User talk:Nutty Roux/Archive11

This is an archive page, last updated 18 January 2015. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<2>, <1>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>

, (new)(back)

Developing Vector skins

Did you have an interest in doing this? I remember you suggested that I add the code to GitHub. The skins would be for use here if added and for anyone else interested in installing them. I found a guide that basically makes skin creation a matter of adding new CSS over the existing Vector CSS, so it's really fast and easy. –Александр(а) (Talk | Contribs | Ragebox) 19:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

No. I didn't understand what you were doing. There's absolutely no point in creating another skin. 20:06, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright. I wanted to make sure I wasn't leaving you out if there was any chance you had interest. I'm working on making skins for other users of MediaWiki who don't have the skills to make their own Vector skins, since there aren't any published versions. It's not just for here. –Александр(а) (Talk | Contribs | Ragebox) 21:24, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Data analysis projects for Rational Wiki

What kinds of projects are there? –Александр(а) (Talk | Contribs | Ragebox) 17:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Abstracting squid data and API work. Can you get this "inquisitor" shit out of your username and knock off this Sturmkrieg business? It's gotten to the point that I cringe when I see your posts. 17:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Voting on Main redesign

Could you do a intercom thingy about voting on the Main page redesign? (RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Vote) thanks... ^talk 20:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC) just:

---

There is a vote on the Main page redesign proposal going on at the Saloon bar. Head over to participate! ^talk 00:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

---

It's not working for me and I can only post to "general site news." ^talk 00:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

To the resident graphic designer

I saw you gush about a font on Twitter, so I figured you'd like this web book on typography. And artist Jim LePage made some Bible-inspired posters that are totally sweet. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Nice link Stabby. This is a topic of interest to me for my work reports. In my opinion most of my colleagues have crap aesthetics (fonts, colours, spacing) compared to me but I am always ready to take on board professional advice. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 00:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Check out the Elements of Typographic Style by Robert Bringhurst for the hardcore treatment a la Strunk and White. I'll send you a copy if you want, G. S, it's just difficult to identify typefaces that weren't digitized or hugely popular to the point that influencers wrote about them. I check typekit.com, fonts.com, myfonts.com, and fontshop.com first. If I can't find what I'm trying to identify there, I check identifont.com and then myfonts.com/WhatTheFont. I couldn't identify that one. 13:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I know Butterick. Though intolerably arrogant, he's good at what he does. Typography for Lawyers is a must-read for any lawyer. I've mostly been doing typesetting for the web; the rules are substantially different in some key regards. I can point you to some web typography resources if you're at all interested. 13:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

JavaScript problems

The JavaScript at the bottom about Mikal works in the browser but doesn't work on the JS page. Do you know the problem? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Inquisitor_Ehrenstein/common.js –Александр(а) (Talk | Contribs | Ragebox) 02:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thinking it's ok for violence to happen to people I disagree with

I just wrote about why violence would have been wrong, no matter how "justified." Rage reaction versus knowing what's actually right. –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 01:42, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I find it a bit disconcerting that your argument against committing said violence is to avoid turning the Allies into monsters, as opposed to the far more morally upright reason, which is that nobody deserves to be rounded up and murdered period. - GrantC (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't care anymore. RW is a chat site for cranks. Have fun. 01:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

you know

you're still cool, even if i don't always agree with or like you. --Mikal | lakiM 01:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't like you either. 02:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I know. --Mikal | lakiM 02:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Just passing by. Генгис^evolving 08:53, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey buddy. Emails to your regular account bounce. :-( 12:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Really? I got one from you on 26th August with that pop-page screencap. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 13:10, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Cooperative job

Something to work with other users would be good, to stay occupied and to have something uncontroversial. Do you want to work on the idea I had to move the template formatting to the CSS pages to improve interskin compatibility? –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 20:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

No. I don't have any interest in doing that. It's a pointless make-work project to do something nobody but you thinks is worth doing. You're disconnected from reality. Please don't talk to me. 20:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Gadget project

I'm working on making a gadget that will display various links for each user's user space. I'm probably screwing it up in some very obvious way. Do you know what I'm doing wrong? User:Inquisitor Ehrenstein/myDocuments.js –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 15:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I am torn between ignoring you and taking this good faith request seriously. It's difficult.

