User talk:GeeJayK/Archive2

This is an archive page, last updated 4 October 2024. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)(back)

Smoking in NZ

Saw your edit comment. I am a smoker and a NZer but I am in my early 40's so not effected by this new legislation. Problem is we already have issues with shops being robbed, with weapons, and tobacco products are a high priority. I figure this will make the problem worse and the black market stronger. Also they are lowering the nicotine content which is fucking stupid because it'll mean people will smoke more. Nicotine isn't the problem - its all the other shit so less nicotine will make no difference to peoples health. All in all a bold move but may end with some serious unintended consequences. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a ridiculously stupid policy. NZ is gonna learn why the US had to repeal a whole-ass Constitutional Amendment that one time. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄^{Ask about our holiday specials!} 01:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with you guys. The only thing working in favor of this policy is the fact that NZ is really fucking geographically isolated, so it might be difficult for dealers to sell tobacco there. But IMO focusing on education would work better than what NZ just did. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 01:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Tobacco prices here have been rising consistently for the last 20 years or so. As they go up, the black market gets bigger and robberies get more frequent. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

But anyway I just walked out of my office into the yard and had me a delicious nicotine hit from my lovely cigarettes. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Moderator

Welcome to the prestigious position of RW Moderator. I'd tell you what Moderators do, but you've been here for a while, so I'll instead assume that you know what you signed up for. Rabbitseatcarrots (talk) 19:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Yo congrats GJK. You'll do a great job, I'm sure! -- Techpriest (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

A guy who insults the competence of fellow RW editors/social scientists for disagreeing with him is now mod. Why? Vee (talk) 02:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Cuz people voted for him. One doesn’t have to agree with the mob on all political issues to be a good mod. RWRW is still pretty popular and won his way onto the alternate list this year. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄^{Ask about our holiday specials!} 03:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations and welcome to the team! I am glad to have you aboard. Spud (talk) 03:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Cosmology

So it seems you know your cosmology. It's my favourite topic. The last few months I have been delving into the math/physics of infinity. It all started when I had to drive two and a half hours from Auckland back to where I live after a Pixies concert. Both my phones had run out of juice so I started thinking abut the Infinite Hotel Paradox while driving the lonely backroads at 1am on a Saturday morning. I've been thinking more on infinity and the mathematical concept zero. Zero is beautiful, infinity is messy. If you can zero out an equation then you have something elegant. If you equation ends in infinity you have done something wrong and it's messy. I have been thinking about how this applies to Multiverse Theory and I think I can zero it out instead of it being infinite...Aceⁱ⁹ 04:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Ace McWickedWell, I know a thing or two about cosmlogy (defintely more than I know about Astronomy), but it's not my best topic, not because I don't love it, but because I know were my comparative advantages lie and I don't have all that time to study it, unfortunately. Yeah, zero is an amazing thing. If you like cosmology and these math thought experiments, you might like this one. Given that:

• Time is infinite
• The infinite monkey theorem
• Quantum Mechanics

A new universe might arise trillions of years in the future. I think The Five Ages of the Universe covers it a bit, but I'm not sure. Things get even more interesting when you consider that anything that can happen will therefore happen (p=1) before that. Now, does that mean that everything imaginable will happen? A new world where you are the sole ruler? A sequel of your life? If this is possible, it will happen. Probably many times. In other words, if this is correct (so far there is no hard evidence, just speculation as far as I know), we are kinda eternal and we don't even have to fear death, since we might not even have this conversation right now and one of us could be just a Boltzmann brain, like I said on the Bar. Statistically, this is actually likely. Don't tell the user Machina that though... GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

How about... the sum total energy of the universe is 0. All perfectly in balance by the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (Hawking Radiation is a good example of this balance). In Multiverse theory there are an infinite number of universes where an infinite number of things happen - literally anything that can happen must happen . If this is the case the a multiverse would also create an infinite number of universes where there are no multiverses/multiverse theory isn't true - lets call this negative-infinity. So we have positive-infinity + negative-infinity =...zero. We have just reduced the net energy of a multiverse to zero. Therefor the 1st Law of TD is absolute. I started thinking about this half drunk on the couch one evening and just ran with it. Aceⁱ⁹ 00:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, I'm drunk right now and I could understand what you said despite reading it three times. Maybe I should drink more? GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

