User talk:Christopher/Archive2

This is an archive page, last updated 16 May 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <3>

, (new)(back)

Mario-related terms

But why? 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 14:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

What? Christopher (talk) 19:48, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Here

Join me here http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:Asking_for_it --Kingdamian1 (talk) 04:40, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The X-factor affair

Hello, you seem to have been more involved in the X-factor case, so I thought I'd ask you to give a once-over to my judgment regarding X-factor's edit that I mentioned on his talk-page. If it was anyone else, I'd let it slide. Hertzy (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Where do you think it was copied from? Googling random phrases he added doesn't turn up anything really obvious. Christopher (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

It appears to be copied from the cited document. Oddly enough, the first random phrase I googled pointed me to an online version of it. Here's a link. I think the phrase I googled was about new Zealand, at the end of page 16 of the pdf. Hertzy (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I'm removing his/her edit now. Christopher (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Play fair

To say that an article that's a mere tissue of lies and bias "contains too many unsourced statements, and needs to be improved" is an understatement. I request that you carefully read the detailed explanation that I have given on the talk page for that article (i.e., the article entitled "Eugene M. McCarthy") and then either take the page down or replace it with the honest version that I provided. Keep in mind that in protecting this malicious drivel, you are taking personal part in what may be actionable slander. As your own notice there on rationalwiki says, "Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats." I have no wish, nor any intent, to sue you, but I do expect you to play fair. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I'll just point out that you probably mean libel, not slander. Daev (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Making thinly disguised legal threats will get you banned, I'm going to look through the article in a minute and remove some of the unsourced information. I reverted you because a BoN completely rewriting a page is nearly always vandalism, I don't have time to research every person who has an article I revert an edit on. Christopher (talk) 18:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

So are you now saying that I can't even complain about a slanderous attack on my character and reputation? lol. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 18:39, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

You mean the 18,000+ character-edit that was returned to the talk page with a bit of extra formatting? -- Onychoprion (talk) 18:41, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

[EC]@BoN: See the message I just posted on your talk page, don't make legal threats onsite. Christopher (talk) 18:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Onychoprion: He was reffering to me saying he shouldn't make legal threats onsite. Christopher (talk) 18:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Libellous. Daev (talk) 18:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

You could be wrong, you could be right. I'm not a lawyer. Don't interact with legal threats though. Christopher (talk) 18:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't know you. Are you a fair and honest person who is not slandering me? If so, then I'm definitely not threatening you. However, I do expect you to take this matter seriously and to take prompt action. As they say, justice delayed is justice denied. As a friend of mine pointed out, your page now ranks at the top of the Google search page for the search phrase "Eugene M. McCarthy." How fair is that when your article is filled with venom and lies? How patient do you expect me to be? I'm not saying you created this page, but you are maintaining it and it does damage my reputation. I'm a reasonable person though. I'll give you ample time to check through and make very sure that all falsehoods about me are removed from that article. But I won't wait forever. And please don't complain about how much time this will take you. How much time do you think it is taking me to deal with this dishonest invective that your site has deigned to publish about me? I find all this extremely boring and I'd rather be doing almost anything else. I do, however, have to defend myself. If you're worried about this taking a lot of your time, then please just take the article down so that it's just a blank page. And thereafter, if you want to have a page about me, make very sure that every statement you make about me is correct. That would be fair and take very little of your time. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 19:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

The implication being that you'll sue us if it takes too long. Stop making legal threats now or I will block you. Christopher (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

What? Are you saying you're not fair and honest? As I've said repeatedly, if you are, then you and your organization have nothing to fear from me. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I'm only saying that if it takes too long, it would not be fair on your part. After all, after looking at this, it looks as if it's been live on the internet for quite some time, perhaps, as long as three years. I can't say I've noticed it before the other day when my friend pointed it out. But how much longer do you think it would be reasonable for me to put up with such treatment? Think about it from my perspective. How would you feel if you yourself were treated this way?162.197.60.142 (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

(edit conflict)RationalWiki strives to be as accurate and honest as possible, you saying "I won't wait forever" implies that after a certain amount of time you'll sue RW if your page isn't positive enough. You twisting my words to make it sound like I admitted that RW is dishonest is irrelevant anyway, I'm just some random person on the internet with no connections to RationalWiki or the RationalMedia foundation in any way. Christopher (talk) 19:27, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Now you are twisting my words. I did not say I would sue you, nor did I mean to imply it. But you're not just some random person. You personally have been protecting and reinstating an article that contains numerous dishonest and malicious statements about me. You are also personally identifiable. We are all responsible for our actions, both morally and under the law. It's not good enough for you to simply say you're a "random person." You have responsibilities. But I'm not threatening you. I'm asking you to think about your actions and responsibilities and, as I've repeatedly said, to make your best effort to play fair. And again, as I've been saying, my expectation, as it is with most people I meet, is that you will in fact play fair. And I myself am trying to reach a fair resolution of this matter. For example, wouldn't you say that the proposal I've already made (to take the page down until it can be factually vetted and cleansed of any ad hominem invective) is a perfectly reasonable compromise? I'm not asking this out of the blue. On the talk page for that article, I've taken great pains to explain at length all the problems that I found with it, both factual and ethical. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 19:48, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

Sorry if you didn't mean to imply you'd sue RW but that's how it sounded to me. I'm currently removing what I hope are all of the unverifiable and untrue statements from your article, it may take a while and I understand your frustration. I meant I was some random guy on the internet in the sense that I have no connection with the RMF, not that I wasn't involved in this. Christopher (talk) 20:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Actually, I had already noticed that you'd corrected a couple of things. Thanks! And, though perhaps I shouldn't say this, I didn't really expect you to do this immediately. As I say, I think this article has been live for quite some time. So what's a little time more. What I'm looking for, more than speed, is accuracy and fairness. Take any reasonable amount of time. I'll check back later.162.197.60.142 (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

Someone trash-talking you

That troll isn't very funny; especially when Christopher has recently received a death threat.ClickerClock (talk) 02:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

When did I receive a death threat? Are you sure that you're thinking of me? Christopher (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

When that troll pretended to be Trent?ClickerClock (talk) 04:25, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Who's the troll? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 05:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Awesome Award

🧠Rationalwiki

Awesome Award

for Christopher

Reason: being awesome

ClickerClock (talk) 03:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Christopher (talk) 13:51, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I stole your awesome award and put it on my user page. That's a fake. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 18:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I Have Three Two Questions

1. How do I set my user page so only I can edit it?

2. I created a section on the Wiki page dedicated to Liberapedia. How do I change the shortcut in the search box to direct there instead of Wikia?

3. How do I become a ninja? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 18:45, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

1) I don't think that's possible although sysop protection (which is already on there) should stop most vandalism

2) Like this (idk whether this will still be changed after the server thing finishes).

3) People get ninja if they need it and are really trusted, if you need to make 100 boring edits (removing a broken template or something) then a tech/mod will give you ninja. Christopher (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I sent in a request. If they ever give it the light of day, they're gonna deny it. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 19:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

So, just send a request to a tech or mod, and they can approve or deny it? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 19:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

You sort of have to have a reason, "I want to have it for the novelty value" isn't a reason. Christopher (talk) 19:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

And that's why, as I said, that message will probably never see the light of day. Why do we block out these messages again? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 21:47, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Wild night, wouldn't you say?

But in the end, it turns out it all "never stopped being a thing that happened."

Don't feel embarrassed; everyone needs some Fun: sometimes.

...I'm not sure how best to go about figuring out what needs reverting and what doesn't, but... ...I'm sure you'll find a way. Godspeed! ~ <3 16:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Spam Attacks

It seems spammers have taken advantage of the recent changes to the site--(ノ°Д°）ノʇsədɯəꓕ nɹnɯıꓤ 18:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

That's sort of obvious, bots appear to be able to get past CAPTCHA. I'm updating our spamfilter to try and reduce the amount that gets through. Christopher (talk) 18:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

alright then, that should help some, ban hammers for now as you update it--リムルテンペスト 18:58, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

New Dawn's Germaine Greer edit

Hi Christopher, You removed a paragraph by user:New Dawn mentioning Lili Elbe's ovarian transplant (on the Germaine Greer) with "Citation Needed". I can provide a citation for the transplant if that was the only problem you had with the paragraph. Daev (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I was planning to research it and readd if a citation could be found but forgot, thanks for reminding me. If you already have a citation then feel free to readd it yourself. Christopher (talk) 18:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Gadgetspace is editable

Have fun. Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 01:02, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Please use "they" pronouns for me

I like to keep my gender a secret to remain mysterious and "they" pronouns are great for that. See this essay on gender-neutral pronouns. The use "They" pronouns have been traced back to 1794. A linguist explains "they" pronouns. -- ClickerClock (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

OK. Christopher (talk) 09:22, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

here

Join me here http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:Afterlife --Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:22, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

What do you have against Liberapedia?

Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 02:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Nothing, it's just really minor. (Except for the fact that when I looked at their category "things that should be legal", zoosexuality was in it). Christopher (talk) 18:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Why shouldn't bestiality be legal? Personally, I believe that sex with animals is immoral and sinful – but I don't think it should be the government's business to make it a crime. If it is harming the animal, different story; but, if a person wants to have sex with a horny male dog, I'm pretty sure they could do it in such a way that the dog would be entirely pleased with the experience. People who want to have sex with animals, in the private, should be offered psychiatric help (if they are willing to accept it), if not, they should be left well alone. (I believe in God, and I believe that human-animal sex is against God's will, but zoophiles will answer to God in the afterlife for their sins, it is not the proper role of earthly governments to judge them.) (((Zack Martin)))^™ 22:17, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Archive

How do I get my page to archive? Do I just edit it to say so? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 10:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I've done it for you, a bot will now archive your talk page automatically. Christopher (talk) 14:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

this user requests user @Christopher to add the option to archive the talk page of this user on manual mode with no automatic archiving.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[1]] [[2]] 17:23, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

In reply to @that user, Christopher asserts that because you don't have the archive template on your talk page there isn't any automatic archiving. Christopher (talk) 17:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Mind if I move our conversation to the article's talk page?

Hey Christopher, I hadn't originally meant to talk about the evil is like cold analogy, but that is where the conversation went. Mind if I move it to that article's talk page? And the transformative thread to the general theodicy talk page? --Bertrc (talk) 12:46, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Go ahead and add it to the ever-growing heap of discussions you participate in which end up along those lines (unintentionally or otherwise). Why — at the pace you're going, we'll soon have enough documented instances of the misuse and overapplication of said false analogy to warrant debunking it in mainspace. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Cool . . . but are you allowed to speak for Christopher? --Bertrc (talk) 16:02, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @Bertrc, this user asserts the fact that talkpages are accessible to all for participationFAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[3]] [[4]] 16:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Bertrc wasn't suggesting that the Reverend shouldn't be allowed to edit my talk page, they were saying that he shouldn't try and speak for me. I certainly wouldn't mind if you moved the conversation to the relevant article's talk page, you're not allowed to remove any of the conversation from the archive even if the text ends up somewhere else though. Christopher (talk) 16:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Exactly. I would be copying what you had written. Yes, I certainly would not be removing the conversation. Just copying it. Thanks. --Bertrc (talk) 19:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

"citation needed"

Regarding this, why did you remove the BoN's accurate contribution on the basis of "citation needed", instead of spending 30 seconds on Google to find a citation, like this: "One thing that separates Taylor from much of the radical right, however, is his lack of anti-Semitism." (The same page goes on to discuss Taylor's dispute with David Duke, which supports the second part of the BoN's contribution.) Yes, okay, the BoN should have provided a cite, but it is kinder to people (and surely better for the wiki) to supply the missing cite than to join them in their failure to look for one. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 10:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

That was lazy of me, I've readded it with the cite you linked to. Christopher (talk) 10:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 22:11, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

On a different "citation needed" issue. I requested a citation for a particularly false-sounding statement (Dave Rubin page). The request was reverted and the person who reverted my request appears to have a peculiar interest in me. I actually think this is funny. Is this person respectable? Should I just "move on"?Ariel31459 (talk) 14:36, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted exactly two of your edits with one click. Hardly a special interest in you. If you'll check, I even added that {{fact}} tag back when I realised I had removed a legit one. Fareeha A (talk) 14:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

