Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive13

This is an archive page, last updated 27 November 2009. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <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)

KVI

WiGO says that KVI talk radio's link is to mock CP. It doesn't seem like that's true. It certainly should be, but I think their "sanitized" comment is actually sincere. Looking at what else they link to (apparently quite seriously): WorldNet Daily, Hannity, Drudge, the retard patrol, Josef Goebbels and the Morning Commutestaffel, etc. I think they actually are fellow travellers. We have Poe's law in reverse. DickTurpis 22:53, 19 November 2007 (EST)

What is really odd is the blurb they give below the link - "Want something a little more customized than the traditional encyclopedias, Encarta, or even Wikipedia? Conservatives have come through for you with this new reference tool -- sanitized for your protection." sanitized?!

Also, I think "KJV" would be a hilarious set of call letters for a xtian station. human 17:13, 20 November 2007 (EST)

thanksgiving

"A holiday created in the 1800s was so in the Bible! Seriously, guys."

Not a very strong point - sure, the official late november eat & shop fest is more modern, but "thanksgivings" date back to European Puritans, IIRC. Just my .02 human 14:52, 20 November 2007 (EST)

"European Puritans" = still not Biblical though....my two Canadian (therefore mighty) cents' worth.PFoster 14:56, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Harvest festivals date back to pagan times! OH NOES! ollïegrïnd 15:13, 20 November 2007 (EST)

To be exact, they don't say that Thanksgiving as such is in the Bible, but rather that the Puritans were inspired by Jewish celebrations like the Feast of Sukkoth. That's not implausible in itself, but not really necessary either - thanksgiving masses and celebrations were an entirely common feature of 16th century society, as well as both earlier and later. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 15:29, 20 November 2007 (EST)

It's pretty bloody implausible. Do you really think these pilgrims would have been familiar with an obscure Jewish festival? Lets face it, thanksgiving is directly ripped off from the from the British harvest festival tradition, which itself was ripped off from earlier pagan autumnal equinox celebrations. Any attempt to tie it in to Jewish tradition is just wishful thinking. --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 15:50, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Sukkoth is one of the more important Jewish festivals and is mentioned at least a dozen in the Old Testament, so yes, I'm pretty sure that they would have been familiar with it. Also, one should be aware that the modern tradition of Thanksgiving is the result of a long development through the 18th and 19th centuries, combining the religious practice of thanksgiving masses and other observances on the one hand, and harvest festivals on the other. But at the time of the original settlers, the thanksgiving part would have been seen as a primarily religious observance, as was entirely common at the time. So I'm afraid, if you'll pardon me, that an attempt to tie it in to pagan tradition is just wishful thinking. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 15:53, 20 November 2007 (EST)

It is? I've read most of the books of the old testament, and I don't think I've ever seen it mentioned at least not by name... --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 16:05, 20 November 2007 (EST)

No, it's called different things: wp:Sukkot#Sukkot_in_the_Bible --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 16:08, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Hrm. Doesn't that rather defeat the point? I've not seen that either the Roman Catholic or the early Anglican church has ever celebrated any of the Jewish festivals mentioned, whereas there's ample evidence that the church in Britain adopted any number of pagan harvest traditions (corn dollies, 'John Barleycorn' -> 'Plow the fields and scatter', etc.) --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 16:32, 20 November 2007 (EST)

In one sense, a harvest festival is a harvest fest is a harvest fest---depending on what climate you live in. Even Sukkot underwent changes over the centuries based on where various communities were living. I do not know of any evidence that the North American Txgiving holidays in any way directly descended from pagan festivals, and I'm sure the Puritans would deny it. Anyone living in a basically subsistence situation is going to celebrate bringing in the grain, and the way they do it will depend on culture, geography, etc.162.82.215.199 16:37, 20 November 2007 (EST)

It's a funny holiday, really. The "first" one was obviously a harvest fest. But back in the 17th & 18th centuries, "thanksgiving" days were common, and were often days of quiet fasting. I am searching for an article in the Ideas section of this Sunday's Boston Globe (11/18/07) I just read that was all about this, and even included some stuff about what one particular fellow likely did on these days. (Basically he went to his room and laid on the floor). So the name comes from these days of prayer (and the masses AK mentions) but the tradition comes from harvest feasts. human 17:10, 20 November 2007 (EST)

I was under the impression that pretty much every holiday has pagan roots (well, maybe now Arbor Day) but seriously, even Christmas and Easter have some ties to Paganism. The Easter bunny is a direct rip from Pagan fertility celebrations. ollïegrïnd 08:55, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Fastest growing educational resource?

TK claims that Conservapedia is the fastest growing educational resource a lot, but wouldn't that be wikipedia? Wikipedia seems to have had over 1500 articles new today, plus many, many more edits to older articles. In absolute terms, that's way more than Conservapedia gets in a week. Perhaps wikipedia isn't educational enough. Or perhaps TK is just lying... --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 17:40, 20 November 2007 (EST)

He's probably doing it based on percent increase, which would be greater for a small site like CP rather than a large one like WP. But even then he's wrong, as Truthopedia just increased in size by about 50% in the past few minutes! DickTurpis 17:47, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Heck, RW grew 10,000% in the last 6 months! As far as that TK riff, he got Andy to buy him a phrase-o-matic just like the one he uses. human 19:03, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Not sure if this is still an open question, but knowing CP, the magic is that CP gets to decide what counts as an educational resource. So of course WP is not an educational resource because blah gossip blah useless trivia bluh liberal bleh porn, etc. --Sid 20:11, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Even more Dawkins

[Moved to the Dawkins talk page]

It'd be appreciated if anyone performing such a major move could LOG ON - it looks a bit dodgy at first sight. Susan^{... miaow ...} 07:24, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Sorry, that was me. OurMike 08:04, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Happie Burfdae!

It's a few hours premature, but tomorrow 11/21 CP celebrates one year since ashfly's first concise, factual edit, according to our deceitful, mocking records. human 19:06, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Sounds like we need to mix up a batch of celebratory kool-aid. DickTurpis 19:17, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Re: "MINE!"

You know, I'm not usually one for "homophobes are actually repressed homosexuals" arguments.....but if I made close to a thousand edits to an anti-gay article in the space of five months, I'd probably start questioning some fundamental assumptions about myself. PFoster 01:15, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Which is why I try to cut him some slack, I know he's one of "mine" (even if he doesn't). When and if he comes around I don't want to have to rebuild bridges...well not too many anyways. Poor kid. CЯacke®

You know, I haven't seen Our Li'l Guy around here in quite some time. I'm almost starting to miss him. Though I imagine it's only a matter of time before he appears again with his usual "what do you think of my recent edits to the homosexuality article?" or "Get ready for big news at Conservapedia that will double our page views in a matter of weeks!" He's probably realized by now that no one over there pays any attention to anything he says. At least he gets a response from us. DickTurpis 01:26, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I put a lot of stock in "homophobes are actually repressed homosexuals". However, I think it applies more to the leaders of anti-gay conservative movements than towards your everyday "I'm conservative because I haven't got time to think for myself while I'm watching the race" (they're just out-and-out bigots) person.

Datestamp

It occurs to me that it mightn't be a bad idea to individually date/time WIGO entries. Susan^{... miaow ...} 01:39, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Five tildes gives just a timestamp. Thusly: 01:43, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Well, dividing the entries by month gives a sort of rough "datestamp". Do we need it to be finer than by the month? --Kels 07:20, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Dunno - can't remember why I thought it - there was possibly a reason @ the time. Susan^{... miaow ...} 07:31, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I'd like to see weekly breaks, or some such, just to make editing easier. Perhaps a dummy header every 20 or so entries? Or a "date" header before each Sunday or Monday? human 14:46, 21 November 2007 (EST)

New Essay

CP's self-congratulatory essay is going to be quite interesting I can tell. Already they're patting themselves on the bak for the decline in Wikipedia's popularity (which has yet to be documented; do they mean rate of growth is slowing down? Because that's not the same thing at all) and their internet crime-fighting experience, by which I assume they mean calling the FBI because someone made edits they didn't like. And, of course, what essay would be complete without a reference to liberal deceit? DickTurpis 10:43, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Oh noes WIKIPEDIA IS DOOMED! DOOMED! DOOOOOMED!!!

....

Hmm... Alexa must be another example of liebrul deceit... the graph for WP still goes upwards, while for CP it has been essentially flat since February, except for some occasional spike (LA Times, I guess). Andy, we're waiting for Conservalexa, with graphs hand-drawn by you! --128.197.11.30 11:31, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Actually, it occurs to me that CP might be responsible for the drop in daily edits since Wikipedia's peak. By giving Ken, Rob and Ed another venue to vent their spleen, they've saved themselves several thousand edits and an equal number of reversions every day. DickTurpis 12:18, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Hah! Hah! Hah! Hah! Hah! Hah! (chokes on cream doughnut, splutters & sprays cream all over screen!). Seiously though ... No! I mean ... (signs off in hysterics) Susan^{... miaow ...} 11:36, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Kenny1001, whoever you are, you should be ashamed. Leave TK alone! CP needs TK and we need both. Editor at CP 11:50, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Nice. They decided to pat themselves on the back for their bi-monthly daily bible verse and political quote of the year day. Well done, indeed. And of course the courses (when are the Supreme Court and Hilarity in Math courses starting again?). Great. If I can get 32 out of 35 in a class I've never taken you now it's not too strenuous. DickTurpis 12:15, 21 November 2007 (EST)

and entry titling

I accidentally added a second link to the "essay" - sure, I scanned the recent ones to see if it was up there, but saw no text mentioning it. Which makes me whine, will people please make their entries at least slightly descriptive rather than just abstract reactive phrases? Seeing entries labelled simply "WTF?" or "This is one more crazy thing" gets old. Whine. human 14:51, 21 November 2007 (EST)

CP traffic vs. WP

Do they actualy think they are a challenge to wikipedia? CP is just a flat line when compared with WP traffic:

- Icewedge 13:38, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Personally I would prefer if CP would just flatline altogether. Uchiha 14:16, 21 November 2007 (EST)

error message?

