User talk:Spirou/Archive2

Before we delete anything
I haven't (yet) read about "Chibiabos' intellectual property", but I don't think we can delete pages simply because he says so. Copyrights explicitly states that the license, once granted, cannot be retracted. And since the editing box states that all contributions are considered to be "released under the GNU Free Documentation License", I think that firmly establishes the license which applies to the text. --Douglas Muth 02:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * For what i have read, their are just his personal created Fursonas, which should have been on his main article anyways to begin with, and would have been probably asked to do so eventually. Nothing relevant to furry fandom per se without the his (now protected) main article online. If you think anything of it is worthwhile towards maintaining any of it for historical, purposes, I, or somebody else, may revert SpD


 * Or we could open the "Chibiabos" article, add these loose fursonas inside it under a "--Chibiabos' fursonas--" section, and reprotect the main article again? Spirou 03:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Right as you wrote that, I looked through some of those articles myself and yeah, they're just his characters. I wouldn't have any major obections if they went buh-bye.  Maybe we should probably replace them with #REDIRECTs to the main article on Chibiabos to keep anyone else from creating articles about those characters.


 * BTW, there's some discussion of this on IRC if you're interested/able to stop by. --Douglas Muth 03:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I just logged back from work,... accessed IRC but looks like everybody is either AFK, or private messaging. As for the these articles, I guess we can reach a concensus later. GreenReaper its got a point that we don't have to just jump the gun on these kinds of decisions Spirou 04:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * We were in #wikifur - I think you dropped into #wikifur-edits by mistake. It's mostly done now, though, so I wouldn't worry about it. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 04:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * doh, as usual,... Thanks for the info, nonetheless =) Spirou 04:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * As the articles are about roleplayed characters with distinct identities, histories, species, et cetera, I support keeping them and keeping them as separate articles. -- Sine 04:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Just a IMHO suggestion. If leaving them up, would be it better separated as they are know, or unified in a single article with different sections, and finally linked to the "Chibiabos" article? Spirou 05:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism, my ass
First of all, my removal of those personally idenfiable details are not vandalism. Second, I will not stop removing them. So, you know, stop wasting your time, furfag. --72.160.101.152 07:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Vandalism is perhaps not the best word for it. "Trying to hide from the consequences of your past actions"? Regardless, you've obviously not convinced people that they should do what you want. I suggest you figure out a way to do that.


 * As for removals - we've got all day here. There are also a lot more of us. It is our site. We have site protection extensions sufficient to handle a full Something Awful or proxy-using account-registering bot attack. I fear it is you who will be wasting your time - or worse, bringing the attention of sites like ED to that which you are trying to conceal. I'm sure you know how these things can go, and I don't think that would be a favourable outcome. --GreenReaper(talk) 07:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

%$#@&*^% IRC,...
Need to find a good Mac OSX IRC program >=( Spirou 05:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * How about Colloquy? I've been using it for awhile.  --Douglas Muth 13:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Had IRCle for years, but it's kind of bombing on my 15' MacBook Pro laptop (maybe Rosseta?,)... I downloaded a few OSX IRC programs, including your suggestion, so I will choose the one that doesn't blow up on my face Xp Spirou 16:00, 17 October 2006 (PDT)

Phillip M. Jackson article
Ah, my bad then. I couldn't see any obvious connection to the article's subject on the page that was linked to, and 88.96.32.14's original edits  didn't look they were trying to make a serious addition to the entry. I've unblocked the IP address. --Higgs Raccoon 09:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem ^-^ All thought a valid attempt to add a missing link, as I stated, it could or could not be Mr. Jackson. If said person misbehaves in the future, well, thenI'm the fool in this situation =/ (Thank you for responding so fast!) Spirou 09:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Mellis article
I reverted it, as the information you added have nothing to do with Mellis. He doesn't own that in Second Life, and that's not his blog. :) Arcturus 08:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * If you don't wish us to get the impression that these two "Mellis" are the same, you don't add a link of the bottom of the page at http://www.pleasedontsue.com/wtfur/ that indicates "Header Art by Mellis," which directs to a page own by somebody name "Mellis," Has you can see by both your responses, it can lead to some confusion Spirou 17:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Mellis thread
Being that I AM Mellis, I'd ask you to at least learn something about me before editing my entry.

