Conservapedia:What is going on at CP?/August 2007

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
← Previous archive Next archive →

August what was going on? (2 of 2)[edit]

  • Yet another victim of the "Look it up in a dictionary! ...now, someone's going to say I did look it up, and it's wrong." self-pwn: "I doubt Britannica has a 'balanced' view of astrology." - Too bad that somebody actually bothered to check Britannica's entry...
  • Oh noes! The SCOTUS is being led by a zombie!
  • A grammAr corrector is sorely needed here. (Hint, it's not Tash but Hedda Hopper!)
  • Sysop Joaquín Martínez links several random people in the "see also" section of Laura Ingraham, persumably because, like Laura, they are also carbon-based life forms.
  • Perhaps TK considers "faggot" an obscure word geared towards the intellectual?
  • Either a cheap (but subtle) shot to make the activists look bad, or Ed accidentally parroting propaganda: Anybody with a phobia (irrational fear of something) is being irrational. I guess this over-generalization also means that everybody who ever acted in an irrational way is being irrational, too.
  • Just got blocked for calling a sysop's action sophomoric after this was posted on my user page in response to asking Jallen about what functions a person needs to use on my user page "Oh, just shut up. You added the code to obscure the buttons just to get a reaction. You were a nasty little snot to Jallen and you got a reaction, so stop your sniveling. Godspeed! --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ" Funny thing is, I did that back in June. Awh and then the whitewash from Ed!
  • Ed berates a user for working on his user page instead of doing the homework that Ed assigned. Next stop: principal's office? Ed and his "writing plans"... (What he wanted me to explain was basicly the meaning of and all biological processes of life)...
  • Admittedly the editor is question is probably a troll, but Ed's logic is interesting: Ed asks a editor about examples of his accusations (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page), but blocks him (90:10) so he can't actually respond.
  • Spend time on talk pages? Banned. Spend time editing articles? Banned. Uncle Ed catches the excellently-named 'Ilovejesusmore' in a sticky position.
  • RobS, friend of the homosexualists, continues (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) his gay rights campaign against the liberal oppressors (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page).
  • New user Ursus has NO IDEA of the shitstorm he is opening up with this edit.
  • Andy's lecture on World History dismisses genocide in the former Yugoslavia, blaming the "Anti-Christian" media. (Note: this link is to a talk page comment pointing this fact out, but is easier to highlight. The actual mention is in the article's section F: Eastern Europe, near the end.)
  • Fancy: CP finally admits that some articles will never be unlocked. But the selection of articles is a bit weird. Conservative's locked pet projects (ToE, YEC) are not (yet?) on it, but Hillary Clinton and Ann Coulter are. Let's keep an idle eye on this one to see where it's going. (Also compare with the officially approved list of protected pages, sorted by duration)
    • Also, Andy changes the status of the abortion article from "permanently protected" to just protected, saying "we are not like Wikipedia". Huh? It's still protected. It doesn't have a banner at the top saying so, but it's still protected. In fact, the WP page is only "semi-protected". (-> Yeah, but "having banners" is a Wikipedia thing; see #12 here :P)
  • In response to the below, TK goes batshit crazy, yelling at Ken. Good times. Update: Perhaps mindful of Andy's "11th Commandment," TK brushes on a fresh coat of whitewash in the "interests of team efforts."
  • Jesus tap dancing Christ in a chicken basket! Ken reverts an edit by Ed, calling him a vandal! If you think that's hilarious, wait 'til you see the fallout, including threats by TK, and attempts at moderation by Dan!
  • A user's page is his castle... only if it doesn't piss off TK.
  • Does this mean that Conservapedia has implicitly called for the resignation of every Democrat? Update: RobS: new champion of the oppressed homosexual.
  • I guess Rationalwiki is a terrorist organisation (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page)?
  • Totally worth the ban. Even worth the imminent visit by the FBI, come to think of it. Update: WTF?
  • You can't slip a CP-questioning reference past RobS.
  • Ed Poor, lover of metaphors.
  • RobS in another brilliant move adds an article from a British tabloid about stab proof clothes.
  • According to Ed, if you don't give an example backing up everything you say, you are automatically wrong (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page). I guess everything Andy, Rob, and so many others have ever said is demonstrably untrue (this will come as little surprise to many of us).
  • Uh-uh, banhammerer is asleep at the switch. Update: nearly 100 page blankings later, Andy realizes his toadies are nowhere to be seen, and takes up the hammer of the gods himself. What does the user who reverted all the blankings get for his efforts? A place on the chopping block. (But only after the sysops once again give him shit for running user scripts...)
  • TK says that proclaiming you're a conservative (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) makes you a liberal. Does this mean that every trusted sysop really is liberal? Does that make Hoji really a conservative?
  • Andy basically admits he can't find gossip in teh Wikipedia's Bertrand Russell article, insisting a sceptic back up his claim for him. Then refuses to debate the issue until the other party admits Andy is right, this removing any reason for further debate.
  • Seems Jallen has issue with color!
  • Too bad Firefox doesn't have a built-in grammar check along with its spell check, then Andy could seem really smart!
  • Apparently it's Conservapedia's job to decide that the play Romeo and Juliet is inappropriate to even discuss on their site. It's got naughty bits!
  • As matters come to blows over at cp:Talk:Atheism, ever-diligent Ed Poor applies a fresh coat of whitewash. He was just saying what we're all thinking, Ed! And as a bonus, Ed gives us a lovely example of Conservative deceit, how thoughtful.
  • "In a collaborative project such as this, one person cannot monopolize a page." (DanH, August 29th) - Hey, his realization may be roughly half a year too late, but it's the thought that counts. Let's hope that he and TK push through and allow some real collaboration (or at least as real as one can get with tons of people with good potential being banned)! Dear God, I'm actually cheering TK on. What are the odds?.
  • Odd. The alliance between Ed and TK appeared to be one of the few constants in the CP universe. But what is this (last three posts in that section) then? Or, assuming that TK is honest about just being the messenger, what does this say about Ed's spot by Andy's side?
  • This one's a couple of weeks old, but I didn't notice at the time. Arch conspiracy nutjob theorist RobS declares that The Guardian was founded by KGB operatives. Goodness knows what he claims as sources for that choice bit of paranoia.
  • Ed Poor has been reduced to writing total nonsense articles! It seems that the drive to increase the total article count has taken its toll on what's left of his brain. His article about camp doesn't refer to the camps you may have gone to as a child. It stands for "cyclic adenosine mono phosphate". The two sentences of the article were just randomly lifted, with no context or explanation, from another web page. The "battery" being referred to in the original article arises from the explanation of biochemistry being given in terms of charging and discharging batteries. It's actually a very instructive, engaging, and well-written article. But not so well-written that you can just lift two sentences out and call it Conservapedia. Or can you?
  • Praise Bush! Poverty down significantly! Problem: The cited article says that the poverty rate increased (or at least didn't decrease) during all other years of the Bush administration and that the last significant decrease was during Clinton's presidency - AND it had been lower than today's "low" point. Rob's reply: "Media bias." (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) I guess the official US Census press release is also liberally biased: "Meanwhile, the nation’s official poverty rate declined for the first time this decade, from 12.6 percent in 2005 to 12.3 percent in 2006", compared to the 2000 briefing that said "The poverty rate fell for the fourth consecutive year, from 11.8 percent in 1999 to 11.3 percent in 2000, the lowest since 1979 and statistically the same as the lowest poverty rate ever recorded -- 11.1 percent in 1973."
  • *GASP* When somebody says "I do not believe in God", you can't tell whether they're following atheism or agnosticism. That is indeed "a problem" for CP since they now will have a harder time branding tons of people as atheists. (Wanna bet that Evolution will still be an "atheist theory"?) The solution: In biographies and such, you must now state exactly what that person believed in. Just what CP editors needed: More landmines to step onto.
  • From the CP FAQ: "How can I contact you?" - No idea, considering that the page is a redlink. And better not try to look for the official CP users - their page is a redlink, too.
  • A one year block is practically infinite, so it doesn't have to be in the default block options. Five years are perfectly fine, though.
  • The nut who runs Conservapedia believes that Protestants in Northern Ireland are 'English', despite the fact that the vast majority of them actually come from 'Scotland', a migration which happened 400 years ago and thus can no longer be considered 'English' at all (In fact they never were English in the first place) but Ulstermen, or as they prefer to be known, British, or Ulster-Scots Ignorance inside, beware!
  • TK puts it in writing and basically admits that the 90/10 rule is to be used only against people with dissenting views.
  • Poor old Ed (He really is an imbecile) reckons the article on 'strong atheism' is too hard to understand. Awwhhh! [1]
  • Ed suggests that the UN should be run by India and China[2]
  • Editorializing is forbidden at Conservapedia. Wait, what?
  • Totally worth the ban.
  • Wow, there is a new rule specifically for sysops: "No public criticism of other sysops by sysops or argurments are allowed" - I'm not quite sure why this is the 11th Commandment, though. There are only 7 Commandments on CP - does TK have the Director's Cut? (comment: Best of, deserves its own article. H.)
  • I suppose revealing next month's "surprise" article of the month would be akin to selling Harry Potter books before they officially go on sale? The world waits with bated breath for CP's announcement, and Conservative wants to leak it??? (Hint: it's either Homosexuality or Atheism.)
  • Ed Poor finally says something true: CP's writing and research is of a "low level of quality". Who knew? Additionally, the "E[volution] & H[omosexuality]" reference appears to be a direct knock of cp:User:Conservative's talentless, gossip-column style of writing.
  • Only indirectly related to CP: After Johnjoe is banned, Niandra/Jallen is quick to point fingers - obviously, all troubling users are of course our socks. Considering that practically all new members get banned within days, I guess that means that we're the only place on Earth that still cares about CP.
  • Rob concisely sums up every comment he's ever made (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page)! UPDATE:: Robs gets OWNED!!!!!!
  • TerryH finally gets something right. (Update: this one's been deleted with Johnjoe's ban, but it said something to the effect of "according to your logic only athiests are rational")
  • A picture thrust into the public domain is being mocked? Andy should SUE Hell, maybe he should call the FBI.
  • The discussion between TerryH and new user JohnJoe is about as bizzarre as it gets. Terry is offended by an order to stop badgering John because the only orders he takes from persons are those coming from Andy. Another good one was where Terry says that, yes, God stopped the rotation of the Earth for a day. Probably for lulz. (Note: All links died when TK deleted the talk page)
  • RobS (incapable of staying on-topic in any discussion, and unable to make a single post without mentioning Marxism or the UN) does it again, equating the UN with a gang of pedophiles (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page). Strangely, he makes no mention of US troops raping a young girl in Al-Mahmudiyah. Update: Rob hits one out of the park. More update: Rob lost me between "kill all thier domestic poltical opponents" being a definition of practicing realism and the part about keeping peace by sending "pedophiles to commit atrocities".
  • Everybody's favorite rule now has its own (huge and ugly) template: {{9010vio}} (And Jallen added it to her custom buttons, so expect to see it often!)
  • Andy goes off the deep end on a rant against an uncyclopedia sysop. Most Andy cliches are present: mocking a typo, claiming to know more about a subject based on a single encounter with it than someone deeply involved with it, claiming the other party is lying without pointing to any example, a ridiculous simile, and a ban threat. The Schlafly quintuple crown.

August what was going on? (1 of 2)[edit]

  • TK inadvertently calls fellow sysop DanH (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) a liberal (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page). Then tries to backpedal (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page).... TK made a funny
  • Not quite sure how to characterize this but wow. The count of word use is very enlightening!
  • Don't confuse party and ideology! A Republican speaking against Gonzales is a liberal Republican (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) and thus liberal. Likewise, a conservative Democrat is... a liberal.
  • Oldie, but goodie - some gibberish about maps, walking to Boise Idaho and Occam's Razor, but I'm not sure what.
  • One of the important differences between CP and WP: Only WP has many distracting templa-... Uh, nevermind.
  • Open the floodgates, a new quasi-commandment is out: "observations based on personal experience" are now officially okay in regular articles. (Of course, this means only observations and experiences the sysops approve of.)
  • The only reason Alberto Gonzales resigned was because he's looking for a job in the private sector. No other reason, none at all.
  • New user Johnjoe is treading on thin ice (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page). I give him about 2 minutes til banhammer time. Will the excuse be "90:10" or "trolling"?
  • Andy's anti-smoking, and anti-smoking lobby? What? Continued: Andy assures his adherents that even trying a cigarette condemns the smoker to a sure death by lung cancer, no if, buts or maybes, it will happen. (Much as condom use causes multiple STDs and pregnancy)
  • Side note, Tobacco doesn't burn from chain reactions, but rather, inhaling simply encourgages the burn (come on, you can do it.... burn away)
  • TK, in a rare moment of rationality, agrees with the liberals that the bible has no relevance to mathematics.[3]
  • Andy joins RobS in the stupid corner. He attacks something that a user never said, and then goes on to make exactly the same point the user made.[4]
  • Reporting rumors on CP violates a Commandment, as does reporting gossip. But reporting rumors about gossip is a-ok.
  • It's official: Rob is an effing idiot. And his father has a small penis.
  • User names containing words like "Unbiased" are inappropriate. So sayeth TK!
  • This is an older one, but it illustrates RobS's batshit craziness. Did you know that the logical outcome of the Enlightenment was the Holocaust? (Note that with three spelling mistakes in a single sentence, this post wins this week's Andy Schlafly Homeschool Spelling Award.)
  • Is Castro dead? No one knows for sure, but CP, apparently having no policy against gossip, reports on it.
  • Karajou's 16kb contribution to the George Washington article is hardly concise. Links to the various pages he copied from might have been more helpful. (At least he, unlike certain other sysops, just copied from .gov sources.)
  • Plagiarism on CP! By TK! Oh noes! What now? Fortunately, TK is experienced when it comes to plagiarism accusations, so he swiftly bans the accusing member, reverts the talk page entry, adds a misleading reference, and changes a few words to hide his plagiarism (you'll have to check manually, the inserted newline confuses the wiki software).
  • A wave of vandalism is combated...by two normal users. A sysop arrived at one point, but failed to do anything about the vandal.
  • TK, the Martin Bormann of Conservapedia? He knows what the Leader thinks better than the Leader does.
  • According to Rob, the "...For Dummies" series of books are "commie propaganda". Also, he appears to have the inside track on what's going on in hell. Apparently, Kim Il-Sung spends most of his days watching pornographic videos, doesn't sound too bad to me.
  • Another new rule made up on the spot: Karajou deleted The Used because it was "advertizing" an anti-conservative band. Is he aware of articles on Crass, Anti-Flag and the Sex Pistols, for instance?
  • Considering accusations of "hate speech" is what Andy considers "Liberal style", CP must be one of the most "liberal" websites out there. Examples of hate speech by liberals include: Quote: "Rush Limbaugh", and "Alberto Gonzales". Gasp! How can anyone say such vile things?
  • I'm seriously no fan of vandalism (mostly because CP is very good at making itself look silly, anyway), but this edit cracked me up. And it's actually better than this version, which had only been edited by sysops. See what I mean about CP making itself look silly?
  • Based on this discussion (going on all the way to the bottom of the page), I propose a Talk Page Law: "A discussion shall be classified as epic if it has to be split into multiple parts and if images have to be added to keep the casual reader's attention."
  • A NYT computer was the origin of a vandal edit "most vile hate speech" on WP! And how long did this horrible "smear" last? Uh... not even a minute. Nevertheless, about 20% of the NYT article at CP is now devoted to 30 seconds of anonymous vandalism on Wikipedia.
  • Noted geophysicist Andy Schlafly cites fluctuations in the Earth's magnetic field as evidence for a recent creation. He also cites an Answers in Genesis graph with some rather peculiar magnetic history, including a maximum around the time of Jesus. Why? Who cares! AiG is all the proof you need... unless you're a lib'rul.
