Changes: Forum:Hosting options for Uncyclopedia (wikia)

On the 31st March 2019 or shortly after, uncyclopedia.wikia.com will look like that above mock up screenshot. The existing data held on the Wikia/Fandom is likely to be deleted.

Since the initial announcement (see here Forum:A message from Fandom), this website has backed up the data so nothing is expected to have been lost. This backup will include words and pictures with page histories and other data.

After extensive communications between the Uncyclopedia Administration Group and other parties, these are the considered options:-

• Uncyclopedia.wikia moves to the servers run by Lyrithya. The existing database will therefore join the existing arrangement there which sees illogicopedia and uncyclopedia.co sharing the same servers. This can be referred to the 'co' option.

• Uncyclopedia.wikia moves to the servers run by Carlb. Carlb was one of the earliest Uncyclopedians and hosts other foreign language uncyclopedias in the style of the original. This can be referred to as the 'Carlb' option.

• Uncyclopeda.wikia moves to a server run by Miraheze, a wiki farm. The contact is The Pioneer JP. This is the Miraheze option.

• Uncyclopedia.wikia moves to a server to be administered by Llwy-ar-lawr who is an active administrator on this website.

• Voting:Users and administrators/bureaucrats will have equal value as regards the vote count.

• Restrictions:No I.P. voting permitted. No account created here after 25th February 2019 will be able to vote either.

Uncyclopedians who have been active administrators (five edits or more) at uncyclopedia.co from 25th February 2017 to 25th February 2019 are also asked to recuse themselves from voting here as that would be a conflict of interest and could effect the the outcome.

The length of voting will be shorter than normal as there is limited time to come to a decision. I suggest this vote is wrapped up by Tuesday 19th March.

Since there has been a number of user impersonations this year, extra vigilance will be force when coming to this vote. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:25, March 12, 2019 (UTC)

And also:

• Must have five edits to this site before 26 February 2019.
• Active editors must have five edits to this site between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019.

  (See below as posted by Fandom Staff Sannse: "As they restrict voting to active editors, I'm happy." That means active editors on this Fandom site, not on another website that does not belong to Fandom.) DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:58, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:21 13 March 2019

Romartus: did you mean to leave this part out? I thought we'd agreed on this. I will consider it not to apply until you answer. Everyone else: you might have seen Sannse's comment that "the vote should be for the community of this wiki". My rules were meant in this spirit, as I thought it was reasonable. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 07:19 13 March 2019

Vote here

• Miraheze---- Hyper Nintendon't World (my talk page) 23:35, March 12, 2019 (UTC)

• Miraheze —IvanRider 00:14, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
  • Note: I've copied my most major contribution to this site to the Dozerfleet Database, pending slight rewrites.
• Uncyclopedia.co  King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  00:59, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• Uncyclopedia.co --— Dǐll Kevlar (talk) 01:07, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• Miraheze. It is the only option presented in which one or several Uncyclopedians will not be de facto owners of the franchise. Assurances given by the Forkers are due no weight by anyone who might come to be regarded as a "toxic presence." This includes Lyrithya's statement that the two databases will be maintained separately. Miraheze is technically able to host us and has a disinterested group of Stewards to hold sensitive powers such as checkuser. Its finances are precarious. This solution might not be the right one forever; true about all the options, as it was about Wikia too. Spıke 01:17 13-Mar-19

  Wow, it's the real Spike! Glad you could get in. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:50 13 March 2019

Spike, my first reaction to your expressed desire to go to Miraheze and your opposition to a private server (any private server) was that your concerns were ill-founded. However, after watching some of the drama in this forum which was convened for the rather straightforward task of picking a new host, I realize you may be right, and not just for the reasons you've cited. Any individual taking on the task of hosting this site is going to be subject to attack by everybody who thought they had a better idea (whether it was to shut down the site and "merge" with the Fork, or something else). Only a disinterested third party -- such as, for instance, Miraheze -- is likely to escape that. My concerns about Miraheze still stand (so I'm not changing my vote) but I certainly recognize the validity of the arguments for going there. Snarglefoop (talk) 03:54, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Spike voted before the restriction of not accepting votes from inactive editors was put in place. His vote, by precedent and by approval of Fandom staff, is grandfathered in and will stand. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:03, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

