User talk:Arthropleura/Archive4

 This is not a place to call me an idiot. Legit criticism and discussion is fine. If you want to insult me please go here  .

Events in Archive 1: My entrance, the rusty-spotted cat debacle, my promotion to sysopship, the 'Weasel Incident (timeless lulz), the Great Month of the Wikisig, the Great Server Move Journey (the server move), the Rodney Controversy, the Turbobanners, and me telling Toast to eat some toast.

Argh
Whew, that's better.  ħ uman  20:50, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Please do not edit others' talk page comments okay thank you bye.  ħ uman  21:11, 3 April 2009 (EDT)



Poll
If the majority wants me to leave, I will:

Stay, but hide

 * -- 16:22, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Don't hide, per se, just don't act out in a stupid manner. Try to act like an adult.  The reason you recieve so much abuse is that you don't think about the consequences of you actions.  Any good chessplayer should be able to see that if you mention a believethat you think like a cheetah, or something, on a wiki where atheisim is the norm and most dissenters are hit by the Spanish Inquisition (which nobody expected) you could at least expect some outcry.  User:TheemperorUser talk:Theemperor 16:50, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Stay

 * Someone has to be the whipping boy. Neveruse513 16:23, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Who else am I going to raid non-existant castles with without this ? 16:46, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Stay but tone down on the dramatics and antics. The best CP baiters are master baiters who bait masterfully from having practiced a long long time.  I'm not one of them, and I can't imagine ever becoming one if I was as transparent as you are.  You seem like a smart kid (no patronizing here) who needs to direct his attention toward better results, rather than producing a great volume of questionable material.  Read some popular stuff like God is Not Great and the God Delusion and come back in a month reinvigorated, assuming becoming a better CP baiter is your goal.  Nutty Roux 19:08, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Get the fuck off our wiki

 * Start a new user if you want to try acting like an adult. I know you're not, but you should still try. Teabag 03:54, 4 April 2009 (EDT)
 * --Ted 18:43, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

You care too much about what other people think

 * tmtoulouse 16:23, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Arcan  ¡ollǝɥ  16:36, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You care to much about what other people think only half of the time. The other half, you tend to annoy them by ignoring what they are thinking. 16:42, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You have a very thin skin. 16:52, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I endorse what the others said above. 19:19, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * L2Humour Bondurant 19:59, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Stay but try and change a little
Some people are too keen to attack you IMO, but you certainly don't help yourself. Your recent actions on CP (stupid parthian shots from users I've never heard of - it's not about the parthian shot as much as the person it comes from) weren't very good or clever (I liked the rusty spotted cat though), and as for WIGOing them, well, I can't imagine what made you think that was a good idea or that you would get a positive reaction. Much of the criticism that you receive is unjustified and far too harsh, but some of it is justified, and you need to recognize that as contructive criticism. I want you to stay - it'd be a shame to see such a prolific user leave. Sorry for the paragraph, but I hope this helps! EddyP 16:53, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Please try not to be such an attention whore. Take a look back through your contributions here & especially at Rationalwikiwiki.  Virtually every move is drawing attention to yourself & trying to provoke a response from others.  If that response is negative, it's not because people dislike you; it's just that that people dislike that self-centred streak - in anybody.  This threatening-to-leave-&-asking-people's-opinions stuff is a prime example.  Just tone down the drama & take an interest in other people & other subjects.   19:13, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Stay, but try and change a lot
Really CUR, you're just so goddam shouty and annoying and you suck the life out any page with your screeching and demanding attention. Just calm the fuck down a bit and it'll all be fine. Learn that other people have something to say too. And DON'T EVER WIGO your own stupid socks again. DogP  20:52, 3 April 2009 (EDT)


 * Change a lot first, then stay. You really bring "clueless" to a professional level (see section by Kels below about still WIGOing your fucking egotistical loser self).  ħ uman  00:41, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

Stay but please learn to use the flapdoor I installed in the back door
I'm tired of you just scratching it when you want to go out, you can let yourself in and out now.  ħ uman  20:48, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Who cares
You take the internet too seriously. Who cares. You could be a 12 year old, an economics professor, a carpenter, a priest, a pyschiatric patient for all I know. And I don't care. And if you care that much maybe you should leave. I'm glad I somehow contributed to all of this, this dramatic BS from RWians who genuinely seem to live in some sort of internet cloud cuckoo land really makes my evenings. MarcusCicero 16:38, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Look, I want to do the thing that will make the most people happy. If this could be without any social interaction, I'd snatch it up in an instant. But it isn't. -- 16:43, 3 April 2009 (EDT)


 * * smacks head* You don't get it! This is all attention seeking. And the worst thing is that you don't even realise that its very annoying for people to seek attention by being pathetic. Its always better to be an obnoxious twat if you want attention. Arghh!!! MarcusCicero 16:53, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I suppose you and I have different definitions of attention-seeking. I merely want to live here in peace. I can't do that if I don't know what you people want. You tell me what you want, and I'll do it. You want me to shut up? Fine, I'll do it. You want me to leave? Fine, I'll do it. -- 19:03, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I think the consensus is that your material sucks and you're not focused enough on goals that coincides with the wiki's. And you're a drama queen.  But that people see potential and don't wish you ill.Nutty Roux 19:11, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (Ec) First bit- true. Second bit- true. Third bit- very true. My next project. -- 19:13, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

My two cents'? I think, straight-up IQ-wise you might be the smartest person here. But you behave like such a dummy half the time, it's hard to see that. This is a good place for you to work on things like how to argue, what to read and how to think; but it's hard to do that when you're running around screaming "look at me, look at me!" Figure out what the project is about, and see what you can do to contribute productively while challenging yourself by interacting with a diverse and smart community. About that contributing thing: articles on cats and stars=/= not what we're about (you want to write encyclopedia articles, go to ASK). Same with crowing about pissing off Assfly and TK. That's so 2008. And you're no Fretful Porpentine. WIGO world and WIGO clogosphere are the future of this project, I think. Get on the cutting edge. read some stuff, tell us about it in a critical and funny way. And I apologise for being a dick to you sometimes. Really. But grow a pair, man. It's the Internet. And we all know that the Internet is serious business. TheoryOfPractice 19:53, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * TOP- we already had an article. All I'm doing is trying to expand what we already have. -- 19:55, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Archive your damn user page.
Please. Think of the children cubs. TheoryOfPractice 20:34, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Do you not freaking LISTEN?
What the hell is all this about? Didn't you agree not to WiGO yourself? And don't give me that garbage about "it's about Addison, not me", you've set yourself up as the rational hero of the WiGO. It's also FUCKING HUGE, whatever joke you might have had in there got crushed under the tl;dr weight of the stupid thing. That's why people get so pissed off at you, you don't listen. Nothing seems to sink in, and you're back to "hey, look at MEEEEEEE!" Quit it, and start to actually pay attention to what you're told for a change. --Kels 23:29, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
 * This is why I use the stock phrase "shut up cur" more often than the rarely heard "well done CUR".  ħ uman  00:42, 4 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Commented out. -- 11:29, 4 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Do you listen? No, of course not. --Ted 18:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Promotion
Done as requested. It felt good too. :-) Ace McWickedRevolt 17:51, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
 * i've unblocked you so you can reply to this: "Why"? Totnesmartin 17:52, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Course "14" or not (and i remain dubious of that), it's not really our job to be nannies for someone who can't figure out how to stop replying, any more than it would be to shut of the TV for them. You want to "play with the grown ups", then do so.  or, turn off your own monitor and go play football or rugby (or kick the can or king of the hill, or green light red light, or red rover or....)-- 16:49, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

On second thoughts
I never realised you were 14. Your quite intelligent and self aware for that age to be honest. My comments were mere trolling, because I saw you were a volatile member and I wanted to see RW tear itself apart. But I've second thoughts about you. Your clever for a 14 year old, and you'll probably go far to be honest. Now excuse me as I pull my head out of your ass! MarcusCicero 16:43, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Don't confuse the idiot. Just slam him and be done with it. --Ted 18:34, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Definitely TK
Or some other troll. I've been stalking this user for a while, and I know a troll when I see him. In my humble opinion, he should be permabanned and desysopped immediately. --Ted 18:31, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * And you are? --Kels 18:45, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * A former lurker. --Ted 18:46, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Forgive me if that doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. --Kels 18:49, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You're forgiven. I don't particuarly care what you think of me. --Ted 18:51, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Just as well. ;-)
 * What are you suggesting? --Ted 18:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)*
 * Firstly Ted, Toast didn't say anything about you, merely your claim at this stage has little validity. Secondly, I called CUR as TK sometime ago but after discussion and watching his behaviour he seems less and less like TK as time goes on. Perhaps you have some proof or definiative evidence? Ace McWickedRevolt 18:56, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Oh. My proof is that he is constantly grabbing attention (notice that I said or some other troll). --Ted 18:58, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * The first step to being considered a possible TK sock is calling someone else TK, because TK loves TK....TK 19:01, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * How is constantly grabbing attention inconsistent with what he claims to be, a 14 year old who likes attention? I haven't seen anything that seems TK-like in the least. --Kels 19:18, 6 April 2009 (EDT)


 * * People who (apparently) attempt to ingratiate themselves by jumping on what they think is a good bandwagon (in this case the persecution of CUR) are not likely to be welcomed with open arms, I'm afraid. (CUR might be a wazzock, but he's our wazzock) 19:20, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

