User talk:Hipocrite/12/2011

Please comment on Talk:Mellanox Technologies
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mellanox Technologies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Personal Attack
Calling me a incestuous rapist isn't going to win you any fans. I normally let personal attacks on me slide since I figure I have thick skin, but in this case I think you owe me an apology.--v/r - TP 17:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I could have called you a litterer. Hipocrite (talk) 17:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Would've been better than calling a father of two girls a rapist. About that apology?--v/r - TP 18:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant, excepting Alice. Hipocrite (talk) 18:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Figured as much, but worth a try. I'll leave a link here to the ANI discussion in a few minutes.--v/r - TP 18:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Walk right in it's around the back. Hipocrite (talk) 18:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You're cordially invited to the ball.--v/r - TP 18:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

It would probably be best to state that you retract the edit comment, just to elide the dramah William M. Connolley (talk) 19:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems too late now, dosen't it? Also, an admin could rape their own father and get away with it. Hipocrite (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't too late. And please: self-redact that last comment. Otherwise I'll feel guilty for provoking you William M. Connolley (talk) 19:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Revert
Thanks for the warning but it was unnecessary, I reverted it only three times, and I had to request that it moveto the discussion page two of those times before it started discussion. I was well within my rights and your constant threats against me and accusations of sock puppetry are xtremely annoying. If you continue hostile action towards my account, I will invoke WP:IAR and take matters into my own hands against you. That is YOUR warning.--Jacksoncw (talk) 19:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * What exactly are you going to do if I "continue hostile action" (I don't believe I've engaged in any hostile action, but we'll ignore that bit)? Your requests that things move to the talk page need to be accompanied by you engaging on the talk page, not just reverting. Hipocrite (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Oracle Exalogic
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Oracle Exalogic. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:GravEngAbs
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:GravEngAbs. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Tch
Have patience. I plink at Wikipedia a bit during breakfast, dealing with minor items that don't require extensive thought. Questions that require more detailed responses typically need to wait a bit. DS (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I am happy to wait. Hipocrite (talk) 13:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay. First - the reason I got involved in this issue (I typically try to avoid drama, thank you) is that Scott Mac asked (yes, on IRC) for a "sanity check" of his 24-hour block of BD. He most specifically did not ask for any actions other than for an uninvolved person to consider his 24-hour block in context, and either confirm or deny that it had been appropriate. I clicked the link, opened the page, then got sidetracked and went to do things in other windows for a while (the perils of multitasking); eventually, I returned to that issue when he asked, a second time, for a "block review".

A cursory, and then a more in-depth, reading of BD's talk page led me to the regrettable conclusion that the 24-hour block had been appropriate at the time of its imposition, but that the situation had only gotten worse since then.

Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia project. That's three facets, and although BD may have been a worthy participant when one considers "encyclopedia" and "project" (I haven't looked, but that's not the point; he's been described as such by individuals whom I have no reason to disbelieve), there were definitely problems from the viewpoint of "collaborative". I haven't thoroughly reviewed the issue which led to the initial mess, or the issue which resulted from that, or the subsequent one. The mess which sprang out of the word "goyim" was, in my opinion, initially overblown, but BD's responses appeared, to me, to manifest an increasing degree of aggressiveness, anger, hostility, and scorn. [Pause for several minutes while I compose a lengthy message to user:Kiefer.Wolfowitz; you may be interested in that message as well, because it pertains tangentially to this issue. Note that I have multiple edit windows open, and that I have clicked the 'save' tabs one after the other, thus providing the illusion that I've constructed two lengthy messages within less than a minute.)

It is a truism (or perhaps an aphorism?) of mine that every project which involves more than one person, will be subject to personality issues. This is because we are humans, and humans have egos. I found the initial block of BD to be unfortunate and regrettable, but not inappropriate, because his behavior -- on his talk page, and elsewhere (as summarized by what I think was an RFC?) -- had, in my opinion, become increasingly objectionable. I also noted that he had been using the "Unblock" template as a medium for further abusive comments towards other users, which is not acceptable and which is a standard reason for removing talkpage access. As well, he explicitly asked for his temporary block to be increased to an indefinite one.

With sorrow, I concluded -- from the behavior that I had observed -- that it was exceedingly unlikely that BD would resume editing in a productive manner. As such, I increased the duration of his block to 'indefinite'. I removed his access to his talk page because of his inappropriate use of the "Unblock" template. And I removed his access to the EMAILUSER function out of concern that an individual -- who I perceived to be aggressive -- might choose to send inappropriate e-mails. Leaving aside the question of whether this was a pointless action on my part (I'm uncertain as to whether BD had activated his EMAILUSER function in the first place), I freely admit that this particular portion of the block may have been excessive; if another administrator provides an argument for restoring BD's access to the EMAILUSER function, I will present no objection.

Good enough? DS (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Leave Pesky alone!
Can't you see it's hard being a pastor.. ummm.. grandmother... ummm.. horse... oh dear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.118.50.225 (talk) 22:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Occupy Marines Vfd
I would urge you to go and review the edit history on the correct, 2nd discussion! I did not copy votes from one discussion to another. I was restoring substantial sections to the page lost by someone else in - I assume - riding roughshod over an edit conflict, or reverting to restore the template information you object to at the top.

Please get your facts straight before making allegations of deceptive behaviour! --77.100.209.249 (talk) 14:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for apologising, I appreciate you checked and resolved the problem. I would suspect once more of the US is awake that discussion could get even worse for edit conflicts. --77.100.209.249 (talk) 14:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Your Edit Notice
Hello Hipocrite. I was observing the discussion in the RfA and found it compelling to look into you a bit. When I saw the humorous No TB no listen post, I found a possible explanation to why you keep getting TB's. Most TB's are made using Twinkle. When a user uses Twinkle to send a TB, s/he will not see your edit notice and therefore won't know that you do not want one. Consider putting the notification on the top of your talk page in big bold letters so users can see it all the time. Just a thought.— cyber power  ( X-Mas Chat )( Contrib. ) 02:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Harry Houdini
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Harry Houdini. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

r&i
i have a suggestion. what about taking some of the r&i-issues to the fringe theories noticeboard? i believe that a wider community response is needed on the issue of undue weight.--  mustihussain   18:41, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Beatrice Rosen
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Beatrice Rosen. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Right on the money
Thank you for having the guts to tell it like it is. It is good to know that someone noticed the problem and took the time to comment. Thanks. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Abd al-Rab Mansur al-Hadi
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Abd al-Rab Mansur al-Hadi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Indophobia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indophobia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South Asia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South Asia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)