''Invert nexus exists. what's an inverted nexus? Answer: A nexus is a junction where things come together. Therefore, an invert nexus is a junction where things come apart. It is a reference to my predilection towards taking things apart to examine their inner workings. "examine the inner workings"... is that like examining the sensual erotic parts? He is a total waste of spacetime. He has no cinsideration for others, and totally self-indulgant. I don't know why anyone gives this fickle sentient the time of day. Heh. Another one. Can I help it if I say it like it is? You're a horrible writer, Reiku. Surely this isn't a shock to you. If so, then you should spend some time in serious self-reflection. Not only this, but you need to understand that this is a wiki. Not your personal blog. Invert nexus 22:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT) Well, all due respect OH NEXUS, you are a total loser and freak. I cannot stand you. I don't like your attitude, your general comments or even your overall fuckin appearance: In summery, i don't like the cut of your jig. You have hounded me since i ever came here. I wish you would ge and entertain yourself - leave me alone. My writing, is not affected by your insignificant ramblings. Nor will it ever be. My work has been recognized in the past, and to this day with good understanding. So piss off. Dear InvertNexus and Reiku, let it be known to you that it will be best of you to not be hostile towards each other as this life is short and it exists for us to make peace not war. Well, I don't personally give a fuck about you one way or the other. I'm sorry you can't take honest criticism. I suppose you must have a very small penis. Meanwhile, you're misrepresenting the facts to say that I've "hounded you" since you arrived. I hardly interact with you. You are obviously delusional if you feel that I've been doing more than bumping into you upon occasion. As to your writing, please learn to spell at the very least. Learning about how to format your writing in a nearly legible form would also do wonders. I won't even speak as to the cargo cult quality of your scribblings (oops. I just did.) Anyway. Calm down. Your 'work' is still present on that page. It's just been formatted a bit more into how a wiki is supposed to look. Feel lucky that I don't have the motivation to go clean up all your 'articles' as they are all horribly written. I love you. Invert nexus 00:20, 28 October 2007 (EDT) My penis size? Is this the best you can do? Not that its any buisiness of yours, but i've never had a problem or an issue in that department. And yes, you have hounded me [on any particular weakness] - nothing to do with criticism. I can take criticism, or i would be on places like this. Instead, when i said i found math difficult, and is NOT my strongest area, and you mocked me. Now this is my turn. Give and take my inverted prick. Heh. It's your turn. Ok. Whatever you say, buddy boy. Invert nexus 00:45, 28 October 2007 (EDT) What's wrong... loosing consistency in your arguement? Are you for real? If so, my god... Delusional, indeed. Invert nexus 01:01, 28 October 2007 (EDT) Whatever: You are now even more inverted than before. Ooooooh. And you, sir, are more Reiku than blah blah blah. Wow, man. You're getting me good. I'm like crying and stuff over here. I give in, man. I'll do anything if you only stop hurling misspelled words at me! Mercy! Invert nexus 01:15, 28 October 2007 (EDT) I'd like to hurl a great deal more at you, than arbitrary misspelled words you missdirected fool. I'm sure you would. Now, redirect your attention to your own writings and perhaps you'll actually get somewhere. For instance, what is the purpose of the phrase "arbitrarily misspelled words"? Which use of 'arbitrary' are you aiming at? Please choose from the following list: 1. subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision. 2. decided by a judge or arbiter rather than by a law or statute. 3. having unlimited power; uncontrolled or unrestricted by law; despotic; tyrannical: an arbitrary government. 4. capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment. 5. Mathematics. undetermined; not assigned a specific value: an arbitrary constant. –noun 6. arbitraries, Printing. (in Britain) peculiar (def. 9). Invert nexus 01:45, 28 October 2007 (EDT) Arbitrary, in the sense that the words, being spelled correctly or not, does not delete the general information or goal. So in a sense, it is you who is being generally arbitrary, over such silly nonesense. If people can read my work, and understand my work, then why should a parrot like you change anything? I'm sorry. Which definition was that? It didn't seem to be a definition for the word 'arbitrary'. Do they speak english in what? Invert nexus 01:58, 28 October 2007 (EDT) None of the above. So. What you're saying is that you're not speaking english at all? That would explain a lot. Invert nexus 01:10, 28 October 2007 (EST) I might as well be talking in another language than to waste my invaluable time debating this utter shit with you. I was a bit rushed for time last night on my last comment. Let's resume, shall we? Upon a re-read of your explanation of your use of the term 'arbitrary' I see that you have latched on to definition #2. That I am being an arbiter of your writing style. Now, this would actually be a good use of the word had you only meant it that way, but we both know that you didn't mean it that way. Don't we? And, even if you did, you used it incorrectly as you applied arbitrary to the misspelled word, not to me. You claimed with your phrase "arbitrary misspelled words" that the misspelled words were somehow arbitrary. Now. A word cannot be arbitrary as it has no will. You will see from the list of definitions above that in all cases except for the mathematical definition the key element is will. Choice. A choice made not through logic. Not through purpose. But, rather, just pointing your finger at a spot and saying 'there'. So. How can a word be arbitrary? It can't. It has no will. However, the word can be arbitrarily (note the 'ly' which means that this is an adverb and thus adjusts the verb 'misspelled') misspelled. However, if this is what you meant, then you would be telling me that you have been purposefully misspelling words, but doing so in a haphazard fashion. Picking words, not quite at random but close, to misspell while spelling others correctly. You would thus be taking the title of 'arbitrary' upon yourself as you are the one who is hurling the 'arbitrarily misspelled words'. If you have another explanation for your phrase, then please. Let's hear it. Personally, I think you just like saying words that you've heard spoken by the intelligentsia despite your not understanding the meaning. Thus, the cargo cult. Invert nexus 16:47, 28 October 2007 (EST) this is probably the best page on this encyclopedia? just a cunt Those articles do need formating, who on Earth thinks they look better as they are?????? Nickelodeon 07:28, 28 October 2007 (EST) James R. People with small penises? Invert nexus 16:47, 28 October 2007 (EST) Oh. Well as long as a grown up adult thinks so then thats OK. I'm off to the playground. If you need me I'll be on the swings. Nickelodeon 08:13, 28 October 2007 (EST) it's past your bedtime. Here in australia we think that letting children go to the playground at this time is irresponsible and childish James R As i said, Nexus, i am not going to waste any more of my time on this. Or you. Actually, i'll take that back. You said: That I am being an arbiter of your writing style. Now, this would actually be a good use of the word had you only meant it that way, but we both know that you didn't mean it that way. Don't we? Actually yes, ofcourse i mean't it in this sense. What other fuckin sense would i mean it in, as it couldn't be anymore obvious than your stinkin attitude Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Graditude for your time, twat. Then you used it, as I pointed out quite clearly, incorrectly. I repeat, you don't speakuh the english. A pity you're so damned defensive. Oh well. Your loss. Continue writing like shit. No skin off my nose. Invert nexus 00:12, 29 October 2007 (EST) Retrieved from "http://www.sciforums.com/encyclopedia/User:Invert_nexus" '' Is the debate me and inverted prickster got into. So... Is my work shit>? If it is, its simple. I'll just fuck off and never come back.
i must commend you for making science accessible to laymen...less than laymen in my case Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
He's a total nit-picker. Anything he could say or comment, he has done so in the strictest impunity. Flouting my work as nothing but ''shit'' is a personal attack, and he claimed it was criticism. Well, there is being critical, then just being a total fuckin wank-job like him.
can you please put some grammar in that first post? are you mixing quotes in there, or just writing down a disorganised train of thoughts?
Sorry VSlayer... they are a bunch of qoutes mostly between me and Inverted. Gustav... I respect your opinion.
Though... it doesn't mean i agree. He is the only user here i have had problems with - and he started it!!!
Invert - from the link given ''I think the turn of this conversation is an excellent exposition on moderator responsibility. It seems that most who think of moderators and moderation think of authority. The power-mad and prudish. And I feel that this is the chief manifestation of moderation and is thus understandable that we come to such correlations about the concept. However, Gendanken, in her appeal, has touched on something greater and more important within the moderation sphere. Inspiration. How many of our moderators (or moderators elsewhere) understand that their position is not one of power but one of duty and responsibility? Censoring is the least of all moderator responsibilities. I think that in most cases, censorship is wholly unnecessary. In the absolute worst cases, the thread can be moved to the cesspool and/or locked. (Locking a thread would require a judgment of nil value in the conversation as a whole. And one must be careful in judging value as some gather value where others see none. Caution is the keyword when censorship is being considered.) Housecleaning is one of the prime duties of moderation. Cleaning up spam. Moving threads to appropriate forum. Merging threads. Splitting threads (splitting must exercise almost as great a caution as censorship.) Etc... But, these duties are the duties of the unimaginative and the uninspired. True moderation responsibility should be to set an example. To inspire. To promote interesting activity within one's forum. I think few moderators are capable of this. James, I feel, has shown himself to be capable in this regard to at least some extent. He is definitely a knowledgeable source for the physics forum. And he has posted a few threads which I view as inspiring. Not as many as I'd like, perhaps, but the physics forum is certainly not short on posters. So, perhaps his lack of activity can be forgiven on that account. After all, a moderator shouldn't drown out other conversation in his own enthusiasm. A balance of sorts must be maintained. Still, I'd like to see more threads from him like the one with zigs and a few others he posted around the same time on the nature of science and scientific investigation (although, come to think of it, I think that some of these threads were posted in the wrong forum.)'' Sweet words. Very well put. But does he then practice what he preaches... if you ask me, this is hypocritical bullshit.
Then there is this total twaddle to concern: Me ''Arbitrary, in the sense that the words, being spelled correctly or not, does not delete the general information or goal. So in a sense, it is you who is being generally arbitrary, over such silly nonesense. If people can read my work, and understand my work, then why should a parrot like you change anything?'' Right...? So he then says... ''I was a bit rushed for time last night on my last comment. Let's resume, shall we? Upon a re-read of your explanation of your use of the term 'arbitrary' I see that you have latched on to definition #2. That I am being an arbiter of your writing style. Now, this would actually be a good use of the word had you only meant it that way, but we both know that you didn't mean it that way. Don't we? And, even if you did, you used it incorrectly as you applied arbitrary to the misspelled word, not to me. You claimed with your phrase "arbitrary misspelled words" that the misspelled words were somehow arbitrary. Now. A word cannot be arbitrary as it has no will. You will see from the list of definitions above that in all cases except for the mathematical definition the key element is will. Choice. A choice made not through logic. Not through purpose. But, rather, just pointing your finger at a spot and saying 'there'. So. How can a word be arbitrary? It can't. It has no will. However, the word can be arbitrarily (note the 'ly' which means that this is an adverb and thus adjusts the verb 'misspelled') misspelled. However, if this is what you meant, then you would be telling me that you have been purposefully misspelling words, but doing so in a haphazard fashion. Picking words, not quite at random but close, to misspell while spelling others correctly. You would thus be taking the title of 'arbitrary' upon yourself as you are the one who is hurling the 'arbitrarily misspelled words'. If you have another explanation for your phrase, then please. Let's hear it. Personally, I think you just like saying words that you've heard spoken by the intelligentsia despite your not understanding the meaning. Thus, the cargo cult. Invert nexus 16:47, 28 October 2007 (EST)'' Which just pissed me off more, because he is now being as patronizing as possible, continuation of what he said > ''That I am being an arbiter of your writing style. Now, this would actually be a good use of the word had you only meant it that way, but we both know that you didn't mean it that way. Don't we?'' I mean... hello? Did he read my first post concerning this? Sure, he has a lot to say. I do too. He is a hypocrite in any sense concerning what he said about moderation.
Still refuse to admit that the phrase 'arbitrary misspelled words' doesn't point at me the way you attempted to pretend was your intent? It's called english. Learn it.
As to moderation, I still believe that the main duty of the moderators is housekeeping. The idea about moderators 'inspiring' the forums was decided to be a bad idea. In that thread, as I recall. And, by the way: Drama queen. All I did was say your articles in the wiki read like shit. They need formatting, spell-checking, grammar restructuring, etc. I haven't even gone into facts checking as, frankly, I can't really be bothered. I'm just saying learn how to spell. Learn grammar. Learn how to format your damned writing, both in the forums and on the wiki. Also, stop throwing a spaz fit when your crappy article gets jazzed up a little. You should have thanked Nickelodeon for fixing your page. You should have also taken the opportunity to examine the tags and learn to use them yourself so that your pages wouldn't need such drastic renovation in the future. I'll let you duke it out with our physics boys over the validity of the statements you make. I'm dealing solely in the aesthetic. Or you can spaz out and run away. Your choice.
I tend to like Reiku and find his post interesting. I also suck at putting thoughts on paper and I find the Reiku as no problem deciphering my posts. Which is cool.
I don't like or dislike him. I'm just saying that his writings are difficult to read. In the forum, fine. It's his own thing, if he wants to present huge walls of words that very few will actually take the time to go through, whatever. But, in the wiki, there are standards to maintain. Take a look at some of his contributions and see if you think they could use some wikification. http://www.sciforums.com/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Reiku The one article he wrote that was wikified is the one on black holes. He threw a stink fit because 'his work' was changed. http://www.sciforums.com/encyclopedia/Black_hole Nick and Spurious spent time prettying it up. Leaving, mostly, Reiku's 'work'. But, Reiku showed up demanding that his 'work' be returned. Nick, puzzled, did so. I said 'fuck that' and reverted it back to Nick's version. Reiku is more than free to go back to the article and add more content. But, he should expect his work to be subject to editing by others. This is the nature of a wiki.
Okay I see. Thanks. Hey Reiku just changing something as small as your titles will make it better. "Proof of God" to "Possible proof of a God?" "Wheelchair spin" to "Event Horizon" "No going back" to "Center of a Black hole" These are just examples, but you see improvements can be made.
Do you dislike the cut of his "jig" in Springy, Fally and Wintery, too ? BWAAAA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAA !!!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! No, really - it's almost like a snippet of poetry...
