User talk:AD/Archive7

From RationalWiki
< User talk:AD
Revision as of 01:15, 22 February 2012 by AD (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

goofy entertainment value

Pfffft, goofy. Wtf. Aceace 10:48, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I just read RWW, so I can say that I know you're just pissed that everyone thinks I'm hotter than you and your scruffy half-beard thingey. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go admire myself for a while, looking tenderly into my own eyes and gently oh so gently stroking my cheeks.--ADtalkModerator 10:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Fanservice
I knew RW slash fiction wasn't far off... ADK...I'll freeze your bomb! 11:19, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
You know nothing of looks. I just masturbated to a photo of myself. Aceace 22:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk page saga finally over

Good man for sticking with it for so long.

Cookie half.jpg For demonstrating exemplary goatery in the line of duty, Blue
has awarded you a used pre-owned! and slightly stale cookie.
Ewwwwwww.
Cockroaches ate half of it.

Picon small.pngAcer Blue 00:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Question of timing

Here you say that the runoff vote will last one week (September 19th, 2011 1900 NZST (0300 EST, 0700 UTC) to September 26th, 2011 1900 NZST (0300 EST, 0700 UTC)), but in the original rules you state "If no option accrues at least a 15% lead over its closest competitor, then the vote will be trimmed to the two leading options and a second vote over two subsequent weeks will choose the winner." In the interest of consistency, I think you should repost the runoff rules to last until October 3rd. Picon small.pngAcer Blue 00:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that was just a typo when I copy-pasted the instructions. But sure, two weeks, why not? I'll send out an intercom later when I get home from work.--ADtalkModerator 03:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Run-off vote

Planning an intercom message? There should be one. I was going to do it, but apparently can only create one in General News, and votes regarding community standards are not general news in my book. LowKey (talk) 00:23, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I was going to send one out, but I noticed the inconsistency between the runoff rules and original rules that I pointed out above ^^ Picon small.pngAcer Blue 00:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Ah I didn't see that. True, that needs to be firmed. Then again, does the two weeks start from the close of round 1 or from when a notice is actually sent? LowKey (talk) 01:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I just did two weeks from the start.--ADtalkModerator 07:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Playing with your sig

I thought it was a mediawiki cache issue, but it turns out it was only my browser. Apologies for messing around with it. -- Nx / talk 06:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I was wondering what witchcraft you were up to. Okeydokey!--ADtalkModerator 07:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Finally some action!

Thanks. Not that you did it for me, but it's good to see he isn't just getting pats on the back. Seems to me like you made the right decision.--"Shut up, Brx." 21:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

That last vandalism of his was a funny one, so at least some good is coming out of this.--ADtalkModerator 21:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
You mean the one on my page? Isn't that the same pic he puts up everywhere?--"Shut up, Brx." 21:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Yeah but it was suddenly funny again in this context. I can't explain it. Anyway don't be a dildo and withdraw your new thingey on the Coop. That's why people pick on you, man.--ADtalkModerator 21:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I won't withdraw my complaint. You (the moderators) need to somehow ensure that AceMcWicked ceases to vandalize user pages.--"Shut up, Brx." 21:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
distinguish humour from vandalism, dip-shit. Context man, context. Aceace 21:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
EC. Or you could grow a pair, develop a sense of humour, stop taking yourself so seriously, and learn how to use the rollback function. Yeah. That would work. B♭maj7 "If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong." 21:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Yeah for serious. You're just making things worse. He just got a month in the terrible terrible purgatory of Not Being a Sysop and we're going to hire someone to slap him with week-old trout, so let it be.--ADtalkModerator 22:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I sometimes think you completely misunderstand the culture at this website Brx. DamoHi 22:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Ahahaha that is the new best quote.--ADtalkModerator 22:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Ace was aware I did not wish him to vandalize my user page. And I'm sick of his tantrums and his primate-reminiscent shit-flinging--"Shut up, Brx." 22:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Then find another webshite. B♭maj7 "If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong." 22:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Errr, when I have ever thrown a tantrum? Aceace 22:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
All of your petulant and petty protests remind me of myself when I was four, breaking things and bugging people just because I couldn't get my way. You are the child that tears up his bedroom when his parents tell him to clean it, the child who throws his dinner on the floor when told there won't be desert for the evening, and the child who breaks his siblings' toys because he's jealous of them--"Shut up, Brx." 22:18, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
What have I protested? Where have I ever tried to get my way? Aceace
*sigh* Re-read Nx's cooping of you. All the times you went after Maratrean are shining examples. As for that "Acewiki" email you sent me, I should remind you that your rights are well on their way to being stripped, once tmt finishes testing the new rights group.--"Shut up, Brx." 22:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
when Nx cooped I only pointed at two examples that I felt needed greater explanation. Maratrean I was teasing. No "trying to get my way" or "protesting". And what does my email have to do with my rights getting stripped? Aceace 22:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Hold up on the rights change for a bit. Tmtoulouse (talk) 22:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Seriously? The vote on this lasted, like twenty minutes? B♭maj7 "If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong." 22:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
He's changing something technical. Hush.
Ya I'll wait a bit.--ADtalkModerator 22:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
There was no vote. There was a plea bargain agreed to. DamoHi 22:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
(ECx3!!!!!!!!)There was no vote, BbMaj7. Picon small.pngAcer Blue 22:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Then what the fuck was I doing voting here? And here? That's two votes that weren't votes. Get it together, people. Have a vote, don't have a vote, but figure it out. B♭maj7 "If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong." 22:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Jebus - I wouldn't trust these jokers to moderate a doll's tea party. –SuspectedReplicant Support democracy - Ace is the REAL moderator 22:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Put ace into the sysopsrevoke group for now. This will prevent wheel waring over rights. I am still thinking through other solutions but it will work for now. Tmtoulouse (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Okeydokey. Thanks.--ADtalkModerator 23:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
What is "sysoprevoke"? Just curious, since it isn't clear. steriletalk 23:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
If it's still what was discussed, it's a special group that revokes sysop rights that can only be changed by a mod.--ADtalkModerator 23:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
here. So glad I have to do my own research to figure out WTF is going on around here. steriletalk 23:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

You're an enviro-weenie, right?

What do you think of Limits to Growth? I'm trying to put together a page on the Cornucopian vs. Malthusian debate, and I found this paper challenging conventional wisdom on LtG. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's a lot of factors at work here. First of all, there's the question of what we fear in the future: are we worried about running out of space, running out of resources, or accumulation of pollution? All three fears are reasonable and distinct, yet are also answerable. What I'm about to say will bound around to a lot of disparate thoughts, occasionally touch on your real question, and may or may not be useful at all to you.
The simple idea of a lack of space is the weakest. It's dramatic and silly, presented with the idea that the world might end up like Beijing, with millions packed into dense spaces. But it's just not something to worry about - the population bomb in that sense has failed to materialize, because first-world countries have leveled off almost unanimously in their population growth to mere replacement (or lower). For whatever reason, it appears that there is a tendency towards population stabilization after a period of destructive arc. This has the danger of postulating a mandatory linearity to the evolution of civilizations that's not necessarily there, but nonetheless does seem to make sense intuitively - once choice becomes a significant factor in the number of children produced, practical reasons would seem to dictate replacement-level reproduction. So this is the weakest menace to humankind - the notion that North Dakota will end up like New Delhi.
The worry about resources is the one more specifically addressed in the first essay - the whole "run out of coal, use uranium; run out of uranium, we'll find something" perspective is a foolish one. It assumes that a series of mandatory past events necessarily implies a future past event of the same nature, and has the additional problem of just not being very accurate. Consider Iceland: when they cut down all the forests, the residents didn't start building ships out of stone. They just had to stop building ships, and suffered a disastrous drop in population in accordance with the elimination of natural resources and the benefits they had provided. There is no historical law that says that past events must be repeated, except in the most roughly poetic way. It's very possible that, just as the scarcity of rubber trees prompted artificial rubber, humans will replace scarce plastics-producing oil with an analog like ceramics. But it's also possible that humans won't, and since the consumption and scale of resource use is at an unsustainable level, we're taking a dangerous bet.
My own view on this point is that there are good ethical and aesthetic reasons for reduction in resource consumption. Those reasons mandate it, as well as the necessity for hedging our resource bet by giving us the longest possible timeline before we run out of certain resources. If we use oil at half the rate, we have double the time to come up with a replacement. Artificial imposition of scarcity is the best way to achieve the best possible outcomes, then, as it will provide the need within a capitalist society to replace that resource without actually depleting it. Strict limits on mining and drilling!
The third view is the most serious one. Once some things are out, the level of technological competence required to contain them is at such a distance that it may not be practically achieved. Heavy metals are mined out and used for things, then get into the ecosystem in aggressively high levels. They leave the system very slowly, in the sense of both physical body accumulation and the ecosystem as a whole. There's a threshold at which those metals cause catastrophic damage to the ecosystem and thence to humanity. While it's always possible to conceive of some nanite-based removal or something, if enough damage is done then mankind will be decimated to the point at which it cannot effectively counter the problem. It took dense cities of Greeks to produce an accumulation of brainpower sufficient to think up democracy and Archimedes' wheel (or enough genetic rolls of the dice for genius production, depending on your view of history); scattered hamlets couldn't have done it. If there are only a billion people worldwide thanks to one such pollution cataclysm or another, then it's possible that's not sufficient to bring enough brainpower/geniuses to bear on the problem. Permanent harm might be done.
Again, we're wagering here. It's the biggest wager mankind is taking, and it's the worst one. Sometimes local factors override the greater scheme of things - China became the global leader in rare earth mining not because it has the best resources, but just because it was the only country willing to trash itself to a sufficient degree. Now that it's tapering off because of local outrage, the problem is curving back towards acceptable levels of risk. Unfortunately, climate change has few immediate local consequences. Not sure what will happen there.
So yeah. Hope that helped or at least sparked some thoughts.--ADtalkModerator 04:47, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
ask me about the environment
Ahaha awesome. If I had a head-dong I would be able to pleasure your girlfriend twice as much.--ADtalkModerator 05:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Do what you will with my girlfriend just stay away from my wife. Aceace 05:12, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Zing! Checking out FB photos now - well done, man!--ADtalkModerator 05:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I just want to mention a few (3 or 4) things.
  1. "...there are good ethical and aesthetic reasons for reduction in resource consumption." Regardless of AGW (I am skeptical), amen. I would call that good stewardship.
  2. Oil is much too useful and versatile to simply burn it for the heat. Oh, the waste!
  3. Earth covered building, when done properly, has about the same energy and resource consumption as conventional building but has a much lower lifetime consumption (and you can feed your goats by leaving them on the roof).
  4. Decimated - sorry but this is a pet peeve of mine. It means killed off by 10% - from the Roman military practice. LowKey (talk) 05:06, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I had five years of Latin and belonged to the Junior Classical League, so I know the origin (SPQR bitches!) but modern colloquial use now uses it to mean a draconic reduction of a greater magnitude. Thus the OED: "rhetorically or loosely. To destroy or remove a large proportion of; to subject to severe loss, slaughter, or mortality."--ADtalkModerator 05:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. I just resist manglish wherever I see it. LowKey (talk) 05:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, I was talking about the legacy of LtG specifically, but I guess that helps some. From what I remember from skimming through LtG, there were loads of "if...then" scenarios with tons of hedging such that it would probably be fairly easy to pick out some correct predictions to put together a paper like the one I posted above. Also, we need an "eco-fascist AD" pic as well. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:28, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm too lazy to use paint, so Lord Monckton will call you an eco-Nazi instead. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Breeder reactors can bring in thousands of years of energy. China and India are working on them. --145.94.77.43 (talk) 06:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Lazy Bastard

Yeah, thats you. Weenie. Aceace 09:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

RW:ATIM

Would you mind weighing in or signing off on the proposed plan for procedure for the voting standards votes? Picon small.pngAcer Blue 03:18, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Hehe just looking at it now! Thanks for the heads-up, though. You're doing yeoman work on this one.--ADtalkModerator 03:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm trying to not let this whole thing slip by, because we're in a period of calm with no HCM, and even though that's when people generally take less interest in these issues, it's the best time to discuss them and try to make changes. Picon small.pngAcer Blue 03:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Brake

It wouldn't be kosher to use the vandal break on Maratrean for a while, just to, er, slow him down? steriletalk 03:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Ahahha I wish! But no, there's nothing that can be legitimately done to him. Which is kind of a shame, but he's a concern troll who's actually in earnest and who hasn't broken any rules or really even been a dick to anyone (rather instead just being generally annoying, like a cloud of mosquitoes). As long as people indulge him, he will persist.--ADtalkModerator 03:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
(Er, sorry about that. But it's fun for a bit.) steriletalk 03:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey, believe me, I know the temptation. It's like a fat, pendulous bee's nest hanging at the end of a branch. You know you shouldn't swat at it, but it's just so irresistible to take a whack at such a plump fragile target.--ADtalkModerator 03:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm the one who wrote the user box about "not feeding the troll" but "does play sometimes." steriletalk 03:37, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
It's hard to quit. He left us alone for a while, which was truly a blessed time.--ADtalkModerator 03:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
It would slow down the pace to HCM, and perhaps cut it off. Maybe just a consideration. steriletalk 14:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
That gives me a fucking great idea for a "master bin switch" that reduces everyone's edits to once every ten minutes. ADK...I'll jerk your catamite! 15:02, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
That would be both evil and awesome--if you could make it work only on talk pages, there might actually be something to it. Or better: a switch that, when engaged, would force all users to have to make X edits of Y length on Z mainspace pages before they could go back to a talk page argument. (I'm mostly kidding). B♭maj7 (talk) Shut the fuck up, Maratrean 15:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Well, good luck making something that complex, but I see what you mean and it would be great (although it would mean people spamming the crap out of pages with lorem ipsum to get back into the fight). I'm probably slightly less kidding. ADK...I'll confuse your xylene! 15:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
How about a bot to put DFTT template after certain editors edits? steriletalk 23:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Votes, again

I have revised my proposal for the procedure for the voting standards votes. Please go here to sign off and/or comment. Thanks. Blue2 (talk) 04:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

engagement

Look it man, don't even engage the fucker anymore. Him and Brx have just been a nasty sore on the genitalia that is RW. Round and round their griefing goes. Same gibberish, different.....same day. Aceace 09:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't. I only broke my vow to the extent necessary for the discussion of a potential vote. He's a concern troll in earnest, and I do not speak to him.--ADtalkModerator 09:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Excellent. Well done, Clever Trousers. Aceace 09:47, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

You know I love you baby, so I ain't gonna make a big deal out of this....

But the smart thing to do would've been to move that conversation to its own debate space and not to archive it out of human sight. Hugs and kisses... B♭maj7 (talk) Shut the fuck up, Maratrean 14:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Really? That didn't seem like the thing to do - that would just have made it continue and keep getting nastier, but even more visible. Sorry if you feel like I cut off your conversation.--ADtalkModerator 20:44, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
At least there, people who didn't want to see it could more easily ignore it than they could on TWIGO. anyway, it's in the past. B♭maj7 (talk) Shut the fuck up, Maratrean 20:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll think twice before doing such in the future. Thanks for the wise word.--ADtalkModerator 20:49, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Gayageum

25 stringed Gayageum. I only play the 12 stringed.


IS (Infinity of Sound). They're triplets.


Sorea. I believe this was their promotional video. Still lost on the B-boys, but they're cool.— Unsigned, by: Dumpling / talk / contribs

I like the first video, which is pretty amazing. I'm going to try to find her stuff.
The second one I'm a little more 'eh' on... it seems like the piano is the full spine and skeleton for that song, and I instinctively resent gimmick acts like triplets. They're good at their instruments, but I'd like to see more of their unaccompanied playing.
The third one is just silly, like anything with B-boys or K-rap-style beatboxing.--ADtalkModerator 08:28, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeaaaah~ Jung Min-Ah is pretty talented, I really like her style of playing.
IS usually does a lot of Co-work with other artists. They have few songs where it's just their instruments alone.
Like I said, still don't understand the B-boys, but Meh. Their newer songs hopefully should be better. I'm HOPING.--Dumpling (talk) 08:39, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Debate

Hey, just wanted to let you know I fully intend to continue the debate about burden of taxation & class war. I'm getting into my busy season right now, and don't want to give an off the cuff response. I know you put a lot of time & work into you question & response, I respect that, so I'd like to give a response worthy of the effort. Thanks, it's very good discussion we have going there. nobsEmpty Recycle Bin 20:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey, no worries, I know how it goes sometimes. Thanks for the thoughtful word, though!--ADtalkModerator 20:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

So putting raw sewage into a river, for example, is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as the amount is small enough for the river's ecosystem to handle it.

Riiiight.....also you should point out that if the environment dies we die. Aceace 08:26, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Bro, you seem like a nice guy even if you're palling around with the wrong crowd, so let me give you a little bit of friendly advice. Philip's right and you're wrong. He read it in his bible or CMI told him so. End of line. There is no point in trying to have a discussion with an inflexible zealot like him unless the only thing you wanted to learn was how many times you could go back to the trough without vomiting. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 15:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm just interested in getting his side so I can improve my argument to Christians. I am under no illusions about convincing.--ADtalkModerator 21:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Rating

Quick question: Did you enter a category when you rated Rationalist taboo? -- Nx / talk 06:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

No... nothing came to mind immediately to categorize it.--ADtalkModerator 06:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Ok, just making sure there isn't a bug in the gadget. -- Nx / talk 06:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Which rocks, by the way. Have I mentioned that enough? ADK...I'll overthrow your deity of personal preference! 06:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I've already been using it, too - which means it's very easy to use and hard to screw up!--ADtalkModerator 06:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Order of operations

Please excuse my dear aunt sally. () exponent * / + - Tytalk 11:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

The better solution is the one I should have done immediately: plugged it into Google and let it solve it.--ADtalkModerator 11:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
The "Bayesian" thing comes from assessing odds that the appearance of the "x 0" bit is either a trick question or straight. People more readily associate "x 0" with trick questions, so immediately leap to clicking 0 as the answer without running through the entire calculation - Google or otherwise. Though the alternative explanation (YMMV on what is most appropriate) is that operational order is poorly taught in schools. And there's a phenomena (if you could call it that) where students treat equations in an instructional manner, because of an over-reliance on using calculators. So each operation is done as if you pressed that button on a calculator in that order. This leads to hilarious results when asked to solve for x and there's an equals sign in the middle. ADK...I'll stink your fealty! 11:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Then you learn RPN and everything goes to hell in a handbasket again. Tytalk 11:42, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeah. Kill that with f**king fire. ADK...I'll overthrow your sea bass! 11:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Here are some nice easy formulas for you AD.Tytalk 11:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC) EandM.png

Vacation slides

I have mulled wine and 6 months worth of pictures in the Bahamas. Interested? Tytalk 00:44, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Mulled wine. Fall. drools......--Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
It's spring here - mostly - and mulled wine is not very good. I'm not a big wine guy in general. Give me a beer, or a G&T.--ADtalkModerator 01:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Oh, right. you're upsidedown. --Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:52, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Topsy Turvy!--Dumpling (talk) 01:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

daunting - 2 comments

1) if it would help, i could write the basic facts of Adam, and you could rewrite them so they sound pretty and make sense. 2) if you are bored, would you look at this essay Essay:Annotating an idiot and give me an idea of what sub category it could go in? I'm kinda assuming it's either economics or politics, but really not sure. --Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

1. I don't want you to have to do the work I'm just feeling too lazy to get to.
2. Economics.--ADtalkModerator 01:45, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, eco it is. It's a friday night. we should not be editing a wiki. we should be "getting some", and "rabble rousing", and ..... hum. maybe, at 40, editing *is* rabbel rousing. --Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
It's Saturday afternoon. I was out rabble-rousing last night what with the Wales v. Australia game that was on.--ADtalkModerator 01:51, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
And that would be polo, I assume? or perhaps jai alai?--Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:53, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Rugby. I wasn't into it before, but since I've been in NZ I've really gotten interested. Way better than American football.--ADtalkModerator 01:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm really not into sports, but I always wanted to know about the relationship/differences of 1) rugby, 2) "football", and 3) Aussie football. I kinda assumed aussie rules football was just rugby, but i'm now thinking maybe not?Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 01:58, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Uh, I think (not sure) that they all developed from rugby. I am not a big sports guy, though, I just watch out of a general interest in competition. I started watching World Cup Soccer in Korea for the same reason (soccer is still very boring).--ADtalkModerator 02:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I am a tennis and soccer fan now, becasue when hubby and I were first married, he was not allowed back into the country (he had to leave for his father's death and funeral, and the us said "fuck you, you get to wait till we process you" -- 2 fucking years). anyhooo, to feel like we were sharing things, we would skype while watching world cup soccer, and tennis, since both of those were national and shown live. life is strange.Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 02:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I used to despise tennis, after tennis camp when I was a kid and my mother's monopolization of the TV during Wimbledon, but I have come around to it after reading Infinite Jest. Soccer, though, is almost as boring as baseball. There simply isn't enough that happens in either game for the amount of time it requires. It's like a short story read out at the pace of a word per minute: it doesn't matter how good a story it is, if it takes too damn long to tell.--ADtalkModerator 02:10, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Billy Shakespeare

Thought this might be of interest. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 07:17, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, I'm looking forward to it. Thanks!--ADtalkModerator 07:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Skeptical Humanities is trashing it. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
I have literally not seen anyone who knows anything who thought the movie was worth two tin bits.--ADtalkModerator 21:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Thing is, isn't it a fictional account rather than some Loose Change style conspiracy shlockumentary? So why the fuss, really? Do we equally kick off about Shakespeare In Love, which was arguably also historically inaccurate. Or perhaps Apollo 17 (or even the third Transformers film, although less said about the plot of that one the better) or Independence Day or any number of films that have, at their center, a well known conspiracy theory. Okay, fair enough people are idiots and will probably mistake it for real, but is there any need for the people who are protesting over it? ADK...I'll jerk your zoot suit! 22:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it's fiction. But it's fiction promoting a contentious theory that supporters claim has been suppressed by corrupt elitists. Imagine a movie about a virtuous homeopathic advocate or a movie about a proponent of the idea that relativity is evil - the movie will lend credence to a extreme minority's conspiracy theory, and that's unfortunate. It's not the end of the world, of course, or some great tragedy. It's just the sort of thing you roll your eyes at and hope your relatives don't all ask you about it.
I didn't know people were actually protesting, although I guess that doesn't surprise me - Shakespeare inspires passion among his readers.--ADtalkModerator 22:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Good column on the topic by the guy who literally wrote the book on the matter--23:09, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the eye rolling is one thing. And certainly if people start believing it because of a film and think it's 100% fact there's a problem, but it'd be their problem, not the film's. ADK...I'll deteriorate your nexus! 14:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't Panic

I stuck your vegetarian essay into "odd" essays *just for the moment*. Not cause it's "odd' but cause i don't have anywhere else to put it. Once I see what other essays we have, it will have a good home. :-) --Pink mowse.pngGodotTue pour toujours, et tu veux vivre aussi. 15:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

ok.--ADtalkModerator 21:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Alan Caruba

Came across your great bingo card for Alan Caruba. Didn't realize he was known enough to attract another internet (anti-)fan. Does he still troll your comments? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No, and he has refused to ever approve my comments on his blog in the future. He hates me.--ADtalkModerator 05:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
How'd you come across that, by the way, if you don't mind me asking? I didn't think anyone read my blog.--ADtalkModerator 05:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Damn, you actually bothered to comment on his blog? Found it on a Caruba-related Google search. Oh yeah, he's got a million other blogs, by the way. And have you seen the excellent sites created by his "scientific" mentor? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hehe, no, I hadn't seen that. Awesome.--ADtalkModerator 05:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Falling behind on your internet crackpots? For shame! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

You're a postmodern man

I made a new page for rationalization, but I don't quite know how to incorporate this section of the rationalism article. It feels like too much of a jumble of po-mo and non-po-mo sociology (e.g., Weber is not po-mo). Are you up for the job (read: Can I dump this crap on you)? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 07:08, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Is this not just the same as moral relativism but with bigger words, or is the section BS? As it stands, it's implying that postmodernism postulates that there's absolutely no difference between someone who uses skeptical empiricism to judge the world and someone who just sits and divines that it's all gnomes in little batman outfits that are responsible for everything in the world - it seems to suggest both are perfectly "legitimate" because they're all different "rationalities". Or am I doing the thing where I've confused rationalism and rationality? Scarlet A.png...I'll seize your tuxedo! 11:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Honestly, I can't even tell -- it reads like an incoherent mash-up of a number of ideas, some of which are not even po-mo. I think I get some of what it's going for, but it's just written too poorly for me to be sure. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it's badly written, it's just a case of "does it represent post-modernism?". Or are there MANY postmodernism and non are actually correct! Scarlet A.png...I'll suck your noun! 17:38, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't mean style-wise, just that it seems to be mixing up a lot of semi-related ideas. Compare to my (admittedly simplified and brief) definition on the rationalization page. The concept itself does not originate in pomo. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:45, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry about including it. It is half-nonsense, written with an eye to being obscure. I'm going to fix it.--ADtalkModerator 20:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm tempted to just delete that section, unless you want to knock some sense into it. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Sure, go ahead. Not sure when I would get to it; I'm fairly busy at the moment and I am at RW de minimus.--ADtalkModerator 02:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

make unto thee a graven image

With horns. all graven images have horns. ask moses.

AD Graven image (with horns).jpg
WE ARE GREATLY PLEASED. OUR BLESSINGS SHALL BE UPON THEE AND THINE.--00:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

E-mail.

Maybe handy. B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 03:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--ADtalkModerator 04:25, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Books

Paladin of Shadows series by John Ringo. They're bad. Very bad. Gor if it were written in the modern day. Тytalk 22:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

A Game of Thrones, apparently it's a gateway drug Scarlet A.pngbomination 23:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
One presumes you've already burned through the Twilight series. Scarlet A.pnggnostic 23:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
I've already read and mocked Twilight, and while George R.R. Martin's series isn't great, it's also not near bad enough to make me hate it.--ADtalkModerator 23:50, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
How can you read this much? I would really like to know. It's going to take me at least three months to get through G.E.B. Scarlet A.pngmoral 00:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
I read a lot, is all. My reading list.--ADtalkModerator 00:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Goreans

So were they involved in a cult or "independent practitioners"? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 07:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

The girl I knew was independent, just talking to other Goreans over the net, like 99% of them.--ADtalkModerator 07:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
I've been trying to figure out how much of them are actually serious about the "philosophy." I know some dommes use the "female supremacy" label as an indication of the type of role-play they do but they don't actually subscribe to the bullshit peddled by actual female supremacists. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 08:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

in vitro meat

Thought you might find this interesting. I'm a vegetarian now so I find this quite appealing. Sam Tally-ho! 21:53, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, should be interesting. A lot of people have asked about this, so maybe within ten years it will be a real possibility.--ADtalkModerator 22:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
It was on QI a while ago as "the world's most expensive burger". It'll be cool if it works, and even betterif they can get them to eat sewage. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 22:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Mod business

RationalWiki:All things in moderation#MC's Wiki and Human -- Nx / talk 05:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Uncle Siggy

My sources tell me that Freud is still popular in the English departments. Are they still making students apply pseudoscience to literature? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really pseudoscience. Freud has his uses in discussing literature because he encapsulated some of the ways people think and manifest their inner thoughts, and that's a great of how literature is written. Personally, I find Jung more useful, but Freud has his place, too, I suppose. Let's just say I acknowledge him but do not teach him but for ten minutes.--ADtalkModerator 04:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Jung? As in the fellow who thought the rise of Nazism was Odin waking up from a nap? Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 04:58, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
[1]--ADtalkModerator 05:04, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
How about Lacan? PintOfStout Talk Good people drink good beer. 05:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I am not very familiar with him, sorry.--ADtalkModerator 05:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
(ec) The psychological sciences have spent decades distancing themselves from Freud. I can see the value in his ideas that the unconscious makes up most of the inner workings of the mind (and is actually validated my modern psychology) and that people don't act on "rational" motivations (also validated by modern psychology and responsible for spawning one of history's greatest propagandists, but done before), but I don't see why anyone would still bother using the specifics of said ideas, e.g., "id-ego-superego." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Id, ego, and superego are useful ways to describe something. In large part, actually, Freud's usefulness directly relates to how unscientific he was. He used labels and described arrangements that seemed convenient and sensible to him, and was genius enough to seize upon some pretty brilliant things. His later incestual theories are less useful, but things like the subconscious and tripartite mind are great.--ADtalkModerator 05:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that most of today's literary analysis says more about the person doing the analyzing than the text being analyzed, particularly in the schools-of-thought where work progresses from an ideological basis. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 08:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Freudian analysis, like other types of literary analysis, seems to lend itself well to conspiracy theory-style thinking, though. One of the most easily abused is the concept of denial, because if you have a problem, then that's your problem, and if you don't have one, you're obviously just in denial! And that's how we got the shitstorm that was the Satanic Panic and "the memory wars." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:50, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