  • It turns out Ed must be a liberal, as he is practicing deceit; his smarmy "All in a day's work" braglist includes articles written over four days (just check the edit histories). And still most of the articles are pretty damn poor.
  • Okay, we pick a lot on him, but sometimes, you seriously got to give credit where credit is due: Conservative is awesome.
  • Andy has practiced more criminal law than other attorneys. Which makes one wonder how our prisons could be overpopulated, unless Andy works for the defense.
  • The term "divided government" is possibly a foreign conception in TK's world. Fun fact: That paragraph, which "[c]ertainly has no place in this article", was written by Andy... (To be fair: The term was first inserted by another editor; Andy just expanded the initial note significantly)
  • Apparently there is significance in whether or not a wiki has a particular article and what it is titled.[5] In related news, WP has an article about Honesty but CP does not. [6] (Update: cp:Honesty has finally been created and actually has more than ten words!)
  • RobS shows more of his conspiracy theorist side - apparently, subversive infiltrators make obscene edits that no conservative ever would[7]. Me? I call them "interns" and "drunk people" or maybe even "drunk interns".
  • Apparently conservatives consider it normal to be angry when liberals are articulate.[8]
  • TK, CP's resident Dirty Harry.[9]
  • Unlike them liberals, Senator Warner is against withdrawal, and wants more troops in Iraq, eh? Or perhaps not?
  • Amazingly, a message about the FBI incident (though more about the computer issues) produces a response. Note:Link removed. Reason: 16:43, 24 August 2007 TK deleted "Talk:Federal Bureau of Investigation"
  • Golf balls are rolling around inside TK's brain again as he puts yet another sentence through the The Randomizer of Meaning.
  • RobS(mith) must be using Schlafly Statistics for this warning.
  • A change in the counting method again? While the main page claims that there are "about 16,500" entries, AncientPages (the standard used earlier) only lists 16,284 articles, and the Stats page (the standard that would be somewhat honest) only lists about 15,941 articles (all stats checked August 23, 20:12 CP server time, just after the creation of cp:Seattle SuperSonics).
  • Why is Conservapedia better than other forums for examining the Supreme Court? Because only Conservapedia has a bunch of crap made up by Andy. And of course, article titles like "Buckhannon Bd. and Home Care, Inc. v. West Va. Dep't of Health and Human Res." highlight why wikis are the perfect tool to cover the Supreme Court... or maybe not.
  • Actually, it seems as though Sid was asking a reasonable question. I mean, nobody besides Rationalwiki regulars (and people whose last name is "Schlafly," I suppose) care about this guy, right? Apparently the son of Phyllis Schlafly is more encyclopedic than the daughter of Dick Cheney.
  • In an effort to warn people to not mention the FBI, User is banned by RobS for "mentioning FBI".
  • Thanks to CP for pointing this one out: Global warming clearly isn't occurring because the Georgia legislature says it's not. Obviously southern politicians know more about the climate than than 2,000 scientists.
  • A blog by Andrew Schlafly thinks Phyllis Schlafly's got the right idea! What a shocker!
  • Ed takes three months and two days to think up this joke.
  • All living scientists must die off so that finally the right-thinking people can get their way [10].
  • Talk about efficiency! While others need dozens of edits to get anything done, RobS only needs three edits to completely whitewash the Mark Foley article. No more mention of sexually explicit mails to underage boys - there was just "communications with the pages" and allegedly "suggestive emails".
  • Ken decides to disregard the "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." warning by using his 'superior intellectual capacity' to lock the Atheism article and prevent other editors correcting his edits.
  • Hey, kids! It's "TK makes up a new, completely random rule" time! Tonight, we have a new policy against ping-pong conversations!
  • Okay, some people are pretty much asking for it: After six atheism discussion edits, Darknova42 uses his/her first mainspace edit to remove material added by Conservative, apparently not knowing that doing so results with immediate ban-hammering - Nice case of "Do as I say, not as I do" Of course Darknova42 didn't make a good first impression at CP anyway
  • "What is going on?" indeed: Ray Martinez posts ominous links to his user talk page on sysop talk pages (Rob, Admin, Andy, BenjaminS, BethanyS, Bohdan, Tim, Sarah, Karajou). But what is there? Quotes outing TK as a "double agent" and "closet evolutionist", apparently. TK promptly blocks him for "insults and defamation", and Jallen and TK both delete both his user and talk pages. Update: TK apparently takes it with humor.
