User talk:T/2011

April

Hello good sir

It will be nice to have ED pwning Wikipedos again. As for help, you can start by fixing pages than need to be redirected.

Meepsheep

19:56, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Actually, all articles have been remade. The issue is redirecting links to the proper articles. And that is a lolsy first edit.
  Meepsheep
  20:01, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

fag

jew, you were temp blocked to avoid vanadalism, you had blanked a page, remember? Ryan 20:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• That wasn't vandalism it was lulz. Ty 20:40, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: Hey so

In reply to your question, I really couldn't tell you. I only know a little bit about networking, I'm more on the programming side. Haudnotusnomen 21:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

TGcomix

Special:Contributions/SimonKirby – I've found our old friend, and he still holds the old grudges. Out of curiosity: What's your opinion on this fork? --JuniusThaddeus 04:20, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Oh... um... I feel awful about this but I think I forgot who that was... Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Up

What's up? Mgs 07:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Junius Thaddeus

As you can see from the above, our resident moralfag crusader has returned to the fold. Do you think he's hoping to ruin ED a second time with his ongoing war against Jailbait, Lolicon and everything else he finds personally objectionable? I know that at least a few of us oppose online censorship. Free speech was one of the things that ED stood for back in the days before his kind were granted administrative status. BTW: Michael's upset because his attempt to purge all lolicon from Commons crashed and burned. See you round. SimonKirby 15:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Had to fix your failcapitals Kirby. Um, I certainly hope not seeing as how I am quite passionate about the loli and jailbait pics. That said, no, ED never stood for universal free speech. It was certainly very free-wheeling in many regards, but tolerance was given in many respects for the censorship of the subjects of personal attack articles. Case in point, I was blocked for trying to edit in counter-claims to the BS on my article, and probably still would be if I tried it here. Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

SimonKirby / TGcomix is just pissed that I was able to obtain consensus to remove his self-promoting art from Wikipedia's Fan_service article: wikipedia:Talk:Fan_service#Remove_Kogaru_Diaries_image. Why should Wikipedia promote the work of perverted child-lovers obsessed with little girl's panties? Here's some SpankingArtWiki articles TGcomix written about himself in case you need a remainder of who he is: [1], [2]. The "crusade" TGcomix is accusing me of is an exaggeration. If I were against all lolicons, then I wouldn't be talking to Tyciol. I just deleted some CP and some poorly-drawn cartoon porn with copyrights and watermarks. I also never deleted any of TGcomix's art from ED. I haven't even touched any of the articles here yet. --JuniusThaddeus 17:41, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• I'm a bit confused, are you saying Kogaru or some of SK's other work is CP? Or does that mean cartoon porn? Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Michael, I don't wish to fight over an acre of sand. Perhaps you might consider coming to my talk page and discussing the subject in a reasonable manner. You've usually been prepared to in the past, and I'd be (very) happy if Ty could act as an unofficial mediator - we both know he's extremely fair and impartial. If you we can work this out by talking, I'm willing to take the chance. Cheers, SimonKirby 22:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC).

• I'm impartial so much as I'd probably try to get you both to fight more and fan the flames to pull more people into it. =) Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Tyciol and Gauis, are you frequent visitors of 7chan /cake/? I think i saw Gauis Marius's drawings on Konatachan where they were quite appreciated. Johnny 05:08, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

• I believe I've been there in the past but I had trouble getting into the habit of regularly frequenting any of the chans. I still plan to give that a go some day, but I guess I get distracted. I'm a bit of a namefag who doesn't fully appreciate the freespirited of being an anon (though have dabbled in it) so it's hard when you can't register for anything and tripcodes are confusing. Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Shut

Shut up. --Halcy 22:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Who're you? Ty 00:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Halcy = NOTHALCYON from the original ED. She's an expert on DeviantArt drama. --JuniusThaddeus 00:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC) She's also too young for you. --JuniusThaddeus 12:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• What!? :( Ty 23:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

July

Ok so

LEAVE HIS FUCKING TALK PAGE ALONE kthx TKN 05:26, 29 July 2011 (CEST)

• What's with all these month-haters? Ty 19:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

August

RE: Months

no, thx tho TKN 03:08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

No Faggotry

Dancingsandwich 13:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

• I should show up. Ty 10:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

CP

You should have your face scraped along the pavement R U MAD?(talkpage) 18:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Fucking pedos. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 18:42, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Ragetime? Ty 10:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

