| Revision as of 01:45, 20 May 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,385 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Writ Keeper/Archives/11) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:42, 20 May 2014 edit undoMalke 2010 (talk | contribs)2 edits →msg: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
| :Like I said, there are enough dicks in the real world that I don't need more in my entertainment. <small>t-that's what she said?</small> ] ]] 14:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC) | :Like I said, there are enough dicks in the real world that I don't need more in my entertainment. <small>t-that's what she said?</small> ] ]] 14:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::Yeah, that could ''easily'' be taken the wrong way. ] ]] 14:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC) | ::Yeah, that could ''easily'' be taken the wrong way. ] ]] 14:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
| == msg == | |||
| {{you've got mail}} | |||
Revision as of 17:42, 20 May 2014
| SEE YOU SPACE COWBOY ... |
ZackDickens12
NO TIME LEFT FOR YOU On my way to better things. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Yes, of course he's allowed to remove things from his talk page, or restore them, no question about that. But we're also talking here about an editor who is obviously very young, and I think we have a certain obligation to educate inexperienced editors to the culture and byways of Misplaced Pages. Yes, certainly, I could have done that with a note on his talk page, and perhaps I should have -- but you'll notice that he's removed all the good advice he's received (from myself and others) already, so that would probably have been a wasted effort. I won't contest your revert (as you say, it's not something to dwell on), but I do wish you had allowed him to make that choice rather than taking it on yourself - maybe, just maybe, he might have decided to grow up just a little bit, which would have been a step in his progress.
In any case, water under the bridge. Best, BMK (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, it's not that you're wrong; you're quite right that we need to educate inexperienced editors. But the question is: how do we do so, and what tone do we take while we do it? What's more the point is that you/we tried that already, and he restored them. So clearly it's his wish to have them, and, y'know, it's really not that big a deal, so there's no reason to possibly antagonize him further by removing it again. Trying to remove them once was all right, but trying again was a little much, IMO.
It's a fine line, of course: the need to provide meaningful instruction balanced against the need to not antagonize them (which will make them not listen to the instruction). I think, with this particular person, we're falling too much on the side of stick and not enough on the side of carrot. "Spare the rod and spoil the child" works (if you're of the school of thought that it does work, that is) because a child is a captive audience, so to speak--they have no choice but to take their medicine, which in turn gives them a chance to learn from it. Here, since editors are not a captive audience, employing the rod can simply drive them away forever, making any good advice unheard and thus worthless.
There's also the need to minimize damage, of course; drawing the line at the RfA, for example, was probably a good call (though even then, closing it 15 minutes after it went live was still probably somewhat hasty). But the self-awards is really not the behavior we need to make a stand about. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think that we, as a community, have a good handle on how to deal with young editors. We've got WP:CIR, of course, but that's most often used as a reason for blocking, and there's very little that can be done before it reaches that stage, because, in general, we insist on treating all editors the same, as responsible adults, even when its clear that this is not the case. (I'm speaking in the abstract here, not particularly talking about ZackDickens12 and this minor incident.) It's somewhat reminiscent of the WMF's refusal to see that not requiring registration, and allowing IP editing, is, overall, a detriment to the project, and that much vandalism and quasi-sockpuppetry (editors with accounts logging out to avoid scrutiny) would be eliminated if they changed their policy to something reasonable, like pretty much every other website on the Net.
Anyway, I'm rambling - my point is that it would be nice to have a way to deal with young editors somewhat differently than adult editors, other than the informal things that have grown up over time, such as the "Not Now" closing of ZD12's RfA. If there were systemic restrictions on their editing, and they understood that when they began, then it wouldn't seem so punitive to have curmudgeons like myself wagging their finger at them. As it is now, by assuming from the beginning that all editors are going to behave like responsible adults, the negative response to childish misbehavior is magnified; and by the time it becomes clear that the behavior is childish because a child is behind the keyboard, everyone's already a bit put out, and inclined to be harsher than they (I) probably should be. BMK (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think that we, as a community, have a good handle on how to deal with young editors. We've got WP:CIR, of course, but that's most often used as a reason for blocking, and there's very little that can be done before it reaches that stage, because, in general, we insist on treating all editors the same, as responsible adults, even when its clear that this is not the case. (I'm speaking in the abstract here, not particularly talking about ZackDickens12 and this minor incident.) It's somewhat reminiscent of the WMF's refusal to see that not requiring registration, and allowing IP editing, is, overall, a detriment to the project, and that much vandalism and quasi-sockpuppetry (editors with accounts logging out to avoid scrutiny) would be eliminated if they changed their policy to something reasonable, like pretty much every other website on the Net.
