Ihardlythinkso (talk | contribs) →Q: re |
→Q: That would be fine |
||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
::I'm sure such drive-by comment is gonna make me wanna stick around to edit! (BTW, "it appears" the Sun revolves around the Earth; "it appears" seawater might quench one's thirst.) Me thinks policy permits editors to question, and even criticize, an admin re their conduct. (And it's a little hard to edit articles when doing so, and when under attack, me thinks, if that is the co-requirement.) Just following policy?!: [[WP:BACKUPYOURWIKIFRIENDNOMATTERWHATTHEYDOTOOTHERS]]. [[User:Ihardlythinkso|Ihardlythinkso]] ([[User talk:Ihardlythinkso|talk]]) 20:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC) |
::I'm sure such drive-by comment is gonna make me wanna stick around to edit! (BTW, "it appears" the Sun revolves around the Earth; "it appears" seawater might quench one's thirst.) Me thinks policy permits editors to question, and even criticize, an admin re their conduct. (And it's a little hard to edit articles when doing so, and when under attack, me thinks, if that is the co-requirement.) Just following policy?!: [[WP:BACKUPYOURWIKIFRIENDNOMATTERWHATTHEYDOTOOTHERS]]. [[User:Ihardlythinkso|Ihardlythinkso]] ([[User talk:Ihardlythinkso|talk]]) 20:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
:::If you don't want to stick around, IHTS, no one here is making you stay. I "drive by" when I see people bullied, and at this point, you are being a bully. I suggest you look at your own behavior and consider what your purpose is here other than to vent your spleen. See also [[WP:DIVA]], [[WP:KETTLE]] and [[WP:RANDY]] and their applicability to your situation. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 09:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Wow == |
== Wow == |
Revision as of 09:10, 1 February 2015
Q
I greatly appreciate honesty, and in fact, I agree with what you've said. — Ched : ? 03:33, 25
Ched, could you please clarify (to me) what it is you "agree with"? Thanks. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 10:40, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, but that just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Remember this?: "I stand by my thoughts". Well, it is just fine if you continue to hate my guts Ched, I don't particularly like or respect you either. But you should know, as admin, you aren't neutral toward me, and as such, you shouldn't be closing ANI threads concerning me. (Or doesn't that serve your sensibility somehow?) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Four things IHTS
- 1. I don't hate your guts.
- 2. I'm not interested in rehashing an email conversation from a year and a half ago.
- 3. If you're looking for an argument, I'm sorry, but again, I'm just not interested.
- 4. You asked me to clarify something I said. I tried to do just that; and I don't know how to make it any clearer than I did.
- — Ched : ? 08:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Just because you list things, doesn't mean it is being logical or responsive. Like I said, your answer didn't make a whole lot of sense. It still doesn't. (Clearly, I think you have intentionally missed points, been disingenuous & worse. But not surprised about that. Continuing to discuss anything with you is just as distaseful as is for you, I suppose. So we agree to not speak further to one another; good, you give me a headache.) p.s. Your recent edits re me is why I came here. Maybe you should turn off the crap!? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- huh? I'm really not sure where all of this is coming from IHTS. I don't know what response it is you're looking for. I've tried to answer your questions. I'm sorry my memory isn't better, the best I can recall is that we disagreed about something back in 2013. I'm sorry you weren't able to comprehend my response, but I don't know how else to say what I said. You say you think I'm intentionally missing some "points", uhhhh ... no, not really. You're free to elaborate if you wish. You seem to be implying I'm deceitful and that I lie. You say discussing things with me is distasteful, but I don't recall posting on your talk page in the last couple years. WHAT edits "re you"? I hope your headache stops? I wish you well? IDK. — Ched : ? 01:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think you already know I cannot answer your Q because of IBAN restriction. Also, it is too bad WP does not have a mediation venue whereby you, me, and neutral moderator on a non-public discussion page can't get together to get to the bottom for you and resolve your confusion. Nothing much gets achieved otherwise, does it, except wasting time and upping the snark. In lieu of said non-existent venue, why don't you more carefully go thru your recent dialogues concerning me and the ANI you closed, and then either get back to me to repeat your "don't want to discuss any further", or come to better comprehension on your own!? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- huh? I'm really not sure where all of this is coming from IHTS. I don't know what response it is you're looking for. I've tried to answer your questions. I'm sorry my memory isn't better, the best I can recall is that we disagreed about something back in 2013. I'm sorry you weren't able to comprehend my response, but I don't know how else to say what I said. You say you think I'm intentionally missing some "points", uhhhh ... no, not really. You're free to elaborate if you wish. You seem to be implying I'm deceitful and that I lie. You say discussing things with me is distasteful, but I don't recall posting on your talk page in the last couple years. WHAT edits "re you"? I hope your headache stops? I wish you well? IDK. — Ched : ? 01:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- So to recap: YOU violated an IBAN in a way that wasn't obvious to anyone who wasn't monitoring your "thank you" log; then YOU come here to bait and level accusations at me that amount to personal attacks. OK. But just so we're clear, you coming here does not make me "involved" where you are concerned, so iff I see this type of behavior continue elsewhere, then I will not hesitate to block you. Given your history, it could be a rather lengthy one at that. I'm surprised that you would bring this kind of scrutiny upon yourself; but you, and only you, are responsible for your actions. I would strongly suggest that you consider doing article work for a while, but the choice is yours. — Ched : ? 12:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think it's very telling that it seems you can't deal straighforwardly or constructively with this issue opened up in this thread on your Talk, which is an objection to as admin how you've handled your recent conversations with others concerning me post ANI that you closed (for the record, I believe you're the offender here Ched, not me), but instead need to try and shut me up via intimidation via manufacturing transgressions and issuing threats. Good job, Ched. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 14:21, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not trying to shut you up IHTS. If that were the case I would simply tell you to stay off my talk, and I am NOT doing that. You are welcome to post here. I try to answer your questions, but it seems that if you don't get the answers you like - you accuse me of not being straightforward or constructive. I'm not issuing threats, I'm just telling you like it is. To be honest? I doubt it will be me that will block you next, but I won't be surprised if someone else does unless you change your approach. I didn't close the thread on you, in fact, I didn't even comment on it. I closed a sub-thread regarding another editor. My intent was to put out the fire so to speak - yet you continue to fan the flames. I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm simply trying to offer you constructive advice as you go forward. It's entirely up to you how you take it, and how you chose to proceed in the future. I honestly do wish you the very best; I know you are capable of doing credible work. Good luck in all your efforts. — Ched : ? 15:50, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)Ihardlythinkso, from the outside, it appears that your are only here to WP:BAIT Ched. So how about you stop? Montanabw(talk) 22:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sure such drive-by comment is gonna make me wanna stick around to edit! (BTW, "it appears" the Sun revolves around the Earth; "it appears" seawater might quench one's thirst.) Me thinks policy permits editors to question, and even criticize, an admin re their conduct. (And it's a little hard to edit articles when doing so, and when under attack, me thinks, if that is the co-requirement.) Just following policy?!: WP:BACKUPYOURWIKIFRIENDNOMATTERWHATTHEYDOTOOTHERS. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 20:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- If you don't want to stick around, IHTS, no one here is making you stay. I "drive by" when I see people bullied, and at this point, you are being a bully. I suggest you look at your own behavior and consider what your purpose is here other than to vent your spleen. See also WP:DIVA, WP:KETTLE and WP:RANDY and their applicability to your situation. Montanabw(talk) 09:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Wow
This [1] is just...WOW. Caden cool 23:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- I hadn't seen Drmies around and it was getting out of hand. Since I see he's on top of it, .... — Ched : ? 00:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hard not to get sucked into the dysfunction vortex, isn't it? :) --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I logged on Tuesday, poked around, saw this stuff in full throttle, shook my head, and logged off. Logged on Wednesday, briefly considered full-protection of about a dozen user talk pages, thought better of it, and logged off. Pretty much did the same thing today, except saw your name pop up on my watchlist.
You have kids, Ched? (if too personal, ignore). Some of the "discussion" reminds me of a fight between mine. One option is to yell "I don't care who started it! If you don't stop it, you're all grounded". I've certainly done my share of that. It works, but you feel like you somehow failed afterwards. Another is to talk to each of them for an hour, try to figure out what started what, try to get both sides to see the other side's point of view, and finish up with a big hug. I've tried that, it sounds good in theory, and it's probably in all the parenting books, but it's almost always a complete waste of time. Another option is to ignore them, and when they try to enlist you, say "solve it yourselves". Eventually they get tired of arguing, and either walk away, or actually solve it themselves. This doesn't always work, but it sometimes does.
