User talk:Storytellershrink

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Storytellershrink! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

Welcomes

An interesting, though possibly controversial, first post.--Bob^{bing up} 18:33, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

OK, I take your point. :-) One thing about RW etiquette. We're small enough that we can usually get away with replying on the talk page where things started. Don't get me wrong, I love to get stuff on my talk page - it reassures me that somebody loves me has noticed one of my edits. But replying here is usually enough. Welcome again. --Bob^{bing up} 18:44, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Ah, please excuse the mistake. --Storytellershrink 18:45, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

No, no. Please don't apologize. It's not a rule or anything - it's just the way things usually happen. --Bob^{bing up} 18:54, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Oooo. User creates cool sig. User knows Wiki.--Bob^{bing up} 19:07, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Hey, I had a whole conversation with Chaos once, page to page. Figured the world would just think that he (she?) and i were talking to ourselves. --WaitingforGodot 17:27, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

User copied user' sig off of Wikipedia. User took that from other changed a few words, colors, and everything about it. User knows wiki about as well as user knows HTML. But user knows how to work easy and not hard. It still pretty. --Gen. S.T. Shrink *^{Get to the bunker}* 19:09, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

This user like examples to copy ;) I've never really understood why ping-pong conversations developed on wikis. It's bad enough to try to remember what one might have said on someone else's talk page a few days or weeks ago, but following other people's dialogues is even harder. Oh, and Welcome to the Dollhouse, STS! human 19:14, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Meanwhile, you may wish to partake of our unrivaled selection of userboxen. :-) --Bob^{bing up} 19:16, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

WIGO Success!

Ya done good :-) -caius (tinker) 01:23, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

So....no spoon poking? And/or molar hanging? Go Me. --Gen. S.T. Shrink *^{Get to the bunker}* 01:25, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

Uh... no, not at all *quietly removes her spoon pointed directly at the small of your back* --Eira ^omtg! The Goat be praised. 02:29, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh deary me, you were about to commit an original sin. For shame upon thee, for these are the words of Izzard (16:Who gives a Shit) "For you cannot impress the priest with a simple adulterous circumstance, ye must create an original sin, such as poking a badger with a spoon. For these are the words, yet only in Catholocism, for in the Anglican Church there is only "Cake or Death". Please excuse the diatribe. I can also burst into songs about the Sacridity of Sperm. Ramble....ramble....ramble...bob dole....bob dole...bob dole...ZZZZZZZZZZ

--Gen. S.T. Shrink *^{Get to the bunker}* 16:46, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

sig

You would appear to have dropped a " </small> from your sig. I just followed you on TWIGO & went all scrunched up until I put one in. :)   ^Contribs_Talk 22:32, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

O gasp. Thank you for pointing that out. I am full of thankfullness to you. Hope you find this, or I will look very ungrateful. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 01:23, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Susan always watches!

  ^Contribs_Talk 01:44, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

.....*twilight zone music* My name is not Winston Smith. I don't think. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 19:07, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Your sig seems to have gotten busted a bit - what happened to your stars? ħuman 21:02, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, you told me to change to SVG, so I eventually got it right, but I guess the software or something is messed up (you'd have to speak to Genghis about it) and I deleted the images as per request of aformentioned Mongol detractor. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:07, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Aw, what happened to the awesome shadows/lighting effects? The older image was prettier ;). Anyway, your "old" sig named the image specifically, I'll just delete the ones on my talk page (or redirect/transclude the old file name with the new one?) ħuman 21:11, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't know. The reason this one sucks is because (paraphrasing) the SVG looker-ater is off kilter. Ask Linus or GK. They can explain it better. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:14, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I see now. I restored the .png to simplify places like my talk page where there were 20 links to it. I hope Linus gets the SVG looker-ater rekiltered! ħuman 21:24, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Bobby Flay

He puts cajun seasoning on everything. If he did a salad episode, he's season his lettuce with a cajun rub and then blacken it on the grill. I want to put a cajun rub in his eyes so he will go away forever. Hopefully he will take Paula Deene with him. 24/7 Giada de Laurentis, I say.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 03:57, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I know that he is a spice nut (hehe, get...nevermind). I was just noting how ridiculous the man is. The south only has the food going for it, why does he take that away? I like Paula. Granted she always looks like she's having a heart attack but she's cheeky. Her sons on the other hand. And as for 24/7 Giada, if the mute was on, yes. She's pretty, but she has too many teeth (86, last count). I would go 24/7 Alton Brown though. He is my culinary hero. I wrote that while watching Throwdown, a show where he goes out of his way to make us know he has the upper hand, knows weeks in advance, suprises them, then loses. I also like Cat Cora, because with the exception of those annoying as hell Hearty Boy idiots, is the only gay on the Food Network. My responces always contain more than necessary, forgive me. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 04:07, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I was going to reprimand you haughtily for liking Cat just because she's gay, but then I realized the only reason I like Giada is... well, yeah. Food porn, hehe.

