User talk:Arthropleura/Archive2

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 23 June 2017. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <3>, <4>, (new)(back)

Moron[edit]

I use Tor; think you can block me? I'll put far worse in your sig... Fall down

I most certainly do. Bye, bye, Fall Down. P.S. I can also protect it. Looks like you're the moron here, not me. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:32, 15 January 2009 (EST)
But I'm funnier. You wouldn't know humor if it grabbed you by the nuts, would you? Fall down
Really? Try telling that to RWW. Your a hate troll. I'm medium drama, even though I don't try to be. You try to be amusing- that's why you aren't. I don't- that's why I am. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:58, 24 January 2009 (EST)
CUR, you know that there are over 1000 active Tor nodes; blocking him is like trying to kill a blue whale by kicking it. As an upside, he has to use a 20kb/s connection to edit here, so he should get bored after a while. Phantom Hoover 17:13, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Slowing him down. Just slowing him down. And I'm distracting him on RWW too. Expect an explosion of activity on that site shortly. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:17, 24 January 2009 (EST)
You aren't slowing him down much; you only need to hit "new identity" on Vidalia (GUI for Tor) to change node. Phantom Hoover 17:25, 24 January 2009 (EST)
But on RWW, I do slow him down. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:27, 24 January 2009 (EST)
No, I think the fact that he is using Tor is slowing him down more; I've used it on CP, and it's painfully slow. Phantom Hoover 18:04, 24 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) I meant distract. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:05, 24 January 2009 (EST)

FYI.[edit]

It's a shame...I liked that guy. TheoryOfPractice 20:01, 15 January 2009 (EST)

What does that have to do with me? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 20:14, 15 January 2009 (EST)
"Arguing with CUR was the last straw." It seems you have a damn thing or two to do with it. That guy was here for more than a year more than you, and was respected; I hope you're happy. Phantom Hoover 17:11, 24 January 2009 (EST)
And I asked for forgiveness on his user page on Wikipedia. And he came back, just not as often. And it was nothing personal, as he knows. And he also specificially said it wasn't all my fault. And I deal with more than he delt with every day, and I'm not in HCM. He was. Looks like the least respected of us are the best suited to handle this wiki. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:15, 24 January 2009 (EST)

It's not just about the pictures...[edit]

....it's your attitude. You're edit-warring, and you're edit-warring with someone like Human, who is one of the most active, senior, and valued contributors to this community. One person already quit the site today in part because of an argument with you. Your behaviour re: two stupid pictures from some television show is not only contrary to the standards, it's making this place less fun. TheoryOfPractice 21:01, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I realize that. However:

1. If someone can't take someone else arguing with them, they aren't suited for RW. Being here has schooled me in that repeatedly. 2. If the people who Sci-Fi saw the picture, they'd be thrilled. Why? I'm using it to promote their work. 3. Just become someone is valued doesn't mean that they should get away with some of the insults Human gets away with. I get sick of being flamed. He's called me every insult imaginable. I've been curt, but not rude- like I have been treated by most people here. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:07, 15 January 2009 (EST)

1. Edit warring is not arguing. it's being childish and churlish. 2. You can read the minds of people like copyright lawyers? That's quite the talent. 3. You've earned every word of it. TheoryOfPractice 21:09, 15 January 2009 (EST)

1. He also edit warred. Therefore, he is childish and churlish.

2. Common sense. And I'm trying to get permission.

3. No I haven't. And even if I had, that's no excuse for flaming.

--"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:12, 15 January 2009 (EST)

1. No, he (and I and others) were reverting your blatant violations of site policy/consensus. 2. Common sense has nothing to do with copyright law. 3. i disagree, but whatever. TheoryOfPractice 21:14, 15 January 2009 (EST)

1. I admit you have a point there.

2. Common sense has to do with everything.

3. Flaming is illegal. And the kind of insults he was making are against site policy.

--"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:16, 15 January 2009 (EST)

You're not going to get permission. Why? Because they won't gain anything from you having those two pics on your userpage, but giving you a permission is a precedent and a risk. That's how copyright works, if it's not worth the effort, better to just forbid than face unexpected consequences later. -- Nx talk 21:20, 15 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) Common sense means nothing. YOU might think that it's good for whatever-teevee-network -it-is-that-makes-that-stupid-show to use their property that way, and maybe you're right, but it doesn't matter. Copyright law and Fair Use say otherwise. It's not your image to make that decision with. As for the attacks on you, they may be against site policy; but having read this site nearly every day for 18 months now (even during those periods when I had taken my bat and ball and gone home) I've never seen anyone cause so many stupid arguments and create as much grief as you have, except maybe TK. If you're getting flamed, it could very well be because because you're ticking people off--people who've shown themselves to be remarkably tolerant of a lot of shit in the past. TheoryOfPractice 21:22, 15 January 2009 (EST)

(2nd EC) Doesn't matter. Ticking people off is no excuse. And just because they've been tolerant in the past doesn't mean that they should get away with this. Otherwise, people could get away with murder because 'they hadn't killed anyone, even when they were really annoying.' Also, we need to be strict when it comes to personal attacks. But back on topic, I may well get permission. If I do, I will reinstate the userbox. No sooner, no later. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:25, 15 January 2009 (EST)

My two bits[edit]

You are perpetually in a cycle of being obnoxious and then getting angry when people call you out for it. And don't edit war with people about copyright. Copyright lawyers are tantamount to the Nazgul. If somebody takes something down for copyright reasons, you should discuss it with them instead of restoring it. And after said discussion, be prepared to admit that you might not be in the right. You need to lay back, guy. You're being very un-Dude. If you keep it up, people will just start to assume that you're a troll and ignore you. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 21:24, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Fine. But can people please stop flaming me whenever I do the least little thing that they don't like? Hint: That's not a question. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:34, 15 January 2009 (EST)

You know when people break up with you and say "It's not you, it's me"? Sometimes they're lying about that part. TheoryOfPractice 21:38, 15 January 2009 (EST)
I'll be honest, CUR, I was on your side to start off, and while I thought the cat article needed more goat, I was cool with that. But there's been a pattern of behaviour that's not impressed me in the least, especially when you apparently get bored and start poking things because you want a "debate", which you seem to define as "argument". I really started to notice when you poked Fall Down, despite everyone else telling you not to, and the reasons for not poking him already spelled out if you'd bothered to look. The furry article was another example, but there's been lots, some of which I've been present for and some of which I haven't. At this point, I consider you mildly trollish, even if it's not deliberate. --Kels 21:42, 15 January 2009 (EST)
For example, you have this tendency to get in dustups with people and then prolifically brag. I am saying this because I noticed for the first time that you have a sig line that says "the mortal enemy of all things Human." It appears that you intentionally start arguments and then brag about them in order to make you look more important. This may very well be unintentional, but it's annoying all the same. That's all- I'm not going to start piling on. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 22:06, 15 January 2009 (EST)
I was actually making fun of myself. Look. I've been trying to shape up. It may take some time. In the meantime, please stop flaming me. It makes being civil a lot harder. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 10:33, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Hmmm you know I wonder...[edit]

You are not by any chance TK are you? Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 23:35, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I mean no offence but after reviewing all fators etc one must ask, ya know? Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 23:41, 15 January 2009 (EST)
Nah, TK's IQ is easily 160. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:45, 15 January 2009 (EST)
Still, after looking at contributions, arguments, sowing discontent among other editors etc the question needs to be asked. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 23:47, 15 January 2009 (EST)
The question you have to ask yourself is does TK have so little dignity that he would behave like CUR? - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 03:51, 16 January 2009 (EST)
One should put nothing past TK. In fact I think RA is TK also. har har ho ho ho. Oh ye of little respect/prominence. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 05:48, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I'm not dumb enought to be TK. I'm not conservative enough to be TK. I don't abuse my abilities enough to be TK. I'm not TK. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 10:39, 16 January 2009 (EST)

"Not dumb enough to be TK" TK is a genius when it comes to destroying communities. How many people can you think of who would be able to regain sysopship on CP after the SDG incident? Phantom Hoover 12:36, 16 January 2009 (EST)
I meant smart as in good at math or other thought proccesses, not good at destroying communities. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:47, 16 January 2009 (EST)
What evidence have you ever given that you are smarter than TK? He is a computer consultant. Phantom Hoover 17:51, 16 January 2009 (EST)

He fooled me. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:52, 16 January 2009 (EST)

The L.A. Times article. Phantom Hoover 17:56, 16 January 2009 (EST)


TK's not that conservative, check where he falls on RationalWIki Moral Matrix. He just pretends to be a die hard Christian conservative to lull Andy into a false sense of security. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 12:43, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Hey[edit]

Stop being a dick. Thanks.--Tom Moorefiat justitia ruat coelum 23:46, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Alarm clock is ringing[edit]

Who the Hell are you talking to? ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:02, 16 January 2009 (EST)

All of thy who vare veing idel. I.E: mostly myself. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 19:06, 16 January 2009 (EST)
Indeed. Best to only use the intercom if you actually have something to say to other people; not just because you're bored. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:09, 16 January 2009 (EST)
If you are bored how about you set about improving articles in this list instead hoping people will talk to you. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 19:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)
We actual have a page on this. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 19:46, 16 January 2009 (EST)

For Christ's sake...[edit]

When someone goes around fixing your spelling mistakes, reverting those corrections is no way to make friends. TheoryOfPractice 18:43, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Unfortunately, teh Weasel also deleted the Sci-Fi specials --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:44, 17 January 2009 (EST)
Because they're baffling, unfunny & of interest only to yourself. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 18:47, 17 January 2009 (EST)
They are fairly easy to understand. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:48, 17 January 2009 (EST)
But don't make a lot of sense against the rest of it. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 18:49, 17 January 2009 (EST)
They are puns. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:50, 17 January 2009 (EST)

....aaaaand I had to make the same correction again. For the third time. What the hell is wrong with you? TheoryOfPractice 10:12, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Learn to spell...[edit]

Why does your stupid menu item on the saloon page still have a typo? Why do you have so little respect for others' contributions that you insist on reverting their corrections to your mistakes? Why do i now need to correct you for a fourth time? TheoryOfPractice 14:39, 20 January 2009 (EST)

I'm leaving it alone. Must be someone else. Maybe FD. I threatened him. This might be his revenge. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 14:41, 20 January 2009 (EST)

Vandal?[edit]

Why did you call me a vandal? That's one of my favorite songs, I was just correcting someone on the lyrics. 16:06, 20 January 2009 (EST)

You deleted a whole swath of talk page comments. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:07, 20 January 2009 (EST)
Hey emporor, the lyrics are in LATIN! Any English version is a translation, subject to the translators whims.Z3ro 16:08, 20 January 2009 (EST)

Fine, I'll back down. 16:09, 20 January 2009 (EST)

What is the deal[edit]

Regarding this and this, Who do you think you are? Since you've come here you've been difficult and confrontational over everything and now you have the nerve to revert other's comments and insult them on user pages? This is an official warning from someone who usually likes to play it cool: Back off and stop acting like a jackass or we're gonna have problems. SirChuckBHITWIN FOR PRESIDENT! 22:54, 20 January 2009 (EST)

Chuck, I am the last guy in the world to stand up for this clown, but it looked to me like, at least in the first instance, CUR was trying to revert the removal of talk page edits by another user. As much as it pains me to say it, he may have been trying to do the right thing...as for the second one, yeah, a little hevy-handed for what may have been a goof-up /misunderstanding on the other guy's part...TheoryOfPractice 22:57, 20 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) I think The Emperor misunderstood being edit conflicted and he replaced the page with his text instead of adding his comment to the revised page and CUR in his own wiki n00bism thought he was vandalising. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 23:00, 20 January 2009 (EST)
I'd have a little more sympathy if I didn't have other dealings with the Scurvy CUR. SirChuckBHITWIN FOR PRESIDENT! 23:03, 20 January 2009 (EST)

Word.TheoryOfPractice 23:04, 20 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) I notice in our newcommers guide there is nothing about how to handle edit conflicting. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 23:05, 20 January 2009 (EST)
Good point, and it is one of the more difficult things to master, and considering the edit rate at talk:WIGO CP... we need it. Does anyone actually read the n00bs guide, by the way? ħumanUser talk:Human 23:10, 20 January 2009 (EST)
I must say I found it a little long winded and it didn't answer the questions I wanted. I have probably been here about 3 or 4 months too long to write a good one now as I have forgotten most of what annoyed me. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 23:19, 20 January 2009 (EST)
New wikiproject! (I watch your user page...) ħumanUser talk:Human 23:54, 20 January 2009 (EST)
Yeah I kind of start thing and then give up on them. Add it to my list. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 23:57, 20 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) I was only trying to undo his swath of talk page comment deletes. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 11:21, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Sorry for my lack of wikiskillz and wikimanners If it'll make you happy, I'll go on anther exile POWER! UNLIMITED POWER!You paid the price for your lack of vision 11:29, 21 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) Na, it was a simple rookie error of exactly the same kind as Cur him/herself made a few days ago (see here). If he/she thought about it for a moment, he/she would have realised that instead of calling you a vandal. "Assume good faith" is a pretty good rule.
Something else to take away: if you see somebody make this mistake, copy the comment that they've added so that you can add it back in along with the stuff they accidentally deleted & not just look like you're reverting their comment; & leave a clear edit summary to make it apparent what you're doing. It only takes a little bit of clarity to avoid these kind of misunderstandings. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 11:49, 21 January 2009 (EST)
I will take a moment to apologise for my rather blunt comments, but I still stand by them.... I wasn't even bothered so much by the reversion as by the vandal comment dropped on his talkpage.... But I still stand by everything else... I mean, really, in the time you've been here, you've managed to start a fight with just about everyone. Why not chill and take things a little slower? SirChuckBHITWIN FOR PRESIDENT! 11:46, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Allright. Besides, events move apace in the "real world", and I would have had to take a vacation anyways. I'll go back to being a lurker for awhile POWER! UNLIMITED POWER!You paid the price for your lack of vision 11:52, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Look here[edit]

Have fun, and ALWAYS CHECK THE ADDRESS BAR! If it says rationalwiki.com, you're not where you think you are -- Nx talk 19:17, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Howls[edit]

"Weekly" howls? Back in the day, howls were annual things. I've been to more than one but they were over a decade ago. More fun than a furry convention, which isn't saying much...still too much drama and odd misfits for my taste. Skwrlz are above all that :) Secret Squirrel 22:13, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Oh sure. I can't go to one, I'm not 18 yet, but I hear there are weekly ones hosted a few therians on AOL. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 22:15, 21 January 2009 (EST)
Well things have changed. There was no age limit really back in the 90s. Age 14-44 was typical, and they were like your basic camping trip in the woods except with a lot of howling. I wuz bad skwrl and brought a dog whistle to see if it annoyed some of the wolfy types. "Therian" and "otherkin" weren't known terms back then. Secret Squirrel 22:24, 21 January 2009 (EST)
FWIW, I knew a couple of elven otherkin back in the 90's, one of whom used that word. So it was around, but maybe hadn't gotten into the fur community yet. --Kels 00:03, 22 January 2009 (EST)
It's time to go howl at my neighbors dog. He's a sweet chocolate lab, really, and knows my voice (I pretend). Get it? It's all pretend! He sniffs my crotch, briefly, and thence knows who I am. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:49, 22 January 2009 (EST)
I think Allen Ginsberg hosted the first one in 1956. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 10:57, 22 January 2009 (EST)
And you would know that how? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:48, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Because it's famous. --Kels 17:04, 24 January 2009 (EST)
And it's blocked by parental controls. No idea why- but they recently blocked Conservapedia, so now I can't see the WIGOs. :-( (gad, I hate smilies) --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:07, 24 January 2009 (EST)
It was a joke. "Howl" was a famous poem from the beat movement which caused some controversy at the time (see Wikipedia article). It's got quite a lot of stuff about sex & drugs in it, which might be why it's blocked by the controls - probably the same reason as Conservapedia, but from totally different perspective. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:17, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Not funny. Oh, and Conservapedia wasn't blocked- my parents blocked it. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:18, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Quite funny if you grok literary references. --Kels 17:19, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Why did your parents block CP? Phantom Hoover 18:10, 24 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) <Looks innocent> No rational idea whatsoever! Their irrational idea- keeping me from working. Yeah right. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:11, 24 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) I grok that! --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:21, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Fiction[edit]

Have you read the Golden Compass trilogy by Philip Pullman? I think you would really like it, especially if you're a Harry Potter fan, although they are extremely different in a lot of ways. It's set (at least initially) in a parallel world where people's souls take the form of various animals which match their personalities, but there are lots of other themes in it too. (NB. If you haven't read them, don't look up the articles on WP/CP/RW as they contain massive spoilers). ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 11:10, 22 January 2009 (EST)

I.E. the bear is actually a man in drag is Luke's father kills Dumbledore is Keyser Soze ...TheoryOfPractice 11:14, 22 January 2009 (EST)
I read them all in a few days. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 12:00, 22 January 2009 (EST)
It's the His Dark Materials trilogy, not that idiotic transatlantic name! Phantom Hoover 16:54, 24 January 2009 (EST)
I know it's His Dark Materials. That's what I call them as well. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:56, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Yeah, I just referred to it as Golden Compass because I wasn't sure if you'd read them & would probably at least have heard of the movie if you hadn't. Also I hate sayiong "the His Dark Materials trilogy" - that article-pronoun formation ("the his") just seems really really wrong to me. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:06, 24 January 2009 (EST)
The moment I heard of them, I read them all ASAP. The movie was awful. I mean, it really just missed the point of the book. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:08, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Did you think they could have made a film true to an anti-religious book and make any money in the States? Phantom Hoover 17:23, 24 January 2009 (EST)
His Dark Materials wasn't exactly anti-religious- I could see how the Church felt threatened, but it wasn't really anti-religious. But you've got a point there. But what really ticked me off was that the movie ended mushy-happily, and the book didn't. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:25, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Edit Warring[edit]

Dude, please stop the edit wars. It doesnt matter if there is a "wingnut" on the article. You dont have to agree with it, I dont agree with somethings on this site either but I dont edit war. I am from NZ and a user here put something I didnt like into the article but nevermind. OK? Ace McWickedRevolt 22:29, 22 January 2009 (EST)

Minor advice[edit]

many people have issues with spelling, it's a normal thing. However, when you use words that are important to you, others will not be impressed if you spell them wrong. It's not "therianthrophy" it's "therianthropy". By the way, firefox (and probably other) browsers can support a spell-checker, and although it doesn't recognize "therianthropy", by "adding" it to your dictionary, your browser will help you get it right. I did that for cdesign proponentsists since it's impossible to remember, not being a real word, and all. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:34, 23 January 2009 (EST)

Dartboard[edit]

Why did you restore my dartboard? I was trying to get the URL of the delete page, for phase two of my plan. Phantom Hoover 16:39, 24 January 2009 (EST)

To see what it said. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:41, 24 January 2009 (EST)
You can see what's in deleted pages by clicking "restore", then clicking the date of the revision you want to see. Phantom Hoover 16:45, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Spellcheck[edit]

For goat's sake, use Safari or Firefox when typing comments. They both have spellchecks, which should slash the number of spelling mistakes you make. As an aside, you said a while back that you sometimes view RationalWiki using a Mac. Does this mean that you have seen my sig in its full glory? Phantom Hoover 17:06, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Oh yes. But my parents won't let me install another browers- I already asked for Firefox, and they said that viewing a fish app for my iGoogle page wasn't good enough. However, I noticed that this is tolerated from TheoryOfPractice. Why not myself? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:09, 24 January 2009 (EST)
TOP hasn't mocked people for spelling errors, as I remember you doing to π in the saloon bar. Phantom Hoover 17:16, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Why won't your parents allow you other browsers? Phantom Hoover 17:19, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Only to deflect critisim away from therianthropy. And my parent's don't allow me other browsers because my brother's homeschooling program only works on Internet Explorer. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:20, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Why does that have any bearing on your choice of browser? Phantom Hoover 17:22, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Hint: My parents are not computer experts- or Vulcan-esque in the least. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:23, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Another hint would be helpful. Phantom Hoover 17:26, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Hint: My logic cannot determine their reasoning. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:28, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Is there a filter on it which wouldn't work on Firefox or Safari? Phantom Hoover 17:30, 24 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) I DON'T KNOW --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:31, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Ah. I seem to have read to much into it. What prevents you from downloading it yourself? Phantom Hoover 17:33, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Retribution, perhaps? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:34, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Adding firefox to the box won't "eliminate" IE. And IE can still be the "default" so they & he don't get confused. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:35, 24 January 2009 (EST)
I refuse to annoy my parents. I have no wish to be fed meat for dinner. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:37, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Try burying it in several layers of folders full of junk. Phantom Hoover 17:39, 24 January 2009 (EST)
They would know. They would know. THEY WOULD KNOW! Especially since they'd notice the shortcut. . . Simpler to just correct speling mestekes. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:41, 24 January 2009 (EST)
Try feigning an interest in cellular automaton, then downloading Golly, which has at least three layers of stuff they'll never check. Phantom Hoover 17:43, 24 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) If it really bugs you, have Nx fix up some Java to correct stupid speling mestekes. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 17:55, 24 January 2009 (EST)

Java wouldn't work; you really need a human evaluating the spelling to keep the words that are all right, but aren't in the dictionary. Phantom Hoover 05:00, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Theoretically, it would be possible to write a Javascript-based (not Java, that's completely unrelated) spell checker and hack it into the editform, however:

  • it's overkill and unnecessary, just download portable firefox and put it on a pendrive
  • it would take more time to write than I have right now or otherwise wish to waste just for you
  • since you're using IE, it would probably be extremely slow, thanks to Internet Exploder's pathetic javascript engine

So, in one three words: sorry, but no. Lern to spel -- Nx talk 05:39, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Cascading protection[edit]

Please don't use cascading protection on your userpage; it protects all of the userboxes and other templates on your page as well, potentially causing huge collateral. Phantom Hoover 11:57, 25 January 2009 (EST) As a aside, why did you bother to protect your page in the first place? You've never had a vandal attack on it. Phantom Hoover 12:04, 25 January 2009 (EST)

I protected it since I've made a mortal enemy in Fall Down, who once also vandalized my sig. I thought that by using cascading protection, I could eliminate all threat to my user space. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 12:06, 25 January 2009 (EST)
Protection is fine, cascading isn't, as it locks all userboxes on your page and the userbox template. Ironically, cascading protection won't defend your subpages, as cascading only protects pages transcluded into the protected one. About the only place cascading protection comes in useful is at RationalWiki:Anti-page resurrection. Phantom Hoover 12:11, 25 January 2009 (EST)
Gawd, CUR, get over yourself. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:44, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Logout[edit]

OK, I am at the place where I can call you an idiot, and so: CUR, you are an puerile idiot. 92.235.204.231 13:45, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Ah, no. You have to do that on the talk page for logging out. There isn't one, so don't do it. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:52, 25 January 2009 (EST)
You wouldn't happen to be Fall Down, would you? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:08, 25 January 2009 (EST)
The golden rule for the identification of Fall down's socks is: he always signs his name. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:43, 26 January 2009 (EST)
True. But he logged out. So maybe that's why. I guess. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:46, 26 January 2009 (EST)
When have you ever seen a timestamp on one of his posts? Bastard educated Hoover! 15:48, 26 January 2009 (EST)
It was you, wasn't it? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:49, 26 January 2009 (EST)

What it means to be a sysop on RW[edit]

"...on RW, where I am a sysop (I have block, protect, show/hide revisions, and edit rights)"

CUR, you understand that any editor who is not obviously a vandal gets sysoped here within a few days, right? In other words, it's nothing special. Virtually every editor here is a sysop. It makes the site easier to run... ħumanUser talk:Human 00:58, 26 January 2009 (EST)

I see from a later post that you understand this. Question: Why is your spelling so much better there? Question2: Why do you not listen to the wise Anoulf? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:05, 26 January 2009 (EST)
First of all, I'm well aware of that. Removing it now. Interesting that you registered- who as? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:37, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Why is my spelling better? Easier to spell when you aren't being flamed. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:47, 26 January 2009 (EST)
It's easy not to be flamed when you aren't a complete dickhead. You might want to consider that. --JeevesMkII 16:25, 26 January 2009 (EST)

They made me a sysop after two days of editing here, and one mainspace edit :)-Diadochus 16:26, 26 January 2009 (EST)

I registered under my theriotype, as most seem to there. Feel free to guess it ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 16:27, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Ha-ha. I looked you up. But feel free to debate with us there- you might find explanations that satisfy you. Guess there are now two links between the Werelist and RW- not just one. You might even be able to make a good impression (and before you say that you don't need it, making a good impression is almost always good). --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:29, 26 January 2009 (EST)
I really doubt I'll be bothered to comment on anything there. I signed up so I could read the forums. But thanks for the well-wishes. By the way, I haven't found anything resembling an "explanation" yet. ħumanUser talk:Human 16:53, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Then ask --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:55, 26 January 2009 (EST)

Comment[edit]

Just so you know, I have added a rationale for our scepticism on the therian incident talk page. You can reply to it there. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:50, 26 January 2009 (EST)

I did already. I think I explained it quite nicely. Though it would be nice if everyone could work together and find out what is going on. Believe me, I'd like nothing better. Oh, and I think it may have been partially subjective: it isn't unheard of for the brain to adapt to changing conditions by creating new neuron pathways. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:51, 26 January 2009 (EST)

Warp speed ahead[edit]

Why did you block him for three days? He's vandal binned, and his last edit was hours ago -- Nx talk 18:03, 26 January 2009 (EST) Several reasons

  1. He vandalized several pages
  2. Sock of Fall Down
  3. I'm really annoyed now, and Fall Down recently called me a coward
  4. Helps get my mind of the 'incident'

--"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:07, 26 January 2009 (EST)

  1. That's why he's vandal binned
  2. So? He has many more
  3. Not valid reason for a block
  4. Not valid reason for a block

-- Nx talk 18:10, 26 January 2009 (EST)

True- but he's vandal binned. The block doesn't actually do anything- but it makes me feel better. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:12, 26 January 2009 (EST)

It does do something, and it's a violation of site policy and abuse of power. -- Nx talk 18:13, 26 January 2009 (EST)
I've been banned before for worse reasons. Still, undoing block now. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:14, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Good. Leave her (Fall Down) alone and she'll go away. Bondurant 18:15, 26 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) Banned where? Here? After you were sysopped or before? -- Nx talk 18:16, 26 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) Both. But I am going to move his socks user pages to different names. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:16, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Alright, would you please stop it. You're just trying to get his attention. DON'T FEED THE TROLL (and you can't rename users) -- Nx talk 18:19, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Just moving his pages. Same as moving his user page to 'Women are my superior and I respect them as such.' --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:20, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Would you please NOT do that again. User pages should only be moved if the user is renamed. -- Nx talk 18:26, 26 January 2009 (EST)
A, your longest block has been for 10 minutes, big difference between that and 3 days. B, what part of DON'T FEED THE TROLL do you not understand and C, moving pages is a huge time waster and an invitation to petty vandalism. Please stop. That is my nice request. SirChuckBHITWIN FOR PRESIDENT! 18:30, 26 January 2009 (EST)

CUR, you might want to be careful to not let a random harmless sock get you desysopped for abuse of power... ħumanUser talk:Human 19:40, 26 January 2009 (EST)

ROP[edit]

First off you are not a bureaucrat you can not rename users so stop moving user pages around. Second of all not every sock is Fall down. Yes it is someone mocking you, but personally I think you deserve it. I suspect it is an established user you have pissed off today. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 18:32, 26 January 2009 (EST)

No, I'm pretty sure it's Fall Down. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:33, 26 January 2009 (EST)
What makes you so sure? Pi's scenario seems more likely to me -- Nx talk 18:37, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Perhaps Fall Down mocking me? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:37, 26 January 2009 (EST)
Where is the vandalism in his edits? Fall down or not you can't vandal bin a user that has not vandalised a page. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 18:39, 26 January 2009 (EST)
(by the way - i'se got girly bits not falldowny bits) CUr has Vandal binned RationalWiki Overall pain in the arse 18:41, 26 January 2009 (EST)

"Fresh start remember? And that's the point. I want to help."[edit]

Look, you don't get a fresh start just by saying "fresh start." You've pissed off a lot of people in this community--just because you said "fresh start" yesterday doesn't mean people have forgotten what you did the day before that, or the week before that. Yesterday, I--and a few other people--suggested to you that the best way to show a fresh start would be to stay away from the Therian page...instead you essentially put your fingers in your ears and went "LALALA I CAN'T HEEEAAAR YOU"--and Pi ended up yelling at you on the talk page. You want to help? Stop being the centre of attention. Edit some articles that aren't flashpoints. Vandal-bin some vandals and clean up the mess they leave behind. Get some WIGOs from the blogosphere. Discuss constructively on talk pages. Testing out your non-existent Java skills on the wikiblog would not qualify as helping....TheoryOfPractice 17:41, 27 January 2009 (EST)

CUR here is TOP and my's first edits. Notice that they are simple, often copy edits, and not very good post to talkpages. Nothing major, we did not try to change the whole wiki to fit our vision of it, we fitted into the wiki. You will also notice with mine Human is the next person to edit the page after me as he followed me around for about two months. I did not take offense to this, I saw it a helping. My advice start small and you will grow with the site. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 17:50, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Cabal?, Cabal?, Where?[edit]

Why has your 'cabal' remained empty? (i have noticed that everyone you invite is apparently nonresponsive to your invitations... --Redcoat.jpg[[User:Redcoat| Redcoat  18:20, 27 January 2009 (EST)

You want to join? We could eliminate that idiot who's vandalizing my talk page. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:21, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Redcoat, please resize that picture or take it out of your signature. It's taking up way too much room on the page. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:29, 27 January 2009 (EST)
I like it, very stylish. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 20:31, 27 January 2009 (EST)
My apologies for my somewhat overflamboyant sig, i think my current sig is somewhat more appropriate.--British coat of arms.png Redcoat  18:22, 29 January 2009 (EST)

(p.s. define:"The idiot who is vandalising my talk page", is that me?, or is there a genuine vandal on teh prowlies?)

