If home is where the heart is, then I live in my upper chest!!!

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

LQT archive from back when that sort of thing was hip.

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>

[edit]  :(

--ZooGuard (talk) 07:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

My life as it stands is so busy that I no longer have time to seriously contribute here for the foreseeable future. Combine that with complete burn out after almost 7 years here, and you effectively get a retired editor, which is what I now am. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 08:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
It's still sad to see the old guard go. I'm not very happy with the quality of the replacements. People like you will be missed. --ZooGuard (talk) 21:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Without hyperbole; what I've seen on RW this year makes me fear for the site's future and is of a kind with what has caused me to no longer wish to call myself a "skeptic". I imagine Goonie will be available for consultation here if the need arises. Nutty Roux (talk) 15:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
It's all because of bad seeds like me. I'm a horrible influence. - Grant (talk) 17:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Yep. We don't need adults who care whether content is unattractive to anyone but people who already agree with the editorializing and bias individual editors put in articles. This place has become amateur hour. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Nutty, this month you made 105 edits. 83 were talk, 22 were anything else. Your negative attitude towards current editors appears hypocritical. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 18:40, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
And? My negative attitude has no merit? What's hypocritical about it? What does any of that have to do with our current crop of new editors generally being an embarrassment? I'm capable of justifying myself and admitting I'm wrong. Are you? Nutty Roux (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Nutty, you consistently state that current editors fail to contribute to RationalWiki positively and that this is bad. Editting talk pages does very little to contribute to RationalWiki, positively or negatively. Thus, your edits appear to do very little to contribute to RationalWiki, which is what you state is bad in others.
I am not attempting to prove that your points about current editors are incorrect, or that you are a bad editor, or that I am somehow a superior editor. I am attempting to prove that your edits do not live up to your goals. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 19:29, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
I gather you don't even understand what my goals are. But I see what you did there openly stating you've got nothing substantive to say on my point, and not-so-obliquely calling me a hypocrite a second time when you don't know what you're talking about. Did nobody teach you how to reason? Can any of you people conduct a discussion on the merits? Nutty Roux (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Are we having fun yet? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yes, Human, thanks for asking.
First, Nutty, if I have failed to show your hypocrisy, then it is only from lack of understanding of your complaint. Please, restate it.
Second, Nutty, if you would like to objectively prove that current editors are worse than editors from yesteryear, please do so. Until you present proof to affirm that statement, I cannot "debate on the merits" of your point.
Third, Nutty, do you really have to use aggressive questions that imply that the site sucks in every post? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 22:06, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Whhhyyyyyyyyyy?!

Can't you just use one account, like the rest of us? Carpetsmoker (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

You reckon the "rest of us" only have one account? Socks are part of RW tradition! --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 07:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I have more accounts on RationalWiki than I even remember, to be honest. Many of them were one-trick ponies (the "Foster the *fill in the blank* accounts, for example). It is true socks are an RW tradition, and as a second-generation RWian (I arrived just a few months after the cabal founded this place), holding and maintaining socks was one of my favorite aspects of RationalWiki. Nowadays, I stick mostly to Gooniepunk and Noisebot, but I still need the RNS account to vote. Gooniepunk (talk) 08:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
So don’t fear if you hear / A foreign sound to your ear /It's Alright Ma (I'm Only Foster) Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Man, I forgot just how many Foster accounts I created. That was a good time when I was off my ritalin and bored as fuck. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
And yet, I still remember some of the passwords to those sock accounts (unfortunately, the password for the account Foster the Cruel isn't one of them). The Foster, my friend, is blowing in the wind (talk) 04:09, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Bottom line: every day is a good day when you're one of my socks. Oh, and I forgot: some of the Maratrean socks are mine, too. I think half were mine, and the other half were Sterile's. Gooniepunk (talk) 05:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

[edit] A thousand-year block

I strongly doubt anyone can live that long. So I reduced the time to 3.6 days. Nerd271 (talk) 05:45, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

No, you reduced it to 9 hours. And what the hell were you thinking? Do you know anything about why Tisane was blocked? WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 09:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Oops! I was thinking about someone else. So sorry! I realize what you're saying. Nerd271 (talk) 12:02, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
support
Community
Tools