If you are here to register a complaint regarding my edits, before doing so please note: There is a very clear policy regarding the use of non-free images. This policy is located at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria Read this talk page and its archives before registering your complaint. It is likely someone has already registered a similar complaint, and that complaint will have been given an answer. Read the policy Check and make sure the image has a valid source Make sure that the image has a valid Fair use Rationale (A guide can be found here) I will not add rationales for you. As the uploader it is your responsibility, NOT mine. I do not want to see images deleted All images must comply with policy A generic template tag is NOT a valid fair use rationale. If you're here to whine and complain that But <place image name here> is just like my image and isn't tagged for deletion I will tag that image too, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

		The Original Barnstar
		Because of your repeated kindness and willingness to help others when nobody else will even know about it, I sincerely thank you. You've helped me build an army of... well, I'll just leave it there. :-D east.718 at 01:16, December 16, 2007

Removing criticism from a politician's article leads one to believe there's an agenda here

As requested, I'm posting here what I posted at WP:BOTREQ, slightly rewritten.

I'm working on letting possibly interested editors know about Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 4. This is a request that you use your bot to deliver a standard note to a each editor on a list.

I've compiled a list of editors who posted on the page for the prior meetup, but haven't indicated whether or not they will attend this meetup. The list is at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC 4. It isn't totally standard; some items have a user page and a user talk page and sometimes even a link to a user contributions page, but there is one line per editor.

The proposed note to go to each person on that list is at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC 4/Proposed reminder note - May 1.

You can either sign the note with my name or the bot's name (or some combination thereof, I guess) - whatever you think will cause the least amount of confusion. (I'm not the project coordinator or anything, so no one is expecting a note to be from me.) Thanks! -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Betacommand. Thanks for the offer.

Words:"freedom fighter", "freedom", "martyr", "war crime", "genocide", "shaheed", "shahid" (and their plurals). Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories +recursion: Category:History_of_Bangladesh, Category:History_of_India, History of Pakistan. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was wondering if your bot would be able to go through Category:Unassessed school articles and auto assess articles of stub & start importance, which have been assessed by other WikiProjects? Thanks. Five Years 18:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ill get BCBot up for that. β^{_{command 2}} 18:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Five Years 05:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done β^_command 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to this:

Let's see. You concocted "polydimensional programming" after you had already insulted me by saying I didn't know Python and that I didn't know what I was talking about. All because I had made a simple suggestion for how to implement a change that you considered infeasible. After establishing that yes, I certainly do know Python, you started saying it was "polydimensional programming" that I was actually unfamiliar with.

I'm not sure why you would have expected that I would have to be familiar with your "non-notable programming paradigm" to be familiar with Python at all, but once you dropped that whopper there was a bigger problem, which is that you're hiding something about your code, and the BAG for some reason doesn't review it.

"Notability" and whether you could write about it in an article has nothing to do with it. I am dead certain that "polydimensional programming" as you described it does not exist, because:

• No programming paradigm can be "infinitely expandable", except in the trivial way that all Turing-complete languages are.
• I find it highly improbable that you have reworked the entirety of Pywikipedia to be "modular" instead of monolithic. The fact that Pywikipedia is monolithic is, in fact, the reason it would take a strange hack such as checking sys.argv[0] to implement the requested change. If you have made the design modular, then switching accounts should be cake.
• "Plug-in play architecture" and "adaptive interface" are meaningless buzzwords intended to baffle people. "Plug-in play" sounds in particular like a portmanteau between "plug-ins" (a way for third party developers to add functionality to your code, which certainly isn't happening) and "plug and play" (a designation for hardware meaning that it doesn't have to be configured before it works). Neither of these would describe why you can't make requested changes to your code.

You can see the restraint it took for me to refer to this as simply "misleading". You have no such restraint, considering your immediate response is to accuse me of "spreading lies".

