 Beta M?, Former US Federal prisoner |
Rating  |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |
| carbuncle |
 Mon 12th March 2012, 2:00pm
Post
#121
|
 Fat Cat  Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544  |
QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 10:27am)  And presumably you're also stating that there should be no adult topics on WP on the off-chance that an under-age viewer comes across it, or edits it? Sorry, but I don't believe that too much information is ever a bad thing, regardless of how old the kid is. In any case, if the kid is making reasonable quality edits then there's a good chance that he's mature enough to deal with the subject matter. Having access to accurate information on sexual topics is a good thing. Reading about them on WP is a bad thing. Unless you want them to think that scrotum inflation is pretty normal or that the "donkey punch" is a real practice. |
   |
 
|
| Web Fred |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:10pm
Post
#122
|
 Pervert & Swinger Group: Contributors Posts: 739 Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm From: Manchester, UK Member No.: 17,141 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:00pm) QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 10:27am) And presumably you're also stating that there should be no adult topics on WP on the off-chance that an under-age viewer comes across it, or edits it? Sorry, but I don't believe that too much information is ever a bad thing, regardless of how old the kid is. In any case, if the kid is making reasonable quality edits then there's a good chance that he's mature enough to deal with the subject matter. Having access to accurate information on sexual topics is a good thing. Reading about them on WP is a bad thing. Unless you want them to think that scrotum inflation is pretty normal or that the "donkey punch" is a real practice. Out of however millions of articles you want to focus on just two? So when are you going to put both up for AfD so that the community can agree with you? |
|
|
|
| Tarc |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:18pm
Post
#123
|
 Über Member Group: Regulars Posts: 976 Joined: Fri 7th Mar 2008, 3:38am Member No.: 5,309 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 5:46am) Anyway, I'm rambling now...so how long should he be punished for after his sentence is complete? Until he's lying face-down in a roadside ditch, IMO. This post has been edited by Tarc: Mon 12th March 2012, 2:19pm |
|
|
|
| carbuncle |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:25pm
Post
#124
|
|
Fat Cat Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544 |
QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:10pm) QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:00pm) QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 10:27am) And presumably you're also stating that there should be no adult topics on WP on the off-chance that an under-age viewer comes across it, or edits it? Sorry, but I don't believe that too much information is ever a bad thing, regardless of how old the kid is. In any case, if the kid is making reasonable quality edits then there's a good chance that he's mature enough to deal with the subject matter. Having access to accurate information on sexual topics is a good thing. Reading about them on WP is a bad thing. Unless you want them to think that scrotum inflation is pretty normal or that the "donkey punch" is a real practice. Out of however millions of articles you want to focus on just two? So when are you going to put both up for AfD so that the community can agree with you? Yes, an AfD is clearly the best way to determine if an article is accurate or useful. LOL. We're talking about a subset of those millions of articles, the subset defined by your contention that WP is a valid source of information on sexual topics. I chose two off the top of my head to illustrate what everyone here, including yourself, knows - it is a terrible source of information on sexual topics for a variety of reasons. Give it a rest. |
|
|
|
| Web Fred |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:32pm
Post
#125
|
|
Pervert & Swinger Group: Contributors Posts: 739 Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm From: Manchester, UK Member No.: 17,141 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:25pm) QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:10pm) QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:00pm) QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 10:27am) And presumably you're also stating that there should be no adult topics on WP on the off-chance that an under-age viewer comes across it, or edits it? Sorry, but I don't believe that too much information is ever a bad thing, regardless of how old the kid is. In any case, if the kid is making reasonable quality edits then there's a good chance that he's mature enough to deal with the subject matter. Having access to accurate information on sexual topics is a good thing. Reading about them on WP is a bad thing. Unless you want them to think that scrotum inflation is pretty normal or that the "donkey punch" is a real practice. Out of however millions of articles you want to focus on just two? So when are you going to put both up for AfD so that the community can agree with you? Yes, an AfD is clearly the best way to determine if an article is accurate or useful. LOL. We're talking about a subset of those millions of articles, the subset defined by your contention that WP is a valid source of information on sexual topics. I chose two off the top of my head to illustrate what everyone here, including yourself, knows - it is a terrible source of information on sexual topics for a variety of reasons. Give it a rest. You seem to think both articles are neither educational nor useful hence my suggestion about doing away with them. Given your response I take it you've changed your mind? Why do you think that I think that WP is a terrible source of sexual topics? I'm all for them being there so long as they are accurate, factual and neutral as well as not being a HOWTO. I'm of the opinion that if it exists then there should be an article on it. |
