User talk:Misanthropy

Please post new comments at the bottom, using the highest-level header (=header name=).

I'll reply on your talk page if you contact me here.

Cheers.

For any users posting a sixth (or, indeed, seventh or beyond) topic on this page, full permission is granted to move the oldest topic in its entirety to the relevant archive.

Not that any of you will ever do it, but it's worth disclaimer-ing it to avoid unnecessary A/VB shitepipery.

Election

Ah well. So long as we get Lib-Lab, everything will be fine. Just so long as we can avoid a Tory government.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:13, 7 May 2010 (BST)

Well that's the thing isn't it. Labour have said since the beginning of election night that they would support electoral reform. So, hopefully Nick will see that we don't need a poor stable government, we need a good government with a chance of imbalance.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:23, 7 May 2010 (BST)

The DEM Disambiguation

Regarding this edit, could you show me in what way ¯\(°_o)/¯ is connected with the abbreviation DEM? I had stated my reason for removing it on the talk page - I'm failing to find any relation between ¯\(°_o)/¯ and "DEM". If there is indeed no connection, the group should not be listed in the disambiguation, it'd be just as if I added Department of Emergency Management to every single disambiguation I can find, regardless of whether there's a reason to list it or not. G F J 09:34, 9 May 2010 (BST)

The reason it's on there is because it's a retarded joke. --Thadeous Oakley 10:27, 9 May 2010 (BST)

Explain to me, then, how you became an authority on how that group pronounces its name? If the members of that group feel it could be confused with any of the other groups on that disambiguation page, then it's entirely up to them. 14:43, 9 May 2010 (BST)

OK, but to go by that logic, I could as well add the DEM to any disambiguation I see fit, all I'd have to say is "we refer to ourselves that way, we use that abbreviation". In my opinion, this would be really senseless and inappropriate, but if a visible connection between a group and the abbreviation is not necessary, it would be very much possible. Would you like me to do that? Is the state of allowing everyone to add themselves to whatever disambiguation they want to be a part of, regardless of whether there's any actual connection, really what you prefer? G F J 14:55, 9 May 2010 (BST)

If you would like to be that petulant, you're perfectly free, I am neither able nor bothered to stop you. 14:56, 9 May 2010 (BST)

heya, btw,

regarding A/VD, we don't usually bother putting 3 edit vandals on A/VD because it's more of a record keeping module for escalations, and since they've beat the ticker straight away, we don't really need to put them on there. Not to say you should take it off, it's k, just you don't need to :D --

 

 

 

 

01:48, 10 May 2010 (BST)

I'm just a little cautious about doing everything 100% by the book, in case I get stung by it two or three weeks later by someone looking to raise their profile before a re-evaluation in case I make a mistake. 02:12, 10 May 2010 (BST)

S'kool, on my first day as op I did the same thing for the same reason and boxy gave me the same speech I told you. THE CYCLE WORKS :D --

 

 

 

 

08:33, 10 May 2010 (BST)

If it helps you feel any better, I was waiting to see if DDR would comment on you putting the data on A/VD since I was curious which was the correct way. Although, had he not, I was just planning to do a text search of A/VD and visually confirm whether or not there were examples of banned users under the three-edit rule. —Aichon— 09:18, 10 May 2010 (BST)

ya. it looks like I just removed the edit at the time. So keeping it or removing it is right either way. --

 

 

 

 

08:11, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Vandalisms

Do you believe a checkuser between this user and the one you perma'd earlier is in order? Both were created around midnight, editted the same page (which one of them made), and accused each other of being the leader on it. I know it's pretty strawman, but should we do a checkuser, just to be sure?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:08, 10 May 2010 (BST)

I always run a check user on anyone I ban, and the one I ran on Wesker showed nothing. You can double check it in case Vash was created afterwards but I don't think it was. 16:09, 10 May 2010 (BST)

Nah it wasn't. I assumed there would have been a check, but just wanted to make sure.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:14, 10 May 2010 (BST)

Checkuser all vandal users, those you suspect of sockpuppeting votes and anyone involved in a debate about how zerging is cool. You would be amazed how many of the latter have alternate accounts. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:29, 10 May 2010 (BST)

sigh

I never had any intention of winning, but I'm still disappointed in what both VVV and RHO are doing on your competition, cause (particularly VVV) isn't helping the actual cause of the comp at all... I would at leased ask that you visit the talk page of your competition and address or discuss my request to have the image rule removed or amended. At the moment its ended up in shitty image spam and little else. --

 

 

 

 

08:08, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Suggestion voting

I looked around the wiki, but couldn't find who is allowed to vote on suggestions. Thanks in advance if you can clarify for me. The Surreal McCoy 01:46, 13 May 2010 (BST)