Difference between revisions of "Forum:Hosting options for Uncyclopedia (wikia)"

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Miraheze)
m
Line 35: Line 35:
 
*:(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.) {{User:Miley Spears/sig}} 01:58, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
 
*:(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.) {{User:Miley Spears/sig}} 01:58, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
 
{{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190313012131}}
 
{{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190313012131}}
 +
 +
== '''Voting Here''' ==
 +
 +
This is a vote for '''hosting''' options, NOT merging or disbanding this website. 
 +
In alphabetical order. One user one vote (see above for terms and conditions). 
 +
 +
 +
=== {{u|Carlb}} Server Option ===
 +
{{s|+0}}
 +
 +
 +
=== [[https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Miraheze]] Miraheze Server Option ===
 +
{{s|+3}}
 +
*{{For}} [[User:Nintendon't|Hyper Nintendon't World]] ([[User talk:Nintendon't|my talk page]])
 +
*{{For}} [[User:IvanRider|IvanRider]]
 +
*{{For}} {{User:Spike/signature}}
 +
 +
=== {{u|Llwy-ar-lawr}} Server Option ===
 +
{{s|+0}}
 +
 +
 +
=== [[https://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/Main_Page]] {{u|Lyrithya}} Server Option
 +
{{s|+2}}
 +
*{{For}}{{User:Alden Loveshade/sig}}
 +
*{{For}} [[User:Dǐll_Kevlar|Dǐll Kevlar]] ([[User talk:Dǐll_Kevlar|talk]])
 +
 +
 +
Those above have clearly stated a vote on the server option but unlike the real world, votes can be changed by a user at the last moment. New deadline for votes to be cast will be '''Saturday 23rd March'''. Since we're all in different time zones, I suggest when it's midnight in Hawaii, that will be the end of the voting.
 +
 +
Further explanations on the options available are included in the comments below.
 +
--{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 10:15, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
==Comments==
 +
 +
''Please keep exchanges civil. Comments that were originally under the postings of {{u|Romartus}}, {{u|Llwy-ar-lawr}} and {{u|Miley Spears}} start here...''
 
::I now see you [[Special:Diff/6047582|edited my post]] to delete the phrase "on the fork" from "active editors on the fork". I should have noticed earlier. As I said in my email, it does not make sense that way. It is meaningless. You are placing a restriction on an undefined group "active editors", while not restricting anyone else. You did not ask me or anyone about this or mention it anywhere. I've restored it to what it said before, as this is what was agreed on and I don't want my words edited like this. Let's please not have any more edit warring until Sannse replies. I realize my wording was ambiguous ("the fork" = uncyclopedia.co, "this site" = uncyclopedia.wikia.com) and maybe you thought you were clarifying it. I hope I have now sufficiently explained my intent in the below sections. Sorry for the [https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Poor_Communication_Kills mess]. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190314220209}}
 
::I now see you [[Special:Diff/6047582|edited my post]] to delete the phrase "on the fork" from "active editors on the fork". I should have noticed earlier. As I said in my email, it does not make sense that way. It is meaningless. You are placing a restriction on an undefined group "active editors", while not restricting anyone else. You did not ask me or anyone about this or mention it anywhere. I've restored it to what it said before, as this is what was agreed on and I don't want my words edited like this. Let's please not have any more edit warring until Sannse replies. I realize my wording was ambiguous ("the fork" = uncyclopedia.co, "this site" = uncyclopedia.wikia.com) and maybe you thought you were clarifying it. I hope I have now sufficiently explained my intent in the below sections. Sorry for the [https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Poor_Communication_Kills mess]. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190314220209}}
 
: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 [[Special:Diff/6046531|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. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190313071927}}
 
: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 [[Special:Diff/6046531|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. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20190313071927}}
  
==Vote here==
+
==<s>Vote here</s> - See above==
  
 
* Miraheze---- [[User:Nintendon't|Hyper Nintendon't World]] ([[User talk:Nintendon't|my talk page]]) 23:35, March 12, 2019 (UTC)
 
* Miraheze---- [[User:Nintendon't|Hyper Nintendon't World]] ([[User talk:Nintendon't|my talk page]]) 23:35, March 12, 2019 (UTC)
 
 
* Miraheze &mdash;[[User:IvanRider|IvanRider]] 00:14, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
 
* Miraheze &mdash;[[User:IvanRider|IvanRider]] 00:14, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
 
** Note: I've copied my most major contribution to this site to the [[w:c:dozerfleet:Tide Level Rating System|Dozerfleet Database]], pending slight rewrites.
 
** Note: I've copied my most major contribution to this site to the [[w:c:dozerfleet:Tide Level Rating System|Dozerfleet Database]], pending slight rewrites.

Revision as of 10:15, 16 March 2019

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Hosting options for Uncyclopedia (wikia)
Note: This topic has been unedited for 218 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.
ScreenShotMockUp01.jpg

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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:25, March 12, 2019 (UTC)

And also:

  • Must have five edits to this site before 26 February 2019.
    This means you must have five or more edits to uncyclopedia.wikia.com before that date.
  • Active editors on the fork must have five edits to this site between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019.
    This means if you are active on uncyclopedia.co, you must have five or more edits to uncyclopedia.wikia.com in that period. (Llwy)
    (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.) Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 01:58, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 01:21 13 March 2019

Voting Here

This is a vote for hosting options, NOT merging or disbanding this website. In alphabetical order. One user one vote (see above for terms and conditions).


Carlb Server Option

Score: +0


[[1]] Miraheze Server Option

Score: +3

Llwy-ar-lawr Server Option

Score: +0


=== [[2]] Lyrithya Server Option

Score: +2


Those above have clearly stated a vote on the server option but unlike the real world, votes can be changed by a user at the last moment. New deadline for votes to be cast will be Saturday 23rd March. Since we're all in different time zones, I suggest when it's midnight in Hawaii, that will be the end of the voting.

Further explanations on the options available are included in the comments below. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:15, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

Comments

Please keep exchanges civil. Comments that were originally under the postings of Romartus, Llwy-ar-lawr and Miley Spears start here...

I now see you edited my post to delete the phrase "on the fork" from "active editors on the fork". I should have noticed earlier. As I said in my email, it does not make sense that way. It is meaningless. You are placing a restriction on an undefined group "active editors", while not restricting anyone else. You did not ask me or anyone about this or mention it anywhere. I've restored it to what it said before, as this is what was agreed on and I don't want my words edited like this. Let's please not have any more edit warring until Sannse replies. I realize my wording was ambiguous ("the fork" = uncyclopedia.co, "this site" = uncyclopedia.wikia.com) and maybe you thought you were clarifying it. I hope I have now sufficiently explained my intent in the below sections. Sorry for the mess. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 22:02 14 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 talkcontribs • 07:19 13 March 2019

Vote here - See above

  • 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 Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet 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 Radiomicrophone.gif01:17 13-Mar-19
    Wow, it's the real Spike! Glad you could get in. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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 talkcontribs • 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 talkcontribs • 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 talkcontribs • 23:54 13 March 2019
  • For the spoon merging with the fork, Uncyclopedia.co Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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). --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:06, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
  • I say Uncyclopedia.co. Hey, remember me? ~[ths] UotM My Farticles. Gobshite of the Month March 2012 Magician of the Month March 2012 Uncyclopedian of the Month November 2012 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! :) Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 01:20, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    Funnily enough, at least I do. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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 Thinking cap small.png Cainad Sacred Chao.png (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! Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 00:49, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    Strike undone. Please reread the rules. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 01:11 14 March 2019
    Don't get your panties in a bunch. Let the strike stand. Devil Details (talk) 01:26, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
    I'm not sure whether Cainad's vote is still being counted given the drama below, but it's worth pointing out that it was actually added by Devil Details, who also voted for .co. Cainad himself hasn't edited since 2010. I dunno if it was a weird mistake or something else entirely, but it's clearly not legit and shouldn't be counted. Un-Supergeeky1 (talk) 23:08, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    Ah... strange. They voted for me to begin with. We can worry about which votes to count later. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 00:57 15 March 2019
    It would probably be wise to settle on a solid set of rules and decide which votes count sooner rather than later, either with the existing submissions or by starting fresh. I've spoken with several users who have no idea whether they're actually eligible to participate in this vote, and there's a very real concern that the votes will just be cherry-picked by the administration after the fact if the results aren't satisfactory for certain users. I understand there's a limited amount of time, but a clear consensus on this kind of thing is necessary for everyone involved. Un-Supergeeky1 (talk) 02:02, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
    Sorry about that; got confused with my old and new accounts, didn't know which sig to use. Changed my mind because of all the infighting here. Part of the reason I left originally. Less drama on the spoon than here, so go with them. They have a proven track record of hosting. Devil Details (talk) 01:20, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
    I see -- understood. Sorry we've given you that impression. In my experience this community is the more peaceful one, and I do not blame it for what happened in this forum, which in any case has subsided. By the spoon do you mean .co? Usually we call this Wikia site the "spoon" and the other one the "fork". :) ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 04:06 15 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. --Nigel Scribbler sig2.png (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 talkcontribs • 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)
  • Carlb or Llwy-ar-lawr. I think Miraheze is not a good place for a wiki this size. In addition, they now are "low on storage for uploads" (see sitenotice). Expert 3222 19:21, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    Expert3222 Please not that Miraheze is a non-profit, so it depends on users' donations. A fundraiser is to be organised soon, allowing us to assure that we have the funds. I think that rather than paying for another host monthly, it will be simpler for Uncyclopedia to join MIraheze, and donate whatever you see fit (if you would like to). We also host other large wikis, including our largest one so far (AllTheTropes) so I don't think the size is a problem for us. Reception123 (talk) 06:05, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
    Uncyclopedia.co There can be only one. It's getting a bit silly otherwise. Matt lobster (talk) 21:16, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    This vote is on where the current uncyclopedia.wikia.com will be hosted, not whether it will be shut down or merged with another site. Maybe the options presented aren't clear enough. There's been a lot of miscommunication. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 21:31 14 March 2019
    I take your point, but if it was taken to Uncyclopedia.co it would be odd not to merge. So that's why I think there. Matt lobster (talk) 22:26, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
    That's fair. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 00:57 15 March 2019
  • Uncyclomedia ◄► Tephra ◄►
  • I think we can move to the uncyclopedia.co domain. I have edited the uncyclopedia.co domain without any problems when I was blocked over here. Plus, it means that we can get the legacy skins again and not run into issues with ToU violations and legal problems. Awesome Aasim 21:35, March 15, 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

(Immediately below is in reference to Dill Kevlar voting)

  • Not eligible. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 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 talkcontribs • 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." Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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 talkcontribs • 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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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 talkcontribs • 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 beach.jpg Rhubella Avatar-02.png Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits Rhubella Avatar-01.png 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! Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 02:47, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
    Not my idea, not my problem. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 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 talkcontribs • 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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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). --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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.
  • Has regular backups, and can also do them on request

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. Note: Miraheze is separate from Orain (the site mentioned), it is not a rename! Two sysadmins left Orain as they did not agree with policies, and went to start Miraheze (comment by Miraheze sysadmin). Reception123 (talk) 06:07, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

  • 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:
    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.

  • Unprofessional regard for other community members; removes votes she doesn't like and changes the rules at the same time in order to justify it. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lyrithya (talk • contribs)
    That is an extreme mischaracterization. Either you did not read what I said or you chose to ignore it. I assumed the absence of my restrictions, which are still clearly laid out above, was an oversight on Romartus's part. I suppose I should have asked him if he meant to leave them out, but it was very late where he is and I didn't expect this reaction. The vote remains unstruck for now in any case; it can be counted or not at the end. I thought you'd let go of your feelings toward me. Apparently not. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 07:05 13 March 2019
    Lyrithya, you can punch me to. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:36, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
    Since that error was mine, can you Lyrithya strike through your last bullet point under Llwy's site option? --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:44, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
    I'm... not even sure how to respond to this. The diff is clear, but these responses aren't. Are you two saying you privately agreed that should have been the rule, but then forgot to post it until someone violated it?

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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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 talkcontribs • 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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:47, March 13, 2019 (UTC)
It's fine. Don't worry about it. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 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 talkcontribs • 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 Radiomicrophone.gif11:31 13-Mar-19
I did say...can we tone down the language please? --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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..--Laurels.gifRomArtus*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)
Satire :) --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:50, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
So, is Forum:A message from Fandom#The Uncyclopedia Reunification Plan satire or did they mean every word? carlb (talk) 15:36, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Splitting ownership of the server from ownership of the project

I'm a bit confused by the way this question is framed... is this a discussion of who should own the server (the computer) or is this a discussion of who should own the Uncyclopedia website (ie: a copy of the database, the user list, the domain name and whatever else would be needed to seamlessly move the site from one host to another if needed)? The two are different entities which do not necessarily need to be controlled by the same person - and it may make sense to place them separately. That would keep control of the domain name for this wiki in the hands of active administrators of this wiki, who would be free to change hosts at will... a bit of autonomy which we lost when User:Chronarion sold the domain in 2006 and never fully recovered. carlb (talk) 07:28, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

I think the issue of who owns the server is linked with issues like the possible abuse of checkuser to chase down an editor you don't like and harass them that way off a website. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:09, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
The distinction is important for reasons which have little to do with checkuser (as checkuser is the least of our problems). Control of the domain name equates to control of traffic from all of the inbound links from external sites which point to that name. It also amounts to ability to move the site to another server or webhost with no one being the wiser. For instance, there's a huge difference between these two outcomes:
  • I lend one computer in a datacentre to Llwy-ar-lawr; she sets up an Uncyclopedia on that machine with her own domain name and her own group of sysadmins. The project outgrows that server; she's free to mysqldump the whole mess and take it to another host, another server, another datacentre. I own a computer, I don't own the project.
vs:
  • I buy the domain name myself in a backroom deal, appoint myself as the lone sysadmin, dump the data on that same machine and continue to operate as I have for more than a dozen years on whatever other Uncyclopedia-related wikis I'm hosting. The computer is the same, but the outcome - at least in the freedom accorded to the community to move elsewhere if they outgrow the server - is not.
That's why we need to know what this vote is about: is it asking who should get the domain name (which should probably be an active admin on this project) or is it asking which computers are the least-worst for hosting a wiki of our size (a different question, which would get a different answer)? carlb (talk) 16:30, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
I feel like maybe we need to clarify a different between individuals, communities, and perhaps some sort of 'trustees'. Because nobody owns most of these sites, let alone the communties on them - it's how we've gotten so splintered in the first place. But the fact of the matter is you do need someone you can trust not just to not hold these things over the community (or any piece of it), but also to technically handle it correctly. And that presents a bit of a problem. Perhaps we need to define some sort of actual organisation here, with clear governance such that it accounts for all our splintered bits of Uncyclomedia communities, that can thus properly entrust the technical aspects to those qualified, while still ensuring protections against anyone, well, trying anything? Athyria (talk) 16:51, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

This vote cannot be enforced

All right, somebody's been brave enough or wise enough or both to bring up something I'd thought about but didn't post because I was afraid it would make the battle even bigger. This vote is effectively meaningless. It amounts to "Do you vote for 1 (which is already being done anyway whether you want it or not), or do you vote for 2 (which is already being done anyway whether you like it or not), etc."
Anybody who has the database for this Uncyclopedia, as long as they follow legal restrictions (which for the most part amount to giving credit to contributors, typically in the edit history, although there is some restricted copyrighted material), they, in practice, own the site. All of them do.
If two or three or four of them decide--individually with no input needed from anyone else--to put up the site where they want it, they can do so. This vote cannot change that. King Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:07, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Of course. No worries about getting hyperyelled for saying that; you're totally correct about the fact that nothing here can be "enforced". But the real question isn't one of enforcement; rather, it's "Is there enough interest to justify putting the bits on an entirely new server someplace or other, and if so, what would be a good place to put it?", and it's ultimately an advisory thing.
Given how much work it takes to put up a new copy of the Wiki (and the fact that it takes cash to rent space for it), the advice is likely to be heeded -- if nobody wants the new Wiki, nobody's going to put in the effort to set it up.
By the same token, voting on whether "the community" should "merge" with the Fork is kind of useless -- it's a herd of cats, and each cat is going to make up its own mind. Snarglefoop (talk) 18:17, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Good points. Although this site has been copied elsewhere already, so there may be even more after this one closes. Perhaps this should have been posted as an opinion poll instead of a vote. King Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:28, March 14, 2019 (UTC)~
Aaaaannnddd the issue of what to do about domain name ownership is something else again, and may be much stronger than merely "advisory", but that's a swamp I don't feel competent to swim into. Snarglefoop (talk) 18:19, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Now that I did mention near the beginning of this debate. King Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:30, March 14, 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. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*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 <staff /> (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 Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet 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 <staff /> (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 Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet 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 <staff /> (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! :) Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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 Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  03:11, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I'd like to know if we understand them the same way. This is what I meant by those rules. I wasn't trying to restrict it to active editors on this site, but apparently I wasn't clear enough. Sorry all. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 04:38 14 March 2019
BTW this is the rule that was giving people trouble: "Active editors on the fork must have five edits to this site between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019." This seems to have come across as meaning that only active editors on the fork are allowed to vote, or something, but that's not what I was trying to say -- "this site" is uncyclopedia.wikia.com, not the fork (uncyclopedia.co). My point was that if someone is active on uncyclopedia.co, they should also be active on uncyclopedia.wikia.com if they want to have a say. If they're not active on uncyclopedia.co, they don't have to be active here -- they just have to be established (the rule before this). I should have written something more like this:
  • You must have made five or more edits to uncyclopedia.wikia.com before 26 February 2019.
  • If (and only if) you have made five or more edits to uncyclopedia.co between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019, you must also have made five or more edits to uncyclopedia.wikia.com in the same time period.
If this isn't ok, we should agree on that and change it to something we like better. If we want to restrict voting to active editors on uncyclopedia.wikia.com, I suggest reducing these to one rule: "Must have five or more edits to uncyclopedia.wikia.com between 1 January 2018 and 26 February 2019." I was originally going to propose something like this but decided I didn't want to shut out everyone who was part of this community in the past. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 22:42 14 March 2019

Yes, when I say this wik, I mean Uncyclopedia.wikia.com (or .fandom if that happens before the move). I really think that was clear, as it's this wiki we are currently on. Those who forked all those years ago should not have the right to vote about a wiki they left. Except, of course, that they have the right to vote whether to allow this wiki to join theirs. -- Sannse <staff /> (help forum | blog) 20:12, March 15, 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 example screenshot.png

Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 23:20 13 March 2019

I'm not sure what to make of VPS, given our space requirements. That XML dump may look small, but actually grab everything and stick it into mariadb? I'm seeing space consumption of 75-100Gb for the database and close to 25Gb for the images.
VPS looks inexpensive in small quantities, then goes up in cost once one inevitably asks for more. At my upstream provider (eStruxture Mtl1) a virtual server with 1 CPU, 1Gb RAM, 25Gb HDD space is $25/mo, but ask for 200Gb HDD and it's suddenly $60/mo - as expensive as the cost of renting a 1U space in the datacentre rack (computer not included - for shared colocation) and almost as expensive as renting the smallest whole computer ($70/mo for an Intel Core i3 with 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD on a 100Mbps unmetered connection) in the same facility.
Miraheze uses RamNode, where they rent "containers" which are somehow above regular shared hosting but not quite a true VPS. From [3][4] it looks like they had 15 of these at the end of 2017: each "512MB CVZ" container is advertised as 512MB Ram, 2 CPU Cores, 1 IPv4 address, 150GB HDD space, 2000GB/month bandwidth for $5/mo. One is too small for our needs, but two might do?
In any case, we do need to preserve the ability to move the site and its content (a full image and SQL dump with all archived and deleted revisions, user list everything) to another server seamlessly on the same domain name with the same content if we're not satisfied with what we're seeing or if we outgrow a host. That's part of what makes me hesitant of wiki farms - be they Wikia, Miraheze, whomever. We can move a domain we own, but if the same content is also available on some other domain (like uncyc.miraheze.org or whatever) there's the risk that someone will try to be overly helpful and adopt the abandoned wiki, re-opening it after we leave. We've already encountered a similar issue with Nonsensopedia (Polish); they tried Miraheze, had issues with a bungled import which included some Nonciclopedia pages (a big balla Italiana spaghetti) and went to their own server nonsa.pl; one user is keeping the old site open, so this Polish joke is now forked. carlb (talk) 05:15, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that about VPS. They seem to expect that if you need a lot of disk space, you're a business with lots of money. Well, darn, I'm not a business. RamNode looks interesting. Little short on memory, though, maybe.
Wasn't even thinking about deciding to leave Miraheze. I do hope we wouldn't end up with another fork. I don't think we could afford it. Shame about Nonsensopedia, but I guess it's their business. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 07:22 14 March 2019
As a brief technical observation (which is probably already well understood by all parties), 1 core is inadequate. A lot of modern software is written with spin-waits in it; they assume everything's multithreaded and there are multiple physical cores, and breaking out of a spin is faster than waking up. The consequence is that with one core you can see performance that is vastly worse than you'd get with two cores, as the whole system apparently locks up for multiple milliseconds while the spinner's time slice runs out.
Second, I'm not sure how much memory we need, but half a gig is almost certainly too little. One gig is likely to be marginal, at best. At the other end, four is probably adequate for something that's just running a website. So, I suppose we should be looking at memory in the one to four gig range. This, and the CPU requirement, are going to rule out "storage VPSs".
I haven't got hard numbers to back these assertions up but I'm reasonably confident that they're not too far off.
And, yeah, the unpacked DB is something like 90 gigs by itself so assuming we want nice stuff like images we're looking at between 100 and 150 gigs minimum of disk space, and we'll sleep better at night if we have at least 200. (And don't forget to budget space for a swap file -- it shouldn't happen, but if you run out of swap on Unix you're pretty much dead.) Snarglefoop (talk) 13:59, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Maybe Miraheze gets away with this little because their total traffic (across 3000 wikis) isn't that much more than the total traffic for one wiki in the Uncyclopedia family and it's split across multiple VPS instances on different machines?
Server memory requirements depend largely on the number of requests currently in process. Apache spawns a thread for each incoming connection and each of these threads seems to take about a hundred megabytes of RAM. A dozen simultaneous connections can wipe out a gigabyte of RAM with ease, and the database server is consuming memory too. Oddly, a server with a faster processor and solid state drives has been observed to need less memory for the same workload than a slow computer with clunky mechanical hard disks as, the sooner a request is completed, the sooner it's removed from memory and those resources freed for other requests.
Demand initially will be low, as users getting "This wikia has closed" here instead of being told where we've gone won't find us initially, but eventually we need the option to scale up to an entire machine in a datacentre if and when we get the traffic to justify one. carlb (talk) 14:55, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Your point about SSDs is well taken -- faster disks reduce the need for more memory; I had not thought of that. I have no experience with computers with SSDs (I'm stuck in the 2000's here, all HDDs). Half a gig still sounds tight to me; if, as you said, it costs 100 MB per query, that would mean our performance could degrade badly with more a few simultaneous queries. OTOH with an SSD for swapping we might still not be completely dead (as long as we don't run out of swap space, of course).
As to the disk space needed, with a fully unpacked and largely updated copy of Uncyc here we're using 128 gigabytes of space in '/', .... plus another 47 gigs for an SQL dump file, which brings the total to 170 something. The dump is obviously not needed for regular operation but may be relevant to the question, "How do you set the thing up to start with?" And that total includes everything -- OS, assorted applications, and some user files for the admin account. Snarglefoop (talk) 15:46, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
SSDs are optional - if you fully leverage ram caching it doesn't really matter a whole lot either way, but you definitely are going to need a few gigabytes at least to do anything meaningful with it (we're using around 20-30GB on average, and we're not doing much to begin with). But the real problems you're going to run into will be with storage and the software - the database alone is 100GB, the files another 50GB, and you'll need space for caching the rendered pages, different file renders, and automated backups. Even if you're not rendering xml page exports (which you should), the database dumps themselves take considerable space, and you'll want to keep even some of the rather older ones on hand at all times just in case things get really screwy, so I'd recommend at least a 500GB server for this, plus something for secondary usage (offsite backups, using as a fallback, etc).
But for some more context, just so you have a better idea just what you'd be getting into here: if you are doing your own servers (dedicated or VPS), that means you'll also be running your own services, and will need to worry in particular about the specific aspects of your configuration and installation to maximise security and performance, and this hard (professionals make very good money on this for a reason). Even if you're not going for maximal performance, having adequate security is a must, so you need to know how to do things like block ports, set up your services correctly (they shouldn't even be listening externally unless you have a very good reason, for instance), sanitise inputs, review what you deploy, maintain access policies, mitigate attacks, monitor and respond to outages, and back up configs in a way that allows you to re-pull it without exposing private data, and all in some manner that persists through updates. And you also need to stay on top of updates, too, because most of the vulnerabilities you need to deal with will come out of the packages you have installed, and as soon as this happens, they need to be promptly patched as well. Athyria (talk) 16:15, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Which is why we should really all be working together on this. Historically, we're awful at that, but that really needs change. I'd say more, but right now I still need to get a couple of the grabber scripts working again with the current sites (changes'll be in gerrit, don't worry), so I dunno. Ideas welcome. Athyria (talk) 16:27, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
(Got edit-conflicted saving this, so now that I'm saving it it's a little out of date; if I seem to have missed a point or two with this comment that may be why.)
Yes, cooperating sounds like a great idea! All we need to do is ... let's see ... avoid screaming at each other, and try not to sound too arrogant. I'm OK at not-screaming but I suck at the not-sounding-arrogant; I'm working on that.
I'm not going to get too lathered up about security issues. Configure IPTables to block everything but the ports we need (that's just normal -- I even do it on my desktop) and you're most of the way there. There won't be any financial information on the site (I mean, unless somebody posts their credit card number on a wiki page for God knows what reason) so a "breakin" wouldn't be a three alarm panic anyway. And in any case a major part of the reason for putting a wiki out there on a VPS rather than sitting in the livingroom with an SDSL line is to isolate it from other systems we care about.
SSH access with public-key-only logins (passwords disabled) seems pretty secure to me -- good enough that I wouldn't be losing sleep about someone guessing my private key, anyway. (And maybe have it listen on a non-standard port just to avoid constant hammering on port 22 by Bad Guys.)
As to staying up to date -- yeah, of course. That's one reason for going with 1.31; it's an LTS release so staying up to date is at least an option.
As to the backups, yeah, that's an annoyance. I dare say the dumps are going to have to go offsite. That'll be a headache to set up but shouldn't be too impossible -- once it's off the wiki, it's going downstream rather than upstream, and that's the "fast" direction for consumer internet connections. Off-wiki disk space is, of course, essentially free, so storing dumps offsite is not a big deal. Another option for backups would be to maintain an offsite mirror, somewhere inaccessible to the Internet but with lots of disk space for regular full dumps. That might work pretty smoothly, and the grabber scripts would make it feasible.
And yeah, we already addressed the issue of disk space. Your 500 gb number seems a little high to me, given that the wiki and associated OS files only take up about a third of that space and the database dumps would be stored remotely. Snarglefoop (talk) 16:51, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Come to think of it, OS choice is also an issue. For a home system it's kind of a no-brainer (Ubuntu's so easy it's not worth considering anything else), but for a dedicated web server Centos, Solaris, or BSD might be better choices. Lyrithya, what do you folks run? (Not MS BackOffice, I hope! ;-) ) Carl, I think you run a Unix shop -- but which flavor? Snarglefoop (talk) 17:10, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
My primary MediaWiki 1.31 server is a 1U Supermicro (2 x Opteron 6276, 16 cores each, two WD Blue 1TB SSD's in RAID1, two WD Blue 500GB SSD's, 32Gb DDR3 ECC RAM) running the "server" version of Ubuntu 18.04 LTS (which is stripped down, no GUI, as these machines run headless in a datacentre). This server is hosting most of my Uncyclopedia-related wikis, except for static content (images.uncyc.org) and a few tiny bits and pieces which are non-wiki or haven't been upgraded to MW1.31 yet. The rest of the servers are CentOS - which I had used for years, but which tends to ship with outdated versions of key bits of software like PHP that would need to be replaced. carlb (talk) 17:28, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
That. Athyria (talk) 17:34, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Um. If you mean MS BackOffice, I'd just like to say sorry, I wasn't trying to poke at you for using it; that was just a feeble attempt at humor. I actually thought you ran a Linux shop.
In any case, I also realize that MS has some major advantages over Linux, not least of which is that, in my experience, you can do a version upgrade on Windows with nearly 100% assurance that you'll get a working system afterwards. With Linux I've found it's more like 60%, and the other 40% of the time you get to spend a fun afternoon with a recovery disk. (YMMV -- I'm sure it depends on the hardware you're running on and on the level of expertise of the user.) Snarglefoop (talk) 19:42, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Er, I meant ubuntu LTS server for the main ones. Same as carlb. Athyria (talk) 13:19, March 15, 2019 (UTC)

What about VPSDime? Their "storage VPS" option provides 500 GB of disk space, 2 GB of memory and 4 CPU cores for $7 per month (that's the one selected by default -- see the page for their other plans). They claim to use SSD, so this could be enough memory, and it's a lot more than RamNode. I'm now noticing that RamNode's "massive" OpenVZ, which is the only one that looks big enough for us, uses HDD rather than SSD. VPSDime seems to have mostly good customer reviews. Apparently they're so cheap because it's totally unmanaged. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 21:20 14 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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">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 talkcontribs • 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)
Hi Binky! I'm doing just that. I'll come back later and see how things are going then. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 04:08, 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. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 04:00, March 14, 2019 (UTC)
Ugg, seems I made a mistake. I mixed up the second and third rules, and thought that the vote was limited to those who are currently active. Frankly, I think allowing long-gone contributors to vote is a mistake. Of course, this is just my opinion, and I do not claim any control over this vote (I'm not sure anyone else is totally in control of it either >_< ) -- Sannse <staff /> (help forum | blog) 20:20, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
You aren't alone; a lot of us were (and are) confused about the voting. I also think allowing long-gone contributors to vote is a mistake. I think the voting should be restricted to people who edited here in the year or so before Uncyclopedia closing down was announced. Otherwise you have a situation where people who haven't been active here in 2, 5, 7, 10 years can come in and overrule the people who are active. King Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:22, March 16, 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 Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet 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 talkcontribs • 03:52 14 March 2019
We do need to agree. Really I think editors should have had a chance to approve the way the vote would be done before it started. Then we could have straightened things out before it ever became a problem.
I see Sannse has been asked. I'll wait and see what she says. Admin DAP Dame Pleb Com. <font="Times New Roman">Miley <font="Times New Roman">Spears (talk) 04:06, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Separate Vote Forum

I think a forum/page just for voting but linking back here for information on the options and discussions should be done. The Vote page should also be protected the same way as this one. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:06, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

So would that mean restarting the vote?
If we restart it, I suggest there is no more striking out or removing of votes. We can decide determine 03:47 which ones do and don't count at the end when they're tallied. The fighting over strikeouts is counterproductive and risks discouraging participation. It was my idea that there would be "enforcement" needed. I was wrong. There's more than one way to do it. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 20:50 14 March 2019
I agree with that as regards not striking out votes until the ballot closes. In that light, perhaps the time limit for voting can now be extended. I know this makes it tight for the end of the month (and it being Easter too) but I think as long as the decision has been here, we will be given enough time for a back-up and an official closing of this particular url (that being uncyclopedia.wikia.com). It also gives me a chance to alert more users who have been inactive for sometime. I would also prefer that the ballot page just sets out the parameters and four headings for the options to be voted on. Links back to this page for discussions. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 00:15, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps just highlight the vote section so editors can cut to the important part without having to leave the discussion page. Bar strikethroughs anywhere. I would say extend the time but that should be 3-4 days at most. Agreeing to the end of the month (if it is even that) painted Uncyclopedia into a corner.
Realize in America, this is March Madness (NCAA basketball, even now thought the tournament doesn't start until the 19th) and tax prep time. People are generally involved with those in a major way. --Nigel Scribbler sig2.png (talk) 02:08, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
It's also Easter coming up. Regards the vote, so we highlight the vote and put all comments underneath? --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:04, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
We do need to be clear what is being asked and who is eligible to vote. Is this a vote on what happens to the uncyclopedia.org domain name, is this a vote on whether this wiki should be dismantled as spare parts for the other one, is this a vote on who has the least-worst servers? I see quite a few votes which basically amount to "vote for .co" with the intention of shutting the project down or merging it into the fork; is that consistent with the question being asked? carlb (talk) 17:00, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
This forum is about where to host uncyclopedia.wikia, not about mergers or closing it down. Regards the domain name, that's up to Fandom. I presume they have renewed ownership today otherwise this site will be floating in space right now. I think we are clear as regards the electorate as well. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 19:57, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
On the uncyclopedia.org domain, I still haven't confirmed that we will hand it over, because I don't know who we would hand it over to. I asked the question somewhere: if we were to give the URL to the the current contributors of uncyclopedia.wikia.com, who would actually hold it?
There are others asking about the URL, but it seems fair to me that it should go to the people we are kicking off the network (or, probably better, their new host). But we can't even talk about it until we have a specific person or organization to talk to.
Overall... guys, you've got to get organized. I can keep the wiki open a little longer, but not much beyond the original deadline.
The question of the URL can wait, but the decision of where you, the uncyclopedia.wikia community, are going to go, is an urgent one. The content is already safe (from what I understand) and the community here has alternatives as to where they want to edit when this version is gone. But if you want this community to remain a group, then you need to choose a new home. -- Sannse <staff /> (help forum | blog) 20:48, March 15, 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Sannse for the update. This is just like Brexit! Just checking in. The voting will be done on this page (above all the subsequent votes, these can stand unless peeps object). I also think that there is about enough information this forum to let contributors decide where to go for. The community (ex-wikia) can then decide the issue about who looks after the uncyclopedia.org address. Will re-arrange page when it's daylight again here. --Laurels.gifRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 01:13, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
I just checked before I came here, and Fandom (still listed as Wikia.com), did renew uncyclopedia.org the registration of which would have expired on 15 March 2019; it's registered for one more year. King Admin Alden Loveshade, by proclamation of Sannse most noble ruler of the Internet King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:26, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

Ruling?

I will wait to see if I can vote before I will cast an official vote here. Until then, you will have no clue whether I have changed my mind on anything or not. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 05:00, March 16, 2019 (UTC)