I'm not Kemru, thank you very much. I have no idea where the heck you got this idea.

Please check your facts instead of making things up. This is not the first time this has happened, you've made up facts on the Wtfur entry as well that were blatantly untrue. It reflects very poorly on you.


 * First, who is Kemru? (I didn't write concerning anybody by such name, if so indicate where so I could see where the problem is.Two) If Arturus has a link of the bottom of the page at http://www.pleasedontsue.com/wtfur/ that indicates "Header Art by Mellis," which directs to a page own by somebody name "Mellis"(*), you conclude that both "Mellis" are the same.


 * If not, you point calmly that both these link persons are not the same Spirou 17:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * "Please check your facts instead of making things up". I do "This is not the first time this has happened, you've made up facts on the Wtfur entry as well that were blatantly untrue. It reflects very poorly on you." see below


 * Actually, everything that I wrote down was accurate (I did not say Palcomix was the first cub thread, it was the one the attracted the most flak, and yes I was aware about the rest of the cub threads, but, again the Palcomix one was the one people complained the most, enough to attract the attention of CYD, enough to make a "Controversy" section about it.)


 * But thank you for enhancing the WTF, your help adding to articles is appreciated ^-^ Spirou 17:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually that link goes to Kemru's site. Nowhere on the site linked did it even mention Mellis, and I have no idea where you got the Second Life stuff from. The link to Kemru's site was separate from the declaration I did the header pic - though they're close to each other on the page they have nothing to do with each other.

On the wtfur article, you had written: "When several more threads with alleged "cub porn" were created, the administrators final position/word on the matter was that" Giving the impression to readers that the Palcomix thread was the FIRST cub thread, and that it's cretion is what prompted the page's stance on cub art, when in fact this stance was in place since day one. It's extremely misleading.

Not to mention after talking to Greenreaper about how the entire section should be changed to general controversy and wasn't a well written section, you have gone and changed it back. Thanks for that.


 * Well, that could be my fault 50% there, Mellis, if I followed a link that indicates that's for your website, and ends up on the mentioned link, I would assume it's Mellis' website, and add the extra pertinent information there to indicate, for example that, Mellis likes SL. If the link Arcturus posted was wrong, them, yes, the information I posted was wrong, it gets pointed out, and fixed, that's all.


 * I should have clarify more about the Palcomix thread not being the first one, just the fist one to garner enough attention to add to it's Controversy section, but you helped enhanced the article, as all articles are not set on stone


 * And finally, Yes, I made a mistake on the Mellis article based on a wrong linked. I apologize for that, and have changed to reflect that Spirou 18:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Formal Apology to artist Melly from Spirou
Sorry about getting the wrong information based on a wrong link, and apologies for then temporarily omitting valid information on the same article (reverted back.)

Please, it was not my intend to anger or start a fight you, I don't hold a grudge against you because I was wrong, and you pointed so. As other editors can attest, I try (try) not to make enemies on Wikifur. This is being a (not so funny) comedy of errors. Please accept my apology Spirou 18:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Nah, we're cool now. Just check sources a little better in the future =)


 * Will do. Truly, as several editors here can attest, I don't like to antagonize anybody here,... If I make a mistake, please do let me know,... and thanks ^-^ Spirou 18:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Weeeee,...
Well, this was an interesting way to start the weekend (Ha!, who needs coffee anyway!) Spirou 18:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Confirm or Deny
You made two claims that don't seem to stand up to examination. Both these seem verifiably false, but since you made the claim, you probably have some verification. As such, can you provide it for these?

1) Peter Schorn (Hangdog) is Starless and Bible Black on Portal of Evil.

2) Burned Fur, as a group, ever actually threatened anyone. 66.88.135.150


 * A) "Peter Schorn (Hangdog) is Starless and Bible Black on Portal of Evil." A little behind edits, are we?. Mitch already graciously pointed out about a month ago that it was actually Stukafox the person behind those aliases,...


 * B)"Burned Fur, as a group, ever actually threatened anyone." Never made that statement. You should recheck the history log, as you could have seen that it was in fact Xydexx who entered that information... 13 months ago.


 * C)...and, since, you have a particular personal interest on my persona, may I ask who am I directing myself to?. "User:66.88.135.150" is such an impersonal name to have a conversation with =) Spirou 20:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You are still linking Hangdog to Starless and Bible Black in this entry: Hangdog (External Links)


 * In the discussion for Burned Fur you claimed, or appeared to claim, you had information releating to threats made by Burned Fur:


 * Yes, and when I (or somebody elese) gets around to continue work in the article, you may able to read about it, until then, there will be a dearth of data regarding this particular point in the afore mentioned article, so I suggest the use of web search engines =)


 * Did I missread this? It appears you are saying that you have direct information about such threats. Again, in the absence of evidence, the claim Burned Fur made threats should be removed.


 * 733 at your service, but I really don't have a personal interest in you as much as what you've been writing.


 * "You are still linking Hangdog to Starless and Bible Black in this entry: Hangdog (External Links)" Oops, corrected. Yes, they hangdog=Bible Black was a case of mistaking two articles together, which Mitch corrected (forgot to transfer that link you pointed out. and I need to clean those to articles later.)


 * "In the discussion for Burned Fur you claimed, or appeared to claim, you had information releating to threats made by Burned Fur: 'Yes, and when I (or somebody elese) gets around to continue work in the article, you may able to read about it, until then, there will be a dearth of data regarding this particular point in the afore mentioned article, so I suggest the use of web search engines =).' Did I missread this? It appears you are saying that you have direct information about such threats."


 * No, no you got it right,... the whole Burned Fur article is one major @#@%*&! (mess) of an article, and in need of some serious cleaning. Yes, as I said on the talk page, I was going to add some of the threats that were thrown around (plus two posts "inferring" that "actual" physical contact had occurred,) but not before some semblance of an orderly article was set up first (I just started last week by removing the Burned Fur Manifesto so it becomes its own stand-alone article.)


 * Hmm, right of the blue, without my notes at home, the only threat I can recall out of hand would be the one where Clint Forrester threatened publicly to smash Xydexx head through a wall (he did kind of apologize later, if I recall.) So, in brief, somebody did mentioned that there was some threats from BFs to nonBFs, somebody asked for proof, I said I would put some up later when the article was in better shape. But directly stating that "threat" fact on the first place, no quite. Does this answer your inquiries?.


 * "733 at your service,"... Uh, Oh, well, at least is easier to pronounce Spirou 21:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess so. I have a two questions. First, is this correct?


 * A contributor to the Portal of Evil's forums for almost 10 years (under the "Starless" and "Bible Black" aliases,) he announced in February 2006 his intention to officially separate himself from further participation on POE's debate area[1]. The reason behind it was a thread involving political matters regarding the nuclear tensions between Iran and the USA during the spring of 2006[2]. This "decision" lasted less than a week before he returned to the forums.


 * Did he post again? I looked at his posting history and he hasn't posted since the post you quoted. You seem to suggest his post was a ploy and that he didn't really leave. Can you back this up?


 * The second question is more general, but what does this really have to do with Wikifur and furry in general? The guy was a furry, he posted on another message board, and then he left. I'm not seeing the connection between Wikifur and this "controversy". Has he posted other places? If so, should those be included too?


 * On the Burned Fur item: was Clint representing Burned Fur when he threatend Xydex? Was he stating some Burned Fur policy of Xydexx bashing? Otherwise, it seems like this is an unfair attempt at guilt by association. Again, unless you're willing to back up the claim that Burned Fur as an organization ever made threats, that claim should be removed. 733 17:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, that last paragraph was a leftover from the "Hangdog" article,... Thank you for pointing it out, will correct it,... Actually:

"What does this really have to do with Wikifur and furry in general?,"... looking at it again, you are correct,... Outside the "Handog" article context, not much really. Will delete that section, if some other editor feels that that's too drastic, or there's a reason to keep, please feel free to revert it.

