User talk:LCpl Mendoza

imgay-- ► アー・ヒュージ・ゲイピング・バジャイナ◄ ^{スナック ストロング} 23:08, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

dumb pubbie post

KINGAUDIOATTACK SUCKS COCKS

lol ok guy-- ► アー・ヒュージ・ゲイピング・バジャイナ◄ ^{スナック ストロング} 21:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

fyi according to WIKI LAW only confirmed goons are allowed to use GETOUT.gif --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ ☉ |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 21:51, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

in accordance with section 42.069 of WIKI LAW smdftb EDGY FIGHTCLUB WIKIGUY —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LCpl Mendoza (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Signature change required

Hey LCpl, your signature currently stretches the lines of text that it is on up/down. I believe it's because of the use of File:Flame.gif, which hasn't been reduced in size enough to make it under 14px high as per the signature policy. If you could fix that up over the coming week I would appreciate it. Thanks. THE CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER 02:13, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Just note that my math isn't specifically good so if anyone wants to weigh in for confirmation, I'd appreciate it. THE CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER 02:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

I checked your math. You’re correct. Also, turns out that policy is quite a bit harsher than I remembered. I had no recollection that sysops could insta-permaban for certain types of sig violations, nor did I remember that we could skip the one week wait for repeat offenders. —Aichon— 06:15, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

This has got to be the pickiest thing I've ever seen a sysop on a wiki nag somebody about. E: You're wrong, all images in his signature are under 14px high. The signature policy says nothing about using superscript/subscript in signatures. You can literally see how high each image is scaled to by editing this page and scrolling up. Additionally, the signature policy states signatures cannot contain images which are more than 14px high; it does not say the total height of the signature must be less than 14px. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ ☉ |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 03:30, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

That code in his signature (9px) is not the height he's specified for the image. It's the width. Which means he's reduced the image dimensions of "29 × 67" by ~30% which means the functional height (even before the superscript/subscript stuff) is over 20px tall. Again, please confirm for me if this is wrong because I don't tend to get these things right first go.

As for petty, it's cute you think this is the pickiest thing a sysop has done (I wouldn't even consider this close to holding that trophy), and to think that being a sysop is somehow relevant here. I'm doing this as a user who finds the page breaking features of this signature annoying. Anyone can do it, especially if backed up by the policy specifically designed to stop signatures warping pages by virtue of being shittily coded.

And there's also some precedent that sysops can overrule signatures that functionally break the signature policy through loopholes (rather than literally break it). But, despite you bringing up the hitherto unmentioned subscript/superscript code, this just isn't one of those cases yet and I have no reason to think why Mendoza should consider the request to make the images smaller unreasonable in any way. THE CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER 04:16, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

I said it's the pickiest thing I have ever seen, not the pickiest thing a sysop has ever done. Learn to read. You're griping at someone over a mere six pixels. On any modern monitor, that's a 'rounding error at worst. The line size looks fine to me; have you considered moving on from your 1024 x 768 15" monitor? --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ ☉ |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 04:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)