Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive338

Ken's new sock puppet?
MarkLM8 - pound to a penny. London Grump (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The page has now been deleted by Ken. Given Karajou's record when it comes to sock puppets he would have been blocked anyway, Ha!. Who the hell was he trying to fool anyway?--Mercian (talk) 15:31, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

What the MSM isn't covering...
Just when you thought the kids were getting along so nicely, stuff happens. Mick McT (talk) 15:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This is odd. Andy never holds back about his real feeling on Obamacare, abortion, E=mc2, or relativity, and he also promotes his personal views on Main Page Right.  His restraint on airing his personal family problems on Conservapedia is admirable. Hclodge (talk) 13:18, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

A shout out from Ken.
Two things stand out for me. How does one of the editors know he is in the 99.925 % IQ if "Only pretentious people take written IQ tests and/or join Mensa"? And wouldn't such intelligent people point out that it would be "Users:Conservative" not "User:Conservative"?--Mercian (talk) 23:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "Checkmate atheists"? What if he really is a poe? —Kazitor, pending 00:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * coming out of my retirement from RW to briefly comment on this in that I can't believe after all these years Ken is still at this shit. Fuck man, do something else. It has been nearly 10 years since I first started reading CP and editing here and in that time I have gotten married, gotten divorced, had a child, bought a house, traveled to several different countries, worked my way up the corporate ladder, gotten a new girlfriend, crashed 2 cars, had a health scare, quit smoking, quit drinking, started drinking again, buried 2 family members, written half a book, moved in and out of three cities in 2 different countries and basically carried on with my life. But here is Ken spewing the same rubbish, in the same vein, on the same website as of nothing on his life has ever changed. Jesus fuck man, the guy is hopeless. Right - back to it again. Acei9 08:17, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Is there a "quit drinking again" at some point in there? —Kazitor, pending 08:39, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know, maybe. Depends which organ gives out next I suppose. Acei9 08:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I too had a health scare that I happened to mention on Rob Smith's talk page in a disagreement over free health care. The lovely Ken trolled me with such gems as "Atheism and cancer", "Godless UK and cancer". All over-sited and burned now of course. A man of real class.--Mercian (talk) 11:46, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The irony of Ken of all people referring to someone else as a 'beta' is delicious. Delicious, I say. --Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

An old classic
5 Most Bizarre Kids Show Entries on Conservapedia, Houston Press. Just... atrocious. 18:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Conservapedia:In the media t 07:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "Conservapedia [is] literally the prose incarnation of the bats scene in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." I'm dying. LongLostLegend (talk) 13:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh fer fuck sake Ken
Yes Ken, I'm giving you attention. You may now scurry off and masturbate furiously in happiness.

Oh yeah, and Google paraphrasing the top search term, on YOUR PC, based on YOUR search history, and YOUR cookies does not equate to Google recognizing anything as a psychological condition. Google is primarily a search engine, driven by advertising revenue, not the DSM4.

Countdown to essay deletion in 3... 2... --LongLostLegend (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not sure whether to mock or pity him. He has gone on and on about compulsion with a compulsion that is borderline insane. Schlafly's "That made my day, User:Conservative! Thank you for your amazing insights"img has just spurred him on.--Mercian (talk) 23:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As in, even Andy recognises how silly this is and is getting a laugh from Ken's antics? Wishful thinking, probably. —Kazitor, pending 04:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The essay has been around since 2010. The essay is obviously directed at RationalWiki and is ironically awesome. 04:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * PS Ken, I know you watch us obsessively, but you shouldn't rely on us for your front page news. It's the DSM-5 now, not 4, like reported above. LongLostLegend (talk) 09:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh hey, does that mean he has RationalWiki obsessive compulsive disorder? At least ROCD is a marginally cooler acronym. And to top it off, I just noticed he didn't even enter the right search terms. —Kazitor, pending 09:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I like how the 9th result is our own page on user:Conservative which details their various obsessions and breaks down the lack of content, thought, and tedious repetition in their 'writings'. It's almost as though they didn't put any thought into this latest attempt to provoke. Semipenultimate (talk) 17:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Sophos now blocking CP?
The company I work for, for another 5 days before I leave, uses Sophos web monitoring software to block 'questionable' sites. Pron, goat pron, girls in yoga pants etc. I came in this morning to find it is now blocking CP as 'alcohol and tobacco'. Who's wound Sophos up to get CP blacklisted? Oldusgitus (talk) 08:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Ken compares Democrats (and by extension atheists and anyone else he does not like) to rats.
Where have we heard that before?--Mercian (talk) 20:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Northwest
Northwestrapeskids, Northwesttheshithead, etc, etc: This person's behaviour is disgusting. Please stop.--Mercian (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe Northwest shouldn't have been such a fucktard. 69.127.180.183 (talk) 15:24, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Can we add an oldie but a goodie?
I just found the "What's going on at CP" page. There is an old article at CP that I love: Feminism. Can I somehow throw that onto this page? (I didn't want to back date it at the "Best of CP" page unless it gets enough votes). I wanted to highlight that the first defining aspect of feminism they list is: Feminists want women to wear pants. -- Bertrc (talk) 14:34, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Atheist Shooters
CP's found the thread linking all the recent mass murders (that aren't Islamic). It's atheism. Do you think they'd support restrictions on the ownership of firearms by atheists? It'd be a start. We should get Andy working on it. Whoover (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * They do post a link to the "Terrorism Expert" Theodore Shoebat so it must be true.--Mercian (talk) 20:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey Ken, here is a pick of one of the "Pro-Sodomite Sluts And Whores" who the "expert" you so admire is glad is dead.--Mercian (talk) 20:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice over-site Ken, I am glad to see you take the opinions of members of this atheist wiki seriously. Let us take your other crush called Theodore, Mr Beale and his disgusting misogyny. Quote: "Genital mutilation and acid burnings are legitimate ways to treat women". More over-siting perhaps?--Mercian (talk) 15:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

What am I missing?
. . . Not just at conservapedia, but across the right, I see little gloating about Donna Brazile's book. It seems like the book is a treasure trove for them to take and exaggerate upon. Is there some aspect of the story that I am missing? -- Bertrc (talk) 15:22, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope, it's a pretty solid distraction from the raft of issues produced by Current Occupant's lack of suitability for the office he now holds. "Hey, look over there! Whatever you do, don't think about the fact that User:Conservative has declared support for a man who advocates genital mutilations and acid attacks on women! Don't think about how C.O. has the unvarnished support of every white supremacist group in the nation! Look at book! LOOK AT BOOK!" Semipenultimate (talk) 16:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * , But I don't see it being listed on CP's front page. I'm not really seeing much of it on any of the far right blogs.  Maybe a mention here or there, but no repetition, no frothing at the mouth calling for HRC to be sent to DR.  I would have thought they would be all over this, but there is barely a murmur.  Quite frankly, the lack of ranting is rather creepy.  What am I missing?  Is it actually somewhere on CP's main page and I missed it?  -- Bertrc  (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe they are happy that the DNC rigging happened. Had it not it could well have been Trump vs Sanders and Bernie would have won IMO. I don't think right wingers like being reminded of that so it is largely ignored.--Mercian (talk) 22:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Schlafly at recent Roy Moore speech?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbUZX3mJCEc

Guy in the back with the "I didn't know they made that color" yellow tie.

Makes sense after his "mere misdemeanor" post. 108.69.57.107 (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (just a lurker don't invite me reeeeeeeeee)
 * Looking at 1:49, for instance, I don't think it's him. —Kazitor, pending 00:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Found another longer, better video. https://www.c-span.org/video/?437456-1/roy-moore-rejects-sexual-misconduct-allegations-calls-senator-mcconnell-resign
 * Around 27:45 the woman calls Andy up. It's undeniably him. Speaks for about 3 minutes, basically saying his mom supported Moore so he does, too. 108.69.57.107 (talk) 00:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Church basement...his mom slept with his dad so...I'm sure there's the making of a terrible joke in there.London Grump (talk) 18:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

1990'sguy
What is the relationship between 1990'sguy and the World Net Daily? ("Excellent news and commentary source on the vast majority of issues") Is it a sockpuppet for a WND editor or just extreme brown-nosing? http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservative_news_websites&diff=1389231&oldid=1389230img Hclodge (talk) 22:40, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And yet he didn't move it up the list. —Kazitor, pending 04:40, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Who is Mark Jones?
From Conservapedia:In the media, t 14:32, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Wonderful responses to "Mark" including, especially, "What a small world this man lives in." That nicely defines Ken. Whoover (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Slavery in the UK
Alright Ken, as you are so averse to the truth and block anyone who calls you out on your bullshit I will post it here for all to see. It is well known that user:Conservative triumphs the immigration of Eastern European Christians to The UK to combat it's atheism problem. He then publishes a a news story about slavery in the UK. Here are the names of some people who have been convicted of these offenses.
 * Sebastian Mandzik
 * Robert Majewski
 * Pawel Majewski
 * Seweryn Szmyt.

Notice a pattern here? That's right, they, and the vast majority of other slavers are from Eastern European Christian nations that Conservative champions. All this in a week where another of his champions, Roy Moore said the USA was better off before the emancipation and stated his wish to abolish a number of amendments, including The Thirteenth. I say again Conservative, you should do your research. Remember "Pro-Sodomite Sluts And Whores". --Mercian (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * "the vast majority of other slavers are from Eastern European Christian nations?" lolwut? London Grump (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I should have said "a large number of". My words were poorly chosen. I am anti Brexit to be clear and do not think Eastern Europeans are any better or worse than any other people. The fact is that there are criminals all over and those from Eastern Europe and other places are able to con people that they will have a utopian life in the UK when they often do not.--Mercian (talk) 09:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Conservative goes on a bizarre two day tirade trashing Britain and linking its shortcomings to Darwinism
Earlier this year I posted this on Rob Smith's talkpage after he trashed The NHS Now oversited of course, but in response Conservative posted some very nasty articles in the region of Atheism and Cancer/Godless Britain and cancer. I thought he was disturbed and was just attention seeking. I have changed my mind. I now think he posts these things because he is a heartless bastard of a troll.--Mercian (talk) 11:48, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Tell me now that he is not trolling

--Mercian (talk) 14:58, 22 December 2017 (UTC)




 * Mercian, there is no end of people who will cheer when you weep. Or fall down the stairs, or lose your job, or fuck-sake, get a dire diagnosis. These are tiny, little men, with tiny, little souls, and they want to remake the world in their simply tiny worldview, with no room for the 'other'. I went to church with these people. I was the kind of kid that asked questions about idiot doctrine (Cain's Wife? Lot's incest? Animals on islands? Meteor craters?) and the price I paid was to be pelted with gravel by my fellow Sunday School students, week after week. There's a very nice scar juuust in my left eyebrow from a particularly good strike by the biggest piece of shit in the group, who also happened to be our pastor's son. When my mother brought her blood-gushing boy into the pastor's office, the pastor said he was troubled not by the boys who'd stoned me but by my actions - my airing of doubts in Sunday School. My mother got in trouble that day because she hadn't been keeping me in line, that I'd probably been perusing some forbidden cultural item (read: all popular culture) that had corrupted me.
 * These people get off on controlling you, on subjecting you to their power. That's their joy in life, and it fills with me sorrow that this is the case, but I've grown to accept it and do what I can to protect myself. Most days I'm lucky, some days I'm not. On the days I'm lucky, I try to help those who aren't. On the days I'm not, I know I've got good people who are. And so we keep each other up, pushing against the machine, the bleeding hearts and the artists making their stand. I'm sorry that shitposting mound of misery got to you. Semipenultimate (talk) 16:58, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you Semipenultimate.--Mercian (talk) 18:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Always welcome Mercian. Semipenultimate (talk) 21:48, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * It is awful how your mum and yourself were treated. It is hard for a Brit to understand such behaviour from Christians. British Christians can occasionally be a little judgemental but have more of a "come and have a cup of tea and a slice of cake" attitude. What really got to me were the people who defended Roy Moore because Joseph married the minor Mary or when Andy Schlafly appeared to excuse Moore's crimes because they happened years ago. I have seen people use the Bible to vilify homosexuality/etc but never before to defend paedophilia.--Mercian (talk) 22:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Why wouldn't they though? The bible was originally written in a time when such things were considered normal. GrammarCommie (talk) 22:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't know if any of you have ever had a loved one die of cancer, but odds are, you have. And when someone you love is afflicted with cancer, and you're caring for them, it can eat the heart right out of you if you're not careful. So support groups exist for caretakers, not just for those directly facing down Big C. The group I was in cut across class and race lines, and boy howdy, is there a vast difference in this country between the way the rich and poor get treated for cancer.
 * The lucky ones had great insurance and homes that had been going up in value year after year for 2-3 decades. They'd come in, tell their story. Had some strange pain, saw Doctor #1, then #2, then the Onco, and now their loved one is getting a good heavy chemo dose. Maybe 2-3 weeks. Of course they were also now living from savings, because only one of them could work and the other one was taking FMLA time, which is unpaid, so no income, regardless. End result: the middle class eats their retirement savings to provide healthcare for themselves.
 * The unlucky ones were stuck with bad insurance or no insurance and so were stuck with the county hospital. Four weeks to see Doctor #1. Another few weeks to see Doctor #2. Another few weeks to see the Onco. Another few weeks to get your biopsy done. Story after story: "It was two months before I started to get treatment." "Twelve weeks from the first visit to chemo." "the hospital confused my file and there was another month gone." "I saw the wrong doctor and they had to reschedule a month out." "My day care fell through and I couldn't go." "My bus was late and they reassigned my spot." Again and again and again this happened. Nobody, and I mean nobody, had a good thing to say about the quality of services made available to the poor or in-need. For these people, two months of waiting is on the low side with respect to waiting time.
 * Now, to address the cowards posting out of reach of their victims. Please know, I'll never edit a word you say. I might correct your phrasing in a reply back to you without the weasel words, but I won't delete or alter your content, unlike the mass censorship of ideas unacceptable to Andrew Schalfly's delicate fucking sensibilities (like the careful scrubbing just recently done of any of the 'Boy Roy Moore sure gonna win' content - your slip is showing, Andy). This is not a calling out, and there's no fucking debate here, so put your hard-on away, Cons. Just making a point.
 * When the Berlin Wall was built, it put the lie to all the flowery language the Commies used about their rotten little system. Anyone could see that their words were wind, their stated motivations false, and their hidden motives made incredibly obvious. So too it goes with Conservapedia, where only Conservapedians may speak, and even then, not freely... and Rationalwiki, where both Conservapedians and Rationalwikians may speak freely. Draw your own conclusions. Feliz Navidad. Semipenultimate (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * My treatment was quick, 11 days from diagnosis to operation, so that dispels Ken "I got the power" point.. He also accuses us of having less machismo than someone called Heather Wilson. Not that it is your business Ken, and it is not something I shout about (I have never mentioned it on this wiki) but I was part of the First Gulf War, Bosnia and 3 tours of Northern Ireland. What have you done but spiel hate from your mother's basement? Machismo indeed--Mercian (talk) 22:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry, if he can't bother to walk over here to say it, I'm not reading it. Fucksakes, he's obviously already here reading it. What's the point of him replying to our comments here in a place where nobody he's talking to can reply? Oh, right, he's a bullying shite who only talks on wikis where he has absolute power. Semipenultimate (talk) 23:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Apologies for butting in, but I know Ken's reading, so I'd just like to point him to Voodoo Ray by A Guy Called Gerald. Carry on. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Loved that record.--Mercian (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ken, by the way I have noticed you have acknowledged that you are called Ken, here is a thing about me not being a US Navy Seal, I am not an American. --Mercian (talk) 14:48, 23 December 2017 (UTC)




 * Thank you Joaquín. This is another instance of him opening his mouth without thinking but in a twisted way he is correct. Britain has been involved in too many wars since 1990 but in all that time the greatest operational (not accidental) loss of life in a single incident was when an USAF A-10 attacked a British Army column killing 9 soldiers.--Mercian (talk) 15:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Believe me Cons, we already know that your vision of the future is a boot stamping on an atheist face forever. You say it many times, and many different ways, over and over again! But far be it from me to discourage you from doing what it takes to get stimulated. Just make sure to loosen the belt right before you come; you wouldn't want to go like David Carradine did. Semipenultimate (talk) 22:48, 24 December 2017 (UTC)




 * I admit that he got to me so I shared it with my friends on Facebook. A friend of mine replied "Merry Xmas Mercian. We all know the term American Conservative is another way of saying he's a bellend :) and I bet he's jingling all the way in his gimp mask while fitting his but plug and nappy.(Diaper)"--Mercian (talk) 00:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Mercian, mate, why on earth are you engaging with this half-whit? Ajkgordon (talk) 09:11, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

A festive poem shared by a prominent Conservapedian
Mr. Militant Atheist is a super freak mutant atheist

Mr. Militant Atheist is a super freaky mutant atheist.

He's the kind religious girls don't take home to mother.

He's the kind to scowl at your mother's picture of Jesus.

He's a super freak, super freak,

He's super freaky, super freak, super freak.

Mr. Militant Atheist is a super freak.

That guy is pretty wild now.

The guy's a super freak.

He's a super freak, super freak,

He's super freaky, super freak, super freak.


 * Merry Christmas everybody:)--Mercian (talk) 11:40, 25 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I have just read that while listening to Rick James' "Super Freak" and I can honestly say that the version above is an utterly shite parody. Anyway, Ken, you've revealed that you've been listening to a song celebrating casual sex and cunnilingus with a video designed to give you a woody. If you were one of Andy's students and he knew you'd been doing that, he'd be obliged to whoop your ass in an attempt to save your immortal soul. Spud (talk) 12:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I have just seen this.Conservapedia:Debating Kendoll Is it really true that this "person" deprived a charity $20,000 dollars because he was too cowardly to debate? And I let him get me. What a loser, many good people give up their time to to earn a few dollars $ for charity whilst this person  turned down 20 grand because he did not want to lose face. So much for Christianity and charity.--Mercian (talk) 14:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)




 * My dear Conservative, again I urge you to do your homework before you post because you have walked right into this one. You all but declared victory and pronounced me beaten. During the Korean War Douglas MacArthur all but declared victory and pronounced North Korea beaten. What happened next was that MacArthur got his behind kicked to such an extent that he campaigned to use nuclear weapons and was considered so unstable that Harry Truman had to sack him.--Mercian (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2017 (UTC)




 * Yeah I am beaten. You have thrown the proverbial acid in my face, Vox Day will be proud of you. I stand in shame, instead of being beaten by a man of honour I have been flogged (I guess as you are one with the gimp mask and butt plug you do enjoy a flogging) by a man who is anti "sodomite sluts and whores" who spent most of last night over-siting lies and bullshit.




 * I submit to your superiority. Oh, if you do not get sarcasm, this is it.--Mercian (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * PS, I went to the outpatients today and I have been cancer free for 6 months, I am cured. Unfortunately for you there is .--Mercian (talk) 14:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ken, the fact that you need to cite your own "essays" to prove your case rather than peer reviewed journals is a sign of how little you can prove. Comrade GC (talk) 14:29, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Ken is correct when he says that the US led UN force and South Korea came out on top. This was due to General Matthew Ridgway taking command, in my opinion one of the best General Officers in modern history. MacArthur was a good administrator, he did a good job helping to rebuild and reshape Japan after WW2 but he was a poor general. That period had more than it's fair share of prima-donna commanders, most notably Montgomery and Patton but unlike MacArthur these two gentleman were actually good at their job. He is also correct in his assessment that I served neither as a commissioned officer or as special forces. I did serve though. Ken can make some good points, in some ways he is more rational and reasonable than other CP editors. Although he supports Trump he does not regard him as being beyond reproach like Andy does. He objected to Northwest's idea that The Democratic Party should be banned creating a de-facto one party state and then he loses it. This can be observed in the screenshot above. --Mercian (talk) 17:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 1990s guy, I'm not JohnZ, but apologies for mistaking you. --Mercian (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * In fairness, Northwest is a complete fucktard. 2600:387:5:802:0:0:0:87 (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)



Congratulations, Mercian. You made the headlines on Main Page Right and got your own Ken essay. He's a troll and you fed him... London Grump (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Joaquín Martínez asked for it


This is a svg(raphic), much of the information is linked in it and can be viewed by mouse-over. To enjoy the full experience, you have to look at

https://rationalwiki.org/w/images/3/36/Action-Conservapedia-2017-40.svg

Happy New Year, larron (talk) 23:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it would be cool to see a chart of banned users to new active users that year. 16:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think so: from the graphic you can see that more than 70% of all edits were made by just 10 editors, so it is a group blog of an odd mix of true believers and venerated parodists with a steady influx of less successful trolls/parodists/vandals.
 * I'm aware that CP is just a couple of presidential tweets away from becoming an internet sensation (luckily Andy isn't able to suck up to the Donald on twitter...), but until then, I won't produce more stats.
 * --larron (talk) 21:46, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * What about a chart showing which CP articles got the most page views in 2017? It would show what on CP got the most attention in the Trump era, compared to just many edits by the registered editors.98.223.136.22 (talk) 02:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * How to you propose to gather this data? --larron (talk) 08:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's the question. Since the bottom of CP's articles shows the total page views, is there a way to find how many total page views for all the pages was on 1/1/2017 and 12/31/2017 and then compare the difference (or just the later date for pages created in 2017)?98.223.136.22 (talk) 00:42, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are interested in only a few pages, you can use the wayback machine: Here, e.g.,, you can calculate that the top-billed article on the 2nd LoT was viewed less than 41 times a day over the last year. --larron (talk) 11:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the page count does not exclude bots or other CP editors. I strongly suspect that the cp:Donald Trump achievements articles are viewed by 1990sguy and the bot and maybe a few rationalwiki visitors.  One can't help but wonder if 1990sguy is a very dedicated parodist. Hclodge (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * How was this chart made? 02:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The very short version: I looked up the data via the api and came up with some R programs. Here are some details. -- larron (talk) 08:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Conservapedia proven right.
How does this work exactly?. I have noticed a few times that Andy posts a "Conservapedia proven right" headline although there was no such prediction on the relevant page, unless Andy adds it afterwards.--Mercian (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

OK now fuck


Never visit here anymore. But fuck. Guy is fucked. Acei9 07:09, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * At the risk of giving Ken more masturbatory material, I must add a comment. The CP Alexa/SEO/Google-bomb expert doesn't seem to know that the bold words in his Google suggestion list are merely a record of his past search predicates.  He is the only person on Earth to see "atheists eat babies meme" as a suggestion.  Presuming one doesn't click on the link, "atheists eat" will leave Google at a total loss for possible suggestions.  It's as if it's wondering, "what is this sick fuck on about?" Whoover (talk) 08:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Horrible bias. A balanced encyclopedia article would have focused upon the Donner Party in American history instead of those foreign countries. Hclodge (talk) 11:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

666


i like how the lamestream media doesnt mention 666 has a link leading to a USA today headline prominently displaying 666. AMassiveGay (talk) 13:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Karajou perfectly describes User: Conservative in his latest rant
Uncanny--Mercian (talk) 10:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm impressed that he's retarded enough not to recognize ex-Navy SEAL copypasta. 2600:387:5:806:0:0:0:42 (talk) 03:15, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I love the "the President is pissed that the Feds never followed up on the Parkland shooter" comment, with the implication that now they'll be following up on people who comment on an obscure wiki. It's "Call the FBI!" all over again. LongLostLegend (talk) 12:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Conservapedia are responsible for the recent drop in NFL popularity so they do have considerable influence.--Mercian (talk) 21:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that CTE is responsible for the drop in both NFL popularity and youth participation in tackle football. If anything, I think that NFL football is too politically correct.  It emphasizes adherence to the rules, no flamboyant displays after touchdowns, in general being patriotic and honoring the military, and in general keeping politics out of the sport.  In contrast, a close supporter of the President is relaunching the XFL, which promises more entertainment than the NFL.  (Perhaps they will show CT scans of the players' brains with a laugh-track edited in.)  It will be interesting to see if Conservapedia is anti-professional football, pro-XFL, or just neutral on football in general. Hclodge (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Billy Graham
I thought Andy would mourn Mr Graham but he seems to have ignored his death. I don't know a lot about him but I wonder if Andy considered him liberal. Perhaps there was too much love and forgiveness in his speeches and not enough hate and condemnation.--Mercian (talk) 13:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Too much love and forgiveness by Conservapedian standards. London Grump (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a very simple test for a religious leader to be acceptable to CP: did he (and it must be a he) send condolences to the Schlafly family upon the death of Phyllis. Hclodge (talk) 07:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Karajou's gun recognition.
Sorry to post again but I had to respond to this one. Hey Karajou, on the left of your photo the guns are. Up Yours. --Mercian (talk) 19:19, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1: AK series assault rifle.
 * 2: M16/AR15.
 * 3: Uzi
 * 4: FN P90.
 * 5: Barrett 82A1 sniper rifle
 * 6: Not sure of the Daisy, perhaps a toy.
 * 7: A toy.
 * 8: RPG 7.
 * 9:This actually is a Glock.
 * 10: Mark 3 Ford Cortina AKA The Dagenham Dustbin( I owned one of these as a teenager)
 * Karajou wants to fault liberals on gun recognition. I'd rather fail at gun recognition than at reading comprehension, which is his obvious weakness (well, just one of them, really). The square root symbol drawn by one kid led to another kid joking about 'let's get to work before I shoot you with a pistol'. That dumbass 'joke' got spread around school, and tensions being what they are, somebody 'sa(id) something', the police got involved, investigated, and found no credible threat. Nobody called the cops because someone drew a square root sign. Nobody thought the math symbol was threatening. The kid who drew the symbol didn't get investigated. No charges were filed, nobody had their guns grabbed. Jokes about shooting people in school are less welcome than bomb jokes to the TSA guy patting you down at the airport right now, especially with the shit coming down on the FBI and local Florida law enforcement for not doing 'something' about Cruz after they had been tipped off about him.
 * To recap: dumbass kid makes a dumbass joke about shooting someone in school, days after a mass school shooting. The joke/threat is reported to law enforcement, who find no credible threat. The kid still has some stink on him, though, since new school guidelines are for zero tolerance for threats of violence. Think Karajou would be so sanguine about a brown kid joking about bombing a church or some such? What a tool.--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, #7 is a Vulcan EBF-25, which actually is fully automatic. And the Daisy is probably meant to be a Red Ryder.--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * you could probably recognise most guns if you play call of duty or watch the a lot of hollywood blockbusters. the fetishisation of firearms like karajou is doing is front and centre there AMassiveGay (talk) 11:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

New Insight From Andy's Capacious Orifice
"Most people who believe in the theory of evolution inevitably have bouts of depression." Whoover (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * a quote from Peep show 'i'd be happy too if i believed in nonsense' AMassiveGay (talk) 11:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * "Most...inevitably" I'm not sure that I agree with you 100% on your police work there, Andy. Or is this more of a '60% of the time it works every time' scenario?--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Did he do that hard hitting research in his ass? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 03:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

As in many scenarios, watch closely for what they -aren't- saying on Conservapedia. No mention of Ben Carson blowing $200k to decorate his office when he's seeking $6,800,000k in cuts for services provided by said office. Not one mention of Hope Hicks or Rob Porter. Not one mention of Jared's loss of security clearance. No mention of Trump's clear advocation of taking guns away from gun owners without due process. Utter silence. When exactly did they stop attempting to throw shade on the investigation into Trump's collusion with Russian intelligence assets in favor of ignoring it completely, I wonder? The most recent I could find was them loudly demanding the release of the Devin Nunes FISA memo on January 20th, presumably because it contained a video of every Democratic member of Congress attending a Black Mass, but absolutely no mention on MPR since then. Semipenultimate (talk) 16:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Semipenultimate, the failure to mention those things are certainly among cp:Donald Trump achievements.Hclodge (talk) 07:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

1990sguy must be a parodist


Can any serious conservative write "Bannon and Roger Ailes of Fox News Channel had relations with each other" there is more sexual innuendo than in most CP pages. Hclodge (talk) 07:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Similarly, can any serious conservative delete "In the Trump Administration, HBCU outreach has been led by Omarosa Manigault." Hclodge (talk) 07:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Although he was abrasive, Ed Poor did try to keep Conservapedia usable, spending man-years on that effort. He voiced his concerns in cp:Essay:Campaign to make Conservapedia unusable in 2013. Some editors like User:Quidam65 have been continuing his work. However, Quidam65 is being harassed by User:1990'sguy, leading to this slap back claiming (once again) that 1990sguy is an "administrator." Hclodge (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Is something wrong with the voting?
For some reason the moment I posted a link it started out with a score of 70 votes rather than 0
 * You need to increment the counter in the markup. I've fixed this for you. Cosmikdebris (talk) 21:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * With reference to this story I suspect Andy is either a secret LSD user or wants to show that he is the most insane of the CP sysops. Does he really think Katy Perry murdered the Nun with the help of an evil spirit possessing her? That is insane, I doubt even Alex Jones could have come up with that one.--Mercian (talk) 01:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's right up there with Karakjerk's "ok, so this lens flare from a video of the Egyptian riots is totally a sign that the Four Horsemen are coming back, and even if it's not real, it's still totally a sign!" LongLostLegend (talk) 09:24, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Oi, PeterKa
"I watched Schumer in an interview after Gorsuch was nominated. Schumer said, "He'll need 60 votes" and no one challenged him -- as if filibustering a Supreme Court nominee was perfectly routine." I have this letter from Merrick Garland, telling you to go fuck yourself, but since it was written in the last year of a democratic administration, it doesn't count. Semipenultimate (talk) 21:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, tell nobs to stop punching below his weight and start talking crazy on a place that will actually recognize his performance art as such. I'd say something over at Conservapedia, but it would doubtlessly be immediately censored. Semipenultimate (talk) 21:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Uh Oh


How will Andy and Ken deal with the facts? Austin bomber is a home-schooled, self-described conservative. Whoover (talk) 18:37, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Obviously he's a liberal lying in an attempt to make conservatives look bad. Obviously. 21:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Another dilemma for Andy. Facebook is undergoing the biggest scandal in it's history but he has ignored it. This is because they are associated with a UK company called Cambridge Analytica who admitted they helped Trump's election campaign.--Mercian (talk) 23:50, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok. He may be a conservative, home-schooled Christian but Andy says he didn't have a job. Except for the job he had.  And helping his father build the house he lived in when he wasn't working at his job.  But he didn't have another job.  I wonder if the Young Serial Murderers page will get a new column for number of jobs.  More likely this guy will not appear on the page. Whoover (talk) 05:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * He was not a conservative because Ken said so. In fact he was "A Jobless slacker". The non Scottish pot calling the kettle black eh Ken?--Mercian (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)



Talk:Main Page art project


CP's Main Page talk is blowing up right now in a glorious tangle of True Believers, parodists, and shit-stirrers, with plenty of non sequiturs and WTFery as they argue at about 45° to one another. Trying to follow the thinking there is like trying to do play-by-play of twelve rats fighting in a sack with a fever of a hundred and four (forty, in science units). Bizarrely, Conservative is actually the one that makes the most sense there amongst RobS, PeterKa, and Pokeria1 advocating for pre-emptive nuclear strikes on Iran, arguing against Western democracy because it leads to socialism, and claiming that Confederate flags are embraced as a sign of reconciliation among older whites. They're Gish Galloping all over each other over there, and it's fucking glorious. And it all seems to have spun up out of nowhere in the last couple of days. Is it a coordinated art installation? --Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 17:04, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Aye, it hasn't been this entertaining in a long time. My working theory is it's all frantic displacement activity to avoid dealing with the shitstorm that's about to engulf their straw-thatched übermensch. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * A requirement of modern 'conservatism' is the threefold cycle: 1, find a Great White Hope. 2, put vast, unrealistic expectations on them. 3, Eat them alive when they fail, and go back to 1. Since, oh, Newt Gingrich, this has been the way of the Rs. It's just before they've always had someone waiting in the wings who was relatively unsullied by the failure of the present GWH to fulfill said unrealistic expectations. But Trump's gameboard only has room for Trump, so there's nobody else in the party getting oxygen at the moment or for the last two years, for that matter. The boat is sinking, and the USS New GWH is nowhere nearby. My guess is they'll end up quickly latching onto someone with the same hate in their heart for LGBTQs, non-whites, non-Christians and non-supporters as Current Occupant has, but with the low cunning necessary to keep their moral failings in the shadows - your Franklin Grahams, your Mike Pences. Just so long as they can ever avoid any kind of self-reflection or inward examination of exactly when it was they succumbed to the third temptation. Semipenultimate (talk) 15:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

How has Ken changed so little?


