Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive144

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. 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>, <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>, <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>, (new)(back)


Conservapedia Club[edit]

The number of homeschoolers to visit Washington doubles - another example of geometric growth in an more and more conservative world.

But how many are there? 2? 20? 200?

Starting a Conservapedia Club is a brilliant idea: most certainly some of the kids at a club will share a computer - or at least an IP address. To prevent premature blocking, perhaps Ed Poor will undertake the task to contact them - and vouch for them? Shudder...

larronsicut fur in nocte 16:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

We all know Andy can't even be bothered to maintain his shitty blogsite, let alone watch after numerous kids. My bets are around 10 students, give or take. I can just see them taking off in all directions while he has this blank stare of satisfaction that he's making a difference. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 18:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I was just thinking about this when I was earlier on today - his annual trip to Washington. What exactly does he do there? Try and educate them or something? "This is where Jesus landed over 200 years ago and invented the Bill of Rights!" SJ Debaser 18:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Why does Conservapedia Club give me the creepy mental image of a teenage girl hanging posters of Andy? Vulpius 19:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking "Schlafly Youth". And trying to come up with some comedy possibilities for starting one of these. --Gulik 20:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Maybe he just wants a bunch of public schoolers to try and join so he can insult them and recommend watching Comedy Central. --PitchBlackMind 20:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Either that or he wants to try and goad some public school administration into shutting down the club so he can sue them for "persecuting Christians." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 20:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Funny how he doesn't say when the trip will be. Also, there's no article on "Conservapedia Club"... ħumanUser talk:Human 20:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
That's typical Andy, really. Wasn't there that "Andy Schlafly will be giving a talk!" issue where he wouldn't even give out details when people specifically asked? --Sid 21:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm feeling a Schlafly Youth Fun article. Where they all wear little uniforms and glasses and comb their hair like Andy. SJ Debaser 10:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
It's all reminsicent of Ken's shououts that something is going to happen on the internet. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
When I heard "Schlafly Youth", I immediately thought of the inverse of that Chick tract with the little Hitler youth type kid. "Andy, Andy, my parents might be... urg... liberals..." PsyGremlinWhut? 22:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Now I'm thinking of the old Mickey Mouse club opening song.
"Hey there, hi there, ho there, you're unwelcome as can be
A-N-D, R-E-EW,
Schlafly Youth! (Schlafly youth!)
Schlafly Youth! (Schlafly youth!)
Forever keep our lib'rul hating high! (High! Hi! Heil!)
Who's the guy who keeps CP
Conserv'tive as can be?
A-N-D, R-E-EW,
SHa-AL-AF-eL-eY!" --Gulik 05:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy informs SCOTUS that Video Games source of all evil[edit]

Not sure if anyone else posted this; never saw it. This is what inspired his absurd news item a week ago: [1] It's the references to Atari-caused-death and Sega violence which make it most amusing. PubliusTalk 20:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OH, that's fine research Herr Publius. Well done for finding this, lots to go through here. But WTF? Did The Governator hire Schlafly? We The People need to know. (Answer: hardly). --DogPMarmite Patrol 21:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Good Lord, that makes for wonderful reading. This document submitted to the Court reads just like a CP article of his - endless assertions and unreferenced "it is obvious that"s; Andy bleats on and on about the "smoking causes cancer" cover up; if "Nintendo learned the message that “violence sells video games to children” from competitors Sony and Sega, as Andy claims, why then did they have such enormous success with the utterly childs-play Wii? Oh Lord I can't go on. No wonder no real Court takes him seriously. --DogPMarmite Patrol 22:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
There was an edit conflict here, but damned if I'm going to adjust the indents. You'll just have to suffer for your actions of daring to add stuff before me. Anywas, great find Publius! Skimming through it, some things that amused me:
  • The paper had the following bookmarks generated:
"New Cover"
"In the" "Petitioners,"
"New Tables"
"New Brief" etc.
  • First line: "Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund (“EFELDF”), a nonprofit organization founded in 1981, is a pro-family group that has long advocated fidelity to the text of the U.S. Constitution." You almost lost my interest at the start, Andy.
  • "There are many studies confirming what should be obvious: hours of violent video-game-playing by an impressionable, addicted child leads to increased likelihood of violent behavior." Perhaps that's cause the kid was already an addict, hurrrr
  • The younger brother allegedly got mad because he got beat at some video games and got the gun.” Yesss, there was NO problem at all with the kids HAVING DIRECT ACCESS TO A LOADED GUN
  • "Although such deaths are unusual, the stress violent video games cause can be seen in most players. Players’ limbs twitch; “[o]ften, they pound the machines as if they were battling real invaders.”" Hahaha, no comment necessary!
  • From different paragraps:
    • "Just as researchers could be found for decades to deny that smoking causes lung cancer..."
    • "..becoming desensitized and even brainwashed into violent thought and action patterns..."
    • "It is not easy to prove a direct causal link between pornography and gambling and the harm they cause, just as for decades it was difficult to prove that smoking causes cancer."
Though the Assfly manages to supress the shouting of his crackpot keywords in most of the article, it does occasionally break through, especially with smoking & pornography.
  • He keeps on talking how everybody knows that these violent video games made by "predatory, billion-dollar video game industry that churns out increasingly graphic blood and gore" will "cause the child to buy into the rampages of murder and other heinous crimes that he is acting out". However, most sources seem to be random websites (, really Andy?) or some paper source which sounds suspiciously like a gossip column (most used source: Death by Computer Games,” Shanghai Star).
  • "Voluminous research data reinforce the common-sense view that violent video games are hurtful to the young people addicted to them, and these games even place those around them at risk for being victimized too." See, THIS is one of numerous places which could've used a proper source!
  • "Our “resilient species” can elect representatives to protect against the corruption of the youth." CP did say that there isn't really such a thing as quoting out of context.. Also, for some reason this quote makes me feel like I should start welcoming our Lizard Overlords.
  • "CONCLUSION The Petition for Certiorari should be granted. " . Or else Andy will write up SUCH a scathing rant on you on his blog!
Sorry for the overly use of bulleted points, I tried to make it a bit readable. I'll leave the legal stuff for someone else to pick through. I think he stated that videogames shouldn't be sold to kids, because it was also forbidden for cars with audio equipment to bother pedestrians with their rantings. --GTac 22:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It's all just wonderful. To be complete, it would only need "the video game industry is brainwashing addicted children into beating balls at eachother with paddles, throwing barrels at plumbers, jumping on mushrooms and turtles, and feeding coffee-soaked cheerios to pet hedgehogs. Deny this and lose all credibility. 2+2=4. Godspeed." PubliusTalk 00:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah. So when Andy agrees with research results, said results are 100% accurate and cannot be called into question. But when Andy disagrees... well. The research was just crap to begin with. Obviously. X Stickman 01:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
So why don't we copy it over and do our wonderful RW magick trix on it? Side-by-side, perhaps, or maybe we have enough tape of him talking now that we could audio-animate it? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:23, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, it also pissed me off that it doesn't have page numbers. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that as well. I mean, what sort of legal document doesn't have page numbers? I can only assume that he typed it himself as any competent legal secretary would have used them as a matter of course. Redchuck.gif Генгисmutating 10:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
As someone with a background as a (competent) legal secretary, I fully endorse this statement. --Kels 20:18, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Whoops, I take that back - they're at the top of the pages, not sure why I didn't see them. Although, it's odd that when scrolling the right side bar thing, the page numbers aren't displayed like on most pdfs. So, anyway, do we want to side-by-side it? ħumanUser talk:Human 23:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
It's too bad that most video game addicts (like me) are weaklings. Because, you know, I've gotten mad a few times, I've "choked" a few people, and I've been punched by another gamer.. but you know, none of it actually hurt anyone. We're so darn weak.. manual violence doesn't do anything significant. The main problem is, yes, the easy access to automated weaponry (guns, et cetera).
Another point, if a gamer mostly plays RPGs (talking about myself here), does he have an increased tendency to have violent bouts? The answer is "no". Why? Because I was more peaceful than my brother ever was. And my brother? He was one of those study freaks, always coming home at 9pm and going to sleep at 10pm. So, by my deductions, it is not video games that turn people violent, it is countless hours of studying and the stress the world has to offer. (video games help me relax and keep me from "sinful" things.. sometimes) Fuzzy =^_^= 17:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Fourth of 7[edit]

Ah, good times, good times. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

So, apparently exposure to CP causes reasonable writing to slowly deteriorate:

"Everyone whose work is not vital (like nurses and police) takes a day or two off work, and people enjoy the summer weather with cookouts, get-togethers, and, at night, displays of fireworks and bonfires. Most towns hold parades, as well as usually sponsoring safe fireworks shows. Some people hold re-enactments of Revolutionary War era events."

Was bit-rotted merely by being on the CP server to:

"Most American businesses are closed and the citizens enjoy the summer holiday with cookouts, get-togethers, concerts, baseball, picnics, barbecues, bon fires, parades, and at night time enjoy displays of fireworks. Some people hold re-enactments of Revolutionary War era and some people give political speeches at events across the nations cities and towns."

I want my edits back, Mr. Schlafly!
I also want to know how the bonfires turned into a daytime activity and became two words. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, Andy finally repaired the liberal bias in my choice of name for the article by cutting and pasting and redirecting (couldn't use "move"?) to the title of a movie... ħumanUser talk:Human 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Moar Conservative words.[edit]

Yup. Now it's "catharsis". Unsurprisingly Andy gets the year wrong (although he's close), as well as the definition. OED: noun the release of pent-up emotions, for example through drama. the purging of the emotions or relieving of emotional tensions, esp. through certain kinds of art, as tragedy or music. 1795–1805. Nowhere (although I'm ignoring Mirriam-Webster) are the words "in writing or teaching or confession" mentioned. Andy, if you're going to pull stuff out of your ass, at least try and make an effort - or do you want to look like a prick? --PsyGremlinWhut? 12:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

An ancient greek word is now conservative? He really doesn't have any knowledge of... well... anything, does he? PubliusTalk 15:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I did check MW and that's where Andy got the date from, but even their definition says "purification or purgation of the emotions (as pity and fear) primarily through art" so just where he's sucked his "definition" from I dunno. Even cp:Catharsis disagrees with him. --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
That is pretty bad. Catharsis derives of course from Aristotle, where his 18th century date comes from I have no idea. It is also a phenomenon that I have long been fascinated with. The psychological and neural underpinnings of such a processes are fascinating. I have been tinkering around with some models using mirror neurons, but I digress. The whole point of catharsis is experience not expression. Telling someone the things that are bothering you, and feeling better is not catharsis. Catharsis is the cleansing sensation that is derived through a shared experience with something you are witnessing. Hence why art plays so highly in any discussion of catharsis. I imagine that for most artist the ability to get people to so identify with your subject that the emotional climax of your piece creates the same climax in the viewers is the height of what art can be. tmtoulouse 16:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
And sex, of course. Oh, and "new layer is now 0-1-2-3, ripe for a good 1900s word worthy of being the 100th for that century" he's not even pretending to try any more that his conclusion is based on his data rather than vice versa, is he? (I know, that's old news, but still...). ħumanUser talk:Human 20:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

So if things are getting more and more and more conservative as time goes by, doesn't that mean that working backwards Conservatism didn't even exist in the Garden of Eden, or by his workings even before the 10th century or so? --Kels 20:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Correct. It was invented in the 17th or 18th century by Devout Christian philosophers and Doctors of Divinity, and has grown in a Euclidean fashion ever since. Parallel lines, after all, never meet. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
That assumes it's working in a linear fashion. If it works in exponential fashion, you'd expect one guy (conservative) in the village (one of Noah's kid, I wonder which one) poisoning converting the whole population (of liberals). K61824"6+18=24" 02:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
No, KT, it doesn't. It's geometric, or aren't you paying attention? No wonder these liberal atheistic children in public schools murder each other on a daily basis when they deny the obvious facts of conservatism and its booming rape of words! ħumanUser talk:Human 04:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Nat'l Enquirer of the Internet(s)[edit]

Okay, that tickles me terribly. The fact that the Liberal Gossip page mentioned in the WiGO cites for the term "National Enquirer of the Internet" a mirrored version of the CP article on Frei Republik! Andy's just not even trying to hide the crazy these days. --Kels 19:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I love that he added John Schlafly as a "conservative figure" who has had destructive and false rumors spread about him. I always wondered how he dealt with a gay brother, and I should've known: by pretending it isn't true.--PitchBlackMind 20:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Normally, I'd say this was the work of editors of a certain nature, but then Schlafly made a front page post about the Daily Mail talking about how Michael Jackson, gasp, did drugs. The edit summary was "Hollywood Values emerge about Michael Jackson". Imitation never lives up to the real thing. 23:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Sarah Palin In Jack Boots.[edit]

