To The Wales Hunter: I am not completely against children handling tasks on Wikipedia, you seem to be (please correct me if this is a misinterpretation). I am merely opposed to power-hungry, irresponsible, and capricious people (this includes adults) being in positions of power.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Yesterday @ 11:49 am)
But, to their credit, they are very adept at crafting and maintaining a leading edge site for cyberspace dramaturgy. When it comes to post-modern theater of the absurd, Wikipedia's unparalleled drama engine is an endless source of captivating lunatic social drama.
They also do a good job indoctrinating people into that drama engine, so that they begin to enamor it, and it becomes a major aspect of their life.
QUOTE(Giggy @ Yesterday @ 1:13 pm)
FürWissen2, do you have an account on Simple? It might make discussion easier if you were to reveal its name here. I mostly agree with what you've said, though.
Sorry, but no. I will tell you by e-mail, if you give me an ISP e-mail by PM though, but I am not sure if it's safe to reveal it on a public board like this. You have had interactions with me on the website before, though.
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Yesterday @ 2:28 pm)
Against my better judgement I took a peek over there.
Somebody is running for reconfirmation after six weeks and has announced they will quit the project as an edit if their bit is taken away:
This is quite an immature move on the face of it; I haven't investigated further.
QUOTE(TurboGolf aka Tharnton345)
You seem to have been very nice in your apology. You have proved that you can be a good editor. Your behaviour was kinda bad according to the apology, but you are saying whenever you come back, you'll be better. But if you edit like you did in en, you might be indefbanned like you were on en and like Jonas. TurboGolf 09:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This is coming from one of those vandals who are "reformed" and have the colorful sigs and a carefree, aloof, and non-serious approach to things at Wikipedia. He was not "nice" in his apology, and to say that makes a statement about the person who thinks this, or rather their hypothetical behavioral tendencies in such a situation. Also, why did he change his signature to "Turbo Golf" if his username is "Tharnton345"?
"Jonas" refers to Jonas D. Rand, who uses the name "User:Jonas D. Rand" on Simple Wikipedia, and was banned on New Years' Day for criticism and offending some hypersensitive or corrupt administrators and social clibers, pointing them out as such. Tharnton is here encouraging people to kiss Wikipedia's ass during and after their ban, showing their true self by proving their ignorance, and being loyal to administrators so as not to be blocked. Just like StaticFalcon
Well. I really think it's nice that you decided to construct such a nice apology (I wish I did the same when I was blocked ). I agree with Yotcmdr: it will be very hard to get unblocked, because the community remembers everything. Seriously. If you a few strong admins to mentor you and keep you in a mainspace majority, you might have a shot. But it will be very hard. Shapiros10 Flap the Yap 12:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This is coming from another sockpuppeteer on English Wikipedia who is now full of himself and wants to be an admin badly. He does all the social schmooze acts that get one into power there; the place is so corrupt that immature and irresponsible people like American Eagle and Shapiros10, if they gain popularity, can gain power as well.
That is really touching. I am also banned on enWp for the same reason and that should get you unbanned. I wish I could write something as good as that. VandalFighterFR(V) Bad warning? 14:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
No explanation necessary. This should speak for itself, considering that it's ShockingHawk.
Quick scan, but "try to make amends or what-have-ya with the community" - Honestly? Make amends or whatever... I don't think thats the best wording. Thats all I have to say on this, I don't have any comments on whether or not you should be unblocked. Kennedy (talk) 09:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Grant is not reliable. He likes to pretend to be journalistic, but in reality he's just a bored 19-year-old who likes to use it as a playground, which most participants seem to view it as.
QUOTE(michael @ Today @ 6:16 am)
Simple is so ridiculously bureaucratic, I can't believe they're spending village pump time on a third bureaucrat. Eptalon, one of the few sane heads, wants five users to go up for RFB to decide who is the best?! I really can't believe they're moaning about timely closures of RFAs.
The entire debate about whether new bureaucrats are needed is a distraction created, or used, to give the illusion of "open debate". When fundamental change is proposed, as Jonas D. Rand tried to do, the person who does so is banned, or gets close to being banned.