User talk:Floquenbeam

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

Folly, thou conquerest, and I must yield! Against stupidity the very gods Themselves contend in vain. --Friedrich Schiller

Don't cross the line, please.

You may have become frustrated. Calm down and listen, please don't threaten me again. Thanks - Supdiop (T🔹C) 23:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Shoo. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

For returning to the mop and bucket brigade. I fully understand why you gave them up but your return is much appreciated. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought I'd put them to use at AIV, but so far all I'm doing is removing reports without blocking. Maybe didn't need the bit back after all? Anyway, cheers, thanks for stopping by. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah he really needs them so he can deal with abrasive assholes like me, right Floquenbeam? ;) ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:48, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

User:Dr._Blofeld, please read NPA, you are making a personal attack against User:Dr._Blofeld which is... wait... oh nohz, which is WP:CIRCULAR and now my policy-oriented-brain just exploded. Crikey what a mess. Nevermind me then, just ne'er-do-mind.  :-)   75.108.94.227 (talk) 04:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

arb?

Ahem, User:Floquenbeam, since you have decided to take up your old habits, perhaps soon we will see you filing a statement here, WP:ACE2015/C, seeking the sweet ambrosia of arb-ness? Well, maybe not, since that violates "complicated, stressful, depressing, AND time consuming".  :-)     But in any case, my real question is, who ought to be running? There are some good names already on the list as self-noms, but can any other folks perhaps be armtwisted into a last-day-surprise-arbcom-run? Nine open seats is a lot, and at present only two of the arbs up for re-election have re-nominated themselves for another term. There are plenty of long-haul wikipedians: who has the temperment and the time and the reputation, that is not yet announced as a candidate? 75.108.94.227 (talk) 04:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

@75.108.94.227: (do pings work for IPs?) I'm sorry, it's a reasonable question, and I suppose I might have a semi-useful perspective, but something seems to have fundamentally switched off in my brain, and I find it really hard to care anymore. I still care in short bursts, but they're separated by long stretches of meh. I considered for a second putting together a short election guide (or whatever they're called), but it would mostly be a list of "vote for"s and "vote against"s; I don't have the energy to write rationales. And I think someone decided that lists like that were "bad" anyway. I'm not as optimistic as you are about most of the noms so far. The vaunted community will get what they deserve, I guess, and I'm not really optimistic. I suspect entropy has grabbed hold of the project, and I don't see it getting better.

To try and answer your question, most of those I think would be good have already made it clear they won't run. I assume NYB isn't willing to wade back in. I've always said that Bish (or even better, Bish) and MastCell should run, but they're apparently too smart for that. I'm glad to see Opabinia regalis and User:Drmies running. Most of the other people I can think of off the top of my head would truly hate it. User:Black Kite? User:Reaper Eternal? They'd hate it and probably wouldn't get elected but would be good. User:Ponyo? User:Diannaa? User:Sphilbrick? Don't always agree with them, but they seem to have good heads on their shoulders. Sometimes the rebel inside me thinks anyone who has made a "cowboy unblock"...

The only useful ArbCom suggestion I can make is this: assuming no one has asked it already, I think a good question to ask every candidate is: "Please point to the most recent discussion on-wiki where someone has convinced you that you were wrong about something." I'd be concerned about anyone who can't point to something. I very seriously doubt I'm going to bother asking anyone that question myself, so you're welcome to steal this question if you want. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Bish. And the Lady. Drmies (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure, if she's up for it, but last I check she was semi-retired. Although I guess Reaper is too, so why should that stop anyone? --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

MastCell passed the buck to Opabinia this year, it seems. Black Kite I believe is now retired, not-so-coincidentally from arbcase fallout. I tried to arm-twist Ponyo, they were having none of it. Drmies is trying to armtwist Diannaa, but she is resisting. Reaper_Eternal has written a voter-guide, if you wanna copy their stuff create an independent voter-guide from scratch inspired by standing on the shoulders of predecessors you might get away with it. I also like reading User:Rschen7754's voter-guide , but this year they too are feeling gumption-shortage, and have written something up with no names named. I see the other two below; I am glad we have at least one member of the plant kingdom running this year, arbcom needs species-diversity. p.s. User_talk:Floquensoque has reported you for campaign finance violations to the proper authorities, in case you have not yet been templated. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 17:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm tempted to attempt a humorous response on the lines of what if I done to annoy you but my family has made it exceedingly clear that my attempts at humor fall flat so I'll not try. As a more serious response, I have considered it. I signed up to be a clerk, on the theory that spending some time as a clerk would force me to pay more attention to the committee which would help me if I decided to run. My theory was correct; the problem is that the experience persuaded me not to run. I've taken on more commitments than I can handle, and that's without Arbcom. I may reconsider in the future, but I'll have to prune my commitment list, and probably stop tilting at climate change windmills.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

• No, pings don't work for IPs. Incidentally Bishzilla's voter guide is now live, if incomplete! Here it is: User:Bishzilla/Vote ACE 2015. Unfortunately the poor monster can't figure out how to transclude it to appear on the list of guides on the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015 page. It's hidden in some template, obviously, but… they make it hard on purpose, don't they? Don't want too many guides on their nice list! Help, anybody? Bishonen | talk 16:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC).
  • [1]. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank you little Florence. Humor? Humor…? Very serious support of little Brad! (Silly fellow!) Notice several guides removed for being empty, and one of 'em restored (still empty). No big deal, but kind of useless. Last time (2013) recollect 'zilla's and Lady C's guides both removed by extremely ignorant fellow stating they were both Bishonen's socks! Shonen should be so clever! Lady C, indeed! bishzilla _ROARR!! 17:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC).
      • Thanks for the votes of confidence, Drmies and Floquenbeam. I am coming back to edit more again, but, no, thank you, on ArbCom. LadyofShalott 18:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Venting

Floq, given the circumstances of the user's block, I'd block them for even longer for calling you a "vile human being". However, you're not an ordinary attackee, so I'll refrain if you'd prefer that I not do it. BTW, welcome back to the admin corps. Not sure how happy you are about it, but it's easier for my brain to think of you as an admin.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Meh. Don't worry about it, there's a 15% chance ignoring it will deescalate, and a 0% chance that extending the block will suddenly make them realize what a wonderful person I am. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:19, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Alakzi seems to be in a mood, immediately prior to this latest incident he got upset at me our of nowhere months after an incident: [2] and User_talk:HighInBC#Nature_of_your_concerns. That conversation reveals a fair bit about how he responds to authority. The short form of the argument is that he thinks that when someone is freaking out that they should not get further blocks, in reference to me increasing his block duration due to ongoing personal attacks/block evasion the last time he was blocked.

He would prefer that he be allowed to vent on Wikipedia when blocked, I don't think Wikipedia is here for people to vent. Based on my experience I think removal of talk page access will be more productive than increasing block length as Alakzi tends to calm down after a day or two. My 2 cents. HighInBC 16:11, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Forgot to ping Bbb23. HighInBC 16:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

@HighInBC: Except nothing has happened in a day or so, so removing talk page access now would be a truly horrible idea. I hope you weren't announcing you were going to do that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

No. I was referring to Bbb's comment about increasing the block. What I meant was that if there was further trouble that removing talk page access would be more productive than increasing block duration. I certainly don't think we should disturb a situation that has calmed down. My point was that longer durations are unlikely to be more effective than short durations in this case. I should have been more clear about that. HighInBC 16:19, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

By the way, very happy to see you back. I always appreciate the level of wisdom you show. HighInBC 16:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I see. I'm actually OK with some venting, esp. if directed at me, but in the case where it isn't OK, I certainly like talk page access removal better than lengthening a block. And thanks. Still probably not "here" here, but here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I missed something and I don't have time right now (class in a few). Yeah, Alakzi doesn't take kindly to authoritay, but I think they are a very valid net-positive for the project. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

(ec) The best for peace would have been to not block to start with. I mused about how I would have reacted to finding myself blocked, hope I could laugh as a famous model did, but who knows. See also Thank you with kitten box, and that was for her answers to some arb cand questions. Remember the name of the cat? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Will you be the one?

