User talk:K61824/Archive1

Sysop
You are a sysop now. Aren't you special? Ace McWickedRevolt 17:17, 2 April 2009 (EDT)


 * Woohoo! Thieh 17:19, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

Doesn't really fit. Mei 00:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Edit to classroom prayer
I desperately tried to copyedit what you wrote so that it said something, but I utterly failed due to lack of coherent content to start with. If you want to try again to express what you were trying to add, feel free. Can you try to avoid "writing to the reader" in second person, by the way? 23:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Update, your last version was at least understandable, thanks. 02:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I moved that thing you are working on to Fun:Reasoning for religious conservatives for you. You might want to alter the in-links you created to reflect that. Thanks! 00:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, I mean no offense, but is English your first language? I suspect not, due to certain grammatical weirdness. If it's not, I am impressed by your command of a foreign tongue. Also, it is nice form to reply once in a while to comments on your talk page. 02:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I simply have yet to develop a habit of replying in my talk page. Also, English isn't my first language. Also, my vocabulary mostly comes from math/science/engineering textbook, so it may look odd that I am not using words that may happen to be simpler to most people.
 * Thanks for the clarifications. And, yes, I asked about English because you seem to write well as far as the meaning, but your syntax and grammar are a bit "different".  Which is ok, all it needs is someone to copyedit it a bit.  19:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, most of the books I read happens to be infested with equations/formulas/graphs, so of course my grammar looks weird; they simply don't have enough words. Thieh 02:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Edit to Mary (Mother of Jesus)‎‎
Sorry Knnnn, I had to remove part of your comment on the above, it just didn't make sense. 12:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

CP and Fair Use
it's best not to trust what CP says when it comes to image copyright - they're buggers for nicking stuff. It's a wonder they get away with it. Anyway, I checked that abstinence beads pic and we're fine. Totnesmartin 16:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Final Warning
Be less productive or be elsewhere. Godspeed. 16:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh? Thieh 16:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better. 16:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah... ambiguity rocks. 16:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The trouble is, you are "very productive" in edits, but almost all of them require intense corrections and copyediting. Also, you have a tendency to add "strikeout" comments and "refs" that really don't improve articles.  By all means, we enjoy your presence and your sense of humor, but if you ran at "half speed" you might be a lot easier to deal with.  Keep in mind that we have to Englishify many of your contribs.  It's a lot of work.  Try to make it easier, please?  03:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * True, the "strikeout humour" may be overplayed, but I wouldn't criticise for many small edits. It takes a while for people to get immersed into a project such as RW and figure out the best way to make better contributions. Would you rather newish users dived in and made massive articles as their first edits? 14:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My only criticism are the edits that are almost in a foreign language. There's no way to tell which are which just looking at the summaries, of course.  20:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Under construction
Please don't use an "under construction" banner on talk pages (or anywhere for that matter). If you can't complete a thought immediately, then I suggest that you write it in a notepad or similar & then copy/paste when finished. 01:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Or a sandbox or subpage. Works fairly well usually and lets people see what the plan is before it's finished. 14:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Braille...
...on a computer screen. That's brilliang! 02:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Real blind people don't need special unicode chars (I actually took the effort to make a template for it. That's real idiocy) to display braille (they'll have devices that converts chars to braille).  Hence, it's only for people who isn't blind.  Thieh 02:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Testing New Sig
Testing.... 04:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Talk link doesn't seem to work while it works in the template... strange.  04:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Links don't work to pages they are on. It will work everywhere else.  03:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh. Thanks for the heads up.   04:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem.  Example: User_talk:K61824  03:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, are you using some weird unicode on some versions? Also also, put a "dummy parameter" at the end - see mine - or all the versions will be the same on any one page.  03:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am trying to fix the line break introduced by the braille line too, and the braille is in unicode.  04:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I give that up for now. Maybe try again later.   04:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Getting tired of fixing your writing...
Dude, your article on David what's-his-name is fucking atrocious. Can you step it up, or get someone to proofread for you instead of leaving it to the mob? Amin7b5 00:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Working on it. Sorry for the inconvenience.  00:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Please don't use unnecessary capitals in headers (or article titles) 05:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...
...For fixing the Telegraph talk link on my Andy Schlafly essay. 12:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You are welcome.  16:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I rolled back the DeanS link you put on WIGO CP, Neveruse513 got rid of the link, as it wasn't all that necessary. 18:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Sid edits
Is there a good reason why you are editing Sid's user page? That's his personal space... 21:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It says list is work in progress; thought I would put a thing or 2 in. Please revert if deemed inappropriate.   21:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But it's on his user page, so it's his WIP. Idea - why don't you take the items you added and put them on his talk page, and then roll your edit to his user page back?  If he likes them I'm sure he'll use them.  01:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Duh
Thanks for fixing my (non)redirects. I'll learn how to do this wiki voodoo someday. Silver Sloth 15:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

TV linux computer
You fixed it!? Awesome. 06:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed it only till the point of watching it. Recording is still out of reach (can't get mythtv to work; using TVtime to watch it FTM). So for the moment I got a windows box to record TV and a linux box to watch it.  14:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh...is this something I need? &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Any luck on mythtv? I'm getting (the parts for) my new computer delivered monday. I hope to start tuning in by wednesday...maybe?? &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, I only get as far as using TVtime to watch tv. For some reason the audio isn't going through for mythTV.  If you aren't using ATI TV Wonder, it may work better.   02:14, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I went with the pcHDTV 5500 because it's made for linux and is supposed to work for mythtv. The TV Wonder 650 kinda did seem like a better deal, though. You get audio through TVtime but not mythtv? That's disconcerting... I'm sure I'll end up messing with both programs. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 13:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, I use TV Wonder Pro (the one with a patch audio cable). TV Wonder 650 (I have one in my windows box) doesn't work with Linux. (perhaps that's why they're cheaper?)  16:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, so I'm trying this now...yeesh... &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 22:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, tvtime worked out of the box. mythtv-setup can find all the same channels, but the frontend does nothing when I select "Watch TV"...pretty frustrating. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 04:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * er...working now. I don't even really know what I did. Some variation of what I've been doing for the last 2 hours, I guess. Holler at me tomorrow and we'll compare notes. &mdash; Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 05:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Atheists
Thanks for adding the a/theist examples and I should have remembered it myself. It's one of my pet peeves on RW that some people can't spell atheist. Which if us is athier and who is the athiest? 14:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You are welcome; although there might be a better way to put it in the sentence though.  16:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Redirects
Hi. Do you think you could explain what you are doing with those redirects? Cheers.--BobNot Jim 15:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I am attempting to do a randomly generating version of Fun:Creationist Argument Bingo by DPL (therefore a redirect for each entry), since DPL doesn't seem to have overlapping entries. Maybe you can help me if you can think of a way to format it to a 5x5 table with "Free Space" in the middle.   15:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that you're looking for someone a lot more technically able than I. I'm not at all convinced that you're going about it the right way with those redirects from your personal namespace but, as I said, it's not something I know much about.--BobNot Jim 15:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Me neiher, but I am not yet technically capable to write my own extension for it. (I'll redo/remove the redirects once this is validated to work)  15:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't understand exactly what you're trying to do, but I think I know a way to make the free space thing. You can write a conditional statement in dpl based on the sequence number, see and Template:Today's birthdays --  Nx  / talk 15:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I think I'm starting to understand. However, catting is not necessary. See linksfrom -- Nx  / talk 16:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So like a subpage listing the links?  16:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, though you can only list the articles by their true names then (although if you create the redirects, those names are used, so you're basically back where you started, except instead of the category, you have a page listing the articles.) -- Nx  / talk 17:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Better yet, I think I can use include to eliminate the use of redirects (and instead have a bunch of pages with one section with one link), and I'll work on that once I can get the randomizing order working.  05:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Pages that are Ridiculously difficult to navigate to/Vandal Bin
If you just hit "block" next to the contributor's name, there's a link to the vandal bin on the block page. I've got a bookmark for all the RW pages I might need, so it's three clicks away at most. 01:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you.  03:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, go to contributions, and hit the vandal bin button in the subheader (below the page title), it fills out the username as well. Two clicks from recent changes (mediawiki limitations prevent me from putting it on recent changes and filling out the name when you access it from the block page.) E.g. Special:Contributions/Nx -- Nx  / talk 07:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Nx. 12:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

User:K61824/Conservative logic
Are you going to do something with that? We already have a Conservative logic article -- Nx  / talk 11:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll get rid of it then. That was one of the drafts.   12:12, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of that. Thanks. -- Nx  / talk 12:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me?
What were you talking about? When did I generalize conservatives, and what does this have to do with point 3 of "Andy is a Muslim," which I've never contributed to? Junggai (talk) 07:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * When you say you are not going to say a certain phrase, you have to say that phrase in order to identify what you are not going to say. Example:  By saying "I will not say 'I am an idiot'" I just said the phrase "I am an idiot" (required to identify what I am not going to say) because the phrase "I am an idiot" is within the sentence, albeit in a different context.  Point 3 in "Andy is a Muslim" he argues that only muslim will use that phrase "my muslim faith" in any context (including the way of bringing it up in the previous sentence).  Hopefully that'll clear it up.   14:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh, your point is now understood. But if I may return the nitpicking, my comment meant that unlike TK, we're not directing our juvenile personal attacks at entire groups of people, only one at a time (namely, TK). Saying "you're a douche" can be totally justified when the person has earned it, but "all liberals are douches" is a ridiculous statement. This all, by the way, was in reaction to TK calling us hypocrites for attacking him. Junggai (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * TK takes it one step farther. If someone says/does something he doesn't like, then they must be something else he doesn't like, and therefore attacks them based on this next step. "You talk a lot, therefore you must be a liberal, and therefore you must be a liar!" And so forth. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * @Junggai: No, I have no problem with the content of what you said, I just have the problem with the way you said it (Namely, "I will never said '(phrase)'" is a really bad way to say something because you have to say (phrase) to complete the sentence).   20:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not to be rude, but that was just your misunderstanding. I didn't contradict myself. Simply put, I said, "We would never say 'all conservatives are liars,' but we would say 'TK is a liar.'" Junggai (talk) 21:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's probably for Irrational Atheist, right? I understand perfectly that Junggai don't want to generalise a description to a group of people, and that TK is suitable of some particular descriptions.  I just simply points out "I will never said '(phrase)'" is a really bad way to say something because you have to say (phrase) to complete the sentence.   21:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it was for you, but it's seriously no big deal. Not worth arguing over. Junggai (talk) 21:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

"Blocked by TK (Who isn't?)"
I chuckled gently to myself. Merry Esther! 10:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

"Fancy Welsh lard" K7374865 for the win! 02:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, yes, go ahead and move sandbox4 to the main space. I'm "watching" it so I'll see when you do it and pop in for some light copyediting. 02:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Iz bak?
Haven't seen you in a while. Were you away for some reason? -- 00:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have been around, just not very active due to the lack of creativity for the duration.  02:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Closing tags
Thanks, I didn't even notice I screwed that up after hitting "save"! 00:15, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You are most welcomed.  02:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my link in the updated WIGO
Dear K61824,

Many thanks for changing my link from http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Conservapedia:Article_matrix to Conservapedia:Article_matrix. All help with wiki-formatting is greatly appreciated. I do have a quick question, though; is there a particular reason why the template and internal address is preferred over the former external link? At a guess, your version would stops links on RW from breaking if major changes to the site's addressing system were made but that's only a hunch, maybe it is just a matter of consistency.

