Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive12

This is an archive page, last updated 1 April 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

New system for Best of CP

Everyone who reads this should go check here to see the proposed system for voting for Best of CP and please offer any suggestions. 130.113.218.226 12:58, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I have ported the system over to the main wiki and have set up a sample at User:Tmtoulouse/wigosample feel free to leave comments on that page. tmtoulouse ^oppress 17:31, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Hmm created some errors along the way, but the errors pointed me to a way to fix the negative issue I think. so there we go we are now "live" lets see what break first.... tmtoulouse ^oppress 20:40, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Department of Redundancy Department

Please pick one or the other but both link to the same edit.

• There's way too much trash here to mention.
• Andy, in favor of blocking SSchultz for "gaming the system" gets 3 points for this edit to a "trustworthy" puerile blog "encyclopedia".

Is this normal?

Is anyone else getting massive errors when trying to view this page? Locke ^{Always Watching......} 20:48, 13 November 2007 (EST)

What errors? tmtoulouse ^oppress

Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /home/rationa1/public_html/wiki/extensions/poll.php on line 342

and

Error

You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 's5150 at line 2.

Repeated over, and over, and over, and over. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:01, 13 November 2007 (EST)

What browser are you using? tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:06, 13 November 2007 (EST)

The latest version of Firefox. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:07, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Is anyone else getting these errors? I am not getting them so its going to be a bitch to error check if I can't see them... tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:08, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I'm okay here firefox 2.0.0.9 CЯacke®

Works for me with Mozilla 1.7.13 human 21:10, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Haha, I opened it in internet exploder, tried to make a tiny edit, and the preview and submit buttons don't work! My IE is a couple years old, but still... weird. human 21:14, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Huh, one of the errors is gone now. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:15, 13 November 2007 (EST)

It's a server-side issue that occurs as a result of your name, Pinto's, I believe. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 21:16, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Oh, should I change my name then? It's never had any problems before. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:18, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Ah fucking PHP the ' is special character used to parse strings. Thats the cause of the second error, I will work on a fix. tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:18, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Is it fixed now? tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:22, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, this won't fuck up the server will it? Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:23, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Do I have skills or what! Errrr............no, it was a simple change in the source code for the ratings. tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:24, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Wow, thanks, I don't know what we'd do without you. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 21:25, 13 November 2007 (EST)

The best way to deal with this sort of thing is to run MySQL in "only SQL escapes" mode, which renders the MySQL proprietary escape sequences illegal. Then, any software that breaks as a result, that's software you don't want to run. If the people who wrote the software didn't understand escape sequences in any meaningful way, they sure as hell don't understand security. --Jeeves 23:47, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Eh, it was just an invalid query from a function call in a php file due to a string parsing error. tmtoulouse ^oppress 00:07, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Next

Okay, Human, what version of IE and what do you mean not working? tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:24, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Who cares(?) it's IE! Anybody that uses IE on teh intertubes should expect a BSOD daily, if not all the time. CЯacke®

I agree in general principle, but any error that occurs could point to a much more fundamental problem that I am missing. Its best to hunt them down as best you can.... tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:29, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Okay its time for dinner or something....it looks safe enough to leave this alone for a while, we shall see....post here any errors or problems as they come up. tmtoulouse ^oppress 21:34, 13 November 2007 (EST)

My dreaded IE is 6.29 with sp2, or something. Have to use it sometimes, like to get old documents in pdf from teh Fisher Plow site... forgive me... human 13:55, 14 November 2007 (EST)

PS, the edit I made did load, just IE never reacted at my end, which was weird. human 13:56, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Fletcher/Horace

Well, in fairness to GregLarson, who did the deleting and blocking, it did follow a concerted campaign by me to post this response on Karajou's talk page. I posted it seven times (using usernames based on various famous admirals - I thought Karjou would appreciate that) before giving up and posting the abovementioned rant on Talk:Main Page. --Horace 02:32, 14 November 2007 (EST)

TK Bails?

Say it ain't so, Joe - anyone know what Asshat did to piss him off? Or is this some sort of put-on?PFoster 23:05, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I have been searching contribs but don't see anything more than whinning about the contest. 130.113.218.226 22:58, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Did you see his talk page before it got deleted? The exchange might have happened there and so is now unreachable. - Icewedge 23:03, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Nope, it was gone before I could screencap it...PFoster 23:04, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Well I've gone looked through the user contribs for schlafly and tk and I'm not seeing anything from either of them around the time TK quit. I wonder if it was a private exchange via messages or email. I definately don't see where Andy "publicly and sincerely appologizes" though, fer sure. -Smyth 11:53, 14 November 2007 (EST)

PS Check the change in the way WIGO is handled now to encompass the new polling system, its pretty straight forward. 130.113.218.226 22:59, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I'll do that, Mr Anonymous IP Person. TM..... Sorry, I hadn't realised there was a procedure...PFoster 23:00, 13 November 2007 (EST)

If TK quits, I might have to quit RationalWiki.... because it'll prove that there is a God.-αmεσ (spy) 23:01, 13 November 2007 (EST)

No problem, I know it was sort of a sudden shift....I am on my lab computer and being lazy. tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:03, 13 November 2007 (EST)

He'll be back --Uncle J 00:09, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I think Uncle J is right. Usually it takes murder to break up a dysfunctional family. This here's just a spat. CЯacke® 00:12, 14 November 2007 (EST)

You can say that again. --_transResident Transfan^form! 00:13, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I think we all knew he'd be back. I actually expeted him to hold out at least a little longer, though. I guess he's less ballsy than I thought. There goes his credibility. I think his departure score for "best of" is inflated. I refrained from voting til I saw how long it lasted, and now that I know it wasn't any longer than a coffee break I gave it a thumbs down. We might want to reassess how worthy it is. DickTurpis 10:07, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I voted for it only because it shows TK's lack of staying power and weak convictions which are rampant over on CP. Jrssr5 10:28, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I agree with turpentine, it's not BO material. So TK snits, packs up, comes back. Fine. How long will the deletion log be a good link to see what the story is about? human 14:03, 14 November 2007 (EST)

The Mob wills as the mob wills.........130.113.218.226 14:31, 14 November 2007 (EST)

The trouble is, a lot of the voting was between him quitting and him coming back. I agree, if the mob wants it in BO, fine. But some might want to reconsider their votes now that the teapot has cooled off and all is the same as before (See Lion in Winter) human 14:34, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Aye and the system can absorb that.........there will be a lot of interesting analysis available after a week or so to see how to tweak the voting as well. tmtoulouse ^oppress 14:39, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Yeah, my votes should be worth ten! IPs can't vote, right? Can't remember if I tested that... human 14:45, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Voting is done by IP not user name, so any one IP can only vote once whether logged in or not......if we really want I can force a log in I think......but do we really need to? tmtoulouse ^oppress 14:50, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Ah, ok, that probably works fine. That means one cannot reverse one's vote though, right? human 15:29, 14 November 2007 (EST)

If the same IP votes the same way the vote is ignored, if the the same IP that has an existing vote then votes the other way then one vote is subtracted from the old vote and one vote added to the new vote....so yes reversal is possible. tmtoulouse ^oppress 15:32, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Excellent! Now, about those thumbs... I was thinking maybe a green up arrow and a red down arrow?

arrows

The thumbs are just links to and change those images and the thumbs change to whatever ya want....just overwrite once people find what they want. tmtoulouse ^oppress 16:02, 14 November 2007 (EST)

? VirileSterile^yawn! 18:08, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Nice, but too tall - they should only be "one line of text" high - about 20-25 pixels. human 18:21, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I uploaded 25 x 25 ones using the same image name. Still too big? human 18:28, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I now saved the "thumb" images, and will upload some 15 x 15 simple wedge shaped arrows in their place to see how it looks. Flame away. human 18:41, 14 November 2007 (EST)

<flame>They are large and... bright. I preferred the grey thumbs; they were a bit large, but not so jarring against the black and white background and text. Lurker 21:19, 14 November 2007 (EST)

<megaflame>Not bad, I prefer wedges to thumbs, but I still think those wedges are a little big for my taste. I'd be ok with things as small as ↑↓. 'Course, I'm way too lazy to actually come up with any images, so ultimately whatever's available is cool with me.Addendum:Lurker may have a point though, if we keep the wedges maybe the colors could be dulled? --Bayes^update 21:21, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Ooooooooh tiny arrows. I'm a fan Bayes. They're small, unobtrusive, and they already fit in with the wikiness. Lurker 21:29, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Well, they have to be big enough to click on reasobly easily. But anyway, I'll mute the wedges so they are mellower, and we'll see what we think then? Remember, anyone can play this game, and if my little wedges are overridden, s'ok, I've got them on my hard drive and will use than at morethanrationalwikiyouwantedtoknow.info to pwn you all!!! human 21:38, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Test for clickability: ↑↓ Lurker 21:42, 14 November 2007 (EST)

<- too small to clearly hit - can they be wider? ie, say, 15 x 15 gifs? I'll make them if you want so we can see the results. Check out the darker wedgies first, but I'll try anythin' you suggest. human 21:46, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Guess you lack my mouse skillz. Dunno about making them wider; as they are now they are actually just a font character, so they would have to be imigized. Does anybody know how many pixels high the standard font is? Ideally whatever we pick shouldn't be much larger (if at all) that way it doesn't separate the entries.

I like the darker color, but they seem too big still. Maybe try shrinking them? Unless other people like them this way, I guess. Lurker 21:56, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I'll make some arrows that are more line-like and load them up here for thinksing. human 21:59, 14 November 2007 (EST)

-3 Conservapedia suckzorz again! human 22:06, 14 November 2007 (EST)

-3 Test on two lines

+π Now on three

I like it. Lurker 22:09, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I'll swap them in, then. Still open to other options, of course. human 22:11, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Oooh, that's much better.--Bayes^update 22:17, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Is it me, or are they bigger on the article page? Something to do with the template? Lurker 22:20, 14 November 2007 (EST)

<--- I think I see what you mean; that perception might be due to the amount of white space in between entries. It might be nice to reduce that, as long as the arrows don't jumble together.--Bayes^update 22:31, 14 November 2007 (EST)

You are right; optical illusion. How did that white space get there anyway? Up until now I just thought the images were too big. Lurker 22:51, 14 November 2007 (EST)

The template is basically a ton of HTML tables. It might have something to do with how those tables are displayed, or something to do with the <poll> tags. I'm not much good with HTML or CSS though.--Bayes^update 23:04, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Take a look at the last 4 entries...is that better then what we have currently? tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:09, 14 November 2007 (EST)

IMO, that is much better. Very nice tmt.--Bayes^update 23:16, 14 November 2007 (EST)

All right I will regenerate the template. With the changes. tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:17, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Now your only job is to make Bohdan happy by making it wandalism-friendly.--Bayes^update 23:18, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Yes much better! Thanks TMNT! (Turtle power) Lurker 23:19, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Well thank you guys for the help with aesthetics, as that's not my strong suit. With the text closer the "stepping" created when an entry has a vote above or below one that does not is more obvious, should the "tally" be positioned elsewhere? I might be able to get it to appear above or below the arrows. tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:26, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I see what you mean. Is it possible to add a default value of 0? That would solve the problem, but I'm not sure how <poll> works. Also, I noticed on polls with negative numbers which are more than one line long the "-" gets separated from the score and put on a separate line. Just in case you don't have enough to do tonight :) Lurker 23:34, 14 November 2007 (EST)

my where's waldo skills are not working to night could you tell me the begining text of an example with the negative problem? tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:38, 14 November 2007 (EST)

One example is about the 9th one down ("Its official, making useless edits is not a blocking offence"). It takes up more than one line, and the score is -2. CTRL+F-ing for "-" will bring one up as well if my instructioning is as good as your where's waldo skillz. Lurker 00:56, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Hmm, I do not have that problem, but maybe if I bump up the white space after the results it will fix it. I will try. tmtoulouse ^oppress 15:19, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Sorry to trouble you even more Trent but at this time the WIGO pages consists solely of "Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 33554432 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 432953 bytes) in /home/rationa1/public_html/wiki/includes/Parser.php on line 313". 216.67.71.169 23:52, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm anyone else getting this error? tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:54, 14 November 2007 (EST)

Whatever it was its fixed itself and is gone now. 216.67.71.169 23:56, 14 November 2007 (EST)

If it happens again I will look into it, I have a feeling it has to do with the number of tables in the WIGO template, as soon as we iron out the details for how to transfer to Best of I will probably decrease the number of tables. Human suggests that we do it once a week, so we would only need a 150-200 tables max not 500.........I suppose I should get started on writing the automation scripts......tomorrow maybe. 23:58, 14 November 2007 (EST)

I am getting the error. Bohdan 00:56, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Well, yeah, but Trent programmed a special version just for you so you can never read it... human 01:32, 15 November 2007 (EST)

I wouldn't put it past that lunatic. (I am actually kidding. I get no error message, I just wanted to create more work for him. But lets keep that our secrect.) Bohdan 01:35, 15 November 2007 (EST)

How's this new system work?

I posted an item and it automatically started with a -2 rating.-Shangrala 21:04, 14 November 2007 (EST)

It must have sucked worse than my brightly colored arrows for that to happen! human 21:39, 14 November 2007 (EST)

This is just the voting part...the discussion as to what the cut off is to have items posted (and forgotten) onto BoCP is, hasn't started yet. We haven't even decided what shape the table ought to be! (People over 45 years old will maybe recognize that one). CЯacke® 14:13, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Geo.plrd

Based on his post highlighted in WIGO, does he honestly believe that you should never have sex or did he totally CP his comment and have it come out wrong? Jrssr5 10:54, 15 November 2007 (EST)

They are also ignorant of other means of transmission. If it has anything to do with sex, they are agin' it. human 12:14, 15 November 2007 (EST)

There are two stupid ideologies here combining in to one super stupid ideology. First, the mean old government forcing you to get your kids vaccinated. You know, because only you matter. Rugged individualism, and society can go hang and all that. Then there's the "vaccinating against sexually transmitted diseases makes kids go have sex" ideology. Yep, because that mandatory TB vaccination makes kids go and kiss people with TB, doesn't it? God help them if they ever make the rabies vaccine safe enough to administer to everyone, people'll be getting bitten by raccoons left, right and centre.

The best part ever is when Phyllis Schalafly bitches on her radio show one week about vaccinations and the next week about Mexicans with drug resistant TB. You've got to figure she's either severely brain damaged, or just really really hates Mexicans. --Jeeves 12:23, 15 November 2007 (EST)

I vote for C, "all of the above", and add in answer D, "She's Just Fucking Stupid", and vote for that also. I Eat Glue 12:57, 15 November 2007 (EST)

You guys are confusing your disagreement with their viewpoint and their ignorance of the subject. Believe it or not, there are people who believe in individual choice, and they aren't hurting anyone but themselves so why should you care anyway? If only conservatives don't get the vaccine what difference is it to you? Lurker 15:13, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Several issues, 1) denial of major preventative care to children is not a "right" of the parent and 2) herd immunity dictates that vaccines use must be wide spread in the population. tmtoulouse ^oppress 15:15, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Well, we haven't had to immunize against smallpox for decades, since everyone got immunized and we basically wiped it out. human 15:16, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Not according to Andy. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 23:16, 15 November 2007 (EST)

I'm certain User:PalMD will be happy to explain, at length, what difference it makes when he gets here. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 15:21, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Hydrogen Cars

(moved entire conversation to Talk:Hydrogen_economy) human 18:19, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Pride

Please forgive me, I know this sounds prideful (one of the deadly sins I hear) but please don't just delete someone else's work because you don't agree with it.... If you have a problem, simply ettiquite(sp?) would suggest move it to the talk page and make your argument there.... On top of that, when the deletion is made via IP address with no other contributions (74.86.179.138) I start to wonder why..... SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 16:59, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Does this surprise you in the least?

20:57, 15 November 2007 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) blocked "GayandProud (contribs)" with an expiry time of 5 years (use your real name)

I mean, CP has always hated gay people. It would not surprise me. Elassint Throw things at me 21:03, 15 November 2007 (EST)

I for one don't think they hate gay people as much as they just hate everything about them. PFoster 21:11, 15 November 2007 (EST)

I for one feel the block is justified because gay people are bad just because they are different. A Conservative 21:13, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Imaginary numbers

What is the item about imaginary numbers on this list for? It may be a really bad stub it it seems factual enough. - Icewedge 23:58, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, it's been a very long time since I studied any maths, but I can't see any issue with this article. Bondurant 02:28, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I don't know terminology in America, but I too find the CP article wrong. Complex number = a + ib; a: real part, b: imaginary part; for me every complex number where a is zero is an imaginary number. It's like saying "real number: 1 (one) is the one and only real number". I'd call 'i' the "imaginary unit" or something like that. Editor at CP 02:54, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Thinking about it on the way into work, the primary thing wrong with the Imaginary Numbers article is that it is missing a "Criticism of Imaginary Numbers" section, where it discusses the conservative viewpoint of a number that is vital to liberal sciences such as quantum theory and relativity, and a "Young Earth Creationist Viewpoint" section, where imaginary numbers are dismissed because they aren't mentioned in Genesis. Bondurant 04:21, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Guys, guys, guys. Yes the article is bad. BUT HAVE YOU SEEN THE PREVIOUS DIFF?? No prizes for guessing who did writed it. Matt 06:11, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Well, "non-existent" is arguably correct; but it applies just the same to 1, 2, 3,... In fact, all numbers, be they complex, imaginary, real, rational, integer, natural or whatever, are just abstract concepts. But I'm afraid that what Aschlafly was really saying is "I don't like/understand imaginary numbers, thus they must be a liberal hoax." The word "true" in CP's first commandment obviously refers to Truthiness. --Hobey 06:33, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Numbers are used by those evil evolutionist scientistists. Have you ever seen evolution in action? Have you ever seen beneficial mutations? Were you there millions of years ago? Have you ever touched a number? Editor at CP 06:40, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Factual enough? That thing is about as wrong as it gets:

• As "Editor at CP" pointed out correctly, there is no unique "imaginary number". Every nonzero complex number with zero real part is an imaginary number, thus there are infinitely many. What the author of the article might be trying to describe is the "imaginary unit".
• But even assuming that this was supposed to be the subject of the article, it is still wrong. In fact, there are two "non-real square root[s] of negative one" (and no real ones anyway!) in the complex field. The "definition" given in the article is really an abuse of notation which easily leads to all sorts of contradictions (an example is shown at Wikipedia).

