User:Bicycle Wheel/RationalWikiWiki Treehouse archive 10

RW is slow thread #5720
It is. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 01:49, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And again! TyComplain 01:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And... it is down. TyComplain 01:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe the server just hates you?  03:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a love-hate relationship. TyComplain 03:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That's just because you stopped returning its calls.  03:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I go camping at the worst times. TyComplain 03:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, slow again. TyComplain 18:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Trent forgot to warm the server up before turning it on this morning.  20:29, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not in his bedroom anymore, though! :P Armondikov 13:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh! TyComplain 01:42, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * -_- TyComplain 14:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Bogged down again. I blame the supermoon. 19:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Stalkboxen
Is there any point having active/inactive stalkboxes? Seems like every week someone blows the dust of their RW account and does stuff. Seeing ye olde Kip the Dip strutting his funky stuff made me realise nobody really leaves for good until they LANCB in the real world. Rennie McGreet 14:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Dont we already have a "last edit" space anyways? --Mikal 14:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * @Rennie I'm not holding my breath for Akjeldsen or HoG to show up, but see your point. @Mikal that is what Rennie is talking about. TyComplain 16:14, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's worth having a way to point out that present tense should be metally corrected to past. And hit 'random page' a few times and see how many people there are you've actually seen lately. Tobul Oltarolin 22:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I like "metally corrected". Should we start adding umlauts to people's names? Rennie McGreet 15:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hüman
 * Armöndikov
 * Äce McWïcked
 * Dümpling
 * Rennie McGreet 15:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Damn vandal's back
Ty once mentioned something about rangeblocks. Is that a crat feature, or can us lowly coppers do the same? Tobul Oltarolin 08:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * To my knowledge, anyone can do it, though we tend to vote on them. TyComplain 15:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to work. TyComplain 15:16, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Give me temporary admin rights please
Tmtoulouse 14:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * While you're at it, can you fix it so we can rename users here? We tried a month ago, and the extension is borked. Punky McPunkersen 14:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Main Page revamp
I've hammered out one possible revamp of the main page, and I would like those interested to take a look and give some feedback, please.

Because we're such a small wiki, we don't really need any community portals on the front page, like Wikipedia or RationalWiki have, nor do we need seven paragraphs explaining why we exist, as we currently have. What do people actually come here for? Our WIGO, and our articles. Thus, the proposed revamp puts the focus on both of those things.

Please let me know what you think. 05:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I like replacing the long mission statement with WIGO:RW, but not removing the policy box at the bottom of the page. 06:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I re-added the policy box, though it says something completely different now. Let me know if you liked the old one better, or what you think the new one should include.   08:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Um, if no one says anything, I'm just going to change the main page a few days from now -__-  16:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Alrighty. TyComplain 17:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. 04:33, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

People come here for the WIGO? Wow, people are strange.  W easelicious B ite M e 07:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * TyComplain 12:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

My only remaining complaint is that the background to the wigos makes them trace a white part around the text with the rest as grey. Tobul Oltarolin 01:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you post a screenshot? Because I can't see what you're talking about (though I am using a mobile browser...)   08:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I see it now. I can actually make it out better on my phone. (I can't see subtle pastels on my desktop because I crank the gamma up on my crappy monitor.) I'll fuss with the wikicode tomorrow to see if I can get it to go away.   08:26, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * If you add the bottom thing from here to common.css that will get rid of it. Not sure what else you can do. Tobul Oltarolin 22:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Found the cause. It's fixed.   00:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good now, then. Tobul Oltarolin 05:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The revamp is done. 02:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Now it looks like a teenage girls room who desperately tried to avoid pink for fear of stereotyping… --84.158.62.122 14:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

CAPTCHA on RW is borked
The CAPTCHA on RW seems to be borked. No matter how many times I give the right answer, it just doesn't accept. 93.182.132.100 03:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You mean the 'nth letter in the logo' one? Have you tried deliberately inputting the wrong letter, i.e. 'a' when it asks for the first? Tobul Oltarolin 03:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This guy managed to get through. Tobul Oltarolin 03:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Two insights: FIRST, it doesn't work at all for LiquidThreads. SECOND, it works okay for rationalwiki.org, but not if you use another domain, like mail.evowiki.org. Why would anyone use that domain? It's indexed in Google, so people finding RW pages from Google will end up on it and not realize, or just not know any better. 166.70.207.2 06:30, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Given that the LQT thing means you can't get through to Trent directly, could you post your findings to Forum:Spam bots? Tobul Oltarolin 07:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * LQT probably needs to be dumped since we dont have anyone actively updating it anymore. As per the second that is easily taken care of with rewrite. 174.50.69.13 19:20, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * but... i like liquid thread--Mikal 21:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried to warn everyone that we would regret the adoption of Liquid Threads eventually. 23:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * but... i like liquid thread--Mikal 03:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what the fuss is about. It does slightly clog recent changes bout it's not that bad. Rennie McGreet 12:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

So what happened there?
Hmm? Tobul Oltarolin 20:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Death and Destruction. --Mikal 22:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

A new era for RWW. Tmtoulouse 22:30, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Last I checked connection problems were part of the old Era.--Mikal 22:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Learn to differentiate between "connection errors" versus other potential reasons you can't access a site. Tmtoulouse 23:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I can? --Mikal 23:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep. Pay attention to "error codes" you get when you can't access a site it can tell you a lot about what is going on. Tmtoulouse 23:59, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I was saying i can already do that; I just use Connection error as a general word for issues in using a website--Mikal 00:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Trent :D TyComplain 00:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * But what for? Tobul Oltarolin 05:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * RWW is no longer hosted with RWF resources. Tmtoulouse 05:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Freedom from the tyranny!--Mikal 06:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Except that I am now your new overlord!!! Mwahahahahahahahahaha! Punky McPunkersen 20:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * -begins the Rationalwikiwiki Peoples revolutionary party- :3--Mikal 20:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Too small, too poor, too stupid. Flep Hendersen 00:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We start small., but as the obvious corruption becomes apparent we will swell at a geometric rate! But as a precaution, we will also have the RWWPRP-VG, the Rationalwikiwiki's peoples revolutionary party - Vanguard Group--Mikal 02:01, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Holyrollers are now autopatrolled. TyComplain 23:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool. Thanks. Now all we need is some good ol' LQT. Punky McPunkerson 12:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Before going down that road, you might want to read Trent, alias 174.50.69.13's remarks above on the liquid thread extension. 04:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed. It's a well-known fact that any extension that isn't supported causes the entire server to instantly burst into flame.   05:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, so that is the reason why Trent thought we had to remove liquid threads. For myself, speaking as a long-time user of open-source software (which is often abandoned and left to the tender mercies of bit rot), we do not want to be stuck with an extension that is not in active development/maintenance. 05:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Inactivity and all that
There are several 'crats who have not been active in a while (ex. Theemperor), and several who don't really do much of anything/only show up every once in a great while (ex. FalseFlag). After reading the DeltaStar article I really have to ask, do we need so many crats? Mbwun 12:51, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * *shrug* TyComplain 13:33, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We have crats still? I thought we did away with them and instead have moderators and techs.--Brxbrx 15:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * He/she/it is talking about RationalWikiWiki you stupid fuck. EricR 15:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd do something about it myself, but if I did, WIGO RWW would say mean things about me :'-(  05:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * RWWW is still alive? TyComplain 13:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Meh, we don't need a massive de-cratting here like RW attempted a year ago. Though I would argue that we certainly don't need any more 'crats. Punky McPunkerson 14:03, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Blocking of Brxbrx
Proposed, that Brxbrx should only be blocked from RationalWikiWiki if he is deemed to be disrupting the site.

Discuss. 05:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable.TheCurtlyKnave 06:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * But what does "disrupting the site" actually mean? Tobul Oltarolin 07:05, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We should work that out here. However, following the suggestion in your edit comment, I submit that one must edit the site in order to disrupt it; and Brxbrx has spent most of the last few months on long bans or permabans, most issued with no mention of any disruptive behavior, and at least one issued at a time when Brxbrx had been inactive (i.e., blocked) for over a month. 07:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm very much tempted by the prospect of banning brx outright and never having to worry about him again, but if giving him half a week's probation to find an excuse to do so is the price we must pay for that then so be it.
 * As for disruptive behaviour, it would be wise to look at his previous "contributions" for context. This, for example, looks rather like it to me.
 * I would support making him hold to some kind of promise, and then permabanning him when/if he breaks it. Tobul Oltarolin 07:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking over Brxbrx's talk-page, I suspect that if we were to admit that post as "disruptive behavior," we would have to permaban half the Wiki on that charge. I would focus more on Brxbrx's edit warring on WIGO:RW. 08:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm focusing in him being irredeemable garbage. He's had a year to become human, yet has been nothing but trouble and is getting worse. More lies and drama whoring. Let him go back to ED so he doesn't have to worry about taking openly about "niggers" raping white women and "faggotry" anymore. Nutty Roux 12:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It is a slippery slope to block somebody for something they do off-Wiki and unrelated to the Wiki, no matter how vile and disgraceful it is. That being said, I like the idea of blocking him when he's obnoxious on this wiki. However, if this community feels otherwise, so be it. Punky McPunkerson 13:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Slippery slope as in at some point we start blocking people for less than making hateful commentary on 3 of the most despicable taboos in modern society on another site? Is it better or worse if he says he was joking? The slippery slope moment would be if we officially blocked someone just because he's an irritating shit like Maratrean. Or if we actually tried making an official determination that he was "disrupting the site." That would entail some kind of difficult subjective decision that I don't think a mob is competent to make, which is why I will continue to oppose community bans. I opposed Brxbrx and UHM's bans on RW because only the most egregious on-wiki conduct merits even considering that remedy. Officially blocking someone for being a loathsome shit and allegedly engaging in some wiki-vandalism (innappropriate edits get rolled back by their nature ...) seemed to me to be a disgusting display of raw power that would never have been appropriate before the breakdown last May. Yet I draw a huge distinction between bullying and harassing Brxbrx for his odious character, and more so for the specific act I noted. I'm just openly abusing sysop tools to express an opinion and show him that there will be absolutely no long-term consequences for me or anyone else doing the same thing because he's burned every bridge he ever had and is now universally loathed. Anyone can undo the blocks. There's nothing official about it. And I'll only put up an intermittent and half-assed fight. Nutty Roux 13:47, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Look, I get where you're going with this. I've just never liked the idea of using what people do on the internet outside of the RationalWiki-sphere of things and using it against them. It has nothing to do with Brxbrx or Encyclopedia Dramatica (the bottom feeder of bottom feeders, IMO). That being said, I can see your point, which is why I said I won't object if RWW wishes to overtly block him as persona non grata. Punky McPunkerson 14:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I disapprove of such bans and believe the better course is to teach a creature like Brxbrx humility. If he can't learn on his own thus far and is instead strident and dishonest in his resistance, we must employ other methods. Nutty Roux 14:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As much as i disagree with how nutty does it (though im as guilty of it as well); he is right. --Mikal 16:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with Goonie's idea of what properly constitutes a blockable offense, which also lines up with RationalWikiWiki block policy. Brxbrx has caused a certain amount of trouble here, with the edit-wars on WIGO:RW, for example; there is nothing overly subjective about that, and if we block him, that is what we should lay to his charge.
 * Nutty Roux, in response to your claim that "anyone can undo the blocks," let me remind you that on several occasions, when attempts were made to do just that, you started wheel-wars. 21:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll wheel war it but I get tired pretty quickly. The only part that's going to hurt is that I keep coming back. Nutty Roux 02:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * what brx practically is now
 * Who are you and what the fuck is your problem, anyways? Flep Hendersen 22:56, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiBlame
Yes, no, etc. TyComplain 13:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Why not? We can always get rid of it if we don't like it. Punky McPunkerson 14:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool, I'll do it when I get out of the madhouse later. TyComplain 14:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC) In a couple of days, bloody finals. TyComplain 23:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What for though? Tobul Oltarolin 22:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Only if it's accompanied by WikiShame. Flep Hendersen 00:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

"Recently"
Can "recent" & "recently" please be added to the abuse filter, to force editors to stop using time-sensitive language when writing about events at RW? I've just removed these words from a bunch of articles where they related to minor things that happened months or years ago, often in the earliest days of the site, but people still keep writing like this about current events. Let's not kid ourselves that new article content isn't going to be similarly neglected, so it's always going to be better to be more specific ("in early 2012" etc.) when referring to new developments. We can set up a template ( or something) for when people want to mention recent changes.  W easelicious B ite M e 22:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool, hold on a few. TyComplain 22:33, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * works. TyComplain 22:41, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * So that recent changes page that Rennie made a while ago is now unlinkable? Tobul Oltarolin 04:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I think ṝecent may need to be removed from the filter. TyComplain
 * Putting a common word like that in an abuse filter was a silly idea in the first place, but could its application at least have been restricted to mainspace edits? 04:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It is. TyComplain 04:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh. Your use of the ṝ character on this page suggested otherwise. In any event, you should disable the new filter; I suspect that it will be about as effective at its intended purpose as Prohibition. 04:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I could set it to merely warn rather than prevent. TyComplain 04:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Better. 04:24, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * (EC)That would be a good idea. Tobul Oltarolin 04:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems like a good solution.  W easelicious B ite M e 13:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've disabled the "Recently" filter. Mostly because I have a strong aversion to using the AbuseFilter system to block and deal with anything other than its intended purpose: abuse. So what if an article uses the word "recently?" That just gives someone something to do down the road. Punky McPunkerson 12:13, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Something is broken on this page
This page is titled "Special:RecentChanges/5" and all the section edit links are gone. 03:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to be fixed now - has somebody been fiddling with the server? Tobul Oltarolin 04:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Now it is happening again. 04:15, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Happens when AbuseFilter modification is in the last 5 edits. TyComplain 04:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Weird bug... Tobul Oltarolin 04:24, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

A few questions
Hi. This is Marcus. I've been away for a while, but was on a nostalgia buzz there. Some of my antics were utterly hilarious and I'm still amazed you pack of CENSORED didn't properly appreciate me and decided to ban me.

Can you please clarify a few things?


 * How did my wiki about rationalwiki get taken over by a few CENSORED and CENSORED with too much time on their hands? I only figured out a couple of weeks ago that the so called 'burgerwiki' is actually the same URL as my wiki!
 * How is rationalwiki working in a post mobocratic age? Have the CENSORED completely won? Is the sense of humour as terrible and cringe inspiring as I imagine it to be?
 * How many decent, long standing and witty contributors have the irritatingly earnest, CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED drove off with their incessant leglislating and general CENSORED?

Would appreciate a concise summary of events in the last six months or so.

EDIT: What a pack of CENSORED! I can't use any of my favourite words such as cUUnt or wAAnkery or vIIrgin or aSSpie because you pack of losers can't handle a few swear words! Honestly, you're all even more pathetic than I remember. 83.71.31.24 20:32, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You'll be happy to know that RW is still very much a mobocracy.--Brxbrx 20:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hahahahaahahahaaahaeheheheheeeehehaaeooahahaooohohoho "Marcus," making it seem like we have a swear filter. Liveware Problem 21:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Aspie virgin shit fuck piss damn crap cunt twat ass. Nope, looks like we don't. Copperhead 21:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Try logging out and re-posting that. 21:53, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * MC is not censored. He's an underprivileged guest.   21:58, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Something is malfunctioning, by the looks. Tobul Oltarolin 22:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * And now we have a demonstration that we do in fact have a swear filter, applied to all users below the rank of holyroller. 22:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I invoke Hanlon's Razor. Tobul Oltarolin 22:10, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You are correct. Fixing this stupid thing. TyComplain 22:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Might I suggest that you remove the words specifically targeting Marcus from the blacklist? As Marcus has demonstrated here, it does not compel him to dismount from his usual hobby-horse. 22:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Correct, but it does make him more bearable. It's like disemvoweling.   22:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


