User talk:Sardaukar

Hello and welcome to Sardaukar's discussion page. I am the first comment and will guide you on your journey into the white expanse ahead! Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә &amp; ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 01:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Blasted Sardaukar! Hiding amongst even our wikis! Fremen..AMBUSH HIM!  П  ALANA  16:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Paper Wrapped Parcel/Drop rates
I think I used an old revision by accident when I edited it. I was looking trough the revisions before I updated the totals. Thanks for spotting it. // HeavenMonkey 10:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. Thanks for updating the totals. :) Sardaukar  [[Image:User_Sardaukar_sig.png]] 12:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Idealism
Hi! I'm posting this on your talk page because I don't really believe that it belongs on Auron's RfR talk page. I think you're confused about what idealism is as, in order to be an effective idealist (a "visionary"), one must be keenly aware of the way that things are. A good example is the "letter of the law v spirit of the law" argument: arguing for the latter is an idealist value, though it's based on the very real fact that the system that said law belongs to is flawed. More accurate would've been: Note that neither belief necessarily implies that the other is false. While it is possible to be idealist without holding realist beliefs, it is not a working philosophy. At the same time, though, being a realist with no idealist beliefs is also not a working philosophy: in its best iteration, it equates to stagnation with no hope for advancement. &mdash; Raine Valen    16:25, 31 Aug 2010 (UTC)
 * You disappoint me. Try again. Sardaukar  [[Image:User_Sardaukar_sig.png]] 16:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Raine can't help it, she's a girl. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 17:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The total absence of reasoning in that post makes it difficult to understand where your viewpoint differs from mine. &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  17:21, 31 Aug 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you agree. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 20:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Rfa post
You kind of messed it up. - Reanimated X 15:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

That was one of the best votes I have ever seen. O_O - Mini Me  19:39, 3 September, 2010 (UTC)
 * I concur. - Reanimated X 20:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

hi
A few of your other points I intend to answer later, but one issue you brought up I felt the need to comment on. When I posted on the community portal talk page, I was completely serious. I thought the entire project was a waste of fucking time. I still think it was a waste of time, and contrary to your post, I actually did things the right way. It irks me that you link to those as examples of trolling, because those two posts in particular are exactly how a dissenting voice is supposed to act. I did not agree with any of the changes proposed. I made my POV known, and when it was challenged, I replied (once, and only once) to re-affirm my stance. After that, I let the matter lie. I did all I could, as a dissenting voice, to let them know I disagreed with their wasting time. If I had posted more, or followed people to their talk pages, or whatever you will, I would have been disrupting the wiki to spread my views. Simply voicing my opinion on the relevant talk page and leaving it at that is how that kind of thing is supposed to happen. Compare it to, say, Scythe doing anything to see the difference. He wanted his views heard, no matter the cost, and when people said "cool story bro" he flipped out and tried to force consensus. That's bad. I think a lot of shit on this wiki is a waste of time, but I'm not the only person on this wiki. I know that some people love wasting their time on stupid bullshit, and considering that I cannot force consensus (and do not try to), I simply make my views known and then back off. I did it with the gww:account page, and I've done it with others in the past. I post a few times to spur discussion, answer questions if any are asked, and let the community make the decision in the end. If enough people want to waste their time maintaining a page, I'm not going to be mortally offended that the page continues existing. I don't crusade to force people to agree with me, and it was the case on that war in kryta coloring thing as well. It was a waste of time and I simply told them so. I did everything exactly like I was supposed to - making a clear dissenting voice heard without causing disruption by incessant posts or refusal to change my view (in a continued argument). - Auron 13:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Obligatory long-assed response.

 * Elections everywhere would like to disagree with you. Being "tough on crime" is generally considered a strong positive in any campaign anywhere.


 * You linked this.
 * The overwhelming irony of a suggestion here, worded like this, that users should avoid posting objective truth for fear of offending a subsection of contributors defined by their actions: you read the subsequent discussion, obviously, and I made several posts therein explaining exactly why offending people by telling the truth is okay. If you'd like to disagree, then I must ask why you bothered to write the post to which I am now responding; I have my doubts that you did not write it to avoid hurting my feelings (as strongly evidenced by the fact that you did not not write it, at all).


 * You linked this.
 * I'm quite curious as to how you interpreted (bold added for emphasis), or anything else said there, as a threat.  It is quite likely that you meant something else (warn?), but chose to use "threaten" because it is a clear-cut word with strong negative connotations – however, because I read what you said at face value, it simply looks inaccurate, from my point of view.
 * The fact that the user in question later admitted that they were in fact, trolling, isn't relevant.
 * If a user were quite possibly trolling, would you (1) ignore it, (2) ban them outright over a suspicion, or (3) bring it up to them and warn them about the possible consequences of similar actions in the future? I picked 3; what would you have done?


 * I think that a much more accurate simile would have been an officer pulling a car over on the highway for skirting the edge of the speed limit and saying, "Watch it; officers here ticket for speeding, so don't be caught doing it in the future."


 * Please understand that the majority of the discussion was quite painful to me, as well, because there was an assload of flak and only slivers of (subjective) logic to back it (which I thank DE for).
 * I strongly encourage you to – in fact, I'd very much love it if you were to – present a logical counterargument to anything said therein, if you have one. It seems that you've discovered a previously-unmentioned, but somehow obvious, reason that it was completely inappropriate.  I'm very interested in this.


 * You linked this.
 * Now, I'm forced to ask: what do you think a troll is? Do you think that people who  are trolls?  The commonly accepted definition,  (e.g. this) seems to suggest otherwise, but lumping those who post honest complaints (e.g. "bitch") into a group characterized by dishonest intentions seems to be growing more and more normal, here.
 * I don't have a problem with people bitching about things or offending people if it appears that they are sincere (for example, everyone who posted anything regarding my RfR or, hell, about half of the things on my talkpage ever); I do have a problem with people pretending to be upset with the intent of stirring up drama.


 * However, even with that being said, I enforced Salome's discretion in that case, even though I did not necessarily agree with it.


 * Now, admittedly, not a whole lot. There aren't people trolling the shit out of the wiki uncontested (as had been the case when I submitted my initial RfA), so the reason that I had sought sysop status (yes, there are other facets of sysophood; no, I am not interested in them) has become a moot point.  This is why I supported the RfR (no, it was not a joke).


 * Indeed, I'm a wiki noob.

You're welcome. &mdash; Raine Valen    23:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * U MAD? LOL. 76.10.172.239 00:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Furious. &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  0:41, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 0/10 76.10.172.239 00:44, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * qft. &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  0:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)