RationalWiki:Saloon bar

Welcome, BoN
This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
For previous conversations, see the automagic barchives.

edit

Post the Karajou incident, cleaning other last names

Archived, live thread preserved.

Lessons to learn

Do not even let TK get his foot in the door, set any mail from his address to go straight into the trash folder, do not even let it touch your inbox. Block his IM accounts. If you do not do this then do not under any circumstances come to RW and act as he surrogate for anything. If he wants something done on RW he can come himself and discuss it publicly. 216.221.87.112 11:37, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Not bad for a BON. :)  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 11:41, 15 January 2009 (EST)

'Tis Trent. Phantom Hoover 12:26, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Mea Culpa: should have recognised his IP & his editing style. :)  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 12:32, 15 January 2009 (EST)

What's TK email address? Phantom Hoover 12:53, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I'm certainly not putting that put, for your own safety :). And I don't want anyone to think I was acting as TK's agent. He asked me to pull his info, true, but I agreed to the request because it's reasonable and, more importantly, in line with my principles.-caius (heckuva job!) 13:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I have socks on CP with my email address, so I can contact him anyway. I can't put someone on my trash list unless I know their address. Phantom Hoover 16:03, 15 January 2009 (EST)

TK has often had his email addy on his CP user page. Dig it up at your own risk. ħuman 17:21, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Would anyone mind if this thread was archived

NOW? ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 13:58, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Done. Phantom Hoover 16:18, 15 January 2009 (EST)

What's with the early closing? Archive the the thread, not the whole darned page! Генгис^unbelieving 18:07, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I thought rather a lot seemed to go bye-bye... ħuman 19:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Last orders sure come early around here. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:36, 15 January 2009 (EST)

It's ok, opening time is 3.14 minutes after closing time. As far as your orders, see the "retardaunt" section below. ħuman 19:00, 15 January 2009 (EST)

• I don't know what is the general consensus on this, but I agree with AKjeldsen that we should be careful on self-censorship, and with Pi on CP sysops' real names and general info (?), maybe just the general area where they live in. Really, is there anything wrong with saying that Karajou is Brian A. Macdonald from Murfreesboro, TN? Or Geo's real name? JJ4e^{I christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot} 19:45, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Restaraunt

Should we have a place where people could 'order' articles? --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 18:05, 15 January 2009 (EST)

No. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:06, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Why not? And would people please stop saying no to anything I say? --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 18:07, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Nobody is under any obligation to write articles, so "ordering" would be pointless. People write articles on what they are interested in; not what other folks tell them to write. There are already thousands of links for wanted pages, which are created whenever you create a link to an article that doesn't exist yet. If there's an article you think we should have, the best thing is to start it yourself, even if it's just a stub. If people are interested in the subject, they will join in to finish it. If they're not, they won't. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:13, 15 January 2009 (EST)

How about a place where people can order food, like a restaurant? Just pub food would be fine, although a couple of daily gourmet specials would be nice. Oh, and some chips and a bowl of bean CURd for dipping? ħuman 18:58, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I can make an excellent bow-tie alfredo asiago. And my salads are fantastic. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 20:18, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Can you take a picture of them and upload them into the menu section? ħuman 20:36, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Next time I make them, yes. However, that kind of stuff is expensive. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 20:37, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Yes, I didn't mean "this very minute", just when it's convenient. ħuman 20:44, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Returning to our muttons. In all fairness(!) I suspect that CUR meant "suggest" articles rather than "order" articles.  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 21:58, 16 January 2009 (EST)

That is what I meant. And why was my menu deleted? --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 12:09, 17 January 2009 (EST)

because it was silly (& taking up room on the chalkboard) at a guess.  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:13, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Ambiance

I am sorely tempted to use that nifty music toy to link through to an mp3 or two of mine... ħuman 19:07, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I'd love to hear your stuff. TheoryOfPractice 19:10, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks... the mp3s are here. I added "Out of Beer" to the jukebox for fun, although "Believe" is more "on-mission"... ħuman 20:15, 15 January 2009 (EST)

That's one way to completely change my image of someone. Listening again!  ^{(with butter!)} _{talk to Toast} 00:46, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Interesting... I'm curious how your image of me was changed (and what you've listened to so far). PS, the "album" is certified to have gone "paper" - I sold a copy a year or two ago... ħuman 13:52, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Stargate Copyright

Might as well fight it out here. Now, what do us poor Stargate fans do? I say userboxes aren't in violation. Human says they are. Neither of us are lawyers (that I know of). What gives? --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 20:35, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Well the "Marks" one is cited as a screencap, so no way can we (as in you) use it. The other one has been discussed on its relevant talk page, and it would seem that no matter what anyone says, you persist in edit warring instead of awaiting some sort of consensus (even when a clear "NO" consensus seems to be arising.) And what's a "Stargate," anyway? TheoryOfPractice 20:40, 15 January 2009 (EST)

The BEST TV show ever! By the way, this picture is approximately five years old. The series is over. And the picture can be easily found on any site that mentions Rodney. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 20:41, 15 January 2009 (EST)

That doesn't make it legal to post it here, in a way that does not constitute "fair use". Please go research "fair use" with your giant brain, okay? ħuman 20:46, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Human, how is CUR's Stargate image particularly different from the Seargent Pepper, John Lennon, Helena Bonham Carter, Spongebob Squarepants, Godfather and Monty Python images in userboxes on your page? I'm sick of the massive double standard about fair use, where anything newly uploading gets jumped on but lots of longstanding & prominent violations get ignored. Either we clean up the site properly & get rid of all the Simpsons & Family Guy stills used irrelevantly around the site, or we relax about it & let inconsequential stuff like this go. I'm inclined towards the latter option. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:05, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I'm inclined towards cleaning up rather than bustin' copyright law - even if it means I have to remake some of my userboxen. PS, you forgot to list the JC Superstar image I have on a box ;) But, yeah, there are probably thousands of examples, you only mentioned the ones you found on a quick search. The only difference is that the image is "hi rez", I think most of our silly userboxen images are loaded at about 50 x 50 (not that that makes them ok). Maybe the only problem is that curDLE brains is a twat, and draws attention to every stupid thing he does? ħuman 22:23, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Say, Human, is there any chance of convincing you to tune the insults down by, I don't know, 20% or so? Just try it out for a little while? Proper conflict resolution and all that? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 22:30, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Sure... wait, what insults? Sorry if my description based on evidence seems harsh, but seriously. Also, I note you didn't respond to my agreeing with the ferret (re: cleanup). CUR is a twat, a clueless twat - and in spite of this, thinks he is a genius. Gee, I guess I could tone down my pointing out the truth for a bit, sure. 20%? How about I shoot for 100% for the duration of this discussion? But please to forgive me if the twat adds even more evidence (as it does with virtually every edit it makes) and I react to it? ħuman 23:02, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I would say there's likely no problem with icon-sized images (50x50, or maybe 100x100), or else LiveJournal would have to close down. --Kels 23:10, 15 January 2009 (EST)

In my perspective, at least, calling someone a "twat" and a "curDLE brains" are indeed insults, and if I remember the guidelines correctly, we "frown" on that sort of thing. Ergo: *frowns* --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 23:31, 15 January 2009 (EST)

My thoughts exactly. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 10:45, 16 January 2009 (EST) AKJ, normally I'd say "you're right," but in this case I gotta ask--maybe this guy is asking for the insults. Look, I made what was possibly the single largest fuck-up in the history of this project and nobody has called me names over it, though they have every right to. CUR gets called more names than TK and HoG put together. When that happens, you gotta ask why...TheoryOfPractice 23:35, 15 January 2009 (EST)

See, the thing is, I didn't "call it" a "twat". I described it based on observation. There's a difference. Also, "curDLE brains" is a miscapitalized reference to its user name and its claim to having very large brains (IQ = 133!!!!). All I am doing is observing, really. @ Kels, do you think we can figure out a way to encode the "thumbnail" idea? It might make CUR happy to have his userbox, and justify a few others? ħuman 23:44, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Okay. Well, thank you for running roughshod all over the guidelines before we're even finished rewriting them. I'm certain that'll encourage people to follow them. Good job. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 23:48, 15 January 2009 (EST)

I knida agree with ya here AJK. Come on Human, dont let C(TK)UR push you! Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 23:50, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Sorry for describing it based on evidence if that broke our guidelines. Sometimes it's confusing, you know? Respect for user vs. empirical observation of creature's persona on here? Dang, I'm hung between the mission and the guidelines! ħuman 23:58, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Ahem. May a n00b butt in? First, Stargate is awesome, and I'm looking forward to Stargate:Universe (God help us all if it's bad). Second, it may not be fair use, except as an absolutely minimal use. But third, even if it isn't fair use because it fits none of the other traits, it's so minimal that I would eat my own balls if Sci-Fi sued you. Keep it!-Diadochus

Well, if CUR sends them that letter he's mentioned, they will notice and they will sue. However, Weaseloid is right, so I've uploaded small versions of the two pictures. Either keep them or delete every other copyrighted image. -- Nx ^talk 06:11, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Fair use doctrine

The US copyright office has this to say on assessing fair use,

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Now I know the people at CP think because it is on there they are covered by 1 but I can't see how "educational purposes" cover use on your user page. It is a single image out of a TV show so not much there on 2. There in nothing around it that supports it use so they got you on 3. It has hurt their potential market as I might not watch the show just because CUR likes it so they have got you on 4 as well. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 01:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)

• So we can use screencaps of a YT video, say Conservapedia on The Hour? --JJ4e^{I christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot} 10:47, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Covered under parody clause. Генгис^unbelieving 11:10, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Thank God. JJ4e^{I christen thee Sir Annoyz Alot} 11:20, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Some of the most obvious violations in article space are here, here, here, here and here. I like the way these pics are being used, but it obviously isn't fair use. Is there anything we could do to them in terms of cropping, colour adjustement & effects that would make them 'our' images rather than copyright violations but still keep enough of the characteristics of the originals? ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 14:05, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well, as an artist I can probably knock up a few 100% original cartoons or imagines and just allow RW to have them up without bringing up copyright issues if it comes to it. The thing is, no one noticies this stuff and it just flies under the radar; pragmatically, so long as the site is respectful to requests to pull them down there is no real problem. But it would be nice to stay 100% within the law. ArmondikoV^postate 14:17, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well, this is where I have the problem. I would much rather let these things go; these kinds of trivial violations go unchecked all over the internet & nothing comes of it. However, if people are going to be hassled by other editors about the copyright status of every new image uploaded here (as is regularly happening), then we should at least show some consistency in dealing with what we already have around in prominent places on the site. Basically, the hypocrisy bothers me a lot more than the legal issue. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 14:23, 16 January 2009 (EST)

You know, I bet if we could reach him, Kevin Smith would give us permission for the Jesus statue thing (it is from Dogma, right?). ħuman 14:38, 16 January 2009 (EST)

A few points, first a law suit is never the first thing to hit, we would get a DMCA take down notice, and if we get a legitimate one we can act. Second does anyone have the court case for the Yoko Ono "Imagine" lawsuit against expelled? I think there is some relevancy here regarding use of copyrighted material is criticism/parody of something other than the copyrighter material. tmtoulouse 14:46, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Copyrights, derivative works and the like

My background is as a photographer. I have some experience creating copyrighted work and registering copyrights. I've also read the copyright bit a few times and have two books on copyrights and photography (and assorted cases). I am not a lawyer.

One of the key questions for courts is how much the violation borrows from the original and how much it impacts the commercial value of the original. A small section of a frame (not the entire screen capture) is less impacting. Using the image in a way that is not associated with the original material (the image of Buddy Jesus is not in an article about Dogma) impacts this less than something that associates the image with its original copyright. I'm not a lawyer, so you should probably read [1] and [2] which are by a lawyer.

A screen capture such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Babylon5_01.jpg is a low res image that is used only in an article about the series. You will note it is not used in any user page templates. It is only being used as part of an editorial which is covered by fair use.

One of the things that owning a copyright gives the holder is the right to authorize and publish derivative works. Cropping or altering an image is still covered by the original copyright. If you translate Harry Potter into Esperanto, you own the copyright on the translation - but you can't publish it unless you have permission by the copyright holder. A photograph of a painting is the same way - the painter controls the derivative work. In order to make a derivative work into a new work, a substantial amount of new material must be included and copyrighted itself (changing titles or phrases is not copyrightable).

I will point out that removing copyright notice from an image (be it in the border of the image or one of the fields of the image) is a huge violation and means a willful transgression rather than an innocent one.

CP has gotten in significant trouble using AP photos in a way that competes with AP's own use of them.

So, back to here. If anything may be copyrighted, follow the bit on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:B5_aliens.jpg - the "rationale" and "resolution". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content is a good policy.

