Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?"

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎JPatt and Reliable sources: No pressing need for emphasis - quote is short enough)
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 239: Line 239:
 
:Planet Schlafly, of course. {{User:Human/sig|}} 06:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 
:Planet Schlafly, of course. {{User:Human/sig|}} 06:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 
::Also, CP's sourcing standards basically come down to "Whatever a sysop approves of". There is no "X is reliable, Y isn't" rule because they want to arbitrarily approve or disapprove of any article, depending on whether or not they agree with it. Blogs aren't reliable... unless they feel it's cite-worthy. Newspapers are reliable... unless they disagree with the sysops. Scientific articles are okay... but only if their findings agree with The Truth. Check "830/573f55..." and "840/0ec183..." from the [[TZB]] for a look into how CP sysops discuss sourcing standards. That makes it clear that sysops recognize the need for rules... but don't want to be bound by any. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 08:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 
::Also, CP's sourcing standards basically come down to "Whatever a sysop approves of". There is no "X is reliable, Y isn't" rule because they want to arbitrarily approve or disapprove of any article, depending on whether or not they agree with it. Blogs aren't reliable... unless they feel it's cite-worthy. Newspapers are reliable... unless they disagree with the sysops. Scientific articles are okay... but only if their findings agree with The Truth. Check "830/573f55..." and "840/0ec183..." from the [[TZB]] for a look into how CP sysops discuss sourcing standards. That makes it clear that sysops recognize the need for rules... but don't want to be bound by any. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 08:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 +
:And speaking of Jpatt and his articles, I gotta say that I'd ''really'' suspect him to be a parodist if he wasn't so hyperactive on Twitter. Just check his articles on [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jill_Rowland&oldid=822132 Jill Rowland] ("Jill Rowland is a conservative candidate that fights for you against big government") or [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=CommieBlaster.com&oldid=822408 CommieBlaster] ("This has attracted the usual trolls from MediaMatters utilizing their liberal tricks.") to see how the article standards have fallen to the level where it's fine to insert random opinion or simply copypaste phrases or paragraphs from campaign websites. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 09:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:11, 13 October 2010

What is going on?

(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting on existing topics. This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts. Thank you.

When adding a link to Conservapedia that is not already on What is going on at CP? please place <capture></capture> around the link.

For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the saloon bar.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: Archive list

Socialist obama.jpg

Obamageddon Meter

RationalWiki:Community Chalkboard

New Conservapedia

Here's a Conservapedia you can edit! It's growing rapidly, parodists are very welcome. And I think half the RationalWiki team are already there. Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC) RationalWiki

Bored, did this

Mainspace edits today: CP - 21 edits (inc 3 in "essay" space that the great dunderhead hasn't set up yet), 10 articles, 1 new article (baby boomer), about 4000 bytes added. RW - 72 edits, 21 articles, 1 new article (Prison) about 10000 bytes added. And we're not even building an encyclopedia. Totnesmartin (talk) 16:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I look forward to the day when a WP:WP:RS makes note that registration on CP is closed and editing is restricted so we can put it in the WP article. Occasionaluse (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, that's the issue with "reliable sources" and Wikipedia. It's not true unless a reliable source says it - even if it's blatantly obvious - and it is true if a "reliable" source says it is even if it's clearly bollocks! But I suppose at least that rule does solve more problems than it creates. Scarlet A.pngsshole 14:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm also bemused that the Baby Boom definition is put as between the Second World War and the Vietnam War... Is there any part of American history that doesn't involve war? Scarlet A.pngsshole 14:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Well the US was founded on a genocidal war against the native inhabitants, backed with a war against it's then ruler(s) and has continued with wars either itself or by proxy for it's entire history. The only wars they didn't actively get involved in until they had to were the 2 world wars. And before anyone shouts I agree that without US support then Europe would almost certainly have struggled to survive but then without the support of certain US citizens, bush (very) senior for one, so would nazi germany. But then the entire history of the UK until the past 30 years or so has also been based on colonial wars and the oppression of johhny f. Has anyone ever done an analysis? How many nation states entire existance has not been essentially based on warfare of one kind or anotherOldusgitus (talk) 14:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me, is there any part of any societies history that isn't cluttered by war? Sure the US started with a genocidal war against the native americans, but they were continuing a grand tradition of genocide on both europe and the americas. When the spanish went through the south west the Athabaskin tribes were a narrow band, when the americans finally made it there they had broadened their control, how you might ask? Oh through genocidal war. The US troops never encountered a tribe that did not have a proud long warrior tradition. --Opcn (talk) 23:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Which is in fact pretty much what I said Opcn. Do not some anthropoligists argue endlessly over war is a good thing will they not? It increases genetic diversity, drives technology and expans and secures a nations borders, hence the security of it's residents. 06:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
It was just a sarcastic aside - not to be taken too seriously. Once you start looking at history it's just a string of events where we decided not killing each other was just too much bloody hassle. Scarlet A.pngsshole 17:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

That's it...

I've tried all day to get some work done, but if I can't get anything done, neither can anyone else: *Casts spell of "Productivity Diminishment" — Unsigned, by: Carlaugust / talk / contribs

NOOOOOOOOOOOO! --Sid (talk) 19:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Right, that's today fucked then. DogPMarmite Patrol 22:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Makes me wonder for a minute-would it be worth the while to set up a list of religion tropes? Not just to call out examples from any one faith, but to underscore that what many regard as THE real deal is just the same old, same old, recycled to the point of being a trope rather than a "unique insight ". --DinsdaleP (talk) 22:56, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Huh, check out the first link I found on that page without even trying. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 18:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

"Only humans understand good and evil, and clothe themselves because of it"

Is this...img seriously Christian teaching? It strikes me as some sort of non sequitur to say that we wear clothes because we understand good and evil (and thus that wearing clothes is now an indicator of morality), but I won't rule it out - after all, especially the Old Testament had quite a few WTH moments. --Sid (talk) 18:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Far as I know, that's the whole point to the Adam & Eve story. They were innocent, the way animals are, and thus it didn't matter if they wore clothes so they didn't (in fact, neither apparently knew what clothes were). Gaining knowledge of good and evil meant they had the potential to actually do evil on purpose now, and thus weren't innocent any more. Thus the need for clothes, since being unclothed led to evil/lasciviousness. And as we all know, looking at someone naked and thinking they're sexy is a BAD thing. --Kels (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Wow, that's... pretty weird. *frowns* I always thought those were separate concepts, but yeah, this does explain the "NO NEKKID HUMANS" fits they have. --Sid (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
That's one reason to laugh at PJR's stupid "absolute morality comes from God" schtick, since if you read the silly thing it's clear God didn't want us to have it. Well, that and the fact that it's stupid. --Kels (talk) 01:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
So wait a minute, does that mean the Bible says that humans began as nothing more than animals? Sounds a bit like that evolution thing to me... TheMayor (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Best of the Public?

Remember Andy's bullshit assertion that the BotP re: Sports is that "Anyone can enter, and winning is based solely on skill." Well here's a great example of the best of the public coming up against so-called experts. In this case, the experts being people who actually trained for their sport. Enter Indian synchronised Swimmer, Avani Dave, who learned how to synchronise swim via Youtube, in time for the Comonwealth Games. Now, 100 points for effort, but sadly this example of BotP came stone last - 40 points behind the winner. Of course, it might be due to the fact that she's a heathen and not a good Christian... --PsyGremlinSprich! 09:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

But but but butt butt SHE WAS A TEENAGER! We all know teenagers are not only the best of the public, but the most synchronized swimmers ever! ħumanUser talk:Human 09:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
The judges all have liberal bias, that's what it is. What else do you expect a bunch of middle-aged people to watch teenage girls swim? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Since it's the Commonwealth Games, none of the achievements count. Everyone knows the British are a nation of deceitfu liberal atheists, and obviously they taught all their colonies the same thing. DogPMarmite Patrol 21:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Anti-colonialist

Cut to Forum:Anti-colonialism and the U.S. at 01:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Andy & Bible class homework

I thought he secretly gave up on the Bible class (since he never advertised it), but he's doing the homework now! --Composure1 (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

That's Teacher Ed's Bible course. Obviously more important for Andy than preparing notes for the world's largest American Govt class. I'm waiting for the moment when Teacher Ed steps on one of Andy's many, many crazy toes - especially regarding interpretation of passages. 100 internets says Teacher Ed is blocked before he can finish his course. --PsyGremlinPraat! 15:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
(ec)He won't pass up a chance to justify the CBP, so of course he'll jump right in. Though I'm mostly amused that so far, three people got the "sheep follow blindly" approach down: Nobody questioned why all links in Bible Homework Oneimg read Bible Homework Two. --Sid (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Should we at some point start suggesting him to start a new religion open a new church now? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
I see one fatal flaw of having Andy as the head of a charismatic church... the man has the charisma of road-kill. --PsyGremlinSermā! 15:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Can we expect liberal grade inflation when Mr.Ed. marks the homework?  Lily Inspirate me. 15:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Looking at how the site is run and how those who disagree with Andy's opinion (a.k.a. The Truth) tend to be banhammered, I don't think TeacherEd will dare to mark ANY of Andy's answer below "Perfect!" --Sid (talk) 15:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
My prior respect for road kill has been decimated...--Brendiggg (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, road kill is one of the four major food groups. On a serious note, I have a feeling Ed is trying to set Andy up, paint him into a corner over some Biblical issue. Of course, not having a ban hammer, he's doomed to fail. --PsyGremlinParlez! 16:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
My question is: Will Andy get the extra credit? And will he actually have done the work required? Nil Einne (talk) 18:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
I enjoyed his answer to why the Bible was translated. I always thought it was so it could be read and understood by anyone, but it appears it's because its original meaning is no longer correct...82.1.197.90 (talk) 18:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Haha, I wonder if he takes the same approach to the constitution.... --Composure1 (talk) 18:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Silly student three: "Correct, but you should not have included the picture (which I removed). This is a serious class - would you include pictures in a real-world class? Minus 1 for that, for a total of 9." [1] WTF? sterile t-shirt 19:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
"I like the Gospel of Luke because it is so beautifully written and its parables (like the Prodigal Son) are so powerful, and Gospel of John is so brilliant." OK, so that's the sort of answer that Andy himself would give full credit for, but "so brilliant"? Has he turned into a 14-year-old girl or something? Cantabrigian (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
That would be quite fitting given that the instructor's name is Ed. Tetronian you're clueless 20:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
This from an Ivy league asshole. Fuck, those places of higher learning must be regretting =taking mommy's bribe--Thanatos (talk) 22:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Well done, Andy, you're the best in class! This course has real potential for the parodists to goad him into doing more silly stuff just for the extra credit, as he'll never let anyone outdo himself on this topic. Making him twist another few bible verses was a good start. Röstigraben (talk) 06:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


Camels through the eye of a needle - Schlafly edition

I believe some people have been waiting for thisimg one? --Sid (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

And againimg for the people who tuned in late. --Sid (talk) 22:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Truly beautiful! 22:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Isn't Andy pretty miserly anyway? I don't recall any large donations to any charities from him, or anything of the sort (but I could be wrong). I guess maybe he thinks his teaching makes it not apply to him? But then he charges (quite a bit) for that too, soo... X Stickman (talk) 23:22, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
He had three points to address:
1. There's no surprise in his interpretation of "rich man" (with Jesus being the clear ultimate defender of the status quo).
2. The "camel vs. rope" issue doesn't really change the meaning, but it's a little odd for someone so fond of polysemy, semantic shifts and "mistranslations" to make no comment on it.
3. By now I should know better, and yet I still continue to be astounded by grown-ups deluding themselves with that pitiful Needle Gate (or "gate needle") piece of whishful thinking.
I'm torn between what Susan said (enjoying another Schlafly moment) and continue to shake my head in disbelief. This man is supposed to have had access to an education too many people only dream of!--Xyr (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Mr. Schlafly is not a fan of the status quo. The status quo involves secular states, accurate Bible translations, and sane persons solidly in control of science. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 01:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
If the Tea Partiers get just a little bit wackier, they're liable to come knocking on the Schlafly Estates door begging him to run for office. One would hope they'd hire him a voice coach or maybe corrective surgery? C®ackeЯ
Huh. Interesting. What's Andy's position on masturbation, then? Is he not a wizard? Blue (is useful) 06:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
It might be worth writing up eye of a needle. The WP page is, as expected, dry and to the point with whatever can be cited, but the discussion page has some interesting ideas. Scarlet A.pngsshole 10:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I'd love to see how he gets to "idle miser" from the root word of "wealth." Then again, I seem to remember WIGOing some comment of his about Jesus wearing fancy robes, so this edit is right up there. --PsyGremlinZungumza! 11:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Does it not say a lot about the man that he actually chose to reword that particular verse when there is still a lot of of the CBP to finish?  Lily Inspirate me. 11:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
You have to admire the priorities. It is making me want to rewrite some Bible. An RW translation... pull it off as a group project for National Novel Writing Month‽ Scarlet A.pngsshole 14:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

HERESY!!!! Possibly

Isn't that one of the heretical passages on Mainpage Leftimg?--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 22:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Huh? I speak English too!

I see that TK's absurd misrepresentation of what "own" means when uploading an image rubbed off on someone with such a long history stealing pictures from all and sundry. Nutty Rouxnever mind 23:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Has anyone thought of alerting the Wikipedian who owns the image to this bit of plagiarism? — Unsigned, by: 87.102.45.117 / talk / contribs
He released it into the public domain, so it's free for anyone to use. Even lying, stealing bastards like Terry Koeckritz. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 22:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Use ≠ lie about authorship. Nutty Rouxnever mind 22:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but to be fair he's fixed that now. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 22:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Just saying...

Oct 11, 2010 CP RW
Registered users 37,955 4,814
Active users (Users who have performed an action in the last 7 days) 36 148
percentage 0.095% 3.074%

larronsicut fur in nocte 07:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I have more user names on RW than CP. Like 20:3 or so. Just sayin'... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
You mean to say you have more user names on CP, right? Hateboy (talk) 22:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
No, here. At CP it may only be two - human and nadhob. Here I'm me, "everyone", a dozen or so Bohdans, and probably a handful of others. None of which I ever use (except, duh, this one). ħumanUser talk:Human 18:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Ken's schizophrenia

He's talking to himselfimg now. Creepy. Tetronian you're clueless 12:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Dememoryhole. CS Miller (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Nothing like posting comments on a locked talkpage. You can also see him stroking his... er... mouse and whispering "presssiousss." He also as a thing for bossy wives and peanut butter. Given that Ken is single and a virgin, one can only assume his mother inflicted some lasting memories on him. --PsyGremlinParlez! 13:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Even if the page wasn't locked, account creation and general editing is normally locked, which would also prevent anyone from commenting. CS Miller (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
So many of these fundies (Christian, Jewish amnd Muslim) are actually scared stiff of women and their sexuality, that's why they need to be repressed and controlled. Of course men have strong sexual urges so when you imprison women with either real or virtual chastity belts you are only left with - horror of horrors - other men to satisfy your baser instincts. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 14:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I do like the intense aversion to the idea that a woman can be as capable, or more so, than a man. There's a lot of fear in that attitude. --Kels (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
What does Ken's inability to find a woman willing to marry or even date him mean for his MA-CHEESE-MO? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 21:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

TK's plagiarism

Dear TK,

when you read the information of various sites, digest it, and put it to paper, it is not plagiarism. When you copy information nearly verbatim without the intermediate step, it is plagiarism. When you copy stuff from a government's source without quotation marks, it is not forbidden. But it is still plagiarism.

Glad I could help

larronsicut fur in nocte 14:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

You forgot the part where "it's only plagiarism if I say it is". Scarlet A.pngsshole 14:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Dear TK,
Plagiarism means taking false personal credit for academic gain, which is not at issue here.img. I'm afraid, your former contributor to the project is wrong, or at least mislead. You should read cp:Plagiarism: Plagiarism is the use of another person's words or ideas with the goal of deceiving readers into thinking the plagiarist originated the ideas and deserves credit for them. Fits to a t. And you are setting a bad example for all the home-schoolers visiting the project - what happens when they copy your methods for their homework? But, but, but, like, I gave all the links! won't help them. And shouldn't sysops adhere to the highest standards? larronsicut fur in nocte 14:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Even funnier - poke TK with a stick and you know how he'll react. 1) Burn the evidenceimg. When doing this, make sure you tell a juicy lie about why you are deleting the page. (Hint: Wikipedia isn't "public domain," sbt) Two: In the absence of any actual editors on CP, take out your frustrations on an editor you blocked almost 2 years ago.img Rinse. Repeat. --PsyGremlinFale! 15:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
LOL!! No!img The definition of plagiarism is WRONG! I'm going to rewrite it and if you don't like what I say, you're a troll! Methinks the lady doth protest too much, but isn't he just too wonderful when he throws a hissy fit? Mwha, big boy! --PsyGremlinPrata! 15:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a well known fact that neither TK nor Andy would know integrity if it pissed in their faces. Corry (talk) 15:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

More funny from the recovered talk page - TK deletes it and blocks Tom Moore until the entropy death of the universe, but tM actually had nothing to do with the whole calling TK out thing. It's just him lashing out becuse he's all butt-hurt now. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 10:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

TK's rantimg

I am going to delete this article, pending a rewrite, because of the inconsistencies noted above by Professor Jensen, and the insertion by vandal site trolls (who have all long-ago been blocked for their perfidy) of completely spurious information. Using government-provided text, written at taxpayers expense, and duly cited as the source, with links provided, is not plagiarism as established in case law. Someone employed by the government, to write website text, has absolutely no claim to copyright, as they do so as part of their duties, and are paid for what they do, at taxpayers expense. Aside from that, it is also a well-established policy here, from the owner of this site, that copying from government websites is permitted. Now if someone copies an article from the Department of Defense, without attribution, leaving the impression they were the author, that isn't plagiarism, but it could be dishonesty. But to adapt government copy for use here, or anywhere, with a clear citation of where it comes from is not dishonest or illegal in any way, shape or form. Anyone who argues differently is either a troll or liar, most likely both. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 11:22, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

Interesting definition Terry, let's see some case law proving that. And as for the two "government sites" you stole information from (yes, Terry Koeckritz, STOLE) what does their copyright say?

  • Uni Nevada: "All text, images, logos and information contained on official University websites are the intellectual property of the University of Nevada, Reno and the Nevada System of Higher Education unless otherwise indicated.U.S. copyright law provides protection for all content, with or without this statement. Reproduction of any content--text, images, photographs, etc.--requires permission."

I have dropped a note to the site owners, with all of Andy's contact details, as listed on the main page so they can lodge an official complaint. Your move, Terry. --PsyGremlinZungumza! 15:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that the University of Nevada has any problems with their text being copied and promoted by any blog: most organizations love to have their point of view being represented seemingly unaltered and stated as factual in wikipedias around the world.
But that is a part of the problem! The other part is that TK pretends to be able of original thought...
larronsicut fur in nocte 16:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I just hope that when DouglasA(dams) takes his mask off, he deletes all of TK's work as "serial material thief" --PsyGremlinParla! 16:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I'd resist any of my work appearing unaltered on WP. Basically, you get a lot of sites that say that they can give you info on a subject - but it's identical to the relevant WP article. So, it looks like you've copied it from Wikipedia, even when it's obviously the other way around. It's why I didn't dump my MChem dissertation onto WP, although I did entertain the idea for a bit, I thought they'd run the electronic plagiarism detection software and I'd get shot for copying! Scarlet A.pngsshole 17:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm too lazy to follow all links and stuff, but I'm incredibly amused how TK holds up talk page posts by RJJ as absolute authority.
And seriously, what's all the worry about? TK got his sysop powers through copypasting, practically all his non-trivial mainspace contribs are copypasting, he even got caught on CP... and nothing serious ever happened! It's obvious that TK is above the rules, and I dare any CP sysop to tell me otherwise. Heck, do it by mail if you're too scared of TK watching your public posts! --Sid (talk) 18:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I think poor TerryKakes is struggling with the differences between copyright theft and plagiarism; both are dishonest thought Tel-Boy! DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Since the original of the UCLA talk page was burnt, I uploaded a Google Cache screencap of it so people can check it out. Cache link if somebody wants to upload a version with a different width. It only occurred to me later that my upload might be too wide for some screens. --Sid (talk) 20:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

WIGOing TK

Why are people still WIGOing Terry Koeckritz? It's rehashed, it's boring, it's trolling, and he gets off whenever he sees his name on this page, or RW users on WIGOCP sporadically asking why everyone keeps WIGOing him. He's had his day in the sun anyway, his worst trolling is behind him (i.e. BluntKnives, plagiarism, DeanS incident, etc). SJ Debaser 09:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Generally agreed, although you have to admit, his frantic attempts to hide the evidence, but his planning to redo the definition of plagiarism, was kinda funny. So glad we can control editorial content from here. --PsyGremlinZungumza! 10:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
TK is intrinsically both insincere and dishonest. I'm not over-enamoured with the WIGOs but the postings on this talk page have yanked his strings in a most amusing way.  Lily Inspirate me. 10:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Exactly. It's gone into another meta-level. First, WIGO recorded trolling/lies etc from Terry Koeckritz. Then Terry Koeckritz started doing it to get mentioned here. Now, RW mentions Terry Koeckritz in order to watch him dance to our tune. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 10:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
It's not entirely unlike that little incident where Ken and some youtuber entered an infinite loop of mentioning each other. Good times. ONE / TALK 13:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I think it's kind of fun. Most of us have talked to TK and we know that he's just fucking around. Who else would he be hiding this shit from? It's the same cat and mouse game it was when trolling CP was fun. Now it's happening on RW. It's better than nothing. It highlights how insulated everyone over there is. It fills in the gaps between Andy's insanity. Keep WIGOing TK. It's good stuff. Occasionaluse (talk) 13:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Let's unblock him. He's obviously not going to sue the site and I enjoyed the conversations we had with him. Senator Harrison (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh sure, Terry's harmless and big ol' barrel of laughs when you get to know him. Hell yes! Let's unblock him. And why not make him a crat too? Cos he's just one of the boys, you know. --PsyGremlinSermā! 15:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. He's a despicable, lying individual whom I would call a "piece of shit" were it not for the fact that shit can help grow things instead of killing them off. Anybody wanting to talk to him can use his email address - or just post something here starting with "Oi! Terry you sack of pus" on this page. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 15:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Terry, if you want to come back, give us a sign. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
He was WIGO'ed because theres nothing else happening. --Opcn (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

(undent) I dislike the guy as much as you all do but I think that the block was a little hasty. Plus he didn't do what we blocked him for, unless there's something else. That's all. Senator Harrison (talk) 22:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

This is fucking stupid, another TK block/unblock decision? Please. TK is blocked, everything is fine, why bother going down this route again. i9 22:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hasty? I thought we spent months, years, even wasted decades of our lives arguing about it. But this place is so much nicer without the TrollKing wasting our time by calling us names. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

(draws line under discussion) 22:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

The reason Terry Koeckritz gets WIGOed and will continue to do so is because his conduct is representative of CP. If the only things going on are his petty bullying, plagiarism and history burning to cover his own ass, then that says more about CP than any parody. Every Terry Koeckritz WIGO is a concrete example of why no-one in the conservative movement wants nothing to do with them and how badly Andy is mismanaging the site and being a poor educator by putting his own ego ahead of student development. For all his trumpeting of the Tea Baggers, I don't see a rapidly growing category based around Template:TeaBagger. Every Terry Koeckritz WIGO serves to remind anyone thinking of associating with that blog of the kind of crap that is allowed to go on there by the 'most high admin'. So what if he gets hard every time we WIGO him, there are two major theories:

  1. Terry Koeckritz is honestly a conservative, therefore every time he gets WIGOed our recording of the conduct means he damages the site's reputation further
  2. Terry Koeckritz is a deep cover parodist, therefore he wants to damage the site further and we're just helping him bring it down

Either way, CP suffers. Let's keep WIGOing the pompous shite for that very reason. -- Iscariot (talk) 09:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Double standard

Let me put it this way, Andy. I would have no problem with a wealthy preacherimg if a) he paid taxes on it like everybody else and b) didn't become wealthy by fleecing ignorant, superstitious fools like yourself. Really Andy, take the time and watch Marjoe - with an open mind. Or even better, think back to Oral Roberts begging for money, otherwise God was going to kill him. Nice religion you're a part of Andy. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 16:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Look at the poor fools that fall for the TV preachers even AFTER they have been discredited. For those interested, "Marjoe" is on YouTube in sections (or was). I watched a year ago, and it was quite interesting. Considering when it was made, I'm sure it took guts to do it. Jimaginator (talk) 16:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Youtube linky - part 1 of 10. --PsyGremlinFale! 16:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Psy. Awesome film, we should have article on it! ħumanUser talk:Human 01:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Dear Christ... Who made that piece of shit flow chart they have on the page? SirChuckBObama/Biden? 2012 19:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
"Wealth by"??? Where did Andy learn to write, anyway? ħumanUser talk:Human 20:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
He was homeskooled by his mom. 'Nuff said.  Lily Inspirate me. 06:32, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Dishonest Andy

He was nominated by Obama but he is too liberal to be confirmed quickly, yes, he was nominated by Obama, that ensures that he will not be confirmed quickly. --Opcn (talk) 06:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Is being a fuckhead a "conservative" field? --IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 20:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Death threats from WIllminator

Long time listener, first time caller... I was talking to "Willminator" and I guess I got under his skin. I expected him to be a hypocrite, but I didn't expect explicit death threats ("I want to kill you so bad...", "you will soon lose your life", "I plan to hide and wait all night outside your crib until the morning when you come out of your crib. Then I’m going to push you inside your crib and kill you...". It's kind of freaky knowing an extremist knows your name and is out to get you. Should I be taking action or just ignoring him and hope he doesn't find me? If any of you here is Will, please fess up in our little conversation. JeffT (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd be about as worried about him getting you as I would the FBI showing up at your door if you wandalize CP... after all, the people at CP need some way to feel powerful, and since they can't actually do much of anything in the real world (case in point: CP) they probably feel the need to "talk tough" with you. ghazi alizm, comments? 18:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I was email baiting Willhemina but stopped when I became convinced that he was mentally retarded. 18:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
That email address was on CP, right? I sent tizzy zoran an email bait a few weeks ago since his/her address was public but I never got a response. they must be too busy drawing billions and billions of people to their encyclopedia to notice any emails.... but mentally retarded? Do share! ghazi alizm, comments? 19:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Ghazi is right. Don't make an ass of yourself by taking this loser seriously. Hateboy (talk) 19:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Susan G. Komen

As I see on the CP main page, Susan G. Komen is a liberal feminist communazi, and the only thing she loves more than breast cancer are abortions. Just like the World Health Organization, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Medical Association, all who are liberal pro-abortionists and pro-breastcancerists that deny the PROVEN scientific link between abortions and breast cancer. </psuedo-CP rant>

Ugh...writing insane shit makes my brain itchy. I don't know how they do it over at CP.

Seriously though, how sick and pathetic do you have to be to attack the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation?Carlaugust (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Or retarded. Senator Harrison (talk) 22:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

JPatt and Reliable sources

Ok... Even knowing that he's an idiot.... Even knowing that he's a crazy homophobic fundamentalist.... On what planet is a website who's slogan appears to be "PROGRESSIVES = SOCIALISTS = COMMUNISTS = LEFT-WING RADICALS = ANTI-CAPITALISTS = UNAMERICAN" considered a reliable source by anyone without a steel plate in their head and tinfoil lining their apartment? SirChuckBCall the FBI 06:41, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Planet Schlafly, of course. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Also, CP's sourcing standards basically come down to "Whatever a sysop approves of". There is no "X is reliable, Y isn't" rule because they want to arbitrarily approve or disapprove of any article, depending on whether or not they agree with it. Blogs aren't reliable... unless they feel it's cite-worthy. Newspapers are reliable... unless they disagree with the sysops. Scientific articles are okay... but only if their findings agree with The Truth. Check "830/573f55..." and "840/0ec183..." from the TZB for a look into how CP sysops discuss sourcing standards. That makes it clear that sysops recognize the need for rules... but don't want to be bound by any. --Sid (talk) 08:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
And speaking of Jpatt and his articles, I gotta say that I'd really suspect him to be a parodist if he wasn't so hyperactive on Twitter. Just check his articles on Jill Rowland ("Jill Rowland is a conservative candidate that fights for you against big government") or CommieBlaster ("This has attracted the usual trolls from MediaMatters utilizing their liberal tricks.") to see how the article standards have fallen to the level where it's fine to insert random opinion or simply copypaste phrases or paragraphs from campaign websites. --Sid (talk) 09:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)