We both know you're a sick pedo fucktard R U MAD?(talkpage) 23:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC) I still have the recording of you attempting to justify your pedo activities. you sad fuck R U MAD?(talkpage) 21:00, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Seriously?! D:< Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 21:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

We're both laughing at you at the same time, along with others on here. R U MAD?(talkpage) 13:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking of drying your eyes out & keeping them in my wallet so you can watch me all day... Also, Castration is the answer for you R U MAD?(talkpage) 11:27, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

	“	I wish I had tiny lady hands. Also that I was short. These are both for very useful reasons.	„
	—Tyciol

Chemistry or surgery may be more effective in controlling your sexual impulses R U MAD?(talkpage) 05:24, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

Re:

ONLY BECAUSE IT'S UNDERAGED, PEDOPHILE. D:< Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 01:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

• Righteous rage bra. Ty 08:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

what the fuck, I don't draw porn of my fursonas, you sick, disgusting thing you. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 12:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

He seems to be running all over the place trying to chat people up about his pedo interests, it's pretty disturbing. Someone should fork all his activities and related logs to the party van, he's probably molesting kids in his basement as we speak. --Onideus 13:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

What is wrong with you

Why are you suddenly taking an interest in me? I'm nobody. No one cares about me. Forever Equivamp. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 23:11, 26 August 2011 (CEST)

• Well you'll forgive me if I read "threesome" and nearly threw up. Also, the WikiFur article was created because WikiFur wants entries on every furry ever. And idk why they made an article about me. I said funny things in irc i guess. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 07:37, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

I believe he's interested in molesting you...just sayin. --Onideus 22:15, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

Not really. Unless the trolling so far counts. ^Ty_Talk 03:44, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

RE: moves

I guess moves should be based upon whether the content is relevant enough for an article, but yeah redirects are fine. Also, you should be able to edit protected articles, didn't Zaiger give you editor privs? 05:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure, create redirects as needed. 05:24, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Little girl images

I'm not comfortable with allowing you to upload images of teenage girls due to the community you belong to. I've deleted the images you've uploaded. Please don't upload any more images of underage individuals. --JuniusThaddeus 23:09, 26 August 2011 (CEST)

• I was a lot younger when those pics were taken, too. plz2be stopping fapping to my images, kthx. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 23:13, 26 August 2011 (CEST)

RE: Community?

Meepsheep and Armucat may upload those sorts of images because, as far as I'm aware, they aren't connected to the pedophile community. I know that you don't intend to harm Equivamp, but protecting children isn't my only duty here; I also have to defend ED's image. Some scandals would probably facilitate the image of infamy we're trying to create, but it isn't in our best interests to become known as a pedophile-enabling wiki. That's not the sort of infamy we want. I don't want headlines to say, "Pedophile Advocate Stalks Teenage Girl and Uploads Her Photos on Encyclopedia Dramatica." There are many people watching us and waiting for us to make a mistake they could exploit or publicize. It only took a single DMCA complaint for our previous host to drop us. Imagine how our present host would react if we gained the wrong sort of media attention. If this host drops us, it would be extremely difficult to find alternative hosting. No offense, but I need to keep users such as yourself on a short leash. --JuniusThaddeus 15:07, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

While I do share your concern Junius, I feel that him uploading drawings from a DeviantART account may not be as concerning as if he was uploading photos of her. Of course this should be up to Equi herself anyway. 23:00, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

He did upload pictures of me. From when I was several years younger. Equivamp^{talk(Troll me here)} 23:10, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

Alright, that is quite creepy. 23:14, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

Sorry but I didn't even notice you were younger in them, I had a lot of work to do and wasn't paying attention. You basically look the same in all your pictures (boring). The whole "oh hey I'm a model" thing was basically to add to the self-promotion image which is clear based on making furwiki articles about self and stuff. ^Ty_Talk 04:01, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

"I swear, I didn't know she was 3!" LOL, sorry, but that's what you sound like, Mr. Pedo. Also, are you sure she wasn't being ~sarcastic~...cause it sure sounds like it. And what the fuck do you think WikiFur is for? I mean, ~that~ is the whole gawd damn point, it's a self-promotion wiki, it states that plain and clear as can be. --Onideus 07:40, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

Who is the current host? You might want to think about Lunar Pages, they're pretty much the most liberal host state side. I know, cause I put in like 3 months worth of research and talked directly with the owners of more than 50 different hosting providers to find the absolute best of the best..Lunar Pages was it. Before I switched to them I had constant problems with hosting providers bitching about whining about stupid complaints and all sorts of other retardation. LP simply does not give a fuck and will ONLY respond to ~actual~ law enforcement and even then ~only~ if they actually have a subpoena or warrant. And they definitely don't entertain retarded DMCA take down notices either. As soon as you send a counter notification, that's it, they could not a fuck give.

