|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|For future reference||6||05:54, 2 February 2013|
|You're on the list||2||03:41, 2 February 2013|
|Hey there||8||15:47, 7 January 2013|
|Lamentations||3||08:38, 7 January 2013|
|Schweitzer and soft tissue||1||01:39, 24 December 2012|
|Mod Nom||1||07:57, 21 December 2012|
|you know your stuff||1||05:31, 4 November 2012|
|much better||4||03:23, 21 October 2012|
|Capture||3||22:55, 22 September 2012|
|You've been noticed!||1||04:08, 18 September 2012|
|Fucking Beatles fan||7||06:32, 31 August 2012|
|Break||2||09:06, 30 August 2012|
|RW:ATIM||4||08:58, 28 August 2012|
|Thanks for the heads up||0||05:01, 29 July 2012|
|Election results||1||04:50, 6 July 2012|
|Email, please confirm receipt||10||13:55, 27 June 2012|
|My take on NZ Asset Sales.||0||22:34, 21 June 2012|
|Because horns are cute, and loins are tasty||7||13:44, 19 June 2012|
|My edit about Liberapedia was sourced.||1||09:37, 16 June 2012|
|Screw you||0||07:03, 14 June 2012|
Use double quotes ( " " ) for everything. It drives me nuts whenever I see people using single quotes when they're supposed to use double quotes. Don't be one of those people. If you continue, I shall be forced to think very judgmental things about your ability to hit the shift key on your keyboard.
I am a minimalist sometimes, Mr Two-spaces. :P
I use extra spaces everywhere when editing to help me differentiate between different chunks of wikicode (including where one sentence ends and another begins). I wish I could hit "enter" for a line break after every reference tag, too, so I didn't have to squint to differentiate references from the rest of the text anymore, but that gets rendered as spaces before and between references.
It makes sense to use single-quotes for scarequotes or titles.
Um, no it doesn't.
Last edit: 05:58, 30 June 2012
Not the list of people that can edit the Bodega, but rather the list of moderator nominees. Accept or decline.
Man, mod noms always bring out the silly in me-User:Brxbrx/sig 04:32, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations on your recent ascent to mod tier! There's no guide, of course, because we're awful, but I hope you do the good things anyway.
This will teach me to vote for myself, won't it?
Well, we'll see about that if we get Trent to release the data...
Congratulations. I hope you fare better than the last Kiwi to get the gig.
Liquid threads?? I almost didn't post on your page I hate them so much.
He has a non-LQT talk page, if you want to congratulate him on a page that doesn't have that annoying swirling thing above the edit box.
Don't mind me, I just don't like LQT. Good luck with your dictatorship.
Hi Peter, I'm lamenting the fact that you either weren't nominated for moderatorship, or refused the nomination. It's a tragic turn of events. Don't think your geniality and easy-going nature will remain unpunished for long (I have a theory about power and corruption that I want to test). I'm also lamenting your horrible choice of "endorsement"; although I guess somebody needed to fill the cavernous vacuum left by the non-appearance of 'Cretinous Incompetent' who was my favourite candidate at the last election. Tielec01 (talk) 05:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
I was nominated by Brx, as a matter of fact (see a few threads down), and that may have had an impact on my rejection.
More importantly, as I said, my evil plan has experienced a few delays over the past six months and wont be ready until October at the very earliest, so running now seems like bit of a waste of effort, you know?
I'm working on writing a serviceable article on Mary Schweitzer and intended to expand soft tissue material to specifically address CMI's persistent misrepresentations of her research, including claiming that she discovered intact protein, DNA, and various cells. I see that you've done a lot of research on ICR's responses. Mind seeing what you can adapt?
I've long been irked by CMI's approach because it's so transparently dishonest. It relies solely on Weiland's claim, based on a popular article that directly contradicts the paper Schweitzer published on this exact research, that she discovered intact blood vessels and blood cells in dinosaurian fossils. Weiland also misrepresents that the bone tissue Schweitzer examined was "unfossilized," when the research is clear that it was partly mineralized. CMI creationists typically trot out responses to objections to this claim based on the fallacy of the excluded middle. It's either 100% this or 100% that. Never what the researchers say it is when it's contrary to the "biblical worldview." Sarfati continues to claim Schweitzer's early research included finding blood cells by ... citing Weiland.
