User talk:AgingHippie/Archive7

This is an archive page, last updated 9 January 2016. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <8>, <9>, <10>

, (new)(back)

What made you finally snap and block LogicMaster777?

I'm just curious, because I've been soooo tempted to do so myself on numerous occasions. ScepticWombat (talk) 15:46, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

There is only decaf in the house. Beware. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Yipes! You have my utmost sympathy (as I've just had a cup - decaf doesn't count, it's not coffee). Peace, indeed! ScepticWombat (talk) 16:09, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Coop case against you

This is a courtesy notice that I've lodged a case against you on the Coop. Chrimony (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Lemme know how that turns out. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Yup, Turning out pretty much as I thought it might. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Your defence at the Coop was a classic example of DefendEachOther. Good stuff. --MtD^{Notorious Sodomite} 02:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't know that was a thing. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 02:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

A question

Thanks :) I have contributed before but not under a name. Do you know the answer to my question by any chance?--Mouse (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Sysops can do that. Contribute and you'll be one eventually. Or you can ask virtually any regular user to do it for you....Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Ryulong

Rylong revdel'd some drive-by BoN nastiness on his talkpage with the suggesting he was being doxxed or outed. I've undone it because I think he was over-reacting and he has a tendency to misuse his ops. You seem to have some familiarity with him and his predicament. Would you mind sanity checking my action? --MtD^{Notorious Sodomite} 21:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Ya know, sometimes I wonder why you guys give everyone sysop rights if people're hardly allowed to use them (except for joke bans). Sure, if Ryulong revdels some stuff he said and later rewrote/rephrased, that's pretty secretive and potentially deceptive. Is it really harmful, though, if it's just a minor comment on a talkpage? RationalWiki has many unconventional conventions regarding sysop rights and while he's been on the wiki for some months now, I get the impression Ryulong hasn't learned all of them yet. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Are you talking about that thing yesterday when Ryulong said something that he fears his online stalkers would twist around and use to pile on him? Or has he done it again? If it's the former, it's against the rules, but I don't think it's worth making a federal case over; sometimes it's nice when life has a Mulligan option. If he's done it again, though, it's time for him to learn how to own what he says before hitting save....Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 21:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Know You Can't Respond

But good luck with the deadlines anyway! :D --Castaigne (talk) 19:35, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Game

That was some game of cricket. What did I tell you about the Black Caps. They got this...but it hasn't been easy. The South Africans were brilliant. Aceⁱ⁹ 08:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

The magic of time zones kept me from being able to watch live, but yeah. Saw the highlights. What a match. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Stranger!

May I ask, do you believe in the concept of induction, or in patterns? That what happened in the past should be considered when it comes to determining the future?--Tanis (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I am a historian by training. It is crucial to understand the past in order to understand the present, and understanding the past will often give us insight into how the future might unfold. That said, the differences are as important as any similarities, and "patterns" are probably imposed by the observer. "Tendencies" need to be taken seriously, but they are by no means determinative. Why do you ask? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Wait, what?

What did you mean about conservapedia? ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 15:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

RW's outgrown CP. Digs no longer necessary. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 15:33, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Sure, but they're still fun. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 15:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

To us, yeah. To random readers, nah. Cømrade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 15:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd like some pizza

KJ24 (talk) 03:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

2001 EDSA revolution

You know how you said to me, 'Get a blog'?
I do have a blog; walrusofdoom.wordpress.com KJ24 (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Sysop

I got promoted to just autopatrolled when Weaseloid got mad at my redirects. Can I pretty pls with sugar & goats on top haz the ᴘᴏᴡᴇʀ again? (To delete a page.) Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 16:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

You mean the same Weaseloid that always makes sure people follow site policy in the chicken coop ignored site policy and removed rights without a coop case? o_O 141.134.75.236 (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

BURN THE DUCK! I mean witch... no wood... no duck ah! PacWalker 21:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

He had to make the 1-hour block stick, desysopping worked. Weaseloid's fine, but not having sysop's a bit of a drag. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 00:07, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Not my circus, not my monkeys. Ask the rodent nicely. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

fiiiiiinnneeeee FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 00:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

[1] 32℉uzzy, 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 03:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll spare the details, but when I was a lad, I phoned my father and announced to him that the police had arrived and I was looking at the distinct possibility of being arrested. My father said, "It sounds like you've got a problem, Son. I'm sure you'll figure out a way to deal with it." And then he hung up the phone. You have a problem. I'm sure you'll figure out a way to deal with it. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 03:49, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

All right. Thanks for the advice! αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 04:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

That was public

Sir, you don't need to hide it. The link to his Facebook page is public, added by himself on his user page. If that was the only reason, please unhide it and readd my comment here.

