User talk:Gooniepunk/Archive2

Hey now
Rationalwiki is like the bacon of the internet - Delicious and juicy, but oh so bad for you in the next 5-10 years. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 07:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but RW is not substitute for bacon and $3 tap beer at the Library. Gotta run. Gooniepunk (talk) 07:14, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo, can I get your input on something?
Hey there! You're a mod, and you and I seem to be on good terms, so I will ask for your opinion on something. Can you step in and try to cool Carpetsmoker's aggression here? And perhaps put a final statement as a mod either way (because if you disagree with me, fair enough), because I see no other way that this argument will resolve based on it's current standing. Cheers! Sorry to bother you. I'm getting tired of the ad hominems. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 10:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll be right there (though I'll be honest, it is my bedtime soon, so I won't be around much longer after I intervene). Gooniepunk (talk) 11:47, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I appreciate your patience with us. Can you at least take out CS's sleight towards me in the collapse title and tell him to knock it off? Cheers. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 11:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Just some fun while in the holding line to cancel my girlfriend's car insurance. :-) Childish, really, but we all have our flaws :-) Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:50, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Harassing other members sure is fun. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 11:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Come on, it's hardly harassing. I just changed the title to goat-related topics. Very missional. "A question of etiquette" is a gross misrepresentation of what this is about, but ah well. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * But I'll admit, it was a bit childish and it was out of boredom. I'm sorry. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It is most absolutely not a misrepresentation of what this is about, but I suppose you just want to turn the title into "Kitsunelaine is a bitch and I hate her also buddyroids lol" -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 11:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Also that may be the single most dishonest apology I've ever seen. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 11:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Shrug. Okay, fine. I take my apology back. Whatever you want :-) Maybe I was wrong and you're not looking to pick a fight, but just have a persecution complex and all that. You probably won't believe this, but I had drafted (in my head) a decent reflection on our discussion on Ryulong's coop and some of the miscommunication we were having there. I wanted to post that on your page and "kiss and make up", so to speak, but you didn't give me the chance. Shame. Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah yes. The "I was TOTALLY GOING TO APOLOGIZE HONESTLY YOU JUST DIDN'T GIVE ME A CHANCE AND BRUSHED OFF MY DISHONEST APOLOGY" talk. No, you had every opportunity to make that your go-to choice. You didn't, and now here we are. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no wish to fight you, really. Or anyone else, for that matter. If I had to choose, I would have gladly avoided this, and I should have stopped replying after 2 or 3 comments at the most. So here's my apology: I'm sorry it got this far, and I'm especially sorry about the silly thing with the collapse title. I really do mean it, but for some reason I've rubbed you the wrong way in such a way that most everything I do or say seem to be "bad" or disingenuous in your eyes. At least, that's how it appears to me, and has since pretty much all contact we've had. Again, this is how it appears to me, so perhaps I've misjudged your intent or comments. I don't want to drag old stuff into this. So please, lets both cool down, look back on this in a few days, and both try to truly honestly look what we could have done better, and learn from our mistakes. With love and goat. The smoker of carpets Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright. As I am a proponent of good faith, I will accept this apology (as it doesn't seem too steeped in cynicism), and hope that the two of us can work to a more productive future. I think what you need is distance from the Ryu drama that has upset you so greatly, and I encourage you to look at me as my own person, for that is what I am. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * (ec)FYI, You don't "need" to do anything on my account, as this conflict is over as far as I'm concerned. I'll walk away and leave it alone, everyone can see how ridiculous this is for themselves if they so desire. What Kitsunelaine does or doesn't want you to do is up to her, of course. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:49, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * If you ask me my opinion, that "water" joke was cute, but not something I would want in a cover story article. It's certainly fun-space quality snark, but not worth leaving in a gold-level, cream-of-the-crop article. Keep in mind, gold articles are something that we want to be unique to RationalWiki; something you can't find somewhere else. That joke, though worthy of a rimshot, and its placement are not worthy of the start of a front page article. Having said that (and only from the standpoint of Goonie the editor), it seems to me that the rest of the editors on that talkpage agree with me. As far as the shitfest you two got into on that talkpage, it's my best advice to both of you to walk away. Nobody wants or likes arbitrary moderation, especially when both sides were engaged in a war of words and an edit war (that means I have to burn both sides). So what do you say? We can continue to be EditWarWiki and HCMWiki, or we can just agree that shitfests get us nowhere and act like adults and just walk away. It's up to you two. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Shitfests get us nowhere, which is why I tried to engage with Carpetsmoker in a civil dialogue. The response I got was appalling. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay; closing statement: there was no edit war on the main page. This entire affair is a manufactroversy. One revert is not an edit war and did not need an unhelpful and disingenuous "intervention"; reverting one edit happens multiple times daily and it's nothing special. We just had to put up with ten months of this shit from another user and everyone is burnt out from that. I'll be damned if I let that happen again; so yeah, my tolerance level for "putting up with shit" is a bit lower than it was two weeks ago.
 * But yeah, I probably should have stuck to my first reply and not replied after that. Sorry for wasting your time, Goonie. Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * You did more than one revert, and that would have happened with or without me. Also you used pretty incendiary language in the revert I undid. Which is the type of stuff you criticized Ryu for. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I still miss my ex-fiance, but my aim is improving. Gooniepunk (talk) 12:24, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Why was six afraid of seven? Because seven "ate" nine. Gooniepunk (talk) 12:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I never wanted to believe that my Dad was stealing from his job as a road worker. But when I got home, all the signs were there. Gooniepunk (talk) 12:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My co-worker comes up to me and asks, "Why do you always have to be a smartass?" I say to my co-worker, "Because it's better to be a smartass like me than a dumbass like you!" Gooniepunk (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is there no Windows 9? Because 7 8 10. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:30, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Running fortune? ;-) Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My grandpa once told me, "Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things." Gooniepunk (talk) 12:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Why did the chicken cross the road? So I would be ontologically justified in talking about it crossing the road. Yeah, it's a pretty nice chicken. ;) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 17:56, 9 December 42015 AQD (UTC)

Also hey, can I ask for Sysop?
I don't know if I've done enough to warrant asking this, but if I abuse it (I'll do my best not to), you can just remove it from me anyway (conversing with joke blocks is too useful a feature to not have in my arsenal!) - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In the olden days of RationalWiki, it was generally held that those asking for sysop did not deserve it.
 * However, those days have passed. I'll make you one in a jiffy. Gooniepunk (talk) 12:30, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah! Yeah, I totally understand that, and I wouldn't have minded had that been your reason to not give me any. Thanks, Gooniepunk! - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 12:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Article Concern
I have raised some concerns about the article Timeline of Gamergate on its talk page. The article makes various factually inaccurate allegations about me. Can you have a look at the talk page section I have created please? Vordrak (talk) 11:27, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * None of them are inaccurate. You tried the same whiteashing at wikipedia and got banned after you threatened to dox other editors. Typhoon (talk) 12:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, what's this
Permabanning a Gator with no prior history on this site? You're not turning into Ryu, are you? ;) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 22:15, 10 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Fuck you. Read the Coop case I started, where they were e-mailing legal threats while concern trolling here. Unlike your great hero Ryulong, I consulted the community because I knew it was a violation of Community Standards and had they not liked what I did, I would have, albeit begrudgingly, undone it. But guess what? Everybody agreed I did the right thing. So with that, take your smarmy attitude and shove it! Gooniepunk (talk) 23:38, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sheesh man, it's just a friendly joke. I already commented on the coop and didn't criticize your actions. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 23:42, 10 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry. I took that in exactly the wrong way then, and I apologize. All this studying and working and lack of sleep is starting to get to me. Sorry. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

