User talk:Nx/Archive12

Just me
I really like the improvements you made. I'm a sensitive person, so I kind of understand why the criticism bothered you. But please keep up the good work - you clearly do a lot to make this place better. --Leotardo (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Well this sucks
at my school rationalwiki.com was not blocked, but rationalwiki.org is. dammit. --Slugboy (talk) 00:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That does suck, but the change to .org is something that has to be done, really. You're best off petitioning the site to be unblocked. Just say you're using it as a learning resource and point to some of the higher quality articles - and hope your sysadmins aren't creationists... 10:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but there's not much I can do to fix it. We can't have two domains with the same content, because google will consider us a spam site and lower our rankings. -- Nx  / talk 11:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * unless it's the swearing and other nsfw content that's causing the block. Our cocaine article was blocked at work, for some reason. Totnesmartin (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ohhh yes there is: Canonical URL links. They're specifically for this sort of situation. If they're not built into MediaWiki already, they'd be a trivial thing to add to the generated HTML - David Gerard (talk) 11:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * They're not built-in, but here's the extension Wikia uses. Wikipedia doesn't bother with 'em, fwiw, but they already won at Google - David Gerard (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey NX/capture
How long does it take the capture bot to create the img? Does it do it automatically? Thanks rational ghey (message) 13:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * From what I've seen, it takes about a minute after the link is put in either the sandbox or a watched page. Very automatic. 15:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * About a minute to notice the redlink, then a few seconds to load the page, capture it and upload the image. Much more for large pages. It's automatic on the pages Capturebot watches (WIGO:CP, TWIGO:CP, capturebot's sandbox and a few others), otherwise you have to put the link (with capture tag) on the sandbox. --  Nx  / talk 15:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * but it'll work in the userspace? rational ghey (message) 23:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The capture tag only creates the special red img link. Capturebot scans the page and detects red img links, then uploads the images. But it only scans a few pages, that's why it didn't detect the red link on your user page, and that's why you have to put the same thing on Capturebot's sandbox. -- Nx  / talk 23:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nx rational ghey (message) 00:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Embedded ogg
Does it have to be on the server to embed ogg onto the wiki? tmtoulouse 19:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * For the ogghandler extension, yes. But if you can find a place to host it that allows direct access to the file, you might as well just post a link to it, and Firefox/Chrome will play it in the browser window instead of downloading. -- Nx  / talk 19:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have put it here but FF doesn't seem to want to open it as a stream. tmtoulouse 22:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Works under Chrome, but not Firefox. It's probably a mime-type issue: the server is replying with "application/octet-stream" as the content-type. It should be "video/ogg" -- Nx  / talk 23:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, got that changed, does it "stream" it or does it have to download the whole thing? tmtoulouse 23:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It streams, and you can jump to any point. But something seems to be wrong with the audio. I'm getting an accelerated "chipmunk" echo. -- Nx  / talk 23:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Chipmunk echo? tmtoulouse 23:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you know, the effect you get when you speed up the audio. I get then normal audio plus that at the same time, on both Chrome and Firefox. -- Nx  / talk 23:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No that is just his natural voice! Er, though seriously....is it at a particular "time" in the video because I am not getting it. tmtoulouse 23:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's constant. But since the sound gets stuck even after I close the browser, it's probably a problem on my end. -- Nx  / talk 23:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Subpages
Just curious as to what you're currently in the middle of. Something about detecting subpages and changing the edit notices to reflect subpages? 14:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm updating the editnotice loader to be smarter (and cleaning up the code). It started out with me wanting to put a single editnotice over all present and future subpages of Template:Cover abstract. Then I backported safesubst from MW 1.16, so now I got sidetracked and I'm fixing the welcome templates to use it. -- Nx  / talk 14:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I see. Good stuff. I'm just wondering what the advantages are of holding the abstracts in a single template rather than the articles are. (I assume safesubst enables substitution on transclusion only, I looked it up on WPs help file and was left thoroughly confused). 15:05, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I moved them out of mainspace because pages there show up on random pages, contribute to various statistics, are added to search results etc. Simply put, they are not articles, so they shouldn't be in mainspace. I've also disabled subpages in mainspace.
 * As for safesubst, it allows a template to be both transcluded and substituted recursively. With subst, you could force recursive substitution using the includeonly trick, but this would break transclusion. Safesubst fixes that. -- Nx  / talk 15:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There are articles that make use of subpages. I can't remember off the top of my head, but I think the chickenhawk article lists the individuals in subpages. Or have you just disabled searching for and special:random directing to the subpages? 15:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, those shouldn't be subpages. Disabling subpages means that / is not interpreted as a subpage separator, and you don't get the breadcrumbs. Otherwise it's almost the same. -- Nx  / talk 15:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So they still exist, just as single articles with "/" in the title? 15:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. -- Nx  / talk 15:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And transclusions from subpages? A few use customised TOCs that are transcluded in. I assume that it hasn't changed, but having them as subpages was a decent way of organising that. Or would you prefer such things moved to the template space even if they are article specific?
 * Yes, it was a neat way of organizing them, but unfortunately mediawiki counts them as articles even if they're a subpage. So they either have to go back into the article, or into template space. -- Nx  / talk 15:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll keep an eye out for such things. 15:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * User edit notices seems like a good, straightforward idea. Could you get an edit notice to automatically play a sound file that screams "GET OFF MY LAND!" when editing? Not that I'm advocating such silliness... 16:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's nothing new, I implemented those ages ago, but noone noticed. You can put a playmp3 or whatchamacallit tag on the notice like Jeeves does on his user page. -- Nx  / talk 16:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Question
No hurry on this, but a question, could WIGO like voting system pull its database ID from the page title? Is there any reason this would be a bad idea? 130.113.218.226 (talk) 16:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as it's possible to override the automatic id. And we could do it using templates. But it wouldn't solve the fundamental problem that people can't do additions. -- Nx  / talk 16:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking more in line of trying to implement something on article pages. Such that the same "code" could be entered on every page and it could pull its ID from the page its on. 130.113.218.226 (talk) 16:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's possible. You'd have to use the #tag parserfunction to turn the vote tag into a parserfunction, because templates and parser functions are not expanded before being handed to tag functions in MW1.14. Something like this:


 * -- Nx  / talk 17:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Conservatroll
Was it the WIGO wording, or the subject matter you found lame? I just appreciated the extent of the article, and it gave me some lol's. It was marked for speedy deletion, so wanted to WIGO so others could see before it was oversighted. 72.224.42.45 (talk)
 * The subject matter, it was a direct copy of Uncyclopedia's Conservatroll article. Also see Conservapedia:What is going on at CP?/Instructions. --  Nx  / talk 13:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 'Twas as funny as something that's not funny at all. Very lame. 13:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * Thanks for the links. Never been to uncyclopedia, so wasn't aware of prior existence of the article, and it didn't really seem to correspond to any of the instructions.  Have followed WIGO:CP and CP for awhile, so thought it was funny in my judgement.  But obviously, in light of its complete copy from Uncyclopedia, not WIGO worthy.72.224.42.45 (talk)
 * I think most people end up seeing Conservatroll pretty soon after seeing Conservapedia. It's certainly very rare for it to go unnoticed by even a casual CP-watcher. And knowing is half the battle. 13:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * *raises hand* I'd never seen it before - David Gerard (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Dude you are missing out! 13:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean seeing the Conservatroll article on CP or seeing it on Uncyclopedia? Like I said, been watching CP for about a year or two, and can't say I've ever seen it. Guess I'm just a rarity :-) 72.224.42.45 (talk)
 * Seems like a lot of us are rarities then, cause I've been following CP and RW for a few years too and I didn't know of it either. Perhaps I've seen the term "Conservatroll" before but assumed it was just stood for a conservative troll. --GTac (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Background brain
Hey where was that cool background brain you were playing with once upon a time? tmtoulouse 16:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's still available in some of the message boxes, I think. But people seemed to hate it so it's not on any of the main ones any more. 16:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but I wanted to try something with it for a super-secret pilot project. tmtoulouse 16:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * [[File:Brain watermark.png]] and [[File:Brain watermark_light.png]] (for dark backgrounds) -- Nx  / talk 16:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!tmtoulouse 16:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry
I apologize if I was a bitch recently. I hope you can find it in your heart or liver to forgive me. 09:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Because
I need a result for a parser function and it become clear very quickly that a colon would not be acceptable. 09:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Quite hard
I suck at image design. Is there a way of doing it in GIMP easily? 09:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Open in inkscape, click on circle thingie, object->fill and stroke, and set the fill. It's not rocket science. Or you could even open it in a text editor, find the part that says "style="fill:#365f91;fill-opacity:1;stroke:#ffffff;stroke-width:8;stroke-miterlimit:4;stroke-opacity:1;stroke-dasharray:none;" and change the fill color. It should be the second path object. -- Nx  / talk 10:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I like the second method, I'll use that in future. Thanks. 10:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

