Talk:2012

Ok guys, even Offshore CWCki knows this page is fucking retarded. AS IN NOT EVEN THEY LAUGHED AT YOUR SHIT. Stop adding your lame jokes now guys. Freecell 00:58, 3 January 2011 (PST)

If there was a physical CWCki Editing Guide there would be a screenshot of this "article" with DON'T DO THIS YOU FAGGOT written across it on the first page. Anybody that played a noteworthy role in the current state of the "article" should be permabanned. Sully 14:37, 4 January 2011 (PST)

Quarterly month articles

As I was mentioning to Eamoo, perhaps it'll make sense to make quarterly articles instead of articles for each month - like January - March 2012 instead of January 2012, February 2012, etc. I'll leave the articles as they are now, as Chris could in theory come back and there could be a shitton of new content, but I'm not holding my breath and I'm just throwing it out there in case I forget.--Champthom 06:17, 16 January 2012 (PST)

Dumbass

ok the "Dumbass" video should be mentioned here, and here is my argument.

• The video was important enough to make it to the front page
• freecell said that he does not recall including this sort of thing but its here January 2012
• This is the punctuation of the best example of Chris failing at being a troll hunter
• the Dumbass video was directed to Chris
• If Chris directed a video at you (especially without provocation) and you reacted to it in this way, i would totally want that recorded.
• Dumbass is a great word especially when used in this way

besides that its funny as hell and Fatman deserves recognition. slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 09:22, 17 February 2012 (PST)

When I said that, I meant specifically the "20XX" articles. These sorts of videos just haven't ever gotten recognition in those articles. The closest thing is some stuff Megan did in the 2008 article (e.g. "March 14 - Megan asks Chris to leave her alone."), but I think this is a different situation. Chris hasn't acknowledged the video at all. It's entirely irrelevant to Chris' year. If Chris does mention it, I can see it maybe being worth putting in, but as-is, I don't think it's relevant enough to the subject material of this article to warrant a mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freecell (talk • contribs) 09:33, 17 February 2012 (PST)

ok its your wiki.. i respectfully disagree but its not worth any more of my time. slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 09:38, 17 February 2012 (PST)