User talk:ISlayedTheKerrek

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 01:54, 6 July 2007

Hi, i'm Dinoshaur, not Dinosaur, you should create a user page. So.... have fun! --Dinoshaur 20:17, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, i'm Color Printer, not Printer, and you should stop trolling talk pages. he already has a user page. --Color Printer

Possible addition of joke on your user page

Hi, ISTK. I just wanted to suggest to you that you could add something like "...but I didn't slay the peas-an-try" to the first line of your user page. When I first saw your username and clicked on your user page for the first time, I thought sure I'd see a joke referencing Eric Clapton/Bob Marley in there somewhere, but alas. Just a suggestion that I thought I'd throw to you, since I figured you'd like jokes TBC might use since it appears you're a fan of their style of humor. Cheers. —THE PAPER ^PREEEOW 17:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

About your user page...

What be up Mr. Thekerrek? Sorry, but I just thought I could make a suggestion. Your user page seems a little (how should I put this) white. Since you supposedly slayed the Kerrek why not add a pic to your page depicting your triumphant victory, like...

I mean, take a look at my user page. It's been overrun by pix! Cheatachu72 03:05, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Very nice, Cheatachu! I think I'll add this. --ISlayedTheKerrek 17:58, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Cool. You're my newest homeslice! Cheatachu72 04:31, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hey Dude!

I think your webpages are AWESOME!!! For real. -Kinsey

-I have a fan? Cool. Muchas gracias, Kinsey. --ISlayedTheKerrek 19:15, 25 Jul 2005 (UTC)

How to STUFF

Hey there ISlayedTheKerrek. You really need to take a look at the instructions for how to STUFF. — It's dot com 02:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I did. I don't know how it came out the original way, and besides the point, why was STUFF made so hard to do? The old version was a lot more serviceable- never really understood why it was changed. --ISlayedTheKerrek 02:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

It was changed because it was too unorganized. It had deteriorated into a haphazard forum where votes were hard to tabulate and personal attacks were rife. — It's dot com 02:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the Winds

I didn't revert your change of Winds to Brass because it's still technically correct, but it's not true that the trumpet isn't a memeber of the Winds; you're thinking specifically of woodwinds. Brass is a subsection of Winds (i.e. instruments you blow into). —AbdiViklas 23:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Ya got a point, but I was always told that wind instruments usually referred to woodwinds. That's what they taught me in school, that's what I stick with. --ISlayedTheKerrek 04:02, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Brass and woodwind are both wind instruments. Brass just have mouthpieces, while Woodwinds have reeds. -- Salty 04:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Either way, sign your piece. --ISlayedTheKerrek 04:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot. Also, I don't know why it says my name is Salty. I'm Lappy 486. -- Lappy 486 04:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Wait, are you saying you weren't doing that yourself? That's weird. —AbdiViklas 04:13, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

You mean how I didn't make it say Salty? I don't know why it does that. My username is Salty on some forums, though. It just says Salty when I do the two hyphens. -- Salty 04:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Check your preferences, maybe? --DorianGray

I was gettin' a little worried...I thought my talk page was possessed, lol. --ISlayedTheKerrek 04:20, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Seriously, that's still weird. Are you signing with "-- ~~~~"? And it's piping your link for you? —AbdiViklas 04:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

That's what I sign off with. But I guess it's okay, because I decided to request a name change. To Salty. Cuz Salty is my name on a lot of forums. -- Salty 04:36, 26 November 2005 (UTC) <---Still says Salty

Hello

Just felt like saying hi.--Homsarroks 19:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi

Yo I give you a Kerrek So you slay it I'm never giving you anything again.TheThingé 01:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Consider said Kerrek slayed. Muchas gracias, Thing. --ISlayedTheKerrek 02:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Summarize

Hello, and thanks for contributing to the HRWiki. When editing a page, there is a field labeled "Summary" under the main edit-box. Please remember to always fill in the summary field, as even a short summary is better than no summary. Indicate in the edit summary field why you changed the page; this will greatly help other contributors in understanding your reasoning. Thanks. (BTW, some great editing lately!) - Qermaq - (^T/C)  17:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes

Hey ISlayedTheKerrek, I noticed that there are some stray table fragments (| and |-) on your user page. Would you like those removed? If so, all you have to do is add the line {{userboxtop}} before the userboxes and |} after them. The thought also occurred to me that you may have omitted these tags on purpose because you didn't want the boxes on the right side of your page; if so, I can make it so that they're centered or appear on the left. Just let me know if you want me to tweak 'em. Best, Trey56 05:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

If you want to, Trey, by all means go ahead and do it. I didn't know what I was doing. I'd appreciate that. --ISlayedTheKerrek 04:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Cool — I'll just set it to the standard right justification unless you'd like otherwise. :) Trey56 06:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Closing STUFF

Hey, I noticed you tried to close the "Chocolate Cake" STUFF item... there is a procedure we like to follow when closing STUFF items – see HRWiki:STUFF/Verdict. If you don't plan to follow all of the steps on that page, please don't close the STUFF item, it just makes things confusing (for instance, the template says "The votes and arguments have been moved to HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/unnatural", but you hadn't actually moved the votes and arguments to that page). --phlip ^T_C 06:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought that was automatic, Phlip. Apparently not. I do apologize for that. --ISlayedTheKerrek 06:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Stuff

Re: STUFF:dreamail - I noticed you voted for the version saying "shows like SBTB" and not for the one saying specifically "SBTB". If that's your opinion, that's great, I just wanted to be sure you hadn't overlooked the revision which removed and TTATOT wording. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  03:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I voted for that one because I felt the revision was unnecessary. I mean, the intentions of TBC were rather clear in the DVD commentary, Qermaq. TTATOT doesn't exist there, as I stated before. --ISlayedTheKerrek 16:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

That's totally cool, just wanted to be sure you saw it. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  23:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Stains on Head fact

Hey there, ISlayedTheKerrek. I read the comments you made on the STUFF fact Stains on Head, and I just wanted to mention a couple things. First, that fact has been open for a week and has had a 10+ vote difference for a few days now. I meant to close it earlier today, but I didn't have a chance before you posted your comment.

Second, you mentioned that the decliners' votes were invalid — a vote is never invalid just because the voter didn't provide an argument satisfactory to those who voted the other way. It could be that those who voted against simply didn't feel like taking the time to explain why they were voting the way they did, or, more likely, their arguments don't seem satisfactory simply because they were voting the other way. Either way, there's no obligation for an item's arguments to be suitable to both sides for the outcome to be valid.

At any rate, I just wanted to explain why the vote was ended since you posted a comment close to the time at which I closed it. Later, Trey56 05:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason why I said the votes were invalid was because none of them were apparently based on whether or not the stains themselves resembled a smiley-face, but whether they were intended to. To me, that was not what the fact was about. If you're going to decline it, fine, I got no problem with that. But I sensed false pretenses. --ISlayedTheKerrek 01:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Captions

I've noticed that you like to change image captions, but a lot of the time it seems that what was already there is better than what you're replacing it with, and that you're changing it just for the sake of changing it. — It's dot com 18:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Sometimes that is the case. However, I fail to see what was wrong with that caption, as well as the one Loafing changed. I only change when I feel there's better fitting captions. If they get reverted, so be it, but I don't have to like it. --ISlayedTheKerrek 00:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Things should indeed be changed when you feel there is a real need for change. Not simply, "this would be cool" but "this would be better and I can justify it somehow". Still, if your only justification is "I think it's funnier" then prepare for other senses of humor to form an opposing consensus. If you find changes are being routinely reverted, it might do you well do discover what it is that causes that. - Qermaq - (^T/C)  01:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)