He still has all his same habits, obsessing over internet rankings, making dozens of inconsequential tweaks to his ravings. How can somebody stay at the bottom for so long without changing in any way? My life is radically different from when it was back when I actually had time to be a regular here. I just can't fathom the level of mental illness required to keep User:Conservative festering at Conservapedia for over a decade. This guy has been doing nothing with his life since 2007. Always hyping some great change that never comes, always with the same tone, with the same bizarre mannerisms. I just feel bad for him. When I started editing RW, I didn't have a job. I didn't have any friends. You couldn't look at me and assume I had a future. Now I don't work less than 65 hours a week and I've formed a close and fulfilling social circle. I'm not saying this to brag, because it's not bragging if it's the bare minimum of American middle-class existence; I'm saying this to contrast my life to Ken's. He's on CP all day every day. He doesn't work. He doesn't have friends. It's always been like this. It doesn't get better for him. And that makes me sad-- "Shut up, Brx." 04:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Always same since 2007 → irrelevant. Not intended to be a reply in any sort of the way, i just make a comment.--Hi! SMB99thx XD I'm not LeftyGreenMario! 08:37, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I would argue that wasting your life and demonstrating the same manias for over ten years is pretty goddamn significant. I mean, holy shit.  Since 2007.  He's been the same way since 2007.  Conservapedia is his life.  Case in point, he felt the need to spend over two hours crafting a reply to this thread.  I wonder if he has any family that checks in on him.  I wonder if it's possible his life can get better at this point.  It just makes me sad-- "Shut up, Brx." 02:08, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The essay has now been deleted, rather proves your point Brxbrx. Conservative is a raving Anglophobe and he always manages to find a small nation that does things "better" than than The UK. One nation he never compares The UK to is America, which is understandable as all of his arguments would fold if he did so. Britain and obesity, The USA is the most obese country in the world. Britain and bestiality, a practice that is LEGAL in some states. Britain and child abuse, it is possible to get married age 12 in some US states and from what I can gather the adult and the parents of the child have to agree, the child (normally herself) has no say in the matter. Britain and violent crime, It is true that violent crime in London has risen recently and for two months it has seen a higher murder rate than New York, that is like celebrating a consolation goal after already being 20-0 down.--Mercian (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * About violent crime, it's still difficult to compare violent crime between U.S. and UK because they're defined and counted differently in each country. When gun nuts try to use "U.K. haz more violent crime and less gunz", it's a disingenuous argument. Oh, but hey, you know what the U.S. DOES have? A salad of culture! Mexican and Chinese restaurants everywhere in some parts of the U.S.!!! Oh, I think talking about this is far more interesting than the sad little man that Ken is.  23:51, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I see Cons has produced another essayimg replying to this talk page. As someone who only recently discovered Conservapedia and RationalWiki, why doesn't he just reply here? After all he does have a user account here on RW and its quite clear to anyone who is aware of the existence of RationalWiki that that is who he's talking about when he says, "a wiki beginning with an R." CPWatcher (talk) 13:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No one can criticise him on Conservapedia as he’s a sysop. All long-term users on RationalWiki are sysops. Christopher (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * i'm still convinced conservative is schafly in the same way norman bates was his mother AMassiveGay (talk) 14:28, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ken does not reply here because contributing to Rationalwiki is a bannable offense for anyone with a CP account. Hclodge (talk) 11:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * And because here he can't delete and oversight arguments he loses. Wilder Bicycle 12:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Seriously, they made it a bannable offense over there for commenting here? Is that why RobSmith disappeared? Semipenultimate (talk) 20:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Andy's double standard.


When Trump and Co are mocked it is "Dismal and vulgar". When a misogynist does the same to women it is "A setback for feminists".--Mercian (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Tea Party = Redneck opioid addicts
Noboby noticed Rob called the Tea Party a bunch of redneck opioid addicts? This has the makings of a conservative battle royale. nobsAloha Snackbar 05:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The fact that you had to come over here, to crow about your own trolling, shows you how much we care. LongLostLegend (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey, its a major election year issue: if the racist redneck opioid addicts who elected Trump vote the communists back in to get free oxycodone from Obamacare, the Democrats have a lot if kissin' and making up to do with racist scumbags. nobsI survived a vast leftwing conspiracy 03:15, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You consider the centre-right corporate puppet that is Hilary Clinton a communist Nobs--Mercian (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hold that phone there, nobs. You don't believe any kissing and making up is required at all. It's your avowed belief that the southern realignment never actually happened - and all those Nazis, skinheads, Klansmen, white supremacists and other derivatives of the unreconstructed Confederate mindset are actually Democrats in disguise, a vast conspiracy of millions of people, all perfectly keeping the secret. Or wait, no, you also believe that we're all Communists, which kind of invalidates the whole Nazi/Klan thing? But hold on a sec, we're also all secretly ISIS members, too, while simultaneously all moving forward the Homosexual Agenda (i.e. brunch), which also totally conflicts with your other prior presumptions. Did the RROAs, secret Dem-i-crates to a one, and the rest of the unreconstructed Confederates vote for Trump because George Soros paid them? Or because they're all secret ISIS supporters? Or Nazis? It's difficult to understand the points you try to make when you're so inconsistent in the mutually-exclusive things you presume about other people! Semipenultimate (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm saying the Southern rednecks and blue collar Midwesterners who voted for Trump are opioid addicts dependent on government largesse and Obamacare. They are traditional white racist scum Democrats who are pissed off at the Democratic party cause its anti-White. And these scum think they're gonna take over the GOP thru other RINOs like Trump.
 * As to Hillary, for the first time in her life (1) spoke the truth and (2) said something rational that made sense: being the greedy capitalist pig that she is hurt her among commie-Dems. And to their credit, the commie-Dems saw thru her bullshit. nobsI survived a vast leftwing conspiracy 17:35, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The saddest thing Nobs is that you and Andy, and the parodists like 1999, are desperately trying to pretend that someone who lies about fucking a porn star a few weeks after his trophy wife gave birth and then paying said porn star hush money whilst claiming to be a born again xian would not also be willing to lie about his connections to russia. I don't like right wingers much but what really fucks me off about you all is the way you will throw EVERYTHING you claim to believe in under the bus without a second thought so long as someone dog-whistles to one of your 'core' beliefs.  I'm a Marxist-Leninist but if someone who allegedly shares the same political views as me were to be exposed as such a major fucking liar and hypocrite as trump has repeatedly been proven to be I would not hesitate to stop defending him.  Will you now stop defending the repeatedly proven liar and adulterer or will you pretend that in some way clinton is worse?  Oldusgitus (talk) 17:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * All it amounts to is deja vu Clintonism. Facts are: Hillary only ran, and Democrats only nominated her for, an effort to exculpate the honor of Bill Clinton for posterity. To pretend to be outraged over Stormy Daniels, Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Cosby after the 30 year orgy of sex abuse and misconduct the Clinton's and Democrats unleashed, advocated, and justified, one and half years after nominating that stupid bitch to rehabilitate the Clinton legacy, is a bigger hoax than Trump-Russia or Iraqi WMD. nobsI survived a vast leftwing conspiracy 18:23, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S.: Maybe he paid her $130,000 just to spank him with a magazine, as she says, with his pants down. A bit rich for me, but something to consider. nobsI survived a vast leftwing conspiracy 18:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * So, hilary's lies make her unfit to be president but trumps can be ignored because of hilary's. And that, in one post from you, is why I REALLY despise the right wing. You support homosexual 'pastors' like haggard, you support 'pro-life' republicans like broidy and murphy who pay for their side-fucks abortions despite being 'family values' cunts and you support trump.  Because he blew his dog whistle and you are too fucking idiotic to stand up and say you won't be led by the nose.  Oldusgitus (talk) 18:49, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * No. I'll take a businessman over a lawyer as Chief Executive anyday, as the entire Mueller fraud and FISA abuse scandal is proving me out. nobsI survived a vast leftwing conspiracy 19:14, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * In short, Rob's saying what some of the Leave people in Britain are saying: the plebs have done as they were told and now the useful idiots can fuck off back to their hovels until we need them again. London Grump (talk) 09:13, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Roads to Nowhere


Let's make Ken dance for us.

1. Ken: Ken takes the usual 50 edits to equate British potholes with belief in evolution.

2. Karajerk: Yeah, I live in conservative Louisiana, and we spend our money on fixing our roads, not helping illegals, like California.

3. Reality:
 * 2013 - Louisiana 41st in the country in rural interstate pavement condition (4.07 percent of mileage in poor condition, more than double the national average); 44th in rural arterial pavement condition (3.06 percent in poor condition; more than three times the national average) and 48th in urban interstate pavement condition (15.31 percent, more than three times the national average).


 * 2017 - Rural road conditions in Louisiana are the 17th poorest in the nation and the state has the ninth most structurally deficient rural bridges

Ok Ken, let's hear why the good old God-fearin', Bible-huggin'. gun-totin', cousin-fuckin' folks of Deep Red Louisiana have such crappy roads. Are they all closet Darwinists? LongLostLegend (talk) 14:33, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I can live with potholes, I could not live (comfortably) with having sewage water come through the taps as is the case in Flint and other US towns. Personally I could handle the odd puncture better than I could handle potentially catching an infectious disease every time I shower, cook or drink.--Mercian (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Ken has since written this . It will soon be over sited so I will copy it


 * "The fans of Ariana Grande don't subscribe to wholesome values. And there is a price to be paid for libertine values. "Here is the lottery ticket that single mothers are handing their innocent children by choosing to raise them without fathers: Controlling for socioeconomic status, race, and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced."(Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America by Ann Coulter)."
 * So because the fans of Ariana Grande don't subscribe to wholesome values they somehow deserve what they got? Ken you are a sick motherfucking twat, no more needs to be said.--Mercian (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Did somebody forget to pay the bill?
Conservapedia.com is currently a suspended account. MDB (the MD used to be for Maryland, but now means Magically Deliciousthe B is still for Bear) 10:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Could this be the whimper instead of the bang that it ends with? Spud (talk) 11:42, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * IIRC, it was funded by Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum, and I think there's some kind of fight between her heirs over who should control it. Perhaps the non-Andy faction pulled funding.
 * Or maybe someone just forgot to pay the bill. Or maybe the hosting service decided it was too vile for them. MDB (the MD used to be for Maryland, but now means Magically Deliciousthe B is still for Bear) 11:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Countdown to rabid Karajou/Throwbottom blog post, dribbling on about how liberals hate free speech in 3... 2... LongLostLegend (talk) 12:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Nevermind
It’s back to normal, for CP values of normal. MDB (the MD used to be for Maryland, but now means Magically Deliciousthe B is still for Bear) 22:38, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Pokeria and Rob talking shit
I'd like to thank whoever caught that one. It's a classic, head and shoulders above their usual know-nothing mewlings. London Grump (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Conservative (Ken) Trolling?
So, I know that Ken's editing style is er... unique, but is it possible that (perhaps inadvertently), he is trolling? Take a look at this. By no stretch of ANY imagination is this a serious encyclopedic material. How does this not make ANYONE suspicious that this might be parody? This is a man who will be turning 56 in less than 2 weeks now. Does he actually think that this material qualifies for a serious encyclopedia? Or an encyclopedia that encourages conciseness? He could virtually create ANYTHING with "Atheism and [blank]" title and no one would question his err... contributions. For example:
 * Atheism and the preference of dogs over cats
 * Atheism and losing debates with your wife
 * Asian atheism and lack of desire for western values

You get the point. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 04:24, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And in other news, Queen Anne's dead. So Ken is doing the same stuff now that he's been doing for about a decade. So fucking what?
 * Yes, he wants to be noticed and to provoke a recreation. I'm sure he has no illusions that he's writing for an encyclopedia and I'm sure he doesn't care.
 * And stop writing in all caps. You've been told not to do that already. Spud (talk) 06:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * We all give way to our wives. It's an occupational hazard of being married.  London Grump (talk) 06:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Anger Bear

 * ''See also: RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive289



Was he writing while having a massive stroke? I've read actual stream of consciousness writing more coherent than that, I honestly have no idea what the hell most of that was even supposed to be about. Mildly disturbing to know this actually served in the institution dedicated to protecting my country. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 20:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I always have a giggle when Karajerk insists he's sane/not paranoid etc, because I'll never forget this little missive from him:

This video of the demonstrations in Egypt is pretty interesting, as well as very ominous. At the 1:17 mark something shows up in the video that could either be a reflection of a flag, an image of an individual on horseback deliberately-placed via Photoshop...of it could very well be the first appearance of the "Pale Rider", aka the Fourth Horseman of Revelation. To me, this is just more evidence - rider or not - that Jesus is coming back with the next few years.
 * Yeah, it's either the Horseman, or a reflection, or Photoshop, but it's totally a sign that Jesus is coming. Not paranoid at all, swabbie. LongLostLegend (talk) 09:06, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
 * What's the origin of his term "Otisburg"? Whoover (talk) 04:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Otis is the name of Lex Luthor's extremely dimwitted henchman in the 1978 film Superman. Lex says about him that he's surprised he's smart enough to walk and talk at the same time. Lex says that when he takes over the world, Otis can rule over a town all of his own. That town would be called Otisburg. So Karajou is using Otisburg as a synonym for "Stupid Town" when referring to RationalWiki. Spud (talk) 05:06, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The lack of self-awareness on his part is impressive, he strikes me as someone who'd believe lemon juice turns him invisible. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 19:12, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * He's one of those sorry souls who finds great purpose, meaning and pleasure in being incredibly fucking angry about stuff. He'd rattle like a smackhead without his daily fix of fury. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 22:12, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Karajou reminds me of those types of people who always seem to pop up any "debate" on social media. You know the kind, the ones that are mad as fuck about whatever the topic is but actually don't really know much (if anything) about said topic. 22:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Karajou could be that person no matter what the topic is. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 00:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Anyone got a sock to burn?
And fancies mentioning this, courtesy of Right Wing Watch. Oldusgitus (talk) 10:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * So Andy's out at Eagle Forum too. I hope Phyllis left him lots in her will, because he seems to be running out of income streams. I assume he's still counsel for AAPS? LongLostLegend (talk) 13:47, 29 July 2018 (UTC)




 * Ken deleted all record of it in five minutes. MDB (the MD used to be for Maryland, but now means Magically Deliciousthe B is still for Bear) 14:21, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Kens calling someone again




No doubt it will be burned shortly. Oldusgitus (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * ken, unlike you, we don't have unrealistic expectations. You may believe that you will destroy atheism single-handed by next Wednesday, Ken. We don't expect to do the same to sexism. Spud (talk) 13:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Burnt already. Oldusgitus (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I see Cons has replied with another marvelous essay. CPWatcher (talk) 14:44, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh goat, I'd seen that gibberish earlier but had just assumed kenny was off his meds again and was just dribbling. I'd not noticed it was a reply so Spud. Oldusgitus (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Have to say cons, you're truly a grand crusader for conservatism, bravely talking a whole lot of shit from behind the walls of that fortress. Very inspiring, you sitting there with your absolute power, cranking out vast repetitive diatribes. Come out on the sidewalk, and say it with the courage of your alleged convictions. I can promise you I won't change or delete a single word you type here. Doubtless I'll run shrieking and wagging my limp wrists when your super-machismo approaches, unable to handle it, since I'm such a little namby pamby foo-foo dandy nancy girly-boy. Semipenultimate (talk) 20:55, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Do it Ken. It's been over a month since I last truly felt amusement. You have no idea how boring my life is at the moment. 21:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * He's got an account here. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Kenny, Kenny, Kenny... I am not the equivalent of a rabbit, I'm more like a predatory reptile such as snake. 18:07, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The rabbit is hiding because he (I mean she, homosexuality is a sin) knows that Ken is on the prowl.--Mercian (talk) 04:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Wait. What?


"Setback for liberal denial: it. was apparently an ongoing affair with a co-worker by a Colorado man that led to his brutal murder of his pregnant wife and presumably their two little girls, and not due to lots of debt as implied by the media. But the latest AP story does not even mention the affair."

Apparently Andy feels that murder because of debt is conservative but murder because of an affair is liberal. I guess. Does anyone feel comfortable enough in Andy's head to explain this one? I feel dirty just reading it. Whoover (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't you know? Only liberals have affairs, where as good honest conservatives go hiking on the Appalachian trail. 21:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Trump bad news-o-meter


Not a dicky bird on on MPR or Talk:Main Page about Cohen. Not even any attempt to regurgitate Trump's own guff on the subject. You'd think they were worried... Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 23:24, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Inevitable, I suppose. As you were. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

DavidB4 is slowly blocking the internet


Don't know if anyone else has noticed but DavidB4's bot has slowly been blocking tens of thousands of IP addresses as webservers allowing spam. From what I've read, such automated IP blocking would have made TK proud.CPWatcher (talk) 17:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Dude, click on the link and you'll see that all those blocks were made over 1 year ago. How's he "slowly blocking the internet" if only a few blocks were made all at once?Sovereigntist (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * My mistake, I meant to set the number of entries to something much larger than the default of 50. Here are the oldest 1,000 entries stretching from 31 August 2017 to 2 September 2017. 10,000 blocks later and its only 26 September 2017. The bot hasn't made any more blocks since June though. CPWatcher (talk) 11:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks and that looks like a lot of blocks. But it's still been a year since the blocks ended. Sovereigntist (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Was that bot set up before TK died? If so... 17:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No, DavidB4 only joined in (I think) October 2015 and his bot in July 2016.CPWatcher (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And whoever is running 1990'sguy seems to be losing patience and is pushing their luck more to see what he can get away with. Only a serious parodist would post this with a straight face. Oldusgitus (talk) 09:32, 9 September 2018 (UTC)




 * Dude, the guy's from wikipedia, created 2013. He's obviously a true believer and admits he edits cp on wikipediaSovereigntist (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * So what? My account over at CP is a few years older than his and I've even had Ken supporting me as a good faith editor during an argument in the past.  The fact his account is long standing doesn't mean he's not a parodist. Oldusgitus (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * all the links I shared were from wikipedia. He was on the site long before joining cp in 2016 and already had a reputation for being a rightwing creationist. That and the sheer amount of edits shows he's more like TAR than like you.Sovereigntist (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Ken's Thing For the UK


Is there a reason for Ken's tirades about the Darwinist UK and, say potholes, beyond the fact that Darwin was English? Why never France and potholes or Japan and potholes, even though both of those countries have higher belief-in-evolution responses? Whoover (talk) 20:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, that. Apparently his fight with a member here back in April-May who actually lives in Britain and therefore could counter Cons' lies and misrepresentations about the NHS got very personal and he's added Mercian, and by extension their entire nation, to his Book of Grudges. So now it's on his list of fair game and out comes the repetitive patter. Terribly Christian of him, to never forget a slight nor forgive a trespass. Semipenultimate (talk) 23:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Back in April-May? It's been going on much longer than that. It's been going on for at least a decade. It was nearly ten years ago that Ken was writing articles like "Bestiality and godless Britain".I think it's partly a result of Ken's attempts back in the early days to get on Andy's good side. And remember, Andy used to think that the use of British English on Wikipedia was one of its problems because, of course, American English is so much better than British English thanks to all the time you save by writing "color" instead of "colour". And I think Andy's dislike of Britain, which Ken has tapped into, is not only because of Darwin but because of other historical reasons. 1776 and all that. Spud (talk) 23:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know why he should have a 1776 issue with the UK. That's when we started winning. Whoover (talk) 02:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This March 2007 article inspired a whole bunch of UK editors to sign up and point & laugh / argue with the crazy fundamentalist loons / create parody articles / wandalise the shit out of the place (delete as applicable). Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried to reach out to him to have a serious discussion and exchange of views, at first he was on the verge of reasonable then he turned into a spoiled child. The pothole story was a footnote on the BBC website on a very slow news days but Ken has now written more about this "crisis" then the entire British media combined. The roads in central County Antrim are in good condition though, not because of the protestant work ethic but because hardly anyone lives there and uses them. It is not like Southern England, The Midlands and the southern portion of Northern England where the population density is one of the highest in the Western World. His latest article on the upcoming winter "Global warming"? fails to mention that we have just been through the hottest summer I can remember in my 40 odd years. Last winter was very cold, last summer very hot and the upcoming winter is again supposed to be cold. That Ken, is called climate change because without a doubt over the last 5 years the climate in The UK has changed as you point out yourself mate. --Mercian (talk) 05:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * To add, we had heavy snow deep into April this years with flurries lasting into early May. By the end of May the temps were in high 80s so within 3 weeks we had an 50 degree swing in temperatures, if that is not climate change I don't know what is.--Mercian (talk) 06:06, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And one of the reasons we are having issues with pot-holes is that historically we have had a very mild climate here in the UK, look where we are on the planet compared to Canada and Russia then look how mild our winter temperatures are. So historically our roads have not had to cope with the extremes in temperature that occur elsewhere in the world.  AS the climate changes and the UK gets hotter summers, colder winters and more rain then we are going to have to change how we lay road surfaces or it will not get any better.  And of course on the lie of austerity trillions have been taken out of the overall economy and given to millionaires and bankers in bail-outs and tax cuts, money which could have solved the problem many times over had the political will been different.  Oldusgitus (talk) 10:44, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I looked and it surprised me, Edmonton, the most northern Canadian city of over 100,000 residents is level with Plymouth, the most southern British city with over 100,000. Moscow is at a similar latitude to Glasgow and Newcastle to the Alaskan panhandle. Glasgow can get get quite chilly in a (normal) winter but I cannot imagine winter in central Scotland stopping Napoleon or Hitler in their tracks. Barcelona is also east of London, that really surprised me, I thought it way to the west.--Mercian (talk) 21:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Ref Knob's post about mass murderer hating Trump.
There does seem to be a hint of truth in this, what gets me though is that it is listed in "Left-wing violence in the Trump era". I suppose some people see Trump as too liberal. The left are certainly capable of violence, this though is far right. Correction, Nazi's are of course left-wing liberals.--Mercian (talk) 15:19, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The Nazis were left wing. Stalin was left wing.  FDR was left wing. Mussolini was left wing.  Doesn't it strike CP odd that there was no right in WWII? Whoover (talk) 04:20, 29 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Only Winston Churchill and George Orwell.


 * On a wider point, this is a gem of a project by RobS, up there with his "definitive" investigations into Hillary Clinton. He says "We're doing important work here cause when you Google "Left wing violence", all you get are "rightwing" results. There's nobody like ADL or SPLC solely dedicated to doing the it. We're doing important scientific research here, compiling a database."  and then tells us he thinks Anthony Bourdain is a victim of the Clinton crime family.


 * I suggest he eases back because he is danger of blowing his cover LondonGrump (talk) 08:31, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Subprime = affirmative action
Right here Maxine Waters admits "subprime" is a codeword for "black" or "minority". RobSmithMisogynist women made me loose 23:05, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's nothing to do with the narrator's Russian accent, but I can't see where she says anything of the kind. Please, share your diamond tipped insight and give us one of those minute:second cues.  While you're there, have you got a source for the Marxist thing? LondonGrump (talk) 07:05, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Maxine accepts responsibility for the subprime mortgage mess where she says "we didn't know what we were signing" the new "complicated" mortgage products so that white Wall Street liberals could take advantage of them and make themselves rich. FNMA is a big government scheme to make liberal Wall Street bankers rich by buying back mortgages so they can get more Americans to sell themselves into debt slavery faster; "From each as he is able (homeowners), to each according to his need (greedy rich Wall Street Marxists)". RobSmithMisogynist women made me loose 11:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC) and
 * Surely a contender for best Rob quote ever right at the end there. 2A02:C7D:1635:5C00:9E2:3B47:D026:B241 (talk) 20:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Marxists like the one that shot up the synagogue eh Knobs?--Mercian (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Right now I'm trying to determine the party affiliation of this perp so I can add him (assuming he identifies as male) to our leftist violence page. RobSmithMisogynist women made me loose 23:53, 3 November 2018 (UTC)


 * So, Rob, where does Maxine Waters say subprime is a codeword for black and minority?  If that's too difficult a question for you, you can always tell us what you think a Marxist is.  LondonGrump (talk) 21:33, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Waters makes the claim that "we" somehow were coerced against their will to sign subprime mortgages. In doing so, she places responsibility for the subprime mortgage crisis on her constituents. She then claims "they," presumably Jewish Wall Street bankers, foreclosed on their homes. RobSmithIvanka 2024! 23:34, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So she doesn't actually say it. She says "we" got conned by, according to you, Jewish Marxist Wall Street bankers. I enjoy your nonsense -working out whether you are a troll or genuinely that stupid - but take your anti-semitic shit somewhere else. LondonGrump (talk) 13:28, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming nobS is suggesting Maxine is the one with anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Considering the reach of Farrakhan's Nation of Islam and similar offshoots in the black community, I wouldn't be particularly surprised if that turned out to be true. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't find the reference but I think Rob refered to Hilary Clinton as a Marxist. So in his definition a Marxist is a centre-right pseudo progressive corporate pawn.--Mercian (talk) 14:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hillary I'd classify as a Leninist. Technically speaking, there really is even a subdivision between Leninist and Marxist-Leninist. Hillary appears to have studied closely Lenin's, Leftwing Communism: An Infantile Disease. RobSmithIvanka 2024! 21:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Counterpunch magazine documented how Hillary built a of a chosen few which is 100% Leninism. Marx made no such reference to vanguardism or the idea of a "permanent revolution." RobSmithIvanka 2024! 21:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I wonder where Trump falls in this scheme. What sort of commie is an isolationist-militarist-federalist with ambitions of outerspace-expansionism who ostensibly supports the previously discarded proletariat? 141.134.75.236 (talk) 04:38, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Trump doesn't fall into any of those categories. He is just a pig stupid narcissist Acei9 05:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Good question. I had to point out today to the anti-neocon anti-globalists that Trump's Iranian policy is the same as the neocons. But it's how you phrase it. Instead of saying Trump's bowed to the neocons, you have to say the entire neocon movement suddenly woke up and saw the wisdom of Donald Trump. RobSmithGrab 'em by the nob! Nobs for Mod! 05:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 *  the wisdom of Donald Trump. I never thought I would see anyone describe Trumps manner as coming from a place of wisdon...(BTW Rob you have my vote for mod). Acei9 05:26, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The same in the sense of only making threats against the main state sponsor of terror, I guess. But conquering Iraq and Afghanistan on a whim? Sure why not. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 05:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There's no reason to assume one excludes the other, you know. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 05:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Conservatives use "Marxist" the same way liberals use "fascist" these days. Everyone needs their throwaway political insults I guess. *shrugs* 141.134.75.236 (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Blimey, another person who thinks (?) assumptions are the same as proof and only work one way, with some whataboutism thrown in. LondonGrump (talk) 23:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Blimey, another strawmanning person on the internet, who'd have thought. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 23:19, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * LOLWUT? LondonGrump (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Andy Finds More Trump Economic Brilliance
The World Economic Forum changed the basis of its Global Competitive Report for 2018. Global Competitive Index 4.0 adds innovation and other components to better model adaptation to the "Fourth Industrial Revolution." You don't have to be a macroeconomist to love this change, though. The new index puts the US on top, and certainly would have in previous years. Through Schlafly glasses, "President Trump has made the U.S. the #1 most competitive economy in the world, which the former President Obama never achieved." Gotta love those glasses. Whoover (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The US is kinda like East Germany in 1989. We're detoxing off socialism and converting over to a capitalist and freedom loving society again. nobspiss in my ear 21:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If the last decade or two has been socialism, socialism sure managed to produce a lot of stuff. Whoover (talk) 04:01, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, sure did. Like surveillance technology, Chinese gulag re-education camp, etc. nobspiss in my ear 04:12, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Getting back to the point, it's surprising how many socialist countries made the top ten. LondonGrump (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if Rob is deliberately ignorant or just stupid. Socialism my arse.--Mercian (talk) 00:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Chinese gulag re-education camp Wow, really? Are you sure about that? Obama was a socialist? I suppose all those Goldman Sachs lobbyists who made it into the Obama inner circle as staffers were secret communists. Acei9 00:54, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * They are Jewish Marxists, don't you know. Rob explained it above.  LondonGrump (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * In the real world productivity in the US has been stagnant for the last decade because of massive job creation - in crappy, unproductive jobs. Reducing hours worked increases productivity (hence a brief leap in productivity around 2008). So I don't think the WEF's data has much relation to actual people's lives, although maybe it's less stupid than the standard productivity measure. --Annanoon (talk) 10:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep. ^^^^ We 'splained it all in CP: Obamunism. nobspiss in my ear 02:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Guard dog resurrected?
There seems to be a new user called Minuteman who blocks people minutes after they either remove a large amount of content from a page. Minuteman's user page says to contact DavidB4 for assistance, who already runs an edit bot. I'm wondering if it is a new Guard dog bot to deal with vandalism. CPWatcher (talk) 11:11, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Canadian bacon
It doesn't say Canadian bacon made in Canada, it says all Canadian bacon. Maybe Andy has gone Muslim on us. nobspiss in my ear 02:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe he's in cahoots with the frummer wing of Wall Street, eh? LondonGrump (talk) 09:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe Andy's just an idiot. Ɖøn Ĵuan (talk) 12:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, Conservative has posted this to the main page. I first thought it was parody and would be instantly oversighted but no, it really was posted by the User:Conservative account. CPWatcher (talk) 11:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Looks like it's gone down the memory hole.
 * ''‘Ashes,’ he said. ‘Not even identifiable ashes. Dust. It does not exist. It never existed.’
 * ‘But it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it.’
 * ‘I do not remember it,’ said O’Brien. LondonGrump (talk) 16:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I took a screenshot just in case Conservative deleted it. It's the first file I've ever uploaded, so do change the name etc. if I've done something wrong. CPWatcher (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Poor Ken, you have to feel for him facing Christmas alone, the failed snowflake is begging for attention again.[]. If he were not such a backstabbing coward many of us would give him the time of day. Something that his so called friends at Conservapedia repeatedly fail to do--Mercian (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)


 * How can you not love him? LondonGrump (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Canadian bacon? Its Canadian whiskey that's the real crime. --RWRW (talk) 13:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Ad hominems about user:conservative
I'm very uncomfortable with the snide tone of the latest edit about Ken and Bacongate.

Part of it is because I genuinely do like Ken. He reminds me of so many youngsters - and not so youngsters - who think they have discovered things for the first time. Their simple enthusiasm is something I envy sometimes.

Part of it is because Ken clearly has special needs. Yes, I know, we all do, there's no such thing as normal so, like discourse about Trump's hands and Obama's ethnicity and Teresa May's gender, we need to remember that language is loaded. Are we Otherising him?

It can't be passed off as banter. As any tyro street rat will tell you, it's only banter if the other person is there. If they're not, it's snide bitching.

But the main reason is that we have, implicitly or otherwise, claimed the high ground over CW. We are better than them and their nut gone ilk.

That is all. LondonGrump (talk) 09:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh, and fuck that homophobic shit. LondonGrump (talk) 09:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * To me mate it is fair game, I liked him to an extent and tried to reach out to him and then he became totally awful. Personally he started mocking me about having cancer. On a non personal scale he made posts with very thinly veiled comments about the victims of the Manchester Arena attacks and those of Breivik saying it was wrong these events happened but they were only liberals (kids) who would have grown up to oppose right wing conservative ideology so "no big loss really". I am sorry about his mental problems but even without them the man would still be a wanker.
 * That is all.--Mercian (talk) 09:21, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * It's still punching down. LondonGrump (talk) 17:25, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am just reading the entry and wondering what the hell did I just read. 19:52, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've been on RW for over 10 years now and this sort of comment about Ken has come up many, many times. The response is always the same - Ken is fair game and a truly awful person. He has had every opportunity to address his awful behaviour, has an account here if he wants to defend himself but he'd rather pretend he wins every argument, accuse atheists of being murderous, bestiality obsessed, corpulent losers and is completely beyond help. He has been wanking about the same shit for 10 years. It's open season. Acei9 23:45, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * At least Nobs is open to honest discourse with critics, even though half of that discourse consists of the insane and inane screeching of a senile old man who is determined to channel the spirit of Joe "I've got a little list..." McCarthy. — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  23:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You're all telling me about him and his behaviour, as if that set the standard. Let me put this in street terms: is he is a cunt sometimes?  Yes.  Are we cunts?  LondonGrump (talk) 18:21, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * if you check the categories on my user page you’ll get your answer. Acei9 22:52, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

So, what did you just read? Alright, and others, here's a point-by-point explanation.

A good starting point would be to note that the blue-links in the text are not for mere display. They do link to the relevant contexts.


 * 1) Let's start with 🇰🇪. See Template talk:Ken.
 * 2) Conservapedia:Machismo: A reference to Ken's essay, "Does Richard Dawkins Have Machismo?" and other similarly-worded rants.
 * 3) The deleted page revision: Yet another attempt at Conservapedia:Burning the Evidence.
 * 4) "gay bowel" links to a screenshot of the revision history of the "Gay bowel syndrome" article. This piece seems to be an integral text of the User:Conservative's Conservapedia:Summa Homosexualita canon.
 * 5) "contents of the previous meal" links to a screenshot of the "Atheists eat babies meme" article. In February this year, User:Conservative's pet topic happened to be "Atheistic Chinese Eating Babies". See the relevant February 2018 WIGO entry.
 * 6) "physically unattractive" links to a screenshot showing Ken's attempt to promote his "Atheists and physical attractiveness" article on Mainpageright. See the January 2018 WIGO entry for more details.
 * 7) "bulging tummy" links to a screenshot of the revision history of the classic "Atheism and obesity" article.
 * 8) "grandiose resolutions about exercise and diet" links to a screenshot of the top part of one of User:Conservative's subpages, "Sports, exercise and diet". The page is incredibly long. Even if I could take a screenshot of the whole page, I doubt Special:Upload will allow me to upload such a huge file.
 * 9) "obsessive-compulsive" links to a screenshot of Ken's essay, "Conservapedia Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an officially recognized mental disorder". See the relevant entry at Conservapedia:What is going on at CP?/October 2017 and Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive338.
 * 10) Capture fc0b89e9042db0fe4e81739d03a4b77441031c19.png The Red Telephone used to be a channel of communication between RationalWiki editors and User:Conservative. On Ken's end of the line was the subpage User:Conservative/Gentlemen, which was often deleted. (Did I already mention the burning of evidence?) On the RationalWiki's end was Conservapedia talk:Red Telephone and its Conservapedia-space page. Since the deletion of the Red Telephone Conservapedia-space page — possibly during one of several of RationalWiki's purges of Conservapedia-related articles — this very WIGOCP talk page has served as RationalWiki's end of the line. This time, screenshots of Ken's message were linked from the words "picked" and "up", i.e. this, and this post from his blog, "Examining Atheism".

Here are some other miscellaneous comments: That is all. t 11:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * As can be seen, all those blue links only reference content generated by User:Conservative. It's not a matter of simply making stuff up, and creating satire based on fabricated things.
 * Simple enthusiasm can indeed be something to envy about. The question is: enthusiasm about what? DAESH terrorists tend to be enthusiastic about their cause too.
 * Who has special needs? Andy Schlafly himself had declared that Conservapedia has 0 mental problems by its contributors. Ipse dixit.
 * Perhaps it's only banter if the other person is there. And maybe punch-down humor is wrong, since it demeans those with less power, less privilege. But at the point of writing, I don't think User:Newton has been blocked here on RationalWiki for any time within the past 6 years. This sysop had even been given the same power/rank here as the most of us. I'm quite unsure if our accounts at Conservapedia would similarly survive the eternal Conservapedia:Night of the Blunt Knives, let alone be promoted to the same status as User:Conservative.
 * Are we too harsh, too unforgiving? After all, shouldn't we be holding our own behavior to higher standards? From the comments made in Template talk:Ken made in 2012, indeed, there was some thought about deleting the Ken-template. And so it was replaced with plaintext "Ken". At the same time, as RationalWiki users came and went, fewer and fewer people could be bothered about its Conservapedia related content. The sneering did reduce. In RationalWiki's more-than-half-decade long and still ongoing post-Conservapedia era, Ken have had plenty of opportunity to genuinely show repentance and stop churning out toxic "content", or at the very least, just leave Conservapedia quietly and slip out of notice, like many have easily done, including a certain, ahem, Joaquín Martínez. But he didn't choose to be a more likable person, not even a less hateable one. How has Ken changed so little? Is it too unscrupulous to add a short WIGO entry once in a while satirizing someone's much lengthier and frequently-produced "essays" with much snider language? (This lack of change led to Template:Ken being resurrected earlier this year, but that's besides the point.)
 * Mocking white supremacist Craig Cobb for being 14% black certainly isn't the same as mocking people for having African ancestry. It's mocking his hypocrisy, and by extension, that of the racist movement as a whole. Similarly, pointing out that Ted Haggard — someone known for his characteristic opposition to homosexuality — being completly hetrosexual isn't homophobia. That's not mockery at the expense of the homosexual community as a whole, but only the hypocritical openly homophobic ones. As suggested earlier, all the blue links are references to User:Conservapedia's characteristic pet topics. Despite another Conservapedia editor's rather plump facial appearance, I think it would be rare to find similar jokes about him being overweight. Why? This editor simply isn't known for writing long articles about the obesity of others, spending ridiculously long durations editing Conservapedia in general, and then turning around and slapping on a "Sports, exercise and diet" subpage to "prove" that he's actually keeping fit in the short time he's away from the computer.
 * While I do try to add screenshots to the relevant sections of this WIGOCP talk page, I don't usually leave comments here. Childish Red-Telephony isn't worth the time, especially if the other person isn't open to honest discourse. Instead, if I see something, I tend to just WIGO it directly. And when the downvotes come in, you know that someone's been triggered.


 * I'm not saying Ken should get a free pass. I'm not even saying we should always pull our punches, even though he needs no help to look like a twat.  I'm saying that the tone some of the reaction to the whole Bacongate thing is wrong - see my original comment and my comment below.  LondonGrump (talk) 22:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

How did I miss this steaming pile of horseshit
Wow....there is so much wrong with this. As a New Zealand citizen who has spent about 30 of his 38 years living in NZ I have no idea where Ken is getting this rubbish from. Acei9 04:02, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ace, you've been around CP and RW right? What are the odds that Ken has either completely lost is mind or is high as fuck nonstop? 04:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * His dishonesty knows no bounds. Acei9 06:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I swear, our old friend (and my CP polar-opposite) 🇰🇪 just gets kookier and kookier as time goes on! And also, I've heard that he's actually convinced that last year (2018) was a "bad year for atheism". Not only that, but his fixation on Richard Dawkins seems to have shifted to Hemant Mehta now. Now he has essays making fun of TFA's size and comparing him to some lean and allegedly Christian Indian women dancers. Furthermore, his essay titles are also getting longer and more TMI than necessary, too. 19:42, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I`m betting on all three, Comrade Grammar. — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  14:16, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Ace, you need to get out of that bunny hole mate. Show him you are not a limp-wristed coward.--Mercian (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * oh, I got a shout out. Nice. Is see Ken has upped his debate fee to 5mill. Given he lost so hard last time has decided to go for an amount he knows no one will stump up. Also, Ken, NZ is one of the least religious countries is the world with latest stats on showing 51% are Christian. The most recent census hasn’t been released but it is expected to show another drop. None of our leaders have been religious is modern times either with some explicitly stating they were agnostic. Good luck! Acei9 21:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * and btw Ken, Jacinda Ardern who you mention is a self-described agnostic. I declare victory over you! Acei9 22:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, the highly religious in NZ have decreased every single year as the rate of non-believers has gone up as tracked by the NZ census. You're wrong. Victory is mine. Acei9 03:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, your latest pile of garbage is all about Europe, not NZ. You fail again. Acei9 05:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken you still fail. NZ has become more secular and non-religious each successive year as noted by the census. You are wrong. Ardern is an agnostic, as was Key before her and Clark (an atheist) before him. All politicians frequent the Ratana church in respect if Maori, not Christianity. You are completely wrong and NZ continues to become more left-leaning - not right-leaning. So you can either admit you are wrong (impossible for you) or admit that you see NZ's left-wing government as more akin to to the precepts of Christian values than conservatism(which you seem to be saying without realising it). Good luck. Acei9 06:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I can't believe RW is still in damnatio memorae there, it's literally been a decade since the events that spurred the creation of RW, you'd think they'd follow Jesus' example by "turning the other cheek," but apparently actual Christian values don't mean much to them. — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  08:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

In world of globalization, NZ will become desecularized. My open letter to Ken.
No Ken, it wont. NZ is further to the left than Bernie Sanders. We have a euthanasia bill on the cards. We recently, under the current govt. removed references to Jesus in our parliamentary address. All NZ leaders over the last 20 years have been openly agnostic or atheist. There isn't a single religious orientated party in NZ with any seats in parliament. The most recent census results put Christianity as a mere 51% with non-belief at 36.6% which is expected to grow. You lose heavily. Acei9 08:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * you lost. Acei9 10:24, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

you are at this point arguing with someone who is more or less smearing the walls with their own faeces. and you are probably his closest friend. AMassiveGay (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So you're a massive gay? I guess he was right. See --Mercian (talk) 23:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * And his latest screed is all wrong. He blathers about Europe for some reason which NZ isn't a part of and uses a 2008 university survey to justify his mad rantings which only returned 1027 responses instead actually using the last census data (2013) which is far broader (approx 3 million respondents) and more accurate showing a trend. The highly religious are definitely growing in NZ (evangelical Christians and Filipino/Muslim immigrants) - nope. His second open letter is completely wrong. Acei9 22:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * He is right about the pothole crisis though. I have to carry 3 spare wheels in my car, as it is only a 3 door VW UP I cannot fit anymore inside. I cross my fingers that I get no more than two punctures on my 6 mile journey to work each day. It is a national catastrophe. --Mercian (talk) 23:40, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, you can stop now. You are wrong. Your whole argument rests on The highly religious are definitely growing in NZ (evangelical Christians and Filipino/Muslim immigrants) which is wrong as per last census data (2013). Mr Wrong is wrong again. I declare utter victory. Acei9 00:38, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * As I indicated in Irreligion in New Zealand, evangelical Christianity is growing in NZ. - no Ken it isn't. The data says it isn't. You are wrong. Completely wrong. Utter and total victory over you. Acei9 00:46, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Why does he show a map of Europe when writing about NZ? Ken, New Zealand and Europe are literally global polar opposites, check an atlas.--Mercian (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * KEn your edits are irrelevant. The only relevant point is NZ's religious makeup which is trending downward in a provable way. You're wrong - provably so which I have done. You lose. Acei9 01:16, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, stop talking about immigration as it isn't relevant. What is relevant is what the actual statistics of religiosity in NZ. Which is trending lower and lower. Those are facts - the only argument you seem to make is that there is more migration therefore higher rates of religion. You are wrong as the data clearly shows. Acei9 02:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Ken, religious belief is becoming less and less in NZ as per the census. That’s all there is to it. If you want to carry this on be a man, show some machismo and come here and discuss it. Do that or stay in your bunny hole. I declare victory over you. Acei9 04:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Fuck that homophobic shit
Anyone want to own up to this fuckery? LondonGrump (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

1990sguy: copyright and lack of self-respect
It is clear that conservative content, let alone non-biased content, will not grow on Conservapedia so long as 1990sguy remains within Andy's good graces. First, he finds writing prose difficult and prefers a set of bullet points to paragraphs. Second, he has no idea of copyright law in terms of what is permitted or what is not permitted. img Finally, he is a control freak who casts distain on anything that he did not create himself. One cannot tell whether he is clueless or an extremely dedicated parodist trying to sink the CP editorial clique. Hclodge (talk) 01:52, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should just bomb the shit out of 'em? — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  02:31, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * His behavior on Wikipedia doesn't seem different from there, so I am leaning on genuine moron, also applying Hanlon Razor. Copyright, also, has never been a concern for Conservapedia's editors, given their love for plagiarism and no idea how copyright in images work either. To be fair, yeah, plagiarism is bad and Wikipedia doesn't allow it... 07:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * So you're up for bombing the shit out of 'em? I`m game. — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  14:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't want to. Bombing, I am never in to. 21:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Party pooper. >:( — Ɖøn Ĵuan   Harass  15:08, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

1990sguy decision tree: Is the author an admin or Andy's pet? Y--> leave edit alone N  | V Is the new article non-threatening and non-controversial? Y --> piss on the article (to add                 |                                               Conservative spin) to mark N  |                                               1990sguy territory V Does the article have footnotes? N --> Delete article for failure to source adequately Y  | V Can those sources also be found in Wikipedia article? N --> Add Wikipedia sources Y  | V Delete article as copyright infringement even though it is completely different than the prose in the Wikipedia article. Hclodge (talk) 14:57, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I know we don't have much of a focus on Conservapedia, but doesn't this guy need an article? 17:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably. I know recently created one for Northwest, so one might be in the works already. CPWatcher (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the Conservapedia:1990'sguy article was previously created by User:Kingdamian1. However, it was DELETED by the same user WITHOUT EVEN going through the PROPER procedures at RationalWiki:Articles for deletion! SHOULDN'T the article be IMMEDIATELY RESTORED to its RIGHTFUL, EXISTENT status, so that it can be UPDATED with GOOD INFORMATION? t 12:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * See: Conservapedia talk:1990'sguy. t 10:14, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Mormons
Watching Andy throw an entire religion under the bus, based on the actions of, what, 4 people, really is a thing of beauty. His ideological purity is just so batshit insane - either everybody agrees 100% with 100% of his viewpoints, or they're filthy liberals. The problem is that Andy has so many crazy toes that even his arch-thugs in Ken and Karajerk are likely to step on one at some point. It's a shame DeanS isn't around to watch Andy trash his beliefs. LongLostLegend (talk) 16:54, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Aye. It's especially funny given that, back in the day, Andy used to fight tooth and nail to block any criticism of Mormonism as heretical, precisely because he believed "they" were such reliably rock-ribbed conservatives. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * i thought they've always viewed mormons as suspect until romney was their man against obama AMassiveGay (talk) 00:40, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Atheism and dogs
Any suggestions what to have for dinner? I have two dogs, a Border collie and a Staffordshire bull terrier. The collie is getting old so may be rather tough but the staffy is red meat so would not help my health. He has another dig at the UK. Listen Twathead, bestiality is illegal here and the rare cases are always prosecuted, unlike West Virginia, Kentucky, Wyoming and New Mexico. Three of which are very conservative and the other which is purple. Sort out the problems in your own back yard.--Mercian (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, the well known argumentum ex canibus. CPWatcher (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "Look at these evil Asians eating commodities that we happen to keep as pets!" Look, I don't condone kidnapping pets to eat them but I also don't see anything morally reprenhisble in eating cats or dogs either. It's special pleading to elevate those animals but also don't brush an eyelid when we regularly eat pigs and mindlessly kill crows.
 * Not to mention a lot of argument seems to rest on the fact dogs are clever forgetting to mention pigs just as if not more clever. Acei9 23:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that lambs have personalities, and Jesus ate them. Whoover (talk) 06:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I've seen the light. Having read cp:Communist China and cat eating, I've found the combination of argumentum ex canibus and argumentum a manducans feles to be very convincing and have decided to leave atheism. CPWatcher (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I've never understood this argument. Lots of other animals, e.g. rabbits, fish, turtles, guinea pigs, horses, pigeons, pigs, goats, dormice and sundry other rodents can either be used as companion-animals or food, even by Christians, based largely on factors of size and cuteness. Does the Hindu Conservapedia have an essay on barbaric cow-eaters? --Annanoon (talk) 16:25, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * judging from some of the more extreme hindu nationalists, probably. AMassiveGay (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * considering in the past ken talked up the beauty and physical fitness of south koreans as a dig at supposedly fat western lesbians, gays and/or atheists it seems odd that south korea - the country that always springs to my mind when you talk about dog eating - doesnt get a mention. i guess the last line 'most atheists in the world are east asian' says all. east asians eat dog so therefore savages so therefore atheists are savages. nothing like a bit of racism to underpin your spurious logic and more specific bigotries. AMassiveGay (talk) 17:56, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You bet that this is racist when literal racists use the dog-eater accusation as a spring board in tandem with slurs to inflict serious verbal and sometimes physical damage on random Asians. Also, South Koreans are stereotyped to engage in plastic surgery, but plastic surgery is very popular over there, and it's rather sad that Ken probably bases his perception of how attractive South Koreans are on this plastic surgery culture. But, I always thought China was the one that springs to mind when it comes to dog eating, but whatever, these people should eat dogs, horses, and cats as they please as we let the French eat rabbit and turtles, we didn't make much issue when Australian aboriginals ate cockatiels, and no one except me is crying when hunters eat crows and pigeons. 21:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * it was always south korea in uk due tabloid journalism for the dog eating association. i shouldnt give it too much thought - its more than the prick deserves and hes not like hes making a valid point based on any facts or reasoned ethical basis. hes literally the internet equivalent of a chimp flinging his shit AMassiveGay (talk) 22:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Maybe I am sadist and just like particular kinds of shock imagery but seeing cats and dogs in cages in restaurants prior to getting eaten always makes me laugh. I have no idea why I laugh, probably from the hypocrisy of cat and dog lovers (and horse lovers to an extent) that successfully pass stupid laws to ban eating the animals and the pathetic appeal to emotion that the photographs are often used for, especially in Conservapedia's case. 07:05, 18 January

Ken again
Dude, use your account here and engage. You can’t declare victory otherwise. Really easy to say “I won” without actually having anyone to spar with. Do it or lose - you either start a discussion or you’re a coward. Prove me wrong....Acei9 02:13, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Anyone can be a hard man if they are sitting in Andy's proverbial main battle tank where those outside are armed with a particularly sharp piece of mango fruit. As for this article I retract what said completely and this article, he is going to huge lengths to defend Wyoming's pro bestiality stance. Of course there are no reported cases of bestiality being prosecuted where it is legal. Looking at the map West Virginia is only a few hundred miles from Buffalo. A small upheaval for him to be able to shag his doggy girlfriend without fear of prosecution or being ostracized considering that I am considering moving 8000 miles so I am able to enjoy my Labrador Sunday roast. Gross I know but if he can use animal abuse as a subject of humour  then so can I.--Mercian (talk) 16:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * To add. I don't think I have ever mentioned I am an atheist. I might have done but if so I was wrong to do so as it is not strictly true. If I did I was confused as to the definition of atheism. I rule out the Abrahamic religions of Christianity and Judaism and the major world socio-political system that is Islam but I do not rule out that a being put the Big Bang into motion. I think it is unlikely but possible, that makes me agnostic. Ken, you do not have to be a militant atheist to disagree with your views, you just need to have a tiny bit of reason about yourself.--Mercian (talk) 16:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, RW doesn't have checkuser. You won't be giving up your IP address by editing here. I'm not interested in debating with you across 2 sites. Either come here and engage or allow me to have a Conservapedia account and I'll meet you there. This back and forward is stupid and it just speaks to your cowardice. By doing none of these makes you a coward who is fearful of defeat (which you must certainly have been in the past). Engage properly or cower like the spinless jellyfish you are. Acei9 23:28, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The man who is the biggest abuser of the checkuser function does not want his IP address known. I once made an account to politely comment on an article and the next message from Ken was about me being from The UK, Darwinism, atheism, decadence etc, he admitted using checkuser. It's that proverbial M1 Abrams again. His cowardliness knows no bounds.--Mercian (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh Dear Ken
Hiding in your bunny-hole, claiming victory. Ken - either man up here or let me use CP. If your position is so strong why don't you actually engage? You don't have to come here - allow me to talk to you directly at CP by letting me create an account. It's very simple - let someone debate with you directly. I don't recall any Sun Zhu quotes that say "Taunt your enemies from a place where they can't engage with you so you can claim assumed victory". No, you are a coward. Proven to have no machismo. Acei9 09:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This pedantic, but the correct spelling of "Sun Zhu's" name is Sun Tzu, not Sun "Zhu". —  Ɖøn Ĵuan  Harass  16:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Modern Pinyin doesn't use the Tz dipthong for transliteration to English. Tsu maybe?  Zhu would mean "pig" though, so lol.  ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It would be "zi", but in the Western world for certain people we still use the Wade-Giles system of transliteration. —  Ɖøn Ĵuan  Harass  16:51, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh wow, that's way off from what I was expecting based on how people say his name. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 17:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Zi and Tzu both translate to master in English, so in either way the literal meaning of his name hasn't changed, "Master Sun," only the transliteration has. —  Ɖøn Ĵuan  Harass  17:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * How about just Mister Sun? Acei9 20:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sun didn't become one of the most famous people in Chinese cultural history for you to call him "Mister". 20:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think we're getting off topic. Ken, get off your ass and debate Ace. You can do it on CP or on some other medium. I'm sure The NonSequitur Show would be more than willing to host your debate, were you to ask. I could also find a right-wing equivalent if were you to request one. 20:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sun didn't become one of the most famous people in Chinese cultural history for you to say that discussion of him is "off topic." Sun Zi is ALWAYS on topic. 20:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep - come on, Ken. Allow me the ability to access CP and we can talk properly. The floor is yours. I'm even suggesting CP as a venue because if you lose you can oversight the whole thing anyway. What do you have to lose? You're either a defender of the faith or a coward? Which is it? Acei9 22:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Wake up and smell the coffee Ace, that is not going to happen. Remember the weedy kid who stood behind the school bully raising his fist and shouting "yeah" when the bully stole some poor lad's dinner money then when you found him on his own later and he is all apologetic and submissive? That's Ken that is.--Mercian (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Master Sun would be more correct, IOW. —  Ɖøn Ĵuan  Harass  15:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ken, you’ve lost now. It was very simple - open me an account on CP and we’ll talk. You were afraid of having your IP exposed here so I said let me talk to you directly on CP. A totally reasonable request. You failed to do this for...reasons. So you lose. You have exposed yourself as a failure and a coward. Once again; if you want to show yourself as a debater then let’s debate. All you have to do is let me register at CP - that’s it. You’re failure is also your epitaph. Coward to the end. No machismo. Unable to even allow anyone to engage with you. You’re like a guy hiding behind a fence yelling about how I can’t fight you. Weak man, so weak. I’m glad to have exposed you for what you are. Acei9 03:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * He is between a rock and a hard place. His two primary traits, cowardice and attention seeking are in direct conflict with each other. I suggest ignore him to see which one wins out. I am guessing his cowardice and he will not be open to dialogue outside of Conservapedia.(Question Evolution or Examining Atheism do not count)--Mercian (talk) 01:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Perverse emotional reinforcement apart, cowardice and attention seeking can be complementary: Ken wants to feel like the brave cyberwarrior, starts something, gets a reaction, puts up a symbolic resistance in his safe space and declares victory, feedback loop complete, repeat.   To confront him is to vindicate him so he'll come back for more.  Just look at his latests posts about New Zealand.... LondonGrump (talk) 18:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)