Ideally, the only people who should be uploading pictures like that are adult babies, since it's effectively impossible for adult babies to be pedophiles, as they're direct polar opposites to each other. --Onideus 22:30, 27 August 2011 (CEST)

That doesn't make any sense, adult babies are still adults and could be diagnosed with paedophilia if they fulfill the required criteria. ^Ty_Talk 04:02, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

Nope, not possible. Adult babies seek to embody innocence. Pedophiles seek to destroy it...by raping it. When an adult baby looks at a picture of a child they imagine and fantasize about ~being~ the child in the picture. When a pedophile looks at that *SAME* picture they imagine and fantasize about *RAPING* the child. That's why the two can never be one in the same...cause you would have to imagine yourself being raped...by yourself...and barring some strange Star Trek level temporal shenanigans...yeah...no, just...no. Pedophilia itself goes against the inherent nature of being an adult baby. Adult babies want to *BE* innocence, where as pedophile just want to rape the fucking shit out of it. They CANNOT be one in the same.

It should be noted though that many pedophile prey upon the TEEN baby community, very often posing as "mommy" and "daddy" figures, which, to a teen baby from a broken home is like...winning the fuckin lottery. The pedo then ensnares them, giving them "unconditional love" and babying...but only if they likewise allow themselves to get molested and raped. They often blackmail the teens as well, telling them that they'll tell all their friends and family about their fetish if they tell anyone about how they raped them. Very dangerous for teen babies on the grid. There's even one of the fucks on ED I believe, than "Alan" guy, who posed as a baby fur caretaker in order to get his pedo mitts on some kids...luckily he was caught, but there are *LOTS* of others out there. --Onideus 06:05, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

Several contradictions and assumptions to point out here. First off: seeking to embody a quality does not mean one would seek to preserve it in others. For example, using the concept of beauty, I could seek to be beautiful while seeking to prevent others from being beautiful. The Snow White evil queen character embodies such a selfish contrast. Secondly: "innocence" is not necessarily what these 'adult baby' folk seek to embody, it could be a myriad of other things. Possibly they're just lazy and want people to do shit for them (like clean their shit). They may also be submissives who like being commanded to do things. Or they may enjoy diapers, or not giving up on things they're expected to dislike when older.

Secondly, the desire to destroy the concept of innocence or the desire to rape are not prerequisite criteria for the diagnosis of the paedophilia paraphilia. While there would certainly be some overlap where some (perhaps a significant number) wish to do something like that, the distinction makes it wrong to make that blanket statement as if it were a universal attribute amongst them. I'm not sure if you're trolling by making statements like that, but there is no evidence that indicates they jump to imagining committing rape when they see pictures any more than anyone else would. People who do that would have additional illnesses which could be diagnosed by that criteria.

Nor is there evidence that these adult baby people fantasize about being other children/babies. They may simply wish to regress to a previous incarnation of themself, not become another. Even those who fantasize about being other people of a subgroup necessarily want to be every member of said sub-group. Also: there do exist people who fantasize about raping themselves, so it is not an anomaly. You speak as if the perceived impossibility of the action (omg time travel) would make people unable to imagine it, yet you overlook the flaw in that people like furries exist who imagine fucking imaginary anthropomorphic mammals, or Trekkies who fantasize about hooking up with Vulcans/Klingons (I even tried that once, Bel'Anna Torres is hot). So the illogical aspect would not prevent people from desiring an impossibility in the context of masturbatory imagination.

