RationalWiki:Saloon bar

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Saloon bar
WIGO Bar colour.png

This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
Friends.gif For previous conversations see the automagic barchives. Icon beer yellow.gif

What is going on?

The Bar
(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

  1. Long term goals (00:11, 26 May 2017)
  2. Geocentrism (16:43, 25 May 2017)
  3. Can we get improved link previews, like wikipedia? (21:36, 24 May 2017)
  4. Should public libraries contain anti-scientific books? (19:57, 24 May 2017)
  5. If I CALL my OPPONENTS smug I'm automatically RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!! (15:49, 18 May 2017)
  6. Site name should be changed to Feminist Wiki (20:56, 13 May 2017)
To do list


[edit] What would happen

if Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un swap places?

Any other 'bizarre job-swaps'? (talk) 15:46, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

That would confuse the fuck out of Trump. He'd be thinking, Something's different today, I'm sure of it ... (talk) 19:06, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Well Kim's already got a wall. BicyclewheelToxic mowse.gif 14:42, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
What if Hillary and Melania swapped places? Hillary would be running the country while Democrats would be looking for a way to amend the Constitution so Melania can run. nobs 03:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
And Jeremy Corbin gets parachuted into the FBI vacancy. (talk) 22:56, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Donald Trump would probably enjoy running a personality cult. Church of the Rabid Zombie Squirrels
Who could Putin be swapped with? The Area 51 Rebuttal Group letter writing dogsbody? (talk) 21:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
I am pretty sure Steve Bannon is just Putin in a Klansmen outfit. Probuscus (talk) 09:31, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] How do you deal with emotional eating?

I have a problem with emotional eating, I was talking with my mom today and I mentioned the reason I probably emotionally eat is to hide my personal insecurities. Any tips? First Church of the Rabid Zombie Squirrels

This is one of those CBT things. Find the mental pattern you don't like, find a step in that thought process to insert a replacement action, develop new, healthier habit. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Alternatively, beef tips aren't bad tips. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
It may also be the case that the actual eating is (in a relative sense) less of a problem compared to what you're eating. Do you happen to love apples? If so, you're in luck. They're cheap and plentiful, often sweet, take some time to chow down, offer some chewing resistance (helps tire out your jaws), and best of all — even better than just 'being healthy' (in this context) — they contain very little, aside from fibre and water. Especially the fibre part means you'll fill up rather quick on them. Not "satiety-full", but "better able to override a general eating impulse-full". Note also that I don't suggest just eating apples all the time. The primary solution here lies closer to what Ikanreed talks about above — i.e., seeing a psychiatrist and discussing CBT and/or medication — but what IS true is that adding atleast one sweet apple (though preferably two or more) as the first "dish" when comfort eating, and/or interspersing apples throughout your "meal" (regardless of if your eating habits are more "binge" or "constant snacking") will help you fill up a lot faster, for cheap, adding water and dietary fibre, without actually upping your energy intake all that much. This also works as part of a general weight loss strategy, btw — you'll find it surprisingly difficult to slay your typical size portion or steak if you've stuffed down an apple or two just prior to sitting down for dinner. Combining this with using smaller plates (onto which you still pile what looks like your ordinary portion size) can make a big difference over time. In short; if the eating is of the "nervous" variety, a professional (CBT/medication) should be your first stop. If it's more of the "munchies" variety, adding apples might be sufficient. Though, consider adding apples in both scenarios (and remember, always prior to ingesting the regular high-energy food!). "How do you like dem apples?" Hope this helps! All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 10:52, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
hit the gym. it'll improve your mood and self image, and you can eat whatever you like. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
...Ideally... But assuming limited time, energy, budget and/or self-control — better start with a visit to your psychiatrist's office. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I tried the psychiatrist office but I only see the nurse practitioner as the doctor works mostly at the hospital, the nurse really did not know.--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 16:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Emotional eating is not an uncommon complaint, so they should really be able to offer you more than just a shrug. Couldn't you try to book a meeting with an actual doctor (not a nurse) via phone? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 15:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Rationalwiki barn stars

If Rationalwiki developed a system of barn stars what would they be for? And should there be 'negative barn stars' (for those who really deserve them)? (talk) 21:54, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, I imagine that they'd be for really, really well done edits or quality comments. As for implementing the system? You'd have to ask someone else about whether or not it's a good idea. I suggest talking to the good Reverend. And the negative ones? Bad editors tend to have a reputation, so maybe it wouldn't necessary. Vive Liberté! 22:00, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
The Thumb's Up Barn Star for having a good line in put downs, the Melting clocks for 'stopped clock syndrome' (to convey what is meant), a child's windmill toy for those who refuse to budge from an untenable viewpoint, the Monty Python foot for ... (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Goat Barnstar.png

RationalWiki has a barn star. I hereby nominate the good Reverend for it. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

If RW can avoid WP's unnecessary glorified sticker "barnstar" clutter, that'd be great. 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 06:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Exception for the goat barnstar, obviously. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 06:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
We don't have barnstars, we have brainstars. As of me writing this there's only one image in this category though. Christopher (talk) 13:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
An opportunity for artistic RW-ians? (talk) 14:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Actually, we have an entire category of Barnstar award templates. I was awarded the Beerstar five years ago. I remember being given the Half-stale cookie as well. I can't see it on my talk page now, though. Anyway, you don't have to nominate a user for a Barnstar. You just give it to him or her by leaving a talk page message. It might be nice to spread a bit more love by giving them out more often. Spud (talk) 07:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
How does the barnstar system work ? Who decides to give, for exemple a beerstar to someone ? Diacelium (talk) 12:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
From reading through long gone users' talk pages, you just make a new section titled "a barnstar for you" or "here's a half eaten cookie" and put the template there. It appears to have fallen out of use. Christopher (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
*excited anticipation* oh boy oh boy Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Will RBP's make reference to the relevant tartan? (And any connection to the person of the same name 'the pet webspider' finds?) (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
There should be more acknowledgement of 'reasons for praise' for activity on RW. (talk) 18:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] ITT: nobs guesses wildly speculates about Assange

What do you think? An effort to lure him out so they can whack him?nobs 16:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

So far he seems to be too smart for that. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 18:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Could be trying to give Ecuador an excuse to unload their freeloader. Supposedly, he's still wanted on a minor charge in the UK. Bongolian (talk) 18:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
assange was never at risk of deportation, assassination or extraordinary rendition. he was and is too high profile for that shit. hes not even wanted in the us, despite a lot of talk. it was all paranoia and ego. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Question: if he had calmly gone to trial in Sweden and 'got some clever legal and other people to do negotiations' and done some plea bargaining etc - would he still be in prison? (talk) 21:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
deportation to the US i mean. Definitely would have gone to sweden. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
The conspiracy theories have begun...Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 22:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
What's sad, even tho he's free to walk out the gate, there still is no place to go. Except perhaps Moscow. nobs 01:55, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Gotdagnit

It's a temporary suspension because they're unable to reach him, y'all. If it doesn't get brought back up, it'll be because he managed to evade long enough to pass limitations and whatnot. Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyarnyar~) 20:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

He's been there 5 years. Then, in the past 6 mos we learn Hillary wants him dead, and Pence & Pompeo want to see him in and orange suit for the rest of his life, which is the same thing. Then suddenly like magic, ok, you can come out now (after his two lawyers familiar with the case meet an untimely demise). nobs 04:04, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Poll- what words come to mind when you hear the name, "Trump"

Here is some- Plague, virus, infection, festering wound, cancer, rat, monster, jack ass, shit head, snake oil salesman. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Yakety Sax (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Goodpost.gif Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
There's actually a pro Trump video featuring Yakety Sax as a music bed. Leuders (talk) 21:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
'The last...' (talk) 21:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Me thinks there's an impeachment in the horizon --Panzerfaust (talk) 21:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Ultimate Goat!!!--S.H. DeLong (talk) 03:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Apotheosis of American culture. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 18:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Remembering that he was in the WWE. 2d4chanfag (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Bleh!-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 04:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Word Wildlife Executive?
Welterweight Wrestling Exhibitionist?
Wonky Worldview Expressionist?
Even the captcha joined in - suggesting 'underpants' (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] A good PragerU video?

This one doesn't seem disagreeable at all. Lord Aeonian (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't discount them entirely. This video about the causes of the Civil War gets straight to the point. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 01:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
The common thread between those two good videos is that they seem to feature people who know what the fuck they're talking about. It does sort of handwave the very real threat of anti-Muslim hate crimes as unimportant, it's largely a good video. They even tapped Ayaan Hirsi Ali for another video on Islam which is surprisingly good, at least in the sense that it's not hopelessly warped in favor of a single worldview. Hentropy (talk) 07:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm just glad to see we're doing our best to combat splittingWikipedia's W.svg. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 10:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
It just has the high cost of having 5 Prager video recommends in every video I watch now. Hentropy (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Moar stupidity incoming

I've found here a pair of evangelical radio stations, that come with the usual BS of them -most of it "canned" from US churches- (the gems I remember include negating evolution, Paul's misoginy, the second coming as well as the BS that appears in the Book of Revelation being near, complaining about nobody talking about Hell just about Heaven, NWO BS, and of course begging for monies). It seems all that stupidity is coming here, even if thank Gods it seems nobody gives a fuck about them, like the JW.

It's still worrying their desire of evangelizing everyone here. --Panzerfaust (talk) 12:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

There are several genres of religious radio active in these parts today. The newest format, and the one that seems to be gaining in popularity, is Christian pop music, branded with names like "K-Love" and "Positive Hits." These stations play bland, watered down, heartless soft rock music. Then there is christian talk, mostly preaching and/or right wing politics, as exemplified by the types of radio formats used by Salem Radio Network. Old croaked Harold Camping's network, Family Radio, is still around with nonstop church music and bible readings. The Catholics have their EWTN network with stations all over the place, too. The worst of all (and these are all pretty bad) is American Family Radio, which is a glorified regressive right wing hate factory propped up by pious beliefs. Various church organizations have abused loopholes in government regulations and have established large networks of low powered FM transmitters. And this is just what's found on the medium wave (AM) and FM bands here on the east coast of the USA. Shortwave radio originating from the US is dominated by religious programming, including some of the most insane fringe programming.
Broadcast band radio is slowly dying, killed by the internet. However it's still a fertile ground for the Christian evangelicals.
Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Right now, terrestrial radio as a whole is experiencing what AM radio went through in the '50s and '60s with the rise of both FM radio and television. Back then, the pop music moved to FM and the dramas and comedies moved to TV, leaving AM radio with just a) oldies aimed at middle-aged-and-up listeners who were still loyal to their old stations, b) news, talk, sports, public radio, and emergency services where the long reach of AM signals was more important than sound quality, and c) religious stations. Now, with the rise of smartphones, the once-captive markets of commuters and at-work listeners now have alternatives to the radio, so pop music is migrating to streaming services. It's hit modern rock especially hard. Rock music led the way in moving to the internet with the MySpace-driven emo boom in the 2000s, such that it was the first to start dying on terrestrial radio, with most modern rock stations moving to an "active rock" format that incorporates a lot of classic rock to pull in older listeners. I noticed it happening in New York as early as 2006. In the other direction, the changes in radio are also part of the reason why country music is so big right now. In 2017, the Venn diagram between country fans and people who prefer radio over streaming contains a lot of overlap — they're both older, more rural demographics who may not have, or even want, smartphones capable of hassle-free streaming. Radio broadcasters are flocking to them, and a number of non-country artists, from Jon Bon Jovi to Kid Rock to Miley Cyrus, have started moving in a more country direction in order to shore up a fanbase that they know will spend money on CDs. (There was a great bit in Grand Theft Auto V where a parody of Paula Deen has a famous pop star as a guest on her show. Said pop star just switched to making country music and taking on a Southern accent and a right-wing culture warrior persona, and she basically admits that she did it as a sellout move to pander to the one demographic that "doesn't have a clue what downloading is.")
Looking at my local radio stations, I see that South Florida is well along this path. Up in West Palm Beach, you've got an oldies pop standards station and a K-Love affiliate occupying prime real estate at the center of the FM dial. Ten years from now, Top 40 pop music and hip-hop are likely going to have followed modern rock music onto the internet, with many stations in those formats moving to adult contemporary, urban contemporary, or oldies in order to keep going. You'll also see a lot more sports, news/talk, and of course, religious stations on FM radio. I've been noticing ESPN Radio colonizing the FM wavelength in a few cities over the last few years, and it doesn't look like it's slowing down. KevinR1990 (talk) 17:33, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
What do I think? Listening to gospel music is a great way of practicing your beliefs without actually thinking about what it entails. It keeps up with the times to make sure it doesn't try to stand out. Makes the religious feel modern, feel up to date. It maintains normalcy in the most religious body of power in the world. It makes them feel like they are progressing, when in reality they are not. When you listen to music played in the style of blues and country, you don't get that.
Being a religious person person myself. One who enjoyed and delved into the realms of hard rock to extreme metal. My piers called me a redneck for a reason. You know. I only go here for one reason, and that's because I came across a statement that described religious people as degenerate pieces of garbage. You know, like me. Every time I think about those statements. I wouldn't be bothered to listen to music. Sometimes not for weeks, just knowing people hated you. I've become extremely hostile towards my friends because of it.
I guess I really am a religious tool. Breadbasketbomb (talk) 09:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
The stations I mention are harmless compared to those you mention and do not emit gospel music, or at least not what you in US understand as that. All the music broadcasted there is Christian pop or at best rock (no metal). As for the content, most is harmless -just talking and talking about Bible passages and Christ, asking a minister to pray for someone or something...-. What concerns me are those bits of NWO -Catholic Church included-, negation of Evolution, talking about the Revelation events going to happen, or even already happening and similar gems of BS. Those things are not seen the same way when you've them closer, even if nobody gives a fuck about them, than when they're at thousands of kilometers away.
Another issue are people preaching, even if fortunately Chick tracts have not arrived here (yet). Not those as JW or others, who are on transited places giving brochures -and just targetting immigrants, by the way-, or those who simply are there singing or whatever but those who assault you with a Bible or brochures of their churches for... you know, and even if you're not interested and give them your arguments keep harassing you (I've had issues with that kind of people). Some time ago, a woman who likes to preach in the subway transversing the entire train several times got into a discussion with someone who disliked her ideas. It ended with her being thrown out of the train as she began to say (in loud voice?) said man was a sinner, or at least that's what I was told.
Long history short, if I'm interested in what you've to offer I'll go wherever is. Otherwise, whizz off. --Panzerfaust (talk) 13:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
A reminder for people to check their homonyms - piers and peers.
As for the 'stand and deliver (message deliverers)' - 'by their deeds shall you know them' and 'talk is cheap' (and the person who picks up a bit of rubbish and puts it in the bin has contributed more to the world). (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] The Grauniad is starting to become a waste of time...

...or at least this video on the First Lady seemingly refusing to hold Drumpf's hand is by itself a waste of 13 seconds. Is this news site becoming so reactionary to everything Trump does it risks becoming a gossip magazine? A conspiracy site? Good thing the site didn't ask questions as to why Melania didn't notice him holding out his hand. —Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 22:32, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

All the half decent British newspapers are shriveling up, and their websites are becoming more clickbaity. It looks like soon only the crap like the Express and Sun will remain. (talk) 15:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
As we speak news like Fox and the Sun are dying off and being replaced with Breibart. So it's probably even worse than that. —Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 02:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Basically the sane newspapers are drifting towards neoliberalism, and the ones that are already so (CNN, NBC) are Democrat apologists. —Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 02:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] hawt R nawt

https://u.nya.is/ummkji.png https://u.nya.is/hmdeuf.png https://u.nya.is/zvhpkz.png https://u.nya.is/qrwpll.png https://u.nya.is/uwkvea.png https://u.nya.is/losdln.png

this user possesses genuine curiosity and enquires as to the opinion of others regarding such manner of racy advertisement clickbaits and the encounter rate of these ads on the end of the others.FAMAS (Talk) (Contribs) [[1]] [[2]] 14:35, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Who cares? Christopher (talk) 15:19, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
"... encounter rate of these ads on the end of the others." What? (talk) 15:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
FAMAS isn't particularly easy to understand, I think "encounter rate of these ads on the end of others" means how many people click on these ads? I have no idea. Christopher (talk) 15:28, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I think he means 'how often do other people see ads like these?' FAMAS, you know that Google gives you ads based on browsing history, right.. Face me, swab! 18:33, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Why are you so obsessed with clickbait? you've posted about it before and you were very adamant that your post stayed. Christopher (talk) 15:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Possibly 66 (anyone wish to contort the (James) 1 or 6 into the reference?) (talk) 16:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
>Not uesing add blocker in 2017 2d4chanfag (talk) 02:50, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Famas: Use Adblock, you'll almost never see ads like this again. Ads like this suck, they're just "sex sells" in pixel form. At least the "MIRACLE DIET" or "DOCTORS HATE THIS" ads have some funky images. 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 03:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Famas ...aand that's enough serial link pastes out of "that user" for quite a while, thanks. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 05:03, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

id rather see an ad or two if it means getting content gratis. i am more concerned when ads tailored to what google discovered from reading your emails.AMassiveGay (talk) 05:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Article on online media manipulation and disinformation

Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online by Alice Marwick and Rebecca Lewis. It's a dive into attention-hacking efforts, with a particular focus on far-right radicalization. Understanding why their methods work might help us refute them more efficiently. It's also a decent read. Here's the executive summary:

*Internet subcultures take advantage of the current media ecosystem to manipulate news frames, set agendas, and propagate ideas.
  • Far-right groups have developed techniques of “attention hacking” to increase the visibility of their ideas through the strategic use of social media, memes, and bots—as well as by targeting journalists, bloggers, and influencers to help spread content.
  • The media’s dependence on social media, analytics and metrics, sensationalism, novelty over newsworthiness, and clickbait makes them vulnerable to such media manipulation.
  • While trolls, white nationalists, men’s rights activists, gamergaters, the “altright,” and conspiracy theorists may diverge deeply in their beliefs, they share tactics and converge on common issues.
  • The far-right exploits young men’s rebellion and dislike of “political correctness” to spread white supremacist thought, Islamophobia, and misogyny through irony and knowledge of internet culture.
  • Media manipulation may contribute to decreased trust of mainstream media, increased misinformation, and further radicalization.

FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 03:42, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. Reminiscient of the vogue media manipulation strategy known as trading up the chainWikipedia's W.svg, no? And actually — at this point, we should probably be writing RW its very own article on media manipulationWikipedia's W.svg. Thoughts? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 05:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Back when leftists were still able to score political successes, they freely used comedy and troll tactics. Remember Abbie Hoffman? Roel van Duijn? Lenny Bruce, even? The current left have made themselves quite unattractive by acting like a pearl-clutching establishment smug in their self-anointed moral superiority. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 17:31, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Speaking of left-wing trolls, did you miss this?[3] Bongolian (talk) 20:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
@Smerdis ...so that came off sounding a tad defensive, don't you think? All I was saying was just; "Hi Ratwikians! We should have an article on all sorts of media manipulation, because that stuff would be good to learn about, right?". Aside from that — I don't even speak partisan, so... I'm really just left nodding and smiling in confusion. (e.g "Back when leftists were still ableWikipedia's W.svg..."? *nods and smiles confusedly*) Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, maybe. I'm more reacting to the content of the PDF in question. It made a number of good points, but I thought it undermined itself somewhat by referring to 'male privilege' and similar constructs as self-evident truths, and other evidence of Not Getting It. And what's most vexing is that those bits of the text appear in the middle of passages that seem to accept that this troll culture consists mostly of very marginalized people, for whom the promise of 'male privilege' is about as bankable as junk mail from Publisher's Clearing House. It may well be a text meant for the edification of believers rather than evangelism, but the effect is rather like having your own behavior analyzed in terms of original sin, which would likely annoy you as a rhetorical turn. Contemporary identitarian leftism seems to produce more theologians than evangelists, and more would-be inquisitors than either; but this may be true of all faiths at all periods. What is the color of the pill to take that makes you a believer in things like 'male privilege'? - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 02:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Unrelatedly

A substantially less venerable forum has also mentioned us. I thought "kizzmybutt", "Snarelure", "Gigastrength", and "King_Martha" had somewhat decent thoughts. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 03:42, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't click on that link if I were you, it sent me to some scam website saying I had viruses. Christopher (talk) 14:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Seems fine to me. (I've Adblock, if that matters.) Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 15:56, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
It's fine now, just went on it again. Christopher (talk) 16:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Not too sure myself. It is a 13 months old site hosted in the USA to a c/- spanish address, a gmail account, and in the name of a gentleman who also owns a few dozen other addresses, which all seem to be mainly scrapes of 4chan hosted in various countries with the same names/address/email/phone. There's a few orange flags on his LinkedIn account, but they might be translation ambiguities.
Thrice in 7-8 different pages on his sites => giving focus to the page tried to run an instance of PHP mCrypt - a buggy, depreciated encryption command which hasn't been updated since 2007 and has been declared abandonware. Considering the background on his LinkedIn that just shouldn't be something any page of his should be doing.
I've intentionally not cited sources to err on the side of caution with regards to the obvious, but yeah this is a site I'm going to avoid. Daev (talk) 17:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I was proud to see that the many posts recommending RW came not from people who were fanatically promoting RW as flawless — but rather, from people who were themselves psychologically capable of taking the good with the bad and integrating it all into a cohesive, nuanced and generally fair account (read: people who were not overcome with splittingWikipedia's W.svg).
Furthermore, I enjoyed observing how the vast majority of the anti-RW commenters — triggered gators/manospherians/kekistanians/woomeisters aside — came from people who obviously had not read the two most important articles for getting a clue about what RW is even about.
All in all — every instance of frank opposition to RW came from various incompetents, while none of our supporters came across as mouth-frothing zealots even in recommending our site. In other words: win-win. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 05:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools