Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive178

This is an archive page, last updated 26 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>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Creator of "guidelines"

"...the guideline I issued" sayeth TK.^img(my emphasis). Well at least we know who's in charge. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 00:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ha!

Should be good^img ("Conservapedia is considering launching a Conservapedia Creation vs. Evolution Project in the future.") Go for it Ken. At least you won't have those pesky evilutionists to contend with like PJR has on his blog. 01:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC)^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Haha, first Andy was "Conservapedia" (third person), and now Ken is too. All kneel before the collective entity that is CP!

Also: we never saw Operation Grassroots or whatever it was, so I doubt this will happen. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken has always been Conservapedia, or at least its intelligence wing (snork!). When "Conservapedia has learnt" something, you can be sure that Kendoll and no one else will be in the loop. And you can be sure that the thing that Conservapedia has learnt will never, ever happen. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken seems to fundamentally misunderstand the internet if he thinks there is a separate Canadian and US one. - π 01:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

If you crawl deeply into another mans ass ... --Stocking (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

BEST DIFF EVAH!

TK bitching to no one listening at wikipedia. ħuman 03:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Advice to members of that CONservative vandal site: when you are in a hole, stop digging! So much for TK's whole "I'm not Terry Kockrocks" argument! The Goonie Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 03:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

"From your cowardly anonymous perch, 69.165.155.235, please don't bring fictitious narratives here."

"...posting my real identity at RW and all over the Internet with the intent to cause me harm."

(Disclaimer: He could technically be denying that, but I'm not sure what he'd be complaining about then...) ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 06:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It gets better! That hole-digging smiley, eh, who cares? ħuman 08:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

And Timmy TooLoose replies... "Uh huh...." Brilliant. ħuman 08:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It's quite silly indeed. Apparently, this has become a "He Who Must Not Be Named" situation where ANY mention of a certain full name is automatically an outing attempt of TK on CP and WP. The more hilarious part is that his public cries just shine a giant spotlight on it. It's kinda like someone saying "I wonder who did this," and someone else instantly going "IT WASN'T ME, YOU CAN'T PROVE ANYTHING!" Oh well, maybe it'll get me in touch with Jimbo Wales (who has been allegedly informed of this by TK). That'd be kinda cool, I guess. --Sid (talk) 09:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Attention seeking perhaps? Ajkgordon (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

At this point, I have no idea what Rob and TK are planning to achieve anymore. Their efforts seem utterly random so far. --Sid (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Worse than random, incoherent. However, I think they want Jimbo to block you, me, and Trent until we remove Terry Koeckritz's real name from the internet. ħuman 09:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I take it back. This one is even better! In a perverse sort of way, but that's his style, isn't it? ħuman 10:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

-- Nx / talk 11:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't be boring. Also, why does your sig take up a whole line of text, noob? ħuman 11:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Because it conforms to wp:WP:SIG -- Nx / talk 11:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a retarded answer. This isn't WP and their policies don't apply here. ħuman 13:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

But the reasoning behind that policy is valid here as well. -- Nx / talk 07:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

But we don't care. And never have. ħuman 09:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Suit yourself, it's your wiki. -- Nx / talk 12:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that whole section is just a universe of fail on TK's part. I can imagine what any uninvolved party things when they across that and all they see it TK flailing and screaming, while all the other editors are just calmly asking him WTF he's on about. Bullying, indeed. --Kels (talk) 13:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I wonder which new site Terry Koeckritz is trolling now, that's he's so worried about having his name up in lights. After all, logic would dictate that if he's so worried about CP admin TK being linked to the name Terry Koeckritz, then it must be his name. I'd love to see this go to court:

"Are you Terry Koeckritz?"

"Yes."

"But you're suing these people because they said you were Terry Koeckritz."

At this point the witness became hysterical and was carried from the courtroom, screaming something about "Where's the banhammer? Why can't I oversight this?" --PsyGremlinFale! 17:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

My goodness. Having just reread the SDG and now seen TK's antics on WP, including calling me a liar, I have to say I've never seen anything quite like TK. TK - I'm not going to tolerate you calling me a liar and I won't be a pawn in your pointless effort to distance TK from Terry Koeckritz. I won't demand that you retract the objective falsehoods you've already made on the WP:Wikiquette page, just that you knock the lying off. Got it buddy? 17:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

(victim of malicious EC) For most people, this would be a pretty simple thing. If you don't want your name connected to unsavory acts, don't do unsavory acts. What's so tough about that? --Kels (talk) 18:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Somebody just posted this extract from the SDG on my blog (I have the ref - SDG/Level_1/29e7df4a2c4a2bd4.html). I think this should shut TK up for once and for all (my emphasis in bold:

“”From: Temlakos Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:46:33 -0400 Local: Tues, Jun 19 2007 2:46 pm Subject: Re: 2457 HERE IS THE TEXT OF THE LOS ANGELES TIMES ONLINE ARTICLE: First of all, TK, let me congratulate you for finding mention in the Stephanie Simon article. You did better than I did–assuming that she quoted you correctly. Why she bothered to talk to me at all, I cannot fathom. I plan a review of this article later today. TerryH From: “Terry” Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 07:20:03 -0700 Local: Tues, Jun 19 2007 3:20 pm Subject: RE: 2464 Re: HERE IS THE TEXT OF THE LOS ANGELES TIMES ONLINE ARTICLE: LOL! Anything above 75% accuracy, Ronald Reagan used to say, is impossible with reporters. She used one of my more benign quotes, but took another, and worked it into the article anyway, because I likened them to terrorists, and that stuck in her mind. I am sure others made the analogy, and according to her article, they admitted they were! What could be better for us, in responding to RW? We simply adopt the Government’s own policy: “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.” When they deny that, we simply point to the confirmation of the Los Angeles Times. ;-) The important thing is, the thrust was that against good and evil. And she showcased a mere child quaking with fear of being “destroyed” by those horrid Internet Vandals and Cyber Terrorists! –TK

--PsyGremlinPraat! 18:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

29e7df4a2c4a2bd4 19:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't find the link right off, but I remember him posting a bunch of our real names last July over on CP for some vindictive reason or another. I know mine was there, which is odd since I generally tried to avoid interacting with him, complete with a link to my old comic site. I also remember he and Koward used to delight in posting Ames' full name as well as others' to apparently discredit them if anyone Googled, so it's probably a bit late for him to worry about the morality of "outing" by this point. --Kels (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

His openly defamatory talk page diff and the start of a temper tantrum are here^img. I'm glad he had the good sense to remove that stuff from public view. 19:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I always found that a bit hilarious, since I'm the one who's usually outspoken against vandalizing CP. --Kels (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Moar better

Fucking insane logic I fell off my chair. "Since I am an administrator at another wiki, as you could plainly see on my page, the idea that I would be vandalizing another wiki is pretty remote."

And yet, since we are all, oh never mind. ħuman 04:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandal sites^{[citation NOT needed]} aren't wikis! Stop remembering my name, Huw Powell! ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 05:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletions

TK^img and DouglasA^img are at the great spring cleaning, freeing Conservapedia not only from pop-culture, but also from atheist propaganda, i.e., articles on works of atheists. Well, Andy once stated

“”Article count beyond a certain critical mass (say 20,000 entries) doesn't have any particular significance.

Perhaps one should help them to reach the goal of 20,000 entries (currently, there are ~37,000)? TK, have a look at cp:category:years! larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a funny idea. I have the hiccups. ħuman 06:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

'[...]You don't grasp the beauty of the destruction of articles. Do you know that Conservapedia is the only encyclopedia in the net whose database gets smaller every year?'

Maquissar did know that, of course. He smiled, sympathetically he hoped, not trusting himself to speak. Schlafly bit off another fragment of the dark-coloured bread, chewed it briefly, and went on:

'Don't you see that the whole aim of Conservapedia is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make a liberal world-view literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one article, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Already, in the Eleventh Edition, we're not far from that point. But the process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer articles, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there's no reason or excuse for indulging in liberalism. It's merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won't be any need even for that. The Revolution will be complete when Conservapedia is perfect. Conservapedia is Theocon and Theocon is Conservapedia,' he added with a sort of mystical satisfaction. Has it ever occurred to you, Maquissar, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?'

'Except-' began Maquissar doubtfully, and he stopped.

It had been on the tip of his tongue to say 'Except liberals,' but he checked himself, not feeling fully certain that this remark was not in some way unorthodox. Schlafly, however, had divined what he was about to say.

'Liberals are not human beings,' he said carelessly. 'By 2050 or earlier, probably -- all real knowledge of Oldview will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Russell, Marx, Hemingway, Dawkins -- they'll exist only in Theocon versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the commandments will change. How could you have a commandment like the 90/10 rule against talk, talk, talk, when the concept of debate has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Conservapedia means not thinking -- not needing to think. Conservapedia is unconsciousness.' --George Orwell and Maquissar (talk) 08:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice work Maquissar. Now meet me in Room 101. Aceⁱ⁹ 08:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

My hiccups went away. ħuman 09:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Larron: between 33,000 and 33,100 articles as of yesterday. If I'm not mistaken there is actually less text in the article namespace proper now than there was two years ago. mb 09:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, that explains a lot. It's mostly cover for "disappearing" an embarrassing essay that was linked from elsewhere (and probably included some embarrassing comments by admins too). Subtle, real subtle. --Kels (talk) 13:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The page was written almost entirely by one BHarlan over the course of a few days in October 2008. RJJensen and Terrence Kockfritz made some minor tweaks to it last August. For the most part the page is an ideologically neutral and genuinely informative sysnopsis of the history of the Civil Rights movement. As such it is pretty damning for the Republicans. The article explicitly calls out icons such as Ronald Reagan, William F Buckley, and John McCain for their opposition to Civil Rights legislation, their support of South African Apartheid, and their general bigotry. The article also explicitly mentions that the driving force behind every step forward were liberal Democrats. It heaps scorn on Paleoconservatives to the point of actually using the word.

The page is liberally sprinkled, however, with some hilarious conspiracy crap about Black preachers using hypnosis and brainwashing to keep their parishoners dependent. Black people in general are blamed for making it easy for them. Also, Black people are being lied to about the Democrats by, wait for it, public schools.

The overall effect is that of a very weird pastiche. mb 14:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I figured TK would zap that article as soon as it was linked, so I saved the code as a text file. here's the link. Damn shame I couldn't get the talk page though.... SirChuckB^{Gentoo Penguins is the best kind of Penguin} 04:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Found it SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 05:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Anyone Else?

I just had to have a little chuckle when I saw TK bitching about this stupid FoxNews stimulus share calculator. Tell you what TK. We liberals will pay back all the stimulus money, you conservatives take care of the Iraq War and we'll care it even. SirChuckB^{Please Excuse me, I have to go out and hunt giraffes} 08:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC) PS, since you're bloxered over here, feel free to reply on my Wikipedia page.

$39, me. Less than I struggled to send to Haiti. Fine by me. ħuman 08:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

From the linked humanevents article -

“”When we balanced the budget in the 1990s, we did it with strong controls on spending, real reform of welfare and Medicare, and tax cuts to increase economic growth.

Hmmmmm no mention of that commie, philandering Clinton....Aceⁱ⁹ 10:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

To quote Bill Maher, "he had his dick in a Jew's mouth on Easter!" ħuman 11:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, only people making money in/living in America need to pay this, which I am not. Fine by me too. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

$403 was my result, they can send that to me by check or money order please. I do wish my "tax burden" on that pie chat was really that low, lol. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 21:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

BMcP, I think it's your share of the extra national debt (which they allege somehow has to be repaid eventually) due to government spending the stimulus money. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Damn, well that helps explain that nasty negative number on the totals in my 1040. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 20:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

spam

can't link cus i'm on my cell, but there's some serious spam shit going down in the recent changes Tweety (talk) 17:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Example^img. Prob 4chan/Anonymous again. Doubt anything will happen. Andy will just turn off account creation. It's not like they have any new editors anyway. --PsyGremlinParla! 18:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Captured, plus a cap request of the non-diff version: From Geology Terms I^img

It's a silly threat, of course, but judging from what I saw from the Zeuglothingy Blues, it'll likely notch up the paranoia in the new discussion group. Ah well. --Sid (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, fun: Karajou is on it.^img --Sid (talk) 18:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I like how his note was longer than a lot of the articles it replaced. Jaxe (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I see Karajerk used his challenge as a handy opportunity to delete^img his talkpage without archiving. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 18:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this the massive attack everyone is talking about on Ames/Huw/Kel/Sid/Trent's secret discussion site? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

So secret, even I don't know where it is. --Kels (talk) 18:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

For your own safety, no doubt. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

They've already turned off account creation. Not hard to get around though; all they need to do is coordinate account creation, as in create all 512 acccounts in the space of a few minutes. NU - sorry, but these guys are just one part of Operation Shit-smeared Windmill.EddyP (talk) 18:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I made a WIGO about it but everyone seems hellbent on removing all traces of the threats. This could be quite funny if they do it properly. I'm guessing it's /b/, yes? Webbtje (talk) 18:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

(EC)I threw another little WIGO out there. It all hinges upon whether or not you believe the vandal, but I wouldn't be surprised either way. EddyP (talk) 18:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It could be an interesting standoff, with account creation indefinitely suspended and the CP cabal standing around with their dicks in the hands. Let's see out what happens... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I like Ken's post on the mainpage about how web traffic is up. Especially: The Asian population of web visitors to Conservapedia (Asians certainly have a reputation for studiousness), is above average according to Quantcast. Go team Conservapedia! Yaaaaaaaaaaay! You go Ken! SJ ^Debaser 18:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Quick, someone send Karajou/TK/Andy the global blocking script. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The tags on compete are pretty accurate:

• blog
• conservatism
• discrimination
• hate-speech
• homophobia
• lies

hah... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk /}

Block 19:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC) I like that the 'constant attacks' are only 12 hours a day. I guess their mommys don't let them have computer time after 9pm.

They've oversighted Ken's mainpageright edit. EddyP (talk) 20:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, they need a job to pay the utilities bill and sleep time for the job too. But then again, Oversighting Ken's edit is a bit over the line. Wait, didn't they say they have bots for this? I guess it has somthing to do with night mode then. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It's on

At least TerryH started it^img (and oversighted the note). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 19:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Good for the stats, Ken will be pleased OléOléOlé, 12000000 edits in april... Bad because Rob will blame RW and it's suppersekkrit forum/den of evil masterminds...But Thats not RW's style, we strive for sysopship!

Damn you /b/tards!!!! We should Be CP's Forest Rangers... Someone once said something like 'We must preserve this gem of the internet for our grand-childrens... This will be our we used to walk 12 miles in the snow ... look what used to argue with... Alain (past 4:20)

Nothing's happened so far. Sounds like just an empty threat. Now that I think about it, /b/ would probably just attack without making grandiose-sounding threats beforehand. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Not really, they are first and fore-most attention whores. Before Anonymous attacked the Australian Parliament's website earlier this year they made all these boding videos warning of the attacks, they still garnered very little press outside of the Government owned ABC. - π 01:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

They attacked the Australian Parliament? Wow, that's low. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Given that the week before the Government announced a $22 million cyber-terrorism detection centre, complete with a giant Hollywood style computer screen that appeared to do nothing spanning one wall , it was kind off funny in its own way. - π 02:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

What the hell is "cyber-terrorism", anyway? I mean, I know we are, but what are we? ħuman 04:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Something for the government to spend money on to "protect" us from. Also calling people cyber-terrorist sells newspapers. I am more annoyed about the confusion in the media about hackers and crackers. Hackers "hack" at programmes to make them work better/different, so long as it is open source this is legal. A cracker tries to get into a secured system, this is always illegal. I wish the media would learn the difference and stop liabling the noble hacker who only wants to write computer code. - π 04:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

What the hell is "cyber-terrorism", anyway? I mean, I know we are, but what are we? ħuman 09:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, what we do is, we very cleverly register an account on a wiki that uses nothing more than a simple Turing test to keep you out. So basically, so long as you are not a computer, you can register. We then very stealthily click a button that says "edit" and use it to change the text that appears on the page so that is says something that Andy disagrees with. This is then reverted by the click of a button and our account is blocked so that the "edit" button is no longer available to us. That is, as far as I can tell, the definition of "cyber-terrorism" as being used by Terry Koeckritz. - π 10:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

How come no one has pointed out that...

Moved from the Saloon Bar

...the Evolution article currently begins with a charming picture of cross-burning. Also, what the heck is up with all the Skype-spamming? Vulpius (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I love it, although it could use a little hitwin. I'm not sure what the Skype spamming is about, but knowing that Ken is a search engine optimization magnate, I think we'd do best to follow suit. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, what on earth does "begin_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting" mean??? ħuman 02:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Gah. Sorry for messing up the page. Vulpius (talk) 20:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

First it's Hitwin, then it's the Klan. should we give Ken a list of racists to be included in the article? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Would it be more fun to tell Ken you have to be a Christian to be in the KKK, or more fun just to let him leave that shit there? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I think KenLogic works like this: if you are a True Christian, you are not a racist. Also, some evolutionists were racists. Therefore, evolution = racism. Therefore, all evolutionists are racists. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

(Also, I love that his source is an article from Jerry "A billion undergrad degrees, and still a blithering nitwit" Bergman published in the Journal of Creation. Scholarly! Good to see CMI are keeping those standards up. PJR would approve.) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This reminds me...don't search engines usually remove/adjust for sites that abuse the ranking systems? ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 03:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Depends on how you are doing it. The two main things the quality control bots look for is reciprocal links, this is why after the initial bump Ken's rankings tend to drop back to lower than they were a few days earlier, and repetitive material, e.g, the same site having multiple copies of the same page or parts of the page. Usually Ken gets good results from the spiders because of all the incoming links, but after a few days when the slower, less frequently run bots come along and look at what is actually going they get dropped back down the page ranks. - π 05:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that as far as organizations supporting evolution go, the KKK is pretty damn far down the list. They're your typical "I ain't no monkey" group. DickTurpis (talk) 22:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandal bot

I'm just curious... what does everyone think about the possibility of that happening? regarding the 521 dudes with open proxies worldwide. teh rational ghey (talk) 02:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Incredibly slim. There are basically no skilled programmers on CP. ħuman 02:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

A while ago I socked up and offered to run Andy some maintenance bots, but he blocked me for not making substantial contributions. Educated evil Hoover! 16:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

True, but it a fairly secure site. And they use checkuser very liberally. no pun intended. teh rational ghey (talk) 02:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

My guess is that it is most likely some newbie on the /b/ forums thinking CP is a great target for a raid. There is probably only one other person serious about this and the other 519 (mostly socks, but given they are using the same handle who can tell) are playing them for "lulz". They will launch his two man assault to the laughing of all the others. - π 03:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Should we expect a sequel to the FBI incident?. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 06:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

FBIII?-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 12:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It's just another newf*g who thinks that /b/ is his personal army. Fail levels are low to moderate. -- CodyH (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you like not use that word? thanks. 208.125.226.138 (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm all for teh gays, but I think we need to take certain uses of the word "fag" back. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 15:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Stupid fucking fags Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 15:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No, not that one, you reckless queer. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 15:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

you're gay. YOUR SO GAY SO FUCKING GAY I read Conservapedia and they said yyer goin to hell! It's a real place ya know. No fer reels. I've been there. with assfly. teh rational ghey (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Fags=smokes=cigarettes. Now let's see how many people can resist jokes based on smoking a fag.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 16:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The use of 'fag' as an insult conjures up images of frantically masturbating 14 year olds shouting at Counterstrike. I wish people would put a modicum of thought into insulting people, it's much more entertaining. Webbtje (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

How could it be made back into a general-purpose insult? It's a good word. I want it back. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 16:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Reminder: we have an article for this. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

NU, I just rely on the standby general purpose insult of "Fucktard". It's clean, eloquent and hard to misconstrue. In situations requiring more finesse, I tell the offending party to "shut your two-cock garage", which is especially hilarious when the recipient is female. When all else fails, I just ignore the hell out of them. I've dealt with drill sergeants and I live with the most opinionated and vocal female I've ever encountered, so I'm terribly good at blocking everything out and imagining I'm at the circus, watching midget pirates shoot lollipops out of cannons into the crowd from the tightrope. Or whatever. The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I do have a special affinity for the word "fucktard"...and, of course, I can't think of it without being reminded of Kent Hovind. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I find the -tard suffix horrible and offensive and I wish people wold stop. you'll be calling people mongols next. Totnesmartin (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I tend to think people horribly offended by words have very small, delicate minds. If people would stop getting offended by words that are just words, all this retarded shit wouldn't be so gay. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I find selective, aggressive apathy offensive. No offense. ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 20:50, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

At least it has to be selective and aggressive to offend you. It's better than "word = offensive", regardless of context. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Then again, I haven't heard anyone say that sort of thing since I was ten. Maybe I don't watch the news enough? ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 21:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

For me, it's been at least since 20:28, 15 April 2010 UTC. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 21:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I like "fuckknuckle". ħuman 21:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

@N: I retract my testimony, you darn mongol. @H: I find those two Ks 66% racist. Stop offending my wiki. ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 21:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Aren't Fags obnoxious assholes in leather with noisy motorcycles? Alain (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

A fag is a younger boy who you can beat and who toasts your bread at all decent schools. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 21:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Damn straight! Well, straight as far as the public is concernced.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 22:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I've never heard that interpretation. In any case, this conversation certainly took a bizarre turn... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Fagging ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 23:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

That explains it, then: we don't use the word that way in the US. (At least, I imagine you would get some oddly offended looks if you did.) Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

"When I was at school, we used to line up four or five of his sort, make 'em bend over, and use 'em as a toast rack." Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 08:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

They don't use toast racks in America either. ħuman 00:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Truly, truly, truly outrageous

What is outrageous is that anyone at WP would take all of this standing on chairs and screaming as any sort of serious complaint rather than trolling. I tell you, this is outrageous! --Kels (talk) 00:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

While I totally understand the reasons why several RW editors are getting involved in the ongoing saga at WP, I'd like to suggest to them all that a break might be advisable. TK and RobS (TK-CP and Nobs01) are trolling; nothing more, nothing less. None of their complaints are being taken seriously by anybody except people from here. They have managed to get to the point where an admin would be justified in making up to 4 blocks to stop the pointless edit-warring, insult-hurling and general trolling that's going on.

Don't let them do this to you.

There are plenty of other WP/RW crossover editors whom you can tag if necessary. Don't let yourselves become frustrated to the point of gaining a block.

Everybody here should know how TK operates. He will bang on and on about process while all the time lying, and perverting the truth, but calling him a liar isn't going to work.

The position of TK and RobS is untenable and that's obvious. They know that, too. Don't let them score a minor victory by letting yourselves be blocked. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 00:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

QFT. -- Nx / talk 00:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He's now claiming in his patented way that I forged the chat log in which he said he was suing TMT. He has also called me a liar and said that my clients and prospective clients might be interested in what he says is my inability to keep confidences. As an attorney I can't have someone who thinks he's anonymous on the internet threatening my business and law license. I'll do what it takes to drive that point home without getting blocked on WP, but thanks for the concern. 01:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Then you should raise that issue on one of the WP noticeboards. Reverting him on his talk page (where he does have the right to remove comments, unfortunately), will only get you blocked. -- Nx / talk 01:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I have no WP-fu. To whose attention do I raise this issue and is there a way to do it privately? 01:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, maybe wp:WP:RFC/U? -- Nx / talk 02:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

That could be a good place to discuss possible trolling as well. Although TK's recent stuff goes way beyond "possibly". --Kels (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Or you could just stop acknowledging him. TK will get bored very quickly. Keegscee (talk) 04:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that one's impressive. His response to someone complaining that TK's freaking out in an inappropriate place is the blame the victim and ironically bitch about wiki administrators ignoring clear rule violations. It's a masterpiece of trolling, right there. Seriously, if this guy's so obviously just stirring shit up for no clear purpose, is there any official recourse that can be taken there? I don't know WP policy well enough to say. --Kels (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I must say that I agree with Suspected Replicant here. Let TK and RobS dig their graves over at Wikipedia. It already shows that none of the sysops over there give two shits about their complaining. Lord Goonie ^{Hooray! I'm helping!} 02:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Am I reading this correctly - is rob suggesting that Rational Wiki material should be included or referenced? Would that make it a reliable source? --Shagie (talk) 05:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The same thought occurred to me but then I realised that I was getting notability confused with reliability.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 16:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Advice to all, per above, lay low and keep quiet, while the grave-digging is going on. If you are "active" on WP, do what I do as a mouthwash, hit "random page" twenty times and fix anything you see that is wrong. Again, let Knobs and TKnobs dig their own graves. ħuman 08:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

For 200 dollar: Violent or unrestrained in temperament or behavior?

*BZZZT*

WHAT IS OUTRAGEOUS --GTac (talk) 11:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Human: Laying low or lying low? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Both. ħuman 00:52, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow. TK goes away for a few hours (and nobs, coincidentally), and five or so people work on the wording and do a good job of improving it. Then nobs asks an irrelevant question, and TK pops in at the same time, coincidentally, and calls it "unacceptable" and drag the tone down about 5 levels. ħuman 01:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandal site

I love how TK manages to use every opportunity^img to advertise a certain vandal site, that would otherwise be PNG on CP and the average non-parodist user (stops to laugh hysterically for a moment) would know nothing about them. If you call them, they will come. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 09:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if there are any other vandal sites out there that think TK is talking about them? That guy who posted the silly threat, for example.194.6.79.200 (talk) 10:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

TK, you silly sod, what a stupid, pointless and totally baseless thing to put up on the front page of a so-called "encyclopedia." I can't believe Andy hasn't removed that yet. Godwin's Law, anyone? SJ ^Debaser 11:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's Emmanuel Goldstein from 1984! [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 13:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

CEASE AND DESIST

• Halt your vandal attacks, we know it is you, and legal action will be taken.--TKCP (talk) 10:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Lol, not a very good imitation. He usually is TK-CP with the hyphen. - π 10:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that in itself means it's not Tez, but the capitalised title is suspicious Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 10:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought he was only talking to us through his lawyer, just like my neighbor down back. Yes, I fight and troll people in real life too. - π 11:42, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed the odd indenting for you. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Totally irrelevant question in English

Question on English: does "Halt your vandal attacks, we know it is you, and legal action will be taken." imply that "Halt your vandal attacks" results in "legal action will be taken", whatever those two phrases may mean? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Technically, I think it can be read as "halting will result in us knowing it's you, and thus legal action being taken," so yeah. It could use a semicolon or period where that first comma is. ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 23:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The commas are indifferent separators of clause, and there's no conjunction to suggest this is anything but a list. It's poorly written and ambiguous, in other words, and can be read equally correctly as a string of unrelated events or as a causal series.--^talk 23:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Best... Schlaflism... EVAR!

I may be behind the times, but did anyone catch this Schlafly classic a week or so back: "There is a high correlation between belief in evolution and liberal political beliefs; that correlation alone demonstrates that evolution cannot be factual." (ref^img) There's the usual 2 + 2 = 4 stuff in evidence too. Anyone who can say this stuff with a straight face must be seriously unhinged. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Definitely one for the quote generator, who knows how to edit that? - π 12:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I remember reading that a few days ago, but it never occurred to me how perfectly it fits the quote generator. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 12:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

There's also a known correlation between those things and IQ, funny that. ^narchist 14:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I have tried to put it in (check the diffs to see where). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Or maybe we should have a section of correlations bunched up, but I am not sure if that is accurate. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

With such unbeatable logic, I believe the evolution article could be shortened quite a bit. No need for lenghty tirades about evidence for creationism when one Schlafly insight does the job just fine, eh Ken? Vulpius (talk) 19:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Andy's insights are more entertaining if you remove liberals as the demonised party and replace them with Jews, blacks, or the Irish. Helps show Andy's true colours. I imagine him in a bedsheet or a homemade military uniform, blurting out his gibberish while his mum spits on a hankie and tries to clean the drool from his chin. ^{Ask me about your mother} 22:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

If only his mum weren't just as spittle flecked as he is. All his wingnuttery he learnt at mama's knee. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Naw. he's gone far beyond his mum's nuttiness. But I suspect she taught him "logic" and he has run with it. ħuman 02:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Not WIGO worthy 'cause it's TK

Images " ... need to be non-copyrighted,..."^img Try telling Joaquin, Terry. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 15:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Or even try following his own advice. There was that ice-hockey player photo which he uploaded and which was later removed. But there are many other examples, particularly among his early work at CP. I know there's a picture of a light-house from Wikimedia Commons which was GFDL (later CCSA 3.0) but he just says "from WikiCommons" as if that somehow makes it all OK.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 16:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The trick to getting GFDL images to be removed from Conservapedia is to notify the copyright holder. Have to see where this one goes. --Shagie (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Regardless of political ideology?

Really? Miriel will not last long, he/she fails to display a true Conservapedian spirit! :P --Maquissar (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Hazarding a guess

Who here want to hazard a guess with me that AngusT is a parodist based on his contribs? LimpWrist (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

No matter how conservatively you spin it it is always a mistake to write about anyone or anything liberal or rational on conservapedia. the conservapedia MO seems to center around censoring any conversation on uncomfortable subjects. --Opcn (talk) 20:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

A bit early for speculation, he hasn't even made twenty edits. And don't we have some sort of guidepolicy against outing parodists? Internetmoniker (talk) 20:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Can a bureaucrat please oversight this section urgently. Thank you Sleuth (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Pardon? ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 21:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't sorry, we discuss people we're 95% sure are parodists all the time, and they never do anything about them. JacobB is still going strong. If Angus is banhammered it will be for something he does, not us. DickTurpis (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well if this isn't deleted quickly I'm bloody outed lol Sleuth (talk) 21:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

You admitted to being AngusT by requesting the deletion of this section. You should've stayed silent. -- Nx / talk 21:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I know, I hoped it would be deleted quickly. Fuck. Sleuth (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I love this gambit. Keep going. Who else are you on Conservapedia? 21:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Ooo~ Someone broke Rule #0 of WIGO. (Never talk about possible parodists). I always thought JonB was a parodist, but eh. What do I know besides the person, right? Keklik 21:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's largely pointing out the parody that is the problem. As for admitting to being a parodist then I'm Joaquin Martinez and my brother is TK.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 21:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Motherf**ker

TK is trolling big now^img (compare). - π 11:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Pedantry: this should be the one comparing to. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 13:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

What I can't understand is why someone (anyone, really) would spend that much time trying to antagonise people. Over the Internet. The existence of TK on CP merely cements my opinion of Andrew Schlafly as the world's biggest putz. --Yossarian^{Speak, Memory} 12:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

'Cos he's a sad fuck who has no other life and gets his jollies by "proving" that he's "better/smarter" by being a bigger bully. The sad thing is that the attention he gets here only feeds his fantasies. What would really hurt him is if we ignored him. Jack Hughes (talk) 12:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Well WIGOs that focus on TK being the saddest cunt in the world started getting voted down a couple of months ago. Also, whenever we have CP boycotts their traffic tends to go down a fair old bit. SJ ^Debaser 12:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He is a sad fuck there is no doubt, but he is a sad fuck that has violated our copy-right. We only have given license for our work to be redistributed under CC-by-SA 3.0, so unless he acknowledges us and shares-alike he has violated our copy-right. - π 12:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

cp:DMCA Agent? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Saddest cunt? I got a bollocking yesterday for talking about fucking him, haha Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 12:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh so that did actually happen? I thought I saw a discussion about "flooding" TK's butthole and had to go and wash my eyes out with bleach. When I got back it had gone. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I asked if people would ride him bareback if the fucked him anally. And if so, would they pull out or flood him. I don't see what's wrong with a little homosexual humour. Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 13:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

(Crundy goes off to wash his eyes out with bleach again) Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 13:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

TK knows he's violated our copyright, and he wants us to chase it up. Getting us involved in his latest little shit-flinging escapade would play to his trouble-making agenda. Best to ignore it, but bear in mind that TK will copyvio everything else on RW until he's riled us. Anyway, it doesn't matter - the only people in the entire world who will ever view that article are CP editors (all 6 of them) and us. ^{ONE / TALK} 13:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He's obviously trying to bait us into saying anything resembling legal action in order to capitalize on his own legal threats that got him banned, and then got brought up in the larger arena of WP. It's petty and stupid, but it's pretty clear that vindictiveness is well within character. --Kels (talk) 13:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Should we direct any legal threats to Andy because he's the owner of the site? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

And I wonder why TK still copies from the vandal site, which he is threatening legal actions against. Shouldn't he assume that the contents of the vandal site consists of material baiting to, if posted on CP, will constitute vandalism? (Someone revert him with the reason "material found on vandal site"/vandalism/parody) [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

So Terry Koeckritz plagiarises another article for CP. Just like the UCLA article copied from Wikipedia his mediawiki-formatting skills let him down again. What a sad little man he is.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 16:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

We should send a DMCA request to take it down or acknowledge the source. I'll try to remember how to email Trent. The thing is, it violates the copyright of everyone who contributed to the article, by it being copied to a non-CC-BY-SA site, and by it not being acknowledged. What he did is actually against the law. The easy fix is to remove it upon request. ħuman 02:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Simple truth of the matter is if we are aware of a violation and fail to act we risk losing the right to maintain copyright on the work. An informal request to Andrew and Sitegrounds should be enough. I will take care of it. tmtoulouse 02:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Er, no. That's how trademarks work, not copyrights. But yes, there's a lot to be said for asking nicely - David Gerard (talk) 02:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Trent. ħuman 03:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The original author of the article submitted it to both sites, so we both hold a unique copyright on the content. The problem arises because CP regularly erases important history through deletion and recreation. It is poor management that is for sure. tmtoulouse 06:23, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks again. F'ing idiots don't know how to run a website. ħuman 06:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

TK knew that all along. We're just fueling the fire here. Keegscee (talk) 07:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I guess I owe TK an apology. Sorry for accusing you of plagiarism, TK. - π 07:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Let me assure he was as gracious as one would expect. tmtoulouse 07:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

So what we were too lazy or stupid to do was check the deletion log before panicking and stirring the slumbering giant? ħuman 08:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of deleting, why do we have an article on Schlafly Brewery? Not very on mission. - π 13:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Beer is inherently on-topic. Is the stuff any good? - David Gerard (talk) 20:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Foxhole Atheist says it is. - π 01:14, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

There's a first for everything

JacobB made me lol!^{img — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, no starting entry would be appropriate though. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 21:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

That is amazing... I am not even sure where to begin on that one. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 22:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm equally amazed. Making fun of Ed is like trying to accuse a thief who walks around with a mask, stripey shirt and a bag marked "swag". Our comments seem somehow unecessary. Well done JacobB! ^{Ask me about your mother} 22:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't think JabobB has forgotten about this. Keegscee (talk) 22:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Please use the capture tag - someone oversighted that edit since you posted. 23:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. It was from January when Ed asked Jacob for a writing plan. I'm sure it's been captured already. Keegscee (talk) 23:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's amazing JacobB is still there at all. He was outed ages ago here as a parodist. But of course, blocking him for "liberal vandalism/parody" would, in the CPians minds be an acknowledgement of our existence (though TK's been testing that rule recently on CP). SJ ^Debaser 00:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Trouble is Poe's Law: a good parodist is indistinguishable from the real thing, so why not let him continue adding "good" stuff until he goes berserk in frustration and then just revert his berserk stuff? ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 00:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

We know that logic goes through their heads (see the ZB discussions), but it's utterly wrong. Any good parodist will be supplementing the utterly partisan with the utterly false. 00:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Once a fact has been accepted by the Aschlafly it is true and will be defended whatever. There are no false statements on Conservapædia. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 13:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

In cases where conservapedia differs from reality conservapedia remains definitive and reality is wrong. --Opcn (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Jacob's endgame?

