Forum:Let's shut VFD for a week?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Let's shut VFD for a week?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5506 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

One of your faithful Poopsmiths

OK, my chums over at VFD are going to hate me for this, but I'm serious. VFH could really use the extra attention boost which it might be given if everyone concentrated on that for a bit. VFD is not a page which needs to be operating all of the time, it's more used in the general battle against the crap which has built up over time, or been missed by QVFD.

UN:Poop would still be open, and people could use that if they don't maintain their own VFD waiting list, just no voting on the page for a week as it would be sysop protected. If there were any "urgent" things which need a VFD (I can't think of any examples of that right now) a user could contact an admin who would deal with them on a case by case basis. Obviously QVFD would not be affected.

Why will this help anything? Well, if you don't know, you probably don't vote on VFD. To vote on VFD takes a lot of time and effort, you have to read the whole article, check the history, check the talk page, and maybe even look at previous VFD noms for that article. For me it takes more time than voting on VFH. If we concentrated on VFH for a bit, maybe we could get it going again.

A little shake up of things might just be a good idea at the moment, and obviously everything would be back to normal when the week was up, and the VFD regulars could still build up there VFD wating lists as they normally do. I don't really see any reason why we should not do this. Do You? MrN 16:40, Oct 5

For

Score: 4

1. Um MrN 16:40, Oct 5
2.   Le Cejak • <16:53, 05 Oct 2008>
3. Won't hurt anyone. Might help. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 21:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
4. Sure, it'd be interesting to see what happens. Also would interesting to see: How many VFD regulars go insane and murder their families. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:38, Oct 6

Against

Score: 9 Dexter's against this idea.

1. Dexter111344 - Hell no. Activity on VFD has nothing to do with activity on VFH.
2. Sycamore - Per Dexter
3. Judge Zarbi - Per Dexter and the block log.
4. Mrmonkey72 - Nah. I see where you're going with that, but personally, I just put VFH up higher on my importance list. VFD should remain active constantly. To have a proper system, you have to support what's good while getting rid of the bad stuff; the more bad articles we get rid of, the better we'll seem. (Just don't ignore one in favor of the other.)
5. Dr. Skullthumper - VFD regulars are VFD regulars. VFH regulars are VFH regulars. The groups overlap a bit. But, shutting down VFD isn't going to turn VFD regulars into VFH regulars. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 17:20 Oct 05, 2008
6. THEDUDEMAN - per Skullfucker
7. Charitwo - Stupidest thing I've ever heard.
8. Modusoperandi - after Charitwo's comment, that's the second stupidest thing I've ever heard.
9. Sockpuppet of an unregistered user - For advertising VFH. Against shutting down one of the most essential parts of Uncyclopedia.
10. DJ Irreverent - Activity on VFH is mainly due to quality, if stuff is good there, people will vote.

Comments, sausages, pledges of cash for MrN

(Block log); 15:34 . . Olipro (Talk | contribs) blocked MrN9000 (Talk | contribs) with an 
expiry time of infinite (I wasn't joking.)

OK! Clarification.

VFH is currently in rather bad shape. Without the sitenotice (which a lot of us did not like) VFH is struggling more than I have personally seen before. We may need to start talking about featuring every other day again soon. OBVIOUSLY I understand how VFD works, I'm not sure there are many users who have spent more time there this year than me.

What I am saying is that rather than doing what we normally do on VFD, why not (for 1 week) just focus on VFH? The site needs it. MrN 18:41, Oct 5

VFH isn't drawing people away from VFD. A more practical idea would be to stop people from writing and doing maintenance. Except that's not going to happen, because it's impossible. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 18:44 Oct 05, 2008

I don't know what everybody else's excuse is, but I've read about half of the pages on VFH and none of them do it for me. Mediocrity or worse gets an against, and a page that only generates a smirk or a sigh doesn't get a for from me. In other words, you all suck. Sure, some people would say that I do as well, but they also suck, so you should ignore them. I should probably also point out that I'm a grumpy old crank. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to shoo some kids off my lawn with a broom. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

It may be very appropriate for some to read Embracing Mediocrity: A self help book for losers like you.

-Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 21:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be better for the site to re-feature old features than put up stuff that the community has expressed the opinion isn't ready yet. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 02:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the same, except substitute pictures of people's pets for the old features. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I've reconsidered. Only I suck. Don't you people try to horn in! Lastly, git off my lawn! Git! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)