User:Qermaq/Talk Archive 4

Archives
	Archive 4 (61-80) ; Archive 3 (41-60) ; Archive 2 (21-40) ; Archive 1 (1-20) ;

From Homestar Runner Wiki

< User:Qermaq

Jump to: navigation, search

[edit] Different Town Sheet (B♭ Clarinet)

Hey, could I please have the .pdf of that Different Town song-sheet-thing? If you did it for multiple instruments, B♭ Clarinet, please. --TotalSpace shipGirl 3 11:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

(concerning my content on an anonny talk:

"I would advise two other things. (1) Choose your battles. Getting heated over punctuation placement is a bit much, don't you think? (2) If you really care so much about the wiki's content, why not sign up for an account? - Qermaq - (T/C) 04:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)")

I'm perfectly aware of what an idiotic thing it looks like, but I am demonstrating that my edits are made by my grammar rules that are correct where I'm from, and I don't appreciate them being needlessly and pointlessly 'corrected'. I appreciate that as an American cartoon, American language/spelling is used, but grammar is such a longshot.

So, tell me more about what defines an account as caring about what goes in the wiki? --90.240.34.177 04:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! As we are documenting an American cartoon, we've agreed to largely stick to American rules of grammar and spelling. This means we prefer "color" to "colour", and that we keep to US conventions in grammar. (Not that that's always cut and dried, you'll understand.) But, there's an unwritten rule that's as true here as it is in real life - if it's not terribly important, don't bother with it. If a change makes things clearer, go for it, but if it's six of one, a half dozen of another, no action is really needed.

Re: having an account. Not that it's fair, but the reality is most users accord a bit more credibility to someone with an account, as they've made a modicum of a commitment to the wiki. Also, this enables you to have a user page and let us get to know you through it, and that's an important part of acting within a community. I encourage you to get an account and get involved, as it seems you are sincerely interested in bettering the wiki. If that's indeed your goal, I think you should! - Qermaq - (^T/C)

04:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sitting here chuckling because I'm having trouble making out exactly what you're trying to say. Cut and dried? Six of one, half dozen of another? What are you on about? Anyway, believe me, I looked at the style guide before I edited and it doesn't say anything about "US conventions"... but it does say that it's better to stick punctuation outside of the quotation mark than inside in cases like that, so I did. I'm also not really appreciating the way you're addressing me, as though I was the one being picky in the first place: if my edit had been left alone, I wouldn't have kicked up such a fuss. It's not like I go around moving full stops everywhere I see them.

Not to sound harsh but I'd rather have nothing to do with the 'community'. Fans scare me. The fact I'm already being referred to as an 'anonny', which I believe is a reference in itself, already has alienated me. And I don't like people that get too involved with wikis anyway. "I'm a vandal-fighter, look at my badges." Uh-huh, sure. --90.240.34.177 04:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, as said before, that's not how this wiki (or any other wiki) works. "Your edit" became part of the project, and of course someone else will edit it if it can be improved on. Loafing

04:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

And I'm saying it wasn't improved upon. It was a needless edit. --90.240.34.177 04:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I assume that you are not American and my idioms confused you. I apologize for that. I do tend to talk very "American", and that might be unintelligible to others. And please don't see me as kicking up a fuss - my post to you was concerning "letting sleeping dogs lie" (surely you're familiar with that idiom?) and potentially being a fuller participant.

As to the latter, I appreciate your reluctance and won't press further. If you have a change of heart, realize you will be welcomed and included. I wish you the best in all your endeavours. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

05:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to understand I live my life on principles and get irritated at the sight of... of... well, there isn't a word to describe it. Inefficiency? No, that makes me sound like a machine. Never mind. You sound like a nice guy - thank you for responding with reasoned and unpatronising discussion instead of bombarding me with templates as people usually do. --90.240.34.177 05:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

You seem jaded. Relax. I assure you, if you want to participate here you can do so with relaxed guard. I hope all is well. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

05:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About Cool Things

I already do know, and I knew it was you. :) I just didn't think the "who" was important so I was just being discreet. Thanks for the tip though. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 00:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

It's hard to judge the experience of a newer member. Thanks for the heads-up! - Qermaq - (^T/C)

00:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Old

It is with a hunched back and trembling hands that I accept the mantle of oldest active user from you. Now I must be going. Time to go eat yogurt through a tube. --BigScaryMike 19:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yogurt? That's almost a solid food! Good for you! - Qermaq - (^T/C)

22:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Different Town

I would like the sheet, yes. I signed my email in, so just try "Email this user" again. Thanks, TotalSpace shipGirl 3 11:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing legitimate talk posts

Sir Strong Bad had a group of users whom he associated most closely with. His announcing his return to this group should not be considered spam. Please be more careful when removing such messages, especially so that the misunderstanding doesn't get out of hand. Thanks. — It's dot com 04:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I basically asked Q to do this. I didn't know about the gang and thought he was just spamming random users. Didn't mean to cause a fuss, sorry. Loafing

04:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

All I can say is this: I did what I felt was right. I would never do less or more. If any users have a beef with me, I urge them to post them now, right here. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

05:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It is understandable why you thought those were spam messages—it just turns out that in this case, Sir Strong Bad is not only legitimately connected with those users, but has also been a great contributor to mainspace articles. This is just a misunderstanding and hopefully could easily be corrected by a simple apology on his talk page, if you're up to it.

Trey56 06:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have done that. And I of course respect the opinions of the other users on this matter. I hope it's clear that while my actions were intended in good faith, I can certainly appreciate the dissenting point of view. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

22:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Our Conversation at Image talk:NewToonsMenu.PNG

I'm so sorry Qermaq. It was just a figure of speech and I meant nothing hurtful about it. What I was meaning to say was if it would be okay if the images were changed the other way. Truce? --TheYellowDart—(t/c) 01:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC) BTW, I'm sorry for the late reply also. I just forgot about it for a while :-)

To be honest, I had forgotten about it. Let's keep it that way! We expressed different opinions, and we kept it civil, so no harm. I'm cool. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

03:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, good. Yes. No harm no foul. See you around, --TheYellowDart—(t/c) 03:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teh Span

Wow, I don't know how you helped me with that! Thanks, man! -Viklas

I don't know either, and you're welcome. Glad the info was useful to you! - Qermaq - (^T/C)

13:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should do this all the time! Viklas

20:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

But please don't forget to use </span> at the end of the text that you want to affect with a span. Loafing

02:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I won't forget, and I will still remember that. -Viklas

[edit] That thing you sent me

Sorry if this was supposed to be just 1 topic again, but I was told that the "Do not disrupt Wikipedia" thing you sent me never existed. Did you get the title wrong? Can you send me the correct one? Bad Bad Guy 17:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's ok. I just clicked the link and went right there. It could have been a glitch in the intarwebs. Try it again. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

21:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there was just a "Wikipedia:" missing in the link — it's fixed now.

Trey56 21:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My edits in mile

Hey Qermaq! About my edit to that page: the one about the high school band; did you remove it from the Fast Forward section because it wasn't really the Brothers Chaps' doing? I put it in Trivia instead. Is that okay? See ya! kai lyn 17:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that makes sense. Good call. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

17:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent comments

I didn't much appreciate the insulting comments you made about me in my recent challenge of the Stains on Head decline in KOT's VOQPCS!. I feel that I was being singled out by you because I didn't agree with your logic, and felt that you were more than a little rude and a jerk in your comments. I understand you didn't agree, but you didn't need to go the route you did. If you don't agree, fine. Don't make yourself seem like a superior being just because someone doesn't agree with you. --ISlayedTheKerrek 16:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

ISlayedTheKerrek: I personally think it was kind of rude to single Qermaq out as a so-called bad-faith voter when in fact he hadn't even voted. It seems that it really struck a chord with him and colored his response to you (which, though his tone of communication was clearly irritated that you hadn't done your homework, it was still somewhat modulated, methinks). — It's dot com 18:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so, but I did apologize for that, Dot Com. I thought I saw his name there when I wrote the comment, but after I rechecked I took it back. I screwed up, I said I was sorry. That's no excuse for what he did. (You'll have to excuse me if I misinterpreted what you were saying...not sure what "modulated," used in that context, means.) --ISlayedTheKerrek 05:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I find it odd that the person accusing me of behaving "like a superior being" began this whole affair by accusing fourteen users of voting in poor faith simply because the outcome of the STUFF vote went contrary to his wishes. While I found that tactic distasteful, I replied with what I felt was a fair and explanatory message as to why a majority of people seemed to find the fact unacceptable. I was met with a response which, in my opinion, fell just short of personal attack. Yes, I was upset about that, and I cannot apologize for that. I took exceedingly great care in crafting a post which expressed my reaction in clear and elevated language. In that sense, I suppose my message was modulated. Nonetheless, I hope you understand that when statements along the lines of "fourteen people voted a particular way for a dumb reason" are made, they are likely to be met with responses which might not be anywhere as civil as mine were. I feel, as I did then, that your reasoning was faulty, your post was made without reference to fact, and that your proposal to cancel a fair and compliant STUFF vote was in poor judgement of what's best for the wiki. That's why I attempted to explain the likeliest reasong for these voters' rejection of the proposed Fun Fact. Also, your second post seemed to ignore points I had made in my initial reply, simply reinforcing your message that the fourteen voters were obviously not acting in good faith, even after I showed how I felt they were.

