User talk:Nx/Archive13

Loya Jirga time?
Time to bring in the Loya Jirga methinks. This is exactly the kind of situation that they were formed to sort out.--DamoHi 23:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

stoooopid sig thing
really its a nice idea but it sometimes says i didn't sign even when i did. it just needs some fixing. 67.159.36.22 (talk) 00:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I know, that's why it's enforced only on some IPs. Unfortunately I can't fix it because I don't have access to the server. -- Nx  / talk 00:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * so wait you made that tool just to be a jerk or u disabled it for some people because they complained so much? don't hate us so much one day mei's friend will come out of where ever she's hiding and your going to take it all out on her for no reason. speaking of which where the fuck is shyenne? haven't seen her on the internets in forever. 67.159.36.22 (talk) 00:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I enabled it only on some people who wouldn't listen to nice words and were pissing me off. -- Nx  / talk 00:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind, disabled it. -- Nx  / talk 00:42, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

(From Nx's user page) "I'm a troll/bitch who never edits articles."
Eeew sexy!

More quotes of Nx on "trolls" from WikiIndex: "[...]sees trolls in everyone around her[...]", "Then I got wikilawyered by a concern troll[...]"

I thought trolling had something to do with "baiting" but it was interesting to read that article on concern trolls. Is there a name for the type of troll you are?

I'd ask what kind of bitch you are but I think this is supposed to be a family friendly wiki. =)

Lumenos (talk) 01:18, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Go back to your Lumeniki. -- Nx  / talk 01:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

messagebox doc
thanks! 11:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Instant commons
Thanks for having switched this on - it's great for making articles purty and useful without faffing about with download-upload - David Gerard (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Does this mean we can magically use the commons media? I will stalk you, Dave, until I understand this. 13:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This is precisely what it means. I did this just by linking its Commons filename. Hey presto, the image works! We can use anything that's on Wikimedia Commons the same way you can add Commons images to Wikipedia. There is a small risk that the image might get deleted (we don't control it), but if there's even the slightest risk of that it's easy to upload a local copy - David Gerard (talk) 13:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Very cool. Most WikiCommons images will be stable, I think, unless Jimbo goes on a freakout and deletes them. 14:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If we create, we'll just take care to upload the image locally - David Gerard (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Thanks Nx, if twas you enabled this.  14:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Very nice. Thanks. Treat yourself to a creme de menthe. ConcernedResident  omg ponies!!! 15:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Very cool, good work. Although, a few dipshit questions if I may (these are all working on the assumption that a [[File:whatever.jpg]] markup which does not resolve to an image here will find it on commons, is that correct?):
 * What happens if someone links to a file on RW, but the image is deleted on RW? Will the reference remain borken or will this hunt down the image with the same filename on commons?
 * I did have a question number 2, but since writing (1) I have completely forgotten it. I shall return if I remember.
 * 15:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. It will look locally (RW) first, then Commons, then fail. So yeah, it'll pull in a Commons file of that name, which may be completely unrelated. So if you delete an image, check what happened. - David Gerard (talk) 15:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that could be a little dangerous. Might want to warn people about deleting images. Esp if the image is being used on an important article, gets deleted, and is then replaced with something completely inappropriate. 15:47, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably something worth adding to the help content. Also, I'll add some advice on naming files; given that these problems are less likely if the name chosen makes sense. i.e. a picture of Daniel Dennett would be odd if named midgetporn.jpg. ConcernedResident  Fightin' round the world 17:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've changed the help page at Help:images. You think that would cover it? -- ConcernedResident Fightin' round the world 22:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

While I think this is a great time-saver, doesn't it rather put us at the mercy of edits/changes at the Commons? After all, surely an image there can be changed? I know it sucks to save an image in order to upload it here, but at least if we do that we have control over our content. 02:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

tools
hey can i like have rollback or something? being beaten to the troll pwnage by you and human is pissing me off. Cheerleader Not Troll (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Make some constructive edits to the site and you'll get them. -- Nx  / talk 23:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * bush sucks now can i have rollback? i don't need a whole mop just rollback. Cheerleader Not Troll (talk) 23:12, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. You're banging on the wrong door, I can't give you rollback. 2. Rollback is given to autoconfirmed accounts, which means making edits. And I'd prefer if those edits were not trolling. -- Nx  / talk 23:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a troll! There it is. I finally seen one. Lumenos (talk) 23:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You never looked in a mirror before? -- Nx  / talk 23:25, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Srsly. Get on that 64.120.47.6 (talk) 23:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure a "troll" has one simple definition. Here's one, "someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion." Maybe I crack a little joker, here and there, but I don't intend negative emotional response. And never only for emotion, always for reason (though I am perhaps more prone to mistakes than those who take less risk). Lumenos (talk) 00:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

mc
i should really pm this 2 you but since i'm too lazy to add email... if you really hate marcus and want him to go away then you should celebrate him. and make it sound real and not like what i was doing because my love comments were ironic trolling towards mc. even if he does read this and knows what your up to it will either annoy the fuck out of him or make him feel bad for trolling. i can say i felt bad for trolling goonie when i saw him kind of stick up for me in a thread. Cheerleader Not Troll (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds fairly ridiculous. What's to celebrate? Acei9 00:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * not like a holiday celebration i mean act like you like mc act like mc isn't all that bad butter him up. this will either make him feel bad or annoy him so much he will leave. Cheerleader Not Troll (talk) 00:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * riiight. Acei9 00:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strange, I just ignore MC, siknce he hasn't said anything original in, what, six months? Sorry for the orange boxes, Nx. 01:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Even 1000 MC's typing for 1000 years couldn't come up with anything more than "you fascist cunts". Acei9 01:54, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 6 months, Human? Try more like a year or more. It's sad and entertaining at the same time, IMO. Especially when I asked him to prove his accusations at RWW, and he refused. What a moron. 02:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Goonie, that is a lie and you know it. You delete any comments you don't like and you know I'm not good with wiki code, I'm not good at finding diff links. You deceitful scumbag. 86.40.207.37 (talk) 10:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Please stop
Stop being a dick. 86.40.97.193 (talk) 22:57, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Can you talk some sense to Foster?
I think you raised the issue of vandal binning IPs previously, and how it only affects innocents and leaves me entirely unscathed. Even a moments reflection and people would understand this. Unfortunately, he is so idiotic now that he won't even read such a kind of complaint. I would appreciate it. 74.63.112.137 (talk) 23:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I did. Nice concern trolling. -- Nx  / talk 23:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think its important, regardless of concern trolling or not. Obviously innocent people are affected and the guilty parties (ME) are not. Under any system of comprehension, that is illogical. I really hope RW doesn't adopt the attitude 'well since MC is suggesting it we must do the opposite'. That surely is a sign that I've won! 86.40.107.167 (talk) 23:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't give a shit. -- Nx  / talk 23:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't care that millions of people may potentially be prohibited from activity in this site? How big of you. 86.40.107.167 (talk) 23:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * They can ask to be unbinned. -- Nx  / talk 23:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Its clearly much more simple not to bin the IPs in the first place. Just ban instead. Infinitely more logical. That is all. 86.40.107.167 (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I don't care. I'm not even a sysop. -- Nx  / talk 23:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're very petty, for a fascist. 86.40.107.167 (talk) 23:36, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Irrational numbers and stuff
Is that how Nx should stay or was that a case of inverse admin abuse? i.e. a round a roundabout way of saying double you tea eff? ConcernedResident omg ponies!!! 01:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Nx refers to RW in the second person, which really confuses me at times. 01:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a question about a log
Human made a nice pic. I tried to take a closer look at the entries, a stumbled upon some inconsistencies in the user-rights log. For instance, here's an excerpt of |your log:


 * 13:18, 17 December 2009 Nx (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Nx  from Bureaucrats and Sysops to Irrational numbers ‎ (this is more appropriate)
 * 02:50, 14 December 2009 Nx (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Nx from Bureaucrats and Sysops to (none) ‎
 * 01:33, 11 December 2009 Nx (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Nx from Bureaucrats, Irrational numbers and Sysops to (none) ‎

So, you decratted yourself three times in a row, without being cratted again in the mean time. How is this possible?

Just intrigued, Yours 18:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There are more things with root than are dreamt of in your philosophy. tmtoulouse 19:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * He edited the database, or used a maintenance script. 19:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Careful with the questions LArron, you may find yourself going to deep and end up black-bagged... [[image:Dictator.gif]] 00:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on what you mean by black bagged? What have you witnessed? Lumenos (talk) 22:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahhh that explains it! Clever illusions, Master! Now I hazn't the power. Now I haz! Can we be made to see different things than the others? Now that would be a trick! Lumenos (talk) 00:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In a backhanded attempt to placate the mob for his endless string of administrative abuses, "Nx" uses illusions of promotion in a tiresome theater of deception to mask his true power over the goings on here. Welcome to the fold. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 01:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Request
Sir, I'm thinking that most people miss it when they're blocked here because blocks are of such a short length. Would it be possible to add an option to Preferences to permit a user to opt in to receiving an email when s/he has been blocked indicating the blocker, reason, etc.? It would aid in the fun as well as give users a headsup they've been legitimately blocked, as rarely as that happens, before they find out the hard way. Do you think like I do? ÑR /Señor Admin/Hablar 21:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that if I want to see if I've been blocked, I usually can find it in my watchlist. 03:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sir, can you make the "oh noes you've been blocked" box tell a poor user how long the block has left to run? 03:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

How are you?
Did I miss something? I hope you are well! 22:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

link capture bot?
Hi NX, I posted this on TMToulouse's talk page but I forgot that he probably never checks it, so I thought I'd pose the question to you since you're another one of the sysadmins here (I think).

"Is the source code for the capture bot that the WIGO uses available? I'm thinking about using something with similar functionality on my local machines (capturing different websites though) and even though I'm probably using a different language (python) than that code, if it's available I'd still love to peruse it and learn from it. "

Any thoughts? Pythonscript (talk) 14:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

VandalBrake2
I could probably modify VandalBrake2 to allow an expiration date to be put on vandal binning. By the way, would you have an objection to using the MediaWiki SVN as the repository for this code, or maybe Google Code? The downside to the former is that a commit access request is required in order to make changes to the code, but the upside is that it might attract more attention from other coders who might help with stuff like internationalization, if you care about such things. Thanks, Tisane (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The missing Nx
Not sure if you're on a break, or out for a bit longer, but if the latter is true then I just wanted to say thanks for what you've done here. Not bad for a foreigner. ConcernedResident omg ponies!!! 20:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't be such an idiot. He edits with IPs. I find it hilarious that no-one could give a shit that he's left, considering the damage he has wrought here. 86.40.109.32 (talk) 21:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Come back soon Nx - I like sparring with you..:-) AceX-102 22:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Nice...
...to see you back! 20:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I dislike edit warring, but
"Users were given the right to revert anything that was obviously malicious" Calling for ostracisation of a user isn't malicious? EddyP (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's pointless. He's going to come back and edit war, and he has tons of IPs. You can thank the "ONOZ WERE LIEK CP NOW" folks who made me disable rangeblocks for our inability to stop him. -- Nx  / talk 21:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally I support you in your campaign for rangeblock capability. EddyP (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be against it. We still have anonymous editing anyway, since it's not as if we require a passport photo when people create accounts. Proxies could be covered, although it's difficult to know much that'd hurt us. I suppose MC and friends could just create lots of socks, but then that would be additional hassle for him. Question though is whether we can do this or try to ignore him and have pretty clear rules on what we do when he's being troublesome? Concernedresident omg!!! ponies!!! 21:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's been shown pretty clearly that trying to ignore him doesn't work. I say it's time for the nuclear option. EddyP (talk) 21:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah good luck with that. I tried that already, and I don't want the abuse I got for trying to play policeman. -- Nx  / talk 21:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm scared. Hold me! Concernedresident  omg!!! ponies!!! 21:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Every man for himself, asshole! To the bunker! EddyP (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose that even if you were to use rangeblock, you'd still check the option that let people use their user page. No biggie in that case. 21:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. I hate blocks that also block the user talk page - except in those very odd legally iffy or zomg abusive cases. Concernedresident  omg!!! ponies!!! 21:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Stop being so authoritarian. Freedom of speech is a difficult concept for a fascist to understand, but it is worth fighting for. 86.40.108.41 (talk) 21:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Nuclear Option forum
Why did you recreate it, and leave off my last edit? 06:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because it is a talk page -- Nx  / talk 06:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No it's not a talk page, it it is a forum. The talk page is preserved.  06:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That is just a technicality. It is a talk page just like the Saloon bar is a talk page. -- Nx  / talk 06:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk pages start "talk xxx" The saloon bar is not a talk page, it is an article. You are confused, I think. Also, I did not like you resurrecting the forum without my most recent edits.  Strange move, really.  06:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk pages are pages where you post comments and sign them with your signature. -- Nx  / talk 06:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * But should we really keep a forum that is a trough for trolls present and future? 06:18, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Which part of "Talk pages (including user talk as well as article talk pages) and other discussion pages, such as debates or the Saloon bar, are community property. They must not be deleted, nor protected, although they can be archived periodically. Similarly, users should not delete or change another user's comments on a talk or discussion page." is unclear? This whole HCM isn't about MC even, it's because some Wikipedia idiot on a power trip thinks he can ignore that by invoking MC's name. -- Nx  / talk 06:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm. Valid point you have there. I agree that this whole nonsense isn't even about MC, at least. 06:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

WIGOCP missing &lt;capture&gt; image
Hi, Prior to my edit two links to CP weren't automatically converted into &lt;capture&gt;able link. Just though I'd drop you a note, in case you want to investigate it. CS Miller (talk) 12:33, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You used the vote tag instead of the votecp tag. 12:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That'd be it. BTW, it wasn't me who put entry up. Is there any way to fix it? If a another WIGO page gets up to that number, it will inherit that ones votes. CS Miller (talk) 13:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * We usually use different ids on other polls, WIGO is the id for WIGOCP. 13:11, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see now. WIGOW uses poll=worldNNNN, etc. I take it &lt;votecp&gt; is just an alias for &lt;capture&gt;&lt;vote&gt; (with magic for the closing tags) ? CS Miller (talk) 13:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Portal icons, SVG and bloody Inkscape
I tried making an alt med icon, File:Icon altmed.svg, based on your File:Icon pseudoscience.svg. I just got your file, put the mortar and pestle on it, shuffled a star and saved it. The drop shadow in yours renders on RW, the one in mine doesn't. ARGH. Any idea why? (Presumably an old version of rsvg, I mean what the difference is in the file.) I'm using Inkscape 0.47 from Ubuntu 10.04 - you? - David Gerard (talk) 22:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

What?
I'm permabanning him. --emc  [TALK] 19:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Do we have to feed the troll even when he's not around? -- Nx  / talk 19:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If by "feed him", you mean permaban him, then yes. I don't see what you're getting at. If he comes back under proxies, then ban them. If he persists, do a range block. Not that hard. I don't understand what all the whiny fuss is about. --emc  [TALK] 19:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly. You do not understand. Read up on some history. -- Nx  / talk 19:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems pretty cut and dry to me. --emc  [TALK] 19:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not. -- Nx  / talk 19:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll just say this then: for future reference, I'll permaban him on the slightest whim. I love a good wheel war. --emc  [TALK] 19:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You'll see. -- Nx  / talk 19:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Crikey, even I'm not inclined to block MC while he's making reasonable contributions - David Gerard (talk) 19:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, seriously, why the fuck would you want to do that? 18:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, either whoever is behind MC has finally gotten bored and would actually like to be heard seriously, or they're playing the long game by luring us into a false sense of security. I'd like to assume the former, however. 18:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

