Difference between revisions of "User talk:Lumenos"

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Undo revision 614687 by Bondurant (Talk) You wong! He edit mine, I edit his, this our tree house!)
Line 115: Line 115:
 
:"Don't replace your comments with something completely different because that will just make the discussion impossible to follow after people have replied to you."
 
:"Don't replace your comments with something completely different because that will just make the discussion impossible to follow after people have replied to you."
 
::Do you have an example of me ever doing that? ~ [[user:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 
::Do you have an example of me ever doing that? ~ [[user:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 +
:::How about [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Lumenos&diff=next&oldid=614656 here?] [[User:Bondurant|Bondurant]] ([[User talk:Bondurant|talk]]) 14:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  
 
== Lumeneader for lumenection ==
 
== Lumeneader for lumenection ==

Revision as of 14:50, 7 July 2010

Archives for this talk page: , (new)

Hi! You might be looking for my talk page.

Community editing space (sticky)

Lumenos doesn't mind if you edit this space like a RationalWiki article, but prefers you sign your edits or put group signatures (even though this information might be found in edit histories).


My user page at RationalMetaWiki (often not accessible following the initiation of the Goblin Takeover). Perhaps a coincidence, but they are fiercesome if they be thy foe. The best summary of Lumeniki is probably at WikiIndex presently. ~ Lumenos 21:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Subpage for discussions from Community Standards talk (sticky)

The conversations in this subpage may have begun on the Community Standards talk page. They were originally copied in there by Lumenos, to prevent others from getting edit conflicts, and some such as Pie, Weaseloid, and Human seemed annoyed by me. Then the original was archived (or deleted) but there have been complaints that I altered it too much. ~ That moron who'se always re-editting their comments (talk) 19:08, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Subpage for evaluations of my (or your) behaviour (sticky)

I am interested in your perceptions of my behaviours. Discussing them at RationalWiki may annoy some powerful users. See User:Lumenos/Lumenos' behaviour evaluations ~ Lumenos 21:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Pro-life terrorguments in our little wiki? Couldn't be! (sticky)

I've made a subpage for abortion "discussions". Lumenos (talk) 19:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)



Cutting sections to make them easier to edit

Special:Contributions/89.132.239.149 doesn't like when I do this. Anyone else have an opinion? ~ Lumenos (talk) 16:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's tiresome. What we do to make adding to long sections easier is add subsections, usually called things like "handy edit button". Making a new top-level header to continue a recent conversation really mucks up the flow. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay. But sometimes it appears to be a completely new topic. ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
But the one you did above wasn't a "new topic", it was replying to/discussing the exact topic of the thread you chopped it off of. Our convention here is simple: to make a really long thread/topic easier to edit, we add sub-headers so the whole topic remains under one == level header. Capiche? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Eeeaaarruum perhaps a different subtopic, Sir? You've got it now though. That is basically what you might call a sympathetic debate crap. Enforcing topically according to your perception or preference. If we were both to agree on the topics, that would be one requirement of a multiview debate map. ~ Lumenos (talk) 08:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk page not your property

..don't remove stuff from it, unless to archive. Thanks. P-Foster (talk) 16:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

"the rule for archives is DO NOT EDIT. Just to be clear. - π 10:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)"

You have to edit it to put things in it, obviously. I put something in there after I already had things in it. ~ Lumenos (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
They can be edited for archiving purposes or we have a bot that can do your archiving for you. - π 00:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
(EC)Not necessarily. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Human changing a section again

I wrote that Human did this before to my edit on the CS talk page. Π asked for a diff. Here is a similar example (although this time s/he didn't need to set the indentation to a seemingly "arbitrary" location). ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Further evidence that this talk page is not my property. Here you will observe Human altering my edit. I will attempt to undo this. I didn't want it that way because I may want to archive the section without archiving the section I created. ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

"Further evidence that this talk page is not my property." Exactly. This talk page is not your property. What's so difficult about that for you to understand? P-Foster (talk) 01:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Well do you have some guide for those who wish to know how their talk page is likely to be altered by administrators here? ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
If you format it like a dummy, Human will come and fix it. What exactly are you trying to do here? P-Foster (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
And Human will fix it only because that's something Human just does. There's no stopping his fixes, unless you want him to yell at you the next time he's drunk for not letting him help you fix something. AnarchoGoon Swatting Assflys is how I earn my living 01:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I only take Human's "insults" seriously if I can find some sort of constructive criticism in it. If he has community support that is another matter. But I have seen a lot of evidence that he does not. Comments by SusanG's quote on this page (currently), Gooniepunk's comment here, and the forum on the racist linking, are examples. ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Am I not supposed to revert Human's edits? Nobody has changed it back yet. ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

no. Unless he did something in bad faith, which is unlikely to be the case. what are you trying to do here, exactly? P-Foster (talk) 01:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

