User talk:CheeseDreams/February 2005
Entrapment
[edit]Hi CheeseDreams,
Would you mind adding the name of at least one author, ancient or modern, who maintains the claimed equation between Osiris, Dionysus, Attis, Adonis and Mithras? Right now the article (Osiris-Dionysus)is full of weaselly "some scholars claim" etc.
Thanks,
Bacchiad 02:19, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I looked up the sources you gave. Neither of them actually use the literal term Osiris-Dionysus, but Hecataeus does say straightforwardly (frag. 3 FGH) that the Greeks got the worship of Dionysus from the Egyptians, who call him Osiris. Also, as a bonus, Hecataeus is dated between the 3rd and 4th centuries BC, which makes him an earlier source than you claimed.
Leon of Pella seems say that the Egyptians call Dionysus Ammon, and that they call the sun Osiris. His fragments are a bit of a mess, so it's hard to say exactly what he thought. Perhaps it'd be better to leave him out of it. But that's okay: Herodotus (5th cent. BC) says that the Greeks got the worship of Dionysus from the Egyptians - his main evidence is they both use phallic processions.
So no we've got two ancient sources who say that Osiris = Dionysus, and before the 1st century to boot.
Now we need someone to :
- say that Osiris/Dionysus = Adonis, Attis, Aion and Mithra(s).
- to corroborate the statement about the inner and outer mysteries.
Thanks for your quick response on this. I think it's developing nicely.
Best,
Bacchiad 13:05, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- You disappeared when CheeseDreams was most active [1]
- You had knowledge about CheeseDreams' RfAr
- You asked CheeseDreams to edit an article
- You asked Grunt to ban CheeseDreams for doing so
So, whose sock puppet are you? CheeseDreams 00:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
P.s. I can see what your POV editing is about - [2]
- (copying to CheeseDreams talk page) This is the second time I've seen you imply that someone is a sockpuppet. The first time you did it for me. I count this as harassment. Will you please stop? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:59, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You should watch more closely then. I accused Rienzo, Nasse, and Lady Tara, amongst others, far earlier. I was right about them, as the arb com agreed. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'd be careful. It would be a reasonable (if not ironclad) argument to make that this article is "Christianity-related" and subject to the ArbCom ruling against you. Don't get blocked for no good reason. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 08:46, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
- As it turns out, Fvw did block for 1 week without noting it here. I've reverted this block because 1 week is meant to represent the maximum penalty for a violation, and this edit is questionably applicable to the ArbCom ruling in my opinion. I'm converting it to a 48 hour block instead, expires 30 hours from now (2 days roughly from original block by Fvw). --Dante Alighieri | Talk 17:40, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
- My mistake, the logs obscured this initially, but CD evaded a block by using a sockpuppet and THAT is what resulted in the max penalty. The initial block was for 5 days, which I still feel was slightly excessive. Nevertheless, this in no way excuses CD's evasion of the block. The proper response should have been to petition for another Admin to review the block if she felt it was unreasonable. I am reinstating fvw's 1 week block. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:27, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
Trolling
[edit]Please don't troll the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard page. RickK 21:25, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't troll user talk pages. CheeseDreams 21:54, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- He doesn't. It seems fairly clear from the context that he is not. Particularly when you see what you posted on the board. - Ta bu shi da yu 22:54, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I am aware of what I posted, I do not need to look at it further. If he wasn't trolling, he wouldnt be commenting about trolling. Accusations of trolling are themselves trolling, see User:Rienzo for a prime example of this.
- That's crap. Accusations of trolling are not trolling by themselves. Trolling, by its very definition, is to try to get a rise out of a person. RickK wasn't trying to do this, he was asking you not to troll, which he thought you were doing. RickK is not a troll, and I'd advise you to be very careful with what you say. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- RickK is trolling, not as much as you, but nethertheless doing so, and I'd advise you to be very careful with what you say. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- That's crap. Accusations of trolling are not trolling by themselves. Trolling, by its very definition, is to try to get a rise out of a person. RickK wasn't trying to do this, he was asking you not to troll, which he thought you were doing. RickK is not a troll, and I'd advise you to be very careful with what you say. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I am aware of what I posted, I do not need to look at it further. If he wasn't trolling, he wouldnt be commenting about trolling. Accusations of trolling are themselves trolling, see User:Rienzo for a prime example of this.
- If you can't understand the difference between "Now, if only someone would ban me. :-)" and an actual request for being blocked, I think you need to work on your reading comprehension. Sheesh. - - Infrogmation 21:56, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Seems fairly clear from the context. Particularly the reasons given. CheeseDreams 22:05, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, your trolling is fairly clear. RickK 22:24, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
- Your trolling is very clear. Darling, if you weren't trolling, you wouldn't be commenting here about whether I am trolling or not. CheeseDreams 23:34, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Wow! Nice logic. Pity its fundamentally flawed. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Prove it is fundamentally flawed, or that is just unsubstantiated uncited nonsense. See logic. CheeseDreams 00:26, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It's not hard. If I ask a user to stop trolling on a page, and that user is actually a troll, this does not make me a troll. This makes me a user who is asking for that other user to stop performing their behaviour. This is extremely basic logic. If you cannot see how this is correct, I wish you the best of luck in the future! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Darling, it makes you a troll if you engage in trolling. Trolling includes engaging in discussions about trolling, since these are not the purpose at hand, i.e. writing an encyclopedia. If you can't see that extremely basic logic then you will need the best of luck in the future. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- So in other words, because you are now engaging me in talk about trolling, this makes you a troll. HTH, HAND. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You are the one engaging me, darling. This is my talk page, I am obliged to respond to comments placed here. CheeseDreams 14:25, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- So in other words, because you are now engaging me in talk about trolling, this makes you a troll. HTH, HAND. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Darling, it makes you a troll if you engage in trolling. Trolling includes engaging in discussions about trolling, since these are not the purpose at hand, i.e. writing an encyclopedia. If you can't see that extremely basic logic then you will need the best of luck in the future. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It's not hard. If I ask a user to stop trolling on a page, and that user is actually a troll, this does not make me a troll. This makes me a user who is asking for that other user to stop performing their behaviour. This is extremely basic logic. If you cannot see how this is correct, I wish you the best of luck in the future! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Prove it is fundamentally flawed, or that is just unsubstantiated uncited nonsense. See logic. CheeseDreams 00:26, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Wow! Nice logic. Pity its fundamentally flawed. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Your trolling is very clear. Darling, if you weren't trolling, you wouldn't be commenting here about whether I am trolling or not. CheeseDreams 23:34, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, your trolling is fairly clear. RickK 22:24, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
- Seems fairly clear from the context. Particularly the reasons given. CheeseDreams 22:05, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- He doesn't. It seems fairly clear from the context that he is not. Particularly when you see what you posted on the board. - Ta bu shi da yu 22:54, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- And wow. You just posted that Rienzo is a troll on my talk page. Troll! - Ta bu shi da yu 00:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- The arbitration comittee formally ruled that Rienzo is a troll. CheeseDreams 00:26, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- CD, why don't you look at your own logic again? You said that those who comment on a user's trolling are in effect trolls themselves. If I apply your own logic back at you, this makes you a troll. Either that, or your argument is fatally flawed. HTH. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Darling, you are trolling here, this discussion is really rather irrelevant to the editing of an encyclopedia, and by feeding it you are de facto engaging in trolling. Darling. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- CD, why don't you look at your own logic again? You said that those who comment on a user's trolling are in effect trolls themselves. If I apply your own logic back at you, this makes you a troll. Either that, or your argument is fatally flawed. HTH. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- The arbitration comittee formally ruled that Rienzo is a troll. CheeseDreams 00:26, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- And wow. You just posted that Rienzo is a troll on my talk page. Troll! - Ta bu shi da yu 00:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have figured Cheese Dreams out!
