User talk:79.79.220.104

I'm glad you like my creativity with usernames

Not sure I should be talking to you as I think that'll get me banned ... and I've only come for a look.

It's very strange reading the editing pages and comments. There clearly is some kind of hangover from wikipedia with the idea that everything has to be perfect before it can be "published", which seems to me to be the antithesis of journalism where what counts is speed.

Anyway, please to meet you - ??? no idea whom I writing to! 79.79.220.104 17:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * In response to your question on my talk page, the "cannot edit own talk page" comments are automated, and appear when I set certain functions in the block user page. All that means is that the user is "hard blocked" - i.e., can't edit any page on the site. Generally, blocked users can edit their talk page, so that they can argue their ban, but occasionally this privilege is removed due to abuse. (BTW don't worry, you can talk freely here without fear of being blocked unless you are disruptive, which you certainly aren't.) tempo divalse  17:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yes I am! 79.79.220.104 17:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, since you seem to be interested in how Wikinews works, I'd suggest you take a look at our introduction page, that should help you out. If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to ask me at my talk page. Cheers, tempo divalse  17:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes that did help: particularly where it says: "for an international audience", which is understandable but quite different from my own requirements. 79.79.220.104 17:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that doesn't mean you can't report on local stories - quite the contrary, local news is highly valued, especially when it comes with original reporting. tempo divalse  19:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * But seriously, I've found it very interesting to read through the pages. I have to admit that I've started down a very different model to the wikinews one, but I can see some very worrying facets already. I was thinking about the wiki approach to news recording, but clearly it comes with some major drawbacks most notably being the time to create a collaborative well sourced article versus the quick, but dirty and biased news that seems to be the alternative. Clearly a big problem is that if you insist on well sourced articles, then it is difficult to "break" news because by definition it has to wait until a large number of other sources have broken the news.


 * Also, I'm used to news discussion forum, where the news is posted as a quick summary with a link to one or more sites and then the focus is on discussing the news. The real essence of news is "currency", and part of my incentive to post news on the forum was "being first", even if that meant I sacrificed a NPOV and had to limit the sources. But great food for thought. I've given up any hope of "spontaneous" contributions to my project and now realise that the only people who will contribute are those whom I have bribed, blackmailed or otherwise coerced ... or more likely me, me, me.


 * AND WELL DONE for all your effort. project like this don't go anywhere without a few very dedicated people willing to put up with a lot of crap from "paintedladywithpantsonhead" or whatever that user calls themselves who was clearly trying to wind you up. Still, I'd love to know what their motivation was to be disruptive? And now they can't answer! 79.79.220.104 17:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Most vandals like that one generally do it for laughs, or due to a lack of anything else to do. Usually, we can block the IP address creating these accounts, to stop them from creating more disruptive usernames, but this user is smarter than most vandals, and appears to be making use of open proxies to get around the block. All we can do now is ban the accounts as soon as they are created, checkuser them, and hope that the buffoon finally gets bored and goes away. tempo divalse  17:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I've come here without creating an account to make sure I don't get blocked before explaining to you. I do it to pass the time before other more interesting stuff loads on my computer. I actually do have quite a bit of respect for people who work here as the actual act of getting stuff written and out isn't that easy - I actually felt guilty after some offensive names that named particular users early on, and stopped that. It ain't the most exciting thing to do, but as I said, it passes the time and it's better than nothing. 67.159.26.83 18:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, if you want to pass the time, why not contribute to Wikinews constructively, instead of wasting our - and your - time with creating these disruptive accounts? Write an article, or help an article that needs fixing up - not only will you helping the project this way, but yourself as well: writing articles can significantly improve one's English and is always educational. tempo divalse  18:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)