One may act in "good faith" but make a mistake. ~ Lumenos (talk) 10:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Your comment here doesn't seem to be indented to the proper level. I suppose you wouldn't want me to indent it. Why didn't you indent it? ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I try to organize stuff. Could you ask a more specific question? ~ Lumenos (talk) 01:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
The problem is nobody understands your organisation. We have our own convention that everyone has learnt and we all use it because it is easier than learning a new one to suit one editor. - π 01:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
EC. Because I didn't feel like it. As for being more specific, how does leaving so much word diarrhea all over the place make anything more organized? P-Foster (talk) 01:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I can I put a link to Lumeniki where I replied to you? ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
You could, but it's stupid and boring and would do nothing to answer my question about how you think you're bringing anything to THIS party by trolling us. P-Foster (talk) 02:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I could what? I put this on my user page. Call it "trolling" if you wish. I think many may disagree with you there. I suspect you have done this sort of thing elsewhere on this wiki, and made some "enemies" or at least raised invisible eyebrows. ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I moved that "reply" to this subpage. ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:44, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I would rather "talk" to Π, if this can be allowed here. ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

One thing I'm trying to do (here)

I wanted a wiki where diverse groups (Conservapedia, Metapedia, RationalWiki, WikiSynergy) could collaborate to form multiview debate maps. ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 11:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I was going to add Encyclopedia Dramatica to the list of diverse wikis, whose editors I would like to allow to collaborate with, at Lumeniki. I'm told I should do this with comments instead of editing my comment. Is this an acceptable method of updating information? ~ Lumenos (talk) 23:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Your methodology is either far too clever or (more likely) complete bullshit to actually work in any known universe. Jack Hughes (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Let the record show that a Jack Hughes has suggested that my methodology is so clever in fact that it won't "work", for some mysterious purpose. ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I think the problem is nobody actually wants you to do it (here).--BobSpring is sprung! 14:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Aaah but Brotha Bob, where's ya proof? ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I think his proof is him, Nx, Human, Weaseloid, P-Foster, Goonie and me telling you to stop rearranging the fucking pages. - π 03:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
At Lumeniki you wrote, "You sound as though you are accusing Human of tampering with talk pages, something as you can see we take seriously." I don't see that you take that very seriously. You (Pi) might take the idea of tampering with talk page edit history, "seriously" but you're more than willing to post in numerous places that I have tampered with history. Here you claim all these people have implied that I have rearranged "the pages". I don't recall anyone ever posting a diff; preferring rather to write your own history in the memory of any sheeple who might be reading. ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 09:29, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Why do you run RW and LP together with a slash mark? [Since removed.] Do you think they are similar in some way? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

They are ideologically similar (compared with those others). You got your racists, your fundies, your scientificish (that's RW and LP), woo, and ED is the wiki for the "troll's" (crass critical comedians and cyberstalkers). ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 09:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I guess I see your point. Is LP really "lumenciencish" though? Last i checked they were just a weak parody of CP. And I feel lumenoiled by being glued to them with some cheap mastic. ħumanUser talk:Human 11:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I admit that was half the idea. You say this while I hang from your communEntity's jeezes crucifixes. Oh well. I strikeout for you... Oh dear, now it say RationalWikiaUberapedia. It must be Lorg's will, I cannot change now. So sorry. Why you so racist? ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 11:25, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I changed your strikeout lumenttempt, feel free to change it to what you lumenean. A simple lumenomma would probably unsoil my lumendies. Anyway, thanks for eir lumeneply. ħumanUser talk:Human 11:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Ohhh, you do wong thing and they blame Wong! I never put something in other man's mouth. You measure justice with mobruler. My crime: buckteeth smile so ugly. I can't make new talk page... I know. I take out and put new name. Don't tell! ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 11:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Two things I tried/trying to do here

At 01:20, on 29 June 2010 (UTC) P-Foster asked, "What exactly are you trying to do here?"

