User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner/Archive 16

Well, I'll say this much about assumptions, I'm not an Autie, as fashionable as that may be :D But I can live happily knowing we are all on scale. Penyulap ☏ 07:14, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I thought I recalled your score as being darned close to mine? Pesky (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

As I recall, I scored reasonably high, and you smugly teased 'not as high as you' without pointing out your own score. I also gave a genuine emulation of several other people, which you dismissed, because you don't believe I can do just what you say you can do with animals and so forth. Were all animals you know. Penyulap ☏ 07:42, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I really like the funny picture I put there too :D Penyulap ☏ 07:43, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I recalled you as being "over-threshold" but a few points short of where I'm at. As far as trying to apply scores to other people goes, it's incredibly hard, as only they can know what they really feel about situations. Some of us are, for example, apparently awfully good at social situations. I often come across as over-extrovert (intense), which is a common over-compensation for not really liking it. Pesky (talk) 07:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

A-ha, well we are getting closer "a few points short of" :) well anyhow, I've never been diagnosed as Autistic. I've been assessed in a professional, but not clinical psychiatric, setting. They found there are some seriously strange things switched on in my head enabling me to basically go 'off scale' in a good way on their iqusie type tests. They ended up telling me that I scored so high it put me into the 1 in 500 at the very least bracket, and they didn't know any more as there were no suitable test papers in the building or available online and they'd need to send away for them, they don't keep them onsite as they don't get used all that often. Anyhow, it was just for some kinds of things, and it's no secret that yeah, I have some pretty amazing talents, first and foremost is pissing off idiots. Strangely AndytheGrumpiest one here has never said a bad word about me, which is pretty disappointing from my perspective, I consider his wordsmithing to be artwork for the ages. Addressing the twittermob on the ashton kutcher on twitter deletion with "Sowhatopedia", sublime minimalism. A few words from him would be bliss, I am such a groupie right there. Penyulap ☏ 08:09, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Hehe! Been there, done that, with the IQ test thing! Top fraction of a percent. Often happens with HFA's. That's part of the "high-functioning" aspect. Read WP:AUTIE, especially on the hardwiring of brains. Your visual abilities are gobsmackingly good; I'd imagine that the visual stuff was an area in which you scored very highly, and have very, very intense wiring / connections / activity. My user page has a small bit on my experiences with IQ test. This is actually possibly part of the challenge you have with other people; very-high-visual-functioning auties often "sort" stuff inside their brains, lightning-fast, in a kind of visual-spatial way, which means we have ultra-fast access there, and as we've grown up with it working that way, and (for us!) that's "normal", we have real trouble comprehending that other people just don't do it that way. Sure, we can accept the words on an intellectual level, but we have no way of getting into their brains and actually being able to get any kind of handle on how they do that kind of functioning instead. So, for some of us, it can seem that neurotypicals are quite excruciatingly stupid in some areas. We just can't see why they can't see. But ... they can't, and they can't help it. They're much better at other stuff than we are. A flea probably (even if it had an adequate brain) couldn't even vaguely comprehend why we can't jump thirty times our own length from a standstill.

"Thirty? Thirty? well, Jeeze, that's just piss-easy pathetic isn't it?! It's not like we're talking three hundred or anything intermediate level like that ..."

Ahem. Pissing people off is not a talent. Idiots can do that. Now, not pissing people off, that's a talent. Pesky (talk) 08:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you give me too much credit,I don't piss off people, ok I piss off everyone. I somewhat annoy people in general, but generally make up for it with my charm. :) still, I'd have to admit it's not so much a threshold, as it is a scale Penyulap ☏ 09:42, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

If you could help me make up for (it's fixed) my idiocy here causing damage here I'll promise to see the light on leashing my big fat idiotic mouth, and try a bit harder not to step in it. Penyulap ☏ 01:39, 8 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I've just replied over there. Pesky (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Cute! Yes, I so need another horse, lol! Pesky (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Verifiability/2012 RfC. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Just found Horse rings in Portland, wondering if this stuff is common in the UK and if we could move the article to simply horse rings and expand it to a worldwide focus. Thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 17:02, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

No, we very rarely see those here in the UK! From my memories of the last years of horse-drawn utility vehicles (the rag-and-bone man, the milkman, brewers' drays, etc.) the horses were just trained to stand and wait on command. There was a chap with a milk round in Kensington, when I was a kid, who had an absolutely gorgeous mule, which responded to voice commands just as well as a sheepdog does. His person could get him to walk on, pull in to the kerb on the left or the right, wait, etc., from anywhere he was within earshot of him. What we do still have is quite a few horse water troughs about, though. Pesky (talk) 05:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It does make me chuckle that the article includes a picture of a plastic toy horse tethered up... Worm^TT(talk) 08:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Still see lots of them around in Italy. Nowadays mainly used to tether members of the velocipede breed. —MistyMorn (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

If youse guyz could pop over to the article and offer us these thoughts (the Italy tidbit is good, can you find photos?) it would be quite helpful. Montanabw^(talk) 18:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

• I know this conversation was days ago - but a thought has been nagging at me, but not the point of nightmares. Horse rings in Portland is a blue link - and yet Horse rings is a red link. Isn't that rather putting the cart before... <Ched stops himself in mid-sentence> Just observations about the the wonderful, wacky, wiki. (and now we know what WWW really stands for. :-)) Chedzilla (talk) 09:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey, here's an idea! Why don't you go and dig up any other instances of horse rings on a world-wide scale? ;P [ducks, grins, and runs ...] Pesky (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually I did do a quick look for some references (web based, as I don't have much in the line of horse related references), and tend to find more of these types of rings rather than the ones in the Portland article. Guess I'm just lost beyond this. :/ Chedzilla (talk) 18:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC).

I've actually used those, they seem gimmicky but they actually work! Montanabw^(talk) 21:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

[Pointlessly, but eager to be helpful.] Little Ched perhaps could use a Dalahäst. They don't even require horse rings. [Darwinfish tries to imagine himself on a horse, any kind of horse. It boggles his mind.] darwin^fish 20:36, 15 June 2012 (UTC).

Dear little fishie, I have just the steed for you. Pesky (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

[Tickled. ] The Hippocamp! [Mounts his steed. ] darwin^fish 23:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC).

[Gives a shout of laughter at the 'fish's notion of how he'd look with a harp, or is that contraption a lyre? ] darwinbish ^BITE 23:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC).

Darwinfish upon a majestic 4-legged steed - a handsome vision indeed ... or would that be a finsome vision? :) Chedzilla (talk) 02:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I recall seeing horse and dog rings mounted in walls in my very young days. The horse rings were obsolete even in leafy Winchmore Hill, and not long after most of the cattle troughs were filled with geraniums. Rich Farmbrough, 06:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC).

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Statement by Pesky:

• "I'm only butting in here to pick up on the point about anyone who's not in the out-to-get-Malleus brigade being referred to as 'fan club', 'enthusiast', 'enabler' ... which are so often uncivilly slung about every time something like this rears its head again. It's both (in many cases) completely untrue, and (in most cases) pathetically polarising and moronic." (emphasis added)

• "Somebody pokes the bear with a stick, the bear growls at them, and they go running and crying 'Mommy, the nasty bear growled at me - shoot the bear, Mommy!' -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "@Boing! Said Zebedee: Where's that 'vicious dog' comic strip again?" Pesky (talk) 11:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

You'll have to pardon my not having completely organized this thought (was that a sentence?). First of all I wanted to call your attention to my response to these comments within my own statement:

• "Calling the other side the 'out-to-get-Malleus brigade,' in same post where you say you're sick of polarizing name-calling from us such as 'fan club,' etc, is pretty vexing. And in response to this exchange [with Boing!,] I find these dismissive characterizations just as 'uncivil' as the 'names' you point out. A characterization doesn't have to be in the form of a name in order to have the same exact mocking effect you describe in your statement."

With that as a preface: You do the same stuff you're complaining about there. This is not an accusation; people do things without realizing it all the time (I sure as hell do), so this is just information. PS. I know I'm going to catch hell for this, and no matter how nicely I attempt to do this it'll come off wrong. But I'm doing it anyway.

This polarizing name-calling you refer to is an excellent point. It really is. But not only does this practice also come from you and everyone else on both sides of this debate, it's really not limited to name-calling. We each congregate to discuss the enemy in sarcastic mocking terms, more for the sake of raising our teammates' self-esteem than anything else.

I've done one thing differently, which hasn't helped so far, but I keep doing it anyway: I try to talk. I've tried to talk to Malleus and Drmies, and each time was basically informed there was a lack of interest in talking. I'm not sure if I should've expected anything else at this point, not because the other side is just too unreasonable and wrong (even though they are... just kidding), but because people are too dug in now. But now I guess I'm stupidly trying again.

Would you be shunned if you chose to abstain from the mocking? You do say you're "sick of being called names like this by people who either don't 'know' me or hardly 'know' me every time there's a conflict". I know I'm pretty sick of that too. I try to maintain a debate style when I address this topic (and all topics), though I slip up sometimes, when the mocking is just too much and I feel I have to beat parry a little just to keep my footing. Analogies are also sometimes the best way to get one's point across, so they're tempting, though when used without care they are mocking and polarizing (and perhaps as you say, "uncivil").

I think Malleus would probably say these names, mocks, and jabs are merely the practice of "telling it like it is", and so there's really nothing wrong with them. If you'd really disagree with him on that point, as your statement seems to suggest, I'd urge you to take your own criticism to heart. I certainly will. Equazcion ^(talk) 10:52, 8 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Awww, bless you! First, hugz! You are, of course, absolutely right in what you've said here about me falling into the name-calling trap, too. Yes, I did. But (omg, there's always a "but"!) I wasn't meaning to label all people who don't approach things the exact way I do, just that small subset (and there is one).

Second: please, don't ever feel you have to approach my page with any kind of fear and trembling, or expecting to "catch hell" for anything at all. I really try my hardest to be approachable, and to take other people's views on board, and I kind of hate it that you thought I'd give you hell. (And I'm ordering my stalkers not to give you hell, too – though that's almost certainly unnecessary).

Thirdly; I failed on the advice I gave Pen! I did it! I advised Pen to keep his internal fire-breathing dragon muzzled and leashed until it had learnt "Sit, stay and quiet!" ... and then my own internal fire-breathing dragon rattled the bars of his cage and let out a huff or two of smoke ... it's rare, for me, but it does occasionally happen. I snorted a bit of flame in someone else's direction, too, and realised that perhaps it would be better for me to walk away from the computer and go and do something constructive before Dragon began to think that I'd left the door open and he could go out and toast people ;P

I've always read your various postings with interest and respect; you do keep your head well in almost all circumstances, even though our views may differ on things. But in one fairly important way, we're similar: I try to talk, and to keep talking, too (and I frequently talk too much, I know!) You said "now I guess I'm stupidly trying again." This is not stupid, this was a very good point you made, and you made it very well, and I'm pretty much always open to anyone talking things through. Heh! I've just found myself internally trying to think of a better label for the kind of people I was trying to describe, only to realise that the whole point is not about labelling people! People are such incredibly complex animals that any kind of label is always going to distort the truth.

Your point: yes, I did snarl back a bit, and I did do the same kind of thing myself that I called others on, and yes, I was wrong to use any kind of label. I've not been in the best of places recently; my mother (for whom I was full-time carer) died not very long ago, and my younger son now has a potentially life-threatening condition, and I guess I'm allowing some of that stuff to erode my own manners; I'm a bit more irritable than is normal for me. I'm not intending for that to be an excuse, just a possible explanation. I will do my best to take your words to heart and not wander onto the thin end of that wedge again. You were right. I did wrong. I will try and do better.

Fourthly: if you're ever in my neck of the woods (New Forest, UK), get in touch and I'll buy you a truly excellent beer at our truly wonderful local pub, which sits just inside the edge of the Forest, and has semi-feral ponies wandering in the car park. Pesky (talk) 04:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't exactly apprehensive, as I tend to speak my mind and let the chips fall where they may anyway, but it was more your stalkers I was expecting the fire/brimstone from. I appreciate your amiable response, and the amendment to your statement at arbitration. I was sorry to hear about everything going on in your personal life, and hope your son gets better. I probably won't be on your side of the pond any time soon but appreciate the invite -- we don't get too many feral ponies wandering around New York City, so I may have to visit sometime if only to see that (well, that plus beer) :) Equazcion ^(talk) 22:50, 10 Jul 2012 (UTC)

My stalkers are almost without exception very chilled in here; that's the idea. Mandatory Truce Zone and all that – and they're nice people. Very nice people. You really should come over to this side of the pond if you possibly can; the New Forest is one of the most wonderful places on Earth (and also of global importance as one of the few remaining relatively unspoiled valley mires / lowland heath and wetland habitats). It's a magical place; soul-healing. And I'm sure we could find a member of the family with space to put you up. Pesky (talk) 03:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I realise that he means well, but I think Penyulap is out of control, and needs to calm down. He can be a great asset to the project, but he keeps harassing me, is disruptive and somewhat abusive towards many editors, and won't admit when he's wrong to the point of disruptively pursuing issues which he feels to have "lost" long after everybody else considers them resolved. Over the last few weeks he seems to have been getting worse. I really don't want to lose him from the project as he is a well-meaning and hard-working editor, and when he is not using it to try and dodge questions about his conduct, he has a great sense of humour, but if he continues as he has been recently, he is probably going to end up getting blocked, and that would be a shame.

He won't listen to me, but you seem to have a good rapport with him, I was wondering if you could possibly have a word with him, to try to calm him down or perhaps suggest that he take a break to clear his head. I just don't want to have to keep fighting him as his talent is wasted in causing problems for others. Thanks --W. D. Graham 20:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

WD, I'm not upset or out to get you, I just want to address the ill-feelings of all editors on the ISS talkpage, one of which labeled the English variant issue a 'monument to the failure of the wiki process' and the other used words I shouldn't repeat. I am sorry that you feel harassed, it's not my intention to upset you, my aim, as always, is to being harmony to that page, including the editors who may have left, who you label, or label their actions as, 'pathetic'. Penyulap ☏ 20:51, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

It's important for all of us not to stick labels onto people, wherever possible! I know all too well that when things get a bit heated, all of us can say things which we later regret having said. Thing is, it's so easy to say them, and so impossible to unsay them. If everyone could only just try to be a bit kinder in their approach to everyone else, a lot of this stuff would just disappear. (And "kind" doesn't mean doormatty. You can shoot an animal kindly.) The improvements would still get made; the articles would still get written, but an awful lot of the associated aggro and stress would just waft on out of the window. Y'know, I think one of the biggest fall-foul traps is in using derogatory / undermining adjectives. I have no idea if there's "something in the air" which is making people so edgy right now; it's weird. On the one hand, there are a lot of clearly very edgy and irritated people. On the other hand, I've also seen some very promising discussions about. We need more people who can truly teach, rather than scolding and berating. One of the things I learned early on in rehabbing animals is that, very often, they actually respond better to whispered instructions. They listen harder if you whisper. Pesky (talk) 21:25, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

One of the things I've learned about rehabbing animals, and we've rehabbed loads of ferrets, is that they don't respond at all well to any sort of unkindness. Early on we were told to flick the nose of any ferret that bit, but I can promise you that just makes the little buggers even more determined to get you the next time they see a chance. The only sure way is to take the bites, let them know in their own language that it's hurting you, and pretty soon they don't see the point of trying to hurt you again, if you're not hurting them. It's just a matter of mutual respect. Unlike the situation here on Wikipedia: "You bit me three years ago, even though I probably deserved it, and now I see a chance to get my own back on you." Pack animals like horses or dogs are different again; you have to learn to think like one of them, watch their body language. Some administrators could learn an awful from studying animal behaviour. Malleus Fatuorum 21:39, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

One of the big differences between humans (mass, gross generalisation) and other animals is that sane non-human animals don't either understand or engage in cruelty. By which I mean deliberately causing real pain for any other reason than in physical self-defence, or to eat (when their intent is not to cause pain, but to cause death, which is different). They don't have that thing about it. They don't generally indulge themselves with vengeance – they're much more practical than that. Discipline they understand. Rules they understand (any animal which has any kind of societal interaction has "rules".) Their etiquette may not be the same as our etiquette, but they do have it. Their play can be too rough for us, until we teach them bite inhibition; but they don't bite on purpose just to hear you yelp, for the sake of it. And they rarely, if ever, deal in lies. Pesky (talk) 22:00, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm cool with people calling me names when it's just their opinion they are expressing, I especially welcome it when it's amusing and original, I mean, there is such scope and potential with a character like me that I'd rather sit back and enjoy the variety and surprise than see the opportunity go to waste. Basically when people do it through actions, that is use some part of the process, any process as a means to express their dislike of me, that is where you will unleash the demonic wit who will demonstrate you slam dunked your own foot into your mouth, not mwa. So seriously, enjoy yourself and let fly where you don't have your hands on any buttons or polls or whatever, I look forward to appreciating genuine efforts in this department. So far, if I combine one of my remarks into those of others, I'm a 'damfool idiot' who dresses like a pimp before sitting down at the computer, only to 'rip my clothes off in public and wail like a banshee' (I hope that was directed at me, I love it) to poison the well, or at the very least I 'turn every thread into a Jim Carrey movie'. Penyulap ☏ 22:16, 7 Jul 2012 (UTC)

[Interested :] Rip clothes off in public and wail like banshee… ? Mhm… wanna cyber ? [Bishzilla rips the spiderman suit off in public and growls like a death metal Cookie Monster. ] bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC).

Showdown of the century, but I'll need until at least high noon to stop laughing and stand upright. Penyulap ☏ 00:30, 8 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I had been picturing more of a humorous gunfight/shootout, not eeewww. sorry Penyulap ☏ 06:11, 9 Jul 2012 (UTC)

[Frostily :] "Eeewww"? Regret confuse little user. Assumed user click on 'Zilla links. bishzilla _ROARR!! 16:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC).

• <blushes in shock> OH MY! .. Well I'm certainly not going to let Chedzilla read this thread. — Ched :  ?  07:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

"Eeewww"? Now that was uncivil, lol! For all you know, little 'Zilla could be the girl of your dreams! ;P Pesky (talk) 06:25, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

"Women perceive Wikipedia to be of lower quality than men."

This may or may not be true (depends on whether you know any seriously low-quality / high-quality men, I suppose ....) but fixed as per what I suppose was intended ;P Pesky (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Girls keep telling me "at least you're not Wikipedia," so this actually made sense to me. Equazcion ^(talk) 12:24, 11 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Man! That's LOW! Tee hee! Montanabw^(talk) 19:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Equazcion, it's the day you wake up to find yourself suffering from linkrot that you need to start worrying ... and MTBW, I thought: "Well, I know people say it's bad, but that's a bit harsh!" Pesky (talk) 04:56, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I notice a lot of people worry over currency issues, and with good reason. Penyulap ☏ 11:09, 15 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I'm running a SPI request and haven't done it before (never did get the idea of spending any time at all on people who are not worth spending any time at all on, but spotting socks is like the easiest thing in the universe for me)

I have an incredibly large number of ways to match up the sock with the editor who is running it, however, with each method revealed, the editor would, I would assume, learn how not to repeat the same blunder (at the moment they seem to be following not so much an idiots guide to socking, but something which assumes a far smaller intellect). So it's counter-intuitive to lay any more than enough cards on the table, and the paradox of choice hinders my ability to decide which is the best opening move. I'm such a SPI-Virgin ! :) well, if there are some people who could guide me through email, or even here, that would be appreciated. Penyulap ☏ 12:52, 18 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I have enough advice to proceed, although any comments are still welcome. I can never be too smart, or can I ? :) Penyulap ☏ 14:32, 18 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I know very little about SPI's; I've never started one, though I do know quite a bit about how they work. I can't really advise you; I'm glad you've got advice from elsewhere.

No, you can't be "too smart". But always remember what the ultimate in "smartness" really means. You do still have some glitches in your programming, you just need to work on de-bugging those ;P ... which you're easily smart enough to do. Pesky (talk) 02:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes I agree I have to remember where the ultimate smartness is meant to be... I have to take it out of my smart-ass and put it in my head. Is that what you mean ? or kind of close ?Penyulap ☏ 05:41, 19 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Pretty close. Work and speak from your intellect, not from your emotions. Snark will never cure idiocy, amnesia, or just plain assholeishness. It will only damage you. Now that's not smart. Pesky (talk) 06:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Still, a sharp wit is a good contrast to the tedious types. Penyulap ☏ 12:17, 19 Jul 2012 (UTC)

So long as you don't accidentally cut yourself on it ... Pesky (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Or let Auntie get the last word in a joust :) Penyulap ☏ 15:06, 19 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Awww, thanks! I'm really glad if it helped. I suppose it helps that I'm not only HFA myself, but have taught people for decades, too – all sorts, from severe Down Syndrome to pure geniuses. (And so many of the geniuses are HFA or Aspergers!) The Savant-type geniuses can have incredible trouble with dealing with how "thick" some neurotypicals can appear, just like the neurotypicals can have exactly the same problem with A-spectrum people. The only real difference between all of us is just which software we come pre-loaded with! Pesky (talk) 03:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Someone unaffiliated with WPEQ seems to feel the need to blank half of Connemara pony due to lack of sources. Want to tackle that one next? I think just getting it to C or B quality would solve the problem. Montanabw^(talk) 17:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Aha! Yes, I might well be able to turn to that one. Not necessarily today ... but soon(ish). Pesky (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

You have an eight-foot boa constrictor? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes; she's beautiful. Her posh name is Sarabi, but her pet name is Cuddles ;P She was media of the day on 1st August last year. Pesky (talk) 03:42, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

• OK .. we had a 3' black snake find its way into the house today .. come get it!!!! I HATE snakes. Chedzilla (talk) 07:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Snakes are OK so long as you know what makes them tick, and handle them with respect. So long as your newly-discovered pet isn't venomous, find out where it lies up (probably somewhere quiet, dark and warmish), quietly sneak up on it, and drop a pillowcase over the top of it. Then pick it up inside the pillowcase, turning the pillowcase inside out as you do so (just like using a poop-scoop bag but on a larger scale), tie knot in pillowcase (but not also in snake ;P), put impromptu snake-bag into cardboard box, and transport (gently, they don't like being bumped about) to your local animal rescue centre, or wherever. If it's venomous, get an expert in to deal with it. Pesky (talk) 07:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

We have a large garter snake that winters in our greenhouse, under some straw bales. I think it's a she. But if we lived another 10 miles out, we'd have rattlers. They tend to like dark and cool. =:-O Montanabw^(talk) 19:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I have to admit that I might have trouble feeling any degree of affection for a rattler. Adders are OK (I've only been bitten three times, and nothing serious), and on the whole they're pretty chilled out. But rattlers? Hmmm. Pesky (talk) 05:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I love snakes! Tending more towards the smaller ones, but really they are great pets and not nearly as scary as they seem once you get to know them (the latter quality reminds me of Malleus... :P). Oh, BTW Pesky, I dropped ya an email. Hugs! OohBunnies! (talk) 10:49, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I heard that! Malleus Fatuorum 05:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't have the heart to tell them that snakes EAT bunnies, after all. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

So do people. It's a harsh world if you're a bunny. OohBunnies! (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clip. That's awesome. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:53, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Now I just need a friend with a high frame rate camera of some kind, so that I can record her again with the ability to playback the actual moment of strike in slow-mo! If you slow-mo the current vid, she's just a blur. Quite incredibly fast; I wonder what the metres-per-second rate actually is when she strikes? Pesky (talk) 06:49, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

not too much chance of that outside the film industry. Cameras that go above 60 frames per second have Zeros on the pricetag, lots of zeros. A few cheap ones squint when they do it, giving you a squinty slow motion picture, and the ones that you actually want are EU5,000 or more, easily. The things you see on tv with snake strike are filmed on cameras above 30,000 I would expect. So look for industry friends, people who work at that kind of thing, and you would probably need to take the snake to the camera, omg, some organising there. Penyulap ☏ 08:37, 13 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I suppose one option would be to buy one on eBay, use it, and then re-sell it. Ideally for more dosh ... actually, I was thinking of one that has something like 160 -320 fps, just so I could show the strike at one-tenth normal speed. Slowing it down much more than that makes it actually harder for most humans to comprehend / compare. Fascinating for the details, but kinda loses the impact on speed. Despite, as you say, requiring extra-special kit, and transporting Cuddles (in which situation she's quite likely just to sulk and not want to eat, anyway, just from being moved to a strange environment). Pesky (talk) 03:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you could hire one? The man to ask is user:Parrot of Doom, he's a professional TV cameraman. Richerman (talk) 05:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I've done that a few times recently, (bought a piece of kit from eBay and sold it on when I've finished the job I bought it for, and always for a profit). As Richerman says though, PoD may have a better idea. Malleus Fatuorum 05:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Ooooh, I didn't know he was a pro! He may even have met my father, who was an actor, and used to get hired to do BBC training sessions :D Is PoD UK-based? Pesky (talk) 05:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

He lives not far from Manchester. Richerman (talk) 10:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

So a trip down to the New Forest would make a nice, refreshing break for him, yes? ;P Pesky (talk) 11:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

It would be a nice long bike ride for him :) BTW, that film clip reminded me of many years ago when I used to supply rats and mice to the guy that ran the aquarium and reptilium at Manchester Museum. One day he ended up at the infirmary having a 10ft python's tooth (the python was 10ft - not the tooth) extracted from his thumb bone when it mistook his hand for a dead rat. Of course, it didn't really mean him any harm... Richerman (talk) 17:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

He could hop on a train (with the HFR camera). There's a direct train from Manchester to Brockenhurst, where we could pick up. On feeding snakes – there's a knack! It partly involves making sure that your snake is focussed entirely on the food, and not looking at your hand. And, when not feeding, use a snake hook to ward off the toothy end until you can get your hand onto its neck. Pesky (talk) 03:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

They're hardly the cuddliest of pets then. It's not something I've ever thought about before, but I'd imagine that the film company would provide the cameras, not the freelance technicians? Malleus Fatuorum 04:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

When well-handled from an early age, they can make very cuddly pets. As with most other pet animals, it's more how they're brought up than anything else. My boa wasn't well-handled as a youngster, which is why she has some "issues". In other terms, they're also good pets. They're very quiet, they don't need much exercise, they only need to be fed once a week (or less), they only shit once a week (or less) and they don't piss at all, they don't need to be groomed, they don't take up much room ... Pesky (talk) 06:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Pesky, I could do with your eyes at this venue, I'm pretty sure I can see what's happening, but I doubt Penyulap would accept it from me. Would you mind dropping by? Worm^TT(talk) 07:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I will look. Pesky (talk) 07:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

ygm Penyulap ☏ 07:57, 21 Jul 2012 (UTC)

On the verifiability RFC, View 12 isn't going anywhere like I thought it would. Users have completely lost track of the ESL side of it, and it's turning into a discussion that's unintentionally, but acutely, autie-bashing. I just thought I'd pop over and offer a little moral support. Chin up! All the best—S Marshall T/C 08:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Awww, thanks! I must say, I was horrified at the amount of apparent autie-bashing happening there! And people just didn't seem (and don't seem) to realise that al those labels they've been applying are so out of order! Violation of NPA against the entire autie-editor community, really! "Stupid", "incompetent", "not paying attention", "useless", and all the rest! If someone were to use those terms about them, to theri faces, for their apparent inability to understand what the view even says, they'd be up in arms and screaming "civility violation" at AN/I! Pesky (talk) 05:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I have come to the conclusion that somebody over that-a-way is either a troll or ... errrmmmm... [Pesky wracks brains for civility-compliant word] ... ummmmmm ...[gives up] another thing. Only a saint or a fool continues to attempt to educate the ineducable. I'm no saint, and I like to think I'm not a fool, either. So I'm just walking away from him now. Pesky (talk) 07:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I am amazed at my own self-restraint. I admit that I was sorely tempted to use the phrase "With all due respect", but I managed to avoid it ;P Pesky (talk) 08:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

For some reason you got my statements as equating A-spectrum editors with incompetent editors. I actually think that if average competence score could be calculated for the A-spectrum and neurotypical editors, the former group would have a higher score. I'm very sorry if my comments mislead you, and I specifically apologize if I unintentionally offended you. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I accept your apology; likewise if I offended you, I also apologise. Pesky (talk) 19:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

It's TLDR at this moment, but it seems apologist when it doesn't need to be, and that is one place I think it falls down, IF you use the word 'programmer' for example THEN people may see it's more mainstream. Also include other categories like logical philosophical academic or some such. That's 'getting warmer' I think. Penyulap ☏ 08:53, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Hehe! Hugz! Hopefully the simple use of the omninclusive word "all" (including) should overcome anyone feeling left out. Pesky (talk) 08:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

No, it needs explaining, and 'all' doesn't do the job. Try artist, engineer, programmer, politician. Use a string of words on the page here, or write something new and I'll process it and pinpoint the sticking points for you. Penyulap ☏ 09:06, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same thing here? I'm not sure; made an assumption which could be wrong. Pesky (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I think a large proportion of editors are having trouble with the use of the word AUTIE in policy at this time. The difference stems from your positive discussions with Jimbo and the positive discussions with your own peers, but the public awareness of the subject is too low, so people are uncertain there. Use different terms to express the same idea, more approachable terms, that will achieve the same end. Penyulap ☏ 10:51, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I think I see that the whole thing can't be changed or added to, The Beatles page needed a RfC that rigid and complex just for the letter T, due mostly to just a few editors though. I see it's a complex process and so I guess is it too late to make a suggested change to the 'view' ? is that the part I want to suggest improvements for ? I'm sorry I did not pay attention to what you were up to earlier, I feel I have let you down now. I would have liked to give you a summary of the first 500 editors responses before it began, but it can't be changed according to the edit history ?... Penyulap ☏ 14:39, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

No, the page can;t be edited, mainly because if it kept changing, nobody would be able to tell (without stupid amounts of research) who had made what comment in relation to exactly which version ..... nightmare! If only it were possible to wave a magic wand and make other people see what the clarity thing really is. It gets badly misconstrued. Clarity doesn't mean wordiness. Often, the fewer words, the better, so long as they get the whole picture across. And people still seem to have an "It's them or us" approach, when if something is worded with clarity and precision then nobody can misunderstand it. But, hey, never mind, eh? Pesky (talk) 19:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Pesky, I've worked professionally to produce documents in plain English (for readers at or below the average reading age in the UK), I've produced a website for the deaf (whose first language is BSL), I've worked with editors on this project who are on the autism spectrum, and I have family members who are dyslexic. From my experience, there is not one way of explaining something that would work for all of these parties - they all have different requirements. This is one of the reasons your proposal is not coming across in the way that you intended. Once you start mentioning one group with learning or reading difficulties, people have the view that it becomes incumbent to accommodate all groups with learning or reading difficulties, and that can't be done for everyone with the same text. Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

There is such a thing as explaining so badly that nobody can tell what you are trying to say, there are shades of gray, there are levels of confusion, so it stands to reason that it can be improved. Agreed that not everyone will understand written text, and you'll always have a remainder after the long division of ideas into little words, but I see where Pesky went wrong, and I agree with Elen that people don't like being asked to accommodate any group that sounds like a disadvantaged minority. You are 100% correct Pesky and your idea is 100 % achievable, but making it fit is as easy as doing a different long division. Avoid the subset that suggests spectrum editors are retarded, or avoid the subset altogether when factoring the idea by using a few other words to hold the key concept and it will pass for a large portion of the demographic. Arguing that they are not retarded makes it sound like they are, even when people are agreeing with you. It's looking like you are over-defensive on this point. You know perfectly well what I think of spectrum editors, and I'm saying it sounds to me like your apologising for them. Don't apologise. Especially when we are better than the rest of these clowns :P Stop making us sound bad when we are not. Examine the phrasing with new eyes to see if it sounds like people are being asked to make allowances, or pluck out my eyes and borrow them, you know you can trust me for this.

I have a related edit, how do I search my contributions for an article about a University in America which I assisted on ? there is a program that they run and it has brilliant expression of the concept, There is a almost orphan article I helped with and then incorporated it into the main article, if someone can help me scanmy contributions for that article we will have the solution.

Avoid asking that we state in every policy that Penyulap is not a durian. Everyone knows I'm not a durian, and people object to it being in policy not because they are arguing over me being a durian, it's true I'm not, but it's just not practical to say it in every policy. Penyulap ☏ 22:21, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Here it is, you can find the path in the detail here, ironically it's about disability, but the approach taken in incorporating the aims is what we need, as it completely circumvents apologism. Penyulap ☏ 22:28, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

Universal Design An approach to making facilities, information, and activities accessible to and usable by everyone is called universal design. Universal design (UD) means that rather than designing for the average user, you design for people with differing native languages, genders, racial and ethnic backgrounds, abilities, and disabilities. The universal design of your offerings will make everyone feel welcome and minimize the need for special accommodations for those who participate in your activities or access your information resources. It is also important to make sure that staff and volunteers are trained to support people with disabilities, respond to specific requests for accommodations in a timely manner, and know who to contact regarding disability-related issues.

Just a matter of re-writing it to avoid copyvio OR just asking if it is ok to use the text as it is. It can be incorporated into policy as is almost. It keeps more people happy, a lot more, and you can add anything you like so long as it keeps a similar split amongst the factorisation of the idea.

Sorry the idea, rather than the text can go in, and obviously only some of it.

The wording of policy should be formulated to make it accessible and clear to everyone. This is a concept called universal design, it means that rather than designing for the average user, you design for people with differing native languages, genders, racial and ethnic backgrounds, abilities, and disabilities. The universal design of policy will make everyone feel welcome and minimize the need for special accommodations for those who participate or access the project.

still needs polish, but it's getting there. Penyulap ☏ 22:44, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

• I'm familiar with that concept. You might make thinks multi-use (the larger cubicle can be used by wheelchair users, mums with buggies or three teenagers all swopping the clothes between them) or you present them in multiple ways - eg icons, text, audio, video - so that any one alone or a combination of them together gets over the information you want. You don't do what my doctor's surgery did - each of the rooms including stock cupboards, cleaner's cupboard, toilets, has a number on the door, but the consulting rooms have a second number on the door, which designates which consulting room it is. The number of times I've gone into Room 17 instead of Consulting Room 17. That is an example of spectacularly bad design. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly where I have been going, "Try artist, engineer, programmer, politician. Use a string of blah blah" just add in the additional groups, mainstream ones and you're good to go. Penyulap ☏ 22:52, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

This is critically important FOR the mainstream groups like programmers. There are a lot of mainstream groups that are being put at a disadvantage because people are writing for their own idea of the average user, basically, just themselves. Penyulap ☏ 22:54, 22 Jul 2012 (UTC)

I write stuff that has to be understood by anyone quite frequently IRL. It's not so hard really, unless your reader can't actually read. Malleus Fatuorum 23:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, guys, for your input here. Elen, you have some interesting points; Penyulap, yes, that Universal Design thing is pretty much exactly what I was trying to get across!

I'm in the same kind of boat as Malleus here; I've been teaching for decades, and I've always noted that some stuff just works for everyone. Elen, you;re dead right about the levels of disambiguation required by autism-spectrum people in some respects, the main thrust of the view is just that we should take great care not to include ambiguous and confusing phrases in the first place. If our need to disambiguate is caused by our own poor writing, then that's on a level with the Room 17 vs. Consulting Room 17 thing! I know I keep using the information leaflets in medication packets as an example, but they really are one of the best examples about. They are spectacularly clear. Pesky (talk) 05:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

That's exactly the kind of thing I'm often asked to write. If you've ever read the info on a generic medication then you've probably read my words of wisdom. It really isn't so hard. Malleus Fatuorum 05:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Well look, it's too important to let it go to waste just because the RfC has already begun. May I suggest that we look for other places to insert the guidance into the documentation while we are all here ? Penyulap ☏ 06:03, 23 Jul 2012 (UTC)

@ Malleus: D'oh! I should have known, I suppose .... ;P and @Pen: Not while the RfC is in progress, I suggest. I did a fair chunk with the civility policy a while back; I think it's better for it. I'm working on the Universal Design "brief introduction to WikiPolicies" over here, almost just for fun. Not intended to be a replacement, just a simple explanation of why and what (with a bit of how and links to the policy pages). I reckon that if someone reads the policies having already read the brief introduction, they'll be able to make more sense of it. Pesky (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I suppose one of the things I find most disheartening is the view "It can't be done, so we won;t even try (and it's a stupid idea)" ... where would we be if the Wright brothers, for instance, had kowtowed to that view? Or any of vast numbers of other inventors and so on? What about all those cures currently being researched for "incurable" diseases? (Although we might conceivably be safer if the atom really couldn't ever have been split ... but then again ...) Pesky (talk) 04:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

And (good grief!) has none of them ever trained an animal? Most animals have an IQ of less than 70, and they don't speak English, either. Yet a decent trainer can still train them to do some really quite complex stuff ... all that's required is a knowledge of how to communicate with them, and an ongoing desire to do so. Pesky (talk) 06:28, 24 July 2012 (UTC)