Forum:Filial voterigging

Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > Filial voterigging

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5269 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

OK, so I'm gonna look like the humour-free bad guy now, but...

Yes, we know how much getting Filial Piety featured means to TKF. Yes, this is a humour wiki. Yes, we shouldn't take shit too seriously.

But...

On the other hand, how are we gonna strike any votes again for vote rigging or sockpuppetry when this kind of shit happens?

If the article ends up getting featured because enough of the active community at the time like it, then fair enough, and I will be genuinely pleased for TKF, but I can't just watch something like that happen and laugh it off while trying to persuade other users that certain rules are there for a reason.

I'd like to think I haven't completely lost my sense of humour since becoming an admin, but some things cross the line, and for me, this is one. So I'm making this here forum for discussion: is it that big a deal, or am I taking shit too seriously on what is just a humour wiki? --UU - natter 10:25, Jun 25

Woody said it Funny > Rules. But yes, you are right, vote rigging is bad. TKF was wrong. What he did is punishable, but he's and admin. And this is a HUMOUR (hahahaha lololol rofloflofl lmaomaomao) wiki, no big deal IMO Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 10:34 June 25 '09

Funny is most important, yes. But here it's a case of a few users deciding something is funny and ignoring what could be the opinion of the wider community. VFH is there for a reason. If we let this happen, why not let Meganew feature TYATU? He and Uncyclopedian think it's funny as hell. I repeat: if this gets enough legitimate votes for feature, then fine, no problem. But artificial featuring in this way? That's a slippery slope. --UU - natter 10:38, Jun 25

Per UU. I would say this is worse than typical noob sockpuppetry on VFH. In this instance, its came reasonably close to getting an article highlighted. Whereas when a noob does sockpuppetry on a noob article, it only causes the article to fail at 2 "for", 5 "against" instead of 1 "for" 4 "against". If anything, UU is being too apologetic in his fight against sock puppetry. --Mn-z 16:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

After rooting around more, I discovered that the article actually got a to-be-featured tag on it. I didn't know that the vote rigging and sockpuppetry came that close to working, which makes it all the worse. --Mn-z 18:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I guess the guys had some fun last night. Featuring it right away was going a little overboard. I like the article though, so my vote's still a for. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 10:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Mine too. Sunbeam no u Have you been doing your ironing? 16:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

"Boys will be boys", I said. I also say, "ban them all". Then I say, "and salt the earth so that nothing will grow there". Then I say, "Moo ha-ha!" Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying a lot really, I'm just standing behind UU hefting a very heavy spiked club. ~ 13:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

That's a parasol, Little Miss Princess. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 14:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Man, I was so excited when I found out this got featured. Then I find out the damn against voters ruined it again. /me stares at the poster above me. Saberwolf116 15:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

FYI I only cast one vote and only took a wayward glance at the signatures when I did the featuring, so if anything the only thing I'm guilty of is slight negligence. I dunno what's with all the fingerpointing at me, then.

Anyway, y'all fell right into my trap, fellas, even my "co-conspirators" of DrSkullthumper and SysRq. I finally got you guys to care about sockpuppetry! Now, since this is the first major documented case of sockpuppetry rigging on VFH by esteemed regulars, it doesn't seem to big of an issue as long as we promise never to do it again; after all, we should know better, damnit!

What we need to focus on are the real sockpuppeting issues: there are a lot of sockpuppets, even those held by established users. I tried one out for myself, but I was immediately cracked down upon by Famine, when having a sockpuppet actually meant something bad. Some of us get persecuted for it, like Joe928203. Some of us, however, get completely ignored, or even just playfully warned and forever forgotten. Some of us, even, use their sockpuppetry to try to win awards that they don't possess the requirements for. This site gets hammered a lot for having a lot of so-called "double standards," but this is a king amongst a kingdom of inequities.

Far too few people have to power to check for sockpuppets, and the actual process of checking is lengthy and riddled with red-tape. We are far too lax on sockpuppets, and you know what? Under User is right. There should be consequences.

Therefore, I propose two things: that we grant bureaucrats the ability of checkuser, so that the ability to weed out sockpuppets will be right at our fingertips, and that we retire the award of Noob of the Month, since (as Mordillo said), it's not only become a mockery in the sense that it's giving real noobs the wrong message, but since it has too much potential to be exploited.

As for me, I'd like to believe that Filial Piety will some day have its moment in the sun. However, that'll have to wait until after its brigade of haters have all gone away or died. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 19:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I still love you man. -OptyC Sucks! CUN19:38, 25 Jun

I'd like it to be known that I have always had a dim view of sockpuppetry. I'm just really bad at spotting them, that's all. Hell, I nearly missed Led's second contribution to that vote.

I also wasn't particularly fingerpointing at you TKF, so much as worrying you'd think I was on a personal crusade to prevent this article being featured (which, for the record, I'm not). --UU - natter 20:04, Jun 25

Heh, I actually missed that one too. Anyone, it was really just Mamoosha fingerpointing. My bad. So what do y'all think of the proposals?

PS: I hate you Mamoosha. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 20:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I love the idea of 'crats having checkuser, and have supported the idea before. But 'dillo checked with Sannse, and apparently it's not something our corporate overlords are going to let happen. Which is just another quality decision from their non-stop hit factory, to me, but there you go. As to removing NotM, well, I wouldn't have a major problem with that. I seem to recall it being the cause of many dramathons and much whoring, and as a result it may even put off more users than it encourages. Plus the whole sockpuppet thing. And it can't be that good an award anyway, if I was never even nommed for it ;-) --UU - natter 20:19, Jun 25

Rules V. Funny? (a quick move away from the sockpuppet issue)

Yeah, so I think the no vote rigging thing is up there on my list of good rules. I like it. It keeps things fair. I thought it was hilarious when I saw the vote rigging, and I knew it was very obvious, as, I'm sure, did the people involved, that it wouldn't go through. Someone was bound to look at the votes. It was funny because it was going to fail.

With that said, and I've talked about this enough, I like it sometimes when rules are broken. I go back to the Rc, euroipods experiment. If he had followed the "rules" it wouldn't have been featured at the time. I think its hilarious that he just decided to do it. Sometimes I feel this place needs a kick in the pants like that. Sure, that one ended up with vandalism galore, but I like the cross up. So, if a rogue admin were to do something insane with the featureing, I would probably be for it. Or, if you disagree, I'll just fall back to my old, steady companion: "I agree with Mordillo." The President of Iran WOODY! DeathLife? to the infidels! Go USA? 20:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with that too, and I guess this little stunt was a multi-faceted gem in disguise. However, I also would like to discuss the points I mentioned above. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 20:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

And back to sockpuppetry per TKF's request

I think there are some questions that need to be asked if we are actually trying to crackdown on socks.

1. So, are we able to differentiate between different types of socks? There are the ones we are talking about, people using them to create drama/win awards/vandalize/etc. But, I think there are some socks that are ok. Socks like Inebriated or MR9000Ns don't seem to be bad. So are we going to crack down on all sockpuppetry, or just the evil kind?
2. If wikia won't give our beuracrats the ability to checkuser, is there anything else that we can do to stop them? Do we just need to suck it up, and deal with the red tape? Should we start asking Sannse to check users more often than we do now? Will she hate me for bringing this idea up?
3. To be truthful, there are people I suspect are socks, but only admins are even allowed to ask Sannse. I like the idea of normal users being able to ask for a checkuser, but, I could see soooooo much drama getting kicked up by that, so I'd probably say no to that one.
4. Should the admins, then, be willing to hear a bunch of "I think this guy is a sock!" stuff from normal users? I would think that would get old really, really quick. But, if not, how can the normal users help in halting the spread of sockpuppets? Or do we care?

Just some questions. Sorry if I'm blowing this out of proportion. The President of Iran WOODY! DeathLife? to the infidels! Go USA? 21:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I should probably attempt to explain myself

Basically, what Woody said. Nobody really expected this to be featured, and when it got queued, I was too amused by the situation to really want to do anything about it. I totally understand where UU's coming from, and putting this on the queue was probably a bit too far, but hey, it's a wiki, and everything can always be undone. I think I speak for all the puppeteers when I say that, in grand uncyclopedia tradition, we was only funnin'. I hope I haven't really upset anyone. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 21:49, Jun 25

Anyone who really got upset by this just missed a good joke. It was laughably obvious that it was pure BS that it got featured. In fact, I did laugh. The President of Iran WOODY! DeathLife? to the infidels! Go USA? 21:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The only thing you've upset is democracy. Barack Obama 22:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but that motherfucker was asking for it. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 22:41, Jun 25

Uhm...

