Misplaced Pages

User talk:Geogre

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MONGO (talk | contribs) at 08:01, 15 September 2006 (→Hello?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 08:01, 15 September 2006 by MONGO (talk | contribs) (→Hello?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Talk archive 1, Talk archive 2, Talk archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5, Archive 6, Archive 7, Archive 8, Archive 9, Archive 10, Archive 11, Archive 12, Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17

List of things with gaps

It's new! It's exciting! It's an idea whose time came months ago: The Tags and Boxes Player's Guide Continuation: The Tags and Boxes Player's Guide

New Messages

Going Away

For the next week, I won't look at Misplaced Pages. I simply can't imagine the amount of disrespect, unilateralism, and pettiness that has been par in the last week or two being tolerated. I have no other way, since I believe in achieving consensus, respecting the minority voices, and never trying to force my will on others, to show my displeasure aside from this. It isn't a storming away. It is a strike. Geogre 17:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I was going to prolong my strike beyond the week, but when I saw that today's featured article is Mariah Carey, I knew that all was well and that the seriousness and scholarship of the project were a perfect home for my talents. Geogre 21:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attack by Bishonen

Oh. :-( And here I was just going to ask you to check out the latest civility war here and ask you to throw your hat in the ring. I'm about to post there myself. I do understand that you'll probably come down on the opposite side from me, as in "please accept this arbitration", which would be fine, that's not the point. The point is the punitive attitude to putative "personal attacks"—to "disrespect" ( User:Askolnick's pet peeve), and, yes, the point is the punishment of defiance! Bishonen | talk 18:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC).

Dr John Arbuthnot

You wrote on John Arbuthnots discussion page in December 2005. I am responding there very late in the day. - Kittybrewster 17:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Everything falls apart when you're not here

Even your law is about to be deleted . (Even if it's only the redirect from the main article space). Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

"I wrote an essay saying that cross-namespace redirects are bad, and now I'm going to say that it's a policy and delete them all without fixing the red links they leave." At least this one is up for debate. I'm not sure it will matter, of course, as consensus is irrelevant on Misplaced Pages. Geogre 21:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Ghirla

I disagree with Ghirla, and find that many of Ghirla's comments are unnecessarily abrupt, but I completely agree with you on the RFAR. In my view the best thing here is just to close the discussions - all of them, because nobody is going to back down and few if any are going to change their minds at this stage - and then to watch Carnildo like a hawk. In other words, go and get on with building that encyclopaedia; wait until there is a problem to fix. Guy 20:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, but Fred and SimonP want to accept. I'm sure that they're incorruptible, though, so no worries, and their past actions are above reproof. The fact is that I said, long ago, that trying to sanction for "personal attacks" would mean a race to the bottom, as every disputant began claiming greater and greater psychic wounds and longer and longer blocks for his opponent. Sure enough, we're seeing the non-admins doing just that. As for the admins, they're just imposing the blocks, demanding apologies, and demanding humble supplication from those blocked. It's insane. I've grown weary of explaining this, of going into great detail on why the "policy" is bankrupt and its application misguided. That's why I left for a week.
Once, it seemed like people listened to me and at least let my arguments slow them down. Now, I think they see what I have to say and do whatever the hell they wanted to in the first place. I'm glad that I'm respected, but apparently that respect doesn't entitle me to actual answers from people or mean that they will actually consider what I say. In that, though, I'm not special, as I don't think they're considering what anyone says. Geogre 22:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Please remove link

I am unable to remove the link

- Kittybrewster 13:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Genius

Geogre,

You put this phrase in the end of your article on 'genius', or I think you did"

"and more particularly the view that skill is inferior to imagination, has been in decline."

I find this statement interesting because I thought I was the only one who noticed this. I find this clearly shown in music and painting. Are able to provide any source of discussion on this?

Cellorando

Hello?

Is the militant worker returning to the factory? Would you like to join the Disgruntled Wikipedians' Breakfast Club? I'm sure User:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) would be happy to waive the usual entrance fee in your case. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm at least admitting that I'm looking now, though I must say that I don't have much stomach for any real involvement. I've tried to rethink some bits of why I might or might not contribute, but now is not the time to explain them. Geogre 22:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, it is nice to see your words on the page. The User:Ghirlandajo situation is shocking; the bureaucrats seem to have ceased communicating with the community in any meaningful sense, and certain editors are rampaging around trynig to impose their views on everyone else. Perhaps you are better out of it, but I would be much happier with you around. You are deeply respected and valued, you know. -- ALoan (Talk) 22:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you. The question is about how deep the divide is between the content and everything else. The people acting childish and egoistic are unaware of content and concentrate instead of ornament (boxes and borders) and each other. One could write and revise for months and never see them, and they have demonstrated that they can go years without seeing content or creating any. So, why look at their antics? If the voices of the sane will always be ignored in policy debates, because there will never be another policy debate ("I wrote an essay, and now I'm going to enforce my policy"), then what point is there for anyone to ever look at AN/I? What point is there in doing anything on xfD? Again, if people will simply wheel war and have no penalty over their views, while others will get blocked for revert warring, what on earth is the use? If the answer is "none," then that doesn't mean "leave Misplaced Pages" or even "go get de-adminned." Both of those are allowing these antics to become determinant on oneself, both elevate and empower the clubbing nasties. No, the answer is to do whatever the hell you want: delete what you want, undelete what you want, and ignore whatever anyone of a different opinion says. Since this community of people has a form of collective autism, the answer is to simply use Misplaced Pages for doing what you want, since you (or I) is probably going to want what's right more inerrantly than the rest. Dark, I know. Geogre 11:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Ignore all rules, writ large? That sounds a trifle Hobbesian. (No, not Calvin and ...)
I thought Misplaced Pages was not anarchy; but then it is not a democracy either. I used to think it didn't matter what is was, because we would decide together by consensus . Now I am not sure. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
If we write articles, we probably should IAA (Ignore All Assholes) and do as we please, as communicating with them brings no good in any form. Geogre 18:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Geogre you are of course quite right, as usual. I was going to respond to this piece of civil eloquence - but is there truly any point. He now does exactly as he likes, supported by the Arbcom doing exactly as they like, the only time our paths need cross is when one of them accuse one of us of incivility to them. So if we don't do policy and they don't do content, there is no reason why we can't all exist in perfect harmony Giano | talk 11:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh, wonderful. Tony Sidaway is demonstrating that personal attacks and vulgar language simply will not be tolerated. You see: the more he doesn't do what he proscribes for others, the more he proves that he's right. You think he was out of bounds, don't you? Well, that proves that he should block you for offensive language. Geogre 18:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Is it time do you think to throw in the towel, and return to gainful employment, is there a future here for us or is it just one great waste of time? I've rather come to believe this theory I've expanded on here which is very dark indeed. Will we ever have a huge laugh here again do you think, unless Tony Sidaway posts a foto of himself drunk and naked, I somehow doubt it, and even that is probably not terribly amusing. Giano | talk 19:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing so conscious. On the other hand, there is an American idea that one should keep in mind. The thing is, that power is always consented. If the herd didn't obey, there would be no power. Geogre 20:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in, and if I'm not welcome, I'll understand. I see a great divide now more than ever between those whose major focus is article enhancement and writing and those engaged in policy and procedure. I just wanted to say that when I see excellent writers such as Geogre, ALoan, Giano, Bishonen and Bunchofgrapes as well as Ghirlandajo all seriously questioning why they should continue editing this project, I am very disappointed. I would encourage all of you to make the best choice for yourselves, and I'll hope that this means you'll continue to help write excellent articles.--MONGO 08:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Please do not accuse me of sockpuppetry again unless you have substantiating evidence such as IPs or hostmasks. Ameise -- chat 05:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

    • Block on what grounds? Those were all independent people, whom I told to stop posting on Misplaced Pages. I even posted the link to the thread in which I told them to stop in the AFD/whatever it was. They were not false fronts, I was not them, and if you actually took the time to look at the page history, I put up just as many 'one time user' tags as anyone else. I also banned several people from the forums where they were coming from for disrupting it. So, I still fail to see where the proof is that they were me. The IPs won't match, the hostmasks won't match, the styles of writing won't match, and I would like you to apologize for claiming that they were false accounts by me -- you have no evidence thereof. So, yes, I would like you to start an RFCU immediately. Oh, just because your paragraph structure may function, the last sentence simply makes no sense -- "Otherwise, I will devote all the time to considering your comments that you have in composing them". Ameise -- chat 23:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Oh, and I would remind you that your proof was that one of the one-time users and myself both mentioned proof -- my stating 'I have already offered proof' was that I had already posted around 10 lines of proof earlier. Ameise -- chat 23:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Since you're redressing your own wounds, I hope you're done here. However, "I will devote all the time to considering your comments that you have in composing them" is just one of those English sentences that requires a little thinking. You came here after weeks and demanded that, in the future, I not accuse you of sock puppetting, but you took no time to offer references or explain your point: you spent no time in communicating. Therefore, I felt no obligation to spend any time considering your comments. Now that you have answered yourself, honored yourself, and gone to prove that you are the one and only, I don't suppose you need me for anything. So, unless there is anything else, I'd appreciate it if you go elsewhere. Geogre 02:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I sense this page needs a new topic

Hi Geogre, I don't think I've said hello since your return, or if I have, my early-stage dementia is kicking up. I just thought for some reason this page needed a new bottommost section, don't ask me why. Thought point: the GFDL is the only important Misplaced Pages policy, really: knowing that even if this incarnation collapses under it's own asshattery, our contributions will certainly live on and probably remain editable one way or another gives one hope enough to continue editing. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you got the backups? -- ALoan (Talk) 03:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't bother me with details. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)