Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:08, 19 November 2008

• Popular page listing

Did you know

• 17 Dec 2024 – 1925 Tri-State tornado (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by EF5 (t · c); see discussion

Articles for deletion

• 01 Jan 2025 – Amnesty (band) (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Hey man im josh (t · c); see discussion (1 participant)
• 18 Dec 2024 – Lone Tree, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mangoe (t · c); see discussion (7 participants; relisted)
• 29 Dec 2024 – Bruz Fletcher (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Diegg24 (t · c) was closed as keep by OwenX (t · c) on 05 Jan 2025; see discussion (10 participants)

Good article nominees

• 09 Dec 2024 – 2023 Robinson–Sullivan tornado (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by EF5 (t · c); start discussion

Requested moves

• 26 Dec 2024 – 1925 Tri-State tornado (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Great Tri-State Tornado by Departure– (t · c); see discussion

Articles to be merged

• 03 Sep 2024 – Edwardsville Formation (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Borden Formation by Allan Nonymous (t · c); see discussion
• 03 Sep 2024 – Spickert Knob Formation (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Borden Formation by Scope creep (t · c); see discussion

Articles for creation

• 20 Dec 2024 – Draft:2025 Indy Eleven season (talk · edit · hist) submitted for AfC by GingerLines (t · c) was accepted to 2025 Indy Eleven season (talk · edit · hist) by Grahaml35 (t · c) on 03 Jan 2025

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12

Confirmation

Yes, it's me. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 21:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I am Schroeder on Freenode. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 21:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Puzzled

Q. Should cool-down blocks ever be used?

• Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy: Brief blocks for the sole purpose of "cooling down" an angry user should not be used, as they inevitably serve to inflame the situation.
• Me: Absolutely not. Not for any reason, not for any purpose.

Now your oppose is based on my answer to #9 (which is the question posted above), but I am somewhat mystified by this since it looks to me like I answer the question correctly. Could you maybe clarify your position a little for me? TomStar81 (Talk) 05:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Kurt disagrees with the policy, so his question was essentially a trap. Enigma 05:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

So it was essentially a show trial? That sure reeks of foul play, not to mention a gross violation of AGF. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it. A quick look at his contribs shows that he opposes pretty much every RfA that comes up. This was the only support I saw in his last 100 Misplaced Pages: space edits. Oren0 (talk) 07:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, which closed successfully. I felt the process was a thorough review of my contributions and my demeanor, and I was very gratified to see how many editors took the time to really see what I'm about and how I can be of help to the project. As a result, some editors changed their views during the discussion, and most expressed specific, detailed points to indicate their opinion (whether it was , , or ).

A number of editors were concerned about my level of experience. I was purposeful in not waiting until a particular benchmark occurred before requesting adminship, because I feel - as many do - that adminship is not a reward and that each case is individual. It is true that I am not the most experienced editor around here, but I appreciate that people dug into my contributions enough to reach the conclusion that I seem to have a clue. Also, the best thing about this particular concern is that experience is something an editor - or administrator - can always get more of, and I'll continue doing that, just as I've been doing. (If I seem a little slow at it, feel free to slap me.)

I am a strong believer in the concept that this project is all about the content, and I'm looking forward to contributing wherever I can. Please let me know if I can be of any help. In the meantime, I'm off to school...

Thanks again!

Using AN/I to desysop,: Bad Idea

Theory. Arbitrary Committee, WMF, and the keys to the place. Where did I put those damn keys?

I wrote this for an AN/I report on the bad block of User:Cryptic, then realized that I was doing what I've decried, cluttering up AN/I with content issues and other irrelevancies, which might be quite interesting in themselves, and we argue about them at the drop of an edit, but ... wrong place. Rather than deprive the universe of my pearls of wisdom, I'm putting this here, where you can make of it what you will. Best wishes, here goes:

While I agree with Kurt in theory, he's not understood, I think, certain aspects of Misplaced Pages structure. The keys to the place aren't in the community's hands, they are in the hands of certain stewards trusted by the owners of the place, I think Kurt will get the concept of private property -- though this this isn't exactly private property, he'll love this: it's owned by a corporation, which is an entity chartered by the State of Florida.... In any case, the owners listen to advice that we give, which they can choose to follow or not. If it is coherently expressed, they will usually follow it. Now, as to giving the advice through an AN/I report, it is a totally, really, miserably Bad Idea. This is a hot environment, utterly unsuited to deliberative process. It's really 911 for administrators. We would not expect parties to a divorce to work it out on the phone with 911, where the operator really wants to know whether or where to send the police or an ambulance or fire truck. An RfC would be about the minimum level where I'd expect stewards to consider acting, and it would have to be crystal clear, not only that an error was made (there is, I'd say, consensus for that) but that the error is worthy of desysopping (there is not consensus for that, at least not yet, and much -- including my own opinion -- will depend on the admin's eventual response. or is it the Carroll's Queen: verdict first, evidence later?) More commonly, after an RfC, if the matter is not resolved there (some will resign at that point, if the writing is on the wall -- or perhaps the offended party wants it withdrawn), there would only be ArbComm for something like this. ArbComm will want to see something like an RfC first, anyway. Kurt's opinion that the "Arbitrary Committee" is illegitimate is rooted in a misunderstanding of what Misplaced Pages is: it is really two entities (or more) that cooperate: The WMF, which owns the place and has the keys, and the Community, which does the editing and other work. The Community could refuse to do the work, or even vandalize it, and the WMF could block everybody, even pull the plug, turn the lights out. But that's not likely to happen like that. The Arbitration Committee was set up by WMF, really, and is elected through Community advice, voluntarily accepted by WMF, and WMF is advised by ArbComm, but can refuse to accept the advice of either the Community, or ArbComm, or both, and, in theory, they might be obligated to do both (i.e., refuse to follow the advice, for they are responsible to the State, not to the community, at least in theory. Ahem. Here I go, distracting this AN/I report, just what I've decried so many times. I tell you, it's seductive, we need to fix this. So I'm going to note this here and leave this comment on Kurt's Talk page.

Which I've done, now. One more point: you ran for a Board position. Were you aware that WMF was free to disregard the results of the election, if I've got it right? It's up to the Board, or a designated officer, to accept the results. This is classic Free Association stuff, if you've ever read my FA/DP (Free Association/Delegable Proxy) stuff, which is radically libertarian.--Abd (talk) 02:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't exactly suggesting AN/I was the place to desysop, although I certainly can see how you might get that idea per my reponse to Wisdom89. What I was really going after was that it's the community's prerogative, and the consent of neither the subject of the action nor the Arbitrary Committee is properly required.

Also, I've never denied the right of the WMF to run things however they please. That doesn't make me obligated to like it, though. Brazen hypocrisy is still brazen hypocrisy, whether one has the right to engage in it or not. There's a reason I've always advocated action from within, rather than use of the legal system, to reform what's wrong with Misplaced Pages; and that's simply because the WMF has always acted within its rights as owners of private property, so the government has no legitimate authority to interfere. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 02:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. The community doesn't have to wait before giving advice. I.e., it is the community's prerogative to form advice however it chooses. It doesn't need permission from ArbComm. However, I've watched how ArbComm works. Most of the work is done by the Community, and the Abitrators -- mostly -- opine regarding it. There is an interplay, and a determined community can sway ArbComm more than ArbComm can sway the community. But, then again, there are people in the community who think ArbComm is in charge, which isn't true. They are a device, a set of servants, not the boss of anything except themselves and their own process. So I understand, I think, your point, which is, in general, a good one. Now that we both understand that action from within is where the calvary is sitting waiting for orders, exactly just how do those orders get transmitted? Hint: Free Association concepts -- which is very compatible with Wikiepecia community process, were that process actually fully functioning and awake -- with Delegable Proxy, not as a voting method -- primitive idea, better than other kinds of voting, but highly limited in concept -- but as a method of seeking and finding consensus efficiently. --Abd (talk) 02:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)Stepping down from soapbox

Question

Apologies if you're uncomfortable answering this, you don't have to, but what exactly is wrong with power hunger?--Serviam (talk) 22:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU, Status, and you!

As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the Highly Active Users was taken offline. We now have a replacement in the Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible) system - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot 22:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Anti-fence-sitting cool-down block question

Kurt, I've answered your question. You could have given me longer to respond. I had made ten WP edits from the time you asked to the time you opposed per lack of answer. The discussion on my talk page (which has continued) didn't influence me to not answer or to answer. I just had real-life things to do most of the day. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Given your initial response to the question on your talk page, my presumption that you were deliberately choosing not to answer it was, I think, quite justified at the time. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 22:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a question for reference...:)

If a potential administrator were a Cubs and/or Bears fan, would you support, oppose, or neutral? <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 06:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Morhange

Hi there, I was surprised to see you finally supported an RFA. Just Curious..What makes you think the person is a good candidate ? -- TinuCherian - 13:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kurt, I am still waiting :)Thanks ... -- Tinu Cherian - 07:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

My RFA Thanks

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which has now closed as a success. I understand your concerns about coacing for admin versus coaching for passing RFA. Having seen all the comments, and having seen it all from the coachee's point of view, I will be seeing about making some recommendations about admin coaching when I get a minute or three to spare. In the meantime, this is just to say thank you for your participation. StephenBuxton (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed this week.. All the best, Ben MacDui/Walk 20:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Specialized Pitch Pro et al.

Your argument is not valid for a speedy keep. This was not an out-of-process AfD, although you may think it was. I know that you march to the beat of a very different drummer than most of us, but your rationale just comes off to me as a little WP:POINTy. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 14:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Other than the fact that for some weird reason I thought I'd get a support from you, I enjoyed reading your vote. There's probably no better reason to oppose someone than if they are acting like Gail Wynand... I can agree with that. Do you mind my asking how you think I am acting that way, or if its easier, when I started to act that way? Thanks, HRoark. :) Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 02:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, you two are in on some "inside joke" that I don't get. I have already voiced my disdain for your vote at RFA Kurt, hoping for a reasonable explanation for why you would oppose someone for their username of all things. I will immediately strike my comment there if you, or Gwynand, tell me to. Keeper ǀ 76 02:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

To quickly respond, and not to put words in Kurt's mouth, but he was either saying that I acted like Gail Wynand (quite a horrible guy), or, I was "the man who could have been", meaning maybe I at one time had potential to be a great editor, but failed miserably (like Gail Wynand. So his vote wasn't baseless, I'm just trying to get some reasoning behind it. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 02:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll assume that both of you know what the hell that oppose was about, and I'll step away. I'm still lost. You, Gwynand are not a self nom, you've never been through admin coaching, you have (apparently) a sucky username, and you (gasp!) accepted a nom for adminship. Meh, oppose everyone Kurt, tis your right. I would hope that you have some merit to your oppose beyond "your username is apt", I know you are intelligent Kurt (and in real life, we'd probably laugh about this silly website over a beer, both being Libertarians and all). I won't visit your talkpage again. Keeper ǀ 76 02:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm quite alright with it, and Kurt, I don't know if I've done something to piss you off in the past, but I'm not sure why you don't respond to me on your talk page. Even if a response of "I don't want to go further into my oppose" was given, I'd appreciate that. Reason is, I don't see you having the same mentality of the other opposes, and for the life of me I can't see how I act on Misplaced Pages as garnering an "absolutely not" from you. I desire some sort of explanation, if possible. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 02:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I was a bit preoccupied, sorry. Basically, it is this: you are clearly an intelligent and capable writer. But rather than directing your efforts to true productive activities, most of your time on Misplaced Pages has been spent socializing. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 02:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I know better than to let others speak for you... thanks for the response. I'm taking all of this into account and don't imagine I'll let the RfA run much longer, probably will check it again in the morning. None of it was what I expected and I didn't mean to waste the community's time, heh, for some reason I thought I had passed the "Kurt" test. Oh well. On an unrelated note... after finishing The Fountainhead and spending some time thinking about it, I realized I had no desire to read Rand ever again. I might be in the group that criticizes her writing because I don't understand it, but for some weird reason I kind of hate the points she was making in that book. Are you a Rand fan? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 02:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes Kurt's into Ayn Rand, he's an objectivist himself I think. This is unrelated but the one thing I don't understand is what's wrong with power hunger. Power hunger is synonymous with ambition...--Serviam (talk) 15:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

