Forum:Invite VSTF back?
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
A couple days ago, we had a coverage gap and an old friend was back committing unambiguous vandalism (moving pages from their obvious correct name through a series of unambiguously junk names). I contacted Wikia describing how our tools could be improved, but Sannse replied that "This isn't an area that we are likely to work on in the near future, so for now the VSTF are your best bet....They are currently instructed to leave Uncyclopedia alone so won't automatically look for problems...."
VSTF is a force of Wikia staff and interns who have developed tools to detect and undo vandalism. (Anyone is welcome to replace that with a more accurate formal definition, preferably including links.)
Indeed we have been adamant over the years since Wikia acquired this franchise that they butt out. They have generally done so, with the notorious exception of the 2011-12 jihad against nudie photos and articles whose humor is so subtle and fine that young morons might confuse them for the truth. This induced (or was the excuse) for the events of 2013, when many impressionable Uncyclopedians were stampeded off the site into a nearby tree house to lament censorship and large corporations and joke-ban one another while waiting for the Muse, who is still here. Thus, the biggest opponents of VSTF have, to quote Mitt Romney, "self-deported." Among current Senior Editors of this website, PuppyOnTheRadio was most adamant against greater Wikia involvement, but he, after describing the era in which Uncyclopedia specialized in sprawling pages of randomness, writes: "Given we tend to discourage randumbo now and encourage actual wit, and VSTF volunteers have (looking at other Wikia wikis) respected the existing community culture, I'm happy to allow them in."
I have asked the Cabal whether to make a change and whether to open this Forum for discussion, and they are welcome to restate their remarks. The worst case I see is that greater Wikia involvement in the content of the wiki is that the remaining bare-tit photos may vanish. However, Sannse remarked during the last Forum that dealt with soft porn that the bright line of nudie photos might morph into the mush line of text that someone thinks is "offensive," and looking at American universities and the debate on race, this is construed liberally in places like Wikia's headquarters. Moreover, Wikia Inc. has undertaken a new corporate niceness campaign, with blather about climate change and income inequality, that someone in the boardroom might want to put into practice at the expense of our satire.
So: Shall we invite VSTF back into Uncyclopedia to detect and revert unambiguous cases of vandalism, with instructions to leave to Uncyclopedians edits that might merely be inappropriate efforts of newbies?12:55 28-Oct-15
- Considering what else we have agreed to do (user database name merger), I don't see this as a problem - but as long as we can have our own ground rules and decide whether the volunteers are being over enthusiastic in the activities. We have remind them that Uncyclopedia isn't like the other wikia sites and we are not a product endorsement site. Unless there is a change at the top of Wikia (since 2013), Uncyclopedia should still have a broader remit to abuse and make fun of anyone or anything. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:04, October 28, 2015 (UTC)
- I see no real issue, if it can be made clear the line between what is vandalism and opinion-based censorship. How often does this level of attack occur? Mindful of the voluntary nature of the support, would it be practical to have a "red telephone" i.e. call in the cavalry when we need a bit of back-up; or by that stage would it be simpler just to do it ourselves? 11:02, October 30, 2015 (UTC)
I polled active Admins on 27-Oct; Simsilikesims said that a Forum should be opened, and PuppyOnTheRadio said he had no problem with doing so. It seems this question has been aired and there are no objections. 16:13 4-Nov-15
I have notified Wikia (Ticket 244511), following the text set out in boldface above.23:09 10-Nov-15