RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive37

Blast from the past
Listening to BBC R7: a name from the past: Julie Covington, remember her "Don't cry for me Argentina"? And "Rock Follies"? She turned down the lead in "Evita" & Elaine Page (I think) nicked it. (I was always being told I looked like her back then - took it as a compliment). 20:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I remember her from Jeff Wayne's musical version of The War of the Worlds. 20:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

This bullshit makes me really fucking mad
Its a Fox interview with Rove so what did I expect but he is pontificating about the Democrat who compared the Repbulican health care plan to the Holocaust and complaining from his high moral horse that it cheapens the deaths of millions of Jews under Hitler. You know, I dont hear him saying that same about all those wingnuts waving around signs comparing Obama to Hitler though. Fuck it angers me. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 06:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Is he talking about the democrat saying that Republicans want people to die? Because that was stupid.  However, it is incredibly intellectually dishonest to ignore all the Obama/Hitler stuff.  So the lesson today is that Rove is still a douchebag.  Corry 06:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah the democrat was a dick however it just angers me that both parties are selective in outrage. There is greater division now than there ever was and it fucks me off people are so blinded. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 06:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

A dramatization of a CP Talk page exchange...
Courtesy of the great webcomic Wondermark. --SpinyNorman 12:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Farting and smoking
Well, my first week at Uni's been a blast. In my house, I've already developed something of a reputation for being "the farter", which I find quite funny as I didn't know I did it irresponsibly in the real world either. Although I did let one rip in the room belonging to the one girl staying in my house. "Josh, did you fart in my room earlier?" and I laughed so hard I probably farted again.

I'm also the only smoker in my house which increases my rep to "smoky farter". I gave up on Tuesday (smoking not farting) and didn't smoke for all of Wednesday, then I ran off to ASDA at 11 at night to buy a twenty deck. 23:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I attempted to give up smoking but now I smoke all day and wear a patch all day and all night so I don't miss a moments nicotine. So in actual fact, through quitting smoking, I now have a constant stream of tobacco, all day every day. Oh yeah, I was pretty stoked to get a B+ for my International Relations paper. Even though I am little old and jaded for Uni. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 23:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Josh, quit as soon as you can. I'm really pissed at myself that I smoked more than 20 a day throughout uni. Such a massive waste of money, which could have been spent on beer. I used the easyway book in the end. Works great. It basically brainwashes you into thinking that quitting smoking is the most awesome thing in the world. 09:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not a big smoker, it's mainly when I'm pissed and/or night time, i.e. I haven't smoked at all today cuz I haven't really wanted to. Although I intend to cut down drastically soon, as it was the Fresher's Fair today and I joined a few societies which will need me in better condition than a bleeding smoky lunged runt. 18:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ooh, do tell! Rugby club? I joined and then quit after the first training session when they made us do 1 hour and 40 minutes of non-stop fitness training. I almost puked my asshole through my nose. 22:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha! I'm not a sporty person, although I would say rugby is my favourite sport if I were to choose. However, I'm a skinny white kid and would be an embarrassment to my Uni's rugby team. I signed up for karate however, as I haven't done that in years, and for the skiing/snowboarding which will be fun. As for puking organs out of my nose, I ended up spitting quite a bit in the Union on campus last night when my pissed off friend who needed a drink bought six shots between me and her. Getting out-drunk by a girl is embarrassing... 12:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A scathing review.
So I went to high school with this complete fucking muppet. A real clown shoes who reckons he is quite the deep and meaningful "muso". His latest album garnered this scathing review. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 00:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Clip, please! 00:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Isolation is the New fuckin Party? I don't have to hear it to know I hate it. Fuckin Falling Horses?!? AAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAaaaaa... JS Leitch 03:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I dont wanna be to mean to the guy but really..........
 * I got so high it made my nose bleed all over the cushions at your house
 * And now you don’t want me coming round no more
 * I was so clumsy I spilt my ice cream all over the cushions at your house
 * And now you don’t want me coming round no more
 * And all the cushions at your house are gonna be happy ‘cause I wont be coming around to make a mess on them again
 * But all the cushions at your house are gonna get lonely ‘cause they can’t have any fun if they don’t have any friends
 * I smoked so much I coughed up black stuff all over the cushions at your house
 * I was so excited I came too quickly all over the cushions at your house
 * The cushions at your house
 * You broke my heart so bad I broke down all over the cushions at your house
 * I cried so much it formed a river flowing through the cushions at your house
 * Horrid stuff. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 03:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Emo! Emo!  Emo!!  Those lyrics are awful.  Just awful.   03:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is why I find the concept of lyrics overrated... 09:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's the video. Totnesmartin 13:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

And now I need to play No Sleep 'til Hammersmith. Totnesmartin 13:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tots and arrggghhhh that truly is awful. Now I need to wash my brain out with some full-strength Clash!  20:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

RW is not uncyclopedia...
but I am sure you guys might like this article. 03:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, that crafty Acme! They always know what to do to bend the space-time continuum!   04:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is where UC is good, non of that "The INTERNETZ wuz made in 350 BCE for ppl making pasta!!! Hurr hrurr!!!11 lol". Wikipedia still has hammerspace as an article - I think at one point it was almost like this UC article. 09:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's an excellent article, the sort of thing UC should strive for. Why isn't it in the mainspace?  20:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I love that stuff. Anyone remember the old Ludwig Von Drake shorts where he explained Cartoon Physics on the old Raw Toonage show? --Kels 16:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Points mean prizes
I'm sure it's covered elsewhere as well but the Ig Nobel prizes for 2009 have been announced. 06:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt I have to say it, but my favorite is the gas mask bra. Now when women find me sniffing their underwear I can explain it away as a gas leak. It's good to see that society always has stalkers in mind. 07:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Humph, is it you? 08:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I bloody love the Ig Nobels. It's all (well, mostly) genuine and useful research, just sometimes extremely counter-intuitive to the point that most people consider it bizarre. 09:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * These are just... crazy... and insane... and bizzare... but completly awesome! 18:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Lisbon Treaty
Just after voting in the Lisbon Treaty Referendum there. Anyone have any opinion on it? (I voted yes) MarcusCicero 13:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm voting today, and likely to go for "yes". The benefits seem to outweigh the losses, and I can see pragmatic reasons for the change in voting weights. --Concernedresident 14:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not really following this story, but what's changed in deal that they're voting on in the what, eighteen months since the last referendum? It seems to me that the state is saying "the people have spoken, but they didn't give us the answer we wanted, so we're gonna let them try again. " RaoulDuke 14:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * They did that with the Danish Maastricht treaty referendum in 1992 as well. Why even bother having a referendum on that basis? Totnesmartin 14:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally I don't have much of a problem in principle with the people being asked the same thing multiple times. We voted twice on the Nice Treaty after all. If you were following the election in Ireland you would see the despicable tactics and deceit the 'no' side have been using. Lisbon is a very boring treaty, it says little of any real significance. In fact, all it really does is streamline some uninteresting buraucracy. I, as a PHD student in irish history have to put up with bullshit signs showing James connolly and Padraig Pearse and emotive lines like 'they died for your freedom' and all the rest. Absolutely despicable. Democracy is a value, not an institution in itself. We live in a Democratic Republic, not a direct democracy. TDs and MPs usually vote on the same legislation several times - why should the people be any different? We are simply the organs of a the Republican system, we elect representatives and we hold them accountable. People power is not the be all and end all and their decision is NEVER final. This referendum is basically malign but the hysteria caused by the no campaign has ingrained misinformation and lies to such an extent that it has made a repeat vote necessary. MarcusCicero 15:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the campaigning has been pretty dirty. I realise that posters aren't the place for in-depth coverage of the pros and cons, but some of the claims on both sides are dubious, and in some cases downright dishonest. The religious fundies, in the form of Youth Defence, are involved albeit under the name Cóir. This is the group responsible for some of the "they died for your freedom" posters, and slogans like "Politicians love the gravy train". It's definitely fear mongering in pursuit of their own nasty agenda. The fundie Catholic newspaper Alive are also in full swing, and curiously being delivered along with "The Sovereign" - a newspaper pushing the "no" vote, as well as the usual anti-EU and vaccination junk. Europe is not good for fundies. The freedom --Concernedresident 16:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the whole 'road to recovery' thing is entirely dishonest from the yes side. Nonetheless, its small compared to the emotive patriotic malarky from groups like Coir. And don't get me started on Declan Ganley and Libertas! Bastards. I know one of their PR guys - they really are degenerate scum. No moral center whatsoever and perfect content to lie and exaggerate for foul, obscure reasons based mainly on ego and personal ambition. Honestly... MarcusCicero 16:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What is the nature of the Lisbon Treaty? I'm aware that it somehow reforms the voting process within the EU, but I don't know any more about it and the WP article is too dense for casual reading. 18:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I haven't read the document itself (I was meaning to, never got round to it) But the jist effectively means a re-arranging of parliamentary powers (Actually making Europe more democratic, contrary to Libertas claims) There is a lot of ambiguity over whether Ireland would loose her commissioner AND, most essentially, voting powers are changed in the Council of Ministers to reflect the proportional vote of the population. The No side make all sorts of claims but realistically, while Germany's voting strength goes up to 17% and Irelands down to 0.8%, it allows for veto coalitions (I think something like four states need to join up to veto a motion, while the majority for a motion to pass has to stand at 55%.) In general it makes Europe more fairer proportionally to the European population and more democratic. It also introduces a citizen iniative, where something like 2 million petitions can force the EU parliament to debate a motion. MarcusCicero 18:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So you voted on something you never read based solely on the personality of the main protagonists? That certainly explains a lot. 12:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He clearly grasps the central points of the treaty, so why does he need to read the whole document. 13:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * How do you know he grasps the central points, because somebody said that's what they are? He wouldn't base his PhD thesis on that. I bet very few people have read the treaty in detail because these things can be quite obtuse and couched in newspeak to appease the various interested parties. Most of the voting is based purely on emotion rather than rational considerations. 14:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, hold on a minute. Do you read all the information of differing party manifesto's every time there is a general election? Do you read all the fringe groups manifesto's and the independent candidates? I understand the issues, I read two papers at the least every day, and I'm particularly well informed yet never got round to reading the document itself (Though I do understand what it entails) Get over yourself love. MarcusCicero 15:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no doubt that Declan Ganley (wait, Declan Ganley) is indeed a fucking scumbucket of the highest order. I'm very much looking forward to hearing the scuttling sounds as he retreats back under his rock again, to presumably again pompously announce he won't ever be doing any more politics again, ever, for the second time. Sadly, as one of those scumbags who fled the country due to no jobs no money  wet climate  Gay Byrne religious intolerance I was unable to vote today. So well done Dr.Cicero, you have done your country proud. DogP Marmite Patrol 01:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems Lisbon has passed with flying colours. Thank God. MarcusCicero 14:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * the point touched on above about voting on personalities could be explored more, perhaps it's even worth an article. I remember being pro-Europe in the 90s just because all the prominent euroskeptics were all a bit odd, with weird stary eyes. Totnesmartin 15:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Why?
Why is everyone responding to the troll. He's achieving his attention seeking ends this way. I suspect that there might be something in the mental health difficulties that he lied about earlier (can't be bothered to find diffs - he's a waste of space). 23:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is just low. People should bear in mind that this is Susan, who has a long standing grudge with me after I told her to fuck off when she called all people of religious faith imbeciles. She is exactly the problem I am talking about and her overly defensive response is precisely to be expected. MarcusCicero 23:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I hate interacting with this person but I do think that he is simply lacking in personal self esteem and is trying to manipulate others on the web. If he was really concerned enough to mean what he's saying he'd just start up his own wiki (or blog or whatever), advertise it here and gather together what support he thinks he might have. I do agree with one thing he's said: Akj left because of the anti religion bias on here but I think that's diminished slightly since then. I don't believe I ever said all people of religious faith [are] imbeciles but it's quite possible that I did (I think it was about Mormons?). Is "fuck off" what he calls responsible debate? I don't understand his POV a claimed lapsed (or whatever) Catholic who defends religion? 23:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I said I was going to bed, but I'll have to respond to this. Why do I threaten you so much Susan? Why do you take such a personal affront to a relatively benign proposal? For someone so quick to accuse me of having a mental illness, you seem prone to irrationally bandying that about a rather serious charge on no real basis. MarcusCicero 23:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On the basis of you having claimed (admittedly through a fairly transparent sock) to have one at one time: it was you who started it - not me. Your edits here do nothing to remove the idea. [[image:Wave.gif]]  00:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wasn't starting this section "responding to the troll"? Or is this the reversed troll treble-hook cast I've read about in fishing magazines?  03:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You read fishing magazines? --Kels 03:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not as much as I used to, my tastes have drifted more towards non-fiction... 03:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Playboy bios?--Thanatos 03:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Penthouse airbrushing. 06:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * H, I wasn't exempting myself from the "everyone". I don't know why I respond either. Possibly just midnight boredom or summat like that. 11:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Toast dear, you really need to establish regular sleep patterns. All this editing in the wee small hours isn't good for you. 12:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * One of the benefits of retirement: you don't have to conform to the schedules of others. 12:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah but the day-light is good for you. 13:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But I'm asleep in my coffin then! 13:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That'll be the difficult thing if I ever go freelance and can set my own schedule. I love staying up late, and yet I'm also a morning person and hate sleeping in too much. --Kels 16:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Frisky parrot
Now I found this New Zealand kakapo funny. 13:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I've had it.
This has got to stop. MC has demonstrated time and time again that he's only here to disrupt the site. He's never, ever going to do anything useful here. We need to get rid of him in some manner or other, and we need to decide how to do it now.

We need some clear blocking policy to get rid of people like this. We don't need them or the agro they cause, and our complete lack of ability to deal with them just causes more agro. The vandal bin is fine for vandals, but people like MC need blocking. There is no two ways about it. I suggest as a community we formulate a blocking policy for situations like this, then apply it to him. -- 19:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we should just bin 'em. That way, they can get their one shot per half hour, and we can just ignore it completely.  But that's just my opinion. 20:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That doesn't really help for trolls like MC. It helps to slow down the rate of vandalism, so they we can comfortably revert it. However, trolling isn't really revertable. Unless we have a policy just to revert anything MC says on sight. -- 20:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with binning or blocking, whatever. I'm not of the "well, he's such a poor woobie, and we don't block" bullshit brigade.  If he's trolling, treat him like a fucking troll, same as TK (who I remember banning for infinite during a very similar event). --Kels 20:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know; I really don't believe in permabanning like Conservapedia does, because we shouldn't become what we've set out to destroy. But binning them and reverting them seems like sound policy to me. 20:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we've gone too far in the not being like CP department. Think What Would Wikipedia Do? Anyone behaving like MC on wikipedia would be long gone. It isn't like we haven't given him a chance. Many, many chances in fact. And he's squandered them all. It's high time he was gone. -- 20:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am trying, REALLY trying, to shed myself of the block-happy reputation that I have earned. So part of me thinks I should be just staying away from all this. That being said, he's acting like a douche and brings precious little to the table. We should be able to just ignore him, but we can't. So why keep him around? And the argument: "CP permabans, so we shouldn't" is lame. Fallacy of appeal to CP. What they do is of ZERO relevance here, one way or the other. RaoulDuke 20:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC)I still vote for binning and reverting. They are marginalized to one edit every now and then, and then we can just revert the edits they do make. Again, that is just my opinion, though. But I do agree that we've all put up with his shit long enough. 20:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure. We don't want to get in to the habit of reverting anyone's talk page comments. If we want him gone, then he should be blocked. No half measures. -- 20:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with binning, since at least that slows things down a lot. But if blocking for a month or whatever is what people decide on, then I'm not gonna argue.  The "doing nothing" option is utterly counter to common sense, and just lets him get on with the increasingly transparent trolling.  --Kels 20:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with whatever the community-at-large decides, as long as it isn't doing nothing. MarcusCicero is a pain in the ass that needs to be taken care of. 20:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe a week long ban in lieu of the binning.--Thanatos 20:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I fundamentally agree that there is a difference between a troll who will go away after most ignore him and a permatroll that provokes the wiki into headless chicken mode whatever level. Sterile 21:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This discussion moved here 21:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Draft policy
I've cobbled together a policy draft. Please comment and/or mangle. -- 20:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This dicussion moved here 21:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

When naming a website...
A website about how to pronounce English words sounds pretty useful. Sadly, whoever named it couldn't have been aware of internet-speak. Totnesmartin 22:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hee! Hee! 22:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Whenever Susan giggles, my ears perk up. "developement" indeed.  Nice catch.  08:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh heh heh! Very unfortunate... 12:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it is an Hungarian-English site so my hovercraft is full of eels as they say. 12:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reminds me of sites like Burningahole.co.uk, and therapistfinder.com. Other classics: penisland.net powergenitalia.com whorepresents.com expertsexchange.com, and, um... molestationnursery.com (no longer exists and not archived, unfortunately). Dreaded Walrus t c 14:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's like those optical illusion things where you see it one way and suddenly it flips; one second it's Powergen Italia and then suddenly its OW MY EYES!! 14:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I just saw a guy almost get killed
I just witnesse a pedestrian get hit by a car. Scary scary shit - the car was fuckin flying. The guy jumped right back up, though... I couldn't believe it.

Ruined my lunchbreak, though - it took the cops half an hour to show up and question me. JS Leitch 19:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad the guy is OK. I saw a guy decapitated on a motorcycle a few months back.  He wasn't so lucky, and the work day hadn't even begun, as I was on my way to work.  The cops were a bit more expeditious in that endeavor though, clocking in at less than 5 minutes.   19:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Holy shit. I hope I never see something like that. I know an older guy who hit and killed someone a few decades ago. He was completely not at fault, everybody saw the victim step out right in front of the car, but that's the kind of thing you never get over. JS Leitch 22:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw a guy catch his step the other day, he might have fallen over but he didn't, he was all right and he just walked right along. But just seeing it almost had me in with the therapist, I was convinced I had PTSD.   Couldn't sleep for days with the image burned into my mind of that horrific near accident.  DogP Marmite Patrol 01:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I was actually hit by a car crossing the street eight years ago. Same thing, car flying through a red, I didn't see it in time. And for such a horrible accident, the only injuries I had were a torn ACL and a concussion. Lucky, I guess. 14:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was a pursuit officer in a car chase. We were doing about a buck-oh-five when the passenger opened his door and jumped out. He rolled down the road and hit the cement median. He lost his foot and his guts were in his hands.--MAstEr oF pUPetStalk! 17:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, a gut in the hand is worth three in the bush. 19:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

People are lovely...
I'm often reminded the of quote "...and that's why we don't let grieving parents give out punishments in this country" (although I have no idea where it comes from, I heard The West Wing but I can't find it anywhere). The most recent case of this involves a friend of mine on Friendface who was disgusted and sick regarding this story. Okay, it is sick and disgusting, but let's look at the reactions I've read from people who would consider themselves reasonable... Sick sick fuckers shud be left to starve to death in prison the [sex offenders] list should be scrapped and replaced with mandatory psychiatric care and chemical castration I just get too angry and want blood! a bloody good hiding so there an inch away from croaking it and leaving them with no quality of life would be good though, hopefully they live to be a hundred lead a awful existance and suffer every single day. best poss thing that the courts could do id make a new law where these twats are left with the familys of the victims and let them do whatever the hell they like to them Now, I'm fine that people are upset and disturbed, people should be, this sort of thing isn't the norm and should never be acceptable. However, is this an excuse to start throwing away rights and due process that we've striven to achieve for everyone over the last hundred years or so? Do we want to go back to mob-justice and chaos on the whims of highly fallible emotion? It's difficult to not agree that criminals like this should be punished severely in a brutal manner, but that discomfort and difficulty is the price we pay for having a much freer society than we used to under the comparatively brutal reigns of God-appointed monarchs, dictators, Churches and witch-hunters. I'm also wondering whether to point out to these people that, if they want to make a real and meaningful, preventative contribution they should start killing parents because the facts show, and basically have always shown, that parents are a bigger danger to kids than the few bogeymen that the papers would have us think are all over... Maybe I'd just get the "you don't have kids, you don't understand!!" speech and it wouldn't be worth it. 11:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "skinned alive and rolled in salt..." ugh, lynch mobs. And Plymouth is a nasty place anyway, it's a pretty rough city for fights and general nastiness. Totnesmartin 13:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit troubled that the BBC wanted to keep the quote about wanting to skin her alive & roll her in salt. Yeah, I guess arguably it would be censorship to leave it out of the article, but it looks a lot like the journalist is condoning this kind of sentiment.   23:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm right there with you Armond. I've noticed a very scary trend in America and elsewhere that whenever there is a sexual crime involving children, people lose all rational and logical function in their briains and react like cave people: "He hurt child, be beat in head with rock."  It's rather disturbing actually.  While I'm here, however, I would like to also point out that the sentencing process, where they drag everyone in front of the jury to plead for the worst sentence possible needs to be done away with.  Juries and Judges should not be swayed by the emotion of familes.  Thank you  01:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's interesting how this dovetails with the L'Affaire Polanski - Sharon Tate's mother and sister(s?) were instrumental in getting the "victim's perspective" thing passed in California. 02:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what's really weird? In some cases, the 'sexual offender' is a child themselves.  It can happen that you have, say, a 14 year old boy fooling around with a 14 year old girl, they get caught, and the DA decides that the boy is the 'offender' and the girl is the 'victim' (or sometimes the other way around, and it's sometimes even the case each is both 'victim' and 'offender' at the same time).  Similarly, there was a case of a 14 year old girl in new Jersey who was facing charges for child pornography for putting nude pictures of herself up on Myspace. I wonder if those people would advocate similar punishments in cases like that? 92.0.201.193 22:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

WIGO WP
Is anyone following Kent Hovind's talk page at Wikipedia? It's, um, interesting. Totnesmartin 13:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting, and I thought our BONs were paranoid. 14:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's certainly good for a laugh. Thanks.--BobNot Jim 19:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I tend to stalk Hrafn (a bit) 'cause he's like an avenging angel on teh wooists. 19:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, I like that wingnut template/box thing. 20:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I must admit that I was a little surprised by that.--BobNot Jim 20:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I almost expected it to be our "stop in the name of love" template, before I remembered it was WP. 21:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * When I saw that template I had to double-check the URL. Totnesmartin 21:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we have it? :D 12:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should. We don't have enough templates to decorate talk pages and debates yet.  21:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Here's the code for it:

And here's "ambox":

We might want to start from scratch ;) 21:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The bottom one...
the bottom one... the bottom one... the bottom one *hides in a corner and cries 01:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can't just take them from people when they're recently dead, or through an easy process, then this would create quite the moral dilemma. Hypothetical: A child on the street, seeing you are male, comes up to you to plead for your balls because their mother is dying. "Just one, please? Wouldn't you rather save my mom's life? Wouldn't you?" 04:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe this is more uplifting. 19:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Things like this make me think the homeskoolerz are right.
The safety nazis take all the fun out of the world again...RaoulDuke 04:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My mum took me to school - when I was five. I don't think it's a homeschooling issue because some parents homeschool in order to protect their kids. It's really a societal issue, I think we tend to overprotect kids in the wrong places and about the wrong things because of erroneous perceptions of risk. Institutions like schools or youth groups are scared of being sued so they end up making everything anodyne. The home is statistically one of the most dangerous places and paedophiles are more likely to be relatives or family friends. 08:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In one of my countries I and everybody else used to walk to school up to a few kilometers, starting from first class age 7. In another of my countries instead parents have to either take their kids from school or be waiting at the school bus stop (even if it were in front of your house), or they risk a charge for negligence. I wouldn't say that one country is safer than the other or that it's a fear of being sued - just a cultural difference. Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 08:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * To carry on this "in my day" thread, I used to walk two miles to school and two miles home UPHILL BOTH WAYS - we'd all go on the back road through the country instead of the main road. Nowadays kids get lifts into school, even if it's down the road, and we wonder why they're all fat. Oh god, I'm turning into the Daily Mail. Kill me now! Totnesmartin 08:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I had started typing similar thoughts myself but though better of it. As for the Daily Mail, well the two-faced cunts might lambast the heavy-handed nanny-state but they are first in line demanding that "something-must-be-done"!  08:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's Fox News ferchrissake! Meaning, it's probably not true as "reported". Too lazy to investigate beyond that, but odds are, that's enough.  08:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why did I read that "uphill both ways" in a Yorkshire accent? Totnesmartin 08:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Did I write about walking to school here? Wrong tab, bad Tin of Nesmar Tot!  09:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We would have DREAMED of walking uphill both ways, would've been like a Princess Cruise. We used to have to walk on our hands six miles cause the mill owners didn't want us damaging our feet before work.  09:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You used to get ta work in mill? We used ta hafta work in ta mud, owner made us eat it to make it smoother for tha fields.  Twas good, though, ever' furth Sunday 'e let us eat grass instead.  Ah, the good old days...  09:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

