Forum:The UnNews discussion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 12:07, June 1, 2011 by Dexter111344 (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > The UnNews discussion
Note: This topic has been unedited for 1210 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.


Recently, Dexter and I had a short but quality chat on IRC about users role in UnNews, in particular the Front Page templates and the Main Page box. Below is the conversation, in its agreed-upon entirety:

(3:52:41 PM) TheHumbucker: ok, i'm thinking it might be a good idea to have a dramaless and constructive discussion about UnNews

(3:52:42 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:53:40 PM) dexter111344: There isn't any need for a "czar", pure and simple.

(3:53:58 PM) TheHumbucker: so you think the community should decide?

(3:53:58 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:54:26 PM) dexter111344: Go ahead.

(3:55:19 PM) TheHumbucker: because what i've been seeing is a lot of self exposure in UnNews

(3:55:20 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:56:18 PM) TheHumbucker: which puts articles on the main/front page regardless of quality

(3:56:18 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:56:30 PM) dexter111344: Can you provide one instance of that, please?

(3:57:18 PM) TheHumbucker: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:Uncyclopedia_under_attacks_of_Anonymous_persons!

(3:57:18 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:57:26 PM) TheHumbucker: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:SWAT_team_holds_surprise_party_at_youth_center

(3:57:26 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:57:52 PM) dexter111344: How are either of these "self-promotion"?

(3:57:56 PM) TheHumbucker: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:Bj%C3%B6rk_farts_again

(3:57:57 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:58:20 PM) TheHumbucker: when the author puts the story on the front page of UnNews or in the main page page on his own

(3:58:20 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:58:52 PM) TheHumbucker: i know Aleister had one or two

(3:58:52 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:58:54 PM) dexter111344: A reoccurring history joke that had a majority consensus to have in UnNews, with the standard mislead on the main page itself.

(3:59:18 PM) TheHumbucker: that was the 2nd time it was front paged, though

(3:59:18 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(3:59:22 PM) dexter111344: It's a good thing the leads are constantly changing then.

(3:59:48 PM) TheHumbucker: i guess we can agree to be in disagreement, then?

(3:59:49 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(4:00:12 PM) dexter111344: Bring it up on a forum and paste this little chat.

(4:00:21 PM) TheHumbucker: ok, will do

(4:00:21 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(4:01:09 PM) TheHumbucker: i'll put down my views on the issue as well, so after i post you can add yours, good?

(4:01:09 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(4:01:23 PM) dexter111344: Sure.

(4:05:55 PM) TheHumbucker: i'm going to edit the convo to take out the <AUTO-REPLY>s; and i'll copy/paste from "There isn't any need..." to "Bring it up in a forum..." agreed?

(4:05:55 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

(4:06:25 PM) dexter111344: I'd prefer everything.

(4:06:51 PM) TheHumbucker: ok

(4:07:25 PM) dexter111344 <AUTO-REPLY> : FU Sock!

Clearly there's still uncertainty in how UnNews is to progress, hinging on the issue of whether there should be oversight on the templates. I'm sure that this forum will end in a vote, but I would prefer it if we were able to fully discuss our possibilities before getting to that, so we're sure that we make the best decision we can concerning this whole situation. ~ Humbuck Talk 20:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

