User talk:Sorte Slyngel/Archive1

Hiya, avast, and welcome aboard. ScepticWombat (talk) 07:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome
If you happen to wander to this desolate place of the web, do say hi! Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Public service announcement
For those wondering about the name, our new RW-resident's name is referring to the Disney villain known in English The or simply The Blot. Just in case you're curious. ScepticWombat (talk) 07:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Just for the heck of it
First, thanks for the welcome, ScepticWombat, although I do think you spoiled a riddle. :-) As for me, I'm middle aged, a civil engineer by training but I decided to turn half a circle and am now studying Icelandic as a major and General Linguistics as a minor. That way I can avoid most of the literature courses and most of Chomsky and focus on ancient languages, etymology, Indo-European Linguistics and so forth. This is perhaps too much personal information but you at least know, where I stand. And, I don't know whether I have to mention it, I'm an atheist and Iceland happens to be a good place for those as well as other minorities, gays etc. and even for foreigners, once they've got used to society. Regrettably we are not without our own lunatics, gay-haters, racists and so forth, but the general attitude is fairly relaxed. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Aw, sorry to have spoiled the puzzle for any intrepid researchers out there.
 * Can't say I've bothered too much with languages or Chomsky (let alone linguistics) myself, although my inability to read French turned out to be a real handicap when I had to research some EEC/EC/EU political and social history stuff, while my ability to read German turned out to be an unexpected bonus. I mostly try to stick to history/politics stuff around here ('cause I actually know something about those areas), although I do branch out into whatever happen to catch my eye (and that's how much "self-doxxing" you'll get for now).
 * As for lunatics etc.; every place got 'em - it's just a question of quantity and quality (i.e. how many and how crazy).
 * So, have yourself a spot of brennivín or whatever is the beverage of your choice and I'll raise a glass with some appropriate contents in the direction of the North Atlantic. Cheers! ScepticWombat (talk) 21:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Seeing as you are the only user on here I thus far found who openly admits to speaking Danish (btw, Babel-boxes might not be a bad idea), you can surely tell me whether the ever-elusive Danish concept of "hygge" is comparable to the German concept of "Gemütlichkeit" as both have been variously translated into English as "coziness". Kind regards. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's pretty much a Danish trope that "hygge" can't be translated, yet I think that "cosiness" — or "cozyness" "coziness" in the U.S. ;-) — works pretty well, as does the German "Gemütlichkeit", though I'm less sure there. The German version seems to have some aspects of what in Denmark would be "folkelig", but due to 20th century German history, using terms incorporating "Volk" is pretty suspect there as opposed to Denmark which is rife with People's this and that (e.g. the "People's School", "People's Church" and at one point no fewer than 4 "People's Parties": One Conservative, one Christian, One Socialist and one Danish - only the latter two still call themselves a People's Party today, though). Danish "hygge" has more of the intimacy of the English "cosiness" than the broader sort of "good fellowship" that the German term seems to imply.
 * Nevertheless, the difference is perhaps not so much in the connotations of "hygge"/"cosiness"/"Gemütlichkeit", but in the almost religious veneration that the cult of "hygge" evokes in Denmark, which is perhaps well encompassed by the fact that "hygge" is also a verb in a way that cosy isn't (in this context) and I can't think of a German equivalent either. I think it's intimately tied with Denmark being, as one former US ambassador put it, "not a country, but a tribe", as well as the "Jante Law", which can be seen as the other side of the coin. Terry Pratchett captured it quite well in Unseen Academicals when depicting "the shove" and "the crab bucket" (his descriptions of "Cockbill Street" in Night Watch and other of the Sam Vimes stories are also pretty close): The idea that the tribe will take care of you, but also make you conform is what I'm trying to get at here. It's like living in a village or a similar small community with its combination of people looking after your and people looking into what you do (and I guess I don't have to explain that to an Icelander, but who knows who'll read this...).
 * When trying to explain this part of the Danish psyche (insofar as such an abstraction can be said to exist), I always refer people to a psalm by perhaps the most towering figure in Danish intellectual history, N.F.S. Grundtvig. Entitled "Langt højere Bjerge" ("Far Higher Mountains" for any non-Danish speakers who might be interested), it contains both the warmth of the tribal embrace when it proclaims "Og da har i rigdom vi drevet det vidt; når få har for meget og færre for lidt." ("And we will have gone far in wealth; when few have too little and fewer too much"). However, the psalm also contains stanzas that not only reeks of false modesty, but also of of the kind of inward-looking self-obsession that is at the heart of the "Jante Law". The ideal that the welfare state should ensure that few have too little has made this slogan one that still pops up in debates over welfare and especially on welfare as it relates to equality.
 * Fun fact: In the original English, Tolkien called "The Last Homely House East of the Sea" or simply "The Last Homely House" which in the Danish translation became "Det Sidste Hyggelige Hus" (my emphasis, of course). ScepticWombat (talk) 22:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * My spellcheck says coziness exists while neither of your spellings are known to it. That just as an aside. And your explanations are very interesting. As to the word "Volk" having a bad rep (and currently losing favor rapidly) in the German language, you are of course spot on. Your other comments could even be interpreted as a link between "hygge" and the particular Danish brand of "Scandinavian socialism" or am I mistaken on that? I have not yet been to Denmark, but if all goes well, I shall before the year is out. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I give up. This is the second edit conflict in a short time. I'll write the rest of it when I remember, but personally I think Janteloven isn't even applicable to Denmark, even if it was meant as a sarcasm. But I wanted to add something about Grundtvig, Saxo Grammaticus and other stuff. The Grundtvig quotation is a good one although I am not particularly fond of Danish poetry. It has to do with lack of or abuse of alliteration. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, ScepticWombat, which languages do you speak? According to Avengerofthe BoN we are the only ones here to have shown a knowledge of Danish. All the best and good night Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's actually hygge sig and that corresponds fairly well to German sich gemütlich machen. The word Volk can't really be avoided in German and it should not be. Just take care not to found a party or newspaper with Volks- or völkisch- in it. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well it has sometimes been replaced with the similar term (of a different meaning) Bevölkerung which as you might guess is originally a nominalized verb. Here is an article by someone bemoaning this development. However, if you see the images of and all of them carrying variations on the German flag while screaming "Wir sind das Volk" you can understand how this word is once again becoming a certain bad rep. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:04, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Judging by the fate of similar movements since 1945, this will not last long. Personally I'm not worried.Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As memory serves Wir sind das Volk was not unknown in the late, unlamented DDR - then as a genuine protest against a communist dictatorship and the protesters weren't Nazis - at least to any noticable degree. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)It has already largely dissipated. But it did harm the term "Volk" and the particular variant of the German flag with a Scandinavian cross instead of a classical tricolor... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't spot it on the pictures, but the use of a Scandinavian cross is a personal insult. :-)Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * (EC) Loooooooong answer(s) to the stuff above about Janteloven, Grundtvig, Danish mentality and not least spell checks
 * And the first shall be last (or was it the other way around?). I do think that the Jante Law/Janteloven (JL) is a very real phenomenon, but is also and perhaps most frequently invoked as a sort of "scapegoat argument" by all kinds of people who think they somehow don't get the credit they think they deserve. For instance, if a director makes a crap movie which is then trashed by the reviewers, the director can always claim that it's all just an exercise in JL.
