Leave a Message after the Beep.
Hello! Welcome to UESPWiki. It's always good to have new members. If you would like to help improve any of our pages, you may want to take a look at the following links:
If you, on the other hand, would like to spice up your userpage, take a look at this link:
- Userboxes: near complete list of userboxes, including a guide to make your own
When you're editing, it's always a good idea to leave edit summaries to explain the changes you have made to a particular page, and remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~. Also, the "show preview" button is a great way to view the changes you've made so far without actually saving the page (our patrollers really appreciate it!).
Feel free to practice editing in the sandbox or discuss the games in the forums. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact one of our mentors. Have fun! --RIM 10:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
The signature that you are using is currently violating two policies of standard wiki norms. The signature at User:Sulhir/Sig is currently using three images, which happens to be three too many. There are many reasons to avoid this: (taken from Wikipedia:Signatures)
- They are an unnecessary drain on server resources, and could cause server slowdown
- A new image can be uploaded in place of the one you chose, making your signature a target for possible vandalism and denial-of-service attacks
- They make pages more difficult to read and scan
- They make it more difficult to copy text from a page
- They are potentially distracting from the actual content
- Images do not scale with the text, making the lines with images higher than those without them
- They clutter up the "file links" list on the respective image's page every time one signs on a different talk page
- Images in signatures give undue prominence to a given user's contribution
Also, you have them set up as a transclusion, which also has many problems:
- Signature templates are vandalism targets, and will be forever, even if the user leaves the project.
- Certain automated scripts (bots) are used to automatically archive particularly active talk pages. These bots read the source of the talk page, but don't transclude templates, and so don't recognize the template as a signature.
- Signature templates are a small but unnecessary drain on the servers. Transcluded signatures require extra processing—whenever you change your signature source, all talk pages you have posted on must be re-cached.
So, I guess I will ask that you stop using the transclusion of the signature and instead use a raw signature (something similar to mine). Also, please remove the images per the above reasons. If you want to show them on your userpage, that is definitely okay, we just can't use them for multiple pages. Thanks. elliot (talk) 21:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'll do fixing! Also, every problem you listed is either inapplicable or easily resolved with locking the respective pages. Since clearly you can see this is not the first wiki I've posted on and this is my standard signature. But I shall accommodate you since this wiki is unfamiliar with the procedures that make this a nonissue.
Temporary solution satisfactory? Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff 21:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
:Oh ugh, let me fix that time stamp. fix't
- (edit conflict) We are familiar, so it doesn't matter what other wikis do except Wikipedia. And we won't protect images or pages just because it breaks policy; we are not here to circumvent such policy. Also, do not transclude your signature. Just put the raw formatting into your preferences. Thanks. elliot (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I follow you. You mean you want me to try and copy paste that code into the signature box on my preferences? Because the transcluding is designed to prevent that extra processing you're talking about. Previously signed things should theoretically remain as they are - I site my sources, Sir. Is this not applicable on every wiki? The transclusion is designed to prevent a huge block of code appearing whenever I sign something. If this isn't how everyone does it, how is it done? I have seen personalized signatures that don't do this and I'll look it up myself if I have to.
Ugh, I see that people don't transclude and it makes talk pages horribly messy for anyone trying to edit them. Glorious.
- An easy solution is of course, not to use an overcomplicated signature. Keep your signature reasonable and put all the fancy stuff onto your userpage. --Alfwyn 23:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Also, this really isn't a debate. I have asked you to follow policy, which you have reluctantly done so. We are not Wowpedia, and our policies differ. This matter is rather trivial, and I am floored by your obstinacy. elliot (talk) 23:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Horribly messy? It's just simple bits of code, if you don’t know what it means leave it alone and if you do well… your not suppose to edit other people posts in a discussion anyway so there should be no problem. — Kimi the Elf (talk | contribs) 00:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- Seeing all the code in there is horribly messy. It's a talk page not a discussion of code. And when did you become involved? And I haven't said it's a debate nor have I implied it's a debate, I simply question what I can and cannot do in the matter and have changed according to the policy you showed me. I didn't do it reluctantly, I did it promptly, and changed everything to the letter of what you said as soon as I understood it. What you call reluctance I call making sure I understand exactly everything I'm being asked to do so I can do it exactly. And here you see the temporary signature until I get around to cutting it down to a more reasonable size - which will be done before I sign any more talk pages, oh crotchety ones. Btw, crotchety is the best word ever and probably doesn't fit here but I'm deciding to use it anyway. Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff 00:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Also - I wouldn't recache something that doesn't need recaching... Unless it's an automated process in which case you have a valid point.