Really, these people aren't "disrupting" too many people except themselves; it's not like a bunch of innocents are getting yelled at, everyone is varying shades of guilty. If they want to be self-destructive, I don't know that we need to care. To those saying "where are all the admins?", the answer can sometimes be "solve it yourselves". People need to learn the art of ignoring people who upset you, or who called you a name. If we don't wade in, maybe someone will learn that skill today. I'm not really saying this is definitely the solution here, but it's the one I'm going with. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:27, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm going to think on this a bit. I'll reply further after some thought. (I learned long ago that your words merited consideration :)) — Ched : ? 00:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I tweaked something, didn't really mean "ignore people you disagree with". Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Which is precisely why shutting down WP:WQA was a mistake. Folks thought it "didn't work" but by letting a couple childish editors sling low level mud at each other for few days ... until they finally figured out no one was going to save them from themselves ... we kept that stuff off ANI, article and user talk, and all the other places it happens now. NE Ent 09:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Q.1
So you reply and say I'm welcome to express myself here, then immediately delete the thread, when it is very clear I wasn't satisfied at all with your responses, which were not only not straightforward nor constructive, but clearly aimed to avoid the one-and-only issue I've brought to your attention here - clearly a complaint in how you've conducted yourself in post ANI conversations regarding me. (First you claim you responded, then when I tell you it wasn't addressing the issue and why I can't say more due to IBAN, you fabricate transgressions and start threatening to intimidate.) I think you know what the problem is Ched. If you have cluefulness, you should be able to pick it up in Drmies's message to you, and in my initial query of you. I'm just not buying your response to that query, for reason already told you twice. I could already see by the previous post of yours containing threat & intimidation, there is no way forward with you on the issue you've created here by your elected conversations regarding me, and, like I said, I'm not buying your responses here, they are all over the map, and none of them have addressed the problem that you have created here. If you want to know more I'm all for some kind of mediation with you with a neutral party. But I doubt you'd offer to participate and prefer your current line of feigned attention, goodwill, making threats, then deleting threads. Just stay away from me, and watch your comments, they have been offensive and toxic. The last thing I wanted to do was open the thread you deleted. But IMO you started this with your incendiary conversations. Drmies even scolded you for allowing what you allowed. But you had gone even further than that. In my book that was extremely nasty. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 16:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- First, the only thing I deleted was a bot notification. Second, there's clearly a link to my archives at the top of my talk. THIRD - The thread that we were having a discussion in is at the very top of this very page IHTS. This drives at the very heart of the matter here. You need to stop, look, listen, read, and think before you post. Now while you regroup, I'm going to be doing a few other things; HOWEVER, I will be glad to come back and address any issues you may have a bit later today. Feel free to refactor anything you've said above with <s> </s>. — Ched : ? 18:25, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Um, I tried replying to you at section "Q"--the system told me it wasn't there (not found). I checked your Talk history and saw you archived it. Now you've restored it, but you haven't restored the related offending section where Drmies commented. That is the offending thread, plus your related posts elsewhere stemming from. What's needed here, due to your continuous dodging & weaving, is mediation with a neutral party to which you'd be subject. Other than that, you've exhausted my patience. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 18:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- IHTS, I think you have a lot to offer on this project. OK, now I'm guessing you were editing while I was. When you click the edit link on a section, it says something like this:
- Notice the "section=3" at the end. So I'm guessing you clicked edit and started typing. Then I cut and pasted old threads to User talk:Ched/Archive 30, and then you clicked the "Save page" button. When you first clicked "edit", then "Q" was section=13 (or something like that), when you clicked the "save", section=13 didn't exist, and "Q" was then section=1. At no time did I delete the thread in which we were talking, so I never had to restore it. So once again you've jumped to the wrong conclusions. Yes, it would have been nice if it triggered the "edit conflict" thing - that might have saved some confusion on your part.
- Now, for future reference: I'm guessing [[2]] is the thread you want to discuss. It is a thread that you never posted in, and one that had gone a couple days without any posts; therefore I felt fine in archiving it. Since you want to bring up @Drmies: I think it's only fair to ping him. At no point in time did I take any comment of his as "scolding" me. Drmies is an editor and admin. that I have the utmost respect for, and if he said he's looking at something - then I trust him to look at all sides and offer a fair and equitable solution. Quite frankly, I considered pointing out some timestamps and diffs to show that Max had moved on, but meh, like I said - I trust his judgement.
- You've said that discussion with me is "distasteful", that it give you a "headache", but I haven't been to your page in ages. I'm simply responding to what your asking here. I'm a bit confused as to why you continue if it's so bothersome to you, but I'm more than willing to discuss anything you want. I do have a few other things to add, such as your choice of words like "disingenuous & worse", but I'll stop here to see what else is said. — Ched : ? 20:37, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- IHTS, I think you have a lot to offer on this project. OK, now I'm guessing you were editing while I was. When you click the edit link on a section, it says something like this: