User talk:FloNight/archive 2

1573:

check the bias of their sources, but are in fact mainly using the most bias source there is, Expo. They aggregate slander to prove a point. They mass allegations from the past to prove that the Swedish Democrats is much more extreme than they are. The Swedish Democrats openly admits that this problems have existed and took strong actions against extremism during 1995-2000. In the last six only one or two minor incidents have occurred regarding extremist sneaking into the party. Those persons have immanently been expelled from the party, with of course ‘liftarn’ very well knows, but this he don’t add to the page. So to use incidents prior to year 2000 to prove that the Swedish Democrats today have extremist as members is bias and propagandistic. Something a journalist can do in a tabloid magazine – but Wiki should not be used as a propaganda tool for Expo. The way liftarn is working is in fact exactly how Expo works. WGee is somewhat better, its possible to reason with him with the help of Flonight – but I have the clear impression that ‘liftarn’ is the boss of the two, and using WGee. All the allegations against SD is (as far as I can see) transferred from ‘liftarn’ to WGee. On the Swedish page it’s the same problem. The user ‘rapvatten’ (a VERY unique name, =burphwater) is acting exactly as ‘liftarn’ does here. The same ‘rapvatten’ is also active on the page “socialist.nu” where he argues for attacking Swedish Democrats meetings and so on. So for me it’s a very strong possibility that both liftarn and rapvatten represents EXPO/AFA.

1459:

The links between AFA and EXPO are also well documented. So when you use such dubious sources for your allegations against the Swedish Democrats it must be balanced by also informing just how extreme and not NPOV these organizations are. To understand why a mainstream national party like the Swedish Democrats is treated so very different in Sweden compared to how similar parties are treated in England or Denmark (Conservative Party or Danish People’s Party) one must also understand the uniqueness of the Swedish situation. Before I intervened and started to balance the article, the amount of slander was completely disproportionate compared to how controversial the party is in an international perspective. It’s only by understanding how much different the Swedish perspective is, that one can understand why such an amount of slandering is regularly produced in the Swedish debate. That in Sweden there actually exist a factory created with taxpayers money for creating slander and allegations mainly against the Swedish Democrats. This is a construction that doesn’t exist in any other western democracy. The reason for this construction is obvious. To demonize the Swedish Democrats and make them seen far more extreme then they in fact are. You yourself are an example of the success of this strategy. You rate them as extreme as British BNP, not because anything in their official policy – but based on this slander. And because of this you want to include all this slander in the article.

2772:

you ripped out my comments on a article "talk" page because you did not like them. How much different is that than me coming inot your community there in Kentucky (which, thank God, Lincoln managed to somehow keep in the Union during the Civil War), and let's just say that you had a public library with an old-fashioned card catalog system, and I knew the books that you especially liked, (maybe by looking on the old chek-out cards they used to have you sign) and then I methodically and completely ripped out of the shelves all the card catalog cards for those books so that neither you nor anybody else could ever easily find them agin. That would not be very nice of me, huh? You think? Now, I repsect the fact that you are a nurse. I myself married a pediatrician but she got rid of me once she got what she wanted out of me, which was a child and 17 of child support and very brief spell in jail for me. But I am completely capable of maintaining an NPOV and you, ma'am, are the one having the problem maintaining NPOV. Now, would please consider acknowledging as much? I have been very sincere and honest with you for telling you about my own mistakes that I could have kept private because I still trust you to recognize your mistake. And do not give me any lip about that little girl being a minor, thank you very much. Everything on my page about her was already out there on the Internet. I just organized it better. --

2762:

the web site is to prevent general map-based browsing until you click a checkbox on a disclaimer which sets up the web session information. I personally think that the Megan's Law web site goes to far, but I cannot change it, so the best I can do is inform the reader about it in an NPOV manner. If Mr. Poland does resume his friendship with Sam Sloan, I am hope some good comes of it for both of them. Perhaps they will co-author another book. They are both talented men, each in their own right, and more complete memoirs from them would provide interesting and valuable life-lessons, especially for young people in making life choices. I am not referring to Mr. Poland's legal problems, I am talking about two men who at least bothered to live full and notable lives: mistakes, successes and all. I benefit greatly in my efforts to find NPOV by not caring an iota more for that little girl he was with than for Poland himself. I do not feel sorry for either of them. The girl and the man are both free Americans and, in a sense, I am envy them both. --

2882:

the other hand, and correct me if I am mistaken, but I don't think anyone would object if I posted links to research regarding Scientology because popular opinion is not favorable towards Scientology. I think we live in a culture that is very uncomfortable at times examining "religious movements" that the majority perceives are benefitial. I think there is a resistance at times to examine these groups and the minority voice who has done the examination and posits conclusions that portray something other than widely held beliefs are viewed as negative. The negative "tag" is not based on the merits of the research done by the minority, but because the conclusions contradict the majority opinion and their expectations. As a Wiki reader, I am always interested in the ideas of both the majority and minority. That is how I reach my own conclusions and feel like I am making an informed decision.

3460:

would finally be accessible to them. But nothing will, and they are clearly not willing to compromise on the issue because every single "suggestion" they offer is a rewrite of the same paragraph that locks the point of the debate out over and over. They act as if they run the Aiken page because they feel they do. The POV is rampant and has crossed the line of reason. I certainly have no plans on dropping it, regardless of that being their ultimate goal. So I don't see a solution possible without intervention. Possibility of rejection or not, I can only hope that the admins realize that nearly a month of having a page protected and the pages upon pages of stuff in the talk show there's a problem that can't be handled between us. I just want this to be over with and short of leaving the debate (which I'm not going to do) I don't think it's ever going to end. -

2716:, which was committing possibly the cardinal sin of encyclopædia articles: Editorialising about how Gilbert was only important because of the things he did that helped other people, and that all his plots were borrowed from other operas (and then giving an example that a few minutes fact-checking showeed was wrong - which is PARTICULARLY oddsince he DOES have several major borrowings: Sorcerer has strong structural borrowings from L'elisir d'amore, and one of Mountebanks' subplots takes much of Act I of L'elisir and makes it all far more nasty and mean.) Oh, and it's not helped that one of the authors he mentions as being so much byeetter and more important than Gilbert (Oscar Wilde) specifically said that Gilbert's Engaged directly inspired his most famous work, The Importance of Being Earnest... 1111:

Proximity of IP addresses is accurate; sole posts to one article are suspect. Furthermore, Jim admitted that RP is his wife, so that proposal is valid. I found the connection, FM denies it, and I AGF that he is telling the truth (which is more than I have had in this proceeding; it has been constantly assumed that I am guilty, even in the face of contrary evidence). Are FM accusations assumed to be in good faith and mine in bad simply because he makes them first? His accusations are as erroneous as he says mine are. If you were trying to aid me, it failed miserably. All your admonishment served to do is escalate FM's claims that I am acting in bad faith by providing him with proof that someone else agrees with him. You are now named as a third party that tried to dissuade me.

3617:"Here in Knowledge, there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go un-appreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go un-noticed. Sadly, these editors often leave the project. As Esperanzians, we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. A project the size of Knowledge has thousands of editors, so there are plenty of people out there who deserve recognition, one just has to find them. The object of this program is not to flood editors with Barnstars, but to seek out people who deserve them, and make them feel appreciated." 37:, acknowledging on p. 5 that 11% of its revenue comes from distribution partners that admittedly include portals. These portals account for a substantial fraction of WebEx's advertising costs documented on p. 50. WebEx expressly admits its round-tripping arrangement with "a Chinese reseller" on p. 17. In view of the company's history, the details of the loan arrangement appear to signal self-dealing by its Chinese-connected executives. Please see Sun's annual reports for similar corroboration. Please restore the information accordingly. Knowledge wouldn't want to think that you are partial to coverups of corporate shenanigans. 1905:

think he'd be aware of the procedures), but my real problem is that he took the time to personally contact several arbitrators and several dozen random users in an attempt to color the discussion by sending a skewed version of the events with a negative slant about me - and yet didn't bother to inform me that he had filed the RFA. Even assuming good faith, I find that to be troubling and disingenuous. Regardless, it's not worth getting upset over - I just wanted to thank for getting involved and for being the voice of reason.

2719:...It's a mess, and I want to fix it, but could really use a mentor to help me with stylistic issues. For instance, I found a quote by Jessie Bond, completely in the public domain, that's perfect for introducing the section on German-Reed's work towards the cleaning up of London theatre, in which Gilbert became intimately involved for several years. Without that quote, understanding why German-Reed was important becomes difficult, but I haven't seen other articles using very much actual source material... 3482:

took the chance to leave some; I will note in this that most of the ones who came to leave comments left comments in my favor. But regardless, whether my viewpoint is chosen or not, I don't think a solution is going to work without non-appellate intervention. I realize that the admins typically weigh-in on people conflicts, but I can't see any other process to decide content disputes. If it's not settled and taken out of our hands we'll be editing back and forth until we explode.

1269: 3188:- for pure shame and embarassment) also because of the embaressingly stupid fighting on wikipedia I can not get scholars to come and post here. This article as well as the made up theory posted under plotinus' bio are fantastic examples. I was able to get this scholar out of the kindness of his heart to review an article that a new age @#$ % is now suggesting be DELETED. 2962:

doubt you folks speak Cherokee but I do and tried to restrain them) to no avail. The UKB Chief is apparently using this group for POV pushing to hide the embarrassments of the prosecutions and other materials. Just to to be a little bird and let you know what's up here. They are Cherokee so they won't stop. You need to go to indefinite blocks are it will just continue.

2420:"No one can know how we feel if we do not say. We cannot expect to get understanding if we do not ask for it. No one will dispute that sometimes life's issues are too much for one person. It is fair to say that sometimes Knowledge's problems fall under the same heading. This is a place where you can bring the bruises that can sometimes be got on this project for attention." 2133:"negative"), more like just making sure the painting includes all the colors in the subjects rainbow. I also reread some of my article contributions and they do in fact look alot more like original research because they lack citations. I'll work on improving that. I am going to be out of town soon so my improvements might not be as speedy as I would like them to be. 2239:

this content) to be held to a higher standard of proof than what is clearly being employed by the majority of users who contribute to these topics. If Knowledge was an academic journal (such as I have been published in in my professional life) with rules which everyone actually obeyed, naturally I would follow suit. But Knowledge is

2922:

from La Viviandre are DEFINATELY out of copyright, since I got them from an ancient Victorian libretto I photocopied at the National Liberary of Scotland, and their author died in 1911. I've given my reasons for why I think the questionable quotes are fair use on the Discussion Page at that article. Have I done it correctly?

3502:

This is where I am unsure. I opened the issue to comments from others by posting the request but not as many people came as I hoped they would. I made the request because I feel if the consensus were clearer or there were a stronger majority one way or the other it would make the issue easier to deal

3481:

I'm trying to have the debate ended fully and completely. Note, that I don't want it ended with my side in-tact and victorious, I just want the issue decided. I feel that those of us in the debate are incapable of coming to an agreement on our own. I have placed a request for comments and some people

3416:

It could be argued that linking to websites of discussion forums and amateur art is not, in general, the function of an encyclopedia. While in many cases perhaps this can be either waived or, if controversial, discussed and decided by the editors involved in the article, on this page I'm not so sure.

3289:

trolls or idiots. Fair-use activists wore me down on the IfD, but the overall problem is people who are like "Well in some cultures its OK to do such-and-such but not such-and-such, why should we delete this but not the Mohammed pictures, because after all who can say what's 'right' and 'wrong'?" (To

2771:

Now, I am quite aware that Jimbo already gave himself that pathetic un-American excuse of W not being about free press or free speech or anything like that. But what you are doing is trying to censor me. Now, you know that you cannot Earthlink pages unilaterally because we both live in America. But

1853:

With regard to the rest, the wording of the sportsposter copyright tag says that using a poster is fair use if the the image is being used to illustrate the sporting event depicted in the image. It doesn't explicitly mention that only one such image can be used, but even if that is the case, I would

998:

We could be on to something here. Someone on the talk page of Charmmy Kitty is suggesting in an indirect manner (perhaps some sort of code) that Charmmy and Hello Kitty are being used to endoctrinate the youth of the world about the benefits of slavery. Perhaps training them for participation in some

251:

Well, I've said my piece and I'm not going back. It seems this place is going to be taken over by the people with the hardest heads. As soon as the public perception of Knowledge changes to seeing it as trash, it's not going to turn back. Articles like this are going to send to hell in a handbag. And

3470:

I followed all the outlines in the dispute resolution guideline, so I can't think of any steps I missed. This issue has been going on for over a month and during all this time I've tried very hard to manage the issue on my own. I'm not the only person arguing my position - not by a long shot, and if

2881:

And you said this article had sufficient cult/new religious movment cites, yet it does not have a single one related to popular recovery movements that are embraced by the masses. Movements that have been the subject of a significant body of work by legitimate researchers and even court cases. On

2853:

attendance of Alcoholics Anonymous has been challenged, in each case A.A. has been found by the courts to be "a religion", "religious", and/or "religious movement" and thus ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The United States Supreme Court heard one of those contested cases and they too ruled for the

2286:

and cease his tedious cycle of deletions. However, he has edited it yet again, truncating it quite uneccessarily (I find his arguments above for doing so thoroughly unconvincing) and, if I may be frank, in a rather poor and hurried fashion with an ugly text-block layout. It certainly reads badly and

2201:

for that film, and see my reasons why the material is not appropriate, and advise me of how to proceed further, I'd appreciate it. I know that my side did not come off shiningly in the previous discussion on the Faber page, but I think you'll agree that my position on this one is solid. Right now,

1441:

I'll continue to monitor the article, but I won't edit it for a while, and I'll let SweHomer finish all of his edits. If he finishes, however, and the "Response" section is similar to how it currently stands, I will be sure to take action. But hopefully you can remind him of Knowledge policies and

1412:

He thinks the "Response" section is a place for him to write an essay from the Sweden Democrats' point of view. I told him it is not, but he just won't stop. He is really degrading the encyclopedia, for he is turning Knowledge into a place of politcal debate. I have nothing against addressing the

1092:

of a meat puppet. FM falsely connects me to users I have never come in contact with and users who don't post anything like me because their IP resolves to the same state or country, or because they edited some of the same articles, including a user who I had a conflict with and who speculated on my

4042:

Thanks for the help in the Aiken page situation. I've been sitting at your and Will's feet metaphorically for a couple of weeks now. Unfortunately, the PAW project hits a little too close to home for me, so I doubt I could be helpful often. Still, I'm learning by observing. Thanks also for a rv

2921:

Right! Thanks for the help so far! I've checked the quotes I've used, and one MAY be in copyright, another definately is, but both of these seem to come under fair use, as they're short, to the point, and relatively far from the key reasons for getting the things they quote from anyway. The Quotes

2233:

unsourced information. Seriously! Read any article on a Star Wars character, a television series, a science-fiction movie, a toyline, and you will find little if any sourcing being used. The occasional references cited at the ends of articles are entirely generalised and routinely contain no direct

1633:

which also has a notability tag at present, and for which I have also now provided further references (and again, with print references still to come), to see if you believe that this now has sufficient basis for removal of the tag. (I have provided a comment about one of the online sources on the

1623:

Thanks for your re-examination of this article, for which you had suggested further referencing, and for your removal of the notability tag in view of my provision of more references. I actually will have a few more print references to add, and provide page references for a couple of the newspaper

531:

Yea, I guess after all I've seen around here I've got a nose for those kind of things; perhaps too much so. But it's gone, and it had a minor's name in it, which is bad enough in itself. BTW great job, and I mean excellet job, with that PAW thing. You guys are shining that up nice. I might just get

270:

Cutting that last one out. You can archive it if you want, but I want to let that issue go to rest regarding my input, and don't want anyone coming by and taking a pot shot. Go ahead and replace it if you'd like and scold me accordingly. I just left a plea to rethink the article concept and I think

156:

It's a debate about a scout founder. I can't get them to tell my why it's so important, though, that this much information is needed on this. Why wouldn't the three paragraphs in the main article suffice? How much can you say about a person's sexual orientation? You could write volumes on one hand,

3459:

I certainly understand the case load, but we've been through two polls and a mediation already. I've offered several compromises and have bent over backwards many, many times as can clearly be seen in the talk pages -- I've continually conceded and redone my suggestions in the hopes that something

2761:

I actually consider myself to be a potential friend of Jefferson Poland. I am doing what I can to re-connect him with Sam Sloan, so that they may resume their personal friendship. I added back only that the "View on Map" button does not work if you just bring up his profile because the design of

1508:

I'm getting sick of this. Obviously he think he is my superior and some sort of administrator for this page. I must be able to work under the same conditions as he does. He does not check with me before enter material to the page, but states that I have to do this. Can you do something about this?

1458:

Well, regarding AFA , just look at their homepage, where they admit to be Anarchistic and to do use illegal methods in their work. The reference to the article in the magazine Creole also states that a revolution by creating chaos is what one of their key persons want. So I think its well sourced.

1124:

Okay, Flo, I understand your misconception. However, I am not being vindictive or WP:POINT. The evidence was posted in good faith. (NB I also removed two IP addresses after your comment and my re-examination showed they were unconnected by proximity.) As I will note, the RfM was denied because I

1083:

Why do the findings, using the same guidelines that FM proposed, 'needlessly raise the tension in this case, and are not in the best interest of the WP community'? FM is located in the same area as that group of anon IPs. If he states they are not his sock puppets, then we can only believe him.

875:

Duncharris is blinded by his bias, and I have looked at the many other comments posted on his talk page and he clearly is predisposed towards distorting ID and creationist positions. Therefore I am curious what other strategy you would suggest I take. I was under the impression that a "discussion"

252:

sure enough, it's some sexual issue. I never said anything about that and they are laying claims of censorship on me! My head tells me to just gat away and go back to the plant articles, but my heart says go back and fight. Perhaps this time I'll listen to my head. The heart is a lonely hunter. --

3125:

Hi FloNight, Many thanks for creating the article on The Da Vinci Game - I really appreciate it! I went to update the arbitration page, but couldn't find it. Did you remove it from there? If so, thanks again, I wasn't sure where to start the discussion and that seemed the most intuitive place.

2961:

members. They have about a dozen folks they are mobilizing to vandalize that article. Just to let you know to expect vandalism and postings from several ranges from these folks. They have three active folks behaving as meatpuppets to vandalize the article. I tried to reason with them today (I

2281:

the disputed fan-theory and providing a link to a more appropriate page. I have even acquiesced to re-include his Teela content which I still believe would be better placed under "Trivia". I made all these compromises not because I think it is the right thing to do, but truthfully just to try and

2238:

is correct about one thing; the rules ARE clear. But I flat -out disagree with his assessment that this is "no excuse" to include (or, in this case, preserve) relevant TRUE information which, by its very nature cannot be proven. I think it is absurd to expect me (or rather, the original writer of

1904:

Hi FloNight, thanks for the kind words on my talk page and calming words on the Katelyn Faber talk page. I have no problem assuming good faith with respect to Nightscream bringing the RFA out of turn (although with nearly 2000 edits and the fact that he's been an editor for a year now, one would

1572:

Also I have stated openly that I am a member (on low level) of this Party and that this can implicate bias. My view of the page is that it has a clear journalistic approach. They are trying to use Wiki to “reveal” Sweden Democrats “true” nature. A propagandistic approach. They take no measures to

1568:

Yes, I felt that it was not fair. I was the one not deleting other peoples work, but trying to argument under the talk page. I was the one who followed the advice from Flonight. Its obvious that liftarn and WGee clams ownership of the page. Flonight who is the administrator who have followed this

1228:! I look forward to using these tools to enhance and maintain this wonderful site. I will continue regular article/project contributions, but I will also allocate a sizable portion of my wikischedule toward administrative duties :) Thanks again, and if you have any questions/comments/tips, please 3507:

that they'd listen to outsider input, I don't know if I believe they would. The main antagonists in the debate have an almost god-like, religious reverence and I think this issue has transcended into something much, much worse and deeper for them. As I said once, a neutral party would think that

1362:

I dont know if this is anything for You - but i have the opinion that the subjet "Swedish Democrats" it treated wery POV. If i compare this article to articles about severly more extreme parties like "front national", there is notting of tabliod slander there. The Swedish Democrats page have 30%

2122:

Flo, I very much appreciate you taking to time to address some of this with me and your comments are helpful. I have been rethinking some of my contributions and I think I have a better grip on where I am going wrong. As a result I've been able to come up with some ideas how I can make better

1668:

I'm afraid that both sides are interested only in pushing their own political viewpoint, and have no interest either in neutrality and objectivity or in Knowledge. I think that the page needs to be ptotected for a while, and also listed at RfC. I'll do the latter first, and see what happens.

1110:

I don't understand much of this process at all, being new and never being subjected to it. This arbitration has gone from another request for assistance to another avenue to lynch me. I did not offer the proof in bad faith, but based on the evidence I discovered. None of this is fairy floss.

2132:

Also, most of the subjects that interest me are in fact related and the controversial part(s) are the most noteworthy to me. I don't want to paint things in a "negative" way (though I recognize controversy is often condsidered a pejorative and pointing out controversy is often viewed as being

1408:

article as of now? SweHomer's "Response to the Controversy" section is what I'm talking about. He is trying to use Knowledge to prove his conspiracy theories, and he is knowingly violating NPOV policy, which seems quite evident to me. The most incriminating evidence: "This is of course what

1462:

If you created an organization like Expo in any country they can of course create slander and allegations against any political party, depending on how you aim such an organization. The immigration - industry of Sweden consumes almost 15% of our GNP, why should it not create an instrument for

1173:

is a variation of a sock puppet; a new internet community member account is created by another person at the request of a user solely for the purposes of influencing the community on a given issue or issues. While less overtly deceptive than sock puppetry, the effect of meat puppetry and sock

3553:

Yeah I wanted to make a statement on the email list in the next couple days re pedophilia and pedophilia POV on Knowledge, and maybe point out the existance of the project in case any editors wanted to help out. My statement is not necessarily going to be to your liking, since we don't see

3076:

The talk on his talk page seems to indicate he's been blocked. Since so much BS has been flying over the last 12 hours, I don't know if that's true or not. But whatever. He may have been blocked before this started, which make my momentary ideation of blocking him even more of a cute

1551:

Yes, it's a bit of a mess; they're all behaving pretty badly. I blocked SweHomer for 3RR, and was treated to a series (five so far) of e-mails. Knowledge would be so much pleasanter to work on if we abolished all articles on politics, religion, and sex (oh, and computer games...).

1493:

Thats exacly what i want you to do. As WGee, me and FloNight have agreed about. That is what I am doing with your work, (I am not deleting but discssing) and that what I want you to do with my work. There are objections you are having that i think is valid and i will change som of

1810:, but he/she refuses to respond directly to the statements in which I refute his/her fallacious reasoning. I didn't know there was a difference between mediation and arbitration, and would welcome your advice on other procedures. Can you advise me on how to proceed? Thanks. 1700:

FloNight, I did not accuse SweHomer of anything in my original message to Durova. As you can see, I simply told Durova what each side was complaining about. Also, why do you see the need to privately discuss things with editors? From first glance it seems rather suspicious.