 * The Grundtvig psalm isn't particularly great poetry, I grant you, but it does go from "what a jolly nice idea" to toe curling provincialism from practically one stanza to the next, which is a fairly apt good cop/bad cop description of Denmark. A perhaps more evocative depiction, which incidentally also involves "hygge" is the 1916 song by Jeppe Aakjær (who did write some quite decent songs, especially if you like 'em sentimental) entitled "As the Deepest Well Always Gives the Clearest Water", though it originally had the shorter, but no less bombastic title "The Song of History" ("Som dybest brønd gi'r altid klarest vand", orig. "Historiens Sang"). Written during the height of The Great War raging to the south, it contained these stanzas: "You, childlike country who furtively 'hygger'; while the whole world burns around your crib" ("Du pusling-land, som hygger dig i smug; mens hele verden brænder om din vugge"). That also implies a certain deliberate obliviousness and introspection that's hardly the stuff of great epics.
 * However, and this ties back into the question about Scandinavian socialism, this pre-dated most of the modern Danish welfare state (often said to begin with the 1933 reforms by Minister of Social Affairs, K.K. Steincke as part of the bargain struck between the political parties from the Social Democrats on the left to the Agrarian Liberals on the right to deal with the fallout from The Great Depression (like FDR's New Deal but happening on the very same day, January 30th, that Hitler became Chancellor - but note that the Conservatives, as well as the Communists and the various ultra-right wing parties were not part of this bargain).
 * Instead, I think (and this is not a brilliant insight by me) the search for Danish tribalism should focus on 1864 and 1815 and the losses of the German and Norwegian parts of the Danish Realm. This is what turned Danish attention inwards as, for instance, in the slogan used by Enrico Dalgas who promoted cultivation of the moorland of Jutland in the aftermath of 1864: "What was lost outwards must be won inwards" ("Hvad udad tabes skal indad vindes"). Likewise, as one historian pointed out, Denmark joined several other European states in having a ridiculously outsized capital (as measured in the proportion of the population living in the capital), the only rump of an imperial past (somewhere around 1/5 Danes live in and around Copenhagen) with similar cases being London, Paris, Stockholm and the perhaps most extreme example: Vienna.
 * 1864 is perhaps the better known (except in Norway), but 1815 had perhaps greater consequences. It was the loss of Norway that destabilised the "tripod" of nationalities that was the Danish Dual Monarchy (Danish, German and Norwegian) and the loss of the fleet during the Napoleonic Wars was made permanent by the loss of the Norwegian half of the dual monarchy which had largely financed and manned the common fleet. This was what moved Denmark from the middling to the small potatoes of the European stage and 1864 simply hammered this home and turned Denmark into a European midget, whereupon "small is beautiful" practically became the national motto. It also meant that all of the remaining possessions of the Danish Realm were comparatively small in terms of population and far away: the Danish West Indies (now the US Virgin Islands), Iceland, Greenland and the Faeroe Islands.
 * Thus, in a somewhat analogous version of the way Serbian history was constructed around the Battle of Defeat at Kosovo, Danish history began to revolve around 1864, pushing 1815 into the background. Another parallel was that Danish intellectuals began to court Scandinavism and later Nordism as a sort of regional, supranational historical narrative in a way similar to the Serbian focus on the South Slavs, but because Sweden would always be the big dog in the Nordic club, the Danish version couldn't cast Denmark as the "redeemer" or "champion of the North" in the way some Serbian intellectuals did for Serbia and especially the Serbian monarchy. As Sweden suffered a somewhat similar, if delayed, slide towards the third league in Europe, culminating in Norwegian independence in 1901, the particular Nordic type of "united losers" cooperation almost had to take the form it did: Consensus-based decision-making without any formal supranational superstructure.
 * In other words, it produced the Nordic Council as opposed to the EU), which, due to similar languages, not too dissimilar per capita income, the post-WWII consensus-style of domestic politics, and the long tradition of thinking of the Nordic Countries (though with some qualifications with regards to Finland) as some kind of "natural" (imagined) community, worked surprisingly well and was decades ahead of the EU when it came to mutual recognition of welfare claims and travelling without a passport (this was pioneered between the Nordic countries as far back as the 1950s). The weakness was, of course, that without such undemocratic drovers as the Commission and the European Court of Justice and the insistence on consensus, inertia eventually began to set in, perhaps also in the recognition that even together, the Nordic countries were still "too small".
 * As for cozy/cosy (or coziness/cosiness, the y was of course a mistake by me), my current spell checker (Mozilla's for UK English) doesn't like the former, but is a-okay with the latter (as per the usual z/s switcheroo between US/UK English).
 * Damn, it seems that I got sidetracked by my own mind again. Oh well, if you go tl;dr I really can't blame ya. ScepticWombat (talk) 00:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A challenge regarding oversized capitals. Reykjavík and environs contain two thirds of the population - although that is mostly out of necessity and the numbers are of course far lower. But we are so to speak a city and some randomly distributed other inhabitants. :-)Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, as you say, Iceland is a bit of a different case due to geographic constraints and comparatively low overall population. In a sense, it's not the capital which is "oversized", but the population which is "undersized". And it's not like a rump imperial capital is the only way to get a capital that's outsized compared to the overall population, just think of Singapore or Nuuk (okay the latter isn't the capital of an entirely independent state yet, but you get the drift) or the distribution of Australia's population. However, the distinction between Sidney and Melbourne isn't nearly as drastic as in Denmark where Copenhagen is roughly five times more populous than the second on the list, Aarhus, and seven times larger than the third, Odense. By contrast, while one in five Australians live in Sydney, the city is only 1.1 the size of Melbourne and twice the size of Brisbane. Similarly to the Danish case, London contains 15% of the UK population and is about four times larger than the next two cities (Manchester and Birmingham). In Austria, Vienna not only contains on in five Austrians, but it's six and a half times larger than Graz and nine times larger than Linz, while in (Metropolitan) France, Paris is two and a half times the size of Marseilles and four and a half times the size of Lyon, but Paris only contains about 3% of Metropolitan France´s population (however, the Paris region or the greater Paris area of 10-12 million residents are included, "Paris" is home to 15-20% of Metropolitan French residents (and is 5-7 times more populous than Marseilles and Lyon using similar definitions for them). ScepticWombat (talk) 01:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A similar case would be Berlin which while not outsized for Germany, still sits amid a huge steppe called Brandenburg which is the "heartland" of old Prussia and got the nickname "Reichsstreusandbüchse"(roughly translatable as "imperial sand box") not by accident. And to the North of Brandenburg there is only Mecklenburg with its lakes whose important bits were Swedish up to the 19th century. And as for the South of Brandenburg... Well, wolves are supposed to have returned to it... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * (EC) Über Volk, Völkisch, Gemütlichkeit und Gemütlich zu machen: I'm still not convinced that the verbal version of Gemütlichkeit contain quite the level of intimacy that "hygge" will conjure up in Danish - there's still, in my mind at least, more of conviviality in the German term. As for Volk, the unconsciousness and "Selbstverständlichkeit" with which the Danish version remains can be seen in the several extant and former newspapers called something with "People's" ("Folke"), e.g. the provincial newspaper "The People's Paper of Vejle County" (rough translation of "Vejle Amts Folkeblad", Vejle being a mid-sized Danish provincial city). By contrast "Wir sind das Volk" was chosen as an anti-DDR slogan exactly because the DDR government had appropriated "Volk" (as in the Nationale Volksarmee) in the other way it has typically been used by 20th/21st century authoritarian/totalitarian regimes: As the indicator of a hard line communist government (e.g. The People's Republic of China/Vietnam/Korea etc.). That's why "Volk" got a double barrel of bad press in Germany: First the Nazis used it to isolate those they considered racially impure and then the DDR communists in the SED used it to isolate those they considered ideologically impure. In both cases the "other" is literally placed in the box marked "not one of the people". ScepticWombat (talk) 01:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well that and the fact that the term "Volk" (even more so when used as "Volksgemeinschaft" as used by the Nazis) is inherently exclusionary. If you'd say everybody is "Volk" you would not have to say "Wir sind das Volk" as this always means others aren't. In the case of the GDR it was meant that the government wasn't the Volk. In the case of Pegida it is not at all hard to guess who is excluded from said "Volk" Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

