User talk:Shock Brigade Harvester Boris/ACE2008

All Abord Speeching

Greetings comrade! Did you mean to leave a link to Lar's discussion page at the bottom of the page? . . dave souza, talk 12:43, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the world's worst plagiarist. Fixed. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 16:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I tweaked the row template. Hope you like the improvements. If not, blame User:AGK, from whom I cribbed them. ++Lar: t/c

Wonkery

The old Jonathan is still here. Part of the wonkery is due to decisions like Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman (now thankfully modified). I make sure to put a belt and suspenders on every block. If you check my logs, and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion, you'll see that I am still trying to defend our articles. Jehochman ^Talk 18:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC) and 18:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make a wonking joke, but I'll try to hold it in. Verbal chat 18:37, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it clean, boys. ;-) Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want anyone going blind. Jehochman ^Talk 18:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

too busy to answer questions

Hi, in regards to your concerns about my Q&A being an indicator of whether I will have time to handle the load next year, I am currently on a short term contract and time has indeed been short. Also, I only decided to join late in the piece, as I was waiting to be sure that my planned projects for the coming year would mean I would have time. I initially thought it would be best to not tackle the general questions due to time constraints, and focus on giving individually asked questions most of my time. However, I have started tackling these general questions now that some free time has opened up.

A few of my answers might be helpful:

#Question from AGK

#Question from Carnildo

#Questions from Thatcher

Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response from Carcharoth

This post is a follow-up to this thread. My full comments are on my vote talk page, but I'll post a brief summary here in response to the concerns raised by SBHB here.

SBHB, thanks for agreeing to discuss things here. I'm glad you appreciated my response to the recusal question. About disruptive editors, I agree that leniency on new or inexperienced editors can clash with the need to deal with disruptive editors, but as far as the Arbitration Committee goes, it should be clear that by the time a user has ended up at arbitration, they will have had many chances already. If the evidence shows persistent disruption after several chances, then I would have no problem endorsing a suitable ban to deal with the disruption. The "novel solutions" impression is me being creative. I'm fully aware that not all the proposals will be successful, but I firmly believe that people need to think 'outside the box' in order to come up with new ideas that may end up improving how things work around here. Without new ideas, things would swiftly stagnate. I've said more on this in my response to SandyGeorgia's comments, as seen here. That statement, including the bit about my watchlist, gives another insight into why it sometimes looks like I'm running around different pages without any thought for those on them. Both what you and Sandy have said has given me pause for thought, and I have resolved to be more aware of this behaviour in future and consciously try and avoid imposing on other people's time.

I hope this response has allayed any concerns you had. Please ask if you have any questions. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 05:36, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]