1400:

he says: "Normally I hold the English wikipedia in high regard compared to the Swedish Wiki". Therefore, I think he has much experience with Swedish Knowledge. He is even familiar with the Arbitration System for resolving disputes and knows all the proper formatting, etc.

3151:

Sounds good! I don't have any preference myself on what happens with the article, but if there's a good stub to be made there, great, and nice comments to Aminto, too. (Though I have to admit I was tickled at the chance to make a statement on an RfAr from the other side!)

886:

Also, I'm curious why I am told by 2 people that I should be more civil for calling Duncharris incompetent (which he clearly demonstrated himself to be---I wasn't using it as a perjorative), but when he refers to me as a 'brainless cretinist troll' no one blinks an eye...

508:

Why would a kid go to the trouble to say he is a "boy/male from Norway" and give a name and website address with pictures? I just don't think that was a kid. I might be wrong, but I woldn't be surprised if ppl are trying to sting someone through Knowledge to make a point.

1416:

I ask that you ban him, at least temporarily, because he is not doing this out of ignorance. Or if you could intervene is some other way, that would be helpful, too. We simply cannot work with him, for he insists on including his personal beliefs in Knowledge articles.

445:

After meditating in my secret spot, I decided I'm going to let this go. Perhaps my judgement was a little snap here. I just don't trust answersingenesis.org. I retracted my removal of the material; let's for once assume readers are smart enough to know what's going on.

1317:

Firstly, thank you for the warm welcome to Knowledge. I have been on this fantastic website loads lately, and because I was brought up in a rough part of Glasgow, Scotland I feel my knowledge of the Scottish delinquent personality would be of use as a 'Hall Monitor'.

3384:, I don't expect people to be reasonable about this. That leaves edit warring or an RfC. I think an RfC would be much the better path. True, you could lose, but if you can't win on an RfC from the whole community, you're sunk anyway. Here's what I drafted to post at 3518:

If a clearer consensus came out, or at least a supermajority, I would personally drop my dispute if the consensus/majority showed the view was strongly on their side. If they agreed to the same, there'd be no need for intervention, but unfortunately this hasn't

1865:

All of the other photos seem to meet the standard of being one and only one photo being used to illustrate a particular sporting event that is specifically discussed in the section of the article in which the photo appears. So I'd think that they are all OK.

2160:

Anyhow, I already have some plans to improve some of what you have brought to my attention. It might take some time for me to make them but I'll drop you a note when I have done so and see about getting your input once those changes have been made. Cheers!

2466:- we hope you like it! The major changes are that each month, right after the Council meeting, this will be sent out and will include two featured programs and a sum up of the meeting. Also, it will be signed by all of the Advisory Council members, not just 1099:

of the continued lies and misrepresentations this group has made. Where is your request that they withdraw claims that have been proven false because they 'needlessly raise the tension in this case, and are not in the best interest of the WP community'?

1869:

As I mentioned though, I'm very much a newbie with regard to the issue of fair use of images. So before I actually alter the article to apply my above judgment, I'd appreciate your feedback as to whether you think I'm interpreting the matter correctly.

3170:

I have had this article reviewed by professor Moore. I have the email. I can forwatd it to you. Professor Moore is part of the international neoplatonic society. I have not add more to article because I am corresponding with him. Please of members

2867:

So what people may expect might not necessarily reflect what actually has been proven. And I don't think the majority opinion (whether positive or negative) ought to silence the observations, research findings and conclusions (opinions) from those

2815:

talk page and then thought it might be more appropriate here. I am still trying to figure out some of the norms of where these conversations belong. Feel free to copy or move this to the talk page (or my own) if you think it belongs elsewhere.

2738:

Keep doing good work, and remember that Knowledge's a long-term project. In most instances, the feuds we find ourselves in today on Knowledge will seem like a distant memory in a few months, so try not to stress too much over any one thing. Best ·

876:

page involved just that---discussion, but so far Duncharris has responded with trite, irrelevant comments that are anything but discussion. This really gives me a dim view of open-mindedness and community one would expect to find behind Knowledge.

2353:

On my Lumpkin Article... I know that you removed the video link because of popups, but can I just put a straight link to the video itself, I mean, striaight to the .WMV file itself, ... and announce it as a link to a video right below the link?

3184:). Not greek scholars. He is openly made fun of online and wikipedia indirecty because of him. See the falk blog as one of his own examples. Because of some of the ridiculous nonsense articles(see the historically incorrect nonsense article- 3687: 2486: 3917:

Are ya'll going to do a series on the raids that have taken place over the last six years or so? It would be a good source of information for ppl doing research to have a list of KP raids that have happened, as there have been quite a few.

839:

Quite busy lately. I'm going to pass on voting on the Friends category thing, as I am too on the fence, would probably weak delete, but don't want to think about it, as too much else going on. Sorry to be unresponsive, just loads going on.

1861:

section, since neither photo relates to events discussed direction in that section, and possibly the photo at the top of the page, since that's just a this-is-Kobe-Bryant-photo, rather than one that relates to a specific sporting event.

1789:

These images are specifically designed to be POV and/or elicit emotional response, and the vast majority of them have been retouched. There's no question at all in my mind that this picture should be excluded. Knowledge is not a tabloid.

412:- Slap me and tell me to get the hell away from the creationist/evolution argument. I will buy you a hamburger next Tuesday if you oblige. I'm not a staunch evolutionist, but I think the Creationist caveats... dammit there I go again... 2786:

Flo I have been out of town and haven't had much time to contribute here lately but thank you kindly for the links and info on State physician impairment programs. I thought this sort of riff raff ended 10 years ago. Astonishing.

2294:

begrudges me even mentioning the fan-theory and deferring it's discussion to a more relevant article. With all due respect to him/her, I feel this is verging on either pettiness or a truly fanatical belief in the (largely unobserved)

2146:

talk page, I knew full well that my comments on the Talk page represented POV, bias, and original research. I would never put that in the article itself but that came from an ongoing frustration that is present in that article. The

1253:, which passed this morning. Admins are sort of like vultures, cleaning things up and whatnot... well, as long as you don't think too much about it. If there's ever anything I can help you with, just ask; you know where to find me. 2835:"I know for example that many people go to AA under the threat of penality like losing MD/RN lic., court mandated diversion programs, or a condition for parole. This is not something that someone would expect to happen with a cult" 1882:

Hmm, interesting indeed! If indeed the fair use is that restrictive (must be an article exclusively about X; cannot be in a section of article about Y that discusses X), then that clarification might be a good thing to add to the

3233:. I am very humbled by your comments and your vote of support. Please let me know if at any stage you require assistance, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an administrator. Once again thank you and with kind regards 3471:

I were I'd let it go. But I'm the most prolific and it's immensely frustrating that the issue's been hijacked by people who run out to grab their friends and leave messages on forums to harass me. In response to your questions:

1569:

closest also was going to ask you to ban them, not me for ignoring her advice. Something I have not done. When I reinserted what they deleted I was only following her advice, that my work should not be deleted, but discussed.

999:

totalitarian regime? I don't know, but could be serious. Could be Al Qaida, the IRA, the Mexican connection, Fiona Apple and cronies, who knows. I'm checking into it. May have to protect the article if things get too rough. --

1628:

as you had also requested (and possibly a few more to come), though that article was never tagged so there is no further action needed on that one. I am wondering if you would mind please also having a look at my article on

1431:

OK, I'll refrain from provoking him with such terms, though I do feel they are totally justified. Also, I should clarify that rebuking SweHomer's opinions and theories, no matter how scathing the terms, is not a personal

1409:

EXPO/AFA wants. To grow, and to get their revolution they need enemies and destabilization." I'm sure you can agree with me that this has no place in an encyclopedia. This type of political discourse is typical of him.

1824:

Thanks for the information on the fair use issue with the photographs. The primary reason I've always avoided dealing with photographs (haven't ever added or removed one on any page) is because I've just been too darned

2900:

You know by now (or I hope you do) I have a good deal or respect for your opinion here and I have appreciated your input and support, but on this one you and I will have to agree to disagree. I am cool with that. :-)

1845:

OK, I've had a look. It would appear that all but two of the pictures on the page are from posters. The two which are not are indeed of dubious origin with regard to their fair use, but each has already been listed at

1125:

did not notify everyone individually, KimB was admonished for not notifying everyone of the RfAr in a timely manner, so there was no cause for me to view notifying named IP addresses on their talk page as a disruption.

4056:

Thanks for the response. I look forward to more time for other Knowledge projects myself. Went to Katefan's page to leave a note of thanks, and saw your comment, so I included a brief addition there. Thanks again!

415:

I'm just going to remove it from my watchlist, go home, and take a long nap... it was all a bad dream. Before Peppers, Before Pedophilia, before flowers... there was the nasty Creat/Evolut. battlegrounds. I still have

2220:. I would welcome an informal mediator in this dispute, although I will be honest and say uprfront that I'm not interested in dragging this out for very long, as I certainly have better things to do. I don't know why 742:

are both a mess. Someone is really against the idea of PA. I might look at it tomorrow. I can't believe people fight over junk when important stuff goes neglected (and fight over neglected stuff too, as it's easy to

756:

Well, I guess we'll just have to take it one day (one article) at a time. I wouldn't have started the Hazy Moon article myself, but since it's here, no reason to delete it. Now we can move on to something new...

667:. I was watching for vandalism and acted on auto (easy and tempting to hit the rollback sometimes), then realized the mistake, and immediately re-reverted it. I don't know where this guy comes into the picture. -- 3411:

Here's what I'm thinking: the question of external links, not just in this article but in similar articles. Ought there not be a general standard or guideline about external links to objectionable material.

1829:

to properly educate myself on what does/does not constitute fair use of them. LOL 8-) So your information about one photo's use impacting the fair use of others is an enlightenment to me. Thanks again.

1454:

I do have some little experience from Swedish Wiki, doing some writing about Palestine a year ago (most of it translations from English WIKI). The Arbitration system I found Yesterday in the help section.

3492:

I tried all of the steps in the dispute resolution process, and after the failed mediation, the opinion of the mediator was the issue was damaged and not likely to be fixed by us. He suggested the admins.

321:

Fortunately this one's not as controversial. If it gets chopped, oh well. And please don't be afraid to disagree with me. I'd just like to see it at least go to the block with a tie and its hair combed.

1472:

Yes, I know about the four ~ but i keeps forgeting. I try to better myself! Again 'Liftarn' have removed my contribution. How am i supposed to work on it and make it better when its constantly deleted?

3737: 1935:

Why did you revert my removal of warnings from an external links section? I am not particularly set on them being removed, but I was following a precedent several others have set before justified by

71:). As long as this decision remains in force, I am trying not to generate further controversy in this subject matter. However, I repeat my request that you restore the information in the article on 3430:

Therefore I think that the question of disputable links should be taken to an RfC, not in any way with intent to be confrontational, but simply to get an advisory opinion from the larger community.

897:

Thanks for your suggestions, FloNight. I have a good feeling I'll never change anyone's opinion since their bias towards evolution is so strong, nevertheless I'll try your advice. Have a good day.

130: 174:

According to my quick count between the main article and the fork there is more verbiage devoted to speculation on his sexuality oin two books than the combined total given to his military career

2202:

there are only two posts on that Talk page, both by me, as EmperorSkeletor refuses to engage in discussion, and is now misrepresenting my words in his Edit Summaries. What should I do? Thanks.

1857:

If my reading is correct, I would think that aside from the two aforementioned photos that are already under review, the only other ones that might be problematic would be the two present in the

1854:

presume that it would be one image per event that is being discussed, rather than only one image in the entire article that discusses many such events. Would that be your understanding as well?

350: 2115:

Mr Christopher, this is my opinion and interpretation of WP policy and guidelines. I'm making these suggestions to help you. If these suggestions are not helpful, then feel free to ignore. : )

2082:

LOL! It's not pretty enough. I much prefer the cool kid jumping. Actually from a graphic design point of view it's too wide. The Page layout calls for a taller than wide image. Oh well ;) --

345: 1643: 467: 362: 3180:

This is the whos who of philosophy. Goethian is EVERYTHING THAT PEOPLE HAVE CRITIZED WIKIPEDIA ABOUT. Your poster posts new age groups in California as sources for ancient greek culture (

336:. I'm afraid it's going to die. LMK if asking you to do this is a problem, as I don't want to put you on the spot if you don't like it. I just really think that one deserves attention. -- 1768:

Who is this, the communication police? How could talking to people outside of Knowledge give any reason for "suspicion" about anything? Good grief the Internet makes people paranoid. --

449:

And also: I ruthlessly reverted your last edit at Junk DNA. If you have a question on it, feel free to revert my revert of your revert to his last revert that reverted my first revert.

1654:

I put this in the "talk" page of everyone, so there can me no further accidents. These to reverts were of course not done on purpose, you both just missed to read what Flonight wrote

2712:

I hate to be difficult, but I'm relatively new to Knowledge, but, having most of his plays to hand and a strong interest in him, I've decided to work on the somewhat awful page for

3835:

Thank- you for switching the article name and cleaning up the article. I thought about doing that myself. Much better for you to do it. Hope the unsourced information stays out. --

1690:

Yes, my e-mail is not activated. It's one way of ensuring transparency: all my interactions at Knowledge are conducted on-site. Is there some reason I should change this policy?

432: 82:). It is likely that one or more of the editors currently involved in editing these articles are following corporate orders. Please avoid biased edits that give this impression. 3256: 3396:

name, that would OK. More than OK really since, although I will surely support you, I don't especially want to be point man on this. But I'll post it myself if desired. If it

3224: 2659:

Love the picture, but please call them by their proper name. They are not "bears", just koalas! Us Aussies get very grumpy about our fauna being treated disrespectfully!

1526: 1519: 2248:

I feel like I'm being arrested for jaywalking by the one honest cop from an otherwise entirely corrupt precinct. What's the point of a law if hardly anyone else follows it?

3329:

Charming.... a username block probably wouldn't have been contested, but it doesn't end up mattering, since all that account has been used for is vandalizing. Blocked. ·

1413:

allegations in a neutral way, complete with sources. In fact, I created the "Response" section and wrote the first paragraph. But what he's doing is just unnacceptable.

3282: 3010:...is going about adding nonsense to people's userpages. I've never blocked an admin-level user before, so could you second my comments on his talk page if you agree? -- 2347: 1658: 714:

Golly, I don't know. Can't really think of a motive. Can't think of how it could have been accidental. Then he advertises it by telling me to "butt out". Just wierd. --

499:

Inf3rn0 created it. lol. Mushroom got to it rather fast. I was trying to look up the speed delete policy but he beat me to it. I'm still trying to learn this stuff. --

1088:

that Rainbowpainter is his wife, didn't you? Do you realise that Jim's wife only posted on one article, in the midst of a conflict to aid that conflict? That is the

591: 3285:

Well Ms. Lolicon of 2006 is finally gone. What a long, tiring, distracting process. Unbe-freaken-lievable how many people think this image should be included who are

1037: 630: 3440:- I think he's doing penance for having argued so effectively against a copyvio disallowance of The Image - removed the link function, keeping it as text only, per 1078: 783: 1836:

Right at this moment, I need to turn my attention to finishing off my taxes, but I'll definitely come back on-line at some point tonight and have a look at that.

1104: 3644: 2447: 2260:

went around deleting every unsourced fact in Knowledge's pop culture articles then I'd wager you'd see the overall content drop by about 85%. I'm not kidding.

2891:

And we're talking about links here, not offensive or POV article content that tries to dog AA. So in my own mind I thought these cites were highly relevant.

1630: 3659:

Welcome to the second issue of the new format Esperanza Newsletter - we hope you still like it! This week, it was delivered diligently by our new dogsbody.

1359:

Yes i am a bit new, but still thinks that i have pretty good grasp about NPOV, but im sure there is more to learn. And my english is not exactly perfect...

3355:. However, please note that fair use of copyrighted images cannot be claimed outside mainspace articles - please could you therefore remove these? Thanks, 2963: 1939:. It was my understanding that links on Knowledge should not have such disclaimers. (And if they must have them, they should not be so poorly formatted.) – 1625: 1617: 470:? It might work. But I'll wait it out, I'm sure someone else will think of it soon and start it for me. (for anyone so unedified, yes, this is sarcasm). -- 3508:

Paulus was accusing each of them of having unprotected sex with them with the way they act as if his allegations are a personal attack against themselves.

702: 644: 2510: 2165: 1129: 1115: 891: 3724: 3708: 3699: 956:

Yea, looks like you can just work on the George Bushes. Woa, this week is being kinda rough on me as far as work/classes/family/chores/etc.etc.etc. --

179: 2277:, I have created a new, far shorter version of the "Continuity" section which I believe no longer contains ANY unsourced information, short of merely 1483:

You could discuss your changes on the talk page first. You additions are both highly controversial and entierly unsourced. Not a good combination. //

1249:

Hello FloNight, it's always good to meet someone else who counts their cats among their family. I wanted to thank you for taking the time to consider

942:

I'm looking forward to many years of contribution in certain areas of my acedemic interest, I will certainly be asking for your advice in the future.

2056:

SCOTW needs a new maintainer, and could to with a maintenance bot. If you know of anybody who may be interested in either task, please let them know!

826: 635: 2380: 1590:

I have revritten most of it - but i am not happy with the structure and the language. And perhaps there is others things to that should be changed.

3988: 3312: 2936:

It would be good for someone to take him in hand if you're willing to do it. He seems at least to be willing to listen if you feel like it. Best ·

2648: 3946: 3919: 3565: 3109: 3094: 3060: 3020: 3011: 2994: 2966: 1973: 1791: 1769: 1324:

Please, please, reply soon and let me know - I would be very willing to regulate against the high number of anonymous Scottish & UK vandals.

1304: 1291: 1200: 1160: 1146: 1000: 989: 979: 957: 943: 862: 853: 841: 812: 803: 787: 771: 758: 748: 715: 699: 668: 651: 641: 619: 606: 596: 567: 543: 533: 523: 510: 500: 491: 471: 454: 437: 424: 379: 366: 354: 337: 323: 311: 301: 288: 272: 253: 158: 144: 134: 3875: 3847: 2072: 3900: 3568: 1981: 1972:

I think you are right; a lot of articles need work. I'll try to look when I get some time today since I know you are actively working on it. --

519: 2997: 3862: 3824: 3134: 3118: 2685: 2364:

Several people have removed it. The reason I removed it is because it is unencyclopedic. It is unflattering to the older women on the video.

2034: 927: 4017: 3949: 3922: 3159: 3063: 3041: 2358: 1203: 1190: 1084:

But I am not going to remove the finding, just as he has not removed his finding that I showed were false. Also, you did see that Jim62sch

1003: 982: 718: 671: 654: 622: 609: 570: 557: 546: 326: 314: 256: 161: 147: 115: 86: 63: 3716: 3712: 3610: 3263: 1634:

article's discussion page, also). If you would like to discuss any aspects of the article, I would be happy for that too. Many thanks! --

1487: 3192: 2045: 2253:

But anyway, that's my drum to beat and I don't much expect you to agree with me. All I'd say about that in closing is that if users like

2031: 2016: 2004: 4061: 3811: 3533: 2604: 1772: 1751: 1734: 1597: 1217: 230: 190: 3341: 1705: 1370: 2958: 2858:. But the fact that the majority of people are not aware of this, and therefore would not expect it, does not mean it doesn't exist. 2206: 1541: 486: 480: 3981: 3707:

as before and, also as before, an previous leadership member can run. Please submit your name for voting in the relevant section of

2987: 2626: 1446: 275: 137: 920: 906: 395:

I appreciate the welcome message on my user page, but I've been around for a few years now, I just normally don't login for edits.

3369: 490:

this is a sting/troll lure. It's fake and someone is trying to lure a pedophile. I'm trying to finsomeone to second the speedy. --

4007: 3974: 3400:

posted, my personal recommendation would be to wait a couple days for people to respond/blow of steam before beginning the RfC.

2229:

Firstly, I'd just like to reiterate my broader argument; the vast majority of Knowledge articles on topics such as this contain

1638: 1363:

slander - witch according to what i have seen is a WIKI record. Well, no i dont have anything more to say, so i leave it there,

378:

is going to take up a week's worth of AID time when so many other articles are in need. Knowledge can be so damn frustrating. --

3574: 3550:

Yeah, the email list is good. I suppose eventually it'll start collecting trolls too, although maybe not since it's moderated.

3529:

If they refused to listen to the majority/consensus if it ruled against them, then ofcourse outside help would be necessary. -

3209: 2386: 1250: 2905: 2805: 1307: 1294: 3942: 3825: 3525:

If no, do you think a behavior Rfc is appropriate for the person not willing to listen to the opinion of the wider community?

3165: 3117: 2926: 2181: 2100: 2086: 1925: 1582: 1050: 1513: 786:

makes her look like an axe murderer who hunted them for sport. Not saying it doesn't belong there, just talking out loud. --

285: 3587: 2728: 1814: 1680: 1021: 566:

I left an explaination and I don't see a problem. Someone's being vigilant, but a tad overzealous, I believe that's all. --

2776: 2766: 2039:

A great fact to include would be the shortest time over which speciation of a sexual organism is known to have occurred. —

946: 3311: 2416:

aimed at allowing users to bring issues that they have had in Knowledge to a listening, sympathetic and caring audience:

2198: 1651:"Do not remove or re-insert text without discussion leading to consensus. You have been asked nicely by myself and Mel." 1563: 1518: 1351: 901: 880: 850: 474: 457: 440: 427: 399: 41: 3544:

Yes, of course you can email me. I don't know why email isn't active from my user page; I thought I had registered it.

3464: 3270: 3239: 1794: 992: 960: 689: 382: 369: 357: 340: 304: 291: 3448: 3404: 1976: 1694: 1611: 1577: 770:

You can go here for recovery, but you have to be pagan, mind you. Don't be slipping in any Zoroastrians or Gnostics! --

542:

Perhaps we should leave the quicker discussions on one or ther other's page. This back and forth is making me dizzy. --

95:, I've closely examined this topic, asked for second and third opinions, and decided not to include the content in the 2096:

Hi FloNight, I got your message(s). I left you a response on my talk. Where exactly shall we chat, here? My talk?

1994: 1648:

Again you are taking turns in reverting. Can you please stop this and restore text to the version FloNight put it in?

1163: 1149: 829: 3359: 2751: 2346: 2341: 2332: 1343: 125: 4032: 3112: 3023: 3014: 2108:

I am not sure where the heck to put this conversation...Your talk or mine...But here goes...You said lots, including

1961: 1894: 1877: 1840: 815: 806: 790: 774: 761: 751: 3558: 3380:

Yes I understand what you're saying. No, I don't think that links to child porn should be included in articles. At

3185: 2632:

Thanks, I just tweaked it a little bit more. Will probably work on it off and on forever, since articles never are

1847: 1530: 1498: 1477: 1467: 3229:

Hello FloNight, how are you? Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (88/3/1), so I am now an

2700: 1236: 1145:

was brought to my attention. It seems to give advice on how to do drugs. A real mess. Any comments appreciated. --

865: 856: 844: 599: 536: 526: 513: 503: 494: 466:'s sexual orientation. The article itself doesn't seem to have enough info and I'm hungry for more. Perhaps start 4050: 3322: 3298: 2972: 2663: 2186: 1909: 3643:

aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the

2948: 2446:

aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the

1890:

Thanks for your diligence in the matter. I'm eager to hear what the second opinion you solicit says about it.

