You can contact me via Discord - find my Discord username here. (You can't PM me, though. Figure me out via English Wikipedia server. From there, you can either ping me to enable DM for a short period or join my personal server at the profile to PM me.) or via Libera.chat. (cloaked with .*@wikimedia/-revi. Note that as of 2022 I no longer monitor IRC on a daily basis and I might be disconnected.)
By the way, as of the time when this page is last edited or purged, my home in South Korea is currently 11:31 PM. (click here to refresh the clock!) I may not respond when the time is 12:00 AM ~ 09:00 AM.
I will not delete local userpage for GlobalUserPage, as I consider meta page only for meta, and I want to keep globaluserpages independent from meta page. So, don't waste your time asking about it.
Partial block is a nonsense. You can't be civil in one place, and act like bullshit and be 'partial blocked' on the other side of a single project. You get a (sitewide) block from me or no block at all. If some policy demands partial block instead of a 'block', I will stay clear of them. Go ask someone else who will use it. That's not me. Never.
Whoever at WMF making breaking change with impact to community tools MUST ensure that every previously working tool continue to work after breaking change deploys. (I don't care about how. It's developer's job, not user's. I only care whether it works or not.) Otherwise you are saying "I am lazy, I don't do my work" and offloading your work to volunteers. You are creating problem, you should be the one fixing it, not someone else.
Abstract Wikipedia is a mere projection of 'western (specifically Western Europe/North America) values' to the rest of the world. It is bound to be a short version of English Wikipedia for translation. I do not endorse its existence, therefore I do not / will not contribute to that.
I try not to use support/oppose templates because I want you to read my comment, not the template.
I generally avoid processing any controversial requests and closing RfC. I am not interested in dealing with your problem.
Mostly because there's other non-controversial business waiting for me without looking at that complex stuff.
I outsource all my mathematical questions to Calculator or WolframAlpha. I don't consider advanced mathematical knowledge (beyond , , , ) essential to my life, and forgot all of them as soon as I was done with it.
I hate CCLv4, so nobody shall use my contribs under CCLv4 even if it becomes default license for Wikimedia. (Maybe I have to retire?)
I hate it because it will heal the license violation if you fix it in 30 days: I don't want whoever ignore the license to be automatically given second chance. I want to be in control of that.
Langcom should be careful when promoting tests to their own subdomains, and they should be willing to close down inactive wikis (more than they currently do now - which is none).
Their Closing Project Policy - which says "spambots are always automatically blocked" is outright lie, if it were so why am I deleting spambots from small wikis now and then? What about SRG entries about "Spambots"? Are they witch-hunting? No, LangCom is lying about spambot. They can do better, they must do better.
I would rather block one more spambots, rather than spending my time on hypothetical 2030 stuff.