Misplaced Pages

User talk:Linuxbeak: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:33, 21 December 2005 editSegv11 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,673 edits Username change← Previous edit Revision as of 13:44, 21 December 2005 edit undoLocke Cole (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,922 edits Andy blocked from AN/I: central probation trackerNext edit →
Line 305: Line 305:


Thanks for the help. ] <sup>(]/])</sup> 13:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC) Thanks for the help. ] <sup>(]/])</sup> 13:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

== Andy blocked from AN/I ==
Tony Sidaway prepared a central location for Pigsonthewings probation blocks— ]. As your block is under the same provisions, you might want to update the page with the relevant info. —] 13:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:44, 21 December 2005

Welcome to Linuxbeak's Talk Page.

Please use the box below, or manually enter new messages at the end of my page so I can find them easily. Thanks!

Please click here to leave me a new message. Remember to sign your posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end.


For earlier talk pages see the archives below:

Archive Number Message Numbers Dates What's Inside
#0 1-50 13 Mar 05 - 13 Jun 05 My welcome from Gaurav, I meet Tony the Marine and Antonio, get yelled at a little, and become an admin
#1 51-100 13 Jun 05 - 27 Jul 05 Some random discussions, people thanking me for voting support on their RFAs, MARMOT shows up and becomes a pain (and gets banned), JarlaxleArtemis complains that I blocked him, and other goodies
#2 101-150 20 Jul 05 - 7 Sep 05 More random discussions, more of JarlaxleArtemis trying to place blame on me, Tony asks for my help, JarlaxleArtemis goes insane and starts impersonating me accross different wikis (and gets banned), SPUI reveals his love for me (o_O), and Essjay appoints me as a cardinal of the Protestant Church of Misplaced Pages.
#3 151-200 7 Sep 05 - 9 Nov 05 Even more user impersonation, arbitration stuff, I go lose my cool for a moment, administrative ordeals, Daniel Brandt goes on a personal crusade against Misplaced Pages (and gets banned), and other goodies
#4 201-250 9 Nov 05 - 12 Dec 05 Pigsonthewing acts weird, I let JarlaxleArtemis and MARMOT back into the community (gasp!), random admin stuff, try to defend admins who were wrongly labeled as pedophiles, get a moving Happy Birthday from Tony the Marine, and other goodies
#5 251-300 12 Dec 05 - ? TBA
















Op ed, part 2

Good question...maybe just tell them the truth about me. I'm appaled and sickened by the thought of these kinds of articles appearing here that are written by people taking advantage of the site's generosity. All my contributions are 100% family friendly. I'll do my best to slay the slime and garbage as it comes in, too. That's the reason I wanted the adminship in the first place. - Lucky 6.9 01:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I note (via googlenews) that the original errant press release is making it's way around the web in an unmodified form.Limegreen 02:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I can't tell you how appreciative I am of your calm response to PeeJ. You do great work! - Ta bu shi da yu 02:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Indeed very well done. The only thing better would be if they had actualy retracted the press release (sadly some other sources are picking up the terrible article). Broken S 03:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

News stories

You might like to fire off your response to any sites that appear on google news . --Martyman-(talk) 03:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, well. Good luck with your finals. --Martyman-(talk) 03:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

RE: your RfB

I'll probably end up being the Jeannette Rankin of your party...my vote won't count and I'm not trying to be a spoiler...just for an ape like me, some things have to be in stone.--MONGO 04:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

About Defamation and PeeJ

I read your letter- I'd forgotten about most of that, since while I remember participating in the image tagging project, I forget most of the details. And you're right- when trying to convince someone to tag an image, remove this or change that, (... I tend to think that??...) it's always best to begin with civility. Many thanks, and I will watch this as it unfolds... Schissel-nonLop! 05:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

One of the two articles in which the circular reappeared was published by news.baou.com, which seems to publish a lot of anti-Misplaced Pages screeds according to http://news.google.com, including this gem. Schissel-nonLop! 02:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Parents for the Online Safety of Children pt. 2

Do you have a link for this organization? --Gbleem 19:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

  • "POSC" is a fictitous organization and brainchild of Greg Lloyd Smith. The original press release can be found here: Though it's dated later than the PJ posting, notice that the listing on PJ has no newswire accredidation while the latter posting on officialwire.com (also run by Greg Lloyd Smith) self-credits the same posting. Also see the contrib history of Baoutrust for further exploits of GLS. CrazyLittle 07:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Added fifth question to your RfB

Please look at your RfB and respond to the question I've added about IRC et al. This is very important to me and I'll await your response. Kind regards, Cecropia 16:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. I'm satisfied. I think we should add that question to RfB, although it wouldn't get used very often. -- Cecropia 16:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Your letter

I hereby give you a curious looking red star for your userpage, for dealing with those Perverted Justice people and getting them to publish your letter clearing up the facts. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

metatalk

Left you a note on meta :) +sj + 17:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I was looking over your contribs...

