User talk:Interiot

Greetings, Interiot. Pull up a you ing. -- *Gen. S.T. Shrink*  Get to the bunker  01:03, 9 July 2008 (EDT)


 * You the "real" interiot? If so welcome back!. 10:46, 9 July 2008 (EDT)


 * Fo' real, fo' sho'. I guess this wiki got deleted and re-created?  Is there something I can google for to find out the backstory, or is it hush-hush?  --Interiot 18:53, 9 July 2008 (EDT)


 * There's, essentially we decided to take it public. It was quite exciting, actually. --λινυσ (☮) 19:29, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I've always wondered, Linus: was RationalWiki 1.0 a private wiki? Or just really obscure?  Oh, and hi Interiot—welcome to the !   14:07, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Sort of both. We shut off strictly-open registration after a bunch of Conservapedia sysops announced that we had been infiltrated. Our main defense throughout 1.0 was always obscurity, however. --λινυσ (☮) 16:22, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Hello. :)  I think it was just really obscure, and its main page was tending towards being a little more Conservapedia-centric than it is now?  --Interiot 14:19, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 * It was "private", you had to have an invite to get in and a user account had to be created for you before you could see anything. But we were really, really easy to get an account on and several CP sysops used deceit to get lurker accounts. After the night of the blunt knives we scraped RW 1.0 and moved towards what you see now, bit-by-bit. 22:56, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 * There is a history article buried somewhere on the wiki, Mr. Interiot (Probably in the RationalWiki namespace). Welcome to the Dollhouse!  Also, can you work with Trent on getting that awesome Interiot tool installed here that you did at CP?  The one that shows where one has edited, etc.? PS, Trent, are you sure accounts had to be created for people?  As I recall, I just created my own after you told me about RW1.  ħ uman  23:02, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Colin and I moved it to completely closed registration and viewing a few weeks into the project. At that point accounts had to be created. The first several rounds made their own. 23:08, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Ahh, I must have originally joined during the first couple weeks then, cool. So now that everybody can see what's happening here, does it sully my good name to edit here?  ;)
 * Oh man, it's been forever since I did any tools work, there may very well be another tool that's state of the art now. But, sure, I can look into it at least.  --Interiot 00:06, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Um, no more than it does mine to edit CP again? Weird night...  ħ uman  00:22, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Some history here for those who remember. --BanVote for me 14:11, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Question lost in the frothing excitement of welcomes above
Can you work with Trent on getting that awesome Interiot tool installed here, like you did at CP? That thing was/is awesome.  ħ uman  20:11, 13 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Yeah, I'm going to work on it when I get some time. While I'm in there digging around, I also need to make it work again for Conservapedia, and create a special version that tracks Conservapedia site-wide edits too.  --Interiot 13:36, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

You are sysop
Well done. 14:36, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * See the guide for details. 15:13, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Wow, cool. And I just noticed now.  ;)  Well, sometimes my sleeping habits have me up in the middle of the night to patrol, so maybe I'll be of some use, who knows.  --Interiot 00:16, 18 August 2008 (EDT)

Hello again
Long time no see! 17:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello. Yeah, Conservapedia blocked the IP I visited from while at work (at the httpd.conf level, not the MediaWiki level, so it gives even less information about how to request an unblock than normal).  The block was because it was on the same IP as my "night edit mode" checker, which apparently they flagged as a robot.  I shut down the night mode backend months ago (though I explicitly got permission from them to run read-only bots), but they haven't unblocked.  If anyone knows who the appropriate person to contact is, I can contact them, but this seems like SOP for them.
 * Anyway, I still visit RationalWiki sometimes, but it sucks that many of the links here are dead for me. --Interiot 00:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You should probably contact . If you want access then I would offer to fix their user edit count tool. If they later revoke your access then bork it again. 09:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't resort to extortion. Anyway, there's no need: if I fix my counter for other wikis, the counter can't work for their site as long as they keep the IP blocked.  --Interiot 16:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Good criticisms
Christ Myth Theory and Horseshoe theory are clearly written from an ideological perspective instead of following the evidence.

I have to disagree with the "scientism" bit. The scientific method ultimately boils down to "reproducibility", which can and should be achieved in literary and archeological analysis. Simple things like "only cite things that are literally in the text as evidence" help ensure that the arguments are logical and that other historians can come to the same conclusions. 00:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Autopatrolled!
ClickerClock (talk) 07:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)