User talk:Gooniepunk/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 11 January 2016. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: , (new)(back)


My rollback was a mistake it somehow went through while I was verifying the new link and then you beat me to it. Punk.  Lily Inspirate me. 19:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Since, from my understanding, Fred isn't trusworthy, I checked it out immediately after the revision was made. If you damn atheistic liberals had any common sense, you'd have checked it out first!Conservative Punk 19:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Fred's ok, he just got a bad reputation from the EL edit war, which turned out to be our mistake in the end. Totnesmartin 19:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I see. I wouldn't know, I don't think I was around then. See, if you liberal vandal trolls hadn't been so fascistic, that edit war wouldn't have happened. Conservative Punk 19:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Obama birth certificate[edit]

I love it! Countdown to Andy or someone similar saying something along those lines and meaning it in 3...2...1... Tetronian you're clueless 00:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Glad you like it. I will add more as it comes to mind. This was, in actuallity, a rumination I had the other night. What's more interesting is how my idea, as far off base as it may be, seems to still be more plausible than the entire "Birther" movement.Conservative Punk 02:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I have often wondered if Obama has been ignoring this, because it is causing his political opponents more problems than it causes him. Robert Gibbs has been accused of wasting the press conference time by taking questions from Lester of WND. He usually just stands there berating him and making fun of him to the amusement of the other journalists, who think he is a nut. Of course this takes time away from Gibbs having to answer important, but uncomfortable questions and breaks any momentum they were building in their line of questioning. - π 02:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Exactly why I am convinced that the "birthers" are just conservatives whom you deceitful liberals have tricked into a delusion of their own. It isn't their fault that you lied and brought about this delusion, but for my fellow conservatives to fall for such and obvious ploy is, unfortunately, their problem. Why worry about the socialist Obama agenda when we can be distracted by trivial matters which come at great political gain. Is it any surprise that, even as Obama and the Democrat congress falters, the American people still don't trust the Republicans even more than they don't trust the Democrat Party?Conservative Punk 03:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Poking the beast[edit]

Do you fathom the unfathomable horrors I could release on you? Imagine every WIGO page looping you back to Schlafly's essay on liberal style?? tmtoulouse 06:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Try your worst! It will just prove to be typical liberal deceit from the owner of the vandal site! Conservative Punk (talk) 06:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
You are just lucky I exemplify the qualities of liberal sloth or why, I would make you...not so much regret....but rue and lament your actions. tmtoulouse 06:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Typical liberal threats to quash free speech. You get mad when Assfly does the Lord's work and removes you from his site of truth, but then when a poor, oppressed CONservative such as myself dares question you liberal atheists, you deceitfully threaten me and then try to quash me for just voicing the CONservative opinion, which scares you. Conservative Punk (talk) 06:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


sorry. (talk) 19:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
do you know who this is? (talk) 20:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You are that &hearts person. But I do not understand why I am being apologized to. Conservative Punk (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
for being mean to you two days ago? (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Ah, don't worry about it. I have dealt with far worse things on the internets before, so, even though going after my sister strikes an emotional chord, it was no big deal in retrospect. Conservative Punk (talk) 20:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


Finally got round to making it. So now people know you want them to go ahead and remove marcus comments from your talk page. Should avoid arguments.

This user likes a troll-free talk page. Revert away!

HTH. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 20:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


You plugged the backdoor that shit stirring troll was using to evade his block. LOL! Nutty Rouxnever mind 21:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Nutty. Just doing my job. Conservative Punk (talk) 01:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Sellout! ( ;-) )[edit]

"Oh, I'm gonna quit this place. Trust me" you say. Then days later, you are still here and get a promotion. What next, a million dollar record contract? Writing song about boulevards of broken dreams? You gonna go shop at Hot Topic now? ;-) ConfickerInternational womon of mystery 02:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh yeah, then I'm gonna go hit up the town in my Tripp pants and Black Veil Brides gear. At night, I'm gonna sit in a corner and cry about how my parents just don't understand me. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


Can you fix it on Talk:Gamergate too—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:11, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Maybe. Pibot hasn't run since yesterday morning, so I'm not even sure if I fixed it in the Saloon Bar yet. Do me a favor: if I fix it on talk:GG, please coat me in disinfectant afterwards. I don't want that clusterfuck to contaminate me. Gooniepunk (talk) 10:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
The synopsis is the same: the archive counters don't match the number of actual archives, causing Pibot to go "What the fuck? Oh yeah? Then fuck you!" to those pages. I think my changes will fix it, but if Pibot runs again and doesn't catch them, I might need to try something else. Gooniepunk (talk) 10:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

You've been nominated![edit]

Over here. (talk) 03:17, 2 November 42015 AQD (UTC)

By the by[edit]

Pibot still doesn't work on the saloon bar. :/ Is archiving allowed? (talk) 00:31, 5 November 42015 AQD (UTC)

Yes, I see that. I'm done trying to hotwire the code there, so go ahead and archive it if you so choose. Gooniepunk (talk) 00:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for the easing of my first post and the allyish response to my grumpy activism post~ :B Transgendurr (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. We've welcomed many a "grumpy activism post" over the years. Enjoy your stay. Gooniepunk (talk) 07:34, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


I've decided against it. Can I have my user rights back?—Ryulong (talk) 19:49, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

But of course. Gooniepunk (talk) 13:54, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't seem to have worked.—Ryulong (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
User rights take a while to adjust sometimes. (talk) 22:01, 8 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
Once I made the edit here the cache reset.—Ryulong (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Also it would be nice if someone didn't keep harassing me via the tools.—Ryulong (talk) 22:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Harassment is a strong word for "not putting up with your whining that your own stupidity caused nobody to like you". Stop bothering Goonie. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
If I pulled any of the shit you're doing with specious reasoning behind it there'd be a coop case threatening to take my sysop away again.—Ryulong (talk) 23:01, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
That's what happens when 1) you're wrong/i'm right in usage and 2) you alienate everybody on a website by being an idiot. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry I called your fandom a bunch of pedo eugenicist horsefuckers.—Ryulong (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
tbf a lot of it seems to revolve around just you, Paravant. Other people may dislike him, yes, but you appear to have a raging hateboner, unrivaled in it's glory/despair. Kitsunelaine (talk) 23:09, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Your consistent repetition that this is vindictiveness because you hurt my feelings is amusing but stupid. You've not seen me be vindictive, and it would not be so brazenly open like this. Stop responding on Goonies page. @Kitsu, when I want the opinion of somebody only here to defend a fool I will ask for it. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:11, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
"Only here to defend a fool?" Okay, man. I know you said not to respond on GooniePunk's talk page, but it's not right for you to get the last word on a statement like that. Here's the deal. I was the one who pointed out to Ryulong that the MLP page was nothing but propaganda, before all this started. I initially set out to edit it but Ryulong started first, because I was struggling with the wording a bit, and he's a touch more brazen than I am. I only stuck around after the fact because, while he is a friend, i felt responsible for the dogpiling he was getting from you guys. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 23:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. Welcome to my talkpage. True, I can't stand Ryulong, but I am also a reasonable person who values this website and the rest of its community over my personal feelings. Does the remainder of this bitchfest on my talkpage involve me? No? Please take it somewhere else. Thank you for your cooperation. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

It's cool, man. That was going to be my last response anyway. It just didn't sit right with me for him to say something like that as the final word. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 23:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, and this seems to be the problem with both Ryulong and you: you absolutely must have the final word. — Carpetsmoker (talk) 12:15, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Anybody else here like carrots? I recently underwent a large dietary change where I've been eating a lot more fiber than I ever have (I am working with a dietician to lose weight gained as a result of hypothyroidism). I have found that if you chop up about 3-4 raw carrots and keep them in a bag with you at all times, they are the perfect snack food, along with apples (honeycrisps or golden deicious are my two favorites here). And the best thing about apples is they get rid of the urge to eat junk food like chocolate. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:55, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
How much weight have you lost? Tielec01 (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
A world without chocolate is a world not worth living. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
I've lost about 15 pounds (6.8 kg) in the last two-and-a-half weeks. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Jesus Christ, that's a lot of carrots. Tielec01 (talk) 00:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
And apples, and spinach. The point is that I maintain a diet under 180 calories that is mostly vegetable and fruit based, as itis required to be high in fiber. Gooniepunk (talk) 00:08, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Isn't chocolate just ground-up nuts, though? (talk) 00:14, 10 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
Raw chocolate is just cocoa beans, yes. It's whatthey add to it afterwards, however, that makes it unhealthy. Keep in mind, raw chocolte (i.e: baker's chocolate), actually has a bitter taste to it. Gooniepunk (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Eh, I could go without chocolate if I wanted to. Fries, however... (talk) 00:06, 10 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
Funny story: I once actually lost weight from exclusively eating fries. (talk) 00:38, 10 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
That wouldn't surprise me, actually. So long as you ate less in calories from fries than you burned in a day, plus there is the potential that you lost some muscle mass. I forget where I saw it recently, but I saw an experiment by a college professor who lost 10 pounds by eating Twinkies exclusively. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
As mentioned above, chocolate is a vegetable. I once lost fifteen pounds by doing nothing at all, just stressing in the middle of a divorce. Scrawny to start with, I didn't have fifteen pounds to lose. All better now. Clean-up-the-kitchen risotto incoming, with coarse chopped tomato on top. Alec Sanderson (talk) 01:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Constructive derailing attempt= success. SolPyre (talk) 01:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Friendly reminder (sticky)[edit]

When next I have the chance, the Bradlee Dean article is in severe need of some updating, especially now that his street team is no more and he appears to be a one-man demonstration in dickishness these days. Gooniepunk (talk) 11:32, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

***Important*** Techie notes (sticky)[edit]

  • Filters 10 and 21 are great but prone to false positives (thus, are set only to stun)
  • Filter 37 has been running for 7 months without a false positive, 97 hits, and is ready to go full-strength (i.e: block mode)
  • Filter 1 is hitting the same things as filter 37; filter 37 seems to be doing as good a job without the mess
  • Condition formatting for filter 37 has prevented users from getting caught when, for example, blanking their own user page.
  • Filter 37 has been fully implemented and is functioning just perfectly. Not sure if I want to bag Filter 1 just yet or not. Happy to report that #37 has successfully stopped over 40 would-be age replacement wandals since implementation.