It’s 10:42am Sunday morning here. I have a belly full of opiates (provided legitimately by prescription I should add) and knocking back hard cider with coffee on the side. I already yelled at some seagulls on the beach earlier and stole a packet of chewing gum from the supermarket. I’m in fine shape this foul morning. You should come over to my place for a drink, we can plot and plan. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Not a bad deal, always wanted to go to NZ. Though leaving my family right now would be a bit hard... GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Why don’t you mods want to have fun

I’m having a really nice day and I think you should too ^{— Unsigned, by: 2607:FB91:799D:B442:9449:214D:2CF9:E18F / talk / contribs}

Thanks for asking, I guess. Just came back from a wonderful nature walk with my wife. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 22:42, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello

Just thought I’d message you since I noticed I haven’t messaged you yet. Rational Dude (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rational Dude sure, if you need something, just leave a message. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 16:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, will do! Rational Dude (talk)

Break

I’ll be taking a bit of a break from editing partially because I’ve broken the rules with the categories and also because I don’t feel like I have any more pages to make for now. I feel I’ve been spending too much time here, so I’ll be taking a step back. I won’t be gone for long though, I’ll return soon. I’ll also be on the discord, so you can talk to me there for now. Rational Dude (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

That's fine. Taking a Wiki break is good once in a while. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Why are you sabotaging the article on Prensa Latina?!

I see that you have demoted the article about Prensa Latina to Draft status. Why?

What is your reason for sabotaging the Categories part of the article? ^{— Unsigned, by: Joreberg / talk / contribs}

@Joreberg That's not sabotage. Drafts are never categorized. Spud (talk) 11:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@Joreberg I'm not trying to sabotage your article, I moved it to the draft space because it's not ready for the main space yet. Some people would have deleted it on sight, it's even possible to argue that I saved it from being deleted. The subject is missional, go ahead with the article. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to have bothered you. Forget about it. Good bye. Joreberg (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your grandpa dude

Best wishes. Also always willing to talk if that’s ever something you want. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:12, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini thanks a lot for the message, man. The doctor thinks he'll make it this time, but we don't know how he'll be. He will probably end up on a wheelchair and with a ventilator machine. I honestly don't think he'll last for very long. But such is life. I'm glad he was part of my life for over 30 years. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 12:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

That's awful. My grandpa died last year from lung cancer, so I have an idea of how you're feeling. Just know it gets better. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 17:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Greetings

I’ve returned. I’d like to give my condolences to you and your family, and I hope for the safety of all of you. May your grandfather recover quickly and live long and happily. Rational Dude (talk) 20:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, man. And welcome back. I just visited my grandfather. He's recovering every day, he'll definitely make it for now. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I lost my grandma a couple years ago. I'm glad to hear your grandpa's doing well. Carthage (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

@Carthage Thanks you for the message. As I said before, I think I am privileged to have all my grandparents alive. Losing someine I love is a very new situation to me, and I hope it won't happen right now. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

@GeeJayK you’re welcome, and thank you. I’m glad to hear your grandfather is doing better now. I know what it’s like to lose loved ones, I lost my grandparents a couple years back. Rational Dude (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Smith, Kirkegaard, etc.

This is the real Jonathan Kane, Emily Willoughby's coauthor. I've been following the discussion about the recent City Journal article, and I thought you'd find it useful if I were to provide some further details about what's being discussed there.

First, the guy who was posting under my name on the talk page of the Emily Willoughby article was an imposter. I also want to provide some more detail about the low-level trolling that's been going on, both here and at Wikipedia, of which the Richard Haier article was one example.

In April of 2020, while Wikipedia's "NightHeron" user was rewriting that site's race and intelligence article to make it conform to an "antiracist" perspective, I received an email from Emil Kirkegaard asking me to help him rewrite it, and offering to share the WP account's login details with me. But I was unwilling to help Kirkegaard turn that article into a parody, and he and I argued for more than a week about whether his doing that was a useful strategy. Kirkegaard and I have actively avoided one another ever since then.

Smith seems to watch Kirkegaard's every move, so he probably noticed that Kirkegaard and I removed one another as friends on Facebook around that time. Now he (and the rest of you) can know the reason that happened. I still think Kirkegaard is capable of doing useful research, but whatever ability he has is eclipsed by his impulsivity, his habit of deliberate provoking people, and his determination to prove he's right in pointless dramas.

A few months ago I forwarded some of Kirkegaard's past correspondence with me, which made it clear he's evaded his ban from Wikipedia using the NightHeron account, to Wikipedia's arbitration committee. They acknowledged having received my message, but did nothing else. I know that Emily Willoughby also contacted them about the same thing in September 2022. They told her in response that this issue could only be addressed in a public arbitration request, but in the same message one of the arbitrators advised her against making such a request, because "I think the committee has the committee has very little patience for this matter". One other person at Wikipedia who I know was aware of this issue is the late admin and former arbitrator DGG, who made this amendment request partly for that reason. However, DGG told me and Emily that he felt it would be improper for him to take action about Kirkegaard's ban evasion directly, because he considered himself an involved administrator.

It's a mystery why Smith states in his article about Willoughby that she "collaborated with and defended Kirkegaard on Wikipedia", or that the two of them "edited the same race and IQ related articles with overlapping edits as a sort of 'tag-team' with the same point of view", even though Smith has made it clear elsewhere that he's aware most of Emily's recent involvement in those Wikipedia articles has been to oppose Kirkegaard's attempt to turn them into parodies. (As the Cancel Watch article mentions, that's the only interaction on Wikipedia pages she and Kirkegaard have ever had.) It's also a mystery why Smith is being allowed to use RationalWiki in this way while he's banned. He created his article about Willoughby in August 2022, when he'd already been banned from this site for the past two years. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Tetrapteryx has confirmed to me by email that he is indeed the Jonathan Kane that he says he is. Bongolian (talk) 20:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Yew

A while ago, I added info about yew on his views on Christianity and Islam, and his negativity towards them. Bongolian removed it with leaving a reason, even after I sourced it, which kind of makes it seem like they’re trying to ignore the racism of this dictator. May I put the information back in his page for now? Rational Dude (talk) 17:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I think you should take it to the talk page first and ask Bongolian himself. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I will. But what should I do if they say no or deny Yew’s views and policies? Rational Dude (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I know Bongolian and I doubt he'll do that without a good reason. You should work with him on the article and build a consensus. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

We need to be careful that we don't slap "Islamaphobe" on every single criticism of Islam IMHO. Islam is heavily infested by its own blend of fundamentalist dogma (which through Wahhabism is mainstream in certain countries, and that's before you count the radical factions). This should be a fair subject of criticism, especially on this Wiki (see mission point #3), and especially since when the radical Islam sect gets in power, they tend to be strict patriarchal authoritarians (see Afghanistan) -- also mission oriented.

Yew made one controversial assertion regarding Singapore Malays, which he later retracted. Not sure why he made the remarks in the first place (Malay Islam is very "traditional" but not radically so) but one retracted quote doesn't mean much. Wikileaks also published some more damning remarks purportedly by him, however Wikileaks is hardly a reliable narrator, so I'm more inclined to believe Yew's explanation that he was talking about terrorists like Jemaah Islamiyah.

Overall I get the impression not of pure Islamaphobia, and more concern over Islam radicalization and fundamentalist dogma preventing integration in a modern secular state, concerns I see as quite justified. Since the above already is in the article, I think more evidence is needed of his supposed Islamophobia than that. BobJohnson (talk) 17:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Yew has legitimate criticisms of Christianity and Islam, but there are some sources that insinuate that he has treated unfairly Christians and Muslims unfairly. Rational Dude (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

A little issue

Hey, I hope you and your grandfather are doing alright.

I wanted to ask if I could remove the fascism table from the Paxton section since it’s not an equal comparison and it might make us look bizarre to normies who think that we see trump and putin as equal to hitler. Rational Dude (talk) 17:01, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@Rational Dude Thank you for the message. I went to the doctor today with him, he's slowly getting better. Regarding your question, I think you should bring it to the talk page of the article, and if the community agrees, you can ask someone to remove the categories for you, but please, don't do it yourself right now. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 22:08, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

You’re welcome, I’m glad to hear he’s getting better.

Of course, I won’t remove it. That’s why I checked with you first. Also, I want to remove the table for Paxton comparing trumpism, putinism, and nazism, not any categories. Rational Dude (talk) 02:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Centrism Edit

Just trying to figure out your reasoning for your recent deleting of text on the Centrism page.

1. That the blend of classical and keynesian economics is "theoretically incoherent".
2. That independent central banks can't do enough in times of major crisis
3. That a move towards more of a "command" economy may be required/beneficial during such times
4. That the "centrist" economic style/leaning/whatever outlined in that section might be seen to create financial instability a la banking crisis

I'm not the original author or particularly partial/interested in the argument pushed in the deleted text, but it seems those are four different claims that have been deleted at once. Could you expand a little? Tikitime2 (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tikitime2 I'll answer one by one:

1. I don't think it's incoherent at all, it's the new neoclassical synthesis
2. I think they can, that was my point. Bernanke did a bloody good job. At most, fiscal policy is underrated, but monetary policy has done a very good job over the last 15 years.
3. Unless we're talking about wars, I don't think they can be benefitial because information is disperse in society.
4. Maybe I was too harsh on Minsky's Financial Instability Hypothesis, if you want to, you can add that one again. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Some of these things weren’t addressed in the initial edit summary. I like how things ended up though with the final edit. I feel like there is an opportunity to turn passages like the one that was initially removed into a kind of structural dialectic. Seeing a relevant argument you take as being wrong can be reframed as simply being a postulated argument that can be followed up with a more reputable response. Some scholars respond with X but this a problematic position given y (y being the more rigorous reply). Simply removing x stating that its simply wrong, warrants confusion, and may even garner mistrust. This of course depends of course on the level of epistemic privilege required to know that x is wrong. Do you understand what I mean? I am not making allegations or suggesting you never incorporate dialogue into your edits. Just that you can recognize the explanatory, debunking, and ideologically inoculant value of such a method, no? - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 22:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Can you clarify what the problem with my edit to Cuba was?

I changed the description of Cuba from "dictatorship" to "democracy", not out of commie bias but because "democracy" is a more apt term for describing this particular country's leadership. The country has elections for local and national political leaders and the citizens themselves agree that the country is democratic when interviewed.

On the flip side, any web search will lead back to one major source for Cuba being a dictatorship - The Economist's Democracy Index. This is the source cited by Wikipedia and mostly everyone on (what I would assume to be) your side. I can give you a full explanation on request, but the short of it is this ranking, as well as any attempt to rank democracy is bogus.

Whatever you think about all this, it's impossible to look at the objective facts and conclude that the Cuba of today is a dictatorship. It's undeniably a terrible place to live, but it's democratic.

Hydrolysis (talk) 17:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I was actually thinking about our own definition of democracy here. By this definition, Cuba clearly isn't a democracy. Elections in Cuba aren't considered democratic, but elections are just part of democracy (countries like Hungary and Turkey aren't considered democraties either, they are electoral autocracies. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You're right, Cuba does not match rule 6. Candidates aren't free to promote any policies they want; they have to stay within the PCC's goals, primarily establishing communism in Cuba and Latin America as a whole. Countries like the U.S. are more liberal in this regard - anyone can run for office no matter what. Anyway, to reiterate what I concluded with last time: whether Cuba's model of deciding leadership is good or bad, it certainly has nothing to do with giving the elected officials autocratic power and they don't deserve that label. Hydrolysis (talk) 00:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

P.S. I just found out we have an article on The Economist and how unreliable they are. It's also interesting that a few hours after I started this thread they published an article titled "What World War III would mean for investors", which is further sinking their reputation. Hydrolysis (talk) 03:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Leftygreenmario

You forgot to remove her mod rights. Monet ^Ye 19:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I just noticed you removed your mod rights as well. Monet ^Ye 19:56, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

(EC) Yeah, I realized that right after I removed my own mod privileges. "How come I demoted three new mods, but only demoted two". Already asked Cosmik to change it for me. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:56, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Congrats

On your victory in the election! I know my sig already says it to everyone I talk to on here, but goatspeed! --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}CircularRasoning^{See my latest prototypes} 07:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@CircularReasoning thanks a lot! But... I didn't run this year, albeit I wanted to. Are you talking about 2022? Anyway, thanks again. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, my mistake. I thought I saw your name in the user rights log when the results got counted. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}CircularRasoning^{See my latest prototypes} 21:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Board

So we’ve pulled the trigger on holding a meet on Discord tomorrow at 17:00 UTC. We’re doing this with whoever shows up, but we all hope you’ll be there. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄^{Ask about our holiday specials!} 20:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini thanks, man, but I'm not part of the board. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 16:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

You have two thumbs and a PhD in economic history

Talk to me about economic history! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@Stabby the Misanthrope Thank you for the question. Well, actually, I don't have a PhD yet. I will have it in 4 years if things go right. But I can tell you a bit of economic history for sure. Since the Neolithic revolution 10 thousand years ago, there isn't much to talk about. Life was short and miserable for most humans (the vast majority of us died before 5). There were a few places where economic development happened, like Rome and Greece during the classical antiquity and India and China in some periods, but overall humanity seemed doomed to fall into the Malthusian trap (forever. Then, 250 years ago something finally started: continuous, sustainable growth. It started first in England, and then it spread across other countries. Why did it happen after so long? There are three complementary explanations, all of them having strengths and weaknesses.

The first one is geography. Markets develop better when we can transport goods (close to rivers and the sea, and far from mountains), and being on the “malaria belt” is still one of the main reasons why Africa is so poor. Geography is bad news for some countries: we can't change it. However, it cannot be the main explanation: countries like Switzerland managed to get rich despite having a shitty geography, while privileged countries, like Argentina, failed.

The second one, and the most important according to most people studying development, are institutions: democratic countries where the government protect property rights, provides public goods, enforce contracts, uphold the rule of law, etc. are often the richest. And yet, it can't explain everything. Why is Southern Italy so poorer than Northern Italy? Both regions have the same laws and overall the same institutions.

The third explanation, and probably the most popular thanks to Max Weber's research on the protestant work ethic (even though much of his work is now outdated) is culture. Values that disparage work and profit, not being able to trust the others, gender and race norms… They are also important for development.

I would like to write much more than I did (I wanted to write a post three times longer at least) but I don't have time. If you want to know more, there are two recent books on the subject: How the Work Became Rich, by Mark Koyama and Jared Rubin and The Journey of Humanity by Oded Galor. The first one is a reference book that synthesizes the main theories very well, but kinda lacks a main thesis. The second one is a lot deeper, but while Galor explains the main ideas behind growth and development, he has his own Unified growth theory to develop in his book. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

There's not much to talk about the ten thousand years of human history that saw an exponential population growth rate relative to the growth rate of human populations before the Neolithic Revolution? Tell me again, how exactly did markets in the Americas, Oceania, Asia, and Africa open up again? Carthage (talk) 19:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

(EC) When it comes to living standards, very little changed. Galor calls this period the "malthusian epoch" because, I put a growing population would result in lower living standards, despite a higher output. This is one of the things I wanted to write about, and I'll still re-write our article on Malthus based on his work. Also, what kind of red herring is this last question? GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

About economic development, the Uruk period saw the mass production of pottery compared to the preceding Ubaid period. The point of the last question is that colonialism opened up the markets of the Americas and Africa prior to the Industrial Revolution, and after. I have a genuine question: does economic development account for the effect of colonialism in its analyses? Carthage (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

If you want to read the books I've mentioned, you'll see that they analyze these periods (including Sumer, IIRC). Anyway, How richer were people in Uruk when compared to the rest of the world? Answer: not very much. Anyway, this is consistent with the theories presented. There is, at first, some growth, followed by stagnation. And yes, economic development account for the effect of colonialism. Koyama and Rubin have an entire chapter about colonialism. Colonialism is yet another subject that I'd like to write on the post, but I didn't have time. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Anyway, about Uruk: there was an increase in inequality compared to the period that came before, but that was localized. There was a lot of civilizational redundancy back then in a way that there really isn't now. Carthage (talk) 20:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Somebody told me Malthus is a scary, scary man and his ghost is coming to haunt us. Chillpilled (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@Chillpilled I don't know this guy, but not gonna happen. Population decline is, for most countries today, a worse problem than population growth. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 22:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Yo

I’m back, how’ve you been? I hope your grandfather is still alright.

