Template talk:KenRuns

For what it's worth...

...I think this template marks a line between "making fun of a guy who's making an ass of himself in public" and "creepy, stalkerish bullying of a guy who obviously is in a bad place and needs some help." surely we have articles that need fresh snark, red links that need writing, etc. etc. before we need this? i dunno...P-Foster (talk) 22:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

that's right - you don't know. Ace^X-102 22:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I fall on the side of creepy stalking. People need to get the over it. That's equally the "laughing" crowd because no, it's not funny any more, and the "concerned" crowd because no, you're not impressing anyone with such self-serving concerns. Can CP just die already? ^theist 11:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this, but I still believe it's reasonably harmless fun. For one thing, the templates don't disclose anything that Ken himself is not actively advertising on his personal home page. They don't even draw attention to anything that hasn't been topic of active discussion on the WIGO page for many, many months. Ken is well aware of this discussion. If he wanted privacy he could step into one of his dozens of socks.

For another thing, it's fairly obvious by now that asking Ken's friends to prod him to get help is useless. They simply don't believe us we are worried for the sake of one of them; they can only imagine we are unhappy because we are losing. Ken must be clobbering us, so he must be doing sterling work, as PsyGremlin calls it, so he must be perfectly well. At this point, gentle ridicule may do him actually more good than complaining about him to his notional allies. It may help his comrades-in-conservatism to understand that no, Ken is not "winning", so the reason we're unhappy with what he's doing must be another reason after all. I don't mindlessly pile on people I know are in a bad place and need help.

mb 14:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)