User talk:Dullfig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] A welcome from Sputnik

Hi, Dullfig, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms - СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 01:30, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sources for Objectivist politics

I left a talk message on the Objectivist politics article you just created, asking for sources. Right now it looks like original research; some citations would make it appear more encylopedic. - squibix(talk) 01:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

This article duplicates information already in the much longer article Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. The shorter article (with the incorrectly capitalized "The") should be removed and replaced with a Wikipedia:redirect, so that anyone typing in the title with a capitalized "The" will be redirected to the big article. Since you are a new Wikipedian, you might prefer me to do this for you. Art LaPella 01:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Debate is fun

You seem to share a passion for political debate, as do I, but, unfortunately, personal debate is frowned upon on wikipedia talk pages, and it's generally only a matter of time before someone comes along and tells the involved parties to stop debating and focus on the article. I would like to suggest that you should join Politicsforum.org, the internet's largest political debate forum (that I know of). -- Nikodemos (f.k.a. Mihnea) 05:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Summary Request

Hi Dullfig. Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia since January. A small request though ... can you please write something in the 'Edit summary' text box when you make an edit? It will make it easier for other editors to follow the changes in an article. Thanks! Monkeyman 17:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] /objectivism

FYI: might want to remove categories from you temp articles, since they then show up in the categories as proper articles (e.g. Category:Philosophical movements). Otherwise, looks like you've got a pretty decent article going there. Keep up the good work.Shaggorama 05:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

– Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Value

Next time, please do not split articles that way. The main reason is that doing so destroys the edit history. (The GFDL requires acknowledgement of all contributors, and editors continue to hold copyright on their contributions unless they specifically give up this right. Hence it is required that edit histories be preserved for all major contributions until the normal copyright expires.)

The best way to split articles is to create all of the seperate articles first (with an edit summary that says something like "spliting content from [[Value]]") before you even save your modification to the main article. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• In others words, never move/rename that main article to a temp page because it contains the edit history of everybody who previously worked on that content. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, after you copy the content onto new pages, you just completely replace the text of the original main article with the disambig list. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:13, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit on capitalism

Regarding this edit [1], specifically this sentence, "As Capitalism ultimately means Individual Economic Freedom, criticism has historically come from statists, collectivists and egalitarians." - that is extremely POV (and the last part is inaccurate - anarchists criticise capitalism too) and I hope you can see why. Wikipedia isn't a place to advocate your own views - please read WP:NPOV. Also, Ravi Batra is an idealist, not materialist, as you imply in that edit. -- infinity0 19:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of Weasel Words tag

Please give some justification when you use the tag. It seems you place that tag according to your own political bias.

[edit] Paradox of Value

Just to polish off in private - The point is that the utility/use value of money is less than the immediate use value I may require to obtain, it certainly has a lower aesthetic value, sentimental value, comedy value, moral value, sexual value, evolutionary value and whole host of other values - but it's exchange value will equal the price I pay - and that's how LTV works. Otherwise when thing's prices are equal they are not equal and we enter into a whacky world of everyone marking unequal prices on things (and considering your position rests on people valuing the thing they buy greater than things of equal price you two are really separating exchange and desire/use values). Anyway, if you want to enter into longer discussion about LTV reddeathy-at-yahoo.co.uk since as they say, Wikipedia is a debate forum--Red Deathy 08:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

You mean it's NOT a debate forum :) Dullfig

Picky bugger--Red Deathy 07:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Libertarian socialism

Well, when you consider that the original usage of the term "libertarian" refered to a branch of socialists, it's really not that contradictory. First, your definition of socialism is far too narrow. There are many different definitions of socialism (you just need to read the intro to the socialism page to find that out). Socialism can be in the form of a government-planned economy (which I vehemently reject) or it can be through direct and democratic control of the economy by the people, among other possible options. It doesn't have to be top-down. I'm very big on decentralization of political and economic power and believe everyone should have an equal say in all the decisions that effect them. If you want a more in depth description, read the articles on libertarian socialism and anarchism (except for the stuff on "anarcho"-capitalism). I'm also somewhat of a post-leftist and usually don't identify as a libertarian socialist when discussing politics with people who are more familiar with anarchist thought. My main reason for doing so on my userpage was so that people wouldn't think I'm an anarcho-capitalist, which is far more of a contradiction that "libertarian socialist" in my opinion. I consider a gift economy to be the best sort of economic arrangement. Ungovernable Force^{The Wiki Kitchen!} 07:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catholicism and Capitalism

Read paragraph 2425 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market." Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.

To read the whole section on the Catechism on the 7th Commandment, start here. JBogdan 13:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I saw you made a sensible comment at Talk:Capitalism about this whole JBogdan effort to stick in this awful apologia for Catholic doctrine, that worst-of-all is written in the same register as a sermon or Catholic encyclical, rather than as a secular encyclopedia. I could use some help restoring the sensible, concise version, minus all the preaching, misrepresentation, and link-farm stuff to Vatican pages. Help? Please? LotLE×talk 02:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gun Control at Amnesty International Article

I read your comments at Small arms proliferation and they are great. I made this edit [2] and they are calling it pov, but it is a sourced statement with obvious implications. Well thanks for your comments at the other article and if you feel like chiming in at Amnesty International I can use all the help I can get. Thanks. Whiskey Rebellion 17:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have to say that it is a little POV :-) (not that I don't agree with any of it); Maybe if you move it to the Critizism section? Dullfig 21:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's the best place for it, I guess. It is in the criticism section now. Someone moved it there. Thanks. Whiskey Rebellion 02:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Children and minors in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Children_and_minors_in_the_Israeli-Palestinian_conflict&diff=83912583&oldid=83779039

Regarding the edit above, you said that the claim is unsubstantiated and then proceeded to remove the sentence and source. Can you please explain how the source does not substantiate the claim? Thank you. Tidaress 22:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

the link you give points to nothing. Dullfig 01:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. It does point to something, but I forgot to add a references section at the bottom of the article. It should be okay now. Thanks. Tidaress 02:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barbershop group stubs

Hi - I see you';ve just created a new stub type for barbershop groups. When you did so, you copied across category information which contained the template {{WPSS-cat}}. If you'd read that template, you'd have seen that stub types should not be created without being formally proposed and debated at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals prior to creation, in order to check whether they cross the existing stub hierarchy, are viable in terms of existing numbers of stubs, and are properly named. Currently, this category is incorrectly named, since there is no parallel permanent category (there is no Cat:Barbershop groups). Also it is unclear whether there are currently enough stubs to warrant a dedicated stub category on this subject. Your new stub type is now listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to add any comments relating to its creation there. Grutness...wha? 22:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From LTV

As an aside, has it ever occured to you that price comes close to labor, because manufacturers stop improving the manufacturing process once they have achieved a decent return on investment? Usually a company will not improve the manufacturing process unless it has a competitor trying to put him out of business. LTV cannot explain why new products start out expensive. Look at CD players. They started out costing something like $1000.00, now you can have one for maybe $50. Do you think manufacturers where making $950.00 profit on each unit? hardly. Dullfig 17:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes, many things occur.

1) Until a market is proven the capital may well be used relatively unintensively, i.e. whilst you might have the capacity to churn out two trillion units an hour, if you're churning out sixty thousand you still have to factor in the labour transfer for amortisation of the machinery.

2) Likewise, start-up costs of promotion and advertising will be relatively high before you achieve mass market status.

3) Skills may be in shiort supply uintil there is a big market for them.

4) Likewise factors of production, until you have established a mass market for your suppliers then the relative cost of parts will be high as well.

(P.S. are you really a capitalist, i.e. living off the income from investments and property) or simply someone who supprots capitalism?--Red Deathy 08:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm a business owner :-) Dullfig 17:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Somalia

In regard to your mentioning of Somalia in the socialism article, Somalia actually is free market capitalism now and it's doing pretty well. It's still very poor from the previous "scientific socialism" and bloody civil war, but the capitalist system is very new. There is no government to confiscate profits and private property seems to be protected. Check out the somalia article in the Economy section. Improper Bostonian 20:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Who knew?! Anarcho-capitalism works.... Dullfig 23:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's still messy though. I think you still need a state. Without a monopoly of force it's unreasonably dangerous and the system could could collapse at any time. There's nothing to stop a totalitarian invasion. It does go to show though that the economy doesn't need regulating. Improper Bostonian 19:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:GentlemensAgreement.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:GentlemensAgreement.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 18:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] randism contradictions

Sorry for the late reply. I don't spent much time on wikipedia any more.

• "Objects have inherent qualities that make them desireable for certain uses." - desireable is a subjective opinion.
• So value is the rational application of nature's principles to solve man's needs. - jewellry serves no need. If you say "want," wants are subjective.
• And it is fair that each human spend his own energy in order to maintain their life. - who says it is fair? Fair based on what standard? Entropy tends to increase. It is impossible for anyone to "pay back" in full the useful energy they "take".
• So the payment we recieve at the end of the week is the equivalent of harvesting. - they are not equivalent, not even to the person receiving it. The person only makes this exchange because he thinks it is the best option available to him. These options are affected by factors other than the harvesting/payment itself and so you cannot make any comment about those two things by themselves.
• The owner is not getting paid for making the hammer, he is getting paid for conceiving of the hammer, and of how to make it. - in modern companies, shareholders get money for doing nothing. The whole system today is based upon luck, combined with human judgement, which isn't reliable because people talk shit about their ideas and products and overrate them to others. It could collapse at any moment, and the law of randomness says it will.
• Also, there's no need to lecture me on LTOV, I already said I agree with STOV. -- infinity0 18:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The properties of objects are objective, but even so their values are subjective, because those properties are only desireable depending on the subject. Your example hides this slightly, but the key point is that the stone is only useful *if the subject wants to survive*. Is a rock valueable to a tree? Also, what about diamonds? What "useful property" do they have?

Oh the chess match. I'm getting completely trashed there, and I can't be bothered resigning or starting a new game because the edit button is too far away and I've forgotten what to type. :P -- infinity0 11:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPA

Please adhere to WP:NPA, weither you think someone is off their rocker or not. Argue against the argument, not the person --feba 22:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I try not to argue too much, as anything is possible, but yes, child slavery in the US is an odd one to me. Possibly even odder than the guy I saw blaming starvation in Africa on Global warming. Honestly there probably isn't any point arguing with him, people beleive what they beleive right? You can't really change that most of the time. All you can do is sigh and try to keep them from spreading it --feb^talk 22:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UBeR is being reviewed

Dullfig, I hope you don't mind my contacting you but it is very urgent. I just got this message from UBeR, he is being persecuted by William M Connolley & Co. and he needs our help: Hello, friend. I'd like to inform you of the attacks and claims made by Raul654 to the administrator noticeboard regarding my actions. I whole heartedly believe my actions are just and warranted. Please review the current situation. Thank you. ~ UBeR 23:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC) We should write our views of the situation with the proof to show the degree of frustration which Uber and we all are suffering over the censorship and control of all Global warming articles. If we cannot save Uber from this injustice, WMC and company will simply extend this witch hunt to all who do not support their POV. Thanks, -- Brittainia 00:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence of a conspiracy

Dullfig, I just posted something you will find very interesting here [3]. Please read and add your voice if you feel so inclined. -- Brittainia 06:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Global Warming skeptic userbox

Based on comments you've made on the Global Warming Talk Page, I thought you might be interested in having a userbox on your user page that expresses your skepticism of anthropogenic global warming. It looks like this and will also add you to Category:Wikipedians who are skeptical of anthropogenic global warming. If you're interested, put the following on your user page:

{{User:Oren0/GWSkeptic}}

Feel free to tell your friends. Thanks! Oren0 21:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Dullfig 01:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on Scientific data archiving

Please take a look at this Talk page, especially the part on "pseudoscience" and William's reverts. The POV of certain editors is preventing them from objectively dealing with the facts. The concepts involved are not difficult but they do take a little investment of time to understand. You may need to spend some time in the Pseudoscience article to be fully comfortable. I hope you are able to find the time to help out. Thanks! RonCram 15:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)