His vote is not "grandfathered in". The rules were meant to allow people like him to vote. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:12 14 March 2019

• I'm offering to host the site because I'm the only one I know is willing and able to retain the full history, or close to it, and I'm regularly available for tech support. Logs and file histories in particular contain important parts of the past. Carlb and Miraheze are second choices. Carlb is obviously reliable because he's been running his wikis for over a decade, and he's free, but he still hasn't fixed the thumbnail problems. I would like to know if Miraheze is willing to import anything other than page content and current images. If so, cool, that addresses my concern and I don't have to do the work. I can run the grabber scripts on the new site, so if they go down, we have a backup that we can take somewhere else.
  As for the fork, I don't consider this a real hosting option because the full history won't be retained and they just want us over there to facilitate a "merger", which means shutting the site down. Yes, the history will still exist, but this site would be incomplete without the fork, and pre-2013 pages present here but deleted there would be gone from both.
  I think who has the power and how it is used is more important than whether the site is privately owned, but that's me. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:50 13 March 2019

  I believe Lyrithya's more recent statement on the history issue, though it should be perfectly possible to retain only that part. Just use the startdate parameter for grabNewText. That works here because our recent changes seem to go back as far as you want. I was able to start it at January 2005. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 23:54 13 March 2019

• For the spoon merging with the fork, Uncyclopedia.co DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:29, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  This vote is on which host to choose, not merging Miley Spears. That will be decided later (see below for Lyrithya's comments). --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:59, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

• Either Carlb's server, or Llwy-ar-lawr's "new server" option. See discussion below (where I stupidly "voted" to start with) for the reasoning. Snarglefoop (talk) 02:35, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• Either keep me posted either way. How pissed is Fandom at you? --Factfinder510 (talk) 04:44, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  It's a long, tragic-comedy story. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:06, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

• I say Uncyclopedia.co. Hey, remember me? ~[ths] UotM 05:04, 03/13/2019

  I am very sorry to do this, but unfortunately TheHappySpaceman voted after the rule was put in place: "Active editors must have five edits to this site between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019." That addition was accepted by Fandom staff. So sadly the vote had to be striken. TheHappySpaceman has made many edits here, but unfortunately not during that time period. I've very sorry about that, and hope wherever Uncyclopedia goes that you come back and edit! :) DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:20, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

  Funnily enough, at least I do. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:06, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

• Merge with Wikipedia. Black Enforcer (talk) 19:23, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• Heard about sad turn of events from Romartus. Go with LaL. The Acceptable  Cainad  (Fnord) 20:02, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  I really hate to do this to the person who adopted me here, but Sannse who's Fandom staff has now approved the requirement that voters be currently active editors before the announcement of 26 Feb. 2019. You haven't edited here in years, so unfortunately your vote has to be struck. Dǐll Kevlar's vote stands by Romartus' recognizing the Grandfather Clause and Fandom staff agreement because that editor voted before the editing window was posted. I'm really sorry about that! I really hope wherever Uncyclopedia goes that you decide to come back here you're a great editor and I'll always appreciate you adopting me here! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:49, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

  Strike undone. Please reread the rules. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:11 14 March 2019

• Co. Devil Details (talk) 21:08, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• Llwy-ar-lawr. Ability and interest proven without all doubt when she was the only one to step up and repair Uncyclopedia when broken by FANDOM due to EU standards compliance. Has been the sole real onsite tech since. -- (talk) 21:54, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Well... I would say this is a different level of challenge from that. I think #Llwy's option gives a better idea. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 23:54 13 March 2019

