User talk:Knight Commander/Archive1

Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:59, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
— Oxyaena   Harass  12:04, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Why thank you!--Coigreach (talk) 12:25, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Sysop
I have given you sysop rights. Go forth and enjoy your new found power. AceModerator 03:28, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Unsigned comment by TheFonz
Thats a way to summarise a edit isn't it? To quote the main page of RationalWiki: 'Don't be a dick'
 * More of a play on your own edit comments wording. But, while Trumps twitter antics may be worth including, you might want to try and improve your formatting.
 * Also, please sign your talk-page comments with four tildes.Coigreach (talk) 10:36, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry if that came out rude, i woke up on the wrong side of the bed and decided to take it out on the web. Deepest apologies. TheFonz (talk) 13:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. No harm done.Coigreach (talk) 13:13, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, have a great day! TheFonz (talk) 13:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Do you think my second attempt at including the "Trump on Twitter" section is good enough? TheFonz (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I leave for a three days drinking binge with my best friends and an edit war breaks at my talk page.
 * Anyway, maybe don't ask for me to approve your mainspace edits, as I'm a fairly inconsequential/unproductive user who just happened to be around to revert some of your poor early attempts at snark. Just consider whether your edits actually improve the article, and whether they fit with the articles overall tone. Because if the answer to either is "no", things are going to get reverted.
 * Also, GC already provided you with some links to community standards and what not, but deleting talk page comments is almost never kosher. Users can remove (or collapse) trolling or "vile" comments from their own talk page and doxing from anywhere (though doxing needs to be utterly removed by a mod or tech I think), but otherwise talk pages are community property and comments are not to be deleted.Coigreach (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)#
 * There's an oof on my talkpage if you wanna look TheFonz (talk) 09:37, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Liz Warren page
Hi. I merged two sections together because, as you can see, they are entirely repeated information. I figured it would be easier, since the entire "Feud with Trump" page was about the Pocahontas thing anyway, that we just have one section devoted to it. Do you agree? TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 20:35, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well you didn't include in your merge any actual mention of Trump calling Warren "Pocahontas". You also removed several wordings that showed your lord and savior Trump in less than flattering light like: "(That particularly showcased his ignorance, since Pocahontas wasn't Cherokee.)". You did remove the note too that showed Warren in less than flattering light, but I'm going to put that down to Hanlon's Razor. Additionally you changed some links to ones that serve your far right purposes better you sneaky troll you.


 * If you'd make a good faith merge of the two sections, I'd have no problem with it. But I haven't seen much evidence that you're a good faith editor so far.Coigreach (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * What do you think about this? TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey
What's a bon? Reed Blower (talk) 13:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Bunch of Numbers. Editor who isn't signed in and is only identified by their IP-address.Coigreach (talk) 13:38, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks Reed Blower (talk) 13:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Fyi it's thefonz 🖕

award
—cosmikdebris talk stalk 13:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Coigreach (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

User:ANUS of Production
Can you explain why you revoked talk page access for this user? Also is this username appropriate? If not then maybe a soft block would be appropriate. Kiko4564 (talk) 20:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * you serious dude? Three days block is a really soft block for someone with that username. Anyway, the reason for blocking (mindless generic vandalism) was based on their single edit (exacerbated by their annoying user name). The blocking of talk page edits, I admit, was a purely vindictive response to the hunch that they weren't a good faith editor. If you feel I'm unjust in that action, feel free to bring it up with the mob. I won't object. Coigreach (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Listen, Kiko, it would be much appreciated if you stopped being officious about site policy. It's a bad look for a new user and arguably even worse given your history.--Hastur! (talk)  21:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No I won't stop. I am well within my rights to ask a question about an admin action. If you don't like it then I'd suggest that you bring it up with the mob. Kiko4564 (talk) 21:25, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Question away. Don't expect anything to change though. Except for peoples tolerance for your presence maybe. Coigreach (talk) 21:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This is standard practice. Vandal edit, check one. Bad username, check two. Most RationalWiki sysops would conclude that this person is unlikely to contribute in a meaningful way. The ban handed out was appropriate. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 23:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I'm more than happy to take the risk that I will be wrongly censored for exercising free speech. Talk about officious. Kiko4564 (talk) 19:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Couple of things. First of all, you're not being censored and I would vote against censoring you for writing on my talk page (unless it's abuse you write, which isn't protected speech under Community Standards). I did return you to vandal bin after you were paroled in my opinion prematurely (and after you started to change the tone of Iraq War articles). I did however respect Nuttys decision to let you out and haven't bothered you since (at least unless ANUS of Production was your sock). Secondly, first amendment doesn't apply to non governmental wiki. Just try and see what happens if you start writing racist or homophobic slurs. Neither would be illegal in U.S. but both of them would lead you to quickly being banned from this wiki.
 * In the meantime, feel free to question my decisions. I may even respond to your questions occasionally. Coigreach (talk) 20:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

This account is not my sockpuppet, nor is it my meatpuppet. The first amendment doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned because I'm not in the USA, I'm actually in an American client state called the "United Kingdom". Here we have no constitutional right to free speech, only a statutory one, plus a common law right to freedom of expression. However racist or homophobic slurs would likely be illegal in the UK. I agree with you on that it would lead to me likely being banned from this wiki. Thanks for allowing you to question your decisions. Can I ask why you don't just ban this account indefinitely? Kiko4564 (talk) 22:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * First offence. And blocking rules indicate that "mindless generic vandalism" should only lead to short block (maximum of 3.6 days). Offensive user names could be blocked for a longer time, but I mostly found it idiotic instead of offensive and with the name change applied by Duce that's a moot point anyway. If they vandalize pages again, another short block or vandal bin may be applied.
 * As for the US law, I'm not there either (as you may surmise from my limited mainspace edits). But Rationalwiki excists Legally in United States, so I guess US laws apply where applicable. Coigreach (talk) 22:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry
For attacking you in the coop/ATIM pages. I shouldn't have done that. 15:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It's ok . I'm sorry for getting so mean-spirited myself. I can get prickly, especially when drunk, but I said some things last night that I regret today. I will try to be more civil in my future dealings with you. Coigreach (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Sig Test
Does it work now? 10:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it does. 10:11, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, no it doesn't...fuck. Back to the drawing board. 10:14, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I'm an idiot. 10:17, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Use a sandbox? 10:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Didn't realize at first that the talkpage link in the sig doesn't show on my own talk page and thus thought it was borked. Anyway, seems to work now. 10:24, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

You shouldn't have blocked Pam
I know how you feel. She seems like another potential troublemaker with some, to say the least, very dubious views. But she wasn't causing any disruption at the time and she couldn't unblock herself. I'm officially giving you a slap on the wrist. Spud (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Further Explanation
" Here's the missing bit from your original draft. Feel free to add it to the essay (I won't add it myself, because it's your essay). 13:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)"

Thanks. (I removed your comment from the talk page of the essay only to avoid further confusion and since it messed up with the references.Pam (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

She's an imposter
There can be only one. Much litigation, etc. At least she's earned plenty for when it comes time to settle. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I reckon she made more from the movies by her ex than I'll make in my lifetime. 00:39, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * For sure. Rich pickings for punitive damages. I'm going to let her keep the first and last names. It's not like I'm some kind of monster. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:56, 18 September 2020 (UTC)