Anyway I wanna ask if Milei can be categorized as a fascist, he is legit far right and has ties to other far rightists who are legit fascists (Meloni, Bolsonaro, Orban, etc). Rational Dude (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude Thank you for the message. I personally like to see the opinion of the press before calling politicians fascists. I've seen them calling Milei far-right, but I don't recall any news outlet calling him a fascist. That being said, if someone wants to add the category, I won't oppose either, though I'd advice you to not do it yourself since you're still topic banned. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Always my friend. You’re absolutely right about checking press articles for a common consensus on this topic. I saw quite a few news outlets with articles describing him as far right (I think at least one even described him as a fascist). And don’t worry about me adding categories, I know better than to violate my topic ban. I just wanted to ask you first. Also, isn’t Argentina an authoritarian regime because of the dictatorial actions of Milei (like the crackdowns and gutting government programs)? Rational Dude (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so. The institutions seem to be working there. Is Milei authoritarian? I think he is, but he doesn't have enough power, in fact the Congress and the judiciary system are blocking much of his policies. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Alright. But I still that there is a legitimate consensus to label and categorize him as a fascist though because of his beliefs and how they influence his policies. Rational Dude (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

"According to critics"

This is weasel wording by definition (it's not really different from "some experts believe…" or similar weasel wording). All you need to do to fix it is specify what critics. Plutocow (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plutocow it isn't when it's a criticism that has been used literally thousands of times. I have no interest at editing that article at the moment, (I was going to rename it but someone already did it for me) but I'll add Naomi Klein's The Shock Therapy tomorrow as a source then. By the way, you might wanna clean up the Wiki of this weasel word then, just search for it. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Panama

If you want to be pedantic, you can argue that Panama is partially in South America as it straddles the Darién gap, which is considered the boundary between Central and South America. (Either that, or Colombia is partially in Central America.) Ultimately though, there is no objective line on a map you can draw to separate Central and South America. Plutocow (talk) 21:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plutocow Fair enough, though I don't think we should classify them as a South American country. Even Wikipedia, that is extremely meticulous with these categories don't have them in the South America category. I won't dispute if you, or anyone else revert my edit though. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

"Denialist"

I was using sources posted on the discord by Chillpilled. You have a problem? Take it up with them. Anyway, why did you remove the bit on Costco? Are you gonna claim an actual example of corporate price-gouging is somehow "anecdotal evidence"? Carthage (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

What does Chillpilled has anything to do with this discussion? Regarding the Costco example, it's just poor understandig on how elasticity works, so it's utterly irrelevant to the page. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 23:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Because they were the one that raised the sources and brought up Costco, you clown. Carthage (talk) 23:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

And? GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 23:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Then raise it up with them. I was using sources they provided. it's not that hard to comprehend. Carthage (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

They didn't edit the page. Stop blaming others for what you did. Discord is not the Wiki. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 23:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

"Blaming"? I was simply updating the page based off of new sources provided. Would you accuse them of being a denialist given they were the one who provided the sources? Clearly they, and I, thought it was relevant.

Anyway, what does it matter if something is heterodox? Weren't you the one who stated that "fringe" does not equal wrong? Also given how it mentions recent inflation, looking at a longer period of time seems an irrelevant criticism. Simply changing the numbers does not change the reality on the ground. Carthage (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Question

Is there a rule on ratwiki for specifically formatting citations? Rational Dude (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude No, RW:CS doesn't mention anything about formatting citations, so if you ever get blocked because of this, I would consider such block an abuse of sysop tools. However, it's usually consider a good thing to format your citations. I wrote an essay about how to format sources quickly and easily: Essay:How to use Wikipedia to add beautiful sources, perfect sources to your articles. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@GeeJayK I ask because I made a mistake with several articles (which I corrected and formatted my citations). But carthage and duce believe that I've been neglectful and think a block for me is necessary. While I agree about correcting my citations, I think a block is harsh and counterproductive. You can find the atim here. Rational Dude (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Regarding ATIM

So will I be able to regain my mod powers? And will I only have a topic ban for fascism? I’m asking because what you said in the ATIM was a bit confusing, you worded it as if it sounded like I won’t get promoted again. Rational Dude (talk) 04:04, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude I'm also a bit confused myself. You'll have to ask Bongolian (do it on the ATIM page, not on his talk page, others might have this doubt as well). A minor correction is, you won't get mod rights, but sysop rights. Check RW:moderator and RW:Sysop to see the difference. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 15:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Technicalities. A banhammer is a banhammer no matter how you dress it up. Carthage (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@GeeJayK So will I be able to get mod rights and overturn the ban with time when I show progress? I can wait and use this time to improve and prove myself that I can be trusted with the categories. But just so you know, I never abused my powers, you can ask TechPriest if you don’t believe me. Rational Dude (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

For fixing that problem I had with the troll collapse. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arcadium Trancefer You're welcome. I wasn't sure myself if that would work, but I decided to give it a shot. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 11:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)