AN/I subject

It's been marked as resolved, but you should be aware of this thread: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption and personal attacks from Kurt. Since Sceptre failed to notify you, here's your heads up. Horologium (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thoughts

Hi Kurt.

Apologies if this an egregious FAQ (I scanned your userpage and read a few interesting subpages, but couldn't find what I'm after) but I wondered if you'd collated your rationale for your RfA contribs somewhere?

I dislike the way you get barrages of comments almost every time you oppose. It's pointless drama. I thought that if you had an essay in userspace, it might help. Particularly if it encouraged people who wish to discuss the issue with you to come here.

Then, you could wikilink your oppose (if you chose to oppose) to your essay. Along the lines of:

• Oppose Self nomination

My suggestion has a few simple benefits. First, it would keep drama off the RfA of some poor soul who's possibly quite stressed by RfA anyway and has nothing to do with your stance. Second, it might help prevent some of the more frequent comments thrown at you.

Just a thought.

Cheers, --Dweller (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It's worth a thought, although I wonder how much good it would do. For the people who are most vocal about it, there's no reason for them not to understand my reasoning, as many times as I've already explained it; I can only assume that they're either ignoring it or misrepresenting it, and I don't see how this would change that...it might be worth it for the first-timers, though. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 14:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Go for it! --Dweller (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Socrates barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For trying to instill a reasonable solution, being selfless when one could take the easy way out and say nothing, and as a sign of appreciation for your actions, to show it was not unappreciated, I give unto you the Socratic barnstar. Bedford 07:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, wich was successful with 73 support, 6 oppose, and 5 neutral. I'll try to be as clear as I can in my communication and to clear some of the admin backlog on images. If there is anything I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page! Cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, wich was successful with 73 support, 6 oppose, and 5 neutral. I'll try to be as clear as I can in my communication and to clear some of the admin backlog on images. If there is anything I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page! Cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks for participating in my RFA. I can assure you that regardless of how fast I edit, I always try to ensure that I am doing the correct thing. If you see me do something that is not correct, please tell me.

Cheers!

J.delanoy_adds 20:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter, Issue 5

Apologies for the late delivery; here is the June edition of the newsletter.

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 5 • 21 June 2008 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors	Features USRD gets showings at Hartford Road Meet Record 6 Wikipedians show up at Chicago Road Meet USRD hits 10,000 articles	State and national updates Leaderboard USH Colorado/ New Mexico Michigan Michigan County Designated Highways Nevada New York Utah Washington
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot (talk) 21:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Kurt, I know that you and I have had our differences on-wiki, but I want to say thank you for taking the time away from article work to explain your rationales at RfA. I don't agree with you probably 99% of the time at RfA, but at least now I (and others) feel like you are doing something there other than the "copy/paste" stuff. I've personally been guilty of "writing you off" immediately, but I've come to realize in the last few weeks that you actually are trying to protect Misplaced Pages in your own way, something I can't fault you for. It's refreshing to see you go the extra step (like calling your question the "anti-fence question" for example) to be clear at RfA, which nobody can force you to do (or should be able to) and I respect you for doing that. No need for a response, just wanted to say thanks. Keeper ǀ 76 21:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Gazimoff's RfA

Hi Kurt - this is just a question of confusion for me: Gazimoff has given a reply very similar to L'Aquatique, but you voted neutral on their RfA, and opposed on this one. I'm just curious about the difference - I don't intend this as a badgering question, and am not in any way trying to change your vote. I'm just wondering if there is some subtlety that I have missed Fritzpoll (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

Shapiros10 _{My work} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I disagree with some things you say at RFA (most of them, actually), but who cares? Promote the spirit of kindness! Shapiros10 _{My work} 15:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

For your services to the encyclopaedia, thank you

The Individualist's Commendation I commend you, Kurt Weber, for sticking to your principles and maintaining your stand even when the hive mind is buzzing at its most furious. Although for a long time I dismissed your prima facie comments as a drop in the ocean, I've come to realise that your consistent stand at RfA has raised awareness of power hunger as an issue to be considered when assessing candidates. More and more I think hierarchy and the desire to exert power over others is the biggest problem with our current caste of administrators, and your activism in this area has caused me to change my assessment of more than one candidate. Keep up the good work, and never let the collectivists' baying overwhelm reason and integrity. Skomorokh 19:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Shadow ArbCom

Since you seem to take a less-than-reverent view toward some of our sainted institutions, I was wondering if you'd be interested in joining the new Shadow Arbitration Committee. It's essentially a bit of political theater aimed at the legitimacy of the actual Arbitration Committee, which I intend to either reform or delete. Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 19:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot

Thanks a hell of a lot for talking about me on an off-Misplaced Pages attack site. Did you think I'd never find out about it?

I'm going to have to live with it, of course; the community seems to have given you a giant free pass to say and do whatever the hell you want, whether it actually improves the encyclopedia or not.

--Elkman 02:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

KMW, would you mind private e-mailing me the link. Id love to read it. Penguin curiosity.--King Bedford I 02:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll post it right here: Apparently, both of you have a lot of friends at Misplaced Pages Review who agree with your actions and opinions. --Elkman 02:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Fun read. I'd respond, but they don't accept Yahoo Mail, and all I use is Yahoo Mail. I'd love to post some things on there I can't place on the Arbcom page.--King Bedford I 03:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see kurt talking about you there. He did mention that someone threatened to block him, but he didn't name you. –xeno (talk) 03:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Kurt. Thanks for posting that.--King Bedford I 20:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding "youth administrators"

While browsing infamous "Request for adminship" talk page, I found your repeated railing against minors being administrators. How might you justify, as an Objectivist and Individualist, rounding up all the youth and branding them as a collective group? Why do you not take each as a individual and judge their own merit? LFOD (talk) 05:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

When they've done something to demonstrate that merit, sure. Until then, I have no choice but to rely on general tendencies to fill in the gaps in my specific knowledge of the individual that are relevant to the situation.

ANI thread

Hi Kmweber. You appear to be the subject of this ANI discussion. D.M.N. (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

RFAR

I've filed a request for arbitration here in response to your behaviour. Please comment. Sceptre 14:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Thank you... ...for participating in my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff 22:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Wrongfully deleted articles that I have saved for posterity and Some AfDs I'm fighting, that you might want to fight too

Sorry for MfDing those two pages. I just didn't see a point in leaving them around since the "wrongfully deleted" page hadn't been touched in three years and consisted of just a lone red link. Also, the afd list hadn't been touched in months, so I figured you'd abandoned it. You march to the beat of a different drummer than almost every other Wikipedian (and I respect your ), I should've known better than to touch your stuff. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 00:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh...I've been out teaching a high school marching band camp since Sunday morning...I probably wouldn't have even noticed if you hadn't said anything :D Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 14:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

head up

I have temporarily undid you edit to Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/JGHowes , his RFA was de-listed pending another co-nom. - Icewedge (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Your cool down block questions

I agree with you about cool down blocks entirely. Perhaps, however, you should put 'put your personal opinion, not what you are fed by policy' somewhere on the question. Hoping you are well.  Asenine  18:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, doing that would defeat the whole purpose of why I ask that question, which is to find out if people will put their own best judgment over so-called "policy". Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 19:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was supposed to deter fence sitters?  Asenine  21:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

"Two, two, two spies in one"?

You don't know me from Adam, but I like to lurk around the 'pedia. Anyway, I saw that comment you left on WP:ANI, and I can't figure out what it's a reference to? I did a google search, but I only got 2 hits, one for a review of Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, and one a Google Books hit for a phrase from a scholarly analysis of Hamlet (referring to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern). I feel like I should know this reference, but I can't place it. Can I get a clue? Dgcopter (talk) 19:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

"Aldrich Hanssen" = Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 19:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see... clever! Is there a particular signifcance to the "two, two, two" bit? It just struck me as though it were a reference to a song or something. And the review of the video game phrased it in the same way, which seems to reinforce that idea. Dgcopter (talk) 19:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC) Nevermind, I just figured it out. The old Certs commercial! Been a while since I've heard anyone make reference to that deal. Thanks for the trip down pop culture memory lane! Dgcopter (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I've deleted your entry.....

......in the Soundtrack of Wikipedians, while adding my own. Can you repair it? There is already a SOS on the discussion page of the Soundtrack. KeesInvites (talk) 11:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

ACC Tool

Someone, probably you, requested access to the account creation tool. For security purposes could you please confirm that it was you who made the request so we can approve you, thanks. —— RyanLupin • (talk) 21:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Disregard the above. After discussion it was decided not to grant you access to the tool at this time. Please bear in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and that you may have not attained the trust necessary to use this tool. - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The ACC tool admins have discussed this matter, and in a !vote we decided not to overturn the decision to deny your request. FunPika 23:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry; that is the wrong answer. Try again. Thanks! Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 23:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• Where was this discussion held? While I don't see eye-to-eye with kurt on a good number of things, that doesn't change the fact that he is a long-standing member of this community and can be trusted to create accounts for people. –xeno (talk) 23:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Huh. I was just about to post the same thing as Xeno. I don't see anything in the ACC page, or archives. Perhaps there's a logical answer? Where was this "discussion" held? Keeper ǀ 76 23:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You know, if it were deletion or blocking, I could understand why it would be a problem--my views aren't exactly mainstream, and I could understand (though certainly would dispute) concerns that I might use them to further my own ends. But account creation? Seriously, what harm could be done with that? It's not like adminship, where there's a distinct possibility of causing considerable harm (thus my whole opposition to self-noms, the CDB question, etc.). It's basically like rollback...just something to make life a bit more convenient, or (in this case) something else to do to productively kill a few minutes and break the monotony of typical Misplaced Pages activities. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 23:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Also intrigued by how someone like Kurt could be considered not to have attained sufficient trust, I notice that this didn't appear at WP:PERM, where I would probably have granted access.... Fritzpoll (talk) 23:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Fritz, the ACC tool is an page you log into to fulfilled account creation requests. You don't need the ACC flag to work there, at least unless you're consistently hitting the account creation throttle. While you do have access to requesting user's email addresses, I think kurt is smart enough not to use those email addresses for anything untoward. –xeno (talk) 23:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, it is nearly 1am, and I completely misread what was going on. On the other hand, my point still stands: how can Kurt be considered untrustworthy? Fritzpoll (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Kurt, I just updated your userrights to include "account creator". I still don't see where you were "denied" access. Hoping someone fills me in, but in the mean time, go crazy with your new found powers. For anyone else reading this, I'm not exactly Kurt's #1 fan, no conflict of interest here by any stretch, but I don't see why such an inconsequential tool couldn't be added to anyone that asks for it. Keeper ǀ 76 23:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

@fritz Like I said, there's nothing much that can be done with the ACC tool. @keeper, granting him the ACC flag is pretty much ineffective since he still doesn't have access to the tool. also, we don't typically grant that flag unless people have been hitting the throttle, but may as well leave it now. –xeno (talk) 23:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Good gravy, have we gotten this "technical"??? Go give him access to the tool then. Keeper ǀ 76 23:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin on the tool at present... –xeno (talk) 00:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

What the hell am I missing then? I've seen several non=-admin, trusted users be "given" the ACC rights. Several! I'm at a bit of a loss here, and I'm starting to feel like this is merely political, something I'm explicitly trying to avoid. Keeper ǀ 76 00:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Its a technical privilege specifically for the tool itself, and not an acquired tool based on admin status on wiki. Does that clear the confusion up? Synergy 05:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

From the logs;

Soxred93 Declined, User 247 (Kmweber) at 2008-08-16 21:34:00 because "After discussion with other wiki users, it was decided that Kmweber is still not trusted enough to be given this tool, especially after being banned in multiple IRC channels. ".

I'm a tool admin. Reapply for it and then poke my talk page/email. —Giggy 05:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind that bit; you're approved now. —Giggy 05:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Prodego Suspended, User 247 (Kmweber) at 2008-08-19 05:03:16.
2. Prodego Demoted, User 47 (Giggy) at 2008-08-19 05:02:50.
3. Giggy Approved, User 247 (Kmweber) at 2008-08-19 05:01:09.

Did someone say "I'm starting to feel like this is merely political"? :P —Giggy 05:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

So, Giggy, let me see if I got this right: You approved Kurt, then you yourself were demoted, and Kurt was suspended? And this all occurred in the course of just over two minutes? (I wish I'd spoken up before you embarked on this course; I am confident Kurt himself would have disapproved because it isn't about him getting the bit, it's about the process.)  Frank  |  talk  05:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that's a good summary of events. I hardly ever use the tool anyway (really) and haven't been on IRC in ages, so my adminship on that tool was pretty stale anyway. —Giggy 06:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Kurt, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. I was happy to have to opportunity to address not only my approach to blocking but also my approach to the policy specifics. If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik 17:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

RFA of It is Me Here

Though I doubt we've agreed on many RfAs, I had to leave a note - Well said, indeed. UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 17:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Just Curious...

Just curious, but for how long have you been using your (in)famous self-nomination oppose?--Xp54321 00:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Libertarianism

Hello, a new wikiproject is launched... EVCM (talk) 19:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

EfD

Notice of request for deletion of editor Kmweber :)

Kmweber, the editor you are, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that you satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space. Your opinions on yourself are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at User:GlassCobra/Editor for deletion#Kmweber and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit during the discussion but should not remove the nomination (unless you wish not to participate); such removal will not end the deletion discussion (actually it will). Thank you, and have a good sense of humor :). -- iMatthew _T.C. 01:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your great work and contributions

Hi Kurt. I appreciate your extensive range of contributions, and thanks for what you've written about me. Keep up the great work! Sincerely, Rusty Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

In response to this RFA, which was self-nom'ed, I had to oppose. I don't want to steal your spotlight though! seicer | talk | contribs 01:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 47 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thanks again and cheers! TN‑X-Man 19:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA, which was successful with 58 support, 4 oppose and 1 neutral. I confess I am unsure of the rationale for your oppose but if you want to enlarge on it, just drop me a line. Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

M*A*S*H quote

Since I see you have a few of these on your user page, I thought I'd share the one that sticks with me. It's from A Full Rich Day, in which one plot element is the apparent death of Corporal Leclerq, a soldier from Luxembourg. There's a memorial service in the compound with the Luxembourg anthem played on a phonograph. A previously unidentified soldier, mummy-like in bandages, drags himself out to attend.

Hawkeye: Who's that?

Trapper: Corporal Leclerq.

Hawkeye: I thought he was dead.

Trapper: He got better.

--- OtherDave (talk) 16:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Figured I'd give you a heads up first

WP:KURT. Hope you like it. Please make any changes you want (tone down the first few sentences, reorder, etc). Protonk (talk) 02:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Quick request

My hopeless RfA seems to have stirred up some deep-seated controversies. As a football fan I thought that I was starting things off with a little humor, but several seem to have taken offense. I'm not expecting that the RfA can be saved, but could you weigh in either there, here, my talk page, wherever? Plasticup /C 05:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:It is not that funny

Hi Kmweber. You might want to review Misplaced Pages:It is not that funny. I'm not sure what to make of it. -- Suntag (talk) 05:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Beat you to it. :) Protonk (talk) 05:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Account request tool dispute

Hi Kurt, I have to ask, what exactly do you hope to gain from this discussion? If you really want to effect the changes you say you do, why are you wasting your time there? And, if you have the sort of evidence that would back up the charges you are making, why haven't you brought it to the attention of those who could do something about it? Your actions here do not seem to be in accord with what you are saying.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The Arbitrary Committee is not a legitimate authority, and I will not grant it my sanction. The Misplaced Pages Community is sufficient to demand control of this essential Misplaced Pages process, and community ban the accounts of the offenders for showing contempt to the Misplaced Pages community if they refuse to comply. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 16:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, cease calling me a troll when I am clearly anything but. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 16:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I apologize if I've incorrectly labeled you a troll. However, my question still stands: why are you engaging in an unproductive discussion there, when you could be actively seeking a wider consensus at the Village Pump, or another, wider forum? Cheers, --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

That's the page for discussing the process for gaining access to the account creation tool, and so I am discussing the process for gaining access to the account creation tool there. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 18:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

This is true. However, if you really want to remove the process from the hands of those who currently control it, why are you doing so in a forum that is almost guaranteed not to produce the result you want? I really can't foresee an outcome on that page that truly reflects wiki-wide consensus. Bringing it up on the the Village Pump or the Administrator's Noticeboard would surely bring a wider, more representative section of the Misplaced Pages community in on the discussion, and create a much better gauge of community consensus.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter, Issue 6 (FINAL ISSUE)

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 6 • 8 September 2008 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors	Features Gap appears in freeway New York subproject appears on the Misplaced Pages Signpost New York State Routes leaves jurisdiction of USRD From the editors—newsletter decommissioned	State and national updates State and national updates
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—Rschen7754bot (talk) 03:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Comment at AN

Honestly, you are an adult. You either knew it was wrong when you wrote it or you should have known. I don't care how you treat people who have been at this encyclopedia for some time and who know you well but saying what you said to a new user looking to bring children to wikipedia is unacceptable. I won't bluelink policies and guidelines because I know both how you feel about them and I know you have been linked them before. I will inform you that I have rolled back your comment on my talk page and that you have been mentioned in this thread on AN/I. Protonk (talk) 00:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I second that this comment is way out of line; the teacher asked about using Misplaced Pages, not our opinion of his teaching philosophy, and your comment was a textbook example of biting a newcomer. I need you to stop adding that comment to the discussion; I'm willing to block you if that's what is necessary to prevent you from making our guest feel unwelcome. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:57, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

He should feel unwelcome. He's attempting to use Misplaced Pages for a totally improper purpose. I fail to see how this is any different from attempting to use Misplaced Pages to advertise one's company or product. Keep in mind that, according to his own remarks, he's not using it for a class research project or anything like that. He's trying to use Misplaced Pages to promote a certain ideological viewpoint to his students. Misplaced Pages should not be accomodating the misuse of taxpayer funds to proselytize for a particular ideology. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 01:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Even if that ideology that he is proselytizing for is "Wiki is good, & so is Misplaced Pages"?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 19:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Precisely. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 19:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't that run totally counter to what Misplaced Pages is all about?  Frank  |  talk  19:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage

Regarding this, would it be possible to express your opposition to deletionism in a more tactful way? Thanks, Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Karl Kae Knecht

I have nominated Karl Kae Knecht, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Karl Kae Knecht. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. MBisanz 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I know that you know how to add sources to an article; you've been here a long time. I also know that you've been challenged for your hostile attitude toward 'deletionists' in the last day or two. Did you deliberately create an unsourced article just to make a point? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you look at the article's history?  Frank  |  talk  19:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, Kurt moved the article into the mainspace on July 28, 2008, so the creation of the article, the AFD, and whatever Kurt's been up to recently are unrelated IMO. MBisanz 19:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Good point. I did not realize this was such an old article; I withdraw the question. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You've been indefinitely blocked, as you no doubt notice. This handy section here is where I assume Hersfold or someone else will come along to explain to you their rationale. Avruch 02:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the rationale is simply at ANI. Wisdom89 _{(T / )} 02:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like the blocker did it below. NonvocalScream (talk) 02:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I've semi-protected your talk page according to a request at ANI to prevent people from harassing you here. If you'd prefer not to have this, post here and someone will undo it.

Kmweber (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yeah, I screwed up. I hope everyone understands that while my methods have left a bit to be desired, my motives were pure. Perhaps we can start anew from there. The last couple of days I went a bit overboard...I've always been good at keeping control until now, and the instances where I haven't have been few and far enough between that they weren't much of an issue until now. You'll forgive me if I didn't take the warnings of those who were already in disagreement with me too seriously; just a natural human tendency we all have. I haven't responded before because I've been gone. I think this matter was handled rather hastily, given the fact that no one has made a serious attempt to get the entire community's input in handling this (it's just been one or two individuals here and there) and that in the past RFCs, I had no problem stopping the activities in question until the matter was settled. You're going to do what you're going to do; I certainly don't expect an unblock to come directly from this, but just to start some discussion. Do I think I've been provoked to this? Certainly. Does that justify it? Well, in a way yeah, but I expect better than that from myself regardless. It's just a website, so if I don't get unblocked it won't matter too much, but I would appreciate an opportunity to convince my doubters that I really have always tried to do what I genuinely think to be right.

Decline reason:

This unblock request is declined due to concerns about disruption, however if you were to agree to an indefinite ban from project space as suggested by Ryan, that would be a different matter. — PhilKnight (talk) 21:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You'll notice that when my RfA activities were seriously discussed in the past, I always stayed away from it until the issue was resolved. I'll do the same again, whether there, AfD (I would like to keep participating in the Karl Kae Knecht one, for obvious reasons), or anywhere else, at least until this is all resolved. I've been a reasonable guy whenever someone has seriously questioned my behavior (rather than just taking opportunities to slam me) before, and I will now as well. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 15:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

To add to that (you knew this was coming, right?): This is a perfect example of the wisdom of cool-down blocks. The last several weeks, I've been so busy with school, and with my band kids (we're pushing them so much harder this year, and they're doing such a wonderful job with it, that I have to spend so much more time even outside of rehearsal than ever before to keep up to continue to give these great kids what they deserve from me), that I haven't had any time for any serious work here or anywhere else. I got a bit slap-happy, and since I figured "this is just a website; I have a life, and so this is relatively inconsequential" I decided this was an excellent outlet to let off a bit of steam. That was clearly a mistake, and I learn from my mistakes. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 15:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

:What specific actions will you not do again, what actions lead to your block? I ask this because in order for an unblock request, one must understand what they did incorrect, and what must be done differently. NonvocalScream (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what specific actions lead to his block, unfortunately the blocking admin hasn't made that clear. DuncanHill (talk) 16:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Duncan, if you read the discussion, the examples are cited. I won't debate with you on Kurt's talk page. Please start new conversation a new thread, I'm talking to Kurt. NonvocalScream (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