I should have removed the entire statement.Instead I'll give you the chance of finding references for it, if you can.Ariel31459 (talk) 15:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Look for the triple arrowheads (">>>")

I responded again to you here (here). This time, I've marked my responses with triple arrow heads (i.e., ">>>"). 162.197.60.142 (talk) 19:59, 13 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

Just added another section to the bottom of the talk page. It explains what's wrong with some of the material Bongolian just added to the Eugene M. McCarthy page. These new comments are also marked with triple arrowheads. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I just added two more such sections to the bottom of the talk page (both marked with triple arrowheads). 162.197.60.142 (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

In future, could you put {{ping|Christopher}} somewhere in your post instead of letting me know on my talk page? It's just as noticeable. Christopher (talk) 18:52, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Sure. (I'm thinking of you as a kind of referee in my exchanges with "Bongolian." If you don't want to play that role, then please let me know.) 162.197.60.142 (talk) 20:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

At the bottom of the talk page I just added a rebuttal of the remainder of Bonglian's argument (again marked with triple arrowheads). Have a good weekend! 162.197.60.142 (talk) 22:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

OK, in future could you include {{ping|Christopher}} in your talk page comments instead of leaving messages on my talk page? Christopher (talk) 09:50, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I just responded to Bongolian's comments at the bottom of the talk page. Have a good weekend! 162.197.60.142 (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

In future could you include {{ping|Christopher}} in your talk page comments instead of leaving messages on my talk page? Otherwise this section will never archive. Christopher (talk) 15:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Survivalism Edit

The reason why I put those things there was to show what kind of things would be genuinely valuable and desired in an actual apocalyptic or disaster scenario. I didn't seen them enumerated elsewhere as trade items or exchange media. These come from personal experiences in my own life as well as accounts of others. I did consider including sexual favors, but was worried that might have been to risque, though it definitely does happen in real life. I also wanted to indicate the sheer lunacy of thinking that just because Washington or Tallahassee is offline for a week or two means that the money people have been using all their lives is suddenly worth nothing. While there are ways for a currency to collapse, and it may be generally less useful in a harsh survival situation, short of a landmark shift in the prevailing law of the land, it'll be usable. I've even been in places where there is a sort of semi anarchy, like Transnistria. While I was there, even though it's a frozen conflict and not really a recognized state, the medium of exchange was cash -- I found that rubles, hryvnia, zloty, euro, pounds, leu, and dollars were generally more or less accepted in varying degrees by different people. Nowhere did I have to trade gold, and had someone offered to pay gold or demanded payment in metals, I would have laughed. Anyway, I would like to reintroduce my edits.^{— Unsigned, by: 72.205.27.251 / talk / contribs}

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. Thank you. Christopher (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

So, about my points, are those to be addressed? 72.205.27.251 (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Macintosh

Thanks. 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 17:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, I was glad of a valid reason to ban him. Christopher (talk) 17:58, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Reminder that we shouldn't look for reasons to ban ideological dissidents. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 18:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

I know, I would've done the same with anyone (I wasn't glad to ban him due to racism anyway, but because he was a dick). Christopher (talk) 18:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Who'd you guys ban? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 19:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Some racist dude who revealed personal info about an IP editor. Christopher (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Email

How do I sent private emails? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 19:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

This. Christopher (talk) 19:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Can you give me back my sysop? Also, why is everyone reverting my edits? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 20:37, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Since you've had your sysop removed you've said "CheeseburgerFace is an asshole" on your userpage and obsessed about your sysop on his talk page, plus Burger is a mod, so no. I reverted you because you removed ZackMartin's and your comments. Christopher (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Wait — CBF is a mod...? *scratches chin* Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Why isn't he listed as one? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 03:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

My mistake, he was elected as an alternate mod (if one of the current mods resigns then he takes their place). The answer is still no though. Christopher (talk) 15:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Wait, so saying a mod is an asshole is a promotable offense now? When did this happen? RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

CBF isn't a mod, Bigljbgl was promoted for other reasons. Christopher (talk) 11:55, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Bear in mind

... sometimes I don't want the punchline to a weak joke to be immediately obvious :)

I #am# mostly harmless. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

hi

join me here http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:Dawkins_Legacy --Kingdamian1 (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

For renaming that troll. 92.20.166.189 (talk) 17:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC) (Bicycle Wheel)

No problem, it was the only one I saw in the user creation log, I seem to remember some ((())) trolling as well but I can't find it. Christopher (talk) 17:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Deletion

Could the following pages be deleted: *[[User:Bigljbigl/Funpage Generator]] *[[User:Bigljbigl/Mainpage Generator]] *[[User:Bigljbigl/Essay Generator]] *[[RationalWiki:Draft Generator]] -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 05:07, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Done. Christopher (talk) 09:22, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations

You are invited to join the awesome and intelligent users. Just link to "Category:Awesome and intelligent users" at the bottom of your user page. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 07:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

*bleeeeeaaaaat*

You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline; if you accept, you may wish to campaign. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm ineligible, thanks for the offer though. Christopher (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Question re Jeremy Corbyn entry

While I can see a brief brake on passions, does this site usually put a hold on edits for two weeks!? Don't you think it better to ultimately just determine who is not being reasonable? Otherwise, how does a site with so many contentious topics proceed? Do they freeze topics a lot and for so long?--Tea Sagan (talk) 06:47, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Misclick on a touch screen, I meant to protect it for 1 week, which in hindsight was also a bit long. I've changed it to two days. Christopher (talk) 07:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Why did you remove my additions to Southern Strategy? JohnLogan (talk) 15:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Why did you delete my edits?

Why did you delete my edits Christopher? I am trying to contribute to RationalWiki.I'm I vandalizing this website or did I make several mistakes.Please explain to me.^{— Unsigned, by: Coolguy212 / talk / contribs}

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you.