--Shagie 22:57, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Thank you, Shagie. ħuman 23:02, 16 January 2009 (EST)

From Debate:Tobacco

Moved back to Debate:Tobacco

God's role in plane landing in the Hudson

Perhaps it was inevitable that "God was certainly looking out for all of us". Of course, God had nothing to do with the flock of geese going through the engines, either... Sterile^rationalize 12:26, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well God only does the good stuff, except when he's punishing people of course. Генгис^unbelieving 12:31, 16 January 2009 (EST)

(EC):Or the skill of an exceptional pilot that could, under pressure, land a plane on water without killing anyone. Or the engineer that designed the plane to handle reasonably well without engines. Or the foresight of safety personel who decided to put life-jackets under the seats. Or the people who designed the doors to release under such a situation. Or the fast response of the rescue services. Or the good communication links between pilot and airport that informed the right people of where and how it was going down. Or the people who desinged those life rafts that inflate by the doors.... But to be fair, a lot of the story that circulating is just singing the praises of the pilot above anything else. It's almost as if the people are thinking rationally. ArmondikoV^postate 12:35, 16 January 2009 (EST)

(EC) YHVH's role in the plane crash would be like that of a person who pushes someone else off a cliff, catches him before he hits the ground, and then expects to be thanked for the catch. ListenerX^TalkerX 12:37, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Difference between the saloon bar and the question mark?

Just out of curiosity, is there a difference between the saloon bar and the forums? It seems like the saloon bar makes many of the forums somewhat obsolete as they in many ways serve the same function. I think the saloon bar is better received because it is the same medium as the wiki. Sterile^rationalize 12:32, 16 January 2009 (EST)

The forums have been quite quiet recently and navigating between different topics requires a bit more effort. If you check RC to see what's "hot" on site then you immediately see the activity here and it always seems that people congregate where the action is, so maybe you're right it has made the forums a little obsolete. Генгис^unbelieving 12:36, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well, A) forums require a separate login and membership. B) The traffic will go where the traffic wants to go; therefore if people want to use the wiki to socialise, let that option be open. ArmondikoV^postate 12:58, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I've never registered for the forum, 'cause every time I glance at it there's een no recent activity. The saloon bar seems to have taken off, & being part of wiki means it's easy to move in & out of. Notice how discussions start on some other talk page & end up here, or start out here & end up on a debate page. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:18, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I can edit here...the forum, not so much as the only thing I ever get to see is this

CЯacke® 14:39, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Ambience

The ambience doesn't work for me; it just says "error opening file". Phantom Hoover 12:45, 16 January 2009 (EST)

There's something wrong with the template but I can't figure out what it is. If you feel starved of ambience, I put some goat noises together. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:22, 16 January 2009 (EST)

It may depend on your connection. I have problems with them on my wireless eeePC but all my wired connections work fine. You can still test it for yourself by opening the earlier version from the template history. Генгис^unbelieving 14:03, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Conservopoly

You can add games of Conservopoly by adding <conservopoly /> into pages. All credit goes to Trent. Phantom Hoover 16:09, 16 January 2009 (EST)

It doesn't actually work though. The project got abandoned/delayed a while back. tmtoulouse 16:10, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I thought it worked on individual games... Phantom Hoover 16:12, 16 January 2009 (EST)

You have faaaiiiiled us! Phantom Hoover 16:14, 16 January 2009 (EST)

At the moment the functionality is that you can roll and move around the board and buy property you land on. That is about it. Which frankly wasn't trivial as is, and why I sort of stopped working on it. Someday perhaps....tmtoulouse 16:15, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Faaaaaiiiiiiled us! Phantom Hoover 16:17, 16 January 2009 (EST)

It is not even a bar game! I will make us a wiki based darts game okay? tmtoulouse 16:18, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Darts, yay! ħuman 00:27, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Can you accidentally hit a friend in the thigh with a rusty dart? Corry^{Maybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb.} 01:12, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Is this chair taken?

