User talk:Deus Ex Machina

Your user name/sig
Hi. I can't help wondering why your user name is "Deus ex Machina", but it appears in your sig as "Deus ex Macina". It's none of my business, but I am intrigued. Cheers --  JackofOz 11:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I was going for a general Latin effect, considering there's no "ch" in Latin.. I dunno, I might be wrong about that, I'm no expert. Glad to see you're intrigued though, lol.  ^_^  DEVS EX MACINA  pray 18:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

!! User box
This is my only user box. I definitely don't know the whole story, but what I've seen so far resonates with me. –BozoTheScary 20:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your edit
Hey DExM, there's not really a consensus at talk anymore (Re this edit). Some new concerns have been raised. Jump on in. R. Baley (talk) 05:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Dane in Brisbane
You don't have your email enabled....but did you ever know a "Corey" say 10-15 years ago? Shot info (talk) 06:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't remember.. considering I'm only 20, I'd have had to be a kid, so no I don't think I'm the person you're looking for. Sorry.  Though Dane is an uncommon name, Brisbane isn't that small, either!  And I enabled my email now too, thanks for reminding me.   DEVS EX MACINA  pray 23:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That's ok. The Dane I was knew would be in his mid to late thirties.  Do you get much "Hey Dane...your Great" etc. type BS?  Shot info (talk) 00:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 18:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your post
I'm not sure you can stop that from happening in the first place. Normally reasonable people occasionally make bad calls. What you can do is set things up so that errors like that are rare and self-correcting. Remember that within 75 minutes I recognized the error and reversed the block with apologies, then promptly pledged improvements to prevent a similar mistake from happening again. Processes at Wikipedia are supposed to be preventative, not punitive, and publication of that report two days after I'd addressed the error on my own initiative was about as punitive as Wikipedia ever gets: the mainstream tech press coverage that resulted may do long term harm to my career. Is that really what you'd wish on a volunteer who makes a good faith error after two years' productive service to the site? Durova Charge! 07:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not the fact that you made an error, it's the thinking that led to such an error that is the problem. The criteria you used to determine !! was in any way a harmful account could be applied to any other account on Wikipedia given a bit of leverage, and it is that mentality that is harmful to the encyclopedia.  I know you made an error and it perhaps harmed you more than it should have had, but the  backlash shouldn't have been about you, it should have been about this sort of.. overly punitive thinking.  I know talking tough about cracking down on trolls and SPAs is popular talk, as is - if you will forgive the analogy here, but I think it's relevant - talking tough about eliminating terrorists, but it's the methods and the mindset we must keep an eye on.  I don't wish harm on you.  I wish harm on the thinking that led you to that erroneous conclusion, and would have led you to more in the future had no-one picked up on it.


 * Giano's leaking of the correspondence was the precipitating factor, not any notification to any higher body or the mailing list itself. Had we not known the exact contents, we would have merely dismissed it as a bad block, but it wasn't JUST a bad block, it was a bad conclusion, a bad system, a bad sleuth, not necessarily entirely your fault.  You were, though, the most visible target, and it could have been handled better by everyone involved.  However, Giano's release was not the problem, and any policy which seeks to disable this kind of whistleblowing is harmful to the encyclopedia and our goals.    DEVS EX MACINA  pray 10:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that my reasoning behind that block was seriously flawed. That particular instance was quite different from the kind of investigation I normally run.  Normally I depend on smoking guns, not circumstantial evidence, and within the first two hours I saw the whole chain of logical errors that had led me there.  I promptly pledged improvements that would have stopped the same mistake from happening again.  In other words, the lesson that you say justified Giano's action was something I had already both learned and articulated to the community on my own initiative.
 * What you got from seeing that particular report was an accurate view of small piece of information very much out of context. Get 99 blocks right and one wrong, and suddenly I'm "a bad sleuth".  Post one out-of-character message to an e-mail list about cyberstalking, and a meme takes on a life of its own about what that list was supposedly doing and what it was about.  One of your statements is absolutely on target, although probably in a different sense from what you intend.  I've been waiting for things to calm down enough that rational discussion can become possible.  Durova Charge! 18:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

MfD Again (You voted before)

 * The article formerly known as VP:Admin Abuse is back up for a MfD, in spite of its new title and greatly expanded sections highlighting great admins. (The MfD is believed to be a veiled personal attack.) The new page is WP:What Were They Thinking? (or simply WP:WWTT). The deletion question is here. Please visit and voice your support or, if your opinion has changed, opposition to this article. As you'll recall, it was a UNANIMOUS KEEP the first time around. Thank you for your time. VigilancePrime (talk) 01:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

David Hicks
I'd appreciate it if you could refrain from edit-warring on the lead. Your comments in edit summaries are hardly helping, either - we've been talking about this for a few days already, so your action in restoring the contested version again, and asking people to comment on the talk page without participating in the ongoing discussion yourself is not particularly impressive.

I've indicated why both versions are unsuitable; why don't you help by finding a wording that addresses the concerns raised? Put it up in the discussion forum and we can work from there. Until we get a new consensus, it's best IMHO to keep the version that has survived for a while. But we will change it. --Pete (talk) 03:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair point about me not participating in the discussion. However, I don't think you have satisfactorily explained why the changes to the lead should not be made, apart from vague concerns - and, if I may be frank, your own personal opinion.  The sources are adequate and the facts undeniable.   DEVS EX MACINA  pray 12:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa
My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful, and I'll do what I can to ensure your opinion of my suitability for adminship improves. Thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 19:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

User Skyring
I've spotted the unblock request (no notification) and have replied on the user's talk page. Ian Cairns (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI
I noticed your participation in discussions about this user, or similar articles to those which he was seemingly banned for editing.

See at the bottom of the talkpage:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TlatoSMD  Karla Lindstrom   10:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed from Signpost spamlist
Hi! I'm Ral315, editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost. It appears that you have not edited in at least a few months. To avoid spamming your talk page any further, should you be on leave, your name has been removed from the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to continue receiving the Signpost on your talk page, please leave a note on my talk page to that effect, and I will restore your name, and keep you on the list indefinitely. Ral315 (talk) 06:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll
You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:27, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)