Uncyclopedia:VFS

...and so shall it be that every Admin is presented with Shit-Wading Galoshes, a Steel-Plated Banhammer, and an Industrial Strength HuffMaster 2000 upon inception to the order. “Better to reign in Uncyclopedia than serve in Wikipedia” – John Milton on stating the obvious Are you looking to join a team of enthusiastic and extremely sarcastic individuals? Do you like to feel like you are a valuable part of a "team?" Do you want an employer who considers you their slave? If you said "I prefer not to answer" to any or all of these questions, you may be qualified to be a sysop at Uncyclopedia! This is the place where twice a year, Uncyclopedia users choose and vote for the most qualified users to be given the mop of power. Additionally, this is the place for votes to remove ops from a user, either in urgent cases, or during the regular bi-annual votes. Rules for op votes You may nominate whomever you want. Only registered users whose accounts are at least 2 weeks old and have 75 constructive edits may vote on or nominate administrators. No self-nominations. Votes for bureaucrats and interface ops follow the same rules. Votes on those ends follow seperate vote counts. Joke nominations and votes are permitted. These do not count towards normal vote limits, but each user is limited to a maximum of 1 joke nomination. Joke nominations should go on the bottom, in italics. The process (all dates and times are calculated in UTC, unless someone gets lazy and is a few hours late/early) Each user may nominate one sysop, beginning on the 1st of every April and October. Until the 20th, users may vote on a maximum of three sysop candidates. From the 21st - 30th, current ops take the candidates with at least 50% of the leader's score and vote on who to op. The ten-day admin-only vote has been replaced by a ten-day admin-only bender, after which the crats will be too hung over to fulfil their duties on time. During the bender, late votes are still valid but dramatically groaned at. On the last day of any month with 31 days, current ops play Russian Roulette to see who gets de-opped. (Cat the Colourful goes first with a bazooka) Rules for de-op votes Only established users, per the above qualifications, may nominate an administrator to be de-opped. Be professional, and lay out your case for de-opping clearly and with evidence of their supposed wrongdoing uploaded to Uncyclopedia, and linked in your nomination. For a de-op to be successful, a supermajority (2/3) of votes must be in favor of the motion. No half votes or semi-votes. NB: The ops can change these rules at any time for any reason to help the fight against wiki-terrorism.

Adminship

RealDonaldTrump (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 11

 For. Really nice edits and nothing else --🩷 Sapplerx (talk) 🩷 13:27, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. Does a fuck-ton of good edits Turb0-Sunrise(YANKEES SUCK!) 13:29, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

 For. GlitchyZorua 🎩🦊 (give floofy hug) 13:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. Oᑭöᔑᔑᙀᙏ (vandalize my talk page) 14:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
• No brainer ShabiDOO 14:17, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
•  For. MrX blow me 15:47, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Comment. I don't have a brain either! why am i not getting nommed? Turb0-Sunrise(YANKEES SUCK!) 14:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. OranguTang94 (Complaint board) (Damage trail) 16:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

1.  Yeah? yeah. gergdown, eh (talk) 18:21, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

 For. yep Schism (talk) 15:05, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. Some say he will make a great admin, perhaps even the best. I mean that's what they all say, that's what they all tell me. Bad Motherfucker GET FUCKED! 18:25, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
• moccasins. 21:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Orangutang94 (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 7

•  Nom + For Orangutang94 is a prolific and hilarious writer who has been around as long as I have. He knows as well as anyone what it takes to create the comedy that we are all here for, and he is very knowledgeable with the inner workings of the site, including deescalating unwanted drama. I know it would please Sophia greatly to help our site by granting this awesome Uncyclopedian the admin tools. MrX blow me 15:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Against. It says on his userpage that he's semi-retired. Turb0-Sunrise(YANKEES SUCK!) 15:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  And you're free to vote against, but everyone is welcome to take breaks and/or reduce their activity level. He's been editing almost daily since he put that on his user page. MrX blow me 16:06, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  Lol, I think I was upset about a certain news event recently and how people reacted to it, but I might remove it if I wind up editing as usual. OranguTang94 (Complaint board) (Damage trail) 16:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

• oh. Changing to  For then. Turb0-Sunrise(YANKEES SUCK!) 16:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
•  All for it. Oᑭöᔑᔑᙀᙏ (vandalize my talk page) 16:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
• This is a defo ShabiDOO 22:36, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
•  For. Hell yeah. Bad Motherfucker GET FUCKED! 18:24, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
•  For. They tell me he's a good editor, and that he's great with the cyber, excellent with the cyber as well. Isn't he terrific, folks? Sometimes they call me orange, but clearly orange suits him better, because it's in his name, orangutangy. Some people even call him, the tangy one. Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump •  07:15, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Ok yeah definitely 21:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Gergdown (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 0

I have no clue if crat noms are seperte from admin noms, so here we go 👻_CUN Turb0-SunSpookrise, Esquire 👻21:06 10 31 '25 21:23, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. Soviet☭ 12:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Slight against. I like Gergdown, but is he really fit for adminship? Oᑭöᔑᔑᙀᙏ (vandalize my talk page) 19:04, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Yeah i'm not sold on this either. Maybe next year, if he's still active by then. 14:06, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Against. Same as alula Bad Motherfucker GET FUCKED! 17:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Bureaucratship

Shabidoo (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 5.5

Honestly one of the coolest users around here. Turb0-Sunrise(YANKEES SUCK!) 14:38, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

•  For. Absolutely. Bad Motherfucker GET FUCKED! 18:26, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Half against. I don't think we should have too many bureaucrats around for a multitude of reasons (that i won't be writing down right now because i don't wanna clog the voting page). That being said, if we ever need another bureaucrat i'd be happy to vote for here. 21:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

  That hits hard Alula. I've dedicated a lot of time and effort to this community over a lot of years, been very supportive of both you and MrX's buraucratship and I cannot fathom what the harm is of having a third buraucrat. That stings. ShabiDOO 23:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

  I didn't mean it personally in any way. My point here is that having too many bureaucrats is a bit pointless since the user right is really only used for renaming others and promoting others to admin/bureaucrat/interface admin/bot (of which two or three of those user rights are voted upon, so it's just a formality to give those out). That's the primary reason why i'm against (or uh, half against, i guess). 11:00, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Comment. OOOOOOOOH! Alula just shabiscrewed herself 👻_CUN Turb0-SunSpookrise, Esquire 👻21:06 10 31 '25 23:30, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Unrelated comment, @Turb0-Sunrise: that sentence kinda reminded me of that shitpost where it goes "huh. it seems like PHOENIX WRIGHT is PHOENIX STUPID!"

•  For. Soviet☭ 00:01, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
•  For. sure, don't see a reason not to. 🍂 gergdown 🍂 ☀️ 22:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
•  Strong For I almost always agree with Alula (seriously I can't remember disagreeing with her!), but I don't see any harm in having "too many" bureaucrats. Too many admins in general could be a problem if we don't trust the editors with the tools, but that's clearly not the case here. MrX blow me 15:35, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
•  For. You can never have too many bureaucrats! Elon might complain, but he has twenty baby mamas, which doesn't seem very efficient to me. Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump •  23:24, 17 October 2025 (UTC)