User talk:Paravant/Archive2

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


You learned how, I love you so much right now. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I refuse to spread the ability to do so, like the Hittites refused to spread easy iron forging, so that if the new batch of moderators is not atleast one of the current, the secret shall be lost to time. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure you're the only one who finds the Intercom at all complex, but okay. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Do not ruin my moment. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
What is Intercom? Is that how we were alerted about the coop case on our talk pages? Did we all get the same message?---Mona- (talk) 02:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Nono, that was me copy pasting a message i'd typed up on avengers page and then sending 4 requests at once to the server in a masked attempt to make Davids hair whiten. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
No, that's called Paravant spamming the site. Go under community, above the big Donate button to the left, above blog and twitter and there it is. Only mods can send urgent side wide messages which is the message you got like what, 20 mins ago (my sense of time sucks and I'm not checking RC) that you could mark as read.<-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I tend to just leave intercom messages up for a few weeks when i get them out of laziness. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I left the one from Sophie up until recently about the mod stuff in the Saloon. I found it quite amusing for some reason. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Summaries when reverting[edit]

Never figured out how. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Go to the revision you want to revert to, edit it (it'll warn you that you're editing an old revision), come up with an edit summary, click save. (talk) 02:27, 27 September 42015 AQD (UTC)
The rollback button provides no opportunity for an edit summary. It is a convenient way to revert obvious wandalism with a single click. If you want to add a summary, use "undo," or do as not-BoN suggests. CamelCasePragmatist (talk) 02:30, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
K thx holmes. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Despite being registered, I'm kind of still a bunch of numbers, though. ;) (talk) 02:33, 27 September 42015 AQD (UTC)

Mona's instigating[edit]

She's made it clear she thinks Arisboch is irredeemable, yet still left that message. Why? To rant? To antagonize him? Right when tensions are flaring? She suggests that he is a toddler when her behavior is extremely puerile. If Arisboch has not seen it already, when he sees it tomorrow what will it do? Will it calm him down? Will it complement your advice to "cool it"? You've protected it for now but are you going to allow her to continue this aggravation? Note, this was not intended to be replied to by anyone but Paravant, and it seems Mona has left us for the night. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 04:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

All i can hope is that Arisboch will not keep the cycle going at this point. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Pat on the back[edit]

Believe it or not, you're actually doing about as a good a job as can be expected moderating that Zionism shitfest fight. So, I figured, I dust off an old custom I started a long time ago to show appreciation. Gooniepunk (talk) 19:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

You should lose your mod powers[edit]

And I said as much in the coop case. De-sysoping Arisboch was the last straw that broke the camel's back. All your whining that you don't have an agenda and only want to resolve a conflict has now been exposed as just so much hypocrisy. This is just a heads-up and probably the last nice thing I will ever do for you. Bad day, bad sir. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I do have an agenda, You are correct. It is to see something besides you and mona et al in an endless back and forth. As I said many moons ago when this nonsense started, that will end up with one oarty getting the short end of the stick. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
And it's of course pure chance that you side with Mona all the time... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
if you remember I was originally against mona in my use of rights. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


You've been cooped by Avenger. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 20:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Are you able to read the section immediately above this one? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
You vaguely mentioned a coop case. <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 21:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
"You should lose your mod powers[.] And I said as much in the coop case" constitutes being vague in your world? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:06, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Yea, I was wrong, you totally specified what case. Right? <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 21:14, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Me putting the thing I wanna do in the headline kinda gives it away, doesn't it? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
No, he has no way of automatically knowing if you suggested it in one of the previous coops? <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 21:18, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
He'll click on the link to the coop (unless of course he hasn't bookmarked it already) and he'll thaen find the appropriate section in the table of contents anyway. Way to make a mountain out of a molehill... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't even have a link to rw saved, its just on my Firefox new tab Screen. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hell, I don't even have easy access to most pages - it's why I did some administrative action to get to some log page and change something - there wasn't an easy access on the RC.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 23:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I thought my comment on the Dresden article would automatically go in the box. And I tried to answer you at the block feature, but I still don't know how to do that game thing you guys do with a 0 second block (or any block).---Mona- (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

You know...[edit] would be easier to actuallyfollow the latest faux shock and horror regarding RW's guidelines if there was a link in your no doubt important intercom message. Acei9 02:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Probably, but I didn't actually expect it to work that time (the last 3 hadn't) and so wasn't thinking to far ahead on that ground.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm just really excited to see what shit fest the wiki has descended into this time. Having been involved in a few myself I always find them exciting, like stripping my balls with paint thinner exciting. Acei9 02:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
also tesr Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
For all you know that means something. And man, a reunion of oldies going on these days. Did somebody light a signal or something?--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The secret Zionist cabal by any chance? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not Jewish, I just have lots of money and control Hollywood. Acei9 02:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

My rebuke[edit]

Was it in response to Talk:Israel or Talk:God helmet? I understand I'm probably doing something wrong, so please let me know what I should correct.KrytenKoro (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't take it as a "rebuke." I've only been a user here since mid-August and unwittingly committed some infractions in the first few weeks. (And now that I've been sysoped I still have to learn the proper manner in which to exercise this "power.") I've read the policy/rules stuff and do recommend doing that, but really watching the reasonable users is a good way to learn. Parvant is reasonable (which isn't to say I always agree with him).---Mona- (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Adding: You didn't do anything wrong on the talk Israel page. But in the GodHelmet talk you made suggestions showing you don't grok the process for deleting articles. It has to be nominated for deletion (usually). ---Mona- (talk) 21:13, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
My guess would be Talk:God helmet. Don't worry though, you haven't committed any major infractions. ;) (talk) 21:31, 1 October 42015 AQD (UTC)


Um, would you mind unlocking that page? --Castaigne (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Apparently only if it is ensured that his/Mona's viewpoints won't be challenged in mainspace... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't support whitewashing on any side of the political divide, but could we first try to figure out the facts about CAIR on the talkpage before engaging in edit wars (or planning to)? (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Honestly when I read this at work i'd forgotten you weren't a sysop and couldn't do it yourself, and by the time I was off work i'd forgotten about it. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 05:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


Why are you reverting my changes? Pan (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


I just thought I'd thank you for all the work you are doing managing nasty arguments. It's generally thankless work, so I admire your willingness to do it. --TiaC (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Vandal binning issue[edit]

Hey, please check the FR for the Whataboutism article, and its talk page for the full explanation of what went on. Aging Hippie was adamant on my talk page that the VB is the appropriate tool for those who abuse the revert function, so I VBed both Arisboch and Avenger. No one has objected except those two, but I'd really like to know what your take is. Arisboch accessed his talk page with another account and defends his actions. At this point I'm thinking 2 days.---Mona- (talk) 18:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm ok with it for the moment. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 18:28, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Ok. I'm acutely aware that: 1. I'm new at this, and 2. there is much antagonism between myself and those two. So I felt a little wobbly, especially about any perception that I was wrongly motivated.---Mona- (talk) 18:31, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
avenger causes enough issues to go in it, aris I sTill have faith in so him being in it is a bit more troublesome to me. If nothing else it makes my life easier while I'm at work. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 18:37, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
There's nothing left to persuade Arisboch not to do this shit except the VB. He defends his behavior today, so -- especially in light of his recent history -- I don't see what else can reasonably be done. ---Mona- (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
How about me not restoring this edit without getting a consensus on the talk page?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:01, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
That doesn't cure the behavior. You've done it before and today did it again. You don't seem capable of learning not to do this shit in the first (and gazillionth) instance.---Mona- (talk) 19:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
@aris, reverse statement here- --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 19:14, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
"Reverse statement"? What'd you mean by that?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 20:10, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm utterly sick and tired of having to dedicate time to dealing with both of them when they persist in doing this shit. They don't care, either of them, about the burden his crap creates for other users. If there are no consequences that inconvenience them it will never stop.---Mona- (talk) 19:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

So I've not been around as much lately as before...[edit]