MarcusC
You don't know that he's MarcusCicero for sure. Just give the guy the benefit of the doubt. If it is, then whatever, but if not, you're creating a lousy impression of us to a potential editor. 20:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
I don't know who dunnit on the techie side, but one of you guys disabled the ability to use rangeblocks. Against my better judgment, I almost used one for 20 minutes against these trolls that are attacking, and found out it was disabled. To whomever dunnit on the techie side: thanks for stopping me from doing something stupid. 21:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I did, after a rangeblock of mine caused a minor HCM. -- Nx  / talk 21:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha. That's our Nx! 21:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, twas a good job you done did. And I am also very sorry about that MC thing earlier. I wasn't trying to stir trouble, just prove something to myself. 21:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's okay. I guess you do have a point, MC has changed us. Remember the first MC permabanning HCM? I was firmly against blocking him, and even removing his comments... -- Nx  / talk 22:30, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Rangeblocks
Enable them, edit the database, whatever, just actually do something about this troll instead of letting some people cripple us by imagining ludicrous slippery slopes. 22:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Temporary rangeblocks, i.e. those measured in hours rather than days seem fine to me for IP addresses. Worst case we end up blocking an anonymouse for a day. -- ConcernedResident omg ponies!!! 22:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "We don't do range blocks, dumbass" -- Nx  / talk 22:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nx, would you please stop disabling things when someone complains? 22:12, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It is the mobs will that there shall be no rangeblocks. Therefore to prevent people who think the rules do not apply to them from doing rangeblocks, they must be disabled. -- Nx  / talk 22:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't want to get involved in the debate regarding rangeblocks - I am coming round to the idea after this recent trolling though. Frankly I am rather disturbed by this recent troll wave. The insistence on harassing Goonie and his sister (who has been through a lot - as we know) is revolting. Acei9 22:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The troll seems to have been using proxies. All of them were on FDC IP addresses, at least the ones I checked. If they're limited to FDC networks then rangeblocking may be useful, and then it may be worth reconsidering the whole rangeblock thing. Gabe seems tough enough to hack this kind of thing, but I wouldn't wish sustained trolling of that nature on anyone. -- ConcernedResident omg ponies!!! 22:21, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In retort, far worse things have happened to me and, especially, my sister than some moronic troll on the internet. Hell, this has kept my mind of other, more terrible shit today, so, if anything, I should be obliged to have to deal with it. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Conservative Punk / talk / contribs 22:23, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Capturebot2 on EU Times
I don't think Capturebot needs to monitor the EU Times page on an ongoing basis ... at the moment the problem is that it doesn't appear to successfully capture pages at all from it - it said it had captured one, but had failed to do so. How annoying.

BTW, I plugged Capturebot2 as an example of a huge success for webkit2png on xorg-devel ;-) - David Gerard (talk) 18:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The capture command instructs the bot to scan the page once, but it looks like I managed to insert a left-to-right marker somehow which was confusing capturebot. It's capturing the images now, but for some reason it's taking forever. -- Nx  / talk 18:27, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for kicking it :-) They're full-page captures rather than diff links (it's a WordPress site), so some are 20,000 pixels vertically. But once they're captured they should be fine. Until they change again, presumably - David Gerard (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Brain
Can I have the Blender source for the brain logo? I want to play around with some different textures. MARCVS ANTONIVS 10:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Email sent. -- Nx  / talk 10:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. MARCVS ANTONIVS 12:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

