529:, but it's not my call. I can't speak to their motivations, but yes, the people at ANI were dramatizing something trivial, in one case hypocritically. On-wiki, like everywhere else, sometimes only the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I'd hoped that my just changing your sig would provide everyone with an easy compromise. I relied initially on your words in an attempt to get you to buy into that; I guess it didn't work. Maybe during the next shit-storm I'll more explicitly suggest that others just quietly change your signature. Hopefully it will either make it die down or illuminate everyone's motivations for what they are. I hope I'm being clear about mine. I don't think your signature is funny; perhaps I'm
1056:, which closed as "no consensus," it has turned out that the nominator as well as the first delete "voter" (both of whom made multiple comments to others in the discussion) are actually the same person. I have already notified the respective closing admins in case if the vote stacking (especially in the case where all three accounts commented) presented a false consensus and in the various other discussions in which two or three of them commented (always all three saying to delete...), the AfDs closed as solid "keep"s so nothing to change there. Anyway, thought you might be curious whatever happened with this one. Sincerely, --
634:
sig; Cas had "Cheers, " in his pref-sig and it proved awkward. I believe we're mostly on the same page here, even if you don't always like my humour; mebbe next lulz. The "aka david" sig was used for about a month while I was en:blocked and can wildly misbehave on older version of Opera; the "subscript", which is positioned relativity, could appear wildly off due to the browser being confused about what the text was being positioned relative to; it somehow got the idea the the origin was the bottom-right of the screen. Most uses of that were refactored by me. Cheers,
577:
first came to your attention. There have been the obvious incidents, of course. I'm glad to have met you and believe we can get along just fine. I see that you're serious about this place, so we should be able to find plenty of common ground. I'm going to use another sig I've occasionally used; it's not too long or boxy, not so in your face. An offset it uses is rather empirically arrived at and may result on the layout being a bit inconsistent on some browsers; feedback welcome.
950:
31:
569:. Anyway, this is all a minor sideshow in the larger scheme of things. The motion is due to land. There is also the Gerard drama that's major-sucking-time. The sig is funny to me and I know some others enjoy it. I'll marinate on the whole notion and not be provocative. I'm sure Dae would not be amused to see it on his talk page, for example. It's a part of my wiki-history. If there's a point here, it's that some need to accept the notion of
107:
1169:
him to that personality when he's admitted it himself in the past. There are 3 million articles on
Knowledge (XXG), yet he keeps coming back to those with which he has an apparent COI. Folks have tried more discrete ways of discussing the problem but he rebuffs them all. I think this problem is entirely of his own creation and he's blocking any resolution. It's not helping Knowledge (XXG).
727:"Roi" in the sense that it was you that recreated the account; I knew that had occurred, but had not connected it to whom I've been chatting with. The whole 'involved' bit is moot as there are several recent consensuses that I'm really not disruptive and that the definitions some were attempting to apply were laughably low; "conduct that is seen every day in many discussions."
454:
clearer if you had not done your subpage thing. I'm not going to fuss over it, though. I looked the other day and found 13 of that (or similar) sig. It's no big deal. The 'first class' moniker came from the 'vandalism patrol' where they were making up military ranks for the whac-a-vandal game. I didn't want to be a lieutenant general or whatever, so I made up my own rank
608:(having returned from an indef block is one of the few things you two have in common). It was mostly your mocking AN that prompted me to change your signature the first time. Anyway, I'll also marinate on not changing the other long version. I'm happy to have met you, Jack. It's good to meet editors who are serious about wiki, at least part of the time. ;-) Cheers.--
530:
496:
occasional, it's merely humour. If the shit-stirrers would get a clue, we'd be having a talk about tightening-up the sig guidelines. They don't really care about the sig length; they care about dinging Jack and their core objection is that the AC has allowed a sock account to edit. And some fear my criticism.