Continued at Talk:Conservapedia. Christopher (talk) 07:57, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Vacation

Been on vacation but just got back. I responded to you a while back. --Řïmũŗû Ţèmpéŝţ 01:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

bots

That's exactly what a bot would say... MjolnirPants (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I found the "rule" about not deleting messages from user talk space. (It's a stupid rule, but whatevs). Also, the stupid, stupid joke is the line below the welcome message. Go ahead, read it. I dare you. Hope you have a few IQ points to spare, because you'll lose them after reading that joke. MjolnirPants (talk) 20:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Pulp Fiction

You haven't seen it have you. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

No, which means I shouldn't have reverted you. Feel free to readd the joke, whatever it's about. Christopher (talk) 17:40, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

First thing in the morning, you watch it! It rocks. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 23:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Well in the film, a character gets thrown out of a fourth story window for allegedly giving a foot massage to the wife of ruthless gangster, Marcellus Wallace. So basically, giving Reflexology to a gangster's wife is a good way to get thrown out of a window. Oh by the way, I second Reverend Percy's remark! --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Monkeying with URLs

Could the other IP's query/comment be something to do with the recent 127.0.0.1 glitch? 82.44.143.26 (talk) 15:22, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea, maybe they can only edit when they use https? Christopher (talk) 15:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Gondor calls for aid

SOrry for posting as a BoN, but it's Semipenultimate - sometime in the last two weeks something got compromised somewhere, and I'm now unable to either login or receive my reset email. Sorry for the paucity of details but lack of access leads to lack of information and root cause. If there's nothing to be done, it's fine, I can make a new account. But if there's some way of correcting I'd like to. E-mail address and any other information I may have that may be needed can be 100% provided upon request. 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Do you have any way of verifying that you are Semipenultimate? Christopher (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

It's me. Got your email. Unsure how to prove this to you, although it shows that the correct email address is still rightly linked to the account. So why aren't the password reset requests going through? 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

What email? I left a message on "your" talk page but I haven't sent any emails. Christopher (talk) 15:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The site itself emailed me when you posted on my page. 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:11, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

I know how you could identify yourself, I'll send you an email that's just a random string of letters and you post it here. Christopher (talk) 15:16, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Poised, ready, breath appropriately bated. 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

HbdhfnwkshmiihnsjstgbsyGfdeddimkiitww4321 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

That's it. Create an account called Semipenultimate2 (or anything, it doesn't really matter), confirm it's you with a BoN edit and I'll rename your new account to "Semipenultimate". Christopher (talk) 15:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

And redemote you and stuff obviously. Christopher (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Aw man! My elaborate plan to avoid being re-sysoped is in ruins! But seriously, go to User talk:Semipenultimate2legit2quit and check my BoN edit. 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:28, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Also thanks for the crazy-fast response. You were on this thing in five minutes. It's appreciated. 38.105.4.150 (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2017 (UTC

You're welcome. To log in use your old username but the password you used for Semipenultimate2legit2quit, hopefully I've done everything right. Christopher (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Dude, that was a solid. You're ever in the greater LA area, you look me up. Beer's on me. Semipenultimate (talk) 15:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Put up your fists and fight me

https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=E978&curid=190483&diff=1863793&oldid=1863789 oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 21:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Fite meh. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 21:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Fite me irl—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 21:46, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Sysop

What can I do now? Anna Livia (talk) 12:12, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

You have been promoted demoted to janitor sysop and can now ban people who are trolls, vandalize pages, insert unfunny comments, or hate Goat. Be sure to take your mop and clean articles to a pristine shine and feel free to improve on them, just don't abuse your position and be sure to join the ban hammer wars.--Rimuru Tempest 13:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey

Join me for my most controversial topic yet https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:All_Cultures_Are_Not_Equel --Kingdamian1 (talk) 02:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey

Cheers for unblocking me --101.181.57.232 (talk) 07:56, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

No problem, not sure why you were blocked. Christopher (talk) 13:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Blocks?

I should've did those for infinity?--S.H. DeLong (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Yep. No one is ever going to make good faith edits with a name like that, doesn't really matter though. Christopher (talk) 21:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Vandal binning

You can see why I did it - and done with good intent:)

Who normally deals with such matters? Anna Livia (talk) 17:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Whoever comes across the vandalism first. No one ever bins IPs. Also bear in mind that it's possible to delete large chunks of text by accident, it's if add "LOL THIS IS NOT RASHUNAL!" or something similar that you know it's vandalism. Christopher (talk) 19:46, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

OK - and I am mostly harmless. Anna Livia (talk) 21:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again

For unblocking me. Not sure why buckleddegree viewed my edits to the southern poverty law center and the clogosphere as spam. I will find out when buckleddegree responds on the talkpage. --101.181.57.232 (talk) 08:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I think it was this edit. Someone else editing from your IP? Christopher (talk) 14:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

That was my edit - its pretty silly but I put it on my i.p. talkpage. I was blocked shortly after the splc and clogosphere edits of mine were reverted by buckleddegree. --101.181.57.232 (talk) 04:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

The Persistence

Hello, Christopher.

You deleted what you described as a weird article about Donald Trump voters and supporters, rallying around a hashtag called #ThePersistence. What should I do with this article about it without making it weird? Thanks for the advance. -- Bryan See (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Here's a copy of the article:

[[File:PreslerPersists.jpg|thumb|[[Scott Presler]], the hateful and feared head of "the persistence".]] '''The Persistence''', formerly known as Trump voters, the deplorables and the silent majority before the effort was re-branded, is a group of nationalists to join forces with the [[far-right]] and [[conspiracy theorist]]s to support the presidency of [[Donald Trump]]. Naturally, this effort is encouraged and funded by Trump himself, which only reflects his dedication, concern and that of the [[right-wing]], [[reactionary]], [[xenophobic]], [[bigotry|bigoted]], [[anti-science]], anti-tech and [[authoritarian]] [[Luddite]] [[extremist]]s who follow him. == Background == This effort is portrayed as a "grassroots" effort to persist Donald Trump and his efforts to make America great again, but in reality is an obvious smokescreen to mask Trump's wrong-doings. People know that the Persistence is a so-called patriotic effort, just like the tactics employed by Trump and, by extension, [[Russia]]n President [[Vladimir Putin]] and his government. Any criticism of Trump is met with total [[denialism]] followed by threats and even violence, just like any authoritarian leader. Never mind that he was planning to gut environmental regulations, repeal Obamacare, build a border wall, ban Muslims from entering the country, introduce tax reform, change term limits, attack voting rights to the point of suspending future elections, and destroy [[North Korea]] that would kick off [[World War III]], something that will drive his approval ratings sky-high. == On Twitter == Members of the Persistence are easily identifiable on Twitter by their blue check mark, and by the non-stop pro-Trump and pro-Russia [[propaganda]] spewed from their handle. *[http://twitter.com/hashtag/Persist #Persist] *[http://twitter.com/hashtag/ThePersistence #ThePersistence] == Prominent members == Several members of the Persistence have been exposed to daylight and did not melt, as expected. Here is a short list: * [[Scott Presler]], who is using the Persistence for his own purposes. == See also == * [[4chan]] * [[GamerGate]] * [[Koch brothers]] * [[Robert Mercer]] * [[Pepe the Frog]] * [[PhobosGate]] [[Category:Alt-right]] [[Category:Authoritarian wingnuttery]] [[Category:Batshit crazy]] [[Category:Conservative wingnuttery]] [[Category:Conspiracy theorists]] [[Category:Fascists]] [[Category:Global warming denialists]] [[Category:Hypocrisy]] [[Category:Islamophobia]] [[Category:Libertarian wingnuttery]] [[Category:Luddites]] [[Category:Paleoconservatives]] [[Category:Racists]] [[Category:Sexism]] [[Category:Transphobia]]

It's not that well written, although I think Russian's your first language so you can't really be blamed, (am I right?) it's full of redlinks and should probably be a section in the Donald Trump article instead of a separate page. Christopher (talk) 18:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I think it should. Thanks. As for my first language, it's not Russian. It's English. I'm not fan of The Donald or Vlad "Vladolf Putler" Putin. -- Bryan See (talk) 17:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

autopatrolled

Thanks for adding it to Skeptical, I suddenly realised I'd forgotten whilst I was in bed and rushed to remedy my mistake... Back to sleep now, I guess. Third time's the charm? —Kazitor, ^pending 13:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

No problem. Christopher (talk) 14:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of "Phobosgate"

You moved back "Phobosgate" to my userpage again. I do not want to be disruptive, but I do not want to be incivil either. See this.

In that post CJ-Moki (talk · contribs · block  · rights  · rename) has said that he needs a better source for the claim that Vladimir Putin engineered your ban from an increasingly irrelevant wiki written by trolls, for trolls, and that using better evidence to make better arguments are neccessary in order to create a serious case for "Phobosgate", which is what I'm doing right now. The sources are included there.

I know every tweet with #phobosgate is from you, and I am aware that tweeting and spamming wikis with conspiracy theories about an obscure Russian space probe is not "research" in any sense of the word. I guess that BatteryIncluded, his minions (including AGK, Stanistani, Boing! said Zebedee and Dennis Brown), and Vladimir Putin are all smiling at me. Putin, in particular, is the chief architect of my suffering, given the news driving this absurd episode on Wikipedia is Putin-owned (in other words, Kremlin owned).

Shall we discuss elsewhere on wiki for that matter? -- Bryan See (talk) 04:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for your unblock...

Christopher,

I would like to thank you for reversing the block as you noted that the articles relating to Phobosgate (the absurd episode on Wikipedia with overlooked hate, not the conspiracy theory about the obscure Russian Fobos-Grunt space mission) in my userspace, as I still intend to make a very strong and serious case for the controversy on Wikipedia that got me banned five years ago through disruption incited by Russian media as well as Russian President Vladimir Putin (the chief manipulator of me and BatteryIncluded and the rest of Wikipedia), who I believe caused the Phobos sample return mission to fail upon launch in November 2011. I think Putin is going to have me banned again using the same reasons. This is part of Russia's hybrid warfare.

By the way, the article you moved back to my userspace, the one about the Fobos-Grunt mission, is not part of Phobosgate, though. I plan to remove references pertaining to Phobosgate, at least for the time being. I need to make sure it meets RW's mission. -- Bryan See (talk) 14:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Please

Don't block me. I can't vandalize Wikipedia because my school is blocked until after I graduate three years from now. :(^{— Unsigned, by: Kateri D! / talk / contribs}

If you make your vandalism funny or make good edits as well then you won't be blocked, your Stephen Hawking edits weren't funny. Christopher (talk) 15:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@Christopher: Blocked them. If you want to give them a second chance, fine by me. RoninMacbeth (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

collapsing

But but but he's duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb. Can't I just make fun of an idiot? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease? ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 21:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

My talk page

Can you do something appropriate to whoever added the text I just removed (whose IQ is lower than room temperature on Pluto). I don't mind appropriate swearing, some of the weird fanfic and more obscure corners of RW (or even CP) but... Anna Livia (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Livia: The IP in question has been blocked for 30 days. If you want to block people who do similar things yourself, click here for more info. Christopher (talk) 14:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

It was not clear who had added the phrase in question - and to avoid 'two people confusing the computers (as they easily are) by doing the same thing at once.' Anna Livia (talk) 15:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

What is a reasonable time to block 'that IP twerp'? Anna Livia (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if this is spam

About the ninja sword thing... —ѕυρяємє ℓєα∂єя вιgѕ σf gσαтιѕтαи (ᴡᴏʀᴅs ᴏғ ᴡɪsᴅᴏᴍ/ᴀᴄʜɪᴇᴠᴇᴍᴇɴᴛs) 22:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

My User/Talk pages

You removed the protection from my user/talk page as you perceived the reason for my applying it had passed - fair enough.

However vile language and a direct threat were put on those pages after you did so.

I know RW is more of 'an opinionated free-for all' than many parts of the wikiverse, and am not against 'spats, disagreements and sticking to views (even if I disagree with them)' or using 'strong language' - but this is entirely unacceptable behaviour.

I appear to be one of the few people on RW using a female byname (rather than a male or 'neutral name') - in the rest of the wikiverse wherever I have contributed I have never encountered more than an occasional 'difference of opinion' for myself or other persons using a female byname: here I have experienced really unpleasant behaviour twice in two months.

Therefore, can I, quite reasonably, deduce that RW contains a significant misogynist element - and, no, I do not see why I should be forced to take a genderless name. Anna Livia (talk) 22:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Livia It's two different people vandalizing your talk page at the most, much easier to block them. Christopher (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

You can understand my sentiments - and female-usernames (actual or implicit) do seem to be scarce on RW (and more frequent elsewhere. Anna Livia (talk) 16:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

According to alexa the vast majority of RW's visitors are male, no idea how accurate that is though and it appears to say that the visitors are nearly 100% male but 20% female. Christopher (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

'Summat odd' in the last statistic (and the neutral-names and IPs will jumble the statistics). My comment about female (actual or implicit) names in the rest of the wikiverse is based on direct observation rather than statistical analysis.

In view of conversations elsewhere perhaps a 'RW users promoting lost causes group' might be appropriate :) Anna Livia (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't think they go by usernames, they have gender based info on sites with no usernames involved. Christopher (talk) 18:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I feel ya, how it feels like to be targeted on gender, but those vandals were trolls and don't represent RationalWiki. What's going on is some Grawp twat or imitator that harasses female users here and you'll just have to grin and bear it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

As you deleted the talk page - can I raise 194.82.180.147 with 'The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it (somewhere else).'? Anna Livia (talk) 10:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The "nigger" page

What was wrong with my revision? 138.247.99.204 (talk) 18:55, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

1) You removed the only link to the "racism" page. 2) It was fine the way it was. The term is both slang and an epithet. Bongolian (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Your revision replaced a common word with a less common one, removed the only link to a relevant page and removed information (that it was slang). Christopher (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Socialism

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Socialism#Financing_entrepreneurship109.156.110.177 (talk) 18:30, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

PB

I was making a passing joke, given the likely fate of the page (as 'pee=pence' would probably be too obscure for US people). Anna Livia (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

What is this about?

[5]. I went to User talk:Skeptical to ask him if he knew anything about Flat Earth or whatever you were getting at, and it's full-protected, very odd, but he seems to have disappeared. What did you have in mind? Why did you ask? --Some random Smith (talk) 20:46, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I was asking you why you'd linked to Skeptical's contributions in the 6th paragraph of this post. I've removed the protection from Skeptical's talk page as it isn't really needed. Christopher (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. It was a clipboard error, now fixed. No need to ask Skeptical now. --Some random Smith (talk) 21:29, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, why had you copied the URL for all of Skeptical's contributions? Christopher (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I was reading about conspiracy theories (like Flat Earth), and RationalWiki, looking for cross-references, and one page contained a link to this discussion here, with a link for Skeptical's contributions. I copied it to check it out later. Why do you ask? Does it matter? --Some random Smith (talk) 22:13, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, just curious. Christopher (talk) 22:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Why did you revert my edits? --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 10:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Because what that democratic senator said (whether or not he did say it, I haven't looked at the article) about Trump fanning the flames of racial hatred is true (and therefore doesn't belong in clogs) and your other edits appeared to remove anti alt-right sentiment (which, given it's a hate group, is justified). Christopher (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Calling Ian an "alt-right crank" is quite an allegation. Can you back it up? --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 03:15, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Grammarcommy was the one who added that part to the clogosphere. I have asked him in his talk page to prove assertion to non avail. Hopefully I will fare better with you. --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 03:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

First off, the name is GrammarCommie, as in "all socialists are evil pinko-commies" and second as I stated on my talk page I am not the one who made the edit that you keep bitching about. GrammarCommie (talk) 03:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

and yet you and chris keep reverting my edit. I have seen nothing to suggest Ian is alt right. I'll change that bit from the blogosphere, and if anyone finds anything that shows that he is, we can change it back, ok? --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Moderator nomination

You've been nominated in the upcoming moderator elections. See the nomination at RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Nominations.

CowHouse (talk) 06:44, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Someone beat me to it :) —Kazitor, ^pending 12:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kazitor Same! I was going to nominate you. Christopher (talk) 13:17, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Complimentary hug

Thanks for endorsing me! -D1@m0ndD15c1 (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome! Thanks for endorsing me back! Christopher (talk) 10:05, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for your message. I have replied on my talk page. --110.144.61.146 (talk) 23:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

SpliffMap

Probably self promotion, given a similar incident I dealt with recently involving [6] and the article on Christian economics. Comrade GC (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I can't see how it isn't self promotion, I won't ban the account yet though. Christopher (talk) 18:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Blairewhiteisaqueen

Change the block time if you prefer. (What is a suitable block length in such cases?) Anna Livia (talk) 16:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

In my opinion mindless ideological vandalism doesn't merit a block unless it carries on and on clogging up recent changes dramatically, it's very easily reverted. Christopher (talk) 16:19, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

But a shortish block for 'silly vandalism/graffiti and similar' #feels# appropriate, lets the idiot know they have been spotted, and makes them waste time doing other things instead. Thus happiness/benefit is maximised. Anna Livia (talk) 16:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey. I'm trolling for a reason. Fix the blatant lies on the blaire white page. I already laid out the answers on the CHS page. I just want you to fix your shit ^{— Unsigned, by: Blairewhiteisaqueen / talk / contribs} 14:38, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Trolling does not get positive attention on this wiki. I suggest you propose one definite change on the talk page. If it is stated as a fact, include a reference. Otherwise you are wasting your time.Ariel31459 (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

State which exact parts of the article you believe to be incorrect, provide evidence, sources, and sound arguments to back up your case, and then perhaps you may see change. Simply complaining that someone disagrees with you is childish and petty, as well as accomplishing nothing. Comrade GC (talk) 17:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Coop

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment.