Now, while I intended to express my feelings of exasperation and insult, I never intended to express arrogance or to offend, and if my post did elicit those reactions, I am of course sorry. But please realize that all the users here are humans, and humans are prone to emotion and are apt to reply with those emotions undivorced from their message when they feel provoked. I believe that most of the time I am capable of responding to users with absolute modulation, and while I regret this was not one of those times, I still stand behind the statements I made in that talk. Unfortunately, there seems to be no common ground on this issue, so I ask that we leave it and continue our best efforts at civil cooperation in future encounters, so as to put this behind us. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

07:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not saying that you didn't have a right to be insulted or, pardon my French here, pissed off at what I said. I do think that you did, in your response, were showing less of that and showing more of the arrogance and offensiveness that you mention. I do appreciate that you acknowledged that, and even though I also stand by most of what I said (except for the false accusation that you were one of the voters), I accept your apology. Hopefully there will be no more problems in the future. --ISlayedTheKerrek 19:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

ISlayedTheKerrek, after reviewing both your and Qermaq's posts, I really don't know why you were offended by anything that Qermaq said. When it comes to "arrogance and offensiveness", you are the clear winner. I'm saying this because you just re-iterated your attack on Qermaq and re-confirmed that you stand by what you said earlier. I'm not impressed. To begin with, accusing STUFF voters (including myself) of making bad faith votes is a serious allegation, and I demand a retraction and an apology. Secondly, I wholeheartedly support Qermaq's last post. Please read it again, it is an excellent example of how to cooperate at this wiki instead fighting each other. You can and you should learn a lot from him. Loafing

20:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Loafing, I read what he said, several times in fact. I did NOT reiterate my so-called "attack" (which was not an attack...if I was going to attack him I would have been a LOT more abusive than I might have been), all I said was that I do stand by most of what I said. I'm sorry if you were offended by anything I said, but I am not retracting what I said. I still believe coincidence and intent don't really have much to do with anything involved in the fun fact, just whether or not the fact was notable enough for inclusion. I'm sure none of us will say that it was the intent of the artists to make the stains look like a smiley face. What matters in the end is whether or not it's notable enough and not a stretch. Maybe "bad faith" was a little overzealous of me, and I do apologize for that, but I can disagree with the way the vote went, and I still do feel that way, even though I've withdrawn my challenge to said fun fact. I'm not going to suddenly change my opinions because you demand it. I already apologized for falsely accusing Qermaq of voting against the fact when in fact he didn't. I apologized for causing the trouble, and made the apology in good faith. I thought everything was settled and a truce existed, but apparently you don't believe so. You're making it seem like I go out on a regular basis to cause trouble on this wiki, and that couldn't be further from the truth. Yes, in the past I have done a few things that I probably shouldn't have, but most of the time I try and stay away from things like that. I understand you're a sysop, Loafing, and probably once you read that I didn't retract what I said that you're probably going to take away my editing privileges for an extended period of time. But if you are going to do that, know this: I don't go out of my way to cause trouble with votes (I may not like the way things go on certain ones, such as this, the "Seb" fact from mile and the little orphan Annie or Oliver one from whatever it was from...it escapes me that the exact moment, but this was my first time actually standing up and contesting it), I've been cooperative over my time here with nearly everything I've done, and even though I have had some minor spats and disagreements at times with some other members (which I have admittedly been wrong on several occasions), I respect everyone here and what is done here, and don't think that I should be labeled as uncooperative by anyone. In the future, I can say that I won't be as aggressive with the contesting as I was here (and I reiterate again that I'm sorry for wasting everyone's time with this whole bit), and that I will continue to be as cooperative as I have been in the past. But I do believe that it is my right to disagree with the way something goes, as I do in this case, and I can't retract what I said, outside of the words "bad faith", because that would imply that I agree, and I don't. If you still want to punish me, then so be it. --ISlayedTheKerrek 05:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TMBG

So after finally getting around to reading your user page, I'm going to take a stab in the dark. Your cousin is... Eric Schermerhorn? As in: "So Eric rolled down the window and said 'Hello, excuse me, hey.'"? (from They Got Lost) — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 13:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

That's him. I refer to him as the successful one, he calls me the talented one (and I am flattered). He's very good and very talented and I couldn't be prouder of him. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

02:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude, that's awesome. (Love your Graham Chapman userbox! <33) --MrsCommanderson 02:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Poopsmith Sweareth?

