Forum:Thread for the 9nd PLS

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Thread for the 9nd PLS
Note: This topic has been unedited for 5310 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.
Poo Lit Surprise Logo.png

This year's PLS is coming up, and I have two orders of business to address. First, and the most obvious, is we need judges. The section is below (you know the routine). The second is whether or not we ought to get rid of the Best Article by a Noob category, since the system has a potential to be abused by the use of sockpuppet accounts. And since we don't have checkuser, it'd be impossible to spot any sockpuppeteering. If we eliminated this category the prize total would go back to $25 (how it used to be back in the day) instead of $20. Or another idea would be to replace it with another category like "Best UnTune" or something. What do you cunts think? --EMC [TALK] 07:56 Apr 24 2010

We do have a checkuser, it's called the Sansalator TM. Also, we never had any issues with this category in the past and I think it's more important to encourage noob writers than give a separate category to UnTunes, which falls under alternate space. ~Jewriken.GIF 08:01, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
Ah, sannse has checkuser. Excellent. My ill-informedness. And I wholeheartedly agree, but it's not up to me. Community consensus and stuff. --EMC [TALK] 08:06 Apr 24 2010
I like having Best Noob, even though I refused to enter the category because while I was new here I'd had years of experience editing wikis (gee, I haven't said that in a long time. Felt good). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:40, April 25, 2010 (UTC)


Judges sign up here

Sign with your sig and post what category preferences you may have, otherwise indicate if you have no preference. The categories can be found on the PLS page. Judging spots are not given on a first-come first-serve basis, so don't worry if you're at the bottom of the list.

  1. Best article category - ~Jewriken.GIF 08:01, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Best alt. namespace category because Olipro's a rich fat cat and bumped me off the list. Oh, and I guess he's generous or summat but I'm still ticked. (I got over it.) - • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 08:05, Apr 24 2010
  3. Best article category -THINKER 08:43, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Best Rewrite -SIRE FREDDMOOSHA Lord of Egypt AMUSE ME 11:43, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Best Whatever (no preference) King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:37, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Best something that's not best image. I'm not fussy about it, just let me forget myself for a while. (just leave a note on my talk page about what you want done).--Sycamore (Talk) 19:05, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
  7. ~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 21:22, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
  8. Best Whatever (slightly no preference)  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!* Happytimes.gif (talk) (stalk) Π   ~ Xkey280.jpg ~  25 Apr 2010 ~ 23:07 (UTC)
  9. Not best alt namespace, as that's the cat I'll probably enter into if I get around to enter. Anything else I'm good with.    Orian57    Talk   Union pink.jpg 06:20 26 April 2010
  10. I've got experience from doing it last time, so I'll take Best Alternative Namespace, if anything. Explode fire.gif Explode fire.gifNeon Green Hammer And Sickle.PNG - Not particularly sincere, Sir ColinAYBExplode fire.gifCUNExplode fire.gifVFHExplode fire.gifWhoringExplode fire.gifMore Whoring Explode fire.gifat 20:45, Wednesday 28 April 2010 - Neon Green Hammer And Sickle.PNGExplode fire.gif Explode fire.gif
  11. Since I like to feel important, Best Illustrated Article, as no one else has taken it yet. -- Thankful Kippy Cornucopia clipart.png Share blessings Cornucopia clipart.png Bountiful harvest Cornucopia clipart.png 10:01, Apr. 29, 2010
  12. If there's still a spot available, I'd gladly take it. No preference for any particular category. —Sir SockySexy girls.jpg Mermaid with dolphin.jpg Tired Marilyn Monroe.jpg (talk) (stalk)Magnemite.gif Icons-flag-be.png GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:58, 30 April 2010

Discussion

COCKS. —Sir SockySexy girls.jpg Mermaid with dolphin.jpg Tired Marilyn Monroe.jpg (talk) (stalk)Magnemite.gif Icons-flag-be.png GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:58, 30 April 2010

Special section reserved for Modusoperandi's threadjacking

My rider said specifically "No brown M&Ms"! Why are there brown M&Ms in my dressing room?! Outrage! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 00:47, April 29, 2010 (UTC)!

That was my fault. I told him "Modusoperandi's favorite food is brown M&Ms" Did I do it on purpose? Probably.--Sir ~HELPME~ Count! Awards! Pee! Help! 01:38, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Oh. My favourite food is Wild Turkey. Also, brown M&Ms. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 01:46, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Return of Best Collaboration?

The way I figure it, Uncyclopedia is now more into collaborations than ever. Thus, the return of this would potentially be great. However, we would need restrictions:

  1. No more than two people may work on a collaboration.
  2. No prize money should be given for the collaborations. Or if we get rid of the noob category, then the money can come from that.

Sound good? MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 08:06, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

I like the idea, but only 2 people can work on an article? I get where you're coming from, but why not allow 3 people? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 08:12, Apr 24 2010
Eh, two was just an arbitrary number. Also, if it's more than two, then one person may slack off a lot but still expect the others to share the glory. At least with just two, there isn't much of a risk of this. I namely don't want 50 fucking people working on one article. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 08:23, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I know what you mean, and I completely agree. But 3 was my arbitrary number, and as such it is more important than yours. I guess the issue of who worked how hard on what would have to be resolved among the collaborators. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 08:30, Apr 24 2010
Let's vote on the number after we vote on if we should bring it back. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 08:33, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
The last time we had that, we told them to figure it out amongst themselves who gets the prize money, or split it. Not a bad idea though to bring it back. --EMC [TALK] 08:15 Apr 24 2010
I vote Symbol for vote.svg For. replacing Best article by a noob with Best Collaboration. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 08:19, Apr 24 2010
And I vote against. I think the noob category have brought in some great writers who get the incentive to compete against more seasoned writers without the handicap of being noobs. I think PLS should be kept as an individual competition - it's virtually impossible to set the limit of how many people can collaborate. Two? Three? Twenty? And who would take the credit? And also you nullify the no pee review rule since you have multiple opinions/reviews as part of the collaboration process. ~Jewriken.GIF 10:02, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't think of that. 3 months is the current time limit to be eligible for the noob category, yes? Do you think we should extend that? Because last time we didn't even have 5 entries. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 10:07, Apr 24 2010
How about six months? --EMC [TALK] 10:12 Apr 24 2010
Sounds good to me. Other people, care to comment? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 15:03, Apr 24 2010
Six months sounds fine to me. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 19:15, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Mordillo about keeping the Noob category and that having three people work on one collab essentially eliminates the purpose of no Pee Review. However, as those collabs would only be competing with other collabs, I don't see that as a problem, as long as the noob category doesn't disappear. And if Unc needs $20 or $25 to add another category, I'll donate it. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:46, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
Slight amendment to the above--I just saw this on PLS_Donations: "Olipro has pledged to match donations up to $50 (meaning if $50 is donated, he'll match it). If more than $100 is donated, the money will still be split four ways to our winning contestants." While I greatly appreciate what Olipro has offered, the possibility of donations moving up significantly concerns me. Uncyclopedia is a volunteer site; people edit here because they want to. Getting to put a feature template on your user page is a big deal (I know people will claim it's not to them, but hell, I have no problem admitting that I think getting approval from my talented peers is pretty damn cool). But if the money gets to where it's actually a motivation for competing, I think that could be a problem. So I'll amend my offer--if you need $25 or less to add a fifth category, I'll donate it. If the amount has already reached that point, I'll give it to some needy person. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:01, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
People enter PLS for the template? I thought people entered PLS because they can never finish articles unless there is a deadline. --monika 00:30, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Fredd's Package (vote below)

  • The total prize money becomes $120
  • Return of the Best Collaboration category, with a maximum of 3 co-authors per article. The prize money is split equally among them.
  • Extend the noob eligibility to 5 months.
  • Judges can participate in categories they're not judging.
  • I win PLS unconditionally. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA Lord of Egypt AMUSE ME
Score: 1
  1. Symbol for vote.svg For. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA Lord of Egypt AMUSE ME 19:39, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Six categories with a prize money of $100 split six ways, and then 1/6 of that money split into thirds? --EMC [TALK] 07:18 Apr 25 2010

There. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA Lord of Egypt AMUSE ME 15:40, April 25, 2010 (UTC)
That's $8 and some change dood. --EMC [TALK] 16:24 Apr 25 2010
It would work fine if you made it $108 instead of $100. (See? Somebody remembers how to use prime numbers). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  02:39, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Judging while entered

Is that still verboten? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Wednesday, 03:42, Apr 28 2010

We have this discussion nearly every PLS. I personally think it's a bad idea, just because of the potential for abuse. Two judges entering in one another's respective categories making a deal to vote eachother up, a judge not wanting to vote against somebody's article because that person is a judge in a category they've entered in and they don't want them to vote their entry down, etc. --EMC [TALK] 12:31 Apr 28 2010
EMC, I think you need to create an organized thread with all of the proposals currently on the table, as this is becoming messy. Put everything up for a vote? Also, I don't know how far along are you with the fund-raising (are you filthy rich?) but I think this also needs to be agreed by the community before it goes any further. ~Jewriken.GIF 12:47, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.uncyclopedia.co/w/index.php?title=Forum:Thread_for_the_9nd_PLS&oldid=4527748"