Alton is pretty okay. Good Eats is always fun to watch. I do wish he would do away with his attempts at humor and just do what he does best: the food science.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 04:18, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Wow, all I get on basic cable is Versus - Cage Fighting - half naked men beating the crap out of each other then hugging. Most of them ugly. A few are cute though. Is that what you meant? ħuman 04:20, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I tried coming up with another reason to like Cat but I got nothing except "breath of fresh air in the conservative media". I like Ina though. Giada is just so....peppy. Like Rachael Ray, just less annoying. I also Hate Emeril Lagasse and like Duff. I agree with Alton sentiments. Oh thanks for reminding me, someone owes me money from the Big Show - Money fight. I don't care if he used brass knuckles, I would need a shotgun to dent him. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 04:28, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

OK

OK no problems. Proxima Centauri 14:05, 26 June 2008 (EDT)
It's OK you've helped. Proxima Centauri 15:44, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

Eh?

Which one is "Ender's Shadow"? Stop creating new things I haven't read! _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 15:01, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Ender's Shadow is my favorite one. If you forget the fact that Orson Scott Card is about as Conservative as.....as ummm....A conservative guy, then the books will be fun. But, the last time I even mentioned the books was a long time ago. Anyway, Ender's Shadow is the parralel novel to Ender's Game. One has the main character of Ender (Ender's Game) the other has the main character of Bean (Ender's Shadow). The writings aren't the least bit political as far as I can discern. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 16:22, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

But of course

That's why it's called talent on loan from God! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:29, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Good evening

Why do you insist on reverting my well-sourced edits? You are being quite uncouth. 59.149.34.180 05:10, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Pesky Libt responds

Ruusssshhhhh -- on the EIB network. I could tell you were a big Rush fan. He's a Libertarian you know. (Did i getcha on that one?)

As requested, i have responded on "your" global warming page, and also on the Libt:Talk page. I take it this is how i let you know -- notifies you at some point, probably Rem 23:30, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Q & A to make your day

I have clicked on EVERY link from "I have just left you a very important message on a talk page somewhere" on down thru "Ahem" ...

And could find nothing you added -- where is it hidden? Was it deleted?

Q> Was your partial rebuttal directed at me? Or RationalWiki.

A> RationalWiki. I tried to make it clear that i didn't know who "you" is. I obviously failed.

Q> You just started talking about Rush Limbaugh on my talk page and I'm confused.

A> You left a comment somewhere that referred to Rush, which is what elicited my response, and your link led me to your talk page.

Please tell me i put the AGW rebuttal on the right page (as i am starting to worry about my IQ).

I just noticed a question you asked that i missed before ...

Q> If AGW has a strong scientific basis and support, would a libertarian support government efforts to solve it?

A> Probably not, because it would involve massive outlays of cash (according to the the AGW crowd), and the govt cure would almost surely be worse than the illness.

You are aware, i expect, of the counterproductive measures so far -- govt pushing ethanol which has caused greater pollution -- not to mention pushing food prices up with the result that poorer countries will experience even MORE starvation.

Govt has a stupendously, incredibly, ridiculously bad track record when it comes to problem-solving. But THIS time on THIS issue govt will come thru?

Serious question.

And are you aware of the Superfund program? Rem 08:42, 5 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but it was the green movement which first hit upon ethanol. It was only later that the government started pushing it (with some help from the agricultural lobby). Most bad decisions made by the government are first made by the people. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 06:03, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Not sure i understand your point. Govt is made of people -- what does it matter where bad decisions originated? The green movement is not likely wrong on everything.

Superfund

But i don't think you addressed the Superfund program. I know an enviromentalist that worked on the project a while ago, and he said that over 90% of the funds allocated to it are eaten up by govt lawyers RATHER than cleaning up the hazardous sites on the national "worst sites" list. Which was how it was sold to the public.

And that's not the half of it. They go after businesses that weren't even around when bad stuff was dumped, and knew nothing about the companies that were there before them. And those business owners (most of them small) have to send lawyers, at great expense, to Wash DC for several visits to defend themselves. Were you aware of this?

