Fun talk:Schlafly Quote Generator/Archive1

"I looked at your contributions today and want to you everyone know." Your grammar doth need fixing, methinks. 02:15, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
 * No no, that's a direct quote (the "want to you" part). It had something after it in the original, but it didn't make much more sense then, either. -- 21:57, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh. : D   23:44, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
 * My ears are burning. Insert Name Here 06:34, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * :P -- 08:57, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * ZOMG! teh assfly is in my computer...watching me!!!!-- [[Image:Asclepius staff.png|8px]]-PalMD -- 07:44, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

As long as it lasts, I hope you don't mind this. Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 07:48, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Love it, Editor. -- 07:52, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Aw! They took it down! :( -- 07:55, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Maybe my English is not good enough, but doesn't "No links for the not so wise monkeys, thank you" mean that Conservapedia users are stupid monkeys, who must be spared dangerous links? Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 07:58, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * lol. I didn't notice that. -- 08:02, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

'This is absolutely EXCELLENT'' and deserving of at least 7,000,000 points or 2.3 goats!! 12:49, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * I could use 7,000,000 points...then again, it's been a long time since I've had delicious goat milk...-- 12:54, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Unfortunately all our goats are Billys and should NOT be milked under any circlestations. 13:00, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh shi- -- 14:06, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

I think there needs to be a template version of this, with a parametrised name and the current timestamp so we can inject schlaflisms in to conversations at will. --JeevesMkII 12:56, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree. I was actually gonna ask if doing the current time stamp was possible. -- 12:58, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

Didn't Hoji do a very similar thing quite a while back? We should link both in the Newcomer's guide or some such visible place. DickTurpis 13:00, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * He made a Schlafly generator, or an auto-stamp? -- 13:04, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * A generator, quite a bit like this, but much less in-depth. I'm looking for it, but forget what it was called and what namespace it was in. DickTurpis 13:09, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Here it is:Fun:Schlafly Quote Generator. DickTurpis 13:10, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Oooo, a predecessor! -- 13:14, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

This is indeed one of the most awesomesonic things on this website.  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 13:07, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Thank you! :D -- 13:14, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

Love the scare quotes, Dick. -- 13:20, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * For the date: you could stick  or  (, 27 August, 2024 (UTC))  14:15, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Excellent! -- 14:18, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

I wonder if in the future we might develop our own kind of Turing Machine test, and see if we can debate this infernal device instead of the real Andy? We might be able to slowly reduce the number of optional lines until he eventually and finally goes silent, and at that moment become free of our obsession with the fuckwit man? DogP  17:49, 24 September 2008 (EDT)


 * I demand this machine be constructed using Wang tiles, so I can snigger about Schlafly talking to his wang. --JeevesMkII 18:32, 24 September 2008 (EDT)


 * Are you a physician? A PhD credentialed in this field? If so, then state your credentials. If not, then forget about it here.--Aschlafly 14:48, 16 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I am a medical doctor, born, trained, and practicing in the US, a clinical assistant professor of medicine at a major university. If you wish to know more, I can hunt down my Curriculum Vitae for you...palmd001


 * Internal medicine is not a field of specialty for sexually transmitted diseases. So I don't see anything that would qualify you to speak about prevention. This is not the place for public-school type sex education claims and speculation. Aschlafly


 * I assume the Schlafly "article-o-matic" will be next on the adgenda, saves people having to write entries themselves if they want to complete the article matrix. I can see it now: "San Francisco Deciet is deciet made by homosexuals in San Franscisco. The End."  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 05:31, 25 September 2008 (EDT)


 * My stomach hurts from laughing. Plus, "I'm so proud!"   Fretfulporpentine 18:35, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

A bit long
This quote generator is getting a bit long. Aschalfly doesn't often make such long statements, he is usually, err, concise. Just something I noticed. Ace McWickedcast ye the first stone 18:00, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree in that I don't think it needs to get any longer. But this seems about right for one of his more lengthy screeds. I might re-sort it a bit for the sake of clarity, though, since it sometimes doesn't run together as well as I'd like (although, that might in fact be what makes it sound so authentic sometimes...). -- 03:27, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Is is possible to embed choose tags within other choose tags without it going crazy so sometimes it's concise and sometimes its long, yet still consistent enough to be funny rather than plain wierd?  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 13:45, 29 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Sadly, no, at least not the last time I tried. Even using nested templates it doesn't work.  ħ uman  18:11, 5 October 2008 (EDT)

+100 internet points
I will be using this to add responses on Conservapedia talkpages at once. Hopefully this will improve the discourse. Teabag 05:55, 27 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Not that that's very hard. : )   06:03, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

&mdash; Unsigned, by: Stile4aly / talk / contribs


 * Spock! I didn't know you cared! :) -- 13:59, 29 September 2008 (EDT)


 * I came late to this thing, it is teh awesome by goat!  ħ uman  18:12, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm rather pleased with the collaborative effort that's gone into it. The Schlaf' never had so many fans... -- 00:12, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

It was better before
It used to be simple, but there's too many goats in it now. Makes it less believable. I'm removing goats. DogP  19:52, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Moar goats seen, pleez to remove, goats not schlaflyspeak.  ħ uman  00:43, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Bilingual education?
When/where did Andy rant against bilingual education? I need links in order to understand the guy's mind and, of course, laugh at the bizarre conversation that inevitably came up. NightFlare   22:28, 27 October 2008 (EDT)
 * It was fairly recent, actually. Can't remember where it was from, though. Might be in the WIGO files for September... -- 01:01, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Found it, luckily it was copy/pasted here.
 * The foreign languages thing died pretty quickly sadly. It's nice to see how he suggests (orders? the article is rather ambiguous) homeschooling groups to speak only english on classes unrelated to a foreign language, yet he dismisses the criticism by mentioning public schools... where you MUST comply with the suggestion. NightFlare   17:43, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Eureka! It's all coming back to me...God...I forgot from whence this stupidity came. :p -- 08:01, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

..., so it's obvious to me you're trying to vaccinate me.
Uhm, no. --Just passing by 12:53, 28 November 2008 (EST)

namespace
Shouldn't this actually be in "template" rather than fun? (I know, it might fixing a lot of links, but it is a 'template', not an 'article'?)? ??  ħ uman  00:41, 4 December 2008 (EST)
 * Is this really a template? I never really thought about it, but I wouldn't say so. It is possible to call it as a template, but it looks rather silly doing so. 01:35, 4 December 2008 (EST)

I sorta see your point. However, if the header and box were noincluded, it could be used to place a random comment in a talkpage, right? How about taking the generator itself and moving it to an short-named template (like template:assquote?), and transcluding it to this page for the fully functioning version (add a link to the template on the page, of course). Just a thought, to make it more flexible?  ħ uman  16:57, 4 December 2008 (EST)
 * (I always come late to these discussions for some reason...) I like that idea, and if you haven't already done it, I will! :D -- 04:44, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Template
I haz maed it.-- 05:24, 12 December 2008 (EST)
 * I disagree, Andy. -- 05:24, 12 December 2008 (EST)
 * Except for some reason you can't have the name doohickey on the same page twice...... -- 05:27, 12 December 2008 (EST)
 * Except for some reason you can't have the name doohickey on the same page twice...... -- 05:27, 12 December 2008 (EST)

Pure goat
This template is emphatically only for things that Andy says himself. As he's not said anything about pure goats, cut that lingo.-Diadochus 14:46, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * That's what I thought, too. --" 14:48, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * You were 100% correct CUR. Congratulations. SirChuckB  15:04, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yippee! Go me! --" 15:05, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * A caveat: It IS mostly for things he said, but one IS allowed to be a bit creative about it. That said, the goat thing was right to go. At minimum, it has to be in his style. -- 20:57, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * His style: You deny renaming French fries freedom fries causes Franch to ally with the U.S. When will that be added? --" 21:01, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * He never talks about that, either.  ħ uman  21:39, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * But it is in his style. And the Bush Administration ordered that the cafeteria in Congress rename them that in protest. So come on, he would have said something about it. --" 21:40, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Emphatically only what he's actually said.-Diadochus 21:45, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * It wasn't Bush, it was Congress that did the rename. And it was what, 6 years ago?  Stick to things Schlafly actually says, ideally, very often. This generator should be almost indistinguishable from something Schlafly would really say - it needs to prove Poe's Law perfectly.  Please don't fuck it up.  Why not make your own version in your userspace?  ħ uman  21:49, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * I was looking at what Yossie said. --" 21:50, 4 February 2009 (EST)

I was perhaps a bit unclear. There is a bit of a mad-libs quality to this thing, and that's where most of the creativity comes in. For example, just taking a randomly generated sample from the page, Assfly has never said "You even deny winning in Iraq prevents Hollywood values" ("Winning in Iraq" and "Hollywood values" being the randomly selected options). But those are two of his favourite talking points, and that sentence is based pretty closely on his usual "debating" style. It's absurd (which is the point, really), and perhaps a bit of a stretch...but would anybody be terribly surprised if one day he came up with that? Probably not. It's not sufficient to simply insert the wacky and the stupid. Anybody can be stupid. But can you be Andy Schlafly Stupid (TM)? To really get it right, you have to at be true to your subject, and with this thing, it's better not to go too far from reality. I mean, the subject is pretty hard to get wrong if you just look at anything he's EVER written. So, it's okay to tailor it A LITTLE. But Human is right, it's mostly meant for real quotations. I apologise if my previous post threw you off. -- 07:14, 5 February 2009 (EST)
 * PS:That being said, there are a couple of joke options in the signature and the "god speed" section I inserted when I first made this, but those are set to appear really infrequently, and I don't really think we need a whole ton of those. -- 07:20, 5 February 2009 (EST)

Rich, rich mine of Schlaflyisms
I'm not sure Andy has ever come out with so many fresh, innovative, PERFECT Schlaflyisms as he does in this discussion about President's Day. Quite, quite spectacular - almost every response is a laugh out loud classic. DogP  19:09, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * Jesus, I hadn't read all of his rebuttals. Apparently, denial = adding nuance to a discussion, and causes an outflux of credibility.  19:13, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * Someone quoted one of them at talk:wigo and I thought it was made up it was so perfect. One day, one day, this generator and Andy will say exactly the same thing, and what then?  A Poesplosion of epic proportions.  ħ uman  19:27, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * This Virtual Andy often makes more sense than the real Andy.  DogP  20:03, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * Then we're not doing our jobs! -- 20:27, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah Human, that was me that posted the first one... When I first read it, I thought someone had snuck in and added a generated quote.... I was amazed. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  20:56, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * What was the talk:wigo line? -- 21:10, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 * "Economist", your denial of the obvious only destroys your credibility. You have free will, but you're not fooling anyone by denying how liberals deify the president, and therefore prefer "President's Day" even though federal law expressly establishes it as "Washington's Birthday." I suppose that if you were in the communist Soviet Union then you would have denied that Stalin was deified also. Suit yourself.--Andy Schlafly 17:12, 16 February 2009 (EST)" Wuz it. Srsly. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  03:07, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * * Wow* -- 04:00, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * Holy. Fucking. Shit. I love you guys. Really, I do. TehKenny 01:20, 18 February 2009 (EST)

Format Changes
I noticed the format of the source changed since I edited this yesterday. I tried to add a new quote, but it screwed up somehow so I rolled it back. Can anybody tell me what I did wrong? Zaku 11:20, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * I've put it back in for you. You needed to put a " " tag after the option, as it was the final one in that section. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 12:00, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * Ah, I see. Thanks. Zaku 13:42, 18 February 2009 (EST)

Cut it a bit?
This template is great (and I mean, GREAT!!) but I think it loses realism by generating quotes that are ever so slightly too long. Andy's immortal put-downs and dismissals tend to be about 2/3 of this length. So, should we change it around a bit?--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 12:32, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * It depends, really. I've seen it pull out exceedingly short ones and excessively long ones. Personally, I prefer brevity, but I don't mind if it's a bit prolix (Andy is nothing if not prolix). That said, perhaps some of the long options could be cut down to their essentials without losing the madness/stupidity of the original quotation? -- 13:00, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * I just happened to notice this one... Under the "You don't even cite" choice, one of the responses is Anything I'm capable of understanding.... Is that a genuine Schlafly? <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  17:03, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * Hmm...probably one I added back when this was more of a parody than an attempt to make plausible quotations. Think we should cut it? -- 18:02, 18 February 2009 (EST)
 * Having looked in more detail, I suggest that the following would bring extra Schlafly realism:
 * Make each quote have either "You don't even cite..." or "Clearly you're... I can tell because..." but not both.
 * Cut "Why don't you just admit it?", which isn't really necessary and doesn't contain any choices.
 * Put a line break before "As I've said before..." - he often uses two paragraphs, the first longer than the second.
 * This might seem picky, but I think we are *this close* to being able to pass for the real Schlaf.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 08:35, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * I second these proposals, especially dividing the quotation into two paragraphs, which I hadn't picked up on before. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 09:08, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * A sandbox experiment suggests that nesting choose tags (which we would need to do to implement suggestion 1) might not be possible. Is that right, or did I get the code wrong?--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 09:10, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * Ah, I see the problem. Sadly I am not skilled in this area of wiki-formatting, so I don't know of a solution.  Whilst we're on the subject of improving the generator, should the choice 10 option " RationalWiki causes insanity" be removed as well?  It doesn't sound authentic (although it may be based on something real, it's hard to tell!). KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 09:16, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * I think I might have found a way round it, though it's not the most elegant. As for content decisions, it depends on humour vs realism and I wouldn't want to tread on the original creators' toes in that department.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 09:18, 19 February 2009 (EST)

OK, see User:KrissAkabusiAwoogar/Sand. Comes out great when it picks "You don't even cite...", but there's a stray line break I can't get rid of when it chooses the other option. What do you all think?--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 09:31, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * It's now in a state that I'd consider useable. But I don't presume to replace the version here without further agreement.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 11:14, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * I like it! I'll go right ahead and change it. One thing though: the page break won't work. If people indent with the template, it'll look wrong. Other than that, it's much improved! -- 15:19, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * Hmmm...on second thought, this might not work the way you've put it together. I don't think we should use templates in this, because it means everyone would have to go back and forth over several pages if they wanted to change anything, and I think it should all be more or less unified...but maybe that's just me. What do other people think? I think it looks much better in the sandbox version, minus the page break. -- 15:31, 19 February 2009 (EST)
 * Point taken about the templates. Ideally, at this point a coding genius will pop up and tell us how we can nest those tags inside each other. Failing that, we could make the tough decision to cut one of the bits - maybe choice 3/4/5, and add the best ones to the options for choice 9?
 * I'll take the line break out too - I hadn't considered the indent issue.--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 04:40, 20 February 2009 (EST)
 * I really think I've nailed it with this latest version!--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 09:27, 20 February 2009 (EST)
 * This is excellent! Go ahead and make the change. Make sure to add any recent additions since you started your little project, and I'll make sure everything is in proper order with the template after you've made the move. -- 13:10, 20 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, this is superb - it really makes it feel more random, and each generated quote feels more different and real.  Amazing work chaps (assuming you are indeed chaps and not chapesses?).   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  00:59, 28 February 2009 (EST)

Suggested Quotations
"Censorship is the sine qua non of being a liberal", anyone? KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 09:23, 20 February 2009 (EST)


 * Added (he's said that twice in the last day, which explains why my copied wording is slightly different).--Kriss AkabusiAAAAWOOOOGAAAR!!1 11:57, 20 February 2009 (EST)

I think "Hitler did believe in survival of the fittest, including by humans, and that is obviously deadly" could work as well, although it might be a bit too long. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 11:44, 22 February 2009 (EST)


 * You draw a silly distinction between sheep and goats. He really did say that to Weasel. --"C, U Rthe, ing. 11:46, 22 February 2009 (EST)
 * I thought that was already in there? KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 11:48, 22 February 2009 (EST)
 * Wasn't it removed? And we should have a 'you claim above that X' and then a nutty refution of it. That would be classic. --"C, U Rthe, ing. 11:51, 22 February 2009 (EST)
 * No, it's definitely in there. A couple of elements that weren't actual quotations were deleted, I think, but that one was kept because it's real. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 11:54, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Why do we still have two versions knocking around?
There's a version 1 link up there at the top. What's that, and why is it still around? Can we just delete it? <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  14:50, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * I don't see why we'd need to. It's not takin' up that much space. -- 19:21, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * Well, it's not about space.  It's about - why have two versions of the same thing, when presumably V2.0 is better?   If we leave 1.0 lying around, someone will blunder into it and add lulz to it that should have been added to 2.0.   There's no reason to have two versions of the same thing.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  20:53, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * Sorted.-- 21:58, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * I was just being a tad facetious, re: space. ;) I think it's unlikely to cause problems; it was all but forgotten before I created mk2. It hadn't (and hasn't) been significantly edited in months--I probably wouldn't have made this one if I'd known of its existence. I dunno. It's not so much that I have any attachment to the old one, it's just that I wouldn't feel right deleting Hoji's work, since he had the idea independently of me. That said, I wouldn't shed too many tears if someone vaped it or redirected it here. -- 23:01, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * I think Hoji would take it as a compliment that his idea went on to become such a wonderfully eloquent substitute for the real thing.  I propose vaping the old one and redirecting it to here.  Opinions please?   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  23:40, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * Well, put it that way, go for it! (I'm an easy sell) -- 00:51, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Teh Assfly's Handle
For some reason, it's not always displaying a handle (i.e. Andy Schlafly, aschlafly or Aschlafly) at the end. Is this intentional?Zaku 18:41, 25 February 2009 (EST)
 * Is it? I hadn't noticed that...I'll have a look. -- 20:11, 25 February 2009 (EST)

v3.0
I just spent more time than I should've making a prototype of a phrase that's already in (the "You even deny that X prevents Y") and here it is:

The above works by randomly choosing a form of "denial", then randomly choosing a combination of good/bad policies encouraging/discouraging a good/bad thing, these policies/actions/things are themselves choosing randomly.

The idea is to make phrases by using templates that choose other randomly chosen phrases, thus making the "main" phrases such as the one above easier to make, and use many of them to create a quote, perhaps chosen randomly as well so Andy doesn't always say that his opponent is denying something for example.

So, what do you think, is this a good idea? Too complicated for too little? Not gonna work?

I'm off too sleep, my head's killing me. See ya tomorrow! NightFlare 00:00, 26 February 2009 (EST)


 * Interesting idea. There might be other ways to differentiate it a bit without using templates, though. I do like what you're going for, but it's not as easy to work with this kind of thing if one has go to several different places to make a change to the main body. But I like the idea of making this more random, so it's food for thought! I'm eager to see what you come up with. -- 00:21, 26 February 2009 (EST)


 * I slapped up three more examples out of curiosity. I fear it might be too much work for too little return?  I guess you are trying to spice up the mundanity of the "typical" assquote by mixing up the general flow? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:26, 26 February 2009 (EST)
 * PS, there's a line break in there that fails at indenting right now. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:26, 26 February 2009 (EST)


 * PPS, perhaps we could just randomize the "boilerplate" text as well, which is pretty much what you have achieved? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:28, 26 February 2009 (EST)


 * I like the idea of randomizing the boilerplate. That would add a bit of spice to it, as long as we made sure it always jived grammatically. -- 03:26, 26 February 2009 (EST)


 * Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I've been thinking and templates that branch from each other doesn't seem like the most user-friendly way to add items, which is the reason this thing has grown to be so comprehensive. Though I still think "easy-use" templates such as the good/bad things/policies templates above could be useful to add some variety to additions. I'll try making a few more and see how it goes.


 * I also thought about the grammar issue but then remembered Andy can see how sometime can estimate when the truth when someone else conceals it, so unless it ends up being overdone, it will add some flavor to the quotes. NightFlare 22:34, 26 February 2009 (EST)
 * I was thinking that, too, re: grammar. Some templates might be okay, actually. I was scanning your page and I like what I see. :) -- 23:16, 26 February 2009 (EST)

I've put a bit of randomisation into the 'You even deny' bit of the boilerplate, to add a bit of variety. See what you think.-- 06:03, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I just came here to say how much I like it. Is that sort of what you were going for, NightFlare? -- 06:06, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * The remaining 'boilerplate' elements are:
 * I looked at your contributions
 * so it's obvious to me you're
 * You don't even cite
 * As I've said before,
 * Any suggestions for alternatives? They don't have to be funny - in fact, keeping them short might be preferable, as the average quote length seems to be creeping up again.-- 08:43, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * Just 'You don't even cite' and 'I looked at your contributions' now. If I didn't know, I'd be 98% certain these quotes were written by teh man himslef.-- 11:11, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I added those, but the "You don't even cite" ones seem dull, and since it's of disputable quotability (see below) it seems like it needs more help. NightFlare 16:32, 27 February 2009 (EST)

"Fake" rename
I'd been thinking that v 2.0 was a silly name, especially with the 3.0 perhaps coming next, but the fake rename might muck up people's attempts to link here. How many pages actually link to this one, anyway? Isn't it just template:assquote, really? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:40, 26 February 2009 (EST)
 * I guess I could get away with just moving it to Fun:Schlafly Quote Generator, couldn't I. -- 02:52, 26 February 2009 (EST)
 * Done. It turns out there are only a handful of pages that linked to the "2.0" name. -- 03:06, 26 February 2009 (EST)

LOL
I look at this and it tells me that "mymyrteax" is a pagan name. Too true. LOL. .mymyrteax 22:42, 26 February 2009 (EST)

Disputed Quote
I never got the point of the "Honor and Worship" signoff, until I tripped upon this in my own mining for quotes from Andy: (Sorry if I haven't linked it properly; I'm still getting the hang of this Wiki thing. It's on the CP Main Page Talk discussion of Presidents Day.)

"ShawnJ, you lose all credibility when you say that you "disagree that liberals deify government officials." What you do think the deification of Lenin, Stalin and Castro is about? Or do you deny that deification also? I repeat: atheists don't have God, and something inevitably fills that vacuum. The presidency plays that role for many liberals. Honor and worship!--Andy Schlafly 19:31, 17 February 2009 (EST)"

It seems to me that the phrase in question isn't the same "Go fuck yourself" dismissal that "Godspeed" and its variants are; it's simply an answer to the unstated rhetorical question "What role is it that the presidency plays for liberals?" or perhaps more Andy-illuminating (since characteristic of his God-shaped hole assumptions, among others), "What vacuum do liberals have that needs filling by, for instance, Obama?"

I've seen H&W in so many generated quotes that to me it almost feels canonical as an ashlafly brushoff, but I think my analysis shows that it ought to go the way of the Pericope de Adultera in the Gospel according to Andy. It simply isn't a synonym for Godspeed. Does anyone object to deleting it? 207.180.183.47 08:06, 27 February 2009 (EST)


 * I agree with your analysis, though it's good to have some alternatives to Godspeed as he hasn't actually used the G word that much lately.-- 09:01, 27 February 2009 (EST)


 * One way to add some variety might be to move some short 8s that are basically as much of an FU as Godspeed is (e.g. "Go back to Wikipedia") to the 9 slot, while reweighting so that the Godspeed ones dominate the outputted quotes. I tried doing that and completely screwed it up, but someone who gets the gist of what I was trying to do (and is more competent than I am) could try that.  I did delete H&W.


 * That's a good suggestion, so I've put your changes back in (you just had a choose tag in the wrong place).-- 10:53, 27 February 2009 (EST)

"You don't even cite..."
Giventhat we're talking about Mr. "Don't read a book, write a book," I'm not sure this fits: he rarely argues by citation--one does not have to when one is an expert on everything. TheoryOfPractice 11:16, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I tend to agree with you, but it's been in there for a while... If it does go, I think "You don't even cite the Bible" should find a place somewhere else, as that was a top Schlafly argument during the different-tests-for-girls episode.-- 11:26, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * No, he definitely said that 'cite' quote.  Tell you what though, there's still quite a few that aren't actually quotes - he never said "You're insane from San Francisco values", for example.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  11:42, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * IMO, items are good fodder for the generator if they are: 1) Actual direct Andy quotations or pastiches of them, 2) Statements he’s never actually made, but everyone would agree are the type of thing he would say, and no one would be surprised if he did say, or 3) Outrageously over-the-top exaggerations of what he has said or would say.


 * “Chivalry is about far more than physical strength” is an example of the first, “Homeschooling reduces crime” of the second, and “There’s a 95% chance that, as a homosexual, you deny that feudalism prevents breast cancer, which is undeniable” of the third.  The humor (as in sheer laughs) comes, I think, more from the third, while the ridicule (as in “what an ass he is!”) comes from the juxtaposition of all three in a plausible paragraph.  So a brilliant fake quote, then, has some of all three types.  A quote with too much or not enough of any one of them would fall short of the ideal.


 * On the other hand, there are plenty of things that Andy has said, even many times, that are neither particularly humorous nor especially illustrative of the insanity of his worldview and disposition.  He has actually said “you don’t cite…”, but it’s not that funny because, well, it just doesn’t sound like him.  He’s never said “You’re insane from San Francisco values”, but, well, I couldn’t even type that without my wife asking me what I was laughing at.  (Just imagine him writing that, fuming, while pecking two-fingered hunched over his keyboard-- and meaning it.  It’s funny!)


 * This BoN’s opinion: Drop all of the current “You don’t even cite (Choice 4)” section. It always sticks out like a sore thumb in the middle of a generated quote.  Unlike in other slots, the potential for further development of the Choice 4 options is rather limited, and the generated quotes without that section will be on the whole both more realistic and funnier.
 * 207.180.183.47 13:45, 27 February 2009 (EST)


 * I'm the BoN above. As long as I'm going to be spouting off like that, I might as well be able to say I don't have a number I'm a name.  So I broke down and registered.Arithmostoutheriou 15:20, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I agree with all the above, especially the bit about three kinds of fodder for this thing. Are you suggesting we move all the choice fours into different sections? -- 21:15, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * Okay, tis cut. I think I like it better this way. Thoughts? -- 21:19, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I like the results much better this way. Arithmostoutheriou 21:39, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * Me too.  This has really come along in the last week or two.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  00:57, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * One day, we'll be able to make this thing sentient, and simply replace the real Andy. This is my dream. -- 01:41, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * Well, it's already smarter than Andy, and half the time, at least, passes the Turing test (more often than he does IRL). All that remains is to make it better, better, better...! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:33, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * This is now eerily accurate. Good work everyone.-- 18:53, 1 March 2009 (EST)
 * I'm constantly surprised at how genuine some of these can be. And it's rare for them to look completely wrong (if ever). Amazing how a person like that can so easily be broken down into a series of random quotations. Also, LOL@Human's line about the Turing Test. -- 19:01, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Blocking Result
I went ahead and removed the "Please, please abide by the rules or blocking result" For a couple of reasons: First, we already have two or three other options that say the same thing, and second, it seems to be poking fun at a dropped word rather than focusing on the stupidity of what Andy actually says..... But that is just my opinion and if the mob is for the entry, by all means put it back. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  12:50, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * Well, you're not wrong - I was indeed simply amused by the dropped word - and, we already have "come back when you can learn out to spell "superior"", which is also the same gag.  However, I was also trying to find more options instead of just Godspeed as per the discussion above.   It'd be nice to have a few more Andyisms for closure.   This may not be it though.   Back to the research.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  13:35, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I say put it back in if he actually said it. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:30, 28 February 2009 (EST)

WTF
"Open your mind and admit that the largest pre-college American History class in the world prevents breast cancer."
 * Deny this and lose credibility! =P Not something he actually said, but I love those random "you deny X prevents Y" lines, even if they can be nonsensical. -- 01:51, 28 February 2009 (EST)

Refution
Perhaps we should have a 'You claim that. . .' option? --"C, U Rthe, ing. 17:19, 27 February 2009 (EST)
 * I don't think it would be quite as interesting. Anything someone else claims would be something...sensible, and therefore not indicative of Andy's madness. No, Andy's rhetorical style (if it can be called that) is all about accusing his opponent of A) Being a liberal (and whatever that entails in his tiny pea brain), and B) accusing his opponent of denying something, usually something that has absolutely nothing to do with the argument. -- 01:44, 28 February 2009 (EST)

Did he say this?
"Got news for you: you need to write a book, fast, before you read any more."

I know you guys are beginning to "cite" in your ECs the sources, which is awesome, but this one sounds wrong. Did he actually say it? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:36, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, the "got news for you:" part just seems wrong. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:37, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * Got news for you: he said it.  Yes really.  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  03:39, 28 February 2009 (EST)

"Dude, where's your logic?"
Wow. -- 05:29, 28 February 2009 (EST) Where's the facts, Schlafly? Where's where's the facts, Schlafly? Where's the fucking facts shitheeeeead?
 * The dude abides, yet again... What is Schlafly ON? -- 23:06, 1 March 2009 (EST)
 * It's pretty phenomenal, isn't it?  He's just so.....so....MAD.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  01:25, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * He's gone mad...with POWER!!! -- 04:31, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * Of course he has, you ever try going mad without power? It's no fun, people don't listen. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  11:50, 2 March 2009 (EST)

Cover story?
(Please do not archive this section)

It may be a bit silly, but it would be amusing to occasionally have the main page attack the viewer on behalf of Andy... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  20:47, 2 March 2009 (EST)

Oh, and the reason I suggest it it is that this has become very good. I think it would freak Andy out to read one. Is it already in "best of amusement", at least? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  20:50, 2 March 2009 (EST)


 * Most certainly. I concur. --"C, U Rthe,. 20:49, 2 March 2009 (EST)


 * Should probably use to change the displayed title - would that work on the cover extract? 20:51, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * Got news for you: I approve.  With one proviso - the casual reader needs to know that the Andybot is speaking to them, not the real Andy.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  21:39, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * I don't think it IS in best of amusement, but I'll rectify that shortly. Anyway, I lovee the idea of this attacking someone on the front page! It would probably work with the assquote template...? What say ye? -- 21:52, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * Hah, someone beat me to the punch on the best ofs. -- 21:53, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * http://www.acapela.tv/Cartoon-bc9b2fdf4cdf-bc9b2f11f451d-bc9b2f1701470-3-4-6 NightFlare 22:10, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * LOL!!! -- 22:22, 2 March 2009 (EST)

Gentlemen!
Gentlemen, Gentleman the Emperor (from work by Gentleman Weaseloid) has created a sister "operation" regarding a Gentleman with (perhaps) an even more bizarre rhetorical style than that of our favoured Gentleman. I'm sure he would appreciate contributions and input. -- 23:22, 3 March 2009 (EST) Once Kenquote is up to snuff, we have to make him and Assquote fight it out on a talk page and see who out Poes the other.
 * Don't forget TK. Or perhaps, better to forget TK.  His best work is in his paranoid emails. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  23:34, 3 March 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, a TK quote generator would just be a big banner reading "Mind your business" which then automatically blocks you for not following Senior Admin orders. <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  23:41, 3 March 2009 (EST)
 * Back when Jinxy was still around, I considered following up the SQG with a JQG, but I thought better of it when I realised it would just have been a series of swear words and barely coherent sexual epithets. As for TK, it'd either be what Sir Chuck described, or a redirect here. Ken is the only other one there with a truly imitable style (maybe Bugler, but why parody a parodist?). The rest have their quirks and maladies, but Ken is nothing if not blindingly consistent. -- 00:04, 4 March 2009 (EST)


 * TK does, actually, have a distinctive style, with lots of commas, not that grammatical, that is quite easy to spot, or to pastiche, no? But, Yossarian, and the other vandals who posted above, have you given any thought, at all, to whether it would be easy to randomise? To make a quote generator, that could, deceitfully, pass itself off as him?--₮K 09:33, 4 March 2009 (EST)
 * A 🇰🇪 generator should include inserting a random image with some retarded anti-evolutionary phrase. Or perhaps a youtube (he's going along with the times, if only he could embed them) --GTac 10:03, 4 March 2009 (EST)
 * I think I've figured out a way to add a random photo with an anti-evolution phrase attached, but the first thing we need is a massive cat cleanup.... Didn't we have a bot for that somewhere? <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  12:34, 4 March 2009 (EST)

Multiple exclamation/question marks
Is it possible to further randomise the generator by having an option for multiple use of question marks and exclamation marks for options that already end in one or the other? Andy seems to do this on occasion, and I think it would be a good addition. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 19:31, 14 March 2009 (EDT)
 * Hmm...depends. It would have to be set up so the question marks would always go on questions/the exclamation points always on statements. -- 23:24, 14 March 2009 (EDT)
 * That intelligent comment begs the question: does Schlafly know the difference?! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  23:54, 14 March 2009 (EDT)
 * You know, I knew someone was gonna make that joke... :-p -- 00:03, 15 March 2009 (EDT)
 * If I find the time, and I should, I'm going to add some templates with random items in there (one with a random number of question marks for instance). NightFlare 00:25, 15 March 2009 (EDT)
 * I see it's been added now. Thank you very much!KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 08:58, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

The opening shot
I think choice 1 - the opening shot - shouldn't have so many options that are specific to a particular topic. It would be more realistic to have him start with a generalised "you're clueless" or "you're not convincing anyone", and then start rambling about Obama or Socrates or whatever later on. The best options that were removed could easily be put in later on. Thoughts?-- 14:32, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
 * I completely agree. It works better when it starts with some weird attack then moves onto the weird specific point. -- 01:34, 17 March 2009 (EDT)
 * Done. Most of the old opening shots have been preserved, either as valedictions or favourite assertions. The page is 44K now - should we consider whittling down the number of options at some stage?-- 07:12, 17 March 2009 (EDT)

I gotta say..
....We have this generator down to perfection now. It is indistinguisable from Schlafly. We all deserve a pat on the back and to be bought a beer. Preferably a Schlalfy Beer, it seems fitting. Ace McWickedRevolt 22:58, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
 * I know, it's ended up being really amazing.  When I'm bored I just come here and click for new quotes for ten minutes.   It gives me a warm feeling of comfort to know I can always get a classic Andyism any time I want - and that they're all for real.   I can't believe he said "animals don't dress themselves, they really don't".   I love that one.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  12:29, 29 March 2009 (EDT)
 * I was just refreshing it a few times and found that it is extremely accurate. 16:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Irish Press
Did The Shlaff really say that about the Irish press? I'm a Freelance Journalist, and I'd really like to do a piece on Conservapedia. It wouldn't really be worth it without getting an interview with him (and some senior figures from RW). Ideas?
 * His e-mail is disabled. You'll have to do it via talk page. -- 15:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * He definitely said the thing about the Irish press. I'll see if I can find a link for ye. I'm sure some RWians would love to be interviewed! As for the Schlaf himself...dunno. -- 18:47, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * PS: If you ask around, there should be someone here who knows his email address. Don't bother going on CP. TK would likely block you because...he can. -- 18:49, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * aschlafly@aol.com -- from federal court public records <font color=#1100aa face=albertus size=2>Thee Nuttish  Talk 18:55, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Here's the diff link for when he said he'd been quoted in the Irish press. Hope that helps! -- 19:06, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Thanks guys, really appreciate the friendliness and the help. That Diff is pretty much straight out of the Quote Generator! Oh, and the newspapers are LESS liberal than the majority of the Irish public. The Schlaff knows nothing about Ireland. But oh well, as Tyrannosaurus Koeckritz would say, it's only Ireland! 89.127.170.66 19:55, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * It still amazes me how accurately he imitates the quote generator... -- 20:08, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * YOU LIE BON. The Great and Powerful Schlafly is a well known expert in all international politics, including American, British, Irish, Australian, Swedish, New Zealand, German and I wanna say French affairs.... Did I get everything? <font color="#000066" >SirChuckB  20:45, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Not to mention his unparallelled expertise in physics, linguistics, statistics, mathematics, sociology, biology, theology, debate, law, education, engineering, music, and history. Give the man his due! -- 21:19, 13 April 2009 (EDT) Hmm, am I forgetting any?

Yes, he really that about the Irish press. I was as usual arguing with him at the time and had pointed him to a link in the IT (what with me being Irish and all that). I was flabbergasted, but delighted when he went on to claim to know more Ireland and the Irish Press than me. I've had many debates with him about Irish issues (he claimed there were no unarmed police forces in the world, I corrected him; he claimed no-one used the term Belfast Agreement, I corrected him), but he always claims to know more. Ace McWicked has had many excellent debates with him about New Zealand, and PJR debated furiously with him about Australia. But no-one knows more about stuff than Andy. At least I won the Belfast Agreement thing. <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  15:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow.
This is genius. Ungtss 15:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. This thing is getting spookily closer and closer to simply channeling Schlafly.  The people who worked on it, to get it to be grammatically correct, etc. (except for Andy's sics) must surely be congratulated.  What's freaky, of course, is when Andy edits on CP and pretty much could have been subbed for by this thing.  05:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm starting to think I just should have called it "fun:Schlafly channeller"...or maybe he's just channelling this...</Twilight Zone Music> -- 09:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Name weighting?
Is there a way to check if the user name contains numbers and increase the chance of commenting it as "weird" or "fake" name based on it? Thieh 02:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Might be, but it'd be pretty damn complicated. Maybe ask Nx, just to see if it's even possible. -- 02:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How about we just rewrite all the software to suit you? 03:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a suggestion, but it probably ends up with some bad programming practice anyways (such as using #rand: without explicitly determining how large the list is getting). I am not sufficiently adept to determine if there is a good way to do that yet.  That is why I asked.  Thieh 03:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can give me a function that takes a name as input and returns true or false (fake or not fake), then writing a parser function for it is a piece of cake. For example, it could check if the name is in the form of or  taking and from a dictionary. I'd prefer something written in php, as that would make putting it into mediawiki easier. --  Nx / talk  17:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure this has been brought up already...
But can we include legitimate, full-length, unadulterated assquotes in the results? It'd be funny to never know if it was a real or fake assquote. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Might be...the problem is you can't embed the tag within others. Perhaps it could be done on the template, which doesn't have the random generator aspect. Just set it up so the random one is more likely to appear than the real ones, and replace specific names with the myName tags. I don't think this has been brought before, come to think of it. -- 23:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting idea, and Yossie points out the main technical issue. Be very careful what you do, since this template is not only all over the site, it's also very carefully vetted - as in, teh assfly really did say all these things.  Experiment in sandbox and using preview, perhaps?  05:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Misspelling
Strictly speaking "misspelt" is not a typo, it is an acceptable alternative to "misspelled", although whether Andy would use that particular form is a different matter. However, on a pedantic note, a parting/Parthian shot would only be misspelled if there was a typo in those words. Mistakes in the text of the Partian shot would make it poorly spelled. 07:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Schlafly Statistics
Wouldn't these quotes benefit from some Schlafly Statistics? I generated three and didn't come across any. --70.26.56.90 04:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Look at the source (click "edit") and search for your desired inclusion. It may be that he never used them in a way that could be fluidly incorporated.  04:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Fluidly incorporated"? Sounds dirty to me, but then so does "carpet sweeper" so I've probably just got a pronographic mind. 18:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)