Difference between revisions of "User talk:Jtl/Archive1"

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Conservapedia Edits: dered)
(Works of fiction are full of "lies")
Line 105: Line 105:
::I used to read ''Writer's Digest'' a lot, and one of the columnists, Art Spikol, wrote a book about fiction writing called ''Telling Lies for Fun and Profit''.  --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 21:03, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
::I used to read ''Writer's Digest'' a lot, and one of the columnists, Art Spikol, wrote a book about fiction writing called ''Telling Lies for Fun and Profit''.  --[[User:Kels|Kels]] 21:03, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
[[User:|]] 12:33, 12 February 2008 (EST)PLEASE NOTE: While I love it when people give credit where it's due, it's not due to me for the book in question. I am Art Spikol, who used to be a Writer's Digest columnist, and I didn't write "Telling Lies for Fun and Profit." Good title, though.(Any questions, contact me at artspikol@spikol.com)

Revision as of 17:33, 12 February 2008

Acording to Conservapedia

Thanks for adding something to my worthless template :) Now i only have one favor to ask of you. Can you post a link to the history of the page when that revision was made.Icewedge 01:13, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

My Sig

My signature color is beige because beige is the best color. I know that it is kind of hard to see, but hopefully you will see the question mark. So it is intentional for the color to be beige, but I didn't mean to have a signature that is hard to read. --Staple? 01:12, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

Moved from User talk:

I really like your edits so far:) Nice job. May I suggest you create an account? -Icewedge 02:52, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

Argh. I have one, I just, um, forgot to log in. --Jtl 02:53, 22 May 2007 (CDT)
Kk. -Icewedge 02:54, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

Hey Jtl!

Stop threatening TK's loved ones! 'I have loved ones to protect, and I have seen first hand what these net vandals/terrorists have done to others.'

(: --WikinterpreterTalk?

Do you have any idea what that's about? --jtltalk 04:11, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
Absolutely none. You haven't been engaging in the 'disappearances' of CP sysops, have you? --WikinterpreterTalk?
Not that I'm aware of. But evidently I've been having lots of conversations tonight I'm not aware of, so maybe I forgot that, too. --jtltalk 04:18, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
But... do they love him back? humanbe in 23:32, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

TK archive

Could you set up the TK talk page archive also on his user talk space and link it, you know standard proccedure ala wikipedia? 18:10, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

Thank you. Tmtoulouse 18:46, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
  • I was personally told by Colin tonight that it is wrong to be treated by anyone here differently. I am here with a clean slate and feel that what is posted doesn't fit with the spirit of things and that Colin agrees. My pages are my castle, and if I delete the derogatory comments other users have made towards me, that is my business. I am asking nicely that these games end, and you practice what you preach. Archiving my deletions under Jtl, is a violation of your rules, and Colin said I should have you contact him if you don't believe it. I can really see how this is gonna go here. --TK /MyTalk 02:32, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Your user page is your castle, but the current RationalWiki:Proposed_Guidelines says "user talk page space is public and may be archived, but not deleted". I don't see anything in the rules about archiving under my page (but may have missed it -- can you provide a link?), but will remove it as a sign of good faith, if you'll commit to leaving the archive in your user area, unless and until the consensus changes. --jtltalk 02:57, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
  • Jtl: PROPOSED GUIDELINES? That means they aren't anything yet. What would you have posted to me on CP if I made that statement?--TK /MyTalk 03:42, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
They're all we've got right now. If your position is that there are no rules at all, then your user page isn't your castle, and I could have put the archive there instead of where I did. Is that really the position you want to be taking? --jtltalk 04:26, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Gaining Consensus

"6. User page space is inviolable; user talk page space is public and may be archived, but not deleted.", However due to the nature of the material I believe a deletion would be acceptable. First let us gain consensus. -Icewedge 02:33, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Moved from User:Jtl/User_talk:TK/Archives1

Colin said to tell you my pages are my castle and it is wrong of you to archive anything I wish to delete from my page. --TK /MyTalk 02:28, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

"6. User page space is inviolable; user talk page space is public and may be archived, but not deleted.", However due to the nature of the material i believe a deletion would be acceptable. first let us gain consensus. -Icewedge 02:33, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