• Uncyc.co. No reason for us to have two Uncyclopedias. --_Mohicans says ^hi 01:15, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
• It is sad that there seems to be even more infighting here on the fork than there was when I was more active here. So maybe it would be best if we go with an Uncyclopedian off site like Carlb or Lyrithya but I don't know which. I don't know if we can vote 1/2 for each? If not tell me and I can change my vote. Binky The WonderSkull (talk) 02:36, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

(Immediately below is in reference to Dill Kevlar voting)

• Not eligible. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:21 13 March 2019

  Under what term? --— Dǐll Kevlar (talk) 01:24, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Oh, disregard the question. I guess your reader community doesn't matter. --— Dǐll Kevlar (talk) 01:25, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  The restrictions are laid out above. This vote is for editors of this site, not the "reader community", which you do not represent anyway. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 01:50 13 March 2019

  Someone brought to my attention that you added a rule after my vote was added. That is super scummy. In addition, you are incorrect about me representing the reader community. I am retracting the strike. --— Dǐll Kevlar (talk) 02:17, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  "Voting:Users and administrators/bureaucrats will have equal value as regards the vote count." It says "users" not "article editors." DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:27, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Romartus and I already agreed on that part by email. I would have added it before Dill's vote if I'd seen the forum in time. Dill is not here in good faith and should not get any more attention. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 02:39 13 March 2019

  You eliminated many uncyclopedia.co users and myself because you already knew what their vote would be. These terms that you fabricated are biased and this vote's result should not be taken into consideration by Fandom. My posts are in good faith. In fact, I'd like to think "my unfaithful contributions" just exposed some shady behavior. --— Dǐll Kevlar (talk) 02:53, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Llwy-ar-lawr, maybe that's the way you run things when you're in charge, but that's not the way Fandom works. Two people are not in charge of this site. It belongs to everybody who comes here. That's in Fandom ToU which overrules anything posted here. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:55, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  So do you also have a problem with Romartus's account age and IP rules and his agreeing to what I suggested? This is not about me or how I "run things". I already explained myself in the email discussion. Take it up with him. I'm done with this thread. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 03:08 13 March 2019

• I understand that point well, Llwy. Unfortunately, I can not and would not vote to give the impression of a conflict of interest. I put my arguments shortly on the other forum about this vote. Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits 02:08, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

• Either Carlb's server, or Llwy-ar-lawr's "new server" option. CarlB's servers have shown signs of being substantially faster than they were in the past, and I trust his ability to fetch the entire site and keep the site going, as well as his general level headedness. I also trust Llwy-ar-lawr to successfully pull the whole site to a new server and administer the new site effectively, though the actual, physical server on which it would reside remains unclear.
  Miraheze makes me nervous for a number of reasons, not the least of which is their extremely fragile financial situation. I'm also not convinced we could get the entire site contents moved there without a great deal of assistance from the sysadmins, which I'm not convinced would be forthcoming.
  Lyrithya's servers remain a proven option, but I'm not aware of any assurance that the entire site would be pulled in (as opposed to the parts which are considered to be "different" in some way from what's currently on the Fork), and I'm not at all happy about the implication that it would be a stepping stone to a so-called "merger". In other words, moving to Lyrithya's servers seems a little too much like turning it into a "parts car" for use in maintaining the Fork.
  With all of that said, I'd ultimately find any arrangement that keeps the site alive and functional to be a Good Thing, and probably an improvement, at least in terms of functionality and appearance, over the current Wikia version (which rather looks like a flock of geese have been pecking at it -- ugh!). No doubt we'll lose search engine rank-ness as a result of leaving Wikia, but so it goes -- that can't be helped. Snarglefoop (talk) 02:31, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• "Uncyclopedians who have been active administrators (five edits or more) at uncyclopedia.co from 25th February 2017 to 25th February 2019 are also asked to recuse themselves from voting here as that would be a conflict of interest and could effect the the outcome."

