User talk:Jay/Archive3

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 02:59, 31 January 2006

See User talk:Jay/Archive for old discussions.

Sysop duties 8/27/05

Thanks, Jay. Thank you, thank you. How do you like that {{delete}} template It's dot com and I collaborated on? Kind of makes it easier to delete because you don't have to enter in a reason manually, huh? Speaking of blocking that David Brown spammer, here is another IP that has been used the past few days: 82.67.192.173. Thanks again for cleaning up. —BazookaJoe 16:36, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

True dat. I'd seen that guy in the past but for some reason thought he'd already been blocked. I'm gonna run a check on his IP address before deciding to block the range or just the single address. --Jay (Talk) 16:39, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and my computer's not running this site at full speed; last night, it even 509'd me (heck, I'm surprised I can use it now!) I think it may go down again by the end of the month... --Jay (Talk) 16:40, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's not your computer running slow; it's the server. Everybody was 509'd for a short while last night. I was sleeping. Glad it came back up. —BazookaJoe 16:43, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I know why it's running slow; I guess I just wasn't clear (this computer's only a couple of months old, so it probably wouldn't be running slowly under normal conditions.) I almost wish it had stayed 509'd for real, as then Willy on Wheels (the moron I suspect is responsible for the page move vandalism) wouldn't have been able to do anything. --Jay (Talk) 16:47, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Halloween Costumes - Three Extra?

Hey Jay, I know this is kinda looking a ways back, but I just realized now that you added three alternate costumes to the Costumes page, from a 'secret page'. I was just wondering where you found that, hopefully to add a link or something. Thanks! ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 19:33, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

This page, which is already linked on Secret Pages. Also see Talk:Marzipan. --Jay (Talk) 19:41, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Jay.I did check secret pages, but I just did Ctr+F, and searched for halloween. The link is much appreciated. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 19:58, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I think I'd done that once before. Yeah, "Halloween" definitely should have been somewhere in the description. Ah well. --Jay (Talk) 20:03, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

RACIST!!!!!!!!

You blocked somebody just because they have a Japanese screenname unblock 'em or I'll tell Jimbo Wales on the big wikpedia

That user happened to be a troll. Jay was correct to block them. And we don't have anything to do with Jimbo or Wikipedia. We just use the same software. -- Tom 21:19, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

What was his name? I wanna translate it, see if it means anything mean. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3

Look on the block log at 17:00, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC) (the time shows up as your local time). You can't miss it. Oh, and if you know Greek, you can do the one two lines up, as well. — It's dot com 19:47, 8 Sep 2005 (UTC)

The Japanesse one roughly translates into "King woman of shining of rainbow", I am working on the Greek one now. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3

The Greek one roughly translates into "utmost cows" --TotalSpaceshipGirl3

RACIST AGIAN!!!!

You blocked -Erson just because he's gay (which he openly admits on the brianrietta discussion right. please clarify if you didn't. but until then you are guilty until proven innocent

User:-Erson was a page move troll. If you bother Jay again, I'm going to have to block you for personally attacking him. -- Tom 21:21, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

To clarify, there was a page-move troll who impersonated actual members. You're therefore thinking of someone else. (Also, racism wouldn't apply here, BTW.) — It's dot com 21:23, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Yes, both blocked members were trolls. I found the user name for the first one unreadable (my computer does not display Japanese fonts; for all I know he could have been swearing in Japanese and I'd have had no clue) but the real reason for blocking him was his trolling. The latter was a troll commonly known as Willy on Wheels who impersonated -erson (note the lowercase e) and about fifty other people (notice that I also blocked one "J ay", but clearly I'm not going to block myself). -erson is not blocked and has done nothing worth blocking him over as far as I've seen (I'm not homophobic and don't care about his sexual orientation in the least.) YOU, on the other hand... --Jay (Talk) 00:32, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

whoever you are, you just got served by jay. Seriously 02:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

