User talk:Lulz/Archived talk

... and if you think that little game is fooling anyone think again. I know exactly what you are up to. Lulz indeed.--AvengingAngel 07:25, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

To whom are you addressing this comment? DocSock 07:25, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

CatWatcher puerile plot

It's some sort of ploy over in Conservapedia. A user by the name of Fox is going round making overzealous edits to ingratiate himself. However, it's CatWatcher, I'm sure, and if you look at the posting I've put on his/her page, you will see what I mean. I think that CatWatcher/Fox has a plan to become SySop. also implicated are SeanTheSheep,Lulz,Ferret --AvengingAngel 07:32, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Very interesting, AA. Why don't you just block them? Although, if you wait a little, you may catch more fish with one worm.DocSock 07:33, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

I don't htink you understand. I have been blocked - from Conservapedia, because I somehow got implicated yesterday, but when I went snooping around, I uncovered this. I am just trying to make people aware of what is going on.

--AvengingAngel 07:37, 1 June 2007 (CDT) So what was your screen name on CP?Prof0705 07:52, 1 June 2007 (CDT) AvengingAngel, and apparently I am a sock of someone called Ovissean - I think that's another one of the CatWatcher socks - ovis, sheep, sean (sean the sheep, geddit?) --AvengingAngel 07:55, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

It's pretty obvious that the sly Fox is part of some cunning scheme to become a sysop. He's deleting parody entries and the speed at which he seems to find them[1] makes it obvious he knows exactly where they are. No doubt because he was the originator. Can't wait til he starts abusing his sysop powers. Maybe he'll block TK.

WhatIsG0ing0n 08:17, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Almost superhuman speed, yes. Perhaps its because the parodists themselves keep drawing attention to the location of their dirty little secrets by jumping up and down in protest using their current socks, which attracts scrutiny of where they've been leaving muddy footprints... Lulz 08:20, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Naw! They protest after the sly Fox has deleted their dirty little secrets. He found them on his own, but its not so much found - he knew where to look - he put them there.

WhatIsG0ing0n 08:26, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Cool sock! Thanks! Auld Nick 10:29, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Re: Welcome

How's the weather in your part of the world Fox? Fingermouse 08:08, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Sunny :) Lulz 08:09, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Teh Sig

Warning:Pedant Alert

Your current hebrew transliteration for your sig לול could be better transliterated as לֻלז, if you're interested. lamed-qubuts-lamed-zayin, rather than lamed-vav-lamed. If however, you're a Hebrew speaker, and you're using the actual translation of it (it also means chicken-coop; how interesting), then wouldn't something along the lines of לו֗ליִם convey the idea of 'lulz' in the Encyclopedia Dramatica sense, rather than 'lol' in the interjectory sense. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Actually, to be pedantic, "chicken coop" is specifically לול תרנגולות - but anyway, I chose לול because

• it fits with the aesthetic simplicitly of LoL, maintaining the nicely rounded symmetry
• it is also a sly nudge at its more colloquial use to describe a childrens' play-pen :D
• anything else - and I see this is something you have yet to learn ;) - smacks of trying too hard :D לול 05:51, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

OK; I'll come clean: my pedantry was a way to see who you were. I had a suspicion that you were user:fox, but because I am evil and prone to scheming, I decided to approach it obliquely - by offering some Hebrew points, I tried to gauge how much you knew - evidently, a lot! That, together with your comments elsewhere, has confirmed it. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

I have made no secret of the fact that I am Fox - see Re:Welcome above :D לול 06:34, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Whoops, didn't spot that. :(. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

BBC

Anyway, on a slight tangent, what is a reputable source, if not the Beeb? Fox (no pun intended) news?--ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

I'm assuming by the time you're editing (I'm too lazy to check your user page) that you are living in Britain, probably England - although I may be wrong. But if I am correct then you should hardly need to ask why the BBCs coverage of middle-eastern politics cannot be trusted. You want me to write an essay on it?? As for the Phalange being blamed for the refugee massacres, that all fits very nicely with the revisionistas' and Grauniadistas) blaming of all aggression/deaths/murders etc etc on Israel and Christians. Syria's Army were the dominant force there and were engaged in fierce fighting with the Palestinians. It was their activities in that little tea-dance that led to them being called to account at the pan arab summit. לול 06:58, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Yes, I am from the UK - are you accusing the BBC of falsifying information? --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

http://www.bbcwatch.co.uk/index.html לול 07:14, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

I'll have a look at it; the reports are quite long, but it looks as if they've actually bothered with research, which is good. In the meantime, can you suggest to me some unbiased sources? --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

MidEast fun

Well, if you guys are gonna step into this shit hole, a few things...first, few sources are unbiased, but there was a very good book on the six-day war pub about 2 yrs ago, i can dig it up next time the vicodin wears off. Next, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times has his "rules" of interpreting the Mid East:

Rule 1: What people tell you in private in the Middle East is irrelevant. All that matters is what they will defend in public in their own language. Anything said to you in English, in private, doesn’t count. In Washington, officials lie in public and tell the truth off the record. In the Middle East, officials say what they really believe in public and tell you what you want to hear in private.

Rule 2: Any reporter or U.S. Army officer wanting to serve in Iraq should have to take a test, consisting of one question: “Do you think the shortest distance between two points is a straight line?” If you answer yes, you can’t go to Iraq. You can serve in Japan, South Korea or Germany ­ not Iraq.

Rule 3: If you can’t explain something to Middle Easterners with a conspiracy theory, then don’t try to explain it at all ­ they won’t believe it.

Rule 4: In the Middle East, never take a concession, except out of the mouth of the person doing the conceding. If I had a dollar for every time someone agreed to recognize Israel on behalf of Yasser Arafat, I could paper my walls.

Rule 5: Never lead your story out of Lebanon, Gaza or Iraq with a cease-fire; it will always be over before the next morning’s paper.

Rule 6: In the Middle East, the extremists go all the way, and the moderates tend to just go away.

Rule 7: The most oft-used expression by moderate Arab politicians is: “We were just about to stand up to the bad guys when you stupid Americans did that stupid thing. Had you stupid Americans not done that stupid thing, we would have stood up, but now it’s too late. It’s all your fault for being so stupid.”

Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas ­ like liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes, Iraq is having a civil war. But there is no Abe Lincoln in this war. It’s the South vs. the South.

Rule 9: In Middle East tribal politics there is rarely a happy medium. When one side is weak, it will tell you, “I’m weak, how can I compromise?” And when it’s strong, it will tell you, “I’m strong, why should I compromise?”

Rule 10: Middle East civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil war, with one side vanquishing the other; b) like the Cyprus civil war, with a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps everyone in line. Saddam Hussein used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is America. If America doesn’t want to play that role, Iraq’s civil war will end with A or B.

Rule 11: The most underestimated emotion in Arab politics is humiliation. The Israeli-Arab conflict, for instance, is not just about borders. Israel’s mere existence is a daily humiliation to Muslims, who can’t understand how, if they have the superior religion, Israel can be so powerful. Al Jazeera’s editor, Ahmed Sheikh, said it best when he recently told the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche: “It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about seven million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West’s problem is that it does not understand this.”

Rule 12: The Israelis will always win, and the Palestinians will always make sure they never enjoy it. Everything else is just commentary.

Rule 13: America’s first priority is democracy, but the Arabs’ first priority is “justice.” The warring Arab tribes are all wounded souls, who really have been hurt by colonial powers, by Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, by Arab kings and dictators, and, most of all, by each other. For Iraq’s long-abused Shiite majority, democracy is first and foremost a vehicle to get justice. Ditto the Kurds. For the minority Sunnis, democracy in Iraq is a vehicle of injustice. For Americans, democracy is about protecting minority rights. For Arabs, democracy is about consolidating majority rights and getting justice.

Rule 14: The Lebanese historian Kamal Salibi had it right: “Great powers should never get involved in the politics of small tribes.”

Rule 15: Whether it is Arab-Israeli peace or democracy in Iraq, you can’t want it more than they do

All sad but true; Friedman writes incisively, have you ever read any of his books, PalMD ? לול 08:56, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Not really, as I usually keep up on his column. I haven't read his history of the (first) Lebanon War yet.--PalMD^{-yada yada} 09:42, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Isn't Friedman the guy who's been consistently wrong about how long it would take to finish up in Iraq, to the extent that six months is frequently referred to as a "Friedman Unit" due to his repeated predictions, each of which is followed by another 6-month prediction? --Kels 12:21, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

No. לול 12:44, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Ah, it must have been someone else with the same name and job. --Kels 12:57, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Read the edit history - dumb question receives dumb answer; why ask that question when you had already gone away and looked it up on wiki-p beforehand? Was it to make some trashtalking point about Friedman, or to try and impress everybody with your vast grasp of all worldly affairs and knowledge? Don't waste my time posting dumb crap on my talk page. Thanks. לול 16:57, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

*rolls eyes* I looked it up afterwards, dipshit. --Kels 17:17, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Sure you did, dumbass. I'm not referring to your link posting, I'm referring to your post preceeding that one. לול 17:45, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

For someone named Lulz, you sure got a stick up your ass. Here's a timeline:

• Sees stuff about Friedman
• Remembers term and general gist of blog comments
• Asks about term, etc.
• Gets condescending non-answer
• Looks up on WP, finds out your answer (that it didn't refer to him) was wrong
• Reported back
• Receive more condescention

That's pretty much it. I left out your mind-reading and general rudeness, though. --Kels 17:52, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Friedman has been extremely critical of the US occupation of Iraq. He has consistently warned the administration that long delays (e.g. 6 months) in making important decisions in Iraq can make the difference between one type of defeat and another. I think the FU thing might be some sort of conservative FU to him.--PalMD^{-yada yada} 13:03, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

It was coined by Atrios, who's not exactly right-wing, and I've seen it widely used on left-wing political blogs. Although it's more about his predictive ability rather than his support of the war or lack thereof. --Kels 13:09, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

"slip up"

So you are the sly Fox? WhatIsG0ing0n 04:59, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Er, yes - but see the comments above lol - it isn't a secret :D לול 05:07, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

I seem to be a bit slow on the uptake;-) WhatIsG0ing0n 05:20, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Hey

Its good to have some reinforcements. Bohdan 20:27, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

Hey, nema problema, bro :) I think we would be foolish if we didn't keep some dialogue open here, even if it frequently breaks down to both sides sniggering at each other :D I genuinely don't dislike these people, I just disagree with their methods. I'm all for rational debate here, but they mostly just want to vandalize CP, and some of them really are in it just for the lulz, not because of any deep moral or ethical outrage they claim to feel about CP "corrupting" minds. Just look at some of their edits and comments on wikipedia.... Fox June 20 2007 20:56 (CDT)

Am I included?

At Cp you wrote: And meantime, they've continued to vandalize and add obscenities, and discussed on RW other new ways to add vandalism and obscenity. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Am I included in the they and if so what has my contribution been? WhatIsG0ing0n 09:07, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

Why'd ya quit cp?--PalMD^{-yada yada} 08:17, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Set my mind at ease that it had nothing to do with the outcome of the sysop contest over there. Trashbat 08:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Well at least the CP front page should hopefully lose its penchant for Daily Mail articles now. --Stevo 08:57, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Now how many people are going to understand that!? _δ^α_ι^ι_σ^ρ_Ηταλκ 08:59, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

If one other person did then that's enough for me! :) --Stevo 09:05, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Hey, I got it! MyaR 09:13, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

I got it too but --DoxXoxsays he's got a shot for it. CЯacke® 09:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Hehe. Well then, apologies for my assumptioning! _δ^α_ι^ι_σ^ρ_Ηταλκ 09:28, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Awwww, no more front page articles on "Hurrah for the Blackshirts"...XD Trashbat 09:31, 22 June 2007 (CDT)