User talk:FuzzyCatPotato/Archive6

This is an archive page, last updated 28 January 2018. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <7>

, (new)(back)

Archiving My Talk Page?

Could you archive the stuff on my talk page? I'm not sure I know how to. Thanks! RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Never click a fuzzy upload

Oh god, I know you're uploading these comics to deconstruct them, but god is it ever so mentally exhausting to click one and read actual nazi propoganda. I feel stained just by seeing them. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 18:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Trump's conservatism, where there are only white men, Jews, and SJWs. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 18:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree with ikanreed. Do we know anything about the writer(s)? Anything else, so the article isn't just page after page of cringe?RoninMacbeth (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately not. I've added information about the lack of information to the article. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 22:57, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Racialism page

Hi Fuzzy! It's probably not a good idea to have a WIP template on a cover story for more than a very short period. The one on the racialism page that I believe up put up has been there for a while. Can I remove it? What do you think? Bongolian (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure! The sections need more work. I've been too busy and too distracted. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 21:08, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Hipocrite isn't interested in improving RW.

Hello,

This is in reference to Laci Green's page.

If the statements are true, they should be mentioned and said that it's true.

If the statements are false, they should be mentioned and said that it's false.

In all the cases, the sentences are to be mentioned.

If the sentences are mentioned, and it's said that they are false, and whatever reasoning Hipocrite has is written down, RW will improve both in terms of quality and quantity.

Sadly, Hipocrite is not interested in that.

As an admin, I would request you to reverse his edits, protect the page, place Hipocrite in vandal bin, remove whatever user rights he has.

Thanks. Rational1 (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I've had some problems with this editor too - he's unilaterally reverting changes and improvements to articles crying "whitewash" even when they've been discussed with other editors and admins and it was agreed they were improvements, he seems to be more interested in crusading against specific "targets" he has beef with than improving the content a la RW's policies.--BrittanyPBone (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

See https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=Rationalwiki+no+rationality Rational1 (talk) 16:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

It's time

To unban AmazingSkeptic. 66.65.75.21 (talk) 14:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey

How do I turn this into a gif? nobs 22:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Bernie doesn't share food. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

No idea, but this will help: https://www.google.com/search?q=bernie+scares+trump+gif&tbm=isch FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 23:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Views of Pages

On wikipedia there are view counts for pages. Is there going to be something like that here? It would be interesting to see what is getting lots of views, as a public thing. Roo (talk) 15:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Already on my mental list for after we've overhauled the current MediaWiki software! Now, if only Trent wasn't so busy all the time... Reverend Black Percy (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Paravant

I was looking through the coop archives because I got bored, when I saw references to a "Paravant" as a sort of dictator. Who was he? I'm just curious. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

A good mod driven off by trolls. One troll, Fat Aardvark, has since then made it his "thing" to decry Paravant as a dictator and/or promise that he and Paravant are returning to RationalWiki to impose a new and glorious dictatorship. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 22:20, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Casualty of the I/P shitstorm? RoninMacbeth (talk) 22:24, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

IIRC, yeh. He's on Reddit, you can ask him. :) FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 22:47, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Prerequisites for Ninja

What exactly should a user with Ninja do? Just wondering what attributes are required for the job. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:37, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Ninja lets you edit "secretly", so ninjas have to be (a) trustworthy and (b) really spamming up recent changes. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 11:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Just a ponderance

When do you graduate college? And when you do, I think I owe you a positive reference for your amazingly organized work on the board. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 17:03, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

2020, the year of perfect hindsight and of Trump's possible re-election. :P

I'll make sure to list "Ikanreed" with job position "thinks I'm pretty chill". Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 21:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

No, really, "Secretary general of a small-sized non-profit" is probably a pretty good thing to have on your resume coming out of college, and I really think you deserve some credit for your diligence and organization this whole year. If you ever need someone who can vouch for your professionalism, I'm totally on board. I was thinking it'd be sooner than 2020 though. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 21:34, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

policy change

this user is requesting user fuzzycatpotato to nominate the policy of diverting all of saloon bar activity into rationalwiki:forum on the policy pollsFAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[1]] [[2]] 13:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

No one wants that to happen, just give up on it. Also could you step with the this user stuff? Christopher (talk) 13:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

No, thanks. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 15:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Help a junior RWian? :D

Hi, FCP!
Could I ask you for help with this? I have every source needed, I just need some help with coding it into the website so it'll look neat. Pleeeaaaaseeeee. :D Loc (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, I'd just do something like: <ref>Davidson, Keay, and Carl Sagan. [http://www.worldcat.org/title/carl-sagan-a-life/oclc/41580617 ''Carl Sagan: a life'']. Wiley. 1999.</ref>

Which would show up like this:

That seem about right? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 00:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Captchas

Some of us enjoy (a) being anonymous in some corners of the wikiverse and (b) guessing what the captcha typings will be (and seeing how resistant they are to mis-typings). (I leave arguing with oneself-as-another-IP and 'two persons using the same IP and arguing' (which apparently happened on Wikipedia) to others so inclined.) There are worse harmless amusements :) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Reverend Black Percy

this user asserts the fact that the user reverend black percy is causing trouble in saloon bar via removal of posts by this user and blocking this user.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[3]] [[4]] 14:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Since there's a topic with my name on it

Don't miss this. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Pssst

Check your privilege Skype :3 Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I owe you

For posting this. Shit like this is what I live for. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:14, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Here's the best I could do in return.

All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:18, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion

Friendly reminder that renaming an insanely long troll name and hiding the rename log clears up the recent changes log of the long name.—HamburgerPlate  (talk • stalk) 02:05, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? (Regarding Sargon of Akkad and JonTron)

Sargon of Akkad has been defending the alt-right since its inception. The alt-right are Nazis. Read this: https://blog.ap.org/behind-the-news/writing-about-the-alt-right He's basically David Duke for shy racists. The "Kekistani" (which in itself is unbelievably racist) flag is a slight modification of a Nazi flag. How much more evidence do you need? How can you even think he is not a misogynist? https://twitter.com/sargon_of_akkad/status/737004253013676032?lang=de Could it be that you support Sargon? TheRationalAtheist (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Friend, I added Kekistan (& its flag) and "I wouldn't even rape you" into the article. I'm hardly supportive of Sargon.

1: Unfortunately, "kekistan" is a meme, and it is difficult to know if its users are racists. "Kekistan", much like "Pepe", has been successfully used by white nationalists to normalize their rhetoric and their figureheads -- but not all "Pepe" users are white nashies, just as not all "Kekistan" users are white nashies. As such: the most we be certain of is that "Sargon is using white nationalist memes".

2: That Tweet seems misogynist (indeed, it's already present in the article). But one misogynist Tweet does not a misogynist make. To prove that someone is misogynistic, you need to show they have a pattern of behavior of misogyny -- eg, people have shown that Trump has repeatedly degraded and abused women -- not just occasional sexist behavior. Do you agree?

3: You didn't provide a citation for your "Sargon has been defending the alt-right since its inception" claim. Could you, please? FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 21:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I have been subscribed to this shitheel for three years to call him out on his bullshit. There is no reasoning with him. He is an unabashed racist, but he chooses his words carefully so unassuming people like you have a hard time pinning him down. Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIpcxy9M1pw He claims that black people have lower IQs and that they commit more crimes than whites. He has corroborated Jon Jafari's claim that even wealthy black people commit more crimes than non-affluent white people. He has recommended ramzpaul's (self-avowed White Nationalist) channel. He made a stream with Davis Aurini (which he deleted when Aurini was exposed as the full-on racist he is). He has harassed Anita Sarkeesian on many occasions. He claims the gender wage gap is a myth. He had many talks with noted misogynist and patriarchy-apologist Karen Straughan. What else do you need? TheRationalAtheist (talk) 22:06, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Black IQ: Here's the text form of Sargon's article on black crime. While Sargon makes sure to ignore any role that racism (usually from whites) has, the fundamental argument he makes -- blacks are "victims of [economic] circumstance" -- is not all that different from liberal arguments. Indeed, this vid got flak from white supremacists. TLDR: Blacks do have lower IQ/more crime, Sargon pins this primarily on economics, racists pin this on black genetics.