My advice to you, young Teddy-Bear, is to perhaps establish yourself more before accusing and asking others to be perma-banned. Oh, and welcome. Ace McWickedRevolt 19:24, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I might also add that coming here and immediately jumping on an editor who's been around for a while now, and has proved a generally good sport (definitely not TK-like) and inclined to putter around with actual articles (again, anti-TK behaviour) without making a single other edit with the thinnest of evidence doesn't really make me want to jump in and ban the guy right off. Maybe that's just me. --Kels 19:24, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Done, though for only 31 sec. Ace McWickedRevolt 19:27, 6 April 2009 (EDT)P.S. Perhaps Ted is in fact CUR checking the mood? Or have I been licking to many toads again? Ace McWickedRevolt 19:28, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * CUR, stop it.  You're not fooling anyone.   Your attempt to stop talking about yourself is obviously too much for you, but coming back as this 'Ted' person is transparently obviously a way to "get CUR back on the agenda".   Idiot.   DogP  19:29, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC x 4) Guys, please stop feeding the troll. Let's recap: a user who constantly draws attention to himself goes and blocks himself for three days. Two days later, a "new" user registers, whose only interest is talking about the currently-blocked attention-seeker. Doesn't that seem just a little bit suspicious to you? 19:30, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Yes, I wondered if there was something vaguely "CUR" about this. Not the toads after all...Ace McWickedRevolt 19:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Yup! y'all.s right I reckon. 19:34, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Ace licks toads? --Ted 19:35, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I was hoping that by bashing myself, I would be able to get off on the right foot. Doesn't seem very fair that you guys can bash me all I want and I can't bash myself with a sock. --Ted 19:38, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You STILL don't get it, do you?!!!! JEEZUS!   The only reason we want to bash you is because you keep flailing about the room gong "Lookit MEE LOOKIT MEE LOOKIT MEE!" until we spank you and send you upstairs with no tea.  So coming back here and doing the same thing all over again is....the same thing.   I mean, how thick is your skull that you still don't get it?!!!   Christ on a bike, but you're hard work.   DogP 
 * Bash yourself all you want: just don't do it deceitfully & drag other people into it unnecessarily. NB. You are unblocked; you can take your socks off if you want to.   19:40, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I still can't delete South Park for you. If you want it deleted. -- 19:41, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Bashing yourself with a sock? Sounds like something a teenager does several times a day... 19:46, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You cant delete because you asked to have your sysop powers taken away, which I did. Secondly I am not going to give them back due to your ridiculous antics and "look at me!" behaviour. Someone else might but not me. Ace McWickedRevolt 19:48, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

I actually feel sorry for CUR here. You guys are being waaaay to hard on him. 14 is an impressionable age. Yeah, he's got some awesomely hilarious beliefs, but he'll grow out of them. DSFARGEG 20:08, 6 April 2009 (EDT)


 * He's quite busy - too busy to be TK :-) If he's really fourteen, hopefully he'll grow out of this phase sometimes...   05:01, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

On Third Thoughts
My lord... I am of the opinion that you are akin to a woman's unmentionable area! 134.226.1.234 04:35, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * And you're a twunt, bunchanumbers. With bad grammar. Bondurant 04:49, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * It's ok. I fixed so people can understand him.  DSFARGEG 08:10, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

So you have mental retardation
Don't worry about it! You can still lead a FUNCTIONING LIFE Daust 16:11, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Why so shy? Daust 16:32, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Wow, you sure showed him. Moron.  DSFARGEG 18:18, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Coward
Staud 17:00, 9 April 2009 (EDT) Sure is sockdrawer in here. DSFARGEG 18:18, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Good job CUR
You've handled the recent flame attacks in a very mature and smart way. Great job and keep it up. SirChuckB  17:08, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * No actually, blocking people because you don't like what they say isn't smart or mature, and you my friend are a filthy hypocrite. Staud 17:10, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Don't waste your time blocking the idiots CUR, vandal bin them and move on. SirChuckB  17:12, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Who's being a hypocrite? 17:15, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You think I'm a fundy cause I don't like you? That's just lazy, man. Think better. 65.111.169.81 17:22, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I don't know whether this is a hidden jab or a compliment. -- 17:45, 9 April 2009 (EDT) P.S. If anyone has something that needs done, I need a new prime directive. -- 17:45, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * if you're referring to me, it is intended as a 100% honest compliment. Your behavior in dealing with the two vandals is exactly the kind of adult behavior we like to see from you. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  17:53, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * How about starting up an article on Co Q10? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:54, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Okay. By the way, I made the Wiki articles on star perma-links. A bit of polishing and it should be ready for best of. Felidae might qualify too (will never be featured, but it's good enough to be best of science (I think)). -- 18:56, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Thanks for fixing the WP links. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  16:40, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Kenservative
Just letting you know that Ken/Conservative/Ruy is giving you a shoutout at the top of his page (although it's probably just a coincidence). Don't be surprised if the linky makes no sense, what with the way he fiddles about with his user page. Corryundefined 19:37, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Thank you. Shoutout to Ken: I am honored to have a message addressed to me. Thank you, gentleman Ken. With your help, we can avert all out war. -- 19:40, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Other people's user pages...
...are not for you to play on. Learn the rules and play by them. How many times must you be told? TheoryOfPractice 20:37, 9 April 2009 (EDT)


 * Oh, and while we are at it, you don't have to recreate a page to view it- just click restore, and then scroll down to File History and click the date to view it. User:TheemperorUser talk:Theemperor 21:12, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Jinx?
Are you serious? Daust 22:21, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Ahhhhhhhhhh DECEITZ! Ace McWickedbitch and moan 16:41, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

It occurs to me...
you might be interested in discussing careers in the zoological field, being young and all. My wife is a zookeeper who has worked with big cats and loves to talk about her career. Let me know if you might be interested in learning more. 14:19, 10 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I'm planning on being an expert in zoo design. Farewell, I'm off to skewer the sacred cow. . . er. . . otter. -- 14:22, 10 April 2009 (EDT)


 * You mean Goat. 142.59.186.233 18:33, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Pickled egg?
Pickled egg, available from a chippie near you me. Bon appetit! Totnesmartin 13:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Looks good. -- 13:46, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Tastes good! Totnesmartin 13:56, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Your rights...
You can have them back after your little wandalism spree has been cleaned up...TheoryOfPractice 16:22, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Back. Start that nonsense again and I'll take them away again. TheoryOfPractice 16:28, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Listen up CUR
Please understand and listen, please. For the love of god before one of us dies. When you created Felidae what happened? Over and and over it was faced with deletion. NO ONE in the community thought it was on mission, it was explained to you the RW is NOT a general purpose encyclopedia and is NOT WP and it took up everyones time, caused you a lot of grief due to the abuse you received yet you stood your groumd, fucked everyone off, ran away in a huff and dominated all conversation as it all became wrapped around your stupid pet article. Then the dust settled, your crappy article stayed and slowly we all returned to normal. Now, WHAT THE FUCK? You are doing it all over again! Have you learnt nothing? Understood anything about out mission and RW's purpose? By god CUR all conversation is now focused on the otter article. Why have you gone and done this again, you a pissing everybody off again and soon you'll run away in a huff like last time and we'll have to spend days debating whether your article stays in mainspace or what. Please think!!!! Ace McWickedbitch and moan 16:23, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * furthermore, I would like to add that when you created the Userspace version of your Otter article. Everyone, repeat EVERYONE said "good article, off mission."  But what did you do?  you went and moved it to the essay space as if that would change anyone's mind.  Now that you're meeting resistance, you're throwing another temper tantrum.  Have you learned anything from last time?  I mean really. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  16:31, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I've unblocked you so you can put your case here. Question: why should you not be kicked off RW for good? How would this website lose out if you were not here? Totnesmartin 16:28, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What I'm trying to point out (probably not in a very good way) is that those articles are as on-mission as ones such as coyote, LLama, etc. Yes, it probably was stupid, but I fiqured it was the only way to make you people actually get my point. -- 16:30, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Look at the difference between the llama article and the otter article. One is funny for the sake of funny; the other is trying to be wikipedia.  See the difference?   16:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

HCM 5 <font color= face="Book Antiqua"> JĀvąṢ₡ä₰ <font color=> hi there  16:30, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * That wasn't my question. Totnesmartin 16:32, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I am sick to death of your drama queen bullshit CUR. Stop being such a bitch. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 16:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What would you lose? I don't know. What would you gain? Very little. Among other things, if I had never been here, you wouldn't have the London underground mosquito article. You wouldn't have Fun:Stargate. You wouldn't have Michael Steele, or Rupert Sheldrake. And those are only the things that I've started. -- 16:37, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * So why don't you work on those? You create decent, on mission articles, and then push them aside to work on your pet projects, and then get throw fits when we say no.  <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  16:41, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC)We'd gain getting on with stuff instead of having huge internet drama all the time. We'd lose (or have never had) the stargate article, described on its talk page as too bad even for fun space, and the Rupert Sheldrake article - all three and a half lines of it. Michael Steele/mosquito - OK. But do those two make all the drama worthwhile? I think not. Totnesmartin 16:45, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * The problem is that we disagree on how on-mission something must be to be on-mission. You need to define 'on-mission.' For example, coyote is not on-mission, but you care enough about it to not want it deleted. -- 16:44, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * See my comments above to understand why the articles are treated differently.  16:49, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Trying to steer away from the lynch mob a little bit, CUR, I do have a small suggestion that you really might want to take to heart. Criticism of an article or something you did is not criticism of the person who did the writing. If you were to say that, I dunno, "the article you wrote is a piece of shit!", the reply I would go with is, "Alright, what's wrong with it, and how can it be improved?". With the otter essay, people were saying, "nice article, off mission". (That was not an insult, it was just a statement of fact.) and your response was to light the drama torch. You really need to learn how to do this amazing trick called relax. <font color= face="Book Antiqua"> JĀvąṢ₡ä₰  <font color=> hi there  16:45, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What I was asking was 'how can I get this on mission?' After about 30 edits, it gradually descended into the rythmatic chant of 'delete.' -- 16:48, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Can I just refer us to a conflict resolution flow chart? <font color= face="Book Antiqua"> JĀvąṢ₡ä₰ <font color=> hi there  16:50, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * "The problem is that we disagree on how on-mission something must be to be on-mission" - No CUR, it is YOU and ONLY YOU the diagrees what "on-mission" is. No one else seems to have that problem and it has been explained to you many times. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 16:52, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (ECx5)Again, and I apoligize if it sounds like I'm CUR bashing, but you're taking something out of context. Coyote has several links from other pages. That may just be a minor point, but that shows it may have been created for a reason. We tend to not delete things around here. If someone has a pet project that gets abandoned halfway through, it tends to stay. As I've said before, nobody has the entire Wiki on their watch list, so some things slip through the cracks. Great example. The other day I deleted some of the Rome articles that had been here for years. They stayed because nobody found them and took action...... Get the picture? Mission tagging Coyote was a good start and we could have looked at it and made a decision, but instead, you just got all upset and tried to make a huge thing out it. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  16:53, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC x way too many) As long as one person disagrees, and I am a member of the site, we disagree. Note also that many other articles are as on-mission, if not less, as otter, and they stay because you like the person who wrote it. -- 16:55, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Thats fucking bullshit CUR. One person disagrees means ONE PERSON DISAGREES! Then if the fucker that disagrees creates a huge hissy fit and bitches and moans and causes everyone to be pulled into their made up little drama then that person deserves to be told to go fuck themselves. So go fuck yourself. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 16:59, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