No need to point out the irony of this crap in light of EoBiW point 68; which is already utterly ironic in itself, not least because the linked article Elementary proof is crap as well (see also Aschlafly's expert comment on its talk page - without reference to a given mathematical framework, his request makes just as much sense as a request to prove that 1 exists and is unique). I'll stop here, but you could easily fill a book with all the mathematical nonsense at CP. But I assume that's just the definition of "conservative mathematics". Apparently, even logic has a strong liberal bias. But we knew that already... --Hobey 05:31, 16 November 2007 (EST)

That is brilliant. Andy, expert of everything would like to see a "proof" that i exists. How long until he wants to see a proof that 0 exists? After all, there was no year 0.

I'd like to see a proof that he is in posession of all of his marbles. Like i, I suspect that his sanity is imaginary. Bondurant 07:57, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I put up the issue about the number i. There are a few issues with it:

• i is not defined as sqrt(-1). It is defined as i^2 = -1. This is the proper notation.
• i is not "non-real". It's complex. There's a subtle difference- namely "non-real" is extremely broad whereas "complex" is specific.
• Imaginary numbers in general are of the form z = a + bi. As pointed out, this article is describing the imaginary unit.

If an eighth grader gave me the Conservapedia definition of an imaginary number, then yes, I guess I could say "well sort of, but not really." But in this case, where they assume this is the correct, mathematically rigourous definition, they're dead wrong. This isn't an obviously wrong article, but it highlights that people on Conservapedia have no fucking idea what they're talking about. /mathematician rant.-Shangrala 12:44, 16 November 2007 (EST)

All this is even funnier when you remember that Rashfly has a M or Ph in math! We got into a major battle way back when over the whole "two square roots" thing, at the square root article. You'd think maths at CP would kick ass, with him on board. human 13:09, 16 November 2007 (EST)

That's an informative rant, but... for whatever reason, we've always learned that complex numbers are the ones in form z = a + bi. What gives? It it just a discrepency in the terminology? Or are complex and imaginary numbers less different then I thought? Uchiha 13:25, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Well there's a slight discrepancy. "Imaginary" is supposed to mean purely imaginary, like the number 4i, and "complex" means z = a + bi, though in common usage "imaginary" and "complex" are sometimes interchanged. From a formal perspective:

• i = imaginary unit
• ni = imaginary number, for some real number n
• a + bi = complex number, for some real a and b-Shangrala

Also: RSchlafly has in fact objected to some of the CP math, namely their article on Elementary Proof (which, from what I gather, is a little-used term today snatched up by Andy and consistently applied out of context). But what makes you think Andy even to listen to his own brother, anyway? Uchiha 13:30, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Women: sinners and inferior

Women dare study at Brown University. [[1]] Editor at CP 06:37, 16 November 2007 (EST)

...there are no words. --Kels 07:23, 16 November 2007 (EST)

What a fidiot. There are more women applying everywhere nationwide. VirileSterile^yawn! 08:07, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Andrew Schlafly's mind status: OPEN

Seems "keep an open mind" is his new way of saying "shut up and accept my word as the truth." [2] [3]

Aschlafly...is complaining that...OTHER people have closed minds...? *head asplodes* --SockOfGulik 14:29, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Actually, that's a very clever way of removing himself from criticism, you see, Those with strong Persecution Complexes (Like our little Andy-Baby) think that they are actually viewing things with an open mind, whereas the rest of the world is close minded. By telling someone they need to open their mind, he's not only dismissing them in a way which reaffirms his view, but he's signalling to others that this person is not on his side.... It's quite good if you really look at it.... I would love to see a Pysch profile done on him.... SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 15:06, 16 November 2007 (EST)

And instead of , "Hmm, good point soon-to-be-blocked-editor!" He trots out (one of) his old standbys: "Learn to spell." Which actually means, "No matter how good you argument is, I don't have to pay attention to the points since you can't spell!" 15:22, 16 November 2007 (EST) CЯacke®

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Projection isn't just for movie theaters. --Gulik 19:18, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Exactly.... Which is even better considering there are several documented mistakes in his own writing... There's a debate term for avoiding the argument and trying to win by making your opponent feel inferior from some minor triat.... But I'd have to look it up. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 16:37, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Chuck, Andy might make spelling mistakes, but that doesn't matter because you spelled trait wrong.--Offeep 20:37, 16 November 2007 (EST)

His mind may be open, but there's a big "No Gurlz or Librulz" sign hanging over the door. --Gulik 19:18, 16 November 2007 (EST)

The Assfly is right to think an open mind is a prerequisit for accepting that the increase or accumulation of land by natural causes, as out of a lake or river. is a legal concept. My narrow mind tells me it more likely to be a geological concept. It was probably caused by one of the many cut and paste competitions collective thrusts for quantity. Quality doesn't seem to an issue. Of course pointing out mistakes or criticism simply activates the Conservaborg hive mind-set 'we never get things wrong/make mistakes' and the KingConservaborg starts his resistance is futile routine. His faithful drone TK soon sorts out anyone who disagrees too strongly. Be assimilated or be exterminated, that's how things work in the Conservaborg cube. Auld Nick 16:04, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Actually, there are certain legal aspects to land accretion, regarding ownership and such, so he is right in this case. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 16:13, 17 November 2007 (EST)