What do you think?
[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Mikal/monobook.js what have I done wrong with Dirks block?
That's because you suck at capital letters. Here, have a copy of Capital letters, arabic numerals, punctuation marks, accents, and other extraneous add-ons to the latin alphabet for dummies. It's only 2000 pages, you'll be done by tomorrow. :D
Peter, The other day, you told someone on the WTF-is-going-on-at-CP talk page to upload a screencap file as 'Capture <series of letters and numbers>.png'. How do you find the right series of letters and numbers? I've got a screencap of my own to upload.
If you click on the red 'img' link you get taken to the name of the file you want to upload to.
Your alternative option is uploading your file to whatever name you like, and then putting a redirect to it at the page that the img link takes you to.
I thought it was the rolling stones that had the rivalry with the Beatles? You must mean Taylor Swift, in which case no I am not.
The Stones only rival was their future selves. The elder statesmen lost. I beat Taylor Swift in being fat. For now at least...
Have you seen how thin Taylor Swift is? Everyone beats her in being fat.
Damn Chicken Ass, he's polluting the entire wiki. If it weren't for his bizarre affinities, we wouldn't be having this problem.
Why are you taking one? Also, what are the chances you will answer this, considering you have blocked yourself? It's good having you around so please reconsider this rash decision.
Agree with the guy above me. You were a blast to have about these parts.
Thanks. I'm not entirely sure what has been the trouble the last few days - more likely IRL stuff than on wiki, though. September 16 is when the next set of exams finish, so I should probably try to keep away regardless (not that that worked last year).
In other news, LQT interferes with your ability to edit your own talk page while blocked. Hmmm...
Goddamn it, I will go looking for that thread then...
Ok, doesn't seem to have been much of a thread, exactly - I seem to have misremembered. Blue originally unprotected the page on 9 November, commenting "Good point, WfG. I don't think this is necessary either." The closest thing I can find to said 'point' is this thread, where WfG says "i don't think this is a mod only issue (I'm not sure what is a mod issue, actually - i had thought they just enforced Mob issues)."
So the question of whether non-mods can comment is up in the air (I've seen no comittee minutes devoted to it), but completely excluding them - except in emergencies - would be pretty silly.
Did you see the edit notice? "Note: If you are not a moderator, please refrain from editing this page unless your need is dire. The talk page is the dedicated location if you need to bring a matter to the moderators' attention or comment on this page." Was your need dire when you edited it?
You're supposed to read edit notices on this site? I thought those were some kind of wishing-well system. ;)
Seriously though, 'dire' is rather excessive - I'm not actually sure what kind of situation that could be (dire situations usually require techs, not mods). I'm going to argue that posting there doesn't hurt anyone, in moderation. I'm not the only person who's done it either, take a gander through the archives.
So I had... 5 votes before getting knocked out at the bottom? I feel accomplished ^_^ Danke for the posters, even if they didn't allow me to win (something i would have been genuinely surprised about, though I also had more votes then i expected)
I'll confirm that I have read it, but I must say that your request is absurd.
Given the reluctance shown by everyone when it came to simply unblocking you, what makes you think that you're going to get takers for this (entirely unearned) "megafavor"?
And deny you the fun of working it out for yourself? So much for Sherlock...
Forget it, I'll just forward her the email I sent you. Maybe she'll take me up on the offer, lol
Given that you have linked to the list of "Ninjas," I am going to speculate that Brxbrx wants some edits made in bot mode so that they are invisible on Recent Changes.
Feel free to share with her, Peter. Just not in public, please.
“”Benvolio. We talk here in the public haunt of men:
Either withdraw unto some private place, And reason coldly of your grievances, Or else depart; here all eyes gaze on us.
Mercutio. Men's eyes were made to look, and let them gaze;I will not budge for no man's pleasure, I."
|—Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act 3, Scene 1|
This is annoying: I can't vote for everyone. Well, I can, but I still have to choose...
Actually, you rank order everyone that you want, and seven of your votes count at most because there are even mods. So you do have to order people, but you can vote for everyone!