"On the Burned Fur item: was Clint representing Burned Fur when he threatend Xydex?,"... Hmm, that's a subject that it's still up for discussion,... there are a lot of people pro and con about the matter, and it will probably will be discussed in length as soon as this article is finally finished, formatted, wikified and referenced (This is one heck of a clean-up mess, and I got my plate full for the moment Xp) Spirou 20:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Template suggestions
I agree with Duncandahusky idea for a slower "review" version to the "Speedydelete" tag but, in reference to the section I'm about to delete from the "stukafox" article, would a "speedydelete" tag for sections make sense   to give editors time to evaluate the merit of the removal?

Uh, busy day, Gents?,...
Looks like, as usual, they didn't leave a lasting impression,... =/ Superb job by Admins and Editors, though =) Spirou 06:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The net result is that Tor is no longer a viable route of vandalism. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I gather that Tor is some kind of Anon Proxy service/program?,... Hmm, so much trouble for something it will be just reverted on the fly,... Whatever floats their boats, thou Spirou 07:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Something like that. The problem comes when they try to sink ours. I don't want our admins to be stuck bailing out spam all the time. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 07:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hotelyorba.jpg
Hello Spirou,

This is in regards to Image:Hotelyorba.jpg. It has not been tagged with a copyright status. This can be a complicated area, so I can try to help if you need any. The Wikipedia Image use policy may give some background, but it isn't policy here.

To deal with this image, there are a few choices:


 * If you are the copyright holder, release it under a free license, for example:
 * Public domain
 * Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
 * GFDL
 * If you are asserting that this image is usable under fair use, add an appropriate fair use tag. A very basic summary is that fair use is used for commentary, criticism and review on the image when no free image could be used instead. Some fair use tags are:
 * Logos:
 * Covers:
 * Comic panels:
 * If the image is already under a free license, provide information on the license, and tag the image if you can.
 * If you would like the image to be deleted, ask any administrator

To see a list of current copyright tags available on WikiFur, see Category:Image copyright tags If the copyright status is not resolved, the image may be deleted.

Unless you have a question for me specifically, I'd prefer responses on the page for the image. --Rat 05:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sibe.png
Hello Spirou,

This is in regards to Image:Sibe.png. It has not been tagged with a copyright status. This can be a complicated area, so I can try to help if you need any. The Wikipedia Image use policy may give some background, but it isn't policy here.

To deal with this image, there are a few choices:


 * If you are the copyright holder, release it under a free license, for example:
 * Public domain
 * Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
 * GFDL
 * If you are asserting that this image is usable under fair use, add an appropriate fair use tag. A very basic summary is that fair use is used for commentary, criticism and review on the image when no free image could be used instead. Some fair use tags are:
 * Logos:
 * Covers:
 * Comic panels:
 * If the image is already under a free license, provide information on the license, and tag the image if you can.
 * If you would like the image to be deleted, ask any administrator

To see a list of current copyright tags available on WikiFur, see Category:Image copyright tags If the copyright status is not resolved, the image may be deleted.

Unless you have a question for me specifically, I'd prefer responses on the page for the image. --Rat 08:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. I didn't see the previous message in your archives. I don't think it's compatible with our policies without a copyright status, but I'll wait to see if there's any objection. --Rat 09:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The image is a crop from one of the many dozens of Macro created during the week Sibe was incarcerated. I f we have a (C) problem with this one, a "public" available, civilian image of Sibe is available, part of a request for his official, non (C) beholden "mugshot" from the Police department/unit that booked him the last time. Spirou 10:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Furry" article blanking
I don't want to be associated with "furries" or have my name listed on the NIU Wiki. -Atmotas


 * Fair enough Spirou 23:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Great job with cleaning up!
Thanks for cleaning up this current blanking storm... I'm letting you handle it to avoid edit conflicts, unless you think it is better for two people to work...