|
|
|
| carbuncle |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:38pm
Post
#126
|
|
Fat Cat Group: Regulars Posts: 1,601 Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm Member No.: 5,544 |
QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:32pm) You seem to think both articles are neither educational nor useful hence my suggestion about doing away with them. Given your response I take it you've changed your mind? Why do you think that I think that WP is a terrible source of sexual topics? I'm all for them being there so long as they are accurate, factual and neutral as well as not being a HOWTO. I'm of the opinion that if it exists then there should be an article on it. Sorry, I'm not playing. You know the answers to your questions. Waste someone else's time. |
|
|
|
| Web Fred |
Mon 12th March 2012, 2:49pm
Post
#127
|
|
Pervert & Swinger Group: Contributors Posts: 739 Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm From: Manchester, UK Member No.: 17,141 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:38pm) QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 12th March 2012, 2:32pm) You seem to think both articles are neither educational nor useful hence my suggestion about doing away with them. Given your response I take it you've changed your mind? Why do you think that I think that WP is a terrible source of sexual topics? I'm all for them being there so long as they are accurate, factual and neutral as well as not being a HOWTO. I'm of the opinion that if it exists then there should be an article on it. Sorry, I'm not playing. You know the answers to your questions. Waste someone else's time. Who's playing? I'm not? I don't know the answers to the questions. I don't know what goes on in your head, and pretty damn sure you don't know how my head works. As for wasting your time, you chose to reply. You weren't coerced so as such I can only presume that you are quite happy to waste your own time. As it happens I truly believe that which I stated above. I'm not saying it to troll any one. In other words you have your way of thinking about WP and I have mine. You seem to believe that anyone who doesn't share your outlook is wasting your time. Not very open-minded are you? |
|
|
|
| mbz1 |
Mon 12th March 2012, 10:52pm
Post
#128
|
 Senior Member Group: Contributors Posts: 461 Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm Member No.: 25,791 |
Now beta-m posted a link to http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68230154 to Freedom_Porn:Donations page (like Commons has not enough porno on its own
 ) at AN/U at commons:QUOTE Also as an admin on Commons you know very well that you've not posted a page that anybody who would want to make a donation would see, nobody would look through the history to find a page from 2008 (4 years ago). The real donation page is [http://www.freedomporn.org/smut/Freedom_Porn:Donations here]. And it's very common for a non-profit group to allow people to donate, this isn't something special, it's not a business model. [[User:Beta_M|VolodyA! V Anarhist]] <small>Beta_M</small> ([[User talk:Beta_M|converse]]) 14:29, 12 March 2012 (UTC) I am sure a few administrators and users will visit the site. This post has been edited by mbz1: Mon 12th March 2012, 11:16pm |
|
|
|
| Michaeldsuarez |
Mon 12th March 2012, 11:41pm
Post
#129
|
 Über Member Group: Contributors Posts: 557 Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm From: New York, New York Member No.: 24,428 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Sun 11th March 2012, 7:55pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:18am) And now I have been blocked by 'Mattbuck' for supposed harassment of Beta M. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68158913 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...%3APeter_Damian Mattbuck decided to remove your talk page access since you called them fascists: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68182425 Apparently, you're not allowed to call suppressors of free speech "fascists". Commons' new motto: "All speech is free, but some speech (i.e. porn) is freer than others (i.e. dissension, criticism)." http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68249755: QUOTE I do not see why as admins we should be forced to endure people who simply wish to be disruptive. I stand by my block, and my later revocation of his talk page access when he used the edit summaries to continue to be rude. -''[[User:Mattbuck|mattbuck]]'' <small>([[User talk:Mattbuck|Talk]])</small> 22:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| tarantino |
Tue 13th March 2012, 3:22am
Post
#130
|
 the Dude abides Group: Regulars Posts: 1,439 Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 11:41pm Member No.: 2,143 |
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:04pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:18am) And now I have been blocked by 'Mattbuck' for supposed harassment of Beta M. You weren't blocked on commons yet?!? Man those folks are slow. Mattbuck seems like a fun guy.  © mattbuck4950 CC BY-SA 2.0 |
|
|
|
| HRIP7 |
Tue 13th March 2012, 3:40am
Post
#131
|
 Senior Member Group: Regulars Posts: 483 Joined: Sat 6th Feb 2010, 3:58pm Member No.: 17,020 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 12th March 2012, 11:41pm) QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Sun 11th March 2012, 7:55pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:18am) And now I have been blocked by 'Mattbuck' for supposed harassment of Beta M. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68158913 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...%3APeter_Damian Mattbuck decided to remove your talk page access since you called them fascists: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68182425 Apparently, you're not allowed to call suppressors of free speech "fascists". Commons' new motto: "All speech is free, but some speech (i.e. porn) is freer than others (i.e. dissension, criticism)." http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68249755: QUOTE I do not see why as admins we should be forced to endure people who simply wish to be disruptive. I stand by my block, and my later revocation of his talk page access when he used the edit summaries to continue to be rude. -''[[User:Mattbuck|mattbuck]]'' <small>([[User talk:Mattbuck|Talk]])</small> 22:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| mbz1 |
