User talk:OM: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:38, 5 September 2006

Welcome to Battlestar Wiki!

[Form letter purged because OM hates getting form letters]

Cites to "Cyrannus"

You have anything to cite this information? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 23:52, 3 September 2006 (CDT)

I've tagged as requiring citations the things I couldn't trivially verify, sentence-by-sentnce; ideally, a few tags can be replaced by one source. You certainly seem knowledgeable on the topic, and I hope you take the time to contribute sources. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 02:58, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

Cites added where applicable, although most of the cite demands were quite a bit of overkill on the part of this "Citation Jihad" felgercarb. It's one thing to ask for a general cite that covers most bases, or a cite to back a seriously controversial point, but some of those cite demands...well, at the rate you Jihadist daggits are going, next thing you know you'll be asking for a cite for each letter and p[cite]u[cite]n[cite]c[cite]t[cite]u[cite]a[cite]t[cite]i[cite]o[cite]n[cite] m[cite]a[cite]r[cite]k[cite].[cite]

Never. :-) I made them work with our cite templates so no worries now. :-) --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:34, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

"[I]deally, a few tags can be replaced by one source." --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 19:42, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

NASA

I'm not going to mention your name, but are you the same "OM" that worked for NASA and now a news consultant? --FrankieG 14:13, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

[Insert Shocked At Absurdity Look]

...BWHAHAAAAHH! No, I'm not Jim Oberg. I'm OM, a space history colleague of Jim Oberg, tho. But then again, all of us on sci.space.history *are* Jim Oberg, according to the anti-NASA trolls. Good guess, tho, and besides, if I *were* JimO, do you think I'd have gotten hammered for that overkill on cites? --OM 02:35, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Anti-NASA Trolls? Who could not like NASA? ;-) --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:34, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

Quite a few, actually. Most of these dolts are simply venting their frustrations over their shame at being willingly molested as children. People like Bart Sibrel, Brad Guth, John Thomas Maxson, Tommy Lee Elfritz, etc, etc.

I was spending a lot of time on some of those groups (lurking) following the Columbia disaster, so did I get you two confused? --FrankieG 19:41, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

Then you did see quite a few of my postings back then, especially for the five days following the loss of Columbia. I'm the poor sod who compiled that FAQ site with no sleep for those five days.

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 ...BWHAHAAAAHH! No, I'm not Jim Oberg. I'm OM, a space history colleague of Jim Oberg, tho. But then again, all of us on sci.space.history *are* Jim Oberg, according to the anti-NASA trolls. Good guess, tho, and besides, if I *were* JimO, do you think I'd have gotten hammered for that overkill on cites? --[[User:OM|OM]] 02:35, 5 September 2006 (CDT)
 :Anti-NASA Trolls? Who could not like NASA? ;-) --[[User:Shane|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]])</sup> 19:34, 4 September 2006 (CDT)
+::Quite a few, actually. Most of these dolts are simply venting their frustrations over their shame at being willingly molested as children. People like Bart Sibrel, Brad Guth, John Thomas Maxson, Tommy Lee Elfritz, etc, etc.
 ::I was spending a lot of time on some of those groups (lurking) following the Columbia disaster, so did I get you two confused? --[[User:Gougef|FrankieG]] 19:41, 4 September 2006 (CDT)
+:::Then you did see quite a few of my postings back then, especially for the five days following the loss of Columbia. I'm the poor sod who compiled that FAQ site with no sleep for those five days.