User talk:Lunacy

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Lunacy! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 12:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome to RationalWiki is lukewarm at best, Lunacy. This observation is due to the nature of your initial edits. Pull up a goat and try not to make trouble. We realize it is possible that you do not understand the nature of the site or our objectives. Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards to clarify things for you. If you're still interested in contributing, please see what our articles are intended to be.

I can, however, extract solace from the fact that my "desk job" is actually very rewarding, enjoyable, and pays probably more than twice the amount of money you will ever make in your lifetime. But don't worry, I hear trolling minor communities on the internet is great for relieving pent-up job stress. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 22:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Is that really the best you could come up with? That was very poor. I'm getting to the stage that I'm embarressed for you.

Is no-one willing to stand up to the double standards of this place? Does no-one have a dick or *SHOCKHORROR* A mind of their own here? Lunacy 14:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC) And P.S- Please don't have the bare faced cheek to call anyone else a troll. Just don't. This is one of the reasons why you people are so vacuous. Lunacy 14:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I can. Please cite your specific claims made and we'll deal with them. So far you just seem to be on an anti-RW binge that could be applied anywhere by just changing the name with very little actual content or accusations. ^gnostic 14:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I mean, are you even banned? You're not blocked and not in the bin that I can find. ^gnostic 14:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Please don't be obtuse. I don't do factfinding missions, I lurk and I read and 9 out of 10 of the posts made here are of a juvenile nature. I'll not provide citations because I don't keep a 'grief' list of edits. I'm not that sad. There's a good reason why the intellectual heavyweights have long abandoned this place. You can delude yourself all you want, but these are the facts. Lunacy 14:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I am MarcusCicero. Lunacy 14:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Well if you can't point out to specific examples where the people you've named are being arseholes (would you like me to do it for you, it won't take long?) then you have no right to call such accusations "facts". So if you can't be constructive (I don't follow the drama, really, it doesn't interest me in the slightest), then how can the better parts of RW work to eliminate the things causing you grief? Are you just worried about the increasingly small contingent of the website that still deals with Conservapedia, perhaps? ^gnostic 14:27, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

WIGO is incredibly personal and nasty to real life people.

Every aspect of this website is geared towards irrational hatred of people based on their religious or political beliefs.

I don't know how many times I've read somebody say Phillip was a 'retard' or an 'imbecile' etc. Despite him being the perfect picture of Christian courtesy.

The humour is childish and boring.

There are a certain number of people here who love fake internet authority as it gives meaning to their otherwise geekish and dull lives.

Any intellectual discussions that might happen absolutely reek of needless polemics aimed at the right wing. This website is a wingnut hub (Though it barely even qualifies as that anymore, since most posts seem to revolve around the use of some internet meme)

The majority of you have too much certainty about your own opinions, despite being demonstably ignorant and hypocritical constantly (In an old thread 'what is wrong with being gay' I admitted I was wrong in my opinion and that the userbase here had brought me round to a more liberal point of view. I have NEVER read of anyone here publically back down from a position after being confronted with a superior argument.)

Thats just a snippet and all I have energy for right now. This isn't a court of law. I'm not looking to persuade you. But do you not think it is hypocritical to ban me when all I do is basically mimic what you guys do to over a third of the US population constantly? Lunacy 14:33, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

"You guys" don't do anything. Everyone has their own point of view and is responsible for their own actions. Mimicing behaviour that you don't like achieves nothing. JoeDuffy 14:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

(EC)::I just mostly object to the "you guys" bit as you're really just focusing on a handful of people are just obsessed with the Conseravpedia aspect of RW (they will grow out of it), which is dwindling and you're then tarring some of the truly good contributers who aren't 12. Although the name-calling is often uncalled for, you have to admit, we have seen these people do incredibly idiotic things. If you're not impressed with WIGO entries calling people "retards" then feel free to edit them to something less personal, I'd be behind that certainly. But if it's just talk-page comments, then it's hardly the fault of the site as an entity per se, but just people's opinions. And yes, people can be arseholes, good for noticing. ^gnostic 14:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I have no interest in reforming anyones behaviour. In some ways I quite like the insults. But its the hypocrisy which annoys me. Its the same people who object to people insulting them who banned me. (Jeeves is the classic example - an unrepentable deviant) At least I have the balls to tell them exactly how little I think of them on their own userpage. Lunacy 14:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

If you hate this place, why keep coming back? why not take up gardening or evening classes or something? If all you do is hang about an obscure website telling people you don't like them then maybe you need to look at yourself. Totnesmartin 20:16, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Correction: I backed down from my stance regarding illegal immigration after re-reading the arguments. I also changed my views on abortion somewhat over time, due to arguments from both sides (I sit in the before the end of trimester one, away from my original "Fetus Is Teh Person From Conception" stance). However, I do understand the point you are trying to make. I express skepticism that your indigination over WIGO will ever result in it being deleted. (and perhaps I somewhat agree that intellectual discussions are out the window a bit, it has been a while since an essay was posted that made me think (aside from the abortion one from Earthland). ĵ₳¥ášÇ♠ʘ wasn't me! 20:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Radioactive afikomen

Don't revert me on other users talk pages, it's not your business. And yes, I'm incredibly immature. I enjoy it. SJ ^Debaser 22:44, 23 September 2009 (UTC)