When exactly did we go from being Gamergatewiki to MideastCrisis wiki? I mean, whatever happened to GenderWiki? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:31, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I arrived in mid-August (and not to deal with this topic but to draft an anti-woo piece on "Targeted Individuals"). When I did, I was informed by a user (not involved here) that it is not possible to make edits at RW that are not approved by "those who think Israel is great." That seemed to be the case. The Zionism article was utter shit -- unsourced, pro-Zionist assertions that simply could not be altered in any significant manner and trying to resulted in edit warring. A compromise was called for, e.g., one user (also not involved here) suggested bifurcating the article as is done on the "Morality of abortion" page so both sides could set forth their versions. Avenger and Arisboch refused that and said they'd still revert any edits they didn't like. Time went on, I aggressively insisted on not allowing this lock held by (mostly) two users to continue, and others also persisted in trying to make reasonable, sourced edits on Israel-related articles. These two went batshit. They got de-sysoped, and then today, vandal binned---Mona- (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Don't take this personally, Mona, but I am not at all interested in your wiki-drama. I basically wanted to touch base with Miekal about how, yet again, RW has seen itself hijacked by single-issue voters who have latched onto stuff that some would argue is not closely tierd to the core mission to create a lot of work for community regulars and generally make the site Less Fun. It's happened before, and, once you move on and are forgotten, it will happen again. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
the great late 2015 Zionism war, fun times. Not sure when it started but I've been trying my hardest to get an end too it.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 19:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
It basically started when this IP joined and started spewing pro-Israel propaganda and random accusations of antisemitism. Then Arisboch joined in and started subtly whitewashing Zionism-related content. The IP created an account and around that time Mona joined. Much editing, discussion, drama and animosity ensued. (talk) 20:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Excuse me, AH, but this is not "wiki drama," and I am not going anywhere. I've been a moderator at various fora and I know unreasonable and disruptive behavior when I see it. Two users (mostly just those two, and one arrived just before I did) were keeping other users from editing anything Israel-related. This was being allowed by the sysops, and should not have been. If this eruption disturbs your nostalgia for a RW Golden Age, I am very sorry, but I've done nothing wrong. Dismissing the bullshit the Zio-trolls were being allowed to commit here as "wiki drama" is both unfair and unhelpful.---Mona- (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────It really does seem to be a wikidrama (perhaps better called a storm in a teacup). And as for all dramas you need antagonists and protagonists. Neither has been in short supply. That you have been a moderator in various fora is neither here nor there. It's just as anecdotal as things you've dismissed out of hand. Cheers. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:18, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

The subject in part was me and my purported "drama." My history of having been chosen for moderation duties, and knowing what reasonable behavior is, is relevant. It's a fact about me when the subject is me. Moreover, you are committing the balance fallacy. My behavior, and that of the other Israel critics, has not been akin to Avenger's and Arisboch's. They dislike knowledgeable edits by people who have facts, including ChrisAmiss. So they petulantly disrupt the place.---Mona- (talk) 21:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Drama is still Drama, regardless of whether one side is right. Tht you have Moderator prowess does not exclude you from Drama, oh, the history of the initial Mods...--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Your history might be relevant, but how are we supposed to know? You've dismissed personal stories as anecdotal before. The same applies to you. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I dismiss anecdotes when they are supposed to prove a larger fact about the world. As our entry here says: "anecdotes only ever apply to individuals or individual experiences." Exactly. I did not commit the anecdotal fallacy because I restricted the anecdote about me to me. By your standard, every time a person explains things they have done they have committed a fallacy, which is utterly absurd.---Mona- (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
That's not unreasonable in itself, but why should we believe you? You say you've moderated fora. Let's take that for granted, but it says nothing about how you moderated or if you moderated in any real sense at all. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocking v vandal binning[edit]

Not a criticism, I just want to understand for myself why you chose blocking rather than VB for that Gideon guy? Is it because you thought even every 30 minutes he'd still keep doing that stuff?---Mona- (talk) 13:41, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Pure Choice really - Vandal binning would have also worked but a good 3 day pi ban also sends the message of "stop being an idiot". Neither is likely to be very effective, however, sinc they were doing this a week or so ago. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Another question(s). How does one release a new account from patrolled status, and where is that template thingie to announce it?---Mona- (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Viewing user contributions, you will see a tab for user rights management. Check the "autopatrolled" box, save, and BAM! it is done. Announcing it is unnecessary officious chatter, in my opinion. Alec Sanderson (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Here and wot 'e sed. Scream!! (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused[edit]

I just got a mail saying you'd created my user page. It shows no signs of having been altered and the Fossil Record agrees. What is this about? Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

No idea, I done not know nothing bout' dem tech matters. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 20:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Neither do I. Act of God, then? :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
I had a look at the mail again. You left a comment, which I had overlooked, so you did change something - it remains to be asked, why you don't show up in the Fossil record. And was the comment directed at you or me? Both are possible. In any case, I try not to follow controversial topics on RW as is, but I do take a look every now and then. And of course, I love browsing the good articles. They are the reason I'm here and they provide humour and rest. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Those versions of the email (i.e. created) also come through when one person blocks another, so maybe that was it? MarmotHead (talk) 21:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't even entirely remember why i'm here anymore. Been to many years --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Not trying not to sound like the newcomer I am, but you get jaded pretty quick. Or is that just me? Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

@Me! OK, that's it Sorte, you've been around too long. Double negatives are taking over. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 21:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Well, 4 years is a rather long time to get jaded :P --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
I can't say I don't see nothing wrong with multiple negatives and rhetoric questions, can I? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk CP[edit]

All I saw in the watchlist was the page being blanked and assumed it was vandalism. No edit summary didn't help. Glad it is all worked out though. AyzmoCheers 17:56, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

He was blanking it, so i did the same thing but left the most recent october starte--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 19:28, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hittite population?[edit]

Some old guy I know keeps trying to tell me that the Hittite empire consisted of about eight hundred people. Or maybe eight thousand, depending on which day I'm talking to him. (He likes to keep his mind active by watching TED talks and listening to lectures.) Casual perusal of the WP article gave me no joy. Is that anything you could point me towards an online source about? Alec Sanderson (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Wait. What was the rest? goats? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
No, though I could ask my ANE teacher about it in about... 2 hours. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, please! Alec Sanderson (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Got any time period in particular you wanna know, or just general height? --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 18:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
General height, for starters. More detailed profile would be a bonus. Alec Sanderson (talk) 19:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I'll ask more detailed when we actually discuss the hittities--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 19:10, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
So I asked, and the answer was, as is common "we don't really know" though i'm going to tell you, for an empire which went toe to toe with the Egyptians and covered large swaths of Anatolia, 800 is faaaar to low and even 8k is pathetically small. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Not surprising that we don't know. Every time I ask my friend about the sources for his dramatic assertions he gets vague, or hides behind the forgetfulness of great age. Oh, well, he can be entertaining sometimes. I wonder if they could have been talking about the size of the group that first came to Anatolia from wherever, before blossoming into a dominant force in the region... thanks again, Alec Sanderson (talk) 12:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


So, one guy has to have all this documentation. But no one else does? How does that work?---Mona- (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

No, but if we want to start a fight against unsourced statements, letting people keep adding them in is not how we're going to do it, nor is just removing -all- of them. Neither is throwing a hissy fit and locking a page to sysop against another sysop. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't know he was a sysop. I recalled him as new. Anyway, I was greatly frustrated to see my frequent method of getting some sourcing being undermined. Altho I think the edits per se are plausible and may be true, they should be sourced. I just picked that one about Castro as a place to continue (I've been running around to articles asking for citations, and deleting when after a bit they don't show up; not if they do) in one of MANY articles here that urgently need support.

And, my pique with you and sense that things were not running fairly was aroused when you failed to argue for protecting pages when I was going around about that with AH. But then almost immediately you protect pages for the same reason I was. And that's ok.

Then you reinstate AH's countermand of my brief Avenger block. THEN you meddle with my attempt to get some sourcing. (There is no "RW way to source." It's all ad hoc here. But I'm trying to get some fucking documentation going because it is fucking important if this place isn't to be a fucking embarrassment.) It makes no sense to refuse a plausible edit for being unsourced when most of the article is that way, including the version Arisboch was reverting in favor of. That GH1900, or whatever his handle is, fought for his edit and may be willing to work to find sourcing.

All in all, it seems like Paravant and AH get it their way, even if their ways are entirely inconsistent. Only others have to abide by what is decreed. Just as only some editors must source or face being reverted -- even when an editor is specifically working to get them to source! I admit it: I'm pissed off and frustrated. This ain't no way to run a railroad.---Mona- (talk) 03:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I've not seen you complain much about me forcing a decision down when it worked in your favor. Just as Avenger and Aris only started to really complain when I decided they were the wrong party, not you. I don't like the edit because it puts to much emphasis and blame on a blockade only we follow, although we have pressured other nations at times, and not enough on the fact that Cuba, like NK, were heavily reliant on Soviet trading and investments which vanished after '91, as well as the general problems central planning cause. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
And I undid the block because I didn't feel a day was a good starting point, it's always better to start with low blocks and work/double our way up, not start with the hammer first and see what happens next, even with people like Avenger, because it shows we both tried and that they truly deserve the block. Plus if you want to actually punish Avenger here, starting low is going to work better than high. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

"I've not seen you complain much about me forcing a decision down when it worked in your favor" This isn't about "forcing a decision." It's about inconsistent standards. Here, I saw you seeming to support AH as against my position on protecting articles. Then, lo, you protect two. As for the 1 day block, that is a low block. I would never parole someone blocked by another sysop without discussing it with them first, unless that sysop had just gone over the cliff into unreasonable all over the place. And I generally take the view that if you or another sysop does something like that I should defer absent blatant abuse. But anyway, the edit that got this started needs sourcing, but I was and am trying to get that. The claims seems plausible, but like so much already there it does need sourcing.---Mona- (talk) 03:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

