Forum:New IP AddressPolicy

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > New IP AddressPolicy
Note: This topic has been unedited for 6478 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.


With the failure of the previous vote, I propose another new policy:

IP Addresses, Mark II

  • IP addresses will not be allowed to create new user accounts. This prevents sockpuppetry.
  • IP addresses will not share a bathroom with users. They instead, will have seperate but equal bathrooms.
  • IP addresses will be forced to wear sexy lingere around regular users. Mmm. IPs. *licks lips*

--Chronarion 19:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


Vote

  • Against. What if the annonymus I.P weaing lingere around you ends up being your mom? You wouldn't like that eh? Would you? You would?!? You pervert Ediphus! --Rataube 22:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Against. Your version of the IP Address Policy is t00 silly.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 02:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Against. User:127:0.0.1 11:17, April 1 MMVI AD (VTC)
  • For. Nothing's sexier than a hex-string in lace. --Spin 17:49, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Against. Everyone's an IP until they create an account. Essentially, you've forbid the creation of new users, not just sucks. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 02:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
  • For because you people are too dumb to realize that he's not being serious. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke.gif 20:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Lingerie is a good start, but there should be some guidance about gender (preferably female) and an indication of kink level (i.e. satin, blindfold, rope, handcuffs) --di Mario 00:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

What's your position on transgendered IP addresses? --Carlb 02:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, IP addresses can only create one user account. Having multiple user accounts (aka Sockpuppetry) can get you banned.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 02:44, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet policies have nothing to do with IP addresses. If you have an offending sockpuppet it doesn't matter if you use a different IP address on it. Correspondingly, the same IP address could have multiple legitimate acounts. Roommates might have the same IP, some entire colleges have the same IP. The key with sockpuppets is what they are used for. For the moment they are not allowed to be used, but some legit uses exist. For instance, what if you upload a picture where you use your own face for something. Using a sock to upload the pic would usually be legit as a small bit of protection of your identity. ---Quill.gifRev. Isra (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't think you totally follow! Under this policy, an IP may not create an account whatsover. Yes. Oh yes! --Chronarion 06:30, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
So... uh... how do we get new users? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 02:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
If I upload a picture where I use a sockpuppet's face for something, should I use my own name in order to give a small bit of protection for its identity? --Carlb 03:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes. ---Quill.gifRev. Isra (talk) 04:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

What about IPV6 Addresses? So far only IPV4 addresses are subject to this policy. --User:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1





Since the IP Addresses is getting out of hand, I am proposing a new policy:

IP Addresses:

1. For hereon in, IP addresses are not allowed to vote on VFD, VFH, and VFP.

2. IP Addresses are not allowed to create user pages unless they create an account.

3. IP Addresses are not allowed to create user accounts that insults other adminsusers or if they already have a user account. Not only it's stupid, it's also sockpuppetry.

If the IP address fails to follow this policy, will be banned and their actions will be reported to their phone company or Internet provider and their internet privilages will be revoked. Did I mention they lose their phone connection as well?

If you're in favor of this policy vote For. If against, vote against. Then leave a comment.

If you have questions or comments, contact me on my talk page.

IP votes invalid. --Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 03:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


Oh, H*ll with it.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 03:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I changed my mind. IP votes invalid. From hereon in only Admins and current users are allowed to vote. Voting restart.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 06:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I've added them back they have as much right to vote on this as anyone else,--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 10:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Voting closed. This proposed policy is offically off due to a 13 to 9 vote against.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 06:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

  • leave your discussions here.*

This is one of the stupidest ideas known to mankind. --71.225.60.215 02:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • This is one of my best proposals to teach you proxys a lesson.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 03:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • IPs hold no weight in voting anyways, I think.
  • For hereon in, IP addresses are not allowed to vote on VFD, VFH, and VFP. You know, we could just adopt that, and then never tell any of the IP users. Then laugh at the octets of the world as they can't figure out why no matter how hard they try, the can't effect the outcome of any votes. Though it's a bit late for that course of action.
  • Seriously though, we have a problem with IP address users abusing the system? (as in IP users abuse the system, not we have a problem with IP users abusing the system. Though my comments kind of applies to both intereptations... you can't put too much water in the reactor...it's really lateearly here...)--(~Sir)Nuke || Talk v MUN v Not An Admin v Completely Unimportant 11:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't bother applying it to VFD, we already handle IP votes internally; if they are accompanied by a valid justifying comment, the vote gets counted but if it's an unjustified vote it gets all or mostly ignored. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke.gif 20:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

My sincere apologies to you all.--Jtaylor1Small Egg.png 06:24, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Wait, Is this a joke?

I read this the first few times and assumed it was a well orchestrated joke, but now it looks like it is serious. For the record I have seen no problems whatsoever with IP users abusing the system in any way that this would address. If this is real I give this the "strongest possible against" with a side of "dismiss this discussion." ---Quill.gifRev. Isra (talk) 11:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

It is no joke. It's very serious, and the next person who suggests anything otherwise will have their humor privileges revoked by the HSP. --Spin 22:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Anyone who's got two Fun Hater and an Anal Retentive Fun Hater on Wheels has long since lost his humor privileges; so, is this a joke? --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke.gif 02:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
It seems not, but at the beggining I wasn't sure either.--Rataube 13:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Article creation

I have one question: why are IPs still able to create articles? They almost entirely suck - David Gerard 23:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Corollary question: why are regular users still able to create articles? They almost entirely suck. --—rc (t) 23:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
IP article creation is less anonymous than registered user article creation, especially on a wikifarm with very few checkuserers. Just because Wikipedia does it doesn't always mean it is good. ^_^. I agree with RC. --Splaka 03:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
A wikifarm with two cows? *moo*
In any case, leaving anon-IP creations as anon-IP creations does make them easier to spot, which can't be all bad? --66.102.65.73 05:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, I would even go so far as to say IP creations and edits are helpful to Uncyclopedia. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us.png GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 05:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

<--- Where the hell did that thing come from? Someone gonna take care of that... or are we just sort of looking the other way? HOMESTAR ME!!! TURTLE ME!!! t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 23:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

...Don't question us again. This is your first and only warning. --17:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.uncyclopedia.co/w/index.php?title=Forum:New_IP_AddressPolicy&oldid=651139"