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.
Beer.gif For previous conversations see the automagic barchives. Drinks drunk.gif

What is going on?

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

  1. Name one political viewpoint you can compromise with and one you can't (13:10, 7 Jul 2015)
  2. Suggestion I have for articles on schools (19:55, 6 Jul 2015)
  3. RationalWiki Community Status (20:42, 3 Jul 2015)
  4. Tom Murphy's Physics article on why we will never go to space, is he right? (16:17, 2 Jul 2015)
  5. Thinking about trying my hand at writing some political essays for us (10:03, 2 Jul 2015)
  6. ISIS- Parasite or Cancer (01:35, 2 Jul 2015)
To do list


[edit] Obligatory thread for the SCOTUS LGBT marriage decision.

Just want to say this: seeing the president of my college's gaming club get married to her girlfriend of 5 years is hella satisfying. Master Necromancer(fear me!) 22:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Everyone on my Twitter is excited and full of joy except Brianna Wu who can't stop going "but what about trans people!" man, can't gay and lesbians just have this one day to be happy without someone making it all an oppression olympics competition? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 22:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I actually unfollowed Wu over that (and also over the "Rev60 Criticism Bingo). |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Star of David.png Don't they call people like you stalkers? 23:08, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
What pisses me off about it is the whole "What about MEEEEEEE? ME! ME! ME!! vibe that is coming off of her. She got to marry, but instead of being happy for people not allowed to because of discrimination, she tries to make it all about her again, the privileged snot.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 23:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I always think it's a bit weird that she's so hot in support of trans* rights, but for some reason won't herself speak up about being transgender. It's like she's ashamed it or something, it sits very weirdly with being an activist. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Guys, a major LGBT hurdle has just been overcome; is this really an appropriate time to be calling trans activists attention whores, shame them for not being as happy as we determine they should be and shame the ones that don't (openly) identify as trans (maybe because they aren't or maybe because that would put a big (extra) strain on their lives)? (talk) 00:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
When someone is openly trying to be an attention-whore, there is no shame in calling them out.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
She only really said one thing that wasn't "come on, we can't stop here!". Of course, said thing was pretty ehhh, but... Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 00:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Reminding people that there are still battles left to be won is attention-whore-ism? Eh, if that's how you want to construe it... And I'd say there is shame in it if the attention-whore-ism aspect (assuming there is one) is largely irrelevant and your focus on it deflects attention away from the important issues. That's pretty much what Gators do when they label supporters of social justice "SJWs". (talk) 00:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, looks like it's time to unfollow John Oliver for being an attention whore. I mean, Brianna Wu only brought it up on Twitter. John Oliver brought it up on TV, in a show with his name on it. -Psycho Gecko, 01:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Unless she deleted a lot of tweets, I'm not seeing what she said that was so horrible; not even whatever it is that NS finds objectionable. <3 CSapphire bullets of pure love 02:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Of the three that mention transgender stuff in relation to the ruling, they say: "In 2005, if you said we'd have universal health care and gay marriage, I wouldn't have believed you. Next train stop: TRANSGENDER RIGHTS." and "While #MarriageEquality deserves celebrating, @cathexing has thoughts on what transgender people face. It's not over" and "With all respect to LGB people, historically they've been lukewarm ally at best for transgender people. They've always put themselves first." The last one is a bit harsh (if somewhat true from what I've heard) so I can see why it'd rub people the wrong way, especially on the day in question. I guess I'm not enough of a Twitter person to unfollow someone over that, nor do I see how it's all that attention whorish. Then again, I don't follow her in the first place. User:PsychoGecko 3:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I have been collecting Freeper quotes. This is a day of many delicious tears.
I will also be monitoring the situation with Good Ol' Roy Moore over thar in the neighboring state of Alabama. Looks like we might get some tasty popcorn out of there. Here in GA, we've been gay marrying up a storm today. --Castaigne (talk) 23:00, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
It's been surprisingly quite today in Alabama. I didn't see any public wailing and gnashing of teeth. It mighta been different if I'd been riding the bus to my old workplace or passed through the square where street preachers feel obligated to shout at people. But seriously, I haven't heard much outcry, or seen much on Facebook. I'm sure that will change. --Maxus (talk) 23:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I am personally looking forward to the WND commentary section tomorrow, especially the user comments, it will be epic I tell you, epic!--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 23:39, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree with the decision, and hope its implementation goes smoother than the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (sorry, I personally find the short form name extremely vague and annoying). As much as I'm looking forward to the reaction you describe, though, I'll save a few laughs for the social justice warrior responses to said reactions; just because someone supports my point of view doesn't mean they can't look like a frothing lunatic themselves. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:26, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I personally prefer to refer to it as "Brown v. Board of Education of ToPikachu". |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Star of David.png Open your heart, it's gonna be alright 00:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
So, uhh... How's that marshmallow alert? Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 00:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh, darn. All he said was "we will burn." He didn't say "we will burn via self-inflicted burnination." Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 00:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Who said what now? (talk) 01:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Some pastor supposedly threatened to light himself on fire. It seems that wasn't the case. He did do the usual "we going to get murdered for our beliefs" nonsense, though. Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 01:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Christian-genocide-paranoia is "the usual" in the US? >.> I guess I shouldn't be surprised. (talk) 01:26, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Josh Feuerstein made a video about the decision, and it stopped just short of calling for armed revolt before they started rounding people up for the FEMA death camps. I wish I was joking about that. Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 02:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Living in the USA has taught me that yes, is actually is pretty "usual". ArcticVixen (talk) 02:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Ok, time for me to weigh in with my rightwing perspective and layout the response given when asked about this (usually asked by my bible-believing, patriotic veteran, Southern redneck, anti-Republican, loyal Democrat friends): The only way it can be stopped now is by criminalizing homosexuality through the election of state houses and governors willing to pass and sign the legislation. nobsI'm not from this planet, but let me tell u what I think.... 21:20, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

All these "'Murica!" tweets are making me sick. We did it first. {{SUBST:User:Mkbw50/sig}} (talk) 10:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Are you Dutch or Danish then? (talk) 11:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Finally!--Arisboch (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I have a question for someone with more experience in legal issues. Mississippi is saying that they cannot perform gay marriages at this time. According to the AG, the stay that was issued by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has to be lifted before they can issue licenses to gay couples. The stay was issued until this case was decided by SCOTUS, but, as to my knowledge, was not issued pending a decision (meaning it did not automatically expire). I'm trying to decide if this is a legal hoop that the state must(depending on interpretation) actually jump through, or if this is just something the AG is saying to avoid marrying gay people. Anyone have any insight? AyzmoCheers 03:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

IANAL, but it seems to me that lower-tier courts don't have the function of signing off on SCOTUS decisions. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 04:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I've got my own two cents here which I put on my talk page, not yet confident enough to drop it elsewhere. I'd be interested in folks' thoughts.Iangoeswest (talk) 08:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think some of the SCOTUS's rulings seem pretty questionably founded (for example, see: A Fish Is Not A 'Tangible Object'). In response to some of the dissenting opinions: With the control the Supreme Court seems to have over American law and some SCOTUS judges' reasonings being based more on what the law should be rather than what it is, I can empathize with the idea that it's acting more like a legislature. That said, when the plutocrats and fundamentalists seem to have considerably more influence in the official legislature than in the Supreme Court, I can't say I object to the Supreme Court going a bit beyond their intended role when it does a better job at protecting the people's rights and ruling in society's interest than the actual legislature. (talk) 19:47, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
As for the Supreme Court going beyond their "intended" role - intended by who? The principle that the Court gets to make the final call and to trump acts of the other branches has been accepted without serious challenge for more than 200 years, in the very case citations trotted out by the dissent. I find the whole hair-pulling and teeth-gnashing on the part of the dissenters to be incredibly insincere and downright dishonest. Concerns about overruling majority preferences (and acts of Congress) didn't seem to bother the dissenters when they were with the majority in Citizens United. Or does Justice Scalia imagine that the "original" intent of the founders would have been to allow the Dutch East India Company to pour unlimited amounts of money to influence the outcome of the 1800 election, because 'free speech?' The countermajoritarian difficulty of 9 unelected individuals having the final say is certainly an issue for discussion in a democracy, but their selective pronouncements about the 'proper role' of the judiciary is sickening to folks who are keeping score. Well, to me anyway. Iangoeswest (talk) 01:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
By who? I'd say most people that come up with these 3-separate-powers systems. I'm obviously not against there being a group of legal experts reviewing laws and judging how constitutional, morally justified, overcriminalizing or ineffective etc. they are, though I find it odd that you'd pour that function into a judicial court. Why force a party to put themselves on the legal frontlines before a law can be challenged and colour the review of laws with the context of specific legal cases? France, for example, has a Constitutional Council that reviews laws a priori before the legislature gets to pass them. (talk) 14:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
(EC) Courts go beyond "their original intent" by ruling in ways that make those people unhappy. Nothing new there. Scalia's original intent seems to come directly from his butt as well, often contradicting what people wrote at the time and the actual letter of the law. His written dissent in the gay marriage ruling was an embarrassment to anyone who can write at an above 5th grade level in my opinion. The article on RW has some pretty good examples of when he attempted it and there have been judicial critiques of it a few times. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
It's obvious that whenever Scalia cites judicial overreach it's because he doesn't like the outcome of the ruling. But that doesn't mean judicial overreach can't be a genuine concern and that we shouldn't have genuine discussions about what the role of a 'Supreme Court' should be. (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
(EC) Yep. However, people citing overreach without any idea what it's reach should be, or what that overreach is, sounds just like someone being pissed at the ruling. I am all for the discussion if someone can present a cogent argument to that effect. Not Scalia's babbling about "legal higgilty piggaly." I have gotten sick of pages of going around in circles over, and over, and over...and over again. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Best stopped clock moments

One of my favorites: https://www.facebook.com/ColRobManess/videos/vb.559064320775674/1081172291898205 Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 11:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

What does it say, so I don't have to sit watching a video while I've got music on? BicyclewheelModerator 11:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
It's Megan Kelly agreeing with the guys that did Draw Mohammed day that freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend. Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 12:02, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I have to say because I roll my eyes whenever I see the stopped clock analogy that it is such tedious analogy. Why is the banal fact that people you disagree with occasionally say things you do agree with is in any way interesting? Is that that we are so keen to demonise our ideological foes that it comes as a genuine shock or as I assume it is just so we get to chance to make tiresome lists of all the examples we can think off that we all love doing. AMassiveGay (talk) 13:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I think it's something that started as an odd form of doublethink that then just became shorthand for "person I otherwise disagree with said something I agree with". You see the opposite in a lot of the crazier folk out there in various positions, that they literally can NOT agree with someone they've previously disagreed with. So they either have to pretend they never disagreed with them in the first place, or they have to convince themselves that they don't currently agree with them (by either arguing they don't really mean it, or even doing a full 180 and arguing that they never believed x in the first place anyway). This is a step away from that where it's "I disagree with this person in general and would like to remind you of that, but in THIS instance, I agree". X Stickman (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Sam Harris and Dan Carlin

I don't know a lot about Sam Harris, because the New Atheists bore me, and since he seems to be number four on the list I never really got to him, but since we have an article on the guy and I imagine a few of you are fans: there's a two-hour long interview with him on Dan Carlin's podcast this week. Haven't listened yet, but will put it on when I'm cleaning out the garage. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:22, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Isn't Sam Harris the one who wrote in that apocryphal diatribe The End of Liberalism, "the people who speak with the greatest moral clarity about the current wars in the Middle East are members of the Christian right...While liberals should be the ones pointing the way beyond this Iron Age madness, they are rendering themselves increasingly irrelevant." nobsI'm not from this planet, but let me tell u what I think.... 18:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like him alright. (talk) 20:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I always get the feeling that Harris is too impressed with his own cleverness. He paints himself into philosophical cul-de-sacs because of it. Ajkgordon (talk) 08:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I like listening to Carlin because he's clever and knows how to tell a story, but I'd never say he was one of the great minds of our time or anything. That said, he spent a healthy portion of those two hours running circles around Harris, who mostly came off looking like an idiot. His entire discussion of foreign policy treated the historical/political/social/economic factors that Carlin pointed out as undermining his position as trivialities. It's like the guy lives in a world of concepts that are lacking any grounding in how the world actually works. That might be fine if you want to grow up to be a philosophy major at a liberal arts college, but it's not how grown-ups are supposed to engage with the world. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Are there any transcripts of Carlin's podcast perchance? I tend to miss a lot when all I can go on is sound. (talk) 02:14, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Not that I'm aware of, and I can have the same problem. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 04:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Just me JAQing off

I was wondering what happens when someone moves a page into the "User" category. Does it create a new account?