In spite of all the controversy
You still deserve a pat on the back from the RW Pat-On-The-Back Society for doing a good job around the Wiki that most of us only wish we were cool enough to do. 23:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Unblockable user?
Really Nx? Is that entirely necessary? Acei9 11:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, not entirely. -- Nx  / talk 11:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Necessary? Is it necessary for people to drink their own urine? 11:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It must be nice to be able to enact changes like that on a whim, with zero input from the site. 11:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * A sysop can unblock themselves, so blocking is pointless. If you want to do joke blocks, block for 0 seconds, that's still allowed. -- Nx  / talk 12:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Does it really matter if people don't want to have edits disrupted by a 31-second block? MARCVS ANTONIVS 12:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As Human said,its unnecessary and you have also added to the User Rights screen? Pretty stupid idea Nx, why do you feel the need to be an "unbloackable user" or that anyone else needs to be? Acei9 20:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because a) being interrupted by "fun" blocks is annoying, and b) may lead to losing your comment. Also why is it stupid to put it on user rights management? Should I have just made it hardcoded to me and Crundy? -- Nx  / talk 21:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Doing things the Nx way because "thats what Nx wants" doesn't make you entirely popular is all. Acei9 21:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And we can't have that now can we? -- Nx  / talk 21:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Its irrelevant what I think, it how much you care that is the issue. Acei9 21:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not much. -- Nx  / talk 21:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You have already been spanked by MC/Neveruse - you must feel pretty silly now huh? I wouldn't let it get you down though, they both have superior mental fortitude which us pawns can only gaze at in awe. Acei9 21:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Awwwwwwwwww! --Kels (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I can haz? 23:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No. -- Nx  / talk 23:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I want to be invincible. If you want annoying try not be able to unable to edit and unblock yourself.  23:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I want not approve on it. I think polite post.
 * Anyway, I deleted the extension, so no, you can't be unblockable. -- Nx  / talk 23:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ace has ruined everyones fun. Acei9 23:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Is that you doing Ace? 23:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I only commented about what I thought. I didn't tell anyone what they can/cannot do. Acei9 23:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * But Ace, you have so much machismo that a mere comment from you sounds like a commandment from God. 23:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It cannot be helped. I shave with hedge clippers and my chest hair is like steel wool. Acei9 23:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose that you go to McDonald's, order a whopper and you get one too? 23:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I get chicken drumsticks outta beef steak if I want. Acei9 23:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose that you don't do push ups, you just push the world down? 23:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I fucked mother nature and made a ten acre spread. Acei9 23:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I heard from Goonie, that they got you a giant birthday cake and you ate the whole thing before they got a chance to tell you there was a stripper in it. 23:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Tonight I going to drink gin through my ear in the name of science and report back to RW. Acei9 23:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

If I may
I think that being unblockable should be something given out by bureaucrats upon request for people like Mr. 3.14159 and Susan G who are not fans of block wars. I do, however, think it was a good idea, so long as it is given out on request, and not just something anybody could give themselves, since we have such low sysop standards. 23:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Christ. Did I cause all this? I want not approve on it. I think psychotic post. 23:36, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I haz ideaz. Two of them.  If anyone cares, just ax me.  23:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

-- Nx  / talk 23:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

BTW
I like your work! 15:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * As do I - David Gerard (talk) 19:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course you would. You're a typically boring authoritarian priggish wikipedia cunt with no social skills whatsoever, who thinks he can revert all of his problems away because he has no personal life worth talking about. You are beneath contempt. 74.63.112.147 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I take issue with this edit
I find this to be objectionable and expect you to revert it. It is pure and utter propaganda. Blocks are used on this site to marginalise individuals who have the courage to stand up the vicious and high personal authoritarianism and Stalinism of the ruling elite - for that reason I find your alteration of the blocking policy to be 'fascism creep' via stealth - it is all part of your conspiracy to further ruin this site by bringing about an encroaching authoritarianism, one which is based around discriminatory blocks, edit deletions, page reversions and marginalisation. Some of your lackeys may tolerate it, but I never shall. 86.40.223.25 (talk) 16:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The excuse for not using blocking is that it doesn't allow the blocked editor to complain. That is not true, because they can still edit their talk page. On the other hand, vandal binning someone will allow them to continue their vandalism/trolling albeit at a manageable rate. My edit assumes that only vandals and trolls are to be blocked, as it should be, so it is NPOV. -- Nx  / talk 16:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Protesting block
See, I can protest my block here. -- Nx  / talk 16:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if it's something that's obviously wrong, then change it. I'm sure nobody in the community would mind if it were changed because it's wrong. No need to continue all this edit warring over something as silly as that! When those rules were written, it was BEFORE you installed the "Allow editor to edit their own page" function. 16:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And that's what I did. -- Nx  / talk 16:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, adding a passage that reads "please note that this section makes no sense..." clearly and concisely describes community policy. I've edited the section so that it makes sense, reflects reality, and doesn't read like it was written by someone having a tantrum. P-Foster (talk) 17:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Except now it gives no justification for cautioning against blocks but encouraging the liberal use of the vandal bin. -- Nx  / talk 17:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

