User talk:Bicycle Wheel/RationalWikiWiki QR

=RW contact points= I wonder if we should make a separate page listing blogs & sites that have to do with Rationalwiki/Conservapedia? Any thoughts on this? Refugee 00:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, sort of. I'd say that we should merge the relevant stuff with the existing server crash article (where some of it is duplicated anyway) and leave this to stand alone as a completely seperate "other places" which occasionally "benefit" from the attentions of RW users. That will mean quite a big re-write to this one. --False Flag 14:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've chopped this around. It is possible that "linkspam" is a bit to strong.--False Flag 19:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to me only the first entry in the first section was "Important", with a few from the second belong there (teflonwiki especially, hell, that was important enough that we ported our edits there over to RW after the '09 crash fix). human  22:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

google+
Thinking about asking AD for the password. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 20:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You might as well, if it'll allow more than one admin (no idea how G+ works). Is there anything RWian on diaspora or myspace? I see myspace is back. Rennie McGreet 20:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know for any of them :P TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 20:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As alive as it gets on myspace, and I can't make head nor tale how Diaspora even works. Rennie McGreet 20:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Unofficial page on YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 91.219.238.71 20:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * *coinflip* TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 20:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Really? --Seth Peck 21:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The vandals these days are really lame. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 21:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

3 people joined over the course of a few hours. Page itself is dead, but there is conversation happening. TyComplain 19:30, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Blogs etc.
Several of these are deader than my blog. Remove? TyComplain 03:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Only because you've decided to post more than once a year in the last week or so. Tobul Oltarolin 03:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

=rationalWiki community standards= Trying to live up to our mission and challenge RW to take a look at itself. Also trying to criticise the RW guidelines in the same way RW would criticize such things if they appeared at CP. Unfortunately I have some other work to do now, and this may need a bit of copy-editing by somebody as I wrote it in a hurry.--False Flag 22:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * And if RW improved to take these criticism into account, would you be happy? After all, it should be able to take the crit and act on it. I'm happy to leave CP to the "holier-than-thou-never-gonna-change-cause-we're-right" attitude. Armondikov 11:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I assume your question is asked in good faith and I shall reply the same way. Yes, I would be most happy if they were to update the community standards to reflect the reality of the site - or alternatively (and perhaps more logically) change their actions to reflect the community standards.
 * To be honest though I have some doubt that they will. Basically because re-addressing any of these will result in the usual endless RationalWiki naval-gazing.  Debates, votes (though those have been out of fashion lately) more inconclusive debates, votes on votes etc.  It's the fault of the mobocracy really.
 * It seems to me that, at one time, Human (unofficially) took a more hands-on management role which at least made thing happen. He's been more soft-touch since his battles with RA. I think few people would be happy to see RA take the role over, and TM doesn't seem to want to do it. Nobody else would carry the weight to make things change so I suspect that things will just drift along without change.--False Flag 15:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you're being unduly harsh with comments about these standards being "systematically ignored". In my experience, most users follow most of these guidelines most of the time (except for the Fibonacci sequence, which was probably only ever of interest to a handful of people).  If somebody does go significantly against these standards (e.g. publishing personal info about CP users, repeated vandalism against another RW user, vindictive personal attacks) then they usually meet with opposition from other RW editors, & after some kind of discussion or argument, the matter gets settled one way or the other.  That's the way the mobocracy works.
 * But then it sounds like your beef is with mobocracy itself, and you'd like to see more rules (instead of guidelines) and more management at work at RW. That's probably not going to happen.  I don't think there has to be a benevolent dictatorship by Human, RA, TMT or anybody else: there will always be enough influential individuals (including those) and others sharing their opinion to be able to sort things out (give or take a few passing dramas).  Again, that's just how mobocracy works.
 * The problems RW has at the moment are mostly because it's having to deal with things it probably hasn't dealt with on this scale before (I'm kindof inferring because I've only been there a few months) - persistent vandalism, persistent edit warring, trolls & parodists. Block policies & community standards are fairly vague on things like this, & will probably need to be updated.  The main problem here is that discussions about doing so tend to peter out due to RationalWikians' short attention spans.   w easeLICIOuS  B ite M e 17:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure that I'm being very harsh, though I admit I was trying to be provocative. I also suspect that many of the new RW sysops don't even know these standards exist. And I really do think they don't get used a lot. Look at all the stuff on Andrew Schlafly - is that a personal attack? Is it personal information?  The Fibonacci sequence is never used and nobody blocks vandals for mere minutes.  So no, my main beef isn't the mobocracy.  I do doubt the mobocracy's ability to fix it though.
 * You last point - where you speak about discussions petering out is the same as the one I made above. There is no real decision making apparatus so decisions no longer get made.
 * Consequently either nothing happens, or somebody acts unilaterally and waits to see if it is challenged. It sort of works but it's not the best - and as the site grows it will get worse.--False Flag 22:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The stuff about Andrew Schlafly really is irrelevant, since these are community standards and he's not a commmunity member. Given who he is and what his views are, it wouldn't be in the nature of RW not to be critical, hostile and sarcastic about him.  But those CP editors who do contribute at RW too are usually treated civilly onsite.   w easeLICIOuS  B ite M e 12:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There was at least one account that claimed to be him. Also there is the possibility that he could sign up. What would RW do then?  Remove the personal stuff? And what about TK?  I'm pretty sure that he never volunteered his name to RW, but there it is on the site.  And he certainly has an account on RW.  At the very least it needs to be clarified to cover these points.--False Flag 17:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Rationalwiki Debate
I see that RW is debating these issues now. They could have given us some credit for pointing these issues out!--False Flag 17:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Where is the debate & who started it?  w easeLICIOuS  B ite M e 17:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Right hea Started by RA.--False Flag 17:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Come on RW
We go to the trouble of pointing out your problems, you talk about it endlessly and, in typical RW manner, never bring it to a conclusion. I think you've really got to fix this. It's farcical.--False Flag 19:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You actually expected it to have a semblance of order?  Phantom Hoover  22:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "It's farcical." All going according to plan, then. Fat Tuesday 23:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