On Rationalwiki, blue is orange and a one day block is a very long time, it's just the culture here. And part of why I tried to stick you off from fights with AH is because I know better, he may not be Nutty and go off on a rage with his powers if he doesn't like you, but a fight with him isstill something to be avoided. It had nothing to do with my opinion of which of you is correct--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Could you have a look at the Israel article again[edit]

My dear friend Mona is refueling. I removed a pointed shifting of blame, and it seems that we could end up in some kind of war. Could you have a look? You are a moderator after all. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 18:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Nothing to do with me or my "refueling." She is trying to reinsert ahistorical edits she already lost the argument over. I'm not the only one who disagrees with her, as the talk page shows. "Fairness and balance" do not apply to actual facts; they are what they are.---Mona- (talk) 18:15, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
I lack a few organs to merit the address „she“, although I would certainly embrace my womanhood, if I had one. :-) And I probably think like a woman, if you're the standard to measure „thinking like a man“. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 19:05, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what either thinking like a man or thinking like a woman is supposed to mean, but if Mona thinks like a man, thinking like a woman might be good thing ;-) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

The topic ghetto[edit]

I will not post in that "forum." I will continue in the general world section, including on anything related to Israel-Palestine. You might think about why Avenger wants the topic moved.---Mona- (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

You might think why other people also want it moved. One section is fine, many multiple sections as a page turns into your batllefield is not, and there is precedent for the relocation. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Controversial or long winded topics in omnibus talk pages (like wigo talk or the saloon bar) have been moved to their own fora in the past. This has - as far as I can recall - never been controversial in the past. Also, I take objection to your nonchalant use of the word "ghetto" Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I, for one, am tired of all the same rants by the same people on the same topic over and over again. It's not a "ghetto", it's a place for people who are interested in that topic to discus it without bothering the rest, just like we have for Conservepedia. Carpetsmoker (talk) 11:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Fucking stop it now[edit]

This edit warring bullshit stops now. End of story. No buts. PsyGremlinHable! 15:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)On this one I have to say that Mona is the one being unreasonable here... Not Paravant Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
yes dad. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


Diolch yn fawr <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (talk) 06:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Israel-Palestine forum[edit]

Some are actively discussing in the sections moved there; not like an archive. The consensus was one I-P section stays on main page, rest to the forum. And totally deleting it is wrong! That leaves no record at all.---Mona- (talk) 04:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

there was never any such consensus, you decided that on your own because o a stupim refusal to use a forum --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 04:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
It's been working. It made everyone happy. So what's the problem? Why stir it all up again?!---Mona- (talk) 04:43, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Mona's refusal to accept consensus not to shit all over WIGO talk does not make me happy... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 11:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh fuck off Avenger you're no better than Mona when it comes to "shitting all over the wigo", you even tried to turn it into your own damn battlefield til I binned you. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Adding relevant, timely topics of the world is not to "shit all ove the WIGO." Moreover, Arisboch just added an I/P-related section a few days ago.---Mona- (talk) 17:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

What you said abt political shift?[edit]

It seems to be happening throughout the Western democracies. Bernie Sanders performing so well here in the U.S. primary run, Justin Trudeau gets PM in Canada, and its not out of the question that Corbyn could pull it off in the UK. God, I hope you're right that a fundamental shift away from the right is taking place.---Mona- (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Horsing around[edit]

Carpetsmoker got rid of an illustrative image I added while edit conflicting you.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Also adding fact tags for shit that I only seem to have remembered when going deep through my Tumblr archives.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:15, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Carpetsmoker's extreme whitewashing of any criticism of Bronydom is bullshit as is his insistence that the images be removed.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