Well, Jacob (and Douglas) finally made it to adminship. Any speculation about his exit strategy? The parody game has to get boring sooner or later, especially with the amount of time he puts in. He hasn't really done anything new lately (at least in public), so what's left? --Benod (talk) 23:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

TK's still there, which proves some parodists have the patience and lack of social lives to stay around. Maybe J & D will learn from teh über parodist? –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The question is, what sort of exit strategies are even possible? Pretty much anything can be undone and memory-holed. A truly spectacular exit would need some serious creativity and planning. 00:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The game has changed a bit. Back in the day there was no shortage of bright eyed editors to throw in to the wood-chipper, but right now it's a very limited selection. It's quite clear that Andy doesn't need to be pushed to adopt crazy and unpopular positions, so I'd like to see some serious undermining of a major sysop, such as Ken, Ed, Karajou, or the Mexican bandit. CP deserves to go out with an explosion, and the current slow slide in to mediocrity is really selling the site short. I'd be very impressed if someone managed to drag the Schlafly broodmare in to the game. --^{Ask me about your mother} 00:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I keep looking at the Active Editors stat. I think if that drops below Ψ, where Ψ is some value in TK's warped mind, he'll out himself. Given that there's variable ψ, which is people who edited but got blocked, (Ψ-ψ) must be approaching the critical value. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 00:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Jacob and Doug have probably put a few gems in the CBP. Other than that, there's not really much they can do other than laugh in Andy's face. The only normal editor worth disposing of now is CPalmer, who has probably only survived this long because he hasn't really edited in the past half-year. The best thing they could do would be to take down TK with them; that way, CP might get some new editors, arguments would be held, and we would get to see the CP sysops in all their war finery once more. EddyP (talk) 01:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the ideal endgame would be deleting a crapload of articles (with Andy's approval, of course) and gradually blocking the planet. That way, they can at least be sure that they did some irreparable damage to CP before they risk their own heads going after TK or someone else. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Block as many IPs as you can, insert as much gibberish as possible and defend it with blocks, maybe as a grand finale, delete and restore all the top 20 articles, thus not actually vandalising, but certainly screwing up Andy's beloved pageviews. Ideally, what every mole desires is entry into the soopah seekrit discussion group, so they can emulate Terry Koeckritz by sharing the secrets with everybody. --PsyGremlinParla! 10:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually sorting out their images for copyvio would be awesome.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Point

"For a gov. to not express appreciation or acknowledge an unseen but manifest host conveys that such is unworthy of recognition, or that it is evil for them to do so, or that no host exists." Sayeth Dan^img Too true, Danny boy. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 00:17, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think he's right at all. Not having a National Prayer Day does not mean that the government's official position is atheistic or agnostic - it just means that they are (correctly, in my opinion), staying away from religion so that people can decide for themselves how/when/who/if they want to worship. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I think Toasty Toes was just bring snarky about the "no host exists" part. ħuman 03:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

If the government is atheistic do the government hospitals become atheist hospitals? --Opcn (talk) 05:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

They are, that's why these conservatives wants no universal healthcare — Only Christian hospitals should provide healthcare and they should charge you a fee on top of your tithe. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 07:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

This won't last long

So I'm saving the Stephen Tin Tin Duffy^img reference for posterior. --PsyGremlinPrata! 13:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I've been waiting for them to get to the porny bits Of the OT. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 13:46, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. Especially Levitations and Dorubyourtummyforme with all their talk of "nocturnal emissions". --PsyGremlinPrata! 13:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Sexy stuff. Better than internet porn. SJ ^Debaser 13:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Ha! Said by somebody who's never watched dwarf lesbian nun porn. --PsyGremlin말하십시오 14:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Speaking as a dwarf lesbian nun, I find that comment offensive, Psy. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 14:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

But... but... it's art! PsyGremlinPraat! 14:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh! Googling dwarf lesbian nun gets 212,000 hits therefore it must be true. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 14:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

For all dwarf lesbian nun: if dwarf lesbian nun gets 212,000 hits and cowboy dwarf lesbian evolutionist nun vampire gets about 70,000 hits, then cowboy dwarf lesbian evolutionist nun vampire is approximately 1/3 as true as dwarf lesbian nun. ■ 15:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

cowboy dwarf lesbian evolutionist nun vampire. Now there's a film I'll watch. --PsyGremlinParlez! 15:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Someone "translated" Ecclesiastes months ago, but its still languishing in the incomplete list, its like they are allergic to the entire old testament that isn't about how much fags suck, which reminds me, did anyone bother to screen cap me asking Ken where he is blowing these days? It took a lot of self control to not write "in a highway rest stop bathroom no doubt" in the edit comment. --Opcn (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I never...

They seem to have attracted a genuine conservative judging by his blog. He seems to be operating a la Ed, bigging himself up here, or is he just a parodist who's put in extra work? Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 14:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, in his blog he used the word 'phenomenol'. Yep, conserva-loon Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 14:07, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

... Phenomenon packaged into booze form? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't care if he's a conservative or what, but creating a mainspace article about your own personal blog as your 3rd mainspace edit? Ugh.. --GTac (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He should fit right in Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 14:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Note he claims to be a Native American. Wonder if he's read Roger's diatribes? ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 14:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He looks like Gary Busey. SJ ^Debaser 19:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting how he wrote the article in the future tense. Made me think it was brand new, but it's been around a couple months at least. Quickly glancing through it I think I saw only one post with any comments. Why do is expect this is not an encyclopedia-worthy blog? Also, from what I read this guy doesn't seem far-right enough for CP. For instance he admitted that some of the opposition to healthcare reform could be attributed to Conservative Deceit. [Cue spooky music] DickTurpis (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He also uses the word "majorly". The future tense is due to him quoting the header on his blog, I think. And also, glorious dreams of future fame? ħuman 02:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

He also seems not to have a mother, but he does have two daddies. ħuman 02:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

...and he also signs his article sections. He definitely has a future at CP. Finally, new blood! ħuman 02:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

TK told him to "Scott, please sign all posts."^img He's taken it a bit literally. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 02:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I know. Typical parodist tactic is to not sign their first talk page posts, to disguise that they have any wiki-fu. I like the way he ran with it. TK forgot to say "talk page posts". Don't they have a template yet for that? And I always love the "W with a red line through it" references. ħuman 03:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The guy's phonics schpiel is copied completely from WP too - perfect conservapedophile. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 14:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Trim to fit on one line

Andy really doesn't get how browsers, computers, displays or anything works does he?^{img yummy} &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 23:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Toast (what a ridiculous name!) but your reply scrolled over one line so I was unable to read it. gODspeed –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It is one line for Andy, that is what is important. It is his wishes that count, TK said so. (Aside: If you want to see something bad go to NFL.com with the default Ubuntu fonts. The website must cost millions a year, but text gets chopped of the end of lines unless you are using the Windows defaults.) - π 01:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

As a side note, NFL.com doesn't look screwed up with a firefox/default fonts on Fedora 12, or that may be just me. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 07:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, he's using a monitor that small? Even my used flaptop renders the "pre" version on one line. But then again, as used flappies go, it's pretty shiny. ħuman 02:23, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

More correctly it's the pixel resolution that counts rather than the dimensions of the monitor. I reckon he must be using one of those Hollywood style monitors where everything is displayed in a font that you can read from across the street.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 03:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

True indeed. A friend of mine has a 42" or so monitor, and when he goes into command line mode each character is about 2" tall. ħuman 04:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

He is using too many words to describe the word "concise" in the CP sense. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 07:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe that's where his obsession with conciseness comes from. It's nothing about being able to express an idea in as little words as possible, it's just that he's using some ridiculous resolution and doesn't like scrolling down a talk page. X Stickman (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Remember the Lenski dialog? The lazy fucker can't be bothered to read. --Opcn (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Y'all remember when he uploaded a line drawing for one of his economics 'lectures' as a 6000x4000 jpeg? For an electrical engineer (and a programmer of course!) he really doesn't have a fucking clue. Good spot Toasty. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 16:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

...and now it won't fit on one line...

...because Andy has put a massive image^img on the left side of the main page. No sense of what a good layout is. RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

"No sense of what a good layout is." Fixed that for you. --Kels (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, ruthless censorship of controversial political cartoons. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 23:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken of all people fixed it. Five times. ħuman 12:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken logic

Back at his best, Christian channels on YouTube being shut down for copy-right violation is a blow against atheism.^img I will never cease to wonder what goes on inside his head. He must have some kind of special prism that reflects and refracts what he is reading so that it always comes out as "you are right Ken". - π 01:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me that what Ken is really saying is this: Christian YouTube channels are being shut down because of copyright issues. The atheist channels are saying nothing about it. Therefore, they are the ones doing the censoring. QED. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I've never heard any atheist say "atheist" that much in a sentence. Holy (haha) balls. – Nick Heer 03:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

While they've always portrayed reality as a neverending string of conservative victories, "Belief in God is once again triumphant. Conservapedia has learned that Christian channels at YouTube are systematically being shut down at YouTube..." is probably the ballsiest move yet. Chapeau, Ken! Röstigraben (talk) 07:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"The atheist community at YouTube demonstrates the utter futility and weakness of the atheism." Snigger.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 09:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Ken. Maybe you can strike a blow against the atheism by posting so many copyrighted Hitler pictures on Conservapedia that it gets shut down. In other news, I am impressed by the "TheCristianThinker"'s ability to spell "Christian." Thinky. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me Jeeves, but I fixed your sentence.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 12:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I like how up until this point Ken has ignored numerous DMCA and votebotting instances against atheist YouTubers, but the second a couple of Christians get shutdown he pisses himself over it. Ken's just such an unusual bloke. Even in the Zeuglodon Blue files. SJ ^Debaser 12:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I like the ones where he posts a rambling screed, everybody ignores him and he goes on to post about 7 replies to his own mail. Very strange indeed. Still, it's good to see his writing style is as bad off-wiki as on. --PsyGremlinTal! 12:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

What is ironic is that I discovered about some of the Christian channels being falsely DMCAed through the atheist DPRJones channel when he called for people's support for those same Christians through mirroring their videos. Ken though likely ignored that as soon as he realized it would contradict his stereotyping of atheists. Of course there was a string of false DMCAs against atheist channels not too long ago, and then there was the story of the Christian Venomfangx, who got caught and had to make a public apology. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 17:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, dprjones, AronRa and Thunderf00t get their channels suspended all the time by the same mechanism. And they're the ones most actively campaigning against DMCA abuse. Fucks sake. ^narchist 17:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

What the fuck was this?

