User:The Cunctator/Bias Talk

1800:

many problems he causes, is superior to the way used by academics, political scientists, researchers, historians and people who do this sort of analysis for a living. His edits here are simply part of pushing an agenda. The fact that this page is organised in the standard manner of international research bugs him, because our infallible all knowing Cunctator knows that everyone else's way is wrong, the way by which one rights up research is all wrong, because he knows best. The fact that he has a poor grasp of the facts and a monumental ignorance of how academic research is done don't bug him because he knows best and the entire academic world is going to have to do things his 'superior' way.

71:. Are you out of your mind or can't you read ? I purposely erased the old content because new viewers really don't need to see the soap opera surrounding this topic(or any for the record I have contributed to, and seen you rub your vanilla icing over it and everyone dips in and says it tastes just right). Goldilocks, find another writer to imposes your standards on please ! I dread how you will trash an idea I have about writing an in-depth on the deceased "godfather of New Age" Carlos Castaneda. Perhaps you will get your rocks off like you do all over wiki by ruining each film you review. ~ 2049:

reverted, they instead moved the boilerplate to the bottom of the page -- leading to small edit war over the position of the notice. Another sysop stepped in a protected the page, however 12 hours later The Cunctator unprotected the page (something that only sysops can do) and restored their edit. The Cunctator seems to believe that the vfd page is irrelevant and that he is not bound by it, or the communities consensus, in any way by. Beyond that, I don't trust their judgement, and good judgement is why someone is supposed to become a sysop in the first place.

656:

and competitive if accountability/content neutrality is enforced at all levels; for example, the United States has the First Amendment, the Freedom of Information Act, separation of powers in the federal government, and dual sovereignty (federal and state), etc.; corporations have SEC filings, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, etc. Neither system is perfect, but the flaws usually come from failing to ensure accountability/competition/content neutrality, e.g. keeping secrets, introducing policies of bias, and punishing dissent.

196:, edited in just two instances by 203.109.250.xxx; FWIW, both of these people have been anonymous so far. The fact that it is written mainly by a partisan does not, of course, mean that it is necessarily a biased presentation of the issues. But please be aware that this (and no other page) represents an "official workshop" on the issues raised by the page. In particular, please be aware that these issues have been discussed publicly by many other people, and will continue to be discussed in the near future, on 1632:, yet in point of fact Fred Bauder failed to mention all of the flames that "Dietary Fiber" write about to me, Fred failed to mention the fact that Dietary Fiber is on some quest to attack my personal religious beliefs (which is blatantly inappropriate on Knowledge (XXG)); Fred "overlooked" the forged quote, and then Fred only quoted my response to the trolling...and then stated that _I_ should be put on some sort of watch. 88:

winning run goes to those "We who edit the most and delete most without end win". I really think you need to warn people who are simply embedded in their own scheme of how this pedia should look, and tell them to take a vacation. Would you mind reviewing this "C's" edit record and correlate how much irritation and even apathy this creates ? DO you want articles or do you want censorship ? Thanks. ~

1758:

yourself in the debate, being a further nuisance. I doubt that all of us could say anything else to convince you; you seem far too dense. So quit being so lazy and why don't you go through all our explanations and do some research to see if we're not all engaging in some kind of conspiracy and making these arguments up ourselves?

1985:

slightest attempt to achieve a consensus change. Sanctimonious? If you have a problem with the way I perform as an admin, I suggest you point it out; I have a definite problem with the way you have been performing lately as an admin, and I think you should resign. Frankly you're acting like a spoiled child. -

772:

course, remember that, if you say something that I think is wrong, then I'll explain my reasoning and change it back (probably to something that acknowledges your attitude). You might notice that I have already done this three or four times--changing the text to accommodate comments by various people.

2158:

Do you happen to support vandalism on wikipedia? It appers you oppose semi protection, ricks anti-vandalism barnstar as well as the counter vandalism unit. It sounds like you support vandalism. Are you sure you are worthy of admin tools (strictly judging from your incivil and rather annoying attitude

2101:

In my estimation, The Cunctator has not been using his administratorship well, so I support removing it. Most notably, he repeatedly unprotected a page where he was actively involved in an edit war and seems to have been the main instigator. 4 or 5 different sysops attempted to re-protect the page,

1695:

I was angered at Dietary Fiber for making certain remarks, especially the ones in which he/she attacked my religious beliefs, and made me out to be someone slandering all polytheists. (And I have never done this.) I was also bothered by Dietary Fiber's fake quotes (which my critics here are blatantly

1237:

For someone who says that "more effort should be put into building the cross-link capabilities" and "there should be the option of having Recent Changes show changes from any array of the languages", you're putting an awful lot of effort into stalling useful work to those ends by yakking on over this

830:

The above sort of comment, Cunctator, borders on libel (because not only is it false, it's outrageously false and completely insulting, and seems designed to damage my reputation). This frankly outrages me and wastes me time. I maintain that I am a very reasonable person. If you reasonably raise a

734:

engaging in innuendo, as you have been, Cunctator, then don't expect me or others to look kindly upon your attempts to define what the community is about. You seem to be hell bent on alienating yourself from nearly everyone. If you don't play nice, other people aren't going to want to play with you.

733:

instant policy, because it's obviously a good idea and people instantly get behind it. Sometimes, not. When in doubt, use Meta-Knowledge (XXG). If you're bold enough to think something you've written should be instant policy, try it out. But if you make a habit of constantly insulting people, and

2056:

I support this request. It is worth pointing out also that when questions were raised about The Cunctator's behavior in the edit war, the main reasoning behind his remarks in his own defense were along the lines that different rules should apply to administrators than apply to other users. This is

491:

and they said that's what people were doing these days. I had to make a special trip to Sweden to do this; I got to meet the donor, who didn't seem very funny, just odd. (He said things like "I wish I could afford to wear your clothes," but I was just wearing my acid-washed, elastic-waist-band jeans

2612:

Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a WP:OFFICE tag is a really really

2526:

you find to be uncivil. It says "Try and discourage others from being incivil, and be careful to avoid offending people unintentionally." It's hard to say that this editor's opinion is negatively affecting the editing of articles. WP:CIVIL offers a number of different ways to discourage incivility,

1799:

Re The Cunctator: on a talk page tonight he let slip his real reason for his behaviour. It isn't this page at all. He refuses to accept the manner in which political scientists analyse questions. With monumental arrogance, he believes that his way of throw everything into one article, no matter how

1439:

Cunctator, it seems to me that you don't care that you have alienated, put off, not just Toby and Gareth but a large number of people on the project. This is upsetting people on the list, and for good humor among these key project participants, I'd like to ask you publicly to *start* caring, and to

1098:

We have run into at least one character similar to 24 in the past - Cunctator. (Although 24 seems worse). That is - a person who is clearly quite intelligent, capable of making very worthwhile contributions at times, but frequently unable to distinguish between the encyclopedia agenda and their

655:

Centralized structures scale with difficulty; the only way we humans have found to do that is to increase the amount of regulation in the system, by making new rules and conventions and more strictly enforcing such rules. We've also found that such centralized systems can remain flexible, adaptive,

623:

To be fair to myself, what Cunctator failed to mention was that I then went on to define this "central authority structure" as consisting of the core body of regular Wikipedians, and specifically not as being any individual. It is quoted out of context here, and is a gross distortion of my original

470:

Manning: I tried to exercise "editorial authority" by starting pages, intended as neutral, community-determined entries, on page deletion policy, what Knowledge (XXG) considers vandalism, and how Knowledge (XXG) uses the GFDL. LMS deleted or discouraged all of those entries. It is simply false that

105:

in the Knowledge (XXG). Others like Taw want to say "New Age is a load of nonsense" - that won't stand either. I have had my own disagreements with Cunctator, but on the whole I feel no reason to distrust his ethics or disrespect his judgement. You are taking his actions personally, and there is no

1703:

Hey, maybe we should edit some Knowledge (XXG) articles today! We can forge a quote from Cunctator, questions his religious beliefs, and attack positions he does not have! We can also do the same thing to Fred Bauder! And then when they complain, we can insult them, and deny that these attacks

1204:

I ain't heard nobody but Cunc object so far, and he doesn't say why. I await the reasons with bated breath, if he's got something better than "the English Knowledge (XXG) needs a large pool of people working on it to achieve neutrality and perspective, but I apparently don't give a rat's ass about

2048:

page, after the page had been deleted after the normal vfd procedure, and undeletion talk favored keeping the page deleted. Then they decide, unilaterally again, that a certain page listed on vfd shouldn't be deleted and proceeded to remove the vfd boilerplate from that page. When this change was

1984:

were done, and one party to the edit war had the integrity to stop and assess what they were doing. The other one (you) didn't; moreover, the entire premise of your edits is a unilateral attempt to change the guidelines of where a VfD notice should be posted, without discussion, without even the

1000:

not by playing these sort of games. If you can't let it drop, let's talk about it. Your edits, such as putting the pages of yours that I deleted on the "page titles which have been deleted" page, indicate that you are deeply disturbed about how I have treated you. Let's get it out in the open,

771:

No, I think that you would have edited the entry mercilessly if I had not signed it. And, I signed this page in particular because I found myself referring to myself, and felt too lazy to change it entirely to the third person. So, why don't I do that, and then you can feel free to edit it. Of

54:

is totally changed like Reader's Digest condensed books, I'm getting a fresh look at the effects of the scalpel in wiki surgery. Right now, I like it ! Mainly I appreciate the cleanup because of a fundamental New Age concept, which insists that the Truth is always simple. Why would the Truth

26:

I'd fix if it were worth fixing, C....But as far as I can tell even the title of the page is objectionable. "Silent Ethnic Cleansing" appears to be the cant of various extremist groups. Even disallowing deletion on the grounds of moral objection, erasure is still justified on the basis of NPOV --

2180:

I ask you kindly not to put back the aggressive and attacking userbox you had. I took the liberty of removing it. It doesn't promote good feelings among wikipedians (which is also your main problem about the CVU, isn't it?). It's divisive and unnecesarily insulting. Please do not put it back. --

1151:

I think you are alone in that response, Cunc. The rest of us are willing to put a little faith in the other sysops that when they delete a page, it really deserved it, and there's no use agonizing over what might have been. I don't want sysops burdened with having to explain themselves all the

2116:

It's not really about punishing TC. At least, I don't see it that way. It's just that TC has illustrated particularly poor judgement as a sysop. He could be a nice guy and a great contributor and a boon to the community, but I've opposed nice guys, great contributors, and boons to the community

1757:

I know that it's rude. So is trying to insert your POV after JTD, Tannin, Tarquin, other users, and I have probably written well over a hundred pages on this page, user pages, and the mailing lists explaining why these poorly written paragraphs don't belong here. And here you come, interjecting

956:

Now, given that you've said you're going to stop pushing my buttons, why did you add the above comment to this page? It seems mainly a way to push my buttons. If not, what is the purpose of this page, Cunctator? The natural interpretation is that you want this to be a sort of "Hall of Shame"

777:

I am not going to keep up this replying to you; I'm going to go back to ignoring you, Cunctator, unless you start treating me and others with respect. You probably think that you have been, but you haven't. I don't think you're capable of that, actually, because I think you don't yet, in your

87:

Larry I am sorry to be argumentative, but I have seen a person whom you apparently appreciate here as an unofficial editor(whose name begins with a C) edit every page I worked hours on, and then when this un-named "C" finishes, everyone's happy ! Why is this a collaborative effort when the

2027:

But that misses the point, Mark. :-) The independent republic of TC operates under different rules to wikipedia. You can't expect Cunc to actually /obey/ the wishes of everyone else, now, can you? When tc visits a page, /his/ own rules are all that matter, as he has shown most recently by

1182:

Cunctator, I think it has been discussed enough. This is not an encyclopedia article. Period. It may be the most popular page in the web, but I don't care. We are building an encyclopedia here and this doesn't belong here. If we want popular pages, we should stop this project and start a porno

43:

after I changed the rule (as you'll see if you look at the page): "Counter-argument: This is inanity. Is the rule really 'Check your alleged facts'?" I thought it was a matter of common sense that needed to be stated (since people do tend to believe whatever seems to pop into their heads on a

2593:

That's the Cunctator approach in a single sentence. Anything said by anyone with any positive reputation, or, God forbid, actual authority, is prima facia wrong, regardless of content. If it were said by someone else, it might not be, but if Jimbo says it, it is to be dismissed out of hand.

1408:

Anyway, I didn't support the statement, because it was based directly on the content that I provided. And it's a subjective judgement, I can't argue for it rationally. (Also, I doubt that they would want to read such an argument.) Let each person that read that context make up their own mind.

492:

and "98 Degrees World Tour" t-shirt--it's not like they were expensive! Weird.) The doctors said the transplant was a success, even though once I got back home people have accused me of not having a sense of humor. I'm starting to suspect they bilked me. This is the last time I trust Swedes.

95:

BF - appeals to Larry may get you nowhere. The general pattern of article evolution at Knowledge (XXG) is that the majority rules. Yes this leads to a whitebread consensus on a lot of things, but the alternative is worse. I have been involved in the issues around New Age, and I fully support

2093:

sysop powers to unprotect a page so that he could, not for the first time, ignore everyone else, was abuse of his powers. On its own it was highly questionable, but given it was not the first, or the second, or the third, time he acted in gross breach of consensus, I think there is no other

429:

page, or in insisting that it belongs here on the main wiki? Look, anybody could have created this page. (I would have joined happily.) And I would have strongly insisted that it stay here, because it's a great page that organizes the community. The suggestion that my actions and rules are

154:

be a little less abrasive? You know, your attitude doesn't win you any points or make your arguments any more persuasive. It just makes you look like a jerk, and alienates you from just about everyone. Or maybe you just don't care about that. There is nothing at all wrong with renaming

807:

bad idea, nay, a breathtakingly idiotic idea: constantly shooting yourself in the foot by constantly using inflammatory language, such as "fear-based," above, instead of trying to engage people with whom you disagree in polite, reasoned dialogue. The Knowledge (XXG) Militia notion isn't

1128:

I deleted the "September 11, 2201 Terrorist Attack/World economic effects" page. It had an history of one line, "script conversion", and its content was "This page doesn't exist anymore" or something like that (you can see the log). Why can that be needed? Even if we want the article,

1286:

Cool! a page of all of the insults that The Cunctator's been given. For the record, the above wasn't meant to be an insult itself, only a reference to the fact (widely accepted, even by himself) that he is disliked by several people. (And we've already talked about the below.) —

2068:

accede to the policies formed in consensus which even non-sysops have an equal input, or in the contrary case act consistently to change the policy, but remain within the policy while the change is being debated. This is just my view. Others may legitimately disagree. --

1743:

THIS IS NOT AN ARTICLE ON THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC THEORY OF MARXISM-LENINISM. THIS IS AN ARTICLE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATE STRUCTURE OF A COMMUNIST STATE!!!!!! READ THE ARCHIVED PAGES SO THAT I DON'T HAVE TO REPEAT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

1404:

I like how you copied down even the word "such". It contributes to the impression that you're a bot. (Eliza would have copied down the word "such" just like that. Actually, Eliza would have refused to talk about herself, but switch pronouns and then it works.)

824:

whenever the time comes to make sure that a huge crop of misguided new people do not ruin Knowledge (XXG)--as they could. Most people who arrive "get it." There is always a minority who don't, and they need teaching and dissuading from doing really damaging

1276:

And other people here will leave if decisions are never made. Let me make a request now for people to say so if they would leave if TC were really able to veto every decision ever made about Knowledge (XXG). I'll bet that this request gets a response ^_^.

466:

And everyone doesn't like the National Guard. A lot of people don't like the existence of a standing federal army...they actually usually prefer militias. And people didn't much like the National Guard when they killed college students in the '60s.

1102:

The solution to 24 is probably the same as with Cunctator - the silent ignore and passive editing approach. Maveric has tried to reason with 24 repeatedly, but when reason is clearly failing there is nothing else to do but protect the project.

719:

Of course it's the fact that I started the Guard that got your goat. After all, you have just been talking as if I've been abusing my power! If the fact that I did it were only an ancillary issue, then why bring all that up and dwell on it so

387:

You wonder why people get angry with you, and think they "hate" you, and then you continue to let this page exist. If you want people to treat you with respect, you have to treat them with respect. You still haven't learned that, Cunctator.

724:

If someone else had presented the idea, I would have thought the same thing. The only difference is that his ideas are official policy once they're written, whereas other's ideas (e.g. mine; say "Project Sourceberg") aren't. And that's fine.

1888:

That's quite uncalled for, and I'm getting very tired of your relentless sniping on this list. If you had bothered to THINK about it for a momemt, you might have realised that the three people named were named for a good and obvious reason:

2375:

I think it is in poor taste. It isn't technically a userbox, since it's just raw text in his page, as opposed something in the template namespace. That doesn't make in any less bad taste, but it changes the social tenor of the problem a

1412:

Of course, if your subjective judgement is different from mine, then how can I expect you to answer my question? But I don't expect that at all; it was a rhetorical question. No response is required of you (the less the better, in fact).

2082:

He should receive a specific warning before any further action his taken. His actions, while inappropriate, were not substantially so. Other sysops have made more serious violations, and no action has been taken whatsoever against them.

170:

Cunctator, I have a public request of you. Would you please stop writing about the license issue on the wiki, so that we can focus the debate in one place, namely the mailing list? They will receive more than a fair hearing there.

2415:. The fact that one dislike some wikipedians does not justify namecalling. Requesting politely to stop has been fruitless, so I'm requesting help on enforcing policy and guidance for further channels of action if this continues. -- 1976:

My definition of an edit war is a process of reverting and re-reverting a single article, scrolling recent changes, disrupting the Knowledge (XXG), usually over some petty difference. What happened yesterday fits that description.

125:

How freaking rude and arrogant it is of LMS to remove pro-subpage arguments from the list. If he doesn't understand them, he should discuss them here. --TheCunctator (with the summary: "Removing pro-subpage arguments is weaselly at

1866:

I'm just hoping Knowledge (XXG) doesn't significantly factionalize--or rather, stays in factions of one. I'm mildly disturbed by the way 172 invite particular people to work on an entry ("Wanted: Tannin, Sluberstien, and Jtdirl")

1753:

As I said before, your shouting is rude. You also have a deep misunderstanding of Wikipetiquette, Knowledge (XXG):Policies and guidelines, and Jimbo's role. I hope you will consider improving your understanding. --The Cunctator

2102:

but The Cunctator repeatedly unprotected it. This is way over the line. I am concerned that sysops who abuse of their status can cause more harm to Knowledge (XXG) than users, drive more people away, waste more time, etc.

984:

on (he says, and I suppose it's true) Nov. 3. Among these pages was--he invites you to consider the delicious irony--"Page titles which have been deleted". I do not actually find that ironic at all. I find this to be a

1699:

Yet Cunctator ignored those particular remarks, and implied that they didn't even exist. When Cunctator did make some brief quotes, he left the particular quotes in question out! A lie by omission is a lie nonetheless.

2077:

Out of curiosity, where is that proposition that sysops and non sysops should follow different rules Cimon ? What does it consist in ? Is it just in a talk page or is there a meta page mentionning it ?

1140:(in me) since I didn't know why the page was deleted. This page's history should be restored (go Brion Vibber!) so we can find out what happened to the article. It's definitely a worthy topic, in any case... 2432:

Yeah that subst template meets the new CSD T1 requirements by Jimbo. It is nonsense and should be removed on sight. People who put that kind of stuff up should be warned and blocked if they revert war.

101:

The present New Age article is fair, unbiased and neither disrespectful nor laudatory. I think your problem is that you want the world to know that "New Age is a wonderful thing". Fine, say that, but

2089:

I think The Cunctator's behaviour over a long period has been way beyond what is acceptable for a sysop (his antics on ignoring the consensus on the redesigned front page was just one example). But

1782:

I will ignore the arrogant and illinformed misrepresentation of political theory and science. As someone knowledgeable in the area you know the facts. The Cunctator patently obviously doesn't. --

1950:

when it was your own edits that led to it being protected in the first place. I have replaced the protection. Please respect this rather than abusing your sysop ability to unprotect the page.

276:

I think this suggestion is far more trouble than it's worth. If we screw up too badly, there's all sorts of things people can do to raise hell. Just act like TheCunctator, for instance. --

1747:

ALSO, SITE OWNER JIMBO WALES AGREES THAT FRED'S CONTENT DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS ARTICLE (SEE THE MAILING LIST), SO YOUR EFFORTS TO INSERT FRED'S (PERHAPS YOUR) POV COULD GET YOU BANNED. --

1539:

I'd love to turn this mailing list into a debate forum, and I consider it an honor to have attracted the attention of such an awesome exponent of personal liberty as the Cunctator.

861:

I thought it was intended as the polar opposite of 'dictator' given his often-voiced complaints against excessive use of authority here on wikipedia, sort of a wry pun on "dick"? --

1579:

Oh, dry up. You always say this or that doesn't belong on the mailing list, and then you turn around and say that we *didn't discuss* things enough, like the slogan naming policy.

1008:

listed a number of pages that I deleted. It was, along with his "reasons for deletion" page and his additions to the "vandalism" pages, essentially a way for him to point out the

1313:

I never wanted to use my block function, but I did. 66.57.25.123 just vandalized an article and posted a threat. Was that the correct response, or should that user be unblocked.

1079:

Re a recent user's subpage deletion by yours truly (it was a catalog of quotations by me that were critical of him): ahh, that was enormously satisfying. :-) --Larry_Sanger

405:

At the risk of, well, wasting our time and dragging this out, I'm going to reply to The Cunctator. I apologize in advance to those of you who think this is a bad move. :-) --

1961:

and I don't want to get into some ridiculous protect/unprotect war. Can you please just discuss the issues you have with it on the talk page instead of trying to abuse position.

2394: 1110:" in operation at the Knowledge (XXG). However, rather than being some secretive and exclusive operation, it is a freely admissive assembly: Live by the rules and you're in. 2566:

Yes...we should delete it. Let us not allow an "anything goes", "tolerate whatever the hell anyone says no matter what" "lassiaz-fair" policy. Now that is against common sense.

667:

by constantly trying to undermine what little legitimate authority I claim to myself. Well, that's just ridiculous. That's not how to do it. You're preaching to the choir!

589:

a lot of people who care a lot about it and who are willing to come help make sure the new people are gently brought into the fold--the same people who have joined the Guard.

659:

Thus, in short, I have two motivations: 1) promote a distributed trust/responsibility model (which scales well) as opposed to a centralized authority model (which doesn't)

1646:

It is not standard Knowledge (XXG) policy to move discussion from entry pages to user pages; it's not necessarily wrong to do so, but in the case of the text RK moved (

1669:

which certainly seems to be a fair paraphrase--though the quotes shouldn't have been there. Then the discussion went southward. But RK certainly threw the first punch.

1643:

Oh, please. Fred quoted actual material, while RK characterizes other people's comments as "personal attacks", "flames", and "trolling", without making direct quotes.

691:, then I would can it. But it seems to have gotten quite a bit of popular support--which is totally unsurprising to me, because I know the Knowledge (XXG) community! 1911:

Please quit unilaterally deleting items from the Votes for Deletion page without discussion. Why am I under attack for my actions, but you think yours is fine? --

739:

In the case of "Project Sourceberg," it was a not-particularly-popular idea that had more or less already been started, by Bryce (another person who is not me), on

2449:

It's not really a template, but a modification on a substed template. So there's nothign to speedy, nonetheless, it's a very incivil and inflammatory userbox --

1057:

I agree. I think that the Cunctator is one person you have to watch like a hawk, however, and he of all people has no moral right to say what he is saying here.

419:

Don't tell people to calm down. It is a way of saying, "I'm calm and reasonable, and you're not," when in fact you almost certainly aren't either, he probably is.

611:

the amount of authority I have here. This is in part because I can't be everywhere at once, and in part because there are many more voices (including many more

230: 132: 227: 214: 1657:

This article then points out that this view is not accepted by many liberal Chrisitans and Jews, is not accepted by modern historical studies of religion.

1820:

I think it's hightime that the Cunctator, Fred Bauder, and slr all be banned. It's clear that they didn't get understand the Lir and Clutch incidents. --

755:

But it does mean that his actions, with respect to the future and nature of Knowledge (XXG), are of an entirely different nature from everyone else's.

286: 268: 831:

point, I will reasonably respond. If you accuse me of "fear mongering" and "a bunker mentality" such that "a red flag should be going up," as you are

1635:

I am saddened by his behaviour. If Fred Bauder cannot control himself, let him go elsewhere until he calms down. Some of us have serious work to do.

535:! Jaysus, what possible grounds do you have, in your experience with Knowledge (XXG), to think this? And on the other hand, isn't Knowledge (XXG) 1672:

In other words, RK is unjustifiably, and viciously, attacking first Dietary Fiber, and now Fred Bauder. I'm appalled, and saddened. And appalled.

672:

and 2) promote accountability mechanisms. I think that LMS would best show leadership by doing these things too; he's choosing a different model.