There: Not Fox News. Still wanna discount it, Human? RaoulDuke 18:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better story, too, with more balance. Note that the state has a program to help the locals create/improve bikeways (etc.) to encourage healthy modes of transportation, but this particular town will have none of it.  Be interesting to know more about that school board's other policies...  22:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Homemade baby poop
I'd swear I just heard a TV ad for a thing that makes it. But I may have been mistaken. 10:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell, there's so much crap on TV. Totnesmartin 10:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Where can I buy this wonder product? I'll pay three - no, four hundred dollars! 12:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There used to be a doll that would eat some kind of weird slop and then poo itself so little girls could change its nappy. Totnesmartin 18:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You may be right (although it seems kind of yucky for mainstream) but I do remember Tiny Tears being sold as one that could wet itself at both ends (although that wasn't their slogan). 18:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "My partner's got a really good idea for making dolls. His name's 'Presuming Ed'. His sister give him the idea. She got a doll on Christmas what pisses itself. Then you've got to change its draws for it. Horrible really but they're like that the little girls. So we're going to make one that shits itself too." Danny - Withnail & I. 19:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

BILLY MAYS

 * The guy who did that autotuned Carl Sagan song has also contributed this paean to the salesmanship of the great TV pitchman Billy Mays.  DogP Marmite Patrol 15:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome... 22:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I've actually been playing this game for years.
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal RaoulDuke 18:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Or you can cheat! (actually, it looks like it isn't working anymore : 19:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Barcode battler
Woah fuck!!! I just stumbled on my old Barcode Battler in the cupboard. I must take this to work and begin the assault on my workmates!! Although the rules will have to state that no-one is allowed to use internet codes. Actual product codes only!! Anyone else played this? 19:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoah indeed. I had totally forgotten that those things ever existed. Your cupboard is impressive. 22:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My cupboard is full of win. I also found the original Sims games, some porno playing cards, and my hologram generator which I got in America when I was about 14. 10:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

In America, you don't believe in God
In Soviet Russia, God don't believe in YOU!! 03:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. Whodathunkit?  03:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Our departmental secretary is Ukrainian and an atheist who is completely unaware of religion. It is really refreshing to meet someone that is totally unencumbered by all the religious baggage that even most Western atheists struggle to free themselves from. On the other hand when I was browsing round LovelyRussianLadies.com I think everyone of them said that they were Christian. I guess they were told that they needed to say that in order to snag an American husband. 06:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

NEVER say "now I've seen everything"
Because you haven't. You will never see everything and even rhetorically exclaiming it will lead to people pointing out this, which totally defies description... 12:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it wrong that I enjoyed watching that so much I watched it twice? Thank you for making me think I had taken expired medicine and lost my mind, most enjoyable. 12:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My eyes! My brain! Now can I say "now I've seen everything"? Himmel gott! --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 12:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Check out Muscle March. It's sticking to the usual video game formula of male body builders in bikinis, talking noses, aliens, and Engrish. --Concernedresident 13:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice Muscle! Cheers Concernedresident, that's made my day.   15:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * How about 4 Amish dudes going at eachother with rakes? 17:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Facebook Nausea
I hate it when couples engage in this kind of nonsense in quasi-public fora like FB updates. It reeks of insecurity. And pet-names are stupid. These are people in their thirties, for Christ's sake. Rant over. RaoulDuke 02:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All couples have pet names, or at least most, but they shouldn't be aired on FB. My partner and I publicly abuse each other on Facebook and I threaten her with violence on her wall. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 02:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What's funny is when you call a person you know a silly name, and it is what their SO calls them. Like me calling Lumenos "lumpy".  It was like foreplay, without the pleasure.  03:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My mother calls my father FB and (thankfully) they would not tell me what it stood for when I was younger. Now I know it stands for fuck buddy. 04:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Though if it were my parents, my stomach would turn every time I heard it said.-- 04:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh, no kids ever think their parents had (or even still have) hawt sex. Now at what age do you to plan to stop? As for pet-names, theGrauniad's Valentine's day pages are often cringeworthy. I think I may have used "peachbottom" there once but never snugglebunnykins. 06:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Slightly off-topic, but I loved a CNN article I read a while back that was about how divorce lawyers think that places like Facebook, Myspace and such are goldmines. 11:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I love it less that someone was allegedly fired because of her remarks about her job in her Facebook. In the meanwhile, if you are a basketball referee in Italy - low, amateur divisions included - you are prohibited to have a Facebook (and any social network) account. At least until they amend that part of the rules following the legitimate uproar. Editor at CPmały książe 13:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am pro firing people who use facebook.  15:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Angry
I noticed something, whenever a creationist refers to an "evolutionist", they always have to slip the word "angry" in their title somewhere (e.g. on cretinwiki's news items at the moment: "The Angry Evolutionist Richard Dawkins criticizes creationists..."). I don't find them particulary angry, in fact I normally find the creationists to have shorter fuses. I therefore propose we parody their conventions by appending "angry" to any reference to a creationist. What do you say? I'm off to the WIGO pages now to see what the angry creationist Andrew Schlafly and the angry anti-evolutionist Phillip J Rayment have been up to. 13:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reminds me of WND. Things aren't gay, they're 'gay' (always in single quotes). &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 13:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Aren't we angry? They want the world's no 1 economic and military superpower to teach fairy tales in science class. Yeah, let the west reject science, dumb our technology down accordingly and let China take over. Too right I'm angry. Totnesmartin 14:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dawkins has never struck me as angry, just exasperated at the stupidity of those who cannot see the scientific evidence but are willing to believe in mumbo-jumbo (and that encompasses more than just the religion/creationist thing). 16:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * @Tot: I never said atheists weren't angry, just that creationists love to label us as such, whereas in my experience it's the creationists who get brash and shouty. Therefore we should label them the same. 20:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

CP is moribund... Let's help them!!
I had this idea this morning, while reading www.cynical-c.com, some troll was bible thumping the comments ...

I commentented that :

Pablo, Stop wasting your time here!!! They DONT want to see the light. Pray for them as i do.

I suggest you go edit the true encyclopedia at http://www.conservapedia.com.

We need more Brave followers of the lord like you ! You have such a good penmanship (keyboardship?)Please Dont waste it here…

If I'm lucky, thats one more CPedian in the madhouse and one less troll on our favorite blogs.

So, if we all try to divert the trolls from our favorite blogs to CP , everybody would be a winner!

Just an idea!
 * I've always been a yooge supporter of CP membership drives. The more people the get, the funnier and messier things will become. I applaud your efforts, sir or madam. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 16:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm straight, and happily married. If not for Conservapedia, I'd probably be a gay follower of the unscience. Huzzah for this initiative! 16:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Only problem is they now have a policy of blocking noobs on sight... 19:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Wanna feel small?
Watch this 16:01, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That kicked ass. Especially with the King Crimson I had on in the background.-- 16:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That last frame was just perfect! 19:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See this for a non-animated version. It doesn't contain that final frame, but it does contain a bit of extra info. Dreaded Walrus t c 20:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (derail) Am I the only person who's fed up with FunnyJunk now? It used to be such a class dumping ground of funny pictures, but recently I think someone must have advertised the site on AOL or something. You're lucky if you can find one single funny picture nowadays amidst the endless wave of "Your daily dose of (random female celebrity)", or a page 3 photo with a childish heading, or even worse, some fuckwit who thinks swapping heads on random pictures with their friend's heads (who no-one else knows) is the funniest thing in the world. Nuke the lot of them!!! 21:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Shroud of Turin a fake?
Check out this article from the Associated Press I found in my local paper today. It's quite interesting. 21:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Already in WIGO:World I think. 21:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Damn. That's what I get for not reading the WIGOs. 21:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait, you mean it's not actually the image of Jeebus Christ burned onto a sheet by some mystical force? I don't need the Star/Tribune to tell me that. Tell me something useful, Star/Tribune, like where the hell I left my keys. RaoulDuke 22:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a newspaper. They'll tell you where you left them after you find them. 22:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That is why the medium is dying. RaoulDuke 22:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Dawkins vs. Colbert
Who saw Richard Dawkins as a guest on Colbert the other day? Did anyone else feel a little... underwhelmed? I know Colbert's style is to talk talk talk like O'Reilly and never let his guest get a word in edgewise, but usually there's some dialogue. RD has had some great interviews with Colbert (like this one), but this time it seemed like he never got to even finish a sentence.
 * I saw it, and I agree it was a little underwhelming. 22:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dawkins at least got to pimp his new book, though. And yeah, it could have been livelier.  22:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, right at the end there Colbert let him talk. I was hoping there would be more, but then it ended. Too bad. 22:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dawkins is very controversial. Maybe Colbert didn't want to alienate some viewers (such as conservatives who don't realize it's parody.) Interview could have been better though. Kinda hoping with his recent coverage, Andy will soon have an interview.--Thanatos 01:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Quantifying CP's hilariousness
I just had a weird thought: what if we graphed the WIGO CP vote results over time? (y axis: Score/votes; x axis: time) We would have a graph of how funny CP has been over the course of its history. Does anyone know how this could be done efficiently? Tetronian 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Larron already does this, have a look on his user page. Also can you please keep CP discussions over at WIGO CP talk? 01:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh ok, thanks. Yeah I guess this was the wrong place, it just seemed like it wouldn't fit with the rest of the discussions there. Ah well. Tetronian 02:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The page is actually for discussing WIGO itself, we just use it for general CP chat. 02:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem is that our WIGO:CP votes do not reflect how funny CP is, they reflect the popularity of the WIGO page. 06:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Maddow
Yes, yes, the blogosphere is all over CP again...but you saw Maddow tonight? -- -PalMD -- 02:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, aren't you one of the intellectual giants who is supposed to have abandoned RW in disgust over our obsession with internet memes and goat jokes? 23:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't yet, I was listening to Huw be quoted on Malloy. But I'll catch it on the replay. 02:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have to download Maddow. ...  Sterile 02:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am fucking famous. But, anyway, did Maddow do the blog-whore thing of just just quoting some random blog, or did she link/cite the source?  The Conservative Bible Project is at Conservapedia.  03:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, Maddow actually did their own research and took direct quotes from the Assfly and Conservapedia itself, and handed out jabs at Assfly and his mom. 03:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Links please! 04:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, if only I could find some. I just watched the replay on MSNBC, so I don't have any (yet). 04:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/33201755#33201755 04:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)PS watch this several times for thee additive lulz effect.  04:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for link! 06:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Can someone rip it and send it to me? My computers acting like a piece of shit again--Thanatos 05:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * [SILLY INTERNET MEME] That sends me off to work with a smile. 06:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Toilets
I just saw this and it reminded me of an email which was sent round my last workplace which was pretty astounding:

Hello, I'm afraid it 's one of those emails again...... Yesterday the cleaners found that in the ground floor women's toilets there had been 'sh*t smeared on the walls'. I'm sorry to use this language, and I apologise,  but I am appalled that this should be the case in our building and don't know quite how else to put it so that it is as clearly understood. Obviously this is not acceptable behaviour. I am at a loss to know what to do about it as it is not the first time that it has happened... Nice. 14:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you can scratch a small chunk of the population from your potential dating pool right there. -- 14:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats really disgusting...OpalHonors 14:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The thing is, if it was the men's toilet I could probably understand (as there were quite a few fucked up weirdos there), but the ladies? Why are the women going batshit crazy and scrawling shit on the walls? 14:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised they even can, I mean really, its so gross!!!OpalHonors 14:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My cousin was complaining about a shit-stink that lingered in her bathroom even after cleaning every possible surface with bleach. Then some paint flaked off the wall. Turns out, a previous resident had smeared shit all over, then painted over it... 14:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats absolutely disgusting.... Like really really sickening!OpalHonors 14:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, the bathtub was full of garbage bags when the people moved out. Apparently they couldn't be troubled to carry 'em down the stairs. 14:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * When my wife and her mum moved to a new council flat when she was young there was no carpet, missing floorboards, and used tampons lying around. People are pretty fucking disgusting sometimes. 14:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome to college, where you never know which stall is going to contain an unflushed toilet. Kwsn 15:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * on that note, Kwsn 15:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Last year in my dorm, one of the mens showers was closed due to flooding. The reason for the clogage? Semen getting caught in the hair of the drain. (and people wonder why I always wear flip-flops...) 15:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't semen supposed to be good for your skin? Or is that just a myth spread around by men to fool women? -- 17:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that idea was originally touted in Inside Linda Lovelace. However, a lot of people now seem to thinks it's good for the face. 19:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Unbelievably Messed-Up Bible Stories
Has anyone else seen these Messed-Up Bible Stories? They are also on YouTube but censored for the cartoon nipples and genitals. There are a couple of good bits - the Vote Republican banner when God saw that the Earth was corrupt in Noah's Ark and the Bible being lost in translation in the Tower of Babel. The Ebolaworld website doesn't have the Sodom & Gomorrah episode but it's on YouTube. 19:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

The speed of light...
I couldn't help but smirk when in my first official lecture today my lecturer made an off-the-cuff remark about how the speed of light was/is/and always will be constant. I then imagined myself putting my hand up and saying "but Simon, is it not possible that it varied in the past?" to tumultuous laughter from a room of 50 other students. Just imagining what those poor homeschoolers will be like in the real world once they've graduated from Andy's Underground Academy for Idiots... but I suppose that's why they say everything else is wrong, and not themselves. 13:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * When my dad was in school, a student in one of his math classes challenged the value of pi. He raised a big stink and refused to admit that pi is not, in fact, 3.000. 13:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Andy's homeschoolers will mostly drop out of education altogether and the rest will go to Liberty, where the speed of light has changed and Pi = 3, and will therefore excel (until they get a real job of course). 14:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I have to stop you there. As I discovered in an alcohol-induced dream several months back, pi actually equals 4. I know, you'd think it would be 3, but it isn't. DickTurpis 04:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah. Rounding up. 07:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Gene Ray would definitely agree that pi=4. Totnesmartin 10:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not rounding; it makes perfect sense. If you're drunk and asleep. And maybe being a bit high helps too. Believe me, this changes everything. The Rational Pi Era is beginning. You'll see. Throw out your old math books, they are about to be useless. DickTurpis 11:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, "The Worldwide Era of Rational Pi" - TWERP. 13:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In the "real" universe, e is 3, pi is 4, and i is not "imaginary". The problem is with our system of integers, not the fundamental constants.  Oh, and 2 is still 2, except for very large values of 2.  00:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Why do people edit at Conservapedia?
Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere, but I'm genuinely interested in knowing why so many people hang-on at Conservapedia - attempting to submit edits via email when they've obviously been banhammered by a lunatic? Incredible ability to take abuse, or concern for the homeschoolers? I'd be interested in hearing some opinions, essay suggestions, or links to talk pages telling the stories behind this odd masochism. 14:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've always subscribed to the "They can't be that bad" theory. Then people learn they are that bad and come here.--Thanatos 02:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell just how nuts their management style really is until you start editing. Basically someone either gets banhammered, queries it, and the never returns after a rude email from TK, or they themselves are batshit crazy and fit in nicely there. 07:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Because someone is wrong on the Internet!. --Gulik 17:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

NZ FTW!
You know you are living in an awesome free country when only one politican in said countries 169 year history has ever been convicted of corruption. AceMcWicked 22:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That, or everybody is corrupt and, therefore, nobody that is corrupt is convicted. 22:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering the overwhelming evidence we have that at least a few politicians a year will be convicted of corruption in any reasonably developed democracy with an independent judiciary, I'd say Goonie's closer to having the right idea here. OneForLogic 23:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We have scumbag politicians for sure however NZ's political landscape is so incredibly open that it is extremely hard to get away with anything. Trus me. AceMcWicked 00:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Which is why they take a flight somewhere and get it there while at some conference...OpalHonors 00:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was working for a political party here when one of its members was accused of fraud. Then I stole the couch outside her office and she complained to the speaker of the house. Was rather surreal having my name bandied about the debating chamber. AceMcWicked 00:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why, exactly did you steal her couch? Thats probably what she used to get the money for the fraud...OpalHonors 00:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Because she had been kicked out of our parliamentary office and had taken a couch when she left. I wanted it back so I nicked it from her. AceMcWicked 00:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Very nice.....OpalHonors 00:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On a serious note, Transparency International ranks New Zealand as the least corrupt country in the world. 01:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Knowing very well a few countries both high and low in those ranks, I have no faith anymore in them. Editor at CPmały książe 11:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As I said, NZ's political sphere is so open to public examination that it is virtually impossible to get away with being corrupt. And it just doesn't happen in our politics. Not bad for a bunch of commie, godless liberals. AceMcWicked 01:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Or maybe as liberals you all enjoy engaging in deceit, but as everyone in NZ is a liberal you engage in it together and so have an overall zero effect or something. Maybe I should create a formula for this by pulling constants out of my arse. 01:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Australians are stupid. AceMcWicked 01:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I do believe we had yet another Nobel Prize winner yesterday. 01:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Math is not allowed! I had a math test yesterday and I am still recovering... OpalHonors 01:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

New Zealand's GDP is $115 billion. The US's is $14 trillion. Even the UK has $2.6 trillion. So what are people going to steal, sheep? Fun fact: NZ is the only country on the planet with more sheep than people. I am going to grad school there, so I happen to have that at my fingertips.--Tom Moore fiat justitia 01:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * People steal things like stadiums and quarries. Secondly, where are doing grad school Tom? AceMcWicked 01:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I hear they have a lot of Grand Theft Hobbit. Next year I'll be headed to the University of Canterbury.--Tom Moore fiat justitia 01:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Canterbury is scenic but Christchurch (where I assume you'll be staying) is pretty hectic. Loads of slack-jaws down there and the are always finding dead hookers in the canal. If you want to escape to somewhere a bit more sophisticated, come up to Wellington and we'll get drunk. AceMcWicked 01:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

6 years seemed a bit excessive for me. I mean you get less than that for rape most of the time. Not saying that what the guy did wasn't wrong but on the scale of corruption it was pretty low I would have thought. --DamoHi 08:31, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In my neck of the woods, it's more like 169 a year. Not that any of them actually do time for it; they just get suspended on full pay. -- Psygremlin  17:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

An American Carol
Ok, I feel I should see this movie, but I just can't bring myself to do so. I have a rule for myself: I try to never judge anyone without giving them a chance to defend themselves. This means I don't just a political view unless I've read something the people who support it wrote themselves.

The problem is, with both this movie, and The Turner Diaries, I can't stop myself from hating them based on what I've heard, but I can't bring myself to spend the time watching/reading them (in the case of The Turner Diaries, I want to post a video of myself burning a copy on Youtube, but I would NEVER burn a book I hadn't read).

But, to get to the point, here's the thing that really bugs me about the very premise of this movie: It shows that Conservatives don't even understand why people disagree with them. It spoofs Michael Moore, and the movie is about his pascifist caricature learning that sometimes war is necessary to protect our freedom. Problem with this premise: MICHAEL MOORE ISN'T A PASCIFIST! I mean, I don't agree with alot of MM's tactics, but he isn't a pascifist, so by making a movie about a fat filmmaker pascifist, you do NOTHING to discredit him, you merely reinforce your own beliefs. Apparently, conservatives aren't aware that there are reasons for opposing the War in Iraq other than pascifism (ironically, one of Michael Moore's reasons for opposing it is that HE WANTED ALL THE MAN-POWER USED IN IRAQ TO BE PUMPED INTO INVADING AFGHANISTAN! Hardly a pascifist opinion).--Mustex 02:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * eck, I wouldn't watch An American Carol if you paid me. I haven't seen it, but my conservative friend told me that even he thought it was "retarded and shouldn't be seen by anyone."  I figured that was premise enough to avoid it all together. 02:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's my personal code of morality. I think you should never judge anyone without at least giving them some chance to defend themselves.  Eventually I intend to read Mein Enkampf (sp?).  And, were he alive an in prison today, if Hitler for some reason wanted to defend his actions to me personally, I would listen as long as he payed for the plane fare and translator.--Mustex 02:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Turner Diaries and Hunter were both intriguing and bizarre. An American Carol was sad.--Tom Moore fiat justitia 02:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd consider seeing it. I braved through "Disaster Movie"--Thanatos 02:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On a purely pedantic note, you seem to be conflating fascism and pacifism. Is this a deliberate neologism? Also Hitler's opus was Mein Kampf. Sorry that this is the only comment that I can make but I've never seen An American Carol and have no desire to. 06:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I wasn't confusing them, I was just referencing both. The former I was mentioning to point out that Michael Moore isn't a pascifist (and the people who made AC apparently believe he is).  The latter I brought up to point out that everyone should be given a chance to defend their position, and should be at least listened to (if only for a few minutes), no matter how horrible they are.--Mustex 13:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was talking about your spelling of pascifist pacifist Sorry for being such a grumpy old pedant. 13:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * From what I know of the film (which is only from reading a review or two & parts of the WP article), I don't think it's explicitly identifying Moore as a pacifist so much as an opponent of American patriotism. This is part of the neocons' whole schtick about liberals hate America.   18:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is anyone comparing a conservative lampoon of Michael Moore to a couple of conspiracy-theoretic hate-screeds against blacks and Jews? 18:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't that movie end up making £2 and a bag of peanuts at the box office? If they couldn't even get the god squad mobilised to fill the pews theatres, then why should you waste your time on it? -- 13:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Because I hate the movie, which means that I'm judging it, which is wrong of me since I haven't seen it. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 130.160.97.246 / talk / contribs


 * Mein Kampf is worth reading for its enormous historical significance. An American Carol has no pretty much no significance whatsoever & will be happily forgotten soon enough.  When every reasonable source tells you the movie is terrible, you can take their word for it.  OK, you're judging it without seeing it, but so what?  It's not like anybody is asking you to write an essay about it (are they?).  There are more great movies in the world than any one person could ever have time to see all of them in a lifetime, so why waste time forcing yourself to watch something you know you're gonna hate?   18:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would just like to add, I was so disappointed in Kelsey Grammar for appearing in that peice of shit. 18:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Kelsey Grammar sounds like a school. 18:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He would not if you spelled his name right. 18:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatever, my spelling is not the issue, the issue is bad political movies that don't even make back their gaffe tape budget. 18:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Kelsey Grammar was a school in the UK comedy series Little Britain. 18:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Is gaffe tape what they use to cover all the mistakes? 21:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

lolwut?
Hands up, who changed the Saloon Bar header? -- 23:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weaseloid: and .  23:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Really like the new look. Blue makes it look more relaxed--Thanatos 02:09, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It'll get boring and we'll change prescriptions in a few months... 03:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Now for my opinion! *drumroll*. I'm colourblind and I think the new colour scheme is disgusting. I don't know how that works, but it looks gross. Meh, I'll just avert my eyes. It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what Weaseloid did on this day, in this wiki, at this defining moment, change has come to the Saloon Bar header. /crappyobamaquote  04:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I never noticed the music before. Makes the saloon feel a bit like the bar in The Shining. 18:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Spanish guitar makes me want to play Ace Combat Zero again.--Thanatos 01:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

CP server is down!
CP is down! ...at least I think it is, or I might be having problems with my internet connection-- 18:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Read TWIGO: Colbert told his minions to mob it and it's been on and off ever since. 18:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fascinating insight, Samurai. RaoulDuke 19:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have learnt immensely from your edits Samurai. AceMcWicked 19:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I should read more.-- 19:21, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it still down?? &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 19:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. can't think of a way to verify this Very Important Question. If only my computing device had some way, SOME WAY, to verify if a website was functioning or not. Luckily, Samurai seems to have figured out a way to find this stuff out. how does he do it? How does he do it? RaoulDuke 19:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He probably gets email updates from Proxima Centauri. At the moment CP is up and down like a whore's drawers and given the nature of this site I think it is pretty certain that a large percentage of the readers will be quite aware when CP is down. Really, it only merits comment when it has been down continuously for at least half a day. Maybe we could have a special "CP is down" page where people could report non-sightings without bothering the rest of us. 20:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What about now??? &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, All right, Raoul, you can shut it with teh sarcasm now...

Department of Is-Anyone-Really-Surprised...
Today's update: Delivery of healthcare is best in notorious liberal bastions of Hawaii and Vermont, worst in the redder-than-red states of Mississippi, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Nevada and Texas. --SpinyNorman 22:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I am a bit surprised. Why does the political leaning of the state make a difference? 22:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Because, one, a fair amount of health care delivery is facilitated by the government, and two, regulations of the health care industry are mostly at a state level. Another way to look at it is the other way around - for some reason, the poorer states with crappier health tend to vote Republican... 23:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Your second argument makes a lot of sense--those states are probably much poorer per capita, and would thus have much lower quality healthcare. But speaking as a New Jersey resident (in fact I live about 10 minutes away from teh Schlafly) I know that much of one's healthcare quality is determined by one's insurance. This, of course, has nothing to do with political preference. Vermont and Hawaii do not have significantly different systems than the red states; the only one that is radically different is Massachusetts, which was not really mentioned in the article. 23:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The health insurance industry is regulated at the state level, for instance mandating that various procedures be covered by any plan offered in a given state. Or not. 23:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Yeah that makes much more sense now. (If I were a real jerk I would argue that economics plays a more important role because being uninsured is probably the factor that decreases the quality of one's healthcare the most, and that is more prevalent in poorer states--but I'll drop the subject.) Thankfully, much of that will all go out the window when the healthcare bill finally passes. One of the few provisions both Democrats and Republicans agree on is the one regarding pre-existing conditions. 00:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The jukebox...
...broke before it played my song - I want my nickel back! Did someone spill paint on its guts during the redecorating? 01:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought the bar was full of assholes so I loaded up an hour and a half worth of the same Cher song and walked out. Corry 01:25, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That explains a lot of strange things I've been seeing around here... 04:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I got drunk and spilled 18 year Tomatin all over the jukebox. I will repair it when I am sober again. 04:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Slacktivist
Either Fred's a frequent reader, or he just came up with the same idea we did (at the end, about the "Conservative Shakespeare Project"): -- 03:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

A monumental undertaking
The other day I was reading a creationist paper and they were discussing computer simulations they ran with a program called Mendel's Accountant, which showed how bad evolution was and could not occur. I was initially a bit surprised when I found out it was a program they wrote, less so when I remembered how convenient the results were. The impression they were trying to give in the paper is that this was a widely used program and it failed to demonstrate evolution. I know computer simulations are becoming increasingly common in the kind of research but it reliant on the programmer being honest in what they are doing.

What I was wondering is can we study the program? It is available through sourceforge so we can get copies of it and run simulations ourselves, but the question that comes to mind is how well programmed is it? This does seem to be a huge debunking task available to maybe debunk the program itself. They have got papers published in Lecture Notes in Computer Science about this program. 04:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Here are two paper on this program. 04:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * i had a quick glance at the source code. The good news is there isn't much of it, the bad news it was written by someone to who the words "data structure" and "function" might as well be gibberish. It's like what you'd get if someone who only ever knew BASIC were given a C compiler, it's awful. From a quick scan, it looks like they've got some exciting hacks io there for fixing up Noah's flood, which promise more interesting analysis. I'll have to look in to this further. -- 06:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears that the C code in the package was not actually made by a person, but by a Fortran-to-C compiler. 06:40, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, I know BASIC, I even have the manual. Can it be decrypted from this "C" of which you speak, and then I could rewrite it with awesome "renumberings" so lines could be inserted?
 * This could fun to see what they have done. Who have we got on site that is a biologist? 08:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So, I really need someone who knows a good deal more about genetics than I do to help me deal with some of the assumptions they're making. I have an inkling of where the sleight of hand is being done is, but I really need someone to confirm it for me.


 * I don't think I even need to run this program to tell that there are more or less no parameters you can plug in that will make a population increase in fitness generation on generation. That in itself rings alarm bells for me, since if it were that obvious that evolution didn't work, there really would have to be a global conspiracy to conceal the fact.


 * I think the heart of the whole problem is the uniformity of the distribution of deleterious mutations between instant death/total epsilon minus, Trig Palin style monging and more or less no effect. From my own naive understanding, there is some serious polarisation there which is not at all represented. Then, because the beneficial mutations are (artificially?) limited in their effect by the scaling factor, there's no chance that a population consisting of Jor-El and Lara will give birth to any Supermen, and every chance that you'll end up with a bunch of Jimmy Olsens.


 * Then any possible mate selection is totally left out, so all the Trig Palins and Jimmy Olsens get to shag, possibly with unattainable supermodels depending on how the wheel of fortune spins. I don't know how common this is in real, non-creationist simulations but it seems to me that in any simulation of animal populations, that is going to be important.


 * I think it'll be fun to dissect this in detail as an article, any biologists want to assist? -- 08:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, is there an article somewhere where they put this piece of shit to work, with reference to the parameters they're plugging in to it. I'm not sure it makes a lot of difference, since what is hardcoded seems to be the deciding factor, but it'd be nice to know. -- 09:09, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Along with the two above, there was this published by the ICR. 09:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Another thing that looks sleazy to me, from my layman's perspective. As I understand it, genomes tend to have mutation "hot spots" that account for large proportions of the mutations that occur in any individual. Doesn't that tend to mean that certain little bits of chromosomes tend to become "burned over" as it were, with many mutations reversing each other's effects? Doesn't this mean that the way the creationists model mutations as building up generation on generation tends to be wrong? -- 09:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh for sure, most mutations reverse. I remember a creationist lecturing about it at length, how most mutation are gone with in a few generations, usually fruit flies. 09:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

A thought.....BLAME EVOLUTION!
You know if you can blame the Holocaust and Hitler's view of the jews on the Theory of Evolution then surely, by using this same logic, you can blame the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918 on Evolution also. The viruses used the Theory to mutate and kill 40 Million people. WAKE UP EVERYONE! Cant you see what is happening here?! AceMcWicked 04:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, but that means that God did not burp the Spanish flu virus into existence abruptly by Intelligent Design, and mutations actually happened, and that is clearly unbiblical... 04:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No no, the viruses simply saw evolution as justification to kill 40 million. Someone get Ben Stein on the phone. AceMcWicked 04:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the Spanish flu was an inter-galactic STD. The World Governments were pimping out the populace to the LGMs and we caught it. How else can you explain the expansion of technology in the last century?--Thanatos 04:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dear lord he's right!!! We need to ban evolution now! That'll teach those pesky viruses to evolve!!!!! 15:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have a better idea: Blame the book of Genesis.  It tells us that God made humans mortal.  If the Nazis didn't believe people were capable of dying, they certainly never would have wasted their time attempting genocide.--Mustex 13:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

ArtPrize
My hometown, Grand Rapids, is just now wrapping up a giant citywide art contest that's gone on for the past few weeks. Well over a hundred sculptures were erected all over downtown, and most businesses and public buildings hosted smaller stuff. The contest, open to artists from the whole world, was judged by the general populace via text messaging, and the winner recieved $250,000. By all accounts it's been a huge success. Look for it next year... 22:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, sounds like a wonderful event. You know, what's good for the michigoose is good for the Michigander! Where on the oven glove are you? 03:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Near the base of the ring finger... downtown GR. 03:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The Invention of Lying
I haven't seen this movie yet although there have been countless trailers for it on Sky TV, and although I like Ricky Gervais, Hollywood often takes a talent and beats it into a mush. Anyway, good or bad, I was staggered (not really) to find that the religios are claiming that The Invention of Lying contains a sinister anti-god message. 21:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been dying to see this (along with Zombieland and Trick R' Treat).--Thanatos 01:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cracked didn't seem so positive about the movie.  02:09, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also Zombieland is an awesome movie. It confirmed that I will survive the zombie apocalypse and finally find a hot, intelligent, capable girl that will... oh god why do I lie to myself? 02:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We at the Catholic League prefer our bigotry straight-up. - You can't quibble with that. 17:37, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I might go and see it tonight - my housemates went and saw it the other night but I had a cold and couldn't be bothered. They said it was good but there was a bit where Ricky basically made up religion. Easy targeted as anti-God though, Gervais is a prominent atheist (rips into Christianity in his first and third live shows and it's pretty hilarious). 12:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

For those of the UK persuasion....
Micro men, a comedy docudrama about Sinclair and Acorn was on yesterday. If you didn't catch it, you should. Best TV of the year. Possibly the decade. -- 15:35, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I might watch it later if I can find the time. 15:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. It was fantastic. 21:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

You Lying Fucker!
I wake up at 2pm with this fucking hell of a hangover. So, naturally, I go back to sleep. Wake up again at 3pm and sit down here with a cup of coffee so I can see what that moon probe discovered. As I am scanning the news Ms. McWicked sits with me and I tell her, in WTF? tones, that Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize. See looks at me with eyes of death and accuses me of cheating on her. Seems during my drunken slumber that she has gone through my text messages and found some random messages and reckons I am fucking other woman. Now she is locked in the bedroom and won't let me in which is a real pain because my car keys are in there and I am hungry. Thoughts? AceMcWicked 02:47, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had this problem before. It happens. Delete your text inbox for starters. As for the locked in the bedroom thing......yeah, I got nothin'.-- 02:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I could build some kind of fishing rod with some chewing gum on the end and use it to get my keys from the dresser? AceMcWicked 03:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heeeeeeeere's Johnny!. As far as real suggestions, if you're fucking other women without your wife's permission, then either stop or get a divorce.  If you're not fucking other women, explain to her that you aren't.  If she doesn't believe you, give her some space and let her process what you've told her.  Let her cool down, and you can talk through it later.  Stile4aly 03:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ace, are you sure this wasn't all a hallucination of the ugly kind? 03:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you see any lizards? Is the carpet full of waves?  Are you, heaven forbid, in Bat Country?  I hope your trunk/boot is sufficiently loaded with "supplies". I think it might be time for some ether.  03:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in the world more irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. Careful with that rotten stuff.-- 03:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Last question, does my sig look like a pink smear to you? 03:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

