User talk:TimeMaster

Welcome!
Hi, welcome to Wikination, the Lovia wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Social Democratic Party page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Regaliorum (Talk) 13:28, April 30, 2011
 * Here you have a proper welcome instead of an automatically generated message: welcome to Lovia! These are not are best times we are living at the moment, but we are working to get things rolling again. Therefore, all help is most welcome.  14:14, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah! Welcome! Lovia was unactive but were getting it re-active. If you stay active you can even join congress! I see you joined the LDP if you want you can join a more active party like the one i'm apart of CPL.nm or the SDP if you socialist. For more you can check out List of political parties in Lovia. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:58, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

UNS
Currently the UNS-party has but one congressman. We could use one more, and we think YOU are our man. Interested? The Master&#39;s Voice 15:14, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * No thanks. I don't like the UNS' ideas. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:17, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, we are still a minor party but in a sea of leftism, a little diversity is always welcome, is it not? The Master&#39;s Voice 15:19, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Leftism is good. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:20, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well it's way to fucking big... if one party dominates everything, where's the fun? The Master&#39;s Voice 15:22, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * xD Who knows? Besides, I thought we had 3 large parties currently. Or maybe 2. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:23, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Congress
If you stay active you can join congress right now! We'd like you to join. Marcus/Michael Villanova 15:14, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, how? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:17, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

I'll add you to the list your person William Krosby right? Marcus/Michael Villanova 15:20, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yep. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:20, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Request to vote
In the second chamber forum to approve the new congress. Marcus/Michael Villanova 16:08, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

K. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:08, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't the current congress have to vote? The Master&#39;s Voice 16:10, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry if I wasn't supposed to. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:12, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

No you were suppose to. Thanks for the pro vote future congressman! Marcus/Michael Villanova 16:14, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Citizenship
You are entitled to full citizenship and the political rights that come with it. Just fill in some information and it will be all yours! I need (1) your character's full name, (2) a main address for your character and (3) your sex. Thanks in advance! 14:30, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * I already filled it out on the Citizen page. Let's see. . . William Krosby, male, 3 Old Port Avenue, Pines, Newhaven, Kings. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:32, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, saves me the work.  05:35, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Amish Kinley
This isn't any of your fault beacuse no one can settle on what Amish Kinley is, but a village is fine. The difference is 14 citizens I get that, but since Amish Kinley hasn't really been determined on what it really is we left it as a private LRC under Lovian rule. And since there closed of we let the latest newspaper results to determine it as a unwritten rule. It's totally up to you, but the latest Nova Times said 235 citizens. In any case good job with the census we really did need one ! Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:19, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

I'll keep it as a neighborhood using the neighborhood calculation. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:24, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to propose a add-on law to the nice settlement act saying some communites can be private for reiligous or other reasons with congresses approval. Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:28, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Marc Thomassen
Hey, please don't count fake users in the census figures. Census is based on the houses sold to real users. That's why if one user buys a house the total number grows with 121 (includes 120 fictive users per inhabitant). --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:36, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * PS, you forgot to check apartment buildings :) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:38, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * I have the bad habit of giving fictive guys a home. Jonathan Frum isn't real either, sorry if this complicates things. 09:10, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah many people live in apts, including me in Downtown NC. Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:54, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

I did count apartments, but a lot of people were counted twice or thrice last census. I think that is the OOC reason why the numbers are down. I'll remove thomassen. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:18, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, then I think we used to use a different system then you. People who have two homes are counted twice, fictive users are not counted, apartment buildings also count. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:09, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * That makes no sense. You don't get counted twice in a census. And I DID count people in apartment buildings. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:10, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you said that, but you did forget the apartment building in Millstreet though. Well, I believe it does and we've used this system several years now, so there's no reason in changing it so suddenly. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:11, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't believe that I didn't count that. I'll double check it. Also, FYI -- using a system for several years does not make it good if it is faulty. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:21, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I did not count it. Odd. But all of the residents there do not have their primary residences there. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:23, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Yes, I know, but it also doesn't mean that it has to be changed immeadiately without discussing it first :) In this case, we've decided for this system, because it's less work counting the inhabitants and stimulates buying houses and making your town more attracting, so people are going to buy a second house in your town. :) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:24, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * If you look at the town page, you will still see people have a house, even if it is not their primary residence. So that doesn't really make a difference if they are counted there or not. And some people like quaint towns! —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:26, May 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I like the old system and I'm willing to fight for it ;) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:27, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

K then. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:28, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

1st of May
On the First of May there was no replacement for the Donia I government - the Villanova Government was not installed until Late April when activity had dropped drastically and measures had to be taken. Get your facts straight brother. The Master&#39;s Voice 12:33, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't call me things that I'm not, thanks. The Villanova government was installed on May 1 when we approved the government. We approved the CONGRESS on April 30. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:32, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Boy do I feel silly; I read march 1... instead of May 1. Sorry bro, my bad. The Master&#39;s Voice 13:27, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * He already told you he is not your bro, sonny boy.  08:25, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * He's not your boy, guy! Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:51, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Action
The King has been absent for a long time now, and has not been active since February. I have opened a discussion here. I won't bring it to Congress just yet, as I want to discuss this with my fellow Citizens (such as you) first. Then if we have some sort of consensus we may vote on this. This will either yield us a new, better monarch, or force the current monarch to return. Both would be good. The Master&#39;s Voice 18:34, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Prefer
I like your state reform better, let's go foward with it, I support all changes. Marcus/Michael Villanova 21:07, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:08, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

PM?
Is it that we don't put foward a PM anymore but basically, the coalition would but there PM foward. Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:41, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the government coalition puts their PM forward, and also, the government coalition is organized between the end of polls and inauguration. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:43, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Then there will have to be alot of coalition talks i see Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:48, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Also, the condensement bill is now null and void. Now, we can delegate the positions to the same person twice by using one of their controlled people a minister spot. Say if Jon Johnson was under your control, you could give him the minister of finance while you were the minister of justice at the same time. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:06, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * You'll annoy people if you give yourself all the positions, Marcus. --Semyon 12:09, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

The collective government coalition has to agree unanimously, or someone will leave and make the opposition coalition the government. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:13, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Ha, that would be a classic thing! I would never do that. Marcus/Michael Villanova 12:23, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Appearance
would you like to appear on Chef Telemann, cooking with... for June 2? HORTON11 16:12, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I love cooking! —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:12, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

I would like to vote for you, but where can I vote? Peralt 22:58, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

You have to have 50 edits and have 4 days of activity before you can vote. Once you reach those milestones, you can vote at Forum:Federal elections, put a under my name. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:17, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

Conworlds
On Cornworlds, I see you have a large presence in the Black Sea, please help me block his oil reserves in Bulgaria and if possible block his oil supplies from Russia. I'm wanting this threat to be gone from Europe. Nathaniel Scribner 22:20, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

I like how you said "On Cornworlds" Is all you think about corn? Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:23, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

I'd rather not have the USSR get involved in a giant war. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 02:19, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, ahaha- I didn't even notice I did that. Prehaps I do :D Nathaniel Scribner 12:41, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Lukas Hoffmann
I would like to remove one MOTC from our list and replace her by someone else. That does not mean I want the page to be deleted. I've seen worse, and I could improve the page. The Master&#39;s Voice 07:47, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, then just improve the other article, I just marked it for deletion since it was a stub and useless since she wasn't a politician anymore. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 17:04, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I am quite thrilled to be a new resident myself. Now let me check out those links... --COP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 03:22, July 23, 2011 (UTC)

Spotlight Request
Hi. Wikination is in generally good shape, and I appreciate you linking to the conversation with the admin. There are a few tweaks that it would need to meet the spotlight criteria. While I can see on the talk page that most of you do not use the Wikia skin, visitors clicking the spotlight will. So please take the time to customize the skin (an administrator can use Special:ThemeDesigner and it does not take very long at all, but please feel free to ask if you need any help with it). Likewise please customize the message at Mediawiki:Community-corner. There is a small handful of uncategorized pages as well. Please let me know on my talk page when you have taken care of these issues and I will be happy to add the wiki to the approved spotlight list. -- Wendy (talk ) 04:01, July 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * @TimeMaster: I categorized those pages. Any ideas for the Community-corner box? Maybe we can use it for announcements like 'elections are coming up', 'new TV show is a big hit', etc? Let people know what is going on, what is hot? 07:20, July 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah it's for stuff like that or "URGENT VOTE IN SECOND CHAMBER" Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:21, July 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah it's for stuff like that or "URGENT VOTE IN SECOND CHAMBER" Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:21, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I propose we put a modified version of the welcome message and announcements there: Mediawiki:Community-corner. Also, check the talk page if you want. Next we should make a skin. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:01, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

The law
You know, funny thing about the law... we ought to obey it, right? You got some talkback at those Royal Family talk pages, just so you know, bro. The Master&#39;s Voice 21:03, September 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * PS: It doesn't get ANY clearer then this... The Master&#39;s Voice 14:03, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

I have a feeling he's your sock since he didn't want it before. I dislike the idea of Lashawns being in the line of succession very strongly anyway. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:53, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why would you dislike that idea so strongly? Oh and as it just so happens, both me and Horton are in favour of including them and expanding the Royal Family in general. The Master&#39;s Voice 14:56, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

I prefer having the royal family of small sensible people not people who have seven kids and planning on more. . . And the Lashawn stuff is incomplete anyways and as I said BastardRoyale seems to be your sock. . . maybe YgoD too. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:59, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * TimeMaster, what do you mean by "small sensible people" (small of stature, perhaps? ) and why is a family of seven children a bad thing? If I recall correctly Tolstoy had eleven children and Darwin had eight, and both of them where very wise and intelligent people... Since when is having a large family a sign of stupidity or lack of intelligence? If so, then this is entirely new information to me. The Master&#39;s Voice 15:03, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I mean of small stature. I did not say that, but I think that the Lashawns are too big of a deviation from the royal family. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:05, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * In what way? I mean, Arthur III and Arthur II where also, by all accounts, rather "unusual" people. They didn't have big families, but if that's the only difference. Philip has a large family, but George doesn't... If a family typically isn't very fertile, is it then impossible for one member to break with the general rule of having few children by raising a large(r) family? Character-wise, I don't think they deviate so much from the rest of the family. So again: in which way to you think they are so different? The Master&#39;s Voice 15:12, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

In number of children and in that they are directly controlled by BastardRoyale (excluding Dimi but he gets to be king ). —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:13, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * They aren't really controlled by anyone, I'd say. Neither is the rest of the Royal Family, as Dimitri has made very clear he has left us with no intention of ever returning. So that argument doesn't really hold in the light of this fact. "In number of children" is also a silly reason: only one of Arthur's sons has a large family, the other son has a normal, average-sized family. The one son that did have a large family would then be a "black sheep" to the rest of the family, in your point of view? The Master&#39;s Voice 15:17, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

I suppose. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:50, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI Lashawn (and Donia) are definitely both socks of TMV - not that that's a reason to oppose his suggestion. --Semyon 18:17, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Very true, Semyon, such assertions are definetely no reason for anyone to appose my suggestion. The Master&#39;s Voice 19:15, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, although I'm convinced you are Donia, I don't really care. :) You (or he, if you prefer that) were blocked totally unfairly and illegally, so I'm quite happy for you to carry on as you are. I did, however, prefer Donia as a character. --Semyon 19:36, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you cannot get what you want because people prevent you from it. And something else you should think of is this: behind these characters is still one and the same person, and that person is not a "bad person", per se. If an actor plays Stalin in a movie, does that mean he is a murderous dictator in real life aswell? Just like the actor who plays Superman can be a complete @#!*% . The Master&#39;s Voice 19:40, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's not that I dislike you (I don't). Nor do I think that you're a "bad person". It's simply that I don't like the 'back-story' behind Blaca so much, because I am not so keen on far-right atheists. --Semyon 19:47, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * You know, I'm constantly trying to "reinvent myself". So why pick a Christian conservative once more and make it all so predictable? An atheist is about as far from my real-life persona as it gets, so that is why I made LaBlaca an atheist. A very orthodox, old-fashioned Christian is also pretty far from what I really am; a more or less moderate Christian.
 * The far-right part is closer to me, although many of the views held by LaBlaca are not my own. As Dimitri once pointed out, I put little bits of myself in my characters, but only just that, little bits. I am neither a nazi, nor a communist, nor an atheist. But I like to pretend, just for the @#!*% of it. Say you are playing an online game and you are a lame, average, uninteresting person, would you recreate yourself entirely or make yourself into a total badass, just because you can? The Master&#39;s Voice 20:09, September 25, 2011 (UTC)

I do believe BastardRoyale is a sock of Magnus's. However, he denies it. A long time ago it was agreed that the Lashawns were not in the royal family and just because of the constitution doesn't mean they get in -- they resigned a long time ago. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:38, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, the constitution says they should be in and, they didn't even resign and wish to be included so this is a non-discussion of you opposing something that is supported both by the law and by me, Horton and, apparantly, also Semyon. What you are doing, TimeMaster, is lying and twisting things. Sorry to say, but it's just a load of bullocks. The Master&#39;s Voice 06:48, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am kind of neutral on this point, but I think that it's of paramount importance that users are considerate rather than legalistic. If you want them to be in the Line of Succession, hey, it doesn't bother me. But you must then reciprocate, and not try and make Philip king without agreement from everyone. --Semyon 12:25, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, Semyon, I have said this dozens of times and I will say it again, one last time: I do not want to make any of these people King or Queen of Lovia. Not within the next hundred years or so, that is. If they are to be included, they will be below all others, at the bottom of the list. The sons of Arthur III and their offspring would be last in line to the throne because of the condition under which they were born; out of wedlock. Not much would change, if anything, on the ground. The only difference would be that a younger, more fertile branch of the Royal Family would be added, thus expanding the LoS significantly without having to invent entirely new people to the Royal Family. In many ways, it is much less radical a change then Horton and TimeMaster creating new people and giving pre-excisting members of the Royal Family new siblings. That is much more radical then what I am trying to do here, which is to change the status of characters who are widely accepted and who's status is protected by our laws and our constitution. Do you now understand, Semyon? I sure hope so. I'm getting tired of explaining it all the time, you see. For some reason, TimeMaster hates this plan but his arguments aren't very convincing, IMHO. }} The Master&#39;s Voice 13:15, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think they should just be removed because part of the idea of them was to not have them in the LoS. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:36, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * If I were you, TMV, I'd appeal to the Judge to ask for a ruling, but we need to appoint one. --Semyon 14:50, September 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd rather save us all the trouble since there the Lashawn's are in the LoS according to the constitution and according to the editor behind them, as can be seen in the link on the first comment I made in this section. There are no viable arguments against this, and only one person objects, TimeMaster. His arguments? He does not like them... Better just go ahead and update the them Line of Succession and leave out all the drama. The Master&#39;s Voice 15:03, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

"Part of the idea of them was to not have them in the LoS." ≠ "I don't like it." Sorry Magnus. And why do you put after three out of four posts? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:26, September 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess I could do without the smileys... It's just that some people out here find it difficult to recognize a joke, I have learned in the past. :)
 * And whatever "the idea of these people" is or was, it is not at all relevant and you know it. Because excluding these people from their rightful place in the LoS is a direct and grave violation of the Lovian constitution, something that doesn't seem to bother you one bit. Not that it has bothered me in the past, but let us do this according to the book just this one time, shall we? It's the least I can do after breaking just about every law their is to break. The Master&#39;s Voice 07:43, September 28, 2011 (UTC)

Prince James's kids
I was hoping to push back the dates of birth of Prince James' kids to the early/mid 1920s. This would have to be as somegrandchildren of these people are barely older than their grandparents. HORTON11 19:05, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

The second cousins were forty years older than dimitri, even though they were supposed be to less, I just had to push it to twenty years -- it is a bit unrealistic and the royal family doesn't have kids at 20, even for the James-type of people. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:07, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Back then it was more normal for this to happen. PS I just found another problem. Prince Thomas is listed as Dimitri's grandfather in King Joseph's page but also as Dimi's dad in his page. HORTON11 19:09, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

It should be dimi's dad. I just think 20 is a bit too young. . . so I pushed it to 32, which gives them more time for being crazy. XD —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:11, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Having kids at such a young age is the craziest thing they did, and also Thomas was born in 1938 so he's old enough to be his granddad and too old to be his dad. HORTON11 19:16, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

He could be either. The page says they liked to do crazy things, so that would give them like 2 years to do all that stuff before kids. That's why they should be born later. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:05, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Even with kids they still did crazy and unusual things, so they don't impede that. I was already working on the bios for many family members before you changed the dates so now that they're up please don't change them again. Also what about making Thomas DImi's grandfather. We could say he had Dimi's dad in 1960-1965. HORTON11 06:24, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Horton: Prince Thomas married late in life with a woman who was more then twenty years his junior. Before you change his age, remember that his mother, Queen Lucy, was born in the 1890s. And that Dimitri, who wrote the page, also wrote that there was some controversy about the age difference between Thomas and his wife. Also, please take note: it is not at all unusual for men to father children at an old age. Anthony Quinn (Guns of Navarone, Zorba the Greek actor) had children well into his 70s, Hugh Hefner had sons at 60+ and Marlon Brando had his last son at the age of 70. Jacob Zuma of South Africa, also in his 70s, had his last child just two years ago and Sarkozy of France knocked up his trophy wife Carla Bruni recently (and he's also in his late-fifties).
 * Btw: why did no member of our Royal Family ever divorce or seperate and remarry at some point? There isn't much drame in our Royal Family, not as much as is usually seen in other Royal Families around the world. Just my two cents. The Master&#39;s Voice 07:16, September 25, 2011 (UTC)

A message
Just to inform you, TimeMaster, Pierlot would like to have a word with you. About something political, if I'm not mistaken. The Master&#39;s Voice 20:24, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. Edit: err, where can I find him? He's not on the chat. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:25, October 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * He must be offline then. He'll be back tommorrow, I'm sure. He always is. The Master&#39;s Voice 20:28, October 4, 2011 (UTC)

You've got it man. Just give me a day to get back on track with things, and Christopher will be back in business! Thanks for that, and I hope that Wikination progresses past the slump we're in!--COP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 01:13, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

I noticed your edit to my character's profile. Please don't tell me that in Lovia, that the internet is restricted to the country. If so, I can work around that, but it would be nice to know, as I have Communipedia set on a world-wide scale. Also, message me once I officially make it into congress so that I can update my character's page a little more. Thanks, and cheers! --COP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 20:52, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's not limited, but it's a guideline to not create gigantic things like a huge social network that is bigger than Twitter and MySpace. That's why I tuned it down a bit. Also, k. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:09, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

50 is not majority
Nor is it minority. With 50 seats they are not larger than the opposition, so they are not a majority :) It's an equality: 50 = 50, while 51 ≥ 49 (majority) and 49 ≤ 51 (minority). In a political context this is rare, as practically speaking no one is able to govern, quite near the current Dutch situation though. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 04:51, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * And even more strangely is that this stimulates cooperation between different majorities formed at the spot around a certain proposal, only to fall apart for the next. Very curious indeed.  06:05, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * In the world of politics, it's business as usual once again. Meanwhile the revolution continues and the situation is a far cry from stable. The Master&#39;s Voice 08:04, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

Due to this fine line I just said it had 50 seats. :/ Does CPL.nm want to rejoin? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:02, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Not at all; it was our moderate wing that wanted a coalition with the liberals. Now that they feel strong, they leave us. Rejoining would be a bad move for the party, but we will support any good proposal and don't back down when responsibility needs to be taken. 16:56, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

Cool thanks! I'll continue to edit regularly, and will contribute whenever I get the chance. Thanks again! --COP Christopher Costello (Pikapi - Discuss) 00:07, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

News
Got some news for ya right here, Sir. Almost all the major badguys from Lovia's past that are still with us today are now involved in the conflict. For now, that is, because obviously our days are numbered. The glorious First Consul of Rome 16:43, October 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Cute. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:46, October 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * In a way, yes. Like a big, happy reunion! :D The glorious First Consul of Rome 16:47, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

Adding categories
I'm not purposely adding the categories, I'm sorry. Seriously. -- 中亚人/中亞人 (Chinasian/Jeffwang16)*跟我谈话 14:29, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. When you edit, the same ones get added again, which is kind of weird. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:30, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

Something for La Quotidienne
Oos has now joined the rebellion, the Civil War has effectively ended as UNLOR forces only hold Kings and all other states are now virtually in the hands of the rebels. It seems as if Yuri has now given up, his spirit broken by the unexpected support of Il Duce Octavian and Ilava's sudden betrayel... This is a historic moment in Lovian history, although things are still very uncertain. The glorious First Consul of Rome 16:15, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

French Wikination
Quand est-ce qu'on va commencer cet nouveau wiki? HORTON11 16:36, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Il commenca demain. Je suis prêt. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:07, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

As-tu vu les commentaires que j'ai fait dans mon talk page, et aussi la carte plus detaille? HORTON11 20:13, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Je connais une personne avec les compétences de dessiner. (on Conworlds Wiki) Ta carte est bonne. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:15, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Damn you guys, I'll have to use google translate to understand what you guys are saying... Yes, I'm that bad at french... The glorious First Consul of Rome 20:17, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually understand everything :D --Il Duce Octavian 20:17, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well then you should learn some Französisch. It can come in handy. HORTON11  20:19, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * XD Nice one TMV. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:21, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * I just suck at French... most French girls speak english well enough, though... The glorious First Consul of Rome 20:23, October 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Come live in Belgium for a year (the Wallonian part) and you'll be an expert. HORTON11  20:25, October 26, 2011 (UTC)

Congress chart
Two issues: I don't exactly get where you want to have the speaker. Also, who is the speaker - what party is he/she in? 13:24, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Speaker is LDP (Krosby). Remember, there was an election and stuff and Oos abstained because he was opposed to the post and etc. Basically the speaker should be positioned about right between the two ends of the semi circle. The semi circle of 99 seats would arc above the speaker's 1 seat in the middle bottom. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:30, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

I think I got it now. But there are an awful lot of parties involved, it's going to looks like an LSD trip... 13:44, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

You can make one or two seat parties independent/other instead of having a color for each 1/2-member party. That's what was done in the Tunisian chart, since they have lots of tiny parties. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:45, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try that. In addition I will mix in a grey-tone, so that the color range is narrowed. 13:51, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, good. Just a reminder on the CCPL color - Even though their main color is red, CPL.nm already has red so they should be teal. LDP is probably sky blue instead of pink, and SDP green instead of red, because SPP should take another color that is reddish. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:11, October 29, 2011 (UTC)