335:

Restoring old version. The point was a generalization, which holds perfectly true and which is important to note. Cunctator, let the issue rest.--

1051:

Which really means that its important for all of us, every contributor, to feel vested with responsibility. We are all responsible for oversight.

2028:

unprotecting a protected page so that he can get his own way. Knowledge (XXG) rules like on protecting pages don't apply in tc-land. :-)

763:

a paid project organizer. I think it's my job to formulate Knowledge (XXG) policy, finding consensus when I can, and presenting things fairly.

302:, misattributions and misunderstandings, and other problems. Correcting all this is precisely the sort of thing that I don't have time for. -- 255: 820:

a lighthearted way (until you came along and spun it in a way that made me look as bad as possible), to get people turned on to the idea of

767:

If it were anyone else, I would have just edited the entry mercilessly, instead of commenting on it. Please understand this. --TheCunctator

475:

That is not only false (I didn't delete or discourage all of the entries!), as you well know, it is a complete distortion of the situation.

372: 1174: 40: 1898:

can also be presumed to have formal qualifications in the field (doubtless higher ones than mine) as he too teaches it at tertiary level

786:

that the above reply will have helped you to understand just how and why this sort of things that you write is completely outrageous. --

2480:

Yes, that's not the problem though. Anyone is entitled to disagree or dislike. It's the uncivil namecallign that it's uncalled for. --

2345: 2305: 2034: 1426:

Y'know what? I was just about to ask if Cunctator was a Turing device. His responses sound just like a bot parroting back questions.

552:

The characterization of high traffic as an "invasion", a "major disaster", "war", etc. that "old hands" have to combat is detrimental.

63:

article once everyone seemed to be happy with you over-write. Now you aren't satisfied with winning, and you need to put the deleted

1152:

time, or having to put to vote the simple deletion of complete nonsense. We have work to do here. Just do it, and don't look back.

440:

Cunctator, you could save yourself and us a lot of grief if you would just stop trying to act as a check on my rampant authority. --

363: 1665:

You indicated that idolatry has a non-religious meaning by referring to a "liberal/scholary" view; as opposed to a religious view.

2365:

Are attack userboxes ok? Since a former arbitrator is using them, I think you would want to know and perhaps voice an opinion. --

949:

Cunctator, why do you have to make an issue of virtually every time I have exerted any significant amount of authority at all? --

142: 117: 1920: 1707:

Or we can cut the crap and learn to act like adults. Some of us are here to do some serious work on this encyclopedia project.

957:

primarily for me. Is that correct? Or will you cleverly explain it some other way? I can't wait to hear your explanation. --

2064:

I cannot honestly oppose this request. In my view he is a valuable contributor. But we should be able to require that sysops,

915: 888: 599:

When Knowledge (XXG) started, people wouldn't assert, as Manning has now done, that there's a "central authority structure".

181: 2109:

I find TC evasive, oblique, condescending and instigative on many issues, something I do not find ideal sysop qualities. --

544:

Part of the joke that you didn't get is that we're pretending we're being "invaded" and as if that were a bad thing. If we

499:

I'm going to go through this with a fine-toothed comb, Cunctator, to let you understand exactly how I react to your screeds.

548:

that, then of course we'd be stanching creativity and communication. But since we (except you, it seems) don't, we're not.

238: 1562:

Cunctator has already stated previously that he does not believe in consensus, and will do whatever he damn well pleases.

1041:

But for now, there's no pressing need unless and until we find chaos descending on us from the lack of constant oversight.

635:

I think that's too bad--since I believe that there are alternate organizational/societal models which would be successful

155:"/Evaluation" as "flaws" because at present the page focuses on pointing out the flaws in the pro-subpage arguments. --LMS 527:

which will encourage the type of communal behavior which usually leads to the stanching of creativity and communication.

162: 258:

that goes to what I see as being the heart of the matter behind Cunctator's repeated disruptions of Knowledge (XXG). -

450: 397: 572:. You ignored that explanation, as if I had not written it. In doing so, you insult me, and I indeed feel insulted. 973: 2649:

SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!! As if answering to your pet peeves would solve all problems in the fucking Knowledge (XXG)!!!

748: 295: 1327:

And why, if you have questions about whether you did the right thing, did you do it before checking with others?

1324:

I'm confused. If you never wanted to use your block function, then why did you? Admit that you wanted to use it.

426: 2117:— when I didn't think they would be good sysops based on how they interact during the editing process. -- 1582:

I don't mind your being curmudgeon -- we need at least one! -- but would you please do it in a consistent way?

1177:

8:14 Sep 25, 2002 in response to my request to work on a way of dealing with the page acceptable to all parties

1143:

Thanks for the explanation. There should be a better mechanism for explaining why a page like that is deleted.

688: 569: 1868: 687:

this totally ridiculous insinuation that I am not fully accountable. If there were widespread objections to

2560: 2267: 2263:

under any circumstances on Knowledge (XXG), and may result in blocking if they are persistent. Thank you. --

2229: 1971: 1775:

The Cunctator turned up at the end, ignored all that had been said and all that has been agreed and demands

1221: 1146: 942: 924: 897: 871: 849: 81: 1936:

Oh, Alex, you're making it too complex; stop thinking like a lawyer. And, Cunc, stop being a dick ;-)

1391:

Now, now. Cunctator, Toby. Both of you have used the word "asshole". You're even now, so cut the crap.

1704:

against them even exist! Hurrah! How wonderfully fun it would be to join in with this type of trolling!

1158: 966: 905:

Don't delete part of what I wrote, Cunctator. I INTENDED to give you a back-handed compliment! :-) --

2159:

here at wikipedia and on the mailing list). I DOnt believe if you had an RfA now it would have passed. --

1502: 577:

Are you starting to understand why your screeds are so frustrating to read and respond to now, Cunctator?

312: 75:

I swear to god you better be paying Larry Sanger to allow your intellectual property rapes to continue.

2503:

I didn't claim it was a personal attack. I claim it's uncivil and therefore against official policy. --

2279: 1596:

Since Cunctator will do whatever he damn well pleases, what's the point of discussing anything here? --

1471: 1351:

And why, Cunctator, if you're such an asshole, do you continue to infect the world with your existence?

1228: 1213: 1197: 1092: 992:

This pointless game-playing, Cunctator, has to stop. It obviously doesn't help the project. Don't you

2628:

Because he wants to see if you really will oppose or challenge absolutely anything anyone does, ever.

2557: 2264: 1525: 1298: 1269: 1249: 1116: 1085: 1028: 294:

I started to reply to this, but halfway through realized that it was pretty self-evidently a series of

197: 2530:

Do not answer offensive comments. Forget about them. Forgive the editor. Do not escalate the conflict.

2474: 201: 2497: 1813: 1792: 1736: 523:

wrong with the presentation, and you've given no reason to think that there's anything wrong with it.

68: 1892:

I have a degree in that field and (before I went into business) used to teach it at tertiary level.

1647: 1132:

a link with a ? is more useful than that "article". Should I have waited for a vote on "that"?

327: 2367: 2240: 2161: 2151: 2118: 2103: 2044:

be de-sysoped -- or could someone tell me why they should be a sysop. Recently they undeleted the

1927:

I think Cunctator should be ignored until he presents any arguments for his position. --Eloquence

64: 34:

Yeah maybe we should change 'holocaust' to 'the jewish problem' because 'holocaust' is too biased.

2527:

of which removing the incivility is only one (controversial) way. Another few you might try are:

2385: 2225: 2041: 1958: 1947: 782:

It doesn't mean agreeing. You can respectfully disagree; polite people do that all the time. I

740: 376: 223: 193: 17: 2519: 2412: 2256: 2139: 1980:

The difference between protecting the page and simply asking the parties to stop is moot, since

1477:

Left to his devices, "the cuncator" would appear to want to "cuncate" Bibles into Cliff notes. -

914:

In response to again moving the above comment to this page, this time with a link to this page (

459:

Like hell you aren't. It's your purpose in life on Knowledge (XXG). It's what you live for. --

1486: 2568: 2434: 1895: 1854: 1605: 1416: 1354: 1288: 1280: 1241: 1206: 1166: 1072: 1020: 1004:

In the interests of full disclosure, on said page, in the version that it seems I deleted, he

933: 906: 840: 787: 480: 299: 246: 205: 2377: 2070: 2050: 1716: 1625: 1463: 1341: 1261: 878:

Good job on the logo. See what you can do when you focus on producing something of value? --

488: 2586:

From WikiEN-l Mar 7, 2006 7:47 PM Subject: Re: April Fool's Day proposal Sean Barrett <

2260: 2224:

Hey, the new userbox looks spiffy! And actually explains why you don't like CVU. Hooray!