 * Start with the latests, I will work from the bottom up Spirou 02:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Uh, never mind,... the Cavalry is here =) Spirou 02:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

+sysop
ah,... hmm... Hope I can do the title justice, GreenReaper <=)


 * I noticed you were having to do a lot of reversion there. Here's a few extra powers to make things a little easier (the bot rollback feature is particularly useful). Remember you can always come onto IRC for more help. Enjoy! :-) GreenReaper(talk) 02:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Patrolled edits
Now that you're an administrator, you can have your edits marked as patrolled automatically. If you'd like, go into "Preferences" in the top right, under "Editing", check "Mark edits I make as patrolled". --Rat 17:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip Spirou 10:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

*Big Hug*
Thanks for helping me with the ASWL page :)

Small question about a comment
Small question. Was the split of your "cannot read minds" comment accidental or intentional? --EarthFurst 23:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, ye Gods, I can't recall, sorry =/ Spirou 05:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

zoot-sex and zootphilia?
When you started the Zoot-sex article you wrote: "This practice is not to be confused with "Zootaphilia"." Today Errorwolf changed that "Zootphilia" to "Zoophilia". I'm guessing your "zootaphilia" wasn't a typo. --EarthFurst 09:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, it wasn't,... I just haven't got to that entry yet. Thanks for the heads up <=) Spirou 10:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

/b/day passage on 4chan & 7chan articles
Hi Spirou. You keep reverting my, and Downspin's edits to the 4chan and 7chan article regarding the posting of CP to 4chan's /b/ board before /b/day, and whether rules to remove it were rigorously enforced. Despite asking you for clarification on your position I have heard nothing, so let's discuss it here.

There were two main rules at /b/ prior to /b/day; A) No posting of calls to invasion or personal information, B) No posting of illegal material (i.e. CP). Now, while A was lackadaisically enforced (it was enforced intermittently), B was ALWAYS enforced rigorously - especially when it came to CP. CP was removed immediately by any moderator who discovered it, and the poster banned permanently. Apart from this empirical, this is further evidenced by the meme '20 MINUTES NEVER FORGET' - an expression of surprise that arose one day when a CP post lasted as long as 20 minutes before moderators found it and removed it. Clearly, if the rule of removing CP was rarely enforced this would not have been surprising at all. Furthermore, even the posting of child models fully clothed was not tolerated, as evidenced by the 'loli in a bag' picture being banned.

There are two things which may cause confusion: 1) JB posting was tolerated slightly more than CP prior to /b/day. Fully clothed 'tween' models were somewhat tolerated, however it was declared a 'grey-area' on /b/day and began to be removed with a vigour that paralleled CP. 2) Lolicon used to, in the very beginnings of 4chan, be tolerated, indeed it did have its own board. Lolicon is now banned from all boards at 4chan except /b/, but one can hardly call lolicon 'CP'.

So...yes. Please either contradict me here, or stop reverting the edits to the articles in question. Thank you. --Anonymovs 10:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * (sigh),... One, reference to contradict those claims has been posted,... and, two, doesn't it cross your mind that other people but /b/ regulars visit it, and are aware of what goes on or happens in it?. Here, let me make it more simpler: Other people (COUGHSpirouCOUGH) may have been regulars on the forum, not just you, for a long while,... No, no clue that it was Moot little pet project, Something Awful?, what's that?,... Get the point know?.


 * 4chan's 2006 /b/ exodus didn't happen just because. No, just enough idiots trying to push the envelope to the breaking point, making the mods life hell until they just let it go,... And the idiots kept pushing, and then the POOL finally CLOSED, and they whined because of their own retarded actions,... And those were posting CP, JB, calling for /i/, and posting personal info.