He is known as Fall Down. Look him up. He has enough socks to make me proud- he uses TOR. It's not you. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:25, 29 January 2009 (EST)
I'll keep my eyes peeled elsewhere for him then.--British coat of arms.png Redcoat  19:28, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Vandalism[edit]

Look at recent revisions. One more reason to find a better way to deal with Fall Down. He's doing it every few seconds. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:36, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I told you not to feed the troll. You were asking for it. Fortunately, it's only one person, and he'll get bored, especially if you ignore him -- Nx talk 18:39, 27 January 2009 (EST)
So what? Don't do the rollback? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:39, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Maybe that's what you get for poking him with a stick both here and over at RWW. Best bet may be to protect the page so only sysops can edit it for a while...we're mostly all sysops anyways...TheoryOfPractice 18:42, 27 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) No, just stop poking him. E.g. just two things you did recently: renaming his userpage, blocking his sock randomly. Stop doing it and he'll get bored. -- Nx talk 18:43, 27 January 2009 (EST)
(EC)I won't use my powah like that. I want to be better here. I have no wish to do anything evil again. Protecting my talk page would be wrong. I can take it. I still am irritated, though I think that we do need to do something about him. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:44, 27 January 2009 (EST)
We're doing the only thing we realistically and practically can do: Ignoring him until he gets bored. Responding to him only makes it more interesting for him. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:50, 27 January 2009 (EST)
We could ask TOR to cut off his service. They probably wouldn't pay attention, but it's worth a try. He's been causing trouble all over the internet. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:54, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Not their problem. Trust me, ignoring him is by far the most effective approach. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 19:00, 27 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) TOR doesn't work like that. Look, he'll find a way to edit here no matter what you do, so just let it go, and he'll leave you alone. -- Nx talk 19:02, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Fresh start?[edit]

You are currently edit-warring with three editors (Yossarian, Pi, and me) on two different articles. TheoryOfPractice 19:25, 27 January 2009 (EST)

You started it. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 19:27, 27 January 2009 (EST)
By Jove, i fear that i may regurgitae my lungs in sheer laughter! --British coat of arms.png Redcoat  18:25, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Please Stop Edit Warring.[edit]

Look, when everyone else on the wiki is reverting you, it's time to back off. You are pissing off and wasting the time of a number of editors now, and nobody seems to be willing to back you up. Please reconsider your behaviour and refrain from acting in such a confrontational manner. TheoryOfPractice 20:10, 27 January 2009 (EST)

You started it. Calling therians rediculous is a sure way to get up my nerves. Expect the same reaction as you would get from Kels for calling furs 'silly,' 'irrational,' 'wannabees,' or another insult. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 20:13, 27 January 2009 (EST)
FWIW, a lot of furs are silly irrational wannabes. =) The harshest critics of fur fandom I've heard have been furs, Patriotic Nigras and Something Awful notwithstanding. --Kels 20:35, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Who cares who "started it"? Try being an adult for once and end it in a mature fashion. As is, your childishness is filling up the recent changes page and making it hard for me to keep an eye on the going-ons around here. You ask if you can start over fresh and then... go back to doing the idiotic things you were doing before? -Redbacknot Redneck 20:17, 27 January 2009 (EST)
"You started it" is straight out of the sandbox. Edit warring is not cool. Therians are ridiculous. Your nerves have nothing to do with it. And Kels has a sense of humour. And I imagine from what she says around here that she sees furry fandom as a fun, funny and sexy thing to do--not a raison d'etre....TheoryOfPractice
Allow me to rephrase: calling furs idiots might get on here nerves. And how would you know? The fact is, you don't. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 20:25, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Actually, ToP is absolutely correct. An awful lot of furries are self-obsessed, shallow sex freaks. There's an awful lot of pointless drama in the community, and for the most part I just ignore it, since I don't really care about it. Wanna criticize furs? Have fun. Because by criticizing it, you're not criticizing me as a person, a lesson you'd do well to learn about therianism. --Kels 20:43, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Right, but no-one would call furries idiots because furries simply like to dress up and get off. Nothing idiotic about it. You, on the other hand, want to make extraordinary claims with no evidence--claims which I am no longer interested in discussing. What I am interested in discussing--and what this thread is about--is why you continue to poison this community with your selfish edit warring, your poking at known trolls, and your general inability to play by the very few rules we have. TheoryOfPractice 20:33, 27 January 2009 (EST)

ToP - CUR is a Troll who, in a few short days, has turned RW upside down so that all we do is discuss his agenda. He's causing nothing but trouble, doing nothing to further the RW mission and doesn't know how to play nice with others. Personally I feel he belongs in the Vandal Bin. Maybe, at one edit per hour, he'd limit himself to additions of value instead of bovine excrement. Silver Sloth 20:39, 27 January 2009 (EST)
I hate to say this, but I agree. I think the Therian article should be locked in a way to prevent CUR from editing it, which might make this all blow over. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 20:44, 27 January 2009 (EST)
SS--I agree, but am to close to the situation to act errrr, rationally. Besides, it would be an unprecedented move.. If Kels or Human or Pi or someone of that stature wants to go that route, so be it. If they don't, so be it. TheoryOfPractice 20:45, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Unfortunately, it would only make the whole thing worse. If we want to conclude this, we must actually try to figure out a scientific explanation that satifies both groups, not merely throw around rotten tomatoes. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 20:52, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Well, when you actually come up with something scientific to back up your claims, by all means let us know. -Redbacknot Redneck 20:54, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Why start with an assumption that it's real in the first place and not the more likely conclusion that someone who feels different chooses to identify with an animal on a psychological level, then justifying that identification? Your approach makes the same sort of unfounded assumptions as PJR's take on YEC, and I'm not inclined to accept either without a good deal of convincing. --Kels 20:58, 27 January 2009 (EST)


To CUR: Satisfying both groups isn't an obligation of the site. Your attempted rationalisations of therianthropy have been integrated into the article, along with other users' criticisms of them. We won't treat all theories as equally plausible when they obviously aren't. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:01, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Weaseloid, the article is biased heavily along a LA-LA-LA-LA-CAN'T-HEAR-YOU point of view. It uses titles designed to debase it before anyone's ever read the arguments. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)

I've got a solution to all of this. Here's the thing. No one plays by these rules. The moment I came here, my entrance was marked by several ugly episodes, which no one's gotten over. I've tried to play by the rules, but I am repeated flamed. My signature, user page, and talk page our vandalized. My edit-warring isn't selfish- rather, I am responding on behalf of a group that I represent. I stopped poking at known trolls, except on RWW. I do not want to make claims with no evidence- that is something I never do it I can help it. Now, if you really wanted to get rid of this, you'd just delete the articles and debates in question. But you don't. No. You want to poke fun at minority beliefs. I am not a troll. I have no agenda that I wish to discuss. My only agenda is to either be left alone, or, if that cannot happen, to fight until I either draw my last breath or you concede. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 20:45, 27 January 2009 (EST)

CUR, I moved your last comment here as it's better for the flow of this conversation.
We're not going to delete the articles, debates & talk pages. That would be rather a Conservapedian move. What you seem to be saying is that if you don't get your way on this issue, you'll make it hell for the rest of us. That isn't a good attitude to take. Listen to what other people are saying: they're talking about limiting your editing rights here - do you really want to drive them to that? You don't have to "represent" the therian community. You've already introduced a couple of therians to the site, & if they want to contribute again they will. What you tell us about therianthropy is being incorporated into the article (we wouldn't've known most of it if you hadn't talked about it), but you won't be allowed to have free reign to present the subject your way. Your best option is to try to take it less personally, & raise any objections on the talk page rather than warring over the article. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:56, 27 January 2009 (EST)


Weaseloid, as one of the few people who I respect here, I've got to disagree with you. Deleting pages that threaten to tear everyone apart isn't exactly Conservapedian. I'm listening to what they're saying- but they don't exactly have support, or good reasons. I'm trying to take it less personally, but the fact that personal attacks are sent upon me on a semi-constant basis doesn't help. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:04, 27 January 2009 (EST) +