874:
I'm unconvinced that you can parse a clear verdict on what 'extreme caution' means, from the comments in the current RfC. People seemed to want to craft *some* escape clause, so they would not be merely saying 'Never ever do a live merge, for any reason.' So in a sense they were just trying to find a
576:
I've no idea who that other fellow with the garish sig is; he was, I believe, confused on the ANI thread about what sig was even being discussed. Thanks for viewing me seriously; I am serious about these projects and enough people know that, now. I've not much noticed you and don't know how or when I
420:
Hi. Please do not edit my comments on pages; my above comments were specific license re the sigs on Pablo's page only. There was no consensus in that insipid discussion that I was being disruptive, but I view your edit there as disruptive. You cut-in to my post with a link to your userspace to a copy
358:
For the record, I have no issue with either your sigs (butt-ugly though they were!) or Chaser's amendment thereof. A knee-jerk reaction was to revert, but on reflection, it was a good-faith edit and may be better this way. So if no-one has any strong feelings, let's leave it as is. The only info lost
1168:
Benjiboi is the first editor to have mentioned "X" on
Knowledge (XXG), writing an entire article about the personality. He fought to have the article kept when it was nominated for deletion, twice. I really think he's being extremely hypocritical to file complaints about other editors for connecting
1096:
Thanks for your comments on my FA nom of Edwin P. Morrow. Though I've been out of town for several days, I don't see that anyone else has weighed in on your suggestion for rearranging the headings in the article as we had hoped. Would you like me to declare us a consensus of two and make the change?
380:
No problemo; we all know they're not really gone. I know source code control systems *well* and they are the core technology underpinning the wiki page history concept. Seeing the wikis this way is key to seeing things properly. It's simply not about the version on top. Oh, it is quite possible that
343:
So I thought I'd say hi, and open the lines a bit. I like the bit on your user page about your being here since before the dawn of time. When you joined, I had already been through an arb case; the other party was banned and over the next few years his socks were, too. The road did get bumpier after
1217:
was rendered rather moot when those two articles were deleted. So your effort to connect me to the subject of either article and then try to use a press release to further connect me to someone I've never even met let alone barely heard of before
Knowledge (XXG)? Ridiculous. I could write up a list
883:
live-merging language to be tightened up further, I think you'd have to launch a new discussion and be very specific in your question. In my personal opinion, the issue may not be profound enough to deserve that amount of detailed study. (Cases of bad-faith editing will probably be discernible even
633:
I missed that you had some sort of mentoring arrangement with A Nobody, although I'm am aware of Durova's role; so much for my involved comments. I had not seen that you had removed parts of my comments on Pablo's page; what you viewed as mocking, no doubt. A salutation is really not ever part of a
339:
I don't think we've really met before. I see you're keeping an eye on some the pages involved in the wiki-drama that's kicked-up *again*. You seem to be taking an even hand. I have no issue with your having trimmed my flashy sigs on Pablo's page; he might, though. He's a friend and has used bits of
564:
I would ask you to not edit my occasional sigs; I'd be fine talking about it further. This would be about you remaining uninvolved. There is always the possibility that someone will need to be in that position — and I don't just mean re myself. I'm more interested in who does the dead horse thing
453:
On my page you did refer to my above comment. Look, I'm not intending to be pointy here. I know the sig guidelines; I've opined on them. This is just an occasional thing and a few shouters are stirring-up shit for other reasons. My use of it on ANI *was* a demo and I think things would have been
495:
I'm good at code; that sig uses some advanced styling and correct markup. People who have poor skills and aesthetics are filling talk pages with crap and it is annoying and is about attention seeking and insecurities. If I were doing this as my regular sig, it would be a clear point. Since it's
730:
The various salutations are not part of anyone's sig per se, they are part of the post itself. I have a local text file with some sigs in it and copypasta them occasionally. Sometimes, however, I copy from some recent post of mine and replace the old timestamp with five tildes; and sometimes I
739:
1212:
There's more to it than what has been presented and I already explained that "admission" posted a few years ago. There remains no excuse to harass other editors and tellingly, no evidence of COI editing. Additionally I regularly work on dozens if not hundreds of articles and that COI
920:
Hi, I'm waiting for a comment by at least one editor on my final version before closing the RfC. It would be tricky to contact the discussion participants for their views, since I don't want to appear to be canvassing any particular voters, and I am reluctant to spam all 28 people.
533:. I know you didn't cause the shit-storm, but parodying stupid signatures is a good way to produce another drama-fest, which distracts everyone from mainspace and from the valid criticisms you make. The point you're making is lost on the editor whose signature
1193:
guideline: anyone with a conflict of interest can ignore it and those who try to enforce it are accused harassment. It's not a good situation and it directly affects both the encyclopedia's inherent neutrality and its reputation as a reference work.