Anyway, I hope you will listen to my concerns. Today, he was reverted again for insulting an user from Wikipedia... and he is using your pages to do it. Regards. 12:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Newsmax

Is there a problem with Newsmax? Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:15, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Here's a link. That we have an article on it should probably tell you something. >.> 141.134.75.236 (talk) 17:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

The /16

This discussion was moved to RW:CC#The /16. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 22:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Any further input on the Ryulong coop case? (No, not the meandering "is rangeblocking okay" thread)

Hi AH,

I moved the stuff about whether rangeblocking was an appropriate tool for RW, what counts as doxxing, and when to revdel to the Community Standards talk page, but this still leaves the original coop case regarding Ryulong unresolved.
It seems to me that no one has been advocating further sanctions, but I'd like your input on whether you think the coop case can be archived. ScepticWombat (talk) 21:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Like i said at the time -- talk some sense into the kid, and give him his mop back. which I already did. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 22:36, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the bunny

unless this is some Easter thing in which case it might get crucified. Carptrash (talk) 00:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Coop archive

I've asked Bicycle Wheel, and I will ask you: RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive list doesn't show the most recent archive 37. I hope I didn't break something. Regards, Alec Sanderson (talk) 16:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

That may be one of the things that only happens when the Bot does it. Ask Pi, he made the thing. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Cycle Wheel says it's now visible, so I'll just wait for it. Thanks, Alec Sanderson (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

BoN JAQing Gator

I warned him that if he went off topic again I'd lock him out btw. You're free to unblock and change it to talk page semi if need be.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 19:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

You seem like you're editting angry lately

I'm sorry about whatever stress is getting to you, but you're really lashing out in a really ikanreedish way at bad edits. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 16:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I saw nothing wrong with Hippie's manner. This was a backhanded insult and passive aggressive attempt to emotionally manipulate Hippie. It says a lot about what kind of nasty character you are. --LMFAO

Have you looked in the mirror lately? You'd be surprised how much of the bullshit that you spout out applies to yourself. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 04:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I have and aside from some pores needing a bit of a touch up, I love what I see. So far I've said very little and all of it's true. Some people who are invested in this site need a wake up call as to what's been going on. XO boo. --LMFAO

Bin

Why can't I? He's just wasting time.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 23:58, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

It's his time to waste. It's only wasting your time if you choose to engage. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 03:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

You're putting a lot of effort into cleaning up Gamergate

This is just a post to say thanks. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 20:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Keep up the good work. Don't let the bastards grind you down. Wéáśéĺóíď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Any time. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 21:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Didn't realise Viharo was blocked

And given that I think everyone deserves an explanation, not to mention the (rather naive) hope that Viharo would realise the problem in helping Chopra building ISHAR, I thought a response entirely fitting. However, either Viharo is simply oblivious as to why helping woo peddlers spread their woo is a problem, or he doesn't understand that by creating ISHAR he's at least an enabler, or he's just bullshitting to avoid getting the "credit" he deserves, or a combination of all three. His sock puppet's latest response indicate a bit of all of them. He seems to be claiming that ISHAR is somehow neutral, which ignores that it was specifically built for woo peddling. This echoes the earlier claim that he just worked for Chopra (as if being a hired hand somehow absolved him of any responsibility for enabling Chopra and others to spread quackery via ISHAR). Instead, we get yet another round of internet PR newspeak about "online consensus building" (aka creating an echo chamber for altmed woo peddlers). So, I don't think I'll waste any more time with either Viharo or his shlock sock. ScepticWombat (talk) 04:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I have read very little of the debate/exchange, and am pretty much uninterested, but I've been here long enough to see when people are unable to ignore a guy and just keep inviting him back for more nonsense (I'm totes guilty of it myself. It's bred in the bone of people who are attratcted to the site. We can't shut up). 13:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Now the other one has picked up the libel theme [2]. Leuders (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