1262: 436:

I stold this from another user's page, which you've probably seen. I go here when the cr@p get's too thick... --

4044: 4043:

you just made that I didn't dare make, and, if you think it warrants it, there was an accidental deletion here

3994: 2273:, is the current status of the article, or rather the section, under dispute. Despite totally disagreeing with 2194: 2187: 1607:

WGee again put back what you took out, and we have not agreed about this, in fact i clearly stated i disagreed.

1423: 1393: 3564:

Where is this email list at? I've never seen it. What is it, do they post the emails we send to each other? --

1277: 684:

Interesting how he changed his signature on that edit he "reverted" from my mistake revert. See my comment at

69: 3961: 3294:). Not to mention political sense. Erg. Anyway, thanks for being there, it felt good to have you by my side. 2983:

he has put the article up for delection AGAIN. How is deleting this article not retailation and censureship?

2399: 2068: 1073: 417: 3142: 2980: 2825:

Flo, thanks for your reply and we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. And here is why - You wrote,

2617: 1833:

With that in mind, I will indeed review the article to see what needs to be cleaned up in that regard.

80: 3853:

Yes, it seemed like the most sensible solution. I'll be watching the article closely from now on too. --

2193:

Hi. An unregistered user by the name of EmperorSkeletor keeps re-inserting unsourced material into the

1936: 1616: 207: 595:

not the most flattering, but the best example I could find of a statement i've made in this regard. --

35: 3804: 3720: 1503: 103:. Please let me know if there is a change. Otherwise, I consider the subject closed for now. regards, 2197:

article that is not consistent with other articles on such movies. If you could take a look at the

4028:

THANK YOU! So very very very much..You and danielCD are very unappreciated the guys are the best..

3741: 3668: 3197: 2177:

and tell me what you think of my latest efforts? I know you're busy so when and if you get time.

1914: 3498:

Will the parties to the dispute be willing to listen to input from the wider Wikipedian community?

2505: 3982:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/237458/message/1144111446/Chad+Smith+Re-election+Supporters+Needed

3758:

when viewing discussion. If they feel that consensus has been reached, they will act accordingly.

3454: 3346: 3230: 2224:

claims that I am refusing to converse over this matter; my posts above are proof to the contrary.

1225: 932: 739: 685: 664: 390: 79:

remains a "hot topic", with evidence of corporate attempts to censor related Knowledge articles (

1463:

propaganda to keep its wheels turning? Its not conspiracy theories, its logic and common sense.

1155:

I'm not sure where to begin. It still seems to give advise or encourage use. Should you prod it?

300:. Legitimate, but possibly not notable enough. Still, I see no grounds for outright deletion. -- 3970:

is back and posted defamation in the article again. You may want to take a look at his edits.

3352: 3156: 2916: 2077: 1685: 1663: 404: 26: 3203: 1137: 210:

needs an update. People have lost perspective about what an encyclopedia is and is not. Being

3029:

I was looking through his contrib list, thinking he must be drunk, then it hit me April 1. --

2781: 2355: 1799: 1784: 1397: 1339: 951: 735: 375: 280: 3547:

No, I didn't see your comments on the email list yet, it's hard keeping up with everything.

650:

I dunno, they come to me like I'm a magnet or something. Say something then disappear. ?? --

3130: 2705: 2597: 2314: 2091: 1967: 1674: 1602: 1557: 1546: 1331: 1175: 923:

based on things you've edited in the past. Check it out -- I hope you find it useful. --

297: 2030:

Lots of potential for this little article like examples, causes, and general elaboration.

1858: 8: 3985: 3858: 3792: 3626: 3606: 3316: 3214: 2902: 2802: 2756: 2623: 2585: 2467: 2462:

Welcome to this new format of the Esperanza Newsletter, which came about during the last

2429: 2321: 2178: 2162: 2097: 2026:

These are the comments on the nomination, which may be helpful in improving the article:

1930: 1819: 1300: 1229: 1126: 1112: 1101: 1054: 898: 888: 877: 825:

Thank you for the welcome. It's nice to be considered a part of the Knowledge community.

3754:

has been deemed fine. All Advisory Council members and the Admin Gen are to endevour to

3441: 3172: 4000: 3896: 3843: 3776: 3772: 3750: 3683: 3640: 3602: 3337: 3250: 3037: 2944: 2747: 2733: 2681: 2644: 2482: 2463: 2443: 2413: 2376: 1884: 1730: 1387: 1186: 766: 226: 111: 59: 17: 3980:

FloNight: by way of background, you may find this thread from the "blog" informative:

3308:

I am sorry for adding nonsense to Knowledge. I will use the sandbox in future. Jamie.

2151:

article could use someone like you to help getting started in a positive direction :-)

3667:): any execution complaints should go to him. Content comments should be directed at 3375: 3206: 3153: 3003: 2923: 2773: 2763: 2725: 2556: 2549: 2524: 2174: 2083: 2064: 820: 730: 2849:

either. Yet in the 5 or so federal and state court cases where the religiosity and

1533:. I don't think you really meant to put it in the main space so in the interest of 423:

LOL. I'll just take it off my watchlist, pick up my Kafka, and hope it goes away. --

4037: 3872: 3732: 3555: 3445: 3437: 3401: 3295: 3267: 3202:

I'm sorry to bother you again, but I found a fantastically inappropriate redirect:

3138: 3059:

No harm done. But I wish they wouldn't do that. That could really start a fight. --

2697: 2570:

by the Advisory Council themselves, if others want to propose it, they will listen.

2536: 2288: 2283: 2274: 2254: 2235: 2221: 2203: 1811: 1715: 1635: 1405: 1375: 1335: 1241: 1018: 1010: 870: 2854:

plaintiff. Not exactly what one who goes to AA under the threat of penalty would

4029: 4023: 3704: 3266:. The final result was a successful request based on 111 support and 1 oppose. -- 3234: 3189: 2984: 2040: 1922: 1899: 1670: 1553: 924: 912: 834: 479: 3175: 3971: 3854: 2660: 1534: 1233: 1211: 1069: 1026: 96: 72: 68:

As you probably know, I have been forbidden to edit articles related to WebEx (

31: 3503:

with. Unfortunately it's split nearly down the middle. Regardless, while they

3205:

and don't know what to do. The linked article has no information on the play.

2845:

Agreed. And that is not something that someone would expect to happen with a

1624:

articles, so it will only get more precise. I also added some references for

919:

that helps new members contribute to Knowledge. You might like to edit these

4014: 4004: 3889: 3836: 3660: 3539: 3330: 3030: 2937: 2931: 2740: 2674: 2654: 2637: 2369: 2365: 2301: 2266: 2234:

indications of which aspects of the articles' content is being sourced. Now,

2213: 2008: 1983: 1800: 1723: 1655: 1608: 1594: 1574: 1510: 1495: 1474: 1464: 1383: 1376: 1367: 1179: 1014: 975: 971: 744: 554: 463: 219: 183: 104: 92: 83: 52: 48: 38: 1669:

You've done your best, but I think that they're just not going to listen. --

1303:. I'm not so sure the definition is so solid. Just if you are interested. -- 1199:

OK, I think I have read about that. Wow, lots of ways to play the system. --

966:

Got my bot suggestions just now. My problems are solved: from now on I edit

75:

according to the evidence that I have provided in response to your request.

3808: 3796: 3755: 3664: 3425:

indicates that links to any fansites etc. at all is controversial at least.

3422: 3418: 3385: 2713: 2706: 2691: 2601: 2589: 2541: 2338: 2329: 2060: 1906: 1807: 1538: 1484: 779: 618:

I have no idea whatsever what HMAS means. Your guess is as good as mine. --

396: 215: 2794:

article. I am going to address that on the talk page there. Basically -

34:

is clearly documented in WebEx's annual reports. See e.g. its 2003 report

4058: 4047: 3967: 3800: 3530: 3461: 3275: 2790:

Also, I saw where you removed three reference books/links I added to the

2593: 2322: 1940: 1891: 1874: 1837: 1719: 1691: 1170: 916: 211: 3488:

Are there other methods of dispute resolution that are more appropriate?

2243:, or at least certainly is not in its thousands of pop culture articles. 802:

This is what I've been saying all along. Yet it can still create POV. --

131:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Robert Baden-Powell's sexual orientation

2148: 2143: 1259: 3736:

is now ready for extensive discussion! Specific comments should go to

2007:, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is 3779:, to help us determine the membership's thoughts on the ideas there. 3421:

provides some material but not a definitive answer. The talk page at

3004: 1850:, so I'd assume that process should play out before removing either. 1748: 1702: 1443: 1420: 1216:

Hey FloNight/archive 2, how is it going? Thank you for supporting my

1066: 1047: 3050:

This is bullshit. I ought to... well maybe I'll just go play a game.

2696:

Thanks for your note. I've responded at the PAW talk page. Cheers, -

747:

an article when no one stops by). Ho hum. I'm calling it a night. --

363:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Abraham Lincoln's Sexual Orientation

3366: 3356: 2973: 1919: 553:

We will talk over top each other. So be dizzy or edit conflicts. --

409: 3775:

is terribly underused! Please leave any comments, good or bad, on

3292:

Um, how about people who have the moral sense that God gave sheep"

2368:

advises users against harming non-notable people. So, sorry no. --

2015:

You are receiving this message because your username is listed on

1312: 3381: 2173:

Flo when you have a spare moment would you walk down the hall to

1268: 1142: 157:

but this is an encyclopedia. It's supposed to be an overview. --

3181: 3019:

Some kind of April fools thing. These people are characters. --

967: 333: 3678: 3647:

at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.

3582: 3255: 2670: 2477: 2450:

at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.

2394: 2300:

I would appreciate any help you could provide as a mediator,

1644:

Can LIFTARN and WGEE please recpect the advice from FloNight.

1043: 100: 76: 3605:

aimed at giving more very deserving yet unappreciated users

3223: 2019:. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name! 3281: 2955: 2812: 2791: 1396:) is not new to Knowledge in general. For example, on the 1287: 1245: 1174:

puppetry on the community as a whole may be similar. (From

605:

Yea, all kinds of interesting crap goes on around here. --

1887:

page and/or to the applicable copyright tags themselves.

4013:

Thanks! I figured it had to be something like that. --

3740:, discussion of having one at all should be directed to 2527:

requires members to have 150 edits and 2 weeks editing.