- Yes, it is automated. elliot (talk) 02:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that edit summaries like this one are not appropriate. I understand you were just trying to justify your edit, but that kind of language is offensive and shouldn't be used here. Please make an effort to avoid comments like that in the future. Thanks! ⇠eshetalk 13:15, 10 November 2012 (GMT)
- Yes, of course. I just didn't feel like working up another suitable allegory and it is quite applicable. I'll put forth more effort in the future.Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff 22:48, 13 November 2012 (GMT)
Hiya Sulhir! Thanks for your help around the wiki; however, you seem to have been making multiple edits to a page by not using the show preview button, clogging up the Recent Changes in the process. We appreciate your enthusiasm, but keep in mind that each edit needs to be patrolled, so multiple consecutive edits create an unnecessary hassle on those who patrol. So please utilize this feature! Feel free to ask if you have any questions. — ABCface◥ 03:18, 24 November 2012 (GMT)
- I use the show preview, and try to make sure that I check minor edit when applicable but a lot of the information I'm added to the pages I'm adding as I get the information - hence the lotsa recent edits.Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff18:31, 24 November 2012 (GMT)
- Just set it up to count all changes as minor by default - depending on your patrollers I believe that should help.Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff18:37, 24 November 2012 (GMT)
- Setting it as a minor edit doesn't exclude it from needing patrolled. You should be checking your information thoroughly before adding it, so you shouldn't be discovering new information that could potentially invalidate the first edits. Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 18:45, 24 November 2012 (GMT)
- It's not a huge deal, but it does make things easier on those monitoring and/or patrolling Recent Changes. Trust me, we all do the multiple consecutive edits thing every now and then, just try to keep it to a minimum rather than letting it be a regular thing. And please don't be discouraged by this, it's just a friendly reminder. :) — ABCface◥ 21:50, 24 November 2012 (GMT)
- Also by editing a page with updated information does not mean an edit was invalidated. It's called "more information" not always "made a mistake". And how is it that a two person conversation invariably ends up with multiple parties? It's like that movie Office Space. - Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff04:28, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- Although you may see it that way, here are my two cents. This is not a place for users to have conversation with you. Talk pages are for discussing wiki business. You can chat through emails. Also, please just use the preview button whenever possible. Rapid edits in succession show that you already knew that you wanted to make the edit before hand. If you have more info, put it all down at once. It's just a way to ease the strain on the patrollers. They work very hard to patrol all of the edits, and rapid edits make it that much harder on them.--Br3admax (talk) 04:36, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- My big question is where the hell are you people even coming from. It's like cockroaches - you see one but there are thousands more waiting for the lights to go out. And this is a conversation, fyi. If it weren't then people would just say what needed to be said and leave it at that. S'far as I can tell only ABCface has managed that feat of social engineering. - Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff04:54, 25 November 2012 (GMT) Also as a side note - how has Silence is Golden's signature not been harrassed to death? He's clearly in violtion of at least one of the billions of regulations regarding this wiki's signature policies. 04:56, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- I will answer your question, by proving the point. Every time you make an edit here. A very noticeable red mark appears on my recent changes. I have to go through and patrol every edit you make on this page. I would greatly appreciate it if you would spend only a little time to finalize your thoughts before clicking the save page button. Every single edit you make, no matter how small, must be reviewed and reported as reviewed. Please, just use the Show Preview button. And what I mean is:Talk pages are not for you to have one on one discussions. If any user has an issue, they have the right to join in. Please just be nice, and understand that we have to go throw all of your edits, and cutting back on that will be well appreciated.--Br3admax (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- So... What you're saying is... I'm being stalked by all the recent edit people? Do you stalk EVERYBODY? And I'm not asking for a one on one discussion but this is a phenomenon I've have only seen on this wiki... ever. It is very strange.- Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff05:19, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- This is the Recent Changes page. You don't see the red marks, but Patrollers do, and you've made lots of recent edits, so you're noticeable. Anyway, if you plan on making multiple edits within just a few minutes, please do not keep editing a page, and rather type some info, get your new info, add the new info, and then make the edit. It will require leaving the editing page open a bit longer, but that's it. Every wiki has a Recent Changes page, and many of them have Patrollers (but not all), so it is not unique to this, and it is not stalking.
- As for Silencer's signature, it's neither an image nor a template, so it's pretty much the same as your signature or mine in that manner.
- If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. Vely►t►e 05:42, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
What is unique to this wiki is the community, which is to what I was referring. And don't be so bashful, you can stalk me. I think I might be able to like it when you put it that way. Aside from using a sandbox to save things as I input data, leaving my browser window open for an eternity isn't an option for me. Steam's browser crashes randomly (which I use to add game content as I encounter it), as does my current computer. So either ban me from this wiki or be satisfied with what concessions I'm currently capable of offering you. New computer comes this Tuesday, should be put together and running by Wednesday some time. Also - this wiki's policy has issues with images for the same exact reason the Silencer's signature should be addressed. Should be but won't be, I know my place. I'm only capable of being an obnoxious, apparently even without effort. I wonder if this resource of obnoxism could be tapped for fonts of untold power... No, no. Don't get up. I have a logout button.- Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff 06:07, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- Oh, we can stalk you for reals? *grabs his stalker hat* Kidding aside, Silencer's signature doesn't need to be addressed because of any image policies. His signature contains no images at all. If you look at the code for his signature, it's only text that's been recolored. Just like your signature. There is no problem that needs to be reviewed.
[[User:The Silencer|<font color="B8860B">Silence is Golden</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:The Silencer|<font color="800000">Break the Silence</font>]]</sup>
- See? It's all fine. Signature review is now over. :p Feel free to ask if you have more questions. :) ES(talk•email) 06:36, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- A minor suggestion unrelated to the topic at hand: You can Alt+Tab away from the game, open your regular web browser, and edit from there. When you wish to return to the game, Alt+Tab to it. It'll most likely show up as a window that's entirely black. Move your mouse to the bottom of your screen (so you can't see it), and Alt+Tab to Skyrim again. This is useful if you need to make any large or otherwise time-consuming edits, and also allows you to use any applications. • JAT 07:54, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- The hard drive cannot handle alt tabbing out of Skryim as it won't alt tab back to it afterwards and I have to force shut down my computer every time or engage in some creative keyboard shortcuts (usually force shut down). Wednesday cometh! And as expected you missed the reason why the Silencer's signature could be seen as a violation of the signature policy. I just thought I would point it out - I know no action will be taken as it would have already been taken ages ago if any were to be taken at all. I wanted to see who would notice what I was doing aaand... no one did. But then again, the internet does not lend itself to seeking depth or meaning from things people say. I need smarter stalkers. But I guess I shouldn't be seeking intellectual stimulation from a game fansite anyway... - Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff
- As no-one else can fathom what is wrong with my signature, perhaps you can elaborate yourself, and stop this issue from distracting from the real reason this section was started. Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 22:21, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
- It honestly doesn't matter that much to me. Nothing would change, no one really cares, and it was a side note to begin with. I've moved on to something more interesting.- Vainamoinen-Talk-Stuff
- It does matter, if my signature is in violation of rules then it should be changed. Either tell me what is wrong with it or apologise for making up a non-existant issue to deflect from the real reason this section was created. Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 23:25, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
(←) I don't see this discussion heading anywhere productive. The show preview issue has been addressed, so far as I can tell there is no issue with anyone's signature, and all I'm seeing at this point is borderline personal attacks, which will not be tolerated. If anyone has anything else to say regarding the use of show preview, please feel free to do so. Otherwise, I suggest everyone take a breath and focus their energies on something more productive. ⇠eshetalk 23:36, 25 November 2012 (GMT)
Hi Sulhir. Your re-upload of SR-npc-Lynoit.jpg doesn't meet our image standards due to the low resolution of the NPC (or alternatively the camera distance and the ash piles surrounding him). The previous version, while incorrect, is of much higher quality. I've reverted accordingly. —Legoless (talk) 23:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I figured that out with the comments and the revertings. I'm just clever like that.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 23:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Edit: Disregard, your new version has addressed those issues. —Legoless (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
You are on the brink of edit warring over the Skyrim:First Lessons article. If you take issue with a change that has been made to the article, please discuss it on the talk page before reverting it. Making any further reverts to this article without discussing the changes beforehand may result in your account being blocked from editing. Zul do onikaanLaan tinvaak 18:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'd like to point out that multiple users have recently reverted my edits without a second thought. My edits now have cited sources listed at the bottom of the page under bugs if you have any questions you don't wish to discuss with me.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 18:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- From over here it looks like they're vandalizing the article by removing accurate information and reverting it back to the old inaccurate information.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 18:27, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I have explained why I reverted your edits in my edit summaries and that talk page discussion. It isn't possible to complete Elder Knowledge without having spoken to Faralda at some point, because you have to get into the College of Winterhold to complete the quest, and you can't get into the College without getting past her first. Therefore, it makes no sense to say that such and such scenario can occur if you previously completed Elder Knowledge without speaking to her.
- Just because someone doesn't agree with you or can't see the logic behind your edits doesn't mean that they are vandals. "Vandalism" refers to intentional and overt violations of wiki policy; just because someone makes a mistake or doesn't agree with you doesn't make that person a vandal. One of the principles we adhere to on this wiki is to assume good faith, which means that whenever possible, we should assume that a person was genuinely trying to improve the wiki. When there's a disagreement, the standard procedure is to proceed calmly and reach a consensus.
- As a final note, comments like this are not appropriate ways of dealing with someone on the wiki. Comments which insult or belittle other editors violate our etiquette policy, and are another thing that can be grounds for a block, in addition to the aforementioned edit warring. I have tried to be patient and courteous with you throughout all of this, so I would appreciate it if you didn't condescend me in return. Zul do onikaanLaan tinvaak 18:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Appears to be vandalism is not the same as actual vandalism. And it looks like vandalism. Personal opinions are unsurprisingly subjective.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 18:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- It is also not necessary to speak to Faralda to get the Elder Scrolls. You can bypass them entirely and go straight to Septimus' Outpost without ever going to Winterhold at all.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 18:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Furthermore you seem to expect me to take information you know to be true while refusing to acknowledge that information I know to be true is equally possible. eg. You know the dialogue is obtainable while I know that you don't have to speak to Faralda at all.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 18:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Again, we have fairly clear guidelines in place for what constitutes actual vandalism. When those fail, we defer to consensus. I am not refusing to acknowledge your information, I'm merely asking you to explain the edits you made, because that's the way things work here. If a user makes an edit that challenges established information or goes against consensus, that user must be able to satisfactorily explain why they made the change. You initially posted a bug entry that was fixed by a version of the USKP that doesn't exist; when I questioned you about it, you provided me with a link to the bug tracker, showing that the issue was known to exist. That's the kind of information that you need to be able to provide when a claim is challenged. If you had provided that link in your initial edit summary, it would have been clear what your source was, which would have prevented it from being removed. The reason that your edits keep getting reverted is because they are contradicted by a pre-existing consensus, no new consensus has been established, and you are not providing reliable sources to back your claims at the time they are made. If you can continue to provide reliable sources for your edits and explain why they are better, then it will be much easier to establish a new consensus to support your new version. Zul do onikaanLaan tinvaak 19:16, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- How shocking that doing a little leg work or a google search on your own isn't part of the program.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 19:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Please don't lump me and Thuum together as having the same opinion on this or anything much else. I never said you were wrong, I just said its true. It has been long enough that I won't rely on my own memory, but knowing that it has been specifically verified by someone on this wiki less than 1 month after release by someone I knew to be very trustworthy is good enough for me. I couldn't find a link through the quest script to the dialogue so I never refuted your statement in that regard, I just gave the id of the dialogue which a more competent CK user than I can try to back-link. Your link for the USLEEP fix suggests only that the dialogue remains but shouting won't work, not that shouting never works, which was the reason you removed the sentence in its entirety. As an aside you can't just assume that the as yet unreleased version of USLEEP will be 3.0.5, also given that as it is unreleased it is not yet "fixed" by any proper version of USLEEP, and finally you cannot say in what way it is fixed because you have not seen the documentation on what has been tweaked. No-one gets anywhere with calling people vandals, or prematurely telling people they are about to cross the line of edit-warring, so why don't we all take a breather before resuming our fact-sharing in a non-shouty way. Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 19:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
(←) You know me, Silence. <Swearword of choice> if I'm going to touch that <triple X reference> page to resolve it anymore myself. If the <peculiar adjective that doesn't apply and is profane> users want the information back they can <more profanity> correct the information themselves.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 19:27, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
I wanted to add that the bug report actually says that the dialogue is removed, not that shouting won't work. Regardless they are documented bugs, which I've already said. And since the developer of USLEEP himself stated in what version it will be resolved... you can go discuss with him why you think he's wrong. The sentence was removed for more than just that you can't tell her you're Dragonborn. It references the wrong quest as well.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 19:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Why am I not surprised that once proven wrong you leave the conversation in such a way as to appear that you did nothing wrong, I didn't even release who you were until the hidden parts of this page showed up with my edit conflicts. Thuum has eloquently explained why he undid your edits, which are all perfectly reasonable. He was not in full receipt of all the facts of your issue because you had not provided them, which is your responsibility. The bug submission to USLEEP would likely not have been cached by google at the time you first removed the sentence, and would not have appeared on the first couple of pages of google anyway. Neither of us undid your edits without first checking our own viewpoints, in my case I trawled the cs and found the dialogue, then went back through the edit history of the page to see first when it was added and if it had been questioned, before I even went near undoing the changes. A report and fix in the USLEEP mod is neither here nor there in terms of validating a claim. Edit warring doesn't apply to talk page discussions, so you are free to either back up your 'facts' on the talk page, or leave and have it assumed that you were incorrect or encountered a one-time bug that will never affect another user. Perhaps though you need a reminder to use show preview though, the amount of edit conflicts I've had when trying to reply is frustrating when you keep bringing up points that need addressing each time without letting others reply to the first ones (when you go and complain to an admin that no-one is replying you might conclude this is the reason). Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 20:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- As I said, Silence. You know me. I'll leave it to the admin to sort it all out. If something takes too much effort on my part after doing all the research necessary (I can supply relevant saves at any point in the game if you can't do it with your own big boy pants) I don't see the need to pursue it further. Everything I wanted to accomplish from my initial edit of the page has been accomplished and the rest of the world can catch up if and when they feel like it. P.S. I add extra thoughts as they come I don't spend five minutes pondering things on a preview screen first. I'm not the one obligating others to prove their points. Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 20:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sulhir/Vainamoinen! I notice that your signature doesn't match your username. While there's a fair bit of flexibility here, the general guideline is that your signature should more or less identify you. Obviously, Vainamoinen and Sulhir don't exactly fit that description. :) Shortening is fine, using alternate alphabets like Dragon Font or even Dragon-language translations are fine (at least around UESP)...anything along those lines. If you'd like, I can also permanently change your username to Vainamoinen, in which case your login name would change, and all your user pages would be moved over to the new name. If you do want to do that, just let me know. The only thing I would ask if you do that is to log out until the request is completed, just to be on the safe side. – Robin Hood (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Any way to change my user login? When I first made my account on here I didn't realize that was also going to be my username.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 21:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I actually would prefer Vain.3805 for a login if it's up for grabs.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 21:25, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yup, that's fine. I'll assume you've logged out and go ahead and change it. If you're reading this and you haven't logged out, just don't make any changes! You'll probably need to log out once I'm done in any event, though. – Robin Hood (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Okay, you should be good to go now. Your signature page has also been moved, but I think you'll need to edit your preferences to point to the new page. – Robin Hood (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Would you still like me to change my signature or is it close enough now?Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 21:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I think it's fine now. Given the smaller user base here, it's not as big of a deal as in Wikipedia. As long as they're vaguely similar and you can't be confused with anyone else, I'd say it's good enough. – Robin Hood (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
||Comments like this could be construed as a personal attack, which is grounds for an immediate block. Using snarky and abusive language towards other editors is inappropriate behaviour and disruptive to the site. —Legoless (talk) 23:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Full disclosure, I wasn't being snarky or abusive. Silence is Golden seemed genuinely unhappy and often seems self conscious and I thought my karma experience today would make him feel better.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 23:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Though now that I take the time to really think about it I think this may define the root of all my hostile user interactions on this particular wiki... Just for a nice philosophical moment here, if anyone else can feel it comin'.
Think of yourself. You are you. Nothing anyone else says, thinks, believes, or asserts can change a definition of self for any individual. Then there is everyone else and how they perceive the proverbial you. Now, if a society were perfectly adjusted, complainers and trolls could live happily and accommodatingly side by side with peacekeepers and diplomats. The two aspects of society that conflict most often on the internet would be able to coexist knowing that their sense of self is the only truth and it is not compromised by anyone else's opinion. Trolls would troll and diplomats would help and both would be content knowing that both snark levels and the pursuit of accuracy had been obtained. I might rewrite a creation myth about this.
Then there is reality. If someone describes you in a way other than your perceived sense of self, that sense is offended. That your inner workings are a mystery to others and that this is a surprise is solipsistic at best, a philosophy that cannot technically exist by its own definition. This then breeds cognitive dissonance as any individual understands from toddlerhood that mom really can't understand a thing you're saying with your mouth full of cheerios. So to clarify, on one hand you know you will be misunderstood often in life but on the other it is offensive to your sense of self when it inevitably occurs.
Now think of the other guy. Who are they. Short of tying them up and dangling them over the edge of volcano the only information you have defining the other guy is based on actions and interactions you observe from your slanted little point of view. You define them based solely on your own solipsistic point of view and, knowing just as they do that they/you will be misunderstood more often than not in this life, offense is still taken and breeds your own layer of cognitive dissonance.
Notice that. Taken not given. Offense is a choice and as forgiveness cannot be taken neither can offense be given without consent. Forgiveness is given by choice and done so by force can no longer be defined as forgiveness. Offense is taken and done so by force is just an excuse for the small minded. Feel free to establish your own rape allegory here but it won't apply. Aside from agreeing to be offended we go back again to the sense of self. It's almost easier to explain over the anonymity of the cyber world. With the anonymity also comes the lack of proof of existence. This lack of proof begs the question, if it is not real what does it matter what I say to it or what it says to me. Now, this is most often perceived as only half of that question. It does not matter what I do to it. But it is far more important that it does not matter what it does to me. Because it cannot be proven to be real. Short of threats of physical harm, done in jest or in earnest, the internet should not theoretically be able to have any effect on the world outside of it because at face value none of what happens on the internet can be proven to be real. It is all just a complex Matrix, populated by bots with varying degrees of intelligence and finesse. I identify myself as a well programmed bot and who can contradict me? I identify you as a well programmed bot and how can it be contradicted?
Solipsism is perhaps my favorite philosophy because everyone ascribes to it, its not actually possible to be purely solipsistic, and it inevitably causes neurotic doses of cognitive dissonance taken to extremes.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 23:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- That's a nice bit of musing and all, but to put it simply, we take our etiquette policy very seriously here. Some friendly trash-talking (or whatever those comments might be classified as) are all well and good between friends and acquaintances offline, but on this site, we expect our members to be courteous in their dealings with others. Whatever issues you may or may not have with Silencer are between you and him, and out of respect for his privacy (and yours), it would probably be best if it were kept that way. Zul do onikaanLaan tinvaak 00:48, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- Other than challenging the general competence of people online I find it an interesting opinion that trash talking has occurred, and exclusively from myself, to be entertaining. Such is opinions. Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 01:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Typing error in signature
I observed the user page link in your signature links to 2805 rather than 3805. However, your user talk page and contributions list are linked correctly. Hope it is helpful to you. —MortenOSlash (talk) 04:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
- s'what I get for using my phone to edit things. Should work now.Vainamoinen -Talk -Stuff 05:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems to work. Happy to help! —MortenOSlash (talk) 05:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)