I remain convinced that "polydimensional programming" is a cover for the fact that BetacommandBot's code has become unmaintainable, and I don't want unmaintainable code (with a hostile operator, no less) loose on Wikipedia. This is not a lie, it is my belief based on the information you have provided. If you believe I'm wrong, maybe you should open up your code to scrutiny. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 19:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say that I could not make the needed changes, what I said was the way that the design is does not easily allow for that. yeah what you are saying is a lie. you are making unfounded personal attacks and calling an established user a lier without any ability to back it up. There are reasons that I cannot release a majority of my code. (there parts of my framework are copyrighted by my employer.) Since I dont have several hours to lecture on the design, and I am bound by some non-disclosure agreements I cannot fully explain it. lets just say it makes adding on to the bot fairly easy. either prove that I am not using a polydimensional program design or shut the fuck up and stop trolling. β^_command 22:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I pretty much thought it was BS too (trolling comment removed in 5..4..3..2..1..). MickMacNee (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell from the context, "polydimensional programming" is a fancy name for a common technique involving introspection to write self-configuring plugins. --Carnildo (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, introspection wouldn't prevent changing the login name between bot runs. If anything, it would make it easier. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 23:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In light of past comments from BC where he has banged on about having released his code to 'trusted' wikipedians, I am intrigued by the news his code contains copyrighted work of his employer. I can only conclude beta is in fact a wikimedia developer. MickMacNee (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the parts that I have released are free. I have not nor cannot give out confidential information. β^_command 02:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mick, can we keep this serious? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 23:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beta, your use of words is sloppy and problematic. People who say what they honestly believe based on the available evidence aren't "lying". Just like people who make edits you personally disagree with aren't "vandalizing", and people who criticize you aren't "trolling". Do you really think it advances your arguments at all when you toss these words around? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 23:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

introspection is one key part of the design but there is more to it than that. If I really really wanted I could spend 10 hours re-coding the system and another 10-15 hours debugging the changes, but its not worth it for such a minor change. β^{_{command 2}} 19:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So changing the login information takes 20-25 hours between bot runs? Franamax (talk) 22:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no, reconfiguring the code to use a non-CentralAuth login will require a large amount of re-coding and testing, which I know will introduce errors. β^_command 22:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But a large theme of the BRFA was that you would use a different uid for different bot tasks, which you adamantly refused to do. So it's actually not that hard to run the different tasks under different id's? Why not just cut the mustard and run the different tasks under different names? (I'll leave aside the issue of how poly-dim coding makes it so hard for you to recode). Franamax (talk) 22:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

its not as easy as you think and I dont have 20 hours to waste on something as worthless as new user ids. Im not here to play politics, I am very busy and I dont have the time to waste on some points idea. β^_command 22:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pace Mick, that comment doesn't include me, I'm interested in the technical reasons and the social reasons too. Beta, couldn't you in fact pretty easily clone the 100MB of code into 8+1(proposed) separate directories? That's one whole gigabyte of disk space, I can email you that :) You make and test your updates to the central dir and copy them off to the clones, only the auth file stays the same over updates. Each task has a separate login and you spawn each process to perform the spec'd task number. Is there a problem there? Franamax (talk) 23:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very very bad idea for maintaining code. I am constantly tweaking and changing things keeping the data updated across multiple computers and multiple directories is just piss poor idea. keeping two copies together is hard enough. β^_command 23:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blaggh. Copying code into another directory as a complete overlay, then dropping in a specific config file is trivial. You run a known stable version of any particular software from a single place for a specific reason, when you want to update the software, you copy in the new version. Where is the difficulty creeping in? Franamax (talk) 23:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

its a bad idea and poor practice, I also dont like people trying to tell me how to code when they dont know what they are talking about. As I have said I am not going to implement it, end of story. β^_command 23:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no point in asking Beta for shit, if he doesn't see merit in requests made by several people, despite their merits or qualifications, he will just revert and ignore. It is becoming clear there never was any technical reason for beta not to implement any reasonable requested change, the reasons given are all just excuses, which is the fact of the situation as I called it before his second arbcom case, beta is only aquiescant to any suggestion that meets with his philosophy of how he wishes to work here, nothing more, nothing less. It has nothing to do with technology, nothing to do with policy, nothing to do with making Wikipedia better. He is here for a hobby, even though he now wants us to believe he is a hot shot company programer entrusted with novel technology that no one knows about, but that he is allowed to distribute on wikipedia as he seed fit. In short, beta is full of shit, that's me calling a spade a spade beta, which is your preferred method of communication on here if I recall correctly. MickMacNee (talk) 23:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MickMacNee, your a fucking dumbass troll, you have no idea what I have or have not released to others, please take your first grade IQ somewhere else Im not interested in your dumbass opinion. if you are going to use words you dont understand at least spell check them. β^_command 23:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see here - Tinucherian (talk) 04:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done β^_command 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Betacommand, how can I gain access to UserCompare? Sincerely, Bstone (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

drop me an e-mail with a private password you will use for the tool. I have a new web interface for the tool as soon as I can get around to uploading it. β^{_{command 2}} 19:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]