Question about this. Why did you mark this POV, but then not follow up on the talk page? Why couldn't you just NPOV it yourself? You can answer here, I'll keep an eye out. Thanks. --LV 19:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, yes. I actually think I got sidetracked when that happened, and I never got around to following up on that. That was a mistake on my part.

Also, your user page says "I do have intentions of running for bureaucrat again, but that won't be until March 2006." Why the change of heart? --LV 19:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know. I figure now is as good a time as any, and besides... it would be a nice early Christmas present if this RfB is successful. Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 21:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi

Hey don't take the RFB comment to heart. I vote oppose on practically all admins. I know that the policy is that "becoming an admin should be no big deal" but in my opinion it is a big deal. If for no other reason than it is virtually impossible to ever be removed. I vote keep on articles if I can find any reason for it to be kept, and oppose on admins if there is any reason to.

As for Brandt, I think he's a great guy. While he is obviously a bit paranoid and way too conspiracy-theory like for me, his heart is in the right place, and he's out there to help all of us. I don't for a moment think that Google is evil, and when I saw his stuff about it, I was left scratching my head about it. Like so what if they scrape? Yes he's right, but I mean like why does that affect me? Same with most of the stuff he writes. He seems to be over-dramatising stuff that's not really relevant. I wrote to him a few times back in 2002 about it, and he never really gave me an explanation. He kept going on about Big Brother and the CIA and stuff. Yes, okay so Google is government sponsored and probably is CIA sponsored. But like huh?

But the thing is that, whacko or not, his heart is in the right place. He is really out there to help each and every one of us. He writes a lot of good stuff, and he tries to help out every single person on this earth. One of the really great things that he does is with privacy. And it really sickened me to think that Misplaced Pages had portrayed him as a privacy invader. Even if you think that he might have inadvertedly done that, that was certainly not his aim. He was out there to protect privacy.

The guy is a bit hard to take, and I suppose that if you're not an activist yourself, then you probably don't understand where he is coming from. It's about people who are trying to help each and every one of us. People who are trying to make the world a better place. And when you're trying to do that, it doesn't matter what the results are. Its the aim that is important. Yes, he stuffs up. Yes, the whole thing about Google is totally over the top and unnecessary. But I support namebase and Scroogle, and what he's written on Misplaced Pages Watch has been really helpful. If only Wikipedians realised that he's actually helping Misplaced Pages. He saved Misplaced Pages with the Seigenthaler issue, and it will be because of him that Misplaced Pages gets out of this. If you think it was all a selfish publicity stunt, then you don't know him.

His article is very biased, and quite inaccurate in a lot of places, where it states POV as fact, over such things as why Google Watch was started. It wasn't started because of his page rank. He started it because his web site was listed on Google without his permission. He started it to protest against privacy invasions. That's what he used to say back at LiveJournal in 2002. And he was involved in a number of law suits with Google, which worked in his favour, yet there is no mention of them. That was when he got famous, over the law suits. Although I didn't know his name back then. He was just the Scroogle guy. Pretty sure its the same guy.

But really, when you're dealing with people like that, who are out there to help others, the best way to deal with them is to get them on side. Write to them so that you agree with them in principle, but disagree over a few points. That's what I've always done in dealing with him, and with other people like that. Then you would find that he would support you in all things.

I've seen what you've written about him, and its horrible. And I don't know why you wrote me your name or something, perhaps expecting me to tell you mine? I don't know. There's an article about both of my grandparents in here, who are both famous activists, both with their own Misplaced Pages entries. Of course, none of the rest of our family were. Just those two. The most I've done is written a letter to Paul Keating to petition for him to give me more Austudy. It was a purely selfish act, but 2 weeks afterwards, they changed the policy so that everyone got what I had asked. That's really pretty much my greatest achievement, other than helping out the odd person with legal cases etc. But I am happy not to be famous. I believe in baby steps. Incrementalism I think is the word. We can achieve great things through little steps.