So RW finally managed to update its standards. Will we be treated to an RWW analysis and verdict on the process and results? 78.105.198.239 19:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Needs update
Needs update. Liveware Problem 20:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Where are the Apsie Fascists when you need them? Guybrush Threepwood 20:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

=RationalWiki IRC channel= Donde esta el link? Speakerface 01:48, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Link fail. It doesn't work.  Speakerface 01:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Odd. And I have no idea where the fuck the IRC is anyways. Sorry. Punky McPunkersen 02:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * they're some pretty fun people, just be watch yourself. fei bites. Ty 02:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the place is populated with bots. I went there, and nobody said anything.  There were just names like chanserv (which is usually an IRC bot)--Brxbrx 04:16, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nah, its just 5 people or so, and they aren't on often. Ty 12:56, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Usually. Anyways, this is the link: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=rationalwiki

=RationalWiki social ladder= My word. So many on zero. Signed: False Flag.
 * I don't think New Gwenson should be included on the list. S/He/It was never a legitimate user.  We shouldn't include it for the same reason we aren't going to include the "My password is" vandals:  the list would be too long.  --Hans Johnson 18:24, 25 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'm not sure it's fair to say Jazz is openly persecuted, The Fuck You Too Incident notwithstanding. 134.82.109.72 00:35, 26 February 2008 (EST)
 * It certainly describes his last visit. I think it's valid unless something different happens on his next visit. Signed: False Flag.
 * You might just have a point there. Icanhaveaccountpreferences 22:07, 27 February 2008 (EST)

Update
I think we need to update this. Tier 6. Need to drop Ames. He's not about that much.

Tier 5

* PalMD * AKjeldsen * Kels * SusanG * Linus

Palm, Kels, and perhaps Linus don't seem as active or influential as they were.

Tier 3

* Bob M   * Genghis Khant * Cracker * Sid * NightFlare

Bob, Ghengis, Cracker and Sid could go up. --False Flag 17:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ames remains so high because if he ever came back, he would almost certainly slip into his old role again. 21:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Aww.... I dropped two tiers, how sad. Well not really. Congrats on the site move, by the way. Pinto&#39;s5150 21:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. 21:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Kels... tier 5? Sterile 14:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Fox
I understand that Fox has traditionally been given leniency by RW but after today I must question this. He blocked Jareddr and then totally freaked out when asked about it. He resorted to threats and demanded phone calls and then said "fuck you all" and proceeded to throw his toys on CP, outing and banning any number of rationalwikians and claimed he had some list of Socks. Honestly, I can think of nothing more disloyal than that and think he deserves our contempt. Just my 2 cents.--Pinetree 04:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Stalkbocks
Should the Tier be in the stalkbox (I'm assuming it isn't). Fat Tuesday 02:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Redirect or delete?
I would very much like to see this article deleted or redirected. It's standards are uselessly subjective, the division between tiers is arbitrary, it's normally out-of-date, and it doesn't add anything constructive or informative to our coverage of RationalWiki. Frankly, I consider this to be the most embarrassingly awful article I've made. 04:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree. (although you probably have made worse :-) ) Fat Tuesday 08:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with delete. While it is interesting, the "status" of editors changes so frequently that it really is impossible to keep up-to-date, and it's subjective as well. Suggestion: we might want to keep a list of Zero tier or less editors in a separate page. Refugee 21:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, or archive as a historical record that we can embarrass Hans with at the RWW Christmas party. It's too subjective, people go up and down in different users' perceptions, leave, come back, screw up etc. It's much too fluid to rank clearly. Rrose Selavy 23:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I redirected it to RationalWiki, for lack of a more appropriate redirect. Though... I am inclined to redirect it to social dynamics; it sort of discusses the same things, but it has more potential. 00:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Social dynamics would be better - it's a better article than this one, and doesn't attempt abitrary gradations. Rrose Selavy 19:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

=RationalWikians by edit count= I like this idea. --Admin 16:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Good. This is my Nov. Project for this site. Tyrannis 17:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm dropping the time on site, I may do another list for it later, and will merge them if you like. Also, for titles, I'm going with Church titles for Irony points. Tyrannis 17:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem with this is that it would need to be updated fairly frequently, which would become even worse if these were categories. Also, I still don't see why we need these categories. The best thing to do would be to use a template that assigns the cat, and regularly update the edit count on every user's article. But even then it'd be a lot of work. -- Nx  / talk 18:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Or I could just manually update it each month. If I drop the 200 edit category, that would be really easy, as there are only ~100 editors with 1000+edits, and several are inactive or bots. Tyrannis 21:09, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Patriarch. Oh yeah. Kneel before Zod, bitch! Armondikov 01:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * We all thought you were a woman. Tyrannis 01:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Patriarch, matriarch, all the same thing really. Armondikov 11:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Mainspace
Nearly ready, also, would you like one done for just mainspace edits? I think it would contain quite a few surprises. Laughs Evilly at impending destruction of all you hold dear*'''Tyrannis 21:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Strikethroughs
Retired users get them. Tyrannis 00:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What is bold supposed to be? Liveware Problem 19:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * CratsTyrannis 21:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Should add "dead"... human  03:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Cabal members
Somewhere there's a list. And RA certainly was not one. Liveware Problem 17:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I got the names from there. Frankly, most appear either to have moved on or actually become productive. Unfortunately(IMHO) the demise of TK + the leak has reinforced the CP obsession. I'm getting serious lagtime with the site now. Tyrannis 18:31, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't differentiate between old-school and arriviste cabalists. Neither Genghis Khant nor RA were originals. Genghis was possibly the first outsider to be let in, I think Pi was also admitted, SusanG came and went, RA was inducted when he became concerned about some scarf and butter-knife activities. There was also another cabalist who was the last to be admitted and is not mentioned and off the top of my head I think that the list of crats is incorrect. Ed Wig 16:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Then edit it. Noone is going to stop you. Tyrannis 17:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * What, Peter Noone of Herman's Hermits? Ed Wig 17:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. yes. he is :). Do what you like Tyrannis 17:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The RWW list of cabal members is, perhaps rather unimaginatively, included in the article Cabal. --False Flag 16:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that was the list I used. Ty 16:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. I wonder if you could you tell me how up to date the stats on this page are?  Thanks. --False Flag 16:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Valid to April 1st. I update it monthly. Ty 16:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If you would like, I can update it later today. Ty 16:55, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No, there's no rush. I was just finding the CP numbers for the big hitters interesting.  The top three show an interest but not much. The next rank show an utter disinterest with the exception of Susan. I was also amused that Dalek who according to us "identifies very strongly as Post-Conservapedian" has a CP edit rate of 7.29 - higher than any of the second rankers with the exception of Susan. I've got to say that you, Ty, are in the front rank of cp ignoring though.  I don't suppose this can be put into one of those sortable table things which allow people to rank them by various orders?  If would show up those with the worst CP-obsession quite clearly. OH! and what period does it cover?--False Flag 17:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can try to make a table, no problem. And it covers everything, since day 1. Ty 17:10, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, looking at this again, and to be fair to Dalek, his editing rate in mianspace is first class. I can't help but feel that there is more that could be done with this. For example should/could the stats be transcluded onto user pages?  This would really give an objective assessment of whether a user is useful, just chats or is obsessed with CP.  (In the light of current discussions, number of pages deleted would be good as well.  (joke):-) ) --False Flag 17:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ;) That is a good idea. I do this by hand, but OCD helps. I can also do it by every namespace if you would like. "The numbers they keep me sane" Ty 17:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I think it would be interesting as an objective measure, but I suddenly feel that I'm inventing a lot of work for you. Anyway, I wouldn't think that we'd need all namsespaces. Not recipe I suppose, and perhaps not fun? Or include them as "other"? What might be interesting would be to find out what percentage of edits people make in the SB - which really simple "chat space" rather than "article chat space".  I imagine that people at RW would find the numbers interesting as well.  So great.--False Flag 17:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh relax, I've done sillier things. Problem with Saloon bar is that it is in the same space as WIGO:Everything else, as well as projects and policies. Ty 17:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok - just a thought.--False Flag 18:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Surely the Old Cabal is simply those of us who were on RW1, plus a few very early joiners, such as Kels and Susan? human  07:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The cabal is the people in the cabal article I believe. As nobody who was active her recently was a member, nobody know much about RW 1.0. Care to spin us a yarn? Ty 11:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Tables
Will be grand unified, w/total edits, likely at the end of the month. Right now, I'm just making lots of sub tables. Ty 17:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean one single inclusive table?--False Flag 18:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * yeah. Ty 18:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Now I'm really going to be difficult. These tables are all-time.  Is there any way to do an historical analysis of the data to show graphically how interest in CP has moved over time? Either by individual user or by whole site? I'm not really sure what data you have or how well you can manipulate it or what is possible. (I'm hopeless at it.) But some way to show the level of interest in CP over time would be exactly what the site is about, well, in my opinion. --False Flag 18:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Individual user, by month, I can do, all 100 would be absurd, but say, all the bureaucrats or the top 20 I could do. Ty 18:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you get site-wide totals? That is to say a breakdown by month of CP and non-CP edits since inception? Or just CP edits as a percentage of total edits? A simple graph would do it. It would tell us if interest in CP was stable, increasing or reducing. --False Flag 18:58, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. Ty 18:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can get most revised pages, but it is mainspace only :/ I can count edits by month by hand though. Ty 19:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Argh too many edits. I know a work around, but it would require me to have about 5 hours of free time. I can however do a month by month analysis of editors, by namespace. Ty 19:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Five hours is a looooooooong time. You can do the other thing by some sort of sort? If so really all we need is total edits by by month and total CP space by month.  Then express CP as a percentage and see how that percentage moves across time.  My prediction is a gradual percentage with spikes for things like Lenski. (I never claimed to be profound.)--False Flag 20:12, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I can do that, will take a few days though, I do do other things occasionally :)Ty 21:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Post CP
Ah! I see it's one big table now. Thanks. Very interesting. At what point should we call people "post CP editors"? My thought would be 5% of edits?--False Flag 16:40, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll look up colors in a bit, 5% mains pace? 5% margin? <=5% CPtalk? Ty 16:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Colors would be good. I'm afraid that I don't really understand your question about margins, and also my initial 5% suggestion may have been a bit too harsh.  One thing that leaps out of playing with this though is that the more interested an editor is in CP the less interested they are in mainspace. It holds almost as strongly in the other direction as well. I had expected that, but I hadn't expected it to be so striking. It almost looks like two separate communities.--False Flag 16:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It almost is. People have mentioned "who are you" to me, and while I'm not the most social, I've been there over 15 months. Ty 16:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Early update
I'm updating this today, cause I have finals when I would normally be updating. I am replacing the silly titles w/total edits. Ty 14:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I like the titles. Ty 14:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Another religious title should be added I think, for >50k edits: "God". Or perhaps "Satan". human  03:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Metropolitan? Grand Metropolitan? Ty 10:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't fit the theme. How about "Right hand of God"? human  07:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that could work. Ty 11:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Update
I will probably update this at some point this week, after which it will be back on it's regular schedule. Because you all care soooo much. Ty 21:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The number of strike-throughs is depressing. Ty 00:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm....
I am right now #134 at 785 edits. I would need to be at 1178 to reach the top 100. Only 393 edits to go. Of course, this is a moving target. But then too I could join the diaconate. Maratrean 11:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As the Grand Metropolitan is very fond of telling us, edit count is meaningless. Ty 12:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Interestingly though, while it isn't always correlated to social standing, until this month,everyone over 6000 edits, and most over 4000(and all over 6000) either were or had been crates. For an example of a low edit editor with excellent social standing see Mei, for the opposite see David Gerard. Ty 12:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Some day
Someday I'm going to beat that squirrele guy. Sterile 03:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Quibble about titles
The titles of "patriarch" and "cardinal" are higher than that of "metropolitan" in the ecclesiastical hierarchy. 06:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it's Grand Metropolitan. If you put "grand" in front of it then it automatically becomes the best. Nembus  06:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Socks
Out of boredom, I'm going to merge confirmed socks, as Hans did it for SusanG/Toast. Might as well be consistant. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 15:21, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Fuck
This is going to take forever to update. Guess I know what I'm doing tomorrow afternoon. Tytalk 04:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

=RationalWikians by education= This is a bit USAian, in that "High School" is not really defined in many other countries. Just sayin' human  00:41, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * What is it called outside the US? 01:13, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * Umm... we call it "High School"  Ryan  01:58, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * "Secondary school" in most parts of Europe, to the best of my knowledge. User:Jellyfish! 02:11, 12 June 2008 (CDT)

Is it worth adding some other, more unknown users to this? I know a few. -- Ryan  02:59, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * Go for it :) User:Jellyfish! 03:46, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * Eh, will do tomorrow... I'm tired, for some reason. -- <font face=Eurostile>Ryan  04:58, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * "Secondary" is good. It's not common in the US, but the meaning is known.  By the way, what does "self-employed" have to do with "edumacation"? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  18:04, 12 June 2008 (CDT)
 * Nothing. I was gently mocking you and DogP :-) 18:34, 12 June 2008 (CDT)

Outing the kids in "secondary school" verges on the creepy, by the way. Why not call them "pre-college"? Or leave the section out? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  00:42, 13 June 2008 (CDT)

The use of College as a term is also confusing. In the UK, Malaysia, Singapore, and countries that have systems modelled along the same system, "High School" refers to qualifications up to GCE/O Level, and "College" or "6th Form" to A Level, and pre-degree certificates and diplomas, usually but not necessarily vocationally orientated. --TheEgyptian 14:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Cliobluestocking
Removed because s/he doesn't exist. 23:24, 13 June 2008 (CDT)
 * I'll fix. And how do you know "she" is a "she"?  Oh, maybe I typed that.  Anyway, she was the one who ruined my free time by telling me about CP aeons ago.  And she chuckles over teh assfly. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  23:34, 13 June 2008 (CDT)
 * I did not say "she". I said s /  he, similar to the gender neutral her/his.  23:42, 13 June 2008 (CDT)
 * I see. "It" does exist. 23:44, 13 June 2008 (CDT)
 * She wouldn't like you calling her an "it" ;) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  00:00, 14 June 2008 (CDT)
 * * shrug*
 * Why "Clio Bluestocking"? 00:24, 14 June 2008 (CDT)
 * Clio is the goddess (or muse?) of history (CB is a history professor), and the Bluestockings were some sort of troublemaking early feminists, IIRC. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  17:59, 14 June 2008 (CDT)
 * What does "IIRC" mean? 23:26, 14 June 2008 (CDT)
 * "If I Recall Correctly". A common 'net acronym, sorry. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  23:34, 14 June 2008 (CDT)

Excuse me
But my home page explicitly says I have a graduate degree. Researcher 22:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed it, you could have too (the only page we're not supposed to edit is the one about ourself). Human 22:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but for once, I felt like being a whiner. That, and I was still unsure of how this wiki worked.  The meta-ness is giving me the vapors. Researcher 23:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

A Bit Mixed
This page purports to be a list of the educational level of RWians but SusanG is down as 'retired - past it'. This says nothing about the level of education she achieved back in the dark ages. Similarly DoggedPersistance and Ghengis are down as 'unemployed/unknown' - unknown is OK but unemployed is not an education level. 212.58.233.129 16:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Then fix it, dear Henry, dear Henry, dear Henry. Then fix it dear Henry, dear Henry, then fix it! MNpunkboy 05:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's been so long since I've heard that line, Goonie. I'm kind of surprised that you know it.  Radioactive afikomen 06:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

MC's edumacation
I, personally, am of the opinion that we should let him claim that he is that edumacated. How doth the other non-MC user (I think there is only one) vote? MNpunkboy 05:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Does the word "fascist" not raise any red flags? 89.132.239.149 05:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * He is doing a doctorate on Fascist movements in Eire. He is educated. RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor 06:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. However you guys decide. In the meanwhile I'm taking a leave of absence to deal with the phne call I received at 2 am. MNpunkboy 07:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless of education, does MC count as a "RationalWikian?" 84.246.168.14 08:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Fuck you. 86.40.104.155 09:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that he admitted that he was making the education up in his coming-out speech. 15:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * How did you interpret that exactly? I gave the illusion of being a renaissance man but am nothing of the sort. Doesn't mean I'm not educated. 86.45.202.117 16:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Me
Not music. Liveware Problem 03:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Then what? Another CS major? Ty 03:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I've got some time before I have to declare. Most likely political science and econ, possibly a minor in CS. Liveware Problem 03:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Suddenly I feel very old. Ty 12:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

=Rennie McGreet= Is it worth mentioning that I started on MCWiki, then worked backwards to here and then to RW? and does this mean I should sign up at CP? Rennie McGreet 20:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, and no. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 20:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was thinking he might be a sock of Ty but I'm not sure the personalities match up. Nembus 22:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, I was not around for CUR or Fox. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 22:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It just seems like a name you'd come up with. Nembus 22:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I know who this is, but I'm not sure. But yes, some of us suffer from Random Sockpuppet Creation Syndrome. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 22:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And who might that be? I know of nobody who actually has socks on RWW. Well, aceept for me, and RA, and numerous others. Punky McPunkersen 22:14, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You dare accuse me of sock puppetry? John Childermass 02:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

RFLANI
What's a one of them? Rennie McGreet 16:53, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * A misspelling of RFNALI. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 17:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Took a while, but I eventually figured out what RFNALI means! Armondikov 15:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Didya now? TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 15:37, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

=Researcher=

He made an article that started with each letter of the alphabet
Sounds interesting. what's the article? Rrose Selavy 10:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think he created an article for each letter. Though the other way round would be awesome. Ty 11:22, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * let's see... All books change daily, except for great heresies in Jewish knowledge, leaving mainly no other possibility quite reasonable; some tales use verifiable work, xeroxing yesterday's Zwinglianisms. Rrose Selavy 11:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * :) Ty 12:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)