CUR, it's worth noting that normally, conflicts tend to split the site one side against the other. In this case, it's pretty much everyone against your antics. That should tell you something. 17:02, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC)Allow me to say the same as ACE a little less verbose. CUR, please understand that nobody (except maybe ACE... and TOP.. And possibly Human, but not so much) has anything against you. You seem like a nice kid. However, everytime repeat everytime you don't get your own way, you throw some new hissyfit. As such, everybody sees the end result (your cloggin the recent changes with what looked like spite induced, unilateral deletions) and nobody knows what started it all. This makes you look horrible. You're trying to shift the problem off of you and onto us. The problem is not "RW hates CUR and everybody treats him like shit." I swear, look how many people have given you chance after chance, and try to help you along. Instead, the problem is "CUR acts like twelve year old girl, pisses everybody off." Do you understand? Just answer me that. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  17:06, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I do. Unfortunately, Ace and TOP are the ones who follow me around all the time. -- 17:07, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Ace HAD nothing against you which I had stated before, just didnt like your drama-queen behaviour. Now he does. You built a fucking AceQuote? You godamn child. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 17:11, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Bullshit, CUR. Nobody needs to follow you around when you're clogging the change logs with childish nonsense. Ace has been VERY patient with you and as far as I can tell didn't have anything against you at all. Ace - CUR lost sysops rights and can't unblock himself from your block.  <font color=#1100aa face=albertus size=2>Thee Nuttish  Talk 17:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * He does have sysop rights still BTW. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 17:25, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * He made an AceQuote? Really? Really? Wow. -- 17:20, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Yeah he did. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 17:25, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (ECx2)Ok. Taking your last statement (about Ace and TOP) to be true... I don't know that it is, but I think I can extend you that curtesy. We have a page for that and you can always seek out someone, like me or someone else you're not having issues with at the moment to come in and moderate. However, you do not do that. Everytime we've had an issue like this, you do something immature (deleting all the pages you think are like yours, or creating an Acequote template, or leaving suicide notes on your talk page) or you continue to whine about it and push it into every conversation. Do you see why this starts getting annoying? I can't speak for everyone. But I have no problem with you day to day, just when you have these little flare ups. I would personally be happy to work with you on your articles and help try and deal with any conflicts you're having. But the first thing you need to do is stop throwing tantrums when you don't get your way. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  17:21, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I thought the Acequote was pretty fuckin' funny, myself. And ultimately, I disagree with promotion--I just wish the kid would slow down and listen to what others in the community say instead of being so pig-headed in his editing. TheoryOfPractice 17:25, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * It's not that we want to promote him, it's that as pointed out above, he has shown that he has not the wisdom to use the powers.  17:33, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC) What Chuck said. I've never had a problem with you, per se, CUR, but boy is it irritating when you monopolise everyone's time. You're a smart kid. You're infinitely more articulate than most 14 year olds. But that wisdom beyond your years is often totally counter balanced by behaving like a five year old. You can't take everything so personally...you'll never get anywhere that way, especially on the Internet. If we say we think your article is off-mission, and it's really everyone saying that, you might just have to accept that you might be in the wrong, you know? And I respectfully disagree, TOP. AceQuote (although an okay pun) was laaaaaaaaame. :p -- 17:30, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I like the idea of an Acequote template because Ace's screeds nearly always bring a smile to my face, and that's a damn good thing. I'd like to see a good one done that actually captures the good-spiritedness of Ace that makes him one of my fav RWians to read.  It just seems to me that the better way to do the Acequote would be to actually do an analysis of the elements of his typical waking rant.  They seem to usually have a reference to the weather, being hungover, smiling, listening to music or reading, a woman, and booze.  The good ones note something fun from the night before, like exposing himself to strangers.  Sure, they also usually close with a "get fucked," but they're peaceful and airy, not the largely negative thing that CUR's concoction was becoming in a mere 2 lines.  Also, to be fair to CUR, I jokingly suggested an Acequote template in an earlier post somewhere, possibly in a thread CUR was posting in.  I just didn't think anyone would get all half-cocked and try making one in such a context as to suggest ill-will.  <font color=#1100aa face=albertus size=2>Thee Nuttish  Talk 19:25, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Oh no, I love the idea of an Acequote (the opposite of Assquote!), I just thought CUR's implementation was lame and mean. -- 19:30, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Don't feed the troll
For god's sake, every few days, it's a new hissy fit about something inane, and those who are all-too-reasonable try to paint the situation in black and white for CUR, who insists on drawing attention to himself while playing the victim. So, I ask all of you to stop responding to him when he decides to be inane and stop validating his cries for attention. There is a certain sort of person who is happy to build a reputation as a hated individual and happily takes insult and scorn, intermixed with bitching. If CUR can't act like a sane individual, promote him and ignore him. 17:17, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I agree with the promotion. He has proven himself incapable of handling even the minimal responsibility involved, in many respects. --Kels 17:23, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Yes the Acequote had potential to be funny sure, but only if done in the right taste and not by someone haveing a fucking whaa-whaa. I dont mind CUR having his sysop rights but, for christ sake he is a slow leaner Ace McWickedbitch and moan 17:27, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I think promotion (at least for a while) would be a good move. Deleting a batch of longstanding articles to make a petty point is no good way for a sysop to behave.  But if we're gonna do this thing, we should really open an Admin Abuse case, which might just be more drama than it's worth.   17:35, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Well, I'm not limiting it to this article so much as, say, his overreactive blocks of people claiming to be religious, and that sort of thing. --Kels 17:37, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I never blocked Shay once. You hear? I'm sick of people saying I did. -- 17:41, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Implosion imminent
Confinement chambers at 60% and dropping. Plasma coolent non-existant. BEWARE!!! -- 17:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Full speed ahead, Mr. Boatswain, full speed ahead! -- 19:35, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Plasma field contained. Plot a course to earth, Mr. Data. -- 19:37, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Full speed ahead it is, Sergeant. -- 19:40, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Set thrusters to godspeed. -- 19:40, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Cut the cable, drop the cable. -- 20:09, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