He got served well over 4 months ago. Contributing to such conversations aren't really contributions, and tricks poor Jay into thinking he's got new messages. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 02:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just going crazy trying to find the new message! Well, okay, no, I wasn't going crazy, but I was a bit confused. --Jay (Talk) 05:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Heh heh, then I guess it was worth it. ;) ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 05:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Undelete

Jay, could you please undelete User talk:Be's careful? A WoW sockpuppet with that username created that, and I would like to keep it as evidence of who he is. —BazookaJoe 01:10, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I'm personally against it, as the name has been blocked indefinitely and WoW couldn't use it again if he wanted to. But I did it anyway. --Jay (Talk) 01:21, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

IMO, registered trolls' user pages should not be deleted, unless they contain obscene content. I also didn't want JoeyDay to delete all of the impersonation accounts (but it's too late now), just in case I decide to make a WoW template. I was also going to tell you that his accounts here are logged on Wikipedia, but I can see you've already noticed that. —BazookaJoe 01:32, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Not all of his accounts - the impersonations are absent. --Jay (Talk) 01:35, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

The impersonation accounts no longer exist here, so I, thinking like a computer, decided it didn't matter. —BazookaJoe 01:37, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Anyway, since most of WoW's edits are page moves, they don't show up on our Contributions pages, so even if the user names were never deleted, there wouldn't be any evidence that he did do any wrongdoing except in our own memories. --Jay (Talk) 01:37, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Insult to Insult

Jay, your comment about me sounds very insulting. "Dont'cha like me?" (trogga)

It wasn't meant to be very insulting, but you have been known to delete facts or information from pages with no consensus, and after you've already made the very changes and had them reverted. I have a tendency to be blunt, I admit, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em. --Jay (Talk) 02:16, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Blue Jay

Hey, Jay! Just so you know, your racist friend has just made fun of you in a sad, sad, way. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 03:04, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

To elaborate, he made this edit and moved Homsar's Main Page to Homsar Main Page on theon wheeles. It's all in the past now. —BazookaJoe 03:15, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Homsar... main... page... on... WHAT?! Tell me it's not... --Jay (Talk) 06:08, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

68.200.46.214

Jay, 68.200.46.214 is a garden variety troll, and has made a few edits, including a vulgar one to strongbadman's user page [1]. Should he be added to WikiTroll? — Lapper (talk) 21:21, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

No need, I'll look into it and take care of him. --Jay (Talk) 21:21, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Okay, just wondering. The edits were minor anyway. — Lapper (talk) 21:24, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Trolll from HRFWiki!

The troll Marshie Man trolled me, as an I.P address. How do I know it was him? His user page said marshie man lives. And he, was from the HRFWiki. Thanks for taking care of that. H*R 700

I actually haven't been on the site lately that much, and there are other sysops around. I also have no jurisdiction over the Fanstuff Wiki. But if someone else hasn't, I'll check it out. --Jay (Talk) 20:45, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Oh dear! Someone has deleted the entire Fanstuff Wiki database! Oh wait, that's just Tom, upgrading. — It's dot com 20:47, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Uh... okay? This guy was a real troll, and left unblocked, so I did the 24 hour thing since it was pointed out to me. --Jay (Talk) 20:48, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I thought he was reporting trolling on the fanstuff. I went there to see, and there was no data there. — It's dot com

No, no. I think he was just informing me that he was a user on the fanstuff Wiki, probably in hopes that I'd block him there too or something. --Jay (Talk) 20:54, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

No, nothing like that. I jsut wanted to point out that he was on the Fanstuff wiki, before. I know you don't have a user, there. H * R 7 0 0

Why

Why'd you delete the Teen Girl Squad characters page? I was about to make an edit! And what happened to my account!? --daunrealist

Never mind, my account disappeared for a second. But why the deletion?

I stupidly hit the "delete" button instead of "Edit," and didn't pay attention (I was reverting.) Oops! Fixed it now. Sorry about that. :[ --Jay (Talk) 21:19, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, ok.

With great power, comes great responsibility... Sorry, I just had to rub that mistake in.  :) ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 03:53, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, I'm sure you're Mr. Perfect. --Jay (Talk) 05:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

But it's true you know, just like being a super user. -- Tom 01:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

207.27.152.6

Actually, I thought he was on to something there—"I too miss video games?" Surely something better than that can be found. —AbdiViklas 05:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps, but simply making it "The Olda Boys" isn't really any better. --Jay (Talk) 05:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Howdy there, Jay...

I was just wondering why you or any of the other mods aren't making a big stink about the Sebastian Coe fun fact currently on the STUFF page. It's a big coincidence, even moreso than the infamous Change Of Pace fun fact that you and I fought over, and yet no one is saying anything. Just wanted to know what the deal was. --ISlayedTheKerrek 22:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

It isn't really the job of us "mods" to make a stink about content. Sysops perform maintenance and help keep people in line, but in questions of content our vote counts the same as everybody else. (That's the theory anyway. We all know that it's not completely true. But it's something to strive for.) I can't (and wouldn't) speak for Jay, but I'm not completely convinced this item is wrong. (I'm not convinced it's right, either, which is why I haven't voted. In fact, looking at the page, I see that a lot of people with good heads on their shoulders are still on the fence.) And what does the item really say? "'Seb' may be a reference..." Well, okay, it may be a reference. Everyone who is voting to accept it (and I stress again that I don't necessarily agree with them) knows that it's not certainly a reference, just that it may be. Ordinarily, we nip "may be" facts in the bud, and for good reason. Most of them are total rubbish. But we have to be flexible enough to allow such a fact to make it through the process if enough people agree with it (and, at last count, it's lopsided by a 4-to-1 margin). And doing so doesn't mean that the process is broken, or that everyone has suddenly gone mad. I'm not trying to argue the merits for or against this particular fact. All I'm saying is that how this particular vote goes is not a good indicator of whether nor not the world is ending. — It's dot com 23:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I understand, Dot com, but the thing is such a stink was made about the other fact, which I believe had more of a factual basis than this one, and it was not put up for whatever reason. It would just seem awfully hypocritical to let one that is an actual coincidence stand and b**ch and moan about another one that wasn't as clear cut. (I know you didn't do it, Dot com, but Jay did, and that's why I put this here.) --ISlayedTheKerrek 01:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I think you're going to find that even reasonable people will disagree from time to time on what is clear cut. For example, some people with whom I have chatted find this current item quite plausible, or at least are undecided like I am. And even a certain person with a reputation for declining good facts (I'll let you figure out who) even voted for it. — It's dot com 02:17, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

This is one that I have literally no opinion on. Notice that I never even voted for it. Dot Com hit the nail on the head: what's plausible or clear-cut to one person may not be to someone else. The Family Guy thing is one I simply cannot wrap my brain around; the timing made it near-impossible as far as I can see, and, if TBC really did get the idea from Family Guy, it was less a reference and more a stolen joke. This one is plausible, in theory; I don't like the fact but I don't dislike it enough to say that it's definitely not true. --Jay (Talk) 05:11, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and despite the comment to the contrary on STUFF, the Change of Pace fact was added to the do over page and has not been removed, despite my protests. Thus, I can either assume that you were a) mistaken or b) trying to garner sympathy for your opinion. --Jay (Talk) 05:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I never saw the fact put back on the page, but I still don't think it was fair what you did. And I will contest this fact if it is accepted, because there is absolutely no factual basis behind it. --ISlayedTheKerrek 13:46, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Dude, it's a guy nicknamed "seb" who runs a mile. It could be a coincidence, but the odds of something like this are so rare that you can't just dismiss it as obviously and definitely untrue. - Joshua 14:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, ISlayedTheKerrek, you have to have grounds for contesting a verdict. That is, you have to show that something was wrong with the way the vote itself was handled. Looking at this vote, I see that it is being conducted properly and fairly. The item is worded carefully so as to be factual while taking into account the speculation (yes, speculation; on rare occasions we allow ourselves to do that). Each voter, as far as I should be able to tell, is aware of this wording and the speculation, and those who choose to accept are all comfortable with it. Because of this vote's sensitive nature, it will not be closed even one minute before the standard 14-day period is complete. Everything is on the up-and-up, and if the vote holds it will be placed on the page. Your contesting, should you make good on your threat, will be groundless. — It's dot com 15:03, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I dislike the fact that not only are you attacking Jay, but you're using his own talk page to do it under false pretenses. You suggested it would be hypocritical for him not to make a fuss about this fact, but later you said that you "don't think it was fair what [he] did" in the Change of Pace fact. You can't have it both ways. It seems the only reason you posted here was to try and goad him into taking a stand because you hoped it would support your position. Then, when he didn't back you up, you threatened to do the very thing you claimed was unfair for him to do. — It's dot com

Whoa, whoa, whoa! You're taking what I said out of context, Dot Com. First of all, what false pretenses am I doing this under? I'm noting that there is another controversial fun fact out there, and bringing up what happened the last time that that had happened. But whatever. Secondly, I wasn't trying to goad him into doing anything. I just wanted to know why no one said anything. That's all. Maybe you didn't like my choice of words, and maybe I shouldn't have said anything to begin with. Did I expect Jay to back me up? Quite frankly, no. If he wanted to, that was his business. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHY NO ONE SAID ANYTHING. THAT'S ALL. And why did you say I attacked Jay? I never said anything that can be considered an attack! That hurts me- I've done nothing wrong on this wiki. I've tried hard to be a good Wiki member, but apparently no one sees that. Maybe I shouldn't have said anything, but I just was curious. If being curious is bad, then I'm sorry. --ISlayedTheKerrek 19:03, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps "attack" was too strong a word. If that was not your intent, then I apologize. I certainly was not trying to be hurtful. But I did feel that there were apparent contradictions in what you were saying, and that's what I was trying to point out. — It's dot com 19:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I accept your apology, and I understand what you were trying to do (although you sure have a heck of a way of showing it ;)). Let me explain what I meant- although I didn't like what went down there, I thought that if it was gonna be done on one and not another that was along those same lines, it would be sort of hypocritical. (And besides, I know better than to attack someone on their talk page- it doesn't make sense to do it, as we've seen from someone else who doesn't know what the meaning of the word "racism" is). --ISlayedTheKerrek 01:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

ya, he says it! Sbemail

If you listen to the email, homestar says "I'd like to see it try"...unless i am listening to it wrong...just watch the email again, he says "it"!!

I'm quite confident he says "ya" or "you", especially given that he's looking directly at the wagon when he says it. PS. Sign your comments on talk pages. --Jay (Talk) 06:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I just got back from watching it, i am 100-percent sure now that he says "it". I'm sorry if you don't think so...but I listened to it twice and he does, in fact, say it. Listen to it very close next time, and tell me what you hear.

I just did. I heard "Ya". Perhaps you're meshing it with the "T" in "try"? --Jay (Talk) 06:08, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that it's possible that you're speakers may be playing the sounds funny, in result you may hear "it" instead of "ya" or "you". It's obvious that Homestar is saying "ya", in context of the senctence. Homestramy20|^Talk 06:09, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Thats weird...im gonna listen to it one more time...i'll tell you what i hear...

PLEASE, sign your comments on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~) and don't creat a monta... er, don't create new headings for continuing the same discussion. --Jay (Talk) 06:10, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok, i hope this is the right place, and I'm doing it right...anyways, i still hear homestar saying "it"...but if you are so confident, i guess I'll take your word for it...Sbemail 06:24, 22 October 2005 (UTC)--

You got it that time. Perhaps this discussion would be better placed on the montage talk page, but expect more people insisting that it's "ya." --Jay (Talk) 06:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Um... I think an easy way to resolve this discussion would be to check out this page (July 7). — It's dot com 22:09, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, forgot all about that. Well, that settles that. --Jay (Talk) 04:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Stupid Spammer (November 5th)

Can't you just block his entire IP range? Guy is annoying as hell, and why should you work to undo his BS?! --(U)(T)(C) 10:09, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. On another Wiki I sometimes visit, WikiTikiTavi used IPs a few times, and guess what? There's no rhyme or reason. Not just a dynamic IP, but a VERY dynamic one that switches servers. --Jay (Talk) 10:11, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Well... damnit! There has to be a way to permanetly block this tard, right?! --(U)(T)(C) 10:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I wish. I've come up with a solution that will at least reduce the damage that I've proposed to JoeyDay but I'd need him to activate it, if it's even feasible. --Jay (Talk) 10:15, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Here's the really sad thing: take a good look at this page. The stupid spambot keeps hitting IPs it's already tried (unfortunately, it's impossible to confirm just what those IPs are from that page alone, but still...) --Jay (Talk) 11:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Well... eventually you should be able to block all the IPs it tries to use, correct? --(U)(T)(C) 11:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Eh, the auto-blocks you see there are for one day each, no more. And since we can't see what the IP addresses are, we can't do any better than that until it returns. And I have a sinking suspicion that it will... --Jay (Talk) 11:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Didn't this happen to you once before on another forum? --(U)(T)(C) 11:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Wiki. And it came back after reverting (though the sysops on that Wiki seem to have an aversion to use the "block" button, not to mention the fact that they're in short supply.) --Jay (Talk) 11:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I meant wiki! --(U)(T)(C) 11:44, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

secret pages

Ok Jay, feel free to kill my secret page. I just made it as something to do for people who are bored, just something funny. However, if it's in the way, go ahead and kill it. — _talk Bubsty _edits 19:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

West Is Ellipsis

Actually, according to the Chicago Manual of Style (see halfway down the page), ellipses should have spaces before as well as after. Ellipsis does concede that "some write ellipses without spaces," though. I was just wondering, is there a particular standard we base the wiki's on? I know journalists play by a slightly different set of rules on a lot of issues; is that what we're using, since a wiki is somewhat a journalistic entity? —: AbdiViklas 03:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this, and as far... as I know... we write ellipses... without spaces before them... in most cases... --Jay (Talk) 03:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

When I did stuff with journalism way back in the day ... ellipses ... were like ... this. As opposed . . . to a more English-papery . . . way of doing them, or...this. Just..............my two cents.Spell4yr 05:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Ellipses... with spaces? I've never... heard of such a thing. And try reading... this conversation with... the implied pauses. It's... hilarious. --Dorian... Gray

If you were publishing a book . . . this . . . with spaces everywhere . . . is how you would make . . . an ellipsis. But that isn't necessary here, and it could cause bad line breaks. If we're using the ellipsis to actually indicate omitted words, then ... this ... with the space before and after but not internally ... would be fine. If we're indicating a pause... or trailing off... then it looks better... without the space before. No spaces at all...just looks...silly. It's... Dot com 16:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Dot Dot Dot — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 17:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

On a side note, following up the journalistic idea, the bad line break reason is why most journalistic stylebooks wage against the usage of . . . (in favor of ... and it was fun proving my English teacher/newspaper advisor wrong on that; he thought it was . . . for newspapers too). It's how I've become accustomed to using my ellipses, no matter the reason for it. But I can see the argument for... but not...at all.Spell4yr 17:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Newspapers get so many things wrong when it comes to style that I can hardly stand to read them. They try to squeeze as much as they can into as small space as they can, and they will therefore sacrifice accuracy for brevity. So don't get me started on that. I happen to be in the publishing business, and A Dictionary of Modern American Usage and The Chicago Manual of Style are two of my best working companions as I edit the magazine that we print each month. To solve the problem of bad line breaks caused by the internal spaces, I use nonbreaking spaces. I suppose we could do that, too (like this: ". . ."), but that seems overly pedantic. — It's dot com 17:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I see. Understood. (The indentation on my previous reply was correct, by the way -- I'm not reverting the formatting back, but it was more of a reply to you than to Under Construction, though that is quite possibly the best. Usage of ellipses. EVER. Spell4yr 17:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

So it sounds like we're agreed on.... However, do we also maintain that full sentences should end with four, as I just did (period plus ellipsis)? —AbdiViklas 19:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The thing is... we almost never use literal ellipsis points. By that I mean, relatively speaking, we rarely have the need to quote something and leave out part of it. In those cases, I still think that the space before is appropriate: "Do you take your wrestling mask ... off before you go to bed?" The period-plus-ellipsis-points variety (typographically identical to four periods and used when the previous sentence is complete) would be even rarer. We just don't quote that much stuff. Most often we use them as a suspension... to indicate a pause. I personally think the subtlety of the four version versus the three version would be lost on most people and not worth the effort to fix them. By the way, this discussion has taken on a life of its own, and seems to be a bona fide standards conversation. Should it be moved to HRWiki talk:Standards? — It's dot com 19:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps those who feel most passionate about these style issues would like to collaborate on an official HRWiki Style Guide defining what to do in these types of arbitrary grammar/spelling situations. I'd love to see something like that come into existence alongside our Standards. — Joey (talk·edits) 22:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

(This thread has been copied in its entirety at HRWiki talk:Manual of Style.)

Stinkoman Lives

Okay, I know this is awhile back, but please try to remember. Around the week of October 13th, you made a change to the StinkoMan enemies page (sorry there is no link here). You removed my comment about using lives to help store shields and you said that "lives were good for that anymore." Can you explain this. Last time I checked, StinkoMan 20X6 hasn't been changed. Anyway, I'm going to re-post that comment. I've used lives to allow me to go through a level, collect shields, then die and replay the level to get more shields. It's a very good strategy. Please respond soon! SparkPlug 22:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

That stopped working for me a long time ago. Now, you lose a life, your shields reset to 3. --Jay (Talk) 22:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, that's weird. I played it today and my shields stayed at 5.SparkPlug 02:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

No good here. I lost a life (not my last) with six shields in 9.2 and started my next life with just three. Perhaps the old version is in your cache? --Jay (Talk) 05:48, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Userpage Protection

I don't think it's necessary that your userpage is protected. None of the other sysops have their userpages protected. It's the Wiki-way. ;) - Super Sam 15:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

It used to be that a lot of the sysops protected their pages, I guess Jay is the only one now? Homestar Coder 15:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I just don't see any reason to un-protect it. Who needs to edit it besides me? I don't have a "guestbook" on it like some users do. And trolls have been known to edit the user pages of sysops in the past. Now, the trolling greatly reduced when anonny editing was removed a while back, but at the same time, I had been (and, to some extent, still am) busy, so I didn't do much then. And now anonny editing seems to be back... --Jay (Talk) 17:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I used to have mine protected, it was one of the first things I used my sysop powers for. But now that everybody's got those little "This page has been vandalized X times", it kinda makes me jelous. I wouldn't mind a little list of vandalisms. I just wish I'd unprotected it sooner. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 02:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Who do you think I am, E.B. White?

Your line in your edit summary about "Extracurriculariffic, extracurriculariffic, extracurriculariffic. What kind of acrobat do you think I am?" is a reference to Charlotte's Web, if I'm not mistaken. Heimstern Läufer 06:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Very good. Your ten points are redeemable for about $.03 American. --Jay (Talk) 17:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow! That's like... $50 Canadian. (Or it used to be, our dollar's gotten better as of late). ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 02:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

You got an email answered! Or at least somebody who identifies themselves the same way did. Still... Close enough. :) ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 02:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Would you have even posted this if not for the note on my user page? :P --Jay (Talk) 02:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)