What's the point of notability rules? (annexed) Options

[thekohser]

Why did you feel the need to alter my quote, "Gruntled"?

Why did you feel the need to allege that I altered your quote, "thekohser"? As anyone can see, what I put was word for word and letter for letter the same as you did.

Michael, you took away the hyperlink. That's altering.

[Kelly Martin]

This forum has too many children.

[gomi]

This forum has too many children.

We specifically forbid children from the Review, for their own protection. This forum has too many childish, immature idiots.

[Gruntled]

you took away the hyperlink. That's altering.

By that logic, removing a single word or letter from a quoted post is altering; will you criticise everyone who does that? But actually, it's not my fault. The mods have installed an anti-bot filter that stops anyone except trusted users like yourself from posting spamlinks.

This forum has too many children.

Let's not blame "thekohser". He's in a race with Jimbo to see who can be the first to buy a castle and he won't win unless he can keep getting free publicity from this site.

This forum has too many childish, immature idiots.

Well, it does have to mirror Wikipedia!

[thekohser]

But actually, it's not my fault. The mods have installed an anti-bot filter that stops anyone except trusted users like yourself from posting spamlinks.

Mods, can you confirm or dispute that claim? Is the default on this site to prohibit links unless the user is "trusted"? Or is it (as I suspect) that there's something fishy about "Gruntled" that necessitated your placing a link restriction on him particularly?

[Zoloft]

I put in links all the time, and I'm not a trusty here.

[gomi]

But actually, it's not my fault. The mods have installed an anti-bot filter that stops anyone except trusted users like yourself from posting spamlinks.

Mods, can you confirm or dispute that claim? Is the default on this site to prohibit links unless the user is "trusted"? Or is it (as I suspect) that there's something fishy about "Gruntled" that necessitated your placing a link restriction on him particularly?

To the best of my knowledge and ability to use the admin control panel, Gruntled is not under any restriction, and there is no systematic restriction on links. There are some restrictions on image sources, which are well documented elsewhere. Those restrictions apply to everyone -- including mods and admins -- and cannot be waived on a per-user or group basis. I don't believe the board software has the ability to screen links at all, beyond the registration process.

[thekohser]

But actually, it's not my fault. The mods have installed an anti-bot filter that stops anyone except trusted users like yourself from posting spamlinks.

Mods, can you confirm or dispute that claim? Is the default on this site to prohibit links unless the user is "trusted"? Or is it (as I suspect) that there's something fishy about "Gruntled" that necessitated your placing a link restriction on him particularly?

To the best of my knowledge and ability to use the admin control panel, Gruntled is not under any restriction, and there is no systematic restriction on links. There are some restrictions on image sources, which are well documented elsewhere. Those restrictions apply to everyone -- including mods and admins -- and cannot be waived on a per-user or group basis. I don't believe the board software has the ability to screen links at all, beyond the registration process.

So, in all likelihood, "Gruntled" is puffing up a big, fat lie in "know it all" language.

Man, am I sick and tired of people who do that.

[lonza leggiera]

But actually, it's not my fault. The mods have installed an anti-bot filter that stops anyone except trusted users like yourself from posting spamlinks.

Mods, can you confirm or dispute that claim? Is the default on this site to prohibit links unless the user is "trusted"? ....

Well that's a theory that we hordes of untrusted pariahs can test easily enough:

There's already a hyper-inclusionist wiki out there, so why turn Wikipedia into one?

Yippee! My cunning plan to get the mods to make me a trusted user after just 18 crappy off-topic posts has succeeded in spades!

[Gruntled]

I'm not a trusty here.

I'm one of Greg's socks.

Try to be consistent, "Thekohser"

Lots of jargon

Come off it, Gomi. Greg is no doubt impervious to sarcasm, but you must be able to recognise it when you see it.

I'm glad nobody's tried to deny that it was a spamlink, unlike the link posted by Zoloft.

[Zoloft]

I'm not a trusty here.

I'm one of Greg's socks.

Try to be consistent, "Thekohser"

Lots of jargon

Come off it, Gomi. Greg is no doubt impervious to sarcasm, but you must be able to recognise it when you see it.
I'm glad nobody's tried to deny that it was a spamlink, unlike the link posted by Zoloft.

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

[thekohser]

Come off it, Gomi. Greg is no doubt impervious to sarcasm, but you must be able to recognise it when you see it.