 * So, has anyone got anything to say other than this obscure bureaucratic farce? (A cruel satire of how degredated the rationalwikian community has become) I had seriously forgotten how much I loathe all of you. Let me summarise what has happened. The aspies won. They scared off all of the interesting and useful users through a combination of their patheticness and outright intimidation. They've created a grotesque virgin of wikipedia, with all of the aspie tendancies but none of the good content. 83.71.31.24 22:32, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You and Romney should have a flip-flopping contest. --84.158.46.8 23:26, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * *yawn* Tobul Oltarolin 22:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Marcus is correct. RW has been turned into a chit chat forum for aspie nerds who exult in living their pathetically boring existences out in block log messages. It's depressing. Nutty Roux 23:12, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a new thing? Tobul Oltarolin 00:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not new, but much worse than it used to be. Refugee 01:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I think your memories might be getting a little dodgy. Why, I remember when certain users would go on massive block rampages, blocking every sysop on the Wiki. 03:29, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you're being silly. Those block wars aren't remotely the same thing as incessant chitchat about tea and Dr. Who and whatever other boring shit these people talk about in block messages. Nutty Roux 05:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Tea is very important nuttyMikal 05:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No, they are not remotely the same thing; those mass-blocks used to crowd out Recent Changes from one end to the other, and make my watchlist twice as long as usual, neither of which the chatty blocks seem to do. Most of the blocks on my watchlist now are people blocking Brxbrx for some reason or another. 05:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Would you like to go back to those days, Nutty? I've still got the bot scripts. Liveware Problem 06:07, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't follow. Did you write block war scripts?Nutty Roux 14:13, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The only way Rationalwiki can ever be competitive in a harsh and intense modern internet age is by having a detractor who can rally all the dispirate elements against him. You are the last men, I am the overman. Stop being churlish and embrace me for the necessity I am. When you blocked me you killed rationalwiki.
 * I used to think it was all a conspiracy by AD and Foster the Cruel, I now realise that the aspies were pulling the strings all along. AD doesn't realise what he has actually done. For all his purported intelligence he hasn't the wit to figure out the larger ramifications. Foster the Cruel is anyones guess, but I'd imagine he doesn't have the full mental faculties to grasp the complex machinations by the aspies. Although he has many aspie tendancies himself, such as a lack of a sense of humour, he still could bring Rationalwiki into a new age of enlightenment.
 * With Nx's disappearance RW was granted a great opportunity to push out the tech aspie nerds and really begin to control its own destiny. You blew it. You completely blew it. 83.71.31.24 09:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * How cute, the wannabe Machiavellian tries to play people against each other. *pats troll on the head, goes back to work*--Burzum 12:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You have no idea how close to the power structure the people who run the MarcusCicero persona are. Wannabe Machiavellin. Balls. One need only open his eyes to see the silent majority rejecting the last vestiges of the overwrought and unworkable "process" that got foisted upon us last year. Marcus will return RW to the glory of its anarchy-syndical past no matter how long it takes. Slow and steady wins the race. Nutty Roux 14:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What the hell why didnt anyone tell me we were reviving the MC character. Am I being ousted from the group? Tmtoulouse 16:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Email Jehoova or Birdynumnum for the password to the new cabal forum. I didn't realize you weren't up to speed since the last meeting in New York. 166.147.97.195 17:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Reasons why Rationalwiki should unban me

 * I've completed the first four chapters of my satirical novel.
 * I add some invaluable comic relief.
 * I point out what everyone else is too chickenshit to say.
 * I don't care about fake internet friendships and will adopt the position that is the least tainted by cronyism.
 * I stand up to the aspies who are attempting to make the site a more boring version of wikipedia.
 * I have no stomach for the legislation fetish, which in reality is a mechanism for ineffective real life losers trying to pretend they are somehow relevant by creating a nanny state on the internet.
 * I keep rationalwiki real.
 * Every group requires a detractor to unify the remainder - I am that person. Without me Rationalwiki is a squabbly mess of personal quarrels.
 * I deeply care about the rationalwiki project, and have donated to it in the past.

