IS clearly PS and not MSPaint standard) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 10:42, 1 Nov2005 (UTC)

October's already in the can. I say give it to Elvis, if he wants it. Hail to the King, baby. -- T. (talk) 16:24, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)

In keeping with the spirit of the award I agree. I vote to belatedly award the October award to Elvis, and on the strength of a disinterested minority he should be allowed to hang his new award in a prominent place in one of the small rooms of his mansion. Huhhuh huh. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Congratulations! (He's a busy man, so I guess I'll deliver it in person.) -- T. (talk) 17:35, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations to the first official winner of the GOTM award. I am so going to have to make it my life's work to win this award...... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

SO where should this be swen on to my uniform?--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 16:31, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)

It is to be featured on the reverse of the ceremonial y-fronts. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

New rule proposal

So as to exclude the most obviouse vandals/trolls can I suggets that some nominated for this cannot have been banned for longer than a day for a least say a month, it will obviously raise the bar somewhat! (ofcourse they may get banned after being nomed)--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 17:02, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that makes sense. I tried to filter in some kind of effort into the original rules, but you're right, unless anyone has reason against I'll add it now. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I agree to this... --AAA! (AAAA) 08:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Eliminate the award proposal

• Funny but no Harms the image of the site for new users. --Nerd42Talk 15:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry but as a fellow awardee (and the first at that) I have to vote to Keep as a semi-non-vindictive way of letting off steam.--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 15:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I got it too, and I like it --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 16:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep....if people can't enjoy a laugh they shouldn't be here.... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)
• Keep. You're just jealous =]   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for the reasons stated by Mhaille. ~Sir Rangeley GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 21:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This award is a good idea because I think it allows people to express issues they have with other users in a public forum and can eventually have constructive results. I tried working on the Skeletor page after Jtaylor1 nommed me. So I don't think the award is a bad idea. I still think my nomination is utterly ridiculous though, but I'll let the rest of uncyc decide that question.

--RudolfRadna 03:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC) (forgot to sign before, oops)

• Keep Idiots need awards too.--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 00:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete - Nasty cyber-bullying.--Metropolis 01:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Question about self-noms

Are you allowed to ask someone else to nom you, or does that still count? And what about droopping subtle hints on talk pages? --User:Nintendorulez 20:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The no self nom rule is stupid, because anyone can just create another account from another computer and just nom themselves anyway.

--RudolfRadna 20:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Then again, who wants to nominate themselves for UGotM anyway? --AAA! (AAAA) 08:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You'd be surprised, actually. Some people will do anything for attention. --Hrodulf 08:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

In the past, several have. We try to talk them down from the ledge (see the top of this very talkpage for an example).--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

About the "blocked within the last month"

I think the rule should be changed to: "Any nominee cannot have been banned for longer than a day, for at least the previous month. However, if they were banned after they were nominated, then that doesn't count." Otherwise, most of our users can't be nommed because they will be banned sooner or later. --AAA! (AAAA) 10:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

No. -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 10:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Was this meant to offend?

By nominating useful admins as a silly joke, you're making this prize absolutely void. Who will get offended by being UGotM when Braydie and ZB were also elected to its highness someday? This is becoming just a "look at me" award, and a real award: there are people actually wanting it. Is this prize which is becoming an useless gobshite. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 00:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yay! Perfect! -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 11:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually when ZB won it he deserved it. :) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Acctaully Mhaille, I still have "contributed the most "point free" articles...[with] bad grammar, [and a] lack of punctuation." -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 17:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

But, by your sig, I can tell you are still proud of your prize... Those Romans are crazy, Asterix! -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 17:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The Walter Humala Trials

(Discussion about the candidate Walter Humala, hero of the free expression, bashed by the greedy jews and their puppets) -- :herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

MOVED EVERYTHING TO Uncyclopedia:Useless Gobshite of the Month/Walter Humala

Let's vote for him!

If Mr. Humala was to be considered a real Nazi - I mean, the dangerous type, not the childish type - he would not appear in UGotM, he would just have been infibanned. He's the leading candidate, but I think more two or three votes would guarantee his election - and I'm sure he's the most worthwhile candidate in the list. (This comment is here because I'm just calling people to vote, not discussing his merit, which is the purpose of the subpage). -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 23:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow, the UGotM page...

...is a mess. It looks like it got hit by a car. Is it where we're putting all of our crazy now? 'Cause I've got a box full of expired crazy at home I've been meaning to get rid of. --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm still very supportive of Walter Humala's candidature. Except if we make him, how do they say it in France... Horse-concours! -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 02:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Zerotrousers