I get this when I vote or when I add something to the list:

"Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 33554432 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 262160 bytes) in /home/rationa1/public_html/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 296"

Although my actions do take effect, so it's not fatal. human 14:37, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I remember the days when we had 48K of RAM, and we were glad of it. And when we got home, dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle. If we were lucky. --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 14:43, 21 November 2007 (EST) P.S. why is the user name this runs under in the DOS style, truncated to 8 chars... it frightens me...

EH. 48K!! You was lucky, when I were lad ...

And you tell that to young people today and they won't believe you.--Bob^{bing up} 14:44, 21 November 2007 (EST)

When I was a kid... we had to "remember" shit in our own heads oh noez and count on our own fingers (drop pants to get to 21...) No RAM, no goat, life was so hard. human 14:53, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Back in my day we all carried around clubs and ate whatever we could find. I've lived a lot since then, and i can safely tell you that global warming is a hoax. 12.75.66.221 15:21, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Eeek! when subhuman young all very cold. Now ice melting everywhere. Earth warms everyday. ook.--Subhuman cabal member 15:31, 21 November 2007 (EST)

How often is this error occuring? tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 15:50, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Hard to tell. I saw it a day or two ago after clicking an arrow, and today when I added an entry. Perhaps it's just a weird kind of edit conflict due to the voting program? IE, two people do it at the same time and although what they do works, one gets an error message on the reload? If it happens again I'll try to get you more info. human 16:07, 21 November 2007 (EST)

OK, before typing the above I tried a few quick votes. 3, to be exact. First two worked fine, 3rd one bargled exactly the same error message. This is the url displaying:

http://www.rationalwiki.com/wiki/Conservapedia:What_is_going_on_at_CP%3F#BDEC6542164EAEEB6335EA03B227DE24

human 16:09, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I have cut back the number of supported WIGO poll entries to 250...I think that will solve the problem. I need to get that automated best of bot going soon........... tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 19:30, 21 November 2007 (EST)

It probably occurs at 256 entries. 11111111 ---->100000000, y'know. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 18:47, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Birthday Spike?

CP seems to be having some sort of very sudden increase in traffic...

That is interesting. I hardly think a mere birthday can account for such a dramatic leap. Anyone know what's going on? DickTurpis 13:58, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Yea there has been massive blog coverage of there stats page on boing boing, andrew sulivan, pz myers, fark, something wicked and a bunch of smaller blogs. Its the whole 9/10 homosexuality article thing. RW is having a corresponding traffic spike as well because we are mentioned the the probable culprits. tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 14:23, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Someone should make a graph similar to this, titled something like "Effect of lulz on CP traffic". Was the July spike due to LA Times? --87.4.236.156 16:24, 22 November 2007 (EST)

No July was actually due to CP being covered on the Daily Show. tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 16:29, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Damn - did we (nah, just Genghis :)) give CP its second biggest spike? -- מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

That graph is a crap example, although it is titled Effect of Scandals on Wikipedia foundation donations, it infact shows that there is no causal relationship beetween the cited scandals and Wikipedia foundation donations. Its another ConservaBorg act of faith. Auld Nick 18:47, 22 November 2007 (EST)

I suspected it might be the top ten articles bit, but I wasn't aware of just how much coverage it was getting. I'm quite amused. How will Our L'il Guy deal with those stats I wonder? Surely he won't delete his pet articles to get them back to zero. I also can't wait to see Andy publicly jiz his pants over the spike, attributing it to their long awaited anniversary and all sorts of "positive" coverage. "This site is growing rapidly!" DickTurpis 19:20, 22 November 2007 (EST)

The 21st was the peak of the hit, and Alexa just updated their traffic for the 21st, CP has had its biggest traffic spike ever, even bigger than the first blog rush.....a whole new generation of WTF? It will be interesting to see what happens. tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 11:37, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Prophet and his hometown?

Is Andy talking about Muhammad? Somebody should sock up n' go ask him. --Ζωροάστρης 13:12, 22 November 2007 (EST)

I like the part of the conversation where Andy accuses the whole internet of being liberal. (Also, the media is a bunch of horrible liberals... except when they print one nuetral sentence about Conservapedia, then they're wonderful.) --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 13:41, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Where's this conversation taking place? --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 13:56, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Re. "Oh no, our homophobia is showing!"

Um, methinks that someone may be taking the piss ;) 84.98.245.178 13:55, 22 November 2007 (EST)

FBI

Somebody mentioned the FBI (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk%3AEssay%3AConservapedia&diff=340951&oldid=340927) yet only got a short block (filed under a rule he most likely didn't break), is this worth mentioning or has something like this been reported before and/or been noticed before?

There is no such thing as an "FBI". We are not deceived by your liberal, huh, deceit. GodAmphetamine! --Ashfly 17:46, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Somebody Hates TK

...more than usual, I mean. Uchiha 21:41, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Have you not looked at the evidence? Its obvious he's been working for Rationalwiki all along, and I aim to inform conservapedia of this fact. Schlafys reaction to this, his mind numming stupidity may just allow TK to survive though. 86.40.101.53 14:45, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Think.before.you.type. OF COURSE, Rationalwiki members know TK's been working with them all along. But just why would they tell A. Schlafly? You won't find anyone willing to help you expose TK here. Add to that, TK's threatened a lot of ppl with "real-life" consequences, so ppl are hesitant to get involved. And consider this: A.Shlafly KNOWS about TK and his espionage, he's been provided information, but has chosen to keep him at CP. Why? 1) TK provides a lot of "inside information" about RW, gathered as a "spy", "double-agent", or what have you. 2) Schlafly thinks he can "convert" TK into loving the lord, it's his Christian duty to turn the other cheek. (sadly, this is a lost cause, as TK is a psychopath). 3) TK does more blocks than anyone else, he's like a pitbull, doing the "enforcing" at CP so that A.S. doesn't have to do it himself. So, A.S. overlooks TK's activities at RW. A.S. knows TK's got sock accounts at RW (E.Wig, Night Train) and at CP (MattM, Earwig, tfk, and more) so don't waste your time sending evidence, because AShlafly already knows. He just doesn't care. He's going to maintain the status quo. Most of the CP Sysops are clueless though, they just don't have capacity for rational thought. And some members of Rationalwiki are not all that rational either, and if you persist in sending them info, you just may be accused of being TK himself, which will eventually dissuade you from involvement too. 193.200.150.189 20:28, 23 November 2007 (EST)

I don't care what TK threatens - His tactics are something I find completely deplorable. I will not rest until the other sysops kick him out. (Although I wouldn't be surprised if he was in bed with Rob and Conservative. 86.40.101.53 23:5323:53, 23 November 2007 (EST)

I wish they actually were... Conservative I'm almost certain is for real (though he's still plenty damaging to the site). Rob I'd suspect because of his ludicrous commie-kicking Reagan-worship fanatisicm, but there's no evidence to support him as being parody. Uchiha 19:08, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Trying to hurt TK with these tactics is pointless. TK is just too valuable to Andy in keeping the castle walls intact. Despite what you may think of him, TK puts in more hours than any of the others in protecting Andy's demon baby. Rob and Ken are there a lot but only really work on their own pet projects. If anyone thinks that sendingexposés to Andy or other sysops is somehow going to get TK chucked out then they don't understand the mentality of CP. If they could listen to reason, facts and evidence then they wouldn't be producing all the wing-nut stuff in the first place. IF TK is collaborating with outside interests in some way then any attempts to hurt TK will only rebound on the others. Genghis Khant 07:36, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Schlafly logic

"We don't allow here the silly "citation needed" games that are used to inject liberal bias on Wikipedia." This is perilously close to saying "we don't need facts here- facts are liberal!"Shangrala 23:53, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Ok AssFly, really knows his science

This really pissed me off. This guy really goes beyond the normal bounds of conservative. I am amazed that there are parents in America that would want to have this guy teach them. I wish

That's evidence I was smarter than Aschlafly when I was 12 or so (When I first heard that example), is that saying much? NightFlare 17:40, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Schlafly would also be a great counterexample, why isn't he on the list? --195.71.90.10 17:43, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Moon and Young Earth

Anyone see the talk page there? Apparently Andy would be surprised if 1% of Catholics believe in an Old Earth. Yeah, I'd be surprised too...

My brain hurts. Uchiha 20:03, 23 November 2007 (EST)

More to the point, didja see the part where Alleged Human Being And Possible Deep Cover Sock TK loses his tiny mind with Andy? Maybe he'll threaten to stomp off (for an hour or so, like last time) again...PFoster 20:20, 23 November 2007 (EST)

And so the cracks begin to show... --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 08:05, 24 November 2007 (EST)

It's interesting to see guys like TK and DanH actually making sense (well, a little bit of sense, more than Andy anyway). I don't think I had a full grasp of Andy's stupidity until I saw this discussion, though. Here he says that a worldwide flood is 100% certain because there is limestone all over the world and it can only be formed from organic organisms. So this animals turn into rock in the space of about a thousand years? Furthermore only a flood could have made the Grand Canyon? How the hell does that work? Why would a flood covering the entire country make a gorge in a select area in a matter of days? How is that any more plausible than erosion over millions of years? I wouldn't mind this so much if it was simply him, like PJR, taking the Bible as the Truth and refusing to accept anything else, but he claims he was an old earther for years, and it was scientific study that convinced him the Bible was right on all accounts. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt for a second and say that maybe the decay rates of carbon 14 and such may have varied slightly in the past. While such a theory could throw off the age of the earth by a bit, it does absolutely nothing to support YEC. And now his Schlafly Statistics are up to 99% accuracy (he just keep getting better). Does anyone have any real figures on what percentage of the American populace are YEC believers? DickTurpis 10:04, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Contest

Please tell me I'm not the only one laughing my .... Rear off at Andy's constant demands for a recount? I thought that was what us deceitful liberals do SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 02:34, 24 November 2007 (EST)

More than anything, I weep for these people and their sorry little lives. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 07:49, 24 November 2007 (EST)

What was the contest all about, anyway? The usual? "Copy-paste as much as you can and give yourself tons of points for minor edits - oh, and only the Supreme Beings are allowed to participate"? I'm curious, but I also don't want to visit CP - I just realized how relaxing it is not to be directly exposed to so much stupid. --Sid 08:26, 24 November 2007 (EST)