I can see why he took it down^img--Opcn (talk) 06:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

i can't even see where that is in the article, he might be the one with delusional "thinking". - π 06:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't understand what Conservative is saying. Someone translate it into English, please. Rodlen (talk) 06:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Just another red telephone message, move along.....Aceⁱ⁹ 06:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Best of all is this. Douglas is confused, as he should be, and it's Ken who wants him to elaborate? What is in that man's mind? 06:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"If I am not mistaken, I believe I am the principle contributor of these articles" - Bloody right Ken. They've been locked away from ordinary editors pretty much from day 1.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 07:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Oooh me me me me me! What is in that man's mind? Ummm, pudding? Gravel? The foam bits from earbud headphones? Eraser tips, OCD pills, watermelon seeds, foam. 14:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Small sections of bicycle chain. ħuman 14:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Dried up moth parts. 14:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Used Q-tips. ħuman 15:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Plastic bible figures. 15:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Life-giving CO2! Vulpius (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Turkey cum --Stocking (talk) 18:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

That's disgusting. rational ghey (talk) 18:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

So, basically, Ken would be one of the few survivors of the upcoming zombie apocalypse. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Rodlen (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

So that's the "end of atheism/evolution on internet" he's always been foaming about, zombie apocalypse? Vulpius (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, there wouldn't be the internet, people would pray for their lives, and the dead have problems evolving, so... Rodlen (talk) 19:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I tip my hat

to DouglasA. The scale on which he is destroying articles is unlike that of any parodist seen before; and he's getting away with it too. Truly he is among the masters. EddyP (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

He is quite skillful, but it's not as hard as it used to be because almost nothing is going on at CP these days. Plus, right now it's Sunday morning EST, so Andy and most of his gang are probably at church. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Unless I'm missing something, it looks like he's just deleting articles that aren't on par with conservapedia's mission. And he just translated a bible verse. Senator Harrison (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Most of those articles were already marked for deletion. They were still up because Conservapedians are lazy by nature - I've seen stuff marked for "speedy deletion" still up months later. Yeah, it's amusing that DouglasA deleted almost 150 articles in a week, but it was all stuff that CP wanted deleted.

I do find it interesting how selective they're being with the anime articles. Only a few of them were marked for deletion, ironically the more widely-known series. I'm honestly surprised that they didn't just nuke the whole section after Jessica got the boot. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 16:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

My favorite one: cp:HeadOn. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 16:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought that CP's mission was to become a general encyclopaedia and destroy WP utterly. EddyP (talk) 16:15, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

It is, but I seem to remember Andy saying that he didn't want all the pop-culture and "gossip" that takes up such a sizable fraction of WP's main space. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 16:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

As a large percentage of net searches will be for trivia, they'll miss out on a lot of traffic. What was that revolting Canadian dish that we were number one for, began with "P" if I remember right? I believe it brought us several new members. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 16:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Just when I thought Andy couldn't get any more blind Sleuth (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Conservapedia's law dictates that people will stop having fun as time goes on. --Opcn (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Pretty sure the dish was donair sauce. Do we have an article on poutine at all? --Kels (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, Kels, it was Donair sauce. Fun:PoutineRecipe:Donair sauce ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 17:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

No offense, Canadians, but Poutine looks vile. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 17:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

It's actually very tasty if done right. Personally, I prefer thicker cut fries, they don't get soggy that way. --Kels (talk) 18:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I like poutine. Also, that is definitely a much better Conservapedia's Law, Opcn. Rodlen (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

We just have to hope that Andy's hubris will give birth to another pet project. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 17:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

UD)Fun = Hollywood values; Fun = sex; Fun = Drugs; Fun = Not doing what your elders & betters tell you; Fun = Unchristian; Fun = Liberal; Fun = " I don't have fun, why should you"; etc etc etc. Ergo Fun =/= Conservapedian. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 17:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken's Sense Of Humour

This car^img is apparently comedic to Ken. I don't understand. At all. Rodlen (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

And now he links to Hitwin. That, I don't find as surprising. Rodlen (talk) 20:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Methinks that "Gishmobile" is not funny in the way intended by Ken. I like the "God bless america" thing on the front bumper. Perhaps the driver is hoping that God will be crossing the road in front of them and think "Wow, that's a great idea! I'll bless America!"-^{Ask me about your mother} 20:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

(EC)I think the picture's funny, but probably for different reasons to Ken. The yank (obvious due to his back to front baseball cap) is shouting and pointing at a car which says, "Evolution? The Fossils Say No!" while the front bumper has the Stars and Stripes with a bald eagle and the slogan "God Bless America!" It's a kinda "YEAH! WE DON'T NEED NO DAMN SCIENCE! USA! NUMBER ONE!!" which highlights the idiocy of the American right-wing. (No offence there, America.) SJ ^Debaser 20:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Ooh, we now have Stalwin too! Rodlen (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

He thinks it's funny because it is his firm belief that fossils say the earth is 6,000 years old or whatever. And they say no. And that's funny to the boy man. rational ghey (talk) 20:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

[1]^img Here is the actual car if you don't want to search user:Conservative's page for ten minutes. Mei (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow I Just noticed the "evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups." .. WTF?! rational ghey (talk) 20:42, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed Ken's page, and after a small nap to regain my senses, I had a bit of a laugh. He has a link to the classic Abbott and Costello routine about baseball. He has it named "Who is on first?" Small and stupid, I know, but still funny. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 23:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I love how Ken calls himself "athiesm" on Flickr. Rodlen (talk) 00:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Mass vandalism wave

Check the CP recent changes. 'Nuff said Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 18:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

This must be the most edits they've had in a day for a few months now. EDIT: are all the admins at church or something? EddyP (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

What percentage of their edit per article count is vandalism? --Opcn (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Figures its on a saturday when all the kids are home from school.Senator Harrison (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Figures it's on a day when I was in NYC all day. I missed creating an account and getting in on the reversions. Fuzzy =^_^= 21:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Abortion and Hitler

Obvious parody is lame. -- Nx / talk 20:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I know, but it remains there, as with the Obama/Osama controversy. I wrote that WIGO (I know, I have an amazing passion for creativity) and I'm not expecting much. SJ ^Debaser 20:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Just remember that the admins requested it in their anti-abortion project. Rodlen (talk) 20:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I was gonna say that the article was a good thing to WIGO but the WIGO is lame, but you acknowledged that already. Good for you, SJ. Senator Harrison (talk) 20:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Is it obvious parody? It was Ken himself who requested such an article. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 21:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

True, but both editors who worked on that article reek of parodist. Of course, I admit that it's sometimes hard to tell. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 21:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

On a related note, I have a hard time understanding Ken's relationship with parody. Sometimes it looks like he recognizes parody for what it is, but then he'll go on to expand on the parody and take it seriously. Is he just that out of touch? (That's a rhetorical question, by the way.) Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

One more thing: I've been ignoring CP's latest project, so I didn't notice this until today, but Ken is alleging that they'll be vetting all the new articles. It's like they knew that they were inviting parodists to the party and decided to draw a line in the sand. My guess is that it won't matter. Ken's going to half-ass this like he does everything else, and they'll never find all the vandalism. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 21:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, they'll be vetting all the new articles. Vetting so much so that Andy Schlafly gives skipcaptcha to the person who wrote "Abortion doctors are doctors that carry out abortions." Same high attention to detail and respect for quality that we've become used to. 21:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

This^img made me laugh. Nice new crop of parodists over there. 21:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Though that is parody, I've heard that argument used seriously on a number of occasions, including by my own father. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

'What do liberals that oppose wiretapping have to hide from the government?' -> Their dignity. Mei (talk) 21:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Conservative reply: "But the government doesn't care about people's personal information, so they won't do anything with it unless it constitutes a security risk" (actual quote from a conservative friend of mine). Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

IT BURNS >__________________< Mei (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

My favorite part of that wiretap article is definitely the one source: it involves the arrest of police who did drugs, through the use of a wiretap. To justify the entire article. Rodlen (talk) 23:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Update Ken gives it his blessing^img--Opcn (talk) 04:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems that this has suddenly become Conservative's favorite article on the wiki, seeing how he restored it post-deletion for a reason that isn't real, and has turned it into a section of the main Abortion article, and has edited the Abortion & Hitler article many times. Whoa. Rodlen (talk) 02:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Poe's paradox

An astonishing fact that I've discovered recently is that even parody by a known parodist can have a nauseating effect. Just Take JacobB for example, we all know that he is a parodist, same thing with DouglasA_dams, yet when JacobB stole the work of another editor people were legitimately upset about it. I reread Andy's letter to PNAS and was pissed off at it, but it didn't nullify any of my anger knowing the DinsdaleP was permabanned when he got fed up with parody and started simply trolling. I'm having a hard time sussing out whether it is just another mental disconnect that causes me to enjoy and revile these people, or if it is because, as poe's law dictates, parody is by in large the same to read as fundamentalism. I remember back in 2003 thinking that fox news was ridiculous and feeling like most of america agreed with me, yet since then the pendulum has swung and most (53%?) of America will say with a straight face that Fox news if fair and balanced. I can't help but worry that an uncareful but effective parodist might in the end do more harm than good. :/ Thoughts? --Opcn (talk) 00:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Parodists are boring on CP. We want pure, unadulterated Andy insights! ħuman 00:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree, but in order to make these insights from Andy blossom, it needs a bit of parodist pollen to stimulate it. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm 100% with Human. That said, do people really think I was a parodist/troll when I was on CP? If anything, I was trying to speak for the other side (i.e. reasonable people) on issues where I felt something needed to be said, but I'd never supported or advocated vandalism or parody because they're boring, unimaginative and lame. Even master parodists like Bugler can only hope to point out the validity of Poe's Law, and since that's long been established what's the point of any more? In the end, the best reason TK could scrape up for permabanning me and silencing my consistent display of reality's known liberal bias was over my membership here, and that's a coward's excuse. --SpinyNorman (talk) 01:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Fancy a coward who debates poorly relying on a crummy and contrived excuse to block you. No, I don't think you were a parodist or troll at all. There are 2 brands of parody that I detest and you didn't do either. I hate this current course of terrorizing users and parroting TK's smug but substanceless patter and Andy's extremely unique worldview (nobody and I mean nobody could possibly agree with Andy on the wackier stuff he repeats, but here we have guys like JacobB putting banners chilling discussion on the relativity page). I guess you could cram Bugler into that category. He was odious. Then there's the stupid obvious stuff like that clown's wiretap and abortion articles we were discussing earlier. Do you feel like you fit anywhere on these two extremes? I don't. That turned into a big back-pat. Cheers. 02:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Conservative Bible Project

I'm amazed. Conservapedia has almost finished the New Testament in their Conservative Bible Project. This is not a good sign. Rodlen (talk) 00:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not? X Stickman (talk) 01:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a great sign. The systematic removal of compassion from the Bible is very funny.--^talk 01:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to being able to rebut CP arguments using their own bible. – Nick Heer 02:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm with AD. it's a great sign. I'm waiting with baited breath to announce this grand achievement. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm intrigued, just what are you baiting your breath with?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 07:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I look forward to someone rebutting Andy with Ephesians 4:29. 31 and 32 aren't bad either. --Shagie (talk) 04:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I wont say where, but I will mention that somewhere in the CBP I did backronym Colbert in and it is still standing. --Opcn (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I added "singes" plus "e". But I won't say where. ħuman 08:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but what you don't know is that you were inspired by the holy spirit to do those things. You're working for Jesus on Satan's dime, suckers. ;) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I love the blitz they did. They wanted to grind it all for easter... Talk about meticulous care. I guess when god(tm) speaks in your head, you must hurry to type every single word she inspires you ... Good job, nut jobs! Alain (talk) 23:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Standby for a Crap Joke from DeltaStar communications

Isn't this a Sex Pistols song? DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 09:53, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Funny but the first two edits to that page made by user Newton and the following two by user Conservative. Coincidence?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 09:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

RW:Newton is definitely Ken. CP:Newton seems to be a lot more coherent. 14:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if this is another "friend" of his like Freedom777. I notice Ken uses the 777 too sometimes. - π 23:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

An Ed Poor favourite.....

...Heh.^img Stayed like that for nearly 2 years. Aceⁱ⁹ 10:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Extra laughs here^img. Aceⁱ⁹ 10:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes indeed. ħuman 10:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh heh, good spot. Poor Ed Poor must have been distracted mid way through that last sentence. For two years. Good article though, they just need some other articles to wikilink to 'The closet' to make use of Ed scholarly efforts. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 10:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's nice to see that others nurtured his stub and grew it into an article. Isn't that what they call 'standing on the shoulders of giants'?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

hahahaha :D rational ghey (talk) 14:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Or giants were standing on Ed's shoulders. Or something like that. On a related note, here is your piece of hate for today: "[False outings] can ruin the reputation of an innocent, respectable person.". in·no·cent, adj: 1. not homosexual. [2] — Pietrow ☏ 14:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm imagining Ed's inner monologue..."Homosexuality is bad, homosexuality is bad, homosexuality is bad, stub, stub stub, homosexuality is bad, homosexuality is bad, homosexuality is bad, stub, stub, stub, homosexuality is bad...hey, new user, stubs are bad!

Do as Ed says, not as we all know he probably does. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 14:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Can't you get prosecuted in some countries for saying things like Ed has here? 14:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

As a Freudian Psych student, I have to question this: "(Subject:) To Jack (Message:) Two heads are better than one - Ed Poor. [3] SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 16:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: the category, Ed (as you know) has these articles strewn all over that defied categorization, so I finally gave up. In theory he'd have one handy category that he could hypothetically go to and solve the problems, but (i think) I got a warning for vandalism after a couple of them so I gave up. 173.10.105.29 (talk) 17:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I know they don't like Richard Dawkins...

...but are they saying he's not human^img any more?^img Well done that vandal! proper cap^img DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 18:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm amazed that the Dawkins picture was there for so long. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The Assfly also dishes out 5 year bans^img for pointing out that humans are primates.^imgDeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 18:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Capt. Mei (talk) 18:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Somehow this reminds me of Keynesian beauty contest. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 19:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I love how one of the categories is "Creations of God", but when you go to the category listing, only homo sapiens are listed. A backhanded way to admitting that perhaps all other life evolved? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

All other things are subcontracted out to other entities when "the creation" took place. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Check out their new toy

Check the IP block log. Seems like they now have some tools to autoblock IP of a user when they block said user. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a standard MW feature - in fact that box is checked off by default. ħuman 01:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

My last two socks to be blocked were the only two not to have the IP's blocked. Hell they IP blocked me two years ago when I didn't use my account to edit for a few months. --Opcn (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Whichever asshole rewrote my WIGO

did a great job, thanks! --Opcn (talk) 05:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Translation

I wonder what software Andy used to mangle up his anti-Brown comment^img? I wouldn't have commented on it if Herr Schlafly didn't make such a big issue of other people's spelling and grammar in the first place.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 16:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

He dropped a D at the end of rescue. For some reason he hates the letter D. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Dememoryholed CS Miller (talk) 18:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Dememoryhole is a word he hates. As is Darwin. And Democrat. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

"Rescuing people IS DECEITFUL!" I just love the way Andy is meddling in British politics now. It gives him all new things to bitch about. Vulpius (talk) 21:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of deceit, what's the betting that when the Tories almost inevitably win the election, Andy and Co. will be congratulating them on a marvellous victory for Conservatism^TM, conveniently forgetting all the times they previously denounced the Tories as Not Real True Conservatives? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Vulpius, to be fair to Andypants, his read on Brown sending the Navy to rescue holidaymakers is spot on imo Iatrogenic (talk) 17:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Can people please effing stop highlighting new parodists

It's getting boring for us and annoying for the parodists hoping to work their way up the greasy conservapedia pole (shudder). It seems to be happening more and more, yes - by all means discuss sysops whom you reckon to be Poeing it; but not some new user with a dozen edits. For eff's sake. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 21:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

THIS. Totnesmartin (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Mine was a joke, sorry. Like I would be that dumb to create a username of my same real name & random letter. Candlewick 22:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Man down. I was SamuelC. Rodlen (talk) 00:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice work buddy! What do you think gave your game away? (PS. Don't say too much if it will thwart your future plans, TK reads here all the time) DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it was a mixture of three things: the focus on one subject (abortion and evolution), the shortness of the articles, and the fact that my parody articles were linked to here as parodies. Rodlen (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

"An abortion doctor is a doctor who performs abortions" screams parody even in the land of the intellectually challenged that is Conservapedia. 23:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

And that's one of the ones they kept. Rodlen (talk) 23:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Andy's latest comment

This is a bit too much^img, even for me. Does the man refuse to ever leave the country? DickTurpis (talk) 00:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

! ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 00:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, because I'm sure that's what they're thinking about... </sarcasm> Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that comment is... wow... --Sid (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow... So the Church of England both exist and not exist simultaneously? Schrödinger's Church FTW! [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Most American fundamentalists consider the Anglican Church to be irredeemably liberal and secular. Interestingly, the CP article on the Church of England is very neutral, so either Andy and Co. disagree or that article is stolen. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 04:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I checked the CoE article and, aside from a section that would qualify as plagiarism in J-school, it doesn't appear to be stolen. An original article on CP which is informative and neutral? Well, I never. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 05:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That comment is just... words cannot describe. He's getting worse every day. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised if Andy's never been to any part of the UK, and I am more than fine with it staying that way. Typical fucking arrogant Americentric Andy. SJ ^Debaser 10:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a mistake to allow these people back in to the US. How are we to know that they've not been corrupted by liberal atheistic Brits to return home as Manchurian candidates? Andy, suggest they be dumped at sea! ^{Ask me about your mother} 10:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The man is a numpty. However, crazy utterances like this are perfect for screencapping the whole page, and adding it to CP's WP article. That way, even more people get to see Andy's insane rantings. --PsyGremlin講話 10:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't even make sense. How can there be lack of belief in gods everywhere you look? Hang on, I'm looking out my window now, and I can't see a church - does that mean I am looking at atheism? What a cockend. PS. I agree with Psy - this is exactly the kind of shit that needs adding to the WP article. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. Nice thing is, Terry & Rob can't even moan about it, because all we've done is update the front page of CP on WP, which is the True and Only Word of Andy. Gotta love how the "news" section carries on for miles past the "info" section. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 11:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Psy, you left your IP on that screenshot. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Aw, I liked the old picture - it had Hitwin. --Sid (talk) 12:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

"Stoopid" WIGO

Worst story telling ever. Every link is to the same diff, and except the first, none "highlight" anything to make their point. Should probably be rewritten. ħuman 02:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoever added it was trying to link directly to the citations, apparently unaware that the Capturebot doesn't work that way. Since all the citations are listed in the source code anyway, I think we can safely delete every link after the first. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 04:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I went to the direct links, they failed also after the first one. It desperately needs rewriting by someone for whom 1) English is a first language and 2) wiki is a second. ħuman 04:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

So stop complaining and rewrite it already damnit!! Keegscee (talk) 04:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

There's so little to write. It's a crappy wigo, the person who first posts this crap should get their "joke" together. I removed the redundant links. By the way, "The intelligence of humans is rapidly declining" is at odds with IQ tests needing to be renormed every decade or so (scores are rising a few percent per decade). WIGO is lame because it just says "ha ha" and adds nothing. ħuman 04:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I gave it my best shot. Keegscee (talk) 04:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I spend most of my time "rewriting" mainspace stuff. I expect wigos to tell a joke or story and make sense, so when I opened five tabs and they were all identical, well, you can understand my reaction. I hope your new version fares well and amuses people! ħuman 04:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, well I'll take your suggestions and try to make my future WIGO entries a little better. I appreciate you editing it, I especially like the picture of Assfly at the end. I guess you guys don't get my sense of humour though because I thought it was funny the way I wrote it. I was trying to make the point that Assfly is saying people are stupid, but for proof only offers up unsupported footnotes, hence he's the stupid one (ha ha). That was the point and I thought that was actually funny, but I guess the execution didn't quite work out. And yes, English is my first language. Wiki is not a second though! Diavolos (talk) 13:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

hehe irony

was anybody else amused that the most recent criticized ken for a news item that used the same link 3 or 4 times, and the wigo below it had to be rewritten so that it wouldn't have the same link 3 or 4 times? 07:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's time to black up and have a pot party.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 07:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

ROTFL! ħuman 10:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Ours used the same link, albeit with "different" #reflinks, five times. Still, Ken's news thing screams "please give me national health care so I can afford my meds every month!" Ours was just short term epic fail. ħuman 10:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It is, however, good to know that god continues to sit securely on his throne. Wouldn't want him to fall off and accidentally crush the earth with an elbow or something. If I may deign to offer some advice to the almighty, he ought to get up and have a walk around every now and then. Deep vein thrombosis is a killer, you know. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 12:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

For real laughs, click on Paul Kurtz and read the "encyclopedic" entry that is almost verbatim to the main page article, including multiple links to the same page. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 13:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's TK, so it isn't really even worth mentioning, but still...

Why is this news? A governor 3 months into term (still in the honeymoon period) has an approval rating of 53% and that's supposed to be exceptionally good? It's not too bad, I guess, but Obama was over 65% at this point in his term. Meh. It's TK. DickTurpis (talk) 17:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Wake me up when Andy does something hilarious. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

TK's a troll who thrives on negative attention. Please to ignore unless he's addressing you directly. 18:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd ignore him even then. Vulpius (talk) 18:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That's the thing. If it were your standard "liberals are evil Nazis" thing I'd pass it off as regular TK. This is him trying to show how good his side is by trumpeting some lackluster statistics. It's almost counterproductive. I assumed Andy wrote it at first, because it's his some turf and he has a stake in the game there (especially in his recall campaign). This makes little sense. DickTurpis (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's actually mildly counter-Andy, as Andy has been tagging Christie with being a RINO for ... I don't know, some local New Jersey bullshit... 173.10.105.29 (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not surprised that he's tagged Christie as a RINO, since he's ignored social issues (which Andy loves) and has instead decided to focus on cutting every piece of state spending that isn't nailed to the floor. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

• Also don't forget that the poll he cites is Rasmussen, whose poll model counts a Democrat as only 3/5ths of a vote of a Republican. --Leotardo (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That can be sound policy. In the UK there is a difference between what opinion (and even exit) polls say what will happen, and what actually happens, normally under-reporting Tory votes. If this is known to happen, then it it wise to scale one party's intention-to-vote by the observed intention-to-vote to actual-vote ratio. 62.56.63.226 (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That article is a real eye-opener. Thanks for posting it! Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Schlafly in the Princeton Alumni Weekly

I finally had time to catch up on recent issues of the Princeton Alumni Weekly magazine, and I was astonished to find an interview with our favorite conservative in the February 24 issue. And the April 7 issue has responses from fellow graduates: "No more of Mr. Schlafly’s know-nothing brand of conservatism!" [4] "God did not bring a Bible into existence to primarily turn Americans or anyone into political conservatives." [5] "I find his replies such total nonsense that I have to ask: Is this a leg pull?" [6] "I learned about the use of B.C.E. and C.E. in Hebrew school. I had no idea I was attending an atheistic and liberal religious ­institution." [7] - Cuckoo (talk) 16:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice find. The shirt!!! Well, someone finally took a halfway decent picture of Andy. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 16:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

What the fuck, they got the top 5 wrong, two of them don't even make the top ten! I'm an idiot, they used the cp list of popular items --Opcn (talk) 17:15, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Except nowadays abortion pushed the bible out of the top five. ħuman 10:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

“”A jury is guided by good rules to promote truth-finding. A mob is guided by the biggest bullies.