There is already a gadget that does that for monobook... You can't create gadgets on your own. All you can do is create some JavaScript limited to being executed by any user who properly installs it. Look at the code for the gadget in monobook if you want to waste your time. Go take some Xanax. 16:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Military woo

I'm currently in the process of adding information about actual military woo. –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 16:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Could the article not be moved back into userspace until those changes are made? - GrantC (talk) 16:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

You're a crank, so I'm no longer assuming good faith in matters like this. You'll need to justify the existence of "military woo." There's woo that tangentially relates to the military as much as it might to anything else. For example, that bogus bomb detector was probably just outright fraud, but to the extent the inventor believed it worked (he didn't - it's not woo), it was tantamount to a dowsing rod. But it's not woo. As it stands, the article largely reads like a disjointed and crummy list of nonsense. 16:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll move it there then. –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 18:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Heads up

I'd probably go to this if I lived in Chicago. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 17:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I would love to but I'm already committed. Thanks scurvy dog. 18:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Bigotry Wiki

I remember you complained about it. What exactly is wrong with it? I'd like to know so I can fix any problems with it. –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 18:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Supress revision

Hope this helps. Hipo^crite 16:24, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

With what? I don't care what this person does as long as it's not disruptive. 16:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, thought you had a strong opinion on something. Hipo^crite 16:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Well I have lots of strong opinions, but it's not worth fighting about rights stuff anymore. RW's got much more serious problems with getting rid of cranks and net-negative hangers on. 16:37, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I suppressed the revision to remove personal information. –Aleksandr(a) Ehrenstein, Jewish Bolshevik 17:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Whoops

Just so you know, that post on your talk archive was a complete accident- I actually meant to post it on a different wiki, and because I had, like five tabs open, and it was 2am, I got confused. Just clearing that up. Messiah of Doom- Unite with thy Oracle (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

William Lane Craig

Sorry; I didn't pay close enough attention to the edit I reverted. The portion I took issue with was the improper capitalization of the word "god" in the preamble. In both instances of its use, the word was used as a generic noun, but was capitalized as though it were being used as a proper noun. I didn't think much of the other sentence when I reverted. - GrantC (talk) 04:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I didn't notice he was referring to a a generic god, not that I think we should cap the name of the xtian god. I prefer looking at RW on my phone bc I can't see it as well, which is obviously conducive to errors like mine. 12:43, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

In the West when we talk about 'god' we are usually referring to the Judaeo-Christian god and so I do think that the name is worth an initial capital to distinguish from any other god, just like Allah, Shiva, Woden or Zeus. However, capitalisation of religious pronouns is definitely a no-no unless it's done in a snarky way. When Christian apologists argue for the existence of god, it is God and not any other deity that they are supporting. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:10, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I consistently do not capitalize god or the bible out of open disrespect for the particular cultists who believe in that fiction and who might be inclined to object. 13:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Point taken. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 13:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, you both, in particular, know I've been concerned about tone and content here, so I'm not sure my practice is appropriate in mainspace. The general convention is to capitalize the names of deities, even if you don't accept their existence (few if any acknowledge, for example, Vishnu and Ganesh, unless they're creationists who might tell the old lie that all non-Abrahamic deities are either false gods worshipped by cultist heathens, or are degraded records of the xtian god). That is what our style guide should require. Just so people understand a little better where I'm coming from, Genghis easily convinced me that it's not fair to make some of the assumptions we do about our readers, and I've articulated my own beliefs about this idea to Grant. Nobody on RW likely cares, but yeah. 13:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

"God" is not the name of the deity however, it is closer to the title. When talking about Vishnu you are capitalizing it because it is the specific name of a deity, and names are capitalized. You could also, if you consider "god" a title, capitalize it only when used with the name, so you could talk of the God Vishnu or just a god. I think it's a stupid social convention that we shouldn't be beholden to. I suggest, if we want to be talking about a specific god, we should say so: "The Christian god". Don't capitalize the word god only when used to refer to one broad generalization of it (the Jewish/Christian/Islamic idea of it). Shadow of Lords ^talk 13:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

(EC) Referring to the god of Abraham as "Yahweh" or whatever would emphasize the point that he is just one god among many, but considering how difficult it is to get people to make sure articles are up to date, I don't think anyone is going to change all references to "God" to "Yahweh" out of spite. (As an aside, I love that Arab-Speaking Christians use the term "Allah", whereas Western Christians use it to "other" Muslims. People never cease to disappoint me). --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 14:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

(EC) Except that "the Christian god" is a theologically and historically imprecise term, as that leaves out the face that He is also the divinity of Judaism and Islam. I guess you could use "the god of the Abrahmic faiths." But really, people generally understand "God" to mean a specific thing, and people coming to this wiki for the first time, ie, the people we need to be writing for, should see the project as one that adheres to a certain amount of linguistic standard practice. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 14:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm intermittently looking at this on my phone so I'm not necessarily reading that closely, but if Shadow is suggesting "God" isn't the Abrahamic god's name, I disagree. El is traditionally translated as "God" and adonai, while I think it means "Lord," is apparently treated as interchangeable. 14:35, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

The point is one of grammar. The way those phrases were written, e.g. "The Christian god", referred to the word "god" as an improper noun. They referred to "a god" who happens to be the Christian god. Whether or not you agree that "God" should be capitalized on its lonesome, the two sentences as written did not warrant capitalization. I notice Powder already changed the two sentences to better reflect Craig's views, which I think is fine, as I doubt anyone viewing the wiki is going to be confused as to which god Craig is talking about. That said, in general, if you're slapping the word "a" or "the" before the word "god", "god" should not be capitalized. - GrantC (talk) 15:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

@Nutty: The Jewish people have many names for their god, unfortunately a lot of them are just normal phrases and titles. Some of the cases are very similar to that in Islam: "Well, you have a god? Fine, we have The God. That's our god's name: The God." I still stand by that we should attempt to, wherever possible, write it as "the Christian god". I mean, if we want to get really specific we can say "his conception of the Christian god", but I think that part is implied. I'm not proposing we go back and update every single page to be like this, but I think it's a useful standard and it means we don't have to be forced into paying lip service ("Fine, we'll let you guys own the term god when it's capitalized"). Shadow of Lords ^talk 15:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ "The Jewish people have many names for their god..." Wait. You seem to be under the impression that Jews, Christians (and Muslims, presuably) worship different gods. Am I reading that right? PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 15:29, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not Shadow, so I can't say for certain, but I think the crux of his point was that many adherents of the Abrahamic religions would vehemently deny that they share the same god. I interpreted his post as a satire of that, if you will (e.g. "What? Your god isn't my God. My God has a capital 'G', while your god doesn't"). - GrantC (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I would bet that many Christians don't actually think of their god as Yahweh, to them it is God just like for Muslims it's Allah. After all, the US currency doesn't have in Yahweh We Trust on it. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 15:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I would love to see some statistics backing up the claim that "many adherents of the Abrahamic religions would vehemently deny that they share the same god." PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 16:02, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I think perhaps you misunderstand my post. I'm not making a statement for or against his point. You'll notice that I used a deliberately vague qualifier ("many") to reflect that. My stake in this discussion is one pointing out a grammatical error in the capitalization of the word "god", and nothing more. - GrantC (talk) 16:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Your Blocking of Thal....

Isn't that a bit too harsh?--The Madman (talk) 23:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)The Madman

I didn't block him. 00:42, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Stuff

The wife did a charity stall for a hospital at the local town fair on Saturday. Next to her was a stall for a local evangelical church recruiting members and handing out the usual Jesus crap. The double-sided sheet of paper they were thrusting at passers by was printed entirely in Comic Sans. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 07:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

.

Aceⁱ⁹ 09:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

crazy video

This made no sense to me; let me know your thoughts. [1] --Danielfolsom (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Your question

I realize it wasn't trolling. The comment by PSAL was. I won't cover the question. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 21:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Just remember

I'd so be doing this now if you were my love muffin. ^talk 16:01, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

♥ 18:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Powder Smoke and Leather

Can you perhaps shed some light on this troll who keeps deleting all my honest efforts to contribute here? I'm adult enough to cop to when I make a mistake, but this user is just getting out of line, (s)he is mean-spirited and bullying in a way I do not appreciate at all.Andrewstewart1 (talk) 04:12, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Why are you asking me? He's a productive editor with good editorial sense. I'm a nobody. Ask him. If you don't like the answer it's probably because you're wrong. 04:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

He's just a cyberbully. The Scharzvehr has assembled quite a dossier on his activities. We had a talk with him; hopefully he won't bother you any more. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 17:21, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop it, Ehrenstein. His "activities" are fine. He's not any of the terrible things you say about him. 00:05, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I deleted what I said. I felt bad. We talked things over. He made insensitive comments, but it's not worth getting worked up over; it wasn't on the scale of what the Amazing Atheist did. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 06:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