If I could use the example of Heloise from Jimmy Two Shoes, she wants to be the smartest, yet hates fellow geniuses like Doctor Scientist who compete with her for the position of most brilliant, to the point of being willing to destroy them. This is another 'evil queen' scenario that contradicts your assertion that someone could not wish to destroy in others a quality they themselves wish to embody. Of course this is hypothetical since I accept neither assertion that babies want to embody innocence or that pedophiles wish to destroy it. Overlap, sure, maybe even minor correlations, but not synonymous groupings. ^Ty_Talk 00:39, 3 September 2011 (CEST)

Equivamp

Equivamp wishes for you to leave her and her article alone. Can you please respect her wishes? MediaWiki lacks ACL's, so the only technical means I have to enforce those wishes would be to block you. I don't want to block you, but I will if I have to. --JuniusThaddeus 13:49, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

RE: Ryan

I started a thread about it on the talk page. I have no problem with it being a disambig, but I want to see what some others think. 04:25, 28 August 2011 (CEST)

September

RE:

Thanks, be sure to add to it. 02:59, 3 September 2011 (CEST)

Oh, I thought you were talking about the Wikichan template. nvm. 03:04, 3 September 2011 (CEST)

RE: underage users?

I don't have any problems with iconic or (in)famous images. You may go ahead and upload them. I didn't agree with granting Editor rights to Equivamp. After I saw this, I told the other sysops that I didn't believe that granting her that bit wasn't a good idea. The original ED went through underage sysop drama several times and regretted it each time (eg. Robert_Pierson#The_Drama, EDS1). Zaiger was the one who entrusted Equivamp with those rights; you should talk to him about it instead. --JuniusThaddeus 14:24, 3 September 2011 (CEST)

• Naw, Zaiger's cool, so far I haven't necessarily seen any harm done with the editor rights (then again, haven't seen every edit) but I guess it's sort of like, if a minor is considered competent and hard-nosed enough to be entrusted with those rights, I'm not sure why we should be all "leave britney alone" with'm. Btw, can I upload childhood pics of myself, or woul that be barred? heh ^Ty-c_Talk 19:48, 4 September 2011 (CEST)
  • You own your photos, and it would be your own image and reputation at stake. It's not as if you need to worry about child predators anymore. What you probably need to worry about is unintended consequences. Once these images end up on ED, they could potentially end up everywhere, especially with a bunch of fans archiving every revision made and every image uploaded as well. Your images could end up on torrents. You may upload those images if you wish, but please don't upload anything you'll regret. --JuniusThaddeus 23:33, 4 September 2011 (CEST)
    • Yeah, I think I'll scan them in case I want to some day but for now I think I'll keep them for myself. I never know if I might want to use them for IRL purposes right? In which case I wouldn't want them matched up here. Still they are pretty awesome. ^Ty-c_Talk 00:07, 5 September 2011 (CEST)
• It's not their age, it's how mature they act towards these things. -- 23:35, 4 September 2011 (CEST)
  • I wasn't talking about users as mature as you are :) --JuniusThaddeus 23:49, 4 September 2011 (CEST)

TGcomix

I just wanted to let you know that TGcomix wishes to use you as a tool in his vendetta against me. --JuniusThaddeus 04:18, 12 September 2011 (CEST)

Sorry for being a lamefag, but it was one of TGcomix's promotional images. At least I caused the "Kogaru Diaries 1" portion of the image to be removed. From my experience with TGcomix, he uses wikis for personal grudges, and his articles aren't particularly good or informative. ED is better off without his influence. Sorry :( I'm not going to stop you from using that wiki. You're free to do whatever you wish. I just want you to be careful; that's why I made you aware of this. --JuniusThaddeus 17:31, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

Alright. --JuniusThaddeus 22:11, 19 September 2011 (CEST)

RE:

The link was on an imageboard, most likely it died. --CinoxFellpyre 09:22, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

Drat, that's disappointing. ^Ty-c_Talk 07:32, 19 September 2011 (CEST)

Hey

Please do not edit my talk pages after it has been archived. Thanks. Equivamp^talk 14:32, 15 September 2011 (CEST)

• You generally shouldn't archive talk page content until it's somewhat old. On September 13 you archived conversations that had been posted the past previous days of 11/12/13. That's way too fast isn't it? I don't see what you're all upset about, all I did was sign an unsigned comment or two and monthed it up. This is considered a courtesy. Moreso to the person leaving it than to yourself. ^Ty-c_Talk 07:32, 19 September 2011 (CEST)

October

Hey

The videos I removed were links to videos that have been removed already so I don't see the point of having any broken links on the article anymore. --MegaManSwordMan 08:01, 16 October 2011 (CEST)

