View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:37 am

Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 2024
Reply with quote
Yet another obvious example of how the only women who really last on Wikipedia, are ones who are even worse than the men.....(said to court jester EEng:)
Does no one notice this irony: one of the things that makes your talk page so big, is all the notes from people complaining that your talk page is too big? (BTW the reason you were graced with a custom "archive this" notice instead of a template is because the user got a lot of grief for templating me to archive my talk page. Even though mine is a tiny seedling compared to your magnificent tree here.) -- MelanieN (talk) 22:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
No Melanie, NOBODY but you gets the irony of how Section 353 of a Wikipedia talk page, a perfectly sensible request to archive it, met with the usual sarcastic bullshit reply, increased its length by one whole section.

As any moron can see, if they have the time and the computing resources, more space is taken up on that page by people encouraging the child and thumbing their noses at the very idea they could ever not be a giant asshole, than serious requests to archive.

The fact this is now only Section 190 is what I find hilarious about this whole farce......
Please don't archive your talk page

I like spending an hour scrolling down to converse with you. Helps me keep the fat off my arm. .... :D Lourdes 03:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
It is perhaps the funniest the court jester has ever been, inadvertently of course, getting a woman editor make a fat joke at her own expense.

As for Melanie being worse than the men, here's what a prototypical crap male Administrator (Tony Ballioni, of course, as anyone might have guessed) did about the complaint. ... =887940416

Arrogant? Yes. Hostile? Yes. Flouting policy? Yes.

But no sarcastic fawning addition. No active encouragement of the silliness, no rewarding of the child, no reinforcement of the toxic insider culture dynamic, just the simple Big Stick endorsement of a corrupt father figure silently watching over his problem child, and of course the problem child frustrating even his father's efforts to keep him out of trouble.... ... =887940631

It's one thing to be a bad Dad. Even worse to be a bad Mother. But to be a shit mother who also engages in cringeworthy attempts to join in the fun of their misbehaving children?


I bet she's heavily involved in outreach too, pretending like she gives a shit about Wikipedia's gender and cultural problems. Actually, probably not. They never are, these types. Unsurprisingly, she is, of course, a Kupdung pick for Administrator. God he really does know an entitled piece of shit when he sees one, doesn't he? Like looking in a mirror.

She is the fucking problem, her and all the gender traitors just like her. Shitheels like Tony are easy to deal with by comparison. He did this, it's wrong for this reason, he doesn't care, so now you know, stay the fuck away from that place if you have any sense. But this? Where do you even begin communicating what it really is, to an outsider. You need Freud for that shit.

Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:40 pm
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 2024
Reply with quote
Now this is ironic.
When you’re done explaining talk page archiving to Melanie, maybe you could find time to explain to my grandma how to suck eggs. There’s probably a template for that too. —Floquenbeam (talk) 03:02, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a pretty funny place. They all tell us they support gender equality and have no clue why most women are turned off by their stink, yet when one of the tiny few women Administrators is rightly pulled up for her own failure to keep a sensible sized talk page, some oaf of a walking penis turns up to White Knight for her.

If Melanie is such a fucking pro - and sucking was of course a brilliant metaphor for her gallant male Guardian to use, no need to wonder what he was thinking about then - she would be capable of answering for herself, right? Guidance says 75kB, and she's already at 132kB, and judging by her comments at EEng's device breaking page, she thinks that's tiny.

She didn't have an answer though, did she? What she did, was what comes naturally to the gender traitor Bitches of Wikipedia (Life President, Queen Bishonen, blessed be those who rest within her wings). She got her claws out and scratched that impudent fucker's eyes right out. In a very feminine way of course, nothing that would be a familiar tactic to her grunting Doorman.

In a starkly similar way to Bishonen, her version of IAR seems to be, If a rule gets in MY way of enjoying Wikipedia the way I WANT TO, then ammagonnajustignoreit, whadda ya gonna do about it anyway? Take me to AN/I? Moi? LOlwut. Puuurrrlease. I'm famous around these parts. Nobody would dare tell on little old me.

Indeed. How DARE HE tell her what she is supposed to know but clearly doesn't, or more likely remind her of that which she does know but she's just the kind of selfish woman not to give a rat's ass about?

There's an essay somewhere in Wikipedia that basically says, if a user is acting like a newbie fuck, then absolutely template them with all the links they have clearly forgotten are real things that people actually wrote with an expectation of them being followed, to be changed by those who think they should not be if they have a convincing reason why not. By all means treat them like the st00pid n00b they so clearly are. They. Deserve. It. You avoid patronising people who are not just aware of the rules, they follow them too, or have the guts to rectify them, or the wherewithal to come up with a decent excuse for why they think they're a Very Special Flower.

There's also another essay out there somewhere that says if someone templates you, then whatever their apparent or indeed actual motive, don't act like a diva bitch, because it's nothing in the grand scheme of things. That if you were truly an actual Wikipedian, you wouldn't be remotely capable of being the sort of precious fuck who freaks out at such a triviality, someone who is so lacking in self respect and self-worth that you literally treat it as an attack on your dignity.

As that great saying went when uttered about one of Wikipedia's most odious users, and which I shall expand upon here, Melanie is not a Wikipedian, she's just someone who prolifically edits Wikipedia and has built up certain expectations, entitlements, and general bad habits, because of it. She's probably not even a very nice person all round. It's not a coincidence that those two things are often found to be in correlation.

Her Wikipedia time card practically confirms she is that very prized specimen for the cult, the woman who will happily edit Wikipedia all day, and who has so few friends that they can usually be found still editting right into the evening as well. A strong confident woman, whose lack of any significant others in her life is probably excused by something that is entirely not her fault, like her personality.

As always, Floquenbeam is the very best at picking out who the good guys really are. :roll:

Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:49 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 2 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.