User talk:Kitsunelaine

Foxgirls

 * 1) Duh. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 01:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Bam Ɀexcoiler Кingbolt Mierda, shit, mierda, shit, mierda, shit...  Look! 02:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) TOO FEW CHOICES. Sigh. I'll vote for this one, then. Typhoon (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Dragongirls

 * :3 Lord Aeonian (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Catgirls

 * 1) Vote. Sinclair Sanguine talk to Sinclair 04:24, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

NZ
You're a kiwi? As am I. Acei9 03:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Editing
For the love of god, please take 5 extra minutes before you post a message rather than adjust it 10 times after it has been made. Edit conflicts caused by you changing a few words in a post you have already made are going to give me a stroke; especially when I'm on a mobile. Tielec01 (talk) 03:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Your message has been received. Please leave me alone. I have no desire to talk to you, as we do not get along. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 04:01, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Really must agree with this. --Castaigne2 (talk) 04:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The edits were necessary, as, unlike others would have you believe, I am not here to cause drama. Leaving the post as-is would have been bad. I have a certain anxiety about these things that is hard to contain. Regardless of the edits necessity, you're all still correct. It is a problem, and one I will have to continue to work on. The fact that it was necessary in the first place is what's the problem here, and I understand that. -  Kitsunelaine  「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 04:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The preview button does actually exist, you know.--Kugelschreiber (talk) 13:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Ranting about feminism on talk pages is not ground for block. Don't do again, pls! 17:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, there are only so many characters in a block statement, but you are right, only in that I should have put it better. If you checked the user contribs, this person is only here to turn the talk pages into a rambling personal screed, without interacting with anyone, and has gotten increasingly incoherent, accusatory, and inflammatory doing so. Moreover, they have been doing this for days, entirely unprompted, without substance, both on the subject of feminism and on the pages of real life individuals. People who have tried to argue with the BoN have given up, and even in a vacuum, the user is posting their screeds in an effort to bait people. The user in question is nothing more than a bad troll, whose only saving grace is that they're mildly amusing in their incoherence. Our talk pages don't exist to be personal anti-feminism blogs. If I had the length to write that up as the ban reason, I would, and I don't honestly think anyone else would disagree. -  Kitsunelaine   「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 19:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Ranting, unchangingly, is not grounds for a block. Thanks! 05:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's an oversimplification, but I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. -  Kitsunelaine  「SJW Illuminati shill.」 05:27, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Making RW Great Again
I don't contribute much here either but I don't actively make this place worse. Can you, uh, tone down the drama for a bit? Maybe try not to mention your buddy (the one who appears when you say "dragon" three times) or bring a coop case for like a month, and see how that goes? I think you'll be happier. If it works you can try 2 months and so on. Otherwise we'll need President Trump to straighten things out. – Sarah (HH) 03:43, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You contribute whenever there's drama around (i mean, seriously), and whenever you can take shots at people like Ryu (Like you did just now). Lighten up buddy. Also, take up your claims with Aneris and Carpetsmoker, they're the ones who can't seem to shut up about him. -  Kitsunelaine  「SJW Illuminati shill.」 04:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If she contributes more during times of drama, she also contributes to moderate or calm drama. You just read her as attacking. I can sort of understand why, but you can also read her as offering constructive advice (her true intent, I think). So, ya' know, try turning down the defenses a little, please. It wasn't hostility so it didn't require striking back. MarmotHead (talk) 05:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The user in question only has interest in fanning the flames. That much is painfully obvious if you look at their contributions (All of which are contained nice and neatly in one page, no more than 500, spreading across quite a long time, so you can gauge it pretty well), and the fact that they tried to dig up this almost two days after it had settled down. Plus I don't think someone who wrote this has my best interests at heart. -  Kitsunelaine  「SJW Illuminati shill.」 05:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's probably because you show no sign of having this site or its community's best interests at heart, only pushing an agenda on a very narrow range of topics. I know of at least four editors who left because of you and the like of you (myself included), and there are probably many more people who silently left or, perhaps wisest of all, took one look and ran as fast as they could. Lets not even mention all the time wasted on the silly antics. All that, for the six paragraphs of text you contributed. Community builder indeed. Carpetsmoker (talk) 06:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Didn't you previously admit you left because of David saying you invited editors and not because of me? Also, don't you have better things to do than troll my userpage? Like start up that UberRationalWiki you wanted? -  Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah. that was the straw that broke the camel's back. But it's very obvious who put most of the weight there. Carpetsmoker (talk) 06:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the heaviest burdens are the ones you put on your own back. If you actually shoulder responsibility and blame for your own actions, it stops being heavy. --Castaigne2 (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Gotta go somewhere now, but I'll say this. You've painfully established what you think of me, Carpetsmoker. I've painfully established the reasons why you're wrong, many times, but that doesn't matter, as your beliefs are immovable. Please stop wasting this site's time in continuing a petty grudge and move on with life. k? k. Wish you all the best. Hope your RW alternative takes off. Won't be a part of it myself, of course, I would probably be banned on the spot if I tried. But I've no desire to continue these meaningless hostilities. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have a problem with people fucking over at least halfway decent educational resources for personal gain. Strange thing, that. Perhaps we should all let go of our "grudge" against Ray Comfort and leave the poor man alone and not write meany pages about him. We even call him banana man and allude to sexual intercourse with a banana. HARASSMENT! Carpetsmoker (talk) 06:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And that's your problem right there. This has never been an educational resource. It's more of that Smerdis-led "We must become the OFFICIAL DEBUNKERS OF SKEPTICISM and take over from the Randi people." crap. That was never RW's original purpose; it's only ever been meant to be used in fun.
 * If you want to create the ultimate skeptical wiki, go ahead and do so. Tallulah decided to make a start with her Crankipedia. Go forth, have fun, and may you achieve your goal. --Castaigne2 (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * K: we're guests in a house that Carpetsmoker and other proper editors built. You act as if RW were as much yours as it is his - it's not. You should thank him for making this place what it is and apologize when you step on his toes. Instead you tell him to leave? What the heck have to done here to earn that privilege? You can get to editing and EARN it or you can check it - one or the other. – Sarah (HH) 08:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Carpetsmoker is a johnny-come-lately. He and other "proper editors" are latter-day additions. They didn't build shit and he didn't "make this place what it is". Also, shill, you don't get to tell others what the fuck they do. --Castaigne2 (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Everyone has the right to edit here, and tell other editors what they think regardless of seniority. Furthermore people who rarely edit articles still perform a valuable social function. Some of our best editors have started on the wiki without editing main space for years (eg Mikalosa).
 * Kitsunelaine unprotect your talkpage FFS. Tielec01 (talk) 10:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * These are good principles and I support them. My objection is to giving everyone's opinion on what makes a good RW editor equal weight. I think weight should be proportional to contribution. It seems you're saying you disagree with that but I don't think you do. Here's a test: if it's true that everyone's voice is equal I should be able to go offsite and recruit 100 Jesus-lovin', Trump-lovin' editors and turn RW into a TrumpJesus paradise. You think that's likely to succeed and if not, for what reason other than seniority? – Sarah (HH) 22:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Something something glass houses - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 10:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm really enjoying watching Sarah to pretend to be 'anti-drama' and telling others to stop mentioning Ryu. Especially since Sarah is unable to stop inserting herself into every drama and obsessing over Ryu so much she modeled her userpage after him. Also, Carpetsmoker, the more time you spent whining in here, the longer it will take for you to create your neo-RationalWiki. Typhoon (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, fuck off Sarah, you cock-mongling shill. --Castaigne2 (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * WOW. Really? That's how you're going to treat some of the most longstanding and respected memners of this community? I do think you should be sent a message through the coop. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * HuskyHarlot is one of the original GG trolls who came here to schlong it to Ryulong. She's not one of the most "longstanding and respected" members of the community. There are dozens who have been here much, much longer. --Castaigne2 (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ryulong schlonged himself.--Kugelschreiber (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * LOL at "some of the most longstanding and respected memners of this community," applying to Carpetsmoker, 27 January 2014, and HuskyHarlot 11 April 2015. But, I guess you, Pbfreespace3 20 May 2015 wouldn't know. Sincerely, Hipocrite 8 January 2010. Hipocrite (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, WOW. Misogyny much? What an asshole. See, I can express myself without being sexist, you should try it. – Sarah (HH) 22:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If we're measuring respectability by how long we've been here, then Conservative and I should be among the most influential editors here - but you dont see that do you. брэндэн (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ryu and his cronies are perfectly fine with being misogynistic - Ryu did call Mona a Bitch because she disagreed with him, after all.Keter (talk) 00:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Please take up any further issues with the users in question on their talk pages, thanks. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 00:04, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Troll account name
Good job; I know I've hated in your blocks in the past, but this one is ironclad. 01:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Finally, Kitsu is banned. :D Keter (talk) 01:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've used my mop responsibly 95% of the time, banning the lowest effort trolls, the other 5% is a murky light grey of me misjudging exactly how tolerant this site is of obvious shitstirrers and trolls who are only slightly smarter. Thank you for taking the time to say this, though. I appreciate it. :)- <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 01:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

= Ryulong =

Hello, I am trying to learn more about the community and noticed the Ryulong drama is quite important to it. I've looked through the coopcase archives but they don't explain much. I was wondering if you could give me your perspective on who Ryulong was and what he did. Feel free to be biased, I will look at both sides and come to a conclusion myself.

If this might cause trouble, feel free to ignore me. Thanks :) Lord Aeonian (talk) 19:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Look
Ignore him/her/hir/zhe/whatever is appropriate. There's no need to Coop every user that pisses you off. Edit articles. Don't read posts from people you don't want to hear from. Don't engage in dialogue with people whose opinions you find loathsome and get huffy when they do exactly what you expect them to do. Just don't read the posts, don't talk to them, and, voila --- problem solved. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 06:33, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The user is here to only start shit. They admitted they're here to only start shit. Moreover, they admitted they're here to wage an imaginary ideological war against me. After I had tried to engage with them constructively. And if you look at their history, they are primarily here due to an earnest obsession with Ryulong, and have left particularly vile comments every which way. I fail to see how this is unworthy of a coop case. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Seriously man, I said Gamergate was an ideological war. I'm not here to edit video game articles or comics, or anything like that. I hardly even edit Gamergate stuff. I really think you've misunderstood. – Sarah (HH) 06:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "I've been succsessful! No more Ryulong! [...] You started this war without realizing how many people you were taking on! Big mistake! What's done is done, there's no going back!"
 * For fucks sake dude, the charade is obvious. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:38, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Those were two independent thoughts. (1) You said my time here was wasted, I produced contrary evidence. (2) You seemed to imply Gamergate was restricted to comic and video game enthusiasts - I explained it was not.
 * Also what AgingHippie said, thank you. I really don't want to waste community time with coop cases though. I was mouthing off at the bar which seemed within the bounds of acceptable bar talk. – Sarah (HH) 06:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You've done nothing to prove me wrong about you. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:47, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * How about you block me for 24 hours and we call it even? So long as I don't have to defend myself or my savior The Donald I will not unblock (assuming I can unblock, I've never done that before.) Deal? – Sarah (HH) 06:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll be satisfied when you're perma'd. But thanks for the offer. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

"The user is here to only start shit. They admitted they're here to only start shit." And by opening a Coop case, you are giving them EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT, i.e. shit. Be smarter than them. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 06:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What exactly is wrong with wanting to ban people like this? Isn't that what the chicken coop is for? It seems like you're trying to undermine the integrity of the facilities we have to deal with users like these just because I'm the one who's using it, and I've had failed cases. Which, sure, is understandable. But this time, I really don't think the user in question has any ground to stand on. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I mean, don't get me wrong. I get the whole "Don't touch the poop" mentality. I've been more or less working on avoiding these types for a while now, and been mostly constructive on talk pages. But how long are we going to let the poop stick around? At what point does the poop become too toxic and stinky? Are we just going to let it stay there in the middle of our house and pretend it's not there? It gets tiring looking at all the poop that flows through our sewers. Shouldn't we do something about it? - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 06:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Without getting involved in the rights and wrongs, the Chicken coop is not "for" banning people.--Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 07:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Right, that was an oversimplification on my part. But it is for handling situations like these. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 07:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hahahahaha, this is great stuff! TruthTellah (talk) 07:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh look, a slymepitter showed up! How cute! Typhoon (talk) 09:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I've decided I'm gonna drop this for now. It's not worth pursuing. I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall with you guys sometimes, and I know y'all mean well, but I feel like we as a community need to put our heads together and do something about our standards on the type of people we let hang around on our talk pages, and what we will and won't let slide. It appears I have a lot of reputation building to do before I can get you guys to trust me on this, so I'mma work on that. For now, though, I'm going to treat it as if the poop doesn't stink up the whole house. I brought a nose clip. - <font color="#9933ff"> Kitsunelaine <font color="#F47A00"> 「SJW Illuminati shill.」 08:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)