  • You don't need a vote! Colin assured me this wouldn't be happening. So you are telling me he is a liar? You are? Why was it not archived as Trent asked, under my name? Why Jtl's? I demand sanctions, as you demanded against me on CP. On fair. --TK /MyTalk 02:36, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Calm down. I do not see why Jtl had to archive it under his talk page it should have been done under yours. As i just said since you believe the material to be offensive I do not oppose your deletion of it. I merely want other opinions. -Icewedge 02:40, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Okay, where to begin? First, I put the archive under my page originally in order to try to abide by the rules, which 1. require archiving rather than deleting from talk pages and 2. give each user control over their own user area. Thus, I thought it would be less inflamatory to put the archive in my area than it would be to put it in yours. After Trent asked me to, I did archive it in your area, but I didn't want to delete my copy until I was reasonably certain that that archive would not be erased or deleted. Second, I don't appreciate you editing the archive page in my area; the comment you left on my talk page was sufficient (and in accordance with the guidelines). And I did the archiving in the first place because you failed to, in violation of the guidelines. --jtltalk 03:10, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
  • Yes, where to begin. Since about 6:00PM when you stole the material, until: 23:45, 23 May 2007 Jtl (Talk | contribs) m (8,579 bytes) (fix link to archive)

(cur) (last) 23:45, 23 May 2007 Jtl (Talk | contribs) m (8,577 bytes) (add link to archive)

That clearly shows your intent. And it doesn't address the issue about me being told I could delete the nasty remarks and comments made to me there, because quite obviously I was not being given a clean slate, and everything you all have done since I got here, including Wedgie, show that is impossible. You are every bit as nasty as on RW 1.0, and no more nasty than me, or any Sysop on CP. If I had taken Jtl's page and stored it anywhere, what would have happened? Not my mild complaints I can assure you. You all would have ganged up on me, calling me your favorite, a moron, incompetent, etc. You know its true. Trent never asked you to archive it under your name, and it is no easier to do it under your talk as mine. Now, I am going to depend upon Colin, whose word I do trust, the last person here whose word I trust to get rid of everything of mine, here. You still have horrid, vile remarks about me all over this place, and it is completely contrary to what I was promised. Even this convo here has been minipulated, cut and pasted from another place, with no transparency as to that fact. What liars you all are. --TK /MyTalk 03:39, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Check your time zone settings, TK. In my time zone, the timeline was:
  • 15:49 - you delete a large section of your talk page without archiving it
  • 16:04 - I make an archive in my user area
  • 16:10 - Someone posting from asks me to archive it in your area also "standard procedure ala wikipedia"
  • 16:44 - I create User talk:TK/Archives1
  • 16:45 - I create a link to that archive on your talk page "ala wikipedia"
  • 16:46 - Trent thanks me
  • 00:27 - you remove all the content from the archive in my user area, then undo that, then leave a comment replacing it
  • 00:32 - You post your first comment regarding this on my talk page
  • 00:33-00:40 - you and icewedge have a discussion, both on this page and on the archive page I created in my user area
  • 00:57 - I reply to the conversation on this page, not yet having seen that you'd edited the other one. I tell you that I'll remove my copy of the archive page, and ask you to provide a link to the supposed rule that I broke by creating that archive.
  • 00:57-01:10 - I discover the separate conversation on the page I was about to delete, and I move it here so it won't be lost when I delete that page, as you'd asked me to do and as I said I would
  • 01:11 - I delete my copy of the archive page
  • 01:39 - you post the comment I'm replying to
In said comment, you assume bad faith based on an apparent misunderstanding of timestamps, you accuse me of theft, and you call me nasty. You post a hypothetical in which you've archived some of my deleted talk page material (of which there is none for you to archive), and conclude that I would have called you names. Both the assumed situation and the presumed conclusion are incorrect.
You also say "it is no easier to it under your talk as mine". That's true, but as I already explained, I was attempting to avoid a situation such as this -- can you honestly tell me that you'd have been less inflamed if I'd originally created a page in your user space rather than mine? If so, I was wrong, and I'll remember that for future use, but my intentions were good.
You also say "this convo here has been manipulated, cut and pasted from another place, with no transparency as to that fact." If you mean the bit I cut & pasted from the archive page, then I'd point out the heading above that section, "Moved from User:Jtl/User_talk:TK/Archives1". What more transparency would one want? And I'll remind you that the reason I moved it is because I was about to delete that page as you asked me to.
Then you call me (and some unknown group of other people) liars.
I'm going to bed now, TK, and I suggest you do the same. --jtltalk 04:26, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
  • Another verbal slap, Jtl...when you do something you would have roasted my ass at the other place for? I was told it was being deleted, and yet, it is back, more of your users comments to poison the well here against me. Nice work. You leave all the nasty comments about me to be google indexed, just as you guys talked about doing in RW 1.0. If anyone here doesn't know what that is, contact me. I will gladly share then entire Wiki. --TK /MyTalk 04:32, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Any editor, regardless of past actions, is welcome here with a clean slate. No user is unwelcome! Personal attacks and threats will result in punishment. Any users with problems may contact Colin at webmaster@rationalwiki.com.