You left out an auto-replay. I fixed it, though. And the issue is currently the fundamental idea of "needing a czar", or one person who fixes up articles, moves some of them back to userspaces, and updates the templates. This is something that everyone should do so as to prevent one guy from doing something that seemingly nobody else wants.
Take, for example, this. Kakun made a reoccurring joke about the Icelandic volcano eruption and TheHumbucker moved it to his userspace. Well, quickly a consensus formed that it shouldn't have been moved like that and it was brought back the UnNews section and re-given the misleading lead.
TheHumbucker is under the impression that this kind of thing shouldn't be done and whatnot since he was given some position in a forum recently. I'm basically reasserting the position I had in the forum that no position should exist because it leads to one guy being the decider of everything, which only pisses people off.
And in regards to Template:RecentUnNews, this is something that any registered user has been able to add their latest work on. Excluding it to one person is legitimately a foreign idea.
tl;dr version: I still don't think we need an "UnNews Czar" and have only seen negatives to having one. MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 20:31, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I userspaced this particular article, not knowing that it was a callback to a previous one about when the volcano erupted the first time. Having only been around for a bit over 3 months, I didn't know about the previous article. Now that I know that it was a callback to that one, though, I rest assured that I made the right decision in userspacing the recent version. It was a picture and a one liner, and I would have done the same thing to the original article if I were in charge then. UnNews stories are supposed to at least look like news or make fun of news, and, even though I'm very open to what fits in this definition, this did neither. It only looked like something thrown together in 3 minutes by someone who didn't want to try too hard, but that happened to have some tongue-in-cheek humor. As for the "consensus" you mention; all I see is Aleister pointing out the original article, the article's author and Dexter disagreeing with my move, and then the templates getting edited to include it once again. The author and 2 other users does not a consensus make.
Continuing on, and in the assumption that this is not just about this particular article and has to do with the concept of an overseer in UnNews, I disagree with you when you put forward the principle that we should prevent one person from doing the job that no one wants to do, in order for everyone to do it. If no one wants to do it, no one will. That's why we corner someone and strong arm them into taking the job; now they're expected to do it, and will be shamed eternally if they don't step up and follow through. If you assume that people will come forward and consistently volunteer to shovel the crap, I'd recommend getting some tall waders. ~ Humbuck Talk 22:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


Oversight is needed in UnNews

The templates behind UnNews - both the Main Page one and the 5 lead article slots - give articles more exposure on the sight, much like featuring. This kind of exposure is something that should not be taken lightly and, in the case of Featured Articles, isn't; nominations are put forward for Main Page featuring, users vote, sometimes for weeks, and the winners get put up on the front page (and granted the high-level of exposure that this entails) as a clear community-based agreement that these articles are the best of what Uncyclopedia has to offer. This is the way featuring is run, and I have never heard any issues with this.

The UnNews templates are much like VFH in this; they give an article much more exposure than it would ever receive if it wasn't hosted on the template. But these same templates are open to any registered user to change. This template altering is often, though not exclusively, done by users to maximize the exposure of their own UnNews story. This is kind of like allowing users to just throw their own articles into the feature box, no questions asked, and I violently disagree with that. We should be giving exposure to good articles, not to whichever ones were written by someone who knows where to find the templates and how to manipulate them; if we don't do this, we're not rewarding good writing, we're rewarding good boasting, and UnNews will degrade into nothing more than egotistical babble.

I've said it many times, and it has many times been agreed, that it is the consistent quality and the sense of direction that makes UnNews as good as it is. Rarely is there a story there that is of utterly VFD quality. Compared to the encyclopedia part of Uncyclopedia or any of its other projects, UnNews is pristine; there are rarely any "miss" stories. There's a consistent quality that, I believe, the rest of Uncyclopedia looks up to, and it is only UnNews that has this quality.

It is also only UnNews that has had an overseer, an Editor in Chief, for most of its existence.

I don't think that this is a coincidence.

Where there is an overseer, a gatekeeper who makes sure that only high-quality material passes through, there is consistency, there is a definite standard of excellence. When there is no overseer this consistency is gone and any material below that bar has free reign to rub shoulders with superior stories. When there is an overseer, the selection process is objective; it is final, there is no changing it. When there is no one there to judge the quality of a contribution, this process becomes subjective to multiple viewpoints. When an issue becomes subject to various views, disagreements flare up, arguments start, and drama ensues. Edit wars will become common if there is no higher power who can provide that final decision on what stays and what goes. Admins will have more work to do, rectifying these arguments, and users will, inevitably, get banned.