Good sarcasm requires the listener knows that you're trying to be funny. When idiots try sarcasm, it's generally not so funny. Similarly, removing a link when quoting someone who used a link to add depth to their commentary is generally not so funny.

And you spelled recognize wrong, Mike.

[gomi]

Come off it, Gomi. Greg is no doubt impervious to sarcasm, but you must be able to recognise it when you see it.

I have not spent much time reading this thread. Life is too short. Next time you might try to make it actually funny, so we know.

[Jon Awbrey]

Come off it, Gomi. Greg is no doubt impervious to sarcasm, but you must be able to recognise it when you see it.

I have not spent much time reading this thread. Life is too short. Next time you might try to make it actually funny, so we know.

As long we caught you passing through Dodge, though, do us peaceable townsfolk a favor and kick this cow-pie into the Annex. It's really starting to skunk up the place.

Thanks ∞

Jon

[gomi]

As long we caught you passing through Dodge, though, do us peaceable townsfolk a favor and kick this cow-pie into the Annex. It's really starting to skunk up the place.

Ask, and you shall receive.

[Gruntled]

Good sarcasm requires the listener knows that you're trying to be funny. When idiots try sarcasm, it's generally not so funny.

I think that the majority of my target audience (which is of course everyone who reads the forum, not just the monomaniacs) got the point. If there's any doubt about that, maybe a top WMF critic could set up a poll. I totally agree that when idiots try sarcasm, it's generally not so funny; we only need to look around the forum to see that.

And you spelled recognize wrong, Mike.

We all know Americans can't spell, even with the help of an American dictionary, but isn't it a bit over the top to flaunt it like that?

By the way, I do feel so privileged to be in the select group that "thekohser" calls "Mike".

Ask, and you shall receive.

Then please put the sensible bits of the thread back in general discussion, and tarpit the rest.

[gomi]

Then please put the sensible bits of the thread back in general discussion, and tarpit the rest.

I fear that I am not able (or willing to spend the effort) to determine what, if any, sensible bits of this conversation exist. Another mod may be willing to do so.

[Lar]

Then please put the sensible bits of the thread back in general discussion, and tarpit the rest.

I fear that I am not able (or willing to spend the effort) to determine what, if any, sensible bits of this conversation exist. Another mod may be willing to do so.

Everything above post 14 (where Jon first says the thread needs to be annexed) seems not really annexable. Sometimes I think maybe Jon wants to annex anything he doesn't think interesting, regardless of anyone else's interest level.

But that's just me

[Jon Awbrey]

Then please put the sensible bits of the thread back in general discussion, and tarpit the rest.

I fear that I am not able (or willing to spend the effort) to determine what, if any, sensible bits of this conversation exist. Another mod may be willing to do so.

Everything above post 14 (where Jon first says the thread needs to be annexed) seems not really annexable. Sometimes I think maybe Jon wants to annex anything he doesn't think interesting, regardless of anyone else's interest level.

But that's just me

The Rule of Dumb is that discussions that could and should be happening somewhere on Wikipedia — that simply waste the space, time, and energy of people who are devoted to genuine critique of related social media — must get them to the Dummery of the Annex.

People who really and truly believe in Wikipediot Ways should be carrying on their Wikipediot Ways on Wikipedia its own self — until such time as they wise up and learn the utter futility of Wikipediot Ways.

Cuz we don't do that shit here …

Jon

[Lar]

Then please put the sensible bits of the thread back in general discussion, and tarpit the rest.

I fear that I am not able (or willing to spend the effort) to determine what, if any, sensible bits of this conversation exist. Another mod may be willing to do so.

Everything above post 14 (where Jon first says the thread needs to be annexed) seems not really annexable. Sometimes I think maybe Jon wants to annex anything he doesn't think interesting, regardless of anyone else's interest level.

But that's just me

The Rule of Dumb is that discussions that could and should be happening somewhere on Wikipedia — that simply waste the space, time, and energy of people who are devoted to genuine critique of related social media — must get them to the Dummery of the Annex.

People who really and truly believe in Wikipediot Ways should be carrying on their Wikipediot Ways on Wikipedia its own self — until such time as they wise up and learn the utter futility of Wikipediot Ways.

Cuz we don't do that shit here …

Jon

Sorry, discussing the very idea of notability, which is what this thread ostensibly is about, isn't something that can happen at WP. Or is ever likely to, since it's Received Truth over there. Hence not annex fodder. IMHO anyway.

As for who does shit here and who doesn't do shit here, I leave that to your capable hands.