PRODding

When proposing pages for deletion, please don't forget to add the subpage to RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Log, otherwise they won't show up on the main AFD page.--ZooGuard (talk) 17:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I long for the old days, when we just hashed it out on the relevant talk page. Who's responsible for the bureaucratic nightmare that a simple deletion has become? I hope that person steps on a Lego. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

User:Zero.--ZooGuard (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I notice that we

can't send Thanks the way we can at that other wiki, but thanks for stepping up to the plate and knocking that junk at Feminism outta the park. Carptrash (talk) 18:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

...Just doin' my job, ma'am. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

"ma'am"? I guess that I have tried too hard to get in touch with my feminine side. Carptrash (talk) 19:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

More likely I'm chanelling Joe Friday. I know you're actually a transgendered left-handed anabaptist. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not left handed!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! What must you think of me?Carptrash (talk) 19:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

proposal for a wikiproject on police and vigilantes

Hey, you old geezer. I've just released- let's call it a working paper- that argues for creating a wikiproject about police and vigilantes. Please read it and share your opinions on the essay's talk page. Thanks and Peace. Rand0 (talk) 12:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Warning

The article does not clearly state that is impossible to group people by ancestry. Think about it. Do some people share more ancestors and would that be informative for genetic traits? No of course not, this is counter revolutionary. The article must state facts in line with the revolution. People do not share more or less ancestry and are not more or less genetically similar. We are are all comrades. Communist Scientist (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

"Warning"?!?!? What are you "warning me about"? Also, "ancestry" appears in the opening pgph, and your edit was a clumsy stand-alone sentence that was poorly integrated into the article. Also, what you wrote is just silly. It is possible to group people by ancestry: "The Smith family." "The British royal family." "The descendants of the people who came on the Mayflower." Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 23:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

This is not MarxistWiki. This is not the revolution. The article already makes the point clearly; there is no need to restate it. --Castaigne (talk) 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

If it is possible to group people by ancestry then one could expand that into races. Central party has stated the concept is not acceptable, since we are all comrades. Therefore it is not possible to group people by ancestry. Communist Scientist (talk) 23:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Trolls be gettin' creative today. CorruptUser (talk) 23:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Well logical arguments don't work on "RationalWiki" so I guess you can enjoy some trolling. Also thanks to AgingHippie whose goodheartedness my be coloring his logic. ;) Communist Scientist (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

About trying to impress someone

She wouldn't like this wiki anyway, she's what you would call a "fundie." I just felt like being a smart ass. Gkggdh (talk) 16:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC) And I probably shouldn't have done that, but I knew it'd get zapped right away anyway. Gkggdh (talk) 16:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll bet you a days worth of constructive editing that you can't guess which [name redacted] in this world I was referring to. Gkggdh (talk) 16:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

OpSkyNet

Can we please leave in the Terminator joke?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 05:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Is it at all relevant? Would it distract an interested party unfamiliar with the movie from getting what it important about the article? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 12:51, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

What is an issue with a joke on this wiki? Or are we back to ditching SPOV again? --Castaigne (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No, not at all. But SPOV does not mean "throw in jokes wherever." A joke based on an obscure subreference that distracts from the thrust of an argument can undermine good work. As the passage was written before, I, having never consumed "Terminator" (a movie/book/comic/video game/TV show or something, I guess? Whatever it is, I don't really know...) could not even recognize that a joke was being made; I only became aware that the joke required knowledge of something called "Terminator" when I read the first post in this thread. So it just looked like a weird and clumsy sentence. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to be mean here, AH, but I think your knowledge of modern geek/pop culture from the 1980s forward is a bit lacking. I honestly cannot imagine someone under the age of 45 who does not know what the Terminator movie series (and resulting TV, book, and comic franchise, not to mention constant modern culture references) is unless they deliberately shield themselves from modern society. I mean, the latest Terminator movie is out next month and has been highly advertised. What gives here? --Castaigne (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll start at the end: Unless the ads in question ran in Downbeat, the NY Review of Books, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review of Books, Foreign Affairs, or any of the specialist historical publications I read, or on select NPR, CBC, Radio-Canada, or BBC radio shows I listen to, I probably would not have seen them. If any of those did cover the phenomenon, I probably would have skipped over the story, much as I would skip over a story about, say, local politics in Finland. Not really interested, so much to read, so little time. I have not played a video game since 1994 or so. I do not watch television, and I mostly go to the movies to see documentaries, not Hollywood blockbusters. I have an ad blocker on my browser, so I miss a lot of ads that way. Rest assured that I am, however, an active consumer of contemporary culture. I read about 100 daily/weekly/otherwise regular comic strips and webcomics, and just about every graphic novel/graphic memoir/graphic history that I can get my hands on (just finished Ed Piskor's latest instalment of his history of hip-hop series, and John Lewis's March, both excellent) and I listen to lots of contemporary music by musicians younger than I: latest additions to the collection include stuff by Jason Moran, Vijay Iyer, Robert Glasper, and Rudresh Mahanthappa; all cutting edge, all younger than me, some by many years. I don't read a lot of fiction, and most of what I do read is, admittedly, behind the times -- I can't see moving forward on reading more contemporary sci-fi until I've read more Delaney, Niven, Clarke, Asimov, Heinlein, Butler, Anderson, Herbert, Pohl, ert. etc. etc. I am over the age of 45, but not by much. Old enough to be secure in the choices I've made about consuming popular culture without worrying about the critiques of people who think someone isn't "cool" (is that still a term with resonance?) if they don't wear the same clothes and listen to the same band as they. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 15:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

If you have not yet read Kornbluth and Pohl's "Venus, Inc. then you need to do so, post-haste. The first book in the diptych was written in 1952, so it will not save any of us from fuddiduddidom, but its tale of government captured by corporations in a time of overpopulation and scarcity still resounds. Catch you on the flip side, Alec Sanderson (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Then, to be bluntly honest, I think you should refrain from removing jokes that refer to popular culture, since you do not know it. I'm not saying that you should be required to, or that you're "uncool", or anything like that. It's for the same reason that I do not edit things that involve chemistry; I know nothing about it, nor do I have an even passing familiarity with the subject beyond one or two sentences I remember from my sophomore year in high school. I'm not trying to make you out as bad or unknowledgable, just that it makes little sense to remove something you personally don't get. --Castaigne (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of whether AH is culturally literate, the joke distracts from the message of the article. FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 17:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

AgingHippie? More like AgingHipster euhuehuehuehue.

But seriously, I agree with FCP and AH. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ ^{Flipping out the buttered fuck crumpets} 18:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with these guys (FCP, Raysenn, AgingHippie), unless the article is in the fun namespace, or about terminator, (or at least relevant) then you shouldn't have them in the article. Humor is welcome if it makes sense. Bubba41102^{Taste the shortness} 18:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, now we're getting back to the "no humor is acceptable" bit. We really need to make a policy decision on this and enforce it rigorously and absolutely. --Castaigne (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No, the issue is that shit humor is worse than no humor. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ ^{This isn't 'Nam. This is adhering. There are rules.} 20:43, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

HOW does it distract, exactly? What is so distracting? --Castaigne (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

It distracts when it looks like nonsense. This wasn't a case of "Oh, a joke has been made, but I do not get that joke, so I will not laugh." This was a case of "Did this guy make some egregious typos or some really poor word choices, or perhaps leave out some thing before hitting save? Because those words, in that order, look like gibberish to me." Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Improvements

These improvements are necessary for RW quality increase. Please stop reverting. --Castaigne (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Please see my message on your talk page. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

XD ClickerClock (talk) 07:39, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Capitalisation

Just a quick one. Surely a medical condition should be referred to with the capital letter? Autism surely should be with a capital "A"? BankBox (talk) 04:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Autoimmune disease, headache and hyperactive disorder can all be safely written without capital letters. You only need the latter when the condition is named after someone (e.g. Asperger's syndrome) or acronyms are involved. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 04:10, 12 November 42015 AQD (UTC)

