Forum:Maybe We Can All Learn Something From This...
SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE
I've been primarily an observer of this madness, as due to school and whatnot, I havent been incredibly active lately. However, after reading over all this rediculous crap, I think we can all take a few things from it. We really need to implement some new rules so this kinda stuff never happens again. I have a few points to make, just hear them out...
- Put Euroipods on VFD. Who cares if its one of our well-known articles? Its created neverending problems. Let the people speak.
- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that can be even slightly considered vanity/slandity from now on. Including anything related to site users.
- Infiban problem users. Some people here just love stirring up controversy. In my opinion, Nintendorulez, Hrodulf, etc. are gone. Theyve created enough problems. Let them come back with a new account when they grow up.
- We cant just single out Spang here. All things considered, I think we should have a vote to retain/release every admin on the site. There are many that do a shitty job. Hell, maybe even add a few new admins that are somewhat level-headed. EVERY USER GETS A VOTE, NOT JUST ADMINS. How about some equality for users here. No admin only votes anymore, too. We need some more reasonable people. I can think of several users that would make much better admins than many that we have.
- I'v got some unwelcome news for you. #chans are ruled by a dictatorship. Although they may take on the semblance of democracy, they are not a democracy. Just as in real life power grows from a huge bank account, or from the barrel of a gun, depending on where you stand. In a #chan the founding members rule, and the rest is considered fluff. There is no justice. And yes, I hate it too. All of it. -- di Mario 23:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Now Just Some General Discussion
If some admins have such thin skin as to leave, they should be de-opped. Don't get me wrong, I like Codeine and Hinoa. Splarka and Elvis dont do shit anyways. This is a goddamned webiste, a comedy one at that. If anyone takes themselves so seriously that they cant deal with a little turmoil on a website is not worthy of adminship. The same kinda thing goes for users. Everyone needs to grow up.
- Nintendorulez, are you serious? Look at the monster you've created. Put my name in a goddamn article if you want. WHO CARES?
- Hrodulf. I quote ""Waah waah waah" is all I hear from the baby. Payback's a bitch, you little piece of shit. Go change that diaper, you've been carrying that turd euroipods in there for a whole year. FUCK YOU!!!!!!" Need I say more? Go back to preschool.
- Some User. You usually resolve disputes...what happened?
- Spang. You created some problems, but at least you can reasonably discuss them. Although we've had some troubles in the past, my vote's to keep you. Still, think about what you're doing.
- Famine. You have truly been the voice of reason throughout this whole ordeal. You deserve another UOTM.
Overall, I think we should do what I've proposed. Please, tell me all your thoughts. Calmly.
- I'm for rolling Euroipods back to it's "featured version" and locking it.
- Everyone, as far as I know, has apologized for the many, many incidents that have happened recently. Some have shaken hands. I saw a couple of them open-mouth kissing earlier. I had to kick them out; they were hogging my side of the bed.
- The Some user "incident" disappoints me; normally he's a good egg (and that general level-headed "good eggedness" is why I nom'd him for UotM, in case you're wondering.)
- Everyone should sign The Pledge. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Chronarion has discussed the issue with the administrators that were on at the time of his presence. He set the rules. Thinking about what to do. He alone will decide. Now the administrators wish to let this issue settle and would not like issue continued for an unset time.
22:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yet again, admins are doing everything way "behind the scenes". We should know exactly whats going on. Plus, no offense to Chron, but as far as I'm concerned Rc is in charge. Look at this... [1]. He alone shouldnt decide. Thats called a dictatorship, and frankly, thats bullshit. Everyone should have a say in the fate of this "community website." And two more cents: Modusoperandi for admin! He really deserves it. We need someone primarily interested in resolution. -- Sir C
Holla | CUN 23:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yet again, admins are doing everything way "behind the scenes". We should know exactly whats going on. Plus, no offense to Chron, but as far as I'm concerned Rc is in charge. Look at this... [1]. He alone shouldnt decide. Thats called a dictatorship, and frankly, thats bullshit. Everyone should have a say in the fate of this "community website." And two more cents: Modusoperandi for admin! He really deserves it. We need someone primarily interested in resolution. -- Sir C
- Chronarion has discussed the issue with the administrators that were on at the time of his presence. He set the rules. Thinking about what to do. He alone will decide. Now the administrators wish to let this issue settle and would not like issue continued for an unset time.
Looks like I'm too late with this idea... --~ 
Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.
23:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- I am For Cornbread's changes, For taking a formal vote on Jocke's DMZ idea (it's actually pretty good, and I don't compliment other people's ideas too much.). I am also For a total conversion of our system to one of anarchy. TEAR DOWN THE SYST--arrghh... -Village Idiot♠KUN Free Speech 23:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Long live the new flesh! Mr. Briggs Inc. 23:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC) Eh?
- Am I the only one here that knows this is not a democracy? It's not really a matter for discussion. 23:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- I realize that it is not a democracy, but if I get my idea out there it is possible an admin might like it, and possibly take it as a serious alternative. However, I see that it is too late as the admins already had already discussed the matter beforehand. --~
00:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- I realize that it is not a democracy, but if I get my idea out there it is possible an admin might like it, and possibly take it as a serious alternative. However, I see that it is too late as the admins already had already discussed the matter beforehand. --~
- Am I the only one here that knows this is not a democracy? It's not really a matter for discussion.
- I don't think it's fair to blame me for this monster. I simply wanted to bring to light the question of whether users ought to me mocked in the mainspace after expressing their desire not to be. I had no intention of bringing drama into things. I blame this on the trolls, immature flamers, and our lack of concrete rules. See my post here for further reflections on the matter. --User:Nintendorulez 23:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I'm not explicitly accusing you, but you must admit you had some fault. -- Sir C Holla | CUN 23:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- How so? I tried to aviod all the flaming as much as possible, and make sure not to antagonize anyone. I merely made an innocent plea that my name be removed, and when my request was turned down, I asked for reasons as to why it should remain. I simply didn't respond to the flaming, nor did I flame anyone else. I repeatedly called for everyone to try and maintain a level head so that things can be discussed rationally. If I did make any mistakes throughout this ordeal, I would appreciate if they were pointed out to me so I can avoid making them again. --User:Nintendorulez 00:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I'm not explicitly accusing you, but you must admit you had some fault. -- Sir C
Nintendorulez was probably the most levelheaded person throughout this debate, and Hrodulf only lost his temper once. On the other hand, there were several people responsible for causing the bulk of the porblems (many administrators included). Your proposal is weak and un-informed, those who are voting to support it are also ill-informed. Please, take a look at the big picture, and not just from one side of it. Go ahead, add Euroipods to VFD, it won't get deleted, most people are logical enough to relize that's not the real reason we're here. Tension had been building between some of the sysops and several of the users, it was only a matter of time before we came to a confrontation like this. There have already been several steps taken to resolve the situation, and all of these seperate threads are just cluttering the playing field. Please, leave it to those that were involved and those that actually know what happened. 
t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 00:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Shhhhh!
The dispute's resolved, isn't it? How we got there is unfortunate, but intransigence does that, I guess... I thought the general amnesty thing was a good idea too, but if they want to ban me, I can certainly accept that. Personally, I'd rather we went back to arguing about I maed a yuky doody! At least that article still makes some people laugh... And shame on you for yet another new forum posting! We're going to need a whole new category if this keeps up. c • > • cunwapquc? 23:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- "Benson's 3-D House of Drama"?--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 23:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Calm down
Admins are not democratic representatives. They're people the community decided were funny enough to decide what's funny and delete it and crap. Chron is in charge because he founded the website. It has always been a dictatorship. And it's never been about knowing everything and resolution and whatever. It's been about creating funny crap and deleting unfunny crap. End of story, really. It's only as good as it's fun, so let's not make it more than it is. --KATIE!! 23:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thats just not true. "The community" rarely decides on admins, and when we can, our votes count as 1/2. Only 1/3 of the admins are decent writers, really, most were just chosen not by humor, but by admins for random reasons. Many admins have never had a feature, and hardly know what funny is. Plus, many admins, including you, are NEVER around to make these supposed important decisions. -- Sir C Holla | CUN 23:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thats just not true. "The community" rarely decides on admins, and when we can, our votes count as 1/2. Only 1/3 of the admins are decent writers, really, most were just chosen not by humor, but by admins for random reasons. Many admins have never had a feature, and hardly know what funny is. Plus, many admins, including you, are NEVER around to make these supposed important decisions. -- Sir C
- I left. I was around 16+ hours a day when I said I was here. Do not go around badmouthing people, you do not have a right to do this (Rule #2). Quite honestly, you're setting yourself up to be banned. You're being a dick and it's not funny. You're insulting people who have invested hours and hours of volunteer time to deal with crap writing, repetitive tasks, and people who treat them like shit (like you). Just because they've decided that they have other things to attend to doesn't mean that they are useless or that what they did was not invaluable. --KATIE!! 23:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'm hardly being unreasonable or hostile here. I'm just voicing some opinions and seeing what people think. I'm not trying to start more of a flamewar by any means. I'm not being a dick. I havent badmouthed anyone in specific, I was just suggesting some solutions to this sort of problem. I'm perfectly calm. So you're saying the members of this site, who come here and contribute tirelessly, dont get any say in what happens? -- Sir C Holla | CUN 23:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Seems so. We didn't create this place. The leaders nominate leaders. As to what happens to people that bend or flat out break the rules; it's not up to non-admins to decide what is good or bad for Uncyclopedia. 00:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Seems so. We didn't create this place. The leaders nominate leaders. As to what happens to people that bend or flat out break the rules; it's not up to non-admins to decide what is good or bad for Uncyclopedia.
- I agree partially with all of you. In my experience, for the animal otherwise known as Femina Sapiens the struggle for survival has been taken from the individual to a group level. Oh sure, it has been painted over with a beautiful veneer called civilised behaviour (which most groups cannot agree upon what it should be). But it is still a struggle for supremacy. Those who have power in the form of a large bank account, or a large number of gun barrels, or a large quantity of admin rights, generally do not like to share that power with those who don't have it. At least not willingly. Fortunately, the powers I spoke of sometimes can be eroded by overwhelming them with a sheer power of numbers. Or just by advancing history a couple hundreds of years. Ugh finally won his argument with Urgh when the latter died and Ugh became Head-of-the-Cave. Ghandi did it against the British, and my fellow Dutchmen won bravely against the Nazis. And it helps that the system called "western democracy" recognizes the "one man, one vote" principle, which means the Great Unwashed will in the end get its way. Sort of. Oh sith, I'm rambling again. Time for my medication. Cheerio, -- di Mario 19:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)