Techie to do list[edit]

  • Revamp filters 10 and 21, give them bilateral conditional formatting to avoid false positives
  • Bring filter 37 live with blocking enabled, closely monitor for 2 months just in case
  • Implement space-specific formatting on more filters, using 37 as a example, to avoid false positives with other filters; rollout more bilateral conditional formatting to avoid false positives as well. Implement on all filters where applicable.

#Work on that filter Paravant wanted after, probably sometime after the holiday. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Re-format all edit filters to prevent false-positives using "old_wikitext" variables behind "new_wikitext" rules. Gooniepunk (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Gooniepunk (talk) 12:04, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me[edit]

Could you at least use normal, highly visible rollback on my definitely-not-pointy edits? SockTheory 04:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Gooniepunk (talk) 04:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Oh. What if they were instead, say, sharp-apexed conical edits? SockTheory 04:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
If they were that, then yes. Gooniepunk (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

All those deletions[edit]

I would join you in undoing Ryulong's deletions, but there's nothing that can be done. He's immune. David Gerard will stand by him no matter what. He should be de-mopped so he cannot do this kind of stuff, but it isn't going to happen. Gerard won't let it.---Mona- (talk) 22:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

What the fuck is both of your problems? Tallulah's additions were giving context to completely libelous accusations flung at this person that we don't need to repeat. What purpose is there to have "she allegedly posted photos of her cousin"?—Ryulong (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Simple: when untrustworthy, naughty children (that's you) play with toys that they shouldn't have because they've caused problems with them before and should have those scissors taken away (that's revision delete), it raises red flags. While I continue to dispute the validity of your need to revision delete those sections, I will cede arguing because it isn't worth the fight, and I am unwilling to be the inadvertent source of legal troubles for the RMF on the off-chance I am wrong about that.So far as things go, I agree that content shouldn't have been in the article, just not on the rev. deletion, and assuch, I am not going out of my way to defend the actual content. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:26, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


?getting an edit filter forthis welfare spammer?--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 07:28, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Try not being a welfare sponge, maybe. Just kidding, please don't banhammer me. - Shouniaisha (talk) 07:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I will work on it in an hour when I get home from work. Gooniepunk (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, on occasion[edit]

Pibot is running at all as far as I know. Some old version or mirror bot might be doing the job. - π 10:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Pibot is running on occasion, but it's just completely ignoring some pages like the Saloon Bar. When I looked through how it was set up on those pages, I noticed that the counters for where Pibot is archiving to were all screwed up. I was wondering if this could be a part of what's breaking it in places like the Saloon Bar, and if so, what corrective action you'd recommend? Gooniepunk (talk) 10:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Is the source for Pibot available? I don't mind taking a peek at it... Carpetsmoker (talk) 10:40, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
If you want to try and make an alternative Bot to the borked Pibot, I know ZooGuardhad some documentation on how to do so here. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:34, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
The code checks which pages the template is included on to form the list it archives. My theory is that it is only checking Template:Talkpage/Pibot, but not Template:Talkpage/PibotHidden. - π 02:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I say we just make a new generation of Bot, not beholden to old code masters no longer active on the wiki!--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea. I would help, but feeding my family is kind of a priority. - π 07:09, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, we shouldn't need a new Bot running on a botserver, since that was from days long since past. I'd help build a new bot also, but Python (which PiBot seems written on) is not my forte. However, that doesn't mean I can't learn it (I have a Python programming manual, I just haven't read it yet) Gooniepunk (talk) 07:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Why do a complete rewrite? Isn't it just one bug somewhere? Carpetsmoker (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Nobody seems to be sure. As I said, I don't know enough about the code for Pibot to be able to answer that, and the bot server (which could help us figure it out) seems accessible only by our long-departed operations manager. Gooniepunk (talk) 14:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Who all won?[edit]

I see that you did -- congrats! Who are the others?---Mona- (talk) 02:30, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

David Gerard, Paravant, FuzzyCatPotato and myself are the victors victims of the election. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah, may you all suffer the tortures of the damned live long and prosper.---Mona- (talk) 02:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Well done. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member Moderator 17:48, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
As you are now a moderator emeritus, I feel a sudden urge to wandalise your siggy's brain to jelly or bronze or something. WalkerWalkerWalker 17:54, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Yo, we cool?[edit]

Sorry about going off at you over the balance fallacy in the talk thread. I appreciate you stepping in and trying to help out. I was just incredibly frustrated over Paravant's actions and was talking a bit brashly, even if I was being honest. I respect you doing what you did in there. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 08:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

No harm, no foul. I get that situations can get heated, which is honestly why I proposed everybody stepping back and trying to hash it out constructively instead of bitching and power tripping. Honestly, in my opinion, that was the only possible solution that could've had a chance in hell of actually working. Gooniepunk (talk) 09:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Paravant earned a lot of respect from me for stepping back. I just... I get really irritated when people try to diffuse everyone as opposed to actually getting to the bottom of the situation. It makes it feel more like pushing it under the rug as opposed to actually doing anything about it, where it'll just wait to rear it's ugly head again. After having watched it just get dropped only to constantly resurface, I think I just felt like enough was enough. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 09:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey Gooniepunk[edit]

First off. Thanks for re-sysopping me years ago. Second. I've tried talking—check it yourself and all I get are lame assed objections. Anyway, I'm going soon and I'll be gone a few days at least—likely long after the protection has expired, and then I can go back to undoing. Have a nice weekend everyone!Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 21:15, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't aimed at you solely; I moderated that so all involved can have an hour to think up some good arguments to put on the talkpage. My point was that that edit war was untenable. Gooniepunk (talk) 21:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree, Goonie. There's already been talk page discussion and CC is in the minority, simply deeming the reasons "lame." S/he has said s/he will keep reverting until giving reasons s/he deems not lame, or until blocked. When a user flatly and explicitly rejects the majority's position on an edit it seems to me the thing to do is either ban them for a long time, or de-mop and only protect at level permitting sysop edits.---Mona- (talk) 21:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Honestly, I hadn't even read the damn talkpage by the time I took the action I did. All I saw was an edit war, so I threw on my moderator hat and stopped it. I only protected the article for a damn hour, so it isn't like people cannot resume editing the article after that. That hour was just to give everybody time to think about what was going on and gave people like me (outsiders) time to assess the situation so that if it starts back up, we can be in a better position to make a judgement call. It was a more economical decision at the time than making an arbitrary decision about who was/wasn't correct on the edits in question (which take a bit longer to sort out). And as of this typing, the edit war hasn't resumed, the page lock has expired, and even if it starts back up, I as a moderator now have a better idea of what was going on. Gooniepunk (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Very disappointed[edit]

Lumping me in with Ryu at the coop. Nothing I've done merits that. The opinions of many are of no consequence to me, but that has not included you. In my strong opinion Carpetsmoker is exactly right, that this site cannot survive undegraded, if at all, if grossly disruptive users -- users who are constantly cooped -- are allowed to stay. My belief is a good faith one based on much observation of Internet fora. I have cared about this wiki. But, if not only will nothing be done about the problem users, but a user --a moderator yet, for whom I voted -- is going to diss me in that manner I may have been misguided.---Mona- (talk) 01:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

If you are referring to my remark in that "Taller Goats" section, I was being a bit of a smartass. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes, well, you don't take the problem-user issue seriously. For a number of reasons I expected otherwise. That, combined with your comment, is truly disappointing. Carpetsmoker put a good deal of work into marshaling his facts on the Ryu problem, and, once again, nothing is going to come of it. And, Avenger is back raised fucking hell. Just how long do you expect quality editors to put up with this kind of thing? It would not surprise me if Carpetsmoker packs it in. I would not recommend any of the smart people I know joining here under these conditions.---Mona- (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
On the contrary, I take Ryulong's nonsense very seriously. However, I take a different angle Carpetsmoker in that, since Ryulong desysopped himself, I don't see much meriting further penalty outside of, perhaps, a topic ban and good tongue lashing. especially since the most recent conflicts involving him were two-way streets where the opposition also behaved poorly, MLP being one such example. While I'd love nothing more than to ban Ryulong,the fact remains that that inclination is tempered by reality. I think, given time, Ryulong would do enough to warrant a block, yes. But I just don't think we're there yet. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I find your logic a strange sort of logic, so we have to *wait* while Ryulong causes even more problems before we can take action? How long will this take? In the meanwhile, the damage is real. Paravant‎‎ already left as he's tired of dealing with assholes; we'll see if he sticks to it, but I suspect he will. And If I look at this graph as well as some other stats I can't help but feel there have been more people who have done so in a quieter manner in the last year. We can't blame this all on Ryulong, mind you, but we can blame it on a culture where excessive hostility and aggression is tolerated; and Ryulong is certainly the worst of them. Carpetsmoker (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I dunno; to be honest, I'm still going back and forth on the whole thing. Don't be surprised if my vote changes a few times in the next hours. Gooniepunk (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
If Paravant is really gone I may go as well. I've asked him by email. Ryu and Avenger are both going to destroy this site, and others like them will come because they are tolerated here. This will drive away the good editors, as it drives away the decent people at every single site that does not moderate and ban crapflooders and other problem users.---Mona- (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Speaking of de-sysop, is it impractical to limit edits to sysops on pages on which Ryulong goes haywire, or is that simply spreading the problem by having him moving onto some other page? Or perhaps that's considered an overly blunt instrument (i.e. preventing other non-sysops contributing to a page just because Ryulong throws a fit)?
Also, is there any particular reason why Ryulong isn't currently vandal binned? ScepticWombat (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Paravant has confirmed to me that he's really left. He can't take nothing being done, yet again. That is a terrible loss, as he has been the most active mod and we needed him. That's what all those "do nothing" voters have done.---Mona- (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes, what we really need is a mod that is "frequently active" because he abuses his powers on people he disagrees with, to spite them. That'll fix the problem. And before you say anything, yes, I brought a successful coop case over this, in which Para even admitted he'd been a shit mod for months, before seeking to do something to hopefully remedy the problem, which unfortunately, failed. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 02:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
(EC)You, Kitsunelaine, are part of the problem. Paravant is worth many sacks of gold whereas Ryu is a stick of coal. Oh, he's prickly and has pissed me off as well, but active modding is a tough job. Congrats to you and your pals, you are effectively destroying what was a good site and could have been terrific. I saw the coop case. That's not why he took time off. There were back channel things going on I don't intend to share.---Mona- (talk) 03:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Oh great. "You're wrong, but I won't tell you why, just trust that you're part of the problem!" Figures. Ryu wouldn't be as much of a "stick of coal" if people like you didn't consistently give him a good reason to be one. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 03:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
(EC x 5)Honestly,sysop-locking pages to keep Ryulong out is taking a sledgehammer to where a nail clipper was needed. Honestly, I'm of the opinion that articles like Gamergate need to be opened up to all users once again. Having seen what people think about keeping Ryulong around, it is clear to me that the only thing that needs to happen is fate, i.e: he needs to go. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
The Gamergate page will be overrun with sealioning and people demanding "neutrality" on a case that does not deserve it. Ryulong has done good work in keeping it truthful, as the truth does not always lie in the middle, nor is it always up for questioning. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 03:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I remain unconvinced of that supposed inevitability, especially since there are some highly effective edit filters now in place that prevent much of the obvious vandalism. Keep in mind that I am an orthodox believer in what RationalWiki's main page says about encouraging those who disagree with us to come and discuss it with us. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
You have no experience with Gamergaters, then. They are very interested in JAQing off for the sake of revisionist history. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 03:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
The good thing bout talkpage edits is that, if somebody starts JAQing off on a talkpage, you can do what I normally do to talkpage trolls (excluding Mikemikev, of course, but he's a special case), that being that you are not compelled to respond. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but that would mean needing some leeway in undoing disingenuous additions to the Gamergate article. This is going to cause a lot of edit wars, which is not a thing I think this site needs more of. I would think that opening up the TALK page, but leaving the page itself closed off, would be a better solution I think the both of us can agree upon, to prevent vandalism and attempts at revisionist history. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 03:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps, though as I stated above, there are some good edit filters currently in place to prevent a lot of the crap you're worried about. Remember the last time you saw vandal spree of somebody replacing an article with "RationalWiki sucks" for example? Not for months because of my "page replacement prevention" filter. This can be expanded upon to prevent the GG article from being completely changed in a matter of only a few edits. But I'm still up in the air about unprotecting the article itself. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I don't think that's going to be enough. And I've done my best to revert vandalism where I've seen it here, too. I think on this one we're just going to have to agree to disagree, though I respect your opinion. I just have too much experience with the methods of which GG has tried to spin the truth. - Kitsunelaine 「Beware. The foxgirls are coming.」 03:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Agree to agree to disagree on this one. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Ryu is not the only person who can handle the sick Gamergaters. It's absurd to retain a disruptive presence based on the notion that that single article "needs" him. It doesn't. The site needs for him to go. Avenger as well. Both of them are deeply disruptive and drove/drive Paravant, and many others, batshit.---Mona- (talk) 04:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Carpetsmoker Dutchisms (sticky)[edit]

Because I like these sayings and want to use them more:

  • To have long toes (long enough that they are easily stepped on)
  • The droplet that overflowed the bucket (similar to "the straw the broke the camel's back")

Gooniepunk (talk) 03:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Here's a collection: Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


I could have joined RW as soon as 2008 had I found it then, given that's when I had started to watch Conservapedia. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 05:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I just figured since people were talking about old guard reminiscing, I'd bring up ColinR. Lost I was aware, people still had no idea whatever happened to him. Not even Trent. Gooniepunk (talk) 05:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I know the name and have seen comments, but thats about it. Also, grandpa stop scaring us with stories of the old days when nature was yet untamed and wild scripters made the great robots that now sit idle in our midsts. It's all about the bright sleek future anyways.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 06:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll readily admit to not having dug deeply into the dusty recesses of the annals (note: double n's!) of RW and not having been around long enough to be able to draw on these kinds of fond memories for myself. I also don't think I'll put my history-foo to use remedying this blatant flaw in my character and knowledge, but I'm always willing to listen to a yarn from an Alter Kämpfer Old Bolshevik wise and well-travelled wikitrotter. ScepticWombat (talk) 06:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
A long time ago, in 2007, there was a discussion on Wikipedia between two editors, Tmtoulouse and ColinR, about starting an alternative website to Conservapedia. Those young gentlemen would go on to found RationalWiki. ColinR is the legendary co-founder of RationalWiki who, according to legend, paid the bills for the first number of months that he and Trent ran he website. ColinR then vanished, having made his last ever edits to RationalWiki in February 2008. From that time up until the founding of the RMF, RationalWiki was run solely by Trent. I was only a young editor back when ColinR vanished, having only been here weeks when he LANCB, and I was the prime age of 22 years young back then. But nobody, not even Trent the one time I asked him, has seen hide or hair of ColinR since. Gooniepunk (talk) 06:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Goonie, that's rather sad. We do forge relationships online, one persona to another, and when they disappear I often wonder why. Did they die? Are they terribly ill? Did some calamity befall them, like maybe the horror of incarceration? Even tho I never "met" him, I wonder what happened to ColinR.---Mona- (talk) 06:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not saying ColinR was abducted by aliens, but... Hey that was a great mystery tale! Thanks grandpa! (Never mind that I was a wee bit older than 22 in the Year of the Lord 2008... It's the "RW age" that counts in this context) ScepticWombat (talk) 06:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Oh phooey, the aliens stopped abducting people in the 90s. If ColinR disappeared in this century he's been targeted.---Mona- (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


