| Revision as of 12:10, 9 May 2011 editBarong (talk | contribs)274 edits →Iz borked?: "up to you"← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:27, 9 May 2011 edit undoArcticocean (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators46,395 edits →A solution, if it pleases you: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| : ''same-same, but different'' is an idiom here for ''no difference''. And I wanted the diff in there. I'd not seen that Brad-diff in, I guess, 4 years. And see . Terima kasih, ] 12:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC) | : ''same-same, but different'' is an idiom here for ''no difference''. And I wanted the diff in there. I'd not seen that Brad-diff in, I guess, 4 years. And see . Terima kasih, ] 12:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC) | ||
| == A solution, if it pleases you == | |||
| Hi Jack/Barong/whatever you prefer to be called now. Here is (in my view) the best solution to this whole sorry mess: | |||
| #The argument of those that would keep the restrictions on your account is that your continued creation and use of accounts such as this one are evidence of distracting and ]y, and therefore disruptive, conduct on your part. | |||
| #There are, so far as I can tell, no other arguments. | |||
| #In order to mitigate that argument, you should issue a statement at the request for clarification thread, in which you resolve to desist from such behaviour. In short, you should say that you have "Made your point and will now go back to acting like Old Jack". | |||
| #In that statement, also ask whether there is any other compelling reason why you should continue to be restricted. (In my view, there is not.) Then ask that the restrictions be lifted. | |||
| #Restrictions are lifted. Everybody is as happy as can be. You don't go off the rails any more, ArbCom don't get more annoyed, and the community don't have to renew their stock of ]. | |||
| There is no reason for you to continue to be restricted, but you are in the processing of creating a very valid one. My e-mail is open if you want to talk privately. | |||
| ]<small> <nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></small> 13:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:27, 9 May 2011
undelete requests
If you do have any more, please don't use ANI for them - just ping my talk page. cheers, Rd232 04:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- ok. ani has high readership, though ;) Barong 04:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- or mine. Spartaz 15:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Intoours111
Is this you, an imposter, someone who coincidentally makes lots of references to Scapa Flow like you do, or something else? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:59, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Nope, not me. Could just be someone who thinks it a usual method... but I'm suspicious... Barong 09:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Formatting refs
Erm, never done it like this before - I'd always only do cited texts bit for books and only if I had more than one inline. Anyway, happy to sit back and muse on it. If you are in some bali cafe, any balinese folklore it figures in would be good to add. One of the things that surprised me is how much aboriginal folklore there is about it...be nice to balance. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- They need some further renaming. It's really about getting the whole ref out of inline so the prose is more accessible. Garuda is the obvious avian ref, but there are many; flight has appeal, to all cultures, really. As I said on ani, the Balinese are more focused on their cockfights, these days. It's about gambling, smoking and drinking with your mates, &c., but it's deeply rooted in the culture. If Dewa's cocks lose, it will be quieter in the morning for me. Of course there are many, many more. I'm involved in the local libraries, but they doesn't much cover this sort of thing. KIds books, and Sue Grafton shite for the mundane tourists. Barong 10:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Back where you Barong
{{welcome}} pablo 10:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- glad to be back in it ;) Barong 10:30, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- The image is just as I've always pictured you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 09:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- iz teh Singa Raja ;) Barong 09:59, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Iz borked?
I think my formulation was better . --Two Monkeys (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- same-same, but different is an idiom here for no difference. And I wanted the diff in there. I'd not seen that Brad-diff in, I guess, 4 years. And see these. Terima kasih, Barong 12:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
A solution, if it pleases you
Hi Jack/Barong/whatever you prefer to be called now. Here is (in my view) the best solution to this whole sorry mess:
- The argument of those that would keep the restrictions on your account is that your continued creation and use of accounts such as this one are evidence of distracting and WP:POINTy, and therefore disruptive, conduct on your part.
- There are, so far as I can tell, no other arguments.
- In order to mitigate that argument, you should issue a statement at the request for clarification thread, in which you resolve to desist from such behaviour. In short, you should say that you have "Made your point and will now go back to acting like Old Jack".
- In that statement, also ask whether there is any other compelling reason why you should continue to be restricted. (In my view, there is not.) Then ask that the restrictions be lifted.
- Restrictions are lifted. Everybody is as happy as can be. You don't go off the rails any more, ArbCom don't get more annoyed, and the community don't have to renew their stock of peanuts.
There is no reason for you to continue to be restricted, but you are in the processing of creating a very valid one. My e-mail is open if you want to talk privately.