  Somebody who's active both here and there shouldn't be restricted from voting. That is totally not fair! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:44, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Ok, it doesn't say they can't vote, they're just being asked not to vote. That's like somebody of one political party standing outside the voting booth and telling people of another party they don't want them to vote. That's called intimidation. Try doing that in American and you can arrested for it. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:47, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Not my idea, not my problem. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 02:49 13 March 2019

• You can vote for a merger if you like, Miley, but that's not one of the options. The site will remain separate for now; we're deciding where to put the content. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 02:55 13 March 2019
• Llwy-ar-lawr: If you think there's a problem with the voting, then you need to check with other admins and see if there's a consensus among admins. Otherwise this is now one admin reverting another admin's edits. If admins can't work together, we'll need to have Fandom staff make a decision. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 03:17, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• If you can successfully reunite with users on .co, it will definitely be the best option. One great Uncyclopedia again. However, if it isn't going like that, Miraheze will welcome your migration (though you might want to think about what to do with other Uncyc and Uncyc-inspired wikis there).--The Pioneer JP (talk) 04:16, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
• I do not understand how I should vote. It is confusing to me. I do not understand the six choices. Lanardos (talk) 10:12, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

  Four choices (see below). --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:51, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

A more detailed discussion of the options

The options as laid out are as follows:

1. Miraheze
2. Carlb
3. Uncyclomedia (Lyrithya)
4. Llwy-ar-lawr

It is important that the Uncyclopedia community on this site be fully informed about the proposals presented here. For those of you who don't know me, I am Lyrithya (also Athyria and Isarra) and I have been a part of Uncyclopedia.co's technical team for the last six years. I currently work as a MediaWiki developer for various third-parties as well as on grant-funded projects for the Wikimedia Foundation, and have considerable experience working with MediaWiki, both as a developer and a sysadmin hosting numerous wikis. Athyria (talk) 05:08, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Miraheze

Non-profit general wiki host.

Pros:

• Has a team, so no dependence on a single person for handling bug reports, updates, etc.
• Multiple servers in various locations.

Cons:

• May not actually have the space for a wiki of this size. (Current estimates put it at requiring around 200GB of storage, between the database and files, not counting extra space for backups, dumps, etc.)
• Somewhat dubious management history - already failed once and had to rename due to an internal dispute.
• Cannot maintain the full history (logs, file history, users, etc), requires a separate dump of files to be provided in order to upload them at all (carlb should be able to provide this, though), requires considerable manual effort to import even what they can import.
• Unclear funding situation - no consistent source of income, despite considerable hosting costs.

Carlb

Hosts the mirror uncyclopedia as well as quite a few actually active other-language Uncyclopedias and all of the non-english Illogicopedias.

Pros:

• Uncyclopedia hosted by an Uncyclopedian
• Reliable backups, provides automated dumps of all wikis hosted.
• Is probably not going away anytime soon - has been around the longest of any of the forks.
• Will help you regardless of where you wind up going; values Uncyclopedias as Uncyclopedias.

Cons:

• Managed by a single person, and thus cannot always respond quickly to things or do as much as a full team could.
• Issues with uptime and server capacity - can almost certainly fit the project, but there have also been processing limitiations, historically.
• Cannot maintain the full history (logs, users, etc), but would still be more complete than Miraheze.

Uncyclomedia.co (Lyrithya)

My team.

Pros:

• A team, so no dependence on a single person for handling bug reports, updates, etc.
• Almost 100% uptime over the past six years, possibly better than wikia. Sorry. Fandom.
• Is not going away - has been around for the past six years, and is also bringing on several other language projects, and thus we owe it to them all to continue.
• Will maintain full site history, including old revisions, deleted content, and logs, and have clear history demonstrating our ability to do this. (We wrote the scripts which do this.)
• Responsive to community concerns; heed consensus even when it's stupid.
• Definitely have the space, processing capability, and skills to actually do this.

Cons:

• We will totally gloat about moving the site in under a week if we manage to pull off what we have in mind for how to do it.
• Same server as the fork, technically.
• Sysadmins are all poor and dying, and seem to prioritise uptime over their own sanity.

