User talk:Hipocrite/Archive6

Please see

• User talk:Weaseloid#Feminism

So that Falun Gong guy you edited back said we don't have editors that have read the Zhuan Falun

Now I'm here. I read it and I'll give them hell. --Teslashark (talk) 03:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

God, I knew it

It took about twenty minutes after I used, "Bush administration neocon conspiracy" [1] for you to piss your pants.[2] Why don't you look at the goddamn Wikipedia article or CNN's website? nobs^{It all depends what ISIS is.} 18:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Sit on it and spin, fuckface. Hipocrite (talk) 18:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Whuts'amatter? em-bare-assed by, or can't defend your anti-neocon conspiracy conspiracies? nobs^{It all depends what ISIS is.} 21:37, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

SPIN, MOTHERFUCKER, SPIN! Hipocrite (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Lead-crime point

On your lead-crime deletion, I'm not passionate about my counter-proposal ... just seeing if there's a middle ground. If not, I'll defer without rancor. MarmotHead (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Statistical flim-flam. Comparing two point estimates and saying "crime high lead low in us, crime low lead high in china, so lead inversely correlated crime" is literally statistical murder. You can do that study, but you need to take all the countries - not just two. Or you can do a time-series on the two countries. You can't just say "TREND IS BACKWARDS SO LEAD REDUCES CRIME HARDYHARHAR" Hipocrite (talk) 22:12, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

You're right. Too many moving parts to say lead is the cause. MarmotHead (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Explain this

You blocked John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (talk · contribs · block  · rights  · rename) for multiple days. For what reason? Sarah (HH) 16:25, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Levenge. I think that was clear from my block message, no? Hipocrite (talk) 16:33, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The only thing clear from the block message is that you're just as much an insufferable cunt here as on wikipedia. Cheers. Sarah (HH) 17:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Since revdel activity seems to interest you

Perhaps this is something you might be partial to looking at. ;) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 16:53, 21 September 42015 AQD (UTC)

Listen

You're trying to derail a coop case. Feel free to disagree, but don't attempt to derail things with stuff about Mona. Have a problem with Mona? Start a coop case about her. Don't poison Ryulong's case. Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Unblock and resysop me right now and I'll start that case right now. I don't want to escalate the tool-war game, so please confirm receipt of this message. Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 19:13, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Have an hour to cool down. If you call this entire site "gators and bronies out to get Ryulong" you need it. Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Please copy my section below to the coop, right now. Hipocrite (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I do not take orders like this, from anyone on this site, thank-you-very-much. You can ask like a normal human being to another normal human being. Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

When you blocked and desysoped me our relationship changed, so no. Hipocrite (talk) 19:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Act like a normal human adult. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 20:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I'd be the first. Hey, mod, do you countenance blocking and desysoping people you disagree with? Hipocrite (talk) 20:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I didn't block you for disagreeing, I blocked you because you were disturbing a coop case by inserting stuff that was not relevant to the coop case and being one of the biggest twats I've seen in a while. I don't need to tolerate that. This community doesn't need to tolerate that. Carpetsmoker (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Put back the coop case against you and we'll talk. Hipocrite (talk) 20:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Please copy me to the coop

Carpetsmoker has blocked for 1 hour and desysoped Hipocrite. He did this because "Excessive amount of Tu quoque and other nonsense on the coop page and only serves to derail the entire discussion."

Mona has blocked an obvious sockpuppet of Hipocrite for 3 months. She did this without IP-editing-allowed, effectively blocking Hipocrite for 3 months. She did this because "circumventing warranted block."

I don't think we blocked people for being wrong, or even annoying. Perhaps I was wrong. Let's find out.

I propose we sysoprevoke Mona, who has abused her tools multiple times (links coming)

For:

Against:

Goat:

I propose we sysoprevoke Carpetsmoker for 3 months, for abusing his tools in this instance:

For:

Against:

Goat:

"Despite the fact that we don't fucking block people for disagreeing,"

Please be consistent about this, at least.KrytenKoro (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

[3]

Which one is blocking a non-sysop for disagreeing? Note that blocking sysops is fine for anything. Hipocrite (talk) 19:49, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

My issue lies with you criticizing Mona, and calling for her ban, for problematic behavior which you are simultaneously supporting by defending Ryulong's behavior, and claiming that all of the issues with it stem from other people. Either it's not acceptable for editors to behave in this manner, and they need to develop a remedy so that they can edit constructively, or it's okay and you have no place to be calling for anyone else's bans for playing along. Clearly there is a problem -- banning Ryulong is unwarranted, but that doesn't mean the only other solution is to ban everyone else.KrytenKoro (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Why not? Some people are just possibly pure negative. Their content may be poor, and they may drive off people who provide good content. Ryulog is a question mark. Some of his content is good, and no one is arguing it's not - no one, but he may drive away people who provide good content, but perhaps that's just a side effect of other users who are actually the ones to get rid of. Just a thought! Also, there's a difference between unilateral action taken by one aggrieved party and reasoned decision by the mob. I think we should desysop and block lots of people - but I don't just up and do it, because that's not how things are done. Hipocrite (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

And it wasn't for mere "disagreeing." Hipocrite was one of a handful crapflooding the coop case with trolling and vitriol unrelated to the matter at hand. Something needed to be done.---Mona- (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Mona, you are an incompetent nitwit. Hipocrite (talk) 19:53, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

And Mona rests their case. GJ everyone time for lunch? return to drama with full stomachs? Sounds good to me! 65.78.150.19 (talk) 19:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Whining about banning those who disagree

It'd have more weight if you weren't doing it yourself. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 16:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

What the fuck are you on about? Here's my log of blocks made: [4]. Where do you see this banning disagreers part? Years ago? Hipocrite (talk) 16:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

(change visibility) 15:05, 7 December 2015 Hipocrite (Talk | contribs | block) blocked Carpetsmoker (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 3141 seconds (about 1 hour) (autoblock disabled) (Removing other peoples comments) (unblock | change block) Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 16:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I didn't desysop him. He could have unblocked himself at any moment. That's the defining difference between using blocks to send messages and blocks to ban people, don't you agree? Hipocrite (talk) 16:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Regardless, let me profess my sincerest apologies if Carpetsmoker felt that my block was anything more that an attempt to send an urgent message, and pledge that I will no longer block even sysops for 1 hour (absent the determination that the block is in the serious best-interests of whatever), even though it literally does nothing. Hipocrite (talk) 16:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

We have a series of short joke block lengths for that. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 16:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

My understanding was that people were not notified of the short block lengths, but see my pledge above to not violate, even in totally transitory ways, anyone's ability to edit. Perhaps you could have some other people make that selfsame pledge and apology! Hipocrite (talk) 16:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Nah, Paravant will block someone for two weeks for something that did not even happen... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Proof? TheAmazingSkeptic (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Ask Paravant why exactly he banned me for two weeks. And when I tried to explain what he had obviously (and likely deliberately) misunderstood, he banned me from editing my own talk page... Way to show you are calm and reasonable... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Do you happen to speak German?

If yes, this might interest you... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

NEIN. I speak only english, like a good 'MERICAN. Hipocrite (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Monolingualism is a shame... You only really notice what you'd been missing once you stop being monolingual... btw, does RW support Babels like WP does? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what Babels are. I quit Wikipedia some time ago because it's hot garbage. Hipocrite (talk) 21:36, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Given the way some WP articles are hopelessly outdated, one might assume that the very concept of wikis is dead... Babels are boxes that say which language(s) you speak and at which level... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Paravent

Please confirm that you intend to return my bits in 8.8 hours. I want nothing to do with you, your Israel/Palestine warriors who are destroying what was a great resource, or any of the stupid drama that you've inflicted on a site you used to love, but I'd like to go out with my head held high. Hipocrite (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, odds are that you won't be getting them back in 8.8 hours, given 2 am is not a time I usually am awake at. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 00:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

If you give them back now, I'll LANCB for at least 8 hours, on my honor. Hipocrite (talk) 00:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

No. Go away. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 00:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Ok then. Hipocrite (talk) 00:41, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

How Can I trust the honor of somebody I do not know? Therefor, I maintain the previous stance - you are doing nothing good and need to step away. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 00:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

How about you leave me alone, then? I'll wait until my block expires and someone will give me the bit back and then I'll say good riddance. Don't respond to this, I don't want to hear it from someone who trusts me so little as to think that I'd actually go against exactly what I promised not to do. Leave. Go away. Hipocrite (talk) 00:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Everyone at this site just needs to chill out a little. TheAmazingSkeptic (talk) 00:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Unless you're here to let me leave with my head held high (return my bit and let me LANCB), please leave me alone. I can't figure out how to turn email notifications off. Hipocrite (talk) 00:49, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

If you're watching this thread, unclick send emails for the thread you're watching in http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Preferences if you still care, that is. TheAmazingSkeptic (talk) 00:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

There's a separate line for the talkpage at the Email notification section, actually (at Special:Preferences). Alternatively, emptying the email box would also work (or you could make it send the notification to someone else's email if you wanna be extra silly). 142.124.55.236 (talk) 02:20, 9 December 42015 AQD (UTC)

Your behaviour

It is the poorest of form to try and spread lies about a user, then run away from those accusations. No doubt you believe that your argument is so important, and you are so right, that you can make stuff up to win. Your behaviour is contemptible and your arguments are weak and ineffectual. Tielec01 (talk) 03:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more with you, my dear Tielec01. If you want a textbook example of filthy lies, look no further (in this case Hipocrite nastily accusing me of abusing my sysop tools). From such a bender of pure vitriol, no decent man could ever hope to recover. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:30, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Er, I have no idea which user Tielco means that Hipocrite lied about? How could I have missed any drama at this wiki?!---Mona- (talk) 03:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

It's not like he wildly slandered a handful of good people or anything. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Why are there still people talking/worrying about this goat of a person while they could be doing something else? Carpetsmoker (talk) 03:41, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Just curious, is all. Tielco isn't normally involved in stuff like this and I wonder what raised his ire?---Mona- (talk) 03:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I've done so much constructive contributing today, I've earned dancing on the grave of a vandal. Look ma, no hands. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, we both have done very good work today. I'm nearly giddy with feelings of both happy productivity and the joyous resolution of the Ryu mess. Life is good and I demand satisfaction of my prurient curiosity.---Mona- (talk) 03:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

So what are you waiting for - time to uncork the fine wine and watch Wake Up America with a huge, confused smile. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)