  • Suggest that consensus be measured, if we were going to claim that there was it. Oooh soooo controversial. Stopped bothering trying to correct all the myths generated about rewriting history, trolling, etc. ~ Lumenos 07:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit break 1

Π, what conventions am I not following? ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

You are rearranging comments, creating new level 2 headers in the middle of older ones, placing down block quotes by other in these new sections, you are changing your comments after other have replied, you are forking discussion by stating new sections on other pages.
But this is really tiring. How about we agree that you can use what ever convention you like on your talkpage, so long as you don't; a) remove comments without archiving, b) edit the words of others' comments (titles and indents are alright), c) you follow the normal convention on other talkpages outside your userspace (just go with the flow don't format), d) you don't "organise" comments not on your user talk, this includes copying comments from one talkpage to discuss them on another, and e) you stop trying to fork conversations to other pages, including your own wiki. In return nobody should post on Lumenos' talkpage unless it is helpful advice and people should stop harassing him here and on the admin abuse page. - π 03:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Just so one thing is understood. Human changed a heading from the way it originally was on this page. I was changing it back to the original (as I had created the section). P-Forester seems to either agree with that convention or s/he trusts Human. ~ Lumenos (talk) 04:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I wrote "P-Forester" when it should be "P-Foster". ~ Lumenos (talk) 23:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Could we do this on my Lumeniki talk page? Cause that would be so awesome. ~ Lumenos 07:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Boring

This Lumenos stuff is incredibly boring and is going nowhere. Acei9 01:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree with the McWicked one. Anybody care to help me out over here instead of all this bickering? This upcoming article is turning out to be more work than I bargained for. The Goonie 1 What's this button do? Uh oh.... 02:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
See ya there! ħumanUser talk:Human 02:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Simple

  • a thread is anything under a level 2 heading (==whatever==)
  • if it gets long, level 3 heading can be used to split it (===EZ edit break=== etc.), preferably somewhere where it makes sense (e.g. not between a question and an answer). But you should just leave this to someone more experienced.
  • until you understand how talk pages work (probably never), do not move any discussions at all. I've set up Pibot on your talk page so it will be archived automatically. 89.132.239.149 (talk) 03:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Don't replace your comments with something completely different because that will just make the discussion impossible to follow after people have replied to you. If you must change something, add an indented comment under it or use strikeouts. Better yet: Slow down. You don't need to inform us every 5 minutes that you've now decided to move a discussion to a slightly different location, and then 2 minutes later that you have indeed carried out the move. 89.132.239.149 (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Pretty much what BON said. - π 03:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
BON means "bunch of numbers" at RationalWiki. A reference to editors who sign with IP addresses. ~ Lumenos (talk) 23:57, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
"You don't need to inform us every 5 minutes that you've now decided to move a discussion to a slightly different location, and then 2 minutes later that you have indeed carried out the move. "
I not inform you, I make history edit note. You spy me! ~ Lumenos 08:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
"Don't replace your comments with something completely different because that will just make the discussion impossible to follow after people have replied to you."
Do you have an example of me ever doing that? ~ Lumenos 08:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
How about here? Bondurant (talk) 14:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Lumeneader for lumenection

I am here, oh Lumenaster. Where are the Lumenaps to be Lumenated? Lumenoid (talk) 03:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I hope everybody likes you as much as me. ~ Lumenos (talk) 10:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
They seem to be lumenighted with me! Thanks! Lumenoid (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I think they prefer your humor to my mix of serious and ridicule. I'm considering moving most of the content of Lumeniki to another location, and letting them "run Lumeniki" with some limitations. There was some evidence that someone may have gotten into my email account. I haven't attempted securing it yet. They might be able to "steal" my "identity". Your votes or input would be appreciated at Lumeniki. ~ Lumenos (talk) 21:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
What's a lumenection? Does it require pr0n or blue pills? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 21:10, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Please Stop

I don't know what it is you are trying to achieve but you are clogging RC for what seems like a completely purposeless reason. Please stop, think, and attempt to do.....whatever it is you are trying to do in a more straight forward manner. Thanks. Acei9 03:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what you or P-Forester are talking about unless you are specific. I don't think I'm doing anything in a secret manner. I don't know what you mean. To reply to you I must put a thing in Recent Changes. (I guess there is some way to prevent this, but then I might be accused of hiding the evidence or something.) ~ Lumenos (talk) 03:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
This, smart ass. 89.132.239.149 (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't know what this "secret manner" you are speaking about refers to all I know is that you have been clogging up RC for days with a number of different sub-pages and splintered conversations that appear to be going nowhere and are completely purposeless. I submit to you that what ever you are wanting to do would have either been done by now or not at all so just, you know, quit it. Acei9 04:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I would add that this whole fucking edit war or whatever between Lumenos, Human, P-Foster et al has to stop. It's just getting petty. The Goonie Punk Can't sleep, clowns will eat me! 04:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Based on this comment I will probably quote things and post to Lumeniki, rather than at RationalWiki. ~ Lumenos (talk) 05:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thanks. Acei9 05:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Pibot

Pibot sounds like a good idea, just to get people off my back. ~ Lumenos (talk) 03:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Did you read my comment above in the edit break 1 section? - π 03:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

One consequence of this is that I don't know when things are going to get sucked into the archive, so I am giving the stuff at the top the highest priority. ~ Lumenos (talk) 08:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Read the help/instruction page that is now linked from your talk page. You can set how many days you want dead threads to languish. If I could figure it out, you can too. ħumanUser talk:Human 09:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I found the time setting. I wonder if editing something with no section resets the time for the entire page. If so, I suppose I can limit your time to an hour (to reply in a section or change the time setting) before I have anything archived with Pibot. (forgot to sign this earlier ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC))
Pibot reads the actual timestamps left by signatures. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Where will it put something that is not in a section? ~ Lumenos (talk) 00:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
It does not archive any content above the first == header ==. Everything else by definition is in a section. Also, it will not archive any section marked with == header (sticky) == ħumanUser talk:Human 00:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, Sir! =) Imma gonna copy this to the Pibot page unless someone can stop me. You deserve credit but I suppose I will just have to receive the little slot in the toplist edit history. Ahhaha! ~ Lunemos (talk) 01:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Might want double check for accuracy by asking on pibot's talk page first. And did we really forget to document adding the "sticky" feature? Oh well. I hope the bot serves you well. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I just checked and all that is there already, it's just not obviously specific about not archiving things before the first section header. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Community standards at lumeniki

I have started a page for the discussion of the community standards at Lumenos' own wiki here. In view of the time and effort which Lumenos has put into helping out the RW Community Standards, I think it only fair that RW should help him with his.--Hitman (talk) 09:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually looking at you wiki Lumenos I think that your troll article is a thing of great wonder. Might I ask if it is a good representation of how you think pages should look?--BobSpring is sprung! 19:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't have a very strong idea of how articles (or people) should be. I think articles should be interesting and have sources/signatures where necessary. Lumeniki is not RationalWiki, nor would I attempt to make it that way (except perhaps by making a suggestion now and then, if that is not too controversial). When articles are young, in a small fledgling wiki, it may help stimulate activity, to have less regulations on how everything must be. Currently, you can come "spam" lumeniki with your username, etc. ~ Lumenos (talk) 02:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Signature

Even totally pointless comments on talk pages should be signed. 20:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

What if they "hijack" our user page (also), place "lies" (are they lies if no one believes them?) about us, then say, "Stop arguing!", "Please don't quote anything we write." "Stop spamming Recent Changes!" "Just relax and enjoy your phreedom, Bro. Be coooo dawg. What's with all the hat'n? If you don't stop you'll be all alone. Not even Lumeniod bothers with TOW." ~ The Undecider (an anarcho-librarian) 21:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
What the fuck is wrong with you? ÑR/Señor Admin/Talk 22:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't you be a better judge of that than me, Sir? ~ Lumenos - (Wong's chattery) 08:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what the hell you are doing with your nested talk pages...

...but I am glad to see you joining in, editing articles and chatting on talk pages. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Textifying of conversations means they persist when otherwise they would fade fast as memory. When they are all ulgo-bickerings which can't be properly reorganized, deadly ikilumen could result in some innocent pedestrian being gish gallopped. So then goblins come to my pristine nest and the first thing they do way with is essential lumenati tradition. What do name lumeniki that is not wikiforum for lumenism? Can noone answer? ~ Lumenos 06:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Lumenos is learning how to be a RatWikian, at last. 03:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
<sniff<sniff> What is that smells like pu... oh hi Susan! Didn't see you come in. I guess I'm finding all the knobs and buttons on this wikilumenator here. ~ Lumenos 07:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Lumenos, don't bury your talk page eight pages deep. If you don't FIX I will. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Be nice to Susan

She is the mother of all. She is my personal Saviour. If you won't leave her alone, you'll have to deal with me. --Idiot number 59 (talk) 07:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Is this Susan's wiggy? Just wondering. ~ Lumenos 07:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Redirect

You can't redirect a page to a subsection of that page. Also you have created a double redirect, my other bot will break you page unless you fix it yourself. - π 07:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It was typo. I fixed it. ~ Lumenos 07:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)