What's back, TK? --jtltalk 13:28, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Sorry, Todd....what? --TK /MyTalk 19:49, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Your last comment last night said "I was told it was being deleted, and yet, it is back". I don't understand what's back. --jtltalk 19:54, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
My archive. One bureaucrat told me I could delete it, another seems to think something else. I thought you saying you deleted it, it was gone, but what you did do was delete it from your space and put it back in mine. Nothing that is your fault. --TK /MyTalk 20:25, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
It's not back in your space; it was never gone from there, at least as far as I can see in the history. --jtltalk 20:28, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

I must really be dumb. I thought you said above, that originally you took my deletion and put it into an archive under your name? So it really wasn't in my space then, right? Then you put it there, right? So it was gone, right? Can we stop arguing trivia over every god damn thing here? --TK /MyTalk 20:33, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

I'm just trying to understand wtf you're talking about. For something to be "back", in my mind it had to be somewhere, then not there, then there again. And neither of the two archives did that. Please go back and look at the timeline I posted again before posting on this subject again. And after you do, perhaps an apology would be appropriate for the bad faith you assumed based on a misreading of the timeline in the first place. --jtltalk 20:41, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
  • The only "bad faith" was you assuming trouble, and putting it in your space to begin with. You admitted that, it was wrong, and you fixed it, no matter that I made a mistake reading the stupid timeline, ok? The problem is between me and Colin, who said I could delete the shit, ok? Please, I beg of you, can we drop this? Does everything have to be talked to death until one side "admits" defeat? I admit defeat! I should have only emailed Colin, never even inquired. --TK /MyTalk 21:00, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
Respond or not, as you please, but in this discussion you said I "stole" something; you said I "manipulated" a conversation by cutting & pasting it without indicating that fact; you said "That clearly shows your intent", with the 'that' being a misreading; you called me (and some unknown group of other people) liars; even in your passive-aggressive attempt to end the conversation, you continue to ascribe bad faith to my original action, and mistakenly claim that I admitted as such. And you attempt to claim the high ground on the matter of 'personal attacks'. --jtltalk 21:17, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Works of fiction are full of "lies"

Check out this edit. Probably not worth noting, but interesting to me. HGHeartOfGold talk 00:32, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Thanks! --jtltalk 00:43, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
I used to read Writer's Digest a lot, and one of the columnists, Art Spikol, wrote a book about fiction writing called Telling Lies for Fun and Profit. --Kels 21:03, 24 May 2007 (CDT) 12:33, 12 February 2008 (EST)PLEASE NOTE: While I love it when people give credit where it's due, it's not due to me for the book in question. I am Art Spikol, who used to be a Writer's Digest columnist, and I didn't write "Telling Lies for Fun and Profit." Good title, though.(Any questions, contact me at artspikol@spikol.com)


Thanks. --PalMD-Talk 19:46, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

You're welcome, I suppose. If I knew what I did, I might even try to do more of it! --jtltalk 19:49, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

Thanks! humanbe in 21:00, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

You two are trying to torture me, aren't you? Thanks! --jtltalk 22:28, 24 May 2007 (CDT)
It's not just us... and, you're welcome! humanbe in 23:33, 24 May 2007 (CDT)


Conservative is KDBuffalo? Sorry, if this is not allowed, but I just read that you made this connection. HGHeartOfGold talk 00:07, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for letting me know it is frowned upon. I did respond. HeartGold tx 01:40, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Tech Q

Do you know if it's possible to add hebrew characters to the greek, cyrilic, etc we have?--PalMD-Talk 11:05, 25 May 2007 (CDT) I don't, mediawiki.com might have the answer, or Linus or Jtl might as well. Tmtoulouse 11:08, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

I've given it a shot, but I don't know enough about Hebrew to tell if what I did works and/or is useful. Hebrew has some differences from the other languages already supported (as far as I know): it's right-to-left, and it seems to have a lot of combining accents. For now, I included just the characters marked as 'hebrew letter'. Do you also need 'hebrew accent', 'hebrew point' and 'hebrew punctuation' characters? If so, I can add them, but I'm even less sure that will work well -- I don't know if the accents will get combined properly, and some of them look small enough by themselves I'm not sure you'll be able to see what's what. Also, I don't know what order they should have been put in. BTW, that whole block is MediaWiki:Edittools; all I did was edit it and follow the pattern used for the Cyrillic letters.

What are you doing?!

You posted a link to a "proxy" with an (accidental?) addition onto the URL. When I removed the addition the site tried to download some kind of spyware. I am removing the link immediately. Həlios-speak to me! 03:24, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Eep! I mistakenly used the | between the URL and the intended label (like you use for the [[page|label]] style link); that explains the addition to the URL. As to spyware, many many apologies; I looked at it using Safari and it didn't do anything suspicious for me, or I wouldn't have linked to it. Thank you for removing the link, and I hope your computer's okay! --~~~~

Category for Cheney

I don't really expect you to change the category. This website is a den of liberals after all. Just bantering. HeartGold tx 04:42, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

I figured as much. I was still hoping we'd find language we were both happy with, but I think we're just too far apart on what the truth of the situation is. --jtltalk 21:58, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

Re: SVG support

Yeah, it's a variable in LocalSettings.php that I'll change. And Inkscape works nicely, as does the GIMP. ----Linus(plot evil tech) 07:04, 28 May 2007 (CDT)

Fixed it, after I overcame my laziness :). ----Linus(plot evil tech) 13:41, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
Great, thanks! --jtltalk 13:53, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
Hrm. I can do the upload now, but the images don't show up properly. It looks like maybe MediaWiki is trying to convert them to png for me, and that isn't working? For example: Pageviews.svg --jtltalk 22:52, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
I uploaded some SVG images and they seem to work fine. ɱ@δ ɱ¡ɳHello?/I did this! 23:59, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
But the one I posted here is just black for you, right? If I link all the way through to the svg itself [[1]], that works, but [[Image:Pageviews.svg]]<nowiki> gets served up as <nowiki><img src="/images/thumb/7/77/Pageviews.svg/320px-Pageviews.svg.png"> (well, there are some other attributes, but they shouldn't matter), which is just a black rectangle, for me at least. Maybe if I didn't let it do thumbnailing? I don't know how to do that, though.
Can you point me at an SVG you're using here? --jtltalk 00:11, 29 May 2007 (CDT)
Example Political chart.svg. ɱ@δ ɱ¡ɳHello?/I did this! 00:15, 29 May 2007 (CDT)
Waaaah! Why won't mine work? Pageviews.svg I see that mine has an internal stylesheet and yours doesn't; maybe that's it? I guess I'll just convert to PNG and read up some on SVG. --jtltalk 01:13, 29 May 2007 (CDT)
Yes, all I see are black rectangles. And very lovely they look too! ɱ@δ ɱ¡ɳHello?/I did this! 02:17, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Alexa graphs

Haha, those are cool. Of course, our little peak over CP on edits is, really, statistic-mining, since that was the site-building frenzy in the 24 hours after RW2 went on line. But still, it's interesting that we are visible on a graph that shows them at all! Nice work... Now, if we all boycotted CP, viewing, socking, etc. for a week, how would that look on Alexa? humanbe in 12:49, 30 May 2007 (CDT)