I don't care who this overseer is, but there has to be one. Without one, the quality of UnNews will suffer, degrading the overall quality of Uncyclopedia; this hurts the reader. It will also cause edit wars, which leads to needless drama, which leads to administrative action that no one wants; this hurts the user. Therefore, it is clear that there are only downsides to not having an overseer in UnNews. ~ Humbuck Talk 21:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I moaned about this before. Now I disagree with my own stupid ideas. Leave the 'Recent News'. That's for us all to share and love. mAttlobster. (hello) 21:43, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

"UnNews not necessarily fun news" for Best Forum Title Ever

Score: +2
  • Nom + For. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 22:03, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
  • For Please note how I try to make a serious point, but use a lighthearted tone because I fear I will not be taken seriously. When the inevitable happens and I'm not taken seriously, I abandon my original point and make a rather weak witticism about Kate Bush; my motivation: to pretend I don't care anyway. mAttlobster. (hello) 22:55, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
  • Kate Bush. --Black Flamingo 14:00, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

A key difference

The points made by TheHumbucker are correct that having template manipulation skills should not give someone the ability to be constantly featured on the front page. But the voting process used for VFH is too lengthy for timely events. We would just now be getting around to announcing Osama Bin Laden's death if we had that process. Czar is a loaded title. Blame the US for appointing a "drug Czar" and various and sundry czars. Remember the last real Czars were killed because they were despotic. I think the kindler gentler term of "Groundskeeper" is better. Someone that willingly rakes the sand back to where it should be. They pick up the stray balls. But a real heavy handed grounds keeper could keep the golfers from playing, which is the sole reason for his job to exist. In deciding which articles to move to userspace or re-edit. Err on the side of "I don't get it". This is a wiki, even major news organizations like CBC, CNN or Sun News get a few stories on air that may be unpolished every so often. No babies are killed in their wake. --K evillips эвилипс MUN,CM,NS,3of7 23:38, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Humbucker has promised, on and off the record, to not be as stringent as Spike with his oversight. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 00:02, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
I was not talking about Humbucker, even indirectly, but more to say the term Czar seems like a poor metaphor for any job on a collaborative wiki project. I trust the collective wisdom of the regular editors of UnNews. Once in a while, we may whore our stuff a bit, at times when we are mourning the loss of our beloved sex sheep, or maybe our coffee got bitter before we finished the pot. But if anyone becomes pushy, or insistent, to the point an edit war may be described, an admin may need to to step in.
I have not even looked at any of the the sources of the recent conflict. I am taking a purely academic view from afar. People like what they like, and do not like being over ruled. Regardless of what side they are on. But there is a disclaimer about that on this and every other mediawiki - if you do not like others changing what you did or wrote, then leave now and start a blog. --K evillips эвилипс MUN,CM,NS,3of7 01:12, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

a few points on things humbucker has said

If this comes off harsh I apologize. I really try to be civil, but I suppose I'm a bastard wolfman at heart.

"If you assume that people will come forward and consistently volunteer to shovel the crap, I'd recommend getting some tall waders" You have people lining up to shovel the crap, case in point Dexter. Instead of welcoming his help, you're ignoring his opinion. This he posted on Dex's talkpage: "So again, thank you for stepping up in SPIKE's absence, but I, and apparently others, think that it's time to appoint a single person/entity to oversee UnNews." Does he sound like he's lifting this terrible burden on his shoulders that no one else wants to do, or does it sound like he's deliberately chasing people away? I say the latter, and frankly I don't blame Dex for being a little vexed.

"The author and 2 other users does not a consensus make." An yet it was only a consensus of five that gave this guy absolute power. Plus, add me to the consensus for the article, because I saw the article both as funny and an excellent way to parody the news, and this is exactly what I meant when I said that out of the box ideas would be tossed aside. I won't even go into detail with my own running joke (one that's been going on in UnNews since 2006 mind you) that was userspaced. Frankly, I'm not bothered by it, but I know it's a sign of things to come, or rather a status quo that hasn't changed.

" This template altering is often, though not exclusively, done by users to maximize the exposure of their own UnNews story. This is kind of like allowing users to just throw their own articles into the feature box, no questions asked, and I violently disagree with that." What about you Humbucker? What's to stop you from "judging" your own stories as good and just posting whatever you write on that template, essentially featuring yourself? The only way I can think is that you vow never to put your own stuff on there. Are you up to that?

