Forum:The Pub

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

nl:Forum:De kroegro:RoWikicity:Cafenea Welcome to the Pub!
 * [[Image:Arrow right.png|20px]] also check the archive

Elections: Voting
All citizens can cast their votes in the Federal Elections! Please read the regulations (on the election page) before voting. Thank you.
 * 19:42, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Make a statement
Make a statement, say no to fascism and discrimination! Join the Anti-Fascist League to show that Lovia wont stand it! 12:09, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pleas delete all references to the IGP then Pierlot McCrooke 12:11, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to get the point, the AFL opposes to the Iron Guardists because they are fascist. The fascists need to change, not the fair and democratic people. 12:14, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know. But you have to stop calling the IGP a fascist party'. We are not. Do you want a trial? If no. THen you have to stop saying that IGP is fascist party. Pierlot McCrooke 12:17, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * The party logo states 'loyalty, strength, order', you wish to silence left movements and want to abolish elections. How would you describe such a party? Moderate democrats?! 12:20, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Only the undemocratical left movements. Russia alsforbids commies Pierlot McCrooke 12:21, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * No they don't! They have one. Besides, the CP respects democratic elections and you don't. The IGP is undemocratic, the CP isn't! 12:25, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * You see, here is the link. Take a look at the gallery were they protest on the street. That is called freedom of speech and organization. 12:27, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Communism is badder than my party Pierlot McCrooke 13:11, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Make a statement law
Would you support an outlaw of undemocratic parties? Yes, we should make a law on it right away! No, they just want to violate the constitution I like to be politically correct ( read: an asshole) Just for fun, but I am curious though 12:45, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Makes me think of Popper's theory on democracy. 13:53, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, protect democracy from itself, 'mob rule' and 'dictature of the majority' and all that 14:18, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Was Karl Popper not the man who wrote about open and closed societies and such? -- 14:22, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Popper sucks. He is actually a liberal conservatist, his silly 'falsifiability theorem' is like dogma all the way! 14:31, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not so familiar with Popper's writings. I do know about his theory of open/closed societies and the book in which it was published. -- 14:32, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Most people adore his falsifiability theorem; it states that for a theory to be scientific it has to be able to prove it false. Now that works very well for the classical sciences, but it is almost impossible to use this principle in sociology, psychology, etc. because those sciences are not predictive in nature. 14:40, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * But the falsifiability still is crucial, right? I always thought of it as a good theory. But maybe, you are right - I had not thought of the social and human sciences yet. -- 14:43, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * It is very correct, for it's domain; the exact sciences. Social (or human) sciences suffer by it. Only institutional and other surface theories would be 'correct' then. 14:51, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yes. Who is your favorite philosopher, if I may ask? -- 14:52, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I like most thinkers of the progressive/left spectrum. Existentialists like Sartre. I also appreciate the work of Kierkegaard and Hegel, though I do not agree with most of their findings. I believe that my all-time favorite would be Karl Marx, he may have overestimated the effects, but his findings were genius! Like my prof of sociology said: 'He succeeded in combining all previous revolutionary insights into one big theory. Too bad most of it was proven false and the rest werd met het badwater weggegooid.' 14:59, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

There are troubles ahead
The Guardian published a list recently with the ten countries most likely to suffer from political instability. I was kind enough to share it with you all, and no, Lovia is not on it  15:53, January 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) Iran - Protests against the government continue, but will they escalate into a revolution?
 * 2) Pakistan/Afghanistan - Rural areas controlled by 'terrorists' and corrupt governments
 * 3) Israel/Palestine - No news there, Palestine will soon be gone unless...
 * 4) Yemen - I dare to bet this will be the next US military invasion
 * 5) Sudan - Elections for a government that has no control and of course the pirates!
 * 6) Zimbabwe - Pressure on the Mugabe-regime keeps rising, especially from South Africa
 * 7) China - Xinjiang and Tibet are full of nationalists, but then again the CPC has an army
 * 8) The Caucasus - Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Ngorno-Karabakh, Georgia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, ...
 * 9) Belgium - President of Europe, leads the council in the latter half of 2010 and splitting BHV!
 * 10) Italy - What will it take for Il Cavaliere to step down? A civil war?
 * And what about Moldova? --Bucurestean 16:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Poll
Do you want that the rights of American Eagle, DimiTalen, SPQRobin and Regaliorum will be taken off? Yes No

Every Wikination is obliged to give SPQ admin rights for simple moral reasons. The main reason being that without SPQ Libertas would have never existed and it's very logic to state that then also Lovia would not have existed. Therefore I am the biggest worshipper of SPQ and I would like to say: "SPQ er drottinninn og forgöngumaðurinn hér!" --O u WTB 18:52, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * SPQ is inactive and the others arent very neutral Temporary No Character 18:55, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Pierlot, we do not wish for anarchy. We should not wish for that. Both them, and us, should become administrators. Drabo13 09:55, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I wil ask for sannse that we get admin rights when the admin rights of Dimitri Yuri Robin and Arthur are taken off. Vote for the poll Temporary No Character 10:55, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Go fuck up your own inactive wikis Pierlot and let us work constructively here. --O u WTB 12:54, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * We let you edit constructively, but we need neutraller admins Temporary No Character 13:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pierlot, it's enough. It's rather simple: we need sysops, and the people who currently have these rights have been very useful to Lovia. And just as OWTB said: SPQR was given rights for honorary reasons. If you would wish to argue somebody's admin rights, then only George Matthews can be validly argued about. He is absent, and will probably be absent for a long time. Now don't be silly and don't ask to take everybody's rights away. If you have a good reasons to ask admin rights, or ask for them to be taken away, then please discuss this with me, Yuri or somebody else. Okay? Just stop wasting or energy. 13:52, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

since this is dmitris wiki he should decide on whos admin --Owen1983 16:25, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * He isnt neutral. Wikias have no ownership Temporary No Character 16:27, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

why should we per se appoint a non "Old Five" member, even if we don't have anybody who is suited? Yes No
 * Who has voted no? Temporary No Character 18:59, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps your question is wrong. Perhaps you should ask "why should we per se appoint a non "Old Five" member, even if we don't have anybody who is suited?" 19:01, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol. "Why? - Yes/No" --Bucurestean 16:21, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Just remove the poll Mr. Traitor, you left the IGP and now you are kissing the king's royal ass once again. So why keep this poll? Otherwise you'd better join IGP again. 94.212.213.26 16:24, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Stop with this baby nonsense Pierlot McCrooke 16:25, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

If you follow the King and support the Elitists, Mr. Traitor, you should be removing this poll. If you keep the poll, it means you are against the king and the elitists (old Five). In that case, join IGP again! 94.212.213.26 16:27, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Admin question
Admins are not appointed by the Congress (that would be weird). So, as a way of getting to know who of our users wants to change our administration, I'll make a more formal poll in The Pub. All users can sign, though we will evaluate the user's knowledge of the site and their merit at Wikination in counting the "votes", okay? These are the questions:
 * 19:15, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Admin off
Which admins should lose their admin rights? 19:15, January 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * User:George Matthews: absent (no abuse)
 * I don't care. --O u WTB 08:08, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * never active Pierlot McCrooke 08:21, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't care either; so I suppose i'm . If he comes back, we could easily regrant him his rights, right? 08:30, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Bucurestean 16:20, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no explicit reason to take away his administrator rights. However, it is true he has not been around recently. -- 21:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no explicit reason to take away his administrator rights. However, it is true he has not been around recently. -- 21:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

I am fine with that. I don't think I am able to come back soon. So, please, grant somebody else those rights. George Matthews 16:39, January 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * User:SPQRobin: absent (no abuse)
 * Note: honorary admin
 * SPQ will never be no admin. --O u WTB 08:08, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Only normal admins please Pierlot McCrooke 08:21, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Please note that saying "normal admins only" does have more meanings than one. --O u WTB 08:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I mean that there will be no honorary admins Pierlot McCrooke 08:25, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, SPQ still is 1. a neutral admin. 2. an experienced admin. 3. the admin which the biggest knowledge of wikiing and wikis. --O u WTB 08:30, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * It may be, but he is too inactive and never really used his rights Pierlot McCrooke 08:34, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Does he have to? 08:34, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * SPQ has saved Libertas from the ruins when he had been inactive for a year. If Lovia might also be ruined, he might help us out here too. --O u WTB 08:36, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think he is too busy with MetaWiki and Incubator Pierlot McCrooke 08:37, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * He isn't. He was busier with that when he saved Libertas than now. --O u WTB 08:38, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * that doesn't really matter, does it? From what I understand, he (Robin) is admin because we respect him and his project, right? Then there is no doubt we still respect him and wish to keep him an admin 08:42, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * if he's the founder of the project, then he deserves a little honor. 08:30, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * 12:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Bucurestean 16:20, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am in agreement with both Oos Wes and Mr. McCandless. -- 21:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am in agreement with both Oos Wes and Mr. McCandless. -- 21:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

I would like to explain why I voted two times 'pro'. Since the two admins above are most of the time not around and have - correct me if I'm wrong - never used their admin rights. Taking away their 'rights' (what a poor word) or leaving things as they are would result in the same situation, right? Wrong! I do acknowledge that there are more admins than are really needed to make this wiki function, though masked by the fact that some of them are inactive. Making both admin-off could be a symbolic act, a gesture that signifies a change in the Lovian policy. We also have several capable people that do are around and should grant them a place in the site administration. Finally, the status of 'honorary admins' should be out of the question, several people already stated that we 'do have no nobility in Lovia' and I think we should keep it that way; admins are people with a task, a duty. 12:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Also see my contribution at the Speakers' Corner

Admin on
Which users should become an admin, do you think?

Note: this poll is not binding, just a guideline! 19:15, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Intothewild
 * Pierlot McCrooke 08:22, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * i would find it a great honor. But maybe only if i win the elections? 08:31, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * trusted user, neutral to some extend etc. maybe he's still a bit young (=new) here though. --O u WTB 08:33, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * under the condition that the total amount of admins does not grow! We have inactive admins, replace them! 12:23, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * We already have enough admins, the more the merrier? I don't think so!
 * --Bucurestean 16:20, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I fully support the young Andy McCandless - though I do not see a reason to make him all of a sudden our latest Administrator. If elected Premier, I would sure say yes! If not elected Prime Minister, then we could still consider it. Well, that is my humblest opinion, of course! -- 21:49, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably one of the most just people on the wiki, and with some of the best intentions. Edward Hannis  [[File:CogHammer.gif]] 00:09, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Conclusion
I am glad to see so many people told us their opinion. I think what we will do is this: Now, this is my conclusion of course. I will talk once more to buros Yuri and Arthur about it, and if all goes well, we will implement this on February 1st. Thanks for voting! 07:09, January 10, 2010 (UTC) 07:09, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * User:George Matthews will lose his administrator function February 1st. Of course, he doesn't his his rights, being absent. He won't be present again for a long time, I suspect, so there is no reason to keep his rights. Also, he might be seen as another example of Dimitrian "vriendjespolitiek" in the administration, and I am getting quite sick of this Cabal shit.
 * User:Intothewild will be awarded administrator rights February 1st. I am pleasantly surprised by the great support Andy has got. He can also count on my support, as I find him just, honest and creative. The kind of people Lovia might need. On February 1st, he will receive his rights, whether he's elected or not.
 * User:SPQRobin will keep his administrator rights. Why? First of all, he is of no harm and won't abuse his rights. Second, I see this as a way to honor the project founder just a little. Third, and this I find crucial: in case Wikination dies within a (couple of) year(s), I want at least somebody - of whom we know he is very often around on some Wiki - to be able to alter the wiki and to appoint new, active admins. SPQRobin is our back-up plan.
 * Well, I must say I find this a good plan. -- 09:31, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as SPQ remains admin, I'll give you my samþykkt :) --O u WTB 09:34, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose that means something like "fiat", does it? I see Dimitri included Robin Libertatis in the admin list, so you will not have to fear any such thing. -- 09:37, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Íslenska þína er slæma :P samþykkt = support :) --O u WTB 09:42, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * I expressed my opinion earlier and will not repeat myself. I support the decision made by the majority. 12:33, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you will struggle abit over the SPqRobin rights keep Pierlot McCrooke 12:34, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I can't help it. I do understand the 'back-up' theory but I can't deny the aura of privilege that surrounds it. 12:39, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

3 o'clock news
Du-du du-du-dum ta-ta-ta du-um! (opening tune)

Good afternoon, this is People's Channel with the 3 o'clock news. My name is Harold Freeman and you are watching Channel One.
 * Say, where have I seen that red orb before? Looks nice!  13:32, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * That red orb is from the BBC Pierlot McCrooke 13:33, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm a regular watcher of the BBC. They got wonderful wildlife documentaries! 13:36, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am a regular listener of BBC World Service, does that count? -- 13:57, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * No way, me too! Every morning and sometimes in the later hours of the evening. During the day I listen to (Belgian) Radio 1. 14:03, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I listen to (Dutch) radio 2 Pierlot McCrooke 14:04, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh wow. I use BBC World Service as my wake-up radio station. And sometimes before going to bed, BBC World Service enlightens me! -- 14:05, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * BBC rocks! As does Harold's new television station  14:15, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * He did a great job indeed. -- 14:44, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope they will make a real coverage of the election results, or is that too hard? 14:49, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Can be done, I would say. I recently made a rough analysis myself. The results are quite interesting. Are you still leading, by the way? -- 14:50, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * With one vote I believe, but it could be a status quo by now... exciting! 14:57, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well well well. Should we not be campaigning, Yuri? I see you had foreseen a "2010 Campaign", but until now, we have been quite idle. -- 07:00, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * BBC rocks full stop 08:16, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * @Jefferson, I know. Perhaps people know what is best for them and due to a wave of anti-me bytes my name has fallen quite a bit! Remember that our parties are not the conventional ones. 17:38, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Vote Andy McCandless (Read his points of view)
Dear Lovians! We are half-way in the federal elections. Currently, the experienced Yuri Medvedev is leading. However, it won't be a landslide victory! And if you vote for Andy McCandless, candidate of the Coalition LD+WLP, we might have a chance of delivering our own PM! Let's not make these elections too easy: vote Andy McCandless! 13:28, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Too easy? I think we are in the heat of competition already for quite some time now  17:36, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nothing wrong with some good old competition :D
 * There's just one thing I mourn about: where are the lady competitors? :( M. Van Gent 17:38, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * In Belgium we have quota for elections: only 2/3th of the candidates may be of the same sex and the first two positions on a party list must be divided between a man and a woman. Only the Progressive Democrats have put forward a female candidate, but that is because we have a lack of women on this wiki - just like China  17:48, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol, indeed --Bucurestean 17:52, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you boys going to fight over me? I'd love to see that! 08:32, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * I bet you would; I just don't want to ruin the pub, we should take this outside  12:00, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Dream Town Project
Hi everyone! I can't believe It's been a month already since I came to Lovia! I've been absent for most of that time however, and wasn't really able to participate :(   Having said that, I would luv to start contributing by creating a new town which will stand as a shining symbol of Lovia's greatness.  Please let me know if this is a possibility  :D  Christina Evans 02:52, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a possibility indeed. I have been thinking about a seventh town as well. Perhaps we could have a brainstorm about how and where it should be? 12:04, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remember:


 * Pierlot McCrooke 12:52, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean like Sodom and Gomorrah? 12:55, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * (The Old Testament is quite fascist.) 12:56, January 15, 2010 (UTC)