FIX IT! FIX IT! FIX IT!
Bring back the recipe space now! 06:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * How am I supposed to do that? -- Nx  / talk 06:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not an excuse! Fix it! 06:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't. I don't have access to the server. -- Nx  / talk 06:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That is NOT an ANSWER! Are you are the Son of God or NOT?  06:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You were the one who demanded that I have my server access revoked, no? -- Nx  / talk 06:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "I don't have acces to the server..." Typical liberal deceit. Fix it! 06:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)




 * These things a tendency to work themselves out. tmtoulouse 06:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Nx and tmtoulouse (obviously not your real names), I don't have time for more of your excuses. Isn't it obvious that the connection between Nx's loss of server access and abortion is related? I looked at your recent contributions, and it is obvious that you are engaging in liberal deceit. 06:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Close your eyes, count to 200,000 Mississippis and all will be well. tmtoulouse 06:33, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Cheating
Rather than permitting only specific raw code, can't just strip tags? tmtoulouse 08:01, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Filtering only script tags still leaves a bunch of possible exploits. Chances are slim that someone will bother, but still. What exactly do you want to do, where do you plan to put this widget thingy? -- Nx  / talk 11:54, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Haven't decided, it was more an exercise in proof of concept. tmtoulouse 17:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck it I will just hard code it. tmtoulouse 20:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Long ago deserved, yet not yet honored


Until I have something better, for upgrading RW to MW 2.1 or whatever. You remember, "I did all this work and all I got was a revision bump". We were seriously talking about you when we came up with this idea, since you never really got patted on the back. 07:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't really like to be praised (yeah, I'm a bit weird, I know), and I wasn't serious when I said that. -- Nx  / talk 12:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I know you were joking, but still. If it makes you uncomfortable, we just won't do it much ;)  00:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

...
Is some basic politeness a little bit too much asked? I didn't really ask anyone to agree with me and I don't even expect anyone to be nice to me, but some things certainly exceed the borders of just-not-being-very-nice to somebody. --Earthland (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You'll get more politeness if you stop being such an argumentative asshole. Your edit was petty and vindictive, and it moved Mei's replies out of context. We can argue over interpretations of rules, but experience tells me that Mei's way of replying to your comment is much better than the alternative, tq.
 * Also you can shove your persecution complex, this has nothing to do with your anti-abortion stance. You don't expect anyone to be nice to you, in fact you assume everyone will immediately want to lynch you, so you are extremely combative and argumentative, which in turn rarely results in people actually being nice to you. -- Nx  / talk 19:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Being "extremely" combative once again, I must point out that you failed to answer me. I am more argumentative person than most of you, however, I manage to keep my comments on topic and although I'm not really nice and warm to you most of the time, I don't spend my time making personal insults. --Earthland (talk) 09:24, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have answered your question. -- Nx  / talk 16:16, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Then you didn't understand me in the first place. --Earthland (talk) 11:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh well. -- Nx  / talk 12:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The bitterness, futility, and self-righteousness of most moral arguments can now be explicated. In a debate on abortion, politics, consensual incest, or on what my friend did to your friend, both sides believe that their positions are based on reasoning about the facts and issues involved (the wag-the-dog illusion). Both sides present what they take to be excellent arguments in support of their positions. Both sides expect the other side to be responsive to such reasons (the wag-the-other-dog’s-tail illusion). When the other side fails to be affected by such good reasons, each side concludes that the other side must be insincere, closed-minded, or even devious…. In this way the culture wars over issues such as homosexuality and abortion can generate morally motivated players on both sides who believe that their opponents are not morally motivated


 * Again, this has nothing to do with abortion. -- Nx  / talk 16:16, 3 September 2010 (UTC)