User talk:Ludwigs2

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration Enforcement sanction handling

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration Enforcement sanction handling/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration Enforcement sanction handling/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, NW (Talk) 01:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I responded on the talk page and joking/chidingly added the edit comment okie dokie, as I've seen you do at times. Was not meant to deride, just in case it comes across that way. Though I happen to disagree with your approach in this particular case. Ocaasi (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

lol - that's the first time I've been okie-dokied by someone else. I'm horribly offended you would say such a thing! .

Just so you know, I really do understand what you're saying, and in an ideal sense I'd be inclined to agree with you - focusing on specific issues independently is the preferred approach so long as the big picture is kept in context. Unfortunately, the other people in the discussion who are advocating for a split are doing it to obscure the big picture - a split would mean that (a) the dreadstar/sandstein issue reduces to a pure pro-forma exercise in arbcom legalism, and (b) all issues involving me and QG disappears as 'unripe'. That may happen anyway, mind you, but I'm not inclined to let it slide away that easily. --Ludwigs2 15:34, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Muhammed stuff

That rule doesn't apply to moving comments that are put in the wrong place. Go ahead and report me if it makes you feel better.—Chowbok ☠ 23:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, if you insist. I'll probably hit you for edit-warring, first, though.

unfortunately for you, you don't get to decide what the right and wrong place to post something is. see you an ANI. --Ludwigs2 23:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

policy question

Hi, Ludwigs. I see that wiki life is as lively as ever for you. I was wondering if you know if there is a policy about users contacting other users with offers (thinly disguised spam). Just wondering if you've come across any discussions on this? thanks. --stmrlbs|talk 07:07, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

yeah, well, I commit the cardinal sin of being both rational and stubborn. That violates cognitive schemas and sends the less adaptable element into vitriolic tizzies. whatayagonnado...

I've never heard of anything like your problem, but it seems like fairly straight-forward admin business. If someone's using a wikipedia account to send spam emails, either contact an admin personally or open a thread about it over at wp:AN or wp:ANI. Just include as much of the body of the email as you can without revealing your or the other person's personal information, and it'll get dealt with appropriately. --Ludwigs2 16:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL.. but I don't think that you are totally to blame. It might have something to do with the environment. Once you are "noticed" by a certain group of resident editors, it doesn't take much to end up in what seems at times like a bar room brawl.  :)

I went over to the administration boards.. saw a lot about spamming, but more in relation to articles. Well, it is only one email, so I'm not going to worry about it. Just wondered if maybe this was something that was common or not. It was a headhunter kind of thing - which when I think about it, a lot of people put their skills/experience on their page (I took mine off my page after this). Thanks. stmrlbs|talk 05:15, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Take time, take care of yourself :o)

Ludwigs - take good care of yourself. Do all that de-stressing stuff (you probably know the stuff I mean, lol!) If nothing else, get out into some open countryside (or a deserted beach or some real forest) by yourself, turn off the cell/mobile, stare at the horizon and just stop moving (apart from breathing, of course, it's important to remember to breathe ... ). Give that 20 minutes. Then break into gentle stroll, or lie-in-sun, or sit on log / rock / anything else handy. Take a full day. Better still, two days. Pesky (talk) 16:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hah! now you're just being pesky. --Ludwigs2 17:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like, quacks like ....... I am just me; as they say, "Get used to it!". Too old to change (much, though I'm open to nicely-worded suggestions) , too young to quit, and definitely old enough to know better lol! And you can always ear-cuff me over here Pesky (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

AGF

Please cut out the personal remarks. My involvement in the WP:SHERIFF proposal has nothing to do with you. You are alleging bad motives on my part and there is no justification for it. If you have a problem with my editing then please say so explicitly in an appropriate forum.   Will Beback  talk  07:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

When I ask you numerous times not to push on something because I'm stressed out and need some time to recuperate and reassess, and you refuse, that shows you have no respect for me.

When I ask you numerous times to explain yourself, and you ignore the request, that is IDHT behavior.

When you do both of these over an issue that is by any conceivable measure trivial, that is harassment.

I don't know what your motives are, and I don't really care. I'm asking you to have some f%cking consideration for me. If you want good fait, show some. --Ludwigs2 15:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)