User talk:HH LEADER

Per Aspera ad Astra

Older discussions

---

• Archive 2008-08-22
• Archive 2009-03-19
• Archive 2009-04-21
• Archive 2009-04-21a
• Archive 2009-04-26

Hello!

Hello. 69.109.191.246 01:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you

even know what a botnet is? --76.25.197.215 09:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk pages

Hi HH. I removed the delete tags from your talk page and archives, because they belong to the community, and can not be deleted. Just like you can't just remove comments from your talk page, you can't request them to be deleted. They are archived for future referenc. Sorry. -- Wyn 09:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This is BS Wyn and you know it. You told me that hundreds of suggestions pages were deleted. Those pages included discussions too and suposedly belonged to the community, weren't they? You also rejected to undelete them, when I requested. Archives are also deleted on regular basis. Under U1 I may request to delete the pages I have created in my user space. You may, of course, reject and tell me 1001 rule why it is not possible. The rules can be twisted many ways. To be honest, if I had a vote and hadn't decided to leave this Wiki for good, I'd vote for you on this bureaucrat elections. You surpass anyone on this Wiki by a mile in your bureaucratic qualities.

I actually feel sorry for you, a no fun female, who have been scrubbing this Wiki floors much harder then your comrades-in-arms.

And who would want to vote for someone with a code name Brains12? Dozen of brain implants or what? He accepted nomination from someone whose name is 'Sock' with wording "Capable of bureaucrat". Is it British or German with New Zealand accent?

What dummy can accept such nomination if the talk page for 'Sock' includes the following conversation:

"Socking isn't against the rules on this wiki, it's a way for people to post anonymously. Misery

So is not logging on.-- anguard 17:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

^--Gah Eat my uber regen. 17:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Except that links to your IP which is actually far from anonymous. Misery 17:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

An IP is probably less anonymous than a username.. poke | talk 17:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, this sock has been permabanned, and I would have to agree with poke that a public sock is just a bad idea. -- Wyn 17:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

People should just make their own if they really want to be anonymous. I am astounded this sock lasted this long without getting its password changed. Misery 17:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)"

Misery in his 'I am no hacker' defence told that he may know whose sock this is. Sure. May he tell this now? I didn't suppose so.

I understand why there were so many votes for Misery. He is 'cool' and a is good puppeteer. He may not have an access to a botnet (pity), and if he had, vasting too many IPs from it would be a crime. It is much more fun to build a botnet from human puppets getting them on IRC or MSN, get to be a bureaucrat and become legit for ArenaNet. He played too risky and let B12 to get too much ahead, so even his last minute 'against' vote did not help, though he got on your good side with last minute vote for you.

My last words to you Wyn (and to everyone who reads it): Good Luck on your next elections! You should not let someone like Misery (or whatever his name will be for next elections) to win. Wyn is a Win!

Your truly. HH LEADER talk 16:01, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Lol. By the way, I don't know who created User:Sock or who used it. I don't think I ever claimed that. I have never logged into User:Sock, unfortunately there is no way for me to prove that. Also, if you look carefully you may notice I supported Wyn, a last minute oppose of Brains to try and get myself to win would have been foolish as it would have been and looked spiteful as well as been unsuccessful. Misery 16:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course you didn't. You didn't say here User_talk:Misery/Archive_1 "75.71.67.5 wasn't me either. I just looked through his contributions and I am confident I know who that is as well, yes ..."

And don't troll me to another conversation. I am through with you and this Wiki. Have a good laugh ... HH LEADER talk 16:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if you are going to publicly spread misinformation about me, I am going to reply. I'll reply in a civil manner, if you consider that trolling I apologise, but there is nothing I can do about that. I have no idea who User:Sock is, I know who that IP address that you quote me as saying I know belonged to. I know exactly what I said I know, not what you are saying I know. If you choose to misunderstand or misrepresent my statements I can't fix that, but I can explain myself so that a third party will understand what I actually meant and said. You seem to have a vendetta against me for being against your ideas and perceive that I have been turning people against you. To be honest, people are just against your ideas. People are against my ideas too, that's why not everyone supported me. I haven't taken it personally and I am on good terms with some of those people. If you can learn to act in a similar manner you will find you do better in a community. Best of luck with whatever you decide to do next and wherever you decide to go. Misery 16:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I was also nominated by User:Sock and came in second. I don't see that as being an issue. -- Wyn 18:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

... O_o ...

Different namespaces are different.

Also, even if you did not have a talk page, if you had an account anyone is allowed to create one via the red "discussion" link that would be there at User:YourName (even if the user page didn't exist).

So what you really want is for an admin to delete your talk page page and block talk page creation by all indefinitely.

Have a nice day. --Star Weaver 16:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No actually. Just the same as for the user page: a choice of having it or not having it. That'll do for me. It'll be nice if I could move all Talk page archives someplace else as well. I am sure there could be a solution to that as well ( Talk_archives: namespace maybe? ) ... HH LEADER talk 17:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk page deletion

Once again, I have removed the delete tags from your talk page and talk page archives. As I explained before, the talk pages belong to the community not to the user. We do not delete user talk pages. I'm sorry if you don't want your words here anymore, however, you do not have the right to remove everyone else's as well. The deletion of pages in other namespaces involves consensus (achieved by discussion or implied by lack of dissent for 3 days). The U1 deletion can only be used on user pages, sub pages, and user images. Since the talk pages do not belong to the user, the user can not request deletion. -- Wyn 18:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Having accepting nominations from whoever you like is your business. And I stand by my words, but I usually do clean up before I leave the place.

I tend to disagree with your policy interpretation. Guild_Wars_Wiki:User_page does not say that "talk pages belong to the community not to the user". It says "Your talk page should generally be treated like any other talk page on the wiki. Do not remove any comments, including your own..." and I am not removing comments from my talk page. I want to remove the page. It also says: "You are permitted to archive older comments as your talk page gets longer. Do so by copying or moving your talk page to an archive subpage ..." This explicitely says that archive is a subpage in user space,- it is no longer a talk page 'per se'. After content of a talk page becomes a subpage it can be deleted as you just pointed out. There is no explicit wording in the policy disallowing to delete subpages from the user space whether or not they are archived talk pages. You may try to prove me wrong, but remember what happened when everyone was saying that it is OK to harvest suggestions from this Wiki and I said 'No'. You may want to consider changing User pages' policy wording before disallowing to delete a subpage from a user space that was created by a user on this user's request. I also know for a fact that discussions about deletion of archived talk pages have been held in context of suggestions restructuring to prevent ArenaNet employees to accedintly use them. If my talk pages' content has so much value, I'd suggest that you copy or move it somewhere else, like for instance, my whole topic was moved by Erasculio ( or whatever his name is just a second later after Misery 'has suggested it' ) from Mike's talk page to my talk page. (BTW, I did created a separate subpage for this topic that is accessible from my user page and this subpage has a separate discussion page where people were leaving their productive comments.)

To conclude: do whatever you want: merge, move, delete,- I don't care about where this content goes. I just want no archives and no talk page before I go. You should grant me this last wish. HH LEADER talk 19:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

No, we shouldn't, because you're trying (rather unsuccessfully) to wikilawyer your way out of community rules. 69.109.123.40 22:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe i'm doin' it wrong, but my archive's in User TALK:Star Weaver/Whatever it was. --Star Weaver 22:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Let me give it a try:

1. The user pages policy does no mention to the "deletion" per se, and neither does the talk pages guideline.
2. It is allowed to move talk page content to more relevant places.
3. Deleting the talk page means deleting the content on it and the historial of contributions, and the userpages policy and talk pages guideline frown upon it unless you have a "good" reason (such as a NPA breach). Ragequitting, being permabanned, being a sock, "never coming back", none of those are good reasons as far as the wiki goes.
4. Since a whole lot of the talk page content under your userspace is directed to you, HH, it means that THIS is the more relevant place to keep such content instead of, let's say, whoever wrote first on each topic.

• As per all the above, there is no reason to delete your talk pages. Your main talk page HAS to provide a link to your talk page archives, and your talk page archives HAVE to stay where they are because it's the most relevant place for them to be.--Fighterdoken 22:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Your talk page should generally be treated like any other talk page on the wiki.

We don't delete those either just because you want to. What's the confusion? ~Shard 22:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter, no admin is going to delete it no matter how much he pouts. Misery 22:45, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I mean... there are so many other candidates out there for "deletion because i want to" :).--Fighterdoken 22:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

And no, the archive pages are not subpages of the user space, they are subpages of the talk page. They follow the same rules of belonging to the community as every other talk page, thus fulfilling the "Your talk page should generally be treated like any other talk page on the wiki. Do not remove any comments, including your own...". Deleting the page is the same as deleting the comment only more so since it also deletes all history, so therefore violates the policy. -- Wyn 22:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

OMG: What you are talking about is the best practices, not the policies. The Fighterdoken describes exactly why my post at Mike's page should not have been moved to my talk page because of his number 4. For if we apply the same approach that was used for my post at Mike's everyone can move all the posts around arguing that it is the best place for them. My post was directed to Mike and regardless of whether or not he would answer it should have stayed there. This incident is simply dismissed by everyone.

As far as policies go deletion policy says that U1: User request. Personal user pages, sub-pages and images may be deleted upon request of the user, except in cases where the user page bears an important message (such as a banned user warning) or the image is used on other pages. By definition everything in User space qualifies as personal user page or subpage. So, every page may be deleted unless it bears important message. Call me a Wikilayer, I don't care, but go ahead and close loopholes in the polices. Don't be like ArenaNet that was ignoring you and policy loopholes for so long. Misery's right no one will delete it, but not because it cannot be if policy is followed. Simply because it won't.

Enjoy. So long comrades. HH LEADER talk 01:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

see you in a few months -Auron 01:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

In regards to U1, you are forgetting something: U1 is intended for the "User:" namespace. The "User talk:" namespace is not covered by U1.--Fighterdoken 03:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Nah-ah. Read the policy word by word.

Your user page will be at User:Example.

Your user talk page will be at User talk:Example. This is the primary method that other wiki editors will use to contact you.

You can create user subpages under your user page, such as User:Example/Subpage. These can be used to specify additional details about yourself or manage your current projects.

Your user space encompasses all of the above.

This explicitely says that User space encompasses (means includes) user talk page, so U1 do applies.

In addition, user policy does not prevent from moving any page from "User talk:" to "User:" namespace and request a deletion. Finally, one could archive everything directly in "User:" space not in "User talk:" The problem still remains that Sysop may not grant the request, exactly as Misery pointed out. HH LEADER talk 13:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

wikilawyering woooooooooooooooooo

bonus points for reading the policy, minus points for completely missing its goal and spirit -Auron 13:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't go, you provide so much hilarity. --75.71.67.5 02:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a compliment to hear from a master. You'd do OK without me. HH LEADER talk 13:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Where does it say the admins must delete pages at the user's request? 69.109.120.147 06:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Nowhere. They have no obligation to delete. They only can be ever so kind to oblige or not. Same as with anything else.

BTW, 'deletion' in Wiki is simply hiding the content with no physical deletion. It's tagging that can be removed. Actual deletion is possible by issuing SQL statement only. But you already know that. The whole story here is that a group of good guys and a gal trying to show the bad guy how bad and powerless he is without a community support while it is OK for user A to move a post of user B from talk page of user C to talk page of user B without the consent of either B or C if user A is a good guy and B guy is bad. With community approval everything is possible and nothing is without ... HH LEADER talk 13:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

6/10 man. i almost took you seriously for a second. polish up on them conspiracy theories that the whole wiki is out to get you and you'll be a 9/10 troll in no time! -Auron 13:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No man. 0/10 for you. It is not an example of conspiracy but hypocrisy. If someone shouts "Since a whole lot of the talk page content under your userspace is directed to you, HH, it means that THIS is the more relevant place to keep such content instead of, let's say, whoever wrote first on each topic.", they better be consistent. You were there too. You said nothing. Oh, stop: you said I am full of shit.

My only reason to request not having a talk page is that no one, even you, can call me full of shit or a troll or something else for I will make sure not to go to other users' talk pages. This freaking policy does allows not having a User Page and it does not explicitely dissallow not having a Talk Page. So, what is the problem? My wish is not aligned with this Wiki Spirit? Have you been calling me those nice names and keep coming at me 'In A Name of Holy Spirit of This Wiki'? I am wasting my time with you... HH LEADER talk 15:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

This wiki's spirit is nothing close to holy - spirit doesn't mean "the inner self on a trip to Heaven" when applied to policies, it means "this policy is really trying to say..." You're arguing with the minute details and wording of policy without realizing that you don't understand the point of the policy.

If people could just tag their talk pages for deletion, why would we bother with archiving in the first place? User:J.Kougar tagged pretty much his entire namespace for deletion (including character images, subpages and his picture of himself) but again, we refrained from deleting his talk page and archives because they're there for a reason. They're part of the history of this site, and some of the discussion that went on there has led to policy change (or at least, further discussion in other places).

Nobody is singling you out. If you want every subpage in your userspace deleted, go for it - I'll delete em if you want me to. Your talk page, however, will not be deleted, because it is no longer your call.

And there's nothing hypocritical about it. I have archives dating back to 2006 on GWiki and some of them have pretty embarrassing shit, some of which I don't care for people to read... however, who am I to tell other people their comments aren't worth saving? Who am I to fragment and spread discussion that really belongs in my archives, simply because I feel like it? Obviously, they're still there, easily viewable by anyone who cares. That's the point of an archive. That's the point of the policy. If you don't agree, fine - start a policy discussion on it. But stop trying to act like you're fucking oppressed, it's just getting old already. -Auron 16:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Please don't be disruptive just to prove a point HH LEADER, it's awfully disruptive. Misery 15:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Holy Mother of God! You, who tought people to make a sock because it is totally disruptive but effective and is the only way to get anything done on this miserable Wiki now complaining, Eh? Good call! HH LEADER talk 15:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

If it's Misery's sock you're talking about, it was the only physical (technological?) way of testing how blocking works to Poke. The sock didn't hurt or disrupt anyone. If you're referring to something else, then I'm mistaken and sorry for the misunderstanding. --Antioch 16:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No, Antioch. It is this Talk:Dancing_Daggers:

QUOTE STARTS HERE

" ... no one is attacking shard, more than 99% of the wiki thinks that everything he does is retarded and pointless. im not one of them, but at least im not making an ass of myself defending him for something like this. there's about 1000 other pages i could put the same fucking kind of trivia on if u want. --Cursed Angel 00:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You should do that, it's called being disruptive to make a point and it's highly effective. Use socks if you are worried someone will ban you. Misery 00:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

wow, that's a pretty high level of sarcasm. --Cursed Angel 00:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It really wasn't sarcasm at all =/ Misery 00:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Being disruptive to make a point is the only way to get anything done on this miserable site. --75.71.67.5 00:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

*gives the sockpuppet a Cigar* --lolololololol

QUOTE ENDS HERE

Hypocrisy it is. HH LEADER talk 16:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a personal philosophy which doesn't consider hypocrisy to be a bad thing at all. Also, I'd appreciate it if you could italicise quotes as at the moment it is rather difficult to tell where your quote begins and ends. Misery 16:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Misery 17:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, oh, you can use {{quote}} for "quoting things and making them noticeable".--Fighterdoken 18:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey man

I hate socks too. We should copulate. 99.142.23.15 01:27, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Pity this guy is leaving. Lurking this talk page and others he has contributed to has provided me with a large amount of free entertainment.--118.90.18.96 18:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

End of transmission

This wiki has a few problems, I will concede that point... however, the "many who have multiple accounts, socks and shared sock accounts" is not one of them. The majority of people who have multiple accounts are trolls. Trolls do not run this wiki, nor is their rule-breaking ignored because of their multiple accounts. They do not make the rules - they abide by them or they get banned, just like any other user. How you can begin to pretend that having multiple accounts compromises the wiki... well, I can't say I understand where you're coming from, and since you always seem to run away from logical discussion, I probably never will.
User:Sock is honestly the only "shared sock account" I've ever known of, and it can't have been too big of a problem, since it edited for a whole 2-3 weeks then got blocked. Y'know, the whole "sysops taking care of the wiki?" Yeah, it works sometimes. If you have evidence of hitherto unsuspected shared sock accounts, I would love to hear it.
You seem to think you're the first one to realize that trolls use multiple accounts. I assure you, you aren't. There have been entire archives devoted to discussion of security measures like CheckUser to help detect socking, but in the end, the community (primarily those who do not sock) decided that socking really wasn't a big issue; definitely not one big enough to install CheckUser to remedy. The community decided to treat every account like its own user - if an account violated policy, it got blocked. If it didn't break any rules, why should it be punished? Socking is not inherently evil - although I would like you to tell me why you think it is.

• In most cases one deals with a 'collective' intellect and the decisions that are result of a peer pressure and mob psychology among those who are connected through IRC.

Or, a little closer to reality, "one deals with a collective intellect, called consensus, which is derived from several users who, while they do not necessarily agree with one another, have made compromises in their own personal beliefs in order to further the wiki's aims and goals." People have disagreed with you, HH leader - and they have done it often. You have, however, never stopped to consider the fact that maybe your ideas are so far out in left field that it's pretty easy for everyone to agree to disagree with them. You never try to defend your ideas rationally, and when people call you on it, you get hyper defensive and start saying bullshit akin to "corruption inherent in the system" and "help me im bein repressed." No, the sysops aren't out to get you - the sysops are out to keep the wiki a fun and friendly place. When your ideas are in conflict with that, the sysops are going to stand in your way; not because they hate you, but because your idea sucks. You have never seemed to be able to grasp that. Hopefully it is a lesson you will take with you to wherever it is you decide to go next.

• Some of the Sysops are doing fairly good job being addicts to what they are doing and unable to escape their addiction of a lifetime and some fall victims of their IRC friends.

Halp halp the purple unicorns are keeping me locked up.

• By giving this Wiki to the community ArenaNet got exactly what it bargained for: a hijacked Wiki.

And you think ANet - I mean, ArenaNet, c'mon - would have done a better job at maintaining a wiki? The same ArenaNet that can't even make an official forum? Yeah, right. They had no other course of action. I understand you're frustrated that the entire wiki disagreed with your radical ideas, but you really need to look in the mirror before saying shit like "omg the wiki is hijacked." You know the whole "consensus" thing I mentioned earlier? Yeah, you should read up on it. Consensus is not "everyone doing what you say when you say it." When the community stands in your way, it isn't a matter of the wiki being hijacked. It means you need to learn how to discuss rationally and compromise, and once you've done that, people will be more willing to agree with you. And voila, consensus - your ideas, in whole or in part, will be implemented. If you, however, stop before the "discuss rationally and compromise" phase and start pointing fingers, you will never be quite as successful as you would be if you learned and followed the wiki way.

• Good luck to ArenaNet with their feedback solution on this Wiki: they will get precisely what they are paying for: a mob managed feedback on a verge of insanity. It's a jungle were a lonely traveller should never wonder.

I honestly can't disagree with this at all. Anet has had sub-par community reps since 2005, and replaced them both with Regina, who I don't even think plays the game, let alone knows where the community resides. You hit this spot on, HH. The community-managed suggestions section will never be as good or as fruitful as suggestions sieved out by competent community managers.

• End of transmission. Leader's out.

bye bro, keep an eye out for unicorns on the road ahead -Auron 02:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)