There are legal aspects to just about every thing, so what? I was thinking more along the lines of an increase in a beneficiary's share in an estate (as when a co-beneficiary dies or fails to meet some condition or rejects the inheritance). KingConservaborg's definition was essentially useless. Auld Nick 16:28, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I'm not quite sure what you're referring to, but 'land accretion' is definitely (also) a legal term. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 16:32, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Fair enough, but the crappy CP article tells us nothing about the legal implications of the geological process of accretion. The point is the CP article is crap. It is concise to the point of uselessness. Can we at least agree on that? Auld Nick 16:39, 17 November 2007 (EST)

He forgot the sea. Since Cape Cod (eg) is not a stable hunk of rock but a pile of glacial debris (ie, sand), heavy storms (and weather over time in general) move the shoreline - increasing the size of some people's lots (and moving their houses further from the ocean), and decreasing others. What's the opposite, decretion? human 16:44, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Erosion, I'd guess? --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 17:15, 17 November 2007 (EST)

"Accretion": exactly the kind of term I had in mind when I started Debate:who consults Conservapedia? Editor at CP 17:23, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Yah, I know it's called erosion, but is that the legal term of art? human 17:51, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Can't say for certain, butI would assume so. However, one thing that Andy does neglect to mention is that both that and accretion only refers to a gradual and at least somewhat predictable in- or decrease in land. On the other hand, if it happens in a violent and/or unexpected way, e.g. if a heavy storm tears off a big chunk of shore and drops it off further down the coast, the correct term is actually avulsion, which is quite distinct from both accretion and... erosion or whatever we call it. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 18:10, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Midterm Exam Results

Anybody spot this? Andy's homeskoolerz are so smart! Only 75% of'em got at least 6 answers wrong. But with tricky questions like these, who can blame them? Uchiha 13:32, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I love number 18:

"18. All of the following reasons explain why the media is so liberal EXCEPT:

(a) most American voters are liberal.

(b) distorting the truth sells more newspapers than speaking the truth.

(c) the profession of reporting attracts liberals more than conservatives.

(d) people who buy newspapers and magazines tend to be more liberal.

(e) liberals are less supportive of balanced reporting than conservatives are. "

Mewonders if the correct answer is (a)... VirileSterile^yawn! 13:40, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Wow... we know Andy's not good at math, but "35 questions ... 25% of the homeschooled class scored 30 points or higher." If we take the grading at the conventional 100/90/80/70% cutoffs for A/B/C, only 1/4 of the homskollars got an A or a B+. IOW, 3/4 of the little godtards got a B- or worse. I'd like to see the entire score distro, rather than some cherry-picked statistic. human 13:49, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Oh man, that's seriously weak. I don't know an awful lot about American government, being from for'n parts and all, but I can get most of the answers simply because I know Andy's bias. His Hom'skullerz must be pretty stupid if they can't get 100%, or at least they aren't thinking about what Andy is thinking. Most of it isn't even about education, it's indoctrination pure and simple. This one is just a fucking classic:

34. So-called “hate speech” includes which of the following?
(a) speech that is illegal under the U.S. Constitution.
(b) speech that no one agrees with.
(c) speech that the speaker hates to speak.
(d) speech that leads to hatred of the speaker.
(e) free speech that liberals seek to censor, such as criticism of homosexuality. 

Oh. My. God. --Jeeves 14:18, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I swear. Change a few of the names, and Conservapedia could be something straight out of Communist China. --SockOfGulik 14:31, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Your starter for ten:

1. The bourgeoisie are which of the following?
(a) Jolly chaps in trilby hats and braces.
(b) The powerhouse of a modern economy.
(c) Your cultural superiors, highly skilled and educated.
(d) The friends and allies of the working man
(e) Your oppressors who will be first against the wall come the revolution

Choose one answer only. Mark your answer with a HB pencil. --Jeeves 14:40, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I shudder at the possibility that anyone taking the course is an actual breathing child and not a RW sock. PFoster 19:08, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Poor Ken

Does anyone get the feeling Ken's daddy touched him in bad places when he was a little boy? [4] He obviously has some serious hang-ups. Wait a minute. Isn't Ken still a little boy? Is there some pattern of sexual abuse we should be reporting? DickTurpis 23:53, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Nope, I think he's just a repressed man with homoerotic urges he can't fully understand or explain. He feels that Homosexuals are all evil and anyone who has ever been excited by a person of the same sex is a Homosexual.... These are all complex pysch problems that he can't overlook. So, he turns his self anger and confusion outward and wears his homophobia on his sleeve.... That way, in his mind, no one can accuse him of being homosexual.... That's my diagnosis anyway.... Either that or he's just a prick SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:39, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Cutting