DuncanHill and NonvocalScream, you have both extensively expressed your opinion on the relevant ANI thread, and neither of you are in any position to unblock Kurt. Please take your comments about his unblock request back to the ANI thread; commentary here is not all that helpful. Risker (talk) 16:20, 21 September 2008 (UTC) :Risker, I am allowed to change my opinion at that thread based on my interaction with Kurt today. I did contribute to the consensus. NonvocalScream (talk) 16:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

NonvocalScream, unblock requests are directed to non-involved administrators for the purpose of objective block review. You are neither uninvolved nor an administrator. You can voice your opinion on anything Kurt says on this page by responding on the ANI subpage. I have politely requested you to leave Kurt alone; please consider this a more vigorous instruction not to post here. Risker (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC) :And consider this my telling you no. I'm not reviewing his unblock request, I'm asking him a question so that I can reconsider my opinion on the other page. You don't have any standing to tell me where I can and cannot post. NonvocalScream (talk) 16:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest taking the ban from project space, as at least being able to edit the mainspace is better than not being able to edit at all. An unconditional unblock would be better, but if this is the best the community has to offer, I suggest you accept it. All the best, Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 23:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of unblock request

Kurt, have you read Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Kmweber ban discussion? Are you clear on what concerns were being raised there? Have you given consideration to how you can address these concerns and avoid similar situations in the future? Risker (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

My own position

I'll be frank with you, Kurt, because I think that's the attitude you are most likely to respect and listen to. Rather than equivocate around.

The reason I supported you being blocked for the foreseeable future (but stated explicitly I was open to have you return swiftly if appropriate) is because I believe that, as things currently stand, you are no longer working for the good of the encyclopedia. I very much agree that you have a right to express opinions about how Misplaced Pages works; no matter how unpopular. The problem I, and many other editors, have is how you make those opinions known. I don't think anyone doubts that you, in fact, are convinced that you are working for the good of the encyclopedia but the fact that you refuse to acknowledge when people come to you with concerns about how you're going about it indicates that you do not extend that same presumption to others: you act as though you believe that people who disagree with you don't simply think you are wrong, but are in fact actively working to destroy Misplaced Pages. That is quite entirely unacceptable.

For instance: I, for one, am very much offended by your suggestion that anyone who attempts to have an article deleted is "lazy", or "pisses on Misplaced Pages". Not everyone agrees with the strictly inclusionist philosophical standpoint, and we are just as justified to hold a perspective different from you and to act accordingly.

There are proper channels and methods for discussing what you feel is the proper way to do an encyclopedia; and discussion on the topic is always welcome. What people object to is trying to make a point by disrupting everyones' good faith work; by attacking other editors defending another perspective, by acting blindly not for the sake of the result but for the sake of repeating your view. If you have problems with the deletion policy, or with the way administrators are selected, or with the legitimacy of the Arbitration Committee; then you are quite welcome to discuss changing those— but not to disrupt the process that already have consensus and are already in place.

Finally, you need to consider the possibility that if you are unable to get consensus behind your proposals or that if there is consensus that the changes you clamor for are undesirable, you might simply be mistaken about what people want out of Misplaced Pages. You need to allow for the possibility that few people feel there is something wrong to begin with, or that they disagree that what is wrong would be fixed by your suggestion.

Personally, I will be quite willing to unblock you if you agree to stay away from project space, except for a few well-specified exceptions (participating civilly in an AfD for an article you have contributed significantly to springs to mind, so would participating in discussions about you instigated by someone else). I think you have very nearly spent what was left of the community's patience, and almost entirely wore out your welcome. Agreeing to those terms would still allow you to build an encyclopedia, and allow you to regain the community's trust in your good faith.

— Coren  17:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Perfectly reasonable. I've never intended to *force* my proposals on Misplaced Pages. I was certainly forceful in my presentation of them; apparently, enough people mistook that for this to blow up as it did. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 00:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Given that the discussion on the ANI subpage currently ranges from "immediate unconditional unblock" to "not on your life" with various levels of conditions inbetween, this particular condition seems like a reasonable middle of the road I'm fairly certain most people can live with. I will therefore unblock you on this specific condition:

• You agree to make no edits to project (Misplaced Pages: and Misplaced Pages talk:) pages excepting
  • XfD for pages you have contributed to significantly; and
  • Dispute resolution, according to the generally accepted processes and only if you are personally involved in the dispute.

I'm going to suggest that this condition remains in place no less than three months; and I would strongly recommend that you return to the project space gradually and gingerly even then. In any case, a high standard of civility will be expected from you even though this condition is designed to minimize the sparks. Please be mindful that editors who disagree with your positions may do so from a position which may be intended for the good of the encyclopedia just as much as you do.

I'm going to have a chat with you in three months; don't hesitate to poke me if I seem to have forgotten: I'm lousy with dates. :-)

Welcome back. — Coren  00:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid my welcomes may have been premature; my unblock was wheel-warred. *sigh* This may take a bit to straighten out, please stand by. — Coren  01:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Last words before I head out for the evening: Misplaced Pages is just a diversion for me. A fun diversion, that I'd rather not be lost, but just a diversion nonetheless. If I'm never unblocked, that sucks but oh well. I have a life, and an enjoyable one at that. In a few minutes I'm going to head out with my friends to enjoy it.