Some notes to address other concerns that have been raised:

1. We would absolutely be getting the full history - not just since the split, but all of the content before as well. Prior messages indicated otherwise for feasibility reasons, but having looked into the matter more thoroughly, it won't actually be feasible not to do it this way, as the sites have not just diverged in terms of new edits, but also page moves and deletions. So yes, this would be the full site history.
2. Despite this being the same host as the split wiki, there will be no requirement of merging, one way or the other. That would only happen later if both communities agree to... whatever. Seriously, please figure it out.
3. People seem to think this is the same team as the current adminship on uncyclopedia.co, or people you may have had unfortunate experiences with in the past, and this would put you under their control. That is not the case. This is the team:
   • Isarra
   • Bizzeebeever
   • Jack Phoenix
   • legoktm
   • Skizzerz
   • Various other devs we manage to rope in from time to time

   We heed consensus, on all the projects we work with, because we believe it is the only way to move forward in a way that maintains the integrity of the projects themselves. As such, we also need to be clear on what the consensus actually is. That means open discussion and clear options, whether it's a specific proposal or RfC, a task to add or remove a feature from the site, or responding to community concerns.

Llwy-ar-lawr's site

Pros:

• Uncyclopedia hosted an Uncyclopedian.
• Plans to maintain full site history, including old revisions, deleted content, and logs.

Cons:

• Managed by a single person, and thus will not be able to respond quickly to things or do as much as a full team could.
• No proof of concept or portfolio of prior experience provided; unclear technical capabilities or server capacity.

At this point, I think I would recommend simply restarting the vote, with the rules firmly established first, on the wiki. Keep discussion in the open, especially when it affects more people than you - this concerns everyone who has contributed to this site since the split, and all of their work. Perhaps sannse might be able to help you come up with some guidelines for better handling this, as a relatively neutral third-party? She knows a thing or two about this stuff. Athyria (talk) 13:53, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

The issue on voting was discussed in a wikia admin group, not a private one between myself and Llwy-ar-lawr. I don't mind Sannse contributing to this discussion as you are correct that she has far more experience on wikis than either of us I would imagine. It was my mistake as regards not including the original guidelines. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:25, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

I see; striking the point. Will you reach out to sannse, then? If we know wikia is on board with how this is being conducted now, it would greatly help allay our concerns as well, as a potential new host ourselves. Athyria (talk) 14:46, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Lyrithya. I have left a message on Sannse's message board and her email contact requesting a 'visitation' to this forum. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:58, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

I was going to strike my last two sentences, but now my whole comment is struck. Oh well. That works. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 15:02 13 March 2019

If you want to change that, go right ahead. Obviously your comments are your own; I was just going for consistency. Athyria (talk) 15:07, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Let's keep that as settled. BTW, Lyrithya, you can still punch me. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:47, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

It's fine. Don't worry about it. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 16:43 13 March 2019

I'm not sure whether you'll see this, Llwy-ar-lawr, as you said you were done with this thread, but would you be able to clarify your hosting option/experience running MediaWiki? You mentioned GoDaddy and being locked at version 1.22. Is that still the case? I ask primarily because I've previously hosted a much smaller wiki with GoDaddy several years ago, and even with only 2,000-ish articles, it was a fairly nightmarish experience, especially with my limited knowledge of MediaWiki. I'm not sure how well a wiki of this size will fair with GoDaddy's limitations and seemingly being stuck at an older version for the foreseeable future, and even with the knowledge I've gained since hosting with GoDaddy, I can't imagine taking on a wiki half this size by myself. Can you post some details about your server, like space, bandwidth, memory, etc. and perhaps elaborate on your experience? Not that I don't trust your capabilities on this, but I'd have a hard time trusting any one person to run a wiki of this size. Thanks. Un-Supergeeky1 (talk) 21:24, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

That was a different thread. I've posted a section below to address people's questions or concerns about this. As I said in your link, GoDaddy doesn't provide a version of PHP that's up to date enough for 1.31+. My wiki there is also strangely slow (it's much smaller than this one FWIW). Because of these factors, I would not use them as a host. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 23:27 13 March 2019

An issue of trust

After reading the above discussion of the options, I think it might be worth recalling that the history of the two sites has not been all rainbow unicorns and fluffy puppy dogs. As Lyrithya mentioned, having the new site on the same server as the fork may be considered a distinct con from some points of view.
It is also worth going back up this page, and re-reading Spike's vote. Spike may not be flawless, but he's intelligent and perceptive, and has a lengthy involvement with Uncyclopedia. His comments regarding assurances of even handed treatment of the sites, when they're both being run by the Fork "software team", are something to consider.
Such a move would put this site (the original Uncyclopedia) entirely under the control of Fork personnel. A few days ago we were told the Wikia bits could be hosted on the same servers as the Fork, until the two communities could be merged. Now we're told there would be no "requirement" that they merge, unless there was consensus to do that. But consensus as judged by who? And which set of assertions do we accept as more truly representing the opinions of the Forkers, who would be running the show afterwards? Snarglefoop (talk) 08:11, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Judged by, I think, Zombiebaron and backed by one or more flash votes where our numbers are overwhelmed by voters we've never heard of.

The context for this is a six-year campaign to get us to suicide so the Fork could claim to be us. It has involved treachery and impostors and still does. The battlegrounds have gone from search engines to filing charges against editors at Wikipedia. This Forum is the latest battleground. Miley is an overt advocate, not that we move to a specific server (the question before us) but that we cease to exist as a separate website. She is contributing revert wars and threats.

The voting procedure set out by Romartus and Llwy reflects consensus of the Admins reached over email, consistent with Sannse's call to vote. It seeks to measure where the people who have carried this website want it to move, not what the Forkers want, we know what they want, nor how many casual readers feel their votes should be counted Spıke 11:31 13-Mar-19

I did say...can we tone down the language please? --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:33, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Hi SPIKE, it has been several years so I'm glad you're doing well. Since you namechecked me I feel I should give you a response. I would certainly not be the judge of any merging vote, consensus is judged by the community last I checked. If both communities were to vote together I think you would be pleasantly surprised at how many of our users you have heard of: our entire community is made up of pre-2012 Uncyclopedians. I don't believe there has been any "six-year campaign to get [you] to suicide", and if there has I certainly have never heard about it. I voted for you in the January 2013 VFS because I knew you would lead this wiki well, and I take umbrage with the insinuation that our two sites are somehow at war with each other, that's certainly not how I have ever felt. It would be incredibly sad if this unique Uncyclopedia project's distinct history were to be lost from the public internet forever due to what boils down to years of misunderstandings. I want this project to continue, and I've even been assured by the uncyclopedia.co server staff that we can install Oasis on our servers so nothing has to change. Zombiebaron (talk) 17:56, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

The only thing that isn't going to happen is the Oasis skin post-Wikia. Also..joke..--RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 18:08, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

ZB -- OMG WHY?? WHY would you install Oasis on the new wiki?
Or any Wiki, for that matter?
What a horrible thing to say -- that was completely uncalled for! (Also, you stranded Romartus with one too many colons, so I joined the colon war and removed one.) Snarglefoop (talk) 19:13, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I was unclear, I never said Oasis would be installed, I said it could be installed. I was trying to illustrate how the .co servers can be used to keep this Uncyclopedia project intact in all ways, despite some users here who believe that is not the case. Zombiebaron (talk) 20:23, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

From Romartus

First, thank you Lyrithya for organising the options to vote more cleanly than I initially set them out.

I did make an oversight as regards the voting issue when writing the above forum. I re-checked the emails in the Admin Group. As far as I can see, this only effects one user Dǐll Kevlar who made two edits before the 26th February. Since this is my mistake, I will let his participation stand in this forum. Also, can contributors on this forum please keep exchanges civil between each other. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:13, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

From Sannse

I'm not sure what you want from me, some sort of Supreme Court judgement? Or just comments? I'll assume the latter.

As I've said before, I'm very keen that this vote should only be made by current members of the community on this wiki. To me that means those who have been active editors here within the recent past.