If you guys check the logs, a good half of savethemooses's featured articles were rigged. I mean, like, before there was voting. Well, at least of dozen of them. Plus there was some non-article featured once by an admin, I think. I'm just sayin', admins abusing the rules to feature whatever they want is as old as the site.--<<>> 00:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget that every Thursday I feature my userpage. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but your userpage is awesome. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 05:12, Jun 26

The secret is in the details. People don't expect persian rugs on a userpage. It makes them feel classy and special. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

My intentions...also hi

I fully intended to strike my sockpuppet's vote when the time was appropriate. I implore you to find someone who was planning on allowing their sockpuppeted vote to remain beyond the time it was appropriate. Also, had I stumbled upon it being queued for feature, I would have rectified the matter. Vote-rigging? Please, guys, don't insult me by acting like I'm some asinine child who really wants to get something done at all costs (I'm looking at you, Liechtenstein...shame on you). I apologize for the inconvenience it may have caused, but at the risk of eating my words, chill out.~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 01:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

ALSO IMPORTANT: if we're talking about bureaucrats getting checkuser, then we have to make a new thread in the Dump. Not enough people check Miniluv, and since none of this sockpuppetry was anything except extremely obvious (OegljL? I mean, I even capitalized the L!), the discussion here should not be about checkuser.~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 01:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Good god, what is going on here?? I... couldn't be bothered to read all those words, btw.   Le Cejak • <5:16 Jun 26, 2009>

THIS JUST IN: SOME DUDES GET ALL IN A TIZZY OVER SOMETHING THAT IS CLEARLY A JOKE – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:20 Jun 26, 2009

Thanks, skull! How are you doin' anyway? Was the rest of the internet as stupid as I thought it was?   Le Cejak • <5:25 Jun 26, 2009>

Yeaaaah there is no Uncyc substitute. Also I'm writing a novel!! – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:36 Jun 26, 2009

Ooooh, is it posted somewhere? Are frogs and Hell involved? I wrote stuff too, but it's shitty. Anyway, yeah, where can I read it?   Le Cejak • <5:48 Jun 26, 2009>

Mine's not just shitty... it's shitty and poorly organized. Anyway, here. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:51 Jun 26, 2009

Well, I tried writing fantasy! Making it good was too difficult.   Le Cejak • <5:54 Jun 26, 2009>

I think I classify my writing not as sci-fi nor fantasy, but "alt-universe". (I told my girlfriend this over IM and she was all like, *looks for Universe key* and I lawled.) – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 06:02 Jun 26, 2009

you have a cool GF. Anyway, I'm glad you're still writing. I hope to get back to my story some day. I'm reading your story right now, while I have some free time.   Le Cejak • <6:21 Jun 26, 2009>

She's seriously awesome. And I never get to read your stuff =( – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 06:22 Jun 26, 2009

You've read my stuff, haven't you? [1]? Same old place.   Le Cejak • <6:27 Jun 26, 2009>

Yeah, I got in a tizzy. I'm takin' shit too seriously. Comes of being on here pretty much every day dealing with idiots who are doing shit for real for so long you lose the ability to spot the difference. I also have a lot of IRL stress going on. Maybe I need a wikibreak. However, while I understand that it was a joke, when I came across it it seriously looked like it was going to go through, and that, to me, was going to be a joke too far (I understand the thing was made obvious, I understand... ah fuck it, I can't be arsed climbing through this crap, I'm takin' a wikibreak or something. I'll just pretend it never happened when I get back). --UU - natter 08:16, Jun 26

You know what gents? Instead of getting all hissy about "THESE GUYS CAN'T TAKE A JOKE", how about you drop by every now and then and give us a hand maintaining the place eh? There are about what, 5-6 of us active most of time and we're dealing with loads of shit lately. And I do mean loads. So instead of creating this hilarious jokes, it wouldn't hurt if you give us a hand every now and then. Just saying. ~ 09:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

or you can adminize dexter, socky and/or RabbiT.. Just saying, too, pardon me Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 09:42 June 26 '09

And maybe we'd drop by more often if people stopped getting hissy over small, unimportant bullshit like this. You know, if it were as pleasant to edit at as it was a summer or two ago. If people cared more about writing and making humor than enforcing rules, if people cared more about getting things done than putting things to a vote. If this site hadn't turned into a gigantic helping of serious business with a side of drama now and again. Just saying, is all. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 15:19 Jun 26, 2009

My point exactly, so how about you go and write something? ~ 15:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I avoid it by refusing to read stuff. You guys think you're so big because you can read...   Le Cejak • <15:50 Jun 26, 2009>

I think we all need a great big helping of my favorite template.

