User talk:Buddy13

"I built this place. Down here, I make the rules. Down here... I'm God." -- Not really, but it sounds cool. Doesn't it? -Buddy

Working together
Hi Buddy13. At the Futurama Wikia, we now have 511 articles, and you have 565 here. It's great to see so many people working on this content, but I'm wondering if it would be better to combine forces and merge these two projects. After all, 1076 articles would be better! What do you think? Could a merger work? Angela 21:39, 3 February 2008 (PST)
 * I think I speak for most of us, when I say that we wouldn't exactly like the project to continue on Wikia. But rather have it continuing here (as an off Wikia wiki), personally, I consider Wikia as the geocities of Wikis.  It is filled with ads, etc.  And it does not keep in style with well known wikis such as Wikipedia.  So if you were to move all the content over here, and "close" down the wiki on Wikia and rather link to here, then sure.  But I have a hint that this may not occur.  Also, you may claim you have 511 articles, but most of our articles are much longer than yours.  --SvipTalk 04:15, 4 February 2008 (PST)
 * Hi Svip. I'm sorry you think Wikia is full of ads. If you log in, there are no ads, and even for non-logged in users, there's just one ad in the top right corner when using the default skin. The wikipedia (monobook) skin is available as an option. See this example if you prefer that style. If that changes your mind, the offer of a merger with Wikia is always open. Angela 18:32, 6 February 2008 (PST)
 * I agree with Svip. I don't see such a thing happening unless we suffer a massive cash flow problem. Right now I'd say the benefit of a merge would be minimal to us. Also, with the two wikis covering the same topics the maths is closer to 511 + 565 <= 600 and a lot of headache for those merging articles. - Quolnok 20:29, 6 February 2008 (PST)
 * As the others before me have said, we're not likely to migrate to a wikia page. I appreciate your offer, though, and we always welcome people here. The benefits of migrating here are that the site is wholly owned by me, and totally paid out of my pocket (unless people donate ;), so there are literally zero ads (and there never will be). And this also gives us the freedom to do nearly anything we want with the wiki, including extensions and the like (I don't know if wikia allows extensions, so I may be off on that point). Merging articles from such disparate styles would indeed be tedious, but I'm sure we could work it out if combining forces was agreed upon. I've not personally been to the wikia wiki in a long while, so I don't even know how things look over there. But, as Quolnok said, since most of our articles are on the same thing, it wouldn't give either of us a thousand articles, but rather some lower number. My only concern is stolen text/images. If we do not merge, I hope that we can continue to respect each others' members by not copy/pasting text or images from the other's wiki. Please consider joining us here at the Infosphere. :D --Buddy 13:23, 7 February 2008 (PST)

Adding collaborative videos to your Wiki
Hello,

My name is Avigail Perl and I work with all our Wiki partners here at Kaltura.

As you may have heard, through a partnership with the Wikimedia Foundation, Kaltura has developed a collaborative video extension to the MediaWiki software. (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Collaborative_Video)

What this means is that ANY site using MediaWiki software can add the Kaltura collaborative video extension to its wiki easily and quickly today, by adding the software extension that is available for download.

Looking at your Wiki I thought you might be interested in adding our new collaborative video extension. With this capability, any of your users can add images, videos and sounds to the collaborative videos created, or edit them using the full-featured online video editor (with full history and versioning similar to the text-wiki).

In order to add this collaborative video extension to you site, all you need to do is:

1.      Apply for a Partner ID here:  http://www.kaltura.com/index.php/cms/signup

2.     Download the Kaltura MediaWiki extension here: sourceforge.net/projects/kaltura/

3.     Add the extension to your site

I’d love to discuss this in more detail, answer any questions and help move this forward.

Thank you,

Avigail
 * A. Stick to the format of making comments here, please.  B.  I do not think we are really in grave need of such an extension, we rarely apply videos or feel the need to do so for our content.  Since most of the content we describe is protected by copyright laws, etc., we wish to avoid getting in any trouble with any of the companies who own these rights, I think so far I'd say no. --SvipTalk 02:25, 11 February 2008 (PST)
 * Agreed, I don't think videos are really necessary on the Infosphere, since the only thing we'd be showing videos of would be Futurama, which would just get us in trouble (Fox is known for copyright crackdowns), but thanks anyway. :D --Buddy 07:56, 11 February 2008 (PST)

License discussion!
I have a discussion which I'd very much like you to participate in. It is over at the Conference Table. Go man, go! --SvipTalk 11:10, 7 June 2008 (PDT)

k
since you, uh, created this joint, and, uh, memorized every single episode, you should probably know that Goofy Gopher Revue is wrong. just signed up to let you know. please change it when you get the chance. thanks. Wilkos 01:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the info. As you can already see, some of the quicker members have taken care of it (or at least, members who live in a time zone where they get off work before I do). Now I'm going to have to re-watch that episode. Again. --Buddy 23:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

hey buddy
what do you think about the collectors' items included in the new dvd? i think they're AWESOME! - Wilkos 23:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean the little postcards? Yeah, they're nice. I'll never mail them to anyone, though&mdash;I'd rather just keep them nice and pretty. And the nude volleyball is the same as the one that came with BBS. Or very similar. I'll never be able to afford the actual prints, though. One of them was almost $500 (USD).

Merger
Hey, I just wanted make sure you're aware of my message on the Community Portal. Just take a look and leave me some feedback, thanks! Joeyaa 20:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

CSS!
Thy silly man, thou haveth completely ignoreth my new CSS at the Conference Table. Just add   to thy User:Buddy13/monobook.css article. --SvipTalk 23:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't ignored it. I even have a comment there. I just didn't think it was done yet. I shall now place it into my style receptacle. --Buddy 15:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Build-a-bot Devil
Was your Robot Devil insanely hard to put together, without feeling like it's about to break? - Quolnok 06:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, all "build your own" figures are a little tough, because the joints are made to just barely fit, and then they paint over them, making them just a micron or two too large. The trick is to push and rotate the joint back and forth until it pops in. --Buddy 22:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

New Quote on Main Page
I think we should have a new quote now that the show is close to coming back from the animatic like "yeah were back".Sir Mr. Dr. Professor FutureFan 01:33, 13 May 2010 (CEST)

Your Moves
1) NOBODY Agreed to move it to Susan except you.

2) You didn't wait for an answer

3) You did not cite any transcript as your source to justify the move

4) Any attempt to move from Susan Boil may result in a block, as discussed by the admins--Icyweaner2999 03:20, 7 August 2011 (CEST)


 * What are you, retarded? I am an admin. Now let us see your points:

1) It wasn't moved to Susan originally by me, but by Quolnok, one of the most high-ranking admins here. I was simply moving it back, after you moved it without waiting for anyone to agree or even ask.

2) You not only didn't wait for an answer, you didn't even ask. You moved it to a location that was incorrect, claimed it was based on something Leela said, but couldn't be bothered to check the transcript to see if you were correct. Which you weren't.

3) Nor did you.

4) See above.


 * But have fun trying to get me blocked for correcting your mistakes. --Buddy 03:27, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Oh, so because you're an admin you get to do whatever you want, including call people retarded? How mature of you, so worthy of administrative power. Nobody agreed with Quolnok, nobody agreed with you. Thus, it was moved back to the original article name, Susan BOIL. Just because you are an admin doesn't mean you're above the rules.--Icyweaner2999 03:34, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * No, I don't do whatever I want. I use my brain. You moved something to a WRONG location without a reason, then give someone else crap for doing (what you perceived as) the same thing. THEN you threaten to get that user blocked without even bothering to check with whom you're speaking. The article was created at "Susan Boil" incorrectly, as that name is never given. On the talk page (which is where such things should be discussed, instead of doing whatever you want unilaterally) I suggested it be moved to "Susan the boil" -- Which Quolnok then did. I could have moved it, yes, but I felt that others should have input into the decision. Then you came along and decided to move it back to "Susan Boil" without consulting anyone (or apparently bothering to check the talk page or the transcript, which you claim to have based your decision upon). Quolnok then moved it to "Susan" which is still more factually accurate than yours. You moved it again back to "Susan Boil" thus initiating a move war with two admins. I saw what was hapenning, attempted to fix it by moving it to "Susan the boil" -- before I noticed Quolnok's move to "Susan" -- a mistake I then attempted to fix by moving it again to "Susan". By all means, continue this conversation if you wish. Explain why it's okay for you to move things around without asking, and why you jump on anyone else who does the same thing. --Buddy 03:44, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

So, this justifies calling people retarded? I provided my sources, you didn't. Clearly, a non-specified transcript is unreliable, especially when posted on a wiki. The transcript has been on the site for over 13 months. It wasn't an error then, was it? Susan Boil is where it will stay, as indicated by Matt, the higher power.03:55, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * I just thought it was cute that you invoked an authority you don't have, and claimed that a move would result in a block, as discussed by admins. Where, exactly, was this discussed in a way that involved you? And you're still not citing sources. I have stated that the transcript does not contain the phrase. The transcript is easily found on the proper page here. And you keep claiming your actions are based on information that does not exist. Show me where Leela used the phrase. Show me where Matt said officially that her name was Susan Boil. --Buddy 04:08, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

So, more disrespect, huh? You provided a redlink, and still have not justified calling me retarded. You could've easily edited the transcript, If it exists, in your favor. Last time i checked, power abuse is a blockable offense. You had no right to call me retarded, or my confronting of your little game as cute --Icyweaner2999 04:18, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * The redlink has been corrected (forgot the pipe). And any idiot can check the edit history of the transcript and see that I have never once touched it. Can you explain to me exactly what part of my actions you'd consider a "game"? The part where an admin moved something from where you want it based on false information? Or the part where you adamantly put it back, again based on false information? Or the part where a second admin (me) tried to correct the error? There has not been one example of power abuse. Show me where. I know the rules; I wrote most of them. Which is why I know to ask before moving something to somewhere it's already been moved from. I owe you no respect, as you have shown none by defying an admin's move (Quolnok's), and then doing a second time (mine). If you want respect, try showing some. You are not all-knowing, and people who disagree with you aren't automatically wrong. --Buddy 04:28, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * Transcript. I re-watched the episode on both occasions that I moved it. Did you ever? She is never called Susan Boil in the episode as you claimed. If you can find a source that has her name as "Susan Boil", an official source such as a quote in an interview or a commentary, then it can stay there. Your current reference has been proven to be miss-remembered. If you can't find anything, it goes back. Personally, I think her name is probably "Turanga Susan", but this hasn't been mentioned anywhere either. I'm posting this over at the appropriate talk page too. - Quolnok 04:39, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Quolnok, that's only as you claim, so you still haveno source. You haveprovided no actual proof. Now, Buddy I tried to respect you, until you called me a retard. You know the game you're playing, it's called How to Abuse Power and Get Away With It. Neither of you provided viable sources, so, as any user would, I moved it back to the original name. I at least am following the rules. Since you wrote the rules, everyone would expect you to be its best follower. What bad expectations we had.--Icyweaner2999 04:47, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * What? Where's your damn source? You are the one who wants to move it to the WRONG name. Provide a reason. This is NOT wikipedia. We reached consensus (without you, which is the part that pisses you off) and moved it to a name that made more sense. There is nothing in the rules that states every move has to be run by you. I don't know what part of the rules you think we broke, other than moving something without your permission. I see that you have been cited for unnecessary hostility before. And for making edits without good reason (or even expressly against reason). You wanna see abuse of power? Watch this. --Buddy 04:53, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Via email from Icyweaner2999: "I knew exactly you were going to do that. I confront you about your bad behavior, claim I'm harassing you without any evidence, just like what started the conversation. You have not won, and the fact that you blocked me using false reasons only hurts you. I request to be unblocked. You do realize that the previous hostility was corrected by an unblock within an hour because they realized I had good intentions, right? Same situation here"
 * The block is for one day; I think you can wait it out. I would say I hope you learn from it, but you won't. And you still never said what exactly was my bad behavior, other than moving a page in a way you disagreed with (and you argued based on wrong information). Not continuing this conversation. --Buddy 05:11, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Fine, I'll continue. Whatever. "Icyweaner2999: You treated me with no respect when I was only trying to politely point out what you did wrong by moving the page. You still think you can't be punished for calling me a retard, which you had no right to do. So, that's why I should be unblocked, because YOU were behaving unbecoming of am admin and disrespecting other users"
 * There was nothing polite about threatening me with banning (an authority you do not have, so I'm curious how you planned to follow through on this threat). I was disrespectful in response to your vague threat to try to get "the admins" to block me. You are a bully, threatening people you don't agree with, and you're upset that you used your techniques on the wrong person. I called you retarded because all four of your points were not just wrong, but could easily have been corrected yourself, had you taken the time to check a couple things before making an ass of yourself. Perhaps I made a poor choice in words, but I will not apologize for them, because I still believe in what I said (which actually was a question of your mental competency, not name-calling). I didn't call you retarded, I asked if you were retarded. A fine distinction, I know. Point is: You're a hypocrite and kind of a jerk. You did something without reason, and then got pissed when people undid it, demanding to know what their justification was. You seem to hold a double standard, where your actions are beyond reproach, and everyone else must answer to you. This is incorrect. --Buddy 05:35, 7 August 2011 (CEST)
 * Perhaps now would be a good time for Icy to find that source and re-watch the episode. - Quolnok 05:39, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Well apparently I'm not allowed to post "private" emails. I will respect this wish, because in terms of copyright, you do indeed own your own words and have a say in where and how and whether they are published. But I will draw attention to this one last thing: "...unblock me before Svip does." In other words, I'd better unblock you before you attempt to go over my head and get someone else to unblock you? It's a 24-hour block. Suck it up. You are an unrepentant confrontational jerk with a sense of entitlement and a refusal to ever explain your actions while demanding the same of others, and I doubt anyone will question my insignificant act of punishment upon you. I have NEVER had a hostile conflict with anyone here, yet you seem to have done so with nearly every active user. --Buddy 06:23, 7 August 2011 (CEST)

Break
After Icyweaner2999 was unable to see why people had a problem with his behaviour, I at first just gave up on him, but since he clearly evaded his block, I decided to give him an infinite block. I consider block evasions of an especially high lack of respect and moreover, claiming at the same time to be another person when he was so obviously not. See Talk:Möbius Dick. --Sviptalk 10:25, 8 August 2011 (CEST)
 * Yeah, I started seeing suspicious edits almost right away, but I wasn't sure it was him until that part where an anonymous IP took up his part of that argument. Clearly the same person. --Buddy 10:37, 8 August 2011 (CEST)

I just read all this. This sucks. Icy was a good editor for quite a while. :( - akitalk 13:11, 8 August 2011 (CEST)

Icy has now e-mailed me trying to get me on his side. Sigh. - akitalk 17:57, 8 August 2011 (CEST)


 * I agree that probably 90% of his edits were good-faith edits, and he was knowledgeable. The problem was that things had to be presented in a way he agreed with, or he'd make sweeping changes without discussing it with anyone (other than to complain when people undid his changes). He frequently removed large chunks of information without a single reason given in the edit summary (or, in at least one case, something to the effect of "I didn't like it that way"). The sad part is he did this to himself. I sent him to his room for five minutes. He couldn't just wait it out and take a lesson from it. He had to tie his sheets together and climb out the window. And he wasn't sneaky about it, he got caught, and now he's been sent to his room forever. --Buddy 21:52, 8 August 2011 (CEST)