This is pure nutpicking and looks too much like the clowns, who accuse all furries of zoophilia/bestiality (not sure, what the correcter term is, English is my 3rd language, after all).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:46, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't really like either version, but your version is incredibly hostile for no real good reason. In particular the amount of leading you do to the reader to make them be against Bronys as pedophiles from the start. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I was working on a rewrite until you locked it all down again. And the older version of the page praises Bronies way too much. Carpetsmoker also got rid of the appropriative bullshit they do with regards to "coming out" as Bronies to their friends and family.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I remember when i went public about being a brony, man fun times that was. I imagine it would be remarkably similar to how I would feel if I came out as Pansexual. Your comments don't leave me particularly hopeful that it would be any less of an out and out hitpiece on the fandom, however. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:46, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
"Coming out of the stable" shouldn't be as dramatic as coming out of the closet considering Bronies aren't met with actual visceral conservative hatred.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm curious enough to ask why not? Do you have facts or is this your opinion. Tielec01 (talk) 00:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure Bronies have been systematically persecuted by most western cultures for the past several centuries.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:56, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
No, but "effeminate men who like girly things" have, of which Bronys are a part of. My sister knew nothing of the fandom, I was the first time she heard of a "Brony", she considered it creepy because it's a little girls show. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Which is still an aspect of homophobia and not specifically its application to adult men liking a girl's cartoon.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:00, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Coming out, whether it's as being gay, trans, brony, non-empathic, an OCD sufferer, a Star Wars fan (when all your friends are Star Trek fans) etc., should never be as dramatic as society typically forces it to be. (talk) 01:11, 23 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
Ryu are you aware of what evidence is? Can you present any evidence that Bronies are less persecuted than Homosexuals? Consider sociological studies, attitudinal surveys, case studies etc... Smart arse remarks don't suit you (you're not smart). Tielec01 (talk) 01:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
You tell me where to find academic studies on Bronies and I'll read those papers.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Ok, got it, you don't have any evidence. Tielec01 (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Did you seriously just restore the old version and say that's a balance between two extremes?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

If you would stop making me have to reply to you i might get a chance to fucking edit AND maybe beat up the world as Fascist italy before I have to go into work tomorrow. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 01:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Maybe it'd just be easier if I deleted the whole page so we wouldn't have to fucking fight over it anymore.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:46, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I would restore it because "Wah my version got reverted" is not a legitimate reason to delete an article. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 01:50, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Finish your god damn rewrite so everyone can figure out if the whole of the topic is at all missional. I'm sorry I edited something mostly unrelated to Gamergate and got into a stupid edit war over the capitalization of "gay agenda".—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 02:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Please, continue playing the victim when you decided to make an article your hit piece. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Revocation of sysop-rights[edit]

You revoked my sysop-rights over an MLP-article?? You sirius??--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

He's Sirius Blacks! That's how serious he is! (talk) 00:12, 23 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
I see, so he should probably see, that none of his cousins join a terrorist organization then, right? XD--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you now or have you ever been associated with magician supremacist organizations? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Death to Voldemort! Death to Dumbledore! GRINDELWALD WAS RIGHT Sarcasm.gif!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I revoked them because you were edit warring and the simplest solution was to either de-op and block you or de-op and temporarily protect the article.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Since you mod-blocked the page, may I have my "mop" back?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
No because I only mod locked it to make sure I would have the time to type that out and not get EC'ed, I'm less clear on who I agree with between those two, but I know you were stupidly wrong in your opposition to including atleast a mention of the underage clop controversy. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I never said, that we shouldn't mention underage clop at all, it's just, that the part about the underage clop was written about the Mane 6 and not about the Crusaders and in a way to tar any clop as pedophilia. The way it's written now is much, much better.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 00:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Edit wars take two people at the very least. Your way of "resolving" edit wars has been controversial in the past... Just sayin' Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I for one am both amused and bemused to see adults edit warring over freakin' My Little Pony.---Mona- (talk) 00:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
You were sure ok with them in the past before the stick started to hit you.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand your comment. My observation is about the entertaining weirdness of adults warring over the topic of a cartoon called "My Little Pony." I'm not commenting on edit warring per se, or whether it is or is not ok.---Mona- (talk) 01:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I was talking to avenger. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 01:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Like Mona, I too find this very, very amusing. The article has to stay just for the comedic value of grown adults edit warring over such trivial nonsense :) . --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 01:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
What'd you expect, RW was founded about someone being wrong on the net and it didn't change.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 01:40, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Claim that ur a Brony[edit]

Ryulong keeps saying that. I do not give flying fuck per se, but do wonder if you ever said you were, and thus he has reason to know what he's talking about. Otherwise, he's spewing total bullshit. Repeatedly.---Mona- (talk) 02:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I've discussed it in the past as miekal. He's still spewing total bullshit out of an irrational and idiotic hatred of a fandom because some of it is 4chan, but, you know,--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 02:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
For the record, I've never seen anything of the show (although I'd like to check it out, at some point), but I'm apparently also a Brony ... *shrug* Carpetsmoker (talk) 02:40, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Well, I first heard of the Brony phenom a few years ago and read some about it. What stuck out is the involvement of actor John de Lancie; I'm a big fan of his back to his youthful days as "Eugene" on a soap opera my mom watched. Brony did strike me as pretty weird, but so is fantasy fiction to many. Anyway, if there are going to be insinuations of pedophilia and such there absolutely has to be rock-solid documentation. Can't be in there without it. That Ryu doesn't get that is an indication of unreasonableness. ---Mona- (talk) 02:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
I ain't no brony, either. All my exposure to MLP was through secondary material (articles in on several websites, fan art and Youtube Poop using MLP video material as source) and I'm pissed severe about people being put down, just cause they dis/like some cartoon.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 02:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you seriously protecting the page again because I tried to edit out some of the fluff?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Fluff, such as a relevant quote about the nature of the show and a mention of how it's generally tried to avoid special episodes but does at times do them. This is an article about MLP, not Bronies.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
There does not need to be an 8 sentence description of the plot of a show for little girls but now loved by adult men.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
It gives a brief overview of the basic premise of the show and then mentions how it avoids the trap of childrens television of special episodes which we even have an ARTICLE on. Hardly fluff. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
It's a lot of effort to say "it's not like all those other shows".—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Nowhere does it say that, given its talking about moments where it does, fails to really cover one and actually discusses death in a kid friendly way.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Ryulong, where do you get your MLP information to harbor so much hate? You sir frankly disgust me! Hello! Look! 16:03, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Probably 4chan... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Maybe he's monitoring Horse News or some of the actual wierd shit. EqD and Derpy News aren't that bad. You sir frankly disgust me! Hello! Look! 19:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
He was bitten by a pony and holds a grudge ever since XD--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Let's hope he does not turn into a were-pony Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Or Nightmare Moon... You sir frankly disgust me! Hello! Look! 22:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the page protection on the Israel article. I was ill at the thought of cooping Sorte because those things are just a shitfest and I'm still weary from the last one about Ryu. I didn't know what to do, and I feel at least as strongly about this as you do about Ryo's reverts on the MLP page. Sorte's really pissed that his Zionist faction doesn't prevail here and this seems to be some sort of "Here I stand I can do no other" moment for him.---Mona- (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

You were weary of the coop because you fear you might lose. After all, what you intend to do is whitewash a notable Antisemite and Nazi-collaborator.. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 17:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
You and Arisboch have both let your unhinged, fact-free Zionism get you patrolled as well as de-mopped. Sorte was on his way to the same.---Mona- (talk) 17:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Avenger, "weary" means "tired," as correctly used by Mona just above. The word you seek is "wary," which means "cautious" or "circumspect." Please no wild-eyed accusations of grammar nazism from anyone else here; Avenger has brought this upon himself. In my opinion, he needs to read more and post less, especially in conversations that do not benefit from his input. SmartFeller (talk) 17:28, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Not to mention his persistent capitalization of antisemite like they're an ethnic group or a religion. >.> (talk) 17:32, 24 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
"Please no wild-eyed accusations of grammar nazism from anyone else here" Not from me when it pertains to Avenger. He's most promiscuous with his "corrections," as well as with gratuitous displays of German to show what an intellekshul he really is.---Mona- (talk) 19:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Tambien puedo hablar (o sea, escribir) Español si odian tanto a mi Aleman. Does that make you happy? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:49, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Auf Englisch, bitte. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 20:12, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Чувак, ты забыл про Google Translate СНОСКИ ЗЛО!!!!!!!!!!!!1111 Dude, you forgot about Google Translaate???--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 20:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Wie ich bereits Gelegenheit hatte zu erfahren, ist google translate mit gewissen Slang-Begriffen bisweilen überfordert... Und hier nochmal die Übersetzung meines Spanischen Beitrages ins Deutsche: Ich kann auch Spanisch sprechen (oder besser gesagt schreiben) wenn ihr mein Deutsch so sehr hasst. (Und ja ich bin mir dessen bewusst, dass man statt "ihr" eigentlich "Sie" übersetzen müsste, aber das ist Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch und da gibt es kein "vosotros") Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Stop modlocking the page every time I introduce criticism of Bronies.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I mod locked it because you are edit warring. If you want to make your massive tone shift stick, maybe actually discuss it with us instead of just hiding discussions you don't like? --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
You know seeing you react to a conflict I have no interest in besides distant curiosity, I can almost emphasize with you... If only you hadn't "resolved" conflicts in a way that appeared not entirely neutral and disinterested... But I know it's a thankless job... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
I made two edits. How the fuck is that edit warring? Adding criticism of Bronies is not a massive tone shift.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:42, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
no, but changing it si that it goes from vaguely pisitive to "all bronys are foal fucking ableists from 4 chan with persecution complexes and no fallout drom breaking norms" is--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 22:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
I put forward possible citations to support my statements about appropriation. I have a source pointing out the issues of ableism. The page no longer has any of the content you're complaining about and I have no present intention to add anything to that respect. Presently, I want the sentence saying that being a Brony doesn't carry the same stigma as revealing one's non-conforming sexuality or gender identity and the citation criticizing the documentaries as not featuring any criticism and even going out of their way to omit criticism that appeared in an unscripted moment. The demands for stronger sourcing on this topic is gatekeeping.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 23:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Ryu, you may well be promoting a moral panic -- you lack evidence to convince me otherwise. This site is the last that should be hosting moral panic horseshit.---Mona- (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
One shitty DeviantArt post of some kid's sociology paper that has "moral panic" mentioned once is not me introducing a moral panic. There's valid criticism out there from sources just as valid as that deviantart essay that raise the concerns that I've put on the page.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 23:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Are you going to drop the modlock yet?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 02:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No. There are serious complaints about your edits to the article and thus You need to actually sell them first. All the more because your edits are attaching such strong statement as pedophile horse fyckers. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 03:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
The constant complaints you have concern edits I haven't tried to introduce to the page in 3 days. Grow a thicker skin because this behavior is really stereotypical of the fandom's defensive nature. Right now the content I want to introduce concerns how liking a show doesn't mean a group is inherently persecuted and adding back the sentence mentioning how one of the documentaries went out of its way to avoid including negative criticism.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
It's also hard for you or anyone else to actually address the changes I would like to make when you constantly ignore any thing I said to that respect and instead take offense at things I did not explicitly say. I've repeatedly provided sources for content I wish to add, including this blog editorial hosted by a major newspaper but no one will bother acknowledging it because fighting you on this matter has poisoned the well to the extent that I may as well just fucking quit this website and swear off all wiki communities for being the toxic shitholes that they end up being.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
I assure you that it was not me who poisoned your well but you yourself when you took your combatice gg policy to talking about how people who violate social norms are never attacked for that, just the fandom I guess all brony haters know all details about. Sell your edits before you make them because enough actual rw users are calling bullshit to be notable. & you have userspace to show them in, that you refuse to use it is not our fault--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 14:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

