User talk:MarcusCicero/archive01

Oh, I thought CP's MarcusCicero was someone from RW (I'm recollecting a discussion about user names). Is this a new sock or am I wrong? Anyway good luck here. And elsewhere. Editor at CP 08:22, 11 December 2007 (EST)

No, I'm a real person! MarcusCicero 08:23, 11 December 2007 (EST)

Yep, sorry, and congratulations for your Conservapedia career, as long as it lasted. I must be confusing this user name thing with something else. Editor at CP 08:36, 11 December 2007 (EST)
 * Hello9. Welcome. :-)  --Bobbing up 11:48, 11 December 2007 (EST)
 * You left CP with a good exit. Conservative blocks you, then replies (trying to act like nothing's wrong), then not even a minute later, BURN IT DOWN! :D  Norseman  Wassail!   12:25, 11 December 2007 (EST)

Ron Paul
What fuck was that all about? PFoster 09:31, 14 February 2008 (EST)
 * Make the edit notes look prettier. You could make the best edit in the world, but if you say "you are wrong" it's highly likely to be reverted anyway. Lurker 12:06, 14 February 2008 (EST)
 * You might want to support your changes with evidence on the talk page before editing, since some of your edits are substantively incorrect. Or just wait for the mob.--PalMD-Did that sound a little harsh? 10:44, 15 February 2008 (EST)
 * I think the original statements, such as that 'Ron Paul supports school prayer' are obscene. Ron Paul supports freedom, and the freedom to choose. The fact that him and the darling of the left (Kuchinich) were such close friends was because they were identical civil Libertarians. I think you need to read more, or get out more, I don't know which. MarcusCicero 12:11, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Will the real Marcus Cicero...
...please stand up? Are there two, or just two accounts?-- -PalMD -- 20:07, 13 March 2008 (EDT) Wha? MarcusCicero 20:08, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
 * User:MarcusCicero, User:Marcus_Cicero-- [[Image:Asclepius staff.png|8px]]-PalMD -- 20:14, 13 March 2008 (EDT)...ah..i got it...sorry...-- [[Image:Asclepius staff.png|8px]]-PalMD -- 20:15, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

What was that about?? MarcusCicero 07:38, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I confused the article about the person with the user.75.62.26.190 08:40, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Is there a contradiction here?
I note that you see your function at RW as being :"bringing someone up when they are being out of order." Furthermore your favorite verse contains the phrase: "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!". Given this, do you see a bit of a contradiction by starting a post with the words: "Fuck you Susan."?--Bobbing up 05:56, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * You might of also noticed when reading my page that I am an atheist, and am not expected to stand in line with the demands of the Christian faith :-) P.S- If you look at what Susan wrote to cause me to react that way, I was entirely justified with my 'fuck you' comment. And besides, I don't see how I am actually contradicting that passage in any way by saying 'fuck you', maybe you can explain that to me? MarcusCicero 07:23, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Sure. I'd say a comment, "Fuck you." is out of order under in any circumstances. If you think its a reasonable thing to say to somebody then we have different views about what is "out of order".--Bobbing up 10:32, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I'd say saying 'persons of low IQ' when describing around 95% of the worlds population is bang out of order as well. I use the word Fuck quite a lot by the way, I don't have the American predisposition towards looking at all cuss words as 'bad'. The word fuck really rolls of the tongue, brilliantly summing up someones irritation when they are genuinely disgusted at something. MarcusCicero 12:32, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Nevertheless, I'm afraid that I'll have to ban you for a short while. See it as a demonstration of awesome neutrality. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום

Is this a joke or serious? MarcusCicero 12:37, 14 March 2008 (EDT)


 * It's a token discharge of my sysopship. See yourself as an unfortunate, innocent victim of our neutrality policy ;). I do agree with you, though ... --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום

Thats Ok, glad to see I got some of the 'lulz' (Am I phrasing this right?) MarcusCicero 12:49, 14 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Indeed. The lulz must flow. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
 * Hi Marcus. I'm just trying to get my mind 'round what you would consider "out of order". Am I right in understanding that you object to somebody making a generalized attack on religious beliefs; but you feel that saying "fuck you" to an individual is OK? I must say that personally I'd have it the other way 'round - attacking philosophies is fine but attacking individuals is over the line.  I think that's more or less our unofficial policy as well. (I'd also say that anyone who says "fuck you" to you has gone too far as well - but I'd only raise it if their user page indicated they felt they held the high moral ground.) --Bobbing up 13:06, 14 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Hold on a minute there Bob. If you say that I claim to hold the moral highground in relation to pulling people up and you yourself are opposed to people holding the moral highground then maybe Ratwiki isn't the place for you. The entire place is a moral highground over the collective looney tunes over on Conservapedia. I say I bring people up on issues when they are being blatently hypocritical (calling Mormons nutballs on the front page when this place is so ready to jump on the highground when it comes to CPs front page). Was I attacking Susan? No, I was expressing disgust at what she said.


 * I would say that trading insults of little content whether it be saying someone is of low IQ or telling someone to fuck off moves a conversation from a discussion to a fight. That is all. Sterilexx 13:17, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I would agree.--Bobbing up 13:21, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Jesus talk about pedantics. She said all religious people are morons. That is the most moronic thing I have ever heard or seen and if anyone ever deserved to be told to fuck off it was her. Look at the bigger picture for Gods sake. I think this is more of a cultural thing anyway, my experience with most Americans is that they hate the use of swear words. Get over it for FUCK sake. MarcusCicero 13:22, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Thank you for clarifying your position. (I would point out in passing that I am British.)--Bobbing up 13:25, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

I agree with you at talk:Mainpage
Word.- 11:56, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Care to explain?
"Internet Infidels is a group of morons just as bad as CP in my eyes. ...Thanks for putting the ridiculous fringe loony tune story back in Human. Are we really going out of our way to appear like an inverse CP? —MarcusCicero" You express yourself strongly and you appear certain your opinion is the right one. And do realize you come off as a bit of an ass. Would you care to explain the rationale behind these opinions, now? -- 18:00, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Its not my fault this place is going out of its way to seem like a parody of the far secular left. MarcusCicero 18:02, 24 March 2008 (EDT)


 * I find the comment in the link about internet infidels to be absolutely despicable. 'Moron' is not a term I would consider using to describe anyone's views on religion. Their views should not be mocked in a pluralistic society which is supposed to place great value on tolerance.


 * I think you really need to grow up, and take a good long look at yourself in the mirror and see where your conscience lies. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:27, 24 March 2008 (EDT)


 * It can't be parody if it's the real thing. As you said, the "far secular left" [italics mine].  Perhaps we're too far left for you, neh?  Also, I would rate us as much less radical than Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, or any of their raving fans.  SusanG is the only raging antitheist here.  -- 18:34, 24 March 2008 (EDT)


 * One must admit that one is not quite sure one agrees with that assessment. -- AKjeldsen Godspeed! 18:38, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Let me rephrase that...
You're being an ass. Please discuss your proposed changes before making edits that will be swiftly reverted anyways. -- 18:34, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Frack off
I mean that. Fuck off. MarcusCicero 19:23, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * orly? NightFlareSpeak, mortal 19:25, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Nightflare,

Your little post earlier was very interesting. You repeated word for word the post I made when referring to all Mormons as nutjobs. I consider the users at Internet Infidels largely to be morons. Thats just a personal view I have and I'm not running about on the front page declaring that. That was the point I was trying to get across, but I'm sure you can't see that.

And yes, you people are probably too left for me. A few miles into the looney asylum too left. MarcusCicero 19:29, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Aw come on, be nice :) human  19:58, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Wherein Ames sticks his neck out

