User talk:Funnybenny18

First of all, you desperately need an actual talkpage.

Second of all,

You've made it very clear that you don't give a shit about censorship, consensus, OR compromising from your edits and talkpage bitching in Seventh Soysurgency. Me, Rickbert, TheCatalan and Cobblestone all had some serious disagreements over the subject, but you keep your "more literate-than-thou" attitude up, impervious to what the rest of us have agreed upon. Even Catalan tends to give up after a while, but you utterly refuse to be reverted since the article goes against your supposedly infallible narrative that the war/soysurgency/whatever was a complete nothingburger with zero consequences, and that it had absolutely zero effect on the current state of the soysphere whatsoever. And yet, ironically, you are the only one who is still fighting the so-called soyvil war, the rest of us have moved on ever since Salt took over. Heck, I would have written the article to be far more biased than you already think it is, had I gotten my way. When Cobblestone edited the article to show a bit more of the quotist perspective, I didn't revert her. She was focused on neutrality.

That's just what consensus is. It's a fundamental aspect of culture both of not just the 'ki, as well as Wikipedia and just about every other online wiki out there. Suppose you really like Vlodson, or something, and are mad that his grading template says "brimstone". Do you edit it to say he's a gem? Even if you tell us why you think he's aryan, you're most certainly gonna get reverted. The important thing is not what you think, it's what everyone else thinks. I apologize, Mr. 300 IQ superintelligent alien being from Planet Leekij, but that's just how things go. Even I often struggle to cope with this fact, I must admit.

TLDR give up nigger, you're the only one keeping this useless nigger war going Nut (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

OK, now let me dissect why your "useful and eloquent" edits to the page are (mostly) retarded

>removing anti quotist victory and declaring the 7th soysurgency to be two seperate events

At least in the eyes of the average 'teen, the furcord, the smuglet, the rule change, they were all obviously related. No quotist revisionism can change that.

>Quote's alterations to rule 2 were simply done to match the 'ki's and 'booru's less vague wording

There's no way in the world that Quote didn't realize that pedo janny allegations were running rampant. At least you seem tounderstand that the removal the "pedo jokes" clause would bring in bad actors, I would consider reverting that.

>removing files from the gallery

I get it, a bunch of files got wiped off the 'ki. But we're trying to add them back, dammit!

P.S. the only reason why people even post Smuglet at this point is its association with the "diddyphiles", as you put it. By itself, despite coming from a pedo-infested game, it's not INHERENTLY pedophilic, but by that logic, neither is Soylita. In fact, the 'ki's on article on 'lita states that the variant was considered socially acceptable in the 2021-2023 era. Smuglet was hated from day 1, judging from old comments on LuxHere's original Smuglet upload.

I also probably forgot a few sections because the difference viewing tool sucks balls. Nut (talk) 21:47, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Reading this; this is not objective fact that BTFOs my objective fact but your own understanding of the situation. Read the manual of style then try again. Hint, there's a clause in the Manual that says: You will NOT be B****d, I'll let you figure out what that means exactly

Also I didn't remove files from the gallery, my mistake. Think it was because I took so long trying to figure out how any of these events follow on to each other so I can make it very understandable to people who just want to read an article and not have to follow up after some SNCA other article written by another chimp. Some of this shit simply doesn't entertain any other event in this article, and the way it's written- it has you jumping from one point in the timeline to the next, then assumes you already know the context of multiple things when that is very clearly NOT how articles should work.

Also lita is supposed to represent underage women as opposed to Smuglet representing chibi forms of people. That's my point, I wasn't able to elaborate on that because I was too preoccupied - yet again I had to chase after what was essentially ripped up footnotes covered in green goo and yellow snot. It's a WIP for a reason, I don't have all day to decipher every article and relevant tidbit that is related to some of the SNCA in this page. You realise that I'm just gonna be the first motherfucker to do this, right?

Because other people are gonna read this page, be either horrendously confused or buy into the hunkymania that this page exhibits- if it's the former they're gonna WANT to fix it because that's how this fucking site works. Well guess what buckeroo- because not only is there a fat sephardi freak of nature guarding the page like a cave-troll, it's not even coherent! You need to have a degree in hunkyglyphics to understand what the fuck this article is talking about- and what kind of narrative it's even trying to tell you in the first place.

From one paragraph to the next, you're talking about Warrior-Z, you're talking about Soybooru, you're talking about Furcord leaks, you're talking about BOORUBUX, you're talking about outages, you're talking about GETS, you're talking about- it's all so fucking overwhelming that you're left with total dismay and confusion on what you're trying to read?

What- what events can YOU remember from this article? I want you to read the article yourself- the one BEFORE my edit, and I want you to summarise what happened by JUST reading through it. Don't click on any of the links- don't click on any notes or citations- just read. Just read the old edit and tell me what you think the page is about. That's what I've been asking the entire time.

Get the fuck off my back, admit that the article is shit- so horrendously tangled in a web of poopy doodoo feces, green goo and alien snot that nobody wants to DARE try untangling it, nobody wants to DARE try rewording or rephrasing it, and if they do they're met with @TheCatalan1977 who guards the page like a native freak. If you think my edits are wrong, I implore you to work backwards from my edits before undoing it. Otherwise, stop being a fat lazy stupid wiki-dalit who busies themselves in corrections and SPaG and MoSwarlording instead of knowing how to actually create a coherent, understandable, relevant and USEFUL article. --Funnybenny18 (talk) 22:06, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

are they houding you again @Funnybenny18 Glisterald (talk) 22:14, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

The article's rather shitty, i'll admit, and I never said it wasn't. You should be able to understand that, especially because you run around assuming that your oppositionists can't read shit.

More about that manual of style section- what I get from it is that we need someone who isn't either of us to edit it. Someone who isn't horribly biased, an actual neutralDEITY like @User:Rickert, for example. You were strongly on the pro-Quote, pro-Mustard side of the war/soysurgency/whatever, spamming your anti-hunky song parody, don't try to deny it. And note that I did partially un-revert one of your new sections. And I implore you not to talk to me about objectivity when even the jannies aren't on your side.

Also, thanks for clarifying about the deleted files. I forgive you for that. Nut (talk) 22:20, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Nut i'm kinda with funny benny here, i'll edit the soisurgency page to be more neutral while keeping the info Glisterald (talk) 22:26, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Glisterald And I'm perfectly fine with that. Like I said, I never said the article was good. And you seemed pretty neutral throughout this whole conflict, much more so than me or Benny ever was. Nut (talk) 22:29, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Nut i don't care about petty discord drama ev&oe i basically started it by posting the smuglet shit Glisterald (talk) 22:34, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Glisterald I've heard that you wanted to accelerate the ban on smuglet posting by joking about it being blacked. Is that true? Nut (talk) 22:41, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Nut yep, that was always the intention. i wanted to see if jeanies would ban it again since i saw it got unbanned. Glisterald (talk) 22:43, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Glisterald So you probably know more about the smuglet shit than all the rest of us put together. Sorry about accusing you of being an actual lolifag earlier, I can forgive you now. Nut (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2026 (UTC)