  • The fact that the vile sex act is something you "submit" to in Conservapedialand is hardly surprising
  • Andy criticizes a Wikipedia lawyer for editing his own article. Andy, of course, would never dream of editing his own article, would he? Oh, and of course, people like Reverend Stephen Black don't have to follow this rule, either. They even get a nice sysop welcome
  • Ed Poor decides that The National Academies of the United States must be part of the US Government (despite evidence to the contrary) because liberals cite them. (RobS is getting some competition as non-sequitur king.) Related in many ways: No, Ed. That's not an "unsourced quote from liberal Wikipedia article" - it's part of what TK copy-pasted from the copyrighted page linked at the bottom. Update: Ed blames Porthos for inserting the liberal bias. Considering that this is Porthos' only edit to the NAS article, that's quite a feat.
  • RobS slyly intimates that a trip to Mecca is a trip to the slave market.
  • Andy adds material that got a previous user reverted and banned as a "liberal parodist".
  • Iduan is in for the smackdown of his life: He removes "vandalism"... which was added by Ed Poor. Update: TK puts it back in [11] and blocks him- but only for a week? Why the softly-softly, TK?
  • Porthos notifies TK about a copyright violation committed by TK - what will happen? (1) Porthos will be banned, (2) TK will tweak one or two words in the article, (3) TK will claim that copying is okay, (4) all of the above and then some. Current count: (1) (warning), (1) (1 day, officially not for this, though), (3) (sorta) Update: Block extended by 3 days.
  • Thomas Paine? Garbage!
  • Why did TK delete "Human" as a redirect to "Homo sapiens" (a more obvious and neutral redirect would be hard to imagine)? Easy, TK knows that "People will not search for Human". Duh. And for those who are confused by the "more than meets the eye" part: That's not TK being a Transformers fan, but him trying to deny the forum members any sort of satisfaction. He's a bit touchy on the subject. [12]
  • It seems that conservative schools have serious criminal problems too
  • Has RobS ever said anything remotely intelligent in his life? [13] And Andy says non-sequiturs are liberal style? It's embarrassing that people this moronic even exist.
  • Not a surprising news: Editor (I) banned by TK for just adding well cited statistics favourable to atheists while not breaking any commandment. Reason for ban "Studies actually show atheists have no life."
  • Drug tests are pretty much the same thing as math tests (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page), because they're both, you know, tests.
  • RobS thinks that gay journalists who criticise dead presidents who were infamous for ignoring an epidemic that was killing thousands of Americans are engaging in "liberal hate speech against persons with disabilities."
  • Good blood goes sour so fast. After getting angry at a dismissive, "well, we don't care if we're wrong" reply from TK, another contributor bites the dust. On second look, TK might think he's a RationalWiki member.
  • RobS excuses Rush Limbaugh's illegal use of OxyContin by saying 'it was the doctors fault' [14]. If the same argument was put forward for a liberal, they'd be banhammered.
  • In what may be a new record in instant bans, a user points out that CP Main page linked public opinion stats include some pretty devastating numbers for conservatives Six minutes later, TK paraphrasing Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men, screams "We Can't handle The Truth!" (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page) and, one minute after that, the user is banned as a "Moronic Troll" [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AKenFrum. What a hard bastard TK is!
  • Once again, Andy attempts to make a point regarding morality and public schools[15]. Gee, I seem to remember big posters all over my school's weight room talking about how steroids cause more problems than they solve...
  • One wonders how long this piece of Front Page pwnage can possibly last? Update: Only 3 hours, sadly [16].
  • Ed Poor, in a stunning burst of projection, compares liberals to the Party in Orwell's 1984.[17]
  • Server lockdown for people without the all-important "edit" powers continues through noon EST on 19 August 2007. More proof still that Conservapedia has become TK's private blog.
