Forum:Thank God For Rational Wiki!

I just wanted to say what a relief it is that there is a site willing to fight back against the blatant and outrightly pathetically right wing and extreme religious viewpoints of Conservapedia. Finally a site which does indeed as the title suggests have a rational viewpoint. Just thought I'd upload a nice pic of a beautiful edit I made earlier on conservapedia, before my IP was blocked. Buggy proxies have prevented me from continuing my spamming - ctunnel and the like dont seem to be able to make wiki edits without the forum autonoticing. Anyone got any good proxies to use?

Having deleted the whole socialist article, I replaced it with this simple line of text (which was reverted back within a minute; damn admin)

http://i50.tinypic.com/j7umvm.jpg

Also - one more point; has anyone considered starting a petition to Obama to get the founder banned from teaching in the US? I think its quite sickening he is allowed to imprint his misguided views on these children like his mother and father clearly did on him.

Cheers, Tom


 * I spoke to Obama last night and he told me that he has a conservapedia sock account under the name TK. Acei9 21:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid we frown severely upon vandalism of CP; we aren't a vandal site, despite TK's insistence. Please don't do it any more. 21:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Loving it Ace - it all becomes apparant when you view their personal pages. It makes you wonder how you can carry that much hate and delusionalism. So Hoover, is that an order or a suggestion? :D. Say have you guys got an IRC channel at all? Would be great to talk to some people with decent viewpoints for a change! --Tomf60 (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * We have a theoretical IRC channel at #rationalwiki on Freenode, but it's very quiet and the regulars there and here are mutually exclusive. 21:27, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah that's a shame! I noticed that as stated on here Conservapedia has a total hatred of the use of British English. Seems quite pathetic considering that's how the language originated. Surely both dialects can be enjoyed? I mean after all only minor changes are present. I was wondering; does Wikipedia itself have a policy on the use of British/American/Australian (or any other dialect) in its English articles? --Tomf60 (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't need to frown severely on vandalism of CP when we can just ignore it, same as vandalism of any other site on the internet. If you replace an entire article (on any wiki) with a one-line soundbite, it's gonna get reverted (damn admin!).  When it wasn't even something witty, it's really not worth boasting about.  I don't think "please don't do it any more" is a reasonable request - we can't dictate what our users do at other sites.  But if you do troll other sites, don't associate it with us. . . . Wikipedia's policies on English spelling variants are covered at WP:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style.  & Petitioning Obama to personally do something about A Schlafly would be about as silly as most of Conservapedia's own stunts.   22:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * PS. Welcome to RationalWiki. Sorry for being a bit harsh above - I first came to site, as you did & many others have, having just discovered Conservapedia & being both outraged & fascinated by it.  But once you've watched it a while, it does become rather predictable.  There are still lots of users keeping track of goings-on at CP, at WIGO:CP & its talk page, but there's also lots of other stuff going on at RW which doesn't relate to CP, if you keep an eye on recent changes, the forum & saloon bar.   22:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has this policy about use of English variants. Basically, use whatever is appropriate to the article, and be consistent. Conservapedia just uses American English, because that's what Jesus used. Bondurant (talk) 08:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose "please don't do it any more" really means "please don't do it and brag about it here as 1) we've grown out of it and don't particularly care and 2) ostensibly it reflects badly on the site when people advertise it."  09:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok Sure, thanks guys :). I will be sure to take a look around at the other goings on. --Tomf60 (talk) 09:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)