That made me snort. --Shagie (talk) 17:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments aren't available. Too bad. My Princeton alum friend is disappointed this hate-filled and deliberately ignorant man was interviewed as if he were just another Princeton grad. He's not. 17:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

"Having read the interview with Andrew Schlafly, I find his replies such total nonsense that I have to ask: Is this a leg pull?" 18:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Why not comment and point out that what he has resembles a Kangaroo court more than a court of law. --Opcn (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments aren't permitted. 21:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

“” By looking at things through a political lens, it often becomes easier to see what should not be there and where the biases come in. A political analysis of the manuscripts is an easier way to identify passages that are not authentic to the true spirit of the Bible than other approaches.

"Logic" that goes in circles like this makes my head hurt. Internetmoniker (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Somewhat irrelevant question

What is a leg pull, in that context, anyways? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

"Pulling one's leg" means to prank someone, to tell them something that isn't true in jest. ħuman 23:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's most common in Britain. I believe the American equivalent refers to "yank ones chain." SJ ^Debaser 11:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Also "pull one's plonker" or "tug one's todger" or erm _{I'd better stop now before I go too far off topic} DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

To "yank one's chain" is to provoke someone into a response.... it's not quite the same as pulling a leg, which involves liberal deceit. 194.6.79.200 (talk) 12:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

See also: "pull the other one (it's got bells on)" 12:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I thought that was just a Discworld expression.. --GTac (talk) 13:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

(unDent) Old practical joke to pull on a friend. Tell them, You know, the strangest thing happened to me today. I was in the checkout line at the grocery store, and I noticed there was an elderly woman in front of me, and she was crying.

I said to her, "Ma'am, is everything all right?"

She looked back, and said, "you look just like my son. He died about three years ago."

"Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that."

"Would you mind if I show you his picture?"

"Well, okay..."

She showed me the picture, and I didn't think I looked like him, but I didn't want to be mean to the woman, so I said, "Yes, there is a resemblance."

"Thank you," she said. "Could you do one more thing for me? Could you just call me, 'Mom'?"

I thought that was pretty odd, but I felt sorry for her, so I said, "All right... Mom."

She finished at the stand, and then the cashier rang up my groceries, and said "that'll be $235, please."

"What????" I asked. "There's only about fifty bucks worth here!"

The cashier said, "your mother said you'd pay for hers, too!"

"Wait just a minute!" I said, and ran out into the parking lot. I saw the old woman, and she was getting into her car. I managed to get close enough to grab her leg, and started pulling it and pulling it.... just like I'm pulling yours now. #rimshot# MDB (talk) 11:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh Ken!

Dawkins article research^img Doesn't Ken just make you laugh? The idea of someone like him doing research, I mean. And still the bunny down a hole piccy there. 13:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Ouch! Ouch! Ken is just so embarrassing that I really feel sorry for him. I mean, here's a 40-something guy acting and writing like a remedial class 13-year old (apologies if that sounds un-PC) but he obviously has some talent in an autistic way by searching through mountains of quotes or locating irrelevant YouTube videos. What can his poor mum think of him? She must be an absolute angel to still keep him at home when most of his peers have gone out into the world and got married.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 14:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's nice to see him with a hobby, since he always struggled to make friends. Hmm, must stock-up on tissues. We always seem to run out of tissues whenever the History Channel has a special on Nazis. Maybe I'll see if he can spend the weekend at that nice Mr Andy's house. Ken was so excited that for a week afterwards he only left his room to fetch biscuits, 7-Up and more tissues for that terrible cold he always seems to have. (Channelling Ken's mum) --^{Ask me about our love} 15:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The bunny is supposed to be Dawkins? It looks really scared. Perhaps it's a bit of psychological projection... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

When Ken goes on these forays I see Dawkins as King Arthur in MP&THG with the limbless Black Knight of fundamentalism screaming "come back and fight you coward". But of course, in reality it is Ken who shies away from debate. Either by locking his articles at CP, or firing a salvo on a talk page/forum and refusing to continue with the thread when he has been pwned. His habitual deletions of stuff are really a badge of cowardice, in that he doesn't have the cojones to leave his ramblings and outbursts in public view. With the Library of Congress supposedly archiving Twitter tweets it would be funny to have access to Ken's bleats. (Lame spur of the moment joke: The Conservapedia version of Twitter could be called Bitter and their postings would be bleats.)  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 03:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That's actually very funny, Lily. ħuman 07:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of parodists, doesn't anyone wonder why an alleged resident of a small city in the Yucatan is editing articles about American synogogues. ...

[8] and a host of subjects that would be beyond the interest of a retired Mexican academic unless he has particularly urbane interests. Discuss. 14:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Are you outing parodists again Nutty? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm on a roll. You're next. 14:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

What a coincidence, my old amigo Joaquín from Campeche. I somehow got added to his address book and now receive spam emails because his account has been hacked or infected. Of course these mailings are also sent out to his fellow CP sysops but with all their email addresses in plain view. It's interesting to find how many different ones they use. Especially when Andy mistrusts anyone with a gmail/hotmail email address. They're all wankers and I'm glad that I don't have any dealings with them any more. Silly twit (talk) 15:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't wear a sock while having funtime with CP Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

You should wear a rubber. That place is a cesspit of infectious diseases like YEC, xenophobia, homophobia, and racism. 15:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

How does rubber prevents transmissions of those diseases? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

We're playing word games. Socks cover your feet but have nothing to do with the internet. Condoms (rubbers) cover your knob, which also has nothing to do with the internet, but don't protect against diseases of the mind. 15:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Clearly one of us is using the internet wrong NR.--Opcn (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Why are you saying my knob has nothing to do with the internet? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

ERrr, I was referring to Thieh's knob, not either of yours. Your knobs can continue being famous on the internet. 18:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

If anyone is interested, I'll be on chatroulette. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 19:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of that site until my friend showed it to me a month or so ago... I didn't care for it. SJ ^Debaser 19:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I recently heard about it in a NYTmes Op-Ed piece, which described it as creepy and pretty pointless. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

So a lot like the NYTimes Op-Ed page, then. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 22:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

David Thorne didn't care much for it either. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 07:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

How The Mind Works: Andy

Not earth-shattering by any means, but this little comment by Andy really sums up the way his mind (doesn't) work. Andy and DanP are debating how William Penn (found of Philly) came up with the name "Philadelphia". So Andy sez he'll do a little research, but that "anti-Christian bias from internet searching may make the truth harder to find than usual". I mean, really? Andy thinks that there's some sort of anti-Christian Internet cabal censoring search engine results to keep Christian history buried? And what's funny, too, is that the answer to the query is that Penn pinched the name "Philadelphia" from a city of the same name mentioned in Revelation. You'da thunk Mister Bible Genius Andy Schlafly--who claims to have studied the Bible cover to cover--woulda known that...--WJThomas (talk) 02:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Andy's position on the Bible strikes me as untenable. On the one hand, he claims to be knowledgeable enough to "translate" it effectively. On the other hand, he is emphatically not an expert...so what is he? In his mind, he's some kind of ubermensch who is still technically an amateur. But, in reality, he is obviously nowhere close to being a Bible scholar. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I have always admired those people who could remember a book verbatim from cover to cover. Unless you master memory tricks to do so it is largely a question of leaning by rote. So have all these bible-spouting fundamentalists memorised the entire book? I suspect not, they probably focus on the mainstream stories, essential teachings and/or those bits that support a particular viewpoint, especially those backed up with eternal damnation, brimstone and hellfire.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 02:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Tetronian gives an excellent explanation of the "best of the public" 04:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Phil·a·del·phi·a

1. An ancient city of Asia Minor northeast of the Dead Sea in modern-day Jordan. The chief city of the Ammonites, it was enlarged and embellished by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-246 b.c.) and named in honor of him. Amman, the capital of Jordan, is now on the site.

2. The largest city of Pennsylvania, in the southeast part of the state on the Delaware River. It was founded as a Quaker colony by William Penn in 1681 on the site of an earlier Swedish settlement. The First and Second Continental Congresses (1774 and 1775-1776) and the Constitutional Convention (1787) met in the city, which served as the capital of the United States from 1790 to 1800.

Etymology: Gr philadelphia, brotherly love < philos, loving + adelphos, brother - Refugee^{talk page} 05:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

"anti-Christian bias from internet searching may make the truth harder to find than usual" cracked me up. ħuman 07:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It is an amazing example of Andy's final paranoid days in the bunker. I imagine him calling tech support, claiming that atheists are preventing his modem from getting a dial tone. Sure it could be the 5 phones and numerous splitters overloading his line, but it seems more likely that those darn atheists are to blame. Andy, you fail at Bible and Google! ^{Ask me about our gyroscope} 18:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fatwah?

TK Uploads and inserts a piccy of the Prophet. Wonder where he found it? 07:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Where you found it, at least. The 'source' says they "found it on the internet" so I don't think your hunt is over yet! ħuman 07:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually the Great Klepto says he found it here.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 09:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

AllenShaw

Whoever it is, knock it off. Do you really want Ed Poor classics deleted? Or are you just trying to goad Ed into defending their existence? As funny as that would be, some of them are just too good to lose. Please stop. Or at least be very careful. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 15:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I say nuke the bastards. Let Ed face the truth. EddyP (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it'll be interesting to see them explain that this^img isn't pop culture, just because Creepy Uncle Ed masturbated while watching wrote it. --PsyGremlin講話 16:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I love this edit comment^img. How does this retard take himself seriously? DickTurpis (talk) 16:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Captain Mei, captain of a small ship in the Caribbean seas. Oh a pirate's life for me. Mei (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I capt this one because it seems like the Deletion Force might plausibly nuke it soon. Mei (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Proxy link, Dick. I fixed...P-Foster (talk) 16:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, CarrotJew to the rescue Sleuth (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Nothin' like censorship

What an awesome deletion log they got goin' on over there at CP... rational ghey (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm just waiting for them to delete The Beatles. DickTurpis (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not quite on the same level as The Beatles, but deleting Nirvana was pretty bad. Keegscee (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Pah, those guys weren't even as popular as Jesus. *Leaves to see if CP has an article for Stryper* ^{Ask me about our alpaca sandwich} 18:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Pretty sure they deleted that in the screenshot wigo. They also deleted Genesis. It's like... why? ;_____________; Mei (talk) 18:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion is the new parody. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Merging dup vote counts

I've just deleted a duplicated WIGO entry. Is there any way to add the votes for the second one to the first? CS Miller (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

One despairs of the reading ability of people: "Don't remove entries." it says above the edit box. 18:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

