|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
User talk:Buck
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
Welcome to RationalWiki, Buck!
Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing:
|
Christopher (talk) 09:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Your sandbox[edit]
Given your meh AAVE callout with your "mind your own bidness" edit summaries in conjunction with the content of your sandbox, I really hope you're going somewhere sane with this given your Metapedia link. Kntai (talk) 09:21, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- Well, you could read the small header for that Metapedia quote. Maybe that would set your mind at ease. You could also probably look at the rest of it and recognize the space as a super rough, mixed collection of quotes (just look at poor Beckles!), take the suggestion, or not just assume that any language is being appropriated by me. But all that's just extra. IF you really need to know, I might expand a section of an article on slavery apologetics done in the US...which requires collecting the arguments, and I always build from the quotes up. It's gonna be a super slow, super offensive place for a bit because I have to both collect the actual apologetics and some other stuff from some physical books of mine. Also I do enough of this in my day job.Buck (talk) 11:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- But I did read your header for that Metapedia quote, and "shitheads" was vague. Given the amount of trolls that were around before you continued updating your sandbox, I hedged and decided to reach out instead of fully nuking what you were up to because your first link was a great source. Just really, those edit summaries lent to doubt.
- I think "shitheads" is a pretty clear value judgement, but sure. Going forward I dunno if it is wise to be so close to just nuking raw quotes in a sandbox (especially disparagingly-labeled ones). Also not sure what the "Given the amount of trolls...before you continued updating your sandbox" bit means, because this sandbox was created today. I did move lovely Beckles out of the "shitheads" section though, so I guess that's good. But the irony that the literal message of the summaries (which was meant to avoid this) and the labelling of some of the quotes (which was meant for anyone stumbling in to understand what I thought of them via "shitheads") got completely ignored because of the source itself (again, under "shitheads") and the usage of AAVE itself is honestly amazing. Don't be sorry for me, cause I'm not. I get to work in my favorite period and field, reading and forming arguments is inherently entertaining, and I get to be way more mean about it when I'm online and not on the clock.Buck (talk) 13:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- It was very clear what you were doing, @Kntai shouldn’t be so paranoid. Christopher (talk) 14:48, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hence why I reached out, because nuking content isn't something I would particularly like to do, nor do I think I should be doing that on sight; before I saw your edits in real time I had been dealing either Nazi, racist, or otherwise sketch edits here. Instead of riding that horse to town on a whim, well—I thought it best to reach out. Reading how I went about it after a bit of shut-eye, though, no, I chose the wrong words to go about it for sure. I'm glad you enjoy what you do, so instead let me say I'm sorry it whooshed over my head instead. Please do carry on!
- It was very clear what you were doing, @Kntai shouldn’t be so paranoid. Christopher (talk) 14:48, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- I think "shitheads" is a pretty clear value judgement, but sure. Going forward I dunno if it is wise to be so close to just nuking raw quotes in a sandbox (especially disparagingly-labeled ones). Also not sure what the "Given the amount of trolls...before you continued updating your sandbox" bit means, because this sandbox was created today. I did move lovely Beckles out of the "shitheads" section though, so I guess that's good. But the irony that the literal message of the summaries (which was meant to avoid this) and the labelling of some of the quotes (which was meant for anyone stumbling in to understand what I thought of them via "shitheads") got completely ignored because of the source itself (again, under "shitheads") and the usage of AAVE itself is honestly amazing. Don't be sorry for me, cause I'm not. I get to work in my favorite period and field, reading and forming arguments is inherently entertaining, and I get to be way more mean about it when I'm online and not on the clock.Buck (talk) 13:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Christopher: I'm new with my mop, and have but a simple ask: do call me out if I make mistakes, but please, if you ping me, talk to me—not around me. Kntai (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- It’s an understandable mistake in that case. I’d suggest looking through someone’s contributions (linked in the tools towards the bottom of the sidebar when you’re on a user/user talk page) before jumping to any conclusions. It would’ve been pretty clear Buck wasn’t another racist throwaway account. Christopher (talk) 17:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Christopher: I'm new with my mop, and have but a simple ask: do call me out if I make mistakes, but please, if you ping me, talk to me—not around me. Kntai (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Autopatrolled[edit]
Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.
We hope you enjoy your newfound POWER — and these external tools:
- Google Scholar Button (Chrome, Firefox) searches your highlighted text in Google Scholar. Easily check academic citations!
- web.archive.org and archive.today, among other tools, can save permanent copies of webpages. Never lose a crank website or racist Tweet ever again! Monet Ye 07:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)