User talk:Nutty Roux/Archive12

Beer?
Sometime next week? I'm available any weeknight except for Monday. I could either hit the old neighborhood or someplace in Logan Square. Godspeed (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Word. I'll call you Tuesday. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 02:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Paul Randle-Jolliffe
As you are a lawyer is it possible to have that engagement with you on the posting about me? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Paul_Randle-Jolliffe http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:PaulRJ
 * I do not accept any engagement without a written agreement establishing the scope of my duties, my fee structure, and taking a retainer for deposit in my client trust account. I do not practice in the UK or anywhere else under UK law, and I am not currently accepting matters such as yours. I regret that I will be unable to accept the engagement. If you're suggesting that you wish to have a discussion on the talk page for your article, that would be fine. Keep in mind that I am just an editor here, not RW's or anyone else here's lawyer. I'm not the gatekeeper or decision maker. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 03:51, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Now is the time when we do the party

 * I'd never noticed the word "Marcus" in that image until now. Must be a sign. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.silverbrain.png 03:16, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't your keen eyes and I'm shithoused afdter having a really good few days getting something sorted. So help me out because I can barely see. IE what image. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 03:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The dancing naked guys image. About a quarter of the way over from the right, at the very top in the background. The sign reads "Marcus." PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.silverbrain.png 03:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Cat's out of the bag. Now you know we're legion. You can't beat MarcusCicero. Cunt. Also I just looked at the MC campaign poster I made and goddamn I'm good at typesetting and jesus that typeface is nice oh but how can you got wrong with the typeface that Obama used for his last campaign. Because Marcus. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 03:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Now is the time when we do the Nutty

 * Well played. Acei9 04:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit Filter 23
My major concern with having it enabled to block outright is that, given some of the broad criteria it lists, it may turn up more false positives than other filters. This is why I try to have it block only during times when we are being heavily wandalised, and have it warn before it blocks. If there is a wave of wandalism that it would help with, however, feel free to turn on blocking mode if nobody else has. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 07:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty ok with an unconfirmed editor who comes on here to talk about "niggers" and "gas chambers" getting automatically blocked for 24 hours ... With a warning, the guy would be able to continue testing the filter like he does, and it's not very well written so he usually wins. Someone needs to sit down and write a proper regex. As it stands, the filter only looks for a short list of words, so I doubt there have been very many false positives. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 12:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Pretty much agree on all accounts. That filter was just a hacked together quick fix. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time or internet to look into reprogramming it, and won't have good internet again until next week. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Nutty.
PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 17:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That dude is cooler than cool. Thanks buddy. I don't have a phono preamp anymore, so I can't play my LPs. That makes me really sad. I've got a fair collection of out-of-print classic country records and some great jazz from the 50s and 60s. If you have a turntable, lemme know if you want to borrow some Rollins, Milt Jackson, Modern Jazz Quartet, Ahmad Jamal, Monk, etc. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 17:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Just noticed this reply. No turntable here -- I reluctantly went all-digital after moving too many times. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Board
Nominated you. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Comment on AD's talk page Re: Word
I've been following that discussion, as I found it quite interesting. However, I noted that you mentioned using Word templates for your legal writing, and I wanted to ask about that in a way that wouldn't sidetrack or clutter the discussion there. Am I correct in assuming that Word is commonly used in the legal world? I come from a scientific background and virtually exclusively use LaTeX to typeset all of my documents. I know that most of the engineers in my old research group were much more familiar with Word, but they always had a tough time publishing papers, since most journals have very strict style guidelines (and it's far easier to use the LaTeX packages these journals provide than it is to try to formulate a template elsewhere). - Grant (Talk) 19:25, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I find that templates in Word make things quite a bit easier. We rely on somewhat idiosyncratic typographical conventions that we'd have to teach Word anyway, since it natively forces a hideous and inappropriate style. Whoever wrote the Word defaults should be hanged. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 19:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I definitely agree with you on Word. I don't touch the thing myself, and I kind of wish LaTeX was a bit more accessible, though there are attempts at creating GUIs to make it so. I just wonder if it wouldn't be easier to generate a LaTeX style that would encapsulate all the information in that template. - Grant (Talk) 20:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I've often wished that I could use my standard CSS typography style sheet for word processing. It's almost like I could do better work writing briefs in HTML/CSS. CSS, and I'm sure latex, gives you much better control over things I use in legal writing. I'm not even sure Word uses correct font weight, italic, or small caps glyphs rather than faking it the way CSS does for some glyphs. 20:25, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, the biggest problem with LaTeX would be setting up the style sheet in the first place, but once it was drawn up, I feel like it would be much easier to generate documents that conform to all of the various specifications. Of course, this requires one to learn how to use TeX notation (not too difficult), and it generates a PDF that isn't editable by others. Not so great for collaborative work unless everyone knows how to use LaTeX, but definitely great for anything where you just want a spiffy end product. When in doubt, Word is probably failing...
 * Using a LaTeX style sheet, you can basically set every piece of information you could want for your document (page number style, font style, heading style, line width, etc.), and you can define characters to use whatever glyphs you want. Actually, it seems like someone is doing exactly that. - Grant (Talk) 20:34, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Abuse Filter false positives
I've changed the code syntax to, hopefully, avoid similar false positives. RNS test (talk) 01:49, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

"Totes. Down to the shabby, ill-fitting suit and poor grooming."
It's because you is a young boy doinz grown man shiz
 * Like kicking your ass. Word... Acei9 08:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Like touching your titties.. Acei9 08:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Like touching your titties.. Acei9 08:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)




 * Onesie I made for my good friend's recent spawn. When I was typesetting the Killa Bees logo, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that they used Bauer Bodoni (IIRC), a truly venerable typeface based on the 18th Century Italian original. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 17:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Have you heard of this?
Illustrated Guide to Law I understand you are often asked legal questions, so this might be useful. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 22:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey Yo, About Hovind
I'm really serious; you should get Ken White over at Popehat to raise the Popehat signal. (I'm surprised his site is blocked under the spam filter here and that we don't have an article on him.) The signal is raised specifically to see if anyone can pro bono against a SLAPP suit like this. Ken's a huge defender of free speech. I'm pretty certain he'd be happy to help. --Castaigne (talk) 14:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I am not RMF's lawyer, but I don't personally view it as a SLAPP suit anyway. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 16:24, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * But thank you for the idea — thanks for any ideas. We're exploring options for getting assistance from outfits that also value free speech. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 16:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

You almost certainly
Were noodling around on the web in the 90s. Come clean and repent for your sins!  22:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I've been on the net since around 1990, which pre-dates the first graphical web browser. Heh Google still has Usenet posts from me going back at least until 92. Back when I was a kid we used lynx and we liked it. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 22:57, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Love you too


How big were the Nagas you got off your plants? Crundy Talk nerdy to me 16:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Like stunted Scotch Bonnets — about 1/2" with tight by wavy flesh. They're basically weapons. [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 17:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)



Happiest of birthdays!
I heard it around the playground that it's your birthday today. Hope you have a great one! I'd get you a present, but I don't know you IRL. Just imagine that I played a live gig for you, or something. MESSIAH OF DOOM A sea on earth is a sea of tears  11:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * That could be the opposite of a gift. Are you in a death metal band? [[file:Nuttysig.svg|68px|link=User:Nutty Roux|Nutty Roux]]100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 14:25, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. I'm in a prog metal band, an alternative rock/metal band and a project where I experiment with various forms of doom metal, mostly funeral doom. MESSIAH OF DOOM  Impurity is the secret Dolan.png 21:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Happy birthday Roux. Imagine I baked you a pie or something. 22:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind birthday wishes. 04:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I see what you did there.
What the section heading says. Well done; it's basically a perfect replica. - Grant (Talk) 05:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * So much so that I was completely fooled the last time you did it, too. Bravo, sir. Bravo. - Grant (Talk) 05:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

you haz mail
Hello there, you haz email from a female... check your inbox (or perhaps spam folder). :-D Refugee talk page 22:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Gotcha back! 23:06, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Really quick
Thank you for this comment. It's probably one of the most intelligent responses to the idiotic responses to a legal threat that I've read on this Wiki. As a donor of money to the RMF and an article contributor to this project, I understand that there's always the chance for us to get sued. However, I want that chance to be as limited as possible and get irritated when people around these parts casually brush off legal threats like that and, worse, give people like Kent Hovind more of a reason to want to sue us. Thanks again. Cheers. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 08:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Word. Hope all's well with you. 13:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I also donate to the RMF, and I don't generally enjoy the kind of dick-waving that happens whenever the threat of a lawsuit is raised. While we obviously shouldn't strip legitimate and truthful content in the face of legal threats, I would prefer if we also didn't taunt the people making them. - Grant (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Which is why I think letting anonymous IP users persist in posting threats in an open forum is a horrible idea, and why I blocked the IP in question. If people want to make legitimate legal threats, let them get a lawyer and sent an actual letter to the board. If people want to internet-dick-wave and provoke escalating responses from the website membership, I don't see any good there. TeenageWasteland (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. I wouldn't even let TK privately threaten to sue Trent and expand his harassment to threatening to sue me and turn me in to the ethics board and that was uncontroversial. What do they do on WP? 14:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I restored TeenageWasteland's block on the BoN. Let the lawyerbots slog it out. -- MtD Notorious Sodomite   19:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sometimes consensus on RW consists entirely of who doesn't give up first. 19:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think closing lines of communication with Kevin Martin (assuming it is him) is a great idea at this point. Legal action is (or should be) a last resort when complaints are not addressed satisfactorily through regular channels, so we should at least be open to trying to find out what his specific complaints about the article are & addressing them, not just blocking him & telling him to fuck off. 20:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I see the logic there. I also see that the only person who is complaining about the article is some anonymous IP, who could be me, or Nutty, or you, or anyone. It's a little weird to be engaged in what could very well be a serious debate with serious IRL consequences with the internet equivalent of someone cutting letters out of headlines, gluing them on a piece of paper to spell out a message, tying the paper to a brick, and throwing it through a window. That's not how adults do business. TeenageWasteland (talk) 21:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * And when I actually tried to address his concerns, he just said "I've given you enough time", not pointing to any particular "libellous statements". As far as I'm concerned, we tried, and it's not like he's exactly going to bring anything constructive to conversation. 00:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Yo, Nutty
I've always wondered… what kind of music do you like? I'm going to have a guess and say either punk, classic rock or alternative. Am I far off? 23:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Take a look through the archives of his talk page, I think you'll be surprised. Nullahnung (talk) 00:07, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Punk and old hip hop. 01:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I really like punk as well. Hip hop? Eehhh, not so much, although it depends on the group, I guess. You should listen to doom metal because it is fucking awesome. Trust me, you'll maybe love it after a few listens. 02:09, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

13:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a pretty good song. Did you check out those links I posted? 00:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Not interested in being your pal. 09:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * K. 09:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * So if you're not interested in being my pal, does that mean you're interested in being my bro? Or my bud? Or my mate? I'm confused here. 12:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I would like to stop seeing your name everywhere as you grossly miscalculate people's interest in your opinion and the value of your contribution. Perhaps stop talking for a while. 15:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Right. Well, I'm not gonna stop, but thank you for your opinion. 21:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Apply cold water to burnt area. Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 21:44, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Who? Nutty or MoD? 101.169.127.246 (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * MoD. Come on, the context made it pretty clear. Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 21:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm fairly certain nutty wants none of us commenting here. -- Mikal |  lakiM  21:52, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, comment and be damned. --Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 21:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Well shit. I was hoping you would actually LANCB instead of sticking around to hear yourself talk. 22:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd like to say I shared that hope, but I've long since abandoned it as a distraction. Yours truly, hoping to avoid delusions of my own significance, Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * See? There you go. You were obviously grubbing for attention, but at least you upped the ante. I hope you've got the sac to live up to your word. Good luck! 22:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Who? What word? You won't find me on that article's talk page any more, or have you been reading things that weren't written again? Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Not you, dickballs. 22:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, just checking. Season's greetings, Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Nutty: it seems like you really overreacted. I mean, you were fine one minute but then you were like "I don't wanna be your pal". Why? I mean, everything was normal, and then you were just a douche. What happened there??? Batcavewifi (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

"PS Fuck you Nutty" Seriously? We've interacted a small handful of times. Are you really blaming your tantrum on me being rude to you? I must be a bigger deal than I thought. I sure wish it carried over into real life. 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Mah sig
Okay, so it fucked up, but I had to quickly leave before I could fix it. Here's the thing, though- I don't know how to get it to do the thingy I want it to do, and I don't know why it's fucking up. Would you mind helping me out, as opposed to just being a knob about it? Thanks. 07:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I figured out the problem. 07:49, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No. 09:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry I told you to fuck off in the user rights thing, I guess I was being needlessly aggressive. Trapped inside this octavarium 08:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It was the worst thing anyone's ever said to me on the internet. I have very thin skin. Etc. 12:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay. Trapped inside this octavarium 10:33, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Ken's oversights
I put on two graphics at Conservapedia_talk:What_is_going_on_at_CP%3F. Here is a third one:



For this, I looked up Ken's current list of contributions (Apr 21, 2014), and compared it to his auto-patrolled entries. This seems to be the most reliable data - and it is the best I can do, as I'm hampered by the same shenanigans as you when I try to access Conservapedia.

So, currently only one third of his comments is oversighted, compared to two thirds in 2007/2008. The number for 2014 will certainly rise, but since he learned to hide revisions instead of deleting/recreating pages in 2010, the memory hole includes not more than 40% of his edits.

I cannot say much about deleted edits by his interlocutors, as they are generally not auto-patrolled. However, at least 15% of all comments went missing in 2013 and at least 10% in 2014. (I think that the number of deleted revisions at RW is less than 1% for 2014...)

--larron (talk) 07:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This is fantastic info. Two thirds of all of his edits in 07 and 08 and he still has so many edits? I feel worse for him. Let me wrap my brain around this and ask more questions. Thanks very much for making this graphic! 13:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Auto-patraolling started in June 2008. Since then, Ken has made 85,800 edits, 47,100 of those can still be found in his list of contributions. 38,800 (or 45%) went missing. But this is okay - at least in Ken's eyes. He writes (in a deleted version of cp:User:Conservative/FYI):

!revision 930971, Oct 24, 2011 To: Jeeves
 * style="background:cornflowerblue"|
 * style="background:cornflowerblue"|

Consider:

1. Atheists have a reputation for often being nerds.

2. All wikinerds go ballistic when even minor style/typos are oversighted or essays are deleted to remove style/typo changes.

3. Therefore, many wiki atheists go ballistic when even minor style/typos are oversighted or essays are deleted and recreated to remove style/typo changes.

Just admit it, the logic is flawless. :) Any alternate storage device you maybe using is superfluous. Any oversighting/deleting of style/typos that occurs is like waving a red cape in front of bull to wikinerds. It is reflexive and they cannot help it. Olé! Olé! Olé! It is a shame that atheist &quot;wikinerdness&quot; appears to have rubbed off on RobS.