Thanks again, --NotANumber (talk) 03:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I did that just as a habit; It's not like we need screencaps for our own site. (Internal links aren't capped; only External links are).   03:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, that makes sense; thanks for the explanation (and sorry for the delayed reply - I am travelling at the moment). --NotANumber (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, User:Capturebot2 is your friend for all your screencapping-for-article needs.  05:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Random quote from CP
Where'd you find that? SoCal 212I can't find my talk page 05:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I just random to output either,  or  .  This was I think in Template:Cpquote.  As of where to find those words, you may want to ask in Talk:WIGO CP.   15:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed, wherever does that quote addressed to ProblemChimp come from? I'd like to put it, properly referenced, on my user page. Is it really true that I've only had a RW account for 9 days, have never posted on CP so far as I know (though I suppose it's possible I did so accidentally), and have already had the benefit of a personalised post by Blue-arsed Fly? I feel honoured. I'd like to thank my agent, my family, and all the friends and other people whose necks I've trodden on to be here today.
 * BTW do you suspect that your and my recent improvements to Premarital sex may not have been what the preceding editor had in mind? ProblemChimp (talk) 21:08, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I had in mind the truth that any sex that isn't for the purpose of procreation in the context of marriage is a complete and utter abomination. --Elvis is King (talk) 21:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought that that was what was in you're pleased to call your mind. After my mother died, my father remarried. My stepmother (who has since passed away) was then past the age of childbearing. Thank you for taking the trouble to desecrate her memory, not everyone would have had the courtesy to do so :-) ProblemChimp (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not mean to attack any specific individuals, and my condolences for your loss, but it is quite clear in the Bible what moral standards are. --Elvis is King (talk) 23:27, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You just did. Now please explain why the conjugal relations which my father and stepmother had were - in your words - a complete and utter abomination. ProblemChimp (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do." (1 Corinthians 7:8) among other verses I can produce upon request. The institution of marriage logically was to allow persons to bear fruit. This is as simple as it gets. After the fall of man, it was all corrupted and what once was a holy act of God became severely twisted into a Satanic hedonistic means of pleasure. I am not condemning any persons, but the act itself. "Love the sinner, hate the sin." --Elvis is King (talk) 23:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You didn't answer my point. You described my father and stepmother's conjugal relations as "a complete and utter abomination". ProblemChimp (talk) 23:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If the relations do not bear fruit, they are in the name of vain pleasure. That is a very simple concept, yes? --Elvis is King (talk) 01:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It is indeed. But you described my father and stepmother's loving conjugal relations as "a complete and utter abomination". I'm waiting for an explanation. Your move. ProblemChimp (talk) 01:34, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That vain pleasure by its very nature . That act was intended with the sole purpose of fruitbearing.--Elvis is King (talk) 01:37, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah OK, then. Could you please provide, as requested, Scriptural authority that sexual relations between a newly-married loving couple over sixty years old are (your words) "a complete and utter abomination"?
 * @@K61824, I'm sorry to have hijacked your talk page like this (that's a lie, some opportunities are too tempting to resist). I hope you're enjoying this fruitful discourse :-) ProblemChimp (talk) 02:11, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It is simply there. In the Bible, it is solely a necessary evil that by through the means of said relations, that new persons are brought into being. After the Fall, Satan corrupted those means into the depravity of pleasure. It is a very simple concept, and any glance through the Scriptures will validate this. --Elvis is King (talk) 02:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Please keep to the subject. You said "I had in mind the truth that any sex that isn't for the purpose of procreation in the context of marriage is a complete and utter abomination". Scriptural authority for that statement, if you please, with particular application to my father and stepmother's situation, because you insult them both. Chapter and Verse. I'm waiting. ProblemChimp (talk) 03:24, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There may not be a particular verse about a particular situation, but the Bible makes it clear that these means are intended SOLELY for the purpose of continuing the species. This is the SOLE, the ONLY purpose. The Bible makes this extremely clear, and anyone with an open mind can see this. Just because there is not a SPECIFIC verse for a SPECIFIC situation, does not make it okay. The Bible does not reference pornography, so does that make it moral? The Bible does not mention marijuana, so does that make it moral? Of course not. The Bible has references against sexual immorality and intoxication. --Elvis is King (talk) 04:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I asked you to justify your assertion, "I had in mind the truth that any sex that isn't for the purpose of procreation in the context of marriage is a complete and utter abomination", in the context of my father and stepmother, who was past the age of childbearing when they married. You have not done so. Your introduction of pornography and marijuana into this discussion is irrelevant, and insulting to people I respect and admire. ProblemChimp (talk) 04:35, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

What exactly did you want? I gave you the basis in Scripture that it is prohibited because the SOLE purpose of relations is childbirth. God intended it for that purpose and that purpose only, and the Bible makes it perfectly clear. If you stopped showing behaviors of conceited liberals, and opened your mind to it, you would realize. At least you're not as bad as the libertarian T Swizzle loving wacko. --Elvis is King (talk) 06:12, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Yale Review Article.
Enable your email so I can get it to you. P-Foster Talk " "Santorum is the cream rising to the top." " 02:34, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I got mine through my library so I actually don't. I thought people would require library access to get it so I asked who has to read it.  Thanks though.   13:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Heh
Funny. Acei9 01:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Just the obligatory Appalachian trail joke. User:K61824User_talk:K61824 01:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)