Forum:I'm fucking sick of

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > I'm fucking sick of
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2312 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

hearing about This. Eugh, makes me sick. What's worse is It's sequel, which just spews failing logic out of it's mouth like a Liberal Democrat. Personally, I am requesting a complete rewite of 2000 AD - 2099 AD and The offending article. As Post Apocalypse is a featured article, only minor changes should be made. You may think this forum topic is pointless, but where going to have to do this, as 2012 is not the end of the world. If the article is supposed to be Satire, It fails miserably. The article genuinely sounds fucking serious. And you guys aren't serious about 2012, right?


Do you:

The poll was created at 23:40 on February 25, 2011, and so far 57 people voted.

Even if nothing is changed to the December 21, 2012 article even after 2012, I would also like your views on the subject as I have currently searching to see how many people find 2012 to be a serious Buisness (I don't), and I was thinking of asking the fair people of uncyclopedia (I also done this on 7chan... fuck me). - Barn-owl LOL vandalz

You're absolutely right. 2012 isn't real. It'll never occur! It's a nonexistent year! Because the world will end in 2011! *starts laughing maniacally* Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:39, 25 February 2011
I totally agree with you Another n00b, 2012 is a fucking god-awful movie. --Black Flamingo 23:48, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
No, but you know who's going to try to get people afraid of it? Republican and conservative money, to try to hold down the moron vote (most morons vote Republican, but those morons won't be afraid of 2012 because they are too stupid to focus on it. Democratic morons will be the ones pooping their pants). See my page December 23, 2012 for my in-depth assessment of what will occur after 2012. As for our 2012 articles, they can be used the same way Conan O'Brian played his "in the year 2000" for years after 2000. Aleister 00:07 26-2-'11


'It's'? 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 00:12, 26 February 2011

Unless he's talking about the sequel to the film/novel It, in which case he'd be correct. --Black Flamingo 00:17, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
That was IT. Also, no, he wouldn't. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 00:27, 26 February 2011

Regarding the Timeline

I did some trimming to keep the randumb down. (There was supposed to be a complete rewrite of the timeline, but it was a lost somehow.) And any rate, saying the world will end in 2012 does create a hard end to the timeline, which cuts down on the random in the future. Anything beyond "near future" tends to be random & anachronistic by nature (i.e. saying Tom Cruise was elected President in 2731 AD). Near future stuff also tends to age poorly, but at least it can be funny if done correctly, but I digress. At any rate, having a hard end to the timeline a few years after the present is probably a good idea. --Mn-z 01:36, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that's a good idea. - Barn-owl LOL vandalz 16:57, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Personal tools