FANDOM

Shining-Armor

  • I was born on July 13
  • My occupation is Ex-Wikia editor

Archives: 1

When leaving a message please make sure to create a new level two heading with the subject and sign your message.

I use talk back. This means that if you leave me a message I will reply to it here and post a notice on your talk page.

Re: Blocking

I don't have the rights to block users, but don't worry about it, I've contacted an admin.

Thanks for letting me know, and have a nice day. MrDupin (talk) 14:53, January 20, 2016 (UTC)

I was wondering if this is correct

As for Shining-Armor's edit below, I believe she's joking about your insistence on going against advice despite being warned, translating your name from Burmese and messaging you in Burmese for effect. You can ask her yourself if you really want to know, but I'm pretty sure it was for comic purposes. EmpyrealInvective

If not, then explain. 

တရားသူကြီးကို တစ်ဖက်သတ်အစွဲ (talk) 21:54, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

Replying to : I sent in your written . So while you are or whether you are a skillfully used because it is my belief that I am sending this message to you . When sent to the purpose of my message was a joke .
Well, I was apolgizing to that user because I completley did not even read the warnings at all because there was not a new heading which I thought automatically happens everytime someone sends you a message, which means I did not realize I got a new message. I got this strange message from you, but considering the fact I critque stories, I thought you might have been a user I pissed off. Well, seven days, no death threats so far. Now if I judged people's stories or ideas on facebook or youtube. I would probably get never ending death threats all spelled incorrectly.
တရားသူကြီးကို တစ်ဖက်သတ်အစွဲ (talk) 22:54, January 22, 2016 (UTC)

Re: DMCA

Looking at the photo, I wouldn't really bother with trying to get permission back on it as it's more of a filler image. Thanks for trying, but I think it might be a bit more work than it's worth. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 17:13, January 22, 2016 (UTC)

Re: Re: DMCA

I'm not surprised it wasn't clear. It was in response to the silliness of telling him how to title his replies. I realize you think your vocal pedantry is intimidating, but I'm not impressed. If you're not a sociopath, or at least seeking a sociopathic appearance, then I have no choice but to believe you're a robot because you have no idea how to interact with people. If you continue making these silly attempts at proving dominance, or continue your douche baggery, whichever it is, I will continue calling you out. If you are a robot, which I suspect, then I apologize in advance.

Jay Ten (talk) 20:30, January 22, 2016 (UTC)

Of course I am! Why do you think I'm so aggressive towards people I see as trouble? It's because I hate drama. I also don't agree with Hanlan's razor and tend to question motive, especially with people I don't know. In my experience, more people are malicious than aren't. If you stop giving me ammunition, you'll not hear from me.
Jay Ten (talk) 01:08, January 23, 2016 (UTC)
If you hate drama then why did you feel the need to step in and start some over something as trivial as me asking for a more descriptive heading for messages? By acting aggressively you have inadvertently started a conflict which could have been avoided by simply ignoring what I had said. Personally, I am going to make the step forward to forgive this whole exchange provided that you are willing to do the same.
Unfortunately I do not hold the same opinion as you. I don't believe that the majority of editors act with malice more than they act with ignorance. It's very easy to do something wrong yet very hard to do something right which I attribute to most bad edits unless there is clear malice present in their actions.
And lastly, I am not trying to produce "ammunition" for conflict. I am trying to get back into the game of making positive contributions to the site. If you feel that I am trying to get under your skin then I am sorry but I am truly doing nothing of the sort, regardless of whether I actually do it or not.
ᐃᓐᓂᕈᖅᑐᖅ 14:36, January 23, 2016 (UTC)
Forget it. You're hopeless. The reason I stepped in is because you telling an administrator how to title messages is a very clear message that you just want to bitch or talk down to someone. We don't give a damn if you want things done a certain way. And I by no means was referring to the edits people make being malicious; I was talking about people in general. I will never be ok with people like you. I hate trouble makers and people who want nothing more than to drag everyone down to their level of misery. I will continue to mock you until you decide you want to act like a human being. And you're not getting under my skin, darling, but I know a perpetual pain in the ass when I see one and will always let them know I see them. I mean, I've even seen you bitching about Cleric highlighting things. What kind of a child cares about such trivial things? You need to grow up and realize that when trouble constantly follows you, it means you're the problem.
I'm not wasting any more time arguing with you, but I will step in any time I see you starting your juvenile nonsense. You may be able to fool other people, but I've known too many people like you.
Jay Ten (talk) 15:54, January 23, 2016 (UTC)
Do you even hear yourself? You are the root of this entire issue and you continue to perpetuate it.
No, telling someone that I would like something titled a certain way is not at all bitching or talking down to them. I am merely asking that when they leave a message in the future to add the subject after Re:. Most people wouldn't take issue with this yet you seem to think that this request is completely of left field and entirely outrageous even though I am sure EmpyrealInvective, the user it was aimed at mind you, doesn't even really care. Hell, if he thought it was unacceptable of me to ask he would have came forward to say so.
And if you insist on constantly mocking me then just don't reply to my messages and don't leave messages on my talk page unless they are warnings or things that need to be conveyed. In the future if I need an admin I will gladly go talk to another one that I am sure isn't keen on blowing something so trivial into an entire back and forth argument.
ᐃᓐᓂᕈᖅᑐᖅ 16:08, January 23, 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Hello! I'm Doom Vroom and I like to nose around the recent activity feed. Over the last few days I have seen your edits and interactions with others and so I thought that I might stop by and chat with you. Like, I know it isn't any of my business and that I am an idiot when it comes to reading people (especially those that I've just met and barely know), but I wanted to stop by and see if you wanted someone to talk to. If you don't, then that's cool. Just let me know and I'll scamper off.

Like I said, I don't really know you, so I could be completely wrong and just an idiot here! But, your interactions with others have been kind of emotionless, in appearance, at least. I got curious and read your user page and then I went back through your contributions and looked at a couple of your first posts (blogs) on the site (weird, I know. My curiosity is hard to keep in check sometimes). Back then you seemed to have emotion in your posts compared to now where you come off as robotic. However, that's not quite right either, because you do have a spirit to you in that you seem to want to improve the site. So, I've come to wonder if maybe you just aren't much of a people person anymore. I think that you might just have troubles wording things and they sometimes come across as either robotic or hurtful. In a nutshell, I'm just trying to say that I don't think you mean any ill intent and that you wish to make the site better.

So, when you go to do something on the site or have something that you'd rather people do differently, maybe try to think of the best way to go about it without ruffling any feathers or hurting feelings. That last sentence sounds rude of me and I really apologize for that, I just can't think of a way to word it better. I feel that if you were to do that then you'd become really popular with the people on here (you have willpower which is one of the biggest keys to success). I just hope that you aren't hung up over what happened in the past, because I'm sorting of getting the vibe that you might be from your user page, but again I am sort of an idiot XD

To wrap up my post: I know this was kind of a weird post of me to make, but I became concerned after watching everything and was having trouble keeping my tongue bit. I apologize if I came across as rude, assholish, or egotistical; not my intent. If you ever want a friend or someone to talk to, then feel free to message me on my talk page. Buckle up I'm going to be popular 21:29, January 22, 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I am glad that you have chosen to stop by! And yes, I would much like someone to talk to.
I suppose the reason behind my interactions with others coming off as cold an robotic is in part because forum-esque style means of communication are not my strong suit. I am more adapted to real-time conversations typical of a chatroom experience in which I don't have an endless amount of time in which to form my thoughts and subsequently write them down. Here, in this sort of way I have more time than I know what to do with and in a way this makes me uncomfortable which robs me of my ability to convey... spirit? effectively.
Another reason behind my rather robotic replies is because I seriously messed up on the wiki and people here are not too keen when it comes to putting past issues away. And this is in part due to the fact that I have not really apologized sufficiently for my actions which to me don't seem as dire as others perceive them to be. This is also probably due to me making similar mistakes and then arguing out my position on a medium I am not entirely comfortable with.
You don't sound rude at all. You're right, I do need to improve how I go about doing things so that I don't come to this clashing of the minds as often as I do now. As for me being hung up about the past. I am hung up about it because others are still hung up about it and there is a lot of unresolved differences which I mentioned above.
There is no need to apologize as I am mainly happy that you decided to reach out and say something as opposed to keeping quiet about it.
Thank you for your message!
ᐃᓐᓂᕈᖅᑐᖅ 21:42, January 22, 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I'm the exact opposite. My mind can never come up with a reply quick enough in real life or chatrooms and I usually clam up due to having social anxiety. Online is pretty much the only way I can communicate with people who aren't extremely close to me. Things can get pretty awkward even when talking to people that I am close with.
Sure, but you have to ignore it and focus on making people forget your mess-ups by replacing them with advances. I had a site with around 100 to 200 daily users and wouldn't you know it, I messed up a lot. But, I did my best to learn from each slip-up and pushed forward to try to improve the forums. In the end, I handed over the site to three people that I trusted and saw as more capable than I. I can't stomach being an admin, to hell with that noise (I didn't even make my site by choice, really. We were all from an older forum that was shutting down, so I made the site in an effort to keep everyone together). What I'm trying to say is that it's an assured thing to mess-up. People will hate you and hold you to it, but you have to move on. In the end, it's all okay as long as you feel that you have learned something from it (at least, that's my take on it).
Most users here probably don't even know what happened (I most certainly don't) and I'd argue that's okay. One can be sorry for what has happened/they have done without saying it and I think that, in this instance, not bringing it up in a blog or forum post would be for the best. Just leave it all behind you. I mean, if you can't move on, then how do you expect others to? Your trying to be a positive force and that's the important thing. I want to be clear in regards to the robotic reply thing that I don't want you to change who you are, rather I want you to show us more of you with your posts. You be you, always do that :) Buckle up I'm going to be popular 23:29, January 22, 2016 (UTC)

Re: Arguments

I really think everyone has their different approaches to handling message responses. I tend not to title responses if I think the conversation is just a one-and-done (the picture in question doesn't even look like it belongs on the wiki, maybe I'm missing a super-spooky Slenderman in it, but it looks like a picture of a house.) and doesn't need reference points. On another note, it tends to clutter the TOC (if each user posted a separate title for their message, my talk page would have to be archived every week). For example, my archive is growing every other week. So in short, everyone has different methods for managing their talk pages and responses.

On the point of your back-and-forth with Jay, looking over the messages, it seems like the argument is done. There's no need to intervene there as that would only serve to instigate another one. It looks like you both said your piece and stepping in now would likely result in someone's need to rebuttal, and then the other would rebuttal that rebuttal, ad nauseam. I'd just leave it be. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 16:36, January 23, 2016 (UTC)

I don't think the subject in question really needed a specific title as a reference point as even if the rights to the picture were granted, it would likely not be re-added. You can title messages as reference points for yourself for later, but I think everyone has their own method for managing their talk page to make it effective for them. (I tend to search contributions as my page turns over too frequently and most topics in my field would be deletion related, muddling the search.) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 16:56, January 23, 2016 (UTC)

lolololololololololololololololololololololololol

n

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.