If you have ever written an article on Uncyclopedia then the chances are you have run the gauntlet of Votes for Highlight at some point, which inevitably means you have experienced the helpful criticism, the less helpful criticism and the downright bizarre criticism. VFH is the most popular voting page on Uncyclopedia, and this week the UnSignpost is taking a closer look at the process that separates the wheat from the chaff, and the awkwardly feminine from the possibly Canadian.
VFH has come under fire this week from an outgoing editor and we thought it would be unfair to dismiss his claims without properly investigating them, so we didn't and it was a great fun; we played badminton and then we went bowling. However, when Sycamorecomplained about recent trends on VFH, we decided to have a look. There is a serious point to be made here, with admins being told at least twice a week that both they and Uncyclopedia suck penises - is VFH not somewhere that should be more carefully regulated to prevent articles that are less than amusing being nominated? Or should users who are presently engaged in nominating idiotic pages for VFH be told to cut it out, or else? Discussions have taken place about scrapping voting altogether and having the admins run things or, as one bright-spark suggested: just get rid of against voting. VFH is not a machine in dire need of repair, however, but for many it does seem to be a flawed system that is entirely to blame for A wizard did it being featured.
As a result of the above, the UnSignpost urges you to do two things: Vote on VFH; it needs your votes to work, as the name might suggest, and try to remember that while cocking about is fun, work is immeasurably more useful. Also, because the lead story this week has been very sombre and serious, we have attached a picture of a dog wearing a hat. Enjoy.
Hey guys!!! This week I thought I would talk about something which is guaranteed to interest EVERYONE! My favourite food in the world: Mince Pies!!! OMG they are teh brillz0rz! (Internet slang; I'm hip!) I mean they don't even have MINCE in them! What's UP WITH THAT!? Here's how I began to find them totally lolicious and awesome!!!! It all started at last year's Christmas pa-
New message incoming
There is no need to adjust your UnSignpost. Halt all subversive activity. Exits are not located to the rear. Rollback is not disabled. Expect no Christmas bonus. The Cabal is not addressing you from this periodical. It is not the Festive Season. Santa does not exist. Nothing you do matters. Our patience is not tried by your petty drama and hi-jinks. Contributions are not logged and examined. Addresses are not tracked and houses are not watched. Bans will not be imposed if you reject our reality.
Signal re-established, original transmission resuming
... and that's when I threw up all over the dancing Elephant!
03:29, December 7, 2010 Roman Dog Bird (Talk | contribs) blocked 184.108.40.206 (Talk) with an expiry time of 5 hours (lol k c(-; (that's supposed to be a guy winking, smiling and sticking his tongue out FUCK YOU!!!!)
Biopic of the Week
Imagine, if you will, a drug fuelled after-party in a Special Needs home, then stop because it's time for biopic of the week! This week we have a splendid fellow, as we inevitably do; it's Count of Monkey Crisco! Heard of him? No? That's because he is busy working and not spending time coming up with new and inventive ways of wasting time in the Village Dump, like you. It may surprise you to learn that the Count (yes I must refer to him this way) is a former UotM, has four featured images and was the first man to scale Everest in a kayak... ok, we are exaggerating here; he only has two featured images.
Nonetheless this man is the example of a good Uncyclopedian, hard working, quiet and modest. At least we assume he is modest; he hasn't ever done anything as awesome as I have, so we can't confirm it. So go on - investigate Uncyclopedia's very own man in black for yourself; he's er... Monkalicious.
Old-school featured article of the week
To Whom it May Concern
On the 6th September 2006, I wrote this article, and I am yet to receive any feedback. I believe I expressed a number of real concerns which you have not yet addressed. In case my previous article was lost in the post, I will repeat my concerns here, and I trust that this article will reach you in good time.