User talk:Ed Poor/10

My well-rounded but spiky alter-ego

Computers

Great article Ed, although I have to ask: are you a Mac guy, or a PC guy?--IDuan 19:44, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Started off with the Mac, but I had to switch to the PC to support my wife and kids. Downgrading to Windows 95 was the low point of my computer career. The Macintosh already had full 32-bit multasking eleven years when it first came out in 1984!

The only advantage Windows has over Mac now is integration of the two-button mouse. I wish I could go back. I could ... -Ed

Obama on rifles

Thanks for creating the Obama on rifles page. I moved the discussion from the Talk:Main Page: Obama on rifles to Talk:Obama on rifles. When we have large discussions like this in the future, this might be a way to make it easier to archive the Talk:Main Page. --Crocoite 10:42, 25 February 2008 (EST)

Category

I was doing categorizing like that earlier but someone blocked my other account--ETsa 13:59, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If you are blocked, you need to communicate with the blocking admin to find out why. --Ed Poor ^Talk 14:01, 4 March 2008 (EST)

He was blocked several times by myself and others; all he ever did was come in and do mass-category changes as users Qqqqq, Java7837, and others. Karajou 14:04, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Wrong I categorized the uncategorized categories--Fdfd 14:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Geneva Conventions/North Vietnam

Read. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AliceBG (talk)

• "the United States has acknowledged North Vietnam's agreement to the Geneva Conventions of 1949"

Thanks, Alice. --Ed Poor ^Talk 10:00, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Of being human and the ambiguity of communication

*ties an olive branch around a white dove and tosses it in your general direction* Hey, I know that controversies are a dangerous zone full of heated discussion, but I'm not really here for that. My aim is simply to keep things clear for a reader.

In this case, I felt that your version of Polar bear sort of mixed a few sets of cause and effect (hunting leading to a decline, hunting bans leading to recovery, projection/estimation that global warming will lead to decline and should be fought). That's why I covered the history of the population and the given reason for listing it as vulnerable in one section and the activism and hype around global warming in another one.

I'm not here to take sides (from the looks of it, actively taking sides is sort of like doing a sack race through a mine field here), but I think it's important to keep facts (it's a fact that the IUCN lists global warming as the reason; whether that's reality is another question altogether) away from what political activists say and do.

I was a bit surprised at your reaction to my comment, but I guess that I could have phrased it more clearly (even though the post was getting too long already and since I assumed that nobody would think that I just claimed complete authority and omniscience over the field). I hope we'll get along despite this not-quite-optimal start. :) --DHayes 21:00, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Peace accepted. :-) --Ed Poor ^Talk 21:04, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

As promised, a response.

I wasn't meaning to change the subject-- I wasn't aware that the Australian spelling was different. Barikada 23:47, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Michelangelo's David

It is a classic work of art, is it that offensive to you? BTW, finding a G-rated picture of King David will be difficult due to obscenely expensive price of film during his reign. DLerner 08:12, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

If you can't locate a movie clip, I'll settle for an artist's rendition. ;-) --Ed Poor ^Talk 11:28, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

So we're not allowed to describe anti-semitic outpourings as 'notorious', Ed Poor?

What a strange chap you are. Koba 08:20, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

1. Please avoid personal remarks.
2. Change it back if you wish.

In a comment on another item you recently said "we are under no Wikipedian obligation to be neutral here". But you seem to wish for such neutrality when discussing antisemitic demagogues. Why? Koba 08:26, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Please refer to point #2 above. Thanks! :-) --Ed Poor ^Talk 08:28, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Precision

"In most non-scientific prose, it is common to give approximate values. That being the norm, there is no need to use about in phrases like, "The first airplane was flown by the Wright Brothers 100 years ago."" That implies the Bible is not scientific, doesn't it? Barikada 19:05, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

No, that implies that the particular passage about the circumference of that 10-cubit circle wasn't intended to be scientifically precise. Kings is history. --Ed Poor ^Talk 19:08, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Right, right. History. Barikada 19:11, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Your block of me

Was unjustified. You imputed a snarkiness to my comment, and a willful ignorance, that wasn't there. I forgive you, though, but what happened to "assume good faith"?-PhoenixWright 09:35, 13 March 2008 (EDT)