From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
I wholeheartedly agree with the statements put forward in this essay. I was a pissed off young guy with lofty morals when I went on my first soapbox. Note that that also contains STM's opinion on the subject and that of various people whom I never saw before and whom I have never seen since. I asked STM his opinion, which he gave me. I will reiterate my opinions from the old talk (in short): there is a time to grieve, and there is a time to move on. Now, I may sound heartless and shitfaced by saying this, but now is high time for people (outside of family) to move on.
I don't want to take anything away from a family in pain from losing a loved one in such a tragic and stupid happening. Certainly, it is within their rights to continue grieving. But for the rest of us, there is nothing left to lament. We've already had yet another school shooting incident which has received marginal attention. Situations in the Middle East are worse than ever, with civilians dying every day. Finding anything in this article "shocking" is, to put it bluntly, naive. I resent the fact that people have made accusations that there was malicious intent in the authorship of the article, because nothing could be farther from the truth. Fine, you don't like the page. And, regardless of your claimed objectivity, it is known that there will always be a black eye on the face of this article.
So please, let us leave it as it is (ie: please don't make this Asperger's Syndrome II). I am a firm supporter of all my work, regardless of its reception, and I am very very proud of the product we turned out. Now, this pride comes from something that people apparently cannot see: that the article manages to keep a fair amount of taste and poise throughout.
In closing, I don't understand why pages satirizing genocides and killings and tragedy in foreign countries are passing VFH with such flying colors as this continues to flounder time after time. Well, I don't know, I guess it's because people fail to see the pain that is caused when it's not as close to home. Regardless, I hold no one in greater or lesser favor for their feelings on this article, and still feel nothing but (albeit slightly disappointed) goodwill toward the site at large.
Wow. This really is such a controversial subject, and you worded it wonderfully. While everyone has they're own opinion, the brief blurb on my userpage didn't fully express my thoughts.
I worded it incorrectly when I said that offensiveness doesn't matter. If this article derived it's humor purely from shock value, I would disapprove. (Which is why I don't like Encyclopedia Dramatica.) Rather, what I really meant was that you shouldn't vote against only because it's a touchy subject. To do so on this article and not the others would be acting choosey, which would truely be offensive.
I kind of feel like a heal for nominating it on the 6 month aniversary. I admit, I was partially trying to make a point with that move. Mainly, the "too soon" argument, which Thinker basically covered my thoughts exactly. If we can make jokes about the holocaust now, when will it be appropiate for VTech Massacre jokes? But like I said, it's really all debatable.
Despite this minor issue, my main reason for nominating is that I really find it feature material. My opinion is that it's current form is clever, well-written, and most importantly, pretty funny. It shouldn't be featured just to make a point or to make Uncyclopedia seem edgy. Your vote should be based on whether 1) You find it funny, and 2) It's good satire that makes you think.
I do genuially care about the victims' feelings, and maybe it is too soon. Originally on my userpage I only commented on the memorial link, which really touched me and won me over to Uncyclopedia. Possibly that feeling remands a factor in why I want it featured someday. -- Kip > Talk • Works • • 03:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I think the comments on the page more than cover all the points I'd be tempted to raise, and as someone noted for writing on subjects that many consider "close to the knuckle" it will surprise no one that I support the opinions expressed. Humour, particularly satire, CAN take us to some very dark places buried deep within ourselves, and force us to question our views. I would like to think, despite some of the subject matter, that I've never created something intentially offensive, though I appreciate that other people may have a different line in the sand than the one I have drawn.
This specific article is very well written, and, unlike some of the contributions that appeared on the days after VTM, is not something that I would consider to be offensive. Other's opinions may differ, all I'd ask is that people actually read what is here, before judging it. --