Do you have a cite for the Jafari claim support? (And a citation to refute it?)

Do you have a cite for ramzpaul recommendation?

Do you have a mirror for the Aurini stream?

Do you have cite(s) for Straughan?

I'm not saying that you're wrong -- I'm saying that your citations haven't met your claims. If you can prove that Sargon repeats racist or sexist shit on streams, that's worthy of addition. Or if you can accumulate a whole bunch of borderline-bigoted statements/Tweets, then you can add strong claims of bigotry. Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 23:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Sargon still says that blacks have lower IQs on average. What are you trying to pull here? So he's not a racist just because the open racists criticized his stance?

I was sure he recommended ramzpaul in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhqXZJktKb8 but after skimming through it, I cannot find the mention. Maybe it's in there off the cuff. Regardless, Sargon has regularly jovially interacted with him: https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/850729835295059969 https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/809385024231501824

I was surprised to find that the Aurini stream is up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHXOUxSaxkk I remember now what was actually pulled was Sargon's review of the early Aurini version of The Sarkeesian Effect.

Sargon defending Jon's "wealthy blacks" statement was on his now shut down "The New Memedia" channel. "(And a citation to refute it?)" Are you actually trying to defend Jon's statement? What's wrong with you?

Sargon talking with Karen Straughan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THXCRsUMYSA (Yes, I sat through the entire thing back then, it's absolutely disgusting.) TheRationalAtheist (talk) 01:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Here are even more sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_Rmbmc1BH8 in here he says he's not an MRA, but he would be if he weren't as lazy because they have a lot of valid concerns. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lDy14Lq2kM&t Here he talks with noted ex-feminist (how stupid can somebody be?) and misogynist Cassie Jaye. She is an absolutely disgusting bitch who made a documentary about MRAs where she dares to portray them in a positive light. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj8883DryKA Here he talks to Erin Pizzey who is also a rampant misogynist who blames women for domestic violence and says that men are also the victims of domestic violence, which is an outrageous derailment and akin to blaming Jewish bankers for the Holocaust. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNXWhFTUPE4 Here he meets with and talks to Milo Yiannopoulos who is a notorious racist, misogynist, homophobe, science-denialist, transphobe, pedophile, rape apologist, conservative, libertarian, Donald Trump supporter, serial harasser, white supremacist, Catholic, and overall scumbag who pretends to be gay to be able to spout his vile views. He also goes around campuses to indoctrinate youths. Sargon has made his bed. It's high time we crucify that bastard and expose him for the irredeemable misogynist and racist he truly is. TheRationalAtheist (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Go ahead, add the RamzPaul tweets & Milo stream to the "Reactionary fans" section. Don't overstate them. You might also want to expand the RamzPaul article, it's pretty weak -- but: show, not tell.

You can find mirrors of Memedia piles of shit videos on "The New Memedia Archive". Google it. You don't need a citation of refutation for Sargon's "wealthy black crime" defense. But without it, it just looks like we're including the quote because we disagree -- rather than the quote being proof that Sargon is full of shit. "Sargon thinks X, but science thinks not-X" is damn nice.

I suggest you make the Straughan article first, then show that Sargon actually approves of Straughan's views. Same for Erin Pizzey. Same for Cassie Jaye. Interesting that you describe Jaye as "an absolutely disgusting bitch" who "dares to portray [MRAs] in a positive light". Why did you choose this language?

For the "not an MRA, but he would be if he weren't as lazy" video, I suggest you find the exact quote & timestamp and add to the antifem section -- again: show, not tell.

Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 02:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Put THIS in your pipe and smoke it, commie!

Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

patriotism in liquid form Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 15:49, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

De-botting

You utter bounder! Aylesburymartin (talk) 10:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Fight me! FuzzyCatPotato of the Freeform Ninjas (talk/stalk) 15:49, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Coop Case

There's a coop case involving User:Men's Rights EXTREMIST. Is it worth responding to, or should I just close it? RoninMacbeth (talk) 05:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm Blocking Myself Until June 4.

In case I screw this block up, could you fix it? Thanks, RoninMacbeth (talk) 01:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Signatures

Hey! How do you get your signature to stay static with the #choose thing? I tried with mine, but they change every time I f5 a page and they all are the same phrase. Certainly not Anonymous user, whoever that is.^{[{{#rand:1|4}}][{{#rand:4|10}}]} 23:20, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

In preferences, setting signature to {{User:Username/sig|1}} causes each appearance of your signature on a page to make a new random choice. However, it does not make it static -- and my signature is not static.

Example:

Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk)

FuzzyCatPotato of the Cut-rate Yogurts (talk/stalk)

Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 13:27, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Ohh. Thanks! Certainly not Anonymous user, whoever that is.^{[{{#rand:1|4}}][{{#rand:4|10}}]} 21:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

If you set your sig to {{subst:expand:User:Koidevelopment/sig}} it should stay the same (I think). Christopher (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

subst-expanding would work -- it'd also leave behind a nasty, long custom sig. Lookin' at you, Koi. :P Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 22:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Archiving

How does collapsing stuff stop archiving? Is it only when there's subsections? Christopher (talk) 19:11, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Archiving scripts work based on dates in signatures. I've never tested if {{collapse}} breaks this, but since it's the Saloon it's best not to test. *shrug* It might not, no idea. 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 21:50, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Seeing as it (presumably) works based on the source code of a page not the wikitext, I don't see why {{collapse}} would change anything. I've tested in my userspace, we'll have to see if it archives normally. Christopher (talk) 15:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

We've collapsed stuff on the racialism talk page and it archived fine, I collapsed it. Christopher (talk) 14:35, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Titleblacklist vs Special:Abusefilter

It looks like you can prevent account creation with the abuse filter, if it works should it be implemented? If someone keeps trying to create an account eventually they'll make one and the abuse filter is less likely to catch their edits. Christopher (talk) 11:45, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Yep, we already do so. Check Filter 11. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 14:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Do we? I've never seen an account creation being stopped by the edit filter (except filter 5) and accounts with "hitler" or "faggot" in their name are created fairly often, they just can't edit. Christopher (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

FCP has a short schlong

Short and full of hairy mold. MoldyCatPotato (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

How scandalous. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 16:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Protecting the saloon bar

Given that there have been only three acts of vandalism (unless I'm missing one), is it really necessary? Christopher (talk) 16:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Easier to protect. IMO: Vandal tries to edit, gets stopped, is more likely to stop other vandalism. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 17:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not the Vandal

I support you in stopping this but I would never. Gaul Dernitt (talk) 05:43, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I get a page too, thanks. I don't know much about the influx of trolls, really. I'm against it. Thank you for your trust Gaul Dernitt (talk) 06:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Dip me in shit and call the Klan, I was mistaken! I tried to sort it out, sorry for bein dense. Sorry just wanted to share the racism. I don't mean black people are dense, I mean I am dense uh oh Gaul Dernitt (talk) 06:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I effed up in a real way just now. Gaul Dernitt (talk) 06:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Intercom message

"All edits made between about 10:00 UTC 26 June and about 06:00 UTC 28 June will be lost."

Actually, no edits will be lost. Edits to the migration test wiki (which nobody except me has edited) will be lost. The point of the read-only time is to avoid losing edits. -- Tim Starling (talk) 05:58, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I just edited the message in the database. -- Tim Starling (talk) 06:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

A-hemmm... ...Good thing I made that archive of your userpage then, eh? XD

Not so fortunate is the Saloon Bar, which needs to be rolled back all the way to... oldid=1837875.

Also, Christopher and Cheeseburgerface hotglued wheels to eachother (doesn't that hurt?) amongst other horseplay. ~ ♥ 10:39, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Gotcha. I based that on:

Then at http://rationalwiki.org/ you will see a wiki which, at first glance, appears to be RationalWiki running on MW 1.27. It is a bit of a facade, a lot of things will give blank page PHP errors, and search is not done yet. But if you log in, you will see that I have set everyone's password expiry to be in the past, so you can see how that will work.

It's a snapshot which I imported and then upgraded as a dry run. This database will be dropped and recreated, so any edits you make will be lost.

Apologies. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 13:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Ping ping ping

ping ping ping The Fuzz (talk) 01:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Jew deaths was 4-5 million in the 70s and keeps rising

NO IT HAS, stop making ignorant claims up go and see old docos, papers etc etc and see how it was 4-5 70s and now this page is 11 I have remembered each increased and enjoyed a good laff about it! So dont spout your ignorant false claim! Go and research the changing figure since you dont know that fact!--Whocares001 (talk) 06:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

You've asserted that numerous times and now demand that Fuzzy does his own research on the matter. Why not simply provide actual evidence? Christopher (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

articles and article suggestions being deleted

this user asserts the fact that articles and article suggestions created by this user are removed by other operators who continuously refuse to permit articles on topline crank sites whose articles are required early instead with willful ignorance of the summaries by this user. this user is requesting intervention on the matter as it is counter to the cause of rationalwiki.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[5]] [[6]] 13:07, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Are you referring to this? Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 14:51, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user User:FuzzyCatPotato, this user is referring to http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:To_do_list/Suggestions&diff=prev&oldid=1831904 http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:To_do_list/Suggestions&diff=prev&oldid=1812827 http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:To_do_list/Suggestions&diff=prev&oldid=1831623FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[7]] [[8]] 06:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Your article were voted down -- people didn't think they were worth making. Democracy at work. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 13:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to FuzzyCatPotato, this user asserts the fact that the articles suggested by this user and the recently created and deleted article healingwell.com are topline contenders in the crankshite department with their visitor participator amounts in the highs and thus necessitating emergency creation and research of the articles with bypass of all referendum.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[9]] [[10]] 04:58, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I've made you sysop. Feel free to recreate any articles you think are worth RationalWiki treatment. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 11:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user FuzzyCatPotato, this user is requesting help regarding development of http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Policy_poll as this user does not possess the knowledge on making the page similar to article suggestions with poll options.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[11]] [[12]] 17:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I think the best step would be to ask at the saloon bar if anyone can help out. Bicycle^wheel 17:55, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

this user is requesting user @FuzzyCatPotato to notice the pings in the talkpage of this user and respond accordingly to the pings.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[13]] [[14]] 07:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Why are you so obsessed with what Fuzzy thinks? As a member of the site and a mod his opinions are important but you've repeatedly called him the supreme commander of RationalWiki, which he isn't. Christopher (talk) 07:23, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Fat Aardvark

Can we permaban him now? RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Noooo I'll be good :( --Poggle teh lessAR (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Are you sure? Well, if you promise, then I have no problem with you here. But if you start acting up...well let's just say I won't object to whatever Fuzzy does with you. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

A step in the right direction would be admitting your "banter" isn't funny. Christopher (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank You

For the demotion. Or parallel-motion. Really, whatever ninja is, thank you. Side note, you were also the one who demoted me to sysop. Also I promise to use my powers for good. RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Make us proud, son! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

So...how do the bots work again? The WikiTech article seems to state that bots are obsolete. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Copied from YMB:

If you want to make a bot, make a new account (see Special:CreateAccount, no need to log out) and ask a tech to add bot to the account. See Manual:Pywikibot for PWB installation/information. See Archivist (running archivebot.py) and The Fuzz (running add_text.py or replace.py) for the type of edits that bots can do.

If you're not interested in PWB (or don't know Python) but still want bot edits and have basic coding skills (any language), you can use the api.

Reply:

They aren't deprecated -- I'm not sure what article you're looking at.

How bots work (software-wise):

1: Download Python (I use 2.7)

2: Download PyWikiBot (see Manual:Pywikibot above)

3: Run the initializer scripts (setup.py, generate_family_files.py, generate_user_files.py, etc).

4: Do whatever you want with the bot.

How bots work (under the hood):

They make calls to the API. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 11:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the assist! Mephisto should be up and running within two weeks at most. RoninMacbeth (talk) 22:01, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Snooping About

I was just wondering if you saw the links I posted about CNN in the talk page.--Ultimate Slime 00:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Brisson

That rewrite was desperately needed and my ability leaves something to be desired. Thanks!--Spoony (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks all round. FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 23:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello

What is your opinion on your pet robot? -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 20:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

He's a good boy. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 22:04, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Your pet is the beginning of robots takin' ur jerbs! -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 23:23, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I like to think so. FuzzyCatPotato of the Absorbent Vestibules (talk/stalk) 23:24, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Sealand

I, Bigljbigl, declare myself the new ruler of Sealand. Why? Because I said so. The new government is shown here.

Nvm, I destroyed it. Fuck you Bates. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 19:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Deletion

How do we delete entries on the User Creation log? Is that no longer allowed on the new software? RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:35, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Not sure, haven't checked. Any reason why? Renaming might do the trick. Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 04:54, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Couple of vandals were harassing LeftyGreenMario. Check the logs, you'll see. In the past, we deleted some of Grawp's socks from the logs, so do we do that this time? RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Unless the username is dox, deleting or renaming isn't worth it. Let the insults roll off. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 05:26, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Renaming is easy, and fun. If someone scrawls on my front wall, I don't wait for the rain to wash it off. Bicycle^wheel 17:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

@Bicycle Wheel eh, but leaving the original username makes "problematic username" in block logs make sense. disagree? FuzzyCatPotato of the Pocket-sized Gyroscopes (talk/stalk) 17:24, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

FFS, do your job instead of making up stupid crap like making deleted pages visible. Bicycle^wheel 17:39, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

@Bicycle Wheel Which usernames do you find problematic? The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 17:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Taking a wild guess here, maybe this guy? Christopher (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Dunno if I got this link right

...but would you mind examining the 12-something BoN edits to the Racialism page? Thanks in advance! All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Seems alright. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 17:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Appreciated. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:14, 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) 06:44, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

the issue of block and smear campaign by user reverend black percy

this user pings users @FuzzyCatPotato, Reverend Black Percy, Christopher, RoninMacbeth, and Spoony to bring attention to the fact that this user was testing the sysop systems and this user notes the fact and not opinion that the user reverend black percy acted in bad faith in total ratio in that the user did not bother to ask this user the reason for the removal and immediate reinstatement of the privileges toward user reverend black percy by this user and the user proceeded to block this user with blocked access to own talkpage and proceeded to propagate the lie that this user is attempting to revoke the rights of user reverend black percy,as shown in links http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=FAMAS&page=User%3AReverend+Black+Percy&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&subtype=rights http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:RoninMacbeth#Oh.2C_my_sweet_summer.27s_child http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Reverend_Black_Percy#vandal_binning_without_warning which this user has proven to be a lie by stating that this user was testing the options and thus now raises the question of what this puts the image of the user reverend black percy into. this user is demanding an apology from user reverend black percy for said smear campaign with restoration of the privileges of this user, additionally stating that the apologies for said smear campaign and blocking taking priority over the restoration.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[15]] [[16]] 11:40, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

In other news, ping works again! Christopher (talk) 11:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll just quote myself:

I'm a firm believer in rehabilitation (with a demonstrable will to cooperate being its first step). I also know relentless trolling when I see it. Between these two facts, FAMAS will act to decide his own future for himself. Nobody could — nor has the right to — stop him from doing so. We can only wait and watch him force our hands, regardless of which direction he choses for them (by his own conduct).

So let it be written; so let it be done. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

"this user was testing the sysop systems" doesn't that translate to "I plead guilty of trolling"? - David Gerard (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @David Gerard, this user asserts the fact and puts out the additional enquiry as to what part of testing an option counts as trolling, with emphasis on the fact of the incident that this user displayed it by reinstating the removed privileges as shown in the user rights change log, which was also asserted by user @RoninMacbethFAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[17]] [[18]] 12:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Why not just de-sysop yourself then? You can always get it back. Chris and I have both done it because we're curious and it was given back. Fareeha A (talk) 12:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @Fareeha A, this user asserts the fact that this user is currently not a sysop and this user asserts the opinion of this user that apologies from users @Reverend Black Percy and David Gerard takes priority above all for said smear campaign with the continuous accusation of "trolling by user FAMAS" and this user points out all above links with the addendum that the vandal bin prevents this user from replying in time with additional hampering of the recaptcha system which has problems within the nation this user is currently at.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[19]] [[20]] 12:47, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

While blocking talkpages (a function intended only for when there is reason to believe you're blocking a doxxer) is a bad habit a number of veterans here need to shake, you were very clearly taking away every privilege you could, as a heat-of-the-moment decision. Even with zero context that would still stretch credulity; why couldn't you just test it on a clearly ancient abandoned account, or try sysopping someone you genuinely believe deserves the sys-mop? And, I shouldn't have to say this (and you probably even know it), but

which this user has proven to be a lie by stating that this user was testing the options

is possibly the most farcically far-fetched notion of legal system methods of determining intent there is.

When I was watching your talk page's byte count really shoot up over this "this user" user stuff, I kinda wanted to hop in on the "Aww, don't make fun of him!" side, but how well I'm able to overcome my shyness...varies. However, between the overall quality of your contributions and now your fight with probably one of the most mild-mannered people on the site (certainly the nicest person active enough to have been made a moderator), I have lost all sympathy for you.

So long and thanks for all the fish in barrels, FAMAS, but I think I'll stick to the kalashnikov for my home Pink Pistol needs. ~ ♥ 13:07, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

this user enquires to users @FuzzyCatPotato and RoninMacbeth as to whether such desperate attempts in falsely accusing this user as shown by users Love, Reverend Black Percy and David Gerard should be permitted, said attempts also indicative of bad faith of levels that are to be decided by the operators that take privilege above all other users, should be considered. this user is awaiting reply.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[21]] [[22]] 13:26, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Translation: "Could the two remaining people I haven't run through the patience of like a roll of toiletpaper please dispose of those I have?" I don't have much context on what triggered you to try to de-power Reverend, but if you genuinely believe "which this user has proven to be a lie by stating [after the fact] that this user was testing the options" is sufficient evidence of intent, ...then maybe an atheist activism site isn't for you. ~ ♥ 14:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@FAMAS Fareeha meant, I think, that you should have de-sysop'd yourself while you still had it, not de-sysop'd RBP. Besides, I'm going to side with RBP on this one. I may de-bin you for the sake of skipping captchas, but don't get any ideas. And I probably won't, given the current attitude towards you. Best of luck to you clearing your name or whatever. Koi "the spelling's on porpose!" development 13:48, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @Love, this user asserts the fact that the user love has the burden of proof to prove that the user is correct and is not performing the argument by assertion by the self while accusing the defendant of it, which falls apart even moreso upon looking at the time of the said testing of the option and the fact that this user was not enquired of the reason for doing so and instead was given full block with no time to defend.the user love is attempting desperately to implicate this user of said accusations and now with inability to prove that this user did as user love claimed, is resorting to logical fallcy linking while said fallacies would apply to user love.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[23]] [[24]] 14:46, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

FAMAS you're hurting my head English is my second language.. Anyway, don't shift the burden of proof onto Love. It's a fallacy. It's your job to prove your intent, not his or her's. Fareeha A (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @Fareeha A, this user asserts the fact that the burden of proof is on initial claimer and this user points to the links given above displaying the initial claimers and their stated claims which they made while this user was full blocked as in talk page block and this user has stated during an interim unblock time that this user performed a test of the option as this user wanted to see how the option appears as this user never was anything more privileged than the average user up until the incident of this user being sysopped. this user now enquires to all as to what proof the userbase possesses to show that this user performed a heat of the moment depowering of user reverend black percy and the opposite of that claim which is made by this user is a false data.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[25]] [[26]] 15:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

You are single-handedly making me reconsider my position on the death penalty. Nog Bogmire (talk) 15:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

.. let me go read all the old context then. I thought you were claiming innocence so it's up to you to give proof, but if someone claimed something before you did.. Fareeha A (talk) 15:27, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@FAMAS How come you write normally in articles but on talk pages you sound like this? Christopher (talk) 15:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@FAMAS This is the topic-starting edit you made just before "testing" your guns out on Poor O'l Percy, and while the topic was in fact started a single minute prior to the tempest-in-a-teacup coup attempt, the comment therein (or "post", if you will) where you claimed it was just a joke was clearly a day late and a dollar short. (Two days, actually.) And we're still not clear on which of these rather understandable vandalbinnings it was that you noticed and got so upset about. ~ ♥ 17:08, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Why me?

What have I done to deserve this wretched fate? FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 16:08, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

It's one of the downsides of being the Supreme Commander of RationalWiki. Christopher (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to users @FuzzyCatPotato and Christopher, this user asserts the fact that fuzzycatpotato is currently active and possesses the authority to bypass all other operators in every policymaking until a modification is made in the command system, thus this user invokes user fuzzycatpotato in all matters of policy dispute. this user asserts the fact that in the event of a change in the command structure, this user will have to invoke the new commanders in the said new command structure.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[27]] [[28]] 16:22, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

This user asserts that RationalWiki's command structure is purposefully non-hierarchial and no user can "bypass all other operators". This user requests that user FAMAS stop trying to brownnose person's with increased rights. Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 16:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

This user asserts that the above is textbook HCM

This user requests that:

1. Users who are not FAMAS cease claiming that FAMAS's desysopping of user Reverend Black Percy was significant in any way. This user asserts that it didn't mean shit, since RBP is a damn mod. This user asserts that this is internet fucking drama. This user requests that other users please take a walk outside and contextualize the utter meaninglessness of the "desysopping scandal".
2. Users who are FAMAS cease victimizing themselves. This user requests that FAMAS stop pinging lists of users in an attempt to gain sympathy. This user requests that FAMAS spend their valuable time looking at the TODO list instead of user talk pages.

This user requests that all users walk back from the issue and return with a "blank slate". This user requests that all other users act as if this didn't happen and wasn't important in any way -- the latter of which this user asserts to be true beyond question. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 16:28, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

in reply to user @FuzzyCatPotato, this user asserts the fact that this user obeys the verdict provided by user fuzzycatpotato as the user is the highest authority within this wiki, as per the title supreme commander. this user is requesting a return of the sysop privileges of this userFAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[29]] [[30]] 16:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

This user politely reasserts that no such title exists. This user less politely asserts that user FAMAS totally missed the point of the above. This user asserts that sysop powers aren't necessary to write a good article -- which this user asserts will show that user FAMAS isn't just trolling. FuzzyCatPotato of the Erudite Seaweeds (talk/stalk) 16:36, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

This user vows that the next person who says "this user" will be killed with pliers. Nog Bogmire (talk) 16:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

What

This user inquires as to what the actual fuck is going on, because he doesn't care enough about desysop-gate to be in the loop, yet was still pinged and finds the conversation he was gifted with to be convoluted.--Spoony (talk) 19:48, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

The Reverend vandal binned FAMAS, he unbinned himself and desysopped then resysopped Percy, Percy then blocked FAMAS, Fuzzy unblocked him and Percy blocked him again. After FAMAS' block expired he started this section on Fuzzy's talk page (due to Fuzzy being the supreme commander of RationalWiki). Christopher (talk) 19:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

So er, he hasn't been perma-blocked yet? Why? I've seen his antics. FCP insists he's a good-faith user, but his actions tell me otherwise. I know perma-blocking is a huge thing to do, but it seems everything we do to control FAMAS is growing more counterproductive.--Spoony (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

His "this user" stuff is bollocks, he can write perfectly good English in articles. Christopher (talk) 21:07, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Dons Regular User Hat

@FAMASThis user would like to thank FAMAS for pinging him in an attempt to resolve the issue. He would like to point out, however, that pinging only lets me know something is happening WHILE ACTUALLY READING THE WIKI, which this user is not constantly doing. If you, FAMAS, need to let me know something, then put a message on my talk page. Secondly, I think that this entire issue is a farce, and everyone involved needs to calm down. Fuzzy has enough to deal with without drama constantly unfolding on his talkpage. Thirdly, I would like to propose that FAMAS be unblocked immediately, but promoted until he actually makes a contribution to the wiki outside of "wikiphilosophies." Is this acceptable? RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

That's what's happened, he has been demoted to autopatrolled and debinned. Christopher (talk) 08:14, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Then what the hell is still the problem? RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

There isn't one, just FAMAS being FAMAS. Christopher (talk) 16:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Dons can't be arsed logging in hat

Time to take this whole sorry saga to the chicken coop, I think. 85.234.65.51 (talk) (bloody Bicycle Wheel again) 14:04, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

That makes three votes in favor of breaking the coop's yearly virginity (FCP's, mine, and now Bicycle On Wheels'), and one vote against (Christopher's). Of perhaps understated importance is my tendency to summarize debates I decide to help work towards a conclusion. ~ ♥ 14:57, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

That's four votes for taking it to the coop actually, I naively thought it had died down. Christopher (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Reminder to self: Create a "Satanic Panic" navsidebar

Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 20:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Did you know the satanic panic — yes, the same US-brand satanic panic — made it all the way to Sweden? It got quite some coverage here in the early/mid 90's, although it ultimately gained far less traction here (largely due to the fact that we simply have fewer credulous Christians per capita). Anything you guys are up to, we do our own little version of — typically with a slight 'cultural latency', as it were. It's almost cute; Sweden has a ridiculously overt fascination with everything American — even the crazier stuff you guys routinely get up to. I'm obviously no exception in that regard, btw. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 23:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

On deck, sonny?

I need an adult! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:39, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

See also. @Christopher (since Christopher had popped in earlier). Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

To soon?

Good move locking the page. Also, I wrote him/her this. Just FYI. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:07, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Request to delete articles

• Human Phenotypes - this website has been deleted for years and is not notable.
• Human Varieties - the owner of this blog has his own article (John Fuerst), and so doesn't need another.
• Bonesandbehaviours - website has been deleted for years, not notable (it only had like 5 members).
• Realhistoryww - non-notable website owned by an black supremacist; article is a stub.
• Paul Marc Washington - non-notable black supremacist; stub article.
• Egyptsearch - non-notable Afrocentric/black supremacist forum that is mostly inactive.
• Hbdchick - non-notable (a mere blogger with few hits), the similar JayMan article was deleted so should this.

All the above are also poorly sourced (if include any sources) like a complaint of the JayMan article (hence its deletion).86.14.2.77 (talk) 21:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

@FCP Went through the first article in the above list and tried making it marginally less bad. These articles all seem missional (obviously) and should not be deleted — however, the more 'doxxy' portions of them (i.e. which editorially reek of ED) should obviously be purged. That, and the basic writing is just pretty ass on many of these articles (i.e. a noticable tune-up isn't exactly hard to do). Suggest we 'pass over' and adress all of these in the vein of how I did Human Phenotypes? All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree with FCP. I used to be on the notability bandwagon, but thanks to Essay:Why notability is stupid and I hate it, I have come around to the anti-notability school. It's part of what sets us apart from WP. Bongolian (talk) 20:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello

If sysops are janitors, then what are mods? —Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 05:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Janitors with bigger mops + a mysterious scar that scares the schoolchildren. FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 11:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Survey

Thanks for including me among those august few that you asked about the survey.

The controversy caused by the last one came as a great surprise to me and I think it was totally out of all proportion. Mind you, I doubt that the same thing would happen again this time.

All I can say is that the survey has my wholehearted support. Spud (talk) 14:38, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

So they say the political questions are too binary, huh? Perhaps I see the world too much in black and white and not enough in shades of grey.

Well here's a suggestion. Maybe you could have an option that's, "I have to respond to that question in a different way because..." or "I'm not going to answer that question because..." and then a box to write the answer in. Spud (talk)

I Promised Fat Aardvark...

That if he misbehaved, I would erase all evidence that he was ever here. Can I do it? Please? RoninMacbeth (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Why? I'd ask the saloon bar. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 15:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@RoninMacbeth Erasing all evidence of someone's existence is something Conservapedia does, don't. Christopher (talk) 15:56, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Don't promise things that require the consent of others. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 16:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

OK. It worked better as a bluff anyway. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Your Essay

I commented on your political essay. I hope you like what I have to say... RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

You should be ashamed of what you are doing

Christopher (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Why can't I edit the saloon bar?

This discussion was moved to RW:TECH.

Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 21:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Cannot edit my talk page

Thanks for the semi-protect to guard against my stalker(s). However, I too am unable to edit it now. I don't need to make any changes, so it's not an issue right now, but if more people ask questions, I might want to edit it in the future. --EmilOWK (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

@EmilOWK Try again now, that post you just made was your tenth edit and you need ten edits (and an account over a certain age) to edit your talk. Christopher (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

I see. Yes it works now. Thanks. --EmilOWK (talk) 10:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Nobody is "stalking" you dummy. Your article was inactive for well over a year. In all that time I paid virtually no attention to you, only mentioning you once when I saw you doxed OkCupid profile data for 70000 users. You have a history of doxing: at Open Psych you doxed my IP after I simply criticized your pseudo-journals; someone else while I was there was also banned and doxed. You can hardly complain of digital "stalking" since that's exactly what you do. You're now also mentioning my real name on your twitter and with smears of mental illness. What a pleasant guy (*sarcasm*). I'm also not an "SJW". You got added to RW because you support pseudo-science. You're also a massive pseudo-intellectual: your only qualification is a BA in linguistics, but you call yourself a "polymath scientist".86.14.2.77 (talk) 13:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

The Edit I Did

I know most YEC think that the earth and the universe are that old but there are those that think that the universe is old but the earth is young, I have not seen anything go into detail or mention much on it.--(ノ°Д°）ノʇsədɯəꓕ nɹnɯıꓤ 18:57, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Changing AFD template

Proposing a change to the AFD template to encourage fixing.—HamburgerPlate  (talk • stalk) 18:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

SPLC and finances

Why did you revert my edit? --101.181.57.232 (talk) 03:50, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1) It wasn't FuzzyCatPotato who reverted your edit, it was BuckledDegree. 2) The place for this type of discussion should be on the relevant page's talk page, in this case here:[31] 3) The reference you cited was from from an explicitly conservative news outlet, possibly with an axe to grind. You should at least seek a neutral source for comparison, such as Charity Navigator.[32] Bongolian (talk) 05:49, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

My ideas for fundraising adverts

Here's one

Frankie says, "Donate some money to RationalWiki NOW or burn in Hell for all eternity!"

Spud (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Here's another

We've got 200 white mice. We will step on one on the hour every hour until YOU make a donation to our fundraiser. Give us some money now or the mice start dying!

Spud (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

This could work, if only "mice" was changed to some sort of animal that RatWiks actually value... Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 16:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

We've got 200 long-eared jerboas. We will put one in the blender on the hour every hour until YOU make a donation to our fundraiser. Give us some money now or the beasties start dying!

Spud (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Heresy! Christopher (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

And here's a very slightly modified version of my original idea

Make a donation to our fundraiser and Ceiling Cat promises not to watch while you play with your private parts for the next six months.

Spud (talk) 13:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Can a cat be both fuzzy and potato?