I love the juxtapositioning of the images in this. It looks like Sarah Palin is wearing jack boots. I suspected as much... StarFish 20:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, that's funny, that is. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Ahahaha! I lol'd. <-As fatigue increases, eloquence... gets badder 21:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The competition[edit]

I found a blog that has some interesting insight on it about CP. We get a few shout-outs as well. Can anyone here claim this as their own doing? Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 21:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty convinced it's one of us or someone who reads us. On of the links on the side is SirChuckB's blog and that's pretty obscure (sorry chuck, but you gotta update that sometime!) It's quite a good one though, boils down CP's recent greatest WIGOs into readable English. Totnesmartin 22:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It is Psy's blog. - π 08:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Er... yup... guilty as charged. (Thanks for the comment too!) --PsyGremlinWhut? 10:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Really? I think it's CUR's. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 21:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Schlafly, please pick up the red courtesy telephone[edit]

Yo Assfly! Why don't you get off your ass and GET A JOB or something so you can afford a decent WEB SERVER? Huh? I can punk your bitch into a FUCKING COMA with two netbooks and a free hotspot in FUCKING MAYFIELD. You know what Mayfield calls itself? Mayfield calls itself THE CENTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND PIG FARMING COMMUNITY. And it FUCKING IS! No offense, but WHAT THE FUCK? Seriously, WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK?? You have SYSOPS that take it up the ass harder than that. I recognize you're not exactly SCOTUS material but you could at least SELL THE YUGO or something. Be creative, man. If you can weasel your way to a fucking LAW DEGREE without opening TWO BOOKS, you can weasel yourself into some FUCKING CONNECTIVITY. — Unsigned, by: Mountain Blue / talk / contribs

Ahhhh its always nice to see a fellow countrymen losing his wick, I think may have even been to Mayfield. Rant on good sir. Ace McWickedi9 20:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I see someone rolled through a liter of whiskey and posted. Love it. Epic rant is epic. --PitchBlackMind 06:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
He has a job, with a decent sized nest-egg to boot. Conservapedia is not a top priority.. It's not in his top 5, but probably still in the top ten though.
He has lots of books in his library. I quizzed him on a few, and he faired better than you would have expected.
Just because you say "no offense", doesn't make it any less offensive. Fuzzy =^_^= 06:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
At PBM, yeah, well, people do rant here because we don't mind. At KTLTLKKAMES, yeah, we know he has a fat bank account. "Real job"? Lawyering for his mother's Eagle Forum? Retainer for AAPS? Lots of books? So do I. And I haven't read 2/3 of them, but I could still convince a 20 year old I had. No offense, of course, but I wonder if maybe you knew what was in those books well enough to quiz him? ħumanUser talk:Human 07:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hopefully I'm sleepy and that wasn't supposed to be as rude as I read it. But in case it needs to be cleared up, I said I loved the rant. Should've bolded it apparently.--PitchBlackMind 07:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, I think I might have really been referring to MB's rant not your comment on it. </scotch> is no excuse! ħumanUser talk:Human 07:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Kektklik, I am curious. If he seems to a be half-way decent, thoughtful person in real life, what do you think is the basis of his extreme ideological blindness, ignorance, and bigotry online? I understand that CP is not his highest priority, but lack of priority does not explain what happened in the Lenski affair last year. I know you have a different perspective, and I am honestly wondering what your thoughts on this matter are. What is with him that he behaves the way he does at CP or anywhere else online that he has posted? Kaalis 18:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
People behave differently on the Internet, simply put. We are capable of hiding behind our usernames (for the most part) and act accordingly to whatever fantasies we want. I am a woman~ *flirts with Radioactive afikomen* (just giving an over-the-top example)
Andy lawyers for more than just EagleForum, he also has a few petty cases here and there. (I saw his hours typed up on the family computer a few times). If I didn't answer the question completely, then I guess I can't read too well.
Per the comment below, his primary employment (and income) is being a lawyer. The homeschooling "business" only earns him--I would venture a guess--about 1/6 of his income (after taxes). Fuzzy =^_^= 22:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Interesting that he earns money from being a lawyer. I wonder who his clients are and what kind of work he does. My research of his federal cases reflected the he basically has very little federal practice experience and isn't a great legal writer for someone with his educational pedigree. I have no idea about state court cases because the databases aren't located in a single place and are hence a pain to research. Oh, and Foucault's Pendulum was a best selling novel, hardly obscure, a sort of Illuminatis! meets The Da Vinci Code written at a college level rather than a 6th grade level. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
So very little federal work and 0 New York state court appearances in more than 12 years. See here. I'm checking to see if New Jersey has a similar database online. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Right, so I'm not finding a NJ database, just sporadic references online to a few amicus briefs he did for right wing outfits and some other political hired gun work he's done, like suing the West Virginia Trial Lawyers Association on behalf of a physician for the Associations part in the state's "unfavorable medical liability insurance climate." I wish he had a website up describing his practice. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not at liberty to discuss Andy's clients. >.>
It was obscure in my high school. I was the only one who chose to borrow the book from the school library in the past 4 years. (he didn't own the book). "Filename: Pinball" Fuzzy =^_^= 02:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Just to be very clear, my wondering about who this man's clients are, aside from those mentioned in the press and that I can find in briefs and decisions, was exactly that. Wondering. I'm not looking for any comment from you or anyone on that stuff, as what you may or may not have learned in that house on this subject is not for public consumption. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 02:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Here, here. Which is his primary employment - joke lawyer or horrifying homeschool teacher? (is anyone else confused how it can be called homeschooling when they gather together under an educator for a scheduled class?) But I'd be fascinated to know what is on his bookshelf, though Human is absolutely right - owned certainly != read. In a way, I can see him reading quality literature, but just not getting it, given his unimaginably warped lens. Then again, I've never found the far right to be interested in the western culture they so ardently defend. PubliusTalk 17:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Their idea of "western culture" is probably John Wayne. Totnesmartin 21:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


Andy invites Flanagan to a gun-control debate (twice!). Flanagan begins badly. Andy repeats desire for an open-minded debate, then kicks Flanagan in the nuts. Flanagan tries again. Andy throws dirt in Flanagan's face, and TK hits him from behind.--WJThomas 18:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Bonus Schlafly Statistic (see his edit comment): Guns are used for defensive purposes 40 million times/year in the USA (guns used defensively 100 times more than criminally--100 x 400,000 = 40,000,000). Even Loony John Lott and his ilk don't claim more than a million or two defensive uses/yr.--WJThomas 18:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Gun control is a very entertaining subject to attempt to engage Assfly on. Reality is very skewed toward the efficacy of gun control. Attempts to mount counter-arguments require very careful quote-mining and cherry-picking which Andy is not exactly capable of. Instead, we get awesome Schlafly statistics, references to unsourced "research" and, of course, teh banhammer. Fun indeed. And yes, Andy, I was very amused. Thank you. — Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs 18:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
If only JFK had been packing heat in Dallas, he'd probably STILL be President. --Gulik 21:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

All you libruls don't know what guns are really about. Not only can they fire bullets, but if one is in your possession, bullets fired at you actually bend around you and don't hit you. This is fact, 100%. X Stickman 22:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I was just watching DL Hughley's stand up special, he did a great bit about that. "I saw a car with a bumper sticker that said "I support the NRA" then right next to that was another one that said "What Would Jesus Do?" I'm sure that when Jesus was crucified he said "Forgive them father, for they know not what they do" and NOT "When I get down from here, I'm gonna bust a cap in you muthafuckas." SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 23:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
No, he's saving THAT for the Second Coming. --Gulik 07:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


Does anyone know what started Andy's recent fascination with autism? I appear to have missed the trigger. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

It's been around a while. He shills for an anti-vax (among other things) doctor club, has for years. The vax-autism "link" is made very readily. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Human! Ah jeez, I can't believe I didn't put that together. He seems to be especially preoccupied with it at the moment though. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 22:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
(editing from phone so might screw up) THIS is what first drew me to Rational Wiki, the whole vaccines cause autism nonsense. Anyone with half a brain cell can surely see the lack of any link between them (besides one guys dodgy lawyer funded study based on the opinions of a few parents) and that the complications that MIGHT arise with a vaccine are actually more likely to happen through catching the disease itself! Smg87 22:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I've always been flabbergasted by the anti-vaccination cranks, I just don't get it. Even if you honestly believe in the very shaky theories about vaccinations being a cause in autism... you have to completely ignore the positive effect they have, and that's bloody hard to ignore. ESPECIALLY considering it means you're putting your kids' lives on it, and possibly kids around them. Honestly, what the fuck people. --GTac 00:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The anti-vacc people I've met have exhibited some of the most immoral thinking I've come across: they unabashedly don't vaccinate their kids because they're convinced it's connected with some sort of diseases/disorders, but gladly leech off the vaccination of others by relying on herd immunity (while blaming sundry random problems on vaccination). "I don't want my kids to get sick, but if others get sick/get autism/get ADHD/are retarded/fund Merck while protecting my kids, so much the worse for them." There'd be a bit of schadenfreude involved if the parents got rubella rather than their poor kids. PubliusTalk 00:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I think they're too far removed. The people who now front the Anti-Vaccine crap weren't alive for the true epidemics. They weren't alive when Polio was destroying America, or the Flu, or Measels, Mumps and Rubella.... Or any of that crap. So they can convince themselves that it's just a government/big industry plot to make money. PS, anyone else notice that a lot of the people who front this are the ones who also argue against government regulation of the same industry they claim is knowingly giving kids Autism for profit? How do they function with all the polar opposite positions they take? SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 00:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I'll admit, there is no real evidence for an MMR-autism link, and the guy that faked results did more damage to that cause than any one else. But why refuse to give seperate vaccines? MMR is available only as a triple shot. Say what you like about autism, that's definitely a health risk. Why not three seperate vaccines over a period of months, less likely to cause an adverse reaction. Why not? Because then you might not take them all. Drug companies have no interest in creating a cure, only a treatment. Laurent Cousin 06:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but I have to strongly disagree with you. The medical rationale for making a triple vaccine is simple: less likely to miss shots, better overall protection. So many people miss their shots and suffer the consequences (myself included). Why not combine them? There is no danger with a triple vaccine. Also, there is more chance of an adverse reaction with single shots, no country in the world advocates them over the MMR vaccine. --Smg87 06:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The MMR vaccine is given at a time when the child is most susceptible to those three diseases. Single jabs for each one would be delayed over periods of time, during those delays the child continues to be at risk for the other two diseases. So let us play Russian Roulette with a child, and pick which of the two diseases the child remains at great risk for, right? Should we let the parents chose maybe? That's a hell of a Sophie's Choice. How is having the three vaccines in a single shot a greater health risk than having them in three separate shots? There is certainly no evidence that I am aware of that there is any increase risk, and when the alternative is randomly leaving open a child to a debilitating and often deadly disease...well there is your answer. tmtoulouse 07:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Is he deliberately ironic?[edit]

I notice Andy posts an article about schools in Tampa Bay wanting as 40-100% grading scale, which he heavily criticises. Given that he use an 80-100% grading scale (he marks a student wrong and only deducts 2 of a possible 10 points) isn't that a little rich? - π 03:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry just noticed the WIGO, I stopped reading them a while back. - π 03:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Point of etiquette[edit]

What's the proper thing to do if I see a WIGO that's clumsily written and getting low scores, and would be far more effective funnier if it were rewritten to make its point more succinctly? Should I (a) rewrite it, (f) leave it alone and add a new WIGO for the same CP event, or (q) ignore it entirely and go watch 'Ninja Warrior' on my TiVo? - Cuckoo 13:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

a and q are good options. This has been discussed before and previously users felt quite at liberty to alter other people's WIGOs. As long as it doesn't get into an edit war I think that's fair game. It isn't about personal vanity so much as a colaborative project producing a well written page. It's by far the most viewed page on here so it's in everyone's interest to keep it punchy. INO duplicating a WIGO is always a bad plan. If you edit a WIGO you may also want to post in here saying why. StarFish 14:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
One has to remember what the "goal" of WIGO-CP is...pointing out the mind numbingly stoopid hypocrisy that drives away the very people it claims to serve.
CP, (if it were run by a less insane person, [we're talking TK here not Aschlafly since the latter doesn't do much day-to-day besides finding new "insights" at the bottom of his Jack Daniel's bottles]), could have been a credible resource, just think what an intellect like William Buckley would have made CP!
As such WIGO's are individual's perspectives on the sheer insanity that seemingly drives the wiki into Never-never land. The "scores" have nothing whatsoever to do with anything save how each item hits the mob on any particular day.
In general I leave badly writ WIGO's to fial on their own, though I have rewritten a few as well. If I wanted to be mean I'd ask to have ye "appointed" to be the official WIGO gatekeeper. You could have the power to decide which WIGO's were "good enough" and I'd sit back with mine popcorn and watch the lulz as it unfolded until you left in disgust and revulsion.
People eventually learn "what sells" (higher scores) and write them accordingly or stop writing them altogether.
CЯacke® 14:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
You know, I was actually a bit worried about that in the first place, CP actually being run by someone competent, if intellectually amoral. Basically think of that, a right-wing slant on all topics, presented plausibly and as a valid take on the facts. Believable misinformation that supports Conservatives, all slant all the time. Could have been problematic, but fortunately we got an incompetent nutter who immediately surrounded himself with fruitcakes and sociopaths, and credibility quickly went in the dumpster and we could all just sit here and laugh at the clowns. Philip, on the other hand, had a much better chance to do something similar for Creationist "facts" over at aSK, but he made one huge mistake. Letting himself be questioned and joining in the debates. Not smart, Creationists must never let themselves be questioned, or their arguments fall apart (even if they don't recognize it happening and handwave it away). There's a reason CMI doesn't have comment sections on their articles, y'know. --Kels 16:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Reality has a lib-burr-rul bias, so that is actually impossible. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 16:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Essentially, the danger is a FoxNewsWiki, where you can get utter bullshit analysis, where moron commentators rewrite history (the New Deal worsened the depression. The US won both World Wars virtually alone) and people believe it because they have fancy titles. Luckily, a conservative project can never be sane so long as it is collaborative. In politics and media, the sane do their best to keep the nutters quiet (see the Canadian Conservative Party), but that's hard, if not impossible, on a wiki. PubliusTalk 20:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Plus, to maintain ideological purity from the inevitable hordes of Liberal Saboteurs and apolitical pranksters, they'd need to patrol it like a print-shop in the USSR. Pretty much like CP, in fact. --Gulik 04:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

<insert name here>'s unfunny WIGOs[edit]

Lest anyone accuse me of being altruistically interested in the good of RW, let me clear that up: no, my only thought was of myself and my belief that I am much funnier than, for example, <insert name here>. I sometimes look at a WIGO and think, "Hey, I could have written that better!" But then I think that if I were to rewrite it, the original poster would tie me to a stake and light me on fire. - Cuckoo 16:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Setting the bar kinda low there. Pretty much everyone is funnier than <insert name here>. --Kels 17:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey you jerks, leave <insert name here> alone. Why is all your guys ever do is sit around and pick on valued editors who try and make good contributions. I wouldn't be surprised if <insert name here>. got sick of your crap and left. SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 17:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for sticking up for me, ChuckB. In everyone's defense, though, my dry wit comes across much better in person. <insert name here> 23:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any problem with improving wigos, regardless of their "score". Fix typos, spelling and grammar, obviously, but also if something just isn't "reporting on the lulz" well, I say fix it. I see no reason why this one page on the wiki should be immune to "merciless editing" to make it better. I know people are a bit "possessive" of items they add, but still, it's not like they solved some important math puzzle, CP's RC is there for all to see... Also, the possessiveness sometimes leads to premature wigoing (IMO), often a story can be told better once it is finished unfolding. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
If one of my WIGOs is sucking it, I'm happy to have somebody improve it if they think they can.--WJThomas 20:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
We really need to clarify this "ownership" of wigos, which in my opinion makes for crappy wigos and ego wars over who saw what first on CP:RC. Come on, folks. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I have never understood it either really. Meh, its just like sharing a joke and when sharing a joke its the worst sort of people who lean over and say "I made that up myself you know". Ace McWickedi9 05:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I give in....what have I done to upset you lot? Isn't it bad enough to keep getting banned over the road without you lot picking on me? If I knew how to exercise my Syop powers here I'd be tempted to set a goat on you all. (The real) Mick McT 08:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh bolloxs....just spotted what's going on! Please ignore the above, I withdraw any threat of goat. Mick McT 08:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It always catches me too. Then I remember where I am. This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 09:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I hope the person who invented the myName thing develops itchy balls or something... at least until I stop falling for it. --PsyGremlinWhut? 10:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry Mick, it catches everyone. I made a twat out of myself once many times, but with the Myname thing on "who's going to hell" list here. Boy was my face red! SJ Debaser 10:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Not gonna lie... almost went off over this one. Definitely a WTF?! moment, seeing as I have one world WIGO to my name and almost no other contributions in the past thirty days. --NTemple 16:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Acedemics and Athletics[edit]

I know this is old news, but for those who haven't yet followed the link under the Home-Schooled football league WIGO, the picture there gave me one of the best lulz I've had in weeks! Junggai 13:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

One of Pat Conroy's novels (I think its The Prince of Tides) includes a scene where the narrator remembers when he played high school football, and a pre game pep talk. It goes something like this...

Coach: I want you men to go out there and hit them, and hit them hard!

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: I want to see their fucking blood! I want to see their god damn guts spilled on the field!

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: I need hitters! Do have me some fucking hitters?

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: Let us pray.

That being said, church state issues aside, I see nothing wrong with an athletic team praying prior to the game, asl ong as its asking that they conduct themselves as athletes and gentlemen, no one is injured, etc etc etc. — Unsigned, by: MDB / talk / contribs

That dialogue sounds as if the prayer immediately following would be to Sol Invictus rather than Jesus. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Speaking as someone who spent some time in locker rooms before football games (I was a manager -- read "waterboy"), Conroy's description was a bit over the top, but not far from reality at all. And both my experience and Conroy's novel were in the American South (me: East Tennessee, Conroy: South Carolina's tidewater region), so the prayer was definitely to Jesus. MDB 18:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Aww, shucks. First ListenerX and MDB evoke southern football culture, then JDWpianist goes and creates an article on Gram Parsons, whose "Hickory Wind" always makes me think of my own southern roots. A day for nostalgia, indeed. Junggai 23:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Southern? Wasn't he "country rock" in the sense of leading to the Eagles, Linda, Jackson, etc.? Or am I wrong? ħumanUser talk:Human 05:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, Gram preferred to call what he was doing "Cosmic American Music," and apparently wasn't thrilled with the Eagles. But the country rock scene in many ways started with the Byrds' Sweetheart of the Radio, which Gram contributed a great deal to inspiration-wise. Anyway, "Hickory Wind" is a great song about being from the south, and having complicated feelings about it. Junggai 07:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I guess I should do some listening :) Thanks. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
You should! No one's life is made the poorer by listening to Gram Parsons. Junggai 07:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
PS, I thought this was one of the better recent wigos. That sign... ROTFLMAO! ħumanUser talk:Human 05:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I just had to correct the spelling of this section header. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 17:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Is It Just Me[edit]

Or does the CP server appear to be suffering a little. I'm getting "503 Internal Server Error. The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request." for about one request in five. StarFish 20:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Aye. I just checked a few talk pages today and got 500/503 errors every now and then. --Sid 20:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
They're getting a lot of hits lately, probably a patriotic surge of interest due to the upcoming 7/4 celebrations. Apparently people are visiting approximately as often as the server can manage to keep up (sentence?). ħumanUser talk:Human 21:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Uh, I have trouble reading CP too since this morning (it changes from a 503 yesterday to "Forbidden/Not found" ?) ThiehZOYG I edit like Kenservative! 14:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I haven't been able to even view a page on CP since yesterday morning. Had to look at the screenshots of WIGO diffs. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 17:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Try to view via proxy. Is it possible Andy has taken to blocking your IP from seeing the site? PubliusTalk 18:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Beats me. Is it possible in wiki software to block an IP from even viewing? The site is coming up now, just very slowly. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
It's possible at some level, yes. Trent pranked TK once by 404ing his IP address (I think it was the IP, may have been the user name...), blocking him from even viewing the site. But I suspect it was a server-level exploit, not a MW one. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
The 404s are a consequence of the recent patriotic surge of interest, as Human so lyrically describes it, just like the 503s and 500s. I don't expect any decrease in 404 frequency for at least the next twelve hours. Mountain Blue 22:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
This shows that the MediaWiki software can be used for blocking even viewing by certain IPs. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 17:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

AndyPandy and the Half-blood Prince term 'Continental Drift'[edit]

I knew that Andy was an ignorant git, but this made my jaw hit the floor. Jebus, its not like you have to know a lot about geology to realise that continental drift was an extremely controversial topic in its day, and the only reason it stopped being controversial was the eventual death of an entire generation of geologists.--Precumming Storm 21:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't Andy recently arguing that continental drift was happening at a rate of several feet per hour or some such? --Kels 21:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Should we point out to Andy that conservatives and the church held up recognition of Drift Theory because.... Wait for it...... The Bible said God created the World and said nothing about moving continents apart? It wasn't until the evidence was mounted so high that they couldn't deny it anymore that they finally changed their stance. SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 21:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeh Kels, I remember that too, he said something like that just a few dozens of yards each year is still pretty slow, or something like that. Also this thread title amused me. --GTac 00:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
It was on the Old Earth talk page. Andy lost interest after Addison poitned out that by Andy's calculations the continents were drifting apart at the rate of 8 feet per hour or something After checking the talk page I see that by Andy's calculation they were moving at 8.8 feet per second. Which is pretty quick. Ace McWickedi9 00:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
"Someone stop that continent, it's doing 6mph", if I'm not correct? --DogPMarmite Patrol 00:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
6 Imperial miles per hour, yes. But it's OK because the continents are only moving apart, right? It's not like the Earth is a globe or anything so nobody's in any danger. Mountain Blue 00:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

So I was looking through Conservapedia's wonderful geology section when I found this piece of crap. I'm sorry if I'm highlighting somebody's parody here (Hey, Terry!) but what the hell is this supposed to mean?

"Uniformitarianism is the view that the forces affecting the universe are the same now as at any time in the past. It was proposed by geologist Charles Lyell, and was a major influence on Charles Darwin. Although uniformitarianism has been geological dogma since the time of Lyell, over the last half century, there has been a noticeable shift away from uniformitarianism. It is now, for example, widely accepted that the extinction of the dinosaurs was the result of the collision of an asteroid with the Earth."

What?!? Bil08 01:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

This is "serious" creationist "science". If you take courses in biology, geology, chemistry, they do talk about the assumption that the universe is constant. Fortunately in physics where they debate that assumption, they have found that it has been constant or that for the time frames biologists, geologists and chemists are interested in, it is true enough. Creationist see this as a way to wedge there ideas into science by claiming they are just working under different assumptions, however they don't like to draw attention to the fact that their assumptions are false. That last example about meteors is an exercise in equivocation.- π 01:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
That's just whack. A rock crashing into Earth is as "uniformitarian" as the orbit of Jupiter. Shit happens. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The uniformitarian assumption is that rocks crass into earth at about the same rate, or a rate proportional to the number of available rocks, now as in the past. Huge ones that wipe out dinosaurs show up on average once every few hundred million years. The idea that on catastrophic event effected the earth's geology so the earth's geology must only be effected by catastrophic events is an attempt to squeeze the flood in somehow. I wouldn't try to understand it, creationist are always trying to create controversy and debate where none exists. - π 08:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I think Andy's rate of drift was calculated purely on the width of the Altantic divided by 6013 (2009+4004) years but completely ignoring current measurements which show it to be of the order of a few inches per year. It's quite likely that the rates have varied over geological history as the physical makeup of the earth has changed but it is unlikely that anything approaching 6 mph has occurred for anything more than a couple of seconds in a localised area. Why Andy thinks it surprising that the idea of continental drift is so surprisingly recent as it is "such a simple concept" just shows how dumb the guy is, but anyone who studies geology by reading a dictionary is obviously not going to be in any shape or form an authority. Geology is quite a recent science and macro-geology rather than petrology has only progressed in the last fifty years with developments in geophysics and geodesy. Being able to measure accurately things like distances, and "see" deep structures through analysis of seismic waves or underwater survey techniques. As the continents move so slowly why would anyone think that the continents drift? The initial concept was basically just looking at a map/globe and thinking "hey, doesn't the coastline of Africa fit rather well with that of central and south America?". Early geology was very much about local issues related to mineral extraction and quarrying, so a global perspective was lacking. It's only after we have mapped rocks all over the Earth that we can finally start to piece everything together and most of that has only happened within the last century. Andy's presumption to expound on any and every subject with a confidence and authority derived solely from his religious and political views is simply breathtaking. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 11:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
No kidding, with all the things he's a self proclaimed expert in, you'd think he could find a better job than half assed lawyer for his mom's business. SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 18:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


What's the problem? Powell was later rehabilitated? [2] RobS 02:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Your a witty man Rob. - π 02:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
If you said emancipated that would have been a bit more clever, although possibly slightly offensive. - π 02:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
très encyclopedic, Rob. — Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs 02:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry Rob, endorsing Obama does not get Powell a pass on lying to the UN to let us go to war. His Obama presentation was good (words good, ad hominem does not weaken them), but he utterly destroyed his credibility otherwise years before. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
There is rehab service for that? I thought they only know rehab services for homosexuality, alcoholism and drug addiction. Or are we talking about something so profound that people don't want to talk about it? K61824"6+18=24" 19:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Well duh (why does it always fall to me to explain this?) Gulag stands for Chief Administration of Corrective Labor Camps; read this section of Sozhenitsyn's Gulag Archipeligo for a clue 451-452. Enemies of the People (like Powell once was) were issued certificates of rehabilitation. RobS 23:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy/Addy and the 2nd Commandment[edit]

