User:The Thinker/TDayVote09

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

User:Kakun/The Arichardgoldstonecrats

Overall Humo(u)r:

6 - There is some pretty damn funny stuff here. Could use retooling in areas and a bit more length, but I like it.

Delivery:

7 - A great off-center approach to the joke. I think there is room for improvement, but I quite enjoy the spin put on it here.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

5 - Megadeth. I think with a little more elbow grease this might've been a frontrunner. Though not yet seeing the other entries, it still may be..

Final Score:

18

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:POTR/Fuckwit - English translator

Overall Humo(u)r:

3 - Regardless of the fact that this, at best, tangentially related to the subject at hand, GWB humor is so last year. Ads are funny though.

Delivery:

1 - The only thing I see even remotely related to what this competition is about is the fact that it ends with "THE ARISTOCRATS". Which is nowhere near enough.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

6 - I like the translator idea so some points for that. Maybe the other judges will see something here that I don't, but from where I stand, this is like entering a 500-lb. pig into the pumpkin contest at the county fair.

Final Score:

10

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:Happytimes/The Aristocrat's Turkey Day Ball

Overall Humo(u)r:

2 - After committing to read this trainwreck -- I'm sorry, hyperstylized -- entry, and using POTR's translator when needed, I can say I did not find the core joke of it funny.

Delivery:

0 - Alright, I understand that this is a style choice. And that fact does show in the actual coherency presented beneath the obvious and overt error-riddled wording. And that by itself is fine: make it funny and I'm game. This, this just doesn't work on that level, at least not to me. And that is a shame, because it seems that the author could be leagues funnier. Maybe the other judges will take favor.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

7 I still see the try in it, which also makes my ruling unfortunate. Have some points.

Final Score:

9

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:So So/crats

Overall Humo(u)r:

9 YES!! A non-traditional telling that comes through with the laughs!! Very happy with this one.

Delivery:

8 SOLID. It reads like a joke telling, and yet is a story with internal jokes in addition to the carnal mayhem core. Like a great Ben and Jerry's ice cream: luscious ice cream, and a velvet caramel core. Love it

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

9 When it's told like this, it wins the points on it's own. Very good work here So So.

Final Score:

26

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:Sockpuppet of an unregistered user/ARISTOCRATS

Overall Humo(u)r:

6 - This one reminds me a lot of why I liked Kakun's entry (and obviously there are a number of similar thematic elements). Some areas could be improved upon and expanded a bit for maximum comedy, but I like what is there well enough.

Delivery:

6 - For the choices that are made here, solid. As I said in the humor section there are elements that could go harder, but it works well and comes out in a neat enough package.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

8 - The wiki elements of this piece, I like very very much. Good image, good formatting choices. Really bolsters the content.

Final Score:

20

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:An Ape that Only Exists on Thursdays/Aristocrats

Overall Humo(u)r:

7 - It's quite obvious, from the material that is included, that you certainly understand the crux of the joke. Just wish there was more of it (though I do respect the less-is-more, leave it to the imagination approach in a number of ways).

Delivery:

8 To the point, grasps what is trying to be accomplished and does its job, while also throwing in a nice logical juxtaposition to create a punchline on top of the punchline. Dig it.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

4 - Points to prop the submission, but as it is short and there is nothing else to it besides the bare-bones, sorry it has to be so few. I think you could be a winner with just a slight bit more effort put into this area (as it would subsequently affect the other judging elements inherently).

Final Score:

19

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:GlobalTourniquet/The Aristocrats

Overall Humo(u)r:

4 - A similar play on logic-in-an-absurd-paradigm approach that Ape took, but not as much content (which is pretty weak, as lack of content was a criticism of Ape's piece also). Incomplete perhaps?

Delivery:

4 - Again, just isn't enough meat here. A good start, but jumps off a cliff. On it's own, it does stand as a fairly funny joke when you know the entirety of paradigm elements, but again, its just not enough.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

4 - Bolster points, but obviously no wiki spruce here either. I do see potential for a much better future entry here though, so maybe next year

Final Score:

12

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:Hey people!/Hey people it's The Aristocrats

Overall Humo(u)r:

8 - Ah, a slightly more classic approach. Very well done, utilization of the dog (pun intended) as the omnipotent spokesman was a nice choice that serves the piece well.

Delivery:

8 - Dig it! I think this is what a few other pieces this year are missing: this is a presentation of the fundamental joke with just enough spin to make it unique and original but doesn't go so far as to completely abandon the core tenants. Nice.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

6 - With such a fine presentation of the joke, some more wiki spruce would've been a great boost. Pics, etc. Still great work here though.

Final Score:

22

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)



User:Syndrome/crats

Overall Humo(u)r:

8 - NICE! Well written, fun interpretation of the classic.

Delivery:

7 - Again, written very well, interest elements. Wish it had ended with the Aristocrats punchline, but good enough to overcome that.

Miscellaneous/Bonus:

6 - Would've liked a little more wiki spruce, but the piece carries itself.

Final Score:

21

Judge:

--THINKER 21:22, December 18, 2009 (UTC)


Personal tools
projects