Tue 13th March 2012, 4:00am
Post
#132
|
|
Senior Member Group: Contributors Posts: 461 Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm Member No.: 25,791 |
QUOTE(tarantino @ Tue 13th March 2012, 3:22am) QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:04pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 11th March 2012, 11:18am) And now I have been blocked by 'Mattbuck' for supposed harassment of Beta M. You weren't blocked on commons yet?!? Man those folks are slow. Mattbuck seems like a fun guy. © mattbuck4950 CC BY-SA 2.0 He really is. This post has been edited by mbz1: Tue 13th March 2012, 5:03am |
|
|
|
| Somey |
Tue 13th March 2012, 6:27am
Post
#133
|
 Can't actually moderate Group: Moderators Posts: 11,814 Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 |
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Mon 12th March 2012, 11:00pm) He really is. Hang on, is that photo saying that they're selling beaded belts for just ten quid? I can't tell if the sign says "10.00" or "19.99." Because if it's 10.00, then I got seriously ripped off on my last visit to Sausalito. |
|
|
|
| Wikitaka |
Tue 13th March 2012, 7:47am
Post
#134
|
|
New Member Group: Contributors Posts: 24 Joined: Fri 9th Mar 2012, 9:47pm Member No.: 76,720 |
Wow, take a look at this barnstar.....
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
Tue 13th March 2012, 8:22am
Post
#135
|
|
Can't actually moderate Group: Moderators Posts: 11,814 Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 |
QUOTE(Wikitaka @ Tue 13th March 2012, 2:47am) Come on, that's soooo 7 pages ago. Now, if they could come up with a cold sex barnstar, then that would be really impressive. (As long as it didn't involve corpses, that is... though with WP, I'm sure it's just a matter of time!) |
|
|
|
| EricBarbour |
Tue 13th March 2012, 8:56am
Post
#136
|
 blah Group: Regulars Posts: 5,919 Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am Member No.: 5,066 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 12th March 2012, 8:22pm) Funny that he wants "free culture" and "free porn", but uses a CC license on his own photos. And tries to sell the rights to them thru Getty Images. Who in the HELL does that twit think will pay commercial rates for a photo of his ugly face?..... |
|
|
|
| lilburne |
Tue 13th March 2012, 9:36am
Post
#137
|
 Chameleon Group: Contributors Posts: 890 Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am Member No.: 21,803 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 13th March 2012, 8:56am) QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 12th March 2012, 8:22pm) Funny that he wants "free culture" and "free porn", but uses a CC license on his own photos. And tries to sell the rights to them thru Getty Images. Who in the HELL does that twit think will pay commercial rates for a photo of his ugly face?..... Well the getty images thing is something that flickr put on there, and you have to actively take it fucking thing off. OTOH there are 12,000 photos there of nothing so whether he has link on or off doesn't really matter. |
|
|
|
| Peter Damian |
Tue 13th March 2012, 10:39am
Post
#138
|
 I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin! Group: Regulars Posts: 4,400 Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm Member No.: 4,212 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
The block is back. Apparently my actions were 'inappropriate' http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68262576. This WR thread has been referenced.
[Edit] Interesting what Commons admins interpret as 'inappropriate'. This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Tue 13th March 2012, 10:45am |
|
|
|
| lilburne |
Tue 13th March 2012, 12:07pm
Post
#139
|
|
Chameleon Group: Contributors Posts: 890 Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am Member No.: 21,803 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Tue 13th March 2012, 10:39am) The block is back. Apparently my actions were 'inappropriate' http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68262576. This WR thread has been referenced. [Edit] Interesting what Commons admins interpret as 'inappropriate'. Screw em! http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68267699 |
|
|
|
| Michaeldsuarez |
Tue 13th March 2012, 12:34pm
Post
#140
|
|
Über Member Group: Contributors Posts: 557 Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm From: New York, New York Member No.: 24,428 WP user page - talk check - contribs |
QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Tue 13th March 2012, 6:39am) The block is back. Apparently my actions were 'inappropriate' http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68262576. This WR thread has been referenced. [Edit] Interesting what Commons admins interpret as 'inappropriate'. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...%3APeter_Damian Can PierreSelim really be considered an uninvolved sysop in all this? http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68014045 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68046262 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68057251 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68059378 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68144400 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...&oldid=68150026 |
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th 6 13, 3:05am |