This one: Mandating preventative medical care for children amounts to terrorism. The source used mentioned parents being terrorized, okay, maybe that's hyperbole, but they were quoting a source. While we can question their use of questionable sources, we can't blame what the source says on CP, which I think this does. CЯacke® 12:01, 17 November 2007 (EST)

By citing it on their main page they are placing significant weight behind it, not to mention the associated talk page that proves Schlafly and the rest not only embrace the idea but probably take it further than even your average crazy. This is one of the worst parts of CP and Schlafly himself. This is where the fun and games cross into life and death. I strongly believe that it should stay. tmtoulouse ^oppress 12:53, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I agreee with Tmt. The "source" is a vaccine-opposing group being quoted - so we could also take that source (the yahoo news article) and put it in "according to" if we wanted. Certainly link to the article and mention the group over at VH. human 13:15, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Wrong again, as much as you hate conservatives, the source does not say that vaccines are terrorizing parents, but the that way in which parents are being forced to choose (i.e. "do it or get 10 days in jail") is what's terrorizing parents. Of you want to get in an elitist liberal huff about how conservative parents suck because they don't like vaccines, at least use the right source. Lurker 18:39, 17 November 2007 (EST)

As the WIGO sentence says, its the mandating of preventative care for children that is apparently terrorism. Whether its denying vaccines or refusing a blood transfusion its all the same and is not an inherent right of a parent, and jail is certainly one acceptable "stick" as part of a general program for vaccine education. tmtoulouse ^oppress 18:45, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I didn't say anything about conservative vs. liberal. It's the wacko vaccine hysterisists equating mandatory vaccine programs with terrorism that is a bit "wtf". human 18:47, 17 November 2007 (EST)

CP makes sense

It's difficult when you have to defend two conflicting delusions: in an attempt to show that War in Iraq is going well, they admit that perhaps not all muslims are evil. - a surprised Editor at CP 16:02, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Votes for Sale

This recent post brings up some questions. I notice there is no control for this experiment, and I would hardly be surprised if similar reesults were observed at a more "conservative" school. I also wonder how many people here would sell their vote forever for a million dollars. I'm tempted to think I would. For one, with that sort of money, I could pay someone to hospitalize two people who would vote for the ther guy, so it'd balance out anyway, and I could have my cake and eat it too. DickTurpis 00:26, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Most people sell their votes. What's scary is how cheap they can go. "Yeah, well....maybe Candidate Tweedledumb will cut my health benefits, move my job to Sri Lanka, and start a war, but at least he's not a LIBERAL like that wild-eyed commie freak Candidate Tweedledumber!" --Gulik 01:15, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Let me note two things: we at NYU law are much more sophisticated than our undergrad friends (bastards fill up the lines at Starbucks, too - get a job, hippie!), and this poll is influenced by the fact that, thanks to our lovely electoral crapllege system, a vote from NYC is worthless in presidential elections. Oh, and jk about undergrad bashing, but not about how much the jerks clog the nearby starbucks. Go cry somewhere else, emo kid #3,582! I want to get my chai before Conflict of Laws! Putz.αmεσ (spy) 01:46, 18 November 2007 (EST)

I gotta be honest, if the Republicans steal another election, I'd sell my vote for an 8 ball and a six pack of Pepsi SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:52, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Quack.

That is all. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 12:38, 18 November 2007 (EST)

CP article random survey

I just did a random survey of 150 CP articles to see what their articles are like, overall. I'm not too surprised with the results.

• 44.7% (67) were articles of 3 sentences or less (included were 2 articles that were a sentence and a blokquote).
• 34% (51) were short articles of a couple short paragraphs or a bit longer. Some barely exceeded the threshold of the above category.
• 14.7% (22) were long articles. By that I mean there was enough text that one had to scroll down a bit to read everything. Not included were:
• 1.3% (2) long poor cut/paste jobs. In this case both from their unformatted, contextess US ships series. Didn't deserve to be counted with the above group.
• 2% (3) were essay/debate pages (I included the infamous cp:Liberal style as an essay, even though it's technically an alleged article).
• 1.3% (2) previous breaking news pages
• .7% (1) disambigution
• .7% (1) terms list
• .7% (1) empty terms list

(all results rounded to the nearest .1%)

Included in their long article section was cp:H4 Handy Recorder, which is a bit dubious. Almost seems like an ad. Included in the short articles was one worth mentioning: cp:Fnord, the sort of thing Andy likes to think only exists in Wikipedia (though they did manage to tie it in to homeschooling). Among the substubs we have cp:Galois Fields, which is not useful, certainly not for a schoolage person, the alleged target audience. I noticed a high proportion of the long articles were on countries, and many seemed to have large public domain elements, but I think they had enough original material to qualify as a unique Conservapedia article. The substubs ranged from dictionary definitions that are covered well enough by a couple sentences (but many of which probably don't belong in an encyclopedia), to woefuly insufficient entries on important topics that would need several substantial paragraphs to be covered in any meaningful way. For several of he short articles I noticed quite a few pop culture and entertainment (including quite a few sports figures). There's nothing wrong with this, but it's the sort of thing Andy criticizes Wikipedia for.

