User talk:AntiFish

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, AntiFish! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

What's wrong with fish? What'd they ever do to you? --Kels 22:07, 12 December 2008 (EST)

A six fingered fish killed my father. AntiFish 22:09, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Since then you have dedicated your life to the study of sword_fishplay. For the sole purpose of revenge.--CPAdmin1 22:44, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Fencing with swordfish would be so much more interesting to watch. AntiFish 22:59, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Would it resemble this at all? --Kels 23:29, 12 December 2008 (EST)

You are cutting my two-chambered heart out! --Kels 22:14, 12 December 2008 (EST)

I'm surprised at the accuracy of a two chambered heart on a six fingered fish. And I'm not sure where card sharks would fall into this bestiary AntiFish 22:21, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Probably somewhere in with specific salmon and heart sturgeons. --Kels 22:24, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Vandals

We're getting hit by one misogynist troll... it's not normally like this, and we don't know why he chose us. Apparently he thinks his hatred is rational... we're hoping he'll get tired and go away. Wazza^{Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me...} 20:56, 13 December 2008 (EST)

These kind of vandal attacks happen every so often. We were hit really hard by some hard core racists last year, as well. Researcher 21:01, 13 December 2008 (EST)

I saw it was just one guy- and I'm partly surprised that RW isn't trolled more often.(Goat grant it doesn't change) Although, on the other hoof, I'm surprised one internet-losers fail seems to be causing so much ruckus.

I could be mistaking standard operating procedure for ruckus though, It does seem ruckusful. AntiFish 21:06, 13 December 2008 (EST)

This is SOP for dealing with this kind of vandal. We have been debating quite a bit what SOP should be, but for now this is basically it. This is a more clever vandal than the racists ones we had before, however, and is exploiting some of our better natures in order to keep his shit up. However, this is nothing close to "Headless Chicken Mode." Researcher 21:11, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Well, protecting talkpages can make communication difficult with other users difficult, at least for newbies. AntiFish 21:17, 13 December 2008 (EST) P.S.- Out of morbid curiosity, has FailDim ever attempted to explain his 'rational' hate? I never saw anysuch. Not that I really expect it.

I haven't seen anything, but I haven't really followed this vandal as much as some others. He has some semi-mystical BS on his User page that I think is supposed to explain everything. And, as for the talk page lockdown thing, yeah, that does make things difficult. If I can help (I'm able to write on people's talk pages, but that would be about it, I think), let me know. Researcher 21:24, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Google "Andrew Usher" Usenet. He's just generally obnoxious. --Robledo 21:31, 13 December 2008 (EST)

With the protecting talkpages thing, was that talking about me? Because I protected my user page, which people shouldn't be messing with anyhow. I know PFoster briefly protected his talk a while back, although I dunno why the vandal's got such a fixation on him. Maybe it's love. A thousand romantic comedies can't be wrong! --Kels 21:36, 13 December 2008 (EST)

The protecting talkpages- I saw PFoster protect his, even admitting it was against the rules in the edit summary. I didn't see an unprotection notice for it. And then you protected your userpage- which really is totally within RP's rules, and pretty sensible. Of course, the sysops here are to awesome to allow a protection to go un wandalised, it seems. Or maybe people just like storming your castle, if you know what i mean_{no, seriously, I'm not sure what I mean either}

Ironically, you then protected your talkpage for the night. But only for the night. Anyway, I need to spend today seriously lurking more and developing wikiskills AntiFish 12:24, 14 December 2008 (EST)

I think that protecting userpages - like any protecting any pages - is against our ethos but not against our "rules". I don't think that we have a "rule" against it. It's that mobocracy thing again. It may be difficult to understand until you have been around for a while. It is also possible that we may have to re-address such issues if we grow bigger.--Bob^{bing up} 13:03, 14 December 2008 (EST)