Uncyclopedia talk:VFS

Archives

---

1, 2, 3, 4

Previous arguments discussions:

• Forum:A new VFS is in order‎‎
• Forum:A new VFS is in order/archive
• Forum:VFS: "Change these rules at any time"
• Forum:Proposal to change VFS rules Now superseded.

Discussions from Jan 2013 voting...

Chief crat announcement

• Can somebody please explain to me why Sannse changed ChiefjusticeDS's userrights? I have been sitting on IRC all night so clearly nobody made any effort to contact me. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 02:16, January 22, 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't know about the userrights, but Chief was the only candidate for crat, so has already won and was just waiting to be given the crown and scepter. Aleister 7:55 22-1-'13
    • What time was it changed? I only ask as I think it may have been changed while I was cleaning this page up and preparing it for the lightly roasted admins above, which cuts out the opportunity to ask. You can un-crat him and re-crat him though, if it makes you feel better.                                • Puppy's talk page • 09:59 22 Jan

Who are the current admins here? Can we vote to decommission any trouble makers?

--Funnybony  11:02, Jan 22

Special:ListUsers/sysop. As to voting them out - VFS is voting for admins. We haven't had any admins voted out in the past that I'm aware of. Most admins who no longer have admin status have chosen to relinquish it, or just become inactive over a prolonged period. To vote out an admin - based upon our current site structure - would require a vote specifically to remove an admin.                                • Puppy's talk page • 02:13 22 Jan

Agreed: An important question but out of order on this page. I'm sure the Admins would appreciate having only one drama-fest at a time. Also: We should always choose the card game before the cards are dealt. Spıke Ѧ 15:09 22-Jan-13

Is any wanker going to be admin on both versions of Uncy? I am totally against that major conflict of interest. Any admin on free (worthless?) Uncy should not also be an admin here IMO.--Funnybony  15:30, Jan 22

Hi FB. Can we not inflame please! Thanks. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 16:23, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

I plan to be an admin on both uncycs, but if anybody sees that as a problem I wouldn't object to my de-opping here, if there were some sort of consensus. -RAHB 00:39, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Aye, please don't be so disparaging. We have worked hard to create this project and we have worked hard to try to move it, and some more than others. To call the entire thing worthless, while technically true given the nature of Uncyclopedia, is unfair to all who have donated their time and effort to what they thought was a worthy project. This applies in all cases, on both sides of this rather unfortunate fork. -— Lyrithya ༆ 00:59, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Remember the days...

...when VFS wasn't about the drama? You've changed Uncyclopedia... ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 01:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Blame the split. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 01:08, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

No. Never.                                • Puppy's talk page • 02:26 23 Jan

I remember only too well the VFS drama BEFORE the split, when Pup almost got adminship but declined it and Frosty got vetoed because he was at ED. And there was VFS drama before that, but I don't remember the details right now. No point in blaming the split. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 07:03, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, the split is not just something that happened to us, it was a finding of fundamental incompatibility with Wikia that some but not all of us made. This is an unavoidable source of ill will, but it should not be a source of drama on this page. We decided that we need more Admins. If we were to all move to the Fork, this would not be the case, but that option is not on the table; you don't decide between Obama and Romney by saying, "I want us to have a King instead." This vote is a question of who, not whether, nor what next. Spıke Ѧ 15:58 24-Jan-13

• Clearly you do need more admins, but filling those gaps with infinite monkeys with sysop tools will only make things worse. So far there are a number of users who want it too much Madclaw @ ^talk 16:19, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Don't inflame, Madclaw (see above warning for FB). I am looking up the issue of your signature advertising your own website. I would say a link to your user page and then a note about your own place will be ok for now. BTW, you are on the Wikia hosted Uncyclopedia. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 16:49, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Voting irregularities

Romartus has locked down VFS in the midst of a revert war. Separately, I've noticed the following irregularities:

• Various users (Froggy, Puppy, Aimsplode) have taken it upon themselves to adjust the vote count, police the two-vote maximum, and in some cases decide which vote will be the casualty of the two-vote maximum. I think that it should be up to the voter to police his votes, and up to the Chief to count them, which he ought to do frequently so as not to just announce a result at the end. Inflating vote counts to achieve a bandwagon effect is a well-known manipulative tactic.
• The decision that a given user's votes don't count because of disciplinary action, especially disciplinary action on some other wiki, should likewise be left to Management.
• The Chief struck Aimsplode's nomination, but various users have restored it to the page.
• Supergeeky1 and Madclaw are advertising yet another wiki in their signatures. My understanding of Wikia's policy is that you are free to discuss anything on the Web; but absent such discussion, you should not use Wikia's resources to divert traffic away from Wikia.
• PuppyOnTheRadio is marking a great many of his edits to VFS as "minor," meaning one might elect to view a change report that omits these edits. Reverting a non-minor edit of another user is never minor, and most substantive comments on VFS including adjustment of vote totals are not minor, they are supremely major. My last edit there was an example of a minor edit: Removing the second copy of a signature. Spıke Ѧ 15:37 24-Jan-13

I agree. This VFS is a mess. --Mn-z 15:43, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

• • THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU FIND A STRANGER IN THE ALPS! Clearly this page is in utter chaos, vote pages like these will always have a major outcome on any site, they should be properly monitored by administrators and not by the nominees, both puppy and aimsplode have showed that they are in fact not admin material IMO. Madclaw @ ^talk 15:55, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
  • The reason for the link to my home wiki is that users here have a faster way of contacting me, before my home wiki became independant from wikia it linked to our original wikia site, just because I have a link in my signature does not mean I am in any way directing traffic away from wikia, There are probably a plethora of external links in articles that direct to sites not owned by wikia as well as interwiki links to foreign language Uncyclopedia's also not hosted by wikia, please explain the difference. Aditionally I see no policy here that prohibits me from having my signature the way it currently is Madclaw @ ^talk 15:55, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

    Sigs to a talk page on a different site AND back to the user page/talkpage are legal, as last I heard. The issue I had was with sigs that link exclusively to another website, specifically one that could confuse the reader. I assumed that SPIKE was talking about sigs that link exclusively to Free Uncyclopedia. --Mn-z 16:30, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

    I have moved a side coversation with Mnbvcxz on how to code your signature to User talk:Madclaw. My overall point does not depend on how you code your signature, that is, on whether the link to the external wiki resides in the target document or in your signature file. Sannse supports my opinion at User talk:Sannse#Signatures with external website links, to which Madclaw has now replied.

    Separately, Madclaw, your statement just above that you see nothing in UN:SIG precluding links to external wikis is an evasion. Wikia has a notorious rule against photos of stiff dicks. That this rule is not repeated in UN:SIG is not your green light to put one of those in your signature too. Spıke Ѧ 19:13,19:17 24-Jan-13

    Finally, to go full-circle back to the title of this section, it is not that your signatures break a rule. It is that, as you put it, your "home wiki" is not Uncyclopedia but Darthipedia. You and Supergeeky1 are here to help feed Wikia a Crap Sandwich. This will not help us pick the right Admins. Spıke Ѧ 01:08 25-Jan-13

All my edits are marked as minor by default. The only exception to the rule is when I accidentally click the tick box while making the edit. (Which is not common.) As for the rest - this VFS has been something of a huge clusterfuck. IMO it'd be better to scrap the whole thing until February and start again - part of the reason why I didn't vote that a VFS was needed to begin with. Especially as vote tampering, stacking and manipulation have become de rigueur. Each time VFS comes up there's some drama attached to it and no matter what happens there's bad blood related to it. And in the aftermath almost every time it's suggested we need to change the rules of VFS and often we end up with a rage quit. my habit used to be to vote for the need for new admins almost as default as we have always operated at the minimum. I've changed my opinion as while we generally need more admins, we really don't need this drama every second month.                                • Puppy's talk page • 09:42 24 Jan

• • Puppy, I don't care what policy leads to your edits being labeled minor, nor am I suggesting bad motive nor that rage-quits are imminent. Your edits are simply mis-labeled, as it is rare that they are so "minor" as to not be worth reading or including in a list of edits. Sorry, this is hardly a "voting irregularity" and this is a dumb place to bring up the issue. 1:54

    Regarding the vote, deciding in the middle that it is not a vote will not satisfy anyone, and delaying the process until February will not change the forces at work. We need more Admins. Spıke Ѧ 01:08 25-Jan-13

The need for admins thing was an opinion.                                • Puppy's talk page • 03:05 25 Jan

Sorry. I got sidetracked while posting that before. I meant that I was expressing an opinion - not saying we should try and rein in a VFS part-way through. As for the minor edit thing - I set that up when I started doing baby edits to things ages ago, and neglected to change it. Few people actually take note of it. Fixed the preference now.                                • Puppy's talk page • 05:49 25 Jan

As a site, we really shouldn't allowing some openly hostile users to troll the system to prevent us from appointing new admins. --Mn-z 09:19, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

The success of the present VHS...

...is already assured - Chief is now a crat, long overdue and a great benefit to this wiki. Hip hip horray pip pip and all that. So this has been a very successful VHS. And we will have two new admins, no matter what, and that's a thing to be welcomed. If one of them is a nazi fuck, well by God he's our nazi fuck and we should stand with him defending his right to be a nazi up to the point he asplodes, and then we all should take an arm or leg and throw him out the door, the nazi fuck. Hopefully he's in training somewhere to become an admin, like Rudy in that god-awful movie, or like Eva Braun being led to Adolf's bed for the first time and finding him cutting his toes off with a german hunting knife. And I have a feeling that all the candidates, win or lose or cheat, will still be doing the same things they have been for the benefit of the wiki. Expect for msnbc, beating off to preggie navels will take a few minutes, but then he'll be back. But we've got Chief, and that's a damn fine VHS imnho. Yay! Aleister 3:23 25-1-'13

Score fix

Could somebody please fix the score for votes for myself? I didn't vote for myself on principle, just for everyone's information, though I wouldn't mind being admin if I get enough votes. Anyways, the issue is Aimsplode changed his against vote to neutral as far as I can tell, so now the score should be 2 (3 if Frosty's comment counts as a for vote). -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 04:14, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Am I about up to speed?

A bunch of people deem Wikia the major problem with this site and jet. Like many have before. But they took everything with them, so they've got that. But some quality writers decided that maybe Wikia wasn't the problem after all and to make a go of this site when others left. As many have before. But the ones who left, not content to have gone and left the evil Wikia and to have taken everything with them, decide that they'd like to make a nazi (who really just might be a Tibetan monk) an admin here, even after they banned him from their new site. And this site just has to take it and evil wins. Just not the Wikia kind. About right? --Imrealized ...hmm? 08:33, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

More or less. --Mn-z 09:12, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

VFS was set up to select new admins for this site but others chose to vote for a user who has been banned for vandalism, sock puppetry, abusing other users, truculence, rudeness and as you say Imrealized, under a current permaban at the other site. Besides promising to be good in future, Aimsplode is about as qualified to become an admin here as the next noob to log in today. So all that other stuff that admins are usually chosen for - clearing up vandals, reporting strange activities on the logs, welcoming new users with more than a standard template if they ask questions or seem to have some interesting topics they want to write about etc..etc.. - forget it. Who cares? This is a comedy website and this is all apparently part of the game, sadly. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:44, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Vote striking

While I don't think anyone actually wants Aimsplode to become an admin (irony perhaps?), there is too much vote striking going on. There are no clear objective guidelines. The VFS has crumbled apart. Shall we start again with clearer guidelines and rules? --ShabiDOO 21:15, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I have cleared up the page, all negative votes, the majority of comments and stricken votes have been deleted leaving just the votes. The page will remain locked at present to let everyone calm down and relax. We will extend VFS to make up for lost time when it is unlocked. I will post some clearer rules when that happens. --ChiefjusticeWii 22:50, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Could you also remove my two comments from the page? It seems unfair that they remain while others are deleted. And as a side bar, are we still classing admin votes as double? Or doing the admin only round of voting? If we have both then it really makes user votes close to meaningless.                                • Puppy's talk page • 11:21 25 Jan

I don't know how he will turn this VFS around, but if anyone can do it, it's Chief Justice. --ShabiDOO 00:33, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I've already stepped back and left it in his hands. Best diplomat we have, and his name says it all, really.                                • Puppy's talk page • 12:36 26 Jan

I can do it too: SℲΛ. :D —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 05:37, 27 January 2013

ʞǝǝ⅁                                • Puppy's talk page • 06:02 27 Jan

Socky...you are the funniest gay belgian I know! --ShabiDOO 19:42, January 27, 2013 (UTC)