Will you be the one to end the drama thread about RO on ANI? It is clear to me that things are heated from a days long discussion. RO is indef blocked right now so couldn't someone close the thread, and revisit the issue about community sanctions at a later date when cooler heads are around? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't think there will ever be cooler heads around. And that block is probably not permanent, though I could be wrong. That thread is a mess, 70% due to RO's own behavior, 30% due to the fact that most people who hang out at ANI are hyenas, waiting to pounce on anything they think is wounded. Personally, after having observed the whole thing for a long time, I think a site ban is in order. But (a) I know you don;t agree, and (b) I doubt there's consensus for that, so I think you want someone else. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:16, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Just noticed...

...that you got the bit back. Well done. BMK (talk) 02:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

What gave me away; threatening to block people right and left? --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:12, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

User issue

This guy seems intent on ridicule and uncivil behavior [[3]] Viriditus. I am wondering if he could be blocked or warned for incivility. Please look at the Drexler citation section toward the bottom of the page on the talk page of the Post scarcity article. I am asking here since you seem familiar with similar situations in regard to this person. Earl King Jr. (talk) 08:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

At worst, Viriditas was guilty of being uncivil to you because you did something really really stupid. And he told you so in a variety of ways. Removing a reliable source based on the fact the author (a well-known expert/name in the field) hosted a copy of his (published in multiple countries in the world by reputable publishers) book on his personal website was ridiculous. Multiple people told you why you were wrong and you still failed to get it. Generally that will start to annoy most people. Had you gone "Oh sorry, I didnt notice it was reliably published elsewhere" he probably wouldnt have blown his top. As it is, you didnt notice because you dont know anything about the subject or the author and failed to do basic diligent research (including reading the bloody article!) before removing the material. Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I am familiar with Earl King Jr. from other topics (one example) so I browsed the article talk where extreme IDHT is displayed by EKJ. If EKJ understood any of the simple comments made by several editors in that section they would be apologizing for wasting people's time rather than drawing attention to the mistakes. Johnuniq (talk) 09:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

In general, I'm not interested in being Viriditas' parole officer; please don't come to me every time you're in a dispute with him.

In this particular case, I see two problems. And since you came to me, I won't sugar coat it. One is your bull in a china shop approach on that talk page. See WP:RANDY. If you do not understand a subject, don't keep reverting and lecturing other people; instead, ask them questions and learn from them. If you do not understand a subject, don't assume you are right and others are wrong. it is much, much more likely that the opposite is true. It really is hard to remain kind and sweet with you when you're trying to be condescending, when you actually don't know what you're talking about. It really is frustrating for people. It harms the encyclopedia. I understand why others were getting mad at you there, and you need to stop. if you don't stop, I will consider blocking you for disrupting things - that's how seriously I think you're doing wrong here.

The second problem is Viriditas saying "Any other moronic, imbecilic, microcephalic comments you would like to make now?", on top of the other uncool things he said in that thread, and elsewhere. There's getting frustrated, and then there's losing all restraint. I am not a member of the civility police - I think I've established bona fides with most of the civility corps as "chronically enabling incivility" - and even I think that would be worth a serious warning even if it was a one-off. Except it isn't a one-off. On top of all the other over-the-top stuff Viriditas has been spewing the last day or so (just that I'm aware of), I just can't stomach my usual "everyone gets mad, so let's see if it dies down" approach. I'll probably be blocking Viriditas for a while, I need another cup of coffee to decide.