10 REM CHEESE DREAMS ALGORITHM
20 READ $
30 PRINT DARLING YOUR $
40 GOTO 20
50 END
Slrubenstein 16:34, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
What an awfully antiquated out of date computer language, darling reader. Aside from line numbers, and the actual instruction to end the programme at its end, the most curious feature being the reserved word "Darling", which would have been expected as a string. Still, inaccurate outdated research isn't that unexpected from Slrubenstein, and nor are personal attacks. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Please, do NOT troll user pages on Swedish Wikipedia, darling! We know that you use an open webproxy from the UK... Honey, don't be such a sore loser! ♥ U, fjolla! 67.15.54.16 20:30, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
We know that you use e.g. IP 81.156.180.239 (an open web proxy) to troll user pages on Swedish Wikipedia! Please stop, darling! 67.15.54.16 21:20, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Darling (i.e. banned user Rienzo), I don't use an open web proxy. My technical advantages are far greater. Ask Rhobite. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just to let u know, darling: your multiple IP's have been blocked on Swedish Wikipedia. BTW, how was France? Did u get a lot of "baguette"? =) 67.15.54.16 15:32, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just to let u know, darling: due to a technical limitation, I can't get the same IP twice, even if I tried, so it really serves you no purpose or advantage to block them. BTW, if you are asking if I got a lot of cock, then the answer is that I had no problems in that department. CheeseDreams 19:43, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, u poor little might! Just to let u know: We will block the entire IP range! So long.....darling! =) 67.15.54.16 21:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Älsklingen den hela IP spänner täcker den huvudsakliga internetfamiljeförsörjaren för den hela UK. Till kvarteret kräver den att förbjuda mest UK bidragsgivarear, som är varför, som noterade Rhobite, den inte är ett alternativ för dig. CheeseDreams 00:01, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, my sweet darling! Please check yer grammar, thank ya! 65.161.65.104 03:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Min grammatik är fin. Det är den min pojkvänen som du bör klandra. Han har bott i England jumbon 12 år, så han är inte exakt ny, när han är upptagen att göra någonting annat. CheeseDreams 21:31, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Stop reinserting the tag saying that LouiseR is a sock puppet. If you want to insert that link, tell someone in charge to do so. /Grillo 20:14, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Udda, att du bör skriva den i denna, dela upp. Även mer udda att du grundar min samtalsidaraka bort. Mer udda stillbild som du redigerar artiklar som angår kristendom. Jag undrar vad ditt IP address är, Rienzo. CheeseDreams 20:33, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, darling! Nobody understands your gibberish! Got your mouth full of candy? =) 67.15.54.16 21:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Älsklingen bor jag inte ett sådan ledset torterat liv som baseras på sådan dödligt defekta propositions, som jag måste att tjata på folk, som har mer väl argument, eller att kräva candyen att hurra sig upp, därför att jag var en öm loser som något liknande Rienzo. CheeseDreams 23:57, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I love Babelfish too. /Grillo 00:29, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- So do I! Apparently it works wonders... =) 65.161.65.104 03:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Mig för. Medlidande som det inte översätter mellan svenskt och engelska egentligen. Därför att, om den hade, jag skade för att inte ha krävt att fråga den min pojkvänen att berätta mig stunder, rakade han. CheeseDreams 21:31, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You do realize you're making null sense and an idiot out of yourself, right? /Grillo 22:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Älsklingen du realiserar att du är danande den som increadibly är tydlig att du är en annan Rienzo sockpuppet. CheeseDreams 14:24, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You do realize you're making null sense and an idiot out of yourself, right? /Grillo 22:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Mig för. Medlidande som det inte översätter mellan svenskt och engelska egentligen. Därför att, om den hade, jag skade för att inte ha krävt att fråga den min pojkvänen att berätta mig stunder, rakade han. CheeseDreams 21:31, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The most amusing thing about this section discussing trolling, is that it is the longest section on this page. CheeseDreams 14:24, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nope.
[edit]Not sure what you're implying. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, I had thought you were clever enough to comprehend that. Maybe I will dumb it down for you. After all, you still think the bible is literally true. CheeseDreams 00:27, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Wow. No personal attacks. Time for
arbitrationan RFC! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:59, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)- Its only a personal attack if it is insulting. Are you saying you don't think the bible is literally true? Are you saying that the assumption that you were clever enough was insulting (i.e. that you are thick and proud)?
- Wow. No personal attacks. Time for
Names
[edit]As someone who has been following your career on Wikipedia with some interest, and wondering who you might be a non-obvious sockpuppet of, I was intrigued by the posting from User:Tigermoon here (since removed). At the very least, I'm relieved that it turns out that your name is not Angela or Theresa <grin>.-Mr Adequate 00:44, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just because I have a certain name, doesn't mean that my middle name isn't Angela or Theresa, or that theirs isn't my name. CheeseDreams.
IP lookup
[edit]As I'm not a dev, I lack the ability to answer your question. If you want to try asking a dev they may be able to do this lookup for you, although I suggest you have a compelling set of diffs to back up your request as they're rather busy and really don't like doing that sort of thing.
That being said, I had assumed that that IP was associated with Rienzo. My guess is either that it IS Rienzo, or else someone else wants people to think it is Rienzo. I don't know which. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 08:36, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
Hi!
[edit]Hi! Cheesedreams. Are you banned/blocked/sentenced to the chair etc. at the moment? I can't keep track of the works of the masters of this madhouse. Remember there's a vast number of sites out there that; want our contributions, let us keep the copyright for them, and treat us with normal freindly politeness, work properly instead of seizing up- not saving our edits- being down- or working so slooooooooooow it's not worth the massive effort and goodwill we give this place just to be abused and then banned.
So this site needs us, not the other way around. If you check my [history] you'll see that, as a reward for spending a month writing over forty articles that were requested and no one else was interested in doing, and taking a lot of time to reseach and do them with care, they are to "ban" me "long term". How kind. A great example of noble "jimbo"'s statement on here somewhere that The Wikipedia is "sworn to do good in the world" or some such claim.
And paragon userChrisO is leading the efforts [one example of his kindness]. And 'cos I mentioned that their abusing me was so bad it'd had made me feel suicidal on occasion, which it has, and would they therefore stop; lovely userVioletriga is bringing a formal complaint. I thought it was leagal to say one has felt depressed? It's a wonder they get anyone in 'ere the way they behave.
You see I spent a month doing the above crimes and being nice to people. But they then started abusing me again and I'm back in the middle of being their scapegoat. Regards from me.WikiUser 21:49, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You have to remember that Jimbo Wales is quite right wing, and designed the admin system to perpetuate a right wing bias, when he had the choice of not doing so and implementing a system like slashdot, where admin rights are granted on a rotating randomly assigned basis, and users are granted points by admins, rather than being subject to summary discussion. It would be more neutral to have a forum where admins are not allowed, e.g. an "this admin has comitted admin abuse/needs review" page which could only be commented on by non-admins, CheeseDreams
- Yes, another suggestion; and a counter on Admins' user page where people could leave a 'no confidence' vote anonymously. Say once a month only for registered users. The software is possible to get I should think. Admins with too many black marks could be deselected. Don't forget all those other writing site out there though.WikiUser 19:29, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Hi! again. I wanted to send you an e-mail. If you wish, set up an e-mail address on your options page and I'll send it. (You can of course remove the e-mail option any time.)WikiUser 18:43, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Unfortunately there is something wrong with the software on my machine and I haven't been able to get any incoming e-mails for the last half year, so I haven't set up any e-mail address. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
There never has been a bureaucracy that voted for its own dissolution.
- Actually the Irish parliament voted for its dissolution, allowing the Act of Union of 1801 to be passed, and the apartheid parliament of South Africa also voted itself out of existence, jguk 20:09, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Bureaucracy is really very different from parliaments. Part of the problems with bureaucracies is that they think they have the authority of a parliament. CheeseDreams 20:15, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Europe Poll
[edit]Hi. At Template talk:Europe you voted Oppose to the Explanatory footers poll with the statement: "Again not in europe - east of bosphorus=asia." This statement seems unrelated to the poll in question. Could you please clarify if this is what you intended, or I may be forced to withdraw your vote. Thanks. —Cantus…☎ 03:43, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
- My vote stands. Do not remove people's votes. You cannot remove a vote based on grounds only of their reason. Reasons are irrelevant to their decision. Otherwise we could overturn national elections by going "oh, but they voted for bush because they thought he was clever, not because he was any good" or "Blair was elected because people thought they could trust him. Not good enough, no evidence, sorry your votes don't count."
CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- But it looks like you're just trolling. And it could be removed on grounds of vandalism. —Cantus…☎ 04:48, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
- If you do that I will remove your vote on the grounds of vandalism. CheeseDreams 19:39, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- But it looks like you're just trolling. And it could be removed on grounds of vandalism. —Cantus…☎ 04:48, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Cantus, CD is currently under a block. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:04, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- No, the block expired two days ago, but Id gone to a meeting in france, so couldn't really do anything about it at the time. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Cokehabit
[edit]- (from User page)
What has been you most controversial edit? I see you getting banned all the time... cokehabit
- I'll let you know once I have made it. CheeseDreams 03:56, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- This one - [3] CheeseDreams 13:49, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
You brought arbritration to the whole arbritration committee?!?! Go Girl!!!!
Jesus
[edit]Since this talk page contains the word Jesus, I am not allowed to edit it (Because of an Arb Com ruling about Osiris-Dionysus), so can't reply here, sorry. CheeseDreams 04:01, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Don't be ridiculous. You know exactly what they meant. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:05, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- According to David Gerard of the Arb Com, the article Osiris-Dionysus (about greek/egyptian mythology) was clearly Christianity-related because it contained the word Jesus. CheeseDreams 04:08, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Care to provide a link to the diff where he said that? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:42, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- [4] . It is also of interest to note that the edit by me in question was my reverting the deletion of an article, and consequently "putting in a section named Jesus", which only occurred due to the reverting. The section was there previously. I did not edit it, but the thing with Cabals is that they don't bother looking at evidence, they just pretend to. CheeseDreams 21:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It seems to me that as you reverted it back in, and then there was an entire section given to Jesus, that I would agree with David Gerard. You're the one who got yourself into this mess, incidently, so I have little sympathy for you. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:49, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Darling, you took against me because I showed you a truth that highlights the foundation of your religious views as being held up by a twig. That's extreme religious bias against me, darling, not a neutral opinion of an innocent bystander. CheeseDreams 13:58, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It seems to me that as you reverted it back in, and then there was an entire section given to Jesus, that I would agree with David Gerard. You're the one who got yourself into this mess, incidently, so I have little sympathy for you. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:49, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- [4] . It is also of interest to note that the edit by me in question was my reverting the deletion of an article, and consequently "putting in a section named Jesus", which only occurred due to the reverting. The section was there previously. I did not edit it, but the thing with Cabals is that they don't bother looking at evidence, they just pretend to. CheeseDreams 21:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Care to provide a link to the diff where he said that? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:42, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- According to David Gerard of the Arb Com, the article Osiris-Dionysus (about greek/egyptian mythology) was clearly Christianity-related because it contained the word Jesus. CheeseDreams 04:08, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Arbitration Committee case opening
[edit]The request for arbitration against you has been accepted and the case is now open for submission of evidence. Please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams 2/Evidence. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 16:38, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)
Dear CheeseDreams! I'm so very sorry to hear this...darling! MahBoys 12:19, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm not. Darling. I had planned for it in september. Admittedly its about 2 or 3 days later than I was intending, but I got a bit distracted a few weeks ago. CheeseDreams 13:39, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)