User talk:Mythbuster

Your welcome to RationalWiki is lukewarm at best, Mythbuster. This observation is due to the nature of your initial edits. Pull up a goat and try not to make trouble. We realize it is possible that you do not understand the nature of the site or our objectives. Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards to clarify things for you. If you're still interested in contributing, please see what our articles are intended to be.

What is your agenda? Lyra § talk 02:38, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

From the homepage : "We welcome contributors,and we encourage those who disagree with us to register and engage in a constructive dialogue." Iam offering constructive additions on a subject I have studied.Mythbuster 02:42, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

Go nuts, my man. Make us proud. --Robledo 17:08, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

Apologies for what I did to your userpage. It's just that red link was an eyesore. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 20:42, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

This is a little orange message to promote goodwill. Basically because I'm feeling a bit hippy at the moment.:-) --Bob^{bing up} 13:01, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

welcome back

You are now a sysop. Enjoy RatMaster ^háblame 02:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

don't be stupid about Shakespeare

Your activity on the Shakespeare authorship article has been noted, and as a disinterested admin who came across the saloon bar discussion, I am asking you to take your own advice and leave the page alone. We don't care to legitimize fringe theories here. EVDebs (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Problem is, the facts are being misquoted. And it's not a conspiracy theory. That's just incorrect, based on our own definition of the word. The history is also all wrong. And instead of an amusing write up, it's just a bunch of name calling. ^{— Unsigned, by: Mythbuster / talk / contribs}