You're mentioned by username
Just a heads up. Risk of your photos here ending up in paedo accusatory contexts: medium to high. What an asshole this guy is, no? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 02:51, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In case it is not clear, I think the good Reverend is referring to | this. --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 03:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Meh, good luck to them on that. I do a very good job not using the same persona everywhere on the internet that they likely won't find much. Even if the do, I no longer hold a security clearance job, so I don't need to bite my nails about my employer looking for information. Furthermore, I may even be the ArbCom member they are mad at. Or not. We'll see what happens and, when it does, what actions I take. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:29, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Though, come to think of it, I do have a Twitter feed I think I'll need to consider locking down. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:33, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * @WoganPier That's true, my child. Thank you.
 * @Goonie Yep. Also, the mere fact that you would have to take a simple step like this to avert this internet asshole from trying to mess with you and black mail you for no good reason whatsoever is grounds for him to be infinitely banned on this site, if you ask me. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I've dealt with Vardrak before on another site, and the guy is, im my observation, the definition of a professional internet asshole. Honestly, not that it'll happen, but the pro-Gamergate circles on places like Reddit would be much easier to sympathize with if they didn't embrace him as one of their own and instead disowned him. Oh well. Gooniepunk (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

On a lighter note
This is relevant to your interests. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 23:01, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Heck yeah, more cowbell! Gooniepunk (talk) 01:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

use your tech magic
FA is still lurking around (The assumption its him stems from the timing of his block and the starting of it) inserting "Paravant scrounges of state welfare. The taxes we all work hard to pay go to help Paravant sit on his fat ass and edit this shit-hole wiki" and it's just annoying to have to revert the same spam over and over. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 17:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll get on it when I find a few extra minutes of spare time. Any links you can provide to the reverts are greatly appreciated, as they'll help me figure out specific variables to add. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 1 2 and the above are essentially it for actual content to watch for, unless they change it. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 01:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The tingling of my troll-sense tells me that this may be the same clown who used to put pictures of LBJ on Cogswell's talk page. Various IP's coming Dorset, Somerset, and sometimes Cheshire, UK. 81.156.255.17 86.132.180.231 and 109.155.251.89 are a few of them. Alec Sanderson (talk) 01:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In any case, I'm working on some filtering right now. I already took care of one part of it. I'm going to go after the hard part next. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:56, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Attn
If you've time to fix: http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Edit_filter&curid=162553&diff=1590200&oldid=1488979 04:48, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrolling
What it do? I checked the handy newbie guide I was given but couldn't find mention of it. Seriously (talk) 05:05, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * To my knowledge, it ends your need to do CAPTCHAs and, on the sysop end, it means your edits no longer have red exclamation point blips next to them when you look at the fossil record of a page. Basically, it means that you are considered "mostly harmless" and are well on your way to full sysop status. Gooniepunk (talk) 05:10, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks. It sounded like something bad, lol. Seriously (talk) 05:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah,I'm not fond of that term either, but it's MediaWiki's term, not mine, and changing it to something else would confuse the shit out of people who are familiar with it. Gooniepunk (talk) 05:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * It means that your edits are automatically approved instead of being manually patrolled by actual users. But yeah, it's easy to interpret the term the wrong way without that context. ;) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 02:49, 18 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Indeed. The good news is that I updated the guide for new users to tell them what the fuck it means. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

BTW this is why I made rit, which links to RationalWiki:Autopatrolled. 02:58, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I didn't know such things existed. Thanks for pointing them out to me. Gooniepunk (talk) 04:21, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Important! Write a killswitch for yourself to stay out of gamer stupid shitfest
Should be easy enough to follow Blue's code and write a filter to prevent yourself from further inadvertent involvement in Gamergate bullshit stupid nonsense. Eeeeew. Gooniepunk (talk) 09:59, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Problem user issue
Goonie, I hope you are somewhat around, what with school and the holidays approaching but I must ask for your intervention to continue a binning, with your mod hat on. As you likely know, Avenger has been in the bin, on and off, for some weeks now; he's currently still there. He's been put there by Paravant, got out and immediately started shit again, and then David put him back in. Then I think was let out again, and put back in (not by me). That's just recently.

He's been binned, cooped, blocked -- once for two weeks -- over the course of nearly his whole tenure here, and things have been relatively quiet when he's brought under control. As with Ryu, he has a long history causing drama and disruption here and there is no reason at all to think he can change -- much to think he cannot.

User SorteSlyngel came to me last week at my talk page, attempting to negotiate my agreement that she he could unbin Avenger if he made certain promises. ( She He seemed to think my agreement carries sway.) At first I refused, but she he and I have had a truce and been friendly, so only because she he asked, I said I'd consider giving my agreement under certain conditions. Hipocrite had tried this weeks ago, to negotiate promises of good behavior from Avenger, promises Avenger would not give. He still will not, not for any necessary length of time. (Promises to not edit any pages about, or containing sections pertaining to, the Israel-Palestine issue, including Muslims.) There's no reason at all to trust him, but if this is to be done we should have some security in a binding promise of at least six months of staying away from those topics. (He's wholly unreasonable on other matters as well, but the I-P topic is his biggest trigger for disruptive behavior.)

In my strong view, Avenger should be banned or remain binned, just as Ryu has been binned for a very long time. This wiki has all kinds of GG drama at the moment, with some sort of invasion of cretins here and at their own sites threatening various of us, including me. This GG thning is a dynamic situation that is going to continue to take energy and time to deal with.

I want to edit articles, which is why I won't run for mod even tho someone nominated me. There's so much writing and copy-editing I very much want to do, on diverse topics. And I'v'e been doing so, and want to continue without constantly having to mess with Avenger's continual refusal to accept that the majority here does not accept his I-P views. He undoes edits that have long been settled in those articles, or just because. He just removed 2800 characters of text in a well-established I-P article, saying in the edit summary the whole thing had to be rewritten when I left in the future. That's recent, and Paravant tossed him right back in the bin, for the umpteenth time.

Sorte has told Avenger she he will let him out tomorrow. I have said I will put him right back, that she he has not secured anything like the conditions that my (very reluctant) agreement was contingent upon. Please, Goonie, for the good of the wiki, do not let him out of the bin.

Thanks.---Mona- (talk) 22:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Works for me, I have no intentions of letting Avenger out. I think I may codify it with my moderator hat. Gooniepunk (talk) 22:52, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Goonie.---Mona- (talk) 23:48, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Anti-Gamergate slate
How would that work? Do you want a fully separate wiki, or something like RussionalWiki? 01:23, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not entirely sure yet. I'm currently working on the draft of the proposal that I plan to submit to the RMF Board. This is something I'm actually very serious about. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear it. Now that we have vicious asshats reading every word said here, following us as their very own reality TV, and planning who to dox, whose wife to harass, whose neighbors to call, stopping into the coop to issue "concern" that is really a threat, sending legal threats, with all of that -- something must be done.---Mona- (talk) 01:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree. My hope is that, if we can get enough users to be a part of that category, I can submit it as evidence to the RMF that it is something the users here agree with. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Shadowban-Glitch
Hello! Wanted to notify you as well, so not only FCP has to take care of this (who helped wonderfully). The same shadowban-glitch is back. My account is User:Aneris. Since you or someone has edited in my mail address by hand the last time to fix it (which worked), it can now be ruled out entirely that my mail wasn't stored, for it evidently was. I'm not sure what can be done about it when it keeps recurring for some rather strange reason. If the Wiki wants to get rid of users who aren't totally in line with a certain postmodernist "SJ" ideology (or to be precise, who are against it) it would be better, as argued before, to simply make that public and put out the request that things should march along this line. That would be fine by me. I also don't dream to bother the Conservapedia. Thanks for your time. Aneris23 (talk) 03:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * We've been in e-mail discussions about it. Gerard says it's some weird glitch that he's not sure how to fix at this moment, and is going to wait until the MediaWiki upgrade at the end of the month to get it fixed (it seems related to the outdated MediaWiki version we're using). Sorry about the inconvenience in the mean time, but it will get worked out eventually. Meanwhile, since you still seem able to edit and create accounts, while this is a total bastard of a situation to deal with, I'm going to say sit tight until after the upgrade when your glitch (and many of the other current technical glitches at RationalWiki) should be addressed. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll use this then for the time being. Thanks a lot! Aneris23 (talk) 03:52, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not a problem and, honestly, even if your original account is fucked beyond repair, you can just keep using the account you're currently using anyways and we'll still give you credit for what your old account did. Gooniepunk (talk) 04:00, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Alliumnsk
Don't we make a point of not blocking people for bringing up things on talk pages, even if they're dumb? --Ymir (talk) 09:55, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, a 10 year block seems rather harsh... Carpetsmoker (talk) 10:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's just another goddamn Mikemikev sock account. Nobody has ever been pissed about my blocking of NeoNazis before, but I don't really give a shit if you unblock it since Mikemikev has a hundred dozen other socks anyways. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not everyone who holds racist views is a neo-Nazi. Nor is every racist editor Mikemikev. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * So unblock the racist shithead then. See if I give a shit. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:52, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Why so hostile? Relax man. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't intend to be. It's just that I am very sleep deprived at the moment. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:55, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's okay :-) Hope you get a nice sleep soon! Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, good to see that, even when dead tired, my gut instinct was correct. Mikemikev socks are as unoriginal as they come. Gooniepunk (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not a socksuppet. https://www.facebook.com/dmitry.anisimov.39/posts/10207690222670109 37.140.189.222 (talk) 16:34, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * So if I understand you correctly someone else registered here in your name? Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Correct. User:Alliumnsks is an impersonator and I'm the owner of Alliumnsk account (and used single IP leased by me (FOR YEARS!) to post as Alliumnsk so nobody else uses my "own" IP). 95.108.225.225 (talk) 19:12, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Right. In that case, a moderator can rename the current user so that you can make your own user account. I am not a moderator, but Gooniepunk is, so I guess we'll have to wait for him (or another moderator) to see this. ;-) Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:43, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Now I'm not sure you understand me. User:Alliumnsks is an impersonator but User:Alliumnsk is not. Gooniepunk banned the latter under delusion that he is a socksuppet. BTW what was the 'personal data' specified in the ban of the former? 37.140.189.215 (talk) 20:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's been rectified; I've unblocked the "Alliumnsk" account. So far as the personal data that the Alliumnsks account leaked, I wish not to divulge it, as it is somebody else's privacy at stake. Gooniepunk (talk) 12:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Adding to that: It wasn't your personal data (I think this is what you're getting at?) Carpetsmoker (talk) 15:26, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * What could be intent of impersonator's actions and leaking data?Alliumnsk (talk) 09:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The impersonator's intention was to harass and intimidate another user here, and via impersonation, they hoped to confuse us into who to block (it worked quite well, unfortunately). Gooniepunk (talk) 11:25, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

The A's
Avenger is a point per se. That is still open to discussion pending the swearing-in of new moderators. I'll avail myself of that.

I have to admit that I don't know what Arisboch does besides this wiki, and I have yet to read that thread armed with Arisboch's user name there.

Still, I believe you'll listen, and possibly reject whatever I bring from that really depressing lecture. No names mentioned of course, but let's see, what turns up, shall we? Mona and I have a truce, and she's actually fun to talk to, provided some subjects are avoided. I've sworn off war, but I still think an amicus curae should be in order, if I remember that cliche correctly. I'm in no hurry. Cheers and happy new year Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Arisboch doesn't use the username "Arisboch" over there, but did link the name Arisboch with their account name over there. I don't want to link to what happened over there, because doing so would perpetuate doxxing of information of users and users' families here, and I don't want to give them that kind of power. Bottom line, though, is that the action taken against Arisboch, while not how RationalWiki typically does business, has precedent set in the blocking, for example, of User:Inquisitor Sasha and in the second TK blocking incident. All three moderators knew this when we decided to block him. The fact that the blocking moderator hid their name was directly a result of Arisboch's behavior off-site being considered a serious personal threat to us. Bottom line: the case of Arisboch is not open for discussion, as the decision to permaban them was a unanimous moderator decision.
 * The case of Avenger is still open, pending your appeal. Avenger hasn't done anything warranting this to be changed. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. So be it. I'll write in January, when I've finished some duties in my corner of the non-virtual world. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:07, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Semper Fi
I read your announcement and I just wanted to say that I'll miss you buddy. And I don't blame you for making this decision; I've really got very little information about the general goings-on, but just know that I enjoyed the much too short period of time during which we happened to both frequent the site. Rock on, man. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Farewell
You're the second moderator in a short time to leave. We haven't talked much, but you're a decent guy as far as I can see. I wish you the best of luck whatever you'll do. Happy new year. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)