There was a question regarding the flag used by Pegida - here is an overly sympathetic portrayal of the flag and its origins. But the fact that Stauffenberg is some idolized figure is probably something so far ingrained into the German mainstream it won't ever change. I for one like Georg Elser or the White Rose way better. Even though the latter had strong Christian overtones. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Danish/English/German, one set of words and concepts that translates directly and fully between Danish and German, but not into English is the distinction between "Bildung"/"dannelse" and "Ausbildung"/"uddannelse". Only the latter works in English (it's "education" if someone didn't guess already), whereas no good match exists (at least to my knowledge) for "Bildung", which is why the German word is used in English (similar to such loan words as "Realpolitik" or "Kindergarten", both of which, incidentally, also translate directly into Danish as "realpolitik" and "børnehave").
 * The reason I mention it is that I've become a greater and greater proponent of Bildung over the years. Not necessarily as a pre-set canon of "great works" that it sometimes deter to, but as the ideal of a broad, well-rounded basic education in the arts, humanities as well as the social and natural sciences, along with whatever traditions one cares to throw in (at my high school we had to learn to dance as well as reading the Odyssey, perform in one school concert, and study art). Given that life-long learning becomes an ever more present demand, the lack of anyone to plausibly identify any set of core skills beyond reading, writing and math, I've become still more disenchanted with the increasingly specific demands for "measurable learning" and the barrage of standardised tests and New Public Management economic stimuli for schools to have their students/pupils do well in them that has gone farthest in the US.
 * It's bizarre that in an age where the agreement seems to be that we're less and less able to predict future needs due to the speed of R&D and new implementations and uses for all kinds of technology and software, the education sector has, if anything, regressed back to an increasingly narrow focus on tests and claims about what will be needed in the future (curiously, it always seems like what we need in the future is the kind of skills that there's a shortage of right now, especially if said shortage is in the private sector). Instead, I'd suggest the broad brush of introduction to all kinds of stuff.
 * The test regime, NPM performance incentives and the underlying dogma their promoters actually know what society needs is the ultimate victory of "economism" and the pinstriped suit "manageocracy" over broader societal consideration such as, personal development, equipping youngsters for a hard to predict future, and good sense in general. It seems that the system's main function is to fill endless amounts of Excel sheets so someone will have an "alibi" for implementing the management fetish du jour. The "permanent revolution" didn't die with The Great Helmsman. Instead, it blossomed into the carrion flower of permanent "restructuring" (or "glasnost", for those who remember Gorby) and the complete and utter abdication of responsibility from the leadership or management as every problem can be explained (away) as "due to our recent restructuring". "Routine" has become almost a dirty word, but routines have efficiency advantages, and when everything becomes a process of essentially searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, a lot of these efficiency gains are lost (just think of the host of meetings, mails, calls and whatnot needed to coordinate and half implement several simultaneous processes of restructuring that are either never finished or quickly replaced by yet another round of restructurings). In this sense, a conservative approach of the kind that seeks "to change in order to preserve" becomes almost a revolutionary concept, refusing to pander to the faddish mood and chatter about "innovation" that is even influencing research (because donors, public or private, tend to throw money after "the latest thing").
 * Just another tl;dr detour from the corridors of my mind to the noise machine of the Great Web... ScepticWombat (talk) 04:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As you seem to be experts on the Nordic countries, do you consider the Finnish school and education system to be among the best in the world? Or is it getting a better reputation thaen it deserves? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Finnish is on my list of languages I would dearly want to learn, but I don't know anything about their school system. As a bit of extra information, Finns and Icelanders generally get along well - they seem to have a more similar sense of humor than either compared to the other Nordics, excluding the Faeroese who often learn Icelandic, we have quite a lot of them here and they assimilate very well. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The bit about having a lot of them in Iceland and that they assimilate well refers to the Faeroese. They are also always the first to lend Iceland a helping hand, when needed. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well the two places appear to be similar enough on the face of it. I know little of Finland, but I have heard they enjoy Tango, cheap booze(Something you can't get in Finnland, but can in e.g. Estonia), Saunas and fishing. And if their humor is any guide, Finns are stoic. Have you heard that one for example?


 * Two Finns are fishing.
 * After five hours one says "They don't seem to be biting, do they?"
 * The other replies: "That's cause you can't keep your mouth shut" Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That one or a variation of it is probably known to every Nordic. :-)
 * Another one: This takes place in WWII where the Finns really had the choice between the Devil and his grandmother and ended up on the German side, until they managed to extricate themselves in 1944. (As a tidbit of history: The Finns had the only field synagogue belonging to the Axis powers and their allies. The Germans were told to mind their own business, when some bright German thought of mentioning Jews to Mannerheim.) But Pekka and Jussi had been given leave for bravery, and were sent on a luxury visit to Berlin. They definitely made a night of it, but somehow managed to get back to their hotel. Berlin was bombed later that night, but our heroes slept through that. In the morning Pekka awoke, walked to the balcony, only to find the balcony, most of the wall and quite a bit of the neighborhood missing. "Jussi", he said. "Let's sneak out quietly. We'll never be able to pay for this." Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually know very little about the Finnish school system, so I'm afraid I can't help you there. Like you, I've heard a lot about the supposed virtues of the Finnish system, but little about its actual contents or how or what it does. Btw, despite the tendency to view the Nordic countries as being quite similar, their educational systems are just one of the areas in which the Nordic countries differ quite a lot from each other, that much I do know.
 * Btw, the stuff about Finns being laconic or downright taciturn is one of those cases where a national stereotype has more than a grain of truth to it. Anyway, if you want a light hearted introduction to the Nordic countries, you could do worse than the webcomic Scandinavia and the World. ScepticWombat (talk) 10:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have heard about that one, maybe I'll give it a try in short time ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 11:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I took a look at that just now. Naturally I selected my own country as a reality check. I usually do that. If I have, say a book about linguistics, I always look up the Icelandic examples first if there are any. If they are correct, I'm fairly ready to trust the rest. If they are wrong (amazingly often) I write the book off as a source. But I saw the lava spraying cartoon. The funny part is, that this works. When Helgafell erupted in 1973, Þorbjörn Sigurgeirsson, a physics professor, came up with the deceptively simple idea, that given enough water and pumps, the flow might be cooled to a halt. And it worked. It's one of these „simple“ ideas that nobody in their right mind would think of, but he was a physicist and he had done his homework, that is used his knowledge of thermodynamics and calculated that it should be possible and it was. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Just another Finnish joke - true this time
Once upon a time your correspondent attended a Baltic conference about ... well, I won't give that away, there has to be some mystery, but the city of the conference was in one of the Baltic countries. On the street beside the conference building people were repairing footpaths and a pile of earth had accumulated in the process. The Finnish delegate - dear me, this might be one of the you had to be there stories - was as laconic as the stereotypical Finn, but at the sight of this pile of dirt he stopped, gave it a scornful look and said absolutely deadpan: "If this were Helsinki this would be a work of art." He didn't intend to be funny but everybody else suffered various kinds of internal injuries. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I chuckled. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
&#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 19:05, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sometimes I do have a tendency to show a bit of insanity, which makes me all the more proud. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:08, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Then you'll fit right in with the current status of recent changes. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * There are no edit wars. Only disagreements of principle.... about every. fucking. word. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:32, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd be getting tired, if I were in your shoes. My sympathy. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry
I had a really bad sig for a few days, but I changed it several months ago. KOM 07:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It sounds like we're not talking about the same thing. I've only been here for just over a week. Still, OK, and peace be with you - for me too for that matter. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * When you change your sig, it doesn't update all of the ones that you have already typed. KOM 19:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * KOM 19:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * That was quick. I'll try not to turn into a megalomaniac. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Bloody cheers mate. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See what getting into the whole Zionism mess has gotten me? I am not even a sysop. Oy vey... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Nor is Mona unless I really was gone for a while. It's because there's an edit war, and there is a strong possibility of abusing powers. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Anyway, my hearty congratulations for your promotion. And as a piece of advice to preserve your sanity: Try and hide your opinion on Gamergate or Zionism ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sticking to your guns is known to have a deleterious effect (one might call it a test of character) so Peter's Law is likely to catch up with invertebrates like me. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * PS: I have no idea what Gamergate is and I'm in favour of Jews having their country. The detail, however, have turned out to be supercomplicated. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well if you talk to a certain Mona even this rather benign non-opinion is bound to create a bit of a kerfuffle, to put it mildly. As for Gamergate, I don't really know. It may or may not be related to Anita Sarkeesian Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * As for Israel, the greatest favour ever done to it was the attack in 1948. Had the Arabs stuck to the partition plan, Israel would have been left with absolutely indefensible borders and might not exist now. Just my take on history. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:37, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Shhhhhhh......&#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, it's out here now. :-) And, Avenger, it is actually an opinion. You have millions of Jews in Israel, and there's no way I'd wish them gone. That would require genocide, which is apparently not outside the imagination of quite a number of Arabs I've spoken to. Incidentally, you also have a lot of Israeli Arabs who are better off than most Arabs under Arab rule. I'd say that this is an opinion. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't say I disagree with any of the things you say. Just pray to Atheism (wait, is that a thing?) that Mona never reads this, or you will find some not-so-nice words thrown your way... Cheerio, Miss Sophie(A reference to this) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll save this viewing pleasure a bit, but I did look around on M's talk page and found a reference to a ten agorot coin. Many years ago, our then PM was hoodwinked by Arafat and shown a coin ostensibly representing the borders of a greater Israel. Asking around led to the "discovery" that the coin in question had a ceramic fragment on one side and that archaeological finds were the theme of a series of coins. This particular PM actually belongs to our worse once - he was at the very least very gullible. I have another story regarding that. But is this the coin in question? All of this is from memory so the details might be shaky. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * PS: Apparently one could with a great stretch of imagination and suspension of disbelief believe you saw something resembling a crude map of the Mediterranean coast, but pottery shards tend to come in all shapes. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:14, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes Arafat did indeed bring up a ten agorot coin (I don't know whether it still is in circulation, as ten agorot are a tenth of a shekel and thus not all that much). If I recall correctly, the design in question was inspired by coin from the Maccabee era (back in those days getting coins perfectly round was hard). Anyway, the fact that Arafat either seriously believed this or thought he could exploit it for political gain...Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Atheism is not a thing, of course, it's, well, an ism, but the guiding power is Atheos and his name is not to be taken in vain - he insists on being declined according to the rules of Attic Greek, even in English. If one does not do so, one vanishes in a puff of smoke, which is one explanation why he is so seldom heard of. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Łøľ Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * One of the nice things about atheism that you're rid of all that praying stuff. Atheism is the absence of religion despite many attempts to convince people otherwise. („Everebody has to believe in something“ and nonsense like that. If you're not brought up with religion (i.e.,brainwashed), chances are you'll live your life without celestial worries. I'd rate a 6 on Dawkins' scale. Cheerio Sorte Slyngel (talk) 07:57, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed. So it is written. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 12:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Sortie
Your username reminds me of martial sorties. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 19:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm as immartial as anyone could wish. But nicknaming is free, so id I'm Sortie, then so be it. The explanation of the name is here on the page and on my user page. Sorte is Danish for (The) Black. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:40, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Somebody who does not know what this is about will probably be getting ideas :-P Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I sincerely hope they do. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * We'll see... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