"In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity." HST. RaoulDuke 03:43, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Harry S. Truman said that? 05:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "The possibility of mental and physical collapse is now very real. No sympathy devil, keep that in mind. Shit, you buy the ticket - you take the ride." AceMcWicked 03:53, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ace, what was the content of the offending message(s)? 19:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

theamazingatheist comic
Hey, is it ok to add this comics to theamazingatheist page, since it comes from another wiki? http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Theamazingatheist#A_Completely_Intelligent_Debate_4_TEH_LULZ
 * No it is not okay because it is very shitty. Do we even have an article on "theamazingatheist"? 13:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We do even have an article on "theamazingatheist". 13:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay next question, who is he? I guess I should just go read the article then. 13:29, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure we could knock up our own, much better, shorter and punchier cartoon to illustrate AA's style. 11:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, who's going to do it? BTW, the reason I'm targetting this guy is because I think he represents the perfect example of someone who's a dick about the fact that they're right, and is actually helping the anti-science movement in that way.--Mustex 00:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just do a "fictional dramatized typical TAA repsonses" dialog? No need for a cartoon, I think Armond was just emphasizing how bad the one at ED is.  00:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll think one up and if I get my home internet a bit more stable, I'll boot up Illustrator and illustrate a nice rant. 11:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Way to go!
Finally reconciling myself to my own mortality I just found this interesting packing idea to send me on my way. Now, I only have to think of some amusing image to apply to the outside. 08:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't you go popping your clogs on us now Genghis. If you do I'll never speak to you again! Totnesmartin 18:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Inside every older person is a younger person wondering, "What the heck happened?" 09:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Dreams...
I had my first RationalWiki dream tonight- buy me a round of drinks and I'll tell you about it. -- 18:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is an Irish Car Bomb and 2 shots of Slivovitz. Tell us!   18:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had dreams about coding and other random things, but never about RW. Do tell! 18:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. So I dreamed that I was on RW, which was actually a castle, where we sat around drinking in the Saloon Bar, and chatting about Conservapedia in a giant observatory on top of one of the towers, because we could.  So one day, we found PH dead in the Saloon bar, murdered.  Shortly after that, RWians started dropping like flies, with Human and I next, followed by Toast and TOP.  Anyways, so it was all going down like an Agatha Christie novel (I've been watching too much PBS mystery), with MC as Poirot.  Eventually Kels pushes him off a cliff, but we know she wasn't the murderer, cause she's Kels, and had an alibi and stuff.  I hang around (ghost of course), seeing how we're doing.  Eventually it reaches the point only Trent and Nx are alive, and Trent shoots Nx because he knows he's not the murderer  However, he gets killed by persons unknown after that.  Finally, the real murderer is revealed to be AmesG, who is actually a deep cover sock of TK, who is merely an alibi of CUR.  It was pretty much like Ten Little Indians, but with RW people as characters.  -- 19:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool! Are you putting this on DVD?  20:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... What was your mental image of me like? 21:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should post it as a story. Make my death exceptionally gory. The god of Death killed lol--Thanatos 00:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Semi-technical question
Anyone know if there is a hotkey combination that will substitute for the "Save page" button? 20:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ctl+S? 21:04, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Alt-shift-s on Firefox and Ubuntu; it's probably different on Windows. I think it might be alt-s. 21:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's "s". The rest depends on your browser/operating system. It should be shown in the tooltip. For me, it's alt-shift-s on FF, ctrl-alt-s on Chromium and shift-esc-s on Opera. -- Nx  / talk 21:23, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * What is it with people who insist on having to press five keys at once on the keyboard instead of moving their mouse pointer three inches? It's not like it's more efficient or anything.  -- 21:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is. If you are using the keyboard to type the message, you'll have to move your hand to the mouse. It's faster to just hit the shortcut. Plus it's easier to hit the keys on your keyboard than a relatively small target on your screen with your mouse. -- Nx  / talk 22:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks folks! Also, with the preview showing, the "Save" button isn't on the screen, so it's grab mouse, move cursor outside edit window, scroll, move up to a foot of screen, click... 22:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Turned out that alt-shift-s on my ff3.5ish "jumped to" the Save button, and "enter" was also required. Then I edit conflicted with myself, so one of the earlier tries might have worked... 22:19, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Or: tab x4 + &crarr; (return) works for me. 00:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice one. I might prefer that to the "claw", not sure yet...  00:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey, is there any way I can map "F10" to be either one of those? (4 tabs or claw-s) 00:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Alt + f4 works for me. 01:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Shuts FFx down! (or at least asks for permission to) 01:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Horse Maneuvers
My band, Corrosive Kids, just released a limited-edition cassette called Horse Maneuvers. The video of the release party turned out great:
 * 09:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 09:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 09:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cool! Are you putting this on DVD? And why cassette not CD?  20:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Umm, weren't we just talking like a few weeks ago about how cool Tascam 4 tracks are, Human? The answer to your question is pretty self-evident. He's putting it on cassette so nobody will listen to it except the 10 people who still have tape decks in their cars. Sheesh. Thanks JSL for getting me remembering the classic demo tapes and 7 inches I made on my Tascam Portastudio.  23:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC) Moar: JSL - great show. What venue is that? Is that you screaming or on guitar?  23:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm the geetar guy. And Nutty is right about the reasoning, we did it for reasons of intentional obscurity; I'm also thinking about making a vinyl record if we get enough interest. When I get digital copies of the masters I'm gonna put it online for free download, though. 23:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Vinyl is remarkably viable, especially among hipsters and the geriatric. Lots of indie labels are still releasing on LP. Heck, the only physical copy of Kid A I have, which obviously isn't even indie, is on vinyl. 23:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I buy all music on vinyl. CDs seem awfully flimsy, and I've heard stories about them oxidizing due to room moisture, even when stored properly. I don't know if that's a fact or just another form of audio woo, but as a geriatric hipster, I really don't have a choice but to believe the hype. 15:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * CDs do eventually go bad. I have a few decade old ones that started growing random black spots on them. I buy all my music on vinyl too (on the rare occasions I actually buy music) mainly because I have no use for CDs anymore.-- 17:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

BNP
Ugh, just watching a program called "BNP Wives". Honestly, I give up. They all seem to think that brown people are the borg, coming over here to assimilate us all and integrate us into the collective. Is it still illegal to shoot BNP supporters? 20:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why do you not just report them to the State for Incitement to Religious Hatred? 20:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Can't we just shoot them? It would be much easier. I'll have to convert and upload a clip where a bunch of them are protesting against the building of a mosque, and a woman came up to them and asked "what's wrong with building a mosque? Why can't people have the freedom to worship?" To which the reply was "ugh you fat slag", and "You won't say that when one rapes your daughter". Nice to know they can answer the questions posed, like a real political party. 21:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Can't we just shoot all those >ugh!< evolutionists who all think like Hitler with that survival-of-the-fittest stuff? 21:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Listener, are you just posting non-sequiturs for the sake of it or do you have a point to make here?  21:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not good to speak of shooting people because one dislikes their perceived politics, regardless of the nastiness implied by the perception. 21:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But I'm 95% sure Listener would like to shoot commies... -- 21:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Though I hate what they say, it would be unsporting and dishonorable of me to shoot them for saying it. 22:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That is what fascists do. As much as I would like to shoot people I disagree with (Usually like the Comedian during the riot flashback), they have a right to spew shit from their mouths. All we can do is try to change their ways and hand them toilet paper to get rid of the bits around the corners.--Thanatos 00:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Reds like to do it as well... 01:15, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I remember this show being on telly a while ago. My dad was flicking channels and pointed it out to me. You could tell straightaway it was about BNP supporters - all white (obv), middle-aged, fat, skinheaded, etc. 17:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

CP "fair use" project
I'm entertained at least a few times a week by the steady stream of weak or unsupportable claims of "fair use" of unlicensed copyrighted images on CP, particularly those used as a central resource in articles on the subjects they refer to. If you're interested in helping me with a cataloging project, please let me know privately. I could really use the help of a coder capable of writing a bot to dump all claimed "fair uses" into a format that lends itself to further analysis and notation like a table. 23:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Early last year I took it upon myself to email the source websites of about 200 "Fair use" images. One (as far as I recall) was taken down. As long as they claim to be "Educational"[!], they're apparently OK. 00:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No they're not. (And I mean that both ways!)  00:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone should remind Andy that ignorance of the law is not an excuse...if they want a three-hour sermon--Thanatos 01:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Andy's beyond teaching anything. I'm more interested in seeing what happens when more than a trickle of copyright holders come in to assert their rights. Very interested. 01:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just checked back: I sent:

An image on your website has been copied* and published* on the internet at Conservapedia.com a rght wing fundamentalist Christian website. Justification is claimed on the first of these web pages. A procedure is laid out at (http://www.conservapedia.com/DMCA_Agent) for objecting to this usage and a mere email to: aschlafly@aol.com (with "copyright" and "Conservapedia" in the subject line) should be enough in law to satisfy objection. ( I also included links to the particular image(s) referred to.)
 * to 105 institutions/websites. Many of the sources are themselves on dodgy ground re copyright, many couldn't care less about a mini site showing their piccies. some think "any publicity is good publicity" & many say that the resolution etc makes them not worth worrying about. Wonder why some of them bother with copyright notices. 01:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This was my RW sock doing it. 01:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * They've overstepped since you did your project. There are dozens and dozens of images from major news outlets, big time museums, and other commercial enterprises, not to mention [liberal] ones. Your project was great. I love the page. Thanks for the info. Godspeed. 03:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think people don't generally care if their stuff is being used like this, unless of course, it's artwork or blatant misrepresentation. 09:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I really wonder why they bother with copyright notices at all. All those I wrote to had &copy; on them, some quite prominently but few apparently acted on it.  10:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Possibly because they don't fully understand what that little c means and the power it can wield. There's a lot of misunderstanding in the world of copyright and licensing. For instance, there are numerous images on DeviantART that are marked as under a Creative Commons license but then the comments underneath are all like "you CAN'T use this image!!!!11", but they released in under CC and once released under CC it's always released under CC and people just don't understand that. But I also imagine that people just don't feel it's worth it unless they put a lot of effort into the work being snatched under "Fair Use" - hence why people are uppity about their art or professional photography being stolen but not generally about a few cheaper or older snapshots, diagrams or illustrations. 10:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, JPatt is happy to use copyright as a bogus reason to delete pages that have no content in them whatsoever.-- 11:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but he's an idiot! 11:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

We'll see what happens. I'm not seeing any volunteers. 14:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I got bored with it last time. It should be fairly easy for our coding geeks to select "Fair use" in "Image" (Or I suppose it's "File" now) & pull out a list. There's no need to do it off wiki: a list posted here will give us something to go at. Then sort on source somehow - I dunno. 14:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

This Is One Nation Under God
Pardon if you've seen this, but it made my day. This patriotic fucker. 04:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the first was the parody one. This is the real patriotic fucker. 04:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been on the clogosphere wigo for nearly a week. 04:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * At least Mr. McNaughton knows how to paint. 04:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * NSFW but awesome: One Nation Under Cthulhu 98.225.64.214 09:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's still fecking crazy either way. And ripe for awesome parody. 09:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh. Some animals stars are more equal shine more brightly than others. --Kels 22:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

This is why your music player shouldn't track play counts.
Apparently, I've now spent more than 24 hours of my life listening to Bill Oddie singing On Ilkla Moor Baht'at. Where did I go wrong? -- 12:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Surely the more pertinent question is Wheear ast ta bin? ;) 12:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thankfully a computer crash has wiped that data for me, it'd probably be highly embarassing. I imagine I'd be on at least 3 days worth of Electric Light Orchestra, despite having only one CD ripped onto it. 12:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So, what did you think the 'O' in OCD stood for? As my MP3 player has been stuck on Alabama 3's Exile in Coldharbour Lane for the last month or so I speak from (obsessive) experience. Bob Soles 14:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Bob Soles, you have excellent taste. My favourite track is Peace in the Valley.-- 14:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - check out my user page - guess what's quoted there. Bob Soles 14:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You kids today and your insipid guitar music. How is it this stuff hold your interest for more than 5 seconds? -- 14:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thinking about it, Alabama 3 support drugs, techno music, terrorism, communism, idolatry and blasphemy. Are they the most liberal group in music?-- 15:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ooh, Leadbelly! I particularly like Borgeois Blues.  And Where Did You Sleep Last Night.   21:15, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