Ah it doesn't apply when you have to put "a" or "an" in front of them (an autoimmune disease etc etc). The same applies for "the" (measles, mumps etc). You can't put "a", "an" or "the" in front of Autism. It's a proper name/noun, so I think it should be capitalised. BankBox (talk) 04:32, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Autism, like cancer, schizophrenia, or dementia, is a common noun. Asperger's and Alzheimer's are exceptions because they are named after people (like capitalism versus Marxism). Don't change it back, please. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 04:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Withdrew

Hi, I was wondering why you dropped out of the election and if I could put that reason on the Candidate fact sheet. (For example; are you withdrawing in favor of another candidate?) If you don't want to say or don't want it on the sheet say no more, I won't bug you about it. SolPyre (talk) 19:54, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I am trying to limit my participation here to what I enjoy and can be good at -- fixing articles and making jokes in the bar. I am weary of the Coop, edit-wars, Internet drama, and do not like how I feel or the person I can become when I engage in those aspects of the wiki. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, peace. :) SolPyre (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Anders Björkman

OK, so we reach a very rapid point where, when I finally try to become a RationalWiki editor, someone immediately restylizes my debut article. I guess my career is at an end here. 50.174.200.16 (talk) 08:16, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Preach, brother. Plutoniumboss (talk) 22:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Huh? Are you talking about these changes? They don't seem so large to me, just some changes in linking and capitalization. Don't quite see what could be the problem here? This is a wiki, after all... Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:43, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Mod election data

I've emailed you the two files and the order the names go in. Let's see if the results make any damn sense ... - David Gerard (talk) 11:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I bet they won't.--"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 20:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Not so far, anyways... Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hrrm. I'd offer to help, but on the off chance people voted for me, that'll look bad... that said if it doesn't start to make sense soon I might ask for a copy of the extension's files and work from that end to figure what it should look like, laughing at my cluelessness as I go before finally admitting defeat... well, hopefully not. WalkerWalkerWalker 20:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The problem is probably more to do with me than the software, dataset, or process. I'm off to work soon, but will take a look tonight (Pacific time...) Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

It's not like there's any documentation on what the hell the number barf means, so I don't think anyone can blame you. WalkerWalkerWalker 20:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

If you want it all to get deleted, or sent to my mother in some file I thought was pics of the grandkids, and/or to never know anything ever about the election results, ask me to "help."---Mona- (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I similarly volunteer as a number monkey, if you want any number monkeys that is. Seems like previous election results could be compared against previous election number soups to figure out the trick of it.SolPyre (talk) 01:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

There is no need to keep this data secret, and previously it has been released to the wiki. I have double-checked numbers in the past (although a long time ago) and will do so again, if released. Tielec01 (talk) 01:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Wait, I'm confused a bit about the method. If you need 3 votes to win a seat, and 4 people vote for Alice, and of those 4 votes the second choices were equally Bob and Charlie, who gets Alice's spare vote? CorruptUser (talk) 02:04, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Each their share, here half but different if the ratio wasn't one:one, I believe. In other words, your vote need not stay whole. WalkerWalkerWalker 02:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Depends on the counting method, in the past I believe we used the Droop quota here (though memory fades); in the example above both Bob and Charlie get 2 votes each. Assuming 3 candidates, 2 positions and 4 votes the quota is indeed 3 (4/2+1). Ties are rare, but can happen in small samples like the above. How these are resolved is a separate question. Tielec01 (talk) 02:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I am not afraid to admit....

...I may be over my head here. THIS is where we are at now.... any and all input welcome. Awake and at my computer for the next 3-4 hours or so. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 06:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I understand what it's saying, based on i think one of the 2012 elections results pages, but without knowing which candidates are tied to which number, it's somewhat useless. Also the fact that it doesn't mention who got how many votes is interesting, it just says everybody is constantly tied and thus it randomly eliminated people over and over, which leaves me skeptical to the validity of the information in this, and certainly to the election status of whoever the hell those numbers at the bottom mean. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 07:14, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

The data looks wrong, and there wasn't 86 candidates. There's no rush on this AH, so let's take our time. Is the data in a format that is able to be opened by excel? Tielec01 (talk) 07:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes. E-mail me and I will forward it to you. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 08:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I sent an email back, which may or may not contain information telling how to suck eggs. I think the data is fine, we just need to work out how to format it for the program of choice (OpenSTV) and what number corresponds to what candidate (possibly as per the candidate list on the election page)? Lots of questions though, which won't inspire the electorate with confidence. Tielec01 (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I did leave a note on Trents talkpage asking if he had the time to figure out the results. and maybe teach somebody else the secret to this arcane thing. If nothing else, leave us with some hints as to make sure this works fine next year instead of days of people going "how do work?" --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 08:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Order should be that which David stuck into whatever variable in LocalSettings.php so I'll go dig that lovely factoid up. WalkerWalkerWalker 08:27, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Here it is: $wgElectionCandidates = array("142․124․55․236", "Alec Sanderson", "Aloysius the Gaul", "Arisboch", "Captain Wolff", "ChrisAmiss", "CorruptUser", "David Gerard", "EddieMonah", "FuzzyCatPotato", "Genghis Khant", "Gooniepunk", "Human", "Ikanreed", "KOMF", "NarkySawtooth", "Noir LeSable", "PacWalker", "Paravant", "Queex", "Revolverman", "ScepticWombat", "Serocco", "Smerdis of Tlön", "Spud", "Stabby the Misanthrope");

The data is somewhat surprising to me then. Tielec01 (talk) 08:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Does it take the form of rank numbers for each candidate or candidate numbers for each rank? WalkerWalkerWalker 08:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Candidate numbers for each rank. Tielec01 (talk) 08:36, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Did someone say wat? WalkerWalkerWalker 08:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Is there a wat to make it look like this?--"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 08:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I am working in a slightly different format though, email me for my excel spreadsheet if you like. The data is making sense to me using the numbers given to me by PacWalker, but I am working by hand at the moment as I am at work and my home computer is de-powered thanks to a clumsy roofer. 08:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Yo, dog, the first column worth of counts is wrong; the Countif should refer to the same C2:C60 range for all of them. Got quite a few rounds in before I caught that too. :/ WalkerWalkerWalker 09:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm down to ten candidates left now, but amusingly enough nobody's been elected yet. WalkerWalkerWalker 10:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually, one elimination later, someone did hit the quota finally. WalkerWalkerWalker 10:12, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

That's not enough candidates. There was 26. Tielec01 (talk) 08:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, missed the top two mate, ignore me. Tielec01 (talk) 08:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

My result is DG, Fuzzy, Goonie, and Paravant. Will upload work as soon as I figure how. WalkerWalkerWalker 11:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Here, pardon the formatting WalkerWalkerWalker 11:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Correct result PacWalker, I have recreated the borked .blt file by hand (don't ask; fuck everyone that cast all 26 votes) and ran the election via OpenSTV. the files are going to the returning officer as we speak and he can make an official announcement if he finds the data and analysis to be satisfactory. Tielec01 (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I will CC you in PacWalker. Tielec01 (talk) 11:50, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I take my numbers back; they don't match the raw data you provided me. WalkerWalkerWalker 14:04, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm in bed, but I can't help but ask, what do you mean the raw data doesn't match? Tielec01 (talk) 14:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

The votes in the Excel sheet you sent me do not match the .blt you sent or the OpenSTV results; I noticed this when I noticed the OpenSTV results had 12 first-choice votes for DG and so immediate election, whereas the .xls you emailed me had only 11 (hand and machine counting confirm I'm not loopy). I'm wading through the logs atm to see which set matches them. Also, the .xls listed 12.6 as the threshold, and I didn't bother double-checking that yet; OpenSTV seems to be acting like 12 even is. WalkerWalkerWalker 14:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

No problems, the dangers of doing it by hand. If you find the problem ballot give me the identifier number and I will fix it on the .blt. It's a million to one that it will change the result though. Tielec01 (talk) 14:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Your blt is consistent with the logs; since that Excel sheet was a derivative of those anyhow, I'm not going to chase the discrepancy further. WalkerWalkerWalker 15:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Thyanks everyone for dealing with this. Had I known it would be so far beyond my skill set, I would never have volunteered.... Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I am not afraid to admit that I have never understood any of the elections under this system. Bicycle^wheel 18:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

We're just like a real democracy then. Carpetsmoker (talk) 22:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)