 * This does not bode well for the fate of humanity... 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:19, 19 September 42015 AQD (UTC)


 * Why? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I feel inclined to ask the same question. What does not bode well? I did express a wish for confusion above since, let's face it, confusion is so much more fun! But I'm curious to know what nefarious activities are suspected. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't elaborate, I'm afraid. Gotta safeguard the Anti-Zionist conspiracy and all. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:41, 19 September 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Which one? The one on al Quds day or the one headed by Saudi Arabia? Or was it the one with the ? Or are you one of those people? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:45, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I'm not a member of that organization but if I were to join, do you know where I could pay the entrance fee of thirty shekels of silver - an Israeli currency to be sure, but since Jews rule the world it has to be the stablest currency in the world, right? Shalom Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait, Jews rule the world? One more reason to convert.... If only there was a kosher supermarket in the place I live in... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Just out of curiosity: If a gentile wishes to convert to Judaism, is there a way to avoid circumcision? There's no way I'm letting a sharp implement anywhere near that part of me without really urgent medical reasons. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:04, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts, forget it. There's no way I would adhere to the diet. Salaam (to show impartiality) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:09, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Converts are usually not required to be circumcised. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The last time that issue came up, I was told that circumcision as well as a rather intense Jewish religion course is required for conversion. The person who told me that was standing in a synagogue at the time and worked there, but he is no Jew. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not as well endowed as Jesus, who had up to 18 foreskins to spare, counting by relics, so I'm just keeping my one. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:20, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm sorry, I actually think it is required as Brit milah (misspelt) IIRC. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Brit milah? What does that mean? Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:24, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, I don't remember that much (if my memories are even partially correct here). Perhaps you should research your questions. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:26, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

I thought that was the technical term in Hebrew for the actual circumcision Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * (several edit conflicts) The answer is yes, it is required. They consider it a covenant with their deity. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * About the Holy Foreskin: It struck me as rather weird, since normally, the foreskin is buried right after the circumcision. If a Jew has the misfortune to loose, say, a limb, it is also buried. What asshole stole the foreskin (if any of these foreskins is legit anyway, no way they let some scientists at those to analyze them, right)?!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 21:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, this is in the same category as the forest of crosses stored as relics as well as multiple heads and other body parts of martyrs. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Also if the guy goes to heaven in his whole bodily form, why does a piece of him still remain? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Christianity is a testable, observable, reliable, verifiable, repeatable science grounded in logic & evidence. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 21:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It isn't. Why would you say so? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you feeling alright, Avengerofthe IPs BoN? &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 21:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who occasionally misses the hidden smiley. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I am unable to recognize humor on the Interwebz. Some users meaning things seriously that I had thus far only ever heard as jokes does not aid in that. Also a question: Is "IP" or "BoN" an offensive term? If so, which one is more offensive? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:32, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It depends on use, but many users don't have the same trust for BoNs as they do registered users (or maybe I'm projecting). BoN as you already know is the acronym for Bunch of Numbers (IP addresses that show up for unregistered/un signed in users). &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 21:41, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Of that, I am fully aware. So there is to your best knowledge no real connotation with either term, correct? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I myself use BoN (not IP) slightly to moderately disparagingly (which probably isn't the best thing). &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 21:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. I shall keep that in mind. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:53, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

