User talk:TransChicken

Christopher (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

FYI
Ben Harrison lost the popular vote in 1888 by .8% but won the election like Trump in 2016. But in 1892, Cleavland did oust Harrison, and also won the popular vote by 3%. --Andrew5 (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Afd
?? 10:47, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * It's spam, from a bot account. 10:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If it's spam it doesn't need to go through AfD. The user can be blocked and the page summarily deleted.
 * I could do it myself, but I defer to some other sysop/mod with better spam identifying abilities than myself.  11:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I mean the bot made this article which got deleted https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Tips_For_Outdoor_Patio_Umbrellas_Sale&action=edit&redlink=1 I afd'd it since I can't delete it myself lol. 11:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Blocked and deleted. 11:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Because of your edits to and time on the wiki,  has been added to your user rights. If you have questions, bleat ask away. 15:04, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

""""""""""""""""Communist""""""""""""""""""
AAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!! Moron. 12:40, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What's up ☭Comrade☭ ☭Grammar☭ ☭Commie☭. 13:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Because nobody has sarcastic portions of their username...-Flandres (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, because I would call myself a commie ironically just to goof about it. Considering also the place I'm posting in, there are good chances his username accurately describes him. 14:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Just because you wouldn't jokingly call yourself a communist doesn't mean nobody else would!-Flandres (talk) 14:10, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You know, rather than just assuming what my views are, you could just ask me. (Hint, I think money, while it has its issues, is mostly fine for the foreseeable future.) 14:27, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

