User talk:Luxofluxo

This is Luxofluxo's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your ACE question

Hi Luxofluxo. I would appreciate it if you could strike the unsubstantiated allegation that you made about User:Galdrack being a WP:DUCK.

Quite apart from that, there is a limit of two questions per person per candidate, and your current question asked to all candidates appears to be a multi-part question designed to game the limit.

Per WP:ACERULES, I am going to ping the members of WP:ELECTCOM: @RoySmith, Barkeep49, and Cyberpower678. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove the fully 100% justified WP:DUCK comment as you asked nicely and I was unaware of such rules - I would ask you actually do something about it though. I would like my question to be answered in one way or another - however, difficult it is for the users in question, because it is of a substantial nature - and currently the most salient issue that the encyclopaedia is dealing with publicly.

It is not intended to game the limit at all. I believed the rule was that I could make two separate posts - and I was fully intending to ask follow up questions - but I guess I can't do that. My apologies if I interpreted the rules incorrectly.

Luxofluxo (talk) 20:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note I have edited all question to fit the 2 question rule. We'll get to see how aware some of these users are of key obscure Wikipedia decisions on affected marginal communities off the site. Already delighted to reply that one has denied any knowledge of an antisemitism scandal on the site. Good stuff.

At least one other has at least been brave enough in response to another question to acknowledge that their family and friends have found such decisions hard to grapple with. That was a lot more honest.

Luxofluxo (talk) 21:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt response :) Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries :) Luxofluxo (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]