User talk:Gobligok
|
Welcome to RationalWiki, Gobligok!
Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing:
|
Ah, herro Gobligok!!! Are you a Harry Potterland Goblin perchance? SJ Debaser 22:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to RationalWiki, the apathetically absorbent guru of the possibilityosphere! ĵ₳¥ášÇ♠ʘ <insert witty comment here> 00:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Demotion[edit]
You are hereby demoted to the lowly rank of janitor. Guide, bar and hoes. Now get out of my sight. SJ Debaser 22:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
So apparently trolling RW user pages is in vogue. How nice. Definitely some brain-damaged remnants of Conservapedia at work here. Granted, "brain-damaged" qualifies as the upper echelon of Conservapedia's ranks, but I wouldn't stoop to calling it "rational," not even relatively. A hearty fuck you too, "SuperJosh." Gobligok 07:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Um you are a sysop now, we have nicknamed that janitor in these here parts. We can take the rights away if you are going to be agressive. - π 07:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, woe is me for not bothering with the links in an apparent troll message titled "Demotion" that concludes with, "Now get out of my sight." To the uninitiated, THAT is pretty damn "aggressive," so maybe clear up the lines of communication before deeming my response to said apparent troll message as such. I'd never been to this wiki prior to a few days ago and had no way to know why such a message was forthcoming or that you jovially invert the meaning of words here without telling anyone. Gobligok 08:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- And once again we see that noone bothers to check the links on the welcome template... -- Nx / talk 08:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah we need to limit our rampant demotion process so that people aren't demoted before they understand the words. What happened to 50 edits and a month? - π 09:44, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- And once again I'm left to wonder how I can follow links in a "welcome template" I've never seen, or how I should be expected to follow links in a post I dismissed summarily as indistinguishable from trolling, prior to the proper context finally coming to light post factum.... :-| Gobligok 11:16, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- The purple box that says welcome, perhaps? - π 11:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- The "50 edits" thing was a mere guideline suggested during the standards revamp, based on the fact that the whole sysop thing is a massive and very difficult to understand (at first) in-joke. However, as that felt like too much of a "rule" it was wiped by someone. And no-one clicks the links on the template, we know this.
gnostic 11:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- The purple box gives one no reason to assume the meanings of certain words are inverted here or that obvious trolls, as a result, might not be trolls at all. For that matter, my first notice of said box occurred concurrently with being told to "get out of [SuperJosh's] sight," so I was torn between trying to ascertain why I was being spontaneously trolled while offhandedly pondering my sheer disinterest in goats. K? Gobligok 11:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- And that's why I don't like the abusive intros. Even I was taken aback by it when it happened to me and I managed to do some chatting and a few dozen edits first. gnostic 11:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yours was abusive? One more reason for Pi to start using Sir Reginald Albert Humfildink-Hollingsworth the Third again. -- Nx / talk 11:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Good point, although as half the bureaucrats aren't current editors, that's a difficult one to follow, Sir Reggie. gnostic 11:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Good point, although as half the bureaucrats aren't current editors, that's a difficult one to follow, Sir Reggie.
- Yours was abusive? One more reason for Pi to start using Sir Reginald Albert Humfildink-Hollingsworth the Third again. -- Nx / talk 11:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- And that's why I don't like the abusive intros. Even I was taken aback by it when it happened to me and I managed to do some chatting and a few dozen edits first.
- The purple box gives one no reason to assume the meanings of certain words are inverted here or that obvious trolls, as a result, might not be trolls at all. For that matter, my first notice of said box occurred concurrently with being told to "get out of [SuperJosh's] sight," so I was torn between trying to ascertain why I was being spontaneously trolled while offhandedly pondering my sheer disinterest in goats. K? Gobligok 11:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- The "50 edits" thing was a mere guideline suggested during the standards revamp, based on the fact that the whole sysop thing is a massive and very difficult to understand (at first) in-joke. However, as that felt like too much of a "rule" it was wiped by someone. And no-one clicks the links on the template, we know this.
- The purple box that says welcome, perhaps? - π 11:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Now, there's clearly been some wrong-footing here. So I'll explain; the derogatory statement made by SuperJosh is an in-joke, and not a particularly funny one (I've never liked it and it's the worst thing about RW by a long-shot so can we please dump it? Please? Demotion is fine, the abuse is not) and Pi then misinterpreted Gobligok's response as a bit more angry than it was (remember, Pi, you've been here for sod knows how long, you don't see the offense in the demotion thing). Now, can we learn from this? Please? gnostic 11:28, 23 September 2009 (UTC)