Talk:Recovered Memory - Revision history

Renegade: /* Two Cents */

2008-04-02T21:30:39Z

Two Cents

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 2 April 2008
Line 232:		Line 232:
	::Generic phrasing in an attempt to discredit. Which mistakes?		::Generic phrasing in an attempt to discredit. Which mistakes?
	:::keep reading		:::keep reading
			::::Nice try, but the rest of your post talks about what an evil, evil person I am, with no relation or reference to this part of your post. So, are you going to at least try to prove your ridiculous allegations, or just admit that that was a bad attempt to talk me down?

	:{{quote\|platy\|the difference is, i have fessed up to them when i have been called out.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|the difference is, i have fessed up to them when i have been called out.}}
	::Unsourced.		::Unsourced.
	:::*i'll source myself.		:::*i'll source myself.
			::::Fine - then do so. Links?

	:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}
	::I have threatened to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.		::I have threatened to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.
	:::*i could claim the same against you, that you are spamming the edit page by reverting MY edits. why are you edits more valuable than mine. further, what administrative rights do you have to threaten users with administrative action?		:::*i could claim the same against you, that you are spamming the edit page by reverting MY edits. why are you edits more valuable than mine. further, what administrative rights do you have to threaten users with administrative action?
			::::No, you couldn't. You changed, I disputed your change. That is not spam, that is normal procedure. Had you gone to discussion immediately, everything would've been fine. Hell, I even showed the courtesy to ignore the fact that you ignored procedure and edit-war'd your revision back in, reverted, and initiated a discussion myself. Instead of going with the discussion and waiting for the outcome, you tried to force your revision in ''again''.
			::::This is not about ''my'' revision being more "valuable" than yours. This is about ''any'' original revision being the basis on which changes are discussed. That has nothing to do with whose revision the original is.

			::::And, once more, you are lying ''and'' you try to paint an evil picture of me by implying I randomly threaten users with "administrative action". How about you skip the propaganda part and actually source your allegations? Link us. Show us these "users" which I allegedly threaten with "administrative action".

	::The fact that I threatened to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for threatening to ban you.		::The fact that I threatened to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for threatening to ban you.
	:::*it is an act of aggression. you might as well flag my talk page with ''stfu''		:::*it is an act of aggression. you might as well flag my talk page with ''stfu''
			::::You're trying to evade the point - again. The fact that I threatened to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for threatening to ban you. (All of that still ignoring that you are lying.)

	::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.		::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.

	::In addition, I find it rather hilarious that you are trying to discredit me, while both [[User talk:Platypusrex256\|your talk page]] as well as [[Talk:Mexican Mating Machine]] show quite clearly that this is not the first time you're trying to pull this exact thing, and that you're ''constantly'' clashing with the administration over these matters.		::In addition, I find it rather hilarious that you are trying to discredit me, while both [[User talk:Platypusrex256\|your talk page]] as well as [[Talk:Mexican Mating Machine]] show quite clearly that this is not the first time you're trying to pull this exact thing, and that you're ''constantly'' clashing with the administration over these matters.
	:::*i am not constantly clashing with anybody but you.		:::*i am not constantly clashing with anybody but you.
			::::You are not constantly engaging in ''long discussions'' with anybody but me - mostly because you previously clashed mostly with administrators.

	:{{quote\|platy\|i ask only that credit is given to my sound logic and clear writing and also that the community observes renegade's never ending quest to pwn me with analogies, red herrings and personal attacks.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i ask only that credit is given to my sound logic and clear writing and also that the community observes renegade's never ending quest to pwn me with analogies, red herrings and personal attacks.}}
	:Invalid. Lacks proof my analogies are not relevant, lacks proof of red herrings and fails to show any "personal attacks".		:Invalid. Lacks proof my analogies are not relevant, lacks proof of red herrings and fails to show any "personal attacks".
	::*analogies have no place in arguments. when i argue against the ''it has been noted'' phrase, dodge the issue. and you told me that i have no grasp on the english language. what proof do i need?		::*analogies have no place in arguments. when i argue against the ''it has been noted'' phrase, dodge the issue. and you told me that i have no grasp on the english language. what proof do i need?
			:::Proof that ridiculous claims like "analogies have no place in arguments" are true in any way, shape or form.

	:{{quote\|platy\|i am not proud of our pissing contest, but i cannot step down when i feel that i am right.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i am not proud of our pissing contest, but i cannot step down when i feel that i am right.}}
	:And that justifies an editing war instead of following common procedure and courtesy?		:And that justifies an editing war instead of following common procedure and courtesy?
	::so let me get it strait... if there is any confusion about your phrasing, it should remain at your phrasing until you admit that you are wrong. which is never? who decides in the end?		::so let me get it strait... if there is any confusion about your phrasing, it should remain at your phrasing until you admit that you are wrong. which is never? who decides in the end?
			:::No. It should remain the original phrasing until ''the majority'' decides it should be changed. If it was as obvious as you pretend it is, this discussion would never have happened.
			:::Instead, you're the only one advocating your phrasing, while only minor alterations of my phrasing have been proposed. Funny, isn't it?

	:{{quote\|platy\|i have outlined how renegade's writing could be stronger and more direct and he returns with a fractured ego.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i have outlined how renegade's writing could be stronger and more direct and he returns with a fractured ego.}}
	:Untrue and unsourced. In fact, I have shown up multiple times how your writing is lacking in style, as well as how my notes are more accurate.		:Untrue and unsourced. In fact, I have shown up multiple times how your writing is lacking in style, as well as how my notes are more accurate.
	::look above. look below. you display your ego every time you place an editorial adverb in front of your verbs that describe my actions.		::look above. look below. you display your ego every time you place an editorial adverb in front of your verbs that describe my actions.
			:::Then it should be easy to take any given sentence and show that. So why are you still refusing to show proof?


Line 263:		Line 277:
	:Pathetic attempt to get your will without having to actually prove your notes are the better choice.		:Pathetic attempt to get your will without having to actually prove your notes are the better choice.
	::i would never attach such an adverb to your actions. you've called me pathetic and feeble and stupid before and you keep crying ''untrue and unsourced!''		::i would never attach such an adverb to your actions. you've called me pathetic and feeble and stupid before and you keep crying ''untrue and unsourced!''
			:::Well, if you actually sourced your allegations for a change, I'd have no reason to note the lack of source and proof.

	:In addition, learn to use the preview button. Not only are you spamming recent changes and generated dozens of useless revisions, but not knowing when you're done, or being conflicted by the next sentence of your reply is also extremely annoying for anyone else using a page.		:In addition, learn to use the preview button. Not only are you spamming recent changes and generated dozens of useless revisions, but not knowing when you're done, or being conflicted by the next sentence of your reply is also extremely annoying for anyone else using a page.
Line 268:		Line 283:

	it is a personal attack when you editorialize your verbs with colorful adverbs such as pathetic and feeble and stupid. it not a personal attack but a fact (i should hope it is a fact) that you should know better. i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you might have the education and discipline to formulate a decent argument but you give me no reason to believe.		it is a personal attack when you editorialize your verbs with colorful adverbs such as pathetic and feeble and stupid. it not a personal attack but a fact (i should hope it is a fact) that you should know better. i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you might have the education and discipline to formulate a decent argument but you give me no reason to believe.

			:That attempt to get Zoey to decide arbitrarily instead of reading the discussion ''was'' pathetic. There simply exists no other word to describe it. You keep going reply after reply with unsourced allegations and ridiculous claims, your sole arguments seem to be that you (allegedly) studied rhetoric, and thus, you're automatically right, and that I'm a bad, bad man and shouldn't even be talking.

			:I have pointed out how badly phrased your notes are. I have pointed out how your attempts to do the same with mine fail and are not based in reality. Instead of tackling my arguments, you keep screaming my methods are invalid without a glimpse of proof for these claims.

			:If you actually had studied rhetoric and could actually prove your notes are far superior to mine, then your first post should have utterly destroyed me. Instead, you're down to a point where you try to discredit me personally, try to force your own, personal discussion rules upon me, question the validity of the discussion as a whole, and try to get others to quickly decide a "winner" before I post a reply.
			:If you had as much skill in this as you would like us to believe, this discussion would long be over. Because I can't argue against facts. Alas, no matter how much you claim to have studied this and that I should know better than to argue against you, factual evidence is not your strong side so far.
			:You keep insisting I'm doing it all wrong, that I'm just insulting you, that I have no idea, and so on. How about ''you'' just do it right, for once? Show your magical Super Rhetoric Man skills. Drop the whole "Renegade is evil" and "Help me Zoey" angles and just concentrate on the facts. Show us some proof instead of yet another round of "omgomgomg Ren is so evil and has no idea! I'm right! I studied this!".
			:Because, if you were as good as you pretend to be, I would automatically fail at proving you wrong, and everyone else would agree with you.

			:Oh, and btw - the fact that your replies are practically invisible within other replies is another reason we don't practise the impolite style. But I guess we've already seen you don't care about that...
			:::Third level is mine.
			::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 16:30, 2 April 2008 (CDT)

	== further proposal for structure ==		== further proposal for structure ==

Platypusrex256: /* further proposal for structure */

2008-03-31T19:44:19Z

further proposal for structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:44, 31 March 2008
Line 286:		Line 286:

	:::Please, just calm down. Geez. Ren is part of the community too and everyone has an equal opportunity to respond. And I agree that we don't need an elaborate structure for notes. Things look fine as they are, and the phrasing of the note can indicate what type of note it is.--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 14:30, 31 March 2008 (CDT)		:::Please, just calm down. Geez. Ren is part of the community too and everyone has an equal opportunity to respond. And I agree that we don't need an elaborate structure for notes. Things look fine as they are, and the phrasing of the note can indicate what type of note it is.--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 14:30, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
			::::it might clear up some issues and provide opportunity for embellishment. have you seen lostpedia? - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]

Jonpro at 19:30, 31 March 2008

2008-03-31T19:30:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:30, 31 March 2008
Line 284:		Line 284:
	::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)		::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
	::*get off my case. let the community speak for themselves. the more you talk the more reason i have to believe that it is you that should be banned. not me. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]		::*get off my case. let the community speak for themselves. the more you talk the more reason i have to believe that it is you that should be banned. not me. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]

			:::Please, just calm down. Geez. Ren is part of the community too and everyone has an equal opportunity to respond. And I agree that we don't need an elaborate structure for notes. Things look fine as they are, and the phrasing of the note can indicate what type of note it is.--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 14:30, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Platypusrex256: /* further proposal for structure */

2008-03-31T19:14:16Z

further proposal for structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:14, 31 March 2008
Line 283:		Line 283:
	:Also, you forgot a subpage for userboxes.		:Also, you forgot a subpage for userboxes.
	::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)		::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
			::*get off my case. let the community speak for themselves. the more you talk the more reason i have to believe that it is you that should be banned. not me. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]

Platypusrex256: /* Two Cents */

2008-03-31T19:12:23Z

Two Cents

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:12, 31 March 2008
Line 231:		Line 231:
	:{{quote\|platy\|i have made mistakes in the past, many of which are similar to the mistakes that renegade is making now.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i have made mistakes in the past, many of which are similar to the mistakes that renegade is making now.}}
	::Generic phrasing in an attempt to discredit. Which mistakes?		::Generic phrasing in an attempt to discredit. Which mistakes?
			:::keep reading

	:{{quote\|platy\|the difference is, i have fessed up to them when i have been called out.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|the difference is, i have fessed up to them when i have been called out.}}
	::Unsourced.		::Unsourced.
			:::*i'll source myself.

	:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}
	::I have "threatened" to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.		::I have threatened to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.
	::The fact that I "threatened" to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for "threatening" to ban you.		:::*i could claim the same against you, that you are spamming the edit page by reverting MY edits. why are you edits more valuable than mine. further, what administrative rights do you have to threaten users with administrative action?
			::The fact that I threatened to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for threatening to ban you.
			:::*it is an act of aggression. you might as well flag my talk page with ''stfu''
	::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.		::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.

	::In addition, I find it rather hilarious that you are trying to discredit me, while both [[User talk:Platypusrex256\|your talk page]] as well as [[Talk:Mexican Mating Machine]] show quite clearly that this is not the first time you're trying to pull this exact thing, and that you're ''constantly'' clashing with the administration over these matters.		::In addition, I find it rather hilarious that you are trying to discredit me, while both [[User talk:Platypusrex256\|your talk page]] as well as [[Talk:Mexican Mating Machine]] show quite clearly that this is not the first time you're trying to pull this exact thing, and that you're ''constantly'' clashing with the administration over these matters.
			:::*i am not constantly clashing with anybody but you.

	:{{quote\|platy\|i ask only that credit is given to my sound logic and clear writing and also that the community observes renegade's never ending quest to pwn me with analogies, red herrings and personal attacks.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i ask only that credit is given to my sound logic and clear writing and also that the community observes renegade's never ending quest to pwn me with analogies, red herrings and personal attacks.}}
	:Invalid. Lacks proof my analogies are not relevant, lacks proof of red herrings and fails to show any "personal attacks".		:Invalid. Lacks proof my analogies are not relevant, lacks proof of red herrings and fails to show any "personal attacks".
			::*analogies have no place in arguments. when i argue against the ''it has been noted'' phrase, dodge the issue. and you told me that i have no grasp on the english language. what proof do i need?

	:{{quote\|platy\|i am not proud of our pissing contest, but i cannot step down when i feel that i am right.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i am not proud of our pissing contest, but i cannot step down when i feel that i am right.}}
	:And that justifies an editing war instead of following common procedure and courtesy?		:And that justifies an editing war instead of following common procedure and courtesy?
			::so let me get it strait... if there is any confusion about your phrasing, it should remain at your phrasing until you admit that you are wrong. which is never? who decides in the end?

	:{{quote\|platy\|i have outlined how renegade's writing could be stronger and more direct and he returns with a fractured ego.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i have outlined how renegade's writing could be stronger and more direct and he returns with a fractured ego.}}
	:Untrue and unsourced. In fact, I have shown up multiple times how your writing is lacking in style, as well as how my notes are more accurate.		:Untrue and unsourced. In fact, I have shown up multiple times how your writing is lacking in style, as well as how my notes are more accurate.
			::look above. look below. you display your ego every time you place an editorial adverb in front of your verbs that describe my actions.


	:{{quote\|platy\|i regret putting you on the spot Zoey, but you must decide one way or another. flip a coin if you have to.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|i regret putting you on the spot Zoey, but you must decide one way or another. flip a coin if you have to.}}
	:Pathetic attempt to get your will without having to actually prove your notes are the better choice.		:Pathetic attempt to get your will without having to actually prove your notes are the better choice.
			::i would never attach such an adverb to your actions. you've called me pathetic and feeble and stupid before and you keep crying ''untrue and unsourced!''

	:In addition, learn to use the preview button. Not only are you spamming recent changes and generated dozens of useless revisions, but not knowing when you're done, or being conflicted by the next sentence of your reply is also extremely annoying for anyone else using a page.		:In addition, learn to use the preview button. Not only are you spamming recent changes and generated dozens of useless revisions, but not knowing when you're done, or being conflicted by the next sentence of your reply is also extremely annoying for anyone else using a page.
	::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)		::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

			it is a personal attack when you editorialize your verbs with colorful adverbs such as pathetic and feeble and stupid. it not a personal attack but a fact (i should hope it is a fact) that you should know better. i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you might have the education and discipline to formulate a decent argument but you give me no reason to believe.

	== further proposal for structure ==		== further proposal for structure ==

Platypusrex256: Undo revision 116756 by Platypusrex256 (Talk)

2008-03-31T19:12:03Z

Undo revision 116756 by Platypusrex256 (Talk)

Show changes

Platypusrex256: /* Two Cents */

2008-03-31T19:08:50Z

Two Cents

Show changes

Renegade: /* Two Cents */

2008-03-31T18:56:45Z

Two Cents

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 31 March 2008
Line 236:		Line 236:

	:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}		:{{quote\|platy\|renegade has in the past, threatened to ban me from pedia, used inappropriate language and personally attacked my intelligence.}}
	::I have threatened to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.		::I have "threatened" to banned you because you spammed the pedia. Something you did ''again'' by ignoring general procedures and insisting on forcing a disputed edit on the page in an edit war.
	::The fact that I threatened to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for threatening to ban you.		::The fact that I "threatened" to ban you is ''not'', in itself, an illegitimate act of aggression. If anything, you could attack my ''reasoning'' for "threatening" to ban you.
	::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.		::However, given that '''you are lying''' anyway, that's irrelevant anyway.

Renegade at 18:53, 31 March 2008

2008-03-31T18:53:14Z

Show changes

Platypusrex256: /* further proposal for structure */

2008-03-31T18:45:03Z

further proposal for structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 31 March 2008
Line 213:		Line 213:
	:e) theories (such as redsuv51 = EA)		:e) theories (such as redsuv51 = EA)
	:::- [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]		:::- [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]
			in all fairness, the notes concerning the chat should be moved to the page that has already been created and is dedicated to the chat - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:30, 31 March 2008
Line 284:		Line 284:
	::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)		::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 13:53, 31 March 2008 (CDT)
	::*get off my case. let the community speak for themselves. the more you talk the more reason i have to believe that it is you that should be banned. not me. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]		::*get off my case. let the community speak for themselves. the more you talk the more reason i have to believe that it is you that should be banned. not me. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]]

			:::Please, just calm down. Geez. Ren is part of the community too and everyone has an equal opportunity to respond. And I agree that we don't need an elaborate structure for notes. Things look fine as they are, and the phrasing of the note can indicate what type of note it is.--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 14:30, 31 March 2008 (CDT)