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/ is their official site.

It is a superstition, not easily overcome, that govt is a good thing rather than a necessary evil. Most people on opposite teams (Dems vs GOP) believe that, when THEIR guy wins, govt will solve problems. It never works out.

Rem^Beau 23:40, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Rem, it's called "due diligence" - when moving onto property, a prospective buyer investigates what liabilities may pertain to it. By the way, I think you are wrong. ħuman 00:17, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Shrink, should you not want this discussion on your page, where is the best place to move it -- my page? Rem^Beau 23:40, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

As it happens, I don't care about Superfund too terribly. It could be a flawed system, as could any federal program. But, as far as I understand Superfund takes things that are hazardous to you, and you refuse to do anything about it, they come in and fix it, fine you, blah blah blah. Basically to your first thing, 90& allocated for personal use. I didn't meet this friend, I don't know anything about him, but yes, it's possible for corruption to intrude. The second point, Lawyers paying to go to D.C. If you knew there were bad stuff where your business is, and you do nothing about it, you need to be forced to to not kill people around you. As businessmen can't be trusted, it must be enforced. Your third point, which really isn't a question: Government is a corruptable thing, but not naturally corrupt. It is not only not a necessary evil, but not evil at all times. Only when bigwigs and incompitents take the lead. Allow me to explain a point where some form of governement is necessary. Slavery. As humans naturally don't like to do things, and want to feel superior, they create slavery. The government for a long time, advocated slavery. Then we got an intelligent leader in lincoln. Do you honestly think the status quo would have changed without some kind of leader? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 00:02, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

You can count on Los Federales proving it is a flawed system, time after time, and counter-productive more often than not.

But my point is, they DON'T "come in and fix it", they fritter away over 90% of a huge budget on govt lawyers, many of them anti-business, and accomplish very little of their stated purpose. Small businesses, their employees, and a local economy are just collateral damage.

They should have spent at least 90% of the Superfund money on cleaning up the sites. Can you not agree with that?

Businessemen can't be trusted, but govt can? Misplaced faith it seems to me. The ONE area where govt has a licit role in business is in preventing monopolies, but they can't even handle THAT.

For the life of me, i CANNOT figure out how govt has managed to prevent, thus far, another successful terrorist attack on US soil. I can only deduce that terrorist networks are not particularly clever. Maybe they just keep trying all the doors until they find one unlocked.

Is it your belief that "bigwigs and incompetents" in govt are the exceptions rather than the rule? If so, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

Wilberforce, not Lincoln, was the leader in pushing for the abolishment of slavery. Lincoln got a ton of Americans killed for a mixed bag of reasons, and i plead ignorance as to whether the Civil War (you just gotta love the oxymoronic flavor of the name) was a good or bad enterprise to embark on.

In the states during Lincoln's time, it was members of Congress that took the lead in abolishing slavery, and their clear leader was (if memory serves) Thaddeus Stephens. But i will grant the importance of Lincoln signing the Emancipation Proclamation.

Rem^Beau 12:29, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Again, I cannot comment on the 90& thing as I don't know that it's even true. I have not met your friend, have not spoken to him nor have I spoke to anyone concerning Superfund. Therefore, I refuse to comment on that question I know nothing about. As for your second point, how the government has prevented attacks on US soil, I happen to think that the current administration has been sitting around with it's finger up it's ass and the only reason nothing has happened is because we have scared all terror leaders into holes in Pakistan. Bush is incompitent and knows it. But at least he realizes it. The bigwigs and imcompitents in government are not the rule, nor however are they the exception. They are around the equal. Ah, Wilberforce, of whom I am a great fan. Wasn't he....BRITISH? Do you honestly believe that except the idea, Wilberforce had anything to do with american politics? Had there not been an intelligent person like lincoln in power we would have accomplished anything? No government is perfect, and the American government till now has been particularly stupid. Without the president nothing would have ever happened with Stephens ideas. Incedentaly, President Stephens would be a scary thought, given his record. Also, to what you said to human, the thing about your self esteem in particular, you have called me an idiot and an anarchist. Perhaps my self esteem is taking hits as well. And, if you build a business, you should take superfunds funds and clean up the damn area. It is your responsibility. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 18:30, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Ref Human 00:17, 9 July 2008 (above)

Really? -- a small time guy setting up a little business is able to figure out all the stuff that happened on his property for the last 50 years? That exceeds due diligence; that's fantasy.

And suppose you decide NOT to buy a property because you know a tannery (let's say) used to be in business there? Should the previous owner that bought it in a more naive decade be sued?