541:. Maybe he should have more clue. I don't see how your occasional absurd signature helps with either. It just makes it less likely you'll be taken seriously. I'll probably take you seriously regardless, but I'm not the only person editing here.
827:
Nah, I wasn't doubting it, I just meant to be saying that I'd not even bothered to look in the last few days since you mentioned it. I did just look, lightly, and what I see is all re issues and time periods that did not involve me. Cheers,
503:
in prefs (under editing), set "Editbox dimensions: Rows" to 40 or so and "Widen the edit box to fill the entire screen" to on. The defaults result in a cramped edit window and warp peoples' sense of space. Do most editing in an external
1053:
1043:
that in addition to canvassing and incivility these accounts were actually the same guy who also had another account going (these accounts have been going since I think 2006!). THREE of the accounts who said to redirect in
1188:
I hadn't seen the request for the
Oversight. But it's not a "memory hole". BB's identity has been the subject of his own editing. That he refuses to deal with the issue in a straightforward manner shows the weakness of the
1048:(Bravedog = GaGaOohLaLa, and also Dalejenkins) were actually the same person (including the nominator) and therefore may have unduly influenced the discussion by giving a false consensus, the nominator and first "voter" in
467:
1097:
Also, could you strike out the concerns you feel have been sufficiently addressed? It'll help me and the eventual closing admin to keep track of what is still actionable. I'm hoping to wrap up the nomination this week.
462:
433:
Jack, I take your point about ANI, where I guess you were just demonstrating it. But no one needs your permission or license to change it just about anywhere else. It's distracting in the edit window, it doesn't follow
645:
1218:
of likely a hundred very well known celebrities I have met yet I really don't edit their articles either. Seriously, we have well known problems and breaking civility to make a point isn't helping anything.
421:
of the sig with an different timestamp and effectively inserted your opinion into my post. You are free, of course, to have an opinion and I suggest you offer it using a normal post over your own sig.
1268:
I wish you the best of luck in whatever you do in the future. Since we probably won't "run into" each other before then, have a Happy
Holiday season (whatever holiday you celebrate). Take Care...
508:
I said before that I saw you as taking an even hand, and mostly you are. Before you form much of an opinion of me, please be sure you see the whole picture. I'll be glad to help with that. Cheers.
738:. I had seen the two example you just gave. I was vaguely aware of him back in 2007, but it wasn't until the E&C cases that he really got my attention. I made a statement about this
1067:
1049:
1129:
Your recent revisions based on your personal preferences are getting a little bit annoying. As an admin you should know better, use the talk-page before deleting right away. --
998:
1040:
969:, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the
1045:
641:(ah, I have also cut the text-shadow from my standard sig as too-copied, at this point. This became supported in Firefox at v3.5 and off the anyones went.
438:, and so anyone can change it. If you don't like people changing your signature, then use one that's three lines long instead of 15 or whatever it is.--
789:
I didn't mean to imply that I disbelieved you about not having known that I was AN's adopter. I believed you the first time. Sorry if I was unclear.--
1109:
Certainly. I've done so. I don't know how actionable the other issues will be according to the FA criteria, but I've crossed out most of them.--
673:
The "Sincerely" is part of AN's signature, so when I saw your "salutation" twice, I mistakenly thought it was the same deal. I don't think I'm
677:
with AN. Despite our long history, most of my interactions with him in the last year and a half have been in an administrative capacity (
970:
520:
Jack, I appreciate your saying you think I'm being fair. Often the perception of fairness is more important than the reality of it.
964:
757:
It's typed into the editbox and everything other than what the tildes cause MediaWiki to generate are my 'post' not my 'sig'.
472:
1036:
949:
999:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jack_Merridew_is_back_to_his_disruptive.2Fannoying_signature
626:
I wrote a reply here earlier and it seems to have not saved, and I'm trying to remember what I wrote; something about
305:
296:
287:
278:
274:
265:
261:
252:
248:
244:
231:
223:
219:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
181:
177:
173:
169:
149:
139:
94:
86:
81:
69:
64:
59:
538:
1320:
I wish you all the best in your future endeavors and I hope you are finding more happiness than I... Sincerely, --
344:
that, but conflict, and appropriate resolution, has always been a part of the wiki. I suppose it always will, too.
165:
161:
157:
153:
135:
131:
127:
123:
38:
111:
316:
649:
588:
674:
1276:
1201:
1176:
359:
was your enquiry as to the whereabouts of your ARS welcome; don't hold your breath waiting for that.
322:
1254:
957:
926:
911:
903:
889:
864:
856:
565:
about this and tries again. And again. If you suggest that others just edit my sigs, they *will* per
366:
1294:
984:
106:
1219:
829:
761:
653:
635:
582:
510:
423:
386:
348:
566:
1310:
1270:
1134:
1249:
Well, that was embarrassing, but it's gone now. I'll start on the sources soon though. --
1196:
1171:
1153:
1145:
1114:
1079:
1020:
898:
OK, if it will save running another RfC, I'll support further revision of the paragraph for
794:
690:
613:
551:
443:
403:
318:
227:
47:
17:
1190:
1071:
876:
561:
Glad you like the better editbox; mebbe the peanut gallery will benefit from the tip, too.
435:
414:
1250:
1243:
1090:
922:
907:
885:
860:
361:
899:
880:
1290:
1005:
980:
1321:
1057:
605:
1305:
1130:
1099:
1324:
1315:
1298:
1282:
1258:
1234:
1207:
1182:
1157:
1138:
1118:
1103:
1083:
1060:
1024:
1009:
988:
930:
915:
893:
868:
832:
798:
764:
694:
656:
638:
617:
594:
555:
514:
447:
427:
407:
389:
371:
351:
855:
Hello Chaser. I replied to your comment about SNOW consensus for merges, over at
1149:
1110:
1075:
1016:
790:
686:
627:
609:
547:
439:
399:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1054:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Chronology of Star Wars (2nd nomination)
1001:
600:"aka david" renders much like subscript in Chrome. I noticed you when I was
468:
Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/User:Drew R. Smith/Vandalism Patrol
463:
Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/User:Programmer13/Vandalism Patrol
340:
code of mine before. I've helped him with bits of his user space, too.
320:
1041:
Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet_investigations/Bravedog#Conclusions
323:
25:
715:
I really was unaware of your prior interactions with him. I
1068:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Cherub (TV series)
1050:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Cherub (TV series)
961:
was updated with a news item that involved the article
735:
732:
720:
716:
682:
678:
601:
534:
526:
490:
488:
486:
484:
482:
381:
Ikip simply missed offering me an ARS welcome, so I'll
859:. Is #4 truly a more permissive rule than #3? Thanks,
904:
User talk:EdJohnston#Third version for your comments
101:
879:that seemed to match the problem. If you want the
1303:^^ Thirded. Have a good whatever you're having.
1066:If you disagree with the result, you should take
1074:. The closing admin has not edited in months.--
1046:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Una Healy
1037:User_talk:A_Nobody/Archive_23#Canvassing_thread
546:Thanks for the editbox tip. I implemented it.--
458:. That's all gone and for the best. See these:
8:
884:if the rules aren't completely watertight).
1144:I think we've got a clear consensus now at
944:
354:(real name's David; many know that, now;)
906:. I hope this version is less ambiguous.
1015:I'm deferring to Fut.Perf on this one.--
941:ITN for Uruguayan general election, 2009
537:on your talk page. Maybe that's due to
473:User talk:Programmer13/Vandalism Patrol
742:and need to get that process finished.
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1052:are actually the same person, and in
7:
24:
681:), though I will still sometimes
965:Uruguayan general election, 2009
948:
105:
29:
604:to Pablo by my former adoptee,
525:I agree with your second point
332:Greetings, from a sockpuppet ;)
1:
1325:21:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
1316:23:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
1299:20:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
1283:20:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
869:23:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
723:and find it amusing that you
408:18:12, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
390:15:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
372:10:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
352:09:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
1259:07:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
1235:00:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
1208:23:37, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
1183:23:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
1158:16:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
1139:17:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
1119:14:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
1104:13:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
1084:06:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
1061:05:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
1025:18:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
1010:18:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
989:09:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
931:18:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
916:16:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
894:02:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
833:05:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
799:05:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
765:05:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
695:03:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
657:14:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
639:10:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
618:16:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
595:08:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
556:05:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
515:03:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
448:02:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
428:02:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
104:
745:The sig I'm using here is:
1343:
1146:Talk:Tiger_Woods#Dispute
1039:, it has turned out per
749:Cheers, ~~~ <sup: -->
42:of past discussions.
955:On 1 December 2009,
902:. See the latest at
857:User talk:EdJohnston
750:(sock;)</sup: -->
1035:Chaser, regarding
1285:
977:
976:
875:suitable form of
329:
328:
308:
299:
290:
281:
269:
256:
239:
214:
185:
143:
100:
99:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1334:
1308:
1279:
1273:
1269:
1231:
1225:
1204:
1199:
1179:
1174:
1102:
952:
945:
752:
593:
592:
591:
539:willful deafness
535:you just changed
513:
426:
364:
324:
304:
295:
286:
273:
260:
243:
218:
189:
148:
122:
109:
102:
78:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
18:User talk:Chaser
1342:
1341:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1314:
1304:
1277:
1271:
1266:
1247:
1244:Alex Jacobowitz
1229:
1223:
1202:
1197:
1177:
1172:
1166:
1127:
1098:
1094:
1091:Edwin P. Morrow
1033:
996:
971:candidates page
943:
853:
748:
586:
585:
581:
509:
422:
418:
370:
360:
334:
325:
319:
74:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1340:
1338:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1309:
1301:
1265:
1262:
1246:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1165:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1126:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1093:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1032:
1029:
1028:
1027:
995:
992:
975:
974:
953:
942:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
852:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
806:
805:
804:
803:
802:
801:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
758:
755:
754:
753:
743:
728:
704:
703:
702:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
659:
631:
621:
620:
559:
558:
543:
542:
531:humor impaired
522:
521:
506:
505:
501:
493:
492:
476:
475:
470:
465:
451:
450:
417:
412:
411:
410:
395:
394:
393:
392:
383:keep the faith
375:
374:
365:
333:
330:
327:
326:
321:
317:
315:
312:
311:
310:
300:
291:
282:
268:
255:
238:
213:
184:
142:
116:
115:
114:
110:
98:
97:
92:
89:
84:
79:
72:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1339:
1326:
1323:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1312:
1307:
1302:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1284:
1280:
1274:
1263:
1261:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1245:
1242:
1236:
1233:
1232:
1226:
1216:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1206:
1205:
1200:
1192:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1181:
1180:
1175:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1124:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1101:
1092:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1042:
1038:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1007:
1003:
1000:
993:
991:
990:
986:
982:
972:
968:
967:
966:
960:
959:
954:
951:
947:
946:
940:
932:
928:
924:
919:
918:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
895:
891:
887:
882:
878:
873:
872:
871:
870:
866:
862:
858:
850:
834:
831:
830:Jack Merridew
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
800:
796:
792:
788:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
779:
778:
777:
766:
763:
762:Jack Merridew
759:
756:
747:
746:
744:
741:
737:
734:
729:
726:
722:
718:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
658:
655:
654:Jack Merridew
651:
647:
643:
642:
640:
637:
636:Jack Merridew
632:
629:
625:
624:
623:
622:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
598:
597:
596:
590:
584:
583:Jack Merridew
578:
574:
572:
568:
562:
557:
553:
549:
545:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
