Forums: Index > Village Dump > IPs voting on VFH
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2866 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I'd like to bring up an issue that i've seen for a while now. The issue is having IP's voting on VFH. My problem with IP's voting on VFH is that they are not experienced or autoconfirmed users, and that it clogs up votes. For all we know, it could be some kid that thinks it's funny. I've seen a group of IP's that have also been nomming articles on VFH too. It really isn't fair to other users, and VFH should be strictly for users. Thank you. --Maple leaf >> Hello, my name is Sir Lollipop, and I am Canadian! 00:09, 10 June 2011

Na, the problem is the users! I recommend that all the admins of this site close ranks together and move in for the kill while we still can. We need to act swiftly! MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 00:27, Jun 10
I always envisioned it would end like that. The admins snapping and banning everyone that dares edit and ruling the site. --Maple leaf >> Hello, my name is Sir Lollipop, and I am Canadian! 00:30, 10 June 2011
Eh? MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 00:36, Jun 10
As an unregistered user, I am highly insulted that you would want to forcibly instate your elitist and exclusionary beliefs on unregistered users by restricting the rights of said unregistered users. The denizens of Uncyclopedia, whether registered or not, should have equal rights, and forbidding unregistered users (commonly called "IP's" as a cruel pejorative) from voting would be bigoted and prejudiced. Your statement on how an "IP" voting on VFH could merely be a "kid" who thinks "it's funny" is logically flawed, as the point of VFH is to vote on articles users deem to be humorous, or "funny". Furthermore, the rights of unregistered users should include the right to nominate articles of their liking. Believing that an unregistered user's opinion isn't as valid as others is an obvious sign of deep-seated hatred. I do not believe that unregistered users should be privy to more benefits than their registered fellowmen; all of us on Uncyclopedia should be subjected to the same laws and rules, and this includes equality. Remember, before you speak of your dislike or distrust of unregistered users, know that you were once like us too. Thank you for providing me with a medium of which to express my complaints, and allowing me an audience.-- 00:35, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Insert ironic {{IPJoin}} here. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 00:37, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
There's such thing as Special:UserLogin, you know. --Maple leaf >> Hello, my name is Sir Lollipop, and I am Canadian! 00:40, 10 June 2011
I am absolutely flattered at your offer, but I must decline. My services are needed much more to fight for the rights of the unregistered. If we were in a world free of hatred and injustice, I would gladly accept. But, not now.-- 00:44, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
Uncy of the Month, the leader of the unregistered. Do you always have the same IP? Good to meet you, masked man, a true hero of the people. Aleister 00:55 10-6-'11
p.s. Wait, you've only made two edits before today, and that may not even have been you. You are a pretend fighter for the people! You have given IP's a bad name (IP), and your mask of justice is ripped off and a lazy IP is found under it. No wonder you don't want to register. Pop and doddlecorns to you, sir.
Such madness! I switch computers every other hour! I have very expensive IP changing technology (with lasers)! Sometimes I use my mother's laptop when she's not arou — oh crap.--White Toaster Talk - Contributions 01:03, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
I have nothing against IP's. Please don't get confused with that. Voting is really a community thing (in my opiniojn, others may disagree). --Maple leaf >> Hello, my name is Sir Lollipop, and I am Canadian! 01:08, 10 June 2011
Of course, IP addresses change, so the person may have made several edits. Regarding IP voting, I think only bots and admins should be allowed to vote on VFH, because I don't trust auto-confirmed users. --Mn-z 02:13, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
I've changed my opinion. Nobody can vote for VFH. --Maple leaf >> Hello, my name is Sir Lollipop, and I am Canadian! 02:25, 10 June 2011
I think they should be able to vote, but it shouldn't count for as much as the vote of a regular user. ~ Humbuck Talk 03:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
We should also probably scrutinize the votes to make sure they're not the result of voter fraud. Those two ideas would probably be the best ones.~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 03:07, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
ACORN!!! NEW BLACK PANTHERS!!! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 04:08, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
I've always wanted to be a Tamil Tiger myself, but whatever floats your not-as-good-looking-as-I-am boat.~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 04:43, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
I joined the Tony Tigers. They're...alright. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 04:59, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
@ "all of us on Uncyclopedia should be subjected to the same laws and rules, and this includes equality" — but you are speaking in vain; IPs already are treated differently, since their votes on VFH only count as 0.5 as opposed to registered users' votes, which count 1. @Humbucker, did you make a joke or were you not aware of this fact?
@Lollipop: "Voting is really a community thing (in my opiniojn, others may disagree)" — I totally disagree. Voting should have something to do with quality, and not with community. This community-idea is the reason why User:Dr. Skullthumper/10 reasons to defrost Frosty got featured and why Fuck ChiefjusticeDS is allowed to exist in mainspace, not to mention that it made it to 2010's top ten list. Also, and I might be wrong about that, and if I am, I will humbly accept Thekillerfroggy's 10 year ban, but I think that this community-thing MIGHT have contributed to Filial Piety becoming 2010's #3 article (considering its VFH history). And how do you know that IPs are not experienced? Yes, they may not be part of the "community", but that doesn't mean they can't tell quality from crap. And if a crap article gets nominated on VFH, the nomination is usually over quickly, so I don't see why this is a big deal. As for "For all we know, it could be some kid that thinks it's funny" — what difference would it make if that kid were a registered user? Schamschi, 14:42, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
tl;dr-+1,592, dude? Seriously?

Lollipop, you disappoint me. Why did you bother raising such a pointless issue? I for one think that the rules providing registered users with 1 vote and IPs with 0.5 is perfect in managing things on VFH. As the reaction of our esteemed IP clearly shows, trying to reduce the freedom of IPs when it's not necessary shall only lead to wasteful quarrels and drama. Cease this pointless discussion at once! --Scofield & Friends 18:01, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Ljlego already came up with a solution. Protect this at once! --Purple mini lolly Lollipop Purple mini lolly - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 18:26, 12 June 2011
  • Dunno if somebody already mentioned this, but I think the real problem with IPs voting on VFH is that 75% of IPs are sockpuppets of registered users. I don't have a solution to the problem or anything, I just wanted to bring that up. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:39, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
    Do we actually, like, know this? What with Spang's improvements to VFH and all, it's very easy to vote correctly - a dropdown menu and a button - so I don't find it unrealistic that unregistered users are jumping in on the action.  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 19:40 Jun 12, 2011
    Ok so how do you explain IPs with only 1 or 2 edits, both of them VFH votes? How would that even happen. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:42, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
    Dynamic IPs, the simplicity of voting vs. the complexity of editing, VFH now appearing in the sitenotice...  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 19:50 Jun 12, 2011
    Yeah ok. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:55, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with everything said on this forum up to I'd like to bring up an issue.... As we're talking about the site that anybody can edit and we have no restrictions on who can become registered, isn't this all a moot, and rather stupid, point. Besides, one of our most senior editors is not only an unregistered user, they're also a sockpuppet. Pup 08:02 12 Jun '11

Desgalipedia opinion

In my opinion, any Uncyclopedia IP's are prohibited from voting. Rhubella beach Rhubella Avatar-02 Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits Rhubella Avatar-01 20:14, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion your signature is too tall. You also smell. Please remedy these deficiencies and mail samples to my secretary, who can mail my response back to your secretary, in fact both of our secretaries could have lunch together; really put the world to rights. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:42, June 15, 2011 (UTC)