I'm a little curious about the spike they've got right now, it's the highest they've had since the "echo" in mid-March. Any idea where that might have come from? --Kels 12:52, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
How does alexa work? Is it like Neilson ratings for tv? Because if it is, they can skew the results by putting an alexa toolbar on their computers and ping the site often making it look like a lot of people are actually interested. Jrssr5 13:33, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
I don't know how Alexa works, although I do know that Neilson has software they send to randomly selected people to run in the background. That spike is odd, especially coming after a day when they fall off the graph. Wasn't someone here spamming them on Richard Dawkins' site or something? Or maybe ashfly gave another one of his fake interveiws? It will be interesting to watch over the next couple of days. humanbe in 13:41, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
The graphs on my page aren't Alexa; they're mine, based on numbers from Special:Statistics, sampled hourly. For CP the samples start at 2007-04-21 11:03:40 (US/Pacific; that first sample was taken manually; all later samples are within 10 seconds of the beginning of the hour); for RW they start 2007-05-22 14:00:14 (the RW sampling happens after CP has finished, so it's generally 5-15 seconds after the beginning of the hour).
I'm honestly not sure what spike you're asking about, Kels, so I don't have a theory -- I see some weekly fluctuation, with a general downturn on both (but with a pageview spike immediately after the purge). --jtltalk 13:56, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Oh, I see -- you actually were looking at the alexa graphs. That spike is interesting, yes, but I don't have a better guess than human about where it's from. It's not obvious in their self-reported pageview numbers -- they're up from the 26th, but still firmly in the 40000/day range. --jtltalk 13:58, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
The last week's worth of CP pageviews & edits/day:
  • 2007-05-23 47152 1451
  • 2007-05-24 42091 1132
  • 2007-05-25 35321 992
  • 2007-05-26 26124 889
  • 2007-05-27 34296 850
  • 2007-05-28 42812 1279
  • 2007-05-29 40924 1340
I sure don't see the growth on the 27th and 28th that alexa sees. --jtltalk 15:16, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Alexa's public description of how their numbers are determined is here: "Alexa's traffic rankings are based on the usage patterns of Alexa Toolbar users over a rolling 3 month period", "Reach is determined by the number of unique Alexa users who visit a site on a given day." CP's Reach is peaking too, so based on this Alexa thinks more users are viewing it. The Alexa Toolbar is available only for IE for Windows, and it's not clear to me why someone would install it, so all Alexa numbers are somewhat skewed; it's just not always clear how or why. --jtltalk 15:22, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Great info. So, scour CP and find out where either soeone told Andy to install the toolbar, or he suggested to all his homeschoolers to do so. "This site best viewed in IE7 via the Alexa toolbar" humanbe in 15:36, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Last I checked, Andy actually had a phase of awesomeness and recommended Firefox (along with some Bible quote extension or so... whatever...). Maybe it was a page-view vandal with the Toolbar? --Sid 16:58, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
That Firefox rec only lasted a day or two, but was nice to see, yes -- especially coming soon after some of TK's inane "off-brand browser" comments. As to a page-view vandal -- their pageviews are barely up at all, still within their normal range; they're not at all what I'd expect from someone intentionally bumping pageview count. My current guess is either a sub-rosa campaign to get sysops to use Alexa or someone's figured out a way to convince Alexa CP's getting traffic, without actually putting any load on CP's system at all. --jtltalk 17:17, 30 May 2007 (CDT)


I would never have figured that out.Bohdan 20:25, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

It's pretty easily, actually (says the man who once again confused the single-[ and double-[ link form)... When you're deleting stuff, instead of hitting DELETE or whatever, hit Control-X to cut to the clipboard. Then in another window, type "User_talk:Bohdan/Archive1" into the 'search' box and hit Go. You'll be told there's no such page and given a link to 'create this page'. Click that, then click in the edit window, then Control-v to paste. Save that, then go back to your talk page and add the [[User_talk:Bohdan/Archive1|Archive]] link. (and use double-brackets! Only doofuses get that wrong!) --jtltalk 20:30, 31 May 2007 (CDT)


AdamSteve.jpg The Adam and Steve Award
For acts of liberalism so amazing, that they are unbelievable!