More or less - except this time, we get a spectacular encore of bitching about which kinds of edits are sufficient to actually earn points. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 08:39, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Sheesh, could it get any more idiotic than that? Okay, I guess it could: Andy could ban some of the contestants and take away their points. *snickers* --Sid 08:45, 24 November 2007 (EST)

I don't know if you looked but it's Andy that's doing all the bitching as his team of homeschoolers (which he chose) largely never showed up. Genghis Khant 09:35, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Looking at some of the ridiculousness some players gave themselves hundreds and hundreds of points for, I'd be sympathetic with Andy's cries of foul, except for the fact that he made up the fucking rules! DickTurpis 09:40, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, but he made up the rules, twisting them to be beneficial for HIM... When he was the only one who knew how to run the Wiki software (not that he was amazing with it himself, but that's another story) Now other people can do it and he doesn't like it. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 13:32, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Meanwhile

Gotta say my heart sank when I saw WP has launched a contest. Will credit be claimed? Totnesmartin 19:00, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Wikipedia has had contests for far longer. [1]-Shangrala 19:42, 24 November 2007 (EST)

It seems to be as though WP's contests have specific site-improving goals, rather than "copycopycopy" mania. --Ζωροάστρης 03:39, 25 November 2007 (EST)

I think WP's contests actually have prizes, unlike CP where all you get is the right to brag about it to the only other people who care, the losers on the other team. --Kels 09:52, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Misunderestimation

From TK's forfeit: "having made up new rule, new interpretations after the contest began. In what contest or sport is this allowed? The answer is, nowhere." I can think of somewhere where all that and more is allowed... airdish 13:43, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Not bad

I can see it... tmtoulouse ^beleaguer 12:36, 24 November 2007 (EST)

AHAHAHAHA Oh Jesus that's hilarious.-Shangrala 15:27, 24 November 2007 (EST)

I thought it was RW policy not to identify CP's young female sysops. Bethany's life will now be made hell by internet stalkers, abortionists, liberals, and paedtheists. Genghis Khant 16:17, 24 November 2007 (EST)

WP did it not RW! But its too late for her the groomer she knows is all ready to close. 24.141.169.227 19:02, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Apparently…

Karajou thinks someone is a sock. WIGO worthy? --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 19:41, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Linky? PFoster 19:44, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Somebody's always thinking someone's a sock over there. Unless it's Sclafly or someone being suspected, is it a surprise any more? Totnesmartin 19:51, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Well, I don't have a link… hearsay. Presumably it's not worthy of the honor of WIGO. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 19:54, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Is Hoji still getting those sysop emails then? Or shouldn't I mention that?. Genghis Khant 20:21, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Well, some people are still trying to ingratiate themselves to us, if you know what I mean… --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 20:27, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Half of my accounts get blocked before making an edit because they're socks of AmesG, apparently. I use a completely different IP each time too.-Shangrala 21:18, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Yeah, TK has a hard on for my IP range too - he's blocked a whole bunch in the past little while. PFoster 21:47, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Anyone got any clue why he's got problems with mine? I've never had an account on CP, nor any socks, so it doesn't make much sense. I know there's some folks from Toronto that have gone over in the past (although I don't know who they are), but that's not really close. --Kels 22:20, 24 November 2007 (EST)

You are canadian and a large contributor to our sexuality section. Isn't that enough?--PalMD^{-If it looks like a donut, eat it} 22:55, 24 November 2007 (EST)

I support an element of socialism in my democracy too, how wicked! --Kels 23:02, 24 November 2007 (EST)

A Canadian girl with socialist viewpoints and an interest in sexuality?!?!?! Call me!!!! PFoster 23:04, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Taken, I'm afraid. But did I mention the nude photos? --Kels 23:06, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Haha, everyone knows there are no g-... Canadians on the internet. Uchiha 23:29, 24 November 2007 (EST)

How do you explain the boobs, then? --Kels 00:20, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Plenty of people with boobs in t'internet, but the presence of the boobs doesn't necessarily correlate with sex. --Jeɚv☭s^{Your signature makes me horny} 09:23, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Fox

Thought about putting this in WIGO but it's not really up to it:

Could Fox be involved in the disappearance of tax related info on CDs sent via courier TNT (Fox's userpage)? He seems to dislike paying for other people's tax benefits ( Fox's diatribe regarding taxes). Alright so it's rubbish but what is all that about TNT? Susan^{... miaow ...} 09:08, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Meh. Maybe he was listening to some classic AC/DC at the time and just likes messing wid ya mind?

Hate Speech

I was going through the diffs following TK's resignation from the latest contest, and noticed this interesting comment from Andy. The money shot is this quote, "Italy won the world cup by calling France's star player a "terrorist", compelling him to strike back and be ejected from the game." Doesn't that totally fly in the face of Conservative positions on hate speech? What he's saying here is that someone using a loaded term to describe someone is reasonable justification for a physical response. So isn't this the basis of the concept of hate speech, that words, particularly loaded terms and phrases, can cause harm in a real-world context? Somehow I doubt Andy will have an epiphany about it any time soon, though. --Kels 15:25, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Yeah, that whole "process" has been hilarious. Andy whines and complains, others say "let's figure out how to make next time better" and make suggestions, and he goes back to whining and complaining to the point where the "other side" tries to shut him up by forfeiting. Meanwhile he drifts off into random sports analogies, which he doesn't even do well. As in the above quote. Trash talking "compels" a physical response? It may have "caused" it, but only by igniting a volatile athlete. If the short fuse weren't there, it could not have been lit. I do hope, though, that Andy does not take up smoking pot, as it will render him as unfunny as South Park and SNL often are. human 16:10, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Is this for real?

Am I reading this wrong, or has TK been desysopped? [2] -DickTurpis 00:41, 26 November 2007 (EST)

There are no words. Tohuvavohu 01:13, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Repent, for the apocalypse is nigh. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 01:18, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Lets party! The evil one has fallen! LordAlvania 01:41, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Words cannot encapsulate it. This is lolsome! I wonder if he'll start a conservapedia.info, or, rather, if he'll populate it. Glorious day! Caloo! Callay!-αmεσ (spy) 01:57, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Lets send andy a petition, calling for our blocks to be thrown out! LordAlvania 02:11, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Actually it not only desysops him but deprives him of night edit and upload rights. Genghis Khant 02:28, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I kinda doubt this is for real. Did TK do something bad enough to actually get de-sysop'd now of all times? (I still haven't visited CP again, so I dunno if I missed something.) Last I heard was about TK telling Andy something about the contest or so, but that should normally pale in comparison to the rest of his history. Heck, disagreeing with a sysop/bureaucrat shouldn't be a reason for losing sysop status anyway, but then again, this is CP we're talking about... My point is that I don't get the timing.

Meh, I'll stick to "He will be re-op'd within the next 24 hours" unless there is a bigger reason I didn't know about. TK being de-sysop'd just doesn't fit into my world. It's an invariant: "No matter what he does/did, TK will never lose his status" - he kept it all the time, so I don't see why he'd lose it now. (And heck... now it's a few months too late in my opinion - tons of good people have been kicked out or left already... and there are still the other idiots who make sure that only the ultra-conservative opinions get heard.) --Sid 09:16, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I think it might be for realz. And, if it is, I suggest all RW members be on guard; he'll probably want to come over here to fill the void CP has left in his "heart."-αmεσ (spy) 11:59, 26 November 2007 (EST)

To paraphrase Buck Turgidson, I'm going to hold off judgment until all the facts are in. It seems quite a bit goes on behind the scenes over there. We get hints of things being discussed from Kenny's "you've got mail" posts. I have no idea exactly why this happened, and I would be far from surprised if everything is back to normal within a day or so. But for the time being, my question as to whether I was misreading the log has been answered, and while TK has been desysopped, I cannot find any real rationale for it in CP proper. I seriously doubt its anything as simple as Andy coming to his senses, as I believe he is utterly devoid of them. This could be interesting to watch. DickTurpis 12:13, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I don't have any info from the horse's mouth, but I strongly suspect it was by TK's request. Whatever you want to say about his desire to "shake up" the admin team at CP, I think his disappointment (or whatever you want to call it) with Andy is genuine.

Doesn't mean it won't blow over, but I think looking for the reason for Andy's decision is getting it backwards. Aziraphale 13:47, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Interesting point, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if he just went "Meh!" and effectively packed his things or at least distanced himself from the idiocy. At some point, the good sides of having sysop power might get overshadowed by the idiotic YEC-pushing and Conservative's rambling. --Sid 14:43, 26 November 2007 (EST)

TK give up Sysop? Not in this lifetime. The man lives to exert power and control over others. Look at his "work" at CP - 99% is blocking (many times without cause), reverting edits, and posting on talk pages. The only "articles" attributed to him have been proven to be total cut/paste from existing articles. I'm betting this is a simple spat between AS and TK, and TK will be back at CP very soon, continuing his undercover operations to bring the site down. 85.195.123.24

Maybe he's been de-sysop'ed. But with Alltel, he can change his plan whenever he wants, without extending his contract! [3] Master Bra'tac^Kree! 14:25, 26 November 2007 (EST)

...*snickers* Great find XD; --Sid 14:43, 26 November 2007 (EST)

It occurred to me that the desysopping may have been at TK's request. He did quit in a huff before (for a few hours), so maybe it's happening again and in order to try to make it seem like he was serious this time (after losing all credibility last time) he asked Andy to demote him. Of course, it's just as meaningless as his empty threat of quitting because Andy would give him all his powers back on request. But if that is the case, usually Andy would say "per users request" in the edit summary, and I'm not sure why Andy would keep whatever group memberships he still has (are they related to the contest or something?). Also, if requesting demotion out of protest, TK would probably make a public stink, like he did last time. I really don't know what' going on here. As of now his demotion has lasted longer than his quitting forever did. Anyone have the brilliant idea of asking Andy? I imagine it would be a bannable offense. DickTurpis 17:16, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Hmm, I don't know if there's a link to be made here, but TK blocked StevenM as a confirmed troll, which was then reverted by Andy at 23:50 claiming it was a mistake, a little later at 00:36 Andy defrocked TK. Now Andy doesn't usually undo sysops blocks (I know because he always ignored my pleas for reinstatement) so I can only guess that StevenM had special access and must be one of Andy's homeskulers, certainly the name style fits the pattern and he joined on 30 September which would be around the start of the academic year. There's nothing in StevenM's edit history which would lead one to think of him as a troll (other than a 2 hour block by Ed Poor for newbie hijinx), in fact his edits look like the sort that would be linked to homeskuling - legal cases, math, chemistry, religious topics. The only thing a bit odd is that before his block his user talk page was pwned with a www.Rationalwiki.com link which was reverted by BrianCo who then blocked the user. I would presume that during the "missing 46 minutes" there were some heated exchanges behind the scenes which caused Andy to snap. So maybe it was an unknown pwner that caused TK's downfall? Genghis ^Marauding 18:36, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Interesting theory. TK never could read diffs, and is likely to confuse a vandaler with a vandalee. I'd be just desserts if TK's own stupidity did him in. DickTurpis 21:26, 26 November 2007 (EST)

