User talk:Floquenbeam - Wikipedia

[Worn out but smug.] My god, I just did a history merge![1] You know, the "delete B, move A, delete A, undelete A, move A." There's a special procedure for admins, but it looks frankly even worse. Drinks are on me! Carry me on your shoulders through the gates of the city! Bishonen | talk 18:06, 23 June 2015 (UTC).Reply

(watching:) I would if I could! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Um... I don't know how to say this, Bish, without raining on your parade. Do you want some constructive criticism now? Or would you prefer I wait for a day or two so you can enjoy the (usually well-deserved) smugness?

Also, when I saw the orange bar, I thought maybe you or Gerda were leaving a message to congratulate me for one or two mildly amusing things I've said in the last 3-4 days, but which (*sigh*) no one has noticed, leaving my self image as mildly witty on occasion in doubt. :( --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

You saying "No foul, play on" was so great, it's for life! Where would I have met you saying something new? I try to avoid the dramah boards ;) - (Bish, don't listen.) You meet me in infobox discussions again after I was released a bit. In teh case, I thought if I only show them (arbs) how useful they (the little boxes, harmless like images) are, they would win. Instead I was told to better "conduct themselves". I try, - please review my conduct ;) (#1, #2). I spend little time on it because (following Bach's cantata cycles) I set myself a goal of a GA per week, celebrating my initials, #3 will go for FA next year or later, #4 is ready for nomination, - it's St. John's day today ;)

ps pssst: I confess --- to be proud that Beethoven made it from suggestion in teh case to real, - I play on and enjoy it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

You recently described someone as an übergrump. I'm seriously thinking now of visiting CHUS with a request! I'm pretty sure that the person you so described went to the same Cambridge college as me, based on things they said about William Stone Building prior to and immediately after I created that article. The college only takes around 70-80 new undergraduate students each year and, since I am also an übergrump, perhaps causation really is correlation in this case ;) - Sitush (talk) 12:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Sitush: Which caused what? Did the college instill grumpiness in until-then normal people? Or did they recruit already-grumpy people? --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ha, the old chicken and egg! I doubt anyone who attends Cambridge is truly "normal". They're either like me - people without privilege but bright and very independent of mind - or they're the more stereotypical Hooray Henry's whose life began with a silver spoon and ends with silver mountings on their coffin. (I knew a chap there called Pine-Coffin, btw: what a great name!) In fairness, my grumpiness was probably pre-Cambridge: I got extremely pissed off with what I perceived to be the naivety of Hugh Trevor-Roper at my entrance interview and called him a fool, amongst other things. He bought me a bottle of scotch when he next saw me, as a new member of the college. I think the likes of Michael Axworthy, Andrew Roberts and Guy Black will probably attest to a grumpiness in me that at least began on Day One in their experience, and that they are all much less so. Probably why they have got somewhere in the world and I have not, come to think of it! - Sitush (talk) 19:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Floquenbeam, I don't believe you intended to remove my report with the other, unless I am mistaken. ([2]). I won't restore it, I am sufficiently terrorized by your edit summary.   Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I already noticed I removed too many, restored it, and then blocked the IP. Sorry. But I'm glad to know the edit summary instilled terror, that was my goal. Just you weren't my target. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

I rather figured! Thanks for all the hard work. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

You do the hard work, I just occasionally push the block button. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Regarding the other half of that, so much for avoiding the depressing.   Facepalm Perhaps should switch to decaffeinated. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

...are not in the clique. On the contrary, if you are not a content creator, then you are one of the targets of Blowfeld's blanket attack. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:39, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Floquenbeam is a reasonable guy I think, even if he thinks I'm abrasive at times ;-) If you don't contribute to content and all you do is relish in drama at the notice boards, making negative comments, then you're not exactly of value to the site.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yes, he is. I used to contribute a lot of content, but I got tired of fighting the vandals. But still believing in Wikipedia as a concept and as a first-look for information, I found the ref desks, where I hoped vandalism would be less of a problem. That was overly optimistic, but at least there is a good-sized group of "regulars" who are equipped to deal with the vandals. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

If you starting creating some stubs on Gabonese rivers or East Timorese villages I'm sure you won't have to worry about vandals! ;-).♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

[3] You may not like my view of Bishonen's bad faith actions, but that doesn't give you the right to revert without comment. If you have a problem with my view, have the basic courtesy to comment and state your disagreement. Resolute 14:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

(watching:) Talking about good faith: have you never hit the rollback button inadvertently? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

you have an unlimited amount of good faith, Gerda, but in this case it is misplaced. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Today's Sunday sermon is about mercy, - shamelessly inviting to a GA review, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yes, Gerda, I have. And my very next edit is invariably to self-revert such a mistake. In this case, Floq is deliberately hiding an opinion he doesn't like and mislabeling it as "vandalism". Which is itself disappointing, because a former arbitrator should know better. Resolute 15:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Floq I'm sure my opinion matters squat to you but I do agree with Resolute, it isn't the sort that needed removed or classified as vandalism. If it bothers you consider hatting it? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's not that it doesn't matter to me, but I disagree. I have a deep seated hatred of smug hypocrisy like this. Editors wandering around demanding editors be banned because they aren't "civil" to others, but feeling free to make offensive personal attacks, with no basis in reality, themselves. "Vandalism" isn't accurate, of course, but if it annoys Resolute, then yay, that was the intent. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Let's not get all abrasive now Floquen, be nice ;-).♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:30, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Speaking of hypocrisy, suppose someone made a comment, and you ignored it? Resolute 16:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

How dare you use revert on my edit? You think it was vandalism?! Doc talk 00:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

No, more like being an ass. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please stop reverting. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

You should be stripped of your tools. You can't tell vandalism from personal attacks from dissenting comments. Doc talk 00:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Everybody calm down. I do think you need to explain why you have reverted a half dozen times Floq. This isn't a good hill to die on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:01, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dennis. I'm bone-wearyingly tired of the hypocrisy of people pretending to be so concerned about how important civility is, but the second they see an opening, they feel free to do the same thing back. Worse, really; in real life, that accusation, based on nothing, is worse than name calling. Anyone restoring that comment has no class; I'll trade a block for identifying as many of those people as possible. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

I don't give a rat's ass if you think I have "class" or not. Follow teh rulez, "Floq". Doc talk 01:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

(edit conflict) Objectively speaking, I do see plenty of snark, but I regularly see worse and wouldn't, and don't, revert it myself. I have to put on the admin hat here and say that while the comment wasn't particularly constructive, the same could be said of many of the comments in that and other threads, and I can't see a rationale for redacting/reverting. I understand your frustration, but you need to keep your powder dry and pick your battles. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Nothing but bad faith in that remark, so personal insult, yes. 66.168.253.87 (talk) 01:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

The comment was a) not vandalism, and it was b) not a personal attack. This admin reverted it multiple times beyond 3RR, and he really should be blocked for edit-warring. Any other editor would be blocked for those reverts! I may have to make a big deal out of this one. Totally unacceptable behavior for an administrator, really. Doc talk 01:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

It would better if you didn't. Nothing worthwhile will come it, it was arguably snark, and if no reason that I'm asking you to please just not. I'm trying to get things cooled down, adding gas to the fire isn't what is really best for Wikipedia. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

I am not going to restore it. You know me, Dennis! But he had zero right to remove it once, let alone however many times he did. And you know what I'm saying is right. Doc talk 01:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Get hold of yourself and stop edit warring. You're over 3RR. It's certainly rude and in bad faith but not a personal attack. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply