I hereby award you the award for the most Kakun-esque User Page. I don't have an award yet, because really I just wanted to try out my new signature. But still... congratulations... Mr. "Blue Link" Tompkins 16:27, 13 March 2006 (EST)
- Wow.....no edits for over six weeks...... -- Mhaille
You can vote for/against your idea at Proposals for new projects, but preferebly against, because in all honesty, it sucks. It is complete and utter crap. But that's just my opinion. Or one of them. Or perhaps five. I appear to have a split personality. Anyway, just vote. I tend to go on and on and on and.... ~ 14:35, 28 April 2006 (EDT)
- Actually, don't bother, it's been voted against anyway. ~ 09:33, 29 April 2006 (EDT)
Can you change the links on your user page to the Uncyclopedia articles that they refer to, as it crowds up the Special:Wantedpages, making it unnecassarily full. ~ 12:45, 4 May 2006 (EDT)
- Changed again... ~ 12:46, 5 May 2006 (EDT)
...and so on, and so forth. -- Mhaille
Hello Mhaille, there is a new crew working on UnMeta, giving it a new purpose. After thorough deliberation with the other momentarily active admins, we concluded that
- since you haven't edited here for a long time, haven't reacted to the latest changes and clearly have no intentions to be active in the future and
- since we want to make new start, and there would be confusion as to who is active here and willing to help,
it would be best for the transparancy of the wiki to relieve you of your duties. This will be affected as from now.
If you intend to again become active here, you can place a request for admin rights on the appropriate request page.
Yours truly, D. G. Neree 17:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Screw you! -- Mhaille
- You where last seen as an active user back in 2006 so right back @ ya. Alzheimlich 18:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- I wonder why you are angry. Is it because now you are not able to continue your vandal-fighting here? Well, as a non-banned user you are free to contribute here in a positive way, as long as it is not posting screen dumps of Uncyclopedia articles. Or is it a status-loss? in that case, you are (were) admin for the wrong reasons. Aren't you ashamed you guys left this wiki like that? In the course of the run you forgot what Uncyclopedia is all about: It's for fun and for the people that make the fun possible. Not for personal status. D. G. Neree 19:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Actually it was a joke. Remember those? I'm not angry at all, had forgot all about this little old site. Just to give you a little history this was set up during the "take over" by Wikipedia when the future was a little unclear. When it became aparent that they weren't going to destroy what many of us had built up most of the contributors who had migrated here migrated back.
- Just for the record I, speaking as an Admin and Bureau on Uncyclopedia, would have worded your comments a little more diplomatically. Just changing someone's status without giving them a chance to respond is going to lose you the help of a lot of people who could do this site a lot of good if they thought that it was going to become active again. Maybe a "if you don't respond within 30 days we'll be relieving you of your duties" may have been the way to do it.
- Anyhoo....good luck with everything, hope you manage to breath life into the old place. What is it that the new crowd are looking to do with it? -- Mhaille
- The plan is to invite the different ***pedias to set up embassies here, and have a communicationscentre for the different languages, to talk about the different ***pedias, exchange info and help out with interwiki-problems and such, all in a (i hope) Uncyclopedian tradition. The invitation letter is at the moment being written and one will go to Uncyclopedia too.
- What I don't understand is why you've all left and didn't expand the joke. You left the site dead and in a mess. It still will have the same purpose as before i guess, but now, two years later, there's not one Uncyclopedia, and although you're still the biggest and our mommy, there are many Uncyclopedias now and Meta could be very useful in stimulating the cooperation and communication between wikis. If you think this a good idea, and want to help working on it, you are free to do so, i would be more than pleased, because there is a lot of work involved. But eight inactive admins is very confusing and for the purpose of the plan, namely to give the ambassadors of the different wikis adminstatus, a too heavy delegation on the Uncyclopedia part.
- Sorry if i didn't recognise "screw you" as a joke. Maybe this is why i get in trouble with Uncyclopedia all the time, i just can't come to understand that cursing and denigrating remarks are considered humor on Uncyclopedia. Well... so be it. To each his own.
- I hope i answered your questions. Untill now you were the only one who responded. Anyway: Hope all's well on Uncyclopedia, and if you like the idea, i look forward to seeing yours. And of course there will be a history page. If you want to start one, please do. This is a wiki. D. G. Neree 20:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thats great, and not far off what we intended to do with the site in the first place. I'm sure you'll get a lot of help from the folk at Uncyclopedia, and it will be nice to highlight a little more of the diversity. -- Mhaille
- As a matter of fact, i don't excpect Uncyclopedia will help much, at least i won't be the one to ask any. Maybe someone else will. I won't be talking much on wikia-wikis, because i believe that the move to Wikia WAS a desastrous one and Wikia is a vampire, making money over the backs of idealistic and dedicated writers. You sold out and Wikia staff is setting the rules now, with Wikia staffers (and janitors) interfering with the wiki and the users. Above that: Uncyclopedia is not really a good example when it comes to reasonableness, fair play and regards for its contributors. You guys (nothing personal, because i don't know you and maybe you are one of the people that hasn't) have grown arrogant and bitchy, flashing badges and medals around and in general generating contempt and anger. But the words "I as an admin an burocrat on Uncyclopedia etctera.. would have made me laugh hartily, were it not for the tragic reality, that the admins on Uncyclopedia would've done no such thing. you wouldn't even have posted anything more on the talkpages than something like: "Heehiho, youre gone! tss.. Ur pwnt", or something in that tone, thinking that very funny. So please don't talk to me about high morals and regard to users. I started editing on uncyclopedia more than 2 years ago, editing, altering and creating articles and have been permabanned without good reason by someone who is not even an active contributor on ANY of the wikis except his own little games site, and without giving me a chance to to speak up. I as an admin and burocrat on Oncyclopedia am very sad about that. But anyway thanks for your blessing and hopefully it'll work out. Please look forward to receiving the "official" invitation, and if you don't feel like being an ambassador for Uncy, i'm sure you will know someone who will. D. G. Neree 08:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- Agree with you completely, especially about the lack of reasonableness amongst some of our Admins. I've said it before and I'll say it again, democracy just doesn't work. ;) -- Mhaille