WIGO has AddisonDM (whose name always makes me think of cough syrup) challenging Andy's contention that the Bible forbids images of humans, and tweaking Addy for forgetting the 2nd Commandment. Except...that's not what the 2nd is about--it proscribes "graven images", but does not mention humans specifically, and is generally interpreted as a caution against worshiping "false idols" and statues and whatnot. There's potential for fun here, by the way--While Andy bemoans the good ol' days of image prohibition, he seems fine with it on his website, and there's a long history of graven images (particularly people) within Christianity, particularly in Andy's claimed denomination. I suspect Addison realizes all this, and that this is where (s)he is headed.--WJThomas 10:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Another thought: Andy can go three ways here, and I'm not sure which would be most fun. 1)"Oops, I was wrong." (unlikely) 2)"I'm right--we'll have to remove all images of humans from CP" (highly unlikely) 3)"I'm right, but now I'll twist myself into a knot to rationalize the painfully obvious exceptions". (likely)--WJThomas 10:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and of course...4) ignores Addison (most likely, if he tries to think it through)--WJThomas 10:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Expect a talk-page archival soon. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 11:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Awhaaaaa....I just read this comment by Andy and my brain tried to scurry off and hide in the closet. --Kels 15:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I always thought that the Second Commandment was a blanket ban on all images, which was why there was not very much of a Jewish art tradition. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 15:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I always understood it as a ban on images of god which gets interesting when you consider the number of images of that man being strung up. Silver Sloth 15:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Like any other aspect of Christianity, what it means depends on which wackos you're listening to. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I've never heard of anyone interpreting it as a ban of images of people or images in general. All it says is you shouldn't make and worship "idols", which I believe refers to images, statues etc. representing God or of false gods. All images aren't idols. Etc 18:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, most of the pictures in the masterpiece section on their main page has to be removed if Andy stands by that statement. And then there is the problem of painting of the picture of Jesus/God/Trinity, as seen in Vatican and a lot of painters around Europe/America. All of a sudden they don't look like human anymore. ThiehLooking for potion recipes 18:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Sad news for CPalmer[edit]

With the unfortunate demise of Tago, his list is back down to nine. Maybe TK wants the spot? The reason can be 'not blocking me yet'. EddyP 10:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

He may want to get rid of the list altogether. It is cursed. At least my list only had 2 people forcibly removed from it. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 10:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Craven Obama[edit]

In yet another example of Obama's socialist tendencies and hatred of self-defense for Americans, he has cravenly thrown himself at the feet of America's great enemy the USSR Russia and agreed to destroy all of America's weapons. EddyP 15:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure Chuck Norris will provide a fair and balanced analysis for WND. Silver Sloth 15:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Please knock it off with the TK WIGO's already[edit]

Jezus christ knock it off with the TK WIGO's already. Is anyone surprised at anything that guy does anymore? He's a transparent hate-troll. Poking him with a stick by going anywhere near his talk page is going to get you blocked. Wouldn't surprise me if he also used it as an opportunity to rangeblock part of Western Europe. Please for the love of goat wait for him to do something out of the ordinary. Intellectually dishonest news posts, blocks of unremarkable users, "look at me, Andy" brown nosing, it's all par for the course. Fuck this guy. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 16:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

He does things at CP, therefore, he belongs on this page. Trying to understand CP's collective insanity without mentioning TK would be like trying to understand the Bush administration without mentioning Dick Cheney. --Gulik 17:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
As a normaly outspoken anti-Tk-WIGOer, I thought the latest involving TK's userpage was hilarious. It's all about moderation in all things, including TK WIGOs. Z3rotalk 17:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
At least it gives the beautiful mental image of TK falling for the trick over and over again until finally catching on and blocking the culprit in blind rage. Vulpius 22:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Now that the liberals are done helping Andy reach 100 M pageviews[edit]

Can PiBot archive this page already? I'd do it if I wasn't scared of knocking PiBot out of it's groove, that slick little fucker. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least hang on so that the 100m thread - which is the top thread - can greet the posting of the 100m hits, no? At some point this week Andy's bound to post it. After that, vamonos. --DogPMarmite Patrol 00:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Why do pages have to get archived in order? Seems trivial to leave that one thread at the top, archive everything after it, and then stick it back into the archive next week when we're co done with it. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I last ran Pibot just over 12 hours ago, I try to run it once a day at about the same time. It will archive any thread that has been not been edited for 72hrs. I will see about getting it running soon as I won't be able to run it tonight at the time I normally do.- π 01:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, pibot is cool. It just archives old threads, it doesn't matter where they are in the page. The 100M thing is at the top because it's the oldest extant page. I recently let pibot have its foul and inebriated way with my talk page, saves me a lot of toil and trouble. By the way, Pi, I recommend making the default archiving be "one" thread. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Easy done. I keep meaning to fix it so that automatically archives without you having to tell it the archive location, so all you need to do is stick down the template with no parameters. After I get that working I'll put it on the bot server.- π 03:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Nutty, I done did it. Pibot is pretty innocuous from what I can tell - when archiving it just reads section headers and the last timestamp in them, and cuts and pastes to archive pages, making new ones when they hit the preset size limit. Manually archiving results in things that look exactly the same to the bot, so no big deal. Hey Pi, is there a way to make a "magic button" on a talk page so pibot will run on it and it alone? After it goes on the house bot farm, perhaps? ħumanUser talk:Human 00:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, looks like Slutty has a point regarding the order. The top section, as far as I can see, was last edited a week ago. Doesn't pibot look at every section separately? ħumanUser talk:Human 00:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Pibot did indeed yank the 100m views thread. A shame really, as some day soon Pandy will acknowledge the hits. --DogPMarmite Patrol 15:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyone familiar with this?[edit]

Andy's scissors-paper-stone 101 class

Seems like it has a lot of potential.

That is where he advocates the continuing use of asbestos or something like that isn't it? I think it use to be on his page when it was the joke page. - π 03:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
How about this: Andy explains how to educate great thinkers. Looks like the whole conference is a goldmine. PubliusTalk 03:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
This is pretty new. — Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs 03:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that is sleep inducing, could you imagine him as a teacher? tmtoulouse 03:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice suit, I wonder who it was made for? - π 04:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Ironically, his delivery style isn't too bad. It's just his grating voice, and his content that make his speeches appalling. I love how he switches gears half way through his educating great thinkers speech. He switches from his long and tedious list of "homeschooled" people (congrats to the member of the audience who called on his "anyone who was ever taught to read by mum and dad is homeschooled" bullshit) and rolls extremely seamfully in to bitching about how Lenski was mean to him. (Oh, yeah, and just tacking on Brigham Young on the end of his list of genius homskollars struck me as a bit odd. Surely the Arsefly has no sympathy for evil heretic Mormons?) --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 11:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
This is a good one. Moar breast cancer abortion facts. Andy knew three women who had abortions and got cancer. The chances of this happening without some sort of correlation are small. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Uh, Jerry Falwell said that the gays were the cause of the WTC attacks. That should be good enough for all of youse! Lern!Jimaginator 15:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I like how he's prepared to condemn 10,000 students to ignorance and poverty on the possibility that one of them might be another Thomas Edison. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 22:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
That is hilarious. He whips Lenski out of nowhere (though not by name). I always wondered if Andy took himself as seriously as he comes over but, jeez, theres no doubt. Ace McWickedi9 04:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

RobS' new pet[edit]

Behold: Lib-burr-ull haet speach! I can't believe how many spelling errors and borken links there are. Some of these might be WIGO worthy. Check out "the most vile hate speech" (which also somehow qualifies as race-baiting) backed by the borken link proving it was "[a]n anonymous editor at the New York Times". I never thought it was possible, but I think Rob could be a parodist (or he has completely lost his mind). — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 00:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh he lost his mind long ago. - π 00:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Mad as a bag of hammers that bloke. Hatstand. Off his trolley. --DogPMarmite Patrol 00:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Here's another good one: Michael Moore's "liberal hate speech against South Asians" backed up by (of course) a borked link with no video. Here is the video...did you catch it? Yeah...probably not. 14:32... really. $20 says he's never seen the video. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 00:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
He probably has, but he so genuinely dislikes "liberals" that he is convinced it is hate speech. Have a read of Conservapedia:RobS's Idiot's Grin Stratagem and Fun:Clinton and the Gay Bomb: A play in two acts to see how he operated in the past. - π 00:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Just a little one: Conservative hate speech against people with abilities: RobS implies that the Special Olympics are for children, potentially offending 2.5 million athletes worldwide. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 00:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Michael Moore is high on Michael Moore. He needs to stop doing so much Michael Moore. As for the racism charge, I really think he was just saying the name facetiously because Gupta styles himself as such a credible reporter and Moore believes he is full of shit. It's no different than Steve Martin saying "well excuuuuuse meee" in his signature way. But what do I know. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 01:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
So you think he should madonna/michael jackson himself into Michael Lesse? That's gonna take some diet and exercise to pull off... ħumanUser talk:Human 02:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I just want to say that when I first started browsing Conservapedia (a year ago? A year and a half?), Rob was barely active, so most of his stuff that I saw was found by stumbling across old talk page debates. This stuff fascinated and bewildered me, even more then Schlafly's complete lack of civility or any other major contributor's "style". I felt a bittersweet sense of both regret and relief that he wasn't around to continue his impeccable style of censorship and non-debate. Seeing him (and to a certain extent TK) return and begin to go back to work is kind of like finding out that some kind of infamous local legend has come back to a city you just moved into, like a never-proven mob boss or long-suspected sexual predator. Seeing him cut references from the Ku Klux Klan and Christian Identity articles because he doesn't like the sources... 05:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

"Senator John Edwards viciously attacked social commentator Ann Coulter, calling the petite embodiment of women's aspirations for equality in the marketplace of ideas a "she-devil"". Holy christ talking about inserting bias! Or is that her official title? --GTac (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I like the way that implying that people with an extra 21st chromosome are inferior in some ways is hate speech, but stating that people with an extra X chromosome are inferior in most ways to those with a Y chromosome is A-OK. To be honest, the whole article smacks of the much-hated political correctness. Perhaps Rob suspects that a political correctness advocate is hiding in his closet and watching his every move; perhaps it exchanges notes with the communist under his bed. EddyP (talk) 13:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
She's six foot tall plus the heels. If it wasn't Rob, it would undoubtedly be parody. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 13:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I think we've highlighted Rob's lust for old horseface in the past. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 15:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

"Conservapedia links to a graph mentioning things that happened 24,000 years ago"[edit]

CP is not expilicitly YEC, never has been. Yes, they are anti-evolution, and have some YEC crap in their articles, but the uber-God-siteowner has never pronounced on CP that YEC is the only answer (yeah, he's made a YECdiot of himself on talkorigins, etc., but not on CP). No big deal, since they are whack anyway. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Uhh, yes he has made a YECdiot of himself on CP, thrashing belief in an old earth (creationism or otherwise) on the Moon's talk page comes to mind. FlareTalk 08:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
He has constantly reverted edits which assume Earth's existence to be longer than 6000 years. Usually with an edit summary of ‘Removing liberal bias.’ Matt oblong 11:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeh, Andy mentioned YEC being the only answer a couple of times. Furthermore, since CP's administration is such a mess, they never really make explicit claims on CP's position about anything. Hell, even them having a conservative viewpoint has been confirmed and denied by several admins. --GTac (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Andy might be, but CP is OEC friendly, as long as gOD did all the work, I think. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Their articles on "Old Earth" and "Old Earth Creationism" contain nothing but criticism of these ideas. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 18:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Human, I think in various SDG posts Andy has said that CP should be OEC accomodating. However, all his own posts have been YECish and the various lickspittles have tended to echo their master's beliefs. So while the stated intention was not to reject the OEC view, I think all the evidence points to a de facto YEC stance. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 19:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Paging Ed Poor[edit]

Dear Ed Poor - there is math happening at Conservapedia.. Where are you to prevent this? And what happened to cp:User:Foxtrot? larronsicut fur in nocte 13:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Errr...did somebody oversight cp:Functional Analysis or did LArron give the wrong link? No text in the page, nothing in the logs. Wuzzup with that? Bjones (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I gave a wrong link - I don't know why I thought of Functional Analysis... cp:Fundamental group, that's what I should have said... larronsicut fur in nocte 14:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Sotomayor on Main[edit]

