Forum:Deciding who gets to be whom if Rationalwiki were the Roman Republic

All of your problems would be solved if you didn't behave like offended Victorian ladies all the time and descend into HCM every time there's a problem. The biggest issue here is that certain members (particularly the newer ones) love to play the 'leaving and never coming back gambit' all the time, and generally manufacture drama wherever they can. The solutions are relatively simple and straight forward - don't behave like a pack of retards or indulge those who are behaving like a pack of retards... I can't believe I have to point this out to you, its quite straight forward. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 09:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And I can't believe I'm agreeing with you. Totnesmartin (talk) 12:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I used to think of you as one of the most vacuous people on RW, a horrible wikipedia nerd who was destined to bring this site to mediocre destruction. Now I understand you are more of a Agrippa than a Sejanus. Mostly harmless and with perhaps some good intentions. Anyone who has read I, Claudius will understand this analogy. RW in the beginning was like the Republic. But then the personalities got so bizarre and willingly offended that it became necessary for there to be an Empire. The clash of personalities resulted in an Augustus like figure (The Loya Jirga) This quickly receded to irrelevance but the precedent established became dangerous. Any manner of internet nerdiness was now rewarded. New folks like Ty or Suspected Replicant got their jollies from consistently challenging the old Republican heroes of the past - Human, Nutty Roux, Dogged Persistance, Nx even - which leads us seamlessly to the reign of Tiberius. Tiberius of course was a rotten man, a degenerate Emperor, but he seemed virtuous next to his successor Caligula. Caligula was insane, much as this present fuss is, and thankfully he didn't rule all that long. Yet he made lasting damage to the Empire while he did.


 * We must hope that a Claudius now emerges to save Rationalwiki. Perhaps it is too late to return to a Republic but it is possible to have sensible, emotionally mature leadership with a tolerance of dissent and diversity. Here's hoping. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I "get my jollies" from working on the bloody site. And who gets to be the Gracchus brothers? ТyUser_talk:Ty 12:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually nobody gives a shit about your categorisations and other shit. Like RA before you, you will face a grim fall when you eventually realise that people can see directly through your pathetic attempts to win friends and influence people by forging a reputation for 'hard work'. If you want to do some work join an IT consultancy, otherwise stop insulting our intelligence with your transparant attempts to gain recognition and 'respect'. Suppose you'll leave and never come back now, and kick off yet another HCM. Why don't you do everyone a favour and go see a prostitute, you're badly in need of a blowjob. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't care about recognition or respect, I am perfectly happy to be a nonentity. I suppose this means that SusanG's writing of the help files, DogP's "catting binges", Thunderkatz's citation project, and Humans effective construction of mainspace were all wastes of time apparently. And you still have not answered my question. ТyUser_talk:Ty 12:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The fact that you have went to such trouble to learn all about the sites history, without apparantly pausing the learn the lessons of its past mistakes, it strikes me that your ceaseless ambition to install yourself Imperator of this site will never be quenched by either rational argumentation or logic. Instead the site must actively reject the notion of hierarchy, return to its liberal roots, and abandon all the traces of authoritarianism that have emerged over the past three years (Sadly mostly because of my provocations). Things will change though, and from now on I will be in the vanguard of that change, leading a movement to bring RW back to its former greatness. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Again. Answer the question. An expert on site history and Roman history such as yourself should have absolutely no problem answering it. ТyUser_talk:Ty 12:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to interject in an otherwise completely pointless discussion, but are you seriously suggesting you view yourself as a populist reformer? Jesus kid, get a grip. Nutty Roux (talk) 12:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Are you referring to me or Ty NR? And no, I don't view myself as a populist reformer. I view myself as Jesus Christ. Persecuted, crucified, punished... but never destroyed. Never!
 * I also bear some resemblances to Frankie Boyle. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:44, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm referring to Ty, who asked you who gets to be the Gracchus brothers. Gaius Gracchus indeed. Nutty Roux (talk) 12:48, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I do not view myself as a reformer. I view myself as a wikignome, I make minor edits. And from Marcus's timeline above I arrived far too late to be considered. ТyUser_talk:Ty 12:51, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Then unless I'm not following I don't see any other question for you to be saying Marcus didn't answered other than "And who gets to be the Gracchus brothers?" You referred to the leaders of a plebe insurrection. Why? Nutty Roux (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Cause I'm a history nut, but not Roman, and wanted to see just how many parallels there are between RationalWiki and the Roman Republic. ТyUser_talk:Ty 12:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest Ty, I think you're a bit of a Caligula in the making. I think that a lot more goes on behind the keyboard than you allow people to think. There's probably a Livia whispering in your ear, but then again thats only one of the voices in your head. Ignore her and whatever you do, don't make her a goddess. Good boy. 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Can I just butt in here for a sec and point out this isn't really helping anything? Thank you. DickTurpis (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh fuck you. I'm glad this isn't helping anything. This entire exercise is an ego driven manic episode where all the jumped up little shits get to play congressman for the day. Get a life and stop trying to regulate everything that moves. Jesus... 86.45.195.245 (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * "I'm glad this isn't helping anything." Good to know. Any reason therefore not to put the troll tags around this entire conversation? DickTurpis (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This isn't really helping anything? And what is, Dick? Hiding conversations? Moving them around hoping they get lost in the confusion? Do I get to follow you around like an aspie on a mission and tell you that you're not helping? Is that helping? Do you really think you're helping? Occasionaluse (talk) 14:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Didn't you retire there, Favre? DickTurpis (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I call dibs on the surviving Horatii brother. DickTurpis (talk) 14:08, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I get to be Scipio Africanus. Nutty Roux (talk) 14:15, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I be Lurcio? Totnesmartin (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I bags Titus Atticus. Titus Atticus (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll be satisfied as any old plebe. Also, I think a lot of the site's drama comes from users like JimJast and Maratrean.  Well, how about this: relegate them to essay-space or debate space or whatever, and then either ignore them or rebut them.  Or are we so low on server space we can't handle "Gravitation Demystified?"  There.  Much drama avoided.  And i'd be nice if the oldfags weren't always bitching about how their circle-jerk has changed.  My solution?  Make a forum where oldfags can reminisce in piece.  Drama averted.  And, maybe, just maybe, if certain RWers weren't allowed to rampantly troll and flame people, we could avoid some drama there too?--Foucault5.jpg-brxbrx 22:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You really are a halfwit. You don't understand this site and seem to have confused it with wikipedia, you virgin freak. 86.45.239.221 (talk) 11:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And maybe, just maybe, if you weren't having uch a hard time transitioning from /b/ and ED and didn't think calling people oldfags is cute or troll and flame people like me I'd take you seriously. Nutty Roux (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * AND I shall be Horace! --Horace (talk) 02:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)