Lastly, as I have gained more life experience, I have seen the benefits of admitting mistakes whether you want to admit this or not. I would also point out that I did have good intentions concerning my schedule as far as things I ideally should not have put off plus there is some uncertainty concerning my schedule from time to time. On a more positive note, I do have a better time management system now which I recently acquired. And as far as my vocation/job(s), I have never told you what I do.
 * }


 * Here errs Ken: it's not about "minor style/typos", it's about the memory he wants to suppress.



!revision 930971, Oct 24, 2011 Will &quot;the Kaiser&quot; of conservative wiki traffic go for the gold in 2012? :)
 * style="background:cornflowerblue"|
 * style="background:cornflowerblue"|

Conservapedia:Pro-life Project?
 * }
 * No, the traffic didn't. And the cp:Conservapedia:Pro-life Project died silently. As virtually all of his projects do. --larron (talk) 09:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * As always, you've skewered Ken on the Internet! Olé olé olé! :)
 * But seriously, you've seen this stuff firsthand — what's your impression of his integrity as a person? What's the purpose of all these oversights if not to deceive? I personally cringe when I see him chiding people for inaccuracies when he himself is simply a baldfaced liar. 15:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * To answer your rhetorical question: I think that Ken believes to be an honest person who is allowed (if not by Jesus, then by Sun Tzu) to take some liberties with the truth when talking to unbelievers. He doesn't see this as lying, but as a mixture of advertising and poking fun.
 * He certainly believes in his predictions, and is just flabbergasted that he is measured by his (non existent) past successes.
 * Believingin your own lies doesn't make you dishonest, but delusional.
 * And that's what Andy, Ken, Terry and even Ed have in common: delusions of grandeur, albeit in various degrees. According to Ken, Andy is working on a legal challenge to ObamaCare. I have no doubts that Andy thinks of himself as one of the main forces which will overcome Obamacare, while Terry will lead menkind after the next Armageddon, and Ken destroys atheism. Just think for a moment what kind of wet dreams these three have....
 * The amusing bit: Andy could have been quite successful with Conservapedia - it could have become the foxnews equivalent of a wiki. Certainly he will blame external forces for the ultimate failure of his project, but in the end, his leadership, his people skills, the selection of his lieutenants, and mainly his overestimation of his own capabilities brought down Conservapedia. Especially the last point can be seen in his debating stile and even in his presentations at court: I'm a very open-minded and clever person. If an argument convinces me, it has to be absolutely logical. So, if someone else isn't convinced by the argument, this someone is just not thinking logically and should try harder.
 * --larron (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

:eyeroll:
Well, I'm sorry. I hadn't thought to do that. Should all questions to the board be done through email? Because that hasn't stopped people from asking them at the bar before. But fine, whatever his majesty demands.-- "Shut up, Brx." 02:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Best music ever created
Jump to 1:50. Acei9 09:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Teemporarreeee. 13:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Email.
22:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I grudgingly responded and am grudgingly playing your attention-seeking game of letting the world know you emailed the coolest person you know. Nutty Roux (talk) 15:06, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Lol. 20:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * But in all seriousness, the actual reason I posted on your thing was because I figured if you logged on to RW before you checked your email, you'd be like "Oh, hey, better check my email", and yeah, as I was not aware of how much you did or didn't check your email. 20:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It comes in on my phone. I see it all. If I don't respond, you can usually assume I'm ignoring you. Nutty Roux (talk) 03:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. 03:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Jesus. I'm being too nice to you. You talk a lot. Nutty Roux (talk) 03:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well that explains why you didn't answer any of the 40-50 emails I sent you... In the last hour. - Grant (talk) 03:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah so YOU'RE V14GRA! Nutty Roux (talk) 04:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well of course! This whole "Grant" deal is just a pseudonym. - Grant (talk) 04:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I wasn't ignoring you. I couldn't decide which of your emails promised me the largest penis and it was unclear whose body it would be attached to, if any. Please to clarify. Nutty Roux (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * But the mystery is part of the excitement! Everyone loves gambling, right? - Grant (talk) 13:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)