Flying Feathers (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

:D

Thanks for unblocking me! 98.194.24.49 (talk) 23:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Improving abuse filters

I see you are also interested in improving the abuse filters. ClickerClock and I were discussing that a while ago, I wonder if there's a way we could all collaborate without revealing "secret" information? —Kazitor, ^pending 22:35, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kazitor and ClickerClock, It doesn't allow links, pings or anything like that but we could communicate via a filter set to private (the comment section allows it to function as a talk page), it would allow other techs to easily contribute and would keep everything on site. Christopher (talk) 10:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I think this is good. —ClickerClock (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

It's certainly awkward, but I guess I can check back on the comments whilst also checking my watchlist and the unpatrolled edits. —Kazitor, ^pending 10:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for being a nice person. :) ♥♥Alyssa Bryant♥♥^{Leave me a note} 19:56, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Removing WIGOs

It's not a filter, but hopefully this change to the edit notice should help. —Kazitor, ^pending 22:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

That should do the trick. Christopher (talk) 22:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Sysops

Do you think we should reconsider our policy on Sysops? Personally, I think people get promoted way to easily, so much so that it degrades the prestige of the status. On top of that, such speedy promotion overlooks possible trolls and vandals. What do you think? Nerd (talk) 02:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

There’s not meant to be any prestige. Trolls can’t cause any damage even as sysops because we have so many. Christopher (talk) 17:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. But that could pave the way for ugly conflicts between Sysops. Nerd (talk) 00:41, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@Nerd, ??????? Christopher (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, so you haven't been here long. I have seen more than my fair share of Sysop using their tools against each other, not just the ultimately benign blocks but de-mopping. This has led to some rather unpleasant drama at the Chicken Coop. Yes, really! That actually happened. Nerd (talk) 14:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Really brief tenure as mod

Why were you a mod for one minute? 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 14:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I briefly gave myself every user right when I became a tech. Christopher (talk) 14:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Moderator election results

See the results here. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 03:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations! Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 03:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congrats, Christopher!—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 04:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations to the new cabal (there is no cabal). Cheers, Cosmikdebris (talk) 04:55, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations, once again other people beat me to it :P —Kazitor, ^pending 06:15, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Have fun. Try not to be too serious...and congrats!Ariel31459 (talk) 14:55, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Something to keep an eye on.

I have been trying to keep the Jordan Peterson article from getting too hysterical. One of your demotions (johnny fog) has torched any hope of doing that myself. I am not opposed to criticism of Peterson and would like to help with the page, but this sysops has created a disneyworld of ridicule, much of it unjustifiable. I am going to leave it alone, but I think some of the horseshit in the revision needs to be flushed.Ariel31459 (talk) 05:37, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I know very little about Peterson, but the article as it stands is a poorly written joke. Christopher (talk) 16:08, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Georgie

What a nice boat. Do you want it back?--Pennywise (talk) 17:16, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Basic income (James Earl Cash's revenge)

Hi, recently I added few criticisms in the section "Advantages" of Basic income. Soon after, James Earl Cash reverted my edits. It seems to me that my edits are founded and I think that James Earl Cash reverted them just to spite me, since recently we had a discussion.

Please take a look. I added my criticisms in the talk page of Basic income. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Basic_income#Adding_some_criticisms_to_advantages --McLaghing (talk) 08:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

That guy is like a Trumpist: thinks he knows a lot, knows very little, can't or won't learn. We need more sysops like him/them.Ariel31459 (talk) 14:24, 22 February 2018 (UTC).

Responded on the basic income talk page.

@Ariel31459, who is the guy you’re talking about? James Earl Cash, McLaghong, or me? Christopher (talk) 18:10, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Christopher I am sorry, and embarrassed that you have to ask. Not you, not Mclaghing. Sorry, maybe I should not have butted in.Ariel31459 (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

@McLaghing See the Basic Income talk page. Went ahead and elaborated my conclusions. James Earl Cash (talk) 19:24, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Request

As the Grand Judge of Rationalwiki, I request you give me access to Abuse Filter 11.--Grand RW Judge (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Grand RW Judge No. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 23:31, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Christopher! I'm Jenna Smith, a famous musical artist. Can you put a page of me on main space? I'm on IMDB and YouTube. Search:Jenna Smith (Musical artist). Jenna Smith (talk) 12:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Lomax

Don't forget he's been blocked for repeated doxing. He's not that good at hiding who he is, so just shoot on sight when you see one of his accounts. Wilder^Bicycle 20:16, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Having looked at recent changes, that was clearly one of his, my mistake, will block any more accounts that appear. Christopher (talk) 20:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Abd will mostly not edit RationalWiki at all, but when he does, he will do it in one of three ways: As Abd (now blocked) or by a disclosed and authenticated account (authenticated on his blog on a page with nothing else), by IP, usually not disclosing identity (but if it quacks like a duck, it might be a duck) -- but there are many who have been harassed by the sock master involved, many who have documented it -- or covertly, in which case you will not notice the edits as being him because he will not be touching obvious topics at all.

However, if disclosed accounts are blocked without any disruption, merely because they are him, he reserves the right to do what someone else is obviously doing and has been doing for a long time, create as many socks as serve his purposes. He has never had any intention of disrupting RationalWiki, but there are limits.

He was desysopped and blocked without cooping. That's not nice.

The disruptive activity you have seen is not from Abd. He doesn't do "disruptive," not like those socks. He has far more powerful tools. It's obvious who is creating all those disruptive accounts, this is a long-term and widely repeated behavior of the sock master that Abd confronted on WMF wikis, revenge being typical for him.

Those socks are making legal threats against people that Abd has no beef with (even if he might disagree with this or that action). RationalWiki is being disrupted by a person (actually two persons) identified on Wikipedia as a long term abuser, and they are.

What has been called "doxxing" by me wasn't, but currently I'm being blatantly doxxed, first of all, by the impersonation socks, which use personal information and real names, and then by the response, which identifies socks as me, a real person (whether they are or not).

If you are not in collusion with the sock master, you are nevertheless being used by him. He has learned how to manipulate administrators, he finds vulnerabilities and abuses them.

One of his tricks is to take my comments and then place them repeatedly and abusively. It's worked before (and not just with me), so he keeps using the same trick.

Sorry for all the disruption.