So this is what I have to say: To those who doubt my intentions, keep in mind that this is the first time in a long time that there was a threat of sanctions that was not overwhelmingly turned down by the community. The block a year or so ago was vociferously rejected by a large margin; the two RfCs merely said I wasn't doing anything wrong; every other discussion on this eventually died out with no decision. This is the first time I can recall that I've really been given any evidence that the community at large thinks I've gone too far, in a big way. Fine. I can deal with that. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 01:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

So, the unblock has been redone (or re-undone, whatever) and you are welcome back. I don't expect anymore surprises, so have at it.  :-) — Coren  23:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

Hello there Kurt. I've been thinking hard about this all weekend and come up with some possible conditions for an unblock. They can be found here. Could you possibly give your thoughts on your talk page? It would be good to hear your side. There's quite a few of us who wouldn't mind seeing this April Fools' joke in 2009 ;-) Take care, Ryan Postlethwaite 18:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You know, I'm a bit shocked that this happened at all. The fact is, as far as I know and as far back as I can remember, every time that this has been brought up in the recent past, the general consensus happened to be that, for instance, my participation on RfA and the substance of my participation on AfD was fine. No one even brought up the issue of the manner of my participation; I was just being blunt, and to my knowledge there was no significant opposition to it. The sudden progression from "nothing at all" to "indef block/community ban" is a bit surprising. Seriously.

What about gradually lifting the terms of project-space participation? Is there any potential future for that? I have some things I'd like to say, but I hope you'll understand if I'm hesitant to say them until after an unblock, lest they appear trite and insincere (it appears that people are already jumping to those conclusions with what I've said to this point). Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 00:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I want you to be here to give us the April Fool:) This year's was classic.:) Sticky Parkin 01:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

What was this year's? I'm afraid I wasn't there for the joke.:)--Xp54321 02:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I'm easily amused. I think this was part of it User:Kmweber/Adminship -it caused a truly tragic amount of drama from the usual suspects (not Kurt himself) if I recall.:) Sticky Parkin 02:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Philosophies

"Welfare recipients are the new feudal lords--they are the unproductive living off the productive by holding them at gunpoint."

"Anyone who argues against something on the grounds that it will help 'the big companies' can be safely ignored--not because of the idea itself, but because he used the phrase 'the big companies'."

I'm curious to know where the 700 billion dollar taxpayer bailout of the big and irresponsible mortgage industry companies fits into those two rules? :) Baseball Bugs 21:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The latter is more tongue-in-cheek; the bailout isn't wrong "because it helps the big companies" but for other reasons. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 23:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

To L'Aquatique

Yeah, I said earlier I was leaving for awhile, but it was earlier than I thought it was.

He is apparently not familiar with the circumstances surrounding the last block, when he says @Coren, no, obviously you misinterpreted the situation. Last time he was blocked, about a year ago; this was the rationale given by the unblocking administrator: agreed to stop and talk things over, and stop commenting on RFAs if needed. Apparently, he didn't keep his word that time, what's changed?

I did exactly what I said I would; I discussed the issue with the blocker, and we both decided that it would be best to get the community as a whole to provide input. I agreed to stop commenting on RfAs if needed, that is correct; indeed, I did stop commenting on RfAs until the issue was sorted out, at which time it was pretty overwhelmingly decided that it was absolutely not necessary for me to stop participating on RfAs as I had been.

Hope this clears things up. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 01:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Unblocked

Your April Fools' Day prank better be epic. I expect nothing less.... and if you FAIL, I'm reverting my unblock. Jennavecia 05:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

It is pretty hard to follow up last years, Kurt... oh well, you're unblocked. Finally. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 12:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

It's going to be tough to top your previous April Fool's prank. Useight (talk) 00:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The Resilient Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For putting up with a bunch of political shenanigans with style, you definitely deserve the Resilient Barnstar. King Bedford I 13:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

		The Resilient Barnstar
		Well Kurt, i'd never have thought i'd give you this, but it's never been easy to make my mind up about you. But people give you so much shit, and it's not warranted. Shapiros10 My work 21:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind looking like a Christmas tree, with all of these stars hanging off you...

		The Purple Barnstar
		For bringing some much-needed iconoclastic vibrancy to our strange little Wiki-world. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

French fries needs Potatos au Gratin. A little sophistication on Planet Wiki. Shapiros10 _{My work} 15:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:ASSESS

I've responded on my user talk. — Coren  22:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

To answer the question... generally (I've found) you're welcome to just reassess the article yourself. Most of the time article assessments aren't a massive deal. (Unless there are some specifics I'm not aware of.) Giggy (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Kurt. Maybe you can write WP:ASSES, kthx. Jennavecia 00:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I actually thought that that was what the wikilink was, until I looked more closely. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 00:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom Election - Questions

Hey Kurt. I've posted the list of General Questions to your Questions for the Candidate page. Please answer them at your convenience. Again, Good Luck with your Candidacy! UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 14:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I think removing questions is disruptive. I suggest you restore the questions and merely don't answer them. Hiding your refusal from voters is deceptive. I've raised this matter at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008#Removing_questions. ++Lar: t/c 11:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Kurt, in removing the general questions from your page you removed the questions that I'd put there. Two of the things I was trying to assess in those questions were the amount of preparation that the candidates had done and the extent to which they follow current ArbCom groupthink; I'm not trying to make any of the questions mandatory, but if you aren't going to answer the ones I asked I'd appreciate some feedback as to how meaningful you found them. Thanks ϢereSpielChequers 14:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't even looked at the general questions yet. There may be a few relevant ones on there (perhaps including yours); I don't know. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 16:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, looking at yours in particular, the answer to #1 is "0", which tells you the answer to 2&3. #4 is relevant, athough you can probably figure out what it is. I'll be copying over the relevant ones over the next few days. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 16:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Kmweber ban discussion

Please see the outcome of the discussion at the top. You were specifically asked not to edit the Misplaced Pages namespace, yet you've now decided to make edits in the wikipedia space which are exactly the same as what got you the ban in the first place. Here are two examples . I can turn a blind eye to you editing WP space as part of the arbcom elections, but I'll block you if you continue to post to other areas, especially if you continue to make the same kind of edits as you have been. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)