524:
523:
519:
518:
517:
516:
512:
511:Jack Merridew
502:
499:
498:
497:
491:
489:
487:
485:
483:
481:
480:
479:
474:
471:
469:
466:
464:
461:
460:
459:
457:
449:
445:
441:
437:
432:
431:
430:
429:
425:
424:Jack Merridew
416:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
396:
391:
388:
387:Jack Merridew
384:
379:
378:
377:
376:
373:
368:
363:
357:
356:
355:
353:
350:
349:Jack Merridew
345:
341:
337:
331:
314:
313:
309:
307:
303:
298:
294:
289:
285:
280:
276:
272:
267:
263:
259:
254:
250:
246:
242:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
212:
208:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
163:
159:
155:
151:
147:
141:
137:
133:
129:
125:
121:
118:
117:
113:
108:
103:
96:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
77:
73:
71:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1272:NeutralHomer
1267:
1264:Best of Luck
1248:
1227:
1221:
1214:
1195:
1170:
1167:
1128:
1095:
1034:
997:
978:
963:
962:
956:
854:
851:Live merging
724:
579:
575:
570:
563:
560:
507:
494:
478:These, too:
477:
455:
452:
419:
382:
346:
342:
338:
335:
301:
292:
283:
270:
257:
240:
235:
215:
186:
145:
144:
119:
75:
43:
37:
1198:Will Beback
1173:Will Beback
1125:Tiger Woods
958:In the news
628:masala chai
398:Hi, Jack.--
36:This is an
1289:^ This. --
1251:Ricky81682
1215:connection
923:EdJohnston
908:EdJohnston
886:EdJohnston
861:EdJohnston
683:defend him
652:. Cheers,
385:. Cheers,
336:Hi there,
136:Oct—Dec 17
128:Jun 20—Jul
124:Mar—Jun 19
95:Archive 30
87:Archive 25
82:Archive 24
76:Archive 23
70:Archive 22
65:Archive 21
60:Archive 20
1291:MZMcBride
981:BorgQueen
740:somewhere
140:Dec 17—31
1322:A Nobody
1058:A Nobody
760:Cheers,
675:involved
606:A Nobody
602:directed
580:Cheers,
571:unbanned
567:WP:BEANS
347:Cheers,
112:Archives
1131:Hapsala
1100:Acdixon
679:example
504:editor.
456:Sock FC
306:Jan—Dec
297:Jan—Dec
288:Jan—Dec
279:Sep—Dec
275:Jul—Aug
266:Apr—Jul
262:Jan—Mar
253:Nov—Dec
249:Jul—Oct
245:Jan—Jun
232:Oct—Nov
224:May—Aug
220:Jan—Apr
195:Jun—Aug
191:Jan—May
154:Feb—May
132:Aug—Sep
39:archive
1191:WP:COI
1150:Chaser
1111:Chaser
1076:Chaser
1072:WP:DRV
1031:Update
1017:Chaser
877:WP:IAR
791:Chaser
719:a few
687:Chaser
610:Chaser
548:Chaser
440:Chaser
436:WP:SIG
400:Chaser
1311:hablo
1306:pablo
900:WP:GD
881:WP:GD
751:~~~~~
644:much
589:david
367:hablo
362:pablo
302:2015:
293:2014:
284:2013:
271:2012:
258:2011:
241:2010:
216:2009:
187:2008:
146:2007:
120:2006:
16:<
1295:talk
1278:Talk
1255:talk
1222:Banj
1203:talk
1178:talk
1154:talk
1135:talk
1115:talk
1080:talk
1021:talk
1006:talk
1002:Ikip
985:talk
927:talk
912:talk
890:talk
865:talk
795:talk
733:mess
721:bits
691:talk
650:maor
646:lulz
614:talk
587:aka
552:talk
527:here
444:talk
404:talk
1220:--
1164:COI
1148:.--
1070:to
994:FYI
725:are
717:see
685:.--
630:...
500:tip
415:Tea
236:Dec
228:Sep
211:Dec
207:Nov
203:Oct
199:Sep
182:Dec
178:Nov
174:Oct
170:Sep
166:Aug
164:|
162:Jul
158:Jun
156:|
150:Jan
1297:)
1281:•
1275:•
1257:)
1230:oi
1156:)
1137:)
1117:)
1082:)
1023:)
1008:)
987:)
979:--
973:.
929:)
914:)
892:)
867:)
797:)
736:up
693:)
648:;
616:)
573:.
554:)
446:)
406:)
277:|
264:|
251:|
247:|
234:|
230:|
226:|
222:|
209:|
205:|
201:|
197:|
193:|
180:|
176:|
172:|
168:|
160:|
152:|
138:|
134:|
130:|
126:|
91:→
1313:.
1293:(
1253:(
1228:b
1224:e
1152:(
1133:(
1113:(
1078:(
1019:(
1004:(
983:(
925:(
910:(
888:(
863:(
793:(
689:(
612:(
550:(
442:(
402:(
369:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