Userpage Talk 20:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Userspace pages can exist without corresponding to a real user account. Sysops can change a user account's name, though, and this will typically also move the relevant userpages over to the new name. (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Maybe 141 is lying. How do you think they got to be the four-armed invisible 141? Maybe they gained the power of the BoN through secrets that are not easy to part with. Think about it: Isn't it suspicious that a mere pile of numbers knows so much? Isn't it odd how they make no account? Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 11:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Any Internet radio suggestions?

As you may know, I'm a Brit living in Taiwan. While I'm pottering about here and on other wikis I usually listen to BBC Radio 5 Live via the Internet. For the next two weeks, while Wimbledon's on, I won't be able to listen to it for most of the day. I'll just get a message saying that the programme is unavailable outside the UK due to rights restrictions repeated over and over. In past years, I've switched to BBC Radio 2 for the fortnight. But I cannot stand to listen to Steve Wright in the Afternoon again. Steve Wright is an absolute dick! So, what can I listen to instead on internet radio between the hours of 9:00pm and midnight for me? That's !:00pm to 4:00pm UTC, 2:00pm to 5:00pm British Summer Time, 3:00pm to 6:00pm Central European Time, 9:00am to noon in New York, 6:00am to 9:00am in Los Angeles and 11:00pm to 2:00am in Sydney. I'm open to any suggestions. Spud (talk) 16:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I'm no big fan of radio, since it has people interrupting the music to say stuff I'm not interested in and the music they repeat ad infinitum on radios typically has plenty songs of the this-is-very-popular-apparently-though-it's-absolutely-abhorrent-to-listen-to kind in there. I also don't listen to it for the news because my hearing isn't very good, so I'll look for written sources instead. If it's just the background music you're interested in with radio, I'd say just look up a playlist of music you like on YouTube. (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Just download some old radio programs like x-1, you'll be fine for a while --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
The World Sefvice or Radio 4 are good go-tos. You might want try the CBC or one of the big NPR stations like WNYC or WBURPeace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Try ROK radio; Tunein radio. There's loads out there Scream!! (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Soundart Radio is totally amazing, except for that weird presenter who plays random noises on Wednesday lunchtimes. BicyclewheelModerator 19:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I just listen to WWV for the steady beat. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 20:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
How about you download some BBC R4 podcasts. You can do worse than Life Scientific, Inside Science or, my favourite, The Infinite Monkey Cage. Ajkgordon (talk) 08:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
What the lads said about Radio 4. There are some great programmes that make you think and not just about the scientific. In Our Time, More or Less, Thinking Allowed and Woman's Hour (or at least 45 minutes of it). There's also the History of the World in a Hundred Objects and Germany: Memories of a Nation by Neil McGregor the former director of the British Museum. All these are downloadable as podcasts. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. Moderator 11:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions, lads and lassies. I listened to WBUR yesterday (I was disappointed when I realized it wasn't called WBURP). I'm going to listen to WNYC tonight. I'll listen to the CBC tomorrow for Canada Day. And I'll certainly listen to Soundart Radio soon, although the Wednesday lunchtime guy sounds like a bigger dick than Steve Wright. And special thanks to Smerdis for making me laugh. Spud (talk) 12:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Project Creationism

If you're wondering why KOMF is spamming up recent changes:


Project Creationism! Because RW needs better and more cretinist articles.


  1. Cleaning up stuff here
  2. Porting over stuff from EvoWiki
  3. Updating articles, forever
  4. Responses to specific articles

2 is the most important one, because EvoWiki has hundreds (if not 1000+) decent articles on creationism/evolution that more or less belong to RW. (Many can be merged.) 2 also requires EvoWiki Curator rights. Anyone know how to make Trent hand out curator/ability to grant curator?

Gentlemen, 2015 is going to be a bad year for not having substantial anticreationist coverage. Hopefully. Especially if more people help. Cømrade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 20:04, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

You forgot to mention that this will be a bad year for internet creationists...

My Userpage/TalkFile:Starwars.gif 20:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

That too. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 21:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Sounds good. You have my axe. Or my keyboard, as it were. Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 23:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
KOMF kindly ported some pages. They need RWifying. See Category:EvoWiki ports. help pls FuzzyDogPotato (talk/stalk) 23:40, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm a little bit shit at RWifying articles, but if you need someone to assemble the facts and put them into layman's terms, I'm your man.Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 00:16, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
RationalWiki:Project Creationism#New arguments might be your forte, then. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk)

Internet creationists - 'persons who claim to have invented the tubes'? (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I forget where the discussion is, about deleting EvoWiki articles after porting them. Doesn't a copy-paste move lose the history, or does it even matter? CamelCasePragmatist (talk) 15:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, the history disappears, but it's not much of a loss, and there's no real alternative. 32℉uzzy, 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 19:27, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
If I rememer corectly there is almost nothing we can import from EW becasue their article format of claim and counter-cliam is so different to ours. The last time I looked I think there was just one that that could be used. --Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 15:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
FCP has actually been doing not badly at recovering the useful material. It's work, but there's worthwhile stuff there. "claim|response" goes well in an SBS, for example - David Gerard (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Massive anti-vaxxer Facebook page meltdown (bring popcorn)

For those who like to watch the crazies fight, there has been, ever since the Supreme Court ruling last week, a major meltdown of the Vaccine Resistance Movement Facebook group as a result of the fundies using it as a pulpit to attack gay people (screencaps here, here, here, and here. There's also coverage of the rabid rise in anti-vaxxer homophobia at the Anti-vaxxer Wall of Shame website. Take a look, and grab popcorn. John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (talk) 05:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I guess that terminates my remaining fragments of the stereotype of anti-vax being a left-wing ideology. I mean, I've known for a while that it's predicted not ideology, but instead conspiratorial ideation, but the moonbat origin story still kinda persisted in my head. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 13:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Meh, I've seen both wingnut and moonbat anti-vaxxers. It depends on the anti-vaxxer FB page/forum/IRC channel/blog you're reading. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Star of David.png Anyway, how is your sex life? 13:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, but you've gotta agree the portrayal in the media has been that the anti-vax movement was anchored in middle-class left-wing ideology, right? Like that it's very frequently thrown around as the left's equivalent of the climate-change and evolution deniers on the right. I'm just saying the above linked outbursts kinda finish off any mental credibility that notion had with me. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 14:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
That's a fair point, really. Conspiracists come from both sides of the political spectrum. I'd still say that there's a larger majority of left-wing anti-vaxxers than right-wing, but it's personally anecdotal (i.e., most of the anti-vaxxers I know IRL are the far-left leaning, anti-big-business, "hippie" type, and they've got the rainbow-filter selfies to prove it. They're lovely, amazing, and caring people; they're just really paranoid of "da chemicals" and anything that could hurt their kids). ℕoir LeSable (talk) 15:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
(EC) From my experience most conspiracy theorists are subject to creeping crank magnetism from all directions no matter their original views. If something drastically changes they tend to go full wacko on the subject. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Unrelated note: I kind of agree with them on the photo about the naked dude. I really don't approve of what TNT!MEN (Totally Naked Toronto! Men Enjoying Nudity) did for the pride parade. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 15:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I've long thought that part of the pride parades comes from the legacy days when people just didn't want to acknowledge the existence of homosexuals. In fact the very term "pride parade" hails from that era. It was a way to force people to acknowledge the reality of homosexuality. And... it's antiquated, and illegal, and probably harmful. But I also don't want to be the straight guy saying "you've now got enough acceptance to no longer fight bigotry in that way." Fundamentally, I suppose it's up to the parade organizers to make that choice(many pride parades have already done so). ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 15:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I get the feeling most pride events in the western world are no longer political in any real sense and now more celebratory in nature. I think that's a testament to how far we have come. Sure theres plenty of fights to fight but certainly in my neck of the wood, your mostly preaching to the converted. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I think most people have realized that making something illegal for everyone else because their religion forbids it (or they don't like it) is loony. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 19:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I have never quite believed homophobia is a purely religious phenomenon. When ever I have experienced it (v rarely thankfully) or witnessed it, religion had very little to do with it. It's on an almost instinctive level of disgust rather than 'my god says you are an abomination'. I doubt any of them had any religious beliefs of any sort. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:15, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
It's true that it's far from just a religious phenomenon. It has to do with various culturally instilled notions not meshing very well with there being gay people: the cultural norms for sex, the ideal of a nuclear family, gender roles etc. This results in homosexuality being seen as weak, depraved, gross, or treasonous to one's culture. But religion is not unimportant in this regard, as it's one of the factors that has guided many cultures towards blatant homophobia and contributed to solidifying it within them (and often continues to do so). It's not for no reason that citing religion is such a popular tactic for justifying homophobia; saying that the source of absolute morality considers X abominable sounds a lot more compelling than saying X goes against particular cultural norms. (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I am not doubting the religious influence, but really, here in blighty no one truly gives a shit what any church has to say. I don't think it can be over stated just how religious and Christian the US is compared to the UK. The church really does not hold any sway with people over here. The CofE is dying on its arse. It seems more like a rationalisation of their own prejudices. These people would find any excuse to unleash their prejudice if the bible wasn't so handy. I mean, you have to wonder, if we accept that bible is the word of men and not god, what was their justification for hating on the gays? AMassiveGay (talk) 20:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it's entirely isolated from it though. You have pastors telling parishioners (and major politicians) that not just doing this, but that it exists openly, is a sin. With variations on who is condemned to hell. Which really demonizes homosexuals and completely screws up the people who grow up in this environment that are gay. There's a great deal more baggage with major authorities in religion going off about it rather then a few people saying they don't like it. While I think it's using an argument from authority to justify it...a 10 year old who grows up in this isn't going to have the tools to understand that. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
It can exist pretty isolated of religion too, though. In my country, religion basically has no influence in the public sphere and most people are irreligious agnostics or apatheists, even if many still nominally identify as Catholic. But that doesn't mean homophobia isn't a thing anymore. It's not because religion is going away that the things it managed to entrench in society are all going away too. There's still plenty of slut-shaming in various secular Western societies, to give another example. 142․124․55․236 (talk) 21:15, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
EC. look, you are really preaching to the choir (I said converted earlier) here. All I am saying religion is not the only factor. I appreciate that in fundy land USA it is an important factor, but as I have said here the UK (if we ignore n. Ireland, and we all do) no one gives a shit about it. Maybe that's why the us seems so much behind on this, but we still have bigots here and they are not religiously inspired. Even in the us, its not the only factor. Your constitution seems to slow down even the most blandly inoffensive and obviously useful legislation AMassiveGay (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
And more or less the only reason we ain't have gay marriage acknowledged is the CDU/CSU being cunts and blocking it.--Arisboch (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
(EC) I just thought it was an interesting subject. People can do it for any reason, but politics and religion for the right seem to be bizarrely intertwined in the US. Which is doubly funny when you contrast statements from the pope on homosexuality (and global warming or poverty), against major religious figures in the US, and what Jesus taught. Then US religious figures start bad mouthing the pope. Like many US religious figures don't really care what Jesus said (pretty obvious to me). -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 21:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
maybe their disregard for their religions most vital figure is evidence that maybe religion isn't their main motivator. I probably clutching at straws there though. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:45, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
And there are also quite an amount of (Protestant) fundamentalists, who hate Catholics almost as much as they hate gays or even more.--Arisboch (talk) 21:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
(EC) Yes, but that makes sense. In the US this doesn't always make sense. It's difficult to talk to someone about what jesus said when they are hearing at church, on the news from major religious right politicians, and talking heads....the exact opposite. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 22:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I am reminded of a quote from ghandi which is something like 'i like your christ. Your Christians... not so much' AMassiveGay (talk) 23:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
A fricken men. +1 -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Barlow

people think I'm mean 'coz I didn't pay much tax,

but check this my thermostats set to max!

I've got so much money I don't need to borrow

splashing my cash like there's no tomorrow!.
Gary Barlow
— Unsigned, by: ‎ / talk / contribs
Okay. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 18:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
this posted in wigo world talk awhile ago, and someone removed it because it was so banal (banal is my word of the week - everything is fucking banal). Plus it was already established that Barlow is an unrepentant tax dodging prick months and months ago. You know when it was actually news. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] IP Filter

What IPs / IP ranges are we blocking? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 03:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[=userblocks&limit=50 These?] Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 04:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Which is to say, no ranges at all. Our whiny bonbon on the gamergate page got himself banned sometime and turned to a proxy because they weren't satisified with that. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 12:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I've never been banned from this site in my life. Also, what the fuck is a "bonbon"? (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
BON. Thanx @ AH & ikan. FuzzyCatPotato™ (talk/stalk) 12:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I see a small range banned by Ryulong in there. It tracks back to a Singaporean host, with a single address in-sue by a Canadian game dev company supposedly specialising in 'casual, hardcore games', the totality of which comes across as sketchy as fuck to me. Queexchthonic murmurings 13:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Wait, I thought we had a whole coop to roll that rangeblock back. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 14:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Just double checked, there's definitely no active rangeblocks. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 15:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I undo all rangeblocks on sight, or at least try to; I also occasionally go through the list and pardon IPs, especially if no clear reason was given to block them for more than a day. . Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 15:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
...and indeed, got rid of that one not long after I spoke about it. Queexchthonic murmurings 18:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Bryan Fischer on a roll

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/06/christian-radio-host-bryan-fischer-has-mental-breakdown-on-twitter-over-same-sex-marriage-ruling/ We could create an entire new article just for this shit. Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 13:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I thought he had a mental breakdown a long time ago, and all the crazy stuff he said later stemmed form that. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Evowiki articles

So what's the deal with these? Are we allowed to edit them, or are we merely hosting them as an archive? If the latter, should they be protected? And should they have their own space? BicyclewheelModerator 19:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

The idea is to RWify them and move/merge them to the right spots. See #Project Creationism. (talk) 19:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

[edit] This will be the longest hour since 2012

There's a second going on the year tonight. Scream!! (talk) 23:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

This has happened twenty six times already. It seems to me that the value of the second needs to be periodically revised to keep pace with the earth, instead. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 01:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I dunno why we even need to keep pace with the Earth. Who'll notice if we celebrate New Year a second before Earth has finished a complete orbit? Who'll care? (talk) 09:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The matter is complicated by the fact that rotational days are not of a consistent duration. It's better to make a negligible change here and there than have to slap an extra minute on rarely, in particular because not all computer systems are written to handle the exceptional case. An extra second can get swept under the carpet with a NTP sync, it's a bit harder to do that with an extra minute. Besides, the standards documents allow for the possibility of a leap second or double leap second, there's no provision for a leap minute. Queexchthonic murmurings 09:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Right, but that isn't an argument against the BON's point which was to get rid of the adjustment altogether. This entire mess is there to help out amateur astronomers. Nobody else benefits. Civil time's relationship to mean solar time is so practically unimportant that we routinely shift local civil time back and forth by an entire hour and yet everybody is supposedly worried about one second. The correct thing to do is abolish/ redefine UTC and base civil time on TAI, giving up the pretence that mean solar time is important. Tialaramex (talk) 10:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
That's no solution, unless you like drift. Queexchthonic murmurings 10:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Solution to what ? Step back for a moment, and observe that this entire argument relies on begging the question. To even call the alternative "drift" is to arbitrarily accept that mean solar time should be the deciding factor, thus assuming your conclusion. We're long past the point where measurable variation in the Earth's rotation exceeds errors in our instruments. Calibrating the instruments against the known in-consistent Earth is insane, which is why TAI is even maintained at all in the first place. The people with accurate clocks don't want anything to do with this inconsistent spinning ball of rock. We happen to live on it. Fine. We care about daylight hours. Also fine. Right now today, with no need for re-defining the world's co-ordinated time system, local civil time in some jurisdictions moves about by hours or half hours on the whim of politicians. If the politicians decide it's sunny at the wrong time of day they can fix that any time they want with their local civil time. But they don't need to re-define the co-ordinated universal time to do that, so let's stop messing about with it, fix UTC to TAI (by abolishing/ renaming as appropriate) and never worry again. Tialaramex (talk) 10:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
If all co-ordinated time was used for was deeply embedded in computer systems, you would have a point. But it's also how civil time is calibrated (modulo time zones - half-hours and summer time are separate issues and I'm not trying to defend them). Local time can be expressed as a consistent UTC+/-X, you simply wouldn't be able to do that if you permitted significant drift in your reference clock. An unadjusted system is mathematically pure, but it is for day-to-day purposes less useful. You might as well do away with hours and days altogether and adopt an arbitrary standard time interval other than the second. If adjusted UTC did not exist, then it would be a practical necessity to invent it to avoid significant gross drift sometime in the future. Queexchthonic murmurings 10:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The time zones are a relic of the railroad era. In an age of computers and GPS, there's not really any reason not to get rid of the lot of them and go back to true local time. One result, of course, will be that the west side of town will be a minute or two behind the east side. But that's just how it is in reality; the true time of day is an astronomical fact immune to human jiggery-pokery. And it will undermine the industrial system of lock-step time discipline. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 12:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Umm... true local time would making things like business hours for telephone service, co-ordinating teleconferencing, rail and bus timetables, etc. markedly more annoying. Queexchthonic murmurings 12:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
That's part of the point, to move away from "11:07 AM" and towards "maybe around noonish". Increasing precision and synchronized time redefine punctuality in the bad direction of greater rigidity and impose greater burdens of compliance. This is something that's been done to you against your will. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 15:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I'd rather have my co workers come in at 11 Am, not sometime in the area of 11 am based on whatever clock they happen to be using. It would make everything far to annoying for far to little gain in your "yay no rigidness conformity" bullshit. Timezones may be incredibly artificial, (and outside North America, heavily political to the point of nonsense), but they are better than just having the other half of town not be the same time as my half. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Fun fact: It was the necessity of 'railway time' that killed off local time. That need has not reduced in the slightest since then. Greater flexibility in working hours, where practical, is a completely orthogonal issue. Queexchthonic murmurings 15:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Aardvarks

Are they, or are they not, the coolist animals ever? -Fat Aardvark (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

It's pretty tempting to put them at at least second ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 12:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] plz

Plz plz plz can I be removed from da vandal bin -Fat Aardvark (talk) 13:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

What would you do with that newly-found freedom? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 13:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Keep vandalizing as his user page directly states I bet. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 13:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@AgingHippie I'll dive straight in and get involved with this wikis top quality bants of course!--Fat Aardvark (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Skepnav

RW has a lot (~100) of skepticism- and skeptic-related articles. A skepticism {{navsidebar}} seems useful. What icon would be appropriate? oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 13:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Probably. The skeptic movement doesn't have any really iconic imagery to make the navbar really punchy though. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 14:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
? Scream!! (talk) 14:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Guy Fawkes was a radical Catholic. And that the mask has been assumed as the mantle of idiotic internet crusades. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 14:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
^, Guy Fawkes wanted to free us from the oppressive Protestant tyranny so instead there could be a Oppressive Catholic Tyranny. Hardly skeptical. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
quite aside from those irritating guy Fawkes masks already being appropriated by anonymous. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
sorry was already mentioned AMassiveGay (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
How about an eye looking through a magnifying glass, to symbolize scrutiny? I'd draw one if I could. Frederick♠♣♥♦ 16:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
A tea kettle in space (unless we have that somewhere)? Pyrrho? Narky SawtoothNarky.png (Nyar~) 21:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
That seems workable. How about this -
- Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 05:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I like it. Now we just need an .svg version... The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 11:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Are we talking skepticism in all its facets, or only the 'reasonable' type? (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I think we should go for a goat with a cocked eyebrow and skeptical expression. We have a theme, let's roll with it.--Stunteddwarf Jabba de Chops 10:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I know I'm late, but my only request is that Carl Sagan somehow be included in this image-'Legionwhat do you want from me 09:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] IAmA subforum on Reddit in peril, AMA

So, for those folks around here that still use Reddit, apparently Victoria Taylor (Director of Communications and central liaison for /r/IAmA celebrity Q&A sessions) was unexpectedly let go. This has sent the eighth largest subreddit on the site into private mode/damage control as Victoria was extremely deeply involved in the IAmA process and no moderators of the /r/IAmA subreddit were notified of the departure of Victoria or given any forewarning to prepare a transition of responsibilities (in fact, the only reason they knew was because one of the interviewees told them at the last minute). This isn't just limited to /r/IAmA -- Victoria had also been acting as liaison for interviews on more niche subreddits (such as researchers on /r/Science and /r/AskScience, musicians and performers on /r/Music, popular authors on /r/Books, etc.), leaving a lot of people high and dry, and in some cases, having wasted money on tickets to NYC for in-person interviews. Considering one of the larger draws of Reddit were the /r/IAmA interviews, where all the questions are provided by common users, and considering Reddit had recently come out with an official AMA app, this is a rather sharp blow and a mind-bogglingly unusual action on the admins' part.

Current leading rumors behind Victoria's termination include fallout from a very recent botched AMA from Rev. Jesse Jackson, and making good on an ultimatum Reddit had made requiring all employees to move to the SF Bay area or risk termination. I have a feeling that the admins will make some sort of statement later today, considering the news broke just two hours ago and the upvotes are starting to snowball, so we'll see, I suppose. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Tempest in a teapot. Employees change. Smallish companies serving a large community change too. Unless there was something particularly irreplaceable or controversial about her I'm not getting from you story, it's... life? Like every time reddit makes a corporate decision, its users are completely blown away. I do not understand that site. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 20:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
So... what's IAmA? (talk) 20:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
First you post "I am a/an X" then people post questions about X. Then you answer them. Or you're actually famous and your staff answers them, after your realness is verified by the kinda staff member who quit was nuked form orbit. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 21:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Victoria actually sits with a number of these celebs in person and helps them answer the questions. There is no indication that she had quit of her own volition -- much more notice and direct work with the moderators would have been there if that were the case. I have the feeling that you really don't like Reddit. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
That's a fair description of my views of the site, yeah. I mean, it's not 4chan, but I don't much care for memey regurgitation of last-week's jokes and insular little hugbox(or worse hatebox) communities. I mean, I can recognize that as a gigantic site with lots of variation there's more to it than just that, but my overall impression of the community is a cold one. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 21:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
IAmA (short for "I am a....") is a subreddit where people, particularly celebrities or with a particularly unique aspect about themselves (e.g. former Disneyland actress, gay conversion therapy camp survivor, 911 operator), allow themselves to be interviewed by the Reddit userbase for a brief period of time. See: Wikipedia. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
That's the thing: she was pretty damn close to irreplacable, given that she was behind a large portion of the good quality of the IAmA interviews and the celebrities themselves. This isn't just another "corporate decision" that were essentially tempests in teapots like the removal of upvotes or addition of RedditAds. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
But, see, that was her job. Other people can and will do that same job. I appreciate that some readers might have developed a liking for her, but people move on from career changes. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 21:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Even if she suddenly quit (rather than giving notice and it being ignored), for whatever reason, job #1 for the company was to parachute in a replacement. Not "Let's set up a meeting with HR to see about hiring a replacement in August", not "Jim, draft an email to send to the moderators and we'll get that out to them by the end of the week", but right now put your best person on the problem full time until further notice with 100% authority to do whatever they feel necessary. If the CEO can't get this stuff right they will (sooner or later) sink any company they run, whether it's a good old-fashioned dairy farm or a "media company" making a Twitter-based live-fashion web series. Tialaramex (talk) 17:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I've never exactly followed reddit, but it very much seems to have succeeded in spite of its management rather than because of it. Their knuckle-headed free speech absolutism, for example, speaks volumes that they don't really know what they're doing. Queexchthonic murmurings 17:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
It seems kind of odd for an online company to require all workers to move to a certain area. Wouldn't most of them be able to do their job just fine from anywhere with an internet connection? (talk) 21:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
There's been CEO shuffles. The previous one was ah not entirely with it, e.g. hiring someone to work on a Reddit equivalent to Bitcoin (seriously); I think that might be the one who told everyone to move locally. The present one made her big splash kicking the worst subreddits in the world off recently, and may not have had the time to rethink such orders as yet, as she desperately tries to work out how the fuck to keep the company in the black - David Gerard (talk) 22:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I always thought AMA meant "ask me anything." I see people claiming r/IAmA brought a big share of traffic to reddit, and that Victoria went above and beyond, keeping the wheels greased so active Q&A sessions didn't overwhelm the guest. As I understand it, she fielded the questions on screen, read them to the guest, and transcribed the answers into reddit's format. That's a lot of multitasking while typing at a high rate for as long as the multi-threaded session takes. It's tough to find a drop-in replacement for that kind of specialized skill set.

There is talk of some guests being left hanging after having traveled to do their AMA, not a sign of a well-planned exit. Who knows why, but to me it looks like a case of management shooting themselves in the collective foot. It seems a few other high-profile serious subreddits have gone private (disabled posting and reading) in protest. SmartFeller (talk) 23:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] EvoWiki - so help me I'm gonna do stuff

RationalWiki:EvoWiki is something under the auspices of RW, which has had bugger-all done to it over a number of years now.

So, FPC wants to actually get stuff off it and to RW.

Obviously, porting stuff by copying is easy. But what is the plan at the EW end? Soft redirect to RationalWiki? Or just leave it all there looking like a ghost site? Does anyone still reading this remember?

'Cos unless there's a good reason not to, I'll probably twiddle the database to give FPC editing rights and put in soft-redirects to ported pages. On the rationale that leaving EvoWiki there as a ghost forever is unlikely to be a great idea. - David Gerard (talk) 22:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Would replacing that EvoWiki URL with a page that says something like "EvoWiki has left the building, but if you are interested in debates about evolution/creationism and science/pseudoscience, come join us at Rationalwiki" with a big link to our home page be a good idea? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Who's this "FPC" fellow?
I support (1) porting everything over & either soft-redirecting or deleting the EvoWiki page (preference for deleting, it's easier to tell when all pages are done) and (2) redirecting the "evolutionwiki.org" URL directly to "rationalwiki.org" in the way that "evowiki.org" goes to "evolutionwiki.org". Cømrade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 22:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
With a redirect forest at this end matching the old title, so all old URLs work? Sounds sensible - David Gerard (talk) 22:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
That's the question. Is a redirect forest (a) workable and (b) worth it? How often is EW linked at all? (Is there any way to find out?) FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 22:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Hah! The answer is "bugger-all". Google for links to it reveals five total on the internet - David Gerard (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
I've found google's "link:" parameter less than useful. A search for "-site:evolutionwiki.org "evolutionwiki.org"" in the past year gave 73 results. (For RW, it gave ca. 7000.) Are tops 100 links/year worth it? Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 22:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
ehh, if we're feeling perfectionist! - David Gerard (talk) 22:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
FPC, FCP, it's all cats, potatoes and fuzz - David Gerard (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Nobody can remember anything much, so anyone who wants to work on evowiki retrieval, I'll add you as a user using my s00par l33t p0w3rz of database twiddling (once I work out how to do that) - David Gerard (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
The plan seems to have been to do more or less what FCP's been doing: redigest stuff from EvoWiki to RW, leave a pointer on the EvoWiki page - David Gerard (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] EvoWiki is go!

Meaning I have:

  1. created myself an account with all the powers
  2. created FuzzyCatPotato an account with all the powers, so he can add more people instead of me having to (ask on RationalWiki Talk:EvoWiki)
  3. updated RationalWiki:EvoWiki instructions

So GET HACKING AWAY. There's good material in this archive, let's TRIM OUR WIKI IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RATIONALIST LIFESTYLE, and not stop until we've COMPLETELY SUCCEEDED or we see a new shiny thing - David Gerard (talk) 14:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Can I get an account, as I have ported over ~20 articles? KOMF's Userpage/TalkUSERNAME will die. 18:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes. 32℉uzzy, 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 18:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

How? KOMF's Userpage/TalkAnonymous user will die. 19:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] 1952 US Presidential Election.

Looking at the election map of that year confuses me, the only states are now dies hard Republican.[1] Why the change? — Unsigned, by: Mercian / talk / contribs

Who knows?--Inquisitor (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
because the great and glorious major electoral shift that left the south a wasteland of republicans and the democratic party dead of it's southern racist members didn't happen until the 60's and 70's. Wasn't called the solid south for nothin. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 00:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
The South in 1952 was getting increasingly disgruntled with the northern/urban liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Several Southern states voted for Strom Thurmond's third-party "States' Rights Democratic" splinter in the previous election to protest Harry Truman's support for civil rights. At the same time, though, they still viewed the Republicans as the party of Abraham Lincoln and the forces that defeated the Confederacy, so they held their noses and remained Democrats partly out of generations of loyalty (especially at the state level, where northern-style liberals held no sway in their party organizations) and partly because they found the alternative even worse. That started cracking for good in 1964, when Barry Goldwater appealed to disaffected segregationists; Richard Nixon paid close attention to this, and implemented the Southern strategy in '68 and '72. KevinR1990 (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Infamous cartoon flying around on the net

Does anyone know, who drew the "Hey rabbi... whatcha doin'?!" antisemitic cartoon?--Arisboch (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, I just read a half-dozen articles/blog posts about it that don't mention attribution, so it may be safe to say it's an anonymous piece of work... Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
If I recall, his name (or penname) was Wyatt A. Mann. He has ALOT more then just that "Hey Rabbi... whatcha doin'?!" picture. -- (talk) 15:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I think I found his real name, but I won't post it here, as RW apparently takes (or claims to take, anyway) a dim view on doxxing (dunno, if it'd be doxxing,though).--Arisboch (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, you basically have no understanding of humans. So you in particular should be way more cautious than anyone else, assuming you're sincerely stupid rather than trolling - David Gerard (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
?--Arisboch (talk) 21:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Degolding Young Earth creationism

Discussed at Talk:Young Earth creationism#Gold?. The article doesn't seem to merit gold ATM; it looks like it's mostly legacy. I proposed moving the gold from the YEC article to the general creationism article, which is vastly better. FuzzyDogPotato (talk/stalk) 20:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't know you could move gold from one article to another. Probably a better idea to continue polishing up the creationism article so it can stand the vetting for gold in its own right. Alec Sanderson (talk) 21:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
You can't move gold from one article to another. There isn't a fixed number of cover articles. BicyclewheelModerator 20:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
The other one would need to become coverworthy of its own accord, but yeah, bust this one down to bronze at best - David Gerard (talk) 21:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Disbarred AG?

Does anyone know what happens if a sitting Attorney General loses their law license? Do you have to have a law license to be an attorney general? I know there are various requirements based on the state. In many it seems that you must be a member in standing at the time of election, but I don't see anything about what happens after. AyzmoCheers 20:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

If they're a Republican, they get to stay. If not, out they go. BicyclewheelModerator 20:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
The "evil Republican conspiracy" persecution complex aside, a lot of states (not sure if it's all) have laws mandating their AGs have to be licensed. A lot of that is the result of North Carolina needing to be able to remove Mike Nifong, who seemed to be out to set records for prosecutorial misconduct, in 2007. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Per the Texas Secretary of State's website, the qualifications for being Texas Attorney General are: U.S. citizen, resident of Texas for at least 12 months, and 18 years old. That's it. "Practicing lawyer or judge" is explicitly NOT a requirement. So, if he's disbarred, it would certainly be embarrassing, and he probably wouldn't be able to personally represent the State in court, but AG rarely actually practice law in court anyway. So, basically, no legal or constitutional fallout. (talk) 23:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] I'm somewhat scared...

While I was looking around for Project Creationism, I saw a pop-up on the top of the screen that said "This Password is Compromised". Do you think that I have a virus? KOMF's Userpage/Talk Anonymous user will die. 20:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Did you have any other windows open? Recomment running Malwarebytes and delete ur cache. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 21:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I have McAffe, and I am currently doing a complete scan of my computer. KOMF's Userpage/Talk Anonymous user will die. 21:43, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

You want to scan your system with MalwareBytes and SpyBot Search & Destroy on a regular basis, along with your regular virus scanner, be it McAfee or MS Security Essentials or whatever. And run some kind of ad blocker on your browser too. And to be on the safe side, change your passwords from time to time and use KeePass Password Safe or some such to keep track of them.
That said, it depends on where you were and what the pop-up window looked like. More than likely, it was a scare-tactic advertisement intended to get you to click through to someplace what would compromise your system, your credit card, your life, not just your password. It didn't say which password was compromised, did it? Nowhere Man (talk) 02:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Aren't MalwareBytes and SpyBot Search & Destroy borderline malware themselves? If they're the ones I'm thinking of, I've used them before & they're very difficult to fully uninstall. WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 12:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Not MalwareBytes, no. Proper uninstall, no sneaky 3rd party programmes, and does a fantastic job as advertised. The problem with SpyBot S&D isn't with itself, rather how easy it is to download and install lookalike rogue versions of it which are themselves malicious. The real programme isn't as smooth an install as MalwareBytes. It has a higher install failure rate and it tries too hard to point you towards the paid-for version. Otherwise it's pretty effective although I find MalwareBytes more thorough. Ajkgordon (talk) 10:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

My recommendation? Get a new anti-virus software. Mcafee is total shit-'Legionwhat do you want from me 09:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Is Avira better?--Arisboch (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

It would be useful if you post a screenshot of the message you received. If it was a pop-up within your web browser, most likely it was a spammy website trying to get you to install something dodgy &/or phishing for you to provide login details rather than anything internal to your system. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 12:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

It was a pop-up on my web browser, but I did find a few suspicious files when looking through my 86x program files. It was probably adware though, because whenever I get that I just delete the addon, and I just delete all of the suspicious programs every month or two. Also, I did have several websites open, some which display ads, but I was using adblock. Also, it didn't say what password was compromised. KOMF's Userpage/Talk Anonymous user will die. 19:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Did it say anything else? If it was a pop-up from a dubious webpage, it would usually say your password is compromised (or something similar like viruses detected) & then offer a solution which either involves downloading & installing something &/or providing details like email address/password, either of which would obviously be a bad idea in this situation. ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 00:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
KOMF, follow these steps.
- Run a full scan of your usual AV software. Make sure it is up-to-date first with the latest signature files. McAfee is generally fine at detection on a standard scan although a horrible programme overall.
- Download and install the free version of MalwareBytes. Make sure you uncheck the Pro trial at the last step. Run and then clean any infections.
- Download and install AdwCleaner. Run and then clean any infections.
- Download and install the free version of CCleaner. Take a look in the Tools, Startup tabs and research anything you're not sure about. Less is more.
- Open Windows Security Centre and check that various security settings haven't been disabled, such as Windows Update. If it has been, re-enable it - although this can be easier said than done and you might need to work on that. Once re-enabled, run it and install all essential updates. You may have to restart and re-run Windows Update several times if it has been disabled a while.
These few steps should be enough although you might have something a bit deeper, especially if things like Windows Update has been disabled. A really good resource is Bleeping Computer. Hope this helps. Ajkgordon (talk) 10:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and install AdBlock extension in Chrome or AdBlock Plus add-on in Firefox. To be doubly safe, only use Firefox with the NoScript add-on. Ajkgordon (talk) 10:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Idea for an article

(Before you read, I am not sure why the headline is bigger than the others). I came across a school called the "Maharishi University of Management" located in Fairfield, Iowa. From what I read the school teaches plenty of pseudoscience (Much like Bastyr University) and force students to eat vegetarian meals. Here is a link to their site- https://www.mum.edu/?utm_source=MSN-CPC&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=MSN-Brand-Search--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Fixed the header for ya. (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks :)--Rationalzombie94 (talk) 21:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki shutting down

i have been sent here to bring a message by the government of Wikipedia (the arbitration committee) and the supreme leader of Wikipedia (the right honourable Jimbo Wales). It has been decided by the big shots at Wikipedia that this wiki is bias, and it is to shut down affective immediately. This message has been bought to you by Fat Aardvark, ambassador to the English Wikipedia and commander of the arbitration enforcement unit.--Fat Aardvark (talk) 07:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Imitating Billy mays voice (badly): You shittin me?!?!--Arisboch (talk) 11:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Sure thing. Nods.gif ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 07:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
As someone who is almost certainly jimbob whales, I can endorse this statement as true. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 12:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I've seen better comedy. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Quick, hide the bias under the floorboards until they've gone. Fonzie (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

My name is John Wiki and I invented Wiki. This Wiki is very Wiki and for that I salute. John Wiki (When you want to shoot, don't talk) 15:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] In Memoriam of the victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings

It's been ten years, and many thousands of people have been killed in terrorist and state terror attacks since then, none of whom are memorialized by the project. Time to take it down? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure, assuming that 911 has already been taken out of the rotation. Queexchthonic murmurings 16:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
^ +1. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 17:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I hate America wouldn't say no to that. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Or we could add "and the many lives lost to terrorism since then" below it. I think an "In Memoriam" for victims of terrorism sounds like a good idea, and this seems like an appropriate enough date. (talk) 20:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
And the same for the 9/11 date. (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

[edit] I don't even have words to express this bullshit

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/07/05/crazy-right-wing-preacher-says-confederates-will-march-on-the-north-and-win-this-time-video/ Master NecromancerWhat is dead may never die 01:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

What in the kus emek is his malfunction?--Arisboch (talk) 01:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I've seen how this one turns out. http://www.somethingawful.com/news/guns-versus-apaches/ -Psycho Gecko 1:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I LOL'd.--Arisboch (talk) 01:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
It turns out that idiots think there are a lot of people who agree with their particular brand of idiocy. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 12:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Wow, how many people have screamed civil war since Obama was elected? Now flying under a flag to start slavery again. This is hilarious after 8 years of being with Bush or you are with the terrorist...even ordering french fries instead of freedom fries got me yelled at for being un-American at a Marriot in Denver.  :-p -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Except these assholes are actual traitors under a traitor's flag. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 13:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I'd say any of the lot threating to lead an armed insurrection to put their favored autocrat in power are traitors. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 13:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Personal tools