That said, I am no longer one of those people. I wandered off from being an active admin and contributor here some time ago. And, as a staffer for Fandom, I certainly shouldn't have a say in how you depart us. Given that, the active admins here are the people I believe should set the rules - even if that means changing the rules if they think it necessary. I hope very much that you find the right solution - especially as I have a half written article somewhere about cockroaches being archaeologists -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 16:16, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

A Supreme Court Judgement would be nice. Then we could start a petition to change the Constitution. Then when we win, we could throw out all the rules and make me King of the Internets! That would be nice.  King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:49, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

I can just declare you King of the Internet right now. Congratulations Your Majesty -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 17:52, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Gee, thank you, loyal subject! You all heard it here, I am now officially King of the Internet! Time to make a new signature which should show up right after this post. And, by the power vested in me, I hereby declare Sannse to be Lady in Wikiaiting.  King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:39, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Romartus has clarified that he wants my opinion on the rules for voting. As they restrict voting to active editors, I'm happy. The point that readers are part of the community (I forget who said that) doesn't work because there is no proof that any individual is a reader. Similarly, there are issues with anon votes and the ability to simply switch IP as needed. Anyway, the the norm on wikis is for "community" to refer to the active editors. So I'm happy with the conditions as listed by Rom -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 17:52, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Sannse! While Romartus is out (I just blocked him), he asked me to watch this for him. (Really he asked me for a joke block cuz he's busy.) I wanted staff opinion on this vote, and we got it from Sannse who's one of the best. So it will stand as it is! :) DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:40, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Sannse, there seems to be some confusion here that comes from terminology used by some editors here that not all of us (including me) understand. So for everybody's benefit, I'm going to ask what seems a simple question, but may help clear up some confusion.

To clarify, is your understanding of the rules that "restrict voting to active editors" mean voting is restricted to active editors on this website or to active editors on a website that is not part of Fandom/Wikia?  King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  03:11, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Llwy's option

I realize you've been presented with a pig in a poke, so I'll try to address this.

I've installed and configured MediaWiki several times for personal use, and at this point I have it pretty much down. This kind of import is new to me, but I now have a working copy of this site I've been running the grabber scripts on that is fairly close to complete. It's running MediaWiki 1.31 on Ubuntu 18.04. I have content and edits running up to the 11th or so, all the logs, and the block list. I'm working on the deleted content and the files. The file script is running as I type this. It's on the S's.

I would not in fact be solely responsible for the site. Snarglefoop has been helping me with this process and has advanced technical knowledge of his own.

I don't know yet what hosting service I'd go with. It needs lots of space. VPS would be nice but tends to be quite expensive. MilesWeb MediaWiki hosting could be a good choice. Since they'll install and upgrade it for you, this means I could include others in the management process.

As for how I'd run the site, I would avoid making significant software changes (other than upgrades) without consensus, and I would not use my position to enforce my will on internal matters from "behind the curtain".

My wiki is not accessible from the internet, but the plan is to get dumps from it and upload them to a public one. Even if we don't go with me, I'll keep working on this project just so there's a backup somewhere. We can use it later if whatever we do choose goes down.

And if you're curious, it looks like this at the moment:

❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 23:20 13 March 2019

Please follow the rules

Llwy-ar-lawr, Romartus asked me to keep an eye on the voting for what happens to Uncyclopedia. He said votes were grandfathered in, and nobody disagreed with that. I'm being objective here; I just struck a vote that agrees with what I want, but I have to play fair. I ask you to do the same. Please do not violate the agreement we have with staff and the responsibility Romartus handed temporarily to me. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:26, March 14, 2019 (UTC) (comment above restored and revised after being removed by Llwy-ar-lawr)

Llwy-ar-lawr, removing another editor's comments, whether an admin or not (which I am), from a discussion like this not only violated Uncyclopedia policy, it violated Fandom ToU which are rules we have to follow.