- (EC)Egad! As I said, I cannot come up with something alone! We actually need to work together! Are you (I'm resisting the urge to do a Jinx) people capable of understanding that! Unless several people work together, this is going to tear down RW! I don't want that! I want it to be like it was before the word otherkin was ever heard here! I could take it before! But I can't take this! You aren't being scientists! A true scientist would try to find an explanation! How is this rational, to not try to find an explanation? When confronted with unprecedented events, a scientist tries to find out exactly how the new event happened, not dismiss it out of hand. In this respect, you are acting like YEC. You aren't being rational in the least. Rationality involves being open minded to new concepts. You are being no better than Schlafly. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:04, 27 January 2009 (EST)

We have found an explanation. It is just an explanation you don't like. Rationality involves being open-minded, but not so much that your brain falls out. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:11, 27 January 2009 (EST)
"When confronted with unprecedented events...." We're waiting. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 21:13, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Re deleting the pages - we only do that for things that don't fit in with what this site is about. We don't delete pages just because they cause tension or some people find what they say uncomfortable. That would be censorship.
Re working together on this - the site doesn't conduct scientific research. We do assess the validity of theories & beliefs to some extent, based on the available existing evidence, the scientific method & common sense. We don't change our answers to try to satisfy both sides in a debate. As it stands, the therian article includes some of the theories for therianthropy, but also criticism & snark. That is as it should be (compare with any other article about a non-mainstream belief). ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:20, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Show me where it presents arguments for therianthropy without immediately discounting them two words later. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:23, 27 January 2009 (EST)
(EC) We do the same thing here, and in other articles about spirituality, but I don't see you jumping on any of those for being one-sided. Fact is, if there's nothing beyond anecdotes (and remember, the plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence") to suggest there's a phenomenon in the first place, and there's no reliable science to back it up, you bet it'll be discounted. Just like we discount sincerely held beliefs such as snake handling, Morgellon's Syndrome and reincarnation. --Kels 21:45, 27 January 2009 (EST)
I am not in agreement with this site on almost any topic, and my opinion doesn't really count. I would like to point out to CUR that this wiki is run in a certain way, and functions in a certain way. (quite snarky, tries to make anything that it does not find completely rational look totally stupid.) You have to take the site for what it is. Just because you happen to find something rational, doesn't mean that all of these other people have to agree with you and show it in a neutral light. This site is not neutral, and doesn't try to be. Do you see me complaining about the treatment of christianity here. (show me where you present arguments for christianity without discouting them 2 words later.) No, because I know what the site is, and I am not trying to change it. Because I don't like it, I stay away. I suggest that you should either do the same thing, or else just let the issue go. Edit warring never got anyone anywhere. It just makes them less likely to treat you like a rational adult because you aren't acting like one. --CPAdmin1 21:43, 27 January 2009 (EST)
I value your opinion. However, I never back done. By the way, will you be my lawyer? Here's the thing. I know what this site is. But I do like it here. I want to let the issue go. But they won't. This conflict is self-promoting. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 21:46, 27 January 2009 (EST)
I can't be your lawyer, but I could suggest a solution that is fair to both sides if other people want to hear it. --CPAdmin1 22:06, 27 January 2009 (EST)
Please do. Head over to RationalWiki:Administrative_Abuse, where options are being discussed. - Gentleman Publius (V)<,",>(V) 22:08, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Notice[edit]

Dear ConservapediaUndergroundResistor,

This is a notice letting you know that a movement has been filed against you at the Administrative Abuse desk. As such, you are the defendant. We encourage you not to take this as a personal attack, and try to maintain a calm head when discussing the issue at hand.

Sincerly
ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ is out of his mind

Suggestion of action to take[edit]

I am on the verge of de-sysopping this editor. The reason is not, however, due to direct abuse of the mop and bucket (although he has abused them a couple of times), but so that he can be briefly blocked if (and probably when) he engages in further disruptive, disrespectful actions. His non-stop edit-warring over therian and inserting the same endless whining drivel into every discussion he can find makes me think he now fails the "mostly harmless" criteria we use when sysopping people.

The only reason this is not an actual announcement of me having just done this is to start a discussion and get input, especially from other apostrophecrats, rather than acting unilaterally. However, at this point, I will basically have to be convinced not to take this action, and convinced well.

One warning to editor ConservapediaUndergroundResistor: if you continue your past habit of making pointless, whiny arguments with any/everyone who comments in this section, I will desysop and block you, at least temporarily, so the discussion can proceed. This is not about the color of your spots, but the content of your character, at least in how you participate on this site. — Unsigned, by: Human / talk / contribs

I can't believe I forgot to sign such a portentious edit! This is also being discussed at RationalWiki:Administrative_Abuse ħumanUser talk:Human 21:34, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Poemtry[edit]

You may have missed it among all the clutter on my talk page, and amidst all the recent "excitement", but I posted my modest effort here for your approval. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:57, 28 January 2009 (EST)

See: here for some ideas. Toast s.png (Toast) and marmalade 06:06, 29 January 2009 (EST)
Oh, I saw it. Quite good. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 15:49, 29 January 2009 (EST)
Thank you :) ħumanUser talk:Human 15:57, 29 January 2009 (EST)
I tried. And I would love to discuss where I went in writing it, etc. with you - if you're interested. I know this "think space" is one you want to avoid for a while on RW, but chat back and forth between willing users shouldn't be anyone else's problem. I enjoyed your challenge response, and enjoyed applying my poemistic skillz to it. It was fun, and I thank you for the opportunity to explore an interesting genus. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:13, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Cat[edit]

I thought you might like this news item I just saw. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 18:29, 29 January 2009 (EST)

He was on the local TV news as well. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 18:33, 29 January 2009 (EST)
A-hah! So you live in Britain, Weaseloid! --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:35, 29 January 2009 (EST)
Yes. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 07:03, 30 January 2009 (EST)
CUR card.png

For You[edit]

Hope you like it.  :-) ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 07:03, 30 January 2009 (EST) ----->

See these as well. Looks like somebody here had the same idea before. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 15:51, 30 January 2009 (EST)
<Smirks> That's where I got the idea from. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:28, 30 January 2009 (EST)
I like mine better.

400 mpx

That's because it's not poking fun at you, like the funnier other one. Bastard educated Hoover! 13:34, 31 January 2009 (EST)

LOL sorry[edit]

Soz 'bout the permablock, I just couldn't resist the temptation to type "Infinite"--British coat of arms.png Redcoat British coat of arms.png 13:31, 31 January 2009 (EST)

It wasn't me who you permablocked. If you want to see what this kind of behavior will bring you, I suggest you see above. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:32, 31 January 2009 (EST)

Book[edit]

At the risk of bringing up a worn, tired subject, I am writing a book. If you want to read it, tell me. If you don't want the unnamed subject brought up again, don't. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:34, 31 January 2009 (EST)

What are you writing about? --CPAdmin1 18:34, 31 January 2009 (EST)

You asked for this. You cannot ban me now.