Has anyone noticed how hate-filled racist bigoted ridiculous spiteful paranoid erroneous reasonable the Sotomayor featured article spot is? Is that WIGO worthy? — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 17:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the section on "Terminology" in the Sotomayor article; apparently "anti-abortion," "pro-choice," "environmental," and "racism" are all lib-burr-rul words, and the first is less accurate than "pro-life." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 18:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
All signs point to Andy supporting her (or at least not trashing her)...which I have to admit, scares me. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Whatever happened to moar Hitler?[edit]

Here's a revealing snippetimg that sheds some light on how Ken's activities are viewed at CP. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 18:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

When is he going to learn comparing to Hitler makes your argument look worse?--Nate River (talk) 18:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Astronauts and Global Warming[edit]

Dear CP, please try to understand how science works (with emphasis on the astronauts and global warming):

1. Science isn't always right.
2. Scientists aren't always right.
3. Science is a process, not a conclusion.
4. Scientists are humans subject to human frailty.
5. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers.
6. Science probably will never have all the answers.
7. Some scientists may claim one thing, other scientists may claim something else.
8. Consensus is important in science.
9. Cherry-picking scientists who only hold your views is not having an open mind.
10. At some point in the global warming debate, there was probably a single scientist or only a few making claims about global warming.
11. Astronauts should probably carry more weight on science subjects like global warming than let's say a graphic artist, but that doesn't make astronauts right.
12. Experts on weather, global warming, the environment, etc. probably should be taken more seriously than astronauts on the subject of global warming.
13. The consensus of scientists working on global warming carries more weight than a few astronauts.
14. And yes, they still could be wrong.
15. But probably not. Jimaginator (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
16. The Laws of Thermodynamics are used only in matters relating to the energy of motion. Its use regarding such matters as, say, evolution, radiation, radioactivity and the proclivity of any system becoming more conservative is 0.
17. The term 'global warming' is a fudge developed by the media trying to understand science that lies beyond their high-school education, especially those parts of the media controlled by Darth Murdoch. The correct term is 'climate change'.
18. Weather is not climate. Claiming that it snowed in your area for the first time in 8 years isn't evidence that climate change isn't happening. It is proof that you are a sad git desperate to grab hold of anything you understand to try and disprove something that you don't understand.
19. Truth is a three-edged sword, especially during the Hour of Scampering. If you don't understand something that simple then something as complicated as climate change is beyond your comprehension.
20. Ka D'Argo's primal scream at the end of the fourth series is the most excellent example of a primal scream you will ever hear. This proves that climate change is real. Non-sensible? Not as much as almost all of the arguments used by climate change deniers.
21. Follow the money. Where climate change denialists exist, they are motivated by a vested interest in something that will lose money as climate change is taken more and more seriously. Never trust somebody who is in the pocket of the coal or oil industry. This goes double for people named Scargill. Unless they are named Arthur. Maybe. Or not. You'll have to make up your own mind about that.--Precumming Storm (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Please add to this list. Jimaginator (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
"Anonymous User" (your chosen name is obviously unacceptable), we're not fooled by you here. I looked at many of your edits before reverting them and you list yourself as an "agnostic" here, yet 100% of your edits here have been of an atheistic nature. An agnostic, if fair-minded, should be at least 50% Bible-based and 50% atheistic-based, so it's painfully obvious that you're an Obama supporter. You also refuse to accept that capital punishment prevents rape. Believe what you like, but millions of people do better with prayer, and taking that away from them is like taking water away from someone in a desert. We have this fundamental difference with Wikipedia: Conservapedia is an educational resource, while Wikipedia is not. You're trespassing; don't return.--Aschlafly 23:25, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
While CP's anti global warming stance is just CP being their retarded hateful self, merely denying it because a LIBRUL said so, I thought it's pretty good that a moonlander said it after Al Gore made that analogy. Even though it may be wrong and not an argument, it's pretty funny. --GTac (talk) 22:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
*yawns and blinks* Hmmm? Why is my name being taken in vain?--Tygrehart
Gotcha! Redchuck.gif Генгисmutating 22:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like something I read last night, where a polar bear expert was barred from a meeting because he did not believe in man-made climate change.--Tabris (talk) 23:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh ho ho ho...I see what you did there. Well played sir. Well played. *yawns, rolls over and goes back to sleep.*--Tygrehart

5% of Conservapedia Users?[edit]

Where is Andy getting that Statistic? Is that just Admins, or Users with which he converses regularly, all editors, or readers? Plus, how can he keep track of such a statistic.

Plus, to say that 5% of Conservapedia users are going overseas implies that there are more then 20 regular users on the site, which I highly doubt. --Passerby25 (talk) 01:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

More than 5%, so 10%, presumably. I guess TK finally convinced Kenny to take that trip to the lush rural areas of the DRC. Bil08 (talk) 02:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

He means his class of Heinz 57 communists in the State Department homskollars, not webshite contributors (so the answer is 3?). Also, "What percentage of liberals and public school students do? Probably less than 1/10th of 1%." I love how he just makes shit up. Funny how it's mostly "liberal" presidents who promote things like Americorps and stuff like habitat for humanity. Dontcha love how he never gives details about this "shadow" conservapedia, whose members are "conservapedians"? Like the trip to DC? Anyone start a public school CP club yet? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I have known some people who were in the Peace Corps, and it is pretty solidly left-wing, or at least its people are not as xenophobic as Terry Koeckritz.
By "impoverished areas of the world," Andy probably means Newark, New Jersey, where his crew goes when they want to show their obligatory Christian love to some At-Risk Urban Youth. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 03:28, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
That cracks me up. 5% of CP users (including banned folk) would make them a sensational hit for their charitable deeds. 5% of today's active users would be a leg and an arm of one person. Shoop da woop'd those numbers right out of his ass. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 03:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I can only think by "conservapedians" he means his homskollars (who don't actually touch his site except to submit their comedy homework), and by "helping" he means building churches and other such "helpful" activities. Isn't Christian charity a wonderful thing? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 04:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
My church only has x<10 homeschooled kids... and about 1/3 of our total youth goes on missions. Lessee... to make it more simple 30 kids go on missions, but only 5 are homeschoolers.
My church is in the same town as where Andy lives/teaches. And there are probably 5 churches in that town. Ours being the only one primarily based on missions work (Christian & Missionary Alliance). Fuzzy =^_^= 04:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Jpratt (again)[edit]

Watching that hate-filled little pustule suddenly start quoting scripture as he blocks people makes me itch. Moonshine must be good in his little backwater today... --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

When did he start doing that? I've only noticed it over the past couple weeks. Quoting the bible when blocking people is so over the top that I'd be positive he was a parodist....if not for that epic clusterfuck of a Twitter page. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 17:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
You'll know his name is the LORD when he lays his vengeance upon you? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The Matthew 10:17 ban leads me to believe he is just randomly selecting these quotes...unless he is referring to the innocence of the guy he just banned or something... — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I doubt Jpatt thought this through very well. I get livid, insensed, outraged when people quote scripture at me. It's so disrespectful of my personal belief that god, unprovable though its existence is, must be a sadistic twat of middling intelligence, if anything at all. And it's degrading to fundies in their faith - Jesus railed against mindless preaching and public praying. So when Jpatt does this shit I can only think that whoever's burning proxies over there will just keep doing it a little longer to waste Jpratt's time. And make some entertaining block logs for me to read in the morning. It's been a nice couple of days of clever and highly offensive names. Keep it up. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


That guys webshite is brilliant. Always when a new person shows up complaining about WP I think parodist trying to build back story, but this guy has gone the whole hog with his own wiki. - π 00:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

This fellow has a lot to learn about Wikis; I just signed up over there (making me user #2) to revert some vandalism to one of their main pages, and already I noticed that his main page is not locked down and that his copyrights page is a red link. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 04:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
That sharethis extension looks interesting. Did we ever come to an agreement if we wanted it or not? I am very polarised on it myself. - π 05:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips ListenerX. I set my wiki up initially to create a list of politicians that need to be voted out of office. I've had very little time to work on it and yes, I do have a lot to learn. When wikipedia started deleting 9/12 Candidate pages and edits, I used my wiki as a backup and place to create drafts since I got blocked by wikipedia. Advice is certainly welcomed. Off to NY for a 6-week work project... WashingtonIsBroke 13:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
For whatever it's worth, I just looked at the deleted article in Wikipedia, and it's pretty obvious why it was deleted: the article had no independent sources. On behalf of Wikipedia, I'm offering my heartfelt plea to please not take this as a sign of some sort of deep-rooted liberal conspiracy (as was recently suggested in EoBiW): You wouldn't believe how many articles get deleted as non-notable and subsequently recreated when the sufficient independent proof of notability materialises. As things stand, Wikipedia tends to punish people simply for creating the articles far too early for anyone to care yet. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't listen to him, WIB. He's just another liberal wrench in the system! — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia's early deletion of articles for lack of notability seems completely bot driven. I find it sickening that an article gets flagged for deletion after you make your first save and while you're still working on it, but that's the way they do it. The safe way to do things is just write in our userspace. We don't delete articles very often here, but that doesn't mean your political articles fit our mission that well... which isn't to say your political writing will be particularly welcome at CP either. TK and his pals have useless little hardons for blocking people associated with our "vandal site." Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, I think we do have an article on Glenn Beck's 9/12 thing, but it might take a slightly different POV than WIB tends towards... ħumanUser talk:Human 21:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
WP has speedy deletion in place because, believe it or not, not all people think that only worthwhile topics deserve an article. Yes, people actually do write about the garage bands and blogs that were started yesterday. The bar has to be set somewhere. Hence, new articles must conclusively demonstrate that yes, people actually do care about this subject. For truly worthwhile subjects, this usually isn't too hard. People who find WP's speedy deletion weird probably haven't watched what's bubbling in wp:CAT:CSD - sometimes the rejected material is rather... awe-inspiring. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 21:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Some of that stuff puts me in mind of the pages we vaporize without so much as a blink. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 21:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Conservapedia: Your one-stop shop for one-note political wonks. Fits right in with Ken, RobS and FOIA. --Kels (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Liberal welfare queen demands donation[edit]

I'd appreciate if someone with a unspoilt and untarnished IP address could contact me. I need a certain contribution to me made to a certain blog site, and it has to be from somewhere innocuous. It's for a social experiment. I'm afraid Operation Hammertime might have burnt my proxies. Thank you. Mountain Blue (talk) 05:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I have an open relay at --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Terry Koeckritz is too predictable. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Typical! Redchuck.gif Генгисmarauding 20:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Awww...why was it WIGOed so soon? --Tygrehart
WIGOing it at all was lame. Conversation here should have been enough. WIGOing yourself is in poor taste. ħumanUser talk:Human 22:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, human, but the WIGO is well above twenty positive votes net. I did state that I was WIGOing about something I did here, but I did nothing on CP. You can vote down what you don't like, but I don't quite understand why it was lame to WIGO TK banning the Eagle Forum's website. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 23:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't care about the votes, it was still lame. I have only one vote (down), but I can still call it stupid here. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
That was almost as good as when he blocked CP, but neither compare to the time we got him to block Jinx. - π 00:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Jinx blocking FTW. It's just symbolic to get TK to ban every major conservative website, organization and known people at this point. What will be next? --Irrational Atheist (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Classic. Great WIGO. StarFish (talk) 06:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I'm not calling it a stupid exploit. I'm calling WIGOing yourself lame, and silly bragging. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Email blocked[edit]

A look at the block log shows that 'email blocked' now seems to be standard for TK's blocks. I'm sure he's said before that less than 5% of blocks are contested - guess that was too many for him.--Little Bobby Tables (talk) 14:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it's standard now, but perfectly consistent with his "admin instruction" that people email or IM him off site. Anyone willing to email TK off site deserves what he gets. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Isn't this same TK who used to lie bleat about how unfair we were to accuse him of blocking, because he has the record of unblocking the most people. Yeah... this from the person who came up with the 'don't undo others' blocks" rule. Editing on CP is starting to take on the same aura as the Western Front's 20 minuters. --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
TK states an email address on his user-page. So, while he can be contacted, he prevents any conversation between a blocked editor and some other sysop. It's all about controlling the flow of information... larronsicut fur in nocte 16:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Or anyone else, for that matter. We often used to suggest emailing various freshly-blocked editors there to tell them about RW. Which we/anyone could do even if blocked - as long as their email function worked. By blocking email, TK hopes to strangle that line of communication. Of course, it's so easy to find us it really doesn't matter. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, yes, silly of me to forget for a moment how he operates. --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Can admin read emails sent through the wiki? I feel like I've had clean socks blocked for simply coming on to email another CP user. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I doubt it. They can't access passwords because they're encrypted, and I doubt the server stores the emails it processes. But Trent would know... ħumanUser talk:Human 21:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I've been out of the loop for a little while...[edit]

...but I just took a peek at the CP article on Michelle Obama. Am I suffering some sort of horrible drug flashback, or does it really read: "She is the first African American First Lady, descended from slaves that were sold by rival tribes, brought from Africa by early Americans." ? That may be the most effed-up I've ever seen--was it WIGO'ed? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 03:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

No it does indeed say that. This is a nice example of historical revisionism. Whilst it is true that slaves were often sold by rival tribes it ignores three key points; 1) not all slaves were sold by rival tribes some were kidnapped by traders, 2) this still does not excuse Europeans for participating in the trade, and 3) THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MICHELLE OBAMA! Unfortunately Jpatt appears to be for real and is typical of the morons Andy likes to surround himself with. - π 03:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Limbaugh's children are getting bolder...--Tabris (talk) 03:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I suppose that's what happens when you get your US History from Roots. SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 04:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


He was an incredibly obvious parodist, guys. Stupid bastard Phantom! 19:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

My god, was he ever. I always wanted a silly pretext to ban him, but never got one. PubliusTalk 21:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
(Never mind, checked it.) It amazes me the stuff people can get away with there, as long as they slag off Liberals enough. --Gulik 01:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
There goes another one off of CPalmer's list. He'd better make a list of users he doesn't like so maybe they'll be knocked off as steadily as those on the list he does like. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 15:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I never thought he was a parodist, just a troop-supporting, enthusiastic, slightly haphazard American kind of guy. But then, I thought Kotomi was for real.--Little Bobby Tables (talk) 15:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Two flaws with RobS's most recent Obama poll[edit]

Here they are:

  1. This is the Raussumen poll, which is somewhat biased. The Gallup poll still shows Obama with a 58% approval rating (which I'll admit is also biased, but the best polls, the Kaiser Polls, only cover healthcare). Still the Raussumen polls are founded by conservatives.
  2. Even if there were no biased polls, the poll shows "strongly approve" vs. "strongly disapprove." It doesn't show approve/disapprove. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 23:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, only showing the "strongly"s is utterly dishonest, not just "biased". ħumanUser talk:Human 00:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I REALLY feel like signing up just to point this obvious lie out, but I'm not going to risk being banned from Conservapedia AND having self-esteem. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 02:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
"Wait, Rob, Wasn't it the same Obama approval pollimg you showed the last timeimg?" No, it's not. Same source, etc., but it's a few days (or whatever) later. Look at the graphs, they are different. Lame wigo... ħumanUser talk:Human 04:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Agree. Imagine that, misrepresenting polling data and a deceptive headline to boot. CP must have made it into the MSM.
Seems Obama is still swimming against the tide with the Right Track/Wrong Tack data, after all the "change" we've had. To bad about his declining poll numbers; back in the day Clinton would have barbequed a few Muslim janitors in an aspirin factory with a cruise missile to flex America's might and rally the poll numbers, but a war weary public won't respond the same way this time anymore. Just a symptom of the terrible problems GWB left Obama, I suppose. RobS (talk) 19:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Oops, he did it again. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Want tomorrows news today? "Majority Disapproves of Obama and his job as President." Here's the video that goes with it. [3] RobS (talk) 04:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow, deliberate misrepresentation of your source and an unrelated YouTube video? You've finally fully become Ken. Congrats? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Somehow I bet all this negative emotion towards Obama is being instigated by Glenn Beck. --Crazyswordsman (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I can watch Glenn Beck longer than I can watch Hannity. On a couple occasions, I made it through complete episodes of O'Reilly. Then again, I am somewhat of an intellectual masochist...but aren't we all? — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Summer fun[edit]

Wasn't sure if this belongs in the Saloon Bar or not, but since it's about the CP elite I thought I'd post here. A recent thread on WIGA led to some very clever, funny flowcharts that outline the thought process behind some of the responses on ASK. What I thought on reading them was, "Dang, we should have these for Andy, TK and Ken."

So I'd like to propose a friendly contest for July, for the Best CP Flowcharts.

The only thought I had was to have a category for each key personality, i.e. "Best Andy flowchart", "Best TK flowchart", etc., and one extra for "Best Generic CP Flowchart" not related to anyone in particular. We could then vote for Bronze, Silver and Goat medals in each category, and an extra set for Best Overall.

Thoughts? --SpinyNorman (talk) 15:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

We love voting. We'll vote on fucking ANYTHING around here. If you have a washing machine and a porcupine, we'll vote on which we preferred. If it's got little green and red widgety thingies, our eyes bulge with hyperactive excitement. Do I make myself clear? --DogPMarmite Patrol 16:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
La primero pregunta es: Que es mas macho. pineapple o knife?
8.15 Vote
Washing Machine - — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 17:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Porcupine ftw! Sorry, what was the question? Seriously tho - could be fun, LX has already made me laugh with his TK entry. --PsyGremlinWhut? 17:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Which entry was that? --SpinyNorman (talk) 17:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
He's added it to the TWIGOAsk page, under debates. --PsyGremlinWhut? 17:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Make that two votes for porcupine! Vulpius (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

So let's have a page for this. RationalWiki:Flow chart competition summer 2009? That PJR one ought to be eligible, it's too good to leave out. Oh, and voting should be sliders, to allow for subtle variations in quality. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Despite the above, I really hate slider voting. And I had to spend a lot of time even figuring out how to make a slider with lables, and was totally unsuccessful. So I ended up just cutting and pasting the stupid thing from the Saloon Bar. --Kels (talk) 20:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Washing machine definitely. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I never made my own position clear. Human - I'm disturbed by your washing-machine-leaning tendencies - clearly the winner is the porcupine. We don't have much time for your type around here - try WashingMachineWiki. Godspeed. --DogPMarmite Patrol 05:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Given the choice of spending time with porcupine fanatics, versus those who would prefer to keep their trousers clean, I stand once more clearly and cleanly for those who who would prefer clean britches over needles stuck in their scrota. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

(UI)Hey, this sounds like fun. Uh... the flowchart bit, and the rest of it too I guess, but it's hard to make a game out of that unless we want to set the world record for "most porcupines cleaned in a washing machine at once". -RedbackG'day 18:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

The setup...[edit]

"Do not remove factual info from a wiki." Who will be first to WIGO a witty response? --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Crappy WIGO. This stuff happens everyday. The user is probably a parodist anyway. Are there any real Birchers anymore? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 18:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Apparently, yes. --Gulik (talk) 21:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't do it! It's a trap![edit]

Don't do it! Not even if he offers you balloons. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 20:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Eeeew. "Meet me under the bridge. Don't tell your parents about me." Indeed. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Was the IT video necessary? I had to check the closets in my apartment after that. Apparently I've made no progress getting over my irrational fear of clowns, that shit scared me as much now as it did when I was 10. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Yep. After all these years, that book and movie still scare the shit out of me. Corry (talk) 22:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
That particular aspect of CP I've always found creepy. Sterile pumpkin 21:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I know we keep talking about it, but isn't it about time we hit Andy with a violation of COPPA for allowing his admins to keep doing this? It's clearly a violation. I'll drop Ames a line and see what he thinks. --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Conservative Words Flash Game[edit]

Hello - just popping in to let you guys know about a new, education Flash game I made. Some of you may remember my "Operation Flying Grassroots Fortress" game from a few months ago.

Anyway, I recently stumbled onto Andy's "geometrically growing" list of conservative words and thought it would be a nice opportunity for an "educational" game. It's called "ConWords" and is based on Facebook's "Typing Maniac" game app. Basically, you'll see lots of words going down the screen, and you have to type them as quickly as possible.

  * Type only conservative words to gain points
  * Typing liberal words will make you lose "trust". 
  * If your trust goes to 0%, you lose.
  * There are also "ambiguous" words which do neither good nor harm. 
  * Spelling mistakes will lower your trust
  * Letting conservative words go by untypes will also make you lose trust

Pass a level and get a motivational quote from Andy before moving onto the next one. If you type three conservative words in a row correctly, you have a chance at getting one of the 4 powerups.

  * Ed Poor - his maths skills will get your trust back up to 100%
  * Schlafly Insight (the lightbulb) - will highlight conservative and liberal words for the rest of the level.
  * TK's rangeblock (banhammer) - clear all words on the screen
  * Database lock (padlock) - freeze all words on the screen for a few seconds 

Click on the powerup icon in the lower-right to use it. Make sure to click back in the typing box immediately afterwards.

Here is the link:

--Composure1 (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Was your old game operation? Because I still play it and pimp it... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Pretty hard. Maybe I should have checked the list first--Tabris (talk) 03:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I annihilated that game. Nice work man. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 04:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Very cool. But: The first time I played, after a few levels the words just stopped coming and wouldn't start again. Hitting return when you haven't typed anything counts as a null word and lowers your score. The second time I played, I don't think it asked me for my name, but it seems to have taken the last thing I typed before closing the tab ("ok") as my high-score-list name. It should ask for a name at the end, rather than at the beginning, unless you're keeping stats on uncompleted games or something. It should also display the new high score list at the end of the game. --Marty (talk) 04:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Er, what's with "Level 2 Teh Assfly says "Clearly you're an evolutionist" (game frozen)? I thought I was totally pwning... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, so I got 3792, where's my score dude? ħumanUser talk:Human 07:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I got over 19000, go me! Though it's not saved for whatever reason.
I can't use these powerups even if my life depended on it. FlareTalk 12:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
"NightFlare" (I see you hide behind an anonymous name, like all liberals). If you open your mind and read your Bible, you'll learn how to use the powerups. The liberal media may not admit it, but it's obvious that powerup usage decreases immorality. Deny this, and lose all credibility.... So anyway, yeah, my game is half-assed and broken, just like Conservapedia. I think the main issue is that it will only save your score the first time you play. Unless you fully reload the page after losing a game, it won't work right anymore. There seem to be other bugs as well of course - I'll try to deal with some of them when I get a chance in the next few days. --Composure1 (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)-
Kudos. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Seconded. FlareTalk 07:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Trent, I think TK kinda has a "thing" for you...[edit]

Maybe he teases you like this because he's too shy to say hello... TheoryOfPractice (talk) 04:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hot damn! I want a personalised block reason also like "Obviously Ace McWicked" or "drunk pattern of editing, Vandal site member Ace McWicked". Ace McWickedi9 04:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
What about me TK? You can create a "Negro, probably SirChuckB" block reason.... Please, please please.... SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 04:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
No, that would be Jinx's reason for blocking you. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 01:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice one. That beats out the old, tired "subhuman troll" block reason. What he failed at was using your user name "everywhere", Tmtoulouse. Loser is epic loser. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
It seems TK is running out of ways to get our attention. His manipulation of the block reason list is really like having a personal padded cell where he can rail at those who won't let him play. All very encyclopedic though. Redchuck.gif Генгисmarauding 05:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
You're not kidding about the encyclopaedic bit. In the last three days he may have had about a half dozen edits to the mainspace that weren't reverts and they were creating wiki links and changing ref lists to two columns. He added one cite for something which was about the most substantial thing he did. Andy where is his 90/10 and make substantial contributions? - π 05:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, yeah, you're kidding, right? The rules only apply to those who don't make the rules. Andy is a fascist, such as described, and TK is happy to act as his goon squad. After they are both done wiping their asses, "nobody complained on our site". Nice work. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I assume he does this as yet another attempt to ruin people's real lives, same as when he was phoning people's workplaces and colleges to try to get them in real world trouble. Put up people's names he wants to hurt there, attach them to some slur or another (vandal site, etc.), and if someone like a potential employer or something goes to check them out on Google why, there's that smear. But does Google even pick up stuff like Recent Changes, edit summaries or the block log at all? And how seriously does he think an employer's gonna take any CP link that comes up in a Google search in the first place? --Kels (talk) 05:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I have emailed Andrew Schlafly 3 times from two email addresses to ask him to remove the false light invasion of privacy of my name hosted on his site. I have not yet received a reply of any kind. I will shortly be speaking to a lawyer, since I have found no satisfaction - let alone the courtesy of a reply - by contacting the site owner. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I think a worthwhile employer would consider this a good thing, Trent might want to add this to his resume. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 05:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
There is nothing funnier than watching a barking dog run to the end of his chain. TK knows that we see through his shit and won't let him back to this yard, so all he can do is sit around and threaten the mail carrier. SirChuckBDMorris for new Jinx! 06:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It's gone now, but you gotta admit, this is almost Dante-esque in it's hilarity:

  • Vandalism
    • Vandalism
    • Moronic vandalism
    • Liberal vandalism
    • Liberal name calling
    • Deliberate insertion of false information; lying
    • IP of blocked vandal / troll / troublemaker
  • Sock Puppetry
    • Abusing multiple accounts
    • Sock of blocked user
    • Same IP(s) as previously blocked user(s)
    • Using anonymous proxy
    • Abuse of legitimate ISP for trolling / vandalism purposes
    • Unused account with no edits after registration (removed without prejudice)
    • Unused account with no edits for several months (removed without prejudice)
  • Username
    • Please recreate your account with your real first name and last initial
    • Inappropriate or vulgar name
    • Similar to existing editor name, please choose another
    • User request
    • Duplicate account, other than deceit
    • Impersonation
  • Editing
    • Violated 90/10 rule against talk, talk, talk
    • Troublemaker / Prevaricator
    • Profanity / Vulgarity
    • Trolling / Liberal Trolling
    • Negative personal comments
    • Inserting nonsense or gibberish into pages or edit comments
    • Insistence on last-wordism
    • Violation of Commandments and / or CP Guidelines
    • Member of a website supporting vandalism
    • Entering into disputes not involving editor (MYOB)
    • Contradicting Administrator, interfering with Admin Instruction
    • POV editing/Removal of valid content / adding material without citation
    • Inserting liberal multiculturalism / world view into articles
  • Cyber-Harrassment
    • User removed from the site after engaging in harassment of site's members
  • Abuse of privileges
    • Re-block IP/ranges unblocked by vandal
  • Retired
    • Retired under voluntary circumstances; Admin(s) will reactivate upon request

ħumanUser talk:Human 07:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

PS, one of the special pleasures of "view source" at CP is being reminded of this inanity: "Abusing multiple accounts: Found socks for this blocked user, all editing from the exact same IP, not located in the Northeast." - whatever that means in any known human language... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Er what are you guys talking about? tmtoulouse 07:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It said something like "Vandal Site Owner <fill in your name> making obscene/vulgar username". TK has oversighted it so he doesn't look like a complete prick. - π 08:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The words "stable door", "horse" and "bolted" all spring to mind concerning that representation. Redchuck.gif Генгисunbelieving 10:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
It was more the fact I couldn't remember how to spell Toulouse. - π 11:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Yup, burnt now. always use <capture> from now on! CrundyTalk nerdy to me 10:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least TK has a sense of humour...Trent is simultaneously in France, Austria and Australia. Jammy (talk) 01:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I found "Retired under voluntary circumstances; Admin(s) will reactivate upon request" fascinating. how is it suppose to work if mostly everyone blocks email as well? ThiehI am STILL single 14:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Same old ken[edit]

I would be curious to know where he gets his motivation if not from a bottle - pill or otherwise. "stay tuned for developments!!!" Of which none will be forthcoming, all will be forgotten. UNTIL! "Attention Icelandic readers! The evolutionary paradigm as been skewered (Insert picture of Icelandic volcano)!!! creationist magma will soon flow down the evolutionary slopes of Iceland!!! And so forth. Ace McWickedi9 05:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ken I have left a message on your ASK talkpage about the photo. Copyright, you are doing it wrong. - π 05:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I've been patiently (erm) staying tuned for over a year for a floowup on ANY of these vauge boasts. Come on Ken. How about some more info? Harder, Faster, Deeper! StarFish (talk) 07:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Two years and counting. Longer for others here. "Soon creationist Francophiles may savor the sweet reasonableness of Conservapedia's thorough refutation of the evolutionary paradigm!" You gotta love his sweet tongue on your stiffer parts though, it just melts them. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I rather like the vague-but-true nature of this one. The mysterious Frenchie hasn't done it, isn't working on it, and hasn't promised to do it--he or she is simply considering it, yet it is deemed worthy of note. I may be able to put this to good use: I'm considering buying a Ferrari. I'm considering dating Drew Barrymore. I'm considering joining the Yankees as their new shortstop. See?--I'm now considerably cooler than I was twenty seconds ago without actually having to accomplish anything, or having any actual ability. Thanks, Kenny.--WJThomas (talk) 08:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I remember somebody offering to translate a few of the pages a year or so ago. I think it was into Spanish but I could be wrong. Anyone remember this? The response they got was bizarre and along the lines of "I'll have a think about this and get back to you within 3 to 6 months." It's a strange, strange world they inhabit over at CP. StarFish (talk) 08:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I think some people also offered to have CP in German or something? (Working from age-old memory here, so I might be wrong.) And all these suggestions were rejected for the obvious reason: They can barely keep out blatant parody from English articles - what will they do with articles written in a language no trusworthy CP admin can understand? --Sid (talk) 10:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

viva? Really, viva? I hope the hypothetical Frog is annoyed, being taken for a Dago! larronsicut fur in nocte 09:05, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, cut Kenny some slack--he's barely literate in his native language, and you want him to be multilingual?--WJThomas (talk) 09:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I should point out that Ken speaks German like a native. Unfortunately, that is a native of New Guinea, not Germany. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, my dear Genghis, New Guinea was a former German colony... until 1918... Totnesmartin (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Bugger, pwned! Redchuck.gif ГенгисGum disease 14:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

(UI) Ken - Francophiles love French culture. Francophones speak the French language. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 14:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't get the "Spanish" reference in the WIGO. If it's referring to "viva la evolution", I'm pretty sure that's correct in French too.. --GTac (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Vive l'évolution! Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 18:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
If it's supposed to be "Vive" then why is it "Viva la compagnie"? --GTac (talk) 18:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Because Anglophones are lousy at French? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 18:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Let's not forget that old chestnut: "If you speak three languages, you're trilingual. If you speak two languages, you're bilingual. If you only speak one language, you're American." The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 18:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Because it's not. It's "Vive la compagnie." Sometimes French speakers will give a bit of pronunciation to an ostensibly silent vowel at the end of a word. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually that's not quite right. Few vowels are silent in French and the "e" at the end of "vive" should be pronounced. In fact, vowel stresses should be consistent throughout a word unlike in English. Of course regional accents and general laziness mean that many vowels including those in the middle of words are often de-stressed or even excluded altogether. Ajkgordon (talk) 10:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh ok, thanks. --GTac (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

(undentons) Asszackly. It's "¡Viva la revolución!" or "¡Viva la huelga!" but "Vive la France!" Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 19:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeh, I was just remembering song incorrectly (also not remembering it's actually an English song). And seems like Genghis Khant was right too, the title of that song is even "Viva la compagnie" while the lyrics are "vive la compagnie", or am I unaware some kind of linguistic subtlety? --GTac (talk) 23:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Bert Schlossberg[edit]

Talk about having a one-track mind. - π 05:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Freak. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
"A fanatic is someone who won't change their mind and can't change the subject." --Gulik (talk) 22:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Go CP![edit]

Pick it up and run! StarFish (talk) 14:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

That's going to make their brains explode. "A science teacher tried to kill their pupils, science is evil! Oh wait, it was in a catholic school. Does... Not... Compute..." (head asplode) CrundyTalk nerdy to me 14:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
No it won't. Andy doesn't believe that Europeans are either proper Christians or proper Conservatives. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 14:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Cop yerselves on. Some unfortunate kid is in hospital in a "very serious condition" and you want to cop a cheap laugh out of it? Be a decent human being and forget or delete this. --DogPMarmite Patrol 14:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Get off your high horse, you pontificating prick. Humor and laughter as described by Freud are used to help cope with stress, tension and other upsetting emotions. Or are you going to pull a Schlafly and tell us that something's not funny, merely because you don't think it is? Pull your head in and stop acting so self-righteous. 15:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
BON - fuck off. --DogPMarmite Patrol 17:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I'd really hate to come up against you in an intellectual debate. What's the matter, did my pointing out your Schlaflyesque qualities strike a bit close to home? No intelligent rebuttal? Well, carry on telling everyone else what to do then. 17:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all your great contribiutions around here BON. We love you, which is great, as you clearly do too. Bye. Oh, wait, sorry I forgot - fuck off. --DogPMarmite Patrol 17:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
We're not mocking the kid, the teacher, or anything about the incident, just what CP's interpretation of it would be. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 15:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, you might want to wait to see that interpretation, if any, before you start lulzing too hard. I doubt it will be mentioned.--C0n53rv4p3d14 r00l2 (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Assfly has already explained why things like this happen. The Libburrullization of Europe has corrupted the church. Only Assfly knows the true seekrets of Catholicism. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Ouch. What does 'Cop yerselves on' mean? I like to understand my retribution. It's all a bit 'You can't call me a mook' at the moment. StarFish (talk) 18:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

CP is down[edit]

Again... Stupid bastard Phantom! 21:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I've been getting that on and off all day... In other news, Daniel1212 made this edit, and guess what....IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOMOSEXUALITY!!! — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 21:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Did someone forget to turn off their bots from the 100M? Fuzzy =^_^= 21:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Pageview rate looks normal. Fedhaji (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Does Ray Comfort read CP?[edit]

I see The World's Stupidest ChristianTM has a new book out, and on the cover there's a honking great Dawkwin. So close to Ken's famous Hitwin, it's only a matter of time. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 14:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

That's how I know to lump them in together when constructing my arguments. Arguing against Darwin is just as good (if not better) than arguing against Dawkins. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 14:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Who has Ken's portrait so we can splice us up a Confort.jpg? The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 15:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Alas, kendoll is an international man of mystery. I suspect he looks a lot like that weirdo NephilimFree though. At least, that's how I picture him. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 15:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright, so we need somebody to represent Ken's physical form instead, who'll it be?
I suggest Dr. Evil. FlareTalk 17:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Goldmember would be more appropriate for Ken, and we all know who Fat Bastard is. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 18:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Fredo Corleone seems appropriate. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 18:05, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons seems a good match. Maybe merged with the Crazy Cat Lady. --Kels (talk) 18:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Gareth Keenan from The Office, obsessive and anti-gay. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 18:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
My vote is for Milhouse, furiously fapping it to Ted Haggard sermons. The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 18:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
It should be NephilimFree. Him and Ken are truly kindred spirits. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Unless Ken IS NephilimFree! I wonder if we could compare Neffy's sleepy video posts on his YouTube channel to Ken's manically furious homosex article modification marathons. Kind of like Jack and Tyler in Fight Club, you know? The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 18:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I'd have to go with Hitoshi Demegawa from Death Note. Obsessed with ratings and part-time evangelist.--Tabris (talk) 18:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I always imagine Kenny looking rather like this guy, but with a self-satisfied smirk on his face.--WJThomas (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Dr. Weird will always get my vote. "GENTLEMEN! BEHOLD! Operation Burgerhat!" PubliusTalk 22:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Unindent--Sorry, but this is the definitive Ken. [4]

Perhaps, but with Dr. Weird's voice. --Kels (talk) 00:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that's TK, not Ken. Fedhaji (talk) 02:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I second Publius. -- JArneal 06:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I think in Ken's case it should be the image from one place and the voice of another. So while Ken would look like Wormtongue but sound like Dr. Weird, TK would sound like Wormtongue, but look more like, say, this guy. --Kels (talk) 20:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the Richard Dawkins quote at the bottom of the book. Mr. Comfort does not appear to understand that Prof. Dawkins was actually criticizing him there. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 21:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure even someone as dumb as little Ray of Comfort (or his publishers) is not totally immune to irony. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 22:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Origin of Species[edit]

After a PJResque rant about a book randomly creating itself, then replicating, Comfort annihilates a lightweight description of DNA - from a book for children produced bya drug company! "The letters that make up the words are called DNA bases, and there are only four of them: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). It’s hard to believe that an alphabet with only four letters can make something as wonderful and complex as a person! [footnote:] Kids Genetics, GlaxoSmithKline <" Page 9 [5]— Unsigned, by: Human / talk / contribs

Trent has been busy[edit]

  • 21:13, 9 July 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked (Talk) with an expiry time of 6 months (account creation disabled) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: Sock of RW troll/vandal site owner, Trent Toulouse using Hostmaster Chello Broadband, Vienna, Austria)
  • 21:08, 9 July 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked (Talk) with an expiry time of 6 months (account creation disabled) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: Sock of RW troll/ vandal site owner, Trent Toulouse, using IP from FRANCE TELECOM/SCR, Marseille Bloc 2)
  • 21:04, 9 July 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked (Talk) with an expiry time of 6 months (account creation disabled) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: Sock of RW troll, owner of vandal site, Trent Toulouse using Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, AU)

Ace McWickedi9 01:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like RW beat Ken to France then... Jammy (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
How the hell does the language filter not catch "shit" in a username?! --PitchBlackMind (talk) 01:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
They don't actually know regex? I do like Trent's use of RMIT. In my experience going around universities in Australia unless they give you a full set of login in details you can't use their computers. So unless he has been an official visitor, physically at the university, he must be fucking magic. - π 02:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Whew! What a busy, busy day. The jet lag has been killer let me tell you that. I think I could teach Santa a thing or to though. tmtoulouse 03:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