A Break
Other concerns cause me to disappoint the multitude of my fans out there, and take a break for a few weeks. :-) I'll look in every now and then, but if anyone wants my opinion of Gothic, Proto-Norse, Proto-Indoeuropean and a few related things, just leave a note. I'm fairly familiar with some branches of maths too, and I am probably the resident expert on my native language, although I can't be sure. In any case if anyone wants to know what, say, the declension of u-stems looks like and how it came to be, feel free, and that goes for Old Icelandic (habitually the catch term for Old Norse) too. I think I can safely assume that I won't be swamped. :-) Over and out Sorte Slyngel (talk) 16:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I shall miss you. But I hope you'll return ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me see, I think there's a quote somewhere ... ah, yes, hardly usable anymore but: „I'll be back!“ Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * To think that that guy actually was the governor of the largest state of the US by population once... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Vandalizing, please do not interfere
*Vandalizes talk page*. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 18:23, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Huh? Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What egregious, heinous vandalism!---Mona- (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * We all have our standards, dearest. Some more than others. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I concur, dearest Black Bandit. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Since I am here, someone could perhaps answer a question, if he or she wanders by and knows something about the issue. We have this, which seems to demand the immigration of about 5.000.000 people to a country which already has a population of over 8.000.000 (about 1.700.000 of them Arab citizens) with an area of around 21.000 square kilometers. I'd be interested to see, how this is supposed to be implemented without butchering or expelling a couple of million people. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no way. This was and is just another tool to "drive the Jews in the sea".--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 21:23, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I know there is no way. I have done the math. But to quote a Palestinian I once asked the same question: „That's not my problem. They have to go.“ This was a long time ago, but I still remember it because this and other remarks suggested that he amd others would gladly gas, drown or shoot the entire Jewish population of Israel and I'm not kidding. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This particular Palestinian was, by the way, having a free university education at the expense of the then West-German government. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:30, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * (EC) There was a joke on the net, that Chanin Zoabi claimed, that she and some other punks on the Turkish ships trying to break through the blockade were treated like terrorists. The IDF, as the comedy skit continued, said, that this is a lie, since they didn't buy them cellphones or TV sets and didn't pay for their college education.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 21:34, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Um, Sorte, you don't have to add your signature and make a separate line for every new statement you make. Just add it to your previous writings. &#60;-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-&#62; (talk) 21:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think these exercises in speculation, anecdotes and feverish, nightmare musings are a great use of Zionist energy. Please, carry on and leave the sober, documented writing to me, Chris and a number of others.---Mona- (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Fedora, that's less of a nuisance, but I somehow got the impression that history should be preserved in the text. It should be preseverved and it is in the Fossil Record. You live and learn. :-) @Mona: Why should we? Fever has nothing to do with it and the anecdote is true, something specifically allowed unless I've forgotten something. Do we have a distasteful fact here, by any chance, eh? You do know how to use a calculator, I presume. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:41, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Funny how Mona has not answered the question. By now we can safely assume that she is aware of the existence of said question... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I was about to post this when we had an ec.
 * Just to make it clear, I am really interested in seeing how Mona et al. want to handle this very simple problem. The problem really has nothing to do with any historical right - there are few people alive from 1948 - and their descendants could easily have been integrated into their country of residence. That's how all European refugee problems were solved after WWII. This could have been done. The Arab governments, however, were against that and are just as culpable for creating the problem in the first place. By attacking Israel in 1948 they in a sense guaranteed that Israel would survive and they created the refugees, which they then kept in camps. No, this is not a result of Zionist propaganda. But Mona has admitted hatred for Israel with a very detailed account on her own page. Hatred such as hers serves nobody and in the end, it is counter-productive. In any case, for a long, long time the Middle East has been blown out of all proportions. What about the 3.000.000 or so victims of the Congolese wars? Who cares? They're just some black people far away, aren't they? The main problem in the Middle East now is Syria, Iraq and IS. And people are still going on about Israel. Just do ask a question: Don't you ever feel sick of your own hypocrisy? I guess not. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course she has done the math. That makes her either blind or willing to contemplate the extermination of a good deal of the population. I don't know which one it is. She's a blindingly devoted fanatic, and there are no more dangerous people. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorte, for the greater part, and as with Avenger, I won't be substantively answering your tendentious inquiries. I shall only do so when another, reasonable use indicates they wish to know my reply. Because Fedora is a reasonable user and seeks to know my answer, I gave it to him on Avenger's page. But most often -- NOTE - I do not say always -- I will not substantively answer you.---Mona- (talk) 22:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * In other words, you can't get the numbers to fit. As for your definition of reason - well, you haven't exactly been a model yourself, have you?Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Mona is the Pippi Longstockings of debates. She makes her world just the way she likes it. And of course the same applies as to whom she deems worthy of being graced by one of her responses... But back to the issue at hand. I wholeheartedly agree that there are myriads of conflicts that are more important more urgent more bloody and more heinous thaen any thing done by Israel or even Hamas and Hezbollah (hey at least Hezbollah is not currently burning people alive for protecting ancient ruins), but for some reason Israel is portrayed as the ultimate evil and the root of all problems by some people. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

If you like alternate history
You might be interested in this (as of yet unfinished) timeline. The why will become obvious with reading, though I don't want to spoil the fun by telling all twists ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:29, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * [[File:Question smiley.gif]]--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 23:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * LOL. As it appears the timeline can hardly be more unfinished, since there's not a word to say what it is or where it is. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Leads nowhere, Arisboch. :-) This seems to be the caption where nothing happens. That's sort of an alternate history too - actually, it's probably the real end of the Universe. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:41, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Walking around in a room full of medicine (don't ask) apparently does stuff to your brain. here is the link in question... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

you
will be Eligible to vote on policy on November 29th, after having made 75 edits and signed up for the voting roll. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger will be eligible to vote for Policy on October 28th. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The people's hangman shows himself. There's nothing you can say that will convince a rational person that you don't enjoy this. You can figure out yourself what that makes you. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you saying Paravant and the rest of us should ignore the eligibility rules? --Castaigne (talk) 23:01, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually don't, as it goes against my desire to do as least moderating as possible as a moderator, which, if memory serves, was part of what I campaigned on when I was elected to stand-by mod and then full mod in the last elections. However, actual rules are actual rules, and one of them is you have to be eligible to vote on our rules. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * @Castaigne: No I can't do that, but he clearly enjoys himself. Or perhaps not. But he does have a tendency to rule by Diktat. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree entirely. "Diktat" would be by his whim alone. Paravant performs useful clean-up, moderation, and adherence to the rule base (such as we have.) --Castaigne (talk) 23:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * These sly insinuations about Paravant's character are most unpleasant and unfortunate. I don't want to be a moderator (I've been one several times and it comes with tons of stress and headaches) but someone needs to do what he does. He hasn't always been "nice" to me, either, but he is fulfilling a duty and not doing a half bad job of it. I've seen him seek to know whether others support his actions, so he isn't -- contrary to the insinuation -- some egomaniac on a power trip.---Mona- (talk) 23:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hell, i've been restraining my actions this entire time because I don't want to go to far in my attempt to solve these issues. And I'll again state my answer to your claimed abuse of power by me - I you feel I am acting in a way undeserving of being a mod, take a case to the coop or the AtiM page. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:12, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

What has been sly? I thought I'd made myself clear. And, yes, Castaigne is right, Diktat does not apply. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Israel article protection level/length
Why did you make the protection a month long? I had only had it for another week!---Mona- (talk) 16:48, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I forgot to leave a comment, but I thought that protecting the article was a good idea. I estimated that it would take longer than a week for tempers to cool. Just my personal opinion. You can change it back if you disagree, and I won't do anything about it. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, AgingHippie has also been fiddling with the protection levels and the last thing we need is a sysop war! So I'm just trying to see what everybody's reasons are and keep it all calm. I'll leave it but I'm not sure what he will do.---Mona- (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't state my assumption, but I do it now, that sysops would show restraint and preferably leave the article alone voluntarily, except for fixing minor issues like spelling errors. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, that's now it has worked. The idea is that sysops have already shown restraint by virtue of the fact that they are sysops. They can all edit as we have done at the Zionism article after Paravant make it sysop-only. The whole point is that those whose behavior doesn't merit sysop status are removed from the process. Which is also why too long a time is not appropriate---Mona- (talk) 17:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Understood, but a bit of extra care seems to be a good idea nevertheless. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Deleting talk page comments
Hi. :-) Maybe I am misreading the thread but it looks like you just deleted a talk page comment.Could you explain why you did that? If I misunderstood them my apologies. --Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:03, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That was a knee-jerk reaction. I rolled myself back as you will see in the Fossil Record. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Then be careful - you don't want those knees to make it look like you react like a jerk. (Actually, that reads harsher than I had intended, I was just trying to play on "knee-jerk reaction".) : - ( Cheers.--Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I try to. Anyway, I'm more or less considered to be a jerk. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