"I've said it many times, and it has many times been agreed, that it is the consistent quality and the sense of direction that makes UnNews as good as it is. Rarely is there a story there that is of utterly VFD quality." That is strictly a matter of opinion, as everybody has different comedic tastes here. My own sense of humor is a bit more wacky. Personally, I view the "all UnNews needs to sound like news" ideology to be way too restrictive, and there are users here who agree. You have to respect that. You used that argument against my article actually, but that joke was actually initially a parody of an onion joke. As far as parody news goes, the Onion is about as legitimate as you can get. Even the Onion allows a little wackiness on occasion. Pure unbroken consistency makes for a boring UnNews to me personally. Do we want to be the successful but boring Jeff Foxworthy or the genius but occasionally booed off the stage Andy Kaufman? Being occasionally booed is how you grow. Being consistent is how you run a business, and why treat a free wiki that people edit for fun like a business?

"It is also only UnNews that has had an overseer, an Editor in Chief, for most of its existence. I don't think that this is a coincidence." While this is certainly true, the role itself has certainly changed. The "powers" as it were of the czar have certainly grown, and if users in 2006 faced the same unnews that they do today, people would be having shit fits. Look up Zim's unnews edits. Yes he was "czar", but he worked with people and didn't overstep, and because of that unnews thrived. People had a lot more say on things.

"When there is an overseer, the selection process is objective; it is final, there is no changing it." I see this as bad.

"When there is no one there to judge the quality of a contribution, this process becomes subjective to multiple viewpoints." I see this as good.

"When an issue becomes subject to various views, disagreements flare up, arguments start, and drama ensues." The very existence of this forum means that your argument is non unique. Buddy, we're getting drama either way. It's the nature of uncyc, and czar or no czar, be assured that's not changing.

Before I finish, I would like to add that if we're trying to be so perfectly similar to real newspapers, then perhaps we need to act that way with our staffing. Yes real newspapers have an editor in chief, but there's also copyeditors, night editors, city editors...By the time that story hits the shelves, it's been looked at by at least 3-4 pairs of eyes. Only having one editor is just asking for trouble. Plus, it puts a lot of stress on the editor. Considering how Humbucker has had doubts 3 months down the road on whether he'll be able to keep doing this, why put all our eggs in one basket?

If you disagree with all of this, at least I second the proposal to leave the new unnews template to any user. Not being able to change that template is like saying you can't have your edits shown on recent changes.

tl'dr version: blah blah blah, mrthejazz, you windbag. It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 03:10, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Since it is agreed that voting on an UnNews page leads or the front page lead will be too time consuming, then a 'Czar' is the best worst option available. If they can't decide what makes a good page lead then the 'job' isn't worth taking. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 08:19, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

My Opinion

UnNews is fine as it is right now. There's no need to change it.--Iwillkillyou 333 TALK What's it like to be a heretic? 04:09, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

My Opinion (better than the one above me)

No czar. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 05:05 May 27 2011

*hits EMC with a mallet* Though I do agree with you. No czar--Iwillkillyou 333 TALK What's it like to be a heretic? 09:30, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Building on what MrtheJazz said

Think of UnNews as a sort of "Uncyclopedia Lite" - with the "Lite" part specifically meaning "Lite on Bureaucracy".

UnNews has always been relatively open; the only barrier to putting your article on the UnNews Main Page is being competent enough to appropriately modify the correct template, which, if that is indeed something you have enough intellect to do, Good.

In addition to that however, I'm also not going to deny that an article featured on the UnNews Main Page might suck, but if that is the case, go and replace it with one that doesn't suck (or sucks less) since as is clear; there's no obstacle to doing so other than your own stupidity.

Whether or not a vote is held, I will personally refuse to enforce it. the templates are already semi-protected and that's how they will stay. -- Prof. Olipro Icons-flag-gb KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 09:25, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

So it's just a question of knowing where the templates are? If 'bad articles' encourage others to write 'better' ones then why not do away with VFH and just put up the first story that is standing in the queue when the doors open?? Seems odd to have one area that has a quality (or popularity) test to appear on the front page and another section where it's first one in the door gets their story featured. I thought the idea of Czar was a good one and if The Humbucker or someone else has no overall say about story positioning then the role assigned to him is already redundant in my opinion. Perhaps Spike could be abrasive but none of the regulars minded, seeing what he was doing was constructive and not a matter of ego. If Spike chooses not to return then I welcome The Humbucker for taking on an overseeing position on the UnNews pages. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 09:44, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
There is no current problem with the use of the UnNews Recent News template use. All you lot are trying to do is solve imagined problems, which is just plain weird. Fair enough, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that some of these problems could occur in the future, in which case let's look at solving them then. mAttlobster. (hello) 10:03, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
I agree. These are simply imagined problems -- the lead article and recent news templates have never been a big issue before when we didn't have a "chief" ("chief" being more of a sentiment than a precedent; and yes, there were times when we didn't have an UnNews "chief"). SPIKE's absence is not a big deal; I don't know why it's being treated like it is. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 10:40 May 27 2011
My two cents, although I want change back. I like SPIKE's "rule" that only news related to real events be in the number one spot, not made up stuff about pizza talking or something. I've only put pages on the main page recent news template, mine and others, that I feel are worthy, and SPIKE did a good job on keeping that flowing. The news staff that has been active recently seems like they are doing a good job, The Humbucker included, and when conflict arises it has been talked out. So not much really has changed in terms of quality. All in all it seems to be status quo right now (remember when Osama died - those were the days - when many articles about his death were written but only a few made it to the recent news list, which seemed about right). Aleister 11:14 27-5-'11
What? MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 11:20, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
Nice screenshot. No, I meant of all those Osama is dead articles, and more to come, only a few were carried over to the Main page template (by main page I meant main page and not UnNews front page). Aleister 12:24 27-5-'11
I am going to agree with Romartus for what may be the first (and first) time of my Uncyclopedianism. The VFH analogy is spot-on, and letting people edit the recentnews template without an objective middleman is equivalent to single-handedly whoring yourself a feature, all 18 15 9 votes of it. UnNews is different from Uncyclopedia because of its immediacy, so it needs this snap moderation in order to keep things from getting too egotistical, not to mention of consistent quality. Humbucker is the only one stepping up to the plate to moderate and improve UnNews, so why shouldn't he deserve this responsibility? If you contest one of his decisions (which hopefully all won't be SPIKEworthy) then discuss it with him. The same goes for him with you. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 23:49, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
Plus, if anyone is paying attention to Recent Changes right now, you can definitely notice the steep rise in UnNews quality over the years. I'd definitely put part of the blame on people like Spike, Humbucker, and Zim. The invisible hand of the market isn't so effective with that part of the site. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 23:51, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
I think you've got the wrong end of the stick; I've nothing against Humbucker "stepping up to the plate" whatsoever; my point is that if he wants to do that he should just do it, no cursory forum vote or administrative bollocks required. (primarily because all the templates have appropriate permissions that mean he can ALREADY do what he's espousing) -- Prof. Olipro Icons-flag-gb KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 00:54, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
The problem is folks aren't going along with him just doing it, apparently. Or something along those lines. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 00:56, 28 May 2011
Yeah. The issue is that he has just been doing it, but like Lyrithya says some people have been opposed to it and will make a fuss about it no matter what anybody does about anything. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 01:03, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
Has he been doing it wrong or is it merely retarded bellyaching? -- Prof. Olipro Icons-flag-gb KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 03:00, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
Oli, that again depends on your definition of wrong. If you think not allowing editing of recent unnews is "doing it wrong" or not allowing more "out there" articles is wrong, then yes he's doing it wrong. I'm personally one of those that falls into that camp, and I also believe that you aren't going to solve that problem with a new czar. Is he belligerent? Certainly not. As for the whole self whoring thing, again if you have a middleman, then there's a greater risk of the middleman doing the whoring, and that isn't fair either. Unless he vows not to put any of his own articles on there, I'll keep saying something. People keep saying that nobody wants to do this job. Plenty of people do, they just don't want to wear the funny hat. I saw that Lollipop offered to be "vice czar" and Humbucker turned him down saying he's not doing that because he has a committee. That sounds good, except I haven't heard anything about who this committee is or what they actually do. Is Dex on this committee? He works on UnNews a lot and seems to have little control, so...again, I'm not so sure people don't want to do the job as much as they aren't being allowed to step up. *Edit* Also, Humbucker took a short 3 day vacation, so we'll have to wait and see what he says when he gets back. It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 06:11, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
The only committee I'm on is the PTA at the elementary down the street; they just don't know it. MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 05:47, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
The way I understood it, the committee is whoever wants to be on the committee, and their role is to improve UnNews in ways more important than changing the leads, such as writing and checking and improving articles. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 15:27, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
What TKF said, mostly. I'd say more, but I don't want to. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 00:32, 28 May 2011
@Mrthejazz: I think you're wrong in one point: Being the "czar" in order to avoid whoring doesn't necessarily mean that Humbucker (or whoever the overseer might be) must not put his own UnNews in the Main Page template. It would just mean that he must judge his own UnNews articles as he would judge any other UnNews, from an unbiased point of view. Whether this is possible is another matter, but the overseer is entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining quality on UnNews and on the Main Page templates, which I think should also mean that he is trusted to have the ability to be neutral when judging his own articles. Schamschi, 18:24, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Reading The Humbucker's talk page, he doesn't strike me as the egotistical type either so I don't see it as a problem putting one of his stories on the front page. Nor were Spike or Zim from my experience. If he is away then someone else can be temporary czar or let an admin act as back up UnNews article recycler. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 12:59, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

New section because I'm getting lots of lag

So the committee is "Anyone who wants to work on it" (a.k.a. user, except for Lollipop apparantly). And because of Hum's message about how it's not as much fun now that he's taken this job, that's exactly the reason he shouldn't be doing it. He's too valuable as a writer and as a person to "not have as much fun". He should be having maximum fun here! If he has to leave his laptop at home to get away from us and this issue, then fun isn't at maximum warpspeed, where it belongs. Aleister 13:08 Sunday

p.s. Just like the issue of being an admin, if this hurts his writing in any way it should be tossed aside like a wet noodle.
Al, you're a day behind on your date stamp. Are you travelling in the opposite direction like Benjamin Button? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 13:25, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain the lack of "fun" comes from the fact that we've been debating whether or not Humbucker is in charge of UnNews or not for ages now, not because of UnNews itself. That kind of arguing takes its toll on a person. Probably why he decided to take the weekend off.  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 13:42 May 30, 2011
@Al: The Humbucker's mysterious "committe" sounds like some sort of cabal to me. Schamschi, 17:55, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
Benjamin Buttonhook more like it. I'm on the committee. We will meet soon, and will let you know after the meeting where it was. Keep your eyes open for that announcement. Aleister' 18:18 30-5-'11
I am going to requote Dr. Skullthumper's post in large text right now because I can:
Cquote1 I'm fairly certain the lack of "fun" comes from the fact that we've been debating whether or not Humbucker is in charge of UnNews or not for ages now, not because of UnNews itself. That kind of arguing takes its toll on a person. Probably why he decided to take the weekend off. Cquote2
That is all. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 18:21, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
I noticed the fun was waning when I read this. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 18:30 May 30 2011

So...

What was the deal with that "FU Sock" autoreply? Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 19:47, 30 May 2011

Dexter hates you. It's true. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 19:53, 30 May 2011
^This. MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 11:39, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Vote to name "Bacon and Cheese filled croissants" the official afternoon snack of uncyclopedia

Score: +2
  1. A big big big yes...although ham and cheese cornish pasties would be a close second! --ShabiDOO 17:02, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Symbol for vote For. I will support this with the understanding that my Linguini and clam sauce supper will be next --K evillips эвилипс MUN,CM,NS,3of7 17:10, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

4 days later...

At Olipro: I have nothing against the template permission list, and I'm not suggesting a change to those. I think everyone should be able to make changes to them if they want. However, I also think that we need someone that has the last word when problems inevitably arise. There have been numerous times when I read an UnNews article that I, along with others on IRC, don't think deserves to be on the Front Page or the RecentUnNews box on the main page. I alter the templates accordingly. Someone, usually the author of the story in question, reverts my edit. I revert it back. They revert it back. Ad infinitum. That's the problem I've been up against, and it's beyond frustrating.

At MrtheJazz: A) Dexter hasn't been lining up to "shovel the crap," and neither has anyone else. They just like manipulating the templates to make it seem like they're doing things. Editing UnNews isn't just about these templates; it's about actually reading the stories, fixing any grammar and formatting issues in them, maybe proposing better or less awkward ways of saying things in the stories, maybe tidying up the narrative a bit and adding "Does this work better?" as the edit summary, userspacing especially bad stories, and writing explanations on the author's talkpages describing why the article was userspaced, how to make it better, and all without making the author feel like crap about it. No one's done this since SPIKE left. I tried, having been voted into the job, but some users decided not to listen to the community's wishes, which brings me to... B) It was a consensus of 5 that, as you claim, "gave this guy absolute power." 5 people voted in a public forum, not some talkpage agreement, making the vote to make me "Editor in Chief" (with, apparently, an "absolute power" that can simply be reverted by any user that happens to be online) much more of a community decision than the one concerning the article that is, seemingly, what this whole discussion is all about. There, it was an author and 2 other users using whatever means necessary to get an article onto the front page, which leads to... C) The fact that no one, including myself, should be able to do that kind of thing. Any article that I write for UnNews would get passed to anyone who wishes to read it, whether it be on IRC or however you want to do it, and they can decide where it should go in the templates (see how this fits in with my response to Olipro? Kind of cool, innit?).

The rest of your post confuses me, I'll admit. I have no clue where you're coming from regarding Zim's UnNews editing style (though I would appreciate it if you showed me; he seems to have had some talent for dealing with the difficult parts of this gig), I'm unclear as to why you see things as purely "good" and "bad," as you give no actual argument for either, and I also don't know how you think you can have such a clear idea of my brand of humor as I have, as you so aptly pointed out, only been around for 3 months.

Finally, at whoever came up with the idea that there actually was a committee already: I'd asked a couple of users to keep an eye on UnNews, simply to watch out for atrocious stories (vandal articles, 3-line UnNewses where the only words are "Retarded" and "neighbor," etc.) that crop up from time-to-time, knowing that I'm not online 24-hours of the day and that they make UnNews look bad when they're up. That's it. I guess if you're looking for a conspiracy to be against, there it is. ~ Humbuck Talk 19:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

That elephant in the room that no one's answered yet

If there is no oversight in UnNews, how do we determine what should go on the UnNews Front Page or in the box on the Main Page? The "let's have users vote on it like we do for VFH" doesn't work; unlike the mainspace, UnNews is full of topical articles that lose humor quickly. Spending weeks on what to give exposure to would delay the exposure so much it would kill the humor. We'd just now be putting the bin Laden stories up there now.

The "let's have everyone edit the templates" doesn't work, either; if you're online and you know where to find the templates, you get to choose what stories are seen, and if another user has another idea and executes it, just revert them. Sounds like a great system to me. I, for one, don't want to have anything to do with that kind of pissing contest.

