Hello. My characters:

Nalikill USAI

Assylum Contributor, Incredibly Poor Suggestion Maker, and just plain nuts. Make yourself at home.

• Main • Talk • Complaining • Signature • Sandbox • Navigation • Header • Archive

Join the Lock an Load Loners! whould you like to join the lock and load loners? reply to my Talk Page thanks for reading! --Jakey07 18:55, 1 June 2007 (BST)

Flak Jacket Suggestion

Sorry for bugging you, but it does nerf mall camping, for one simple reason. The only place you can find flak jackets is in Forts and Police Departments. You cannot find them in a mall, hence people have less incentive to stay in malls due to the fact that the flak jackets will expire soon. They have to leave to go to PDs and Forts, far away from the malls.--ShadowScope 19:47, 1 June 2007 (BST)

Racism

No, there's no rule against racism on the wiki. Surely you agree, however, that we're all better off without it? -- Pavluk ^A! 00:10, 11 September 2007 (BST) I agree, but I was merely saying that the much vaunted free speech of the wiki applies in that area as well. Nalikill 00:41, 11 September 2007 (BST)

I believe in freedom of speech. If someone wants to make a statement like "I believe that all members of <x> race are stupid/dirty/warlike etc", I won't agree with them but I'll acknowledge their right to hold that opinion. However, if they start using abusive ephithets or slurs to refer to members of that race, then I'll take issue with it. There's a difference between free speech and hate speech. -- Pavluk ^A! 00:49, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Hahaha, no there ain't. Once one accepts the concept of 'hate speech' as a crime, that then implies that, in the eyes of the law, the way they believe is wrong-which is a judgement the law has no right to make, only the people- which means you're judging their beliefs...exactly like they are doing to yours.Nalikill 03:33, 11 September 2007 (BST)

but we all have a right to be treated equally. hate speech, while "allowed" under right of free speech is not allowed under right of equality.--'BP^Tmz 07:06, 11 September 2007 (BST)

My point? I believe in the philosophy of free speech that goes "Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me. And since words can never cause physical or economic harm to a person, I believe hate speech should not be restricted- just as I believe 'coming out', rap, premarital sex, catholicism, and satanism should not be restricted. For me, the two are on the same level of stupidity, but I tolerate both. As long as they do not attempt to cause any economic or physical harm to me or to anyone else, I believe they should be left alone. Nalikill 11:34, 11 September 2007 (BST)

but what about mental harm? people have gone on shooting rampages because they were teased mentally.--'BP^Tmz 20:39, 11 September 2007 (BST)

That's what 1.Guidance Counselors are for, and 2.Parents. Parents are to blame for not seeing the symptoms in their children, for not knowing their children's hobbies and not raising their kids right. If you mean adults, there's a little thing called 'maturity.' Anyone who goes on a shooting rampage usually gets what they deserve- a.k.a., getting shot down like a dog, as they have made themselves one by forgetting the one thing that seperates us from animals, impulse control.Nalikill 20:56, 11 September 2007 (BST)

true, however that was just one example of how mental haterd can harm people. i agree with what Ryiis wrote futher down on this page. i do know alot of countrys have laws againest hate speech. canada being one.--'BP^Tmz 21:56, 11 September 2007 (BST)

1.Canada sucks anyway. 2.I'm a US citizen, thank God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. See my reply to him for my last response on the subject. Nalikill 22:06, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Hey guys, I didn't mean for my comment to come across as a racist comment and I am not ,in any way, shape or form, a racist. When I said "that" I referring to the taliban, the terrorist group. I wasn't trying to bash the iraqis, afghans, or any other race from the middle east, but anyway, I crossed out my comment and apologized on the suggestion page. --Sonofagun18 07:01, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Don't want to pull an Akule, but...

Actually, I won't at all. However, several countries do have legislation regarding Hate Speech, and the UK I am sure is one of them.

To be honest, Hate Speech is no-where near the same as Free Speech. A couple of users have went over this with you, on their talk pages and yours, as well as the deletions page for the religious suggestion that you took offense too. Race cannot be changed, it is something you are born with. Religion, Political, and Socio-economic beliefs are generated by Sociological interactions among other things - they are inherently different in that they can change overtime.

I respect your opinions, as they are your opinions and no one elses. However, I can question your convictions and belief structures as it is those things that are malleable. Race is something someone is born with - something in which they had no choice. There is no way to change it, and discrimination based on it is wholly wrong.

Words can cause physical and economic harm. I hate to bring it up, but the Second World War and the Nazi Regime of the time is a tarnished example of how Hate Speech can lead to physical harm. As well, words can cause economic harm - and your can protect yourself from such things - hence Libel/Defamation lawsuits and the like. Yes, my example for physical harm is one where words were indirectly the cause - however it was still a cause. Defamation and Libel are direct results of words causing economic harm. --Ryiis 21:36, 11 September 2007 (BST)

We both have the rights to our opinions. I'm not going to argue it. I'm a United States citizen. I can go out on the street and yell "I fucking hate niggers, spics, crackers, jews, wetbacks, and towelheads!" if I want to. I believe that I would be wrong if I did, but I'd fight to the death for my right to do it. Nalikill 21:38, 11 September 2007 (BST)

Hey.....

Youy wana go spam Akule's talkpage with thousands of copywrigted images? Childish, but it'd be a right laugth....--Seventythree 23:39, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Feel free, but I'm already a bit of a controversy raiser. I'm going to keep my head down until october, when I'm going to get that warning purged, and I'm going to run for sysop status. Would you support my bid, if I did? Nalikill 19:57, 8 September 2007 (BST)

You can run for sysop? Didn't know you could do that. Sure, I'd back you.--Seventythree 13:50, 9 September 2007 (BST)

Communism Versus Capitalism: Get your seats now!

You take the opening salvo, 73. Nalikill 22:39, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Ok, let us begin. Hem. Firstly, you said in a coomunist country? We've never had a communist country. The closest we had would probably be either Cuba or the USSR. Both countries in question are (or where) in a state of state capitalism. Which is the state before a leader of the prolateriat takes charge and returns the means of production back to the workers. This is, of course a deeply flawed part of the ideal of communism. Now, let us start on capitalism! To begin with, we do not live under capitalism, as laid out by such founders as Adam Smith. We live under impusle driven consumerism, ruled by conglomerotes of Industro-millitary companies constantly trying to force more and more products down our throats, whilst exploiting the working classes more and more. Adam Smith himself set out that if people of the same trade get together to fix prices it is a crime againgst the people. + Now, I do not beleive that communism could work out at the moment, however neither could capitalism. They're both deeply flawed. I mostly called myself a communist because most people don't know the difference between a communist and a socialist! To you, Nalikill--Seventythree 22:52, 6 September 2007 (BST)

Okay. "Industro-millitary companies constantly trying to force more and more products down our throats, whilst exploiting the working classes more and more. Adam Smith himself set out that if people of the same trade get together to fix prices it is a crime againgst the people."- Exploiting the working classes, I'm not sure HOW. It's not like people are forced at gunpoint to accept goods from one source, or even goods period- look at the Amish, whereas in what is commonly called communism, people ARE. You're right, it's not PURE capitalism, but it is a capitalism DERIVATIVE- Pure capitalism is just as bad as the USSR or Cuba was/is- look at the horrible working conditions from 1865-1930 in the USA- I believe in 'Capitalism with a Safety Net'- A free market, but

Companies must tell the truth

The Government must prevent people from dying; short of that, the government has no debt to the people

No discrimination- if you work hard, you earn more, no matter what you believe privately or are.

People shouldn't suffer losses because of another's stupidity- if a bank fails, people should be compensated. But a gamble- stock market or in a casino- the person acknowledges the risk

Companies have worked hard to get where they are, and don't deserve to have their earnings stolen from them just because they are successful- so taxes on companies can and should be significantly higher than on normal people- but not over what is necessary to run the government.

If I understand you right, you believe in 'Ideal' communism, if it could be implemented. However, would you agree that among currently possible societies, "capitalism with a safety net" works out to be best for everyone? Look at the USA- even the poorest person here is assured of income from the welfare office, has food kitchens all over the place to go to eat at, homeless shelters if they can't afford an apartment- and the definition of 'working class' in the Western world- which has almost universally adopted either "mild socialism (CWASN but with more governmental assistance" or "capitalism with a safety net" means you have a TV, computer, Ipod, and more luxuries per square inch than our fathers had in their entire homes? Nalikill 23:06, 6 September 2007 (BST)

So, we're talking about some level of socialism here. Interesting. However we are going to have to borrow more socialist concepts for this to work, are we not?

Firstly, companies are amoral. It's not their fault. Companies are like sharks. They will try their hardest to exploit anything they can in the interests of profits. For this you need goverment intervention in companies. A strict set of laws, coupled with a strong body to implement them and punish the companies in question. If it can be implemented worldwide, how brilliant would that be? Say cocacola poison another village in india or wherever. They think they're safe because they've broken no Indian laws, then every country with a coca cola headquaters or place of operations in it levvies a huge fine on them!

It is in the intersts of the goverment to provide more than just a saftey net. A national health service is a must, goverment schemse to promote education, the creation of the welfare state ect. This is not just a question of morals, a better educated, healthier and more satisfied public allows for a safer, more secure society. A goverment should represent the needs of a society, it is voted in and maintained by the society and it is their duty to look out for people.

You hit it on the head with the discrimination thing.

You're right, people shouldn't suffer because a bank goes under, but they do, why? because banks and companies gamble on the stock market. And of course are occasionaly do bad things with money (Enron). Best way to elimintae this? Not by having to compensate every screwup a company makes but by imposing tougther legislation on companies.

Yup. Companies should not be taxed too much. Neither should they fiddle the books as much as they do (legaly in most cases, becasue the people who make the tax rules are mates with the owners of big companies) to dodge tax. Part of their success is due to the country they operate in. They owe the people of that country.

Over to you.--Seventythree 23:28, 6 September 2007 (BST)

It seems we agree on a lot of points. We agree in the essentials, but differ in implementation. I'm a strong believer in national soveriegnty; for instance- let's take the current US/China lead poisoning scandal. If the US wants to punish Mattel, it can very easily do so- either it can make a treaty with China or put a tariff on Chinese imports until China punishes Mattel. If there were a supranational government with the authority to punish any government or corporation- let's say that the chairman hated America and Americans. You see the problem? The more power is centralized, the more room for personal bias there is. And the cocacola example is wrong, if they sell poisoned coca-cola to a distributor in india, they're still liable, if I remember right- and that holds true, a company, by selling its product to customers directly, or to a distributor in a country, makes itself liable to that country's laws. So Mattel can still be civilly sued under US laws, in my example. "It is in the intersts of the goverment to provide more than just a saftey net."- Well, I had meant to imply that free education- through High School- was included, as well as healthcare for the poor. Anyone who's not poor has the choice of investing in healthcare, or risking their lives for the extra few dollars in their pocket. So I believe the government needs to protect people from others harming them, and the incapable from their own incapability, but not the capable from their own stupidity.

My theory is, the more power we give the government, the more we depend on it, the more power it demands so it can better care for us, so we depend on it more. I have an essential dislike of the power of the national government, but a belief that state governments (provincial governments) are big enough to avoid personal vendetta, but small enough to care for all the interests of their inhabitants.. Nalikill 23:39, 6 September 2007 (BST)

However, my theory is that I'd rather invest more power in a goverment that we should have some controll over by voting than in the large industriomillitary companies that seem to run a lot of stuff at the moment. Mind you, it's like so many ideals isn't it? It relies on people to act like good human beings. And unfortunately people in charge seem way too eager to sell their soals (if we have them) and sell out the people they are supposed to guide and help. As a socalist I have to beleive that people can become better than they usualy are.--Seventythree 23:45, 6 September 2007 (BST)

I can handle someone being a socialist. I just hate communism- its implementation at least- so devoutly, that I cannot let the claim of someone being a communist go unchallenged. Will post more detailed reply later. Nalikill 00:34, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Arb ruling

Hi Nalikill, there is a case pending on the vandal banning page against Grim s because he got into a discussion with you here on your talk page in violation of an arbitration ruling. Normally he would be punished for doing this, but seeing as it seemed to be a fairly good natured conversation I thought it best to leave it up to you if you want any further action taken. Could you please let us know on the A/VB page, or my talk page? The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 03:57 6 September 2007 (BST)

Suggestion

I'm sorry, I did not mean to offend you, but my suggestion realy was not supposed to be offensive to christians, merely the minority of fundamentalists that give the rest of you a realy bad name. I do understand that 99% of christians are good people, and as such I will write an extra little disclaimer into the suggestion. If you are realy not satisfied with this, then I guess I could remove it. Once again, I'm sorry to offend, that realy was not my intention.--Seventythree 08:47, 28 August 2007 (BST)

I am a Young-Earth Creationist, fundamentalist, conservative, evangelist christian. Trying to convert people and the whole bit. I am, however, in the TOP High-school in South Carolina, I have a good shot at getting into possibly Yale or West Point, depending on which one I prefer, and I am virtually guaranteed a free ride if I go anywhere else- in the 10th grade, before any serious preparation, my SAT score was 1420- not counting writing. If you count writing, it was 2020.. So remove it. I ain't stupid, neither can you call my kind stupid. Nalikill 11:55, 28 August 2007 (BST)

I have to say, your comment strikes me as odd. Intelligence isn't only about SAT scores or other measures that humans have invented. Infact I belive them to be a fallacy of true intelligence. May I ask why you belive that your blunt statement above basicaly saying "I'm smart, so remove it" should work? I haven't see you at any point explain why you belive that the suggestion is offensive. Seventythree made it quite clear that he was talking about a minority of Christians even before you kicked up a fuss about it. The fact that you placed the suggestion into the deletion queue before even talking to him about it just shows that you fail to try to get both sides of a story before making a decision. Much like the type of people that Seventythree was making fun of in his suggestion, they always think their way is the only way and will doing anything to get it. If you are offended by anything I have said, I can honestly say I'm not sorry. But I will not stand by while you make unfounded demands of someone who is trying to open up a reasonable dialogue. - If Jedaz = 15:16, 28 August 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1

I genuinely do not think that fundamentalist christians are stupid, that part was a joke. What terrifies me is how close minded they seem to be (note I said seem. I realy don't know you well enougth to make that kind of judgement about you). If you read The Handmaids Tale by Margret Atwood, you might get an idea about what exactly I mean. I honestly do not beleive that you are stupid, or evil for following the fundamentalist christian faith, I do, however beleive that you may be misguided, but that is beside the point. The point is that now I can't delete the suggestion, as I probably would have (it's not the funniest thing Iv'e ever written) if I thought it realy offended you. Now it has to go through voting, discussion ect. You should take part, It does everyone good to discuss their faith, and occasionaly see it ridiculed.

If you realy want to, you could always post a suggestion ridiculing something I beleive in, like Communism, or Feminism, or Equal Rights or something.--Seventythree 18:29, 28 August 2007 (BST)

Ok, fair enougth. In the title I will change it to Far right "christian" version (with christian in speech marks) And adda disclaimer stating that No offense is intended to christians in this suggestion, merely people who use their so called "christian faith" to propegate hatred and violence towards others

Either I will update it if I get the all clear from you, or you may update it yourself and link to this statement if anyone criticises you for it. I beleive that good faith edits are allowed, and you have my permission to make this one.

I hope we can put this behind us, I wrote a bit of a daft suggestion, mostly out of anger at certain minorities amongst the christan faith, and you beleived that I was referring to you. A simple mistake, and one that I am glad will be rectified shortly. I would love to get into a debate with you as to the nature of the bible, and religion (I am fairly well read in the area) however, this is not the place. I'm glad we seem to have agreed.--Seventythree 11:44, 29 August 2007 (BST)

I don't hold it against you personally... I took it a bit too harshly, and I was afraid this might give a wrong picture to those who don't know what fundamentalism is. Nalikill 00:06, 30 August 2007 (BST)

well, i've gotta say, I'm very glad that we can put this behind us. I realy don't like all this arguing and such. It serves no real purpose. I will change the situation as I stated, when my computer stops playing up. Probably to-morrow.--Seventythree 00:14, 30 August 2007 (BST)

Right. Updated the suggestion as I said I would. --Seventythree 19:09, 1 September 2007 (BST)

Creation thingamajig

Hee hee hee. Young Earth Creationist. You do realise that the same stuff that we use to date the earth to 4.6 billion years or so is the same stuff upon which we built our technology and power. If you truly believe the earth is 10, 8, 6 or 4 thousand years old, then you should stop using the technology that proves you wrong. Anyhow:

Explain Sediments. Without using Noahs flood. That opens so much crap for you. First of which, how did they feed so many animals on board a ship so heavy that the technology of the time couldnt withstand just the animals? Where did the dung go? Wouldnt disease have been rampant? How do you explain the massive craters found in the sediments (And im talking kilometers across). Did you know that water transfers kinetic energy very well, unlike air? Its how Hydraulics operate. Basically, for the duration of the flood, for these craters (Which have been proven to be impact events, through various testing, including, if im not mistaken, testing for increased concentrations of the element, Iridium, which is very uncommon on Earth Surface) to have formed, they would have had to have landed progressively during the alleged flood. One of the biggest was several kilometers across. Such an impact, during a global flood, would have obliterated everything on the surface due to the massive supersonic tidal wave that would have circled the entire globe. Then we have radiometric dating, which, even though in the cases of the longest lived elements has an error margin of several million years, the timescales involved deal in billions. How do you explain Cosmic Background radiation? How do you explain intergalactic distances of up to 13.6 billion light years being visible? Why can we see anything that distant at all? How do you explain cosmological Red Shift? How do you explain Quantum Physics? Quantum Physics are experimentally and mathematically proven to be correct, but they boggle our brains. We cannot grasp the way things work down that small. particles being in two places at once as well as being a particle and a wave at the same time. All this is way out of our league, yet we are somehow created in the image of a creator, and thus should, at least, be able to grasp concepts such as QP as well as it would. How do you deny the colossal arrogance your religion implies in saying that WE are the one sentient life form in the universe, when the universe contains an estimated 125 billion galaxies, each containing over am hundred billion stars on average? (So, basically, 12,500,000,000,000,000,000 different star systems, each of which had their own accretion disc and is probably orbited by a set of planets, be they rocky or gas giant (though i would feel pretty safe in saying that at least half have rocky worlds, be they habitable or not). I could go on and on for hundreds of pages, but id rather not so heavily inundate you that you simply ignore it all. --The Grimch ^U! 13:49, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Prove to me that Carbon 14 dating is accurate. Nalikill 14:31, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Where did i say Carbon 14? Why the fuck would i use that to date the earth? Thats fucking stupid. It only had a half life of about five and a half thousand years. Use the right element for the right job. No, im using fucking Uranium. The most common isotope, U238, has a measured half life of about 4.47 billion years (Do basic physics to figure out how we find out half lives of elements, or look it up in a physics textbook at the local library, or you could just use wikipedia). By measuring the amount of Remaining start product as well as the amount of material from decaysed Uranium in a rock (Or Zircon Crystal), we can tell what proportion of the original product has decayed, and from there, using the half life value obtained, we can tell how old the sample is. Now, you could claim pollution in the samples threw off the reading by a few million years, and you would probably be right, however, the calculated margin for error is way, way too small to put a dent in the 4.6 billion year age we have for our planet. Also, pollution levels cannot be expected to remain roughly consistent across the entire planet, yet we get very similiar dates, particularly for testing of the contents of Zircon crystals, from all over the planet (FYI: Zircon crystals are closed systems, and once formed, cannot be penetrated by later pollutants, or at least, cannot be penetrated by pollutants and then survive till now). --The Grimch ^U! 14:52, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Okay, fair enough. Uranium then. I'll accept the half life part, only an idiot wouldn't. How do you know how much the rock started with?Nalikill 15:52, 3 September 2007 (BST

I covered that in there, but basically, when Uranium decays, it does so through either alpha (Ejects a helium nucleus) or beta decay (A Neutron decays into a Proton, an electron, and a neutrino), and these chains can and have been mapped out by scientists. Basically, they measure the amount of U238 left, then they measure how much of all the daughter isotopes are left, and they then have a nice figure for how much was there originally. As i said above, there may have been some of these there already, but even then, they can only throw off the reading by a few hundred million years at most, and when dealing with billions, thats really negligable. Also, as i mentioned before, contaminant levels across the world are unlikely to be uniform, and the results taken from zircon crystals are fairly uniform the world over, though there are sections where you find even older ones, usually fartherst away from volcanic activity, such as Australia. --The Grimch ^U! 16:05, 3 September 2007 (BST)

But what about molten lava, where the rock is mixing up with other rock? Because it's mixing up its daughter isotopes and U238 with itself, and the existing rock, how can you be certain of an accurate figure? Nalikill 16:12, 3 September 2007 (BST)

As i said, before, such amounts would be small, and certainly not enough to throw off the result by enough to make a young earth valid, especially given the rarity of the vast majority of the daughter isotopes in nature. A lot of them are highly unstable. Some of them last just microseconds. Also, as i said before, the presence of such pollutants would not be uniform, as we see with ages gained from ones all over the world. --The Grimch ^U! 16:21, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Prove to me they would be small.Nalikill 16:41, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Get a chemistry data book, and look up the half lives of the Uranium 238 chain. The vast majority have half lives measured between days and microseconds. A quick search turned up these two useful links: Decay chain. Radiometric dating. Anyway, basically, the second link states that Zircon will form with Uranium, but it wont form with others (This is actually a pretty common occurance in chemistry. not everything will react with everythingn else, and some are more reactive than others), as such, you get a rather pure original sample to go on. --The Grimch ^U! 16:58, 3 September 2007 (BST)

Wait, now I'm confused. You said earlier that the daughter isotopes would allow you to figure out exactly how much U238 you started with, but now you're saying some of it dissapears so quickly it would be small in amount? So how can you be sure the daughter isotopes will be an accurate measure of how much you started with? Nalikill 17:13, 3 September 2007 (BST)

It doesnt dissapear. It breaks down through further radioactive decay into other elements, and the whole system terminates at lead, which is stable. Since everything in the decay tree (AT THOSE ATOMIC MASSES) is considered a derivative of U238, and because they are filtered out of Zircon formation, unlike the parent element, by measuring how much of all the daughter products is in the crystal, you can find out how much uranium has decayed, and then compare it to how much is left, and you get an idea of how much was there in the first place, as well as what proportion has decayed. You then simply draw a line out towards the radioactive decay curve on a graph at this proportion, and where it intersects that curve, draw a line down to the time axis, and you have a date, typically in billions of years. --The Grimch ^U! 01:41, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Okay, but then, after enough time, wouldn't the daughter isotopes break down into something innocuous that would be naturally present in small amounts? Nalikill 03:37, 4 September 2007 (BST)

No. They go to Lead. As the article i liked you to states, Zircon is highly resistant to forming with lead. You have a rather pure sample of U238 to begin with, and the lead that forms inside as a result of radioactive decay is kept there as it cant escape. Even if it did, this leakage would make the sample look younger than it really is. As a result, you can very very accurately date the time of the crystals formation. In most cases, this is between 3.9 and 4.3 billion years, though there are older ones that go back 4.4 (found in Australia), and the Acasta Gneiss, a formation in Canada, dates back just over four billion years. Its pretty much proven without a shadow of a doubt that our world is about four and a half billion years old. Furthermore, from the matter in our star system, our planet is definately orbiting at least a the very least a second generation star (A star formed from some of the debris of a much larger stars supernova). The heavy elements in our planet, and visible in the emission spectra of our sun, prove that our system is composed of debris from an ancient supernova (Supernovae are where elements heavier than iron are forged), and the largest stars are currently estimated to last several billion years before they burn out enough of their fuel to trigger a supernova event (Thats really, really complicated. I suggest you look it up if you are interested). In essence, this pushes the age of the universe as a whole back a lot farther than just the age of our world. On top of that, by measuring the red shifting of galaxies found in the hubble deep space fields, we can measure back at least 13.6 billion years we know have gone by for sure, plus whatever it took for what we see that far away to have formed. --The Grimch ^U! 07:23, 4 September 2007 (BST)

Anyway, the reason creationists attack Carbon dating rather than Radiometric dating is because Carbon dating makes a few assumptions Radiometric dating does not. Radiometric is pretty much impervious to any serious attempts to disrupt it, because the only way to discard it and its results would be to call a very large portion of both physics and chemistry lies. This is something the average creationist who understands those subjects is hesistant to do, because it would mean a lot of our stuff shouldnt work if they were lies. --The Grimch ^U! 07:33, 4 September 2007 (BST)

So if I understand this correctly... the crystal forms in the middle of ore...Considering how small the crystals are, couldn't lead contamination be a problem? Nalikill 11:38, 4 September 2007 (BST)

No, they dont. They condense from lava flows. And lead contamination cannot be a problem because as it crystalises it resists lead. Thus, the initial content of lead would be small to none. Especially that early in our planets history. --The Grimch ^U! 12:06, 4 September 2007 (BST)

votes

I answered your question to condrakka Here. I understand you read the rules a bit differently but the usage is correct. Don't let it stop you making suggestions. --Vista ⁺¹ 14:47, 3 June 2007 (BST)

Uh...when you RE a vote...be sure to a a # in front of the comment or it might mess up the vote count. Also RE under the vote that you're REing. It sorta makes it easier to keep track of things. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 15:52, 3 June 2007 (BST)

Hi

I found the first reason for you voting kill on my suggestion really funny, so I added it to my quotes, hope you don't mind--♠ Che ♠-^{T GC X} 06:40, 10 June 2007 (BST)

Hey, dimbulb. That unassigned report on the Stanbury page, yeah, that was me. And that was made awhile ago. --Doggie 03:17, 9 August 2007 (BST)

NT updates & Danger Report updates

Hi. Just a little thing. When you update the Building Status at (nic) please update the NT Status Map too. thanks.
and see how to update a Danger Report correctly at my Help page -- /// goebi^{TalkHelp/LFS/SR/NT/_{_MWP}} /// 13:25, 25 June 2007 (BST)

Communicating with Others

In general, you should not edit other groups' or individuals' main wiki pages directly without prior permission--that is considered vandalism. I assume, in good faith, that you were simply unfamiliar with this rule. In any case, I have moved your comments regarding the FEZ-USAI alliance to our talk page and posted a response there. the Morrish Building 14:59, 26 June 2007 (BST)

Template Overload!

Wow O_o You've got so many templates on your page that they aren't all displaying properly. You might want to consider getting rid of a few, or moving them to a subpage of your userpage. --Specialist290 ♠♥♣♦ 22:17, 6 July 2007 (BST)

Promotion Page

would you please stop reverting my edits in the promotion page ? you are not only rolling back the parts you didnt like, but also are rolling back how i made it better to read the guidelines for promotion bids. If you have anything against my edits, move it to the promotions talk page, and wait for others to agree with you that my edit is wrong. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:56, 8 September 2007 (BST)

The response to the comment you made on my talk page (I also moved it to the bottom. New stuff goes down there).

Not at present, no. It is my opinion that you are too swift to seek sysop intervention on things, and take things a little personally. Sysops need thick skins, and i dont think yours is thick enough.

Give it some time. --The Grimch ^U! 03:12, 9 September 2007 (BST)

Hows it going

Recently you sent me a message calling me unbreakable man. I think you have me confused for someone else.--Scout 2107 03:55, 10 September 2007 (BST) If you dont mind, i dont like dead weight. Im going to delete our conversation from my page. Also, Am I allowed to delete warnings or am I supose to leave that?--Scout 2107 04:44, 10 September 2007 (BST)

You must leave the warnings. Feel free to delete our conversation, now that I've preserved it for posterity Nalikill 04:44, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Record of a Conversation with a Liar

SO, how you doing?

Mister Unbreakableman? Nalikill 03:46, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Do I know you?--Scout 2107 03:45, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Nope, unbreakableman, just reminding you of WHY those warnings are up there. Nalikill 03:46, 10 September 2007 (BST)

....What? I think you have me confused for someone. Im Scout 2107 in the game.--Scout 2107 03:50, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Grim checkusered you. Found out you posted the humorous suggestion pray. Don't deny it. Nalikill 03:59, 10 September 2007 (BST)

What makes you think I did that?--Scout 2107 04:10, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Check-fuck-user. It checks the IP addresses. Yours and Unbreakableman's came up the same. Ergo, you are unbreakableman, or rather, were. Nalikill 04:11, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Wheres check user? Ill check my damn self.--Scout 2107 04:14, 10 September 2007 (BST)

It is a power available only to sysops, else it might be abused. I do not have that power; by Grim's warning above about 'sock puppets' and his comments about 'unbreakableman' on the vandal banning page, I deduced it had to be you. If you two are not the same, then which sock puppet did you use to post the humorous suggestion, and what WAS the humorous suggestion that was in the wrong place? Nalikill 04:17, 10 September 2007 (BST)

hmm... are you sure he has this ablity? Because the other user page that we were argueing on had a message from grim to the Head admin person asking him if Akule and (I think the name was) Amazing or amazon or something were the same person. Obviously he doesnt have the ability and since I didnt see any message to the admin gut about me I can only conclude that he assumed it was me since 'someone' made a comment on the "humorus suggestion" about it being a troll because of the word 'realizm'. Because both me and unbreakableman both say ours is realistic. Because they ended their suggestion the same way I ended mine makes me think they rather based part of thier joke around my comment or it was just coinsidence. --Scout 2107 04:26, 10 September 2007 (BST)

I'm ABSOLUTELY SURE. D'you know why? he's a sysop. Number 8 on the list. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Special:Listusers/sysop . BAM! And the one thing other than assholes that pisses me off is unrepentant liars. Just admit that you're unbreakableman, and I'll go away and shut up. You know you can't decieve Kevan, the sysops, and the Bureaucrats. Nalikill 04:28, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Then maybe its because hes an ass and hes part of a group that wants to discourage noobs like me from this site!--Scout 2107 04:33, 10 September 2007 (BST)

So you believe he lied, and is deliberately lying to drive you away? Then take it to misconduct (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct)! Unless I see a case there against Grim S, I'll take it as an admission of guilt that you're unbreakableman, no matter what you say.Nalikill 04:35, 10 September 2007 (BST)

I would but ive read some of the head admins page (like I mentioned before) and grim gets away with a bit of shit. I dont think he cares. And you know what- think whatever you want. Doesnt realy make a difference. Just send me a message if unbreakable posts anything else.--Scout 2107 04:42, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Alliance of Fort Creedy

Nalikill... I've seen you on the Wiki a lot. Do you happen to be part of a group? --Secruss 02:17, 12 September 2007 (BST)

I have a couple of alts. I have one at Fort Creedy-CreedyDefender- when I saw your page, the Alliance of Fort Creedy, I decided Creedy was worth creating an alt for- to defend if need be. My main character is in USAI, and I have a zed alt in a group of my own design, Lack Confederacy Nalikill 03:24, 12 September 2007 (BST)

McZeds

Since when is McZeds "no longer active".

McZeds isn't a group
Go to Vinetown and check out the Tynte Building
Check local tagging in Vinetown

I updated my McZeds status just today when I realized that the page information was incorrect.

I'll ask you to retract the nomination and leave McZeds alone. Thanks, --8 Bucks 22:58, 13 September 2007 (BST)

McZeds is no longer active- NEW McZeds is active. Without an active leadership, I don't think the group qualifies as active. If the wiki says I'm wrong, I'll retract it. Nalikill 23:01, 13 September 2007 (BST)

metagame attacks

Is there an advantage to deleting it myself over just waiting for it to get deleted?

Byteme42 20:30, 15 September 2007 (BST)

I don't think you can 'DELETE' it yourself, but you can 1. Ask if you can, and 2.Ask for it to be deleted. Moving it to a subpage of yours, though, would definitely give you the edge in this whole drama. Nalikill 20:31, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Right. Because he started shit with Jorm, got burned, and ran off crying. If you can't handle the heat, stay out of the kitchen. --User:Axe27/Sig 20:35, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Lulz!!!!

And now I laugh because you were banned. See ya tomorrow.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 21:56, 15 September 2007 (BST)

Well done!

