Glad to see you around again, and many thanks for your support. Maybe making WP:100 this time really merits some ink? Anyway, I assume all went well with school for you sir, so congrats on that too. VanTucky 23:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't congrats me just yet - I have 4 more weeks until I get my BS. Yeah, I think I only made WP:50 and one of those users was banned, so I really didn't make it at all. Haha. Stay nice and calm as an admin, and maybe they'll give you access to the mailing lists! the_undertow ^talk 23:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh fuck man, I quit my subscription to the open ones a couple months ago. I was in a bad mood and shot my mouth off with some seriously nasty results. I quoted a lunch conversation with Ward Cunningham (I work with him) out of context, and it got back to Jimmy Wales and people blogged about how Ward was talking shit about him. Then Jimbo called him up. Ouch. I'm just lucky Ward's nice, and saw that people took it out of proportion. Good luck on the BSing. VanTucky 00:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the mailing lists have their own standards - especially the closed ones. I am a big fan of transparency, so I would actually like to see all lists abolished or go public. You're doing great man. I'm really glad that you took the 'advice' given at your RfA, didn't quit and went on to keep editing. It's easy to get discouraged, seeing as how you can take a lot of shit here, and we don't even get paid? Do we? the_undertow ^talk 02:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In supporting this user for RFA here? It ended up as SNOW and i was expecting you to be a novice editor or a friend of the user but your an admin! Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt in that you didn't really look into the user carefully enough, in fact you didn't need to go that deep. You must have had a brain explosion, the user had 24 edits! Roadrunnerz45 (talk) 14:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user wanted the tools so he could take part in blocking IP addresses. I supported as I like the answer to Q1 and the idea of blocking IP addresses. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you will figure out that it was levity. Unbend, my friend. the_undertow ^talk 21:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha... Not everyone gets your classic humor, Chip. Lara❤Love 03:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heya, I just rewrote the "Dealing with disruptive editors" guideline. It's a major overhaul, I basically tripled the size of one section. Could you take a look at it, let me know if you can think of anything else to add? Wikipedia:Disruptive editing#Dealing with disruptive editors. Thanks, Elonka 05:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me give this a serious read. I love having input here. It's like asking a convict to tie his own noose. the_undertow ^talk 07:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly! Erm, yes, I'd love your thoughts, thanks.  :) --Elonka 07:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made some minor tweaks (not like anything I do is minor), but the rest looks like a dummies guide to dealing with disruption - which is a good thing. I can't help you with the email you sent me about not being able to 'break the code' on your Rubik's cube. I mean, I usually just peel the stickers off and put them back in order. You should probably put that in a book or something. the_undertow ^talk 07:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.  :) Would you be willing to post a note at the talkpage? It looks like the last time someone tried changing that guideline they were immediately reverted, so I'd like to try and head that off.  :) --Elonka 10:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:3rd eye.ogg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iz up in ur uploads, fixin ur shit. Lara❤Love 13:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok dude (we are all picking up that word from South Park and Dude, Where's my Car), some visual media which may serve to enlighten you to aussie culture:

• Bush Mechanics - classic documentary and very funny. Great for view of our indigenous culture.
• Chris Lilley (comedian) - who made We Can Be Heroes: Finding The Australian of the Year and Summer Heights High, the last in particular is really brilliant.

For NZ culture

• Summer Heights High is like an NZ version of Snatch (film) or something. Also funny.

These have all come out on DVD here and there may be some going cheap on ebay or something. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Powderfinger. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 05:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Butler Trio and The Herd then if we are talking bands....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, we have hip hop bands in Australia? I wasn't aware. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 05:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I suppose this is topical given I was talkin' 'bout Strummer the other day...something ta listen to anyways..(chuckle) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jezz' play it fckn loud dood. Busy now..is 8PM and hands are tied (metaphorically that is) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Think this is probably a bot account. Cross wiki activity including Commons. May be an open proxy/Xrumer - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'll watch when the block expires. Thx the_undertow ^talk 07:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you'll like it. It's a tattoo where it seems my skin is ripped open and teddy bear fluff is coming out, and it's semi sewn back together. I hope it'll turn out good. I trust my artist, he's been tattooing for 11 years. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 05:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Chip, you should get something like that! Only instead of teddy bear fluff, it should be awesome leaking out... XD Lara❤Love 15:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So a picture of himself pissing? <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 15:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also thinking of getting an Outer Conch Piercing. Tell me whatcha think of zes tattoos and piercings. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 23:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The tattoo sounds good, but there may be only one or two people I would even trust to attempt what you are talking about. I'm kinda over piercings right now. There's nothing wrong with the industrial, but if I get hoops, I'll end up looking like Mr. Clean. Haha. the_undertow ^talk 05:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; this user, whom you have indefblocked, has posted an unblock request. He is, as far as one can tell, a newbie, and while his chosen username was spammy it was, perhaps, less blatantly so than some. I assume that you intended only a username block, but did not post a message on his userpage saying so and, as a newbie, he does of course not know procedure. No argument about the username block, but do you feel a little guidance for him might be a kind thought? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 08:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Took care of it. Dood is unblocked, we are all good, and I have beers to drink. Laters. the_undertow ^talk 11:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the unblock. I am trying to setup a mediawiki server myself. Will learn how wikipedia functions and how it works. Thank you!

Kingstar111 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingstar111 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Granted, but you hardly qualify as a new editor. Indeed, I was considering a prod or even a speedy, but I saw that you were an experienced editor and assumed you knew what you were doing, so I merely posted the tags that I did. And those tags aren't exactly The Scarlet Letter, y'know. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take each article on a case-by-case basis, and often take into account whether it's a new editor or not. Most of the time it's pretty cut and dried on new-page patrol — speedies for outright nonsense, yet another garage band, or another PR guy trying to promote a client. It's amazing how much junk finds its way on here. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, NPP can be fun. Or not. But it has to be done. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anxietyonwiki.jpg Great work! Just about sums up many many mornings for me. :) Thanks for the laugh! SQL^{Query me!} 05:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I find out which articles link to a specific article? Thanks. Tparameter (talk) 14:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you are on an article page, go to the Tool Box on the left, and you should be able to click "What links here." Hope that helps. the_undertow ^talk 14:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop trying to delete the evidence of why this user is banned. He has been conducting an offsite campaign recruiting and directing meatpuppets from WikipediaReview to act on his behalf since he is banned which has resulted in much disruption of Wikipedia. Your actions on his user page are not helpful, and can be taken to be acting on his account as well since there's 5500+ other banned users who's user pages you are not trying to whitewash. Again, please to be more helpful. FeloniousMonk (talk) 14:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you reblock him whilst you're at it please? I'm not too sure what duration you're going to set, but I'd suggest nothing less than indef. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reinstated the community ban, which was indef. Since his plea to be heard about unblocking was rejected by the arbcom, I'm wondering what justification in policy The undertow has for his unilateral unblock of Moulton. FeloniousMonk (talk) 14:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please link me to the community ban? Lara❤Love 15:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background info found linked from User:Moulton. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read that. Where's this community ban FM referred to? Lara❤Love 15:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if you're going to play wikilawyer Lara, where's the discussion with the blocking admin? This discussion clearly supports the block. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, six people. Silly me. No wait, that's what I was talking about. Lara❤Love 17:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More to the point, all of Arbcom who voiced an opinion supported the block, and declined even looking at unblocking, due to the Rfc and how the request was framed (making it clear Moulton had not changed his approach a bit.) KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As his current meatpuppetry campaign confirms. FeloniousMonk (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with FM's comment above. Moulton was banned for good cause, and the arbcom saw no reason to change that. Raul654 (talk) 15:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not endorsing the_undertow's action, I'm just asking where the community ban is. Lara❤Love 15:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its an odd thing about vandalism - the vandal rarely labels it "vandalism". Just so, sarcasm rarely comes with a label "Sarcasm". And community bans don't come with big neon labels so you can read the words "Community ban". Read the linked Rfc, ANI, and ArbCom replies, and the block log. The sum of those items IS the community ban. I thought you were brighter than this, Lara. Are you having a bad day? KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read the Arb case yet, but the rest is unimpressive, especially considering other editors have been unblocked that were way more disruptive than Moulton. Let me read over it. And no, I'm not having a bad day, but thanks for asking. Lara❤Love 17:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am disquieted by your deletion of User:Moulton just after consensus had been reached in the MfD; in your deletion comment you implicitly cite the "Right to Vanish", though obviously you'll be aware that this doesn't apply to persistent users who have been banned. Either way, I think it was a mistake to ignore consensus in this way, and it seems to me (from a brief reading) that your actions and general point of view in the matter put you in a conflict of interest.

Consequently, I am minded to undo your deletion and restore the page to the consensus-agreed page. I would appreciate some feedback on this (I may well have missed some obvious point, for example), as I don't like to undo the actions of fellow sysops.

James F. (talk) 19:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do think it was a bad move to delete it at this point, but it's unclear how "a consensus had been reached in the MFD" - it's not been open four hours, and there are clearly people stating opinions in both directions. you were talking about the compromise --Random832 (contribs) 20:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a lot of thought to what was said before, but I must say that pretty much it's all the suck. And if you weren't so busy fucking sniping on my contribs, this dood, who had a shitty 'banning' would have been able to edit with guidelines. When the fuck will people here learn to fucking let shit go. There's a whole world out there guys. I'm serious. You can go fuck, maybe get a degree and perhaps even cyber with some 'chick' on a webcam for a mere 50 bucks. Instead, you decide to snipe on what I do, in hopes that what? You think that 127 blocks will get you laid faster than me? Fucking realize that this is a hobby. You are not paid. Go fucking make a difference by donating blood and not tagging articles for speedy deletion. In the end, you have nothing left but memories. And you better pray to God right now that your memories don't consist of AfD, nor RfC, nor ANI, but perhaps the time you left the house and fucking had a drink. the_undertow ^talk 20:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, the undertow. I think you may need to take a breath. I've only briefly looked into the Moltoun thing, and I think I would tend towards agreeing with you, but this is a bit over the top. Please rethink what you wrote. Mahalo. --Ali'i 20:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its a hobby that people care about, with a goal that people believe in. It sounds like you are the one taking this too seriously. There is no inalienable right to edit Wikipedia - there are many other useful things Moulton can do with his time if is he unable to edit here. This hobby is a shared one, and maintains itself through (in this case relatively simple) rules and the good will of its members. Sorry to butt in, but I think you do a disservice to the folks involved in this sort of thing and the various elements of Wikipedia by your comments. If Wikipedia is so unworthy to you, and so disturbing to your equilibrium, there are other hobbies. Avruch ^T 20:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find that above response from you completely unacceptable and have therefore asked for opinions on AN/I. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#the undertow. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll take this as tacit approval. Thanks.

James F. (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(moved from thread above as off-topic and confusing)

Did he forget to do the customary AN/I thread where he waits a few hours and then unblocks after no consensus is reached based on his subpage with a mentorship plan? Damn... you should write a guide on that, Ryan. But it's good to see that Moulton is reblocked now, right? But only for indef? Why not longer, as Ryan hoped... how long would longer than indef be? Lara❤Love 14:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"He" who, Lara? He Ryan? Your entire post seems to be a snide comment on Ryan, which normally I'd be sympathetic with, but in the middle of this rather serious situation regarding The undertow's actions, serves only to confuse and belittle the issues. I'd appreciate if you'd move your comment to Ryan's page so as to keep this thread for the main topic at hand - thanks in advance. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"how long would longer than indef be?" Indef implies a chance to return, hence for infinity would be longer.  :) &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149;^dissera! 19:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

It seems you have stepped on a mine. I once did something very similar, but on a much smaller scale. I think I proposed some edits on intelligent design that had previously been proposed by a certain banned user, and well I was totally perplexed by the reaction and also went almost crazy; I know it's not easy to stay sober when basically out of nothing it seems all the world suddenly turns against you; but take it easy and don't take it personally, this Moulton guy seems like a really really disruptive troublemaker. I don't know the full history, and neither do you seem to know it, so please don't fight this fight, and maybe we can just start this over.

Best wishes, Merzul (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the sentiment. It's nice to know that others are willing to empathize. But let it just play out naturally. There are 3 sides to every story, and not everyone is going to agree with the side I have taken. In the interim, I put my complete faith in the system, and if they deem that I have fought the wrong fight, then I lose. It's simply a gamble. And again, your words are greatly appreciated. the_undertow ^talk 21:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There may be 3 sides to every story, but when you remain silent, we don't get to see/hear it. Sorry, but that's just stupid. People are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but your attitude/response is making it hard to do so.Balloonman (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have filed a request for arbitration based on your recent actions. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#The_undertow Raul654 (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, and there is an arbcom filing against Cla68!!! This has to be one of the saddest day in the history of Wikipedia. I'm not siding with anyone here, but this is going to mean big fights between many editors that I respect on both sides. :( :( Merzul (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the arbitration request and have the utmost respect that this situation will be dealt with godspeed. I should point out that 3rd party communications are of no value, as Wikipedia does not entertain off-site behavior. That being said, I will gladly adhere to whatever outcome ARBCOM decides, because after 11,000 edits, and numerous administrative actions, I believe in the system that I have given my free time to. Thank you. the_undertow ^talk 22:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]