Well, it's better for us not making this witch hunt so public. Also, I'm a little tired of this prize. If you want it to be a plastic chocolate-pooping pig to leave on your job mate's desk, carry on. I understood this as a somewhat friendly warning. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 15:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• Nomination I resisted the much I could, but... he just keeps on hanging around with that Carmen Miranda hat. Attention whore... His criminal file keeps on expanding: 1)FH template on user page; 2)Nominating Benson for WotM; 3)Nominating himself to admin; 4)BHOP 5-star veteranship, flamewars, attacking MO and defending Drama 5) Having 3 adopters and nominating himself as an adopter; 6)Nominating the already-featured Fisher Price; 7)Non-confirmed (this I've just heard): creating This Page Does Not Exist. And so on, over and over and over. Yes, all of those stuff can be classified as just n00bish silliness, but c'mon... All at the same time from the same person? In sum, he caught my attention, in a bad way. Here goes my token of recognition. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 15:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
• For - Yeah, he did create Tpdne. Attention seeker, plain and simple (which is why we probably shouldn't give him this, but ah well). –—Hv (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

He does some useful stuff, as adding to QVFD and reverting vandalism. So he's not a vandal, which should lead to a ban, not GotM. I think this prize is just what he deserves. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 15:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• Against. NAB: You are taking this award too seriously, it looks like if you were looking someone to punish each month. Walter Humala I understund, but this? You said it yourself, a bit too N00bish, not a federal crime, no szvastikas in his sig.---Asteroid B612 (aka Rataube) - Ñ 17:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe. I've tried to leave him in peace until I've noticed he - yet again - keeps on looking for attention in annoying ways. But, as I've said: I'm not accusing him of such a huge crime or else I would be suggesting his ban, not UGotM. By the way, I also said this in this prize talk page, and sannse agreed: we are making this prize, which had some friendly but offensive value, just a big nothing. A watermellon to wear on your head. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 17:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• For Because we've tried most other things to shut him up, and giving him this silly award he's been after is the only remaining possibility that might do it! -- (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 22:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
• For --AAA! (AAAA) 03:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Against if I was allowed to vote again - Zerotrousers tries way too hard, especially with his random forum topics. I think the more suttle gobshites deserve this more. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 14:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Are you saying he's not just asking for this prize but also doing all of those stupid stuff in order to receive it? Then this is not a case for us, but to the ones empowered to deal with it. -- herr doktor needsAbolt  [scream!] 14:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
    • No, I'm just stating my voting habits. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 14:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
• For He put the original Contents up for VFD and it got deleted. I believe that giving him this award will be perfect justice for his actions. --General Insineratehymn 15:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment. That's a shitty reason. No, seriously. Shitty. --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh it is? What is your scientific explanation for this reasoning? --General Insineratehymn 15:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Scientifical Comment. Contents VFDeletion was mostly backlash from its run on VFH, methinks. The democratic voice of Uncyc said a collective "Meh". --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• For Just because I can. 82.6.99.79 21:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Pointing things out. Um, this is the talkpage. --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Heating up my dinner Anyone for baked beans and porridge? ~ 08:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Vaguely nauseated Simultaneously? --Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Change the "User banned within a month" rule

This rule should be changed, as you can see this month that nearly all nominations are getting disqualified because the people who truly deserve it are getting banned, thus making the noms useless, and this page cluttered. In case you don't know, nearly everyone who gets nommed for UGotM will be banned sooner or later, so this rule ruins it. If we made it so they don't get disqualified if they were banned after their nom, then we'd have people who'd truly deserve it, such as Metropolis, Zerotrousers, Java7837, and Fonchezzz. I'd like the rule changed so that they can't be nommed if they were banned last month, but are still eligable if they were banned after their nom, like Mhaille did in this diff. Does anyone agree? --AAA! (AAAA) 23:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay... Metro deserves it, Zerotrousers wants it... Java7837 deserves it, cokkies,yum! deserves it..., and Fonchezz, I have no fucking clue. --Lt. High Gen. Grue The Few The Proud, The Marines 23:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. And High Gen., I do know: Fonchezzz is the greatest gobshite of them all. He's the digital equivalent of Andy Kaufman (at age 3). --THINKER 23:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

AGHHHHHH!!!!! UGOTM! UGOTM! --Lt. High Gen. Grue The Few The Proud, The Marines 23:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's a little secret: the GotM nomination guidelines... they don't matter so much. —rc (t) 04:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

They do when the users put the big <s> on the nominee's space. --AAA! (AAAA) 07:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a forum post on this: Forum:Change the "User banned within a month" rule on UGotM. --thematrixeætsyou, the leader (talk) (flames) 09:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ohadaloni

Well, he won, but both his user and talk pages are protected. Who'll do the honors of giving him the badge? -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 13:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Mhaille got the honours. He just finished TP'ing what's left of Ohadaloni, as well as banning anyone who said he shouldn't get this prestigious award by virtue of (permanently) no longer being part of the en.uncyclopedia community.

Another one bites the dust. :) --Carlb 21:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Uh, maybe this is not cool?

Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion#Uncyclopedia:Useless Gobshite of the Month

Yeah, I vote for getting rid of this "award". Why add insult to injury? I vote for throwing this in the garbage, and never to bring it back. --  Le Cejak • <-> 05:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure. You can put it on VFD whenever you want. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 05:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Can't this wait 'til the end of the month?

