This just isn't worth it to me anymore. I've tried to go along, but silence in the face of total insanity has never been my finest skill set, and lately I'm noticing that this isn't a handbasket like I thought it was--it's looking more and more like a porcelain bowl, and we seem to be moving in ever-diminishing circles.

Don't worry, I won't go all rogue or anything; you won't see any Gladys socks, or see me suddenly emerge at Wikipedia Review or hand off my password to those e-mail phishers. I've got no time for that crap anyway--I've got things to do, and maybe now I'll even accomplish some of it. And I'll lurk, of course--otherwise, how will I know when the control-freaks and official trolls stop running the place? (Other than the flying pigs and the nightly ice-skating soirees in Hell, I mean.)

Peace to the hard-working, to the calm-spirited, to the witty, the durable, and the misunderstood. To the rest of you, many of whose (I won't name names) mere presence in a discussion can turn it into a cesspool of ill-considered, humorless, cynical, hate-tinged idiocy--may the headless ghosts of Randy in Boise pollute your every undertaking, and haunt your fondest dreams with the skeletons of Peloponnesus. (No, no, not you, Giano--you just keep givin' 'em hell. Please. :) )

Tilde, tilde, tilde, tilde. Seacrest Cortez out. GJC 03:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...and please don't give up on this crazy site!

PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding ((subst:Kitten)) to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

--PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jéské Couriano is having computer issues and is needing backup on the arbitration report, and your name is down as one of the backups. Always a small way to help around a project that truly needs more people with your sense of humor... Don't go/Come back/whatever keeps you around wikipedia! Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a ((Talkback)) message on my talk page. 03:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per policy, your signature must link to either your user page, or user talk page.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 08:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...Oi.--Tznkai (talk) 10:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Her signature usually does, but it appears a recent edit of hers was stepped on by the broken ec handler, so she copied and pasted the rendered text (as opposed to the wikitext) from an old revision into the current revision. In other words, chill. –xeno^talk 13:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See, this is just the kind of...ahem...STUFF... which illustrates to me why and how WP is circling the drain. Xeno, thank you for the defense; Tznkai, you sum it up as eloquently as possible. (And I understand a little better now why some admins are willing to speak their piece and lose their bit, rather than quietly swallow another ridiculous, ill-considered blob of navel-gazing policy-wank. Fortunately I have a fairly well-developed ability to resist temptation, because the above edit came REAL close to just setting me off.) GJC 14:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GJC, whenever I find stuff starting to get quite a bit off the mark with areas of the project, I pack up and move to a different area of the project. If new page patrol is giving me fits, I might move along to work on some lovely articles needing help such as wall cloud or severe weather. Perhaps, just maybe, you could find some obscure corner of the project to work on for a while where people like Daedalus won't bother you. I for one would suggest the meteorology areas (although I may have a bias... :-) ...who knows?), but you may find some other area of the project more to your taste. Just find that one speck of Wikipedia where you can have fun without being bothered by...them pesky people. With over 3 million articles, there has to be at least one you can make shine brilliantly without being bothered. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a ((Talkback)) message on my talk page. 19:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am chilled out, and I would appreciate if people didn't personally attack me for a small mistake: ill-considered blob of navel-gazing policy-wank.

Yes, I made a mistake, but is that reason to personally attack me? I politely reminded you of what I thought to be a policy violation. There was no need to treat me like that. I made a mistake, so instead of insulting me, why don't you give me the same courtesy, and remind me back.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 20:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "must" seemed a little less than polite (which is why I said "chill"). Jmho. This is a minor matter. In future you might look at some of the user's other talk page contributions to ensure it wasn't a one-off mistake. –xeno^talk 20:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will do that in the future.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 21:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see the Siren's call has you again. Stick around if you'd like, we could always use good hands. If you don't mind listening to someone prattle on about how they've been there and done that, let me know.--Tznkai (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They come with cheese, come in beef, chicken, and pork and are full of fiber. What's not to like? HalfShadow 18:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_amendment, and the subthreads above it. You are being notified as you were one of the users who proposed or discussed the original sanction. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm currently in burned-out, cranky, snide, mostly-lurking mode, but thought I'd mention that seeing your signature (in the middle of a fairly depressing thread) today reminded me of better days here, when people seemed less casually mean-spirited, more interesting, and generally more clueful. So I wanted to thank you for making me smile at that memory, and tip my hat to you for your comments on Hopiakuta. Hope all is well with you in the real world. --Floquenstein's monster (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You lurking about somewhere?--Tznkai (talk) 23:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

add silly
Thank you, editor wishing "Peace to the hard-working, to the calm-spirited, to the witty, the durable, and the misunderstood", for fighting vandalism in articles and among people, for "just an idea", "add silly", and making smile, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A year ago, you were the 816th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Six years ago, you were recipient no. 816 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sure you were joking (at least a little bit). --Salimfadhley (talk) 05:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Gladys j cortez. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dr. Wonder's Workshop is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Wonder's Workshop until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dronebogus (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]