Explain to me how what Paravent is doing right now is remotely acceptable, please? Hipocrite (talk) 15:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Opens coop case, coop case turns into dramafest and is ended. Begins argument on talk page, talk page turns into dramafest and is ended. Perhaps rethink your arguing strategy to include less drama. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Stop following me around. I'm asking someone how to deal with what's going on - remember when you told me to act like a human adult? That's what I'm doing. I could just flail out everywhere, if you'd prefer. Hipocrite (talk) 15:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey, Hipocrite, you may want to take a breather. 𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈 (talk) 15:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Fine. I'll take another 8 hours off, but when I come back, I hope something is being done to prevent people who are VERY ANGRY from banning people who piss them off and deleting their comments without some sort of community review/involvement. Hipocrite (talk) 15:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Sure, if you say so. 𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈 (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry, I was busy sleeping and then at work. What was going on? What was Paravant doing? Can you give me some links? Gooniepunk (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Ending a coop case that was going nowhere but dramatown.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:36, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm just getting to it now, and it's a clusterfuck of drama and wikilawyering. I think the best thing to do is remind all involved that, when HCM ensues as it did yesterday, keep your cool and be willing to let shit go. It may not be the best solution for yourself, but it is the best decision for the community. That goes not just for Hipocrite, but everybody else in the ensuing fallout from the Ryulong case. Yes, shit hit the fan yesterday and, no, not everybody on RationalWiki is perfect. Sorry. But at the end of the day, the case was dealt with and now it is time to move on and get back to business. I've spent enough time on RationalWiki and Wikipedia to know that holding grudges over people doing something you didn't like in the midst of total dramafests isn't healthy. Gooniepunk (talk) 23:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

What fucking chutzpah[edit]

This is to all the mods save Gerard:

It took me a bit to figure out what great crime I and Carpetsmoker had been accused of, and it appears it was the blocking of Hipocrite and his sock. Well, that takes the piss, it really does. I'm not so much angry with you Paravant, but with Goonie and FCP.

The moderators for the coop case CS had so painstakingly put together were almost wholly absent from their duties, and the conversation had utterly degenerated into vitriol about motives, unrelated "crimes," and just general bullshit. The coop urgently needed some order imposed, and the people who were elected to do that were just sitting around with their thumbs up their asses. (You Paravant, I know, were sort of recused.) Except, of course, to party and joke at the expense of those of us trying to behave like adults undertaking a serious process. (Goonie had a grand time laughing it up over slams at me and others.)

So, CS took the lead and tried to block -- for one hour -- the main culprit, to impose some order. When this person created a sock, I banned it for trying to circumvent the block. (Who needs a sock, if they are here in good faith? So I didn't care how long the sock ban was for as long as the main account was just one fucking hour.)

Nothing got done until Paravant left town. Then, mirabile dictu, the matter reuqired sober analysis and actually doing something.

I'll sit still for having Goonie, FCP and anyone else admonish me and CS right after they own the negligent abdication that led to it.---Mona- (talk) 15:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Sincerest apologies for being at work and unable to easily handle 100k text. I did what I did when I got home and consumed some actual food.
That said, blocking isn't a really good method -- not only is it against the CS, but given that Hipocrite is a sysop (or was, until someone desysopped him, also against the CS) is easily undone. Further, consider how pissed you would be if Hipocrite had done the same to you and CS -- desysopped and blocked you. Unilateral and aggressive behavior like that doesn't work well. Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 16:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
If I'd been hijacking a coop case the way Hipocrite was I'd merit a blocking. It should have come from a mod, but it did not. If you were at work I understand that. But you are not the only mod here. David Gerard is effectively not a mod in any case pertaining to Ryulong. Paravant was essentially recused. That left you and Goonie. I will not accept blame for trying to impose order on chaos because no one whose job it is would or could do so. ---Mona- (talk) 16:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
On a minor sidenote, your comment is kinda confusing to read because you're shortening both CarpetSmoker and Community Standards to CS. >.> (talk) 19:18, 8 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
This is really a clusterfuck of assumptions thrown around as fact. Indeed, I didn't originally see the Ryulong HCM as anything more than a dramafest and, thus, my original vote. However, as soon as I made my original vote, I immediately regretted it and started second-guessing myself. In fact, it was this second guessing that prodded me to listening to people like Carpetsmoker and Mona and Kitsunelaine (what a novel idea: a moderator listening to the people who elected them). Paravant's leaving had much, much less impact than Carpetsmoker's reasoning in changing my mind and, in fact, Carpetsmoker's remarks helped re-assure me what the correct course of action. So, yes, this was not exactly the most expedient way to handle community drama, but it was the most analytical and correct way. Sorry if it wasn't to your satisfaction, but I'm a bit new to the moderator game and wanted to curtail my natural inclination to make brash,quick decisions.The consequence was a more analytical side that most of the Wiki isn't used to seeing (again, that natural "driver" style). Gooniepunk (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Welcome back. I assume that means you intend to do nothing about people who feel that it's ok for them to strip sysop powers from people they disagree with and block them for months at a time. Hipocrite (talk) 00:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Dude, I am just now digging to the bottom of the shitpile you wanted me to look into while simultaneously working on homework. Either give me some time to dig into the shitpile and let me draw my own conclusions, or keep mouthing off to me and see how quickly I decide I no longer care. Gooniepunk (talk) 00:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time. You said above that it was your last post and I erroneously assumed it applied here - my apologies. I appreciate that you didn't drop the fact that a fellow sysop removed my bits and then his compatriot blocked me for two months. Hipocrite (talk) 00:12, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll tell you straight up that Monday-Wednesday CST are the worst days possible to expect me to act with expediency, as I work full time and go to school full time those three days and only work on RationalWiki in the minutes here and there I have spare time. That being said, it might take me until a few hours from now to act on anything. Gooniepunk (talk) 00:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Goonie, I do understand that you are new. But the fact remains that the wiki urgently needed moderator action in the coop yesterday. At some point, AgingHippie admonished Paravant to do his job. But, Paravant wasn't sure how involved he should be in a Ryu coop case. The result was HCM, heading toward HCM0. Carpetsmoker had put a great deal of time and energy into marshaling the facts to coop Ryu, an effort for which he deserves thanks. I was utterly appalled to see the case turning into a big fucking joke and digressing into complete bullshit. Hipocrite was a prime offender, and when Carpetsmoker blocked him for a mere hour, I supported him in that and went after the sock account. After one hour the real Hipocrite could be back. Really, it smacks of total ingratitude toward Carpetsmoker to pander to Hipocrite. None of it would have happened had the mods: 1. Taken the coop case seriously from the outset, and 2. Done. Their. Jobs.---Mona- (talk) 00:34, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I dont exactly feel great sorrow that the comments of somebody who only wanted to cause more drama than already existed got removed. A commitment to allowing people to comment has to be matched with not letting people abuse that free speech to make trouble. Yelling Fire in an already panicked theater and all. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I for one enjoy yelling "fire" in crowded theatres as well as malls. TheAmazingSkeptic (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Look, I told Hypocrite I'd look into it. Does that mean I side with them? Not exactly,it just means I am a man of my word that, when I say I will look into something, I will. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


So, basically, here's my thoughts on this Hipocrite/Mona/Carpetsmoker/Paravant clusterfuck. I agree that Hypocrite has been trying to pour gasoline on the fire that is the "Great Ryulong Clusterfuck of 2015," adding counter-productive edits in the original coop case and doing very little but concern trolling since then. While I am of the ethic that remarks in coop cases shouldn't be removed, it is plainly obvious that such concern trolling 1) does not and did not offer anything substantive to the discussion at hand and 2) while I don't exactly agree with the removal of the comment in question, I'm not mourning the fact it was deleted because it is plainly obvious to me by Hipocrite's behavior since the Ryulong coop case that they were either expecting or wanting something like the ensuing HCM to happen. Indeed, the entire coop case surrounding the removal of their comments was nothing more than something straight out of MC's book of trolling. As such, while I'd like admonish Mona/Carpetsmoker/Paravant for what they did, it's moot point when compared with the bigger picture: that they did it in the interests of quelling somebody who was concern trolling and pouring gasoline on the HCM fire. Gooniepunk (talk) 01:18, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

More like pissing in the neck stump of the HCM. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Star of David.png as much fun as requiring a double mastectomy 01:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
a very measured and appropriate response Goonie. Well done. --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 01:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Very good. And yes, I understand that having pledged to, you had to look into it. For my part, I've moved on to some very pleasurable, collaborative researching and writing what is shaping up to be a best-of-the-wiki---Mona- (talk) 01:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC).
I feel included in that praise. Sweet. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 04:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

You're a mod.[edit]

Can you please tell Paravant to stop fucking around. If he can't help himself he should be de-modded. See below for his recent behaviour:

Acei9 03:41, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh hey look it's Ace here to bitch about stuff we've already hashed out.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
But yet you seem to continue acting like some kind of weird RW dictator. Acei9 03:49, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Look Ace, please don't involve any of my issues here. I absolutely do not want Paravant de-modded. If I wanted to coop Paravant I'd have done so. He was wrong to revert edits I wanted to stay on my talk page, but as a matter of his poorly exercised discretion, not a violation of any rules. He's had a tough time with several heinously problematic users, and I give him latitude for that. It is my sense that after the Ryu coop -- and Paravant having taken some time off -- that we are doing sort of a blank slate, starting over thing. ---Mona- (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
If you look here, Goonie, Paravant knows he is being an ass yet carries on anyway. @Mona - it doesn't matter what you think. Acei9 03:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Ah yes, I'm carrying it on by posting a shitty joke template to make fun of Monas detractors. Such brazen dictatoriship! --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Well Ace, it does, in fact, matter what I think. It matters what all editors think. And I can tell you there is very, very little support for what you wish to do.---Mona- (talk) 03:57, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
The first thing was obviously meant as a joke. The rest, eh. *shrugs* I don't see the harm in copying deleted stuff to userspace as long as it's not libel/dox/spam or something. Is there actually any community consensus documented somewhere of how broadly AfD votes apply to content across wikispaces? (talk) 03:55, 9 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
We already discussed all of that in a Coop case in which I admitted fault, Ace dragging it out again is just him wanting to flog a dead horse. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
excellent - then I take it you'll stop fucking with peoples user spaces. Acei9 04:00, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Given we already had a coop case over which we discussed all but the first point, and reopening a coop case on settled matter that nobody but you is still worrying about would look bad on you, all you could coop me on is my posting a shitty joke. But please Ace, do coop me for it. I'll enjoy seeing "Paravant posted a shitty template joke DEFROCK HIM!" --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Oh FFS, I didn't see that example of the template on my user page. Ace, that was a goddam joke. Chill, dude.---Mona- (talk) 03:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Please jog my memory: if we ignore the joke template on Mona's userpage, were not the other issues taken care of by Paravant's recent 10-day editing break? Gooniepunk (talk) 04:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Just look at his contribs bud, he is flailing around like jackass everywhere in a manner no other mod seems to be acting so not quite sure what his issue is but anytime he is around people are being blocked, edits reverted for no particular reasoning etc. Acei9 04:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
The idea of a mod providing a light touch seems to be lost on Acei9 04:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
A light Touch? For IP? Proven to not work on this issue. for Hypocrite? Maybe, but his decision to keep the dramafest of yesterday going into this morning and afternoon leaves me skeptical to the effectiveness of a light touch. That's about it for contributions since my Sabbatical, Ace.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
{EC} I seem to think we recently discussed his actions a week or two ago, with him taking a sabbatical for a week to think about his actions. I'm going to let the stuff involving Ryulong go because, well, Ryulong was more toxic than TK could have ever dreamed of being. The Mona stuff was something Mona didn't seem to mind. Since Paravant was punished after most of those revisionsyou posted, I hesitate to revisit them. If, however, he keeps some of those behaviors up in the weeks and months to follow, then action most certainly can, will, and should be taken. Gooniepunk (talk) 04:21, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
The "chinese robber" deletion in my userspace wasn't a problem as far as I'm concerned, It was you (Ace) that made it a problem. You're free to "make problems" as you see fit, but as "the involved party", I think I should point this out. I was mostly just surprised, and do disagree with Paravant (although I believe he later said he was wrong, not sure); but there was never "a problem" until you made it one.
Also: can we go a day or 2 without stiring up drama please? Because FUCK I am tired of this. we look like a bunch of fucking 12 year olds with ADD and too much sugar who just snorted some coke. Carpetsmoker (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
"can we go a day or 2 without stiring up drama please" Heh, good luck with that one. This is RW after all. ;) (talk) 04:07, 9 December 42015 AQD (UTC)
@Carpet I'm ready for when you want to leave the drama and just have fun making that Dutch guy an article. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 04:10, 9 December 2015 (UTC);;
Hey, I think we made it to three days once--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
More serious, conflict and drama are not the same thing. This is needless drama from someone who has a bug up his ass about someone else, not conflict. You two should get a room and hash it out, not get other mods and half the wiki involved. Carpetsmoker (talk) 04:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Ace, Paravant is a good mod who is aggressive about managing asshole users. He became a bit stressed out and got hyperactive about it, I agree. But you know what? He was still re-elected mod, overwhelmingly. I supported that re-election, and I urged him to return after the Ryo debacle (which ended up not a debacle). We need at least one relatively aggressive mod, and that's been Paravant. I disagree with some of his decisions, but so what? He's mod, not me, and he does a tough and necessary job.---Mona- (talk) 04:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Mods are not special users nor are they the rule makers that should be kowtowed too. Acei9 04:27, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
And yet you seem to be the only one worrying a great deal about my obvious Fascism. Take a step back man. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
McWicked.. enough of the concern trolling. That's all that you do here. If you have some useful content, post it. Otherwise, just fuck off.--TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 04:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
If you have some useful content, post it lol, that'll happen--"Shut up, Brx." 04:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Ha, Brx. Hope you passed your cashiers test. Acei9 04:50, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Both of you stop before this goes in bad directions. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
No. Acei9 04:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Then i'll speak as a mod. Stop, before this goes in a bad direction. We've had enough drama and don't need you or Brx causing more. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
nothing has happened that requires mod intervention so fuck you. Acei9 04:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)