Teh Work in Question --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:42, 31 January 2009 (EST)

I didn't exactly ask for it, and even if I had, I wouldn't take that as permission from the "community" to post it. I would suggest being a bit more careful than that. --CPAdmin1 18:46, 31 January 2009 (EST)
Still, they can't ban me. I know RW. They can't ban me once someone sort-of asked to read it. And I'm not picking a fight. And it's in my user space. And I'd better protect it before FD vandalized it, excuse me for a second. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:47, 31 January 2009 (EST)
At any rate, based on what just happened, I still think you would be better off being careful. It could definitely be seen as an attempt to bring a sensitive subject back up. You mention a book, and basically ask people to ask you about it, and when some one sort of asks, you post the whole thing. I'd be careful if I were you. (just trying to help.) --CPAdmin1 18:52, 31 January 2009 (EST)
Update: I deleted it. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 18:55, 31 January 2009 (EST)
Another arcane issue is copyright - if you "publish" a work on a GFDL wiki like this, you give up a lot of "strong" rights to it. IANAL, but it might be an issue. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:04, 31 January 2009 (EST)
Wasn't going to try to profit off it. Heck, I wouldn't mind someone publishing it through me- I have no wish for publicity. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 19:05, 31 January 2009 (EST)
Sure, we all say that... but you never know. What if the book comes out well, and actually interests a publisher? As a bit of a writer myself, the GFDL aspect concerns me. And who knows to what heights you will rise as your life unfolds? ħumanUser talk:Human 22:17, 31 January 2009 (EST)
If I do not publish it, less people will know about therianthropy- which is how I like it. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 10:20, 1 February 2009 (EST)
if you don't want people to know about it, why do you keep bringing it up? Yours trulyDear Sir 13:59, 1 February 2009 (EST)
Because he's a massive tool, sometimes. TheoryOfPractice 14:42, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Your sockpuppets[edit]

What's the point of lulzy in making sockpuppets if you announce the right away and don't use them at all (Un-human is permabanned)? -- Nx talk 13:34, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Lulz. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:35, 1 February 2009 (EST)
Who permabanned un-human? I didn't. . . Oh, wait, I did. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:36, 1 February 2009 (EST)
Can you point out that I'm not your sock? 9K ruoy ot eornoC eht AR 13:38, 1 February 2009 (EST)
I did. You're Radiactive Afikomen's sock. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:39, 1 February 2009 (EST)
Isn't AR Human's sock, and Namuh RA's sock? -- Nx talk 13:40, 1 February 2009 (EST)
I don't think so. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:41, 1 February 2009 (EST)
You disappoint me. I've dropped at least three obvious hints as to my identity. 9K ruoy ot eornoC eht AR 13:53, 1 February 2009 (EST)

My question. You have not answered it. -- Nx talk 13:49, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Sock of AmesG should probably be an option on the dropdown for canned block reasons. Neveruse513 21:15, 4 February 2009 (EST)

The quote generator[edit]

It doesn't work because you can't have two spans with the same id ("myName"). You have one in your welcoming code, so (a) it's not valid html (b) the javascript magic only works on the first one because there's only supposed to be one -- Nx talk 13:39, 5 February 2009 (EST)

And I fix this how? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 13:43, 5 February 2009 (EST)
Remove the first "myName" span for the quote generator to work -- Nx talk 13:45, 5 February 2009 (EST)

For the attention of CUR[edit]

I'm going to call you "Harmony". You may have a nametag if you promise not to chew it. No, with sandwiches 16:14, 5 February 2009 (EST)

??? Bastard educated Hoover! 16:16, 5 February 2009 (EST)
????????????? --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorMOAR KITTY:[1] (wasn't me) 16:24, 5 February 2009 (EST)
Indeed. Except Harmony doesn't shamelessly repeat other people's jokes. No, with sandwiches 16:40, 5 February 2009 (EST)
Addendum: "Fyodor Pavlovich" would also be a good fit, but it doesn't have quite the same ring to it. No, with sandwiches 16:40, 5 February 2009 (EST)

Desert island sounds[edit]

<flashmp3>http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309059_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309060_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309061_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309062_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309063_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309064_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3,http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/309065_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3|autostart=no|shuffle=yes|loop=yes</flashmp3> <flashmp3>http://www.sounddogs.com/sound-effects/25/mp3/331481_SOUNDDOGS_An.mp3|autostart=no|loop=yes</flashmp3> <flashmp3>http://www.cyberorganist.com/audio/bach-toccata-and-fugue-in-d-minor-%28frederik-magle%29.mp3|autostart=no|loop=yes</flashmp3>


Enjoy! ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:08, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Are thouse wolves or dogs? The sound on my speakers is off. --"ConservapediaUndergroundThermistorRusty-spotted catspeed! 21:07, 6 February 2009 (EST)
Wolves. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:15, 6 February 2009 (EST)
<pumps arm> Yes! Wolves! Finally! --"ConservapediaUndergroundThermistorRusty-spotted catspeed! 21:16, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Intrusion alert[edit]

I have made this for you Template:User intrusion alert so you can adjust the settings easier. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 22:27, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Infobox[edit]

I have also got Template:Infobox‎ working for you. - User \scriptstyle4\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n}(2n+1)^{-1} 08:25, 7 February 2009 (EST)

It also inspired me to create a much more useful template Bastard educated Hoover! 08:31, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Thanks, everyone. --"ConservapediaUndergroundThermistorRusty-spotted catspeed! 09:33, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Sentience of animals[edit]

This discussion was moved to the Saloon Bar, and then it was moved to Debate:Animal sentience.

Whoops[edit]

Sorry, when I moved the Sentinance thingy, I accidentally missed your response. I do apologise for that small mistake. By the time I noticed it, it had already been fixed. ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ is out of his mind

76.173.125.235‎[edit]

His/her edits aren't vandalism as such, just stuff he/she wanted to add to the article. They needed to be reverted because they're copy/paste & poor quality content, which is why I've asked him/her to discuss them on the talk page. Blocking new editors just for making edits we don't like isn't a good way to welcome them. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:38, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Yes, but they edits have been reverted multiple times, he or she hasn't dicussed the changes, and is generally reminding me of the earlier me. --"CURtalk 13:40, 7 February 2009 (EST)
So what? The longest you were blocked for (before you had the ability to unblock yourself) was a few minutes. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:47, 7 February 2009 (EST)
31415/60 = 523.6 minutes / 24 = 21.816 DAYS ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ is out of his mind
Odd. It said 9 hours. --"CURtalk 13:51, 7 February 2009 (EST)
LOL. Javascap, there are 24 hours in a day, not 24 minutes! ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:53, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Coffee spray.gif Pwned. --"CURtalk 13:54, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Wall.gif stupid stupid stupid stupid... ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ is out of his mind

(2 EDIT CONFLICTS I H8ORZ DEM)Even 9 hours is too much. you don't need a sledgehammer to crack a nut. I blocked a drive-by vandal for an hour and he hasn't been back, and there's the vandal bin for those who don't get hints. Totnesmartin 14:50, 7 February 2009 (EST)

And don't call me a fucking spammer you little prick. My internet connection broke while I was uploading a reply (note the nearly-an-hour time lag) and for some reason that made it post twice. OK? Totnesmartin 15:05, 7 February 2009 (EST)

At least four times you changed the time on the dates stamp. All within about one minute. It took me quite a while to figure out what was going on. And no insults on my talk page. Can you not read? See the top. --"CURtalk 15:08, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Your talk page is not your castle. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:09, 7 February 2009 (EST)
If you want to insult me, you still should go someplace else. Like the saloon bar. --"CURtalk 15:10, 7 February 2009 (EST)
The only rules covering your talk page are the community standards. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:19, 7 February 2009 (EST)
And in the community standards are the words 'personal attacks are frowned upon.' --"CURtalk 15:21, 7 February 2009 (EST)
There's a difference between calling a respected user a spammer and them being angry at that and a personal attack. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:25, 7 February 2009 (EST)
The act of spamming does not make me a spammer. And calling me a prick is unacceptable. --"CURtalk 15:28, 7 February 2009 (EST)

You call T.martin a spammer and then want to hide behind your mother's apron of "community standards?" If your goal was to make RW a less fun and less productive place, you're certainly succeeding in that. TheoryOfPractice 15:29, 7 February 2009 (EST)