I have better things to do after 12 hours with a broken computer
Shut up, CUR.

Why not write your zoology articles at CP or ASK?

PS, I promoted you back to editor, quit fucking up our wiki to "make a point" - see wikipedia, WP:POINT.

Go back to your room, please reflect on whatever, GO OUTSIDE - damn, sometimes I go outside for a few hours and don't even think about RW for hours! So much EXCITEMENT I miss! I wonder what would happen if something really distracted me (aw, crap, I'm an aging old man, chances are she ain't turning up soon!), and forgot to check in on RW for days - weeks - months - on end? Probably be fine. Meantime, you are acting like an idiot. You are not listening/reading the constructive criticism people offer you - for free! I'm sure your parents are involved at some level here. Do you only share your minor "accomplishments" - the felidae article? The otter article? Take a look at your relative peer, Icewedge's JHS projects: Alaska and Evidence against a recent creation. Alaska, not really on-mission, but he slipped it by us. EARC, awesome. I totally enjoyed correcting his typos, etc. on that article.

You, sadly, are highly over-impressed with your contributions here. Let me clue you in: if you had never turned up here, RW would not have lost anything. Isn't that sad? Now, reality check. Would RW have missed me? No. Someone else would have fixed Trent's typos. Someone else would have done whatever I did to fix things up, etc. If I disappeared tomorrow, RW would continue (I think) in a healthy fashion - articles would be copyedited, others would be created, etc.

I am really not in a position to say this, but please: "check your ego at the door - it's a wiki". Please to get over yourself - read the advice people have offered (over and over again). Many, many people have taken the trouble to try to express to you better ways to interact with this wiki. You ignore them at your peril. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:02, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Here's the deal
I am somewhat inclined to agree with Human here, even though I am not that keen on him promoting sysops back to editors. Basically you can have your sysopship back when you start behaving in a manner befitting of person that has been invested with responsibilities. You should have no trouble editing the wiki. In three days I'll consider demoting you again if I notice a marked improvement in your behaviour. That means no longer sidetracking conservations so they are about you, no amateur dramatics, and most certainly no edit warring. During these three days no one is allowed to block you or they can spend them without sysop powers too. Keep in mind you do not automatically get your rights back after three days and whining about your promotion will not help you. - User   02:17, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * If RA were here, he'd throw a fit. This should really go on AA. 02:25, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What's so special about RA in this context?--Bobbing up 04:14, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * He made a big fuss when Human promoted Pink, remember? Moreover, he's probably been lurking in the shadows, waiting for Human to do something complainable about. Well, not any more, since he's no longer be availible. 05:36, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * We did agree to a probation period - with an unspecified length of time - in his administrative abuse case, which included promoting him if his behaviour didn't improve. We are just carrying through with it. It is only three days and it is entirely up to him whether his sysopship is reinstated. - User   02:35, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Pi is correct - CUR has basically violated his probation. I think three days is too short of an interlude, by the way - I'd rather see three weeks. But if you are taking it upon yourself to oversee CUR's probation, well, good for you. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:54, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Three days too short, three weeks far too long. Perhaps a time should be agreed on, so we don't end up stringing him along in the rights department. Just one more week, then you can have back rights. That would be a bad scenario. And yes, RA is lurking around somewhere, so perhaps a retroactive AA case, to avoid a shitstorm at a later date? User:TheemperorUser talk:Theemperor 17:29, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * A retroactive admin case would be unnecessary trouble, especially if its only purpose is to appease an absent user who might be lurking & might hypothetically have objections which he hasn't voiced. I don't think a fixed timescale or a definite commitment to re-demote CUR is necessary either.  Better to just leave it a while before discussing whether the demotion is a good idea.   17:44, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Yo CUR
Where are you? Ever since the big hulaballoo, you don't seem very active. Hope you haven't been too upset by this. It's just the internet man. DSFARGEG 20:55, 15 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Here. See, now, that I have something to distract me, I'm more relaxed. . . I think. Oh, and there's the Werelist. -- 21:02, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Anonymous
You are not legion. I know it appeals to your sense of crusading, but you might want to check with your parental units before getting involved (or pretending to?) with anon. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  21:26, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Got it. -- 21:28, 16 April 2009 (EDT)