AgingHippie wants to give Avenger his mop[edit]

It's in the coop. He told me a few weeks ago: "Mona, this is how it works here. If someone is edit-warring, bin them, and undo their edits as needed. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 08:32, 4 October 2015 (UTC)," but now says that I should not VB for edit warring.

I know you two are pals, but I don't know what to do. AH hates my presence here, and is siding with AVENGER prolly just because of my animosity toward Avenger. It's just insane to unleash Avenger as a sysop to get at me. ---Mona- (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't be such a fucking hypocrite, Mona, you were only given sysop-status to spite Avenger.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 14:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
the persistent existence of that myth is amusing but wrong--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 14:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Of course you're callin it a myth, since you the perp.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 14:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Of course the perpetrator of an act would call any wrongful statements about intention a myth, it's my prerogative as the actual perpetrate to know my intention after all, not you, and my intentions leave the statement "only given the mop because avenger was/to spite avenger" a false statement and through your constant repetition of it, a myth. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Well I also recall it thusly.... Furthermore, we could coop Mona again... It has been quite a while since the last time and her behavior has only gotten shriller Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
your opinion on the matter is as irrelevant as aris is. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Cause you wanna continue denying, that Mona is your stalking horseWikipedia.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 17:40, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

You should probably do one of three things.[edit]

Get rid of the mod-level protection on that page about the cartoon, since we only have two active mods; institute a process to get more mods; institute a process to get rid of the mods altogether. The status quo is not really ideal. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:51, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No, it's not, I agree, though we are in sometime in november holding elections for new mods, so you know, option two is moving along :v --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 17:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Request for Account Deletion[edit]

I request that my account be deleted. I have nothing further to discuss. --Supreme Dalek (talk) 17:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

That's not technically possible.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 17:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Courtesy vanishing. --Supreme Dalek (talk) 17:40, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Just exterminate it from the database... -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 17:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Bow before me, O'pessent[edit]

--KingOfRationalWiki (talk) 18:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Whatever you do, Paravant, don't say anything.[edit]

It's much better not to explain the reasons for blocking people, or at least keep it to a bare minimum. Anyway, I'm going soon. Try not to be a jerk.Civic CatTalk to Civic Cat 22:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)