2504:

Bans and Access level changes (apart from autovoice) in

2287:

is now rather inelegantly written. And, unsurprisingly,

178:

his foundation of Scouting. I could have sworn we were

1036: 2993:

Fresh action here. I thought we had been over this. --

1159:

Also: "Meatpuppet" is a new one for me. What is it? --

3999:

Hi FloNight, did you mean to reinsert "city hick" at

3173:

http://www.isns.us/directory/america-canada/index.htm

218:, doesn't automatically make something encyclopedic. 3303: 1806:

Thank you for your response. I tried speaking with

988:

Think Charmmy Kitty is AID material? Peer review? --

849:

I was tidying an archive page and found this --: -->

640:

Being a radio news guy is just a job. Prod? AfD? --

3514:If yes, do you think a content Rfc is appropriate? 2265:Finally, to my main point for your consideration, 3613:, but signing up is encouraged before this date: 1722:a question about a completely unrelated matter. 3477:What are you trying to accomplish with the RFAr? 1079:Sockpuppetry & Meatpuppetry proposed finding 353:already popped up as a redirect. What's next? -- 3388:. I didn't post it, awaiting your thoughts. If 3351:I notice that you're using fair use images on 2517:In the IRC channel, there is going to be only 2470:. Have an Esperanzial end of March, everyone! 861:Did you ask him to do that or want it done? -- 663:I think he means a accidental revert I did at 3719:. There will be three places up for grabs as 3176:http://www.isns.us/directory/europe/index.htm 1065: 2811:Flo, I wrote this enormous narrative at the 2142:As far as the long "lecture" I wrote on the 2123:contributions (and fix a few existing ones). 3554:eye-to-eye about everything, but that's OK. 811:Is Grahram Rix primarily known as a CSO? -- 532:involved again after a while. We'll see. -- 462:BTW, I was looking for some information on 433:User:DanielCD/Personal sandbox#Secret Spot 143:More fun here than Saturday Night Live. -- 3444:. I'm not sure what to think about that. 2959:United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians 2722:...Is there anywhere I can go for help? 1993: 1382:Thank-you for your speedy response. But 1093:identity. I have not seen you challenge 4046:. I appreciate the positive modeling. - 2544:and proposed to the Esperanza community. 852:. Just what is a "courtesy blanking"? -- 3871:Me too FloNight, don't worry about it. 2872:voices who have not reached the masses. 2568:not going to be proposed to be expanded 1718:or any of the editors. I wanted to ask 1224:, which means that I have been granted 296:Sillyness aside, toss this one a peek: 14: 3945:, but what about the Candyman raid? -- 3262:Thank you for your support vote on my 310:Thanks for helping me spiffy it up. -- 4003:? Are you sure it's a real term? -- 3943:Category:Child pornography crackdowns 3826:2004 Ukranian child pornography raids 1714:It has absolutely nothing to do with 782:is a child killer, but having her in 631:Today's ("possible") deletion nominee 332:Could you go to the AID and vote for 3392:want to post it in your words under 351:Michael Jackson's sexual orientation 2531:this is the case will be clarified. 346:Richard Simmons' sexual orientation 271:that's a good place to leave it. -- 23: 3254: 797:Instead it is a navigational tool. 468:Lewis Carroll's sexual orientation 374:More frustration. I can't believe 24: 4073: 3723:is leaving Knowledge. Please see 2553:idea is to be dropped officially. 2005:Science Collaboration of the Week 1220:! It passed with a final vote of 3890: 3837: 3280: 3222: 3218: 3186:Gnosticism and the New Testament 3031: 2675: 2638: 2370: 2302: 2267: 2214: 1937:WP:Not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored 1920:http://www.theandros.com/emoore/ 1848:Knowledge:Possibly unfree images 1724: 1537:moved it to your user space. --- 1531:User:FloNight/Intelligent_design 1398:Sweden Democrats discussion page 1267: 1180: 1035: 1031: 907:Looking for articles to work on? 220: 105: 53: 2497:Future meetings are to be held 1995: 1989: 1299:Now it's Sunday. Look at this: 3609:. It will officially start on 3575:Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2 2387:Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1 349:Can you imagine the horrors?? 51:, thank-you for the feedback. 13: 1: 3897: 3844: 3738:the Code of Conduct talk page 3578: 3166:neoplatonism & gnosticism 3038: 2682: 2645: 2390: 2377: 1731: 1675: 1583:Can you help me edit my work? 1558: 1442:prevent that from happening. 1187: 1064:Here's a userbox for you. -- 287:Enjoy it as much as I did. -- 227: 112: 60: 3791: 3742:the main Esperanza talk page 3290:which I feel like answering 3091:These people are characters. 2584: 2501:, not fortnightly as before. 2003:As a regular contributor to 1859:Kobe Bryant#Early NBA career 7: 2981:Neoplatonism and Gnosticism 2046:21:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2035:04:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC) 1527:FloNight/Intelligent_design 1520:FloNight/Intelligent_design 1352:Regarding Swedish Democrats 1321:But how do you become one! 1046:that thanks for supporting 420:from that. see ya later. 10: 4078: 3751:proposals for new programs 3725:the previously linked page 2949:22:04, 31 March 2006 (UTC) 2927:20:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC) 2906:07:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC) 2806:04:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC) 2777:19:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC) 2767:17:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC) 2752:13:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC) 2729:00:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC) 2701:22:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 2686:12:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 2664:07:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 2649:12:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 2627:23:47, 27 March 2006 (UTC) 2605:17:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC) 2381:16:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC) 2359:16:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC) 2342:22:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC) 2333:19:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC) 2207:05:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC) 2182:07:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC) 2166:20:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC) 2101:13:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC) 2087:11:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC) 2073:22:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1977:14:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1962:00:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1926:04:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1910:04:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1895:03:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC) 1878:06:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1841:01:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC) 1815:18:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC) 1795:16:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC) 1773:23:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1752:20:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1735:20:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1706:19:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1695:17:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1681:15:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1659:12:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1639:08:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC) 1612:23:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC) 1598:20:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC) 1578:19:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC) 1564:17:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC) 1542:07:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 1514:17:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC) 1499:15:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC) 1488:19:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 1478:14:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 1468:01:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 1447:00:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 1424:22:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC) 1371:22:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC) 1308:21:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC) 1295:20:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC) 1263:09:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC) 1237:05:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC) 1130:02:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC) 4062:17:05, 9 April 2006 (UTC) 4051:03:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC) 4033:03:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC) 4018:00:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC) 4008:21:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 4001:White trash#Similar terms 3989:23:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3975:19:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3950:15:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3923:15:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3901:14:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3876:01:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 3863:04:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC) 3848:03:58, 7 April 2006 (UTC) 3812:19:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3773:The propsed programs page 3766:A plea from the editor... 3569:19:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3559:18:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3534:04:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3465:03:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3449:08:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC) 3405:20:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC) 3370:10:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC) 3360:10:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC) 3342:19:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC) 3299:14:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC) 3271:20:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC) 3240:19:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC) 3210:18:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC) 3193:04:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC) 3160:08:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC) 3113:15:23, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 3064:02:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 3042:02:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 3024:02:11, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 3015:02:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 2998:01:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 2988:01:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 2967:01:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC) 2348:Lumpkin (sexual activity) 2328:See reply, my talk page. 1204:21:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1191:21:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1164:21:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1150:21:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1116:19:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1105:17:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1074:04:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1022:00:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC) 1017:. He must know somebody. 