You said you were doing conference tours Trent, but that is a little excessive. - π 03:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Seriously, we should start socks with IP address used in New Jersey, for the lulz of paranoia and collateral damage. ThiehMonitoring virgin birth experiment 03:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Have you forgotten that I live in Jersey? Fuzzy =^_^= 05:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
IPs are registered to companies not locations. You need to have the same ISP as Andy and receive the internet in the same way, in order to get him blocked along with you. When using checkuser on a certain IP address it does list what registered users have been using that IP, he will see both your sock and Andy are in the same range and would hold back blocking. He is not that thick, even if we can make him dance for us. - π 05:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
No Π, Andy can unblock himself, but not for most of his acolytes who go to his secret bunker to homeschool. Perhaps It is safe to assume they spans most ISPs evenly, and if so, any ISP will get a chunk of his acolytes blocked for the lulz (I would suppose the ISPs will assign a segment of the IP address they own within the region, so it may be more or less complicated). K61824Practicing involuntary celibacy 14:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

TK knows this is all bollocks. He behaves like the most pitiable, attention deprived kid in the class pretending to be more stupid than he really is just so people will pay him some attention. It's fine. I'm happy to point and laugh. StarFish (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

@ Starfish, I agree times a thousand. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Trent always struck me as the kind of guy whose alter ego was "BukkakeMaster." Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Jpatt's in on the act now;

  • 15:28, 10 July 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked Kuntkritz (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: sock of RW troll Trent Toulouse)
  • 15:17, 10 July 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked KensGapingHole (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: sock of RW troll Trent Toulouse)
  • 15:17, 10 July 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked LubeMeUpJpatt (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: sock of RW troll Trent Toulouser)
  • 15:16, 10 July 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked SlimyCLlT (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: sock of RW troll Trent Toulouser)
  • 15:16, 10 July 2009 Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked BarebackKen (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Member of a website supporting vandalism: sock of RW troll Trent Toulouse)

Jammy (talk) 20:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Goatdamn! I have always considered JPratt to be a particularly idiotic fundyloon. But he then challenges that opinion with his WTF Poe-ism which can only be the work of a parodist. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 20:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not so sure. When TK claimed Trent was using all those IPs it's obvious that he was being ironic. Given what I've seen of Jpatt's entries on CP I wouldn't be surprised if he actually thought that these were all Trent. Jammy (talk) 20:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
You're right. I shouldn't ascribe to malice what could be attributed to stupidity. I'm sure TK just told Mr. X-Ray that Trent was conducting a massive vandal attack on CP and that any vandal would be TMT. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 20:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
P.S. TK keeps playing to the gallery as he doesn't get much of a chuckle from the CPlowns. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 20:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Er, I am not even following where he is going there anything to this other than my last name being French? Other than that I have a really hard time trying to tease out his analogy.

My hypothesis is that this another move in TK's campaign to purge his real name from RW. My guess is that he is hoping to link my name with libel on CP, and then if I complain about it he will "trade" cleaning up CP with me cleaning up RW. He is going after me because he knows I am the only one in who could possibly force such a clean up. tmtoulouse 20:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

No need to worry about that. I didn't visit Nevada last year just for the sightseeing & gambling. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 20:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Tell him that if he throws in driving off RJJensen it's a deal. EddyP (talk) 20:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC) It's a bizarre way to do it, though. Do wiki block logs (or any logs, for that matter) even show up on Google? It seems vanishingly unlikely that any of this would pop up on any search engine, and so the only place it could be found is here with people talking about you being libeled by Terry Koeckritz. Can't see how that helps his case at all. FWIW, I typed your name into Google, and the first 10 pages showed absolutely no links to CP, and even typing Trent Toulouse Conservapedia didn't show a single link to one of CP's pages. So I guess Terry Koekritz is wasting his time with libel that doesn't do him a bit of good. --Kels (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Just experimented with googlig an old edit comment of mine - google doesn't pick it up. I don't recall ever seeing an edit comment or page history list in a google search - it must dliberately filter them to avoid tons of what most people would call useless clutter. Totnesmartin (talk) 08:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

immaterial interlude[edit]



Two humble fillers to pass the time it takes the inimitable Dr. LArron, if that is his real name, to cook up his next stunner. June has been over for more than a week so we have a "users not banhammered within seven days" number for that month now. As you can see, the site continues to be growing rapidly. Mountain Blue (talk) 08:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Dr. LArron, as in Professor Poor? No, sorry, not yet. But the pics are interesting: over the last half year CP attracted 500 editors each month. But the number of editors which are allowed to stay is dwindling. The quota of welcome editors seems to be on a new all-time-low, and the absolute number of welcome editors is the lowest since March 2007.... larronsicut fur in nocte 09:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I love stats like this. If the welcomeusers/newusers were converted to %, would it be possible to produce a trendline? This could extrapolate when we hit 10%, 5%, 0% of users welcome. Jimaginator (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Or maybe % of new users welcomed. (would extrapolating this be easier?) K61824What is going on? 14:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
That's what I meant if not clear. I like your Teach the Controversy-- Pi=3.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000! Jimaginator (talk) 15:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think 'welcome users' means the number of users given a talk-page welcome. I think it's the number who weren't blocked more or less straight away. Correct me if I'm wrong. And godspeed Philip V - we miss you! Support the troops!--Little Bobby Tables (talk) 15:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I'm sure "welcome" means "survived for a week without being killed". Perhaps the logo in the graphs should make that clear. And a trend line of the percent that stay alive for a week would be nice. Or fudge the threshold as needed to make the statistics look good; fudging data to fit the desired outcome isn't deceitful or anything, is it? We may be able to gain new rational insights from this, and formulate RationalWiki's law. Gauss (talk) 17:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Maybe we'll get a perfect geometric decline that way! Z3rotalk 17:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Yup, a welcome user is a user who survives at least one week. A welcome edit is a contribution that (a) doesn't get reverted right away and (b) doesn't get its originator banhammered. I started using this terminology last time. If anybody thinks they have better a idea I'm open to suggestions. Mountain Blue (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Quel dommage...[edit]

... nous sommes decouvertsimg! larronsicut fur in nocte 18:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if I was going to click that link. I was worried that, due to the smarty-pants way you speak in that strange, incomprehensible toungue that I wouldn't understand it. I did click it though, and let me be the first to say. OH.MY.gOD! Have I somehow taken this out of context, or has TK really become this stupid in the three months I've been gone?
PS: HAI everyone, I'm back from my 3 months of doing Gay Ninja Mercenary work. I'm not explaining that to anyone who wasn't here for that joke, use the dang search to look it up. -RedbackG'day 18:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Je suis desolé, monsieur L'Arron. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 18:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Aux Negociants, 27 rue Lambert, 18e, Paris on September 11, 2009 at 7 pm. Table in the back. I'll be the one wearing a stovepipe hat and false beard. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 19:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

My, my my. I wish I could say this was the first time Conservapedia accused a group of people of doing things that they themselves --Crazyswordsman (talk) 19:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Jpatt's fantasy news item[edit]

I bet he loved finding this, a blog about liberals, gays and muslims!. Jammy (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Huh? I'm not scared to "Tell the truth about Muslim Homophobia", I just don't care about it. Besides, what does Patty mean by "universal thought process"? Are all us western liberals connected telepathically, or controlled by a giant 'overmind'? *sigh* the stupid is strong with this one. -RedbackG'day 20:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
...You mean you can't hear the soothing, all-knowing voice of the Liberal Hivemind? *backs away nervously*. --Gulik (talk) 21:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Let the craziness begin...[edit]

Who wants to bet that this will soon have its own section in the Obama article? Jammy (talk) 20:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably something soon hinting about infidelity. Really though, who could blame him? That's a great ass. --PitchBlackMind (talk) 20:06, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
This should be interesting to watch, and as PBM says, accusations of man-whoring infidelity are sure to follow. I took a photo of my dog when I was a kid, the picture was hilarious because behind her, lined up with the centre of her head was our Hills Hoist, so she looked like she had a propeller coming out of her head. Just as my dog did not have a propeller on top of her head (how cool would that be?), I doubt Obama was checking out that, uh... "great ass"... yeuck -RedbackG'day 20:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Well this video appears to show that actually he wasn't...but Sarkozy on the other hand... Jammy (talk) 20:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
If he didn't look he'd be open to accusations of homosexuality... ħumanUser talk:Human 20:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I was a little surprised to see that JM posted this. — Signed, by: Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Its over 9000![edit]

Over 260,000 IPs blocked today, TK: And nothing of value was lost. Web (talk) 00:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeez, Trent. You're a machine. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 00:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
He's on a roll! *We do not allow active members of known vandal sites to participate in our project.img They even changed the rules because of him. Magnificient! AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 01:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Web, did you miss a zero somewhere? There is like 4x /16 and 1x /17 blocks today. ThiehAhh! my eyes!! 02:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Fixed Web (talk) 03:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

So, if I forget to log in and post, that means that I'll get blocked? So many unguarded WIFI networks here. -- 06:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehe.. funny. I had an account that was blocked recently called Over9k. Fuzzy =^_^= 17:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Quick summary please[edit]

I've been out for a week, and I'm not reading all that crap above me, so someone just summarise in a few words what happened in the past week, pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-zah. SJ Debaser 12:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

TK has been nasty and Andy has been stupid. More IPs got blocked. CP was clickbotted to 100 million views on the 4th. Broccoli (talk) 13:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
(EC)Same old shit really. TK blocked unfairly and tried adding RWians names to things. Ken posted news articles about his operations and pictures of weird Darwin/dictator hybrids. Jpatt found even more offensive things to say. Andy was pretty quite. - π 13:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I just saw that Stalin-Darwin thing. So not only was Darwin really Hitler, he was also Stalin, who was alive at the same time. Those wacky conservatives. SJ Debaser 13:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


The Obama page is unprotected atm, if you guys haven't noticed. Web (talk) 15:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

So? Is there something factual and encyclopedic you'd like to add? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Factual and encyclopedic? What, do you want me to get blocked? Web (talk) 15:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Page views[edit]

CP 100M views.png

It is so sad to see the statistics page showing 100,500,000 page views and yet the frontpage still only boasts about having 97,500,000 pageviews. Andy where is the update? It has been nearly 10 days already since you last did it. - π 05:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he'll stop bragging now that TK has pointed out to him that the pageviews are a complete fabrication? It wasn't enough for us to point out that they were mostly people laughing at CP, not going there for the "truth"... ħumanUser talk:Human 06:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Conservapedia speaks truly about conservatism, but in a way that its writers will never realise. Totnesmartin (talk) 08:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I've posted the history of CP page views so people can see how it has been achieved. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 11:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I love that big dip from the Great Transefer Botch. there's another tiny dip later on, which is probably Portsmouth FC or Law Terms D getting "the treatment." Totnesmartin (talk) 12:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
The second dip is when their server went down and they lost a week's worth of edits. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 12:59, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Poor misunderstood TK! WIGO[edit]

The sreencap for that WIGO is quite long but contains the following bit of deceit:

I am willing to "educate" myself about these matters, if only just one person, in the three years I have been an Administrator for CP, would be able to give some understandable reason for their seeming deceit...

Has the whole 12 months from November 2007 to November 2008 (when TK was in the wilderness) been erased from Conservapedia? The great UCLA/TK plagiarism scandal conveniently swept under the carpet? Can oversight be applied to the User Rights log? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 06:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

TK claims he has been a CP sysop for 3 years. From the CP Logs:

TK is made a Sysop: 23:41, 18 March 2007 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) changed User:TK's user rights from (none) to Administrators.

Goodbye Sysop TK: 01:36, 26 November 2007 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) changed User:TK's user rights from Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, Siteadmin and Administrators to nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO and nsTeam1_talkRW.

Time elapsed as Sysop 1st time: 8 months, 8 days.

Reappointed to Sysop: 00:40, 1 January 2009 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) changed User:TK's user rights from Block, Check users, edit, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, Siteadmin and Upload to Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, Siteadmin and Administrators. (promotion to Sysop!!!)

Current date: 11 July 2009

Time elapsed as Sysop 2nd time: 6 months, 10 days

TK's TOTAL time as Sysop: 1 year, 2 months, 18 days.

Refugeetalk page 08:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone else get pissed off at his illiteracy, or is it just me? ħumanUser talk:Human 08:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
His poor writing doesn't bother me. After all, it's not like he's building an encyclopedia or anything. Totnesmartin (talk) 08:31, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
As a Saturday morning exercise I OCRed the screencap and posted it here. It's probably easier to read that way. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 08:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't forget that the prize idiot immediately started referring to himself as a senior admin upon his re-promotion, saying he'd been an admin all along. Clearly, in his own mind, the demotion following his insult to Andy and opening of the SDG never happened. --PsyGremlinWhut? 09:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I think I know what TeaKhead was "thinking". Considering CP hasn't even been around for 3 years yet, "in the three years I have been an Administrator for CP" means 2007, 2008, and 2009 - 3 different years on the calendar. ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 00:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)