  • Classic example of what happens when Andy leaves important decisions to TK instead of discussing with whatever passes as community on CP: How hard is it to follow the new rule in the TK Manual of Style? Fairly hard, according to Andy and Ed Poor. Not that there is anything close to consensus about this...
  • Apparently conservatives can only read headlines. The article from the Melbourne (Australia) Herald-Sun that they promote on the CP Breaking-News section of the mainpage [18] with the comment "God's vote is counted, say Christians" says something rather at odds to their idea of U.S. politics and religion. Quote: "The recent history of church engagement with politics in the US is definitely not a model to be imported here."[19]
  • RobS holds love in his heart for someone after all [20]
  • Andy decides that crimes are of lesser importance if no-one complains about them.[21]
  • Yet another educational entry: "List of liberal Wikipedians" - quoting the inclusion guidelines, "one must demonstrate an obvious liberal bias in his posts." Congratulations, by Conservapedia's standards, this will include roughly 95% of Wikipedia. The first inclusion demonstrates this: A "conservative Democrat" is actually a liberal - sure could've fooled me... (Update: Several sysops also go "...wha?" at this article.)
  • CP's position on Copyright is quite amusing. Here we have TK accusing EQ of deceit for pointing out CPs failure to comply with copyright provisions--a failure that TK acknowledges exists. Then further down TK is quite happy with copyright violations--a crime--not being resolved speedily, and Andy's comment basically saying that a crime is only a crime if someone complains about it. Talk about hypocrites.
  • TK considers the truth almost deceitful.[22]
  • Andy considers the contest such a success, all homework for his classes will be done the same way.
  • According to Andy, there are plenty of advantages to his "homeschooled" class. These include not being exposed to guns, drugs, or alternative opinions. Disadvantages may include... not learning?
  • As well as being a hardcore fan of The Clash, Andy clearly traded in the mohawk and Dr Martens for the crimpers and black nail varnish with this description of Goth. No mention of snakebite and black, The Sisters of Mercy or The Batcave, just satanism and anti-religion. Seemingly I've been doing it all wrong these past decades. And my Xtian goth friends are clearly Republican bankers in disguise!
  • In a ridiculous non-sequitur, Andy decides that defending public schooling is the same as endorsing illegal drug use (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page).
  • Andy doesn't understand the difference between an engineer and a doctor. (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page)
  • For over two months a picture of the Reverend Billy Sunday has graced the Homo sapiens article as the pinnacle of the Lord's handiwork.
  • RobS really shouldn't be allowed on teh internets without a set of curb feelers.
  • According to Andy, if you've ever seen someone drunk in your school, you obviously can't possibly be learning anything there. I wonder how Andy defines "drug".
  • Conservative's feeble attempts at humor prove to be pathetic and bizarre, further evidence that conservatives suck at humor. Is it any wonder that "The 1/2 Hour News Hour" is being cancelled?
  • Shamed by RationalWiki's compassionate initiative CP belatedly add link for donations for Peruvian earthquake.
  • Harris and Klebold targeted Americans? No way! I thought the Azerbaijani had gotten to them.
  • Conservative identifies a rather bizarre altar call. Or perhaps he meant 'en masse'.[23]
  • PWNED his own self RobS!
  • Remember kids, if people do stupid things on the Wikipedia, it's because the Wikipedia encourages them to.[24] Good thing Conservapedia is never vandalized. Interesting how CP fails to mention that the article they reference cites numerous examples of vandalism by conservatives.
  • According to TK, you have to prove libelous statements aren't true if you want them removed from articles.
  • TK--understands puns as much as he understands a sense of humour.[25]
  • Incredible! Andy actually writes an unbiased article that, although only one sentence long, is simply the correct information. No doubt it's all downhill from here.... [26]
  • Prediction: Kazumaru's next up for the banhammer [27]. Update: Uh-oh, he is really pushing it closer to the edge (link removed because TK is an idiot and deleted the talk page)...and finally, gone [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AKazumaru.
  • Bans loom for BrianRoberston and Kazumaru as they point out to TerryH that lefties also consider the 'mainstream media' the enemy and use the term 'MSM' [28]