You've gone mad! Welcome to the Assylum. We hope you enjoy your stay.--Seventythree 02:34, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Unbanned!

Not quite a template, can't make those properly yet:

Nalikill has survived a smiting with the Ban Hammer!

-- Pavluk ^A! 16:02, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Strange vote

Why did you vote keep on images in A/D that clearly duplicate others uploaded by author and requested for deletion by author? It's just author's inexperience that they ended up on A/D instead of A/SD --~~~~ [talk ] 16:55, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Hm...Okay, if the author requested it, then I'll change my votes to SD. Nalikill 17:14, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Zerging

Dr'Carnage is not mine, i gave him to one of my members called Lukahn. Thnx for asking. (i only run Dr'Spears & Dr'Brainz)--Brainz 23:23, 18 September 2007 (BST)

About removing comments

Well, you were in touch with the A/VB system quite a lot lately, so that's why, i guess, you made this revert. I'm not willing to raise anything about it, but in my humble opinion it was bad faith. You see, that guy posted crap on Kevan's talk page and after 1 reply realised that it was crap and removed it. He was the original poster so he can remove it, it's not vandalism. However now that you restored it there - it has more needless comments and stupidness. --~~~~ [talk ] 17:02, 19 September 2007 (BST)

I made that in good faith. I assumed page ownership-no one can remove anything off this page without my permission, and I would assume the same applies to Kevan, and whatever happened to 'assume good faith?' I thought of all people, a sysop would understand that rule, and abide by it. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 22:17, 19 September 2007 (BST)

You thought of all people when brought the crap back up? Original Poster has same rights to remove his own comments as page owner --~~~~ [talk ] 06:45, 21 September 2007 (BST)

	The Drama Llama is Watching You
	The owner of this page reserves the right to delete trolling and drama at their discretion.

Hagnat:Don't post here. ~~If you need to talk to me, feel free to say "I need to talk to you" and I'll come to your talk page.~~ Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 22:18, 19 September 2007 (BST)

In response to the recent incident... (You just can't trust some people.)

HAGNAT, DON'T POST HERE, AT ALL, PERIOD. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 11:46, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Hagnat, one more time and I'm going to arbitration. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 22:22, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Back seat moding

hay there. Please stop saying how we should punish vandals when reporting them or when others do. It's our job to decide on this, not yours. Too much of it just encourages drama -- boxy • talk • 15:32 21 September 2007 (BST)

Yeah, its annoying for us real sysops to have to read your pseudomodding. Please only post there if you have something relevant to say about a case or need to make a proper valid report, and before you do, reread the vandalism policy and the Administration Guidelines. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:29, 21 September 2007 (BST)

another user used to be highly antagonized for this. He only managed to get some respect from the others sysops when he stoped doing that. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:47, 21 September 2007 (BST)

In Nalikill's defence, I think he is genuinely trying to prove he is a responsible editor of the wiki. Would it be possible to post some info regarding how responsible editors who are not sysops can contribute to the wiki usefully?--Seventythree 17:05, 21 September 2007 (BST)

If he wanted to do that the first thing he should do is get rid of this green.--Karek^maps?! 18:56, 21 September 2007 (BST)

Why?

Would you send Ninjas after me? You bastard!--Seventythree 16:49, 20 September 2007 (BST)

Don't Use Fake Edits As A Response

Tacky, for one, and we have talk pages for a reason. For example- this! --Karlsbad 22:47, 19 September 2007 (BST)

A Question

I was wondering if you made any edits to this page. I thought that I'd had all the edits, but you show up on the history tab. Thanks! --Pede n t i c 00:09, 18 September 2007 (BST)

Yeah, I edited it to fix a small typo that kept it from working. Nalikill ^{TALK E! W! M! USAI} 00:11, 18 September 2007 (BST)

Hmmm...apparently it still does not function properly. The profile field does not display in the example. Any ideas? --Pede n t i c 04:08, 18 September 2007 (BST)

What is this template for? If all hope is lost, try Mr Emo Engel.-- AHLG T G THE END IS NIGH! 04:14, 18 September 2007 (BST)

I'm trying to make a template that people can use when applying for membership into my group. It is being uncooperative at the moment... --Pede n t i c 14:59, 18 September 2007 (BST)

Hm...

It's kinda ironic that in your attempt to avoid drama, you took your conflict with Sonny to one of the most drama-centric pages on the wiki. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 13:28, 17 September 2007 (BST)

Cool!

Love the new backgrounds. 2 questions:

1) Where did you pinch it from?
2)where do I get one?--Seventythree 12:18, 17 September 2007 (BST)

look before you leap

while i can see how what me and Zrex244 is an "edit war" you should have really checked both our talk pages to see what was going on before you wrongfully reported us.--'BP^Tmz 07:39, 16 September 2007 (BST)