Wrong about what? (Everything?) What am i wrong about, specifically?

You should be careful suggesting i could be wrong, my self-esteem is at stake. I'm afraid my coping mechanisms (rationalization, suppression, and the Tu Quoque ploy) could break down.

Rem^Beau 12:37, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Hahaha. Surely, Rem, you know something about the real world? When I bought my property (and I'm as small as they get) 18 years ago one condition I put on the purchase was that the seller pay for remediation of a minor hazardous waste issue (crankcase oil spills & such on the ground - about 6 55 gallon drums of contaminated soil was removed). What Superfund does in the case of your tannery example is uses their budget to clean up sites where the entity that caused the problem can't, basically. As far as you being wrong, I refer to 1) the 90% factoid (surely there is an easy cite for that if it's true?), and 2) that Superfund is a "bad thing". ħuman 19:19, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Me know something about the real world? I did peek out of Plato's cave once, and oh yeah, i did visit Kansas City.

You WERE clever to put that condition on the purchase, granted. But many small businessmen starting up are not so sharp as you -- and my argument is they shouldn't HAVE to be. You shouldn't have to be cagey to dodge the depredations of your govt and its lawyers. It is corruption on the face of it, nailing someone that isn't guilty because they can't get at the actual malefactor. You obviously don't agree, and i can't figure out how to get you to care about it.

Penalizing a guy that wasn't to blame is WRONG. You shouldn't have to be a Libertarian to see that.

Why would the 90% claim be easy to cite? I don't see that. You are saying, i guess, that 90% is not believable? Would you change your view if you became convinced of it?

Saying Superfund is a bad thing is simplistic and misses the point. The point is, given that govt typically is incapable of doing a good job, and often makes things worse (think Don Quixote), let's stop trying to use it for everything. It is an ill-suited, cumbersome, heavy-handed, mindless giant that can't really feel our pain, and can't be as motivated as we are ourselves to best solve our problems. And it grows like a tumor.

Rem^Beau 08:59, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Ref Shrink 18:30, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

As to not taking the word of my friend on that 90% statistic, that seems a bit churlish; Mr. Hyde is a lovely chap, and you'd like him. Is there a convention in the UK that you use an ampersand as a percent symbol? You can't comment on a question you know nothing about? I hadn't noticed that ever stopped you before.

You can't have Wilberforce, he's MY hero. And surely he had an American parent -- all great Brits do. (Bodicea was an exception.) Tho admittedly i don't know how much influence he had on the American anti-slavery movement, i would've thought he had a not insignificant part. There were Americans that could read back then, you know. There are still some. You're probably right about prez Stephens.

I never called you an idiot (must have been somebody else), and i'm pretty sure you can't get into my head, and probably i suggested some of your views were reminiscent of the logic of the worst of Anarchistic views. Here's the thing on self-esteem: mine is important. Yours? Considerably less so.

If i could get my hands on those Superfunds, i WOULD clean up.

Rem^Beau 09:12, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I wish to immediately apologize for saying you called me an idiot. You were right, It was someone else. The problem with taking the word of your friend is I, for one don't know if that friend exists. The fact that you called him Mr Hyde only adds to my skepticism. As for the ampersand, we all make mistakes, and that was one. But I am American, for your information. Wilberforce is a hero to all, I would think. But so is John Locke, yet we do not claim he wrote the First Amendment. Forgive me but I have to say that the comment about Wilberforce having american parents deserves a "What?". Either it's an expression I don't get or....well I can't find another explanation for it. Wilberforce was born in 1759, years before Jefferson penned the declaration. And how are my ideas even remotely anarchistic? You are the one apparently in favor of abolishing the government. And interestingly enough, the very phrase My self esteem is important, your isn't seems an example of very high self esteem.

No, you wouldn't. Because then you would be in government. Your a libertarian. It wouldn't make any sense. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 12:43, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Signature

Rem^BeauRem^Beau 23:12, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Rem^BeauRem^Beau Rem^BeauRem^Beau 23:13, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Maybe i just have hiccups Rem^BeauRem^Beau 23:15, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

But at least it functions, and it IS blue.

Is it going twice on its own? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:19, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah -- wish i could copy the script to a page so that you could see it (without it functioning instead).

