User talk:Dscos/archive13

=May 2005=

Signpost article
You can save your strength and ideas for next week when I'm gone. I'll do this week's Signpost article (late tonight or tomorrow morning). Any ideas are appreciated, though. Mgm|(talk) 17:12, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, alright. I can usually do it, just let me know a little while in advance.  Next week, then?  BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 17:16, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

FAOC
Re your vote on styles. I understand and agree. But only casting one vote is effectively a vote against Alternative 1 because it means that less opposition is recorded against its nearest rival. Ireland uses an electoral system called Proportional Representation using a Single Transferable Vote. It works on the same principle as the one being used (only less complicated! I never thought I would find a system more complicated than PR.STV!) What you do is give your bottom preference to the people you want to defeat, and spread your vote in a way that boosts the rivals of the alternative you do not want. So if for example, you find Alternative 3 the one you least like, give it your bottom vote so that opposition to it is recorded. And spread the other votes to ensure the weakest get votes ahead of it. If for example in Ireland I want to ensure candidate 'x' of Fianna Fáil is elected, and ensure candidate 'y' of Sinn Féin is defeated, and there are 15 candidates, I give my number 1 to 'x', my number '15' to 'y' and spread my other votes to ensure that all other candidates beat 'y'.

Sinn Féin and Fianna Fáil voters famously used to practice a 'first and only choice' vote by just voting for their own preferred candidate and then stopping. They eventually realised that they were wasting their vote because they weren't using it to block those they were most opposed to, or to build up the rivals to the candidate they were opposed to. To stop Alternative 3 winning, if that is what you want, give it your fifth choice and give your second, third and fourth choices to the weakest options.

Just be careful though not to copy everyone else doing it. If everyone gives the same other alternatives the same order of votes they may win. So if option 4 gets a lot of 2s, give it a 4. Doing a full vote right down the line will have the effect of strengthening Alternative 1 vis-a-vis 3 or whatever. Just voting for 1 and stopping actually weakens it against its rivals if everyone else votes down the line, because while their opposition to different alternatives is recorded, by stopping at 1 your's isn't. That is why though very popular Alternative 1 is being beaten. Remember the winner won't be decided by who has more votes for, but which faces the least opposition. By voting first and only choice you haven't recorded your opposition to the other options. Slán Fear ÉIREANN (talk) 00:23, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't like Condorcet voting. I prefer straight up polls, with one choice per person.  That's why I didn't list other choices. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 00:40, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It is your prerogative how to vote. I am posting the following to all those who are currently voting First and Only Choice on any alternative. Whig 13:01, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Survey on Prefixed-Styles
Since you are one of the people currently voting a "First and only choice" I am hoping to encourage you to vote a full set of preferences in the ongoing survey before May 14, in order to prevent a deadlock which will result in no consensus. Whig 13:01, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, buddy. There are no other acceptable options in my mind than the one for which I "voted";  therefore "ranking" or any sort of other thing would be wrong, because no other option would be my second or third or so on preferred choice, for I prefer no other options. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 18:27, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I tried to be fair and post the same encouragement to everyone who had expressed a single preference, regardless of which preference they had chosen. There is very little chance of deadlock now, in any case. Despite any disagreement between our respective positions, I appreciate that you've taken the time to express your view. Whig 17:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Btw, I do intend to submit the winner of the survey to a straight up or down ratification vote. Whig 17:14, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Jeffrey W. Parker
Hello, I have done significant work on this article since your vote. Please consider changing your vote, should be persuaded that notability has been more convincingly established by these modifications. Thanks, 205.217.105.2 16:46, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Warren County Canal
Perhaps a Signpost article could be written on the swiftness (13 days) that this article went from creation to featured status? User:PedanticallySpeaking.
 * Yeah, maybe so, but I'm not really interested in writing it... :-) <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 23:07, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

User:24.70.95.203
User:24.70.95.203 is a menace. This person should be blocked. I noticed that you removed much of this person's talk page when you issued a warning. I was wondering why? Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 09:59, 15 May 2005 (UTC) I've restored the past talk to an archive and linked it to the talk page. I don't see evidence that it is a different person. -- Samuel Wantman 20:14, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
 * A lot of the stuff was months and months old... I figured it was probably a different user... <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 17:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Spelling
See Manual of Style. Gdr 20:33, 2005 May 15 (UTC)
 * I'm well-familiar with the MoS, thanks. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 00:03, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Then how do you justify your edit ? Gdr 08:36, 2005 May 16 (UTC)
 * The correct spelling should be used on our most visible of pages. It embarasses me, to have corrupted spellings on the main page. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 11:50, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * But "color" is not an incorrect spelling. Are you really familiar with Manual of Style? Gdr 11:57, 2005 May 16 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes it is. And yes, very much so, I've read the MoS from cover to cover, more than once, even. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 20:38, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * What make you think it is incorrect? Gdr 21:55, 2005 May 16 (UTC)
 * What do you mean what makes me think that? British English is correct;  all variants are corruptions... <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 00:16, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

(что??)
I had to comment on your signature. что is one of the few words in Russian I still know on sight. (If nothing else you can easily keep a conversation going... "что?"... and they keep talking... - Tεx  τ  urε  21:14, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * :-) I don't see you around much, anymore, bud... good to see you. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 21:29, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Life is like that... lotsa interruptions... -  Tεx  τ  urε  21:39, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

PHS
I made some edits regarding Pensacola High School and the high black population, and the link between new zoning laws to bring more white people in. I'm afraid the way I worded it was a bit...racist, so please read it and tell me what you think. Mike H 22:14, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Eh, it's alright, I guess. I myself would probably just excise the paragraph entirely, as I don't think it's really that imporant/worth any possible conflict... but it's fine, I guess.  Maybe you should try try rewording it a little bit... right now it sort-of implies that there is an implicit connection between African-Americans and poverty, as if the two go hand-in-hand.  <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 23:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe there's not a direct correlation between the two, but come on....I went there and it's pretty obvious. I know the "no original research" rule; I'm trying to get around that. Mike H 01:50, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * I realise that, but I think associating the two is treading on thin water, and I'd prefer to avoid it. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 01:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Signpost
I feel like a jerk for not remembering this sooner, but I won't be able to do this week's article either. I have to go to a wedding. Can you take over again? Mgm|(talk) 12:14, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I probably can... I have an obligation Sunday... but I might be able to do it Saturday if I don't have any-Navy related stuff to do, I'm not sure, though. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 21:34, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Another Pensacola media-related article
Voilà. Mike H 20:19, May 19, 2005 (UTC)


 * This is an article not related to media, but this time a person. Mike H 02:44, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow. How... interesting. <b style="font-size: 74%;">BLANKFAZE</b> | <b style="font-size:90%;">(&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;</b><b style="font-size:70%;">??</b><b style="font-size:90%;">)</b> 05:43, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * And a follow-up. Mike H 18:02, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

I added pictures to the Beth-El and PHS articles. Take a look-see. Mike H 01:36, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks mate
I'm beginning to feel a bit better. But... from now on I'll not do any more pranks that disrupt pages. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:04, 24 May 2005 (UTC)