User talk:Bryan
From STS Wiki
Hello! You can leave a message for me here.
i'll do the dirty work of the cabal. --Buridan 15:40, November 22, 2005 (EST)
- okay, I can be cabalistic. I want to participate here, and given the flow (ooo-there's a STS topic) of traffic here I don't think it'll be too taxing. --RedJ 17 15:41, January 30, 2006 (EST)
Contents |
[edit] degree programs
what do you make of that degree programs section, it seems like it overlaps.--Buridan 17:42, November 28, 2005 (EST)
[edit] biographical sketches
how broad do you want to go in biographical sketches... I was just going down some intellectual traditions, a la who read who and talked about science and technology, but then i realize the list was getting a bit longish.... do you think we should split it up into traditions? or should i just keep adding at my leisure until it gets big enough for its own page? --Buridan 13:32, December 5, 2005 (EST)
[edit] Hi
Hi, I like your wiki, but why don't you specify on the licenses page that all content written starting now is dual-licensed under the GFDL as well as the CC licence you're using? This will allow Wikipedia content to be copied here and vice versa. --Wikipedia:User:Unforgettableid
- Good suggestion - I'll make that clear. Admin 22:43, August 13, 2006 (EDT)
[edit] Hey, a test message
Hi!
[edit] hmm
you have to remember that many of the people who add stuff with ips are just not logged in --buridan. 162 was me again.--Buridan 12:46, 15 August 2006 (EDT)
[edit] concise model
i was going to ask you about that.... seemed a bit like a statement of frustration resolved in humor.... --Buridan 09:00, 22 August 2006 (EDT)
I prefer to think of it as anthropology! Bryan Pfaffenberger 09:24, 22 August 2006 (EDT)
[edit] i deleted it too soon
the spam actually happened after you post today. i deleted it and then couldn't find the rest of the info because... i'd deleted it... bah, have to remember to block user then delete spam.--Buridan 18:37, 4 September 2006 (EDT)
[edit] blocking wierdness
today when i blocked the ip number twice, it was because both times it came up and said that i did not have permission to block someone, becaue i was not in the user group of people wiht blocking permissions. nonetheless it looks like the block took. this is likely an upgrade issue. did you modify the Localsettings on the 1.7 upgrade because they changed the way permissions work in there and an unedited permissions table could do that. .... --Buridan 12:21, 10 September 2006 (EDT)
[edit] revert spammer
if it is the person from the 200 block, just drop him into an .htaccess disallow as a block instead of banning all 255 ips from editing. --Buridan 05:10, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