In light of these above revelations, why does RW continue to ban me? The process was illegitimate and unfair - the vote itself much too narrow to justify a two fucking year ban. All in all, it was extremely messy. If anything, if there was a fair vote, along with a fair debate, and a reasonable amount of time allowed, I would leave gracefully. But I refuse to submit to the railroaded process forced down the throat of the community. 86.47.28.38 09:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If you want to provide even more comic relief, one of the aspies added an essay space to rww this morning. Go to it! Tobul Oltarolin 09:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * MC, if you're going to make more of these long tedious posts on your return, you're staying banned forever--Brxbrx 12:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree with Tobul. You should write our first essay. Punky McPunkerson 12:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I shall compose a series of essays and conclude with the publication of the prologue and first chapter of my novel. Watch this space. I have resolved upon taking a stand against RWs current degeneration, and standing up for its old values in the face of the aspie dictatorship. 86.44.236.94 09:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Your standing on an internet wiki is probably the least important concern in your life, or should be. TheCurtlyKnave 15:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I imagine Martin Luther King faced some similar taunts when he stood up for the rights of black people. Just remember you're on the wrong side of history. 86.44.236.94 15:42, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You did it. I'm offended and amused at the same time. --84.158.60.238 15:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Martin Luther King's goal was the social equality of people who were widely oppressed by not only historical precedence but strong cultural stigmas and forces enforced through a myriad of avenues. Your goal is your own freedom to wave your dick around a website that has no impact on your quality of life, nor does your trivial presence have impact on the quality of anybody else's lives. We should all be so lucky as to have such a sense of unwarranted self-worth as yours. TheCurtlyKnave 15:57, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You lack all empathy. I was banned by a closeted oligarchy who rammed a sham trial down the throats of an unwilling populace. Despite the shrill and illegitimate nature of that process, their majority was razor thin and weak. They rallied the aspies against the normals and subsequently commandeered the site. Rationalwiki is now a bastardised version of its original manifestation. All good men must make a stand when evil advances its tentacles. I wouldn't expect you to understand, as I can see you at the right hand side of racists, dictators and fascists everywhere, oblivious to the fact that one silenced voice is the destruction of the liberty that makes life worth living. Shame on you. Shame. 86.44.236.94 16:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I take it by your silence that you are suitable chastened? Liberty always defeats tyranny in the end. Remember that. 86.44.236.94 16:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, tyrrany... of a site you choose to be on, that doesn't impact your quality of life, your freedoms, your public image, or any sort of real-world aspect of your life whatsoever... TheCurtlyKnave 16:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I suppose African Americans could have chosen to emigrate to the Carribean? What a dystopian and fanatical outlook you have. You're completely divorced from reality. 86.44.236.94 16:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I prefer dystopia and fascism good sir; its more fun. --Mikal 16:54, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Look at where you are right now. You are sitting on your butt, somewhere. On a computer, a piece of expensive technology. Entirely of your own will. Possibly in your own residence, or possibly in a public place that has internet access. Complaining about a website that you choose to go to. Because it won't submit to your massive ego. Your income, your freedom of expression (save on one single site which has agreed that you're a nuisance), the way society sees you, your advantages in life, have nothing to do with this website you choose to go on. You're not a sad oppressed black person in a segregated society. You're a person sitting on a computer whining entirely of his own choice about a website that nearly unanimously sees you as a pest. Possibly because you are actually a pest. TheCurtlyKnave 17:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Like all good literary agents, I think we need to see the first chapter of this novel before offering an advance on it. Armondikov 10:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)