 * Hey, as absentee admin here, I'd like to step in and say that I don't approve of anyone calling each other morons, especially if they're calling all Mormons morons. That's not cool.- 20:04, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Yeah, it shouldn't be on the front page. Its ok if its on at least 3 talk pages and at least 1 edit summary, as long as its not on the front page.
 * Hint: Don't assume anything here represents anything but a personal view of whoever expresses the view in question or those who specifically agree with it. It has been said many times before, we are a very heterogeneous group; I and many others, including you, didn't agree with calling Mormons morons, among other things.
 * Also, how do you reconcile that with the lash against SusanG for expressing her "personal view"? NightFlareSpeak, mortal 20:17, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't think I was involved in the Epic Debate aside from briefly. Also, at the risk off stating the obvious, I'd hate to lose one valued contributor (MarcusCicero) or another (NightFlare).  Is there something I, as an objective third party, should do to make sure that doesn't happen?  has that already happened?- 20:20, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I have to take issue with describing MC as a "valued contributor", sorry. Valued as we value all human life, opinions, etc.  But not as someone who has ever, you know, "improved" RW.  Just my .02. human  22:04, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * That's not nice. Don't we want to keep users?- 22:55, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Not if they insist on channelling Jiminy Cricket with a dirty great stick up his arse. ;) --Robledo 23:36, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Isn't that exactly the kind of contributor we do need? I've always wanted us to make sure we don't stray too far left, and lose our sense in the process, and he's a valued check on that, I think.  He keeps us honest.- 23:40, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * He keeps us pissed, is what he does. -- 23:44, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Could you define which connotation of "pissed" you mean?- 23:47, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Whatever connotation means "drives off Susan, offends Bob, brawls with NightFlare, and rubs the remainder of us the wrong way." That kind of pissing off.  -- 23:57, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Did he drive off Susan? Is it possible that in my quest for a moderate foil, I've settled on a less than ideal character?  Have I stuck my neck out too far?- 00:06, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * If "valued contributor" = "some dumbass who just argues without making valid points, but hates RW", then, yes, (s)he is. Please provide one diff that shows MC has actually in any way improved the discourse here, or any articles. human  00:10, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Wherein the conversation otherwise continues

 * Yes. Yes, it has already happened.  And there's nothing you can do.  Just let 'em fight it out like the two-year-olds they are.  -- 21:09, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Two years old can barely speak, drunkards make a better analogy. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 21:16, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I was referring to how mature you two were/are acting. -- 21:18, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Why is the best reading on this site always "below" that stop sign above? And when will someone replace that awful .jpg with a sweet (transparent background) .svg??? human  21:58, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Oi! I spent literally seconds selecting that image from the first page of google image results! How dare you! -- 08:21, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

In which we set dramas to stun
Can I most respectfully suggest that we are applying somewhat of a double standard here? We were very keen to all jump on Marcus when he called us out on calling all Mormons 'nutjobs', defending our rights to freedom of speech, conscience, expression, etc, but when he himself says a similar thing about our dear, beloved, infidels.org, we consider chucking him off the site, on the grounds that he isn't a valued contributor? I mean, I haven't made a mainspace contribution for aeons, so does that mean that I have to pack my bags, too? Marcus is one of the less egregious types that we've dealt with; does anyone remember Rational Thinker, who called anyone who disagreed with him 'full of bullshit' and 'crap'? May I remind the mob what, say, Bob M described this as? Not 'brawling', being 'some dumbass', or suchlike, but 'a slightly more controversial editing style'. Also, when Radioactive Afikomen blocked him, Human considered de-sysoping him. I'm sure that these differing treatments based on belief are unintentional, but they're still undesirable and wrong.

Be consistent, here, people, or I may just have to start banning literally everyone again. I don't want to do that, since I already have ~30 tabs open already. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
 * I would suggest that this is a not entirely unpredictable consequence of our beloved Mobocracy. In the absence of clear and equitable rules, the will of the majority gets its way. -- AKjeldsen Godspeed! 07:59, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * That isn't exactly the way I remember it. As I recall, most people agreed with MC in that instance. If there's a double standard to be had here, it's MC's. -- 08:00, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Yes, I was wrong to call them morons, all right? (I had said this before the lynching took place on my talk page) My major problem was that while this place claims to refute everything about CP, it had something like that on its front page. MarcusCicero 08:03, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

foul and abusive language...
'''Who said that? Who the fuck said that?

Who's the slimy little communist shit twinkle-toed cocksucker down here, who just signed his own death warrant? Nobody, huh?! The fairy fucking godmother said it! Out-fucking- standing! I will P.T. you all until you fucking die! I'll P.T. you until your assholes are sucking buttermilk. Was it you, you scroungy little fuck, huh?! Sir, no, sir! You little piece of shit! You look like a fucking worm! I'll bet it was you! Sir, no, sir! Sir, I said it, sir! Well ... no shit. What have we got here, a fucking comedian? Private Joker? I admire your honesty. Hell, I like you. You can come over to my house and fuck my sister.

'''


 * What she said... human  19:57, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Sigh
No-one drove Susan off the Wiki. She took herself off. Don't defend her, she shouldn't get so offended when she is so ready to offend 95% of the worlds population in a previous post.

RA; Childish? Don't make me laugh.

Human; You know fine well what I was taking issue with. Is RW simply going to be a place that the radical, and I mean radical secular left gets a hearing? If thats the case, then we're no better than CP. MarcusCicero 06:58, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

A radical internet site is somewhere that gives fringe opinions treatmeant as if their mainstream. The incoherent rant of an 'Internet Infidel' that Jesus DID INDEED SURVIVE THE CRUCIFIXION is in looney tune territory, sorry. MarcusCicero 07:09, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * You're fond of this "no better than CP" thing, but I think there's a crucial difference. No one is going to delete any "conservative" point of view (well, except where you define conservative as neo-nazi, which we delete on a regular basis with what I'd say is good justification.) Yes, most people here tend to be in favour of a lack of religion in public life, but if someone wants to defend religion then there's nothing to stop them. We put up with HoG's nonsense for a long time, so any halfway sane defender of the faith should get along just fine. -- 08:08, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Its when we start entertaining crackpot theories in a website that supposedly attacks such theories is when I compare this place to CP. Also, the attitudes on this website are frankly amazing. MarcusCicero 08:25, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

I can't forgive you
for driving Susan away (whether you did or not, you are the scapegoat now). But I agree with you that Rationalwiki should be Rational, not (only) an insanely atheist/loony/radical/communist mirror of Conservapedia. Says Superstitious animistEd at CP 08:03, 25 March 2008 (EDT), who has a head of Lenin in his bedroom.

Susan was an ass. She was always ready to insult someone else but never able to take it when it came her way. MarcusCicero 08:05, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Dear pot, this is kettle. I wish to comment on your hue. -- 08:11, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

What is your point? I didn't go on a big hissy fit and Leave and never come back. MarcusCicero 08:24, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * The point would be twofold, 1) Apparently you don't like being insulted but it's perfectly fine for you to insult others, and 2) Apparently it's absolutely fine for you to insult others "behind their back" whatever the fuck that means on the internet, but not for others. -- 08:28, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

This is the third or fourth time that Susan has left in a huff. It's not MCs fault. And hopefully this time she means it. She clearly has the brain of a two year old and the tolerance level of a Karijou. I don't miss her a bit. 69.158.96.208 08:32, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * WARNING. I SUSPECT TROLLING AND/OR FALSE FLAG DECEIT IN TPAM. Ahem. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
 * I've been called a troll before. Who cares. I'm just stating my opinion. No deceit. 69.158.96.208 08:51, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

If she stayed around I probably would have told her that on her page. Behind my back means doing an elaborate demonstration on Humans talk page without saying to me, on my page. Very big of you. MarcusCicero 09:07, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Well, since you feel the need to be informed -- I called you a complete and utter twat. Enjoy. -- 10:14, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

To see a real, genuine re-enactment of a 1930s Southern Lynch mob, look no further than my talk page!
You are full of yourself, aren't you? Or prone to self-agrandizing hyperbole.  Rational Ed think 10:45, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * What would you call it? A ream of people came on my talk page overnight, calling me all manner of names. Its as close to a lynch as you'll get online. MarcusCicero 10:53, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Perhaps you are not aware of how inappropriate the 1930s southern lynch mob analogy is. Might be better to stick to "lynch mob" in future, as it does not carry the same heavy racial, historical and moral weight. Probably most of the people in this mob would be satisfied to tar and feather you and run you out of town on a rail.  Rational Ed think 11:05, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

In the interests of everyone's sanity, I've blanked this page. Nasty things got said on both sides and I think its better if we can continue this on the mainpage talk, where I have explained what my objections/interpretation of everything was.

And please don't take a paranoid 'he's deleting the talk' stuff. I can put it back if you all want.