796: 677:

As if the wiki system weren't already the most efficient accountability mechanism possible!

2509: 2486: 2470: 2455: 2421: 2211: 2187: 2130:

You're an ass. I have no interest in discussing anything with you now, or in the future.

2058: 1986: 1829: 1767: 1724: 1650:

09427), the text is clearly in context and impersonal, and RK's action was inappropriate.

1510: 1494: 1478: 1123: 1869:

http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Talk:Industrial_Revolution&action=history

932:

Forget it, then. I won't comment on your page, if my comments continue to get defaced. --

1509:

I uberunderstand - the Cungcator is bold in his bogus assertions, these days isnt he? -

1394: 1184: 28: 2334: 2294: 353:

You're not welcome to characterize Knowledge (XXG)'s policy on vandalism, Cunctator.--

2549: 2199: 2169: 2110: 1689: 1629: 679:

I'm not "choosing a different model." I don't know what you're talking about. I am

643:

I think you aren't thinking particularly clearly about any of this. What, exactly,

564:

Knowledge (XXG) shouldn't need a "defense force". It doesn't need to be "defended".

2198:

I agree. You could be blocked for putting abusive matter on your own user page. --

1940: 1585: 1551: 1381: 862: 1723:

You'll love this :-( The Cunctator is now trying to insert Fred's stuff into

2609:

Subject: Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny under any circumstances

707:

I were trying to be a dictator or an autocrat. You're constantly bringing it up.

2644: 2623: 2604: 2587: 2095: 1994: 1962: 1951: 1907:

You have a problem with professional expertise? Or are you just making trouble?

1901: 1875: 1845: 1801: 1783: 1728: 1653:

Then RK seemed to get a bee in his bonnet for DF's paraphrase of RK's statement

484: 320:

I think you're according Cunctator's edits far too much importance, Simon. --LMS

2011:

Why does this user remain an admin after abusing that privilege in an edit war?

1840:

a solution which Fred was OK with, until The Cunctator decided unilaterally to

1648:

http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Dietary_Fiber&oldid=8

663:

Well, I agree with that goal 100%. You think that you have been accomplishing

581:

Knowledge (XXG), by its very nature, I believe, is robust and indestructible.

2506: 2483: 2452: 2418: 2208: 2184: 2133: 1821: 189: 989:

example of the not-very-subtle trolling that C. continues to practice here.

627: 495:

STG--That's a fair interpretation of the situation.. Feel free to disagree.

345: 1338:

Are we still looking for things on which you're the sole voice of dissent?

2084: 2045: 1912: 1759: 1748: 1688:

I should point out that the Cunctator's remarks about the dispute in the

1597: 1565: 1443: 1429: 1065:

Larry Sanger deletes this page, an action which requires sysop authority.

976:. The Cunctator, for some strange reason, saw fit to list all the pages 958: 950: 879: 568:

Why don't you think so? I think it does, and carefully explained why in

460: 441: 389: 380: 354: 336: 303: 277: 259: 172: 45: 2619:

Is there any particular reason you're putting this on the mailing list?

106:

reason to do so. (Larry - sorry for diving in on your page) - regards MB

59:

You know Cunct, you really need to leave well enough alone. I abandoned

2466: 1614: 1592:

From [[Knowledge (XXG) talk:Naming conventions (slogans) March 26, 2003

192:), the following is a "workshop" on some issues written by a partisan, 89: 72: 60: 56: 51: 44:

subject--sometimes, I suspect they just make stuff up)--not inanity. --

1871:

because I don't see that kind of behavior boding well for the future.

972:

I want to make a comment about something I did, very deliberately, on

967:

http://meta.wikipedia.com/wiki.phtml?title=Talk:Listing_deleted_titles

1229:

http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2002-October/005939.html

856:

Our Wikipedian Cunctator chose this name just to tease us (I assume).

1205:

the contents of Knowledge (XXG) in other languages" to show for it.

1493:

The Cungcator is right about one thing: 'There are no guarantees."-

96:

Cunctator's editing. If I didn't I would overwrite his work myself.

2348:, because paramilitary fantasies have no place on Knowledge (XXG). 2235:

I find the userbox infuriating. Jimbo Wales feels it is bad taste

1685:

Should we do things Fred and Cunctator's way, or act like adults?

1364:

That's a leading question. Why do you assert I'm such an asshole?

1107: 1019:

Come on. We have better things to do with our time. Don't we? --

1016:! That's what started all of this. Pretty ridiculous, isn't it? 287:

User:Larry Sanger/Is Knowledge (XXG) an experiment in anarchy Talk

269:

User:Larry Sanger/Is Knowledge (XXG) an experiment in anarchy Talk

455:

LMS: I'm not trying to act as a check on your rampant authority.

812:

If you think it is, you just don't get it. I'm not engaging in

479:

LDC: Actually, I just had a transplant. I wanted to replace my

55:

about any subject be anything else but ? Think about it. ~

1137:

Yes. Or something, because it caused unecessary consternation

425:

Is the suggestion that I am acting as an autocrat in creating

406: 2533:

Ignore incivility. Operate as if the offender does not exist.

2496:

Calling an organization "retarded" is not a personal attack.

996:

about that? If you're still bothered, let's talk about it

695:

I don't think he's trying to be a dictator or an autocrat.

839:

already. Treat me nicely, and I will treat you nicely. --

647:

centralized about Knowledge (XXG)? Go ahead, explain it,

1258:

Cunc merely has a different definition to everyone else.

1165:

For a change, I agree with all that Cunc is saying here.

1106:

As much as people seem to hate admitting it- there is a "

1014:

removing his archive of vandalism from his personal pages

1012:

insult and harm that was done to him by my--what?--by my

711:

That LMS did it, is in my mind, only an ancillary issue.

1628:'s personal attacks on me. He claimed to have read the 1220:

I really hate saying this, but, um, I'm with Cunc here.

639:

be more distributed--but I'm not losing sleep over it.

2409: 2407: 2405: 2401: 2358: 2317: 2253: 2236: 2168:

Did I miss the queue for the funny little mustaches? --

797:

http://meta.wikipedia.com/wiki.phtml?User:The_Cunctator

2147:

This user is a non-member of the Retarded Fascism Unit

887:

In response to moving the above comment to this page (

2395:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

2145:

As an admin you apperantly have no idea of civility.

2094:

alternative now but to remove his administratorship.

2008:

Why was this person made an admin in the first place?

1993:

On WikiEN-L on 11/26/03 9:20 PM, "John Robinson" <

1957:

You really don't have the right to keep unprotecting

835:

then you cannot expect me to take you seriously. So

373:

Knowledge (XXG) policy on permanent deletion of pages

1175:

Talk:September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack/In Memoriam

2149:. Right. You earned my disgust, congradulations. -- 1459:-- wikipedia-l gains a new mantra (Wed Nov 6 2002) 2205:Perhaps, but actually I'm asking it as a favor -- 2057:not the sort of attitude we should foster here. - 1440:*stop* taking yourself so damn (sorry) seriously. 133:User:The Cunctator/How to destroy Knowledge (XXG) 751:, on the other hand, was a great idea (I think). 729:Sometimes, when someone else says something, it 594:If you think it's unnecessary, why did you join? 375:. The foregoing seems mainly to be the work of 2536:Walk away. Knowledge (XXG) is a very big place. 1946:I don't believe you had any right to unprotect 379:. I will not be participating on this page. -- 215:User:Gareth Owen/How to destroy Knowledge (XXG) 1183:website. We could even earn some money, then. 974:the "page titles which have been deleted" page 607:about that? No; if anything, in fact, I have 585:It is robust, anyway, precisely because there 2603:On March 10, 2006 3:25 PM, David Gerard < 2259:or incivil by other Knowledge (XXG) editors. 1455:"And Cunct, please stop being such a prick." 1446:(who I'm *sure* Cunc will listen to on this) 1256:We're all concerned with abuses of authority. 1200:en.wikipedia.org discussion, October 10, 2002 364:Knowledge (XXG) commentary/Questionable pages 8: 2023:On WikiEN-L 11/27/03 7:41 PM, JTdirl wrote: 1378:(signed) a man with a "poor" sense of humor 2639:From Knowledge (XXG)-L, Mar 8, 2007 6:53 AM 2613:dickish thing to do. So please don't. - d. 1882:Subject: Please, no more personal attacks 1375:And Cunct, please stop being such a prick. 143:Knowledge (XXG) subpages pros and cons/Talk 118:Knowledge (XXG) subpages pros and cons/Talk 1844:it. *sigh* And so his nonsense continues. 1681:RK responded on 11 Apr 2003 08:06:25 -0700 112:I think this might be what started it all: 2333: 2293: 651:without your usual innuendo and rhetoric. 1904:has a phD in the field, and teaches it. 1451:From Knowledge (XXG)-L November 11, 2002 204:to see how this debate has proceeded. -- 1932:From WikiEn-L October 24, 2003 10:59 AM 1545:So I guess I'll just get back to work. 1542:But Jimbo would probably not like it. 1190:Hurray, I made Cunctators' Bias Talk... 683:being called into question. So please 182:GNU Free Documentation License/Workshop 2035:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship 1372:Toby, that was a smelly thing to say. 503:I just think this is a mediocre idea, 2252:Please be aware that edits like this 1536:Toe to toe with the Cunctator - not! 239:How to be complete oblivious to irony 7: 2411:on the grounds that it goes against 2015:These questions are not rhetorical. 1692:page were dishonest and misleading. 539:communal behavior and collaboration? 226:and then spend the rest of the time 163:GNU Free Documentation License/Talk 1921:Talk:Slogan 'AIDS Kills Fags Dead' 1630:Talk page for the Idolatry article 1521:For once, I agree with Cunctator. 24: 2384: 2126:From WikiEN-L On 11/29/03 1:21 AM 778:evident youth, know what respect 348:summary, November 3, 2001 2:53 am 330:summary, November 3, 2001 2:34 am 2572: 2438: 2342:This user is a non-member of the 2329: 2302:This user is a non-member of the 2289: 2261:Personal attacks are not allowed 927:summary December 7, 2001 9:03 pm 900:summary December 7, 2001 5:21 pm 703:! You're constantly harping on 451:The Knowledge (XXG) Militia/Talk 398:The Knowledge (XXG) Militia/Talk 2599:From WikiEN-l on March 10, 2006 2232:) 15:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 434:rules is absolutely ridiculous. 2284: 2040:I would like the request that 2004:I have a couple of questions: 2000:After having today discovered 916:The Cunctator/Talk revision 71 889:The Cunctator/Talk revision 67 715:Oh, give me a break. That is 1: 2622:At 8:17 PM, Ryan Delaney < 2575: 2562:15:09, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2553:13:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2516:08:38, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2493:08:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2462:07:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2441: 2428:07:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2371:17:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2269:15:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2244:01:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC) 2202:21:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC) 2194:20:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC) 2172:19:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 2165:17:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 2155:17:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 1334:which invited these reponses: 759:Yes, and no. Yes, because I 749:The Knowledge (XXG) Community 2580:15:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2569: 2500:08:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2477:07:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2446:07:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2435: 2380:18:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC) 2218:23:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC) 2002:User:The Cunctator/Bias Talk 1727:. Oh God. Here we go again. 1661:with this statement (by DF) 1572:From Wikien-L March 25, 2003 1558:From Wikien-L March 20, 2003 1532:From Wikien-L March 20, 2003 1517:From Wikien-L March 20, 2003 615:voices) in addition to mine. 2522:doesn't say anything about 2404:from Cunctator's userpage: 2400:I've removed three times a 799:, November 30, 2001 2:56 am 483:sense of humor with an dry 427:The Knowledge (XXG) Militia 400:, November 29, 2001 1:40 pm 315:, November 3, 2001 2:34 am 289:, November 2, 2001 12:35 pm 271:, November 1, 2001 11:08 pm 120:, October 18, 2001 12:26 am 2663: 2106:00:17, Nov 28, 2003 (UTC) 2073:14:11, Nov 27, 2003 (UTC) 2071:Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 366:, November 5, 2001 9:06 pm 254:But I'm going to write an 249:, November 1, 2001 3:08 pm 200:; please see the relevant 2322: 2098:22:03, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC) 2061:14:01, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC) 2053:06:40, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC) 1965:02:15, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC) 1954:20:27, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC) 1848:18:49 May 11, 2003 (UTC) 1804:02:48 May 11, 2003 (UTC) 822:doing a whole lot of work 689:The Knowledge (XXG) Guard 570:The Knowledge (XXG) Guard 135:October 19, 2001 12:07 am 1974:06:43, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC) 1972:Talk: Sunset High School 1923:July 2, 2003 19:45 (UTC) 1291:17:35 Nov 22, 2002 (UTC) 816:I'm trying, in what was 471:"no one will stop you". 165:October 28, 2001 6:02 pm 145:October 19, 2001 6:18 pm 2465:LOL, it's true, CVU is 2402:very aggressive userbox 1719:04:45 May 8, 2003 (UTC) 1306:After Danny wrote this: 613:educated and reasonable 487:sense of humor--I read 2346:Counter Vandalism Unit 2255:may be interpreted as 1330:Don't be wishy-washy. 507:Why think so? It's a 82:User:Larry Sanger/Talk 27:can't fix a title. -- 2616:At 7:28 PM, I wrote: 2556:Kill it with fire. -- 2306:Retarded Fascism Unit 2280:User Talk:Jimbo Wales 2121:, 21:24, Dec 1, 2003 1885:Knock it off, Cunc. 150:Cunctator, could you 80:(cut and pasted from 2388:'s attacking userbox 1814:Talk:Communist state 1793:Talk:Communist state 1737:Talk:Communist state 412:Manning, calm down. 228:telling other people 202:mailing list archive 39:I deleted this from 2524:removing everything 1503:User Talk:MyRedDice 1232:Knowledge (XXG)-L]: 1075:15:40 March 1, 2002 603:Er, and Manning is 313:Wikipetiquette/Talk 2113:04:26, 2 Dec 2003 2042:User:The Cunctator 1959:Sunset High School 1948:Sunset High School 1489:04:59 Feb 28, 2003 1472:Talk:Judeocentrism 1222:Lee Daniel Crocker 1147:Lee Daniel Crocker 980:that were deleted 515:poorly presented, 377:User:The Cunctator 300:ignoratio elenchis 188:Note: at present ( 18:User:The Cunctator 2643:Andre Engels < 2631:Experiment over. 2515: 2492: 2461: 2427: 2370: 2363: 2362: 2354: 2353: 2313: 2312: 2243: 2217: 2193: 2164: 2154: 1608:April 10-11, 2003 1505:19:12 Mar 2, 2003 1299:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1270:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1250:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1214:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1198:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1159:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1117:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1099:personal agenda. 1086:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1073:user:Larry Sanger 1029:Knowledge (XXG)-L 1021:User:Larry Sanger 934:User:Larry Sanger 907:User:Larry Sanger 841:User:Larry Sanger 833:constantly doing, 788:User:Larry Sanger 481:Farrelly Brothers 247:User:Larry Sanger 206:User:Larry Sanger 198:Knowledge (XXG)-L 41:rules to consider 2654: 2577: 2574: 2571: 2504: 2481: 2450: 2443: 2440: 2437: 2416: 2366: 2339: 2337: 2330: 2299: 2297: 2290: 2285: 2273:Attack Userboxes 2239: 2206: 2182: 2160: 2150: 2085:Lirath Q. Pynnor 1717:User talk:Tannin 1624:I am apalled by 1093:Manning Bartlett 546:really did think 217:October 30, 2001 2662: 2661: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2636: 2596: 2583: 2512: 2489: 2471:totalitarianism 2458: 2424: 2413:civility pillar 2390: 2355: 2343: 2335: 2323: 2314: 2303: 2295: 2275: 2250: 2214: 2190: 2178: 2143: 2123: 2030: 2020: 1990: 1967: 1944: 1929: 1916: 1909: 1850: 1830:User talk:Ams80 1825: 1808: 1806: 1788: 1768:User talk:Ams80 1763: 1732: 1725:Communist state 1712: 1676: 1621: 1612: 1601: 1589: 1576:Our curmudgeon 1569: 1555: 1529: 1514: 1498: 1482: 1467: 1448: 1294: 1265: 1257: 1245: 1193: 1179: 1170: 1154: 1150: 1136: 1127: 1112: 1081: 1068: 1059: 1056: 1024: 962: 954: 948: 938: 911: 884: 867: 845: 814:fear-mongering. 792: 671: 598: 454: 446: 415: 393: 385: 359: 341: 323: 308: 282: 264: 242: 210: 177: 158: 138: 114: 109: 77: 69:New_Age/OldTalk 37: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2660: 2658: 2582: 2581: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2534: 2531: 2510: 2501: 2487: 2478: 2456: 2447: 2422: 2389: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2361: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2351: 2340: 2328: 2325: 2324: 2320: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2310: 2300: 2288: 2274: 2271: 2249: 2246: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2212: 2188: 2177: 2174: 2142: 2137: 2119:Daniel Quinlan 2104:Daniel Quinlan 2080: 2079: 2013: 2012: 2009: 1787: 1786: 1780: 1667: 1666: 1659: 1658: 1461: 1460: 1293: 1292: 1192: 1191: 1161:, Sep 23, 2002 1135:The Cunctator: 1119:August 28 2002 1053: 1052: 1049: 1048:The Cunctator: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1039: 937: 936: 910: 909: 883: 882: 866: 865: 858: 857: 844: 843: 827: 826: 818:intended to be 805:Really, really 791: 790: 774: 773: 765: 764: 753: 752: 745: 744: 736: 735: 722: 721: 709: 708: 693: 692: 669: 668: 653: 652: 633: 632: 631: 630: 617: 616: 596: 595: 591: 590: 579: 578: 574: 573: 562: 561: 550: 549: 541: 540: 533:fear-mongering 525: 524: 513: 512: 501: 500: 477: 476: 464: 463: 445: 444: 438: 435: 423: 420: 410: 409: 384: 383: 358: 357: 340: 339: 328:Wikipetiquette 322: 321: 307: 306: 281: 280: 263: 262: 235: 234: 209: 208: 176: 175: 157: 156: 128: 127: 108: 107: 98: 97: 36: 35: 29:User:Paul Drye 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2659: 2650: 2647: 2645: 2641: 2640: 2635: 2632: 2629: 2626: 2624: 2620: 2617: 2614: 2610: 2607: 2605: 2601: 2600: 2595: 2591: 2590: 2588: 2579: 2578: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2561: 2559: 2554: 2552: 2551: 2535: 2532: 2529: 2528: 2525: 2521: 2518: 2517: 2513: 2508: 2502: 2499: 2495: 2494: 2490: 2485: 2479: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2463: 2459: 2454: 2448: 2445: 2444: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2425: 2420: 2414: 2410: 2408: 2406: 2403: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2387: 2386:The Cunctator 2379: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2369: 2359: 2357: 2349: 2347: 2341: 2338: 2336:File:CVU2.PNG 2332: 2331: 2327: 2326: 2321: 2318: 2316: 2308: 2307: 2301: 2298: 2296:File:CVU2.PNG 2292: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2272: 2270: 2268: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2247: 2245: 2242: 2237: 2233: 2231: 2227: 2215: 2210: 2204: 2203: 2201: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2191: 2186: 2175: 2173: 2171: 2166: 2163: 2156: 2153: 2148: 2141: 2138: 2136: 2135: 2131: 2128: 2127: 2122: 2120: 2114: 2112: 2107: 2105: 2099: 2097: 2092: 2087: 2086: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2072: 2067: 2062: 2060: 2054: 2052: 2047: 2043: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2029: 2025: 2024: 2019: 2018:- Hephaestos 2016: 2010: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2003: 1998: 1997: 1995: 1989: 1988: 1983: 1978: 1975: 1973: 1966: 1964: 1960: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1943: 1942: 1937: 1934: 1933: 1928: 1925: 1924: 1922: 1915: 1914: 1908: 1905: 1903: 1899: 1897: 1893: 1890: 1886: 1883: 1880: 1879: 1877: 1872: 1870: 1864: 1863: 1859: 1858: 1856: 1849: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1834: 1833: 1831: 1824: 1823: 1818: 1817: 1815: 1809: 1805: 1803: 1797: 1796: 1794: 1785: 1781: 1778: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1769: 1762: 1761: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1745: 1741: 1740: 1738: 1731: 1730: 1726: 1721: 1720: 1718: 1711: 1708: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1696:lying about) 1693: 1691: 1690:Idolatry Talk 1686: 1683: 1682: 1678: 1673: 1670: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1651: 1649: 1644: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1633: 1631: 1627: 1622: 1619: 1618: 1616: 1610: 1609: 1607: 1600: 1599: 1594: 1593: 1588: 1587: 1583: 1580: 1577: 1574: 1573: 1568: 1567: 1563: 1560: 1559: 1554: 1553: 1549: 1548:Pacifically, 1546: 1543: 1540: 1537: 1534: 1533: 1528: 1527: 1522: 1519: 1518: 1513: 1512: 1507: 1506: 1504: 1497: 1496: 1491: 1490: 1488: 1481: 1480: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1466: 1465: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1447: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1436: 1432: 1431: 1427: 1424: 1423: 1419: 1418: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1402: 1401: 1397: 1396: 1392: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1383: 1379: 1376: 1373: 1370: 1369: 1365: 1362: 1361: 1357: 1356: 1352: 1349: 1348: 1344: 1343: 1339: 1336: 1335: 1331: 1328: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1317: 1314: 1311: 1308: 1307: 1303: 1302: 1300: 1290: 1285: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1273: 1272:Oct. 27, 2002 1271: 1264: 1263: 1259: 1254: 1253: 1252:Oct. 25, 2002 1251: 1244: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1234: 1231: 1230: 1224: 1223: 1218: 1217: 1215: 1209: 1208: 1202: 1201: 1199: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1180: 1178: 1176: 1169: 1168: 1163: 1162: 1160: 1153: 1148: 1144: 1141: 1138: 1133: 1130: 1125: 1121: 1120: 1118: 1111: 1109: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1094: 1090: 1089: 1088:April 9, 2002 1087: 1080: 1077: 1076: 1074: 1067: 1066: 1063: 1062:March 1, 2002 1058: 1055:Larry Sanger: 1050: 1047: 1046: 