To answer your question, PSAL usually isn't too bad. He does a lot of reverting nonsense by various cracks and bigots who come here under the idea that they can try to soften our position on them by moderating the language and trying to portray their cause more favorably. Maybe if you're a new user and you editing a controversial article, you could have appeared potentially problematic. Discuss it with him. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 06:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Анализинг Сквид дата

И ремембер тхат у саид сометчинг абоут ит бефор. Ис тчер а ваы тчат И кан хелп? –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 17:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Hooked on phonics, eh? 00:04, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

So is that something you're still looking for help with? –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 05:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're talking about. 00:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps he's referring to RussianalWiki? Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 03:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Looks like a seekrit phonetic code in Cyrillic characters: "==Analyzing Squid data== I remember that u said something about it before. Is there a way that I can help?" Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 03:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I understood the phonetic Russian as much as my translator could. I didn't understand how Ehrenstein could possibly think I would want to work with him. His on and off-wiki behavior viciously defaming Powder in a way that could have caused real damage is reprehensible. His behavior in intimating the same of me, if he didn't even simply come out and say it, made it personal. I loathe you, Ehrenstein. 14:39, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I never tried to intimidate you. I was not "viciously defaming Powder." I even deleted that article once on my own because I felt bad about it; I'll show you a screenshot of the deleted history log where I blanked the page. Furthermore, I would never do something that would cause IRL damage, unless that person had already done something that caused IRL damage to someone else. I don't want to attack you, and I'm sorry that you felt that way. You said there were problems with Bigotry Wiki. Can you please tell me what they are so I can fix them? I should also point out that the reason I got pissed at PSAL is because of his "nazirape nazirape nazirape" comments when he knows I am an Eastern European rape victim; it's essentially what TheAmazingAtheist did, and that article actually could cause IRL problems. Also, there's that smug comment he made saying that I should be in an Autistic social skills class rather than teaching one. He is not a victim. I would like to try to make things up with you, not saying become friends, but at least work out the hostility. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR So you think opposing Nazis is tilting at windmills? 14:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Just so you know, I would never do anything that could cause IRL damage, and I was careful to avoid doing so. I also think outing people on the internet should be a felony, based on my understanding of social psychology, among other reasons. When someone does cause IRL trouble for someone on the internet, I go fucking nuts but contain it. This is why this Paul Elam fuck makes me batshit. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR So you think opposing Nazis is tilting at windmills? 15:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I also said you have no business teaching an autism skills class. Your social skills are horrendous, your behavior is appalling, you appear to be incapable of doing anything but faking empathy, and you crave negative attention. I've ridiculed you by saying exactly the same things for your incessant carping on and on about Nazis and rape. I've pointed out that you made up rape numbers to prop up your case, which I don't think anyone here understands or cares about anymore. None of this makes me a bigot. None of this makes Powder a bigot. You called him a closet Nazi, ableist, and rape apologist. By implication, I am the same. This is enough to say that you are (a) viciously defaming at least Powder, (b) fucking nuts, and (c) dangerous - despite your claim that you would not cause IRL harm, it may not be difficult to connect a real life name to an RW handle, so I question whether even you believe you're telling the truth here. I don't give a crap about about Paul Elam or The Amazing Atheist. I don't know or care who they are or what they said that pushed your crazy button. But you need to stop. And no, I don't think anyone here would know you're an Eastern European rape victim without having read rafts of insane, rambling, incoherent nonsense from you, which I doubt more than a few people would do. I sincerely doubt Powder knew of this claim. I certainly didn't. And even so, I wouldn't apologize for ridiculing you without mercy for your creepy fascination with Nazis and rape; you're not an advocate, you're filled with hatred and the more you keep this up, the more you harm this community and potentially bring RW into disrepute. I can understand making your own personal statement here and there, but you carry on and on with such hyperbole and shoddy scholarship that you lack any credibility at all. Just stop talking. Leave me alone. Leave my friends alone. Go away. 16:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

For the record, I had and have no knowledge of your personal history. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 15:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I actually care when I cause problems. Someone who is "faking" would not. I'm not doing my rantings here any more. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR So you think opposing Nazis is tilting at windmills? 16:39, 18 November 2013 (UTC)