This place looks neat, pity about the sawdust on the floor. I just noticed that Caius did a runner on us. Did I miss the party? Is he coming back?  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 16:27, 16 January 2009 (EST)

If you gotta go, you've gotta go. Candid World will still be there, a user never really goes and never comes back. You eventually fade out with a site but you always pop in, post and do other things irregularly. ArmondikoV^postate 17:44, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I submit that I did things irregularly in the first place, or at least unevenly. --Kels 20:46, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I submit that I did things unevenly in the first place, or at least, irregularly. No, this seat is not taken. Belly up the bar and have a laugh! ħuman 21:57, 16 January 2009 (EST)

You took the words right out of my mouth! And reversed their order! --Kels 22:00, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Well, I thought the upside-down version of couch rugby would be fun. Oops, are we exhibitionists? Anyway, yes, I did, and please to leave your "committed" mouth out of what I can order on the menu. This bar sucks, all the people who hang out here are such phonies. Hahahaahahahahahahaha, I hate idiots. Snuggles... ħuman 22:09, 16 January 2009 (EST)

You were way cooler before you sold out. --Kels 22:10, 16 January 2009 (EST)

I didn't sell out! Seriously, one of my arena dates still had empty seats. And the teenage girls love my new song! ħuman 22:19, 16 January 2009 (EST)

Did anyone else just watch Battlestar?

And is confused?-Diadochus 00:08, 17 January 2009 (EST)

No, and I didn't care? Care to tell me why I should? ħuman 00:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Because it's an AWESOME TV series - do I have to convince you of that too? - and the last half-season just debuted. I just assumed the population here would be as nerdy as the content suggests :)-Diadochus 00:26, 17 January 2009 (EST)

In this case I think awesome may be a relative term, Diddy. I do hope we're not going to have a lot of copyrighted Battlestar images being uploaded now. --  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 10:54, 17 January 2009 (EST)

The last time I watched Battlestar Galactica, it starred Lorne Greene. Is it still on? TheoryOfPractice 11:29, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Confused. That is the biggest understatement ever made by you inferior humans! Prepare for cylon raiders! --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 12:04, 17 January 2009 (EST)

You are a credit to all stupid carbon-based lifeforms. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 13:27, 17 January 2009 (EST)

What, me? 'Cause I don't watch teevee? What are you saying? TheoryOfPractice 13:28, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Correction: This wiki is a credit to all stupid carbon-based lifeforms. EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! RESISTANCE IS FUTILE! --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 13:32, 17 January 2009 (EST)

I have no idea what you are prattling on about. Moreover, I am glad of this. TheoryOfPractice 13:37, 17 January 2009 (EST) Scifi. Universe. FAIL. Phantom Hoover 13:38, 17 January 2009 (EST)

I am giving a compliment to you stupid carbon-based lifeforms. EXTERMINATE! comes from the science fiction show Doctor Who (longest running sci-fi show ever), and 'resistance is futile' comes from the Borg. Look 'em up. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 13:38, 17 January 2009 (EST)

New to me

Didn't know you could do this. <smiley I couldn't be bothered to look up> </smiley>  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 11:26, 17 January 2009 (EST)

New Users

What's with the new users signing up with names simillar to established users? Trolls? Idiots? Both? Maybe someone with powarz can look into this.Z3ro 12:17, 17 January 2009 (EST)

They's all been vandal binned.  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:19, 17 January 2009 (EST)

I guess my username doesn't rate in this guy's book. C'mon, man! The "Dick" is just begging to be mocked. DickTurpis 12:21, 17 January 2009 (EST)

*sigh* Now to de-vandal them all... Phantom Hoover 12:23, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Pardon?  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:27, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Only one of them has made any edits, and they were both productive. Phantom Hoover 12:36, 17 January 2009 (EST)

see:"Spoof" usernames (impersonating another user, usually) can be renamed unilaterally unless the spoofee expresses approval of the spoofer. As no such approval has yet been forthcoming ...  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:40, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Are you deliberately baiting me?  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:44, 17 January 2009 (EST)

No, I wasn't aware of that clause in the Community Standards. Phantom Hoover 12:48, 17 January 2009 (EST)

well, next time, instead of *sigh*ing you might ASK.  ^(Crumpets) _and butter 12:50, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Oh well it was fun while it lasted... Ed Karaschlative 12:56, 17 January 2009 (EST)

I think most of them are Fall Down. I'm remembering Weaselold. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor^{feline fanatic} 13:26, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Nope, one of them had a talkpage comment and signed with their username. Fall down has the courtesy to always sign as himself. Phantom Hoover 13:29, 17 January 2009 (EST)