- I asked a CU, and it's him. I think I'm going to softblock that and his two accounts that are artifacts from his renames and give him a final warning. This nonsense has got to stop; I still don't think it's to the point of a year-long or indef yet, but I don't think a shorter block will improve the situation appreciably, so hopefully this will serve. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'd like to thank you and the IP for fixing the csd on Zack100. I thought a deletion or block would help get Zack's attention, but I didn't think an SPI was the way to go. (I don't know much about that subject.) Let's continue to work with Zack with both encouragement and some slaps on the wrist. – S. Rich (talk) 18:46, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's what I'm hoping, but if he doesn't slow down and start listening, there is a point where we can't keep humoring him. Some might argue that we've reached that point already. The probelm is that the only tool we really have is blocking, and with young editors, it's far too blunt an instrument; even a day's block can seem like an eternity, and they will very rarely see an indefinite--or even a block of finite but long duration, like a year--as anything less than a permanent ban. That's what I was alluding to in my post to BMK just above: we basically can't block him without losing him forever. But we can't wait forever, either, and there's the rub. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:03, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I may generally be a hardass, but I don't disagree with what you folks are saying. Where I define the line that gets crossed to justify a long block is almost certainly less forgiving that your, but I do agree that ZD12 is not quite there yet. He's working overtime at getting there, though.
Thanks for looking into it. BMK (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I may generally be a hardass, but I don't disagree with what you folks are saying. Where I define the line that gets crossed to justify a long block is almost certainly less forgiving that your, but I do agree that ZD12 is not quite there yet. He's working overtime at getting there, though.
- Yeah, that's what I'm hoping, but if he doesn't slow down and start listening, there is a point where we can't keep humoring him. Some might argue that we've reached that point already. The probelm is that the only tool we really have is blocking, and with young editors, it's far too blunt an instrument; even a day's block can seem like an eternity, and they will very rarely see an indefinite--or even a block of finite but long duration, like a year--as anything less than a permanent ban. That's what I was alluding to in my post to BMK just above: we basically can't block him without losing him forever. But we can't wait forever, either, and there's the rub. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:03, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'd like to thank you and the IP for fixing the csd on Zack100. I thought a deletion or block would help get Zack's attention, but I didn't think an SPI was the way to go. (I don't know much about that subject.) Let's continue to work with Zack with both encouragement and some slaps on the wrist. – S. Rich (talk) 18:46, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I asked a CU, and it's him. I think I'm going to softblock that and his two accounts that are artifacts from his renames and give him a final warning. This nonsense has got to stop; I still don't think it's to the point of a year-long or indef yet, but I don't think a shorter block will improve the situation appreciably, so hopefully this will serve. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Now he's requesting that his talk page be deleted, and he's done something bizarre to get an article deleted - I can't unravel it (see his contribs). BMK (talk) 16:23, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- Nevermind, SuperMarioMan blocked him for a week for disruptive editing, and various editors undid his other edits. BMK (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Noting that I posted on the MfD and on his talkpage before I saw any of this. If he winds up being long-term blocked or indeffed, which would be an unfortunate outcome for his morale if not for the encyclopedia, I might wind up blanking (as opposed to deleting) his talkpage, to help him to stay away for awhile. In any event, we'll see how he responds to my post on his talk. (I note that he's asked for an unblock, but hasn't posted an unblock request using the template, which means few admins will see it.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, no, probably several admins will see it, and I think that's part of the problem with the way we've handled this. Too many cooks are in the kitchen here. I mean, yes, he's being disruptive. I actually saw part of the beginning of this latest episode and was considering blocking him, but I was too tired to make a real go of it. But now I wake up and there are like six new threads on his talk page, all from different people. Most are probably telling him more or less the same thing, but everyone has to get their say, I suppose. But while we're all stumbling over each other to tell this kid exactly how wrong he is, what does this look like to him? How does it make him feel? I mean, hearing it from one person is necessary, but hearing it from the entire peanut gallery? Well, I say "peanut gallery", but I don't really mean that, because most of the editors who commented are people I very highly respect (not to mention that I'm as guilty of it as anyone). But this is the kind of thing I think leads people to believe that we are an insular group who hate any newcomers trying to intrude on our territory; it looks like we're all just dogpiling on the innocent newbie. I mean, he needs to hear someone tell him what he's doing wrong, but does he really need to hear it in surround sound? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:15, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- I wouldn't have intervened at all if I'd seen how many other admins were on the case ... partly a function of some earlier interactions on his talkpage having been blanked ... wait, this is where I came in ...
- I assume it would be silly to ask if he's been pointed to Misplaced Pages:Guidance for younger editors at least once? Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- It is a question of whether this is CIR or trolling. While I have gone well out of my way to assume good faith in every comment I've made, there is a voice in the back of my head that says we are being played. The timing of the button pushing is almost too perfect. Regardless, the most recent edits make it clear that the distinction is no longer as relevant. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:03, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's kind of an academic point now, as I've just applied an indefblock that I think is valid either way, but the fact that he chose Prodego, of all people, to appeal to for a block of Doc9871, plus his various other shenanigans has made me now lean towards trolling. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, actually, I've realized that his choice of Prodego kinda makes sense, but still. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
I got pinged and unpinged, I see. Trolls really just hate being called out and busted. They'd much rather carry on the charade for their own "jollies". Trolls that hide behind the lie of being a young editor abuse the AGF of good editors to their advantage. After all: who's going to pick on a little kid? I use caution before ABF'ing and labeling an editor as a troll, believe me. Age is irrelevant when being claimed as an "excuse", as he did with the "I am young if someone is young please don't block them" request. There are plenty of young computer-savvy people all over the world who edit here, as either good or bad WP editors. We don't want minors posting their personal information, but aside from that it makes no difference how old one is. It only matters if one can competently edit here. Normal editors wouldn't delete what I had to say on their talk page with "I don't trust you!!!!" Perhaps it's just a hopeless incompetent, and not a real troll. Meh. Call it a "gut feeling", but I knew this was a bad apple. Cheers :) Doc talk 07:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- In case you hadn't noticed, he's carrying on pasting that article back into his talk page - time to deny access? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Probably. Dennis has handled it for now, but any repetition and I'll revoke TP access. Not a happy time for anyone, but at least it'll be over, for better or worse. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, episodes like this are always a bit sad - maybe he'll be back when he's grown up a bit. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- I think we're well past the point where gross incompetence (for whatever reason) is indistinguishable from deliberate trolling, and I'm more and more in agreement with Doc that the latter is probable. BMK (talk) 16:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, well, it hardly matters now. I'm not going to remove TPA unless he makes it necessary by further shenanigans. Whether it's trolling or not, the situation is kinda bumming me out, and I really don't think there's anything else to say about it, so no more, please. We've spent more than enough time on this, and I'm tired of things. If one of y'all see something that really requires TPA removal, and for one reason or another can't do it yourself, feel free to post a succinct message below; otherwise, let's let it go. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- I think we're well past the point where gross incompetence (for whatever reason) is indistinguishable from deliberate trolling, and I'm more and more in agreement with Doc that the latter is probable. BMK (talk) 16:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, episodes like this are always a bit sad - maybe he'll be back when he's grown up a bit. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Probably. Dennis has handled it for now, but any repetition and I'll revoke TP access. Not a happy time for anyone, but at least it'll be over, for better or worse. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Writ Keeper,
- Umm since you blocked him you should probably know he's created 2 new accounts - Za89 (talk · contribs) + Zack2014 (talk · contribs),
- Just thought I'd tell you,
- Thanks, →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 10:26, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, but we do have SPI for these sorts of things. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I know but I thought It'd be easier to just ask you instead, Sorry to have bothered you!., Oops sorry I wasn't aware I should've filed one, Thanks for your help much appreciated, →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)- No problem. It's not a big deal, really; it just provides a record for admins to review in the case of future unblock requests. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ah I didn't think of it like that, Anyway thanks again :)
- Regards, →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. It's not a big deal, really; it just provides a record for admins to review in the case of future unblock requests. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, but we do have SPI for these sorts of things. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I've emailed you
Hi. I have emailed you about a third-party matter I think deserves serious attention. If you disagree or decline please let me know or comment on the relevant talk page. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 02:53, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hmmm, I don't see it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 02:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Meaning you don't see the email? μηδείς (talk) 03:13, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Correct. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:19, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- I did just resend it 5 minutes ago. If you don't get it,could you email me and I'll respond? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Just sent. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:24, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, just responded. μηδείς (talk) 04:41, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- K, revdeled then forwarded to oversight, who did their thing on it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:58, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Tried thanking your edit, but for some odlly logical reason that option wasn't available. μηδείς (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yup, no problem. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Tried thanking your edit, but for some odlly logical reason that option wasn't available. μηδείς (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- K, revdeled then forwarded to oversight, who did their thing on it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:58, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, just responded. μηδείς (talk) 04:41, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Just sent. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:24, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- I did just resend it 5 minutes ago. If you don't get it,could you email me and I'll respond? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
- Correct. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:19, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
May 2014
Hello, I'm Drmies. An edit that you recently made to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks for testing, but please don't do it on a frequently-visited board such as ANI. Good thing User:Writ Keeper was there to revert you immediately. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. When you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User talk:Drmies, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or 
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Drmies (talk) 18:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Do we have a template to warn someone about templating the regulars? Drmies (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- I was actually looking for one of those originally, but after an exhaustive search of the entire Twinkle dropdown, taking in excess of ten seconds, decided to settle for {{uw-tempabuse1}} as a reasonable alternative. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- {{uw-dttr}}. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Script tweak requested
Sometimes it saddens me that Misplaced Pages isn't social media... it seems the only time I ever drop by here is to beg favours or make requests, rather than ask you how your day was and whether you saw the latest episode of Game of Thrones... Feel free to respond to both of those questions if you like, but the real reason I'm here is (suprise!) a script request. I was wondering whether you could jiggle the settings on User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/easyBlock.js so that there was a "suspected sock"/"confirmed sock" option that allowed an indef block with talkpage access removed. Having spent a little time yesterday dealing with a couple of prolific sockers, both of whom resort to talkpage vandalism after being blocked, it would have been rather handy to be able to kill their talkpage at the point of blocking, rather than having to adjust the block settings after the fact. Yunshui 水 10:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- K, done. Worked first time, for a change. Bypass your cache if you don't see the new options, as usual. My day was about as good as it could get, which given the circumstances is not saying a whole lot, but c'est la vie. I'm actually not a fan of Game of Thrones, neither books nor show (blasphemy!): too grimdark. It's like those miserable Psalms, they're so depressing... I'm evidently more attached to sunshine, happy endings, and fluffy puppies than killing off all of the likeable characters (or twisting them to be unlikeable) Because The Author Is Edgy Like That and situations that are only going to get worse before they get worse. The underlying mythology of the series is kind of interesting to me--I have been known to trawl A Wiki of Ice and Fire for spoilers--and if the series of books ever actually gets finished, I'll be interested to read a synopsis, but I'm not going to get emotionally invested in a story that is actively trying to disappoint me in that respect. I want my entertainment to let me think about things other than how shitty the world is, not reinforce that idea. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:37, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Touched a nerve there, did I? I won't ask whether you're a fan of Forbrydelsen, then... Well, I'm glad you're having a good day, at least. Thanks muchly - as always - for the tweak, the new "(no TPA)" options are showing up in my menu already. Yunshui 水 13:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, it's not just that it's dark; it's that particular kind of dark that makes you think, "well, everything is pretty much effed forever". Like, there was nothing particularly happy about True Detective, for the most part, but I still loved it, because there's at least a glimmer of hope that they might catch the guy. There are no glimmers in Game of Thrones; basically as soon as Ned became the King's Hand, I thought, "well, it's almost certainly all downhill from here", and then when Ned was executed (spoilers), I thought, "well, now it is certainly all downhill from here." There needs to be some chance that things will turn out all right for me to keep interest--even if that chance doesn't work out in the end. When you totally extinguish that chance in the first of seven books, there's really not much reason for me to maintain interest. And it's actually not just that, either; I'm also a fan of H.P. Lovecraft, who is not known for giving much in the way of hope (though a few of his stories actually do have relatively happy endings, so as to not totally ruin the suspense). But there, it's interesting, at least. Lovecraft is all about the mythology; the danger and evil of his stories come from the mythology. As an aside: though ultimately the evil in True Detective comes from mundane sources (spoilers), it is still heavily steeped in mythology--see all the references to The King in Yellow, which was a great book, mostly, and also an influence on Lovecraft--and so scores a lot of points for me in the same way. As I tend to be interested in the mythology, that works out for me. In Game of Thrones, there is mythology--which, as mentioned, does interest me--but most of the conflict and evil in the story doesn't come from that (with the notable exception of the ghouls and the White Walkers, of course); it comes from people just being dicks. There are enough dicks in the real world; I don't need my fantasy worlds to be full of them also. Also, politics bores me, so yeah. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're an admin on Misplaced Pages and politics bores you? How did you make it through RFA? --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- By being bored. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- You mean boring? --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Not really. I really don't think it took much politicking, at least not for me; just, like, don't be a goober, don't care too much about the result (very important), and know your stuff, and you'll be fine in any RfX. As y'all know, but for the benefit of any TPSes who may still be reading (what is wrong with you?!), being an admin is not terribly interesting anyway, and is frequently actually unpleasant. It passes the time, though, in a way that's possibly marginally more useful than many other things that one can do on the Internet. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- You mean boring? --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- By being bored. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're an admin on Misplaced Pages and politics bores you? How did you make it through RFA? --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, it's not just that it's dark; it's that particular kind of dark that makes you think, "well, everything is pretty much effed forever". Like, there was nothing particularly happy about True Detective, for the most part, but I still loved it, because there's at least a glimmer of hope that they might catch the guy. There are no glimmers in Game of Thrones; basically as soon as Ned became the King's Hand, I thought, "well, it's almost certainly all downhill from here", and then when Ned was executed (spoilers), I thought, "well, now it is certainly all downhill from here." There needs to be some chance that things will turn out all right for me to keep interest--even if that chance doesn't work out in the end. When you totally extinguish that chance in the first of seven books, there's really not much reason for me to maintain interest. And it's actually not just that, either; I'm also a fan of H.P. Lovecraft, who is not known for giving much in the way of hope (though a few of his stories actually do have relatively happy endings, so as to not totally ruin the suspense). But there, it's interesting, at least. Lovecraft is all about the mythology; the danger and evil of his stories come from the mythology. As an aside: though ultimately the evil in True Detective comes from mundane sources (spoilers), it is still heavily steeped in mythology--see all the references to The King in Yellow, which was a great book, mostly, and also an influence on Lovecraft--and so scores a lot of points for me in the same way. As I tend to be interested in the mythology, that works out for me. In Game of Thrones, there is mythology--which, as mentioned, does interest me--but most of the conflict and evil in the story doesn't come from that (with the notable exception of the ghouls and the White Walkers, of course); it comes from people just being dicks. There are enough dicks in the real world; I don't need my fantasy worlds to be full of them also. Also, politics bores me, so yeah. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Touched a nerve there, did I? I won't ask whether you're a fan of Forbrydelsen, then... Well, I'm glad you're having a good day, at least. Thanks muchly - as always - for the tweak, the new "(no TPA)" options are showing up in my menu already. Yunshui 水 13:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Quite; if you find GoT depressingly bleak I'm amazed you've survived adminship so capably. Yunshui 水 14:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Like I said, there are enough dicks in the real world that I don't need more in my entertainment. t-that's what she said? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, that could easily be taken the wrong way. Yunshui 水 14:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
msg
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.