 * I'm afraid you've got the wrong idea about Anonymous CUR. The name comes from the Chan sites, mostly 4Chan.org.  Anonymous is not driven by any set of morals, and it's the default posting handle on the sites.  Something you should note too, is that Anonymous hates furries, and otherkin (furries used to banned from /b/ back when it wasn't as shit as it is today, and are regularly laughed at across the boards still.), as well as a variety of other crap to numerous to note.  The original DDoS raids on the Scientology websites was their idea of fun, but it escalated from there as more people got involved, mostly people known onsite as moralfags and newfags.

This is not to discourage from your stance on Scientology mind, as many who are against Scientology are completely unaffiliated with anonymous. DSFARGEG 11:22, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

I should also say, if you have any interest at all in the controversies within Scientology, this should fulfill your needs:. Full of videos by victims of $cientology. There's also entubulation.org, but that seems to be down. DSFARGEG 19:16, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Resysopping
Since it's been three days now, you have been resysopped. 16:33, 17 April 2009 (EDT)
 * You're quite sure about this? -- 16:35, 17 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Three days should be long enough to teach you not to go on rampages. 16:38, 17 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I was just stopping by to discuss this with you. If you can continue behaving the way you did over the last three days there should be no future problems. - User   21:50, 17 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Full props to the Kid for trying to work in a community-oriented fashion on the CoS article. TheoryOfPractice 21:52, 17 April 2009 (EDT)
 * PH was premature, in his own special way. The kid ain't ready for the prime time.  And that doesn't mean he is as funny as the original SNL cast!  <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:32, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What has CUR done since he was re-sysopped other than twice misrepresent the site? I can see no problem with CUR being a sysop other than the fact that he is under the delusion he is important. Unless you strongly object I will resysop him. - User   00:36, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I object. Cleaning up after/dealing with CUR's nonsense has become a major task on the wiki for months now. The sysopship is just about the only way we can signal to him that he's doing it wrong. He needs to be shown that his behaviour is a drag on the community, and there's really no other way to do it. TheoryOfPractice 00:46, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Pi, there's also the otter crap. And, well, talking "for us" on the "innertubes" really pissed me off.  The child is just that.  Incapable of handling a keyboard and mouse with any modicum of wisdom. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:52, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Agreed, its becoming a real drag and its causing my feet to rot. Ace McWickedbitch and moan 01:00, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Call it another vote in favour. I'll leave it as a mystery if I'm talking about Human's frustration or Ace's rotting feet. --Kels 01:02, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I admit CUR isn't our greatest asset, but we have had worse editors and didn't desysop them. Everyone of Mega's previous incarnations are sysops (despite what she believes) and she twitters about us. Old PC needed quite a bit of work after she had given an article her special treatment and we rarely singled her out like this. CUR does seem to attract a disproportionate amount of attention given that he is here less than two hours a day. - User   01:04, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

(UD) Bad example. Mega kept going away and reincarnating. We're stuck with this CUR twit. He endlessly promises a new leaf, and endlessly makes an ass of himself once more. I say be done with it. At least, let him not be a sysop. An exception to our rule? You think he's "mostly harmless" when he writes such tripe "on our behalf" on some blog (do I need to copy here?). And PC was at least well-meaning, if moderately illiterate. CUR wouldn't know how to be well-meaning - hell, we've spent months wasting our time trying to explain to him how to integrate with a community, and he simply fails, fails, fails. Sorry if that seemed harsh... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  01:21, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * PS, PC, was fucking chore from day one. Her awful Madelane laundry article took me hours to clean up, and I had to follow her droppings endlessly.  But her edits are 1/100th of CURs.  <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  01:23, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Email
I see you don't have email enabled. Drop me a personal email from my user page. I'd like a little private chat. Of course I understand that you may wish to preserve your anonymity so you could use the forum messaging system if you'd prefer.  Lily Ta, wack! 17:58, 18 April 2009 (EDT)



