Forum:We need more Forums!

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > We need more Forums!
Note: This topic has been unedited for 1492 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

From Forum talk:Index:

“VD is for most Uncyc-issues, and Miniluv is for stuff concerning admins (since few regular users go there, it keeps things slightly hidden so the proles get no voice, evidently >_>). What about some other stuff? Such as a board for advertising/rating articles, a board for non-uncyc-related stuff and other random crap, and more.”

~ User:Nintendorulez on ∩intendorulez


“List of possible forums of the future (names subject to change):
  • Vanispamcruftisement (Place to SPAM where it can get deleted immedietly)
  • UnRC (IRC-type place for those who don't go to IRC)
  • Uncyclomedia (Misc talk About the Uncyc Foundation itself)
  • Pee Review (Pee review → forum)
  • Fnord (Place to argue about whether the cabal exists or not)
  • Misc (Misc chat)
  • HELP (Problems, argues, should be availible for banned users to edit to complain about bans)”
    ~ User:Ghelae on Ghelæ


“I like it.”

~ User:Nintendorulez on ∩tendorulez


Hm? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 15:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

So you want to get rid of useful things like archives, but create more space for, uh, chatting? Why? In case people have forgotten...rc (t) 15:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Most of them were random, some might end up useful, the "Fnord" one is one of the useless ones, and many vandals wont find the Vani... one to spam in so it'll be deleted. So most are useless, yes. About deleting "useful" things like archives... I don't think they're all that useful. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 15:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, so Fnord and the Spam one are useless. UnRC - just use IRC instead of spamming recent changes. Uncyclomedia - isn't that what UnMeta is for, and why does it need particular attention anyway? Pee Review - already established and linked at the Dump. Misc. - BENSON (though I'm beginning to regret suggesting that) and sometimes the Dump itself. Help - Dump and Miniluv, depending on the issue. None of those are useful. —rc (t) 16:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
"Uncyclomedia - isn't that what UnMeta is for" - yeah, well that's not visited that much now (unless you want to help revive it), "Misc - BENSON (though...that) and sometimes the dump itself" - but what about really misc? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Again, why is UnMeta vital? It's a place to mess around in. As I recall, that's what people wanted it to be. And what do you mean by "really misc"? The Dump and BENSON have enough asinine topics as it is. Uncyc is not primarily a forum site last I checked. —rc (t) 16:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Meh, ultimately it wasn't my idea. Read it and see that it was Nin's idea. I don't have that much of a point there but... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The misc spam certainly does not belong in the glorious forum of BENSON, and I would like it to be moved elsewhere, either the VD, or, better yet, its own forum. A new forum is easy to create, what possible downsides would there be? --Nintendorulez | talk 14:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Er, more misc spam? —rc (t) 19:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello! More forums! Sliferjam - #1UN - You got something to say? - JAM! - I'm special. 16:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Your point is... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
More forums are needed to help people communicate more properly. A complain to the admins forum, a make fun of the noobs forum, 'I think this is cool' how can I use it forum, etc. Sliferjam - #1UN - You got something to say? - JAM! - I'm special. 17:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok then, that was partially my original point. So read the topic now. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 17:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that VD, that admin one and BENSON do the job nicely. --Uncyclon - Do we still link to BENSON? 23:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Agree, 3 is enough. I have half a mind to move this topic to BENSON ^_^. --Splaka 03:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Against stupid --http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/c/c6/Atomsk.gif Kaizer the Bjorn takkun Nya? (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 18:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

“I like it. except we need a designated flaming section, and a designated off-topic forum”

“In fact, we should have a forum where the only unifying topical factor is that we all talk using the Quote template.”

Against this multiple forum idea. Why do we need more forums for useless things? I think we're doing fine with just 3 forums dealing with the most notable topics of Uncyclopedia. Remember: if something is not broken, don't fix it. --General Insineratehymn 23:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Our problem isn't that we don't have enough forums (fora?) but that we have too many. There are many pages like Uncyclopedia:Report a problem, individual request pages, the various pages linked from Uncyclopedia:Community Portal. It's gotten to the point that most (except this section and the vote pages for featured or deleted) are rarely used by anyone, just because there are so many of them scattered throughout project: and meta: space. --Carlb 10:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Then that's not really too many foræ is it? You have a point, in which case some of the underused project: request pages could be merged into a larger requests page. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 10:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The reason they aren't used is that they aren't shown amoung the three "true" forums, so nobody notices them. --Nintendorulez | talk 14:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Man, Carlb is right. Stuff like Uncyclopedia:Forum and Uncyclopedia:Complaints Department are useless and should be deleted, or at least protected and tagged as deprecated so nobody tries to use them anymore. In fact, I think we may want to reorganize the Community Portal to emphasize the stuff that's actually important. It's gotten sort of bloated. —rc (t) 19:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The only new forum we need, is a forum to discuss the creation of new forums --> Forum´s Forum:, Metaforum: or Useless overbureuctratization proposals: ---Asteroid B612B612.jpg (aka Rataube) - Ñ 17:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Weighing the reasons

edit this section to add reasons why there should or should not be more than one forum

Reasons why

  1. Having one forum for all topics is annoying to people who have to wade through all the junk to find the only topics they are interested in.
  2. Having a designated area for joke threads would be helpful, especially since, apparently, alot of people will vote to feature them.
  3. Most of the administrators seem to be against it, thus it is in the nature of true rebels to resist nature.

Reasons why not

  1. It might confuse people (read: n00bs)
  2. Some people don't want to have to goto more than one page to see all the current threads. (could be solved somehow)
  3. We'll have to be constantly moving topics from the forum they were posted to the "propper one", arising useless discussions over the right forum for each topic on Forum:Is this really my forum?:
  4. Most of the administrators seem to be against it, and BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.
  5. Uncyclopedia is not a community site.

What is a "community site" and why isn't uncyclopedia a "community site" ? --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 21:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, right... Go and make friends somewhere else, will ya? -- Colonel Swordman 22:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Uncyc isn't about chatting. I use the same meaning of "community site" as our vanity policies - "forums, linkblogs," and other such sites. I just looked up the WP article on "community sites," though, and they're, er, rather liberal with what they include in that category. So I should have been more specific to begin with. —rc (t) 23:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
well yeah but "Uncyc isn't about chatting" doesn't nessicarily equal "we cannot allow any off-topic discussion forum of any kind". --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 19:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
We already have off-topic discussion. Making more new forums for that will invite an excess of off-topic discussion. —rc (t) 22:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
ok whatever. just chill out yo. --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 19:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)