If you are so offended

My edits clearly offend you. OK, so where is your proof that neo-Nazis are "far right"? Don't tell me it is "conservative" to be racist because it's not. Neo-Nazis and liberals are the same people (talk) 08:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Racism is "conservative" in that it is part of many traditional American views of society, especially in the South. Nazism, on the other hand, is not conservative, falling further to the right than conservatism on the one-dimensional political spectrum. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 08:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't really like the dichotomy of conservative and liberal, which tends to obscure far more often than it illuminates. But okay.
The modern neo-Nazi movement is the inheritor of several traditions. In America, this tradition is predominantly based on old Confederate culture, whereas in the rest of the world (and still in America to a lesser extent) the glorification of the Aryan or other "white races" is part of an old tradition of racism mixed up with real Nazism. In both cases, these traditions are correlated by deeply conservative beliefs on other political issues. Neo-Nazis overwhelmingly support capital punishment, for example, and disdain progressive taxation or social safety nets. This is not to say that all conservatives are neo-Nazis, but almost all neo-Nazis are conservative in outlook on many issues.--ADtalkModerator 08:48, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I suppose it would not be apropos to mention here that the second KKK were big supporters of progressive/populist economic policies, including public education? Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 08:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
That's pretty thin ice. It's true that some of their policies were vaguely similar to progressive policies, but it's also true that the GOP was touting a health care mandate as a good idea ten years ago and now they're calling it socialism. That doesn't make the GOP liberal then; the national conversation was just different. Same thing with the KKK.
Much of the second Klan's appeal can be credited to its militant advocacy of white supremacy, anti-Catholicism, anti-Semitism, and immigration restriction, but the organization also attracted the support of many middle-class Americans by advocating improved law enforcement, honest government, better public schools, and traditional family life.[2]--ADtalkModerator 09:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I said progressivism and populism, not liberalism. Big difference. Although their social views were of the conservative/romantic bent, their support of temperance and public schools were not in line with the conservatism of the time. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 09:22, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Neo-Nazis are SOCIALIST and are only disdainful of social safety nets because of the association with non-whites. In an all white society they would likely see nothing wrong with that. The fact is most are strong anti-capitalists, and most support the Muslims and hate Israel, just like the leftists. Maybe they overwhelmingly support capital punishment, but they also overwhelmingly support euthanasia, cloning and "eugenics abortions", to advance the "Aryan race". They also support using the Sin of polygamy to increase the white birthrate. Many are also in favor of drug legalization, and many are drug addicts or criminals themselves. They have generally permissive sexual mores. And last but not least, a hugely disproportionate number of them are Pagans (like Odinists for instance) and Atheists, and many neo-Nazi groups are openly ANTI-CHRISTIAN!!! Whereas conservatives are almost all Christian or Jewish, and almost none are pagan or atheist. Proud Conservative Evangelical (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I forgot to mention, Nazis and neo-Nazis are HUGE supporters of environmentalism and animal rights. Hitler also banned guns. Proud Conservative Evangelical (talk) 09:16, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hitler also banned trade unions, too. :D --ZooGuard (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I think what we are seeing here is the association fallacy: "liberals and neo-Nazis have some vaguely similar policies; therefore there are no differences between them." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 09:22, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
We are seeing also an example of Schlafly logic: Group X are not "conservatives", therefore they are "liberals". False dichotomy and all that...--ZooGuard (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
B→A; C→A; A=A; B≠C --ʤɱ constructivist 10:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Nominated

To continue as Moderator. Please accept/decline/comment here. Cheers. WẽãšẽĩõĩďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 23:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--ADtalkModerator 00:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Nominated again

For this--"Shut up, Brx." 00:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know :)--ADtalkModerator 07:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Congrats.

Keep up the good work. PintOfStout Talk BRONIES! 23:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I look forward to working with you AD. AceAce For Mod! 23:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Indeed verily sirrah--ADtalkModerator 20:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow

Dude, that was really a very good re-write! Kudoes!  :-) --Bertrc (talk) 20:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad it's agreeable to you! I think that the article is definitely improved, and that you were right to remove a lot of the stuff you did.--ADtalkModerator 23:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

FWIW

If a new user were to appear and begin slagging of Ireland non-stop and for no reason, injecting it into every conversation and targeting a specific user we'd pretty quickly get sick of it and the user would be sanctioned in some form. Because it's Rob on me it is taken differently but in my hypothetical situation above we know what the result would be, just sayin'...AceModerator 06:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

That's probably true. There'd be a discussion and a vote.--ADtalkModerator 10:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeah man, I'll tell you now there'd be no fucking increase of information. AceModerator 10:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I hear ya Ace. There's not much we can do about it though. I mean if we value freedom of expression on this site we need to value it even for people like Rob. --DamoHi 10:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure Heidelberg Kid appreciates the irony of 'freedom of expression'. I'll remind everybody of that next time they jump down his throat. You have a right to free speech - with rights come responsiblities. PsyGremlinZungumza! 10:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Well perhaps. I am not familiar with the Heidelberg Kid situation except I know that he seems a bit of an ass. But do you really want to say to Rob that he can't insult NZ? That he can't make ridiculous remarks about us being a third world nation etc etc. I think that in a website like this (though not within general society perhaps) there is truth in Mill's idea that the best way to discover the truth is by airing all the views and the ideas that are valid will rise to the top. It's not like anyone actually believes anything Rob is saying, and as I have said to him on a number of occasions, every post he makes he looks more and more like a jackass. The more he goes on the less credibility he has on other issues where he might have more of a serious point to make. Its his loss not ours. DamoHi 11:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Rob can say whatever the fuck he likes, as long as he's willing to face the responsibility for his right to say whatever the fuck he likes. However, when he disrupts threads, simply to go "Me! Me! Me!" likes he's been doing with the NZ thing, then he's out of line. And if it was a BoN, or a newbie doing it, then that behaviour - jumping in and slagging off an editor - would not be tolerated by the mob. So there's no need for us to tolerate it in another CP man-child. --PsyGremlinRunāt! 12:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
FWIW, let me point out the obvious: Ace is not NZ (unless he's deluded or has a big opinion of himself), and secondly, nowehere did I insult Ace and/or New Zealand. nobsModerated 13:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Except whenyou did. It wouldnt be so bad if they werent off topic or werent being hidden as some attempt at "american humor!" --il'Dictator Mikal (talk) 13:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
To be honest, I don't give a shit if Rob stays or is blocked. That's why I haven't even commented on the discussion in the Coop - because it does not matter one whit to me. Psy thinks his behavior is outrageous and he deserves to be blocked, fine. Damo thinks all views deserve to be aired and Rob can only make an ass of himself, fine. I don't care. I just didn't want a precedent set where one editor was able to unilaterally decide that someone else was trolling and deserved to be blocked for a day.--ADtalkModerator 20:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Left behind

I've started reading your reviews and it is hilarious! TyAnnoy 02:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

hes done reviews of them?--il'Dictator Mikal (talk) 02:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Scroll down to the "My works" section of his userpage. TyAnnoy 02:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad you like them :)--ADtalkModerator 04:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
They look more practical than the slacktivists go through.--il'Dictator Mikal (talk) 05:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
It's pretty hardcore dedication to the cause to read through them all like that. Scarlet A.pngtheist 15:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm hardcore like that. Although really I enjoyed it - they are magnificently terrible books.--ADtalkModerator 21:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
The funniest review was the last one IMHO, I had to screen again. You should review The Eye of Argon. TyAnnoy 21:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll check it out.--ADtalkModerator 22:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I think it's more than you listened to parts of the audio book that's most impressive. Scarlet A.pngmoral 22:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I appear to have messed up some of the clips, though. I'll have to fix those.
I was really anticipating this last book for a long time, so I was in top form when I got to it. But it exceeded even my best hopes. The villains in the book, the Other Light, are probably the most heroic characters you can ever find. Jesus reigns as an omnipotent racist dictator, granting eternal life to his followers and destroying with thunderbolts those who speak ill of him. Satan has been crushed, and it is almost a certainty that he will be crushed again. Every aspect of life is controlled by the enemy and there is no hope. Yet this brave band of young people, who alone in the world are still doomed to death and eternal pain, nonetheless strike out in pursuit of what's right. It's downright stirring.--ADtalkModerator 22:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Seems like the series left Jedeo-Christian mythology behind a while back and just started making shit up. Scarlet A.pngsshole 01:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
You didn't do anything wrong. You were born wrong, and you need Jesus to graciously forgive you for having the audacity to be born. Now smile. SMILE, DAMNIT!

Mind if I just quote this bit everywhere? Scarlet A.pngd hominem 10:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hehe, knock yourself out. :)--ADtalkModerator 10:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

A jumpstart

I jumpstarted the discussion at Debate:Class_Warfare_-_perfect_response#The_fallacy_of_the_Buffet_Rule. Sorry for the long delay. nobsModerated 21:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

As a New Zealand resident...

You might enjoy this little opinion about the Crafar Farm fiasco. AceModerator 23:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I wish I knew more about NZ politics, really.--ADtalkModerator 23:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support