User talk:Iamthebob

Crop circle

I am sorry to hear that you are leaving this discussion; you came across as particularly level-headed and I thought that you might be capable of bringing some stability to the article. Regards, --BillC 22:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how I can get my point across. I'll still watch and add comments, probably. There is some interesting stuff in there. iamthebob 23:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very knowledgeable about the philosophy of science; most of what I learned comes from what I have learned in the course of the debate on Crop Circles. I am not a scientist, but merely still a student, and a high school one at that. iamthebob 23:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Query: why NPOV tag on Crop Circle? The article seemed perfectly reasonable to me, with the flame war on the Talk page being started and maintained by User:Tommysun's verbosity. I admit to a bias to purge pseudoscience from Wikipedia. Michaelbusch 04:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The NPOV tag is put there because of the flame war. The debate is over POV, is it not? Might as well inform the general public about it... iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 05:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My problem with the tag is that it at some level implies an argument, as opposed to Tommysun's essentially one-man crusade. I also dislike calling attention to flaming. I find it embarassing to the encyclopedia. But I do see your point. Michaelbusch 05:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Paranormal

Hi! I saw you've been actively making a lot of good edits in an article covered by our project, so I wanted to invite you to join us! The project is undergoing a large expansion right now, and we need quality editors! We are a WikiProject with the goal of improving the quality of articles having to do with Ufology, Cryptozoology, the Supernatural, and other topics. We provide a centralized forum for concerns that effect multiple articles within our scope, as well as methods to rate and categorize articles by quality, get input on how to improve an article from our other members, and a collaborative project once a month where the whole project pitches in to make an article great. You won't be required to do anything special once you join; all that we ask of members is that they sign our participants page, though if you do join you may also find it useful to add some of our pages (especially our main talk page to your watchlist to keep yourself apprised of what we're up to. If you have questions about any of this, please don't hesitate to contact me directly. Thank you for your time, and happy editing! --InShaneee 15:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't really make that many edits on Wikipedia that much, it was only the crop circle article mainly. I don't really feel like joining at the moment, maybe after I get a little more involved in Wikipedia. Thanks for the offer though! iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 16:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

N

Your edit to N stated that there was no overclock mode, while having played the game and "achieved trancendence" six times, I know that overclock exists. Please check the facts before editing like this, but can you please give a reason for me not to fix it (and a reason it was vandalism)? - AMP'd 04:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you check my talk, you'll see that maestrosync has commented on this debate, he being the third party. I think we either remove the RGB slider info or keep the overclock. - AMP'd 03:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]