1004:20:18, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 993:14:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 983:14:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 961:14:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 947:04:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 928:22:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 921:articles I picked for you 902:14:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC) 892:23:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 881:22:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 866:15:28, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 857:15:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 845:14:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 830:18:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 816:17:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC) 807:16:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC) 791:14:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC) 775:13:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC) 762:02:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC) 752:02:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 719:02:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 703:02:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 672:02:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 655:01:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 645:01:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 623:01:07, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 610:17:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 600:16:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 571:16:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 558:16:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 547:16:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 537:16:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 527:16:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 514:16:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 504:16:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 495:16:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 475:02:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 458:02:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC) 441:22:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 428:22:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 400:22:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 383:15:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 370:14:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 358:14:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 341:14:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 327:16:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 315:16:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 305:15:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 292:15:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 276:14:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 257:00:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC) 231:22:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 191:22:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 162:21:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 148:17:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 138:16:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 126:Nothing more need be said 116:15:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 87:05:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC) 64:13:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 42:05:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 3941:Ok, I see some stuff at 2566:The Advisory Council is 2563:in future, not voted on. 2464:Advisory Council meeting 3442:this message from Jimbo 2195:Masters of the Universe 2188:Masters of the Universe 1996:File:Chemistry-stub.png 1747:OK, if you insist. --- 1042:This user thinks it is 740:Psychological addiction 686:User talk:ILovePlankton 665:User talk:ILovePlankton 180:not supposed to do that 3749:process for accepting 3669:the Esperanza talkpage 3353:User:FloNight/DanielCD 3259: 2508:are to be reported at 2117: 1053:came in the form of a 911:Hello, FloNight. I'm 784:Category:Child killers 3962:Chad Smith and Johnc1 3258: 2801:Anyhow, thanks again 2622:Looks much better :) 2113: 1218:Request for adminship 736:Pornography addiction 583:Yea really. See this: 376:John Seigenthaler Sr. 2456:Note from the editor 2017:our list of regulars 1404:Have you viewed the 1176:Internet sock puppet 298:Hazy Moon Zen Center 3711:. Voting starts on 3684:The last AC meeting 2618:David Boyd (artist) 2557:Charter ammendments 2540:will be drafted by 2483:The last AC meeting 1631:Cindy Leanne Howell 1327:Thank You, Anthony 1301:Revisionist Western 1278:Hey, it's Saturday! 1009:You get to work on 3700:The next elections 3260: 1626:Bridget Mary Nolan 1618:Sarah Jayne Vercoe 1013:and DanielCd gets 767:Pagans In Recovery 18:User talk:FloNight 3822: 3821: 3818: 3817: 3727:for full details. 3675: 3674: 3340: 3245: 3244: 3147: 3133:comment added by 3121:The Da Vinci Game 2947: 2750: 2615: 2614: 2611: 2610: 2519:one bot at a time 2474: 2473: 2175:Rational Recovery 2024: 2023: 2020: 1986:finally makes it! 1955: 1949: 1943: 1504:WGee again delets 1348: 1334:comment added by 1275: 1274: 1061: 1060: 4069: 3898: 3894: 3845: 3841: 3831:Hello Thebainer 3679: 3598:Barnstar Brigade 3588:Barnstar Brigade 3583: 3579: 3438:User:Steve block 3365:Spooky! Thanks, 3336: 3284: 3237: 3226: 3219: 3198:Deathtrap (play) 3146: 3127: 3039: 3035: 2943: 2746: 2683: 2679: 2646: 2642: 2478: 2395: 2391: 2378: 2374: 2356:Bubby the Tour G 2306: 2271: 2218: 2014: 1999: 1997: 1990: 1953: 1947: 1941: 1915:Who is Dr Moore? 1732: 1728: 1716:Sweden Democrats 1677: 1560: 1406:Sweden Democrats 1347: 1328: 1271: 1246: 1188: 1184: 1072: 1039: 1032: 1011:Ejaculatory duct 228: 224: 208:Knowledge is not 187: 113: 109: 61: 57: 4077: 4076: 4072: 4071: 4070: 4068: 4067: 4066: 4040: 4026: 3997: 3964: 3829: 3814: 3805:KnowledgeOfSelf 3786: 3767: 3733:Code of Conduct 3721:KnowledgeOfSelf 3705:Approval voting 3691: 3654: 3629: 3590: 3577: 3542: 3457: 3455:Re: Paulus RFAr 3378: 3349: 3347:Fair use images 3327: 3306: 3278: 3253: 3235: 3217: 3200: 3168: 3128: 3123: 3008: 2978: 2934: 2919: 2784: 2759: 2736: 2710: 2694: 2657: 2620: 2607: 2598:KnowledgeOfSelf 2579: 2537:Code of Conduct 2506:the IRC channel 2490: 2457: 2432: 2402: 2389: 2351: 2326: 2315:EmperorSkeletor 2191: 2094: 2080: 2052:In other news: 1988: 1970: 1964: 1958: 1952: 1946: 1933: 1917: 1902: 1822: 1804: 1787: 1688: 1666: 1646: 1621: 1605: 1585: 1549: 1523: 1506: 1380: 1354: 1329: 1315: 1284:well-referenced 1280: 1244: 1214: 1140: 1081: 1062: 1029: 954: 938:Thanks FloNight 935: 933:Thanks FloNight 909: 873: 837: 823: 733: 636:Stephen Colduck 633: 484: 407: 393: 391:Welcome message 283: 216:reliable source 185: 128: 29: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4075: 4065: 4064: 4039: 4036: 4025: 4022: 4021: 4020: 3996: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3986:talks_to_birds 3963: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3952: 3932: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3881: 3880: 3879: 3878: 3866: 3865: 3828: 3823: 3820: 3819: 3816: 3815: 3793:Celestianpower 3788: 3787: 3784: 3781: 3780: 3769: 3768: 3765: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3745: 3728: 3693: 3692: 3682: 3676: 3673: 3672: 3656: 3655: 3652: 3649: 3648: 3631: 3630: 3625: 3622: 3621: 3620: 3619: 3592: 3591: 3586: 3576: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3541: 3538: 3537: 3536: 3527: 3521: 3520: 3516: 3510: 3509: 3500: 3494: 3493: 3490: 3484: 3483: 3479: 3473: 3472: 3456: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3433: 3408: 3377: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3348: 3345: 3326: 3310: 3305: 3302: 3277: 3274: 3252: 3249: 3247: 3243: 3242: 3227: 3216: 3213: 3199: 3196: 3167: 3164: 3163: 3162: 3157:(spill yours?) 3122: 3116: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3045: 3044: 3007: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2977: 2976:is at it again 2971: 2970: 2969: 2933: 2930: 2918: 2915: 2913: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2903:Mr Christopher 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2810: 2803:Mr Christopher 2783: 2780: 2758: 2755: 2735: 2732: 2709: 2704: 2693: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2656: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2624:agapetos_angel 2619: 2616: 2613: 2612: 2609: 2608: 2586:Celestianpower 2581: 2580: 2577: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2564: 2554: 2545: 2532: 2522: 2515: 2502: 2492: 2491: 2481: 2475: 2472: 2471: 2468:Celestianpower 2459: 2458: 2455: 2452: 2451: 2434: 2433: 2428: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2404: 2403: 2398: 2388: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2350: 2345: 2325: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2310: 2309: 2297: 2296: 2262: 2261: 2250: 2249: 2245: 2244: 2226: 2225: 2190: 2185: 2179:Mr Christopher 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2163:Mr Christopher 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2098:Mr Christopher 2093: 2090: 2079: 2078:Age of consent 2076: 2058: 2057: 2051: 2049: 2048: 2037: 2022: 2021: 2013: 2000: 1987: 1980: 1969: 1966: 1960: 1956: 1950: 1944: 1932: 1929: 1916: 1913: 1901: 1898: 1821: 1818: 1803: 1798: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1759: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1709: 1708: 1687: 1684: 1665: 1662: 1645: 1642: 1620: 1615: 1604: 1601: 1584: 1581: 1548: 1545: 1522: 1517: 1505: 1502: 1491: 1490: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1379: 1374: 1353: 1350: 1314: 1311: 1282:Now here is a 1279: 1276: 1273: 1272: 1265: 1243: 1240: 1213: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1194: 1193: 1157: 1156: 1139: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1127:agapetos_angel 1119: 1118: 1113:agapetos_angel 1102:agapetos_angel 1080: 1077: 1059: 1058: 1051:successful RFA 1040: 1030: 1028: 1025: 1007: 1006: 986: 985: 974:. (especially 953: 950: 934: 931: 908: 905: 899:Razzendahcuben 895: 894: 889:Razzendahcuben 878:Razzendahcuben 872: 869: 836: 833: 822: 819: 800: 799: 732: 729: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 677: 676: 675: 674: 658: 657: 632: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 613: 612: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 576: 575: 574: 573: 561: 560: 550: 549: 483: 478: 406: 405:Slap me, quick 403: 392: 389: 387: 330: 329: 318: 317: 282: 279: 268: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 262: 261: 260: 259: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 235: 234: 233: 198: 197: 196: 195: 194: 193: 167: 166: 165: 164: 151: 150: 127: 124: 123: 122: 121: 120: 119: 118: 97:round-tripping 73:round-tripping 32:Round-tripping 28: 27:Round-tripping 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4074: 4063: 4060: 4055: 4054: 4053: 4052: 4049: 4045: 4035: 4034: 4031: 4019: 4016: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4006: 4002: 3990: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3973: 3969: 3966:Hi KateFan0, 3951: 3948: 3944: 3940: 3939: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3924: 3921: 3916: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3902: 3899: 3895: 3893: 3887: 3886: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3882: 3877: 3874: 3870: 3869: 3868: 3867: 3864: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3849: 3846: 3842: 3840: 3834: 3827: 3813: 3810: 3806: 3802: 3798: 3794: 3790: 3789: 3783: 3782: 3778: 3774: 3771: 3770: 3764: 3763: 3757: 3753: 3752: 3746: 3743: 3739: 3735: 3734: 3729: 3726: 3722: 3718: 3714: 3710: 3706: 3702: 3701: 3697: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3689: 3685: 3681: 3680: 3677: 3670: 3666: 3662: 3658: 3657: 3651: 3650: 3646: 3645:Stressbusters 3642: 3639: 3638: 3637:Stress alerts 3633: 3632: 3628: 3627:Stress Alerts 3624: 3623: 3618: 3615: 3614: 3612: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3599: 3594: 3593: 3589: 3585: 3584: 3581: 3580: 3570: 3567: 3563: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3557: 3551: 3548: 3545: 3535: 3532: 3528: 3526: 3523: 3522: 3517: 3515: 3512: 3511: 3506: 3501: 3499: 3496: 3495: 3491: 3489: 3486: 3485: 3480: 3478: 3475: 3474: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3463: 3450: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3434: 3432: 3431: 3427: 3426: 3424: 3420: 3413: 3412: 3407: 3406: 3403: 3399: 3395: 3391: 3387: 3383: 3371: 3368: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3358: 3354: 3344: 3343: 3339: 3334: 3333: 3324: 3321: 3318: 3314: 3309: 3301: 3300: 3297: 3293: 3288: 3283: 3273: 3272: 3269: 3265: 3257: 3248: 3241: 3238: 3232: 3231:administrator 3228: 3225: 3221: 3220: 3212: 3211: 3208: 3204: 3195: 3194: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3178: 3177: 3174: 3161: 3158: 3155: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3120: 3115: 3114: 3111: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3084: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3065: 3062: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3043: 3040: 3036: 3034: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3022: 3017: 3016: 3013: 3006: 2999: 2996: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2989: 2986: 2982: 2975: 2968: 2965: 2964:67.169.249.44 2960: 2956: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2946: 2941: 2940: 2929: 2928: 2925: 2914: 2907: 2904: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2871: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2857: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2836: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2817: 