User talk:Swift Thief

Discuss Stuff...
Argh... --Swift Thief 20:52, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Hi
Real reasons, or don't bother. Thanks &mdash; Skuld 10:45, 27 March 2007 (CDT)

Make your siggy SHORTER. Caramel Ni 22:40, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Ok then. --Swift Thief 08:01, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * APRIL FOOLS! 82.17.103.240 14:54, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Hey, your rit build be freaking amazing. I've got a mind to do an R/A, with a scythe, since that automatically does cyclone axe's function. Sh*t i forgot scythes do only 3 peeps in a hit. I was gonna offer for you to make it and take credit, you deserve it with that genius build.Dark0805 19:08, 16 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Yo Ron Ng 13:16, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

Ugh-er
dyke


 * What??? --Swift Thief 17:27, 4 August 2007 (CDT)


 * What??? --Ron Ng 08:25, 18 August 2007 (CDT)

New User Page
It's good. --Swift Thief 22:44, 14 August 2007 (CDT)


 * Dont. --[[Image:User Frvwfr2 signature.jpg|User:Frvwfr2]] frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 22:46, 14 August 2007 (CDT)


 * Why? --Swift Thief 22:47, 14 August 2007 (CDT)


 * Its disruptive. People click ur sig, go to Glint... wtf?! --[[Image:User Frvwfr2 signature.jpg|User:Frvwfr2]] frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 22:51, 14 August 2007 (CDT)


 * And his current one isn't? It's not up to you to decide what isn't and is acceptable for his userpage. The Imperialist

A redirect to Special:Random is more disruptive than what it is now. -- frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 22:56, 14 August 2007 (CDT)


 * Disruptive is disruptive. besides, its not like they can't get to his user talk :P


 * Its not easy for inexperienced users. --[[Image:User Frvwfr2 signature.jpg|User:Frvwfr2]] frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 23:00, 14 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Whether or not it is a little disruptive to new users (I for one feel that it isn't) is not the issue at hand here. According to GW:redirects, this redirect is not explicitly outlawed, and the recently failed GW:personal sites was voted down because it "Was decided user sites would not harm the wiki under any circumstances".  So shame on you Frvwfr2 for editing another users page against his wishes, which could very well be considered vandalism.  --[[image:Hrothgarsig.jpg]] (talk) 23:14, 14 August 2007 (CDT)

Thats strange... go ahead, turn your userpage into a redirect. I apologize, figured it would be illegal. I am also surprised that assume good faith isnt official. -- frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA) 23:36, 14 August 2007 (CDT)

Whats worse is that there isnt even a message that says redirected from... -- frvwfr2 (T/C/RFA)


 * It circumvents a few policies in GW:SIGN. Via the redirect, it obscures the user's identity and links to the main namespace. If the signature itself linked to Special:Random then it would certainly break policy, and I don't see how linking to a redirect to Special:Random is too much different. If it bothers you enough, speak to an admin and get an official say on the matter. BigAstro 00:36, 15 August 2007 (CDT)


 * The page has been deleted - it IS disruptive, and abusing the mediawiki software intentionally to cause such disruptions can be viewed as vandalism in itself. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:45, 16 August 2007 (CDT)