A word
wikipedia:WP:POINT. It means don't advocate something you don't actually want to happen from butthurt - David Gerard (talk) 19:40, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't wikipedia. -- Nx  / talk 22:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It is an essay on ways humans can be stupid on a wiki. You are, technically, human, and you are being deliberately stupid. The way to fix a broken rule on a wiki is not to enforce it like a grinning "just following the rules" idiot and making a fuckwit of yourself - it's to let it languish until it's clearly ignored and deletable. You're doing this because you're feeling upset at Human and P-Foster - go take it out on them instead of anyone in sight - David Gerard (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The rule that talk page comments should never be deleted is one of the most important rules on this wiki. It's not ignored or deletable. -- Nx  / talk 22:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh just fuck off you wikipedian clown. You would quote priggish wikipedian policy here, wouldn't you, you absolute moron. 74.63.112.147 (talk) 19:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Do feel free to stop being a dick to make some sort of point - David Gerard (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Calm the fuck down gentlemen. Acei9 22:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am calm. -- Nx  / talk 22:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Then why are you pissing around with DavidG? Why dont you just let him make the writing small? How old are you? Acei9 22:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because it is against the rules. And so is locking his page. -- Nx  / talk 22:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I see, I agree with talkpage locking. shouldn't happen.
 * As to "its against the rules" you have answered my other question. You are 12 years old. Acei9 22:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You are being a fucking child Nx. I bid you good day Sir, young lad. Acei9 23:00, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "The rule that talk page comments should never be deleted is one of the most important rules on this wiki." - actually it's one of the most absurd rules on this wiki. I never liked it and still don't.  How exactly did this "rule" come to exist in the first place?  Secret Squirrel (talk) 23:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk page comments aren't being deleted though, just made smaller. Acei9 23:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Making them smaller is also against the rules. -- Nx  / talk 23:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, MC's comment is made to disappear but so what? Acei9 23:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's still against the rules, no matter who made the comment. -- Nx  / talk 23:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * (victim of malicious EC) From paranoia, essentially. The fear that someone (usually TK) would lable us "as bad as CP" for removing even a single talk page message.  As if Human or tmtolouse would suddenly go all 🇰🇪 and start deleting anything they disagree with.  It's utterly, hopelessly irrational, and it's something people here would fight tooth and nail to prevent changing. --Kels (talk) 23:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I remove MC comments all the time, so what of it then? Acei9 23:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You mean, it's an example of an unhealthy RW preoccupation with CP? - David Gerard (talk) 23:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it is an example of seeing how it can be abused (look at wp:User talk:TK-CP), and doing something to prevent abuse like that here. -- Nx  / talk 23:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Buts it not being abused in this case, nor any other case in memory. If you want to make a big deal of this take me to Admin Abuse because I frequently revert MC edits and have no plans to cease doing so in the future. Acei9 23:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it is being abused, David broke the rules, and Earthland complained - David then labeled him a troll and justified removing/smallifying his comments. As for MC's comment, it was an apology, not trolling. -- Nx  / talk 23:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "It was an apology not trolling" - what Bullshit Nx. Acei9 23:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * (EC)I don't get it. A wiki means it can be edited by anyone, and removing content or making it smaller are both editing.  A user talk page is for communicating with the user so I don't see how deleting something from it is any different from deleting emails in your inbox, or throwing junk snail mail in the waste basket.  I mean for crying out loud it's still in the edit history, which should be enough to please the "information should be free and archived forever" ideologues.  Secret Squirrel (talk) 23:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Being in the history is not the same as being on the talk page or an archive. If you're reading a talk page, you won't go through the history one by one. -- Nx  / talk 23:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)