Re Image:Poopsmithtaped.png: Very clever :) Trey56

[edit] Queermaq?!

Some idiot changed your sig on the underlings talk page so it said "Queermaq." I reverted it, but I thought you might want to look into that. ~That Guy Over There ()

Thanks for that. I've given him a block warning. Loafing

02:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Meh. People can be malevolent, but I'll assume stupidity here. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

09:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I've had the same sort of thing happen to me, actually. You can guess what to. --DorianGray 09:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, let me guess. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

09:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Stupid malevolence. He/she obviously defaced your sig with something they apparently considered offensive. That's not on, even though I know you won't be bothered by it. A block warning might have been a bit much, but meh. Loafing

09:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was speaking personally. Being a big-shot sysop and all, you need to take a longer view. I think a block warning from a sysop was an appropriate action, but personally I could give two Shets. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

09:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Qermaq "two shets" Jackson? Loafing

09:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

No, no, look. This "Shet" business, it doesn't really matter at all. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

09:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It's been a while

Regarding that thing I said about the opening credits for big toons, the reason I wanted to know was because that person drove away votes for "Where Credit Was Due" for an illegitimate reason. Also, he was dead wrong about the next big toon including opening credits. I also want to note that this is a very different case from "Evident STUFF" because looking old was the only 2007 email w/out DNA Evidence for 4 months, while SB is in jail is/was the last Big Toon with opening credits for 3 years. I also want to know if that person thought I was talking about a different toon or if there actually is a chance of them coming back by the end of the decade. Bad Bad Guy 17:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Dude, I really think it's time to give this a rest. All anyone said on that stuff item was that there could be more eventually. At any rate, this item was declined 17 to 1. I really doubt all those people were driven away because someone wrote that there could be more toons (I suspect it has more to do with the argument "If it were the last toon ever that credited TBC and Missy, then maybe it would be notable, but Halloween '05 (which came later) gets that distinction to date.") In any case, I think the result of this vote is quite clear and that the community at large doesn't feel this is worth noting. Heimstern Läufer

18:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you very much

Thank you ery much for directing me to the talk page etiquette page, and for correcting my bad post. It was very useful. Please tell me if there's anything else you think I should know. Also, what do you think about the, "Eating Five Batteries" diagram issue I proposed a few months ago? 72.133.214.202 23:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I think if you really want to be a contributor here, you might strongly consider membership. And no problem, you'll find most users are pretty friendly here. I might add to that discussion later on. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

23:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I just want to add my thanks for (indirectly) pointing me to the Help:Signature page from Kanjiro's talk page. I had wondered how people made their names all glowy. wbwolf (t | ed) 05:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Wbwolf, you're welcome. Any questions, feel free to ask. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

08:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy New Userbox Day!

Hey Q! This is to inform you that your "DEAD" userbox is now inaccurate. Please change it to "DEC" for decomposed =3 Happy birthday, man! Have a time :-D Loafing 19:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC) _{Oops, it's an edit from the future! It's already Sunday for me ;-)}

Qongratulations! Happy birthdayween!

Trey56 02:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

It's your birthday? Wow! You must be old! --

Super Martyo boing! 02:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I BAKED YOU A QAKE! —Bazzy J 22:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Happy birthday, Qermaq! I hope your birthday has the three G's: greatness, good stuff happening, and umm... gargle. Homestar-Winner (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

So far, all 3! Thanks gentlemen. None of the ladies were told it was my birthday? - Qermaq - (^T/C)

02:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, hello there! Loafingrietta 04:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

That's... that's not what I actually had in mind. - Qermaq - (^T/C)

13:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm in Danger of Suspension!

Can you please help us decide if Lack of Visible Body Parts needs a "teeth" section? I already started a discussion on that article's talk page. Bad Bad Guy 16:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In response to your blurb...

Yes, there's interest in guitar chords/tabs now. Check it out. -- Super Martyo boing! 04:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Must...get...more sleep..!

Ha, good job reverting that edit on Drive-Thru Whale. Typical TYD move by me. =D --TheYellowDart—(t/c) 20:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)