Anyway, I think that you should write to Daniel Brandt and try to make peace with him. He probably won't answer, so maybe just demonstrate that you're nice and stuff. You catch more flies with honey.

By the way, what was that extra bit you wrote besides Linuxbreak? I was a bit confused on that. Do you have 2 accounts? Is that the name of your secret 2nd account? Both links took me here though. I guess its an in joke. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 19:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No, he didn't publish your address. And what he says about you is not defamatory. If you think that it is, then you should sue him. There is nothing illegal about it. And it is far from hypocritical as a privacy activist to display names like that. I could go over why, but its too tiring, and its pointless due to your personal bias. There is no way that I will change my vote unless you apologise to Brandt and sort things out with him. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 04:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

RfC for User:Braaad

Linuxbeak, could you look over the RfC for Braaad, maybe put your two cents in and sign it if you feel like it? Grant 21:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Two more votes!

Looks like Alkivar and I just voted for you at the same time. THANK YOU once again for all your help! - Lucky 6.9 23:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Pedophilia

You placed the {{npov}} tag on the pedophilia article, but you have not commented on just what exactly is biased. Could you elaborate a little so it can be fixed? 24.224.153.40 02:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I admit it

Ok, I know better than to edit other people's comments, but I couldnt help myself. I saw your Rfb and thought it was very well written and well thought out. It also had a silly typo in it that drove me nuts. So I fixed it (you used "rational" instead of "rationale"). If you're really mad feel free to change it back and change my user name to something really mean once you get your new bureaucrat powers ;) -Lanoitarus .:. 03:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Wow, did not realize I could vote, for some reason I had the rather un-wiki notion that only admins could vote for bureaucrats. Best of luck to you! -Lanoitarus .:. 03:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

The Black List

As you are aware, we are all listed on the Black List. Do you think that everyone who is listed on that list should be informed (in case they don't know) so that they can avoid giving out personal information? In fact, I find it most disturbing that he has taken my (and probable everyone else's) quotes out of context - elsewhere in the same comments, I am praising him for finding out who wrote that stuff about Seigenthaler. BTW what's he got against Gmail? I have one of their accounts. Izehar (talk) 18:21, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Brandt

Linuxbeak, I know you mean well over the Brandt issue but you have unprotected an article you've recently edited and may edit again in the near future. Please decide whether you're involved in this as an editor or as an admin, and let me know. I'm probably going to protect it again, though I want to check the history first. I think everyone needs to calm down before deciding how to proceed. SlimVirgin 06:00, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I kept a very open mind and went to Mr Brandt's page before I read the Misplaced Pages talk pages. Linuxbeak, you are the bigger man. If you're like this at 18, then our future, when guys like you hit 30, is in good hands. Stombs 12:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I admit I was a bit surprised that you'd done this. I guess it is good in theory, but that wasn't what I was asking. Yes, he should be unbanned, and yes he should be able to input in to his own article (or at least be able to write on talk to advise people as to its contents). For one thing, I would dearly love for him to tell us why he started Google Watch. I can remember why he did, because he used to have it on his site, but I can't for the life of me find it anywhere. I know its definitely not because he was worried that his page wasn't popular enough - there's no way that a privacy activist would want to be popular. I'd also love him to show us details of his legal dealings with Google, as I couldn't find them either. His being able to contribute would help that a bit.

But at the same time, we must respect the community decision. After much discussion, the Brandt article was starting to come along well, and we were reaching a kind of agreement about it. As at when you moved it, I for one thought that the article was wonderful. Incomplete, due to Brandt not having his input, but accurate and neutral for what it had included. It took one hell of a lot of effort to get it to that stage. Not only were we having people with competing POVs, and a lot of POV pushers, but we also had vandals (including GNAA) who regularly wrote pro-Brandt and anti-Brandt (seemed to be about 50/50 each way) with up to 50 vandalisms per day to the article - one of the most vandalised pages on Misplaced Pages. The GNAA one from yesterday was one of the worst ones, as they used some kind of script to post hundreds of photos of penises on the page without actually editing it. I couldn't get rid of them either.

I have thought it through, and really, he's not notable for namebase. He's notable for Google Watch. And that's the issue. If Misplaced Pages Watch is suitably notable, then, as creator of 2 notable articles, Daniel Brandt should stay. However, if Misplaced Pages Watch is not notable, then all info about him should be a small stub in the Google Watch article. Whilst Scroogle is notable too, that's really the same as Google Watch - its just Google Watch's search engine. Its like if he wrote a Privatepedia as a private version of Misplaced Pages, then it's really just an extension of Misplaced Pages Watch.

Whilst I can understand your intentions, I think it was too much and probably created more problems than it solved. But I am not sure. It was good though as it gives hope to sort things out.

One thing though - one of the fellow admins did a Denial of Service attack on Misplaced Pages Watch. I'm asking for confirmation. If he did, I think he should be stripped of adminship and banned. Similarly, there was a "hoaxer" that attacked him, who also should be banned. Such people hurt Misplaced Pages a lot more than a critic like Brandt. Brandt actually helps Misplaced Pages by pointing out its problems. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 13:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

RfC on Page Protection policy

FYI since you were mentioned in this dispute . I filed an RfC regarding SlimVirgin's use of Page Protection here and other disputes given accusations of it being violated. Your input is much appreciated. Rangerdude 22:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Brandt/RfB

I really appreciate that you took my comment in opposition to your RfB so seriously. I hope your decisive and constructive steps to make peace with Daniel Brandt will bear fruit. Your actions are particularly impressive considering RfB was at something like 70-2 in your favor, so you hardly needed my vote to get approved, and now you're facing criticism from other quarters that you would otherwise not have experienced. Best wishes. --FRS 17:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Your input on AfD is requested

I have entered an AfD for the article Chair force. I feel this is an inherently POV article that is degrading to the United States Air Force and besides, there is already an entry in military slang for this topic. I would appreciate it if you would review the article, other comments and if you are so disposed, please add your opinion/comment. Thanks. --rogerd 19:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


Felix Navidad

Tony the Marine

O.K. Alex, so you don't believe in Santa, but I still want to wish you and your loved ones all the happiness in the world and the best new year ever. Your friend, Tony the Marine 04:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I'd like to thank you, first and foremost; if you're receiving this message, it's because I think you were one of the people I adopted as a personal mentor, and who helped to make the whole Misplaced Pages experience more enjoyable.

The fact is, I've got no choice but to leave. The recent sordid affair with User:Deeceevoice and my appalling conduct in that showed me that I have not the calibre required to maintain good relations with users on the wiki. Worse still, I violated almost all of the principles I swore to uphold when I first arrived.

I've now been desysopped, and I plan on devoting a little more time to what I am good at, which is developing. I don't fit in on this side of the servers, but perhaps I can still be of use to the project.

Thank you. Rob Church 20:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

About the "pedophilia" thing

I've been looking into this silly "wikipedophilia" thing today, and I haven't found very much. This lack of results is interesting in itself. The source of these charges comes from the press release from "Parents for the Online Safety of Children," a group allegedly founded in 1997 by “an organization of concerned citizens.” A Google search for the name of this group reveals absolutely no results whatsoever, except for several references to their press release attacking Misplaced Pages; apparently this organization has never had any mention in any Web site, news service, Usenet newsgroup, or any mention anywhere before now. The sudden appearance of this group and its claims of “pedophiles” on Misplaced Pages suggests two possibilities: 1) The press release may be fake, one of many Internet-based trolls; or 2) it is a result of the recent edit war at the pedophilia entry. --Modemac 21:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's something interesting: a blogger did some detective work and put two and two together to come up with a possible reason for the bogus "wiki pedophile" press release. It might (emphasis on might) be some petty revenge for the QuakeAID scandal early this year that was exposed to the public, thanks to Misplaced Pages! --Modemac 03:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

hi's.

thanks for the revert. I have already posted about this on FireFox's talk page. They first vandalised by talk page before moving to my user one, I reverted that one myself :)

User_talk:FireFox#YOU_are_being_impersonated_-_Please_read.

Do you have any suggestions on what I should do? I think it is User:Kiand but I have no way to check --Mistress Selina Kyle 22:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Assistance with arbitration

We've put in an arbitration that has been accepted The main users involved are

Additional suspected accounts, sock-puppets or cronies (primarily NLP talk page):

Since the arbitration began several new users have popped up with remarkably similar editing style and content POV:

Can you drop by our talk page Talk:Neuro-linguistic_programming and ask these everyone to calm down? I'd really appreciate it. AND if you are up for it we need some assistance in preparing evidence for arbitration so we can restore some civility on the article and talk page. --Comaze 00:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Stupid question, but

...would you please consider fiddling with your signature a bit? On my screen it looks rather like plaintext with a wikilink in the middle, which is mostly because it's the only sig I know that isn't cursive/bold/colored or anything. No big deal but I'd say there's no harm in asking. Yours, Radiant_>|< 01:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Plagarism

I award this Barnstar in appreciation of supplying software to make it easy for people to add comments to the end of wherever.

Supplied to you by User:AlMac| 10:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Your RFB

Early congratulations, Alex! NSLE (T+C+CVU) 01:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations indeed - I'm guessing you've set the RfB record! BDAbramson T 02:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congrats --Jaranda 02:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! --cesarb 02:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Well done, sir, you're a bureaucrat! And you've beaten me to it, as well :P Congrats! Andre (talk) 02:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me add my congratulations! Well earned and well done, best wishes! Rx StrangeLove 03:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations, Alex. You are now a member of the Heartless Bureaucracy®. Your special reward for this achievement is that it is rare enough that you're not getting a canned response. By now you should know what's entailed, but I will offer just a few points of simple advice:

  1. Do what you're supposed to do.
  2. Don't do what you're not supposed to do.
  3. Keep only your own counsel or that of other bureaucrats when a decision must be made.
  4. Ask another bureaucrat if you have any questions whatsoever.
  5. Before making a potentially controversial decision, ask yourself: "If this decision is criticized, do I know how I will respond?" And note that you may be questioned on decisions that appear obvious to almost anyone.
  6. Once you make a decision, you are like an umpire, never change it except under the most unusual circumstances, such as the revelation of an important compelling fact, such as that the "successful" candidate is a fugitive war criminal. Ignore this advice and your decisions will be constantly questioned.

Having said all that, enjoy having reached the pinnacle (*cough*) of unpaid English Misplaced Pages responsibility! :) -- Cheers, Cecropia 02:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

A bureaucrat noticeboard? I didn't know it existed so I can't say if it's active. -- Cecropia 02:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
It's rarely used. Mainly because it's so rare that there's a tough decision (and even rarer that the person who is faced with such a decision doesn't just make it). By the way, the above is very good advice. If we're seen as at all wishy-washy, everyone who fails an RfA will start second-guessing and asking others to intervene, and it will very quickly become a zoo. -- Pakaran 04:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congrats!

And you were all worried! 120-2 is pretty ringing. --Woohookitty 04:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Btw, looks like the last post to the BN is 12/15, so it's somewhat active. --Woohookitty 04:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! I'm proud to have been the very very first vote on your RfB, it's still funny to me how I just happened to notice you going by in the IRC bot's report, wandered over to vote, and was like..."Hey did y'all notice Linuxbeak's RfB just went up?" and the mad rush that followed that. Heh. Ëvilphoenix 05:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't remind me, I was supposed to get the first vote, and ended up getting a seven-time edit conflict. :P NSLE (T+C+CVU) 05:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Tee-hee. What's sad is how short term my memory is, I saw this and went "Hey, he's not supposed to do that, only Bureaucrats...can.......nevermind." Ëvilphoenix 05:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Barely a newly minted b-cat, and already screwing up :-)

Linuxbeak; a) congratulations on the overwhelming support for your bureaucratship. Well deserved! b) When making ILS approaches to RfAs, please remember to place the appropriate templates on the page when you reach the outer marker. These include {{rfap}} at the top of a page for successful RfAs, {{rfaf}} for unsuccessful, and {{rfab}} at the bottom of each RfA. rfaf applies whether "failed" or "no concensus". When you reach the middle marker, make sure you change "ending" to "ended". Whether you mark the end time as originally posted or when you actually ended it is, I think, up to you. There doesn't appear to be any policy on the point. When you reach the inner marker, stick your head between your knees, click "save page" and hope like hell you do it as nicely as the Midwest Air pilot did it tonight in Boston. :) (See , , ) All the best, --Durin 05:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

What happened in Boston? Ëvilphoenix 05:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
This, presumably. -- Pakaran 05:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Linuxbeak. Thanks for the note about my successful RfA, and also for your vote of support. I feel very honored, and promise to use my shiny new sysop powers judiciously and well. :) -GTBacchus 05:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Username change

Thanks for the help. Jamie 13:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Andy blocked from AN/I

Tony Sidaway prepared a central location for Pigsonthewings probation blocks— Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Probation. As your block is under the same provisions, you might want to update the page with the relevant info. —Locke Cole 13:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

User talk:Linuxbeak: Difference between revisions Add topic