What is going on in the Washington Times
Linked to on CP's main page but it's more than that. In the body of the article: "England has more than 85 courts that adhere to Shariah". Now that's a downright LIE. How do these people get away with it? (Is the Times the Mormon controlled one?) Who is Michael savage anyhow. Grrrrr. 15:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've put that capture tagged link onto Capturebot2's sandbox, it doesn't monitor the Saloon bar. -- Nx  / talk 15:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Washington Times is controlled by Sun Myung Moon of the Unification Church (Ed Poor's cult).
 * The British government should realize that by trying to muzzle Mr. Savage, they are just giving more ammo to the BNP.
 * Are there not a number of privately operated Islamic arbitration courts in the U.K., similar to the Jewish courts that handle Jewish family law there? 15:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I meant Moonie not Mormon
 * No-one's muzzling him - just saying " we don't want him here, thank you very much"
 * There're also Masonic "courts" & Heraldry "courts" and Church of England "courts" but they're not referred to in the context of: "Islamic fundamentalism is taking root in the land of Shakespeare and the Magna Carta; already, England has more than 85 courts that adhere to Shariah. London is slowly being transformed into "Londonistan."
 * It's despicable and any journalist who is involved with that newspaper thing should be ashamed of themselves. 15:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This Daily Mail report is actually pretty balanced - especially for the daily hate. A key part "In Britain, sharia courts are permitted to rule only in civil cases, such as divorce and financial disputes. Until last year, these rulings depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims. But now, due to a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996, they are enforceable by county and high courts."Bob Soles 15:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly the same as the Jewish courts: both parties agree to accept the ruling of the arbitrating court, and can't go back on it. Broccoli 15:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC2) The paper is not at all implying that there are civil courts adhering to Sharia, or even bothering to mention that there have been serious calls for such courts. Although the British government has a perfect right barring Mr. Savage from the country and the Cambridge Union has a perfect right excluding him from the talk there, either action will, as I say, only give ammo to the BNP. 15:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't know. Aren't the BNP always on about the bloody foreigners coming over here and taking our jobs? Let a homegrown frothing hatemonger give the speech. -- 15:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * They should take advice from a country that knows how to handle the problem; we barely have any trouble with Muslims here, and I believe there are more Muslims per capita in the U.S. than the U.K. I intend to introduce a debate soon on a topic concerning Muslims in Minneapolis, which illustrates the worst sort of trouble we have on that front. 15:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The UK has about 1.5 million Muslims, compared to the States 2.5 (I think), which probably works out to a higher percentage in the UK. Broccoli 16:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the people who do research for President Obama, we have 7 million. 16:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * While according to the Pew Research Centre the whole of the Americas has 4.6 million. Broccoli 16:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The funny thing is I don't recall CP getting their panties in a twist about the 1st amendment when Yusef Islam, a.k.a. Cat Stevens, was denied entry to the US a few years back. DickTurpis 23:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Full of Win
Today's XKCD is full of win and kinda takes the shine of Andy's autumn leaves crap. -- Psygremlin  18:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But Photoshop was clearly intelligently-designed by YHVH, who made the chemicals put into computer monitors expressly for the purpose of making them be able to show the beautiful colors of the autumn leaves. 18:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * On a related topic, we in Minneapolis appear to have skipped autumn and gone straight to winter; here is an example of the view that greeted me this morning. 18:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yurk - funnily enough we did the same in reverse (if you know what I mean) - from low teens to mid 30s (Celcius for the old fashioned) almost overnight. -- Psygremlin  18:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You're getting snow in October? In Edinburgh we get one day of decent snow on a good year. 18:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of it is just melting on contact with the ground, as the manner usually is with these October snowfalls. Of course there was one October snowfall that did not melt until the next spring. 19:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't let Huw talk you into touching his slider. --Kels 18:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ??? 18:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * !!! --Kels 19:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * &&& 19:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

We get these things in PA all the time too. Usually just an inch or two that just sticks to the lawns and not the roads. 19:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hehe, it's funny, I listen to a MPLS radio station to get my Malloy on, and I almost expected to wake up to snow this morning. I used to listen to an AZ station, and kept wondering why the high never got up to the predicted 114 F. And why it was humid.  19:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Life
Did anyone else see the new Life series on the Beeb? Some stunning photography. 21:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

And this is how my mind (doesn't) work.
So, today I discovered that NASA invented a really useful technology, gel for keeping ants in that acts as both tunnelling substrate and food. Awesome. So now I spent the day planning to build a little desktop vacuum former, so I can mold a clear plastic "C++" shape, fill it with ant gel, wire up some LED uplighting and chuck in some ants, just so I can prop it up on my desk and say: "look, there are bugs in my code." Stupid brain. -- 21:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a hell of a lot of effort for one pun. 23:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * At least it's a pun that keeps on giving... 23:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, you should see my desk full of other yet to be finished projects. I hope to have my bluetooth glove finished before winter, with the answer microswitch sewn in to the palm, the microphone at the end of the little finger, and the earpiece at the end of the thumb so you can make the classic "phone" gesture to talk. That's waiting on me getting a new bluetooth headset, since I destroyed the last one trying to desolder the preattached microswitch. I think next time I'll just leave the one already there on the board and paste on a bypass wire with a couple of blobs of conductive epoxy. -- 23:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But isn't Bluetooth supposed to be "handsfree" Just google bluetooth glove you're not alone Jeeves. 01:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Get one, hook it up to some other gubbins, hide the rest of the computer, and pretend you've just made Hex from Discworld. 09:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I mention Conservapedia in my new book
I am author Brian Katcher. My most recent (well, second) novel is about a young man who falls in love with a transgendered woman. It's called Almost Perfect and is published by Random House.

Why should you care? Because every time I had doubts about the subject matter, I logged onto Conservapedia and read Mr. Schlafley's opinions on homosexuality. That gave me the strength to continue. So I personally thanked him in the acknowledgements.

Now go buy my book: Brian Katcher's website

BrianKatcher 23:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My own personal opinion: while I appreciate your determination to publish something that runs contrary to Andy's oppressive worldview, I'm not sure if this is the best place for your shameless self promotion. 23:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, we try to keep the CP-related things over at talk:wigo cp. 23:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Plus, in your book, I hope you can spell his name :D -- 23:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity, Brian, how did you thank him? If it were me, I would say something like: "Thank you for being such a moralistic twat. You remind me of everything I hate about the world and why I should do something just to spite you." Lol, I find that funny for some reason. 23:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Big hugs to Andrew Schlafly; every time I had doubts about this project, your blog convinced me I was doing the right thing. My editor made me take out 'rabid, anti-homosexual blog'. BrianKatcher 23:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I wonder which would piss him off more, the "hugs" or the fact that you called it a "blog." Either way well done. 00:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Chronicles of Narnia
Was listening to an audio book of Voyage of the Dawn Treader on a long car trip (got it for $5 at Books-a-million on clearance). When reading this series does anyone else start thinking "Lewis, stop trying to defend Christianity. You're not good at it."--Mustex 01:11, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * i agree with you there, although I do enjoy The Chronicles now and then, but only as a fantasy story, and nothing more.Conservative Punk 01:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He laid it on a little heavily in The Last Battle, but the rest of the books were excellent. You are right, however, in that Prof. Lewis did not defend Christianity very well in them; they ended up being more of an apologia for Roman paganism. 03:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't think they defended anything well. Especially since most of the problems that Aslan helped the children to overcome only existed because Aslan put them there (I'm still not sure what lesson an island that causes your literal dreams to come true is supposed to teach, so why did Aslan create it?  I could understand an island that destroys you with your own desires, but who needs to learn that literally showing up to a test naked is not a good thing?  Seriously, making that island at all just made Aslan an ass, as did creating magic spells he didn't want people to use, putting the White Witch in charge of anything, making Lucy go to him when he could have walked to her far more easily in Prince Caspian, etc.)  The only possible argument I got out of it was "The Magical Lion wants to micro-manage your life.  Ignore him and live for yourself." &mdash; Unsigned, by: Mustex / talk / contribs
 * By the same tokens, the developers of Web browsers have no need of acid tests for the browsers; they can just test their suitability with a bunch of average Web pages. 05:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Developers of Web Browsers aren't supposed to be all-knowing and all-powerful. In fact, most Christians regard a more limited God as heresy. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Mustex / talk / contribs

MediaWiki crap.
"This file is part of MediaWiki and is not a valid entry point". I thought everything was open over here. I guess I found something that isn't.

(this is a pointless section, unless someone feels like helping me manage stuffs) Udon 02:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wtf?Conservative Punk 02:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I tried looking at LocalSettings.php to get an idea of what the heck I'm supposed to do (in order to make my wiki in permanent "nighttime"), but I failed. Udon 02:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't here be a better place to look & ask? 02:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Did. Looks like too much work for my current lappy to handle. Speaking of which, Comodo Anti-Virus just found a suspicious file whose file description is "not-a-virus.Downloader.Win32". Yea, that's not a virus. *eyeroll* Udon 05:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

You do know that LocalSettings.php is the configuration file which contains sensitive data such as the database password? -- Nx  / talk 05:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we should make the database password visible to everyone. What are we Conservapedia? Seems typically like Andy not giving out the database password to everyone. 06:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Holy fuck!!!
I knew the woman murdered in this story. She was a social worker at my junior high (10 years ago, mind you), and she had mediated a hostile rivalry between myself and another student. Holy fuck, I don't know what to make of this. At very least, it's quite tragic, in my opinion. 04:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Already people are using the lady's death for their politicking. 05:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that these stories are tragic, and all to common. But seriously the killer is the spitting image of BTK.Rad McCool 08:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No shit Rad, look BTK vs. Allen Taschuk. AceMcWicked 08:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * They're both how I imagined Terry Koeckritz to look. 08:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The woman? I dunno, the guy looks a bit familiar for some reason. I don't even live anywhere near that palace. Udon 11:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Goat movie alert
Warning. They made a goat movie, and you will be able to see it soon. --DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 06:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We probably need an article on either The Men Who Stare At Goats or at least the author. I know there's a reference to it in the article on torture or something. 09:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would think a general article on Jon Ronson would be good. The Men Who Stare At Goats is probably the most on-mission topic, but he's also covered other stuff (Alex Jones in Them and Sylvia Browne in an article for the Guardian for a start) so there's certainly some relevant stuff there.  I could try and knock something together.  10:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears we have a stub. 10:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Another excellent Godbotherer doc
Saw "Audience of One" on Sundance Channel tonight - great fun. Annoying egomaniac evangelical pastor cadges cash from the flock so he can pretend to be Steven Spielberg and tries to make a $200m Bible/Star Wars epic. Turns out to be an incompetant dolt who hasn't a fucking clue how to do anything except give ra-ra pep talks. Fails utterly, leading to much thigh slapping laughs by this smug liberal anyway. Another great 'laugh at the Godbotherers' doc, a particularly favourite genre of mine. <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 06:57, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That sounds so good, it's a shame I'll probably never get to see it. In a way, it's sort of sweet. He's exploiting the same religious impulse as other cult leaders, so he can live his dream. While other less scrupulous people in his position might have started weird sex cults, all he wants to do is make a weird bible/star wars film. He never even saw a film until he was 40, and it sounds like he's entranced by them. Kind of a throwback to the early days of the cinema when people thought a train might come out of the screen and run them over. -- 13:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

The far left side
Has anybody ever heard of this comic? I just found it today, and here is one I think the wiki might like.... There are many more where that one came from. 23:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's pretty funny. Although I wish it did more than just copy the Gary Larson style of comic drawing. 00:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's the proper way to go about uploading copyright material:
 * I'm flattered that you like my cartoons well enough to consider using them on your web site, so feel free to use them as you wish as long as you don't obscure the signature or the URL embedded in the art. Cheers! = mike stanfill = 
 * Original email available on request. 07:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Some are quite scathing, which I like . So is that basically saying we can upload one or two providing they're relevant and we link back to farleftside.com? 13:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh hell yes. 13:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I went through all of them when I first followed Java's link and reckon there are probably 20 or so good ones that we could use. Basically all he asks is that we don't crop his name or the site URL but it would be good form to give a link back in the caption for any that we use. 13:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Which ones are you thinking of Genghis? 01:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Obama vs. Fox News
I was just curious as to what you liberals think about the Obama Whitehouse taking on Fox News' so-called "conservative slant"? I think that Obama is just mad because Fox News is more trusworthy than their liberal rivals, and that is why Fox News is more successful, but I wanted the opinion of you liberal fascists.Conservative Punk 01:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * While Fox News has some very talented and reliable people, Bill, Glenn and Hannity come to the forefront of people's minds when it is brought up. I think the problem is that Fox news allows its pundits more freedom to say what they want and that is abused. Beck would have been fired from almost any other network with some of the things he says. Hannity is a personification of hatred and Bill doesn't let other people talk if he disagrees with him. Shepard is the best guy at Fox.--Thanatos 02:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Shepard? That liberal? Puh-leeze, we all know Bill O'Reilly is the most fair and balanced person there.  But, still, what do you think about the Obama people taking Fox News head on?Conservative Punk 02:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think its a fucking dangerous idea that could easily back-fire. He'll only get everyone worked up about the 1st amendment. AceMcWicked 02:11, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought Bush killed the 1st--Thanatos 02:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He should just throw all the Fox anchors into Guantanamo Bay (which is still open, somehow.) 02:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All any public deserves is a news provider which is both A) Fair, and B) Balanced.  I checked CNN's website, the NY Times website, the Washington Post website, and I saw no mention of those two words which define the very essence of quality journalism today.   So I fail to see what all the fuss is about.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 06:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I think Fox is ridiculously biased. I visit the web site daily. The selection of stories and the slant of the headlines are simply some expression of GOP talking points--just like the WH said. Who knows if the WH calling out this very obvious fact will back fire or have a positive effect, but the fact is that no one should be under the impression that Fox is reporting news, so I am happy that the WH is being direct about it. CNN is only slightly left of Fox these days. MSNBC spends about half of its air-time critiquing Fox. NPR, though they do have a liberal slant certainly tries to be objective. I don't view or listen to the other broadcast news orgs. Print is all over the map but at least with the Web you can read a variety of it, which is part of the problem. The average American citizen has no chance of being informed and that's just how Pepsico wants it. <font color="#ff0000">Me!<font color="#649CD6">Sheesh! <font color="#6ff6633">Mine! 19:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * When I watch Fox, I feel like they're constantly trying to convince me that the world is going to end. But at least they always have hot chicks. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 19:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the most important difference, the overall tone (and I suppose the chicks are important too). Fox spews out populist rage and ignores the reporting side; other stations are much better in that regard. CNN is desperate because Fox does have a lot of viewers, so they resort to whatever they think might increase their ratings. That's why I read/watch the BBC, but not many other Americans do that regularly. 02:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The BBC is incomprehensible because of their liberal European spelling and those ridiculous fake accents. I agree that the Fox news anchors are hot. I predict that in two years they will be delivering the news in their underwear. <font color="#ff0000">Me!<font color="#649CD6">Sheesh! <font color="#6ff6633">Mine! 13:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Scared shitless
Is anyone else scared shitless by this? I sure am. 02:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Scary, yes, but at the rest of being overly repetitive, I have to say it's still not as scary as a snake with a fucking claw!!!!!! DickTurpis 02:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The terrifyingly poor quality of the reporting does terrify me. The necessity of food production growth only 20% higher than population growth does not seem too dramatic to me, even though this article throws a lot of context-free huge numbers at you and does almost no background reporting.
 * Once things reach a certain level, we will simply have to eat less meat. As a vegetarian, I might be biased, but it should be noted that if we grew food instead of animal feed, we could already feed the world several times over with ease.--<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore fiat justitia 02:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Come to think of it, yes, it is pretty poor for the BBC. But what scares me most is the fact that with global warming and all, there will be no solution and a lot of people will starve. That, I think, is clear in spite of the confusing statistics. 02:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We could also work on population control.... 03:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's way more terrifying to me that some major food sources are heading towards an almost inevitable collapse. It is generally ignored, but worldwide fisheries peaked in the late 1980s, and have been declining ever since.  As each new fish species has been overfished to collapse, new species are introduced in order to meet fish demand.  Ever heard of the Patagonian toothfish?  You might know it as the ultrahip Chilean seabass, renamed and rebranded in the early 90s for consumers due to the destruction of such fisheries as Newfoundland (where the cod fisheries have dropped so low they are under permanent fishing restriction... a restriction that was almost too late to prevent extinction).  And of course now the Chilean seabass itself is considered in danger.  When it is gone, it's on to another species.
 * And of course, as horrifying as this locust-like behavior may be, it's still only the tip of the iceberg. We are destroying fisheries of species we don't even eat, such as the ground-up molusks that are often fed to farm-raised salmon.  And all the species that depend on the big fish and small fish to survive or control them are being thrown out of whack.  Red tide isn't just caused by the nitrogen-rich fertilizer factory livestock farms dump in the water (although that sure as hell doesn't help), but also by the massive blooms of algae that go uneaten, since the crustaceans that would consume it have been bottom-trawled off the seafloor.
 * Sure, the population is getting bigger and we'll have to feed them. That's been old news since Malthus - the population increases geometrically while production increases arithmetically.  We've been able to keep up and still massively raise "quality of life" (if meat and sugar consumption can be said to an objective good), but it's come at a cost.
 * Ultimately, though, I'm still not worried. Every single problem I name above will inevitably be solved by the huge forces involved.  Lifestyles will be forced to change in order to deal with this.  The best action that can be taken is to preserve and care for our resources and the world, to sustain it through this terrible dark time.
 * In the meantime: consider cutting back on your fish and meat eating.--<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore fiat justitia 05:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Quick everybody - get some magic beans here. 05:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I hate to say this, but Tom's commentary made me think "I better eat meat and fish while I still can". I'm beyond hope.-- 06:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The last time somebody was making predictions of impending famine and doom (see Paul Ehrlich and Garrett Hardin, 1960s) the food supply did increase faster than needed, and therefore no famine. Of course the reason was people like Norman Borlaug and others with a science-can-solve-anything attitude got to work.  My only fear is that can-do attitude is dying off with the older generation, and who do we have to take their place? A bunch of people steeped in the Gaia hypothesis, peak oil theory, romanticized deep ecology fantasies, and an irrational fondness for "organic" agriculture and an equally irrational hatred of resource extraction industries and comsumption?  They'll not only approach this with a "can't do" attitude, but worse, with a "shouldn't do in the first place because science and technology are bad for teh planet, mkay" attitude.  If that happens these predictions would become a self fulfilling prophecy. Secret Squirrel 11:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * When I consider the current state of affairs, it's true I can't help but wonder if perhaps that attitude you praise so highly might not have had a lot to do with getting us here. Again, I'm no Malthus, but the BBC article was right in pointing out that as water tables shift under the impact of slightly higher global temperatures, we're going to have drought epidemics springing up around the world.  We've gotten to the point where immense factory livestock farms and huge robot-tended corn fields are required to supply the global demands for super-high-energy foods, even in addition to the scientific advances you herald.  In other words, it's not just the science you reference that has brought us here, it's also a reckless disregard for our world.  It's not a "can't do" attitude to say that things should change, it's a "shouldn't do."  The environment all around the world keeps getting worse and worse.  I'm not saying we'll all die off... no matter how bad global warming gets or if every fishery in the sea is wiped out, humanity is clever enough to survive.  But the poor will be fucked.--<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore fiat justitia 15:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Π, is that the ripoff advertising on WorldNutDaily for $297 for about $30 worth of heirloom seeds? I suppose WND knows the gullability of their target market well.  Secret Squirrel 11:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Special discount for WND readers, only $149 until they run out. 12:15, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Gee your not kidding about the $30 worth of seeds. I have now spent 3 minutes researching it and have found everything they are selling for between $1.25 to $2.75 per 2 oz bag. 12:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've seen similar cans of heirloom seeds elsewhere for $30-50. Buying the seeds alone without the vacuum packed can is $30, max.  I can get them at a local greenhouse. Secret Squirrel 12:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The vacuum packing has always confused me. Are you really going to rely on becoming an amateur farmer after everything has gone to shit? Wouldn't it be better to start now and get the practice in while you can still pop down the street and pick up a few things from the shop? 12:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Or just buy some (largely defensive) weapons of gun to use to steal food from everyone else after everything goes to shit. 13:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * People who buy these things usually stockpile ammunition and have power generators as well. Stealing food is not effective if no can grow it. 13:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I suppose the better question is: is it worth it to be that paranoid and stockpile stuff, or should you just live normally and be less prepared? 13:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * About the vacuum packed seed thing: as I have found out it takes a couple years of trial and error to get gardening right and in the meantime it is more of a fun hobby. Also the deal with heirloom seeds as I understand it is with non-hybrid seeds you can save the seeds from your crop each year and plant them the next year, and they adapt to your local conditions through natural selection.  When you first buy heirloom seeds you are buying seeds adapted for somebody else's garden in other words.  If somebody is expecting the end of the world and they think keeping a can of seeds in the basement is going to feed them they are sorely mistaken.  Reminds me of that scene in Easy Rider with the hippie commune haphazardly scattering their seeds in the desert while viewers have the ominous feeling they will starve the next year.  Point being if somebody wants a productive garden for the future they should already have a garden and the thing to do with those heirloom seeds is plant them, not store them in a can.  Secret Squirrel 13:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually artificial selection is the main driving force. Whilst natural selection will take place on the seeds that never germinate, a good farmer always knows to only plant the seeds from the best of their crop, there by doing the selection on which plants' offspring form the next generation. I remember that from the only episode of Plant of the Apes I ever watched. I suddenly feel like hoeing up huge parts of my backyard. 02:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Presumably the idea is that after the apocalypse, there'll be a good deal less people per square metre of land, so you'll have more room to cultivate. This is especially the case after you've shot and eaten your neighbours, while you're waiting for your first crop to grow. Personally, I think I'll be eating the mutated giant molerats. -- 16:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Around Khantacres we could probably get by on rabbits and giant squirrels. And as for seeds you can't always guarantee that you will get a good enough crop to produce seed for next year, especially with some of the lousy summers we've had recently, so it's a good idea to keep enough seeds for several years if you are serious about it. Some seeds will be viable for many years while others need to be fresh each year. It's also a good idea to form friendships with other gardeners so that you can share seed. I read an article recently about why farmers in the middle ages used to persevere with inefficient strip farming with strips scattered all around the village. The explanation was that if they consolidated theire holdings into one they were putting all their eggs in one agricultural basket as certain areas might suffer from flooding or blight but having scattered plots meant that the risk of catastrophic crop failure was spread more widely. 19:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sacrilege
The Co-op are using Blowin' in the Wind on an advert! Are there no boundaries left! 02:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sadly, no.  Everybody blames the death of music on piracy and downloading, but I think licensing real tracks in commercials (which has been going on for ages now) has done more than anything to make music be thought of as wallpaper, merely an mood-generating texture to be slapped onto moments to create fake emotion.   There are no limits - hell, some people even think that the Beatles licensing 'Revolution' on a Nike ad way back when was revolutionary.  Sigh.   --<font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 07:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dylan has been against his songs being used in advertising but gave special permission in this case because he was impressed by the Co-op's ethical agenda. At least, that's what I heard at the time - I can't find a supporting link, only repackaged press releases. You can see the ad here. –SuspectedReplicantretire me 09:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Possibly, but adverts have also featured obscure tracks that have then become quite big hits (one hit wonders, however) Bohemian Like You by the Dandy Worhols being one of the best examples. If you really want something to blame that isn't piracy (which it isn't, that's been around since practically forever and music is still here) it's probably the X-Factor which reinforces the idea of recording artists as mere disposable commodities - they're short lived, mass manufactured, inserted into the public consciousness forcibly by TV. They're presented as just a product which people can buy for the lowest price. 09:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Even the 'new found' tracks which end up in commercials just end up being slapped up there like painting the spot pink, or blue.  And there's not really much connection with the artist themselves or even the song in enjoying a BMW spot with some 'cool' track plastered on it.   There's no real reason for it, and it's the laziest kind of film-making.   But I totally agree with you Armondikov about X Factor and American Idol - they simply present musicians as competitors in a fame game.   The music is essentially irrelevant.   A dreadful development.  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 15:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Some people blame those free compilation CDs you get on the front of magazines. If a £4 magazine can give 20 tracks away for free, how can record companies expect people to pay £15 for an album? So the perceived value of music gets gradually eroded. And now with stolen downloads it's all 1000 times worse.-- 16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)