Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Tavern

Under the auspices of Caravaggio and Dionysus, please use this page to deposit off-topic drunken ramblings tangentially related to the IRC arbitration case.

Establishing page[edit]

In order to keep things somewhat organized I'm being bold and moving a couple of threads here. The Wikipedian who posts the wittiest, most off-topic drunken rambling will receive a replica of F. Scott Fitzgerald's silver hip flask. Durova^Charge! 23:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whooo hoooo....I better get liqured up and start then....;) --Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, No, NO![edit]

We have not come this far, and at such a price to read this [1] Concerns about the behaviour in IRC have not changed one jot! Has Brad read half the evidence? The comments by Slim Virgin, Bishonen, anyone? People are just as concerned as they ever were. I can understand the Arbcom wanting a hurried sweep under the carpet, for accepting this ill advised case, but not an Arb saying that! Giano (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When people say "people", I am always left asking, what people, and what people define which people are important in the eyes of the people and how informed are such people and have they considered what other people might say to those people in response. People who claim to speak for the people are people that people might wish to question. Eh? That's the intrinsic problem with demagoguery.--Doc^g 22:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Winston, you are drunk...! Giano (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite possibly......in fact, yes. But, then, if a drunk man can spot this....--Doc^g 22:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need a nice cup of tea! Giano (talk) 22:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I need another double malt. Indeed I've just poured one. Join me, it will all make sense then. You can tell, I do my most civil mellow editing when I'm drunk. I'm difficult to rattle.--Doc^g 22:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well. I'm not a Scott, but I can tell that has too much water in it, looks like a glass of urine in a tooth mug. Giano (talk) 22:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. Indeed many island malts are fairly pale. Like my Ardbeg tonight. But NEVER put water in a malt. To whisky always add .... ony mair whisky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doc glasgow (talk • contribs) 22:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My off topic observation is that much of the good stuff looks like urine in a tooth mug....--Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank god for the first of February, voluntary abstinence is over - up your bum everyone! --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January was voluntary abstinence month? Wow, that explains so very much. Erm, Doc, can you pour me some of that good stuff please? Risker (talk) 23:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like to give the liver a holiday every January. Now its back it says "if Docs buying mine's a Laphroaig or Jura" --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People[edit]

I think it is clear that the ordinary editor is not able to become "informed" as these "people" merely experience the consequences of the "people" (I guess) you are talking about, Doc. Maybe the levels of "people", since an impenetrable hierarchy appears to exist, needs to become explicit. Having mucked around at the lower levels for nearly two years now, in the dark most of the time, I find the pretense of the "Wikipedia" ideals offensive, at this point. I would prefer less pretense and a clearer explanation of what actually goes on here. Because I like to write I have stayed and kept trying but it has been a very ugly experience. It is very hard to try to write and edit articles well in the atmosphere that exists here where most of us are left hanging out to dry without support, while Admin and ArbCon energy goes into the favored few. Mattisse 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your comments are too enigmatic for me. What do you mean? And what is the evidence? Sometimes if you can manage in the dark, it is better to stay there. I'm trying to be a content editor now and stuff most of the rest, but vague generalisations and assuming far too much from one or two experiences is precisely the problem here.--Doc^g 23:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

::I am too far down on the totem pole for you to relate to my experiences. I realize I am out of my league even commenting here. As far as vague generalizations, I am sure you do not want to hear the specifics -- especially in the cozy bar room atmosphere of drinking provided above. Mattisse 23:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, but have one on me anyway, and I'll pour one for everyone bitching about you one iRC ;)--Doc^g 23:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be cautious about drinking while editing. The mastodons and their relatives may crash the party and break into the liquor.

Hey, where did he go? Matisse, come, sit, tell us your woes. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand a bit of Matisse's issue. There is a fair bit of clique-ish behavior from some of the long time users, and that makes it hard for some folks to feel like their concerns are being heard and acted upon in an appropriate manner. The sorts of kerfflufle that giano gets involved in play to that observation. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]