This is how it is
There is no consensus for your position on the Mufti picture. And if you keep reverting it, I'll just wait a few hours and delete it again. I'll wait until the majority of reasonable people who always outvote the hardcore Zionists are around to make the majority utterly clear.

Moreover, if you block me again I'll coop you.

Your faction can no longer prevail on these issues of fact and relevancy vis-a-vis anything touching on Zionism. It is time you accepted that.---Mona- (talk) 20:04, 23 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Your opinion stands against virtually every other person who has edited that article today. Go ahead. Coop away. If people notice you are fighting over not calling a Nazi a Nazi, I wouldn't like my chances if I were you... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You continue to be an idiot. Many people have opined on that matter and you do not have a majority. And you will be grossly outnumbered if the usual reasonable people enter this particular Zionism-related fray.---Mona- (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * (ec) Avenger, I just had this good reply written. :-( Well, I'll use it another day. @Mona - Take me to coop, do what you want. You have been at war for a long time. So you've admitted that. Good. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mona: Those people probably don't want to get involved in whitewashing a war criminal, apart from a very few who are your what the Germans used to call „Hilfswilliger“ if I remember the word correctly or if they aren't your puppets. The idiotic BoN is suspect. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)In general, war is what anti-Zionists want. That's what their actions tell tales of even in the rare cases when their words are silent. And as for your text, I hope you have it saved somewhere, Sorte Slyngel... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No I haven't. Don't worry, if Mona is a master of the pen, I can try to be - at least I can write it again. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't you dare insult Monas wordcraft! She is a master of the pen and the feather in two languages! So much so in one of them that nobody besides her knows which language it is! Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

(ec again - allow me a minute's respite here, please. :-) And, by the way, dear disturbed Mona, you are not the one who says „This is how it is“. I think that was a part of my sadly lost reply. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I do say "this is how it is" all the time, in sum and substance. That's because I traffic in facts, sourcing, and avoid logical fallacies. At least on this topic you do none of those things. Moreover, you do not have the numbers to prevail in your irrational and/or unreasonable positions. Parvant has entered the fray on this particular article to make the observation that Avenger's edits make articles worse. If that translates into his opposition to the picture with the caption you want (and he's a reason-based person so it's probable), you are not merely in the minority, you are extremely so.---Mona- (talk) 21:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What you say and what the world is like are two different stories. Paravant is rational - you are not. I'd like to hear his opinion about whitewashing the Mufti per se. And now should be the time you go out and get your head kicked in yoyr chosen sport. Do a better job of protecting it this time. Take the example of Muhammed Ali as a warning. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Or Junior Seau, or a mind-numbingly long list of people who have suffered greatly for our entertainment by getting hit on the head repeatedly and hard Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

True. But I think she got it. :-) Or I might be mistaken - you never know. Anyway, it seems a bit superfluous. About Ali, I can´t understand how his daughter could possibly have entered boxing, having seen what it does, and Ali condonig it, if he did. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It's an aerobic kickboxing class. I'm going very shortly. People who spend a lot of time online are wise to tend to their physical health -- for their heart, their weight and many other health reasons.---Mona- (talk) 21:33, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Good to know. Your physical health is OK then, I assume. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Mens non sana in corpore sano? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, corpus sanum at least. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * En eso si tenes (sic!) razon, maé ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Enough
with the comments on peoples intelligence. I will lay a strong hand on you if you don't stop, because we are not going back to that era of commentary. I'm not at nebkon today so I have no other ways to shirk paper writing besides playing fallout shelter. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 17:32, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, apparently all animals are not created equal. Lay an equally strong hand on the others. And the BoN is simply wrong in this case. His revenge-block doesn't help him either. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 17:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Shut up. Say yes, that is the only proper response. We are people, we are civilized. No more of this insulting intelligence, calling people who disagree with you sheep. That is not what this wiki is and it is only going to set a bad precedent if we allow it. This goes to all of you. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 17:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, yes. But I didn't invent name calling here. That was already well established when I registered. But OK, since I have a bit of respect for you, I'll tone it down. I hope the others do too, although I'm not optimistic. You find a similar distribution of good and bad here as in RL. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Chicken Coop outcome
Following the discussion and vote at RationalWiki:Chicken coop, and to avoid further conflict, please:
 * Don't make substantial changes to articles about Israel, Palestine, Zionism, Noam Chomsky or Glenn Greenwald without discussing them on the talk pages.
 * Don't revert other people's edits to those pages (with the exception of obvious vandalism).
 * Don't edit war over anything. Use the talk page to seek consensus if you're being reverted.
 * Leave Mona alone. Don't post comments on her talk page or gossip about her elsewhere.  Keep any discussions about article content civil.

If you can't keep to these guidelines, you may be vandal binned and/or temporarily blocked from RW. If you have any questions or concerns, please post them here. 17:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Correct me If I'm wrong, but hasn't Sorte already given a promise to basically that effect? Pizzameister (talk) 17:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep. And 250 edits of shitflinging later, we're at the same place. 17:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * sigh Pizzameister (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes I did promise. Now that the jury is in, how long is that sentence? An eternal topic ban is unacceptable for disagreeing with Mona, who isn't quite blameless. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

A question. How much is ‘substantial’? I've had perfectly good snark reverted blindly. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * PS: The only relevant topic here is Chomsky. As I have said that more than once, I don't see why the rest was dragged in. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not term-specific and is not the 3-week promise you gave to FCP. We didn't go thru the coop case for THAT, which you immediately violated anyway. You entirely violated FCP's mod authority saying "come what may" and reverting me AGAIN at the Chomsky article. Anything that isn't leaving me the fuck alone, you can't do. And the burden has been placed on you to be conservative in deciding what that means.---Mona- (talk) 18:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Lookie, lookie. This is not your personal decision. I promised to leave Chomsky alone. I didn't say a word about the others, because they are not interesting. But since you have invited yourself, here, I am presumably allowed to answer: You are not the entirety of RW. You do not own articles. And you're lucky not to have been on the receiving end many a time and oft. I will not take anything back I've said. And now you may complain about me again, but as this is my talk page and you have no business here, I doubt the complaint will be taken seriously. I'll keep my word and my word precisely. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

"Substantial" means adding or removing information or commentary. If you want to correct a typo or something on one of those pages, you don't need to discuss it. 18:26, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * So one line of snark is substantial? If I am to follow that one, I'd suggest that it would be enforced on everyone. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Just to say it, but I can not regard the following as substantial: Snark in the RW-spirit, reading suggestions, adding sourced facts. If anything of this is voluminous, then discussion is prudent. I will keep my word, which I gave what seems like an eternity ago. But I will be a regular member when my promise expires. I would love never having to post anything on Mona's page, and as it is, there is no need. But a legitimate reason might appear — things have a way of appearing out of the blue in real life — and then I will comment or ask. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * See this Weaseloid? He's already telling you what the terms are and what he will accept.---Mona- (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, Weaseloid see this! I consider this reasonable. As for Mona, she has sinned massively in that respect. Again, this is my page and I suppose I can answer here. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've seen it. & You've seen what I've said. You're not off to good start.  19:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't call this a bad start. If Mona keeps intruding, I will answer her on this page. As for topic banning, I'll cross that bridge, when it comes. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

As an example of what I would not call substantial can be seen here. And Mona, as long as you keep intruding here, you make yourself a legitimate target, at least for disagreement, although you hate that. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Weaseloid made himself clear: Substantial" means adding or removing information or commentary. If you want to correct a typo or something on one of those pages, you don't need to discuss it. That edit of the Kissinger is substantial according to the mod's parameters. You can't negotiate with a community decision enforced by a *mod.*---Mona- (talk) 19:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * And with Weaseloid having spoken again, I will leave this talk page.---Mona- (talk) 19:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That will cause a debate later on. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

By the way: Why was the snark about Kissinger not removed? If that was appropriate, then similar things about Chomsky will appear. You can't eat your cake and have it too, or however the saying goes. And just as a last comment: I give my pledge, that I'll never go down on my knees begging for assistance or crying to a moderator as seems to be the custom. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

To sum it up
Adhering to RW's guidelines is absolutely commendable and recommendable. But being subjected to what amounts to effectively Mona's censorship is not acceptable and I will not bow to that. This will not be a problem for a while. But when the time is up, I have the right to do what I mentioned above. If not, then RW is useless. If you want to kick me out right away. I did say „Come what may“ in my comment on my last Chomsky-edit. But that was not the full comment. If anyone is interested, it's there to see. In the meanwhile, biding my time. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

What can be expected when time allows, just first things first


 * Some points about Chomsky's linguistics and why these points are wrong
 * Chomsky's reaction to linguistic dissidents — Daniel Everett will be featured
 * Chomsky's myth-building about himself in linguistics

What will not be featured for the time being


 * Chomsky's politics, although some of that will probably come in since it is difficult to separate politics and linguistics. It shouldn't be, but the man himself makes it difficult, as they are both the main strands in his story, and historically they have influenced one another. Not exactly how he thinks, but how he is perceived. As it is, the article is ridiculous. What is the point in listing a number of things he doesn't believe in? Greenwald is also overrepresented, but Greenwald himself is a nobody. I never had any real interest in that article, but as Chomsky's article is now, it is a soapbox for Mona.
 * Anything about IP. I haven't messed with that for a long time.

Everything will be sourced, and Mona does not have the power of veto. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Just so we're clear... Is he, or will he be allowed to do that at any point of time in the future? Pizzameister (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * While I agree that Greenwald is a nobody and Chomsky is a nutbar, the mods have pretty much said you need to take a break. That was the coop decision anyhow. I would recommend that you not touch those articles mentioned by Weasaloid for at least two months, just to be sure. Work on something different and avoid Mona. And do this to show good faith. --Castaigne2 (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know myself, but I will abide by the RW-rules. I will not consent to Mona's having the power of censorship over me. The Kissinger example I provided a link to is an example of what she will not have a say in. That is not substantial by any consideration. And if she is supposed to wield that power, then what good is RW? I will not ask her permission to cite Daniel Everett or refer to his book about life among the Pirahã. As a matter of fact, everybody should read that — it's a riveting story. But to take a historical analogy, I will not accept Mona as my George III. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * There was an edit conflict before the last one by me. I'm in no hurry. But if I am to have Mona judging every single thing I do, I'm gone. A couple of months, that's OK. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:49, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Castaigne II. So I'm to be prolific about my other interests? Be careful what you wish for. :-) When in the mood I can type very fast about quite a number of topics. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Well more input on countries that aren't the US can certainly do no harm, given the userbase of this website... Pizzameister (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes. I once heard Honecker speak. That is probably worth a story. As for the minutiae of Icelandic politics, the fact is, that the politics of small countries are every bit as complicated as those of the larger ones. Trust me — there are shelf-meters of literature on every conceivable thing. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:43, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * At the very least we could explain concepts like (European) liberalism, (European) conservatism, Christian Democracy, Social Democracy, Socialism and the likes. It sometimes appears to me that explaining European politics to another European from another country is much easier than explaining them to an American... Pizzameister (talk) 22:55, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The Atlantic Ocean seems to be more than a geographical barrier. I've lost count of the times I've tried and failed to get the Icelandic concept of left-right across to Americans. I'm not blaming the Americans. There is just a huge difference. For instance, the Creation-Evolution controversy isn't a controversy to most Europeans. But read American news and it is all over the place. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

To take an example: The party I usually vote for is a mix of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats. I'm not Christian, but this party has had the most to say in establishing the existing welfare system, and are considered to the right in my country. Go figure. :-) Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, many American political debates are hard to grasp for Europeans. With the possible exception of those few who make knowing about them their job or hobby. Unfortunately Britain takes after the US in some, though by no means all aspects... Pizzameister (talk) 23:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The best informed people in America are probably the various lobbyists. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comes with the job, I guess... Pizzameister (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately this is not a problem unique to America. They're just organized differently. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2016 (UTC)