1040: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031:March 1, 2002 1030: 1023: 1022: 1017: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1002: 999: 995: 990: 988: 983: 979: 975: 970: 969: 968: 961: 960: 953: 952: 946: 945: 944: 935: 931: 930: 929: 928: 926: 920: 919: 917: 908: 904: 903: 902: 901: 899: 893: 892: 890: 881: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 864: 860: 859: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 842: 838: 834: 829: 828: 823: 819: 815: 811: 806: 803: 802: 801: 800: 798: 789: 785: 781: 776: 775: 770: 769: 768: 762: 758: 757: 756: 750: 747: 746: 742: 738: 737: 732: 728: 727: 726: 718: 714: 713: 712: 706: 702: 698: 697: 696: 690: 686: 682: 678: 675: 674: 673: 666: 662: 661: 660: 657: 650: 646: 642: 641: 640: 638: 629: 625: 621: 620: 619: 618: 614: 610: 606: 602: 601: 600: 593: 592: 588: 584: 583: 582: 576: 575: 571: 567: 566: 565: 559: 555: 554: 553: 547: 543: 542: 538: 534: 530: 529: 528: 522: 518: 517: 516: 510: 506: 505: 504: 498: 497: 496: 493: 490: 486: 482: 474: 473: 472: 468: 462: 458: 457: 456: 453: 452: 443: 439: 436: 433: 428: 424: 421: 418: 417: 416: 413: 408: 404: 403: 402: 401: 399: 392: 391: 382: 378: 374: 370: 369: 368: 367: 365: 356: 352: 351: 350: 349: 347: 338: 334: 333: 332: 331: 329: 319: 318: 317: 316: 314: 305: 301: 297: 293: 292: 291: 290: 288: 279: 275: 274: 273: 272: 270: 261: 257: 253: 252: 251: 250: 248: 241: 240: 232: 229: 225: 221: 220: 219: 218: 216: 207: 203: 199: 195: 194:The Cunctator 191: 187: 186: 185: 184: 183: 174: 169: 168: 167: 166: 164: 153: 149: 148: 147: 146: 144: 137: 136: 134: 124: 123: 122: 121: 119: 113: 104: 100: 99: 94: 93: 92: 91: 85: 84: 83: 76: 74: 70: 66: 62: 58: 53: 48: 47: 42: 33: 32: 31: 30: 19: 2648: 2646:> wrote: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2633: 2630: 2627: 2625:> wrote: 2621: 2618: 2615: 2611: 2608: 2606:> wrote: 2602: 2598: 2597: 2592: 2585: 2584: 2567: 2558:Ryan Delaney 2555: 2548: 2547: 2523: 2507:drini's page 2484:drini's page 2453:drini's page 2433: 2419:drini's page 2399: 2392: 2391: 2364: 2344: 2304: 2277: 2276: 2265:Ryan Delaney 2251: 2234: 2223: 2209:drini's page 2185:drini's page 2179: 2167: 2157: 2146: 2144: 2132: 2129: 2125: 2124: 2115: 2108: 2100: 2090: 2088: 2081: 2065: 2063: 2055: 2039: 2032: 2031: 2026: 2022: 2021: 2017: 2014: 2001: 1999: 1992: 1991: 1981: 1979: 1969: 1968: 1956: 1945: 1938: 1935: 1931: 1930: 1926: 1918: 1917: 1910: 1906: 1900: 1896:Slrubenstein 1894: 1891: 1887: 1884: 1881: 1874: 1873: 1865: 1861: 1860: 1857:May 14, 2003 1852: 1851: 1841: 1837: 1835: 1832:May 11, 2003 1827: 1826: 1819: 1816:May 11, 2003 1811: 1810: 1807: 1798: 1795:May 11, 2003 1790: 1789: 1776: 1770:May 10, 2003 1765: 1764: 1756: 1752: 1746: 1742: 1739:May 10, 2003 1734: 1733: 1722: 1714: 1713: 1709: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1687: 1684: 1680: 1679: 1674: 1671: 1668: 1660: 1652: 1645: 1642: 1639:I responded: 1638: 1637: 1634: 1623: 1620: 1613: 1611: 1603: 1602: 1595: 1591: 1590: 1584: 1581: 1578: 1575: 1571: 1570: 1564: 1561: 1557: 1556: 1550: 1547: 1544: 1541: 1538: 1535: 1531: 1530: 1526:Erik Moeller 1523: 1520: 1516: 1515: 1508: 1500: 1499: 1492: 1484: 1483: 1476: 1469: 1468: 1462: 1454: 1450: 1449: 1442: 1438: 1434: 1433: 1428: 1425: 1421: 1420: 1417:Toby Bartels 1415: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1399: 1398: 1393: 1390: 1386: 1385: 1380: 1377: 1374: 1371: 1367: 1366: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1355:Toby Bartels 1353: 1350: 1346: 1345: 1340: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1329: 1326: 1323: 1320:I responded: 1319: 1318: 1315: 1312: 1309: 1305: 1304: 1301:Nov. 6, 2002 1296: 1295: 1281:Toby Bartels 1279: 1275: 1267: 1266: 1260: 1255: 1247: 1246: 1242:Brion Vibber 1240: 1238:tiny thing. 1236: 1233: 1226: 1225: 1219: 1211: 1210: 1207:Brion Vibber 1203: 1195: 1194: 1181: 1172: 1171: 1167:Brion Vibber 1164: 1156: 1155: 1145: 1142: 1139: 1134: 1131: 1122: 1114: 1113: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1091: 1083: 1082: 1078: 1070: 1069: 1064: 1061: 1060: 1054: 1038:Jimbo Wales: 1026: 1025: 1018: 1013: 1010:awful, awful 1009: 1005: 1003: 997: 993: 991: 986: 981: 977: 971: 964: 963: 955: 947: 940: 939: 922: 921: 913: 912: 895: 894: 886: 885: 869: 868: 863:User:Ed Poor 847: 846: 836: 832: 821: 817: 813: 809: 804: 794: 793: 783: 779: 766: 760: 754: 730: 723: 716: 710: 704: 700: 694: 684: 680: 676: 670: 664: 658: 654: 648: 644: 636: 634: 622: 612: 608: 604: 597: 586: 580: 563: 557: 556:Detrimental 551: 545: 536: 532: 526: 520: 514: 508: 502: 494: 478: 469: 465: 448: 447: 431: 414: 411: 395: 394: 386: 361: 360: 343: 342: 325: 324: 310: 309: 296:nonsequiturs 284: 283: 266: 265: 244: 243: 236: 224:an anarchist 222:Claim to be 212: 211: 179: 178: 160: 159: 151: 140: 139: 130: 129: 115: 111: 110: 102: 86: 79: 78: 65:New_Age/Talk 49: 38: 25: 2589:> wrote: 2475:Alias Wooga 2378:Jimbo Wales 2248:NPA Warning 2176:mod userbox 2096:FearÉIREANN 2051:Maximus Rex 1996:> wrote: 1626:Fred Bauder 1464:Gareth Owen 1342:Gareth Owen 1262:Gareth Owen 810:fear-based. 741:Wikibiblion 717:ridiculous. 531:Talk about 485:Black Adder 371:Please see 67:back in as 2498:Eli Cartan 2230:fuddle me! 2226:fuddlemark 2059:Hephaestos 1987:Hephaestos 1675:as always, 1511:Stevertigo 1495:Stevertigo 1124:AstroNomer 1006:originally 681:constantly 649:carefully, 237:See also: 231:what to do 190:October 28 1487:Talk:AKFD 1395:Ortolan88 1360:My reply: 699:Oh, come 628:User:MMGB 537:all about 346:Vandalism 50:Now that 2520:WP:CIVIL 2511:☎ 2488:☎ 2457:☎ 2423:☎ 2368:Cool Cat 2241:Cool Cat 2213:☎ 2200:RHaworth 2189:☎ 2170:Astragal 2162:Cool Cat 2152:Cool Cat 2140:WP:CIVIL 2111:Fuzheado 2046:santorum 1878:replied: 1862:I wrote: 1855:Wikien-L 1779:is best. 1606:Wikien-L 1552:Uncle Ed 1185:Jeronimo 959:User:LMS 951:User:LMS 880:User:LMS 837:stop it, 624:meaning. 461:User:LMS 442:User:LMS 390:User:LMS 381:User:LMS 355:User:LMS 337:User:LMS 304:User:LMS 278:User:LMS 260:User:LMS 173:User:LMS 46:User:LMS 2467:fascism 1941:Ed Poor 1729:ÉÍREman 1586:Ed Poor 1382:Ed Poor 1368:Thusly: 998:openly, 987:perfect 558:to what 521:nothing 90:User:BF 73:User:BF 61:New_Age 57:User:BF 52:New_Age 2376:bit.-- 2066:either 1963:Angela 1952:Angela 1902:Jtdirl 1876:Tannin 1846:Jtdirl 1836:There 1802:Jtdirl 1784:Jtdirl 1617:wrote: 1316:Danny 1001:then. 978:of his 825:edits. 780:means. 720:much?! 519:I see 152:please 131:Then: 126:best") 2634:Ryan 2570:Voice 2436:Voice 2393:from 2278:From 2134:RickK 2091:using 2033:From 1970:From 1919:From 1853:From 1828:From 1822:Zxcvb 1812:From 1791:From 1766:From 1735:From 1715:From 1604:From 1501:From 1485:From 1479:'Vert 1470:From 1444:Larry 1297:From 1268:From 1248:From 1212:From 1196:From 1173:From 1157:From 1115:From 1108:cabal 1084:From 1071:From 1027:From 982:by me 965:From 943:/Talk 941:From 925:/Talk 923:From 898:/Talk 896:From 872:/Talk 870:From 850:/Talk 848:From 795:From 705:as if 605:right 511:idea! 509:great 489:Maxim 449:From 396:From 362:From 344:From 326:From 311:From 285:From 267:From 256:essay 245:From 213:From 180:From 161:From 141:From 116:From 16:< 2257:rude 2238:. -- 1982:both 1842:undo 1422:then 1289:Toby 994:care 784:hope 685:stop 665:this 609:lost 2576:All 2573:of 2550:KWH 2442:All 2439:of 2078:ant 1913:Zoe 1838:was 1777:his 1760:172 1749:172 1710:RK 1677:tc 1598:Zoe 1566:Zoe 1435:and 1430:Zoe 1400:and 1387:and 1347:and 1310:Hi 637:and 587:are 437:... 432:the 422:... 407:LMS 103:not 2505:( 2482:( 2473:. 2451:( 2417:( 2350:. 2309:. 2207:( 2183:( 1939:-- 1615:RK 1524:-- 1095:: 918:): 891:): 761:am 731:is 701:on 645:is 626:- 388:-- 298:, 171:-- 2514:) 2491:) 2469:/ 2460:) 2426:) 2228:( 2216:) 2192:) 1227:[ 1216:: 1149:: 1126:: 743:. 560:? 233:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index