OOPS: Sorry CSM You didn't remove it: you commented it out Many apologies. No don't think there is any way of adding the votes. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 18:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry Toastie; I should have been clearer that I'd just commented it out, rather than removed it from the article. The voting for the second WIGO was +2; not sure what the total votes was, if there is even an easy way to find out. CS Miller (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Uncomment it, preview, hover mouse over the red-yellow-green bar, vote details will show up. ħuman 01:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Karajou Strikes Back

Karajou's been on a tear over the last hour, pulling speedy delete tags off of articles. I guess he figured out AllenShaw's scheme to trick CP into committing suicide. The de-tagged pages were all anime and movie articles and Uncle Ed's weird tech support stuff. And thus, CP's criteria for determining "pop culture" become ever more arbitrary. Colonel of Squirrels^{白山羊不山羊。商讨。} 18:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I've always thought that (metaphorically speaking) Karajou is the smallest man on the wiki. He just barely beats out Jinxy. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 18:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Andy, Cameron and eggs

Not WIGO worthy, but apparently David Cameron got hit by an egg, prompting Andy to write on the News Feed Liberal values are great, aren't they? The reaction by the liberal media and police would have been very different if an egg had been thrown at a liberal politician. It really, really wouldn't. Remember when John Prescott got egged and he decked the guy that did it? Or how about Lord Mandelson getting green crap thrown all over him last year? SJ ^Debaser 19:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I doubt Andy know the first thing about British culture, history, or politics. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 19:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that we generally piss ourselves when any politician is egged or slimed. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 19:42, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Cameron just lost points by not decking the guy, basically - David Gerard (talk) 19:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Err. The Times is right-leaning (but not as much as the Torygraph). CS Miller (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The Times is a Murdoch paper, and, as such - much as 'Merkins will have experienced from the Wall Street Journal since he bought it - The Sun with bigger words and less tits. Murdoch is not happy with recent polls. But this is veering even more off-topic than usual ... - David Gerard (talk) 20:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The politics of The Times is whatever bolsters the greater profits of News International or related Murdoch-owned companies.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 00:50, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Mmmm, eggs. Personally I prefer omelettes or over-easy eggs on toast. ħuman 01:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Yuh, that's what I said ;-) Also, The Sun (hence directive from Murdoch) is officially backing the Tories - David Gerard (talk) 06:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The Indy vs. Murdoch. [9] just been WIGOW'd CS Miller (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Birther state

WIGO world: "Arizona (motto:"God Enriches") becomes the "Birther" state." Isn't there someone we all know who lives in Az? 20:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Since none of the CP Admins live there, move to Saloon or WIGO Talk:World? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops Confusing my states: Nevada =/= Arizona. Please ignore this section. 20:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

TK did put it up as a news story. --Opcn (talk) 22:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Someone tell this to Andy (Lenin birthday WIGO)

First Earth Day is observed in 1970, exactly the 100th birthday of Vladimir Lenin. Bonus: Jane Froman Died on the 10th Earth day. More Hollywood values for you. I am interested in what kind of lulz it leads to. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Yes, I wonder if they will note this.--^talk 23:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Probably, they will.--^talk 23:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Cp Sysops are bored

They must be bored at CP these days. With so few new users joining, there are not enough to block to keep them busy, so they've started deleting accounts of old users who were already blocked. (Causing red links all over pages) and deleting users who had never edited or had few edits. Then they actually began re-creating User pages, just to delete them again. (Hojimachong?) Now they are deleting tons of pages full of content: rock bands, singers, video games, movies, and anything else that they feel like calling "pop culture". The site is growing rapidly? Soon there will be nothing left of the wiki at all. Refugee^{talk page} 06:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. DouglasA did some good work tonight. He's got to be careful, though, because he's drawing a lot of attention to himself. Keegscee (talk) 06:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Who was that band Terry Koekritz allegedly sat in on sessions of? Hope they haven't been "popcultured" into oblivion. (I note Ken checked a couple of Xtian ones [restore/redelete]) 06:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Do you think it ever occured to them to start improving the quality of some of their lesser articles via research? That would fill in sometime. - π 06:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I think TK said he sat in on Slayer. Aceⁱ⁹ 06:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah he said Slayer. SJ ^Debaser 10:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Here are a few of my favorites from the dozens deleted this week:

21 April 2010 DouglasA deleted "System of a Down" (Pop Culture)
21 April 2010 DouglasA deleted "Gladys Knight" (Pop Culture)
21 April 2010 DouglasA deleted "Nirvana (Band)" (Creation of Troublemaker/Troll/Liar)
21 April 2010 DouglasA deleted "Pearl Jam" (Creation of Troublemaker/Troll/Liar)
20 April 2010 JacobB deleted "Sonic the Hedgehog" (Pop Culture)
20 April 2010 JacobB deleted "Sega Genesis" (Pop Culture)
20 April 2010 Jpatt deleted "LEGO" (Pop Culture)
18 April 2010 DouglasA deleted "SimCity (Video game)" (Pop Culture)
16 April 2010 TK deleted "Breath of Fire Series" (Creation of Troublemaker/Troll/Liar: Pop Culture)

They also delete pages on books they don't like:

15 April 2010 Conservative deleted "The Greatest Show on Earth" (content was: The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution is a book by Richard Dawkins published in 2009)

and websites they don't like:

8 April 2010 TK deleted "Storehouse of Knowledge" (Previously deleted by Admin, now recreated again)

and did Conservative re-create, then delete Hoji's page just to send a shout-out to him? Hasn't he been gone for 2 or 3 years?

14 April 2010 Conservative deleted "User talk:Hojimachong" (content was: 'The Conservapedia growing prominence on the evolution issue on the Unites States internet is coming along nicely don't you think? Bada boom! Bada [htt…' (and the only contributor was 'Conservative'))

Bored much? Or should that be obsessive much? Refugee^{talk page} 06:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken keeps restoring pages and then deleting them, which leaves me to believe he does not know how to view delete revisions of a page. It never ceases to amaze me that he has been a sysop on a wiki longer than I have been using them. - π 07:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh heh, Dougie and Jake are going mental! Nice work boys! After you've deleted most of their articles, please work on getting TK out of there so the rest of us can have some fun! DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 08:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

They still haven't deleted 'The Killers'. EddyP (talk) 09:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

If anyone has any active socks, get on there and stick those 'speedy deletion' tags on everything you can find ('pop culture' only of course)! DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 09:17, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

But the good stuff still remains. As we all know, non-German composers and musicians aren't worth shit, so there's no point in having articles about them. Röstigraben (talk) 10:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Someone needs to put their favourite pic of their favourite German on that article. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 10:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

What I thought was telling was TK's deletion of Victor Jara as "unencyclopedic" for being just a musician, I guess. Of course, Jara was sort of the Chilean Woody Guthrie, and was murdered by Pinochets forces, so he's a little more significant than that chick who sings about her milkshake bringing boys to the yard. DickTurpis (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I liked my BoF article. I find that it was a neat addition to 'Video Games' about how religious terms are used in video games [2 and 3 directly pose 'God' as the enemy, while 4 refers to a 'God-Emperor'] and was useful to parents looking for games for their kids. -- CodyH (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I found another 3! This one and the two links contained therein. And two here and these. EddyP (talk) 14:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

This isn't going to sit well with Uncle Ed. Röstigraben (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that CP's {{speedy}} template's source has a hard-wired value, and they use a different template if you want to give a reason. Don't they know how to create templates with default values? CS Miller (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind that some of these templates date back to the first days of CP - things had been very unorganized, and few people had solid wikiknowledge. And by the time we could've worried about these things, we had different problems and priorities. And nowadays, all templates are locked and major template edits have to be requested and justified in advance. Not that many people would seriously consider to do so - it's work (even more so with the requesting/justifying procedure) and it's utterly thankless. The only edits that count in your favor are the ones that echo Andy's thoughts and "insights", so why should anybody bother with such maintenance? --Sid (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

As for the sysops (who don't have to constantly justify their existence by kissing Andy's feet), several of them are incompetent, and the few who could are too busy with their pet projects or with banning and deleting editors. --Sid (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Ya know what? When Conservapedia started, a pile of experienced Wikipedians offered to come on board and help out with technical stuff. Even ones who disagreed with his political and religious stance. Because they were nice people and wanted to help a new wiki out. He kicked off all the ones who stuck around longer than a month or two, of course - David Gerard (talk) 19:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

True enough. CP is self-defeating, and now they are just getting ridiculous. Not only are they deleting good pages, they are also creating pages on subjects they already have. CP has had an existing page about Christmas since 2007 but inexplicable today Aschlafly made another (stub) article, same subject. Refugee^{talk page} 07:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

You gotta love Ken's writing style

The other gem in Ken's horribly written screed is his failure in WWII history. "We may soon have our Lieutenant General, but if you're looking for a lesser position you can try out for Supreme Allied Commander Europe or Supreme Commander of he Allied Powers." Way to go. DickTurpis (talk) 12:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I know it's amateur psychology but I honestly think Ken is lacking some part of what makes an sane adult. I thought he might be trying to game the search engines with some of his repetitive stuff but he's the same everywhere. See here for instance (from 2006). The man isn't all there and should be in secure accommodation where he can be cared for IMHO. 12:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Is there really any doubt that Ken is at least mildly autistic, or something along those lines? I sometimes feel bad making fun of him because of it, but it's so hard not to. DickTurpis (talk) 17:31, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ken likely has real problems which I don't think should be the subject of jokes. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 17:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

"Cockaddled"--Opcn (talk) 17:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

@Neveruse: I tend to agree but neither should he be given a platform to demonstrate his problem, especially on an "educational" website. As long as Andy panders to him, we have a duty to pillory him. 20:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Actually, Andy doesn't think much of Ken. The fact that he lets Ken contribute at CP is surely an act of conservative generosity. At least that's what TK told me a few months back. Keegscee (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I just want to be part of this section. I enjoy reading Ken being schooled on his content-free "arguments". ħuman 21:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Liar. You just wanted to use the cool new unindent template. Keegscee (talk) 21:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh man, that template's awesome! Er...and Ken's a jerk or something. -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 22:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

EC) Fuck off Mei That should be elsewhere.

Ant-abortion project: "In addition, it is important that the articles be original and not created by merely cutting and pasting content from other websites."^img Yup, don't want any of those naughty quote mines, Ken. 23:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Ken's list of abortion-related articles is staggering in its inanity

• Abortion in Scotland (WTF!)

• Catholic views on abortion
• Protestant views on abortion
• Anglican views on abortion
• Religious views on abortion
• American views on abortion
• Democrat and Republican views on abortion
• Political views on abortion

• Barack Obama and abortion
• Hillary Clinton and abortion
• Abortion and Adolf Hitler

Even if all the articles are un-redded then what we can expect is a humongous single page with all of these articles copy pasted into it and then links to the exact same text saying "See main Article on...".  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 02:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

These are all based on Google search terms. Realizing he has no chance of directing traffic to CP through the search "abortion" he is trying to chew up the next 100 most popular searches that include abortion. As there are few pages with those exact titles, he should expect to get top 5 result each time for that search terms. I also suspect that he is trying to give the impression to the search engine that this is a large resource on the topic and it will have a later effect of dragging up their abortion article, this is less likely to actually work, in the short term at least. - π 13:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a good link that Toast, it's interesting to see Ken' 'work' before CP. As we're talking about Ken, here's a quote from that forum;

Ken's scholarship is abysmal. He is, frankly, a stupid and dishonest person; and recognized as such right across the spectrum of diverse views represented in this forum.

DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 13:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's a little game if you're bored. Look for the TOC in the cp:Abortion article.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 01:58, 24 April 2010 (UTC)