• Because I think replacing the old broken links with a new video on the topic of Jessi Slaughter is better than keeping a bunch of broken links, that's why. --MegaManSwordMan 08:12, 16 October 2011 (CEST)

view whoring

hi. good lookin out. view whoring is harder to catch because its just a video id, so you actually have to watch the video, see who made it, is it similar to other videos recently added to other articles and so on. ive been recovering from surgery, so i dont have the presence of mind to appropriately patrol r/c. also, thanks for organizing my page... lol ocd. <3 -hipcrime 10:38, 16 October 2011 (CEST)

Winning

"Tyciol was a native furfag pedo on ED. He is winning - we should DOX HIM HARD on Hivemind." - A Guest OCT 19TH, 2011

So apparently I am winning something? Could whoever wrote this possibly come speak to me directly with your concerns? Just curious. ^Ty-c_al 02:29, 27 October 2011 (CEST)

I've obtained some answers for you: [3]. It's Mrtrez0n. He or she was using sockpuppets in order to insert gibberish into articles (eg. [4], [5]), so I blocked him. He or she claims that "[you are] winning by using pawns to subjugate ED" and that Equivamp is one of those pawns. --JuniusThaddeus 04:47, 28 October 2011 (CEST)

Cool thanks. Well, I'm not actively aware of any actions she's taken that further my interests except basic stuff everyone enjoys like reverting vandals. But I am not averse to her becoming another one of my queens if she makes it 6-7 steps forward/diagonal to end of the board. ^Ty-c_al 07:11, 29 October 2011 (CEST)

I think you mean Girlvinyl? Kool2 18:49, 1 November 2011 (CET)

RE: Wikipedia review

I'm not sure who runs the WR's Email box, but I PM'd Somey. He or she is the only staff member I know of. I didn't call them "faggots" as you've requested, but I linked to your post, and I put in a good word for you. --JuniusThaddeus 20:08, 29 October 2011 (CEST)

• Awesome, looking forward to what Somey's got to say. My memory's bad so I don't recall if he was part of the limited conversations I had a chance to have after my period of lurking there. ^Ty-c_al 03:14, 31 October 2011 (CET)
  • [6] – You had an argument with him or her. That argument occurred on the same day your account showed any activity. In addition to being the only staff member I've interacted with, Somey might be the person who knows why you were blocked. It's fitting to forward your feelings of displeasure with the WR to him or her. His or her latest activity was on October 23, so I've not sure when he or she will log in and receive the message. --JuniusThaddeus 15:09, 31 October 2011 (CET)
    • Actually, after searching through posts in which Somey mentions you, I can see now that he or she isn't too fond of you: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], and [12]. --JuniusThaddeus 15:35, 31 October 2011 (CET)
      • Unfortunately it appears you need to log in to view those messages, the first message after 'isn't too fond of you' which I am unable to do, but perhaps if the account is activated later I would be able to read them it and spur my memory. I can read the other ones though, so I'll take a look. Please invite Somey to ED in case they want to converse via talk pages or possibly to hang out on the IRC channels, I am interested in their views and opinions. Honestly, all I was trying to do as a member was contribute to the review of TOW's policies, actually wanted to disable PMing and stuff for accounts who say they're kids, but apparently they won't do that. ^Ty-c_al 23:12, 31 October 2011 (CET)

Hello

I decided I don't care; edit the article at your lesiure. This is ED, after all. Equivamp^talk 21:51, 29 October 2011 (CEST)

• Well that just takes the fun right out of it... ^Ty-c_al 03:14, 31 October 2011 (CET)

RE:

It's w/e really, just didn't feel right for me. Btw, the "how's your sex life" is a reference to The Room. 04:54, 31 October 2011 (CET)

No comment 05:02, 31 October 2011 (CET)

November

Wikipedia Review

I don't believe that Somey is going to reply back. Sorry. --JuniusThaddeus 15:42, 11 November 2011 (CET)

Wikimedia's new global ban policy

As far as I'm aware, you're the only person on ED (besides Meepsheep, of course) who is globally blocked on all Wikimedia sites. Wikimedia has finally decided to draft a global ban policy. Here's the draft. What's your opinion on the proposed policy? --JuniusThaddeus 17:12, 16 November 2011 (CET)

I'll look into it once the draft becomes an official policy. If I start a discussion while it's still a draft, they'll probably just modify the draft in order to make it harder for users to request removals of their blocks. I'll start a discussion once everything is set in stone. --JuniusThaddeus 03:28, 21 November 2011 (CET)