I guess it didn't really tell me anything I didn't already know. Nearly half CP's articles are 3 sentences or less, and about 6% aren't articles but essays, terms lists, and other miscellaneous pages. But, of course, they have "20,000 clean concise entries"! [Disclaimer: Wikipedia has some of the same flaws, though substantially fewer. Most of their substubs (of which there are many, though a much smaller percentage than at CP) are at least not the woefully insufficient kind, but rather the minutae of dubious value kind.] DickTurpis 13:18, 18 November 2007 (EST)

I just made a quick program to count how many bytes are in the CP mainspace the results were thus:

• The 5000 largest article contained 29,058,216 bytes. The average size of articles in this section is 5811 bytes the size of this article
• The next 5000 largest articles contained 4,670,609 bytes. The average size of articles in this section is 934 bytes, the size of this article
• The next 5000 largest contained 2,178,723 bytes. The average size for this section is 435 bytes, the size of this article
• The final 4,753 contained 878,434 bytes. The average size for this section is 180 bytes, the size of this article
• Overall the data base contained 36785982 bytes, the average article size was 1862.2984863059 bytes which is about the length of this page
• The mean median article size was 623 bytes which is this article

- Icewedge 14:30, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Is 623b supposed to be the median article size?-Shangrala 15:41, 18 November 2007 (EST)

To be fair, most articles on CP are awfully mean. --Kels 16:04, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Masterpiece of the week

How do they manage to make every MOTW of horrendously low resolution?Shangrala 13:20, 18 November 2007 (EST)

How do you expect your average CP admin to understand difficult techie things like "resolution"? --128.197.11.30 15:25, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Yeah they load their masterpieces several weeks in advance. I saw Van Gogh's painting, wanted to warn about the resolution and maybe find a better one (because the painting is not bad), but I'm getting too lazy and decided against it. Today I wanted to take some credit away from Minardi in their Formula 1 [[5]] article, but was again too lazy. I'm not honouring my RW username! Editor at CP 15:55, 18 November 2007 (EST)

That F1 racing page is hysterical from start to finish - I wonder when the author is due to start school. Thanks Editor@CP. permalink just in case they fix it Susan^{... miaow ...} 11:59, 19 November 2007 (EST)

TK Funnies

He's makin'em, but I'm far to insecure to put them up on WIGO to be judged.

• Only one way to deal with troublesome Arabs Muslims, right?
• I assume the joke here is of a mathematical nature.

Uchiha 22:34, 18 November 2007 (EST)

(pssssst. Iranians aren't Arabs. They're Persians. PFoster 22:53, 18 November 2007 (EST))

You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about! I am highly tempted to censor your comment, and thus avoid having new users confused by your liberal deceit.

(...the funny thing is, I actually just took a course on the middle east. I guess I shouldn't have slept through class so much.) Uchiha 11:16, 19 November 2007 (EST)

The guiding forces referred to Islam as a region... do you really think they know the difference between Arabs and Persians? For god's sake, they think Farsi is a small town in South Dakota....Everyone knows it's in North Dakota SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 17:34, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Dawkins

Jesus Christ Andy is seething ignorance at records levels.-Shangrala 20:18, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Right!

That's it!

He's got to come clean now & admit that Conservapædia's a hoax - it's gone too far to be believable. Come on Andy admit it - it's a joke that's overrun. Susan^{... miaow ...} 21:37, 19 November 2007 (EST)

At this point I don't think anyone believes they can convince Andy of anything. He is emotionally incapable of backing down from anyone against his "crusade." But it's still important to keep pushing him on it. We know what his response is going to be every time, so it's the perfect button to keep pushing over and over again watching him further discredit himself. Anyone who reads that whole mess and has a shred of reason left in them can't come away with a good impression of Andy. I can think back to my youth and recall all the irrational things some people have tried to push in my head, and how it shapes my views today. When those kids taking classes from him grow up and start to think for themselves, they're gonna realize what kind of person Andy really is.

I don't think a normal human mind can function like Andy's for long without resisting. Anyone trying to find any truth from him is going to turn away given time. Pushing him further past the edge is the best we can do to bring people over to reason.

TK if you're reading this, locking that talk page was the best thing you can possibly do to keep Andy from making a complete fool of himself. We joke that you're trying to take over CP, but truth is you need him. You're the O'Brien to Andy's B.B. --97.96.225.254 00:46, 20 November 2007 (EST)