User talk:AutomaticStrikeout/Archive 11

Goodbye

I know some people will question the validity of this retirement, given the fact that it is not my first one, but I have decided to leave for several reasons: 1) I want to prove that I can, 2) my enjoyment of Wikipedia has been severely depleted, if not wiped out entirely, 3) the Wikimedia Foundation has made it clear that they want to modernize the encyclopedia, editor retention notwithstanding (many of the changes will likely create more problems than they solve, but I no longer consider the fight to be worthwhile), 4) the recent kerfuffle at AN has been disheartening and once again demonstrates the dysfunction that plagues the community. Over the past few days, I have not edited at nearly as active of a level as I usually do. Furthermore, I haven't missed anything. Frankly, I don't think I'm going to miss anything when I'm gone. I doubt you will believe me when I say I am leaving, but you will when I don't come back. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  15:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

• I hate to see you leave. Burnout is a real issue, and you have tried to do a great many things, perhaps too many at one time. Take a few months off and see if the idea of coming back appeals to you. I've never liked the idea of "retiring", when most often an extended break is all that is needed. The place can dominate your life and can become an emotional rollercoaster for a lot of people. Regardless of what happens with you here, I wish you well and great success in life. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 05:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
• It has been a pleasure to work with you and I hope we can renew our collaboration at EotW in the future. I also hope you are not TOO committed to your promise not to return. Have a great summer vacation and come back refreshed. Hundreds of Golden Editors await being discovered by you. ```Buster Seven Talk 18:19, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I felt this way and left wiki for a year making only grammar changes via an IP most of the time and once I disengaged and got a perspective I came back and I edit less now and hopefully don't get dragged into the drama that I was inclined to get into then. I think it's helpful to do that most times and look forward to seeing you back when you hit that level of awareness (if you do). Always a pleasure! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Is there any way to complete adoptions. Please don't leave. The WikiCommunity and I need you to help fix these problems. WorldTraveller101^BreaksFixes 01:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Last Request

With my retiring, World Traveller101 needs someone else to take over as his adopter. Would somebody out there be willing to take care of this? Thanks in advance, AutomaticStrikeout  ?  02:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm willing to take him up. WT101, feel free to contact me to discuss what we can do :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:39, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

???

Hi, I thought you have already retired? Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 11:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I am retired. I only dropped back in to participate in an RfA for a candidate that I have offered to nominate in the past. This does not mean that I am coming back. I decided that I would leave a few weeks ago, partly because I realized that the battle against the unnecessary changes implemented by the Foundation was really not worth fighting. Perhaps they need an editor or two to retire in order to show them that they are doing damage with all of their change for the sake of change. Still, that's not the only thing that made me leave. I've been uncomfortable being part of the community for a while now and my tolerance is basically all used up. Even last night, while reading up on some of the goings-on here, I found myself getting angry. The Wikipedia community is, at its core, fraught with inconsistencies and tumult that have led me to reach my threshold on exasperation. I have my own opinions as to what causes at least some of our problems, but I won't bother to share my thoughts. Most people have already aligned themselves in whatever disputes they are a part of and won't listen to opposing views. Although they irritated me at times, I've come to not only understand but even agree with those who hold a very jaded view of your community. I see a pattern of new editors who arrive, identify problems, envision possible solutions, defend their solutions and push toward positive changes for a while and then ultimately realize that it is hopeless, leading them to give up. I've reached the end of that pattern myself and, during my time away, haven't missed much. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout  ?  15:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey AutomaticStrikeout

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:30, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply

Hi! Thanks for the clarification. I have seen so much incivility on this project (mostly as a non-involved observer), that I missed the intended context of the comment. I share your frustration with situations such as these. Regards Taroaldo ✉ 05:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. You have new messages at PBASH607's talk page.
Message added 18:50, 5 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Prabash.Akmeemana 18:50, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- LuK3 (Talk) 16:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

RfA numbering fix

Thanks, trying to edit a page that large from my phone is a pain. Prodego ^talk 21:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  19:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

WAIT! WHAT?!?

You're retiring? This better be a badly timed April Fools joke.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 00:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I've been retired for over a month now, I think. As you can see, I'm not gone completely, just about 90% less than active I used to be. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  13:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Then {{semi-retired}} would be more appropriate.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I don't want to take any major steps toward fully returning. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  20:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Not only you are not neutral but also you don't believe in free flow of information(Very Established Facts!!) :)

Not only you are not neutral but also you don't believe in free flow of information(Very Established Facts!!) :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.99.18.229 (talk) 18:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It appears to me that you added an opinion, not a fact. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so we really can't allow opinions in our articles. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  18:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013

posted by Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Please feel free to join the project! I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

```Buster Seven Talk 16:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Read and replied. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  17:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

TAFI in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on Today's Articles For Improvement for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 02:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Your RFA

You were correct when you said that adminship was no big deal, per WP:NOBIGDEAL. An admin is nothing but an ordinary editor with extra tools. SL93 (talk) 16:59, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree. As a result, having an unsuccessful RfA is also, ideally, no big deal. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  17:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Well you are right in the latter matter - apart from one or two notorious cases where sockpuppetry, personal attacks and or mass plagiarism were discovered in the RFA it really only matters if you run again in the next four months. I failed my first one but had no ill effects from it. However if you do run again please try and put your best face forwards, treat it as a WikiCV and with question 2 make it clear that you are a content contributor yourself. ϢereSpielChequers 17:23, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

" if this is how you treat the people who actually do run" (diff). That's a bit cheeky: the issue is precisely that you didn't run, and you made it abundantly clear that you weren't even trying to. You talk about assuming good faith. Well, perhaps you should accept that those who think adminship is a big deal are sincere in their beliefs, however much you may disagree with them. Anyway, happy editing and no hard feelings. - Pointillist (talk) 18:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it was a bit too cheeky. However, I was not being POINTy as there was, in my opinion anyway, no disruption. I was a little annoyed, not because the RfA failed, but because people got hung up on the fact that my RfA was different and missed the point (non disruptive) that I was trying to make. At any rate, happy editing to you too. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  21:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to make the same point that your comment that others should assume good faith, was itself not assuming good faith. Someone can be pointy and acting in good faith, so others saying it was pointy does not assume bad faith. IRWolfie- (talk) 22:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, perhaps so. Still, I'm yet to receive any explanation as to how my submitting the RfA was disruptive. Therefore, depending on one's perspective, all the !votes invoking WP:POINT could be considered invalid. Anyway, it is over and I'm ready to move on. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  22:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

You were running the RFA to make a point. You did not intend to be disruptive. Creating an RFA request to make a point wastes the communities time, and so is disruptive. Someone can mean well but be disruptive. IRWolfie- (talk)

If the point is worth making, making the point is not a waste of time. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  23:02, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I too am sorry you didn't get the tools. One of a number of good candidates that should be allowed to help out but can't. I hope you keep your morale high, I have to admit that I don't really care enough about the project these days to need the tools. Not really even editing myself outside a few discussion comments. Good luck next time. For what its worth some editors have taken as many as 5 tries to get the tools. I might shoot for the record myself someday and see if I can make it to 6. :-) Kumioko (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 00:16, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

RfC

Would you mind adding a rationale to your !vote, especially since you supported last time "per John Vandenburg".--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done AutomaticStrikeout  ?  00:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is RfA.
Message added 01:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Go Phightins! 01:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

New Essay

Hi AS-- I wanted to ask if you might take a look at an essay I am working on and let me know what your thoughts are on it. I have a few questions/comments:

1. Is this essay redundant based on guidelines like WP:AGF and essays like WP:DIVA & Wikipedia:Charitableness?
2. Do the examples convey the idea well? I have a couple of alternatives I'm considering, but if you have ideas or experiences any based on the idea I am putting forth in the essay, let me know.
3. While I firmly believe that this is an important concept that has guided my interactions on Wikipedia, and I think it is important to share it with others, I am unsure of what situations this essay might be appropriately used. I sort of get the feeling that this could come off as "holier than thou" when used in many discussions (e.g. akin to linking to WP:CIR in discussion with the non-competent editor).
4. I really liked how David Foster Wallace illustrated this concept because he did it in a way that wasn't so much moral preaching and more, "if you allow yourself to think on your default setting, which is something I'm guilty of all the time, you'll be miserable." I don't think that comes across well in this essay and it's something I'd like to work on more before bringing out of my sandbox.

Any other comments or thoughts would be appreciated, and you are welcome to make direct changes if you feel so inclined. I, Jethrobot <sup>drop me a line</sup> (note: not a bot!) 04:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I have to come away now, but I will try to look at it when I get back. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  14:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I have read it over. While you'll want to do some copy-editing of the essay, I tend to agree with the messages you are trying to convey. Good work! AutomaticStrikeout  ?  15:38, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

TB

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Expanded.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The basic idea is that this will always be a subjective list, and it unproductive to criticize others' opinions with loaded epitaphs. So, how 'bout Veras? pbp 19:30, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Veras? AutomaticStrikeout  ?  19:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your new closer lol pbp 19:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I thought maybe that was it. Well, he's actually not our new closer, because Joaquín Benoit is still holding down that job. Veras is doing fine so far. Then again, we haven't lost a single game since he joined the team, so just about everyone has done pretty well in the past 10 games or so. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  19:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Anyone out there?

Hey talk page stalkers, would any of you care to assist in the compilation of RfA statistics going at User:AutomaticStrikeout/RfA History? The work being done should be pretty self explanatory. AutomaticStrikeout  ?  23:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

```Buster Seven Talk 03:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Your signature

It took me a second, but I got it. Good one :-) Go Phightins! 17:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You must have had it watchlisted because this is the first time I've used my new signature. Automatic 17:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC) Thanks, by the way. Automatic 17:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I do. It's inventive. I thought it was a protest of some kind at first, but then I realized Strikeout has multiple meanings. Go Phightins! 18:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Automatic 18:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Made me chuckle outright. --Mark 22:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

+1 TCN7JM 22:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Credit for the original idea must go to Cyberpower678. Automatic 22:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

It is creative, but I would be remiss if I didn't point out that quite a few users have a script that indicates that a user is blocked by stiking out the username in the signature (strikeout for fixed term block, strikeout and italics for indef block). When I saw it, it took me a while to realize that you weren't blocked. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I actually have that script myself (although I didn't know about the italics vs. non-italics). If the signature becomes too confusing, I'll change it. Automatic 23:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Your RFA History Page

Neat work. Not sure where you're pulling all your data from, but you appear to have missed this "infamous" RFA, which I think ranks fourth highest in terms of opposition. Pedro :  Chat  14:15, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. My list is quite incomplete right now. I'm taking data from various sources and trying to piece it all together in one place to make it more accessible. Automatic 19:03, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you so much for your Golden Editor award, it means a great deal to me as I enter my eighth year of being a Wikipedia next month. To be honest, these past three years have been pretty dry ever since real life has gotten the better of me. I honestly haven't really done anything in recent years that could be considered "golden," unless you consider the occasional user rename or swingin' the ol' banhammer. But perhaps I'll be able to do weightier things around here soon. Thanks for the encouragement. :) bibliomaniac15 00:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. Feel free to display this userbox if you would like to. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 01:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/TOPYX_Social_LMS_(2nd_nomination)

Is there any specific reason that you chose to re-list this for a third time instead of closing as no consensus? Dusti<sup>*Let's talk!*</sup> 04:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I usually prefer three re–lists before a close. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 17:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I was just curious as WP:RELIST says in general, debates should not be relisted more than twice. Dusti<sup>*Let's talk!*</sup> 04:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Georgia (country) to Georgia move suggestion

Please comment here. Thanks. georgianJORJADZE 00:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You have a reply at User talk:GabrielD2

Thanks for your brief reply and warning. I've posted a reply to Gtwfan on my talk page. I will also be in touch with you, when I can, to learn more about the situation. I really have no agenda, other than to see that new users get welcomed with useful information and that we do not continue this "eat them alive" approach that I've experienced. Of course, there's a lot I've yet to learn, and right now, nobody has a bigger sense of that than I do. So, yes, I intend to "go slow" and get myself up to speed before wasting this opportunity by making the wrong move or saying the wrong thing, somehow. Of course, I'm not going to become afraid of my own shadow, either. I make mistakes and bone-headed moves, at times, and have no problem admitting it. So thanks again ... I'll be in touch, soon, I hope, to learn more and forearm myself with whatever you may feel useful for my efforts.

GabrielD2 (talk) 08:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Brian O'Nora

The article on MLB umpire Brian O'Nora states at one point and in the infobox that he made his MLB debut in 2000, but elsewhere it states that he worked in the American League (before the staffs were combined) from 1992 to 1999? Do you know which is correct? Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

According to Retrosheet, he made his first appearance in a big league game in 1992. His MLB profile states that he joined the full-time staff in 1999. I would assume that means that from 1992 until his promotion to the full time staff, O'Nora was technically a minor league ump who served as a fill-in for MLB umps who were either injured or on vacation (or, in very rare cases, suspended). I'm not really sure why the infobox says 2000 for his debut. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 20:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll check the history when I have a bit more time, but probably someone was confused by the transition from separate AL and NL staffs to a combined staff before the 2000 season. I'll also clarify the article to reflect the above. Based on your information above, do you think we should indicate his start date in the infobox as 1992 or 1999? Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess it depends on if we mean his debut in an MLB game or his debut on the MLB staff. Which do you think makes more sense? AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 00:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

As long as the entry is for "MLB debut," it needs to be 1992 (as I see it currently is), even though I agree that he was probably a AAA umpire working as a vacation fill-in that year. Hopefully that is consistent with how the entry is filled in the boxes in other umpire articles? It might make sense to have another entry in the box for "joined full-time MLB staff" or similar, but that would be pointless for the dozens of older umpires who worked before umps got in-season vacations, for whom the two entries would almost invariably be the same. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I think we should just leave it at 1992. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 22:34, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Autograph Book barnstar

		The Autograph Book Barnstar
		This barnstar hereby acknowledges and appreciates the fact that you signed my Autograph Book, Thanks. ---$oHƎM ❊  আড্ডা  11:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 15:11, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AutomaticStrikeout. You have new messages at Bagumba's talk page.
Message added 23:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Bagumba (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:Food

It would be appreciated if you joined in the conversation ongoing at WT:Food in regards to the front page of the project. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 12:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	This one for recognising others with barnstars, whichever user page I go to at least 60% of the time I see you giving a barnstar to them, which is nice to see. So here's a barnstar for you for appreciating others work and being generous enough to acknowledge it. Best, Sohambanerjee1998 07:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I am glad to see that I have been an encouragement. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 23:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear AutomatiK:

I want to express you my deepest gratitude for your sincere appreciation of my work. Cheers, and keep your mind sharp and a healthy body. MusiCitizen (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. It was about time that your work got noticed. Best wishes to you as well. Thanks, AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 23:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

"Let someone else handle it"

AutomaticStrikeout - That sentence is used no matter how uninvolved a person actually is. I mean, really, even if someone else actually did handle it, someone still would've accused them of being involved. I know of at least 2 and I think I recall 3 instances of false accusations of involvedness, not including this one, on ANI at this very moment including one against me having never heard of the subject area or editor I proposed for a topic ban. In fact, I've seen non-administrators accused of being WP:INVOLVED despite that the policy has nothing to do with non-administrators and I've seen editors disclaimer themselves as being WP:INVOLVED. That policy is very very very specific for a very very important reason. "Forms of" and "Could be seen as" do not apply in the slightest. The actual written policy is what matters. By that policy, Fluffernutter is not remotely involved.--v/r - TP 18:02, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I know you won't agree with my perspective, but here is how I see it: Kosh made a perfectly legitimate statement, which was censored by Fluffernutter. Kosh rejected this censorship, ultimately leading to his being blocked and topic banned by... Fluffernutter! Obviously, I think Fluffernutter was way out of line. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 18:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I can agree with everything about your statement except for the last part. And we can agree to disagree. But as someone who has been accused many times of involvement when I actually wasn't, I know how demoralizing it is. But the truth is, we all know she's the patrolling admin. Revert warring with her was a bad idea<sup>TM</sup>. He would've been better off asking for Arbcom clarification.--v/r - TP 18:52, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Vanishing

I have, on multiple occasions in the past, attempted to walk away via the simple path of retirement. I will be taking a different direction this time. Due to my immense dissatisfaction with an enforcement of discretionary sanctions and with the fact that an appeal of this enforcement does not seem likely to be heard, I have requested courtesy vanishing. I am sure that I will miss this place occasionally, but I have not been very active here lately anyway. I have other things to do with my time, so don't worry about me. Goodbye, AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 15:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go, AS. I know we disagree about the arb enforcement issue, but that doesn't change my opinion of you as an editor. I'll miss seeing you around here. Should you change your mind before you vanish, I'd be happy to welcome you back. I, JethroBT <sup>drop me a line</sup> 15:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I was wondering when you'd run into Wikipedia's "dark side." It's interesting how one's perspective changes once that happens. Although we may not have interacted much, I did respect your attempts to make change. And yeah...life is better on the outside. Enjoy it! Some things just can't be fixed, only plastered with bandages. Intothatdarkness 15:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

It's been great working with you in the past ASO. I had been counting on you to be my main man if I happen to plan to run for RFA some time in the future. Farewell, my friend. NFLisAwesome <sup>(ZappaOMati's alternate account)</sup> 20:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Its always sad to see a friend leave. Best of luck to you. ```Buster Seven Talk 21:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

ASO, my friend, thank you for what you have done – sometimes I feel a little responsible for your dissatisfaction based on my pushing you/convincing you to run for RfA before you wanted to do so. I would have, and still would trust you with the tools, but that's beside the point now. I value our wiki-friendship, and while it is sad to see you go, I completely understand your reasoning. Best of luck in your future endeavors, and in the immediate future, good luck to your Tigers. Best regards, Go Phightins! 03:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)