I suggest you go read them now before you make any more edits. By rights, you should be blocked for doing that, but I don't want to give an impression of an admin war. But please read the rules we are all required to follow and do not do that again. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:41, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

I restored those comments myself immediately after removing them. See this diff. (You did something similar in these diffs.) Yes, I did roll back your edits rather than picking through them and fixing what you'd done. In fact, you removed my comments. You can see in this diff that I am restoring two comments by me that you removed. You removed another of my comments here and failed to restore it, as well as calling my strikeout of the vote you agreed with "vandalism".

Originally you unstruck a vote that you agreed with. Then you struck a vote you disagreed with. Now you claim you are being "objective" by striking votes on both sides; I am being equally objective by reverting all those strikeouts. I also notice you removed one of those votes rather than striking it, namely the one by The Last of the Mohicans.

Here is what I said about the rules on my talk page:

The rules say:

• No I.P. voting permitted. No account created here after 25th February 2019 will be able to vote either. This means that no IP editors are allowed to vote and no one can vote from an account created after 25 February 2019, which means 26 February 2019 or later.
• Must have five edits to this site before 26 February 2019. This means any time before 26 February 2019. It does not mean in 2019. It does not mean in 2018. It could be any time at all, even before 5 January 2005 if that were somehow possible.
• Active editors on the fork must have five edits to this site between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019. This means active editors on the fork must have five edits in this time period. Not editors who are not active on the fork; they are only subject to the restriction before this.

The rules do not say voting is restricted to currently active editors on this site. I intended to include inactive established editors. I said so. You removed my comment saying this. Sannse may have slightly mischaracterized the rules, but she agreed to them as written. They are written as I say above; check the page. You are the one not following the rules and making stuff up. Whether it's due to inattention or malice, I don't know, but you are. If you have a problem with the rules, you should say so, not enforce your personal unwritten opinions or act like this is all my fault and I'm some evil control freak pushing an agenda. Better yet, you should have objected back when these rules were actually discussed and agreed on. You got the emails and said nothing. Your conduct is disruptive and unbecoming. If you can't refrain from behaving in this manner, I suggest you step out. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 02:18 14 March 2019

It seems you are having trouble getting along here. Maybe if would be best if you each went your separate ways. Binky The WonderSkull (talk) 02:38, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

I do not want to get in an admin war. I understand that you may have removed comments accidentally during an edit conflict and I might have done that too. I am sorry about that. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:00, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

My Two Cents

As I posted before, I was in the email discussion about the vote before it was even posted here and I still couldn't figure out what the vote was supposed to mean. I worked as a journalist covering local politics and was also a state board member representing 10 colleges in the state capitol, and I was still confused by the description. So it's not surprising other people would be confused as well.

For one thing, there's this assumption that everybody who edited Uncyclopedia knows what the "fork" is. As I've posted in this discussion before, I have no idea what you mean by the fork or the spoon or the spork or the whatever, and Sannse probably doesn't either.

Sannse obviously read the rules the same way I did: the rules for voting are for http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com. If she thought you were talking about some other website that is not a part of Wikia/Fandom, I doubt very much she would have expressed her views as a Wikia/Fandom staff member.  King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  03:01, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

By the fork, I meant en.uncyclopedia.co, which split from uncyclopedia.wikia.com (sometimes called the "spoon") in 2013. Sannse was around at the time of the split between this site and that one, so I'd think she would understand. I'm open to rephrasing the rule to replace "fork" with "en.uncyclopedia.co" if that's satisfactory. The vote itself is about where to host the content of uncyclopedia.wikia.com. It is not about en.uncyclopedia.co or a merger with them.

The meaning of my second rule does not seem to have come through. My intent was that people active on en.uncyclopedia.co but not here should not get a vote but people inactive on both sites should. The latter, to me, are still part of this community, while the former are not because they have moved there. Sannse said that the rules meant only active editors here should vote, but that wasn't what I meant. Romartus invited several inactive editors to vote here, some did, and their votes were stricken. This is not fair.

We need to agree on what the rules are and what they mean, and we need to stop assigning blame and just work it out. Maybe Lyrithya is right and it has to be started over. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr • talk • contribs • 03:52 14 March 2019