The winner of this year's IgNobel Prize in Physics was for the paper, "Can a Cat Be Both a Solid and a Liquid?" [33] Bongolian (talk) 04:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but it would be because of all the mold growing on it. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 22:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Modern translation in annotated Koran

Hi Cat. I started updating some of the surahs with a modern translation and Christopher reverted me asking for consensus about it, which was confusing. I'm not quite sure how to go about getting consensus on a project with no main page and on a project were there are only two active users participating in it. You can see my talkpage for his comments and my reply. So...how would I go about seeing what the "consensus" is on the matter? ShabiDOO 07:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Discord

Shouldn't the Discord logo be our logo? —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 20:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I am here to argue in favor of using the second option as our logo (the purple one with the brain in a circle). The goat is an inside joke, and should not be our logo as a result. The Discord logo should resemble the official logo. However, due to aesthetic purposes, the second one would look best as the logo. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 02:38, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Discord Moderators

The DiamondDisc1 on Discord is me. Please make me a moderator :)-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Promotion

How do I promote Discordians to sysop? —Totally Anonymous user and not an imposter (totally Anonymous user's talk page/totally Anonymous user's contribs) 22:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Bob Marley

He's been added to Dumpster Dive, but the AfD vote is 4:1 in favor of deletion. Instructions? RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:47, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Delet FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 14:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Sysop Plz

I just reverted an obvious troll and online stalker, but I am unable to block the IP address quickly before the person can strike again, and I can't hide the malicious edit in question. Me being on sysoprevoke is the reason for this. Could this 1: be lifted or 2: be justified? If it's because of some past action I shouldn't do, I'd at least like to be reminded of it because I've forgotten at this point. Thanks, PB (talk) 00:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

And again! See what I mean? PBFЯЗЭSPДCЗ (talk) 00:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

End this madness. PBfreespace (talk) 01:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

On My Article Reactionary Justice Warriors

Yes but Reactionary Justice Warriors is more appropriate since they prefer the Status Quo Ante Bellum. They don't just want the Status Quo, they want to go further back, the Status Quo Ante Bellum. Also, you know this is true, you see these Reactionary Justice Warriors everywhere, YouTube Channels, YouTube comments, internet forums, Twitter, Facebook etc. trying to be as offensive as possible which is often instructed by their fellow "Alt-Righters" on 4chan. To try and offend and shock people by commenting with nothing but racist bigoted, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic rhetoric in an attempt to terrorize people. They're reactionaries fighting for reactionary ideals.

Come on, you know this is true, let's just put it out there and some other people like you can start adding more to my article to expand it so it won't be so small.

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 also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. —ClickerClock (talk) 05:48, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Laird Shaw harassment

Hi Fuzzy, could you have a look at this? Sorry if this is not the right way to proceed. I don't know the exact workings of of RW. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Laird_Shaw#Note:_likely_Oliver_Smith_random_harassment --EmilOWK (talk) 15:54, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Fuzzy, thanks for stopping by the talk page on my article to respond to Emil's comments. I have responded in turn (twice), and would appreciate you checking in again. In summary: the article contains numerous falsehoods, and I would like it deleted, but if you are unwilling to do that, then please at least correct the falsehoods. Laird (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi again, Fuzzy. I took you up on your offer to remove the unsourced claims from the article on me. My edits were reverted. I don't want to get into an edit war. Could you please intervene? Thanks. Laird (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello? Laird (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Fuzzy, I've listed the false claims on the article's talk page. What's the next step in having them corrected? Laird (talk) 06:32, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

I hate to keep on bothering you, but the troll who created the article on me has reverted some of the changes you made, in particular the deletion of the claim that I am a "pseudoscience promoter". Could you please deal with this individual's bad-faith edits? I also added something to the talk page a few days that I'd appreciate you looking at. Cheers Fuzzy. Laird (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

P.S. This troll has also taken it upon himself to add an introduction to the "Views" part of the article accusing me of "crank magnetism" amongst other things. Could you see to deleting this section, please? Laird (talk) 02:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Fuzzy? Laird (talk) 08:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your small edit. What about the newly added introduction to the "Views" part of the article though? This is unjustified and clearly intended to do my reputation harm. On this matter, why did you revert (delete) the very apposite comments by 66.87.30.66? Laird (talk) 06:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

And what about the claim in the introduction that "belief in psi and the paranormal [are] both [...] pseudoscientific beliefs"? This is simply false: such beliefs can be formed on the basis of either personal experience or legitimate scientific study. Laird (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

You support intelligent design, claim demons influence humans, that mediumship is real, that plants are conscious, that Uri Geller has psychic powers etc. If this isn't crank magnetism I don't know what is. Pretty much any crazy pseudo-science you support. The bad faith and trolling is you coming here denying the crackpottery you believe is pseudo-science.MrOrganic (talk) 03:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Im new to the whole programming thing

and Im scared to get a github account. I have no idea what im doing. —ClickerClock (talk) 09:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC) If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{ping|ClickerClock}} to your message, and signing it.

@ClickerClock: Get one. Even if you don't contribute to anything (like, ever) having it would be good to get around with. Zero ^{(talk - contributions)} 17:09, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@ClickerClock What are you scared of? It's a pretty benign place. The only things made public are: Your username, and your email. (So just create a fake email that redirects to your main one; see [34]). Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 17:25, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

I didn't get a notification for these. Ok, Im making a github account. —ClickerClock (talk) 00:56, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I got one and I learning how to git. Whatever git is. —ClickerClock (talk) 01:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Dammit fuzzy

That rewrite of the section you called "argumentum ad molyneux" is lame and boring! I don't want to revert your other changes, but you've managed to avoid showing just how painfully bad he is at argumentation in the name of being more vague. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 14:37, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ikanreed I thought what you wrote wasn't clear enough about its criticisms; if you disagree, rv me. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 16

39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

what you wrote wasn't clear. I pointed to a specific example of his idiocy describing exactly the mistake. You just fuzzed into a vague allegation that he's bad at logic. Calling "All X are Y and Z is an X therefor Z is Y" logically equal to "All X are Y and Z is a Y therefor Z is an X" is obviously preposterous and he did it as an introduction to logical fallcies. It's a clear cut example of him not knowing a goddamn thing about logic. Whereas you just said "He don't know thing". I dunno; it might be better to just wholesale include the criticism from the cited article, so it's more explicit, but copyvio. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 17:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ikanreed

1: TBH it might be more pithy (and therefore better) to just have a snippy little bit like "Stefan Molyneux, creator of the phrase, wrote a book about logic that logicians don't understand." instead of explaining it

2: That section isn't in the introduction. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 17:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

emil kirkegaard and john fuerst

there's no longer a need for the Emil Kirkegaard or John Fuerst pages since they are now covered on https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/OpenPsych_pseudojournals and I will be writing about them there Asgardian (talk) 15:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Their pages seem fine as standalones. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 17:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Awesome Award

🧠Rationalwiki

Awesome Award

for FuzzyCatPotato/Archive6

Reason: being awesome

Thanks for all the writing articles you do + fixing tech issues. —ClickerClock (talk) 02:51, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Use the preview button.

—ClickerClock (talk) 03:59, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

no u αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 04:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

LOL. Tu quoque. —ClickerClock (talk) 04:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

You ghosted on me

[35] —ClickerClock (talk) 08:33, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

is being mod at this wiki

like babysitting a bunch of toddlers ?? —ClickerClock (talk) 04:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Checking to see if ping is broken again

Did you get my ping at tech support? Christopher (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Nope. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 15:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You've been acting odd

Most of your edits since this one have been adding quotes by some Twitter user called "wint" and the rest have been just weird. This still the same person? (Not really much point in me asking this because you'd answer "yes" either way). Christopher (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

it's wint'o'clock Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 20:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Here's his WP page: Dril. As much as I appreciate surreal comedy, Fuzzy, there's a time and place. RoninMacbeth (talk) 20:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

it's always dril'o'clock and it's always wint'o'place FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 21:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Tuberosi across the species

See [36]! Bongolian (talk) 04:11, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@Bongolian That's honestly the funniest thing I've seen in months. FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 15:12, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Glad you enjoyed it! Bongolian (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Random thought

Spoiler: This probably isn't well thought out. Lately, activity Iron Chariots Wiki seems to have trailed off quite a bit. Do you think it may be feasible and mutually beneficial to merge Iron Chariots into RW (as a long term project, like how RW has merged with EvoWiki)? Asking you for your thoughts since you are a board member and a main contributor to Project:EvoWiki. ^t 09:58, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@Joaquín Martínez Thanks for letting me know. I'll ask the Saloon Bar -- and write a bot to copy all the pages in case they go down. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 13:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. :) ^t 13:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Joaquín Martínez Worryingly, Psiram appears to have gone the same way. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 14:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Any updates? ^t 11:14, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for protecting my talk page against a lifeless troll the other day. Nerd (talk) 23:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Nerd Of course! Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 00:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

A question about protection

I can't find any advice about when it is permissible to protect a page. The case I am considering is when a non-sysop writes aggressively unsympathetic text attacking the subject of an article and reverts efforts to moderate the tone of the article. Is it overstepping to make moderate edits and protect the page?Ariel31459 (talk) 19:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Why fuzz?

Why are you always after seeing what various parts of the internet think about rationalwiki? Like I get chasing after media mentions and academic citations, and serious and thoughtful criticism, but we're not going to learn anything by seeing that reddit and 4chan have deeply ingrained toxic ideologies that results in negative reactions to the purpose and current state of this wiki. You might as well go to kiwi farms and see which random users they've decided to elevate to the ones who control everything and therefor deserve their special brand of "investigation". ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 22:03, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ikanreed

SERIOUS ANSWER: Most political discourse isn't academic. RW's credibility has almost nothing to do with how Slate talks about us -- and everything to do with Twitter users whining about us. In particular, 4chan wields excessive control over Twitter & Reddit and thus over political discussion. Idiotic far-right ramblings matter.

CORRECT ANSWER: watching people make a fool of themselves is A+ entertainment oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 22:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

clogosphere

There's been several reverting of edits by myself and grammar and chris on the clogosphere. What is your view on it all?--Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 04:48, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I can't really follow it, but I suggest a stop to the edit wars over old posts -- all parties should stop it going forward. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk)

They are calling Ian alt right and he is not. I suppose a minimalistic approach would be best. --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 05:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mr1.136.108.2 Ian Miles Cheong took a hard-right turn in the last couple of years. His opinions now have such substantial overlap with other alt-righters, and his tweets are sufficiently popular with the same crowd that fuels them, that to claim he isn't alt-right is to make a distinction without a difference. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 06:43, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

so that people in the alt right find some of his tweets agreeable makes him alt right? No. Your saying he is guilty by association, and not his association with them, but their what, liking of his tweets? What a crock of shit. Get back to me when you have something substantial on this topic. --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 02:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

though I am curious as to these nefarious tweets are. Show me five of them, which will be easy for you to do, since you have done your research into this topic. --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 02:55, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Nope. I'm a working adult with limited free time, which I spend as I choose. I'm not your research monkey. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

it would not be rational of me to believe your unproven assertion then. The "alt right crankery" edit will be reverted per it not being verified.--Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Tweets overall aren't insane, at least the later ones (as of 12/11/17), but some are questionable. It seems like Cheong is a fan of DANGEROUS, the same site that seems to sponsor "Milo" which sounds like Milo Yiannopoulos to me. Some examples. Oh, wait, he WRITES for DANGEROUS. And his Twitter profile: "Writes about entertainment, video games, politics and culture for DANGEROUS. Also @dailycaller. Previously seen on @heatstreet, @thesun." His resume is lookin'-a good-a!

• This re-tweet: "Another day, another male feminist exposed." And one disgusting "joke" about prison rape among the comments.
• And this re-tweet: Blah blah blah libertarian bullshit personal responsibility: the utterly naive "it's not the game developers' faults, it's the parents for giving credit cards to children". If it were only that simple. DANGEROUS disregards the whole "pay to win with lootboxes" part of why government is stepping in. But no, "Problem is if you're a fan of the left, you're not supposed to be responsible for anything, the government is."
• This tweet citing DANGEROUS site. The article posts a source from New York Post, which everyone knows is quality journalism. Oh, oh, this article is written by him. This explains everything. The more I look at DANGEROUS, the more skeptical I get of its honesty. Oh, look, DANGEROUS has "The MILO Show Podcast", that stinks more than a closet of roadkill. One comment is "The leftists really need to check their manhood." Again, what the hell is with people's obsession with masculinity?
• This tweet again cites DANGEROUS. The headline is "British Muslim Political Candidate Denied ISIS Exists, Stating ‘People Die Every Day’". Funnily enough, I can't find enough information for the story outside of low-quality sources, Daily Fail and Metro (which is a branch of the Daily Fail). If your only other sources of your news is a Daily Fail article, something is suspicious.
• Retweeted this garbage and responded with "explains why most male feminists are sexually frustrated predators." One respondent uses "virtue signal".
• This twat really doesn't like male feminists.
• *makes a period joke in a video game, where women during a blood moon get more irritable*. HAHAHAHA THAT'S HILARIOUS. One person complains, and he whines that "Some people can’t take a joke. Apparently a joke about periods will lead to systemic disenfranchisement of women everywhere." HAHAHAHAHA as if that's funny, original, and not demeaning and sexist to begin with.
• More recent tweets are about the Keaton Jones drama, but I don't know enough about it. There is a kid who apparently is a bullied victim. There apparently was a GoFundMe that turned out to be a scam and there are alleged photos of Jones's family holding a Confederate flag. That's all, I have no comment on the matter. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 06:02, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou for finding the above, it is interesting. The Wikipedia article on the alt right states that it is a white nationalist ideology. Any tweets of him espousing white nationalism? If not, then he is not alt right. --Mr1.136.108

Your definition of what's "alt-right" is rather narrow. I tend to think it's more of a combination of factors. Wikipedia defines "alt-right" as "a loosely defined group of people with far-right ideologies", that's Wikipedia's definition. White nationalism is the main crux, but other tenets of "alt-right" is sexism, anti-feminism, xenophobia (particularly Islamophobia), which Cheong definitely has those three) and he writes for far-right hatchet jobs such as the Sun, Daily Fail, and Heatstreet (the latter is the most indicative). I really hate how this twat tweets because he uses images and I can't find the Tweet he responds to because they're images. What is he, a coward that doesn't want people challenging him? If he isn't "alt-right" (like he's not insane enough), he's definitely far-right just from the garbage he writes for. Remember, though, "alt-right" was coined to make it sound more appealing than "white nationalism" or "far-right bigotry".

• He cites Breaking911. Breaking911 seems supportive of Trump, but they're otherwise pretty bland.
• Xenophobia. He agrees with "Nah... what needs to happen, is that if someone in your 'chain of immigrants' commits an act of terror, everyone in the chain gets sent back to the hell hole from where they came." That's ridiculous, creating unnecessary victims unless it's demonstrated that they indeed directly aid to the violence. Funnily enough, I don't think he'll have the same thoughts when native white terrorists commit an act of terror. What should their family members do?
• This statement. He seems disgusted because the family apparently complained about the law enforcement. He conveniently ignores the entire statement, the family's complaint that enforcers held a 4-year old child out in the cold and took out a teenager from high school without the teenager's lawyer, parent, or guardian. Advocating due process of law isn't unreasonable. But his remark? "they should be locked up and deported!"
• This is a retweet of "Meanwhile a man in Florida is going to prison for 15 years because he left bacon in a mosque." It's characterized as vandalism. It's not "whoopsie made a mistake", it seems intentional and aggressive. Did you know the guy also damaged the building by ripping down lights and smashing windows? I'm not sure the entire context, it seems like a poor analogy being made, like two different context. Apparently, the Wolfe guy had prior criminal history.
• Snide Islamophobic tweet. Respondents are also Islamophobic.
• Unironic use of "SJW". Again, he uses IMAGES to make his goddamn post, so I'm not bothering searching for post.

--It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:41, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

he certainly is anti SJW and anti progressivism. --Mr1.136.108.2 (talk) 21:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

No one is arguing that he isn't. There is a big overlap between proclaiming yourself to be "anti-SJW" (whatever the hell that means given how "SJW" is a patently stupid and vague term to begin with) and also spouting far-right views. But I've linked the evidence here that this person is at best, a far-right figure and if he's not "alt-right", he's certainly flirting with it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Archivist and sticky topics

I have had to put sticky topics back four or five times now. Please fix the bot :) —Kazitor, ^pending 04:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

And again. Is there any way I could work out what the problem is, or something like that? —Kazitor, ^pending 03:08, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

i'm gonna move the archivebot to a linux this christmas so i've been putting off debugging. sorry 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 05:49, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough, we all (allegedly) have lives that don't involve RW. —Kazitor, ^pending 07:51, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Speaking of which

Any updates about IC Wiki? Did the current owners of the site respond? If we're going ahead with the merger, please give us some idea of what's the sort work needs to be done.^t 08:46, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

You've been nominated as moderator

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

Bongolian (talk) 04:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Question about the block log

You made some good points about the block log. Sorry if there is a more appropriate place for this question, but is there an option to hide the joke blocks (π×0 seconds) that occasionally clutter up the block log? It would then be easier to check the log to see if the blocks are fair. CowHouse (talk) 15:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Please Don't Leave

You're the only one who knows how to operate most of the bots here, and you're one of the best conflict resolvers. Please don't leave, Fuzzy. RoninMacbeth (talk) 15:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@RoninMacbeth I don't think Fuzzy is going to leave any time soon, he's just not going to be a mod. Christopher (talk) 15:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Christopher But if Fuzzy's not a mod, who will be Supreme Commander of RationalWiki? RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry to see you plan not to run. I think you have done the job well. All the best.Ariel31459 (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree. Christopher (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@RoninMacbeth I do plan to leave eventually, maybe in a year. I'm going to try to get David to run Archivist on the Linode, where I can help when necessary. Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 21:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@FuzzyCatPotato May I ask why you plan to leave? Nerd (talk) 22:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Life is getting busy Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 14:24, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll also miss you. Bongolian (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm haven't been here in months and I'll miss you. See you 'round, you round feline-potato hybrid. Decidedly not a sock of User:Fareeha_A 20:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Discord

My regular Discord account is using issues, so could you demote that account on the server also named Bigs? 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 03:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Bigs Can you clarify which account should be kept as moderator? Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 14:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Until I get my main back online, the one who's name rn is just "Bigs". 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 17:32, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

done Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 20:23, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

quality of sysops

I currently have about active 8 users who are sysops; de-sysop this one makes no difference. And its plain common-sense who is a quality or poor sysop based on article creations and constructive edits. I would rate you as "quality" since you are actually adding informative or useful content; if you look at GrammarCommie: zero article creations and his edits don't benefit anyone. He wrote an essay, but its about 5 lines as if he took 10 seconds.Dr. Witt (talk) 20:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

We do not have a rating system for what makes a good vs. bad sysop. I've never had a problem with @GrammarCommie's edits. So what if s/he's never made a new article. We probably need expansion and clean up of existing articles more than we need new ones anyway. Bongolian (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

—HamburgerPlate  (talk • stalk) 21:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

---> 75% of article creations since October 2017 by examining the past 500 new-page edits, are by the same person. You just don't realise because he is on dozens of accounts. If you traced this individual back to 2012, you would find most article creations on this site are by him.Epigram (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Above he admits he has many sysop accounts here. I mentioned this fact and everyone flung venomous insults at me. Elsewhere he said, "I've used this site since the beginning of 2012;" he finally admitted.

Dr. Witt and User:Anti-Fascist for life put that they retire on their user page at the same time. The second account didn't get its sysop powers removed like the first. Merkel (talk) 02:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes. The fact is> Rationalwiki is protecting a real schizophrenic maniac who owns thousands of accounts on this site since 2012. It was mentioned by Rome Viharo based on a tip-off that this person is also a paid editor, so that explains the large volume of his article creations. "Skeptic" individuals pay this guy to create articles on paranormal-believers or spiritualists, looking at the recent article creations and you can see more of his accounts, an example.Epigram (talk) 02:28, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Paid editors? If only that were true, my financial woes would be over, but alas and alack it is nothing more than fiction. Comrade GC (talk) 02:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie Indeed, comrade! Together, we can make Rational Wiki great by unleashing untold payloads of freedom and democracy! Nerd (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

tbh i don't really care about sockpuppeting as long as it's not done by an obvious vandal. БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 02:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@BabyLuigiOnFire Nerd (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@BabyLuigiOnFire is also possible these rather paranoid rumors of a conspiracy have given rise to an actual conspiracy. Either that or inviduals such as Rome Viharo are playing both sides off each other in order to justify their paranoid babbling. Regardless, speculating without further proof is pointless and as you say the individual(s) in question appear to lack any malicious intent thus far. Comrade GC (talk) 02:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Ha. You have no idea... Dr. Witt (and his countless aliases) was the one responsible for temporarily shutting down Kiwi Farms by phoning the employers of the owner's mother, that resulted in her being fired, as well as bombarding the owner's family with threatening emails; he even created the Kiwi Farms article here. He then managed to get his own thread on Kiwi Farms removed - a first, since virtually no threads there are deleted and Kiwi Farms' policy is never to delete them, notice how Mike's (his main enemy) remains up. So basically a digital stalker and doxing community as notorious as Kiwi Farms is even scared of this guy, or finds him too malicious for even their community. Of course though, if you post anything about this individual here - you end up banned for doxing! He's bizarrely protected here, having made friends with the owners. However, plenty of information you can dig up about him on the web such as the fact he was treated for schizophrenia at Nightingale Mental Health Hospital London. He was/is friends with Ian Keith Gomeche (just Google), who was arrested in 2005 for cyber and real-world harassment (such as phoning people over 300 times in a single day.) Gomeche used to run the website "noncewatch", and Dr. Witt is also obsessed with not only fighting paedophiles online, but virtually anyone normal who shows an interest in sex, since he's an asexual and finds sex disgusting. As noted elsewhere by Merkel, Dr. Witt has an Encylopedia Dramatica article, that notes a lot more about this individual.Epigram (talk) 03:08, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah now you've just overplayed your hand, since I'm an asexual and while I do not find the act of sex disgusting, I also have no inclination to engage in it. Furthermore I checked into the claims of an ED article and found none. Please cease treating us as if we're morons who will believe literally anything you say without verifying it. Comrade GC (talk) 03:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

what this user has done in other sites has no bearing here. stop poisoning the well. also, your comment about how "asexuality is not normal" is disgusting and i suggest you redact that immediately (also am an asexual too) БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 03:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Can you tell us his favorite color too? Jesus christ.—HamburgerPlate  (talk • stalk) 03:50, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

"Epigram" is just a sock of Rome Viharo who was recently blocked on another account. Just ignore and collapse this. All this nonsense is found on Rome Viharo's website who has written 100,000 words on Dr.Witt and has been stalking him for years. It was also Viharo who invented this misinformation & conspiracy theory about Dr. Witt. No evidence however is ever provided, its all hearsay, rumour and just Viharo's delusions. Futher according to Viharo, Dr.Witt has been reported to the FBI for his RationalWiki edits. LOL. 192.99.6.164 (talk) 13:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Sex is gross and I also have reported Dr. Witt to the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:20, 9 January 2018 (UTC)