Awarded to Todd with love.
Display it with pride partner!

Re: Images

Try again. I've changed the permissions, and want to see if it worked.

All better now. Thanks! --jtltalk 17:00, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

more plagiarism

I added a link on PalMD's talk page about where SharonS is plagiarizing her genetics entries from. Babel fishÅЯṬђŮŖ ÐΣйṬNow look here! 13:27, 3 June 2007 (CDT)

and his biometrics entry is straight from http://www.justia.com/dictionary/biometrics.html. Babel fishÅЯṬђŮŖ ÐΣйṬNow look here! 13:33, 3 June 2007 (CDT)

a little wiki help please

Please check out my sandbox for a new, potential side-by-side essay. It needs wikifying and Im and idiot.--PalMD-yada yada 14:17, 4 June 2007 (CDT)

I've created User:Jtl/SideBySideTemplate -- does that help any? I'll convert what's in your sandbox using those instructions to give a hopefully clear example. --jtltalk 14:43, 4 June 2007 (CDT)
I've saved a side-by-side version of your commentary as User:PalMD/sandbox-jtl. It's possible I missed a commentary bit, so you should give it a look-see for that. --jtltalk 14:50, 4 June 2007 (CDT)
Thanks, I appreciate the help.--PalMD-yada yada 14:52, 4 June 2007 (CDT)

Conservapedia Edits

Did rational wiki once actualy get more edits than CP?!? Wow, there situation is even more hopeless than I though.-ĬŴΣĐĝё 02:00, 5 June 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, but just the 2nd or 3rd day RW was open. I'm not sure it's really a fair comparison. On the other hand, it happens every couple days when you look at edits/hour; see [2]. --jtltalk 02:37, 5 June 2007 (CDT)
  • Yes, especially when I am here, your all-time user page-hit champion! :p --TK/MyTalk 05:27, 5 June 2007 (CDT)
We were discussing edits, not pageviews. --jtltalk 13:56, 5 June 2007 (CDT)
    • I thought you were Leaving and Never Coming Back, TK? --Gulik 16:25, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Lets see how long it takes CP to...

I'm thinking I missed the fun -- do you know what was in the "Who deceives?" article and who added it? --jtltalk 22:59, 5 June 2007 (CDT)
All of the articles were Essay:CP on Deceit c and p'd without rw to avoid the filter. 23:01, 5 June 2007 (CDT)
But CP has WAY more bans, so they're still in the lead! --Gulik 16:24, 6 June 2007 (CDT)
oh noes! how will we ever catch up? Maybe we need a Ban Creation Drive (BCD) to go with the ACD? Quick, someone, create 3000 new users! --jtltalk 17:31, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Ms. Rice

Thanks for the assist--I never mind help that keeps me from looking like a dope.--WJThomas 20:19, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Thank you

Thank you for the welcome note!Valorus 02:05, 7 June 2007 (CDT)


You are the ploymeister! --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר שְׁלֹום!

Do I get points for joining into the "spirit" of this place? Can I be blocked for making an inappropriate entry? --TK/MyTalk 16:34, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
Nope. Not by me, at least. Sorry! --jtltalk 16:41, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
Shit, they made you a sysop? They might as well make "he who will not be named" one here. ROFL! --TK/MyTalk 16:45, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

"edit conflict"

I left a nasty note on Linus' talk page. humanbe in 01:58, 17 June 2007 (CDT)


I think I'm in "trouble" now ... TK is claiming I've caused him "real-life $ damage" due to my reverting of his editing of that article with the guy's name he doesn't want mentioned. According to him I have no shame. Weird. Jrssr5 08:33, 18 June 2007 (CDT)

I wouldn't worry too much until you make it up to "real-life $$$ damage." olliegrind 08:56, 18 June 2007 (CDT)
Or until the claim comes from someone with actual credibility.
Anyone saying either of us "outed" him are talking like little children, with their kind of non-logic. People who don't want what they are saying or doing on a website make private forums and exclude others. People should stop with the 'outing' and 'blackmail' talk. Or something like that. --jtltalk 12:04, 18 June 2007 (CDT)