Now, Earl, change your approach. It is damaging too. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Floq... I know how much you dislike civility blocks, but would invite you to view Viriditas' response to your block. With blocks intended to be preventative, and his answer to your block on top of all the other civility/NPA violations he's racked up in the last couple days, I would suggest a longer than 72 hour block would be preventative. Engaging in the exact same behavior you blocked him for on his talk page during his block isn't exactly a good sign that he would instantly return to his behavior in the last couple days three days from now when his block wears off. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

It's not exactly the same; on the article talk page it's directed at a specific person. On his talk page, it's directed generally at the people he thinks are not as smart as he is. I don't care about his user talk page snark (and over-reacting to that could muddy the waters if the block is appealed), but I will keep an eye on edits after the block expires. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

O.k. Floquenbeam I get the message and will try to reform. I don't want to be a Randy. Thanks for the thoughtful overview. Earl King Jr. (talk) 04:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Collapsing. Go away: my talk page is not where you two are going to start bickering with each other

Since your last post here HighlnBC revoked access to his talk-page, and to add insult to injury User:Wikimandia comes along and adds a barnstar of good humor. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:44, 19 November 2015 (UTC) LOL. And how does this add insult to injury? I don't even know who is injured in the first place so I'm not sure who it is I am supposed to have insulted? Talk page stalkers? If I think someone is funny and want to rain barnstars upon them I will. —МандичкаYO 😜 02:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC) That would be fine if you weren't giving it to a blocked user whose crude behavior was the reason for it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Looking for background for one of your comments

Remember this? Do you recall where the template editor discussion occurred? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

That was probably a dangerous thing for me to say, because (a) I was relying on memory, not an actual review of the discussion, and (b) my memory is deteriorating rapidly with age. I'm still pretty sure that was a real concern at the time, but no, I can't recall where that discussion was. Maybe do some detective work on when earliest edits to WP:Template editor were made? History of WP:CENT? Ask at VPP, where people who probably felt passionately pro- or passionately con- are still hanging out? Sorry. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

• Eh, Neil, I really do view this as quite a minor issue to be pursuing given all I did was in one instance apply TE+admin salt instead of admin only salt to a page that's unlikely to be unsalted at any time in the near future anyway. Accountcreators can quite accidentally create editnotices, and although there was minor controversy surrounding that at one point also, I view allowing a TE to potentially unsalt a page that's unlikely to be unsalted in the same category I view accountcreators creating editnotices - de minimis non curat lex. Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I think it's an issue worth clearing up. We get at least three of four salting requests a day and admins should not be using template editor protection for these. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
    • Please don't make me guess what you guys are talking about. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
      • This: User_talk:Kevin_Gorman#STOPzilla. I'm not fussed about one instance but if it's a regular practice, I think it needs to be halted. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Here's the first one I think. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Template editor user right. I feel like there were other discussions leading up to, or after, this RFC, probably on a village pump of some kind, but this was the easy one to find. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Also here (link found in the RFC). --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

• As far as I know it's not a regular practice (even when I'm salting I usually go for admin-salt - I just hit the wrong dropdown and although I noticed, didn't see a significant reason was it was an inappropriate level so just went with it,) but if this came up to a large discussion, I really do suspect it would go the same way that +acc's creating editnotices went. "Technical accident, does no harm to allow and once in a while might potentially do good, if rarely." Kevin Gorman (talk) 19:58, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ydgm

You don't got mail -- no email link? I'll send you the ace2105 if email (or turn your email pref on). NE Ent 11:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@NEEnt: sigh. You don't know how difficult it is to be an idiot. I turned it off to avoid any WP related email on my break and forgot to turn it back on. Switched on now. Thanks. The 2105 questions should be even more useful than the 2015 questions; I was thinking of running again in 2105, so that will give me a real advantage. Emoji goes here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC::

@NE Ent: double sigh. Not having a good day so far. Repinging. ~

Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhh

@NE Ent: There. 106.0.176.61 (talk) 13:00, 19 November 2015 (UTC)