Talk:Identity theft

Someone ought to flag the forged votes so we know what is and isn't legit here. Hard to tell the joke if you don't already know the story. --User:Nintendorulez 19:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Here is the story:

Everyone was forging votes, and because I thought the article was going to get removed from the voting and I wasn't going to get it featured. Inspired as I was in the shower by identity theft, I deceided to forge votes in the spirit of Identity Theft and was prompty banned by Brad for 3 days. This fucking sucks because he said that it was going to be featured if I hadn't fucked with it. But check HowTo:Get Banned and under the expert user section...I got some thing...The bad thing is, is that I didn't fucking get my own joke and lost a VFH...-- Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 01:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I knew that, I just wanted to see which votes were and weren't real. --User:Nintendorulez 02:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok... I obviously didn't explain it very well. I was not going to be featured. It was going to be removed. The forging seemed like an attempt to get it featured, as it raised the votes to being high enough for featuring (falsely). The votes that were forged before were one per person, each linking back to the person who'd originally posted the vote. The voteS posted by Severian (there were many) didn't link back to him. The votes he added are under the line I've added to help with the understanding. All the votes above the line I've made linked back to the people who posted them, when clicked on. Below the line, the signatures aren't real, AND they don't link to the person who posted them (Severian). Hope that makes a little more sense.--<<>> 04:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Identity Theft

Score: +16

• Self-Nominate and For I'm not really who I say he is. -- Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 22:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Didn't you nominate this a few of weeks ago? Am I getting deja vu, or is it just me? Modusoperandi 22:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• For. Read as far as 'tad bit sticky' and decided i liked it. - jack mort | cunt | talk - - 18:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against. —Tompkins 00:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against. You shouldn't sign as other people. —Hinoa4 03:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment You guys are voting against, and stealing identities to do it, Good job on one hand, fuck you with the other. -- Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 09:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• Against - had potential, but didn't fulfil it in my opinion, if it was rewritten I could probably be won around though :) --Olipro Anchor (Harass) 18:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against. —Bradaphraser
• Against. —Rc 13:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

---

• For Good! —Imrealized 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Great Stuff! —Llama-Llover 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Nice work! —Witt E03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For GREAT! —Dummer 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For You deserve to be promoted or something in life... —Anon32 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For bad ass I lauged a lot. —Demonbob 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For It's funny the stuff you think of in the shower —Claudius_Prime 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against What kinda shiiite is this!? —KapKyle 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For This is funny and I think the talk page should be updated with it. —Zim_ulator 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment I'll look into it! -- Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• For Whoever did it already gets a tip of the hat! —Sikon 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For I have my reasons and I think they're pretty funny. —Zork Implementor L 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak against. Kinda bland. -Crowley098 04:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• For You're being so evil! —Cdrdude 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For I had my identity stolen! —Rei 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment We're not who we say we are most of the time —Bear 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• For Stealing Identities is all in good fun right? —Scorchiolio 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For It's great to see such an innovative noob. —129.94.6.30 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against!!!!! I don't get it —Usewho'sname? 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Innovative and delightfully banworthy. —Karmafist 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For ! —Ludoburgero03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against! You're going to get in trouble for this! —epynephrin 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For You're probably right, but it hasn't been done before! —InciJALAJANDRO 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For I'm gonna be RuPaul! —Vosnul 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For it's kinda kitchy Nevermind FOR! —Microx 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For neato, It just made me laugh —RaRanax 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Evil yet fun, Yaaaar! —Rainmonger 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Using it for your own evil ends, awesome. —Helk 03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Against Tripe reads better than this —Elkbuntu03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For I became that tiny woman in a wife beater! —TravisBatos03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For fine stuff ^_^ —DiZ03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• For Ban him, if you must, but it is funny —Page Vandal03:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)