So can you explain
Why your first 8 edits all are suspicious filler edits (first edit is signature, the rest is guffy agreements on talkpages with random statements, an insane mainspace edit that's nonsense and a vote in an AfD) before going inactive for months, coming back a suspicious few days after USH gets banned? I have no clue if you're USHs alt or someone else's but you're not really fooling anyone. Giving you the opportunity to come clean or convince me otherwise. Gonna take your autopatrolled right away for a bit too. Not trusting you one bit. -- Techpriest (talk) 18:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? Also "an insane mainspace edit that's nonsense", could you please give me a pointer because I have no clue what you're mumbling about. And also "the rest is guffy agreements on talkpages with random statements" I recall telling two editors to stop yelling at each other, you might want to double check my contributions before making egregious accusations.
 * I'm pretty sure you think this way since I caused a few commotions these past few weeks, but I am certainly not USHA. You could always try to compare my edits to his, but they're very different. I also don't purposely start fights in the saloon unlike the other person. However, I'm sure those commotions might say otherwise, all I did was express my thoughts on some issues and then a couple of people attacked me afterward. USHA is purposely disruptive and he talks like a kid.
 * About that 1 month hiatus you're speaking of, I have nothing to say other than that I have other things to deal with in real life, I occasionally visit this wiki when I have free time for myself. I should add that you wouldn't have to ask if you had a way to differentiate people by their IPs like most forums do. 19:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1 month? You were inactive between April and last of August. That's 4 whole months and then like nearly half a month. Sorry but I don't buy a convenient activity burst over 2 days before then showing up 4 months later to stir up shit in the Saloon and create your userpage with a reference to the chicken coop. You've shown a rather... peculiar understanding of a problem user in an AfD, specifically one that from what I can tell you should not have had any engagements with in the past, a consistent habit of making statements to then put on your userpage because you know they'd be weirdly received ("Donald Trump can be redeemed", come on you know that kinda stuff causes controversy pretty much everywhere that doesn't suck his dick) and so on and so forth. As for the nonsense mainspace edit, I'm obviously referring to this one in the appeal to confidence (which I just removed). The rest of your contribs are such useful things as "Interesting", "well said", "You listen to Sirius, like you'd listen to your parents, you kiddo." and "Agreed". Aka weird cheerleading that sounds more like you're trying to fill an edit count to get autoconfirmed. I don't think you're USH to be clear, but you really are being a very unconvincing alt of someone who is either here or shouldn't be here because they got the boot. I'm not sure who it might be, but honestly, I don't quite care. You're not being very convincing though. -- Techpriest (talk) 21:30, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * been here barely five minutes and already expert on EiK. dunno about usha, but im certainly stroking my chin. AMassiveGay (talk) 22:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't stir up shit, if you weren't all so stuck up you could perhaps understand my point rather than whining about nonsense like you are doing right here. The picture was unused, I looked up "Chicken" and that was the first thing to show up, that was when I couldn't upload images on my own because I wasn't autoconfirmed. I would have thanked you all for not deleting this obviously unused photograph if I knew you wouldn't react like you did here and expect the worst out of me. Yes, I knew about that user and yes I knew about EiK since I said earlier I frequently visit the website, the difference being that I decided to edit recently and I mean you can obtain plenty of information and context on those two if you bothered to review the archives. That account I cited being from EiK was related to another account that was banned for I quote "Ban Evasion: EiK" and when I noted a similar pattern of editing, that was obvious it was the same user. I shall add that without Plutocow, who named the individual full, I would have never known that his name was an acronym for Elvis is King. I am observant, but apparently that is not in the realm of possibility on RationalWiki! I stated what is true after another user said he was a "vile irredeemable asshole", I don't like this sort of mischaracterization, so I politely explained to that person that he had done a few good things in his sea of mistakes. That same user actually got called out by someone else, I think it was Knight Commander who told that person that he was wrong, but not in regard to Trump, it was another politician. In general, I'm sick of people comparing other people in those weird olympics to determine who is the worst, I heard people being compared to Adolf Hitler, so that too it sickens me. I should add, in my defense, that I only made 3 people angry, it wasn't a generalized commotion like what I could observe from Uncle scrooge and hell that one user who LANCB and then got banned by vote since she couldn't stay away from RationalWiki on her own. 10:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The thing is, you complained that only half your comments were being read and replied to, when you yourself seemed to be guilty of the same behaviour. I said "Trump was and IS a vile piece of shit in every possible way." I never said he was irredeemable, I never said he was worse than Hitler or Stalin. That would be you reading something else entirely into what I actually wrote. See here and read what I actually wrote vs what you seem to have run away with yourself over. Cardinal Chang (talk) 11:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Smallest of children, you didn't make me angry, you made me laugh at how willfully stupid you are. 12:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Since we've gotten this far, there's a certain avian theme, dislike of a certain former editor, combativeness, possible mockery with the former two, familiarity with the inner workings of wiki formatting, and plain arrogance that has been bothering me. Kntai (talk) 12:34, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I edit on Wikipedia. At least ask me for info before you spout egregious claims. 13:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * On what account, because TransChicken on Wikipedia has made ~0 contributions. Andrew5 (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh shit, they deleted the article I was contributing to. Basically, when you delete an entire article all your edits disappear with them. That sucks honestly, though I didn't know I haven't touched that account for a while. 19:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

No as you have no deleted edits as well.Andrew5 (talk) 20:27, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Wp:Wikipedia:Revision deletion 20:32, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Revdel is a different mediawiki feature. If your edits had to be oversighted like that, you've probably inserted something awful on WP. -- Techpriest (talk) 20:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If I posted something awful on there I would have been blocked, I am not and never have been. Also Confirmation bias on your part. 20:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I know of only one editor who has called Oxyaena a "fabulist": User:Helena Bonham Carter. That you? Plutocow (talk) 00:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Possibly. Sounds somewhat like HBC.Andrew5 (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Rubbish; HBC is intelligent - and over 12 years old! Scream!! (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 13:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * TransChicken is not HBC. Both are unpleasant users (who both spewed stupid shit during handling Machina frankly) but HBC is way more of an overt flaming condescending type. 14:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * HBC is far more collected than TC is. Also HBC generally speaking hasn't started pointless arguments for zero reason that didn't involve Oxy. TC being HBC would be very unlikely. -- Techpriest (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This whole line of speculation is stupid, and you should all be ashamed of yourselves for entertaining it. 17:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * IMHO, it doesn't matter if TC is HBC, as neither is blocked. Yet. ~ Andrew5 (talk) 18:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This discussion doesn't matter in general. TransChicken laid some rotten takes. TransChicken said some eyebrow raisers. TransChicken has a shitty userpage. Nothing more you can or should say. End of story. 19:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * i dunno, their user ppage strikes me as problematic, and not the made up self awarded, erm, awards AMassiveGay (talk) 21:43, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * not least attributing all four 'confrontations' to the same user, when the first isnt the same user as the other 3, and the 'confronation' didnt even happen with the supposed 'gay incel' (who isnt in anyway incel, gay or otherwise), whom they had next to no interactions with and any 'confrontations' surrounding that drama occurred elsewhere with a third person not even mentioned. AMassiveGay (talk) 22:51, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The userpage is indeed pointless shit-stirring, and it does call back to prior unpleasant users that were banned and also had userpages of similar nature, AND the image has a weird referral to "chicken coop". I already had very negative first impressions of this user regarding their little nuggets of "wisdom" concerning Machina a few weeks ago, and I think this user is going to be nothing but trouble down the line but I have nothing concrete to say other than "I don't like them". 23:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * i think the image of chicks might just be they have chicken in their user name. still, i feel the 'pointelss shit stirring' on the user page should warrant some action if it isnt removed AMassiveGay (talk) 23:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we should....discuss this elsewhere? TC probably doesn't want to be spammed with notifications, so we probably should do this like at ATIM.Andrew5 (talk) 17:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Why?
Why the pointless antagonism bait? What purpose does it serve? 20:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Honestly I don't feel like pointless drama baiting on a userpage should be allowed. Plutocow (talk) 20:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * It would actually help if people here didn't act antagonistic to TC in the first place. They probably feels wronged and so their way of coping would be by pointing out hypocrisies about those who wronged them. I can sympathize with them as I personally feel like RationalWiki is not very welcoming and that's with my experience with PanGargleGalactic who didn't treat me equal based solely on a subjective assumption. Senioritas (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Vaguely gesturing at perceived hypocrisy isn't the same as making an actual argument. Like have you actually read these? ""People can't remember 9/11", particularly in the sense that they can't remember what exactly happened that day. That made 3 people mad in anger. The site's local communist implied that I was a "Trump supporter" for stating something that had nothing to do with him." Is pretty misrepresentative of the exchange in question. I can link said exchange, but well... I'm not a communist, I asked questions to get to the root logic, I wasn't angry, and TC never really engaged. I'm sorry if I expect people on a skeptic website to be able to defend their views. 22:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Seriously, if any of us were using fallacies TC should be expected to be able to demonstrate that rather than running off to sulk on their userpage. 22:08, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Go whine elsewhere Senioritas. If your contribution to this Wiki is inserting shit clickbait links and defending obvious trolls, you're going to get shit on by at least myself. (And no, I am not Rationalwiki. If I was, these days, I'd turn on Checkuser just to force trolls to pay for a VPN.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 14:28, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A "shit clickbait link", in what language do I have to speak for you to understand? Senioritas (talk) 22:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Please license your images
For organization's/legality's sake, please make sure that any images you uploaded to RationalWiki are properly licensed. Specifically, File:Fallacy.jpeg, File:Strawman.jpg and File:Emma-watson-harry-potter-.jpg are not marked with a proper license template. -- Techpriest (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

By popular demand
See: RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive46. Bongolian (talk) 18:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * RationalWiki_talk:All_things_in_moderation/Archive46 to be more exact.--American time change coming up November 7, Andrew5 (talk) 18:24, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

You should put links in your user page
At least, I would love it if you included links to where you had made the posts. :-) If you had links to where you said these things, the context and reactions might provide more information or, at least, some amusement.  :-)    -- Bertrc  (talk) 20:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) I don't understand the text around you saying: "Bigotry and contempt are mutually exclusive".  The text ascribes bigotted and contemptuous aspects to the same person, which seems to be a contradiction of your point.
 * 2) I would love to see the reactions to you saying Trump is not irredeemable
 * 3) I don't quite follow what you mean when you say "People can't remember 9/11".  I could understand if you meant people have forgotten the impact and importance of it, but you explicitly say you are referring to people forgetting what happenned on that day (I remember the events of the day, but I wrote down my experiences to cement it in my mind).