IGNORE
I find it hilarious that CUR just got bitch slapped by Jessica T. That block comment just made my weekend. 18:08, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * "Does your mommy know you're here?" Poor guy lol <font color="#FF3333" text="Super" size="2px">Super <font color="#FF9933" text="Josh" size="2px">Josh <font color="green" text=""crying into a flannel"" size="1px">"crying into a flannel"  18:16, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Note the incorrect punctation. I will very soon have my revenge. Two words: Fall down. -- 19:38, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Three words: Rethink That Plan. --Kels 19:42, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * CUR you do realise you are the only participant in your war against Fall down? - User   19:44, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * This is more of a deal with the devil. -- 19:46, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC)Oh no. The way I see it, FD's actually been making contributions lately. I cut him a deal: if he vandalizes CP, I will put forth a case for one, and only one, of his socks to be put on probation. -- 19:46, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * And what makes you think anyone but you is interested in this rather foolish plan? --Kels 19:48, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * The fact that FD's not getting much lulz out of wandalizing us any more, perhaps? And that he made positive contributions on the Humazee and Absoulte zero articles. -- 19:49, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Fall down's sock will be put on probabtin if he can behave himself here, not if he is a reckless jerk else where. - User   19:51, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Well, he has behaved himself. I'm simply asking a favor of him- he used TOR, and I don't, or rather, can't. -- 19:52, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * As an admin here, I have no interest in this wiki playing a part in your ineffectual little games at CP. And I am officially requesting that you stop making such offers. --Kels 19:55, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Teh comment has been undone. -- 19:56, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (ECx2) He has been quite, but I think after the way he singled out users for abuse he will need more than a few grammar changes to redeem himself. - User   19:59, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * No, he hasn't --  Nx / talk 20:02, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I'll be honest, given the history of him and his socks, I'm not real interested in probation or anything like it. --Kels 20:06, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Probation is a non-starter. Threatening to "ass-rape" people via the internet takes longer than a few months to be overlooked as a past indiscretion....TheoryOfPractice 20:08, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Oh Fall Down, will you ever win, you wily bastard you! Also, why did you sign up with such an obvious name?  You know they read this site, and you know the rules:  no cp user can have an account on ratwiki.  You MUST troll harder CUR.  You can do it.  DSFARGEG 20:14, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * (EC)With the exception of:
 * Ed Poor
 * Conservative
 * TK
 * Geo.plrd
 * JessicaT
 * TerryH
 * CPWebmaster
 * And so on. - User   20:21, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * See how far you've fallen, CUR? You've got a channer egging you on, for crying out loud! --Kels 20:18, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Can one not be nice every now and then? Some people are never happy!DSFARGEG 20:42, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Also, I would like to say that even though, I am at times, an evil bastard, beneath it all I'm... I'm... hmm.  DSFARGEG 20:46, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Can we drop this conversation? -- 20:23, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Okay but CUR please think about things you say about RationalWiki to other people. - User   20:27, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I'm good with that, so long as you actually modify your behaviour based on what you learned. --Kels 20:33, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What I have learned... is that someone who is bored should graph CUR's learning curve. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  21:10, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Inserting comments
CUR I can't help but notice you have a habit of going over discussion threads and inserting your comment back further up between two other users comment. I find this annoying for two reason, you have broken the chronological order of the discussion and what you say rarely adds any additional interesting/humorous/sensible commentary. I can't do anything about the latter, but to make it easier to read could you at least respect the convention of indenting it one or two times deeper than the following comment. So instead of:
 * Sensible editor's comment
 * CUR's stupid 8 hrs late comment
 * Sensible editor's comment

We have:
 * Sensible editor's comment
 * CUR's stupid 8 hrs late comment
 * Sensible editor's comment

Just to make it easier to read. - User   06:36, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Hey
'sup?--<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore fiat justitia ruat coelum 06:41, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Preface to your undergrad comp and rhetoric course.
I think you should take some comments to heart regarding the Stanek blog. I'm not calling you an idiot, by any means. You're a smart guy. Smart enough to not repeat some rhetorical mistakes. Any time you write something, you should think "To whom am I writing?", "Why am I writing", and "What do they want to hear?" This will be valuable when you write your college admission essays, so listen! (or read, rather...) In this case, you are writing to a pro-life blog, which means that these are going to be conservatives, mostly. Keep it clean. Keep it respectful. And keep it clean. No Assfly, no ass anything. And these folks are probably politically minded, so keep it professional. Keep in mind that you are representing a side of an argument, not just yourself. The next question, "Why am I writing?" can also be construed as "What am I trying to accomplish?" Really, this should be the first question, but I don't want to go back and rearrange everything. So what did you want to accomplish with your posts? Were you aiming to change somebody's perception about something, or were you merely trolling? Let's assume that you, taking the high road, wanted to change somebody's perception about something. Perception about what, then? In this case, you want to convince people that Conservapedia is not a good alternative to Wikipedia. Also you maybe would like to convince people that Andy Schlafly is not a good representative of the conservative movement. How do you do this? REMEMBER YOUR AUDIENCE! You want to convince these people that Andy's a crackpot. The way to do this is to calmly, respectfully, post evidence of Andy's inanity and boorishness. Links (or citations)! Proof is good. Make a coherent argument and back it up with facts. Finally, I brought up what the audience wants to hear. This has been mentioned all along. Think about who you're talking to and consider what is likely to convince them. ALL CAPS YELLING ABOUT FACISM makes you look immature. Prove them wrong and make a calm, convincing argument. If you're in the right you won't have to appeal to emotion. I'm serious here, I think you're a smart guy, but you need to act the part. You have what it takes to represent yourself well, so go do just that. Corryundefined 00:21, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Thanks Corry. CUR, please attend Corry's advice. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:40, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Excellent advice Corry. CUR, please read this, it will help you become a more persuasive writer. Whenever I read debates, I skip anything written in all caps, or with multiple exclamation points, or slurs, I won't waste my time on it. <font color="#000066">Refugee [[User_Talk:Refugee|<font color = "#00F0A20"> talk

page ]] 02:58, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Agree with ref... see also: Law of exclamation <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  15:02, 22 April 2009 (EDT)