User talk:Iscariot

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Iscariot!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

[1] 22:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Thanks, the Beatles actually worked when Youtube kicked in over the guitar intro of Elegy by Machinehead. Now all I have to is remember how to wiki code and set myself up with a snazzy sig. Many moons ago I used to be able to edit wikis without acting like the Man-Of-A-Thousand-Edits Ken. -- Iscariot (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Demotion[edit]

You have been demoted to Sysop for not being a pain in the neck. 17:32, 4 November 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

RE: Aschlafly001[edit]

I'm not sure User:Aschlafly001 is a vandal, really. They could equally be trying to put a little snark in. I'd rather we assume good faith now, and vandal bin later - vandalism is pretty easy to undo. What do you think? DalekEXTERMINATE 05:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm someone else, and I approve this message. 001's edits weren't good, but they didn't seem bad, either. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 05:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
It was unfunny and using that account name is an obvious parody account, though I may be coming down with TK-itus after spending the last 20 minutes on CP. I'll take the brake off. -- Iscariot (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Feeding the troll[edit]

When did turning the tables on a troll become a blockable offense? Tricksy (talk) 07:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

He was editing someone else's comments, it's not something I approve of. If he wants to continue, he can do so in an hour. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 07:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
"He" is me. I wasn't editing the comment itself, but striking it. If that's verbotten, then I wish you were around a few months back when it was being done to me (actually IIRC my posts were being edited as well, which switched to strike out when I complained). Oh well. I've troll tagged the post instead. Tricksy (talk) 07:26, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I have no clue what was going on a few months ago, but from previous wiki experiences I hold another user's signed comments to be inviolate and revert any changes by another user. The banhammer was a cooling off device. I'm sure someone will jump in and tell me if things are different here. I didn't know "he" was you, you learn something new everyday. I'm sure you're a big fish in your own pond, but I had no clue. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 07:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't criticising you for not knowing it was me, just point it out. In fact I wasn't attempting criticism for the block, but genuinely trying to find out if I had breached some "rule". Give it no further thought. Happy Thursday. Tricksy (talk) 07:51, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
You have. -- Nx / talk 07:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, firstly those are quite specifically not rules, but even so why do I get blocked when there was no block for someone doing it to my edits? — Unsigned, by: Tricksy / talk / contribs 12:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
"BUT BUT BUT HE STARTED IT FIRST". Seriously, where's that moral superiority we keep hearing all about? -- Nx / talk 15:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually, no. I was pointing out the unfair treatment in blocking one editor for an action, but ignoring that another is performing the same action. This kind of thing seems to go on a fvair bit for those that disagree. It sticks out at the moment because I have been hearing what a fair place this is. 118.208.86.84 (talk) 21:26, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Troll Punky Your mental puke relief 15:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Jesus H. Me! Let's settle this, you were blocked because I don't like people editing other user's signed edits. If you have a problem with the way I've used my ability to block you then you register your complaint here.

However, as you've already been informed that you should edit other people's signed edits here and then responded to that giving the impression you actually read and understood what was told to you, I don't see your complaint getting far. Finally, you got blocked because I noticed you doing it in recent changes, you bring me a recent case of another user doing the same (with the diff links) I'll happily slap a block on them as well. We've established that I don't know who the hell you are, so this persecution complex you're insinuating is all in your head. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 07:57, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that[edit]

It looks like my phone screwed up something. -- Nx / talk 05:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

No probs, my laptop's done something similar to me before. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 05:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
My phone probably couldn't handle all the stupid. -- Nx / talk 05:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

Thanks for flagging my request up, dahlink. Real first name and last initialTalk, talk, talk skim my contributions 12:33, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 12:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

RevisionDelete[edit]

The "potentially libelous information" reason is for when an editor posts something libelous about someone, e.g. in an article about a person. This is just MC's usual bullshit, the RWF is not going to sue itself because MC posted something libelous on the saloon bar.

Also, please read RW:SYSOP#Hiding revisions, I know it's tempting to just tick all the checkboxes to be safe, but that's not how you're supposed to do it. -- Nx / talk 20:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Did you even read the hidden revisions? There was nothing about RWF suing itself, it was a claim that a user on this site was involved in illegal activities. Without any proof that's something I consider to be libellous. And I'm quite aware of how to correctly hide revisions, if you'll notice I did each one individually and certainly did not "just tick all the checkboxes". -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 22:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
You hid the username which you should not have done, that's what I meant by ticking all the checkboxes. I doubt PFoster is going to sue RW, but in any case the edit has been reverted and PFoster can delete it if he wants to. -- Nx / talk 07:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

GRRM on E-Readers[edit]

I didn't want to get off topic on talk:WIGOCP but my guess for why GRRM outsells the bible on E-Readers is that people buy books on E-Readers for themselves to read, and lots of folks buy bibles for other people. I know I have about a dozen bibles and never bought one.--Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 05:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I don't actually know if GRRM outsells anyone on e-readers, I was just making a funny at Andy's "biggest selling book of all time" schtick. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 13:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Sig[edit]

"Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!" You might want to tweak that a little... :) SophieWilderModerator 10:18, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought about changing it to for Governor 2013, but haven't yet found the willpower to do so... Seems apathy goes with everything with the Schlafly name on it. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 14:11, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

RMF Information[edit]

If you're looking for information about the governance of the RMF, I recommend checking out their actual website. Here's a link to their bylaws: http://rationalmedia.org/publications/foundation/by-laws/

I didn't want to comment on your post at the coop because I'm not involving myself in this issue, but I noticed you referenced our page on the RMF, which (as far as I know) is outdated. - Grant (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)