Just a comment
I'd like to point out, we are a mobocracy. See here. So your objections to a mob ganging up on you are a bit... well... you know what I mean. It's like moving into a country well-known to be aristocratic and then complaining that you don't like how the elite have all the power. It might not be right, but it's the law of the land, and very little short of armed rebellion is going to change anything (and trust me, violence is very difficult to carry out over the Internet). ThunderkatzHo! 15:19, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * And no one has blocked you. You're a free man!  Rational Ed 5 or 6 edits 15:21, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Now, why did you resign? --2 17:58, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Resign from what?MarcusCicero 18:09, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * From your position, #6, from your position. Surely you understand our need to know.  All we want is... information! human  19:23, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Eh, how and what position did I resign from? I'm confused, very confused! MarcusCicero 20:15, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Sorry, it's a series of references to the 60's television show The Prisoner. Most excellent television.  It and MPFC are the only box-sets of DVDs I've ever bought. human  20:52, 25 March 2008 (EDT)


 * Did you ever see the comic series that got made a while back? Painted artwork, involving a rather capable woman stumbling on the Island by accident and finding herself between an aging and cryptic Number Six and the Leo McKern Number Two (and the midget butler) still playing out their private personal war.  Really good adaption. --Kels 20:56, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * No, I didn't, is it on line? Leo was a great #2... human  14:08, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

Community Standards
I put some suggestions on RationalWiki talk:Community Standards to add to the Standards of Behavior Suggestion. Feel free to comment or to add some there. I view it as a community wide discussion, not arbitration for your specific case. It may not be what you want, but may reach the same end for the community anyway. I hope that is reasonable. Sterilexx 17:41, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Suggestion
I'd add something about "fringe loonbags," but that's just me. Also, the best place to follow US politics is with this page not Politico. Lyra Belaqua Communique Delegate scorecard 18:17, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Fringe Loonbags? Who exactly? I dunno... I'm quite conservative when it comes to making a dramatic change with regards to my source of news... MarcusCicero 18:22, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * A, TIME is more reputable. You could try the Drudge Report (the site that broke the story about Prince Harry going to Afghanistan) but that's not all political. B, "Fringe Loonbags" refers to loony people who are on the fringe. (switch A & B :-) Lyra Belaqua Communique Delegate scorecard 18:28, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Politico is almost solely politics though... MarcusCicero 18:31, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Hey, Lyra, you realize the Drudge Report is not exactly "neutral" or "objective", right? human  19:22, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Did I open up a can of worms here? Don't be fooled, MarcusCicero, Drudge may not be objective or neutral but it's just a compilation of various AP and newspaper articles. It's biased in favor of the numerous perspectives it posts, so it gives you a well-rounded discourse of the state of America. Lyra Belaqua Communique Delegate scorecard 19:30, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Point being, you need to actually be looking at more than one source for news. Drudge is certainly not right-wing friendly as it might have once been, and Time, along with most MSM, always has its own agenda, depending if print or electronic. --TK/MyTalk|undefined"Lowly" editor 19:42, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Newz? Nuthin' like a bi' o' oul newz from Miriam O'Callaghhan, eh? Jaysus, she's hot. Hotter than Anne Doyle, anyways.

Personally, I'd recommend any of the following as well as Time. Drudge is right-wing oriented gossip. [Talking Points Memo] is good on general Washington news. [Huffington Post] is good, but certainly Dem-oriented US political news. [Juan Cole] is one of the best commentators on the Middle East and particularly Iraq, period. [Media Channel] is good to keep an eye on the reporter's and news outlets themselves - and so too is [Media Matters]. [Alternet] is a great source of News From The Left, And Hippies. Hey, you know what? I should make tis an article, that's what. More later. DogP  17:06, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

"sharp tongue"
You should really work on that. Saying, "oh, sometimes I am too blunt" or "I have a sharp tongue" ends up coming across as "I have no language skills" at times. It's sort of like saying, "hey, I may come across as a jerk, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em". The first part is all people really hear. You're smart, try to avoid the inflammatory language in tense situations and you will go far. (as if I'm one to talk!) human  01:10, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I do try, though sometimes it gets the better of me. MarcusCicero 08:46, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

McCain
I replied on my talk page. Ajkgordon 08:22, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Sensible
I've not rad a lot of this site but this user looks sensible to me.Tolerance 11:20, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

I sent you a message on your page at the exact same time! MarcusCicero 11:23, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

You're pissing me off
I gave you the benefit of the doubt a while ago and defended you. Now you're just being a douche to Susan. Stoppit.- 12:07, 11 April 2008 (EDT)


 * I know, and I'm sorry. I was intending to be tongue in cheek, but it didn't quite work out like that. I just seemed liked a dick. MarcusCicero 10:05, 12 April 2008 (EDT)