User talk:Bubsty

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 05:05, 28 November 2005

Leave me a message, and I'll get right back to you, hey! Leave me a message, and I'll get right back to you, hey! And don't forget to sign my guestbook before you leave!

Spelling

Hey, Bubsty, I saw that you just added a link to the Wikitour on your welcome message. Just so you know, you misspelled "awesome". I thought you'd want to correct that. Keep on tranglin'! Heimstern Läufer 02:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

If he spelled it as "awexome", that's a forum inside joke and a reference to Awexome Cross. - Kookykman(t)(c)(r)

That's not what it is, though. It's currently spelled "awsome". Heimstern Läufer 02:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Woops! You're right, I didn't mean to spell it that way. Thanks. — _talk Bubsty _edits 03:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

History Repeating

Seriously, what's up with responding to comments left months earlier? That's four now. Could this be a previously undocumented medical condition? —AbdiViklas 05:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Abdi is right, you should just take the time to read the dates they were posted on. There's really no point in responding to it a few months later. Homestramy20|^Talk 05:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. It just so happens I have this thing with my brain that like... won't let me read timestamps. No, actully, some of them were my fault, and I should be whipped for that. But some, I think it doesn't hurt to answer them. Like if someone asks a question I know the answer to I'll answer it, not just for the asker's benifet, but also for any other readers who have the same problem. — _talk Bubsty _edits 05:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah; this would be an example of that. But in cases where some IP asked a stupid question that's been ignored for months, it's best not to disturb nature's delicate balance. —AbdiViklas 05:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I won't anymore. — _talk Bubsty _edits 06:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Apologies

My apologies. The wiki I am from doesn't require people to discuss uncontroversial moves before hand. I'll be more considerate in the future. BrokenSegue 06:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Just being curious, what wiki were you from? - Kookykman(t)(c)(r)

It's ok. Just warning you. — _talk Bubsty _edits 18:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

"the wiki", Wikipedia. (Wikipedia:User:BrokenSegue, I'm an admin/sysop/op there) BrokenSegue 07:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I was gonna comment on this a while ago, but I just ... didn't. I I just wanted to mention, that I think the difference in culture between that wiki and ours is that almost nothing is an uncontroversial move. By that I mean that even the slightest letter, or slightest technical issue ensues into a "heated" debate. :) And that precision spills over into page names. I wish I had examples I could link to but I couldn't come up with any off the top of my head. So don't worry too much, it's just a cultural difference in some sense. And those usually lead to misunderstandings. That said, welcome to the wiki! --Stux 16:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Isn't our wiki really annoying that way? — _talk Bubsty _edits 01:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, especially how you guys vote on Fun Facts and other things. If I have a fun fact, I'm just going to add it. If you don't think it's "fun" or "interesting" you can remove it with an explanation. I doubt people would come to blows over this. *sigh* Alright, I'll stop bothering you now. BrokenSegue 03:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't. It's up to other people to STUFF fun facts. I believe the STUFF maker is furrykef, who's also a sysop at "your" wiki. — _talk Bubsty _edits 04:09, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Oh, you doubt? But actually I don't think it's annoying. Frustrating, at times, yes, but it's a byproduct of the fact that this is a fansite, focused on one body of work. At the Big Wiki the bioengineers don't give a crap about the literary historian's issues, neither of whom are particularly concerned about the hot topics in Balkan exports. Here, we're like, say, a bunch of Egyptologists all studing one dig site. Everybody has the same field of interest, and every edit is essentially peer-reviewed. Although this makes work slower, I think it ultimately makes it better. What our wiki culture lacks in spontaneity, perhaps, it makes up for in accuracy, which I think is ultimately a more desirable quality for a knowledge base.

And BrokenSegue, I like Stux's mention of culture; it is essentially a cultural difference, and I hope, instead of being scared away by it, you ultimately get acclimated and think of it not as "you guys" but as "us." Also I apologize for just doing the very thing you're talking about—respond in a big way to a minor detail! —AbdiViklas 04:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Woah, hold your horses there Abdi. I lost you after that first sentence there. — _talk Bubsty _edits 04:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I may point out that Abdi has a history of making extremely lengthy (but still interesting) essay-like replies to a variety of topics... But it's all true. --DorianGray

So I see. — _talk Bubsty _edits 04:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

The Reader's Digest version: Yeah, HRWiki culture seems petty. But it means a better product. —AbdiViklas 04:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)