That's why there needs to be oversight. Adding votes to UnNews to make it like VFH is too time consuming, and we're already short on votes as it is. Letting it be a free-for-all is only a good idea to the naive and the blind. There needs to be a middle ground. There needs to be either an Editor in Chief or a panel of editors. ~ Humbuck Talk 19:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, this is all true and expressed better than I could express it.~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 20:13, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
But you could work it into a hell of a script :-) --K evillips эвилипс MUN,CM,NS,3of7 20:31, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
"They just like manipulating the templates to make it seem like they're doing things." You caught us; we're just trying to create an illusion here, not unlike the illusory problems fabricated to try and necessitate this UnNews czar position in the first place. Your example about Kakun's Bjork article proves exactly what some of us have been saying: this position can easily create more conflict than it remedies. When the subjective opinion of one user (especially one who has only been here for a handful of months, valuable and funny as your contributions may be) is allowed to trump those of others (like the ones who wanted Kakun's article on the front page), then problems will arise. Also, five users is hardly a community consensus, especially when a number of users have been consistently expressing disagreement with the idea of a overseer. Since you've only been here for three or four months I don't expect you to know that UnNews is fully capable of being a diverse community project without some designated overseer, as it has been before in the absence of <insert user here who spends a lot of time editing UnNews>, but I assure you it is. You say, "The 'let's have everyone edit the templates' doesn't work, either; if you're online and you know where to find the templates, you get to choose what stories are seen, and if another user has another idea and executes it, just revert them. Sounds like a great system to me. I, for one, don't want to have anything to do with that kind of pissing contest." First of all, revert wars are grounds for a ban. Users should be reminded that reverting a revert is a no-no, and that a discussion needs to take place to resolve the dispute. And if you can't tell someone why their article does not deserve to be on the UnNews main page or recent UnNews template, then you've no business reverting them. Secondly, not all users are as obstinate as you, so there will actually be fewer pissing contests than you're demagoguing about (and if you don't like all pissing contests we have to offer you, then you're in the wrong place). That aside, I think you're mostly concerned with people abusing it to only get exposure for their own articles, which I explained to you before over IRC, which you told me you understood is dickery that any admin can easily ban someone for if they notice it/have it pointed out to them by a anal retentive concerned user or two. And the average noob has no idea where to find these templates. Also, you're suggesting that there needs to be a user whose duty it is to go around telling people their opinions of their UnNews articles, doing minor formatting/grammar corrections, and making sure articles meet our (albeit low) quality standards, all of which are things the community exists to do and manages on a daily basis. If you don't think anyone else is doing much, then you can always take initiative, but that's it. No stupid titles like "Czar" or "chief" or "licensed to be an opinionated dick" (vaguely speaking). --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 21:00 May 31 2011
I can totally understand the bulk of what you're saying. But, the end is what really throws me. You spend your whole post telling him that he shouldn't be trying to control the quality of UnNews, then at the end you say "and if you don't think someone is doing it, then do it yourself." It's been made abundantly clear that he doesn't think that anybody else is really doing it. Therefore, he is doing it himself. The title is something that I firmly take responsibility for. He did not invent the concept and has since shied away from it rather vehemently. So he's just a user doing what he believes needs to be done. You know, taking initiative. Doing it himself. I also don't think that it's fair to call Humbucker a dick just because he's defending himself and also has opinions. Doesn't that make you just the type of person you're trying to deride?~~ Sir Ljlego, GUN  [talk] 21:08, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
"[T]aking initiative." Fixing up UnNews articles, updating the templates... MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 21:13, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
He has implied before that he is more than just a user doing what needs to be done. And I didn't mean for it to read as though I called him a dick ("vaguely speaking" probably wasn't the best way to express that). I mean to say that this position/title/whatever it is can be abused by anyone. TheHumbucker is a fine man. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 21:20 May 31 2011
He's a fine man right up until he posts on someone's talk page with "Thanks a lot for helping out, but I think you'll find that's actually my job, so keep your greasy hands off" and at that point he is very much a total dick. Could everyone please just shut the fuck up and get on with editing now? If any "creative differences" arise then they can be dealt with, I'm getting really bored with this feudalistic battling to become lord and master of your own corner of the wiki. -- Prof. Olipro Icons-flag-gb KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 11:48, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
Why is it always BDSM with you, Oli? MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 12:07, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects