Uncyclopedians who neglect UnNews might not have noticed that the U.S. Government underwent a devastating partial shutdown, something reported by Djme13 with a follow-up story by yours truly. (The many Uncyclopedia users who hate to read can avail themselves of either story in Talking Book format.)
Meanwhile, ScottPat, who actually likes government, visited nasa.gov, only to be confronted with a terse shutdown notice in two of his favorite languages, though the Spanish-language message omitted directions to the day's amnesty protest in the federal district, a function of government that was curiously unaffected. He made the helpful suggestion that Uncyclopedia adopt a similar message, as our funding situation is, if anything, in worse shape than government's. (We have tried to print our own currency, and it didn't work.)
So we sporked the NASA message, as we feel we have already paid for it, for use on Uncyclopedia. The best way to make it assault users was to employ our tried-and-true method of assaulting users: the recently retired Content Warning. Wikia eagerly switched the Content Warning back on but — demonstrating again the clear communication that is always present between Admins and webhost — no one saw fit to put the right text on the page. This meant that for most of Monday the 7th, users saw the hated and hotly debated old Content Warning again. ScottPat noticed the bug, though he claims to be unable to see the correction, and you might not either, as the device is designed to deliver a single assault, and not battery.
A remarkable side-effect was a decline in overnight anonymous traffic, as our Third Shift evidently took at face value the claim that Uncyclopedia was shut for lack of funding. We have always known that they have no sense of humor and half of them think that we are Wikipedia.
Editors: Also please note that I would like the UnSignpost not to tout the fact that our own government...
Whoops, that was not for publishing, sorry.
That time I was nearly huffed during my sojourn on VFD
visiting VFD and making sure none of my fantastic articles were being nominated again, like they usually are, right? Like boring in-joke shit.
and this nomination
pops up right in my face. Seriously, an in-joke being added to VFD. We have antiquated rules against that, right?
so I pull out my indignation
and get ready to vote to save some of our most unfunny, formulaic articles from being deleted. But the votes against keeping these articles alive just kept piling up against me.
Some articles nearly got away with a major sinistral external abrasion and a severed brachialis radial. But they didn't. They were huffed.
Seriously, who would have imagined a stale in-joke wouldn't be considered funny?
We call it news
October 2013 - some srs bsns
"If rules are meant to be broken, they should at least be funny," - thought the Uncyclopedia admins years ago and replaced any possible policies of the site with in-jokes, numerous allusions to their moms, self-reference and in-jokes.
"If rules are broken, it is because they are funny," - thought the Uncyclopedia admins in October 2013 and made rules.
Editors of the UnSignpost did not have time to dramatise, exaggerate and change yesterday's news, so unfortunately they are presented without any judgement from our part. Romartus, himself, asked us to keep our neutrality, and reminded us of some possible side-effects of talking, such as becoming pumpkins.
00:00 - 04:00 (UTC): the day starts well, with vandalism and spam