Uncyclopedia:VFH/Nuance

Article: Nuance	Score: -2 morons who see everything in their intransigent black-and-white terms and just need to be shot
Nominated by:	Saberwolf116 06:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
For: 3	Nom and for. So I was hitting the random button to find something to put on VFD, and I found something to put on VFH. Saberwolf116 06:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Nuanced For. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 13:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC) For Look - not to put to fine a point on it, but this should have been nominated months ago. I mean, there's no arguing that. --Globaltourniquet - (was TPLN) 17:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Is that just because you wrote it? Lol. Saberwolf116 18:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Well, like everything else, there's a lot more to it than that to consider. --Globaltourniquet - (was TPLN) 18:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Against: 5	Against. Not to be mean, but this really feels like a one-trick pony to me. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 01:19, Jul 2 Against. I really tried to give it the benefit of the doubt but it doesnt scream VFH at me Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 05:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC) against. didn't hit the spot. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 13:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Against. TKFU U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U UU U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U CK 18:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Against. More about being a moron than nuance . It needs a better set up as well on what it means as regards nuance as well. --*RomArtusImperator ® (Orate). 08:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC) I might be misreading your comment, and if so, I apologize. I don't mind an against vote if the article is not funny enough for you given its joke, but your comment appears to indicate that you do not get the joke. I don't think against votes are appropriate when the joke, good or not, is missed. Again, I could be wrong. But to call this "more about being a moron than about nuance" is completely missing the joke (the one trick this pony is doing, which is very amusing). --Globaltourniquet - (was TPLN) 15:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC) Joke not missed. Still not VFH as stands. --RomArtusImperator ®* (Orate). 19:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC) It certainly may not be VFH as it stands. However, if the joke is not missed, which I will now assume, then surely it does not need a better setup on what it means by nuance. Taking unecessary time to explain that would be like explaining the joke itself, thus ruining it. Irony like this must be subtle if it is to stand a chance at not being stupid. So this belief that one of its reasons for not being VFH is that it needs a better setup is invalid. That's all. --Globaltourniquet - (was TPLN) 20:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC) Comments noted. If you want to continue this discussion suggest via personal pages. If not then let it rest and persuade the other against voters instead. --*RomArtusImperator ®** (Orate). 22:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)