2814: 2808: 2807: 2804: 2799: 2797: 2793: 2788: 2782:Mr C part two 2779: 2778: 2775: 2769: 2768: 2765: 2754: 2753: 2749: 2744: 2743: 2731: 2730: 2727: 2723: 2720: 2717: 2715: 2708: 2703: 2702: 2699: 2687: 2684: 2680: 2678: 2672: 2669:Did I call a 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2662: 2650: 2647: 2643: 2641: 2635: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2625: 2606: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2587: 2583: 2582: 2576: 2575: 2569: 2565: 2562: 2558: 2555: 2552: 2551: 2546: 2543: 2539: 2538: 2533: 2530: 2526: 2523: 2520: 2516: 2513: 2512: 2507: 2503: 2500: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2488: 2484: 2480: 2479: 2476: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2460: 2454: 2453: 2449: 2448:Stressbusters 2445: 2442: 2441: 2440:Stress alerts 2436: 2435: 2431: 2430:Stress Alerts 2427: 2426: 2421: 2418: 2417: 2415: 2411: 2410: 2406: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2396: 2393: 2392: 2382: 2379: 2375: 2373: 2367: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2357: 2349: 2344: 2343: 2340: 2335: 2334: 2331: 2324: 2316: 2312: 2311: 2307: 2305: 2299: 2298: 2293: 2290: 2285: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2270: 2264: 2263: 2259: 2256: 2252: 2251: 2247: 2246: 2242: 2237: 2232: 2231:predominantly 2228: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2217: 2212:Hello there, 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2205: 2200: 2196: 2189: 2184: 2183: 2180: 2176: 2167: 2164: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2150: 2145: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2121: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2116: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2099: 2089: 2088: 2085: 2075: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2047: 2044: 2043: 2038: 2036: 2033: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2018: 2012: 2010: 2009:Chronospecies 2006: 2001: 1998: 1992: 1991: 1985: 1984:Chronospecies 1979: 1978: 1975: 1965: 1963: 1959: 1938: 1928: 1927: 1924: 1921: 1912: 1911: 1908: 1897: 1896: 1893: 1888: 1886: 1880: 1879: 1876: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1860: 1855: 1851: 1849: 1843: 1842: 1839: 1834: 1831: 1828: 1817: 1816: 1813: 1809: 1802: 1801:Katelyn Faber 1797: 1796: 1793: 1785:Tabloid image 1774: 1771: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1753: 1750: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1736: 1733: 1729: 1727: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1707: 1704: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1693: 1683: 1682: 1678: 1672: 1661: 1660: 1657: 1652: 1649: 1641: 1640: 1637: 1632: 1627: 1619: 1614: 1613: 1610: 1600: 1599: 1596: 1591: 1588: 1580: 1579: 1576: 1570: 1566: 1565: 1561: 1555: 1544: 1543: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1521: 1516: 1515: 1512: 1501: 1500: 1497: 1489: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1476: 1470: 1469: 1466: 1460: 1456: 1448: 1445: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1410: 1407: 1402: 1399: 1395: 1392: 1389: 1385: 1378: 1373: 1372: 1369: 1364: 1360: 1357: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1325: 1322: 1319: 1310: 1309: 1306: 1302: 1297: 1296: 1293: 1289: 1285: 1270: 1266: 1264: 1261: 1258: 1257: 1252: 1248: 1247: 1239: 1238: 1235: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1205: 1202: 1198: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1192: 1189: 1185: 1183: 1177: 1172: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1162: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1148: 1144: 1131: 1128: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1117: 1114: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1103: 1098: 1097: 1091: 1087: 1076: 1075: 1071: 1068: 1056: 1052: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1038: 1034: 1033: 1024: 1023: 1020: 1016: 1015:Charmmy Kitty 1012: 1005: 1002: 997: 996: 995: 994: 991: 984: 981: 977: 976:Charmmy Kitty 973: 972:Charmmy Kitty 969: 965: 964: 963: 962: 959: 952:Charmmy Kitty 949: 948: 945: 940: 939: 930: 929: 926: 922: 918: 917:Knowledge bot 914: 904: 903: 900: 893: 890: 885: 884: 883: 882: 879: 868: 867: 864: 859: 858: 855: 851: 847: 846: 843: 832: 831: 828: 818: 817: 814: 809: 808: 805: 798: 795: 794: 793: 792: 789: 785: 781: 777: 776: 773: 768: 764: 763: 760: 754: 753: 750: 746: 741: 737: 720: 717: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 705: 704: 701: 690: 687: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 673: 670: 666: 662: 661: 660: 659: 656: 653: 649: 648: 647: 646: 643: 638: 637: 624: 621: 617: 616: 615: 614: 611: 608: 604: 603: 602: 601: 598: 593: 592: 582: 581: 580: 579: 578: 577: 572: 569: 565: 564: 563: 562: 559: 556: 552: 551: 548: 545: 541: 540: 539: 538: 535: 529: 528: 525: 521: 516: 515: 512: 506: 505: 502: 497: 496: 493: 488: 482: 477: 476: 473: 469: 465: 464:Lewis Carroll 460: 459: 456: 452: 447: 443: 442: 439: 434: 430: 429: 426: 421: 419: 413: 411: 402: 401: 398: 388: 385: 384: 381: 377: 372: 371: 368: 364: 360: 359: 356: 352: 347: 343: 342: 339: 335: 328: 325: 320: 319: 316: 313: 309: 308: 307: 306: 303: 299: 294: 293: 290: 286: 281:Morning funny 278: 277: 274: 258: 255: 250: 249: 248: 247: 246: 245: 244: 243: 242: 241: 232: 229: 225: 223: 217: 213: 209: 206: 205: 204: 203: 202: 201: 200: 199: 192: 189: 181: 177: 173: 172: 171: 170: 169: 168: 163: 160: 155: 154: 153: 152: 149: 146: 142: 141: 140: 139: 136: 132: 117: 114: 110: 108: 102: 98: 94: 91: 90: 88: 85: 81: 78: 74: 70: 67: 66: 65: 62: 58: 56: 50: 47: 46: 45: 43: 40: 36: 33: 19: 4041: 4027: 3998: 3995:"city hick"? 3965: 3891: 3838: 3832: 3830: 3748: 3747:The current 3730: 3715:and ends on 3698: 3636: 3635: 3616: 3597: 3596: 3552: 3549: 3546: 3543: 3524: 3513: 3504: 3497: 3487: 3476: 3458: 3429: 3428: 3415: 3414: 3410: 3409: 3397: 3393: 3389: 3386:talk:Lolicon 3379: 3350: 3331: 3328: 3319: 3307: 3291: 3286: 3279: 3261: 3246: 3207:Adam Cuerden 3201: 3179: 3169: 3154:Mindspillage 3124: 3107: 3098: 3090: 3032: 3018: 3009: 2979: 2957:] is run by 2954:The site at 2938: 2935: 2924:Adam Cuerden 2920: 2917:W.S. Gilbert 2912: 2869: 2855: 2850: 2846: 2834: 2818: 2809: 2800: 2795: 2789: 2785: 2774:Pro123tester 2770: 2764:Pro123tester 2760: 2741: 2737: 2726:Adam Cuerden 2724: 2721: 2718: 2714:W.S. Gilbert 2711: 2707:W.S. Gilbert 2695: 2676: 2658: 2639: 2633: 2621: 2567: 2560: 2548: 2535: 2528: 2518: 2509: 2498: 2439: 2438: 2419: 2408: 2407: 2371: 2352: 2336: 2327: 2303: 2291: 2278: 2268: 2257: 2240: 2230: 2215: 2192: 2172: 2114: 2095: 2092:POV and MR C 2084:Monotonehell 2081: 2059: 2050: 2041: 2025: 2002: 1971: 1968:C. Sexuality 1934: 1918: 1903: 1889: 1881: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1856: 1852: 1844: 1835: 1832: 1826: 1823: 1805: 1788: 1725: 1689: 1686:Your message 1667: 1664:Your message 1653: 1650: 1647: 1622: 1606: 1603:WGee reverts 1592: 1589: 1586: 1571: 1567: 1550: 1547:Your message 1525:Hi! I moved 1524: 1507: 1492: 1471: 1461: 1457: 1453: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1403: 1390: 1381: 1365: 1361: 1358: 1355: 1326: 1323: 1320: 1316: 1313:Hall Monitor 1298: 1283: 1281: 1255: 1254: 1221: 1215: 1181: 1158: 1141: 1095: 1094: 1089: 1085: 1082: 1063: 1008: 987: 955: 941: 937: 936: 910: 896: 874: 860: 848: 838: 824: 810: 801: 796: 780:Andrea Yates 778: 765: 755: 734: 697: 639: 634: 594: 590: 530: 520:Talk:Inf3rn0 517: 507: 498: 485: 461: 450: 448: 444: 431: 422: 414: 408: 394: 386: 373: 361: 344: 331: 295: 284: 269: 221: 175: 129: 106: 54: 30: 3968:User:Johnc1 3873:Herostratus 3653:Information 3556:Herostratus 3446:Herostratus 3402:Herostratus 3296:Herostratus 3268:CBDunkerson 3129:—Preceding 3119:User:Aminto 2819:Here goes: 2698:Will Beback 2525:The charter 2511:the new log 2323:Ron Karenga 2289:Nightscream 2284:Nightscream 2275:Nightscream 2255:Nightscream 2236:Nightscream 2222:Nightscream 2204:Nightscream 1931:Your revert 1885:WP:Fair use 1820:Kobe Bryant 1812:Nightscream 1636:SilverWings 1336:Anthony cfc 1330:—Preceding 1230:let me know 1171:Meat puppet 1138:Today's fun 1019:Herostratus 522:. Hyuck. -- 99:article or 4030:LoveMonkey 3888:Thanks. -- 3717:2006-04-30 3713:2006-04-23 3671:. Thanks! 3611:2006-04-09 3251:RFA Thanks 3236:Gryffindor 3190:LoveMonkey 2985:LoveMonkey 2734:No problem 2559:are to be 2550:NPA reform 2279:mentioning 2149:alcoholism 2144:alcoholism 1923:LoveMonkey 1676:Μελ Ετητης 1671:Mel Etitis 1559:Μελ Ετητης 1554:Mel Etitis 1090:definition 925:SuggestBot 913:SuggestBot 827:Roddelcid7 365:- Sigh! -- 212:verifiable 3972:Sint Holo 3785:Signed... 3709:this page 3607:barnstars 3601:is a new 3519:happened. 3376:re: links 3313:Dicksdick 3215:Thank you 3005:User:Cyde 2757:Thank you 2661:MulgaBill 2578:Signed... 2561:discussed 2409:Reach out 2400:Reach out 2199:Talk page 1873:Thanks! 1593:Regards, 1366:Regards, 1290:. Wow. -- 1286:article: 1234:Deckiller 1226:adminship 821:Thank you 731:Moving on 188:you know? 184:Just zis 89:henryuzi 44:henryuzi 3947:DanielCD 3920:DanielCD 3892:FloNight 3839:FloNight 3777:the page 3688:full log 3663:(run by 3661:MiszaBot 3566:DanielCD 3436:Update: 3332:Katefan0 3323:contribs 3143:contribs 3131:unsigned 3110:DanielCD 3099:March 31 3095:DanielCD 3061:DanielCD 3033:FloNight 3021:DanielCD 3012:DanielCD 2995:DanielCD 2974:Goethean 2939:Katefan0 2870:minority 2851:mandated 2847:religion 2742:Katefan0 2677:FloNight 2673:a bear? 2640:FloNight 2487:full log 2372:FloNight 2313:Thanks, 2304:FloNight 2282:placate 2269:FloNight 2216:FloNight 2069:contribs 2042:James S. 1974:DanielCD 1792:DanielCD 1770:DanielCD 1726:FloNight 1656:SweHomer 1609:SweHomer 1595:SweHomer 1575:SweHomer 1511:SweHomer 1496:SweHomer 1475:SweHomer 1465:SweHomer 1394:contribs 1384:SweHomer 1377:SweHomer 1368:SweHomer 1344:contribs 1332:unsigned 1305:DanielCD 1292:DanielCD 1201:DanielCD 1182:FloNight 1161:DanielCD 1147:DanielCD 1086:admitted 1001:DanielCD 990:DanielCD 980:DanielCD 958:DanielCD 944:Gibb0080 871:question 863:DanielCD 854:DanielCD 842:DanielCD 813:DanielCD 804:DanielCD 788:DanielCD 772:DanielCD 759:DanielCD 749:DanielCD 716:DanielCD 700:DanielCD 669:DanielCD 652:DanielCD 642:DanielCD 620:DanielCD 607:DanielCD 597:DanielCD 568:DanielCD 555:FloNight 544:DanielCD 534:DanielCD 524:DanielCD 511:DanielCD 501:DanielCD 492:DanielCD 472:DanielCD 455:DanielCD 438:DanielCD 425:DanielCD 410:Junk DNA 380:DanielCD 367:DanielCD 355:DanielCD 338:DanielCD 324:DanielCD 312:DanielCD 302:DanielCD 289:DanielCD 273:DanielCD 254:DanielCD 222:FloNight 159:DanielCD 145:DanielCD 135:DanielCD 107:FloNight 93:Henryuzi 84:Henryuzi 55:FloNight 49:Henryuzi 39:Henryuzi 4024:n&g 3809:FireFox 3797:JoanneB 3756:be bold 3665:Misza13 3641:program 3603:program 3382:Lolicon 2602:FireFox 2590:JoanneB 2542:JoanneB 2499:monthly 2444:program 2414:program 2339:Merecat 2337:Again. 2330:Merecat 2061:Samsara 1982:SCOTW: 1907:Tufflaw 1900:Thanks! 1808:Tufflaw 1539:J.Smith 1535:WP:BOLD 1485:Liftarn 1432:attack. 1143:Shottie 1055:userbox 835:March 7 769:--: --> 688:. WTF? 489:--: --> 487:Inf3rn0 481:Inf3rn0 435:--: --> 348:--: --> 214:from a 4059:Jmh123 4048:Jmh123 4038:thanks 3855:bainer 3801:Titoxd 3531:mixvio 3462:mixvio 3182:Noetic 3135:Aminto 2856:expect 2594:Titoxd 2534:A new 2366:WP:BLP 2295:rules. 1892:Mwelch 1875:Mwelch 1838:Mwelch 1720:Durova 1692:Durova 1251:my RfA 1242:my RfA 1222:73/1/1 1212:My RfA 1048:Cyde's 1044:ironic 1027:Thanks 968:Batman 334:Mussel 4015:Allen 4005:Allen 3540:email 3505:claim 3423:WP:EL 3419:WP:EL 3304:Sorry 3077:deal. 2932:Smith 2671:Koala 2655:Koala 2412:is a 2292:still 2258:truly 1260:Meegs 101:WebEx 77:WebEx 16:< 3859:talk 3807:and 3731:The 3634:The 3595:The 3394:your 3338:poll 3317:talk 3139:talk 2945:poll 2813:cult 2798::-) 2796:why? 2792:cult 2748:poll 2692:Rind 2634:done 2600:and 2547:The 2437:The 2065:talk 2032:Neum 1827:lazy 1749:WGee 1703:WGee 1587:Hi, 1444:WGee 1421:WGee 1388:talk 1356:Hi, 1340:talk 1288:Zein 1232:! — 1070:Weys 1067:Cyde 978:) -- 970:and 915:, a 738:and 518:See 418:PTSD 3984:-- 3833:: ) 3390:you 3367:CLW 3357:CLW 3287:not 3276:OMG 3264:RFA 2529:Why 2241:not 1701:--- 1529:to 1494:it. 1178:). 1096:any 745:own 397:drf 186:Guy 176:and 3918:-- 3861:) 3803:, 3799:, 3795:, 3703:: 3398:is 3145:) 3141:• 3108:-- 3097:, 3093:-- 2636:. 2596:, 2592:, 2588:, 2071:) 2067:• 1790:-- 1679:) 1562:) 1552:-- 1346:) 1342:• 1169:A 1057:. 840:-- 757:-- 698:-- 509:-- 453:-- 451::P 322:-- 182:. 133:-- 4057:- 3857:( 3744:. 3690:) 3686:( 3335:/ 3325:) 3320:· 3315:( 3137:( 2942:/ 2745:/ 2521:. 2514:. 2489:) 2485:( 2317:. 2308:. 2063:( 2011:. 1957:o 1954:g 1951:e 1948:f 1945:i 1942:T 1673:( 1556:( 1391:· 1386:( 1338:( 1256:×

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index