Difference between revisions of "User talk:David Gerard"

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by 86.40.109.180 (Talk) to last version by David Gerard)
(AT LEAST COMMENT! AT LEAST REACT! AT LEAST SAY OR DO SOMETHING HUMOUROUS OR WITTY. ANYTHING BUT THIS BORING DRUDGERY YOU IMPOSE ON THIS SITE)
Line 63: Line 63:
 
:OK, no worries :-) - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] ([[User talk:David Gerard|talk]]) 14:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 
:OK, no worries :-) - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] ([[User talk:David Gerard|talk]]) 14:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 
::Yeah. If it was "RA you're a cunt and I'm going to track you down and kill you fucker" then I'd wholeheartedly support reverting someone else's page. But as it is, leave it to RA to see if he wants to keep it or burn it. {{:User:Armondikov/sig}} 14:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 
::Yeah. If it was "RA you're a cunt and I'm going to track you down and kill you fucker" then I'd wholeheartedly support reverting someone else's page. But as it is, leave it to RA to see if he wants to keep it or burn it. {{:User:Armondikov/sig}} 14:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
== You really are an awful wanker  ==
 +
 +
Go back to wikipedia, you dryarse cunt. I hate you most of all. [[Special:Contributions/86.40.99.194|86.40.99.194]] ([[User talk:86.40.99.194|talk]]) 23:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:06, 12 June 2010

No

You won't revert my edits. It was all Bob/Jack who begun to archive my edits from his talk page two seconds after I had written them, so why shouldn't I be allowed to do the same with his comments? Seriously. --Earthland (talk) 11:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually Earthland is right. -- Nx / talk 12:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Just something I need to say

At first I could have accused you of being a hypocrite. After all, nobody has ever sued Bob for immediately archiving my edits, even when I reverted his edits. (Similarly, many things become "truth" just as soon as someone else than me says it, until that point it is something "completely laughable" and even "couldn't be farther from the truth").

However, there wasn't anything hypocritical about bringing Bob's comments back from the archive after you had just deleted (not archived) my comment on your talk page. Like, nobody is that openly hypocritical. It was an obvious, but nevertheless blatant and childish attempt to make me angry. God, you must really hate me. After all, if I were just another clown/troll then you should simply ignore me. I honestly don't know how come that I am the target of such hate, since I don't even remember that I would've ever directly talked to you.

There is nothing left but to wonder how could people here seriously "accuse" poor little Tweety for being 12 years old. 12 is far more than RW's average.

--Earthland (talk) 16:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Wtf.gif WeaseloidWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 18:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
He's 17. He's only just heard that thinking exists, let alone joined-up thinking. He could do with a fun time on LessWrong, since we're too dumb for him - David Gerard (talk) 18:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
"He's only just heard that thinking exists" your words speak of great maturity indeed. --Earthland (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
You're 17, you've only just heard that joined-up thinking exists - David Gerard (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I can't take you seriously because you're a single-issue troll. You have no interest in the site, you have no interest in its mission, you are a single-issue troll. You've reached the point where the difference between "troll" and "advocate" is meaningless. If you had any use here, you'd be contributing anywhere other than on your single droning monotone topic. You don't. Therefore you are a waste of bytes - David Gerard (talk) 20:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
You should have made this comment on the Administrative Abuse page, my dear. Talking on one topic does not make me troll. However, if it does interest you, I have made other contributions as well, as it is mentioned on my user page. There once seemed to be quite a consensus that I am not a troll. I think you have difficulties with reading, and oh... wishes give you big eyes. --Earthland (talk) 20:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
As I noted, you are not a member of the community and, notably, have no detectable interest in being one - only pursuing a single issue and attempting to exploit local rules to continue pursuing a single issue - David Gerard (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

New section

(Just thought that you'll notice)

Toast says it. --Earthland (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Death threat?

Did he just threaten to kill you? Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Dude, I tangle with Scientology for fun - David Gerard (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but if he's going to be making death threats, then we need to stop treating him like just another troublemaker. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Plausibly he's talking about site politics. i.e., I wouldn't personally consider this worth an ISP report - David Gerard (talk) 21:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Honestly, I think he wants to have sex with you. But it is a bit vague, as such innuendo often are. --Kels (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I will admit that my rhetoric gets the better of me sometimes. Sorry if thats how it appeared. 'Waiting in the long grass' is a commong UK/Irish political term... IE, Brown waiting in the long grass for Blair.

I will take this as a providential sign that I should take an RW break for a while. My trolling has been pretty hardcore recently.

Sorry! 86.40.207.73 (talk) 21:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Plea

David, could you please edit by section on talk pages. Your edits on recent changes on e.g. SB & TWIGO are often hard to find, to the extent that I've stopped looking for them. 22:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

I'll try to, then. But, uh, how does that affect diffs? - David Gerard (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Just look at Recent Changes. Almost all the talk page entries have "section name" which if clicked on takes you straight to the section instead of having to scroll down the whole page & hunt for the edit. Also, of course, section editing, rather than full page editing, reduces the risk of edit conflicts although I haven't noticed you getting many of them. Thanks. 22:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Ah ha. What I frequently do is just hit the "edit" link under the words "Current edit" if it's the current edit. This is all but reflexive now. Hit the diff and it will be obvious what I've just said. In further surprising news, wikis make terrible forums software - David Gerard (talk) 22:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Ahhh this conversation takes me back... Acei9 22:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Screenshot.png

Say no more! That edit could have been a follow up to any of the three previous ones! 22:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

Yes, but not if you hit "cur" - David Gerard (talk) 23:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Think you'll find that most people hit "", I know I do. 23:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
If you start hitting "cur", you'll see precisely what I last did, every time - David Gerard (talk) 23:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Hitting CUR is so last year... Totnesmartin (talk) 14:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

With all due respect

I respect you as a valuable contributor to this website. Nevertheless, I'm of the opinion that if a certain someone shows up on a user talkpage that isn't your own, you should let said user deal with it how they want. I won't stop you from doing what you are currently doing, it's just that some of us (myself for one) would rather toy with the trolls than revert them. Just sayin'. Peace. Punky Your mental puke relief 14:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I totally agree with the nine hour bans for MC, but the outcome of the LJ thing was that user talk pages are left to their owners unless the content is "obviously vile". i.e. something more offensive than some guy role playing as a Disneyfied Che Guevara. "Doing an Nx" is useful, since that's what brought us to the point of actually deciding how to deal with him, but right now we have a reasonable consensus we should try. --ConcernedResident Fightin' round the world 14:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, no worries :-) - David Gerard (talk) 14:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah. If it was "RA you're a cunt and I'm going to track you down and kill you fucker" then I'd wholeheartedly support reverting someone else's page. But as it is, leave it to RA to see if he wants to keep it or burn it. Scarlet A.pngpostate 14:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You really are an awful wanker

Go back to wikipedia, you dryarse cunt. I hate you most of all. 86.40.99.194 (talk) 23:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)