 * Oh, I grant you they tried (the Mods,) but after a while of giving up after being piled on, CP, JB, calling for /i/, and posting personal info became part of the norm of /b/, not the exception like you're trying to rewrite in, so, that's the why/reasons of the reverts Spirou 11:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I apologise that I did not see your reply in the 4chan talk page before I posted this. While I can't quite understand some of what you've written here, I will try to reply to all of your points there. --Anonymovs 12:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your revisions and edits to the *chan articles are strange and strongly POV. Why do you wish to keep the grammatical flaws of the previous edits, why do you link /d/ to futanari, why do you insist 4chan has an obsession with WikiFur? Why did it take another administrator to make you admit that Caturday was not for furries, months after you were first informed the article was wrong? Why did you remove the sourced census information? And above all, why do you insist that 4chan moderators rarely enforced the bans on CP? - you could note there was a brief period just before /b/day when CP was posted too quickly and too often to be dealt with, but there was never a period when it was accepted or condoned by the administration. It smacks of assassination and general bastardry against editors who you don't think are nice people. Your two sources should be disregarded, by the way - one isn't even FROM /b/, the other isn't sourced and does not mention pre-/b/day administration.

I'm sad to notice this is just one out of a long trail of 'bad' edits. A good bulk of your body of work is either POV or just difficult to understand. I gather English isn't your first language, but please, some of your work makes no sense. I've asked you be censured and the article cleaned by a more responsible administrator. --DS|go 20:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * "Why do you wish to keep the grammatical flaws of the previous edits,"

Normally I don't misstype, but I will make sure to check spelling twice next time, or you could inform me ^-^


 * "why do you link /d/ to futanari,"

Not my data entry,... Initially it was "Dickgirl," and I changed to the more known japanese term (Original data by user 65.126.197.2 "/d for alternative hentai (aka, "dickgirl")")


 * "why do you insist 4chan has an obsession with WikiFur?"

Not my data entry,... (Original data by Dmuth.)


 * "Why did it take another administrator to make you admit that Caturday was not for furries, months after you were first informed the article was wrong?

Source, please


 * Why did you remove the sourced census information?

Source, please


 * And above all, why do you insist that 4chan moderators rarely enforced the bans on CP? - you could note there was a brief period just before /b/day when CP was posted too quickly and too often to be dealt with, but there was never a period when it was accepted or condoned by the administration.

A) I never said it was condoned or accepted (Lie #1,)... What everybody saw was an avalanche of idiots posting prohibited media, B) and mods running so ragged that some of that material just stayed up until the article turn-over.


 * It smacks of assassination and general bastardry against editors who you don't think are nice people.

If you could read a little more, and there's plenty of people to back me up, I have no beef with anybody in 4Chan, and actually there's a few very reasonable Admins, like Melly,... When Chibiabos when on his crusade against anything he perceived as evil against the fandom, I made sure biased comments against 4chan and 7chan were revereted. So this is Lie #2 on your part.


 * Your two sources should be disregarded, by the way - one isn't even FROM /b/, the other isn't sourced and does not mention pre-/b/day administration.

I don't store every bit of data available. If you see such mistakes, mention which specific ones, and document/change them in the article or the talk page.


 * I'm sad to notice this is just one out of a long trail of 'bad' edits. A good bulk of your body of work is either POV or just difficult to understand.

You are entitled to your opinion =)


 * I gather English isn't your first language, but please, some of your work makes no sense.

'If reason doest work, insult them,...' ^-^


 * I've asked you be censured and the article cleaned by a more responsible administrator. --DS|go 20:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

If Wikifur feels I have overstep my bounds on this, I will accept the censure,... But, as for myself, I already know I haven't done anything to require such, but thank you to comment on this issue. Spirou 23:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * And we both know nothing will be done about you, in the name of drama aversion, because you're such a nice and honest person. But I have words.  Now, you say a lot of things were from other editors - but why did you revert to their changes, and ignore mine?  Was I not nice enough?  Second, you ask for... I THINK you want a source to my complaints that you'd deleted good things in my edit.  They're all in the history.  Jae was nice enough to use my Caturday definition, which had been on the article's talk page for months.  I'd be happy to explain everything if you asked, all the differences here were made with good reason: http://en.wikifur.com/w/index.php?title=4chan&diff=110198&oldid=92833


 * If you need sources, Tretonin has written up a nice little summary of the problem with sources on the talk page.


 * Now, my 'lies'. You repeatedly said the rules against CP were not enforced, so, CP was tolerated by the admins, so, CP was tacitly condoned by the admins.  This is how I understood it.  Number 2, I assumed you trimmed the article for malicious reasons.  I'm starting to believe you didn't know what you were reverting.  Now, from the history page, Chibiabos has never edited 4chan or 7chan.  Is that a lie, or an honest mistake?  You also claim to be close to 4chan, yes?  You should know the boards are named /b/, /h/, /d/, /o/.  And not /b, /h, /d... /d/ is for /d/eviant porn, not /d/ickgirls, which are deviant, but that's not all that goes there.  Also Caturday, also various many other little things that could be solved by lurking moar.  You claim a lot of things as fact, when clearly, you're mistaken.  I'd suggest you take yourself off this article and instead serve to mediate any disputes other users might have over it.  From the IRC: [Spirou has] got this thing where if you don't cite sources he assumes you're lying, even though he usually has incorrect ones himself =P


 * I realize I should apologize, I'm honestly sorry for comments about POV. Hanlon's Razor and all, 'Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.'  Thank you.  --DS|go 00:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Downspin, please do not continue insulting other wikifur users either directly or by insinuation. I have asked you about this several times in IRC and you show no intention of stopping. If you can't develop a little tact then your edits may be considered disruptive to the wiki and delt with accordingly. -- JaeSharp 00:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

/b/day passage on 4chan & 7chan articles (part deux)
And we both know nothing will be done about you, in the name of drama aversion, because you're such a nice and honest person.


 * Hardly,... I'm on a three strike probation, with two marks already for behavior non-becoming of a Wikifur user.

But I have words. Now, you say a lot of things were from other editors - but why did you revert to their changes, and ignore mine?, Was I not nice enough?.


 * If have seen some of my edits, and I do make mistakes sometimes which I revert, or are reverted by others. No, I don't have any beef against you or 4chan,... Why would I?.

Second, you ask for... I THINK you want a source to my complaints that you'd deleted good things in my edit. They're all in the history. Jae was nice enough to use my Caturday definition, which had been on the article's talk page for months. I'd be happy to explain everything if you asked, all the differences here were made with good reason: http://en.wikifur.com/w/index.php?title=4chan&diff=110198&oldid=92833


 * Why didn't you point it out then, instead of now, on the talk page?.

If you need sources, Tretonin has written up a nice little summary of the problem with sources on the talk page.


 * Yes, I have seen them. Thank you.

Now, my 'lies'. You repeatedly said the rules against CP were not enforced, so, CP was tolerated by the admins, so, CP was tacitly condoned by the admins. This is how I understood it.


 * "On August 08, 2006, 4chan moderators started to strictly enforce its rarely enforced banning rules on posting illegal content (such as CP and JB imagery,)" Were do you get from there that I wrote "the rules against CP were not enforced?,"... And part of that sentence I wrote initially was taken from this 4chan (reference) post:


 * "Anonymous 08/23/06 23:34 Thread #440 (edit) (quote) On 2006-08-23, the moderators of /b/ had started to strictly enforce its previously neglected rules on posting illegal content (such as child pornography), plans of raiding other internet communities, and posting personal information. While only the former was met with an undefined ban on the poster of such content, the new rules encompass all three catagories, resulting in bans on the original poster and on anyone posting in the thread, whether they supported the content or not. This caused unrest in the /b/ community; while many lingered to express dissent, deeming the rules to be too harsh, others left to find other image boards at which they could post such content without punishment. This event also coincided with a server crash, which may have been attributed to restructuring to make these rules more easily enforced, a regular server overload, an angered user performing a DDoS crash of the server, or just general technical difficulties."

Number 2, I assumed you trimmed the article for malicious reasons.


 * You assume wrongly. Why.would.I?,...

I'm starting to believe you didn't know what you were reverting.


 * Could be. We make mistakes, including you.

You also claim to be close to 4chan, yes? You should know the boards are named /b/, /h/, /d/, /o/. And not /b, /h, /d... /d/ is for /d/eviant porn, not /d/ickgirls,


 * Sigh,... Again, you mistakenly atribute the "Futanary" entry to me,... here: "Not my data entry,... Initially it was wroten as "Dickgirl," and I changed to the more known japanese term (Original data by user 65.126.197.2 "/d for alternative hentai (aka, "dickgirl")")"


 * And, you mistakenly wrote that it was written as "/d/ickgirls," when you can see that it was actually "/d (is) for alternative hentai (aka, "dickgirl")". Yes, sometimes we don't know what we are reverting... or quoting.

You claim a lot of things as fact, when clearly, you're mistaken.


 * I don't claim, and I don't know, everything, and I have made mistakes, and so have you, but I try to correct mine, thank you ^-^

From the IRC: "[Spirou has] got this thing where if you don't cite sources he assumes you're lying, even though he usually has incorrect ones himself" =P


 * ...And?,... No, I don't assume somebody is lying because somebody doesn't cite sources. I could ask you for a source were I said that, but let's move on, shall we? =)

I realize I should apologize, I'm honestly sorry for comments about POV. Hanlon's Razor and all, 'Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.' Thank you. --DS|go 00:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Could I ask if you could be a little more civil?. Thanks Spirou 01:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You repeatedly bold "previously neglected rules", and if the rules were neglected they must not have been enforced, right? If they were not enforced, then CP must have been accepted... same thing again, if the rules were supported, a word other than neglected should be used to describe them.  At the time, as I recall, the administrators were overwhelmed and unable to properly enforce the rules.  After /b/day modifcations were built into the same, allowing administrators to ban entire threads with a single command, and anonymous janitors were hired to moderate and delete offending threads.  Rules on CP were never neglected.  Stating the rules were ignored or neglected by the administration really paints 4chan in a negative light and invites legal trouble.


 * Again, I'd like to say that's a poor source. It's not from 4chan and not written by a recognized source.


 * I had assumed you were making edits in bad faith. Messages like "Incorrect, but thanks for playing ^-^ Spirou" seem condescending and argumentive, and your revisions set me on the offensive.  I'm not usually a bad person, but I like to reply in kind to percieved attacks!  We all have a little work to do on that!


 * I never ever attributed the futanari reference to you. I did accuse you of protecting and defending it, once, but you explained it wasn't intentional.  Now, /d/ is short for deviant (/d/eviant), not short for dickgirl (/d/ickgirl).  Alternative is not also known as dickgirl, it is alternative.  The /d/ board is for alternative hentai, whatever it may be, futanari, guro, scat, rape, whatev.


 * I've corrected my mistakes. I've also corrected yours, but those were reverted, and I'm trying to form a sort of understanding so we might fix all that and put it behind us.  --DS|go 01:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * How about this, Downspin, let me tweak the article first, then you get a go at it, and then we reconcile both versions. Deal? Spirou 02:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, now that my edit is done,... Downspin, there this section of yours:


 * "You repeatedly bold "previously neglected rules", and if the rules were neglected they must not have been enforced, right? If they were not enforced, then CP must have been accepted... same thing again, if the rules were supported, a word other than neglected should be used to describe them.  At the time, as I recall, the administrators were overwhelmed and unable to properly enforce the rules.  After /b/day modifcations were built into the same, allowing administrators to ban entire threads with a single command, and anonymous janitors were hired to moderate and delete offending threads.  Rules on CP were never neglected.  Stating the rules were ignored or neglected by the administration really paints 4chan in a negative light and invites legal trouble."


 * "Again, I'd like to say that's a poor source. It's not from 4chan and not written by a recognized source."

Not trying to sound confrontational, but, yes, it did came from 4chan. As you can see in the edit, it was a save post, along with several more, including images, pdf captures, etc, which I saved because I knew if one day there was to be a section to be written about 4chan's /b/day, reference would be needed. I know now, that the way it was initially written, it seems I wrote that,... No, and I should have formatted how it's now.

Like I said, I don't have any beefs with 4chan,... it's one of the many places I go to (No fan of Anime, but sometimes I find excellent hard to find media.) That's all Spirou 03:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)