After one changes the time stamp on the page simply to keep up to date with the time, and one gets the annoying 'You have new messages' template, and one goes to their talk page and tries to find the comment, and it happens four times within five minutes, yes, it does make me call him a spammer. --"CURtalk 15:32, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Stop picking on Totnesmartin. I have a temperamental connection, and when there is a hang after submitting an edit, one often refreshes, inadvertently updating the timestamp - by accident. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:42, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Five times? --"CURtalk 15:43, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Yes, if he has a very iffy connection. Bastard educated Hoover! 15:46, 7 February 2009 (EST)
I'll be derned. Whoops. --"CURtalk 15:47, 7 February 2009 (EST)
(3 ECs again (weeps))So you didn't stop to think it might be a technical problem? OK, no more insults, let's leave this in the past, but for future reference - my internet connection frequently cuts out (yes, five bloody times, I was tearing my hear out), and my attempts at reconnecting and re-uploading might look weird at RW's end (and for some reason it happens a lot more here than elsewhere). I don't do repetive posting on purpose, so if you see me doing it it's my internet connection being rubbish. Totnesmartin 15:49, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Wait a minute. Did someone just call me a "respected user"? Where did I go wrong? :) Totnesmartin 15:58, 7 February 2009 (EST)

You've been here longer than me and are a sysop. I apologise for any offence caused. Bastard educated Hoover! 16:01, 7 February 2009 (EST)
If people start respecting me I'll have to leave and never come back. Again. Totnesmartin 16:15, 7 February 2009 (EST)
I have no apologies to give to you, dick. Bastard educated Hoover! 16:16, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Is there anything I can do to annoy you less? I'm not trying to annoy you. But you seem to take offense at everything I am. --"CURtalk 19:11, 7 February 2009 (EST)[edit]

Part of me wants to just say "go away." But that wouldn't really be fair. 1. Stop carving out stupid untenable positions about things you know nothing about (Starfish are sentient! People in comas aren't really human! Andy Schlafly is a neo-con! I'm part wolf!) and then creating huge arguments over them while claiming that you're being "rational." Here's a tip: if two or more "respected users" say you're wrong, that doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong, but it does mean that you might want to think about what they're saying and re-evaluate your position. Look at how many arguments about science I've been in--none. Know why? I know dick about science. So I LISTEN and try to learn. I'll argue history and politics because I KNOW that shit--but if Human and Researcher, say, are piling on me, I'll pull back. 2. A pair. Grow one. You bitch and moan about "personal attacks" all the time. The humour here can get cutting. As my moms used to say--"If you play with the big boys, you're gonna get hurt..." 3. A sense of humour. See above. 4. What was with blocking a guy for no good reason? TheoryOfPractice 19:24, 7 February 2009 (EST)

1. First example: I already admitted that I cannot prove that. Example 2: You are taking something I said and blowing it out of porportion. Third example: I have a dictionary to back me up. You have Andrew Schlafly. Guess who wins. Example four: See example two. And shut up about it. This already caused one mess, can't you leave it be. Beyond that: We obviously have different definitions of rational. 2. I read Scientific American every month. 3. You do not understand my sense of humor. 4. It was for 31 seconds- the same amount of time Phantom Hoover blocked me for holding the position that starfish are sentient. And we already resolved it. I thought he was spamming my talk page. He had a bad internet connection. --"CURtalk 19:33, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Fuck, you're dense sometimes--as for the neo-con thing, you never got the points I was trying to make--that Andy would never care to classify himself as a neo-con (...and what he thinks matters in this case...) and NOTHING in the lame wiki-dictionary link you provided does anything to talk about how neo-conservatism fits with Andy's stated positions. You know why? 'Cause it doesn't. Not even our article calls him a neo-con. 'Cause he ain't one. Tell me what a neo-con is, and then look at Andy's politics, and see how much they differ. But you won't, cause you'd rather just dig your heels in. So you read Scientific American. Good for you. What does that have to do with the fact that you're an utter annoyance and sometimes troll? I might not get your sense of humour, but I know you have a really thin skin and cry "personal attack" whenever anyone says anything you don't like. And the block was for THOUSANDS of seconds, dummy--I undid it myself.Get your story straight. TheoryOfPractice 19:42, 7 February 2009 (EST)
So calling me a 'prick' isn't a personal attack? As for troll, holding opposing viewpoints does not make you a troll. Now that's pretty close to an ad hom. As for utter annoyance, no more than you are to me. But I don't go around delibrately baiting you. --"CURtalk 19:45, 7 February 2009 (EST)
A description is not a presonal attack, although "prick" might not be the right word. "Twerp" comes to mind. CUR, you really need to learn what ad hominem means - for instance, if RA was to say "human" was utterly wrong on X, hence his argument on Y fails, that would be ad hominem. People calling you names is not ad hominem. The real question is, are those names justified? Oh, and TOP, I have sent you a very important email. Or, I might, anyway ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 22:57, 7 February 2009 (EST)
CUR, saying you read Scientific American isn't the same as demonstrating you comprehend it. Reading in and of itself is not an indication of rationality. I'm not saying you don't understand Scientific American--I honestly have no idea--but your statement, taken at face value, means zip. You read it. Okay. So what? I think I'm pretty good at reading Cyrillic, but I don't claim to understand Russian. Anyway, I don't mean to put you down, but that's just one example of why you rub people the wrong way. Sometimes it takes a bigger person to stay out of an argument they feel strongly about it...especially when those arguments have the tendency of degenerating into CUR vs. Everybody. Just don't make it about you. If you must argue, try removing yourself from it as far as you possibly can. If you're going to take it personally, don't bother. And if someone calls you a prick/twerp/cur, etc., just let it go. Teh internetz iz NOT srs biznis. Let them have the petty satisfaction of calling someone names on the Internet. Anyway, there's my two bits. You're a nice guy, you just have to learn to let go. --Purple George!YossieSpring in Fialta 01:59, 9 February 2009 (EST)

This page...[edit]

Says "This is not a place to call me an idiot. Legit criticism and discussion is fine." at the top. A false dilemma, perhaps? No, with sandwiches 10:48, 9 February 2009 (EST)

How's about a piece of pie?[edit]

If you really want to save that archive, why don't you put the link on your page? That way, I can have a nice clean userpage and you can have a record of your vandalism. Everybody's happy, right? RIGHT? RIGHT?!? The electrocutioner 20:17, 9 February 2009 (EST)

Oh, have a sense of humor. Sorry. But everybody else that I know of think's the wandalism is funny. --"CURtalk 20:18, 9 February 2009 (EST)

Such as who, CUR? Electrocutioner, if you want it gone, let me know and it will be. Pinto's5150 Talk 20:22, 9 February 2009 (EST)
Javascap. --"CURtalk 20:23, 9 February 2009 (EST)
CUR: I am a reformed ex-vandal with sysop powers. Do you really think it prudent to tell me to "have a sense of humor"? 'Cause, I mean, I think I could probably oblige you if that's really what you want... The electrocutioner 20:27, 9 February 2009 (EST)
I'll archive your vandalism. --"CURtalk 20:29, 9 February 2009 (EST)
CUR: Thank you.
Pinto: It’s not as though I’m innocent here either; I left a non-sequitur edit on Javascap’s user page after he and CUR edited mine. I don’t have a problem with archiving CUR/Javascap's vandalism—I just think it might be better if we put the link on CUR’s page so that he can have what he wants and I can have what I want. Does that work for everybody? The electrocutioner 20:32, 9 February 2009 (EST)
That was oddly fun. Ah boy, we have to do that again. Give me a fist jab.. come on, virtual fist jab right.... here. Friends.gif Javasca₧ Reticulating splines
As I am wont to say, "Welcome to the Dollhouse!" ħumanUser talk:Human 23:18, 9 February 2009 (EST)