response to one

Hello, I am Iduan - the user from Conservapedia. I'm posting here in response to the "being a sysop (or sub-sop)" gives you the ability to read people's minds comment. First of all, the reason I suspected a troll was because of the innocuous tone the user took at the start of his edit - and then the postage of this http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20137:9;&version=46 . He "suggested" that verse as the Daily Bible Verse - which in my mind, is obvious if not blatant trolling - therefore I reverted the edit and blocked the user. Logic determined that user was a troll - my mind-reading skills that I was given as a "sub-sop" were not even necessary.--Iduan 01:13, 26 November 2007 (EST)

TK is desysopped and CP objects to a Bible verse. That's two seals broken. Armageddon truly is nigh. -DickTurpis 01:26, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Oh and here I was thinking this site was going to give rational responses! How naive of me. First of all, let me say this: it seems to be the general consensus that every user on Conservapedia represents all of Conservapedia's beliefs - that's obviously false. So before I state my reasoning, I would like to say my views are not necessarily those of Andy's or anyone else on CP - as you would suggest DickTurpis. I am actually not Christian - I am more of a Deist - so please consider that. Now, in my opinion, the bible is too old to be applied in every situation. There are obviously remarks you can draw from the Bible that are ridiculous - and some people make a hobby out of drawing those verses out. This user did so, and then suggested that the verse he drew out should be on the main page. Now, frankly an idiot could tell that that verse would never go on the main page, and him suggesting it was inflammatory. All he wanted was the response he would see, and that, by definition, is trolling.--Iduan 01:32, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I can only speak for myself, but I never did think that one persons views represented the views of the entire group (On CP or here for that matter, however CP does have a general theme, which is pro literal-reading of the bible, et al, I believe that that was the reasoning behind Dick's comment. Then again, I could be completely wrong. Locke ^{Always Watching......} 01:36, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I think your right that most are literal readers - however I was merely pointing out the insanity of DickTurpis suggesting that by me objecting to an addition of a bible verse, somehow Conservapedia was also objecting.--Iduan 01:38, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I never said that CP users were a homogenous lot (don't worry Ken, if you're reading this, I said homogeneous); certainly the rifts between Ken and TK, Andy and Roger, and most recently the old and young earthers over at the moon discussion, illustrate that. But the prevailing viewpoint over there is that the Bible is truth, and an entirely good thing. Many sysops over there have made it clear that if you do not accept the Bible, you are less than completely welcome there. So it is a bit amusing when they find a Bible verse they find objectionable. Even if the opinions at CP differ, by removing that users comment and banning him, you were deciding for the entire site that certain verses are objectionable. But you're right, that guy was probably trolling. However I, for one, would like to see the Biblical literalists response to such verses. -DickTurpis 01:46, 26 November 2007 (EST)

They're not literalists. --Gulik 13:57, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Fair enough - although they would probably say something similar to what I did. The Bible was written to the standards of a couple thousand years ago - not everything in it applies today, for example, women can talk in church. OR they would say that "beat" is equivelant to "spank"--Iduan 01:49, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I'm tempted to think they'd go with the latter before the former (though the "against the rocks" part is a little tough to dismiss as a spanking). The whole "that was a different time thing" is a slippery slope. Of course, being the Old Testament, they are allowed to pick and choose what applies now and what doesn't, so they might dismiss that as they would kosher laws. Never stops them from quoting the OT when it suits them, I notice.

Oh, and be careful. Many of us here, me included, have been banned from CP merely for editing on this site, never breaking the commandments. Then again that was usually done by TK, and I guess he won't be doing any of that. At least, not until Andy gives him all is powers back first thing in the morning. DickTurpis 01:56, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Actually I think Bob Jones University used that time argument - reluctantly, when they changed their rules to allow dancing. And, I can not speak for your interaction with TK, but as far as mine goes - most of the time I think TK is very reasonable, I mean obviously we occasionally have disagreements - but who doesn't? I mean people here poke fun at the number of people he's blocked - but I would suggest that most if not all of those are reasonable blocks, that you all, if you were in his position, would make. For example, if I see 'User:ANDYSUCKS!!!' - I'm probably going to block him, so would TK, and so would you.--Iduan02:01, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Those aren't the blocks we mock. TK has a long history of blocking people for merely disagreeing on talk pages; I'm sure you've seen it plenty of times. Face it, if the guy weren't a parodist, he'd be a sociopath. Maybe he's both. DickTurpis 02:04, 26 November 2007 (EST)

A sociopath? Yeah, he blocks users on a website - and that makes him a sociopath. While I'm merely speaking generally, sometimes people who disagree too much on talk pages need to be blocked - because someone that argues that much becomes a troll. Also, if people are spending all their time on talk pages they're violating 90/10.--Iduan 02:06, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Iduan, TK has a real history as a sociopath. He's threatened physically and professionally many users on this site, and in other ways exhibits a dual and manipulative personality, using multiple accounts (TK, NightTrain, E Wig) to play some persons off against others in nothing more than a foolish quest to garner attention for himself. Tragically, it works, sometimes. I'll include a section of a pmail from TK just so you get an idea of who he really is:

“”Pray, Ames, often and with fervor you never in the future [...] cross my path. And there is a good likelihood of that happening, given all the work I do for the more liberal legal groups. It gives me great personal satisfaction knowing that at your young ages, both of you will get lots of lulz reading this. If I am ever given that supreme satisfaction of crossing paths, my only comment to you will be: "Getting your lulz from this now?" In that instant you will remember me, and all that you have so wrongly done. Life's a bitch, eh?

-αmεσ (spy) 02:12, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I'm obviously not in a position to comment on alleged sock puppets - however I have spoken with TK before and I assure you any physical threat is merely a joke - I mean, in all fairness, it's a wiki - don't take everything so seriously. Same goes with the professional remark - I mean seriously? If someone on the street told you that he worked with a liberal legal group and therefore knew all the liberals in the United States - would you believe him?--Iduan 02:18, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Granted that his threats are toothless. BUT, his obvious desire to harm (he's not joking - he's honestly unstable) and his belief that he can are, coupled, kind of scary.-αmεσ (spy) 02:21, 26 November 2007 (EST)

It's funny that this thread started by me saying that I was falsely being accused of thinking that I could read people's minds - as now it seems you're reading his. For example you say that he thinks he can do those things and that he really wants to do them. I really do think taht your just misunderstanding him - I mean yeah he was probably pissed off at you - however his threats are obviously empty and they were only meant to freak you out - and apparently they succeeded. "his obvious desire to harm ... and his belief that he can are, coupled, kind of scary." --Iduan 02:26, 26 November 2007 (EST)

First, I took no position on the WIGO thing about you, nor have I even read it :-). Second, reading minds is different than reading words from drawing inferences from a collection of experiences with a person. My inferences, drawn from experience with NighTWigK, were that he intended to threaten me, which, alone, is vaguely sociopathic. As you note, it is after all just a wiki. In the end, though, you might have to trust us that he's a little freak, unless you want to read through a couple of e-mail threads. Or point your browser to rationalwiki.info, a little creation of his intended to threaten us into silence when we exposed his NightTrain identity. He is, at the very very least, a disturbed little man.-αmεσ (spy) 02:29, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I disagree - I think that he gets frustrated at times with excessive vandalism, but beyond that nothing. Now, AmesG I'm not sure of the situation surrounding you and TK - and I feel like it is not my place to discuss it--Iduan 02:38, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Good point. Then I'll leave you with this: would it surprise you that he encouraged and committed some of the vandalism?-αmεσ (spy) 02:43, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I know I'm really late to enter this discussion (Damn me for not having a home internet connection) but I think the main point of the first post was not so much that you were really able to read minds, but rahter that the mentality over at Conservapedia seems to be "Block First, Never Ask Questions." No one checks on these blocks and noone gives a second thought when the Sysops block entire IP ranges to stop one vandel.... Killing ants with a shotgun. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 09:38, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Just to pile on about Iduan's troll comments. Calling anyone who argues with the powers that be over at CP a troll is fairly ironic. He/She should acknowledge that the only way a sysop gets to be a sysop over at CP is by being a troll. They just happen to be the sort of troll Andy ( also a troll in the most commonly understood sense) agrees with. And they are given license to be an uncontested king troll b/c of their blocking/editing and slash/burn powers. The whole site is in fact just a load of troll-bait. That is its purpose. The trustworthy encyclopedia tagline, given CP's content and tone, simply proves my point. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{I said what?} 10:14, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Drifting even further off topic here... "any physical threat is merely a joke" -- Iduan, would you care to rethink or reword that? Where I live, a physical threat is called "assault" (if acted on, it's "battery"). I don't think the "joke" defense works. By the way, there are a lot of different sides to TK, and one of his modi operandi is to only show people one of them to gain trust for as long as he needs it. human 13:24, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Here's an example of one thing that he has threatened to do - to release personal information, including where I live, to various nasty types on the internet unless I forced certain bits of the site to be shut down. He didn't, of course, but I still don't like the fact that a) he's threatened to, and b) he could. I might have to buy a dog.

Internet. Serious Business. -- מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Hey, folks - can this really be true?!! Defenestrations wouldn't come much sweeter than this. Dare to believe... XD --Robledo 15:18, 26 November 2007 (EST)