You can. Use <nowiki>! (See the code for this comment for how it works -- it stops stuff acting like code). Incidentally, I think this thing is contagious. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ← ↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ← ↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ← ↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ← ↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ← ↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 23:24, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

! [[User:Rembrandt.ryan|<span style="color:blue">Rem</span>]][[User_Talk:Rembrandt.ryan|<span style="color:blue">^Beau</span>]]{{SUBST:User:Rembrandt.ryan/sig}}

Did you just copy from your preferences box? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:28, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Not with a whimper, but a bang ... Rem^BeauRem^Beau 23:29, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes. Rem^BeauRem^Beau 23:30, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Erase everything in the box and put this exactly

{{User:Rembrandt.ryan/sig}}

Then hit the raw signatures button. Then save. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:31, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

(Edit conflict. I won't be stopped!) I'd delete all the stuff before {{SUBST:thingy if I were you. It looks like you're calling the template but also making the sig manually. Hence, two copies. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 23:32, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Okay? Rem^Beau 23:33, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

YAY!!!! --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:34, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Lookin' good. Man thanks. Rem^Beau 23:35, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Just curious -- did i copy something wrong? Rem^Beau 23:36, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

That was good fun!!! Rem^Beau 23:38, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Probably not, just twice. If I had to guess, I'd say you added in one, left, got some new info, put in the other, and just forgot to get rid of the old one. No big deal, everybody has one or 766,834 messups. As long as you aren't in charge of code like Trent, you'll do fine. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:39, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

But it was something YOU did, right? It can't have accumulated, in sequence what i did, could it? Rem^Beau 23:42, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, rationally it wasn't me, and ideologically it wasn't you, so lets blame Chaos. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:47, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Infidel! Verily shall I visit ye with disease and substandard cake. Quail, mortals! _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 23:51, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Quailing....quailing...quailing. Ok, bored with quailing in fear. Ready to caterwaul in agony. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:53, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

B

A

T

T

E

N

B

U

R

G

!

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 23:58, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, so Chaos isn't you ... Rem^Beau 23:59, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

No, chaos is him, he has just changed his name more times than Prince. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 00:02, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Again. I would prefer red velvet but I have never tasted battenburg. I assume you don't care for it.

R

A

N

D

O

M

W

O

R

D

--*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 00:01, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Hey! Thanks for greetings.

Bear with me, I ish n00b. ^_^

To answer The Beatles question, YES! Greatest band on the whole damn planet.

Well

I'll find SOMEPLACE to put it, and it's an extremely well-known picture. But I'm in a mean mood, as I'm in disgust over those asses. ^{— Unsigned, by: PennyLane / talk / contribs}

Thanks!!

Sorry. I was just so mad at them, I have a tendency to launch myself into a blind rage, and thank you for the advice.PennyLane 17:06, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Well

I was playing to do something along those lines, really tastefully at first, sounding interesting to most conservatives, and then OBSENITY! PennyLane 17:14, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Demotion

Obligatory link to useful help file: RationalWiki:Sysop_guide. Please to use your useless powers for good, and not the ebil. ħuman 02:52, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Congratulations, Storyteller! We liked you so much, you didn't have to go before HUAC to get sysopped! : ) Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 03:34, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Umm....Ok? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 03:36, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Commiserations. --Bob^{bing up} 04:14, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Dawkins

"When you think about how fantastically successful the Jewish lobby has been, though, in fact, they are less numerous I am told -- religious Jews anyway -- than atheists and [yet they] more or less monopolize American foreign policy as far as many people can see. So if atheists could achieve a small fraction of that influence, the world would be a better place."

Dawkins, Richard

--Zoophile 03:15, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

What's your point? He's just saying that the Jewish lobby has more influence than atheists, even though there are more atheists than Jews in America.

(sorry Storyteller for hijacking your talk page)--Damo2353 03:21, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Everyone hijacks everyones. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:23, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

I've heard that opinion before and suspect it's based on the usually close relationship between the USA and Israel. My opinon is that is post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. The USA needs all the friends it can get, as Israel does -- that has been the opinion of most recent presidents, be they Dems or Pubs. A solid majority of Jews vote Dem, regardless of the candidates, so it wouldn't make sense that it's about votes. And i think the funding donations are along the same lines. :::-- Rem^Beau

And Atheists are far less common than Agnostics. Convinced Atheists tend to be militant, and speak up out of proportion with their numbers, which gives the illusion that they are a large group.