RE:

That is a bit iffy, but it is definitely worth talking to him about. 17:34, 19 November 2011 (CET)

December

RE: I'm offended

Since you're currently locked out of all Wikimedia projects and can't cause any more drama there, I don't believe that the WR will be willing to dedicate an entire subforum to you. Concerning the proposed Ottava article, I'm not sure where to start. I've only interacted with him on the WR and the Wikimedia Meta wiki. --JuniusThaddeus 18:37, 3 December 2011 (CET)

Well JT, perhaps some day. I'm not there to cause drama, it's mostly people causing drama about me. But since I do intend to maintain efforts to get my editing priviledges back, it is possible. ^Ty-c_al 18:44, 3 December 2011 (CET)

Good luck. Ottava quotes would make a good start, but the Wikipedia Review doesn't appears to be available at the moment. See wikipedia:Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial#Thumbnail_sizes for how to resize thumbnails. --JuniusThaddeus 02:51, 4 December 2011 (CET)

Yes, I'm Michaeldsuarez. I've dealt with the Cavalry previously:

• wikipedia:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive714#GNAA_COI.2C_OWNing_and_votestacking
• wikipedia:User_talk:Chase_me_ladies,_I'm_the_Cavalry/New_Archives/2011/August#GaryNiger_and_Gary-Niger

Also, I work for and earn my girlfriends; I don't steal them ;) I'm not on the IRC too often. Is there something that you wish to discuss there? --JuniusThaddeus 19:24, 6 December 2011 (CET)

No, I don't use Pidgin. I not into communicating with people. I use the Internet primarily to absorb and broadcast information, not to communicate with other people. I dislike Web 2.0 and social networks. Email is my preferred means of communication. If you want to use the IRC, can you please tell which channel you'll be on and when you'll be available? What caused you to dislike the Cavalry so much? No, I don't believe that the two cases are similar. One is a case of Person A being replaced with People B with Person A possibly still having the ear of Person B, while the other is a case of Jimbo trying to influence what sort of information goes out on the tubes. I'm not really good with images, so you're better off posting your suggestion on the TJC. --JuniusThaddeus 15:14, 7 December 2011 (CET)

Panyd is the Cavalry's wife, not his girlfriend. I guess that that ends any scheme to steal her heart away. I've also sent you an Email. --JuniusThaddeus 01:04, 12 December 2011 (CET)

Just letting you know the Email I've sent to you Friday / Saturday. --JuniusThaddeus 21:58, 18 December 2011 (CET)

wikipedia:Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2011#Results – You don't need to worry anymore. Panyd lost. --JuniusThaddeus 22:24, 18 December 2011 (CET)

i need help

hi. you have the best case of ocd ive ever seen. would you be inclined to transcribe the roflcon summit videos for me? -hipcrime 07:37, 4 December 2011 (CET)

at least these two, but as many as you feel inclined to do. these two are listed as parts 3 and 4. combined, theyre about 25 minutes long:

http://youtu.be/IhjtocipcRU

http://youtu.be/9R_xl2onS24

-hipcrime 20:17, 6 December 2011 (CET)

RE:

Yeah, we can def make him/her WOTN, and you can be a caretaker too if you'd like ^_^ btw, all the past features are archived under Portal:Wikipedia/Archive. ♥♥♥ 23:55, 6 December 2011 (CET)

Sounds good lol ♥♥♥ 01:46, 7 December 2011 (CET)

I agree with both, especially the new category to help clean it up a bit. ♥♥♥ 14:47, 8 December 2011 (CET)

RE: IRC

I don't believe that the WR has an IRC channel. If it does have a channel, then I've never been on or heard of it. Sorry. I'll see see if I could convince any of the WR people to speak with you on that new subforum. --JuniusThaddeus 16:22, 29 December 2011 (CET)

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=35970 --JuniusThaddeus 16:33, 29 December 2011 (CET)

I originally posted that thread in a subforum that anyone can see, but then a sysop moved it to a private location. The thread has responses, but there aren't any positive replies. Sorry. --JuniusThaddeus 19:01, 30 December 2011 (CET)

Re: Query

I don't know who you are talking about. --zaiger (talk) 17:24, 29 December 2011 (CET)

RE:

Sure, also I do not remember this being featured, but w/e. ♥♥♥ 07:58, 30 December 2011 (CET)