User talk:Armed roomba

𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒  talk  18:15, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Sysop
Plutocow (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC) I can already feel the power flowing through my veins. Thanks for the demotion! armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 18:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

My edit on an IP's talk page
Yes you're right Armed roomba. I went to far in my edit. I'm committed to keeping it civil hereafter. Thanks.Field Dreamer (talk) 23:47, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. Glad to see you're taking it in stride. armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 23:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

You're quite clearly posting all of this in bad faith
187.20.172.99 (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If you can't explain why I'm posting in bad faith I'll revert your edit. I'm not transphobic, I'm a victim of the problem on the article. 187.20.172.99 (talk) 17:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Posting quotes from an article with no commentary isn't a good start, and incendiary stuff like that to boot clearly shows that you weren't trying to start discussion. If the purpose of that edit wasn't to be transphobic, then what was it? Because that's sure as hell how it comes off. Undoing rollbacks and then portraying yourself as the victim is 100% in bad faith. armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 17:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * 17:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair. Wasn't planning to respond but the second post assuming some sort of victory got on my nerves. armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 17:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * What? The article literally starts with that quote. What did you want me to post? Just the link? The purpose was to ask someone to post it on the main page because I think it is an important subject and it's interesting enough to be on the RationalWiki:What is going on in the blogosphere? page. Doing rollbacks and then accusing people of bad faith when guidelines tell you to assume good faith is 100% bad faith. 187.20.172.99 (talk) 17:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll post the link again with something else that is not the opening quote. If that's not good enough for you I'm sorry. 187.20.172.99 (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "If that's not good enough for you I'm sorry." | Ok man, you have fun with that. armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 17:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey
I don't know about the topic above this one, but you don't need IMO to hide stuff like this. Remember the Hanlon's razor, unfortunately we get idiots like this all the time, and refuting is usually better than just hide. GeeJayK (talk) 17:52, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely, I'll step back on it. Some of the time I get a the bit too into debates even if I know the person on the other end is trolling, so the goal with that was to remind myself to not go too hard. Definitely see how it could be annoying however, so I'll stop for now. Thanks! armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 17:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I would like to know why you reverted my edit in "Sex and gender in sports"
That would be helpful thanks. Epic Games (talk) 02:59, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is a sensitive topic. The presentation of naked data is not helpful to the interests of all concerned. You really ought to practice editing elsewhere in the wiki. Ariel31459 (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Its not naked data at all. And why is this a sensitive topic? Are people going to faint if they discover that trans women have many advantages over the biological woman? That maybe male puberty's advantages are much bigger than you might think? I starting to think that some editors dont want the paper in mainspace because it might offend someone... Epic Games (talk) 03:13, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for others. Leave it. Ariel31459 (talk) 03:16, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Cuz you're an intellectually dishonest user who doesn't deserve breath wasted; people found your arguments sealioning bullshit, right from the moment your first "save edit" surfaced, and they don't want to engage with you further. 07:04, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * "Intellectually dishonest" huh?
 * Who has
 * * Ended a discussion when it was about to get interesting at the Saloon Bar?
 * * Who despite believing in the RationalWiki mission has refuses to accept a scientific paper from a reputable journal because its a contradiction to her deeply held beliefs?
 * * Who has decided to vandal bin an editor on nothing more than difference of opinion?
 * * Who has accused an editor of transphobia despite that editor saying he has no hate or fear of transgender people?
 * But nah, its me its me who is the intellectually dishonest one, the one who has always replied to any question he was asked, who always remain honest about his beliefs who never was afraid to ask a question to clarify things. Epic Games (talk) 08:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I reverted it because it never mentioned testosterone in a section about testosterone. It never even mentioned trans women, only cis men, and wasn't relevant to the section at all. I didn't notice anything wrong with it on a first pass, it was reverted because it didn't have anything to do with the section it was in. armed_roomba (she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 18:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: LGBTQIA
Yeah.... How did that edit remain there? The I and A stand for intersex and asexual respectively. It is indeed a legitimate set of lettets The text goes on to just say LGBT and not even LGBT+.... 05:51, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I noticed the broken link and went to fix it, but then wondered why a link to the LGB Alliance was under LGBTQIA. Read the section, and was genuinely confused at what I read. It was probably written when even adding a Q to the acronym was met with pushback. The times are a-changing in front of us, and frankly, I couldn't give less of a crap how many letters are in the acronym. Inclusivity for the win. armed_roomba(she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 05:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The section used to be "LGBTQIA[whatever letter]" akin to "LGBTQIABCXWYZ" that IS used in a derogatory way but the [whatever letter] part was chipped off and then it looked really offputting. Edit: Bongolian left that part out while readding the content, probably didn't understand the bracketed spot so he removed it. 05:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That... completely passed me by. That makes sense, and would have been a good section. Should it be reinstated? armed_roomba(she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 06:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think so, though searching for people that openly mock the term as "LGBTQIABCWXYZ" and other variants is needed so we have examples. I just know they exist but my Italian stomach can't handle those type's Twitter feeds. 06:30, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Crazy late with this one, but do we actually need examples? Besides, searching that term due to its general variation (there's no actual definitive version of the joke) would probably be a nightmare. armed_roomba(she/her)What am I doing wrong this time? 22:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)