How The Uncyclopedia Scale Of Importance Should Read: RULES < FUNNY

Ahhhhh! It feels good to bring that back. The President of Iran WOODY! DeathLife? to the infidels! Go USA? 16:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

People, please! Can we at least agree that I look pretty awesome in these jeans? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Jeans? I never thought of you that way.. I've always imaged you as a muscley man, wearing a crown and a kingly robe and waving a big-ass sword in the air, basking in the glory of the moonlight. Then running wild in the woods hoping to find an elf.. or something Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 21:25 June 26 '09

If I want to find an elf, I just look in the mirror. I'm Honeycorn Moonblossom (lvl 12). Now taste my Sword of Sunshine (+2) and Dagger of Happy Smiles (+1), dwarf! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh? I'm a berzerker, myself. I get +3 to strength whenever someone says the secret word. And yet, when berzerking, I cannot tell friend from foe... there's always a catch, isn't there?--<<>> 21:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, there is an Elven Kingdom behind your mirror? And don't you ever call me a dwarf again, I'm a FUCKING HOBBIT not a smelly dwarf. Or else, taste my spear of a thousand penises (+8=====D) Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 21:42 June 26 '09

Modus is one funny looking elf! -OptyC Sucks! CUN21:48, 26 Jun

Official Apology

I hereby officialy apologize to mr. fatal frog, for pointing my finger at him with accusations of voterigging, which where not based on reality whatsoever, and so forth with the formal stuff that I don't quite undersand... Sorry, pal, I misunderstood the whole thing.. Now, as for the rest of the community, they can point at me, laugh and throw custard pie, tomato, potato or javelins at my face... I am fair game, now.. Oh, and bans are also welcome.. Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 09:38 June 26 '09

/me molests Sunbeam no u Have you been doing your ironing? 10:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• throws a potato javelin* -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 23:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Red tape?

What red tape? -- sannse (talk) 07:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I prefer red velcro. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 08:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

What we are obviously trying to say Sannse is that we are afraid of you. It would be nice if we didn't have to bring you a 80-pound roasted pig every time we need to ask for a checkuser. Also asking for one of our finest virgins every month isn't the most helpful thing either. And chasing off some of the users by sicking your pet dragon on them was just uncalled for. What I'm trying to say is, we are scared of you, oh almighty one. Please do not feed us to your pet slugs. Woody On Fire! Talking Woody Stalking Woody 14:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Pah, that's not red tape, that's just proper courtesy. Well, except the virgins... you can wrap them in red tape if you like -- sannse (talk) 10:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I remember you saying to someone at some point that we couldn't give ops or crats a checkuser for privacy reasons. Is my memory right, or am I just going all Death of a Salesman all of a sudden? - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 16:07, Jun 29

Yep, we have started being more flexible on that policy, and giving the right to some bureaucrats on some wikis, but that is a new thing that we are deliberately moving slowly on. Uncyclopedia won't be included in that any time soon. Sorry -- sannse (talk) 10:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

We should put an * next to Savethemooses's name in the Hall of Shame, as per this discovery of voter-enhancing practices. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 17:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hearsay is not admissible. Also, it is Bradaphraser who hearsay'd it, and you know how he is. Out of his mouth come only two things: lies and flying specks of chewed up cookie. Imagine for a moment if the Cookie Monster happened to also be an inveterate liar. Lastly BradaMO in 2012! BradaMO: Bringing honesty back to politics! Go team BradaMO! Woo! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I concur with my compatriot. My word can't be trusted. You can take that to the bank. Also, it's important to keep in mind that no one took STM's articles OFF the front page, since they were, more often than not, the funniest stuff on the site, anyway.--<<>> 20:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)