User talk:Benedict Blade
 I just wanted to soil your empty page :-)
No, not really... If you're still looking for more visitors, you might be interested in the implementation of a "Q&A"-part like we did recently here. As you can see on our recent changes, there goes a good part of the traffic. Beside that, it is a lot of fun. Kameloid (talk) 18:21, 27 Jeremy 2013 (UTC)
- That looks very cool, I'll definitely try and do something of the sort.
- I'm not going to lie, receiving a new message within an hour of archiving my talk page has given me a substantial ego boost :P --Ben Blade 18:31, 27 Jeremy 2013 (UTC)
That was the point. -P00psicle
Why do you keep bothering me? Why is what I write not good enough for you? Why can't I just have fun on this site without someone telling me that what I wrote is against what they consider quality/content standards? WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!?!!!?!?! -An annoyed P00psicle
- Because every community lives only as long as everybody follows certain rules. If you don't like the rules imposed here, YOU have to find an other place to vandalize, this one is already occupied by insanes. Kameloid (talk) 18:24, 28 Jeremy 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Kameloid.
- P00psicle: Because that's not what Illogicopedia is about. While quality standards at ?Pedia have never been high, we don't aim for incoherent stuff that is not aimed to amuse, or even borders on offensive. I'm "bothering you" because I want you to become a productive member of this wiki. It would be a great shame if a user like you, who has created a couple of articles with genuine potential, is banned because they repeatedly ignored reminders and warnings.
- Hope this clears things up. --Ben Blade 18:27, 28 Jeremy 2013 (UTC)
- Ohhh yes. It's the only way to be. Because the concept of wiki hierarchy would contradict the whole concept of the site, it's really easy to become an admin on Communpedia. It's still very much a work in progress though. --Ben Blade 13:37, 6 Farbleum 2013 (UTC)
 Yo, I'm Back
So my ban is up and stuff. I'm sorry about all the crap articles and butthurt, I didn't really understand Illogicopedia. I'll be creating GOOD articles now and thanks for all the advice. P00psicle (talk) 23:36, 30 Arply 2013 (UTC)
 Hello, English Counterpart (At least that's how I thought of you when I was active on here. I don't know if that's weird...)
I was reading your thing you and RMS did about improving the site and although most of the stuff that was further discussed didn't end up working out, I was intrigued by one point that you listed that didn't seem to get any attention whatsoever. I'm intrigued by the notion of getting old users back on the site. By my presence and your presence, it is obvious that Illogicopedia is either a drug or the male lead in a over-the-top romance movie: You just can't quit it forever. Therefore, I'm sure that if we got some back, they would be active, at least for the summer. My first target would of course be RMS who hasn't edited since February and only edited sparsely before that. I'm sure our presence will help him want to stay, and if not, whatever. Still, I don't exactly know how to contact old users, and I have a feeling you do. I'm tired of looking at Illogicopedia the way it is now. It's not so much that it's inactive; there are always multiple users editing on a given day, but instead how nothing's moving. Especially that it's mid-June and there's only been one feature this entire year. You and I can flip this place around, methinks. And it's not just because I am always a huge fan of the "let's get the old gang back together" montage is cheesy movies (although that does help).
- Yeah, that was my attempt to get this place going again. It seemed that quite a few 'dormant' users are actually still lurking, as evidenced by the fact that some of them actually contributed to the thread (they didn't stick around, but never mind). Back in January I went so far as getting in touch with a couple of the ol' timers, which didn't really amount to much after an initial return. RMS still visits, I know that for sure.
- Not to get sappy, but I'd say the reason you don't see all these people around now, is, well, the fact that it isn't 2010 anymore. The early-mid teenage editors (like us two) are now three years older & dealing with a lot more academically, and the 'older' users are now even older & probably hold down jobs. Meanwhile, the amount of new users coming in hasn't been as large as it once was. Thankfully we've still got a few good 'uns buzzing around, keeping this place from being completely deserted.
- Oh yeah, those type of films are rather good for cliches. There's always one guy who has settled down and refuses to join in. --Ben Blade 18:45, 18 Yoon 2013 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying with your it-isn't-2010 point. The problem I see is that when I joined ?Pedia way back when, there was a stable base of users who were there for a while and knew what they're doing. It's a huge issue if a majority of users at any given time are relatively new as no one can show them the ropes. You know what I mean. --T3 22:47, 18 Yoon 2013 (UTC)
So, while I don't have a specific idea for the collabo I mentioned, I think it should be a coming-of-age-story because that just seems fitting to me (and I hate coming-of-age-stories so it will be easy for me to nail the tropes). --T3 00:58, 30 Yoon 2013 (UTC)