The reaction to all this is utterly hilarious. If I were deliberately trolling, I couldn't do better! Watch! --37.157.244.220 (talk) 21:43, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Fun

That was fun. I posted, and reverted myself. Christopher, I can revert myself, you can't actually stop me, all you can do is reverse it (as you did) or rev-delete it, but I'd still see it and so could any sysop. But that's not the point. The point is that

• Abd created and authenticated The real deal and someone else created Dealer and Deal and RealDeal.
• Abd created Full Disclosure, and someone else created A full disclosure.
• Abd created Open honesty and someone else promptly created Openly honest and Openly honesty please.
• Other than impersonation socks, there is no sign that Abd has been extensively editing RationalWiki, but trolling him continued here and it is obvious why and who is angry and obsessed, who is vandalizing and putting up legal threats, and it's not Abd. If he wants to legally threaten someone, he will clearly and openly do so, he has long experience, posting under real names under conditions of high controversy since the 1980s, and won't use weird anonymous sock puppets.

Tim Farley is being attacked and Abd has no beef with him. Others are being threatened here, and not by him. The RW community is being played for fools and ... truth will out. --159.65.29.249 (talk) 02:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

The above is banned troll Abd ul-Rahman Lomax on another sock IP (list here). No one has impersonated him, he just creates dozens of socks, then tries to blame them onto innocent people.Debunking spiritualism (talk) 16:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

In regard to 159.65.94.188 this is the same proxy range as the IP above that Lomax is using, sometimes he talks in third-person and pretends to be an "ally" of Lomax in others he admits to being Lomax. In this edit 159.65.94.188 admits to being Lomax and says he can create "20,000" more. As for not attacking Tim Farley, this is a lie. Abd has attacked Farley on his blog describing him as an "opinionated blowhard, like too many fake skeptics." Debunking spiritualism (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Lomax calling somebody an opinionated blowhard is like a black hole calling the kettle black. Wilder^Bicycle 20:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Translations (from the Saloon bar)

Hi Christopher, I'm writing here because I can't answer on the Saloon bar page. I lack permissions. With respect to the translations: I'd like to translate some articles with a friend of mine to spanish.

rodri 20:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

oops, sorry, the saloon bar was semi-protected yesterday due to a persistent idiot. I'll unlock it now. Wilder^Bicycle 20:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

I’ve replied to this in a welcome message on Rodri’s talk page. Christopher (talk) 20:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I was actually signing with "rodri 21:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)", but I changed the default name in preferences. I'll try to fix it. rodri 21:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Christopher, I think I had better point out to you that the Spanish word for Spanish is "español" (or "castellano"). There is no g in the word. It looks to me like you might have confused it with the French equivalent word "espagnol". Spud (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

My mistake, I think I was confusing it with the French. Christopher (talk) 15:42, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Coop case

I have created a coop case on Abd Lomax [7] Debunking spiritualism (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Remembered My Password

I just remembered my password (after forgetting it for so long, also i was busy with my studies recently) just so you know Anonymous4thelolz was my alternate account as i forgot my password, should i just keep it or delete it? Also thanks for the info on that new troll guy. I'll keep an eye out to make sure i ban him next time he appears. (ノ°Д°）ノʇsədɯəꓕ nɹnɯıꓤ 17:53, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcone back! What you do with your alt accounts is up to you, but it would probably be best if you put something on your Anonymous4thelolz account’s userpage saying it’s a sock (logged in on Anonymous4thelolz, not Rimuru Tempest, to avoid confusion and accusations of lying). Christopher (talk) 17:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Alright, thx.--Řïmũŗû Ţèmpéŝţ 18:00, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

“Readymade is a liar” spam pages

Did I miss something interesting? Or was it just Lomax being Lomax? Wilder^Bicycle 21:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@Readymade I have no idea, apparently I'm either "terminally incompetent" (for enforcing the site's rules?) or "radically immature" (for using snark to vent at stupidity?). ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:21, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

An Abd sock spammed pages all containing the same text as Readymade is a troll and with similar titles. Christopher (talk) 10:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Sandbox

I was testing on making a bullshit historical article on Ugandan knuckles for the fun section.リムルテンペスト 19:20, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Rimuru Tempest Fun articles based on memes are discouraged. Even if you make it funny now, it won’t be funny later. Also, please bare in mind copyright restrictions. Christopher (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I understand, although I couldn't find a copyright on that picture anywhere. Speaking of which wouldn't that apply to the buttered cat, considering it's a meme?King Rimuru 19:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

The buttered cat page was created in 2009, a lot has changed. Christopher (talk) 20:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense.King Rimuru 20:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Strieber

Oh. First, I thought the October one was sandboxed - I never had the intention of posting it since it was basically just a copy and paste.

As for the one today, I heavily revised that article. Sure, it was based on the Wikipedia one, but language was changed in most paragraphs, whole sections were removed, and so on. As it was substantially different from the Wikipedia article, would there really be copyright issues? ^{— Unsigned, by: Hochichi667 / talk / contribs}

Adding the timestamp of this edit years after the fact so that this archives correctly, if archiving will still work with the outdated template.Christopher (talk) 18:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

New user

FYI, User:Bombshell is almost certainly the same person as User:Jenna Smith, User:Ice Maiden, and User:Athena. Athena was blocked on 31 March 2018 for harassment. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 20:08, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

About what https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:CheeseburgerFace said about the Trump Tower fire is pretty illegal

The government has to take threats seriously even if they're said in the moment. There's one thing you don't do,and thats wish death upon someone (even if they suck at being president) ShiningSwordofThoughts (talk) Also what's the webmaster's email? Forgot Trent was inactive oops^{— Unsigned, by: ShiningSwordofThoughts / talk / contribs}

ShiningSwordofThoughts: It's not legally a threat, ffs.—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 23:47, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

New template for you

{{tech pledge}}. —Kazitor, ^pending 01:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

AfD notice

A category you created has been nominated for deletion. —Kazitor 01:47, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

"Not really around much anymore"

That's uh debatable. — Oxyaena ^Harass 10:57, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I was curious what you thought of Epstein mainly. Christopher (talk) 11:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm inclined to believe it was suicide until more information comes out. Whether the suicide was his own motivation or someone convinced him to "do the right thing," remains to be seen. RoninMacbeth (talk) 14:35, 11 August 2019 (UTC)