-- Rem^Beau 12:42, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

burqa enablers

C'mon, leave this one for a day or two. It's pretty funny when you think about it. Or do I just have a bad sense of humour?Damo2353 03:41, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

What he's doing is inflamatory. When we delete move residue, why keep a senseless joke. Seems rather pointless. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:43, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

The early ones were, get rid of them, but I pissed myself when I saw that redirect.--Damo2353 03:46, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, clean yourself up. Just seems like useless fluff to me. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:47, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

.egap niam eht tcetorp t'nod eW

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} !syadiloh yppaH .taht ekil enoemos ro ...namuH ot esac ruoy ekam dluohs uoy )ees ll'uoy kniht I ,ti htrow yllaer ton s'ti( detcetorp ti tnaw yllaer uoy fI .noitca taht fo lavorppasid rieht detsiger sah ereh enoyreve tsomlA .yrroS

[1]

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .)MT(soahc fo efil a nesohc evah I .relletyrotS ,yrros m'I

By any chance in honor of the Joker? --71.8.59.31 20:34, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .em no gnihton tog s'eH .ruetama na s'rekoJ ehT .tfffP

You don't know how much I am itching to stick an if statement that reverses just your text. tmtoulouse ^provoke 20:38, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} !elpoep ,soahc eht ecarbme tsum uoY .ti esrever margorp ruoy tel dna yllamron epyt ylpmis dluow I sa ,siht od ot em rof reisae ti ekam tsuj dluow ti taht did uoy fi diarfa m'I ,tnerT

So to clarify, you're only gonna do this for a week? -- Darth Harrington ^{No, I am your salesperson} 20:38, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .niaga pu yaw thgir eht dlrow eht ees dna gniliec eht morf flesym hcated lliw I taht retfA .peY

I've got a question real quick. How do you make it only say {{User:Chaos!/sig12}} as opposed to all of the code in it. I've been trying to make it just say {{User:Storytellershrink/Sig}} instead of [[Image:US-O11 insignia svg.png|17px]] [[User:Storytellershrink|<span style="color:green">'''Gen. S.T. Shrink'''</span>]] [[User talk:Storytellershrink|<small><span style="color:Purple">^{'''Get to the bunker'''}</span></small>]] -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 20:48, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .etats lavemirp a ot trever ot niarb ym esuac dluow sdrawkcab ti gnitirw tub ,ereh uoy llet dluow I .egap klat sih no eb llits dluohs )esicerp dna gnol yrev( rewsna eht -- oga owt ro keew a tuoba nesdlejKA rof noitseuq siht derewsna yllautca I .KO .thgiR

Hmmm, I would have to program some sort of check to see if the words you put in are "real" words and only reverse if they are not.......some sort of spell check...I wonder if they have an open source php spell check out there.... tmtoulouse ^provoke 20:59, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} !timmad ,zlul ym lluc ot gniyrt potS

Why not just type it in the tex reverse thing? Or are you going au natural? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 20:59, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .yllis eht ot tnemtimmoc ym detamitserednu evah uoy kniht I .em ot ynnuf sa t'nsi tsuj ti ,hcuot taht tuohtiW .dnahgnol tuo ti epyt I

.uoy evol I kniht I. Thanks a lot. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:06, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Signature

I love the signature, but I can't help thinking that "Get to tha Chopper" Would be lulz inducing SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 03:02, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Hmm...maybe it is time for a change....-- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:06, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Civility?

Why I autta... Just one more time Alice, and Bamn, Right in the Kisser... (ps, i made a tiny comment up at the top, too).--WaitingforGodot 17:28, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Hojimachong

You are this user, correct? If not, whose sock are you? Bohdan2 19:48, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't think Hoji uses socks here, Bohdan, just fess up to it's being your sock. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 19:52, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I am no ones sock. I am displeased at being called such. Also, if this Bohdan is actually the Bodhan, I have a bone to pick with you. You always say my CP socks are Ames. I am getting irritated at that. None of my socks are or have ever been Ames. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 19:55, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I can start calling them socks of AKjeldsen. Bohdan2 19:58, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Why not call them socks of who they are? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 19:59, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Actually...

If you want to be precise about it, I'm not "from ED". I'm "from the Internets". I'll let you figure out how long a block that's worth. Chris Fanshaw 21:41, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Jung

Damn right. :nods: ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 04:00, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Blocking users

You can't block yourself for 4 seconds not matter how much you deserved it. It is not in the Fibonacci sequence. $\approx$$\pi$ 00:59, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

But it's the third digit (and many others) of Pi!!! ħuman 01:48, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Vandal VS. VCAT

Shit- I thought "vandal" WAS "vcat" - I never looked at the results properly. My bad....and sorry Bohdan, I had no idea the joke was on you...PFoster 13:44, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

No problem. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 13:45, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Very well then...

I wasn't going to make an account here, but since you invited me so nicely, I though "what the hell". I have one account on CP, and haven't yet done anything controversial with it, but am planning on seeing how long it takes to get permabanned despite following all the rules and treating everyone nicely. Johann 20:22, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Just don't out yourself. Are you a liberal? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 20:23, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

In many ways, yes. I agree with some traditionally conservative ideas, but not many. On most of the hot-button issues of today, I find myself in agreement with those on the political left. Johann 20:30, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, you're screwed from the start. Unless you are ferociously Conservative (I'm sure you already know this) you're marked for death. But we're very glad to have you here. Any particular areas of expertise? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 20:32, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I'm a long-time lurker here, so I know that a rather different set of rules applies to those who don't agree with their moronic sysops. As for my areas of expertise, I have a keen interest in science and philosophy, albeit as an amateur. I work as a musician and am still a student. Johann 20:38, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Perfect. Well. What now? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 20:39, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

For me, bedtime. I don't know what time zone you're in, but it's very late where I am. Nighty-night. Johann 20:41, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Page protection

It is like your "thing" isn't it? tmtoulouse ^provoke

Lolwut? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:17, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Er, typo. tmtoulouse ^provoke 21:18, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Allow me to rephrase that. Lolwut? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:19, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Perusing pages that are protected but are members of the class of pages we normally don't protect, I always see your name. tmtoulouse ^provoke 21:20, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Ehhh...Wut? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:21, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Nevermind. tmtoulouse ^provoke 21:22, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Seriously though, what do you mean? I look at pages and protect pages that aren't usually protected pages? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:24, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

I had just noticed that you protect pages a lot, usually the only ones protected are sigs and retired users. Not that I particularly cared, just noticed it seemed to be something you toy with. tmtoulouse ^provoke 21:25, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

I have teh evidence. MWAHAHAA. I've done Main Page twice, the first I was still neowbish and thought it werse common practice. Then I undid it. I protected carlin so I wouldn't forget when I was supposed to start work on it. User:Fawkes because Chaos was going redirect crazy again, then I undid it. tHEN The main page again because....Idk? My page twice for no specific reason. Anyway....My main thing to do on here is to....I don't know why I'm here actually. Make socks of random family guy characters and insert jokes that Susan doesn't get I guess. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 21:31, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

"Chaos was going redirect crazy"? Is it me or are you confusing me with Littlefish again? I should warn you -- I no longer find that suggestion funny. ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 22:07, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

OLLIE WILLIAMS SAW A FISH! -- Darth Harrington ^{No, I am your salesperson} 21:32, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Pls to not protect pages other than yr dig, maybe. Nutting else. ħuman 23:57, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

I IZ EAST GERMANIC VANDAL

I HAZ PARLOE PLZ K THNX Vandal 23:51, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Oops

Sorry, Storyteller. Now we can all laugh at it, though. OneForLogic 22:45, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Hahahahahahahahahaha! -Master Bra'tac^Kree! 22:47, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Insensitive userpage... [sniff]...

Itz funnie I laffed. Twise. ħuman 00:53, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

Damn you Arkansas!

I was monitoring that too, in the news. :( Norseman^Wassail! 22:55, 25 August 2008 (EDT)

Could you just stick it on WIGO world and stop carrying. Rave as much as you like on the talk page, write an essay anything, just deal with it rationally. $\approx$$\pi$ 01:06, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

Under normal circumstances, I would. But there's something about this that's so...ridiculously unfair. And that these idiots are OKAY with it. I mean, they are obviously anti-gay, but if they want to do that, ok. But say what you are doing. When you admit that you're targeting gays, yet still get the others...it seems so wrong. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 01:10, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

I concur it is total bullshit, and needs to be addressed in depth, and even supported your edit war, but I think people are getting tired. Can we call truce for now? tmtoulouse ^provoke 01:21, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

If you must inform us every few seconds, use the intercom. δλερνερ ^{διαλέγομαι | συνεισφέρω} 01:42, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

I added the "alternate main page" to wigo world, gee, whodathunk we have a place for things like that. We also have an article on Arkansas if anyone wants to "improve" it. So, if this passes, will couples getting divorced have to give up their children? ħuman 01:56, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

Did a crossbeam fall off the treadle down t' mill?

[2] I'm sure you remember. Why not add the link to the Sarah Palin article? ħuman 02:23, 16 September 2008 (EDT)

Awesomenessicity

I read it. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:50, 5 November 2008 (EST)

A message

All the staff at McWicked Co. wish you a merry christmas.

Welcome back

To RationalWiki. Тy^Talk. 02:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Goodness. I feel like an old guy yelling about people on a lawn. Are you part of the welcoming committe? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Haha Yes, I am part of the welcoming committee. Тy^Talk. 02:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

*sigh* I leave this place alone for 3 years, and Tim Pawlenty wins a debate. *toddles off to yell at more young'ns* -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

You want your sysopship back? Тy^Talk. 02:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I lost it? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Everyone lost it last month. Oh and crats no longer exist, the wiki is run by a foundation, SusanG/Toast, Jtl, and TK have passed on. Etc. etc. etc. Тy^Talk. 03:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I knew about TK but goodness. Anywhere I can get a rundown a bit more expansive?

Also, I saw you made and kept up a RWW page on me. You're either a fan or a historian. I'm not interesting enough to have a fan.

Or are you a renamed someone I knew in a far-off time? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I am a historian. I joined a day or so before you left. Тy^Talk. 03:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Huh. Which foundation is this? And why did sysopship vanish? If ya don't mind me askin' -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

The RationalWiki Foundation. Sysopship isn't gone(though Bureaucrats are), just everyone lost their rights in May(why is very complex). So I can restore your rights as sysops can now make other sysops sysops. Тy^Talk. 03:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I just read about the Trial and Putsch. Is the state of RW essentially as it has always been: well-intentioned mob rule with occasional moments of total batshit insanity? Except now it's run by a foundation so Trent can get some sleep? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorta to kinda. We've had some bad moments along the way. Тy^Talk. 03:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

That's to be expected. Any more concrete "rules" (suggestions, commands, etc.) I should be aware of? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

There's still no cabal. Thunderkatz^Ho! 03:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! I shall sally forth and wandalize the main page to curse Arkansas! -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

(ECX2) Please no CP references in mainspace. No pointless wandalisms. You can now revert "obviously vile" talkpage comments. And LiquidThreads. 'bout it off the top of my head. Тy^Talk. 03:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Eh. I was angry at Arkansas. I probably won't do it again. And I don't know what LiquidThreads is. I feel old. (Matter of fact, I'll probably not edit more than this.) -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

LQT is a new talkpage system(see mine for an example). Don't go!! :) Тy^Talk. 03:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

That makes me feel really old. And Conservative. Is it required? That's probably a dumb question. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear me no. It's only uised by a few techophiles really. Relax. :)Тy^Talk. 03:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Do sysops still have delete rights? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I also restored your rights. Тy^Talk. 03:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks much. I need to do a little cleaning. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, don't mention it. Have fun! Тy^Talk. 03:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, why? Тy^Talk. 03:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Why what? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Delete all the funny stuff? Тy^Talk. 03:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Go read Gigglegration. That was the height of both my humor and grammar when I wrote it. Most of it's dumb, the rest of it I think about differently now. Amazing what 2 and a half years can do to a person. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 04:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay... Тy^Talk. 04:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• dododododo* Deep moments...on RationalWiki. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 04:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

(EC) I see. Still, the Arkansas thing is funny, from my perspective as a Louisianan. Тy^Talk. 04:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

(What is EC? Wow. I'm John McCain over here.) The Arkansas thing is not my proudest moment. I was angry. It happened at 3 in the morning, which was probably good for general sanity on the Wiki. Which, as RWW can verify, worked out great. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 04:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit conflict. You are too hard on yourself. Тy^Talk. 04:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah. No, I'm not. Any group will have insanity; I've never been in a HCM. But I was a Wannabe. And I was younger. 16, Full of atheism (and not the well thought out kind. The libertarian kind.) and angst. I loved Ayn Rand, for God's sake. Maybe I'm making more out of it than should be in it. But my past on RW is a perfect exemplification of my growth, philosophically, politically, maturitity. Looking back and seeing it all is... weird. I knew I was an asshole at that time, but GAH. It was pathetic. In the words of Charlie Sheen #unwarrantedselfimportance. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 04:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I used to be a fundamentalist Christian Conservative. We all make mistakes, the fact that you have grown and learned from them is a good thing. :) Тy^Talk. 04:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I did too. It's a weird period, adolescence. RationalWiki is here to stay, in whatever form it may be. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 04:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Tarot Cards

Hey, don't mock the power of the Tarot. Death could be lurking, and what will you do if you miss it? that's right, you'll DIE!!!!!. En attendant Godot 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I see you believe in inevitable timelines, as opposed to branching. In either case, yes, it is gay. Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 05:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)