We don't want to deprive Jamesryanjcrjcr of his hard-jcr earned-jcr award-jcr-jcr -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 19:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It is the end of the...oh, you're not using the Uncyclopedian calendar, are you? It's based on Uranus (no giggling!). Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

From VFD, as requested by Flammable

Uncyclopedia:Useless Gobshite of the Month - Again

Keep	Strong Keep as per before. If you get rid of UGotM, that's like getting rid of lipids. Sure, some people don't like lipids, but you need it to go along with all the other macromolecules that have been there since the beginning of existence. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 23:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Storong keep Look, If you can't take a joke... okay... just ignore it. Lemmee point this out to you:We are jackasses. --Lt. High Gen. Grue The Few The Proud, The Marines 23:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Keep. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) The Internet: Serious Business. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 20/09/2007 @ 23:36 Again? -- Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 23:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Keep, also, should the delete vote get higher then the keep vote on this, I recommend that we revert to the "Dead Award" status that we had earlier today. Also, I'd like to point out that Cajek's comment that it was already deleted today is to be taken with a very large grain of salt. Because it wasn't. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 23:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC) keep --- UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs - 23:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Strong Keep So that some of us can dream. -- Kip > Talk • Works • • 05:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keep. Apparently, this isn't a good argument, but it's a joke, like everything else on uncyc. If you're taking it seriously, it's time to sit back and remember that this is the internet, not real life. Also, all of you are SO getting UGotM after this! P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 11:01, Sep 21 Keep Dont you understand!? This is the only thing I'll ever be good aaat!!!! Mr. Briggs Inc. 12:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Eh? KEEP This ain't going no where! --Dexter111344 13:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keep BUT have it limited to admins as per Mhaille's instructions in the forum. - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 17:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keepy, but make it mandatory that the nominees accept. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 19:15 Sep 21, 2007 Weak Keep If the Post nomantion bans does not disqulify a user is removed I think it will become more of joke a less a award for trolls.--Scott 22:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keep - Let Famine win--Sir Manforman 22:42, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keep - It's a joke people...Let's hear the laughs now -- (Bonner) (Talk) 22:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Keep - Delete it simply because a few people can't take a joke? Hell no! --General Insineratehymn 23:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Conditional Keep - Just don't flood it randomly like you have now. --AAA! (AAAA) 00:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Keep - Uncyclopedia will have no way of expelling it's dumb asses out of its many sewers without it. --Eiyuu Kou 00:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Conditional Keep - Until recently, most UGotM winners actually deserved it, but the recent nominations are all crap. I'll be fine with it as long as either no more nominations are allowed or the requirements to be eligible for UGotm are changed. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN • Capt.) 05:15, September 22, 2007 STRONG KEEP - Use it for jokes, not actual people who deserve to be banned. --Capercorn FLAME! what? UNATO OWS 14:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Keep Use if for people who deserve it, not for jokes. The Oblong Lobster 15:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
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	CUN, can we please have real reasons why this should be kept or deleted? I don't get whatever the hell it is yer talking about. --  Le Cejak • <-> 23:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC) I gave a giant paragraph of real reasons the last time this was nominated (earlier today), and I don't feel this nomination worthy enough to do that again. So you can take your "real reasons" and SHOVE IT into a 401k, that way it generates more interest over time. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 23:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC) You don't need to call me "CUN" Cajek. It's a just a rank I acheived for writing a featured article. Also, I was explaining that earlier today, we reached a "delete" verdict this morining, and hear it is, back again. It was not given a fair trial so I re-nominated it--Sir Manforman 23:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Comment - I think Cajek is talking about the VFD verdict--Sir Manforman 23:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Manforman, I'd just like to point out to you that all of the actions that you describe being taken were taken under the assumption that the majority was against UGotM. I doubt that this page can ever be "deleted", per se, because so many pages link to it. The only answer is to have it as a "Dead Award", as it was earlier today. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 23:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC) I guess you're right ZB, it should probably be a "dead" award.--Sir Manforman 23:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC) "Should", not being the optimal word, given the mass of "Keep" votes. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC) I'd like to see this get a full 3 days. And possibly put a note in the dump, as a lot of people are bound to not check VFD regularly. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 04:53, 21 Sep 2007 Watch, as I guaruntee you if this award is to be deleted or given dead award status some user is going to ressurect it in their userspace, although probably with a different name. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 21/09/2007 @ 11:43 $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?-- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 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)

The Self-nomantion rule needs to be put back

This award has become chaos! We need put back in the self-nom rule.--Scott 04:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. --AAA! (AAAA) 04:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Damn you AAA, edit conflicting me!

Anyway, I also agree. I started it to make a point about Sannse's self-nomination. Then everyone started copying me to, so I inserted a {{USERNAME}} joke to parody self-nominations. Unfortunately, it was deleted. -- Kip > Talk • Works • • 04:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Third'd. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 11:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not scared of Uncyclopedia I just don't want them making fun of Jewish people

You'll have to live with it. On the plus side, you're blocked, which means you'll have to live with it anyways. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 19:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

? [definitely not you]??? 05:05 October 23

Hey baby. Come here often, or do you wait until you get home? Pup t 05:14, 23/10/2009

Not to bring up ol' shite but seriously...

Why have I not got this yet? 12:55, October 1, 2011 (UTC)