Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive179
Ghost trains?[edit]
Ken gets points for at least encouraging people to join, but that doesn't change the fact that nobody can. Oh well, all aboard! --Sid (talk) 23:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm on Tor and I can sign up once in a while (not usually though, like we know who is messing with CP using Tor), perhaps it's an address thing... But I agree that Main page should not explicitly mention sign up if they ever turn off account creation. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I made a tiny wigo of this picture, because I thought it was good. I encourage anyone to rephrase it if they want to. Mei (talk) 00:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think I occasionally see the "create account" thing, but most of the time, it's not there. At least not for me, and my current range/IP doesn't appear in the block log (checked by using the "Search titles starting with this text" option while searching the block logs for "User:[first numbers of IP]"). --Sid (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I made a tiny wigo of this picture, because I thought it was good. I encourage anyone to rephrase it if they want to. Mei (talk) 00:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm on Tor and I can sign up once in a while (not usually though, like we know who is messing with CP using Tor), perhaps it's an address thing... But I agree that Main page should not explicitly mention sign up if they ever turn off account creation. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Funny comic about an economic parable in the bible.[edit]
I love SMBC--Opcn (talk) 00:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- HAHAHAHA! Ajkgordon (talk) 07:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- If you liked that one you'll love this one ONE / TALK 08:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I think my favorite thing about the first comic is that the economist even looks like Andy. DickTurpis (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think Zach must be channelling Andy and refuting him. --
YossarianThe Man from the USSR 15:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- They all made their contributions in their teens, of course. DickTurpis (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Natch. --
YossieSpring in Fialta 16:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Natch. --
- They all made their contributions in their teens, of course. DickTurpis (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Shit Bible Project[edit]
I like how in the hour or so since announcing the completion of the much anticipated Conservative Bible, Andy is the only one who comments on it's completion. "This was the finest educational project that I have ever done." Way to go, Andy! SJ Debaser 16:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- All he's got to do now is pick out all the table column 2s to actually make a coherent single screed. Levaing it as it is, with the "original" still there and his supreme "logic" on view, somewhat detracts. 16:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy
& honey(or marmalade)
- It would be pretty easy for a regex wizard, but Andy's banned all of them. Stupid drug Hoover! 17:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- User 188 is a pretty expert programmer surely. 18:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy & honey(or marmalade)
- User 188 is a pretty expert programmer surely. 18:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy
- It would be pretty easy for a regex wizard, but Andy's banned all of them. Stupid drug Hoover! 17:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- "Ahead of schedule"? The only "schedule" I was aware of was finishing the NT by Easter... ħuman
16:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Don't think he ever said which year. 16:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy & honey(or marmalade)
- Is Bert a parodist? "Translating from the Greek and Aramaic"? Even he must realize that there was no translating from a foreign language, merely rephrasing (and updating archaic words) of an earlier English translation so it said more what they wanted it to say. Colbert really missed a good opportunity to make Andy look like even more of an ass by neglecting to ask him how long he studied ancient Greek and Aramaic. Andy's reply of "I haven't really, but that's not important; examining it from a conservative mindset is" would have been wonderful. DickTurpis (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Now commences the project to audit the Bible translated from English to much worse English for embedded parody and covert mentions of Stephen Colbert. But seriously, though. What exactly are they going to do with the conservatised new testamant? Print bound copies with a foreword from the messiah himself, the Assfly? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Is Bert a parodist? "Translating from the Greek and Aramaic"? Even he must realize that there was no translating from a foreign language, merely rephrasing (and updating archaic words) of an earlier English translation so it said more what they wanted it to say. Colbert really missed a good opportunity to make Andy look like even more of an ass by neglecting to ask him how long he studied ancient Greek and Aramaic. Andy's reply of "I haven't really, but that's not important; examining it from a conservative mindset is" would have been wonderful. DickTurpis (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Don't think he ever said which year. 16:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy
- All he's got to do now is pick out all the table column 2s to actually make a coherent single screed. Levaing it as it is, with the "original" still there and his supreme "logic" on view, somewhat detracts. 16:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC) yummy
Can anyone who knows anything about the history of Bible translations tell me how long something like the NIV or the NRSV, took, and what sort of effort (historical and linguistic research, plus whatever else) went into the project? P-Foster (talk) 20:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Professor Wikipedia says 13 years for the NIV. 8 for the NT, OT 5 years later. --Opcn (talk) 21:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- It only took so long because they had crappy old experts do it. With the best of the public, it would have taken a couple of weeks and been the best, most conservative translation evar. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Pedantry guys: Only the NT is completed (The WIGO sounds like the whole thing is completed). OT should have a schedule close to Christmas or thanksgiving. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- It only took so long because they had crappy old experts do it. With the best of the public, it would have taken a couple of weeks and been the best, most conservative translation evar. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Jinx[edit]
I found thisimg edit interesting, and, at the threat of agreeing with Jinx, I can see why he might find global warming alarmists frustrating. It's the same reason why I find the fundies frustrating: everything that happens on Earth, no matter how good or bad it may be, is somehow proof of the existence of God. Keegscee (talk) 20:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is that we are not dealing with a linear system, so I can see how it can confuse the simple minded. - π 22:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Of course, if you actually read the articles he finds so contradictory, they actually aren't. The melting glaciers article says, basically, most glaciers worldwide are melting, and this is probably due to global warming. The growing glaciers article says that the position of the glaciers on Mount Shasta means that global warming causes increased levels of moisture to evaporate from the ocean, which then causes increased snowfall on them, causing them to grow - but this is in stark contrast to most of the world's other glaciers, which are melting. The more hurricanes article says that it looks like global warming is causing the number of hurricanes to increase. The less hurricanes article is actually about a study that suggests that a localised area of windshear, caused by global warming, may make it more difficult for hurricanes to make landfall onto the US from the Atlantic Ocean, but says nothing about the wider issue of whether there will be more hurricanes generally. However, even then, this study has been criticised for being based on 'poor data'. The two articles about air pollution are talking about two different effects of two different types of air pollution, which seems to confuse Jinx, seemingly because he thinks that it's not possible to have more than one type of air pollution. 92.16.18.243 (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Like the fundie Xtians who get to decide what atheism is in their own terms, the fundie global-warming deniers also decide what is or isn't relevant. Many climate change scientists now regret using the global-warming tag as it confuses the ignorati. Although we have global warming which leads to an rise in average global temperature that doesn't mean that everywhere gets hotter. North-western Europe has a temperate climate because of the Gulf Stream. However, global warming leading to the melting of the Greenland ice cap would produce a mass of fresh water which could stop the so-called "conveyor belt" and thus lead to much colder conditions. Weather/climate is such a complex interaction of solar radiation, water, atmosphere, albedo, vegetation and physical geography that it cannot respond in a linear fashion. Lily Inspirate me. 02:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Of course, if you actually read the articles he finds so contradictory, they actually aren't. The melting glaciers article says, basically, most glaciers worldwide are melting, and this is probably due to global warming. The growing glaciers article says that the position of the glaciers on Mount Shasta means that global warming causes increased levels of moisture to evaporate from the ocean, which then causes increased snowfall on them, causing them to grow - but this is in stark contrast to most of the world's other glaciers, which are melting. The more hurricanes article says that it looks like global warming is causing the number of hurricanes to increase. The less hurricanes article is actually about a study that suggests that a localised area of windshear, caused by global warming, may make it more difficult for hurricanes to make landfall onto the US from the Atlantic Ocean, but says nothing about the wider issue of whether there will be more hurricanes generally. However, even then, this study has been criticised for being based on 'poor data'. The two articles about air pollution are talking about two different effects of two different types of air pollution, which seems to confuse Jinx, seemingly because he thinks that it's not possible to have more than one type of air pollution. 92.16.18.243 (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
That SEC porn thing[edit]
Of course, the Fox article also ignores that the report came out back before Obama was president. http://www.sec-oig.gov/Reports/Semiannual/2008/seminov08.pdf They're pretty far behind the times. -|Lardashe
- It's not only Faux; Everyone was hanging on it because it's newsworthy. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Abortion lulz[edit]
I was going through some of Andy's "sources" for abortion info and it seems like he's relying on people not looking them up...because they have nothing to do with what he's talking about. Not even like crazy Andy reading between the lines stuff...there's nothing. He's completely making this shit up. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 13:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Can you post some of the specific and most outrageous examples? There are plenty of Abortion articles and the main one's got something like 72 references... and I've got a bad case of "WTF I'm not going to read all that" now :P --Maquissar (talk) 14:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- He sometimes does the same thing with citations to cases in legal writing, as if citations are merely window dressing for a convincing lie. Nutty Roux (talk) 15:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm trying to find the best example. Some of these articles he cites seem to be non-existent. He's literally the only person on the internet using them. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's not often you see the words "Abortion" and "lulz" in a sentence together. But anyway, this is the man rewriting the Bible on his own beliefs, and Andy's never been one to be bothered be pesky facts, or lack thereof. SJ Debaser 15:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- This is a good example of a cite that's made to be impossible to find. I wonder which "The Independent" he means? It's sure not this one. There's only one article titled "The role of fat in breast cancer" appearing in a major publication and it says nothing relevant to Andy's claim. It'd be hilarious to actually get an opportunity to press Andy on the existence of these sources. If only he wasn't so shielded from reality. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- There's a newspaper article by that name, but the date, author, and paper are different. This and other cites from the abortion article appear to be arrows in his quiver that he's been using all over the place, including a SCOTUS brief. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- This is a good example of a cite that's made to be impossible to find. I wonder which "The Independent" he means? It's sure not this one. There's only one article titled "The role of fat in breast cancer" appearing in a major publication and it says nothing relevant to Andy's claim. It'd be hilarious to actually get an opportunity to press Andy on the existence of these sources. If only he wasn't so shielded from reality. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's not often you see the words "Abortion" and "lulz" in a sentence together. But anyway, this is the man rewriting the Bible on his own beliefs, and Andy's never been one to be bothered be pesky facts, or lack thereof. SJ Debaser 15:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm trying to find the best example. Some of these articles he cites seem to be non-existent. He's literally the only person on the internet using them. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- He sometimes does the same thing with citations to cases in legal writing, as if citations are merely window dressing for a convincing lie. Nutty Roux (talk) 15:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Never mind Andy, it's Ken who's really not in touch with reality. Two pictures of Hitler on the one page about abortion? Come on now. Sometimes I wonder if Ken isn't really insane, but the deepest of deep cover parodists laughing his arse off from the comfort of his living room. Its a testament to the culture of Conservapedia that no one reins him in. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Andy is claiming that in 1959 "the average woman in Russia was having four abortions in her lifetime". His source is a Google translation of a Russian website. It's possible that that's simply a machine mistranslation, but I don't speak Russian (and I REALLY doubt Andy does) so I can't say for certain. Needless to say, a fantastic claim like that would need a much better citation in anywhere else. In Conservapedia however, if the citation (or at the very least the interpretation of it) fits the agenda, that's good enough. Night Jaguar (talk) 20:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
| “ | According to estimates, as reported on the website "Demography of Russia", which are based on EA Sadvokasovoy, already in 1959, the number of abortions in Russia has reached very high values and was of the order of 4 in the average per woman of reproductive age.
По расчетам, приводимым на сайте «Демография России», которые основаны на данных Е. А. Садвокасовой, уже в 1959 г. число абортов в России достигло весьма высоких значений и составило величину порядка 4 в среднем на одну женщину репродуктивного возраста. |
” |
- Not that I can read the original, but the link generally seems to argue that Russia had tons of abortions, whatever the accuracy or implications. (Side note: citation 26 suggests that modern fertility rates are unaffected by abortion.) ~ Kupochama[1][2] 02:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I heard basically that same statistic many years ago. Maybe on a trivial pursuit card even? That doesn't make it true, but if it's a myth it's a widely known one, and not something Andy pulled out of his ass anyway. DickTurpis (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- According to my wife, who is fluent in russian, the sentence isn`t complete. It states that in 1959, women in russia had 4 times as many! abortions, but without stating as compared to whom. It definetly doesn`t say anything about 4 abortions per woman. (Please note that we had to translate it from russian to german to english, so please forgive me if it is somewhat crude)
- I`ll ask my wife if she might take a look at the original site, maybe she can shed some light onto this.Gmb (talk) 14:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I heard basically that same statistic many years ago. Maybe on a trivial pursuit card even? That doesn't make it true, but if it's a myth it's a widely known one, and not something Andy pulled out of his ass anyway. DickTurpis (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Brits kidnapping Murcans[edit]
This comment of TK's suggests he thinks that the Murcans who were stuck in the UK because of Iceland's attack on the UK war against Britain didn't go of their own free will. Is Gordon Brown now sending covert squads of SAS into the US to force USians to go on holiday or business trips to the UK, TK? DogPMarmite Patrol 00:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I personally found TK's response in-depth and accurate - what American in their right mind would want to ever come to our smelly, diseased, atheistic, NHS-loving country? They were obviously drafted in some kind of liberal British conspiracy. SJ Debaser 11:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hell, true Merucins make sure they never leave the country by refusing to get a passport!
bomination 17:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hell, true Merucins make sure they never leave the country by refusing to get a passport!
Moar Hitler![edit]
Gotta lurve how Ken/Andy et al make Abortion their new article of the year, then make complete buffoons of themselves by plastering Hitler all over the front page. --PsyGremlinSiarad! 11:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- You expected anything different? Lily Inspirate me. 12:11, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm an eternal optimist. One day they'll do something without making a complete dog's breakfast of it. --PsyGremlinPraat! 12:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- What is worse is that our parody page now looks less ridiculous than the real thing. - π 14:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Lol! A classic example of Poe's Law. --PsyGremlinHable! 15:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- What is worse is that our parody page now looks less ridiculous than the real thing. - π 14:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm an eternal optimist. One day they'll do something without making a complete dog's breakfast of it. --PsyGremlinPraat! 12:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Nuttin' Ed[edit]
Ah, gotta love his 'article' on Notting Hillimg. Notice how he makes reference to "Grant's self-deprecating good manners" without ever mentioning who the stars of the film are. And he has to tell us that Monty Python is raunchy. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 16:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Note also the "white". Notoriously in the film zero coloureds of any hue are seen despite being filmed in multiracial Notting Hill. 17:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC) yummy & honey(or marmalade)
- I'd love to eavesdrop on Ed's mind when he writes his sub stubs. I just can't imagine the thought process behind them. I'd love to find out what Ed finds "raunchy" about Monty Python (does Ed find stop motion of a giant hand fiddling with Venus' nipple titillating?) I'd love to find out how he picks the key points the article should cover. Truly, Ed's mind is the undiscovered country, where no rational thought ever comes back from. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 21:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- "Oh, new netflix delivery! I'll write a great article on this movie! Oh, 14 year old girls... where was I?" Also, MPFC is fairly "raunchy" - at first it pissed me off too, then I ran the tapes (all episodes and movies are saved in my brains) and thought, "oh, yeah, Python is pretty cool". ħuman 02:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- "Oh, new netflix delivery! I'll write a great article on this movie! Oh, 14 year old girls... where was I?" Also, MPFC is fairly "raunchy" - at first it pissed me off too, then I ran the tapes (all episodes and movies are saved in my brains) and thought, "oh, yeah, Python is pretty cool". ħuman
- Should someone remind Ed that's he's writing for an alleged encyclopedia? "Fans of British humor will love this"? Come on, Ed, just close the damn piece with "4 stars!!!!!" we know you want to. DickTurpis (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- No Dick, he says "Fans of inane British humor...". Either he doesn't know what inane means or he's a racist prick. Lily Inspirate me. 01:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Ed for the heads up that the lead character is "tall and white". Being the bigot that I am, I can safely watch this movie without being offended by short black people defiling my TV (you can't imagine the amount of soap, water and effort it takes when these things happen). --Brendiggg (talk) 11:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- No Dick, he says "Fans of inane British humor...". Either he doesn't know what inane means or he's a racist prick. Lily Inspirate me. 01:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'd love to eavesdrop on Ed's mind when he writes his sub stubs. I just can't imagine the thought process behind them. I'd love to find out what Ed finds "raunchy" about Monty Python (does Ed find stop motion of a giant hand fiddling with Venus' nipple titillating?) I'd love to find out how he picks the key points the article should cover. Truly, Ed's mind is the undiscovered country, where no rational thought ever comes back from. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 21:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Battle of the Wilderness[edit]
In case anybody else is surprised at the quality of writing in Cowardjou's new Battle of the Wilderness article, you'll be unsurprised to learn that it's copied word-for-word from here. Of course, because it's a government site, it's totally allowed to copy it verbatim with no credit - at least in Andyland. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- For a lawyer...hell, anyone who's been through post-secondary education of any sort...and alleged "teacher", Andy really doesn't understand what plagiarism is all about, does he? --Kels (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Even if you accept Andy's "logic" about government information, there's a major issue with intellectual dishonesty. CP is passing off other people's work as its own. Surely that kind of deceit is for lie-bur-uls? –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- He's in the clear in terms of copyright, but it's not academically honest - David Gerard (talk) 19:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- "Information created or owned by the NPS and presented on this website, unless otherwise indicated, is considered in the public domain." So he's legal but as David implies it stinks to fail attribution. 19:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC) yummy & honey(or marmalade)
- "Information created or owned by the NPS and presented on this website, unless otherwise indicated, is considered in the public domain." So he's legal but as David implies it stinks to fail attribution. 19:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC) yummy
- He's in the clear in terms of copyright, but it's not academically honest - David Gerard (talk) 19:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Even if you accept Andy's "logic" about government information, there's a major issue with intellectual dishonesty. CP is passing off other people's work as its own. Surely that kind of deceit is for lie-bur-uls? –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Ha! Hee! Splurfl! Ho! Heheheh![edit]
Sorry, but Joaquín Martínez telling someone else about "Fair use"img is so funny that it's beyond all reasonable headers.. 02:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC) yummy & honey(or marmalade)
- Oh wow, that's just too good. I hate to say it, but, well, irony meter. Tetronian you're clueless 02:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I like how he says "I recommend (you) use mainly Fair use even in that cases. That never could fail if you use the image according to the rules." It really shows how he thinks the world works IE, if I say it's Fair Use, it's Fair Use. SirChuckBThis country needs more Rutabegas 04:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Fuck Joaquin Martinez.--
talk
15:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Jargon.[edit]
Careful Andy, Smeg Ed might just delete your jargon-filledimg post. --PsyGremlinTal! 13:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- what, Ed being jealous about Andy having a "better" (whatever that may mean) stub? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Interesting[edit]
Andy deleted Ken's silly evolution gif and removed the featured article. Ken restored both, but you can't see it on recent changes any more. EddyP (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- See #Priorities above. ħuman 16:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Especially weird as they have the "featured article" of Evolution at the top but placed the "article of the year", Abortion down far enough that you have to scroll half way to see it at all. The Anti-abortion Project not going so well? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:13, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the FA changes whenever they can be arsed to get around to it. The AotY just sits there quietly farting on the rest of the main page, stinking up the borken news. ħuman 21:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the FA changes whenever they can be arsed to get around to it. The AotY just sits there quietly farting on the rest of the main page, stinking up the borken news. ħuman
So much idiocy in one small newspost[edit]
Wow, so let's get this straight: 1. Wikipedia's article on abortion is bad because it doesn't have a photo at the top. 2. "Denies the harm..." The Breast cancer thing again. 3. EVIL Google ranks it "first" causing hundreds of abortions EACH DAY! (The first thing pregnant women do is type in "abortion" on Google and only follow the first link (because it's first! so it must be true!) for "advice"). 4 Liberal editors are very happy because they have caused so many extra baby-deaths! Hooray! Internetmoniker (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- That second sentence (of his) might be the best summary of Andy I've ever seen... ~ Kupochama[1][2] 21:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, conservapedia is an abortion. Though I doubt WP is spawning hundreds such a day. ħuman 00:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, conservapedia is an abortion. Though I doubt WP is spawning hundreds such a day. ħuman
- It doesn't have any pictures of Hitler at all, either. Those liberals and their ability to discuss a topic without bringing Nazis in to it. Fuck those guys. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also also consider what a "photo" of an abortion would be. Porn for weird people. ħuman 00:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I dunno, probably something like the first two photos here? Though I guess Andy would prefer something like this. Only the most heartless baby-eating atheist liberals would still support abortion after seeing that photo. -- Nx / talk 00:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Good, but I was sort of picturing, um, "what the doctor sees". Like babymaking but with less dilation. ħuman 00:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Even if there was an image at the top, CP would find some reason to complain about it. Why is an image at the top of the page so important anyway, does he think people at Wikipedia cannot read? --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 05:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Good, but I was sort of picturing, um, "what the doctor sees". Like babymaking but with less dilation. ħuman
- I dunno, probably something like the first two photos here? Though I guess Andy would prefer something like this. Only the most heartless baby-eating atheist liberals would still support abortion after seeing that photo. -- Nx / talk 00:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also also consider what a "photo" of an abortion would be. Porn for weird people. ħuman
More poor taste[edit]
OK, this is pretty minor in comparison to the rest of their crapfest but this post by TK inserts an image of a cross emblazoned with the word Conservapedia against a background of the US flag. Following up shows that it was originally designed as a possible CP logo way back in January 2007. Most of those efforts were by the then enthusiastic homeskolars and are probably no more than one expect from kids unversed in graphic arts (Hi, GeoPlrd). Unfortunately, the kids have gone but the site still looks like it was designed by infants but is now largely just a bunch of old men. Lily Inspirate me. 03:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Schlafly - less Spritual than a Robot[edit]
So I've been re-reading Isaac Asimov's "The Caves of Steel" - I needed to go back to the old masters having overdosed on new authors lately. What I had totally forgotten is a scene at the end of Ch. 14, where Elijah Baley (the human detective hero) tries to teach the robot, Daneel Olivaw, about religion. The passage he uses is... the Pericope Adulterae; ie, one of the bits Schlafly has excised from his Colossal Bible Phuckup. There's even this little exchange between the two:
...There is a human impulse known as mercy; a human act known as forgiveness."
"I am not acquainted with those words, partner Elijah."
"I know," muttered Baley. "I know."
...which reminded me of anybody trying to discuss the passage with teh Assfly. The last spoken words in the book are Olivaw saying "Go, and sin no more!", illustrating that he gets the point.
Asimov undoubtedly knew the bible better than Schlafly (I'm still waiting for Schlafly's two-volume Guide to the Bible) so it's fascinating that he picked that passage to illustrate something that is "higher than any law can be".
I know everybody on this site knows AS missed the point, but I thought it was worth bringing this up anyway. Life imitates art once again. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe we should have a guide to the Conservative Bible by the verses in the format done by Asimov. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I thought of a Portal remake, but with Andy replacing GlaDOS. Sure he wouldn't as friendly as she was, and he'd be even easier to kill once Kenbot and TKbot have been dispatched, but his voice already sounds pretty inhuman. The CP is a lie.
Ask me about our ectoplasm 21:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Due to mandatory scheduled failure, this encyclopaedia has been replaced by a live fire course designed for TK. Conservapedia apologises for the inconvenience and wishes you the best of luck. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- The Internet Live Fire Course has been DELAYED by snow. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Due to mandatory scheduled failure, this encyclopaedia has been replaced by a live fire course designed for TK. Conservapedia apologises for the inconvenience and wishes you the best of luck. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I thought of a Portal remake, but with Andy replacing GlaDOS. Sure he wouldn't as friendly as she was, and he'd be even easier to kill once Kenbot and TKbot have been dispatched, but his voice already sounds pretty inhuman. The CP is a lie.
Priorities[edit]
I love how Andy moved Ken's Article of the Year:Abortion bleats down the page, ripped out the Hitler picture and halved the drivelimg, and Ken then moves his Featured article:Evolutionimg up to the top. Lily Inspirate me. 06:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Captured (and fixed the first link) –SuspectedReplicant retire me 06:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Article of the year didn't last very long, did it? Now we have this gif gracing the front page Evolution blurb. Apparently evolving through time is way more retarded than an omnipotent, invisible being creating every single living organism in the history of the world. SJ Debaser 10:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hold on - "Featured Article: Evolution"??? I've been way out of the loop, it seems. What happened to the Featured Article Committee? --Sid (talk) 10:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's been steamrollered out of the way ages ago. Andy jumped in and started sticking whatever tickled his fancy as a FA - thus we've had cp:Liberal and cp:Hollywood values as featured articles. plus it is Ken after all; when did he ever show consideration to others in regards to his pet babies. (Argh! I said 'in regards to' when talking about Ken!). Also, the Hitler image isn't totally lost - it's decorating their WP entry at the moment. --PsyGremlin講話 10:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- The new animated gif of the evolution article is giving the frontpage that myspace feeling that was missing before. Internetmoniker (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- They put up the most crude images as long as they're in fitting with Conservapedia's mission statement. How the hell is anyone visiting that site for the first time that sees that on the mainpage gonna take CP seriously? The CBP might even have the tiniest bit more respect if the CP frontpage made a better impression. (and I emphasise might.) SJ Debaser 14:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Andy to the rescueimg Did I tag that correctly? ħuman 16:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Pmail to disaster???img ħuman 16:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh I seriously hope so. This has the potential for hilarity2. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Pmail to disaster???img ħuman
- Andy to the rescueimg Did I tag that correctly? ħuman
- They put up the most crude images as long as they're in fitting with Conservapedia's mission statement. How the hell is anyone visiting that site for the first time that sees that on the mainpage gonna take CP seriously? The CBP might even have the tiniest bit more respect if the CP frontpage made a better impression. (and I emphasise might.) SJ Debaser 14:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- The new animated gif of the evolution article is giving the frontpage that myspace feeling that was missing before. Internetmoniker (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's been steamrollered out of the way ages ago. Andy jumped in and started sticking whatever tickled his fancy as a FA - thus we've had cp:Liberal and cp:Hollywood values as featured articles. plus it is Ken after all; when did he ever show consideration to others in regards to his pet babies. (Argh! I said 'in regards to' when talking about Ken!). Also, the Hitler image isn't totally lost - it's decorating their WP entry at the moment. --PsyGremlin講話 10:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hold on - "Featured Article: Evolution"??? I've been way out of the loop, it seems. What happened to the Featured Article Committee? --Sid (talk) 10:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Article of the year didn't last very long, did it? Now we have this gif gracing the front page Evolution blurb. Apparently evolving through time is way more retarded than an omnipotent, invisible being creating every single living organism in the history of the world. SJ Debaser 10:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The entry page for any site is crucial to making a good first impression. Unfortunately there has been nobody in overall control of the content. The core sysops have been allowed to post whatever their pet subject is without any consideration of design or user-friendliness. The layout uses too large fonts for all the crap they insist on throwing at it. Really if you have to scroll down more than one screenfull then you have too much. As we have seen when Ken gets to play in the sandpit he can make a terrible mess with overlarge pictures, poor formatting and too many items linking to his pet pages. Crocoshite used to keep the broken news to a reasonable length but since his absence it has been allowed to extend to seven or eight screenfulls. Mainpageright really shows that CP is just a political blog rather than any sort of encyclopedia. If there is one word that summarises what is lacking about their main page then it is restraint. Lily Inspirate me. 03:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also on the main page is a nice piccy: US flag (OK so far) fronted by a cross (Yup, still OK) but what's on the cross? Guy nailed thereto? (Oh dear!) No: "Conservapedia" Now that's priorities! 03:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
ContribsTalk
- Ha, now Ken has deleted his Evolution.gif piccy and replaced it with the Darwin-monkey cartoon. Evidently he thinks that the copyright of this image is what Andy is concerned about. Lily Inspirate me. 12:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
"unexpected benefits"[edit]
It said on the news about its completion of the NT that it has many "unexpected benefits". But seriously, What benefits do they not expect? I would suppose they expect everything beneficial to occur while translating the Bible, logical or otherwise. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would expect them to talk big but actually have very low expectations such that anything beneficial really would be unexpected. Nutty Roux (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Andy fails on Yale PhD's[edit]
The article is all about how academic jobs in the humanities have disappeared, no one should be surprised, academic budgets have fallen. How do you get from this to education is bad? Does he think someone with a Ph.D. in medieval studies from liberty university would do better? --Opcn (talk) 03:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Link? (I didn't see a wigo that seemed to be about this, so curious...) ħuman 18:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Alan Edwards?[edit]
Anyone explain the edit comment?img "(added tag...and if I were you, AlanEdwards, I worry about what you and your cohorts are doing in your website.)" 04:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- My name is Alan Edwards. I have been corresponding with Karajou through email. Keegscee (talk) 05:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Does he mean RW when he says "your website"? Does that mean I'm a cohort? I've always wanted to be a cohort! X Stickman (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Why isn't Keegscee explaining this? Karaturd oversighted an edit. What was it? I'm sure the emails are just more of Karaturd's chest thumping and bullying. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- You'd kind of expect Karajou, of all CP sysops, to use military terminology correctly... Does he have bits of his brain surgically removed once a week or something? Totnesmartin (talk) 19:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It just means he was really bad at what he did when he was in the forces, that's all. No wonder he didn't get promotions despite being in so long. --Kels (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- You'd kind of expect Karajou, of all CP sysops, to use military terminology correctly... Does he have bits of his brain surgically removed once a week or something? Totnesmartin (talk) 19:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Why isn't Keegscee explaining this? Karaturd oversighted an edit. What was it? I'm sure the emails are just more of Karaturd's chest thumping and bullying. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Does he mean RW when he says "your website"? Does that mean I'm a cohort? I've always wanted to be a cohort! X Stickman (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Insane Set/Abortion WIGO[edit]
!...? --
YossarianThe Man from the USSR 07:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe this has something to do with why Andy hates the Axiom of Choice so much. I can't see yet what it might have to do with abortion, but then again I can't see what relativity has to do with moral relativism either, and these do both use the word "choice". Linking abortion to set theory at all must be a good first step. This could become a powerful Conservative Insight... -MarkGall (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it seems likely that Andy hates the Axiom of Choice because it has the word 'choice' in it, but he seems to be taking a very axiom-of-choicy position here. He asserts that one can form a set {members who would exceed Nobel and world records} by drawing from other sets {aborted fetuses}, {Nobel prize winners}, {world record holders}, {some others probably}, without showing a constructive proof. However, I'm more confused by his assertion that aborted fetuses would have exceeded past achievements given his parallel belief that the world is getting shittier by the moment: language devolves, society is breaking down, cancer and autism rates are up, human mutation rates are increasing, IQ is declining, lakes are drying up, Earth in general is in its shutdown phase, etc. Would Andy accept that one could find an aborted fetus who would have been wiser than Solomon? Longer-lived than Methuselah? A better evangelist than Paul? More deserving of assumption to heaven than Elijah? Of course this must be balanced against the inevitable triumph of world Conservatism, which will make everything and everyone better, and which has been doing so forever as well, as evidenced by the geometric growth of conservative terms and recent Republican polling numbers and the defeat of atheism on the Internet. And the fact that disasters must get bigger in magnitude the farther back in time you go, which implies that things were worse back then... so huh, I guess that's a tough one to predict after all. Of course, the elephant in the room is that using Andy's Axiom of Pro-Life, one could point out all the Uber-Hitlers, MegaPolPots, UltraStalins and GigaObamas that we have been spared thanks to abortion.--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Singular...[edit]
Amusing insight in the workingimg of Andy's brain:
Singular value decomposition', or SVD, consists of the reduction of a cp:singular matrix into the product of orthogonal and square matrices.
yom is yom is yom and singular is singular is singular...
- SVD can be done for rectangular matrices - which may or may not be singular
- it decomposes the matrix into a product of two unitary matrices and a diagonal matrix. Yes, unitary matrices are orthogonal (in the real case), so no problem with that, but what's about this square matrix? Unitary matrices are square matrices, but the third factor is a diagonal matrix, which doesn't have to be a square matrix.
For short: this entry is just rubbish. When do we get the lecture cp:Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math?
larronsicut fur in nocte 07:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Conservapedia's Sources Are Improving[edit]
Andy writes about terrorist role-playing in a video game on the mainpage. When asked about it he cites a group of teenagers he spoke to last week.
Note: I wouldn't be surprised if such a game existed, but supporting the assertion by referencing a group of teenagers is just dumb. Night Jaguar (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- In Modern Warfare 2 you can play as a terroist. You dont earn "extra points" though. Acei9 09:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Damn, beaten to it. Wikipedia has an article.
- Well, if Modern Warfare 2 is the game he's talking about, then the 'teenagers' he spoke to are either wrong, or having a laugh. You actually NEVER play as a terrorist throughout the whole game. The nearest you get is briefly playing as an undercover operative who has infiltrated a terrorist group, and this group carries out an attack by massacring civilians at a crowded airport. You can choose to actively participate or to simply follow along without firing a shot (until you get to the end, anyway, where you have to fight off the armed forces responding to the incident), and whether you participate or not does not make the slightest bit of difference in the game. Even in multiplayer, if you're fighting against the Marines, you don't fight as terrorists, per se, you fight as as the 'OpFor', which is military shorthand for 'opposing force'. 92.1.153.207 (talk) 11:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's also possibly Andy is misremembering the what they said. Hell, considering his mental state that "group of teenagers" could have just been pile of dirty laundry and a cat. Night Jaguar (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I really hope so...the thought of Andy talking to a group of teenagers disturbs me to no end. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 12:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It also depends on your definition of 'terrorist' - I suspect there are quite a few games that could theoretically call for a player to be a 'terrorist', and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that what Andy defines as 'terrorist' includes all sorts of bizarre things. Worm(t | c) 13:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- As has been said so many times before, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Lily Inspirate me. 13:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It also depends on your definition of 'terrorist' - I suspect there are quite a few games that could theoretically call for a player to be a 'terrorist', and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that what Andy defines as 'terrorist' includes all sorts of bizarre things. Worm(t | c) 13:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I really hope so...the thought of Andy talking to a group of teenagers disturbs me to no end. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 12:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's also possibly Andy is misremembering the what they said. Hell, considering his mental state that "group of teenagers" could have just been pile of dirty laundry and a cat. Night Jaguar (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, if Modern Warfare 2 is the game he's talking about, then the 'teenagers' he spoke to are either wrong, or having a laugh. You actually NEVER play as a terrorist throughout the whole game. The nearest you get is briefly playing as an undercover operative who has infiltrated a terrorist group, and this group carries out an attack by massacring civilians at a crowded airport. You can choose to actively participate or to simply follow along without firing a shot (until you get to the end, anyway, where you have to fight off the armed forces responding to the incident), and whether you participate or not does not make the slightest bit of difference in the game. Even in multiplayer, if you're fighting against the Marines, you don't fight as terrorists, per se, you fight as as the 'OpFor', which is military shorthand for 'opposing force'. 92.1.153.207 (talk) 11:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Damn, beaten to it. Wikipedia has an article.
I can only assume that these teenagers (should they even exist) aren't his homskolrs, since I would assume their parents wouldn't let them play anything violent. Hell, if they're worried enough about their precious little kids and mental enough to think Andy's a good teacher, it strikes me as unlikely that they'd even let the poor sods near a TV past 9PM, let alone a game with blood and shooty bang bang. This begs the question of who Andy's been talking to - he doesn't strike me as someone teenagers would like! Webbtje (talk) 13:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It must be homskolrs, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were allowed to play violent games. They need to be taught about the usefulness of guns and how to apply them judiciously to Un-American persons. EddyP (talk) 15:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Counter-Strike (what Andy is talking about) is a Half-Life mod released before 9/11 even happened, back in 1999/2000. I played and tested during the beta stages and haven't played it in nearly nine years, but players hated the terrorist side because it usually had a losing streak. Besides that, it's two generic names, counter-terrorist, and terrorist, so how more simple can it be? I guess in Day of Defeat (another mod, set in WWII), being on the "bad" side means you're a Nazi sympathizer now. The point system bonus was probably an incentive to encourage players to keep the sides even. 
NorsemanCyser Melomel 19:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC) (oh wait, I played it long ago... brb making pipebombs)
- Funny, when I was but a lad, we didn't have computers to play the baddie, so we played... cowboys and indians, cops and robbers, J_ps and Brits, etc. All just excuses to point stick at each other go bang! bang!, hide behind rocks, and perform excruciating "death" scenes. First person shooter games FTW.
- Oh, and how does Andy feel about grownups playing at being "rebels" during Civil War re-enactments? ħuman 21:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder if Andy knows that in games such as Day of Defeat you can play as a NAZI, and you get bonus points for doing it (as in, you get more points than if you didn't play at all)? DickTurpis (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Andy seems to be indicating that the game in question was Call of Duty, so it's likely he was indeed referring to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. This despite the fact that someone wrote that in MW2 : " you play as an American CIA agent sent undercover to monitor a dangerous Russian terrorist cell". --Night Jaguar (talk) 03:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Missing articles[edit]
I noticed on CP's Abortion Project page a section called "Additional child abuse articles needed". However, it seems to be missing some hot Google search terms such as:
- Catholics and child-abuse
- Christianity and child-abuse
- Vatican and child-abuse
- Priests and child-abuse
I thought Ken was supposed to be an expert on SEO. He's obviously missing a few tricks. Lily Inspirate me. 12:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- That'd be prime for some parody. A Catholic child abuse article that totally absolves them like you know only Andy could. It'd be epic. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 12:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's the children's fault for being so sexy (Warning - may cause blood pressure issues) Jack Hughes (talk) 13:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- They're leaving less and less room for parody - David Gerard (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's the children's fault for being so sexy (Warning - may cause blood pressure issues) Jack Hughes (talk) 13:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
SCOTUS[edit]
Um... so Andy claims that a Conservapede, i.e. him (I thought conservatives didn't gloat or brag?) was the only one to get his amicus brief in.img So why does the source he give make no mention of his name? --PsyGremlinZungumza! 17:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- He's just sort-of gloating that today (4/26/10) SCOTUS denied the motion of a California state senator to file a late amicus brief. We already discussed Schlafly's brief last year - he draws completely unsubstantiated conclusions about violent video games. Nutty Roux (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would assume that it's probably just Andy's delusions of grandeur again. If there were actually any evidence that he was having an effect, he would be sure to provide it rather than just giving a random news piece. EddyP (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Is there any evidence at all that anyone even reads his briefs? I have red ACBs (I'm educated in molecular biology, I live by the acronym) in the past, and legal papers, and while they don't make complete sense to me at least I can sort of follow along, Andys notion of truth can't be accepted in any higher court, I would imagine that any judge who bothered to read and look into one of his briefs would never bother to waste time on them again. Does the supreme court have a bird cage in chamber that it needs to line? --Opcn (talk) 20:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would assume that it's probably just Andy's delusions of grandeur again. If there were actually any evidence that he was having an effect, he would be sure to provide it rather than just giving a random news piece. EddyP (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how they morally edit there and think they are unbiased and factually correct. They block anyone who doesn't bow to them. How disgusting --rational ghey (talk) 21:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of Ed[edit]
Look at his contribs (to 26 April if you're reading this later) methinks his predilection for young girls is showing. (It's almost all about Alice; as in Wonderland etc.) 20:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- It's a bit unsettling how he is writing about Alice in Wonderland and then stops to make a few edits to "corrective rape." We're probably reading way too far into Ed's edit pattern, but it sure does create some suspicious-looking situations. Tetronian you're clueless 20:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- We all know that Ed live blogs the banalities of his life, so ... I wonder what the fuck happened? — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 20:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- He just read (or watched?) half of one of the Alice books? He's mad as a hatter? He's hare-brained? He dropped a door on his mouse? He's a red queen? I can stop any time... ħuman 21:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- He's one strange old man. I noticed this old and rather odd addition to CP's article on Paedophilia. --Ask me about our adjective 21:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- He's one strange old man. I noticed this old and rather odd addition to CP's article on Paedophilia. --
Dunno about the rest, but we've a new insight into his reading habits. Should make this an interesting (read: hilarious) read once he gets a bit more done. --Kels (talk) 21:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Atheist Britain[edit]
Where's Andy (and by default TKimg) gotten the idea that Britain is atheist? I mean they only have the head of the Anglican Church there. Not to mention several million Muslims, Seikhs, Hindus, etc., etc. (ok, so they're not Xian, so they don't count). I thought he'd have a hard-on for the UK, seeing as the Cons are coming into power. So much for the "special relationship". --PsyGremlinParla! 13:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Everyone knows Richard Dawkins atheiified the entire country. Internetmoniker (talk) 13:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Britain is not American, so they hate freedom and are socialist communist atheist fascists. Deny this and lose all credibility! --GTac (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because, barring Mail-reading loonies, it turns out that the UK's actually fairly liberal, particularly according to Arsefly's scale. Atheists are liberals and liberals are atheists. QED. Deny this and lose all credibility. Webbtje (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- From what I've seen of Arsefly, the BNP are 'fairly liberal' by his standards. 92.1.229.76 (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- They might be a bunch of liberals, but he'd vote for them just for their education policies! --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 00:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Does the BNP promote homeschooling? Lily Inspirate me. 03:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'd imagine the BNP would prefer for most people to be educated in comprehensive's (what we call public schools in England and Wales) so they can change the curriculum to their own ends. However, given that Andy doesn't know the difference between England and Britain, his opinion counts for fuck all. SJ Debaser 12:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Does the BNP promote homeschooling? Lily Inspirate me. 03:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- They might be a bunch of liberals, but he'd vote for them just for their education policies! --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 00:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- From what I've seen of Arsefly, the BNP are 'fairly liberal' by his standards. 92.1.229.76 (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because, barring Mail-reading loonies, it turns out that the UK's actually fairly liberal, particularly according to Arsefly's scale. Atheists are liberals and liberals are atheists. QED. Deny this and lose all credibility. Webbtje (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Britain is not American, so they hate freedom and are socialist communist atheist fascists. Deny this and lose all credibility! --GTac (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Spring[edit]
http://conservapedia.com/Video_game_industryimg Whats this game "Spring", is it actually a game? I may not be the biggest game buff out there but I'm surprised I never heard of it. — Unsigned, by: 131.107.0.82 / talk / contribs 22:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- wp:Spring_(game_engine). Doubt that's the one they were thinking of... -- Nx / talk 21:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's all I could find too. I wondered if it were the engine used in Grand Theft Auto, or a publisher perhaps. — Unsigned, by: 131.107.0.82 / talk / contribs 22:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Read the source! They talk about this spring's biggest opening, not a game, but the season. The game was the latest GTA. --Opcn (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- a humorous misread by Andy. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's amusing to see Andy showing an interest in Video games just as Douglas almost completes his task of deleting everything video game related from CP. Andy, well done for noticing what's going on at your blog. --Ask me about our ooze 22:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Stupid as Andy is, I always thought he was at least basically literate. DickTurpis (talk) 22:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh he's literate - he can read and write to some degree, anyway. Problem remains that he simply can't process what he's read properly. The fact you call him 'basically literate' is pretty much spot on, actually: he can read and write to a basic enough standard, but judging by the amount of grammatical and syntactic butchery he commits, I doubt he's very much of a reader!Webbtje (talk) 22:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Gawd that is so funny! ħuman 02:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Gawd that is so funny! ħuman
- Oh he's literate - he can read and write to some degree, anyway. Problem remains that he simply can't process what he's read properly. The fact you call him 'basically literate' is pretty much spot on, actually: he can read and write to a basic enough standard, but judging by the amount of grammatical and syntactic butchery he commits, I doubt he's very much of a reader!Webbtje (talk) 22:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's amusing to see Andy showing an interest in Video games just as Douglas almost completes his task of deleting everything video game related from CP. Andy, well done for noticing what's going on at your blog. --
- a humorous misread by Andy. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Read the source! They talk about this spring's biggest opening, not a game, but the season. The game was the latest GTA. --Opcn (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's all I could find too. I wondered if it were the engine used in Grand Theft Auto, or a publisher perhaps. — Unsigned, by: 131.107.0.82 / talk / contribs 22:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey Doug, you missed one! --Kels (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- That one is an educational game considered appropriate for CP to include it not as pop culture. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 01:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Eternal Forces is also notable for being one of the most poorly received games since ET on the Atari 2600, and like ET, it succeeded in financially crippling it's publisher. Ask me about our neurotoxin 06:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Eternal Forces is also notable for being one of the most poorly received games since ET on the Atari 2600, and like ET, it succeeded in financially crippling it's publisher.
Awesome find, that's just a brilliant misreading of Andy! I had to add it as a WIGO. I didn't feel very inspired so it's a pretty bland description. Any improvement is more than welcome! --GTac (talk) 07:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- On another note, speaking of the source material, how is this guy even making that comparison with a straight face? Modern video games sell for $60. Movie tickets average between 10 and 12. When you divide out the differences, that comes to about 5 million, 166 thousand, 167 units for GTA. and about 4 million, 916 thousand, 967 individual ticket sales for Spiderman, which was hardly a record setter. GTA still sold more units, but it's not nearly the beatdown this guy is making it out to be. Not to mention, when you add the difference in audiences (Nobody buys a video game on its second weekend because they don't like a crowded living room) the comparison is further sunk..... Very strange. But back on topic, it is funny that Andy can't read for comprehension. How the hell did he get through law school? SirChuckBI brake for Schukky 08:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- That is simply incredible. The Trustworthy Encyclopedia at its best. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 09:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hilarious. Pure class. SJ Debaser 10:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- You know, I'm actually pretty flabbergasted by the fact that a Conservapedia article created by Andy Schlafly on the subject on video games does not contain any retarded statements with an agenda, like "All videogames train kids to rape and kill!" or "Videogames are made by liberals to get people to read the bible less!".. Seriously, we've seen time and again that that man will take ANY chance to get in a cheap shot (remember the news articles whenever some celebrity died?), quite often that cheap shot is the ONLY REASON why he creates an article... But nothing in an article on videogames? I'm astonished! --GTac (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Fantastic, that's an absolutely superb example of an old trait of theirs - skimming. Andy has failed at reading yet again. How can anyone trust any claim he might ever make about anything, when he doesn't ever read past the second sentence? Pompous twit. DogPMarmite Patrol 15:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- You know, I'm actually pretty flabbergasted by the fact that a Conservapedia article created by Andy Schlafly on the subject on video games does not contain any retarded statements with an agenda, like "All videogames train kids to rape and kill!" or "Videogames are made by liberals to get people to read the bible less!".. Seriously, we've seen time and again that that man will take ANY chance to get in a cheap shot (remember the news articles whenever some celebrity died?), quite often that cheap shot is the ONLY REASON why he creates an article... But nothing in an article on videogames? I'm astonished! --GTac (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hilarious. Pure class. SJ Debaser 10:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- That is simply incredible. The Trustworthy Encyclopedia at its best. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 09:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Another thing that tickles me about this is that Andy is attempting to be some sort of "expert" on video games by file AC briefs and writing "encyclopedic content" about the genre. There are only a handful of sysops at CP that are "allowed" to find out about the error here and fix it there. Anyone else will be banned as a proofreader vandal site member or accused of nit-picking. Until then, it stays a shining example of Andy's phenomenally-low skill of reading comprehension and complete unfamiliarity with video games in general. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- GTac, don't worry, Mr Adams has ensured that the video game industry will forever be know as a liberal toolimg. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 01:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
More math from Andy[edit]
Uh-oh. Andy has been dabbling in mathematics again. In addition to his educational remarks about the set of aborted fetuses being a good illustration of mathematical set theory, he has created a few new articles, with modest edit comments about their clarity and conciseness.
There is transpose matriximg, with the description "simple and clear". Well, it's stubbiness almost rivals Ed Poor's ruminations on teenage girls and thisimg, but its clarity leaves something to be desired. The term, as a noun phrase, without "conjugate", is rather quaint. The usual phrase is "matrix transpose". He also fails to mention anything about why the transpose of a matrix might be interesting—things like inner products, adjoints, linear forms, and so on.
Then there's singular matriximg, a hodgepodge of jumbled thinking.
And there's eigenbasisimg, modestly self-described as "concise and clear". No explanation of the circumstances under which a complete set of eigenvectors might form a basis, or why such a basis might be useful.
It also happens that all the usual math contributors who haven't yet been banned (that set is identical to the set {JacobB, "professor" Ed Poor}) have been awfully quiet lately. Well, a new editor, Cpurcell, appeared, and attempted to improve the mathematicsimg article. He was, of course, banned for that by TK. For "Deliberate insertion of false information; lying." And his edits reverted. There was nothing wrong with those two edits. They show far more erudition than anything Andy could write. TK must be so terrified of math edits that he simply can't trust anything by anyone other than Andy. He apparently can't even ask JacobB.
The silence of JacobB and Uncle Ed make me wonder whether Andy has put out the word that nothing can be trusted anymore, and instructed TK to enforce same. Maybe one of my socky friends could go over there and test it.
Gauss (talk) 04:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I can understand TK's reasoning - he knows that the only people who join CP are parodists, vandals, and people who are dragged there by sysops (like Freedom777 or Robert Turkel). Since nobody stepped in to say "Thanks for following my invitation", it must've been a parodist! --Sid (talk) 10:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have to say those articles are incredible. Before I read them I had a decent knowledge of matrices, how they can be used and what special operations you can perform. Now I'm just confused. I feel so sorry for whoever had to mark Andy's work during his college years. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 11:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- He worked as an electrical engineer for several years. WHAT. - David Gerard (talk) 11:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
WTF Andy?[edit]
I'm starting to wonder if Andy isn't cracking up, or the façade is coming down on what a mean-spirited bigot he is. a right of the patients harmed by the distractions and germs to sue the homosexual visitors?img What about straight visitors with the flu, you cunt? Seriously, he's almost sounding hysterical by this point. --PsyGremlinSnakk! 18:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Go look at what he wrote about abortion/breast cancer, he is beyond cracked. --Opcn (talk) 18:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Wow... just wow... Children don't sue hospitals and try to intimidate others. Homosexuals do.img And what about the parents of children? --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 18:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Wow. LindaLunch tries to appeal to "Christian charity" to let loved ones visit while the other is close to death. Andy respondsimg:
"Oh, what a joke that is: "Christian charity" ... by the lawsuit-wielding, never-satisfied homosexual activists??? Every aspect of the homosexual agenda is non-charitable and selfish. [Bold original]"
Of course he then goes on to threaten LindaLunch with banningimg. What a fucking bigot.--Night Jaguar (talk) 22:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Captured. TK already blocked her ("Trolling / Liberal Trolling: Time for this piggy to head to market....Oink!") –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Saving for posterior[edit]
Whereimg TK (aka Terry Koeckritz) manages to show off his creepy checkuser skills and unrivalled status as a scumbucket all in one post. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 18:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- And then Terry and Karajerk indulge in some
mutual masturbationlast wordism and saveimg the pageimg for posterior. And Terry manages to mention vandal site yet again. --PsyGremlinTala! 18:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)- I particularly like it because it shows the binary view of the world TK holds. Afterall, everyone knows that all 100,000 employees of AIG are rotten scumbags. Not a hard-working, Christian janitor or secretary in the lot who lost all of their savings to the mismanagement at the top, right? Right. --Leotardo (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Now I'm confused. I thought conservapedian conservatives thought that AiG and suchlike were heroes of unbridled capitalism, and showed just how the free market can self-regulate without communist liberal leftist socialist big-governments keeping an evil eye on them. But now they're slagging off AiG? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 20:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm 15 and what is this? :P
NorsemanCyser Melomel 20:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- The glass houses bit is surreal coming from a guy whose entire online identity is a hamhanded and easily detected leg pull. Nutty Roux (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm 15 and what is this? :P
- Now I'm confused. I thought conservapedian conservatives thought that AiG and suchlike were heroes of unbridled capitalism, and showed just how the free market can self-regulate without communist liberal leftist socialist big-governments keeping an evil eye on them. But now they're slagging off AiG? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 20:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I particularly like it because it shows the binary view of the world TK holds. Afterall, everyone knows that all 100,000 employees of AIG are rotten scumbags. Not a hard-working, Christian janitor or secretary in the lot who lost all of their savings to the mismanagement at the top, right? Right. --Leotardo (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
lol whut?[edit]
Attempted orchestration of mass identity theft? Does TK (I'm talking about Terry Koeckritz here, people) consider if what Fox News says makes sense before regurgitating it? What a silly question... — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 20:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm just really glad Apple isn't doing enough to keep porn off the distinctly porn-friendly iPhone. Thanks for letting me know what my rabid porn addiction already knew, Terryperson. Nutty Roux (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how Karajou and Rob can show their faces around CP...[edit]
...while TK is still doing his thing. I mean, could it be more clear that he's an enemy of the site?
User:Have a fact, provided in a non-confrontational and helpful manner.img
TK: Last wordism! in this irrelevant and low-profile conversation.img For that you shall die.img
I only mention Karajou and Rob because I think that they're the only ones who know about TK. TK has Ken utterly cowed, and Ed, I think, imagines himself to be a great diplomat and mediator, and thus refuses to see the problem (after all, how could anything possibly go wrong on Professor Poor's watch?). EddyP (talk) 20:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- TK has been getting smacked around over at Wikipedia. I know that when that happens to Uncle Ed, he likes to come back to his little playground and torture the new editors. Of course, TK's an even bigger control freak than Ed, so I could see him doing the same. I think he just loves being hated. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 20:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- We should all know by now that RobS needs TK so that he can change the RW/CP Articles on WP, so we should expect him to shut up about whatever TK is doing. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Karajou is a notoriously small man. I don't understand why you think he would have any scruples over what TK is doing. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 20:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose they both think that the ends justify the means. (If we haven't got an article, we should have) If Right wing neofascism with Christ ends up winning, what does it matter what is sacrificed along the way? 20:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- I suppose they both think that the ends justify the means. (If we haven't got an article, we should have) If Right wing neofascism with Christ ends up winning, what does it matter what is sacrificed along the way? 20:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Karajou is a notoriously small man. I don't understand why you think he would have any scruples over what TK is doing. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 20:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- We should all know by now that RobS needs TK so that he can change the RW/CP Articles on WP, so we should expect him to shut up about whatever TK is doing. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 20:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Guy he blocked here, I sent him an email in the vain hope that there is actually some sort of logical reason for anything that dude does. I just wanted to be helpful and post a fact or two :( Booya (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- See, there's your problem, waving around your deceptive liberal "facts" and "helpfulness" - David Gerard (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- You're encountered TK ruse no. 2353: completely silence and ignore the opponent. He won't email you back, you can be sure of it.Webbtje (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- TK's just nasty. Even in his reply before when an editor asks about any terrorist RPGs: "Certainly, I guess it is too much for you to Google, eh? Modern Warfare 2 is one of them. But I am guessing you already knew that, and have read the article about it on Wikipedia, and just wanted to see if we knew what we were talking about?" I tried having an account there about a year ago and someone accused me of being rude when I pointed out something (not TK, some other long gone editor) but TK can go around making snide remarks to any new editor there? What a fucking liability that "man" is. SJ Debaser 22:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Better chance emailing Andy instead. And if you manage to get Andy to unblock you, TK probably won't reblock until you screw with Andy. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- TK's just nasty. Even in his reply before when an editor asks about any terrorist RPGs: "Certainly, I guess it is too much for you to Google, eh? Modern Warfare 2 is one of them. But I am guessing you already knew that, and have read the article about it on Wikipedia, and just wanted to see if we knew what we were talking about?" I tried having an account there about a year ago and someone accused me of being rude when I pointed out something (not TK, some other long gone editor) but TK can go around making snide remarks to any new editor there? What a fucking liability that "man" is. SJ Debaser 22:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- You're encountered TK ruse no. 2353: completely silence and ignore the opponent. He won't email you back, you can be sure of it.Webbtje (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
But Rob is director of counter-intelligence at CP (or something like that), a conspiracy theorist and decently suspicious to boot. Surely he doesn't believe any of the 'TK repents' stuff? Or does he think everything we say about TK is a cunning ploy to get rid of a valuable member of the team? Broccoli (talk) 23:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- The only cunning ploy we ever succeeded in working together on was the Ides hoax, wherein by doing nothing but babble technogeekese we actually scared users of RW that we were going to kill the innertubes. ħuman 02:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- HHJG L7FG BBDE 55DS 2UVG DDX4 KK8H MBBJ H74F LPL3. DogPMarmite Patrol 16:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- The only cunning ploy we ever succeeded in working together on was the Ides hoax, wherein by doing nothing but babble technogeekese we actually scared users of RW that we were going to kill the innertubes. ħuman
- Rob's doing TK's dirty work for him over at WP (and here, whenever he gets a chance). --Kels (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- In related news, Rob would like to be unblocked here (see this now archived thread) so he can continue to drag Wikipedia discussions to RationalWiki. Oh, but he's really just trying to help us, and we've been so terribly unfair, and he's never edited in bad faith anywhere, and we should show tolerance for diversity, and I should show more good faith, and I should be more neutral by arguing his case, and blah blah blah. --Sid (talk) 00:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm about ready to give Rob one last chance to be a part of our dysfunctional community, if he can learn to keep Wikipedia discussions at Wikipedia. What can I say? I'm a glutton for punishment. DickTurpis (talk) 01:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Please don't. I think he was blocked for lying about RW on the innertubes. Let the block stay. He used to a be sysop, but he abused our trust. ħuman 02:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Let the current block run out, it's not like it's hurting his life or anything not being able to post here. If he wants to talk to us, he can Red Telephone it or send a friggin' email. Or, you know, he can not bother, since I've rarely seen him say anything here that wasn't (1) a clumsy attempt at baiting people, (2) WP-related harassment or (3) idiotic conspiracy theories done in stream-of-consciousness style. --Kels (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sid, to be fair, if you have to say things such as "And my Wikipedia user talk page is not your forum to discuss blocks you received on RationalWiki." and not suggesting other means for him to spam you with, it's difficult for him to contact you elsewhere regarding blocks he received at RW. And if he manages to find you through other means (like knocking on your door) it just make things more creepy. Regarding the block, It's not terribly long anyways. Perhaps should we suggest him to unblock someone else at CP (This provoking TK) for a trade if he really want it to be in a hurry? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- You forget one thing - standing up to TK involves having a spine. Something notably lacking when it comes to Karajerk, Smeg Ed and Red Rob. There's plenty of examples of them bad mouthing TK in the ZB and SDG archives, but they won't say peep to his face. --PsyGremlinSnakk! 17:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- @ K61824, Rob could use his Wp talk page. He could use the "email this user" function here. He could not care and wait it out. The exchange of hostages idea sounds like fun, of course. ħuman 17:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- @ K61824, Rob could use his Wp talk page. He could use the "email this user" function here. He could not care and wait it out. The exchange of hostages idea sounds like fun, of course. ħuman
- You forget one thing - standing up to TK involves having a spine. Something notably lacking when it comes to Karajerk, Smeg Ed and Red Rob. There's plenty of examples of them bad mouthing TK in the ZB and SDG archives, but they won't say peep to his face. --PsyGremlinSnakk! 17:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Here's another nice "Welcome to CP, I know where you live!"img from TheKunt. PS. Why would any of this be an issue to Rob or Karajoujou? Rob's a dishonest suck-up twat, and Kaja's a parodist. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 22:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- he could be guessing the guy's location based on his name "JimFullerton", but TK's track record would suggest that he'd have
abused CheckUser to confirm his location. By odd coincidence I recall some guy named Terry Koeckritz complaining about people linking his name to the online persona of some sociopathic fruitcake. Kind of rich considering his liberal usage of CheckUser. --Ask me about our sceptre 08:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- he could be guessing the guy's location based on his name "JimFullerton", but TK's track record would suggest that he'd have
- Sid, to be fair, if you have to say things such as "And my Wikipedia user talk page is not your forum to discuss blocks you received on RationalWiki." and not suggesting other means for him to spam you with, it's difficult for him to contact you elsewhere regarding blocks he received at RW. And if he manages to find you through other means (like knocking on your door) it just make things more creepy. Regarding the block, It's not terribly long anyways. Perhaps should we suggest him to unblock someone else at CP (This provoking TK) for a trade if he really want it to be in a hurry? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Let the current block run out, it's not like it's hurting his life or anything not being able to post here. If he wants to talk to us, he can Red Telephone it or send a friggin' email. Or, you know, he can not bother, since I've rarely seen him say anything here that wasn't (1) a clumsy attempt at baiting people, (2) WP-related harassment or (3) idiotic conspiracy theories done in stream-of-consciousness style. --Kels (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Please don't. I think he was blocked for lying about RW on the innertubes. Let the block stay. He used to a be sysop, but he abused our trust. ħuman
- I'm about ready to give Rob one last chance to be a part of our dysfunctional community, if he can learn to keep Wikipedia discussions at Wikipedia. What can I say? I'm a glutton for punishment. DickTurpis (talk) 01:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- In related news, Rob would like to be unblocked here (see this now archived thread) so he can continue to drag Wikipedia discussions to RationalWiki. Oh, but he's really just trying to help us, and we've been so terribly unfair, and he's never edited in bad faith anywhere, and we should show tolerance for diversity, and I should show more good faith, and I should be more neutral by arguing his case, and blah blah blah. --Sid (talk) 00:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
J "Johnny Boy" patt[edit]
Is he a parodist, or just a genuinely fucked-up little man? I mean what the hell is this shit all about Evil Liberal Funded Projectsimg? Normally, using the phrase 'evil liberal' marks someone out as an over-zealous parodist, but in this case I'm not so sure. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 21:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. He told me he is a deep cover parodist. Nutty Roux (talk) 21:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think he is a parodist. Based on his facebook profile, I take him as a typical redneck conservative. Keegscee (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think someone once called JPratt a reverse Poe. Person so nutty that you think he must be a parodist, but sadly enough he's the real deal. Vulpius (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- It isn't projects that are funded by Evil Liberals, it's Evil Projects that are funded by liberals. Broccoli (talk) 00:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's been a long debate about whether or not lil Johnny boy is for real. Sadly, it would appear as if he really is a genuine fucktard. --PsyGremlinTal! 17:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- It isn't projects that are funded by Evil Liberals, it's Evil Projects that are funded by liberals. Broccoli (talk) 00:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think someone once called JPratt a reverse Poe. Person so nutty that you think he must be a parodist, but sadly enough he's the real deal. Vulpius (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think he is a parodist. Based on his facebook profile, I take him as a typical redneck conservative. Keegscee (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Best edit comment ever![edit]
Very low-brow, and clearly nothing but an honest typo, but it made me laugh!img DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 23:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Andy is having a bad dayimg with edit comments. Keegscee (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Orthonormal eigenbasis as distinct from orthogonal eigenbasis?????? Andy, do you have any idea what the fuck you are talking about? Give it up! Gauss (talk) 04:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also strange is that each eigenthing has its own page... eigenvalue, eigenvector, eigenbasis, and there was eigenspace too until Douglas deleted it. Why not just give the definition of all the stuff together, given that there's only really one definition? We also find nullspace, nullity, kernel, rank, and image all on separate pages, when it would take all of a paragraph to define them coherently together. The whole linear algebra category is just a mess of stubs, half of them misleading at best. Wish I'd fixed it up a bit while I was there. --MarkGall (talk) 04:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Andy seems to be putting together a linear algebra page full of links, many of them red, to every phrase he can think of. He's going to get the spectral theorem written about? Who is he going to get to write these things? Foxtrot? "Professor" "99th percentile on math SAT's" Poor? You (MarkGall)? SamHB? Jaques? LemonPeel? Robert? DanielB? BRichtigen? Dieb? PatrickD? WilliamBeason? They're all gone! Only JacobB is left, and he appears to have been muzzled. And with TK reverting those few contributions that still happen, it doesn't look promising for Andy's linear algebra category to get filled out any time soon. Gauss (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also strange is that each eigenthing has its own page... eigenvalue, eigenvector, eigenbasis, and there was eigenspace too until Douglas deleted it. Why not just give the definition of all the stuff together, given that there's only really one definition? We also find nullspace, nullity, kernel, rank, and image all on separate pages, when it would take all of a paragraph to define them coherently together. The whole linear algebra category is just a mess of stubs, half of them misleading at best. Wish I'd fixed it up a bit while I was there. --MarkGall (talk) 04:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Orthonormal eigenbasis as distinct from orthogonal eigenbasis?????? Andy, do you have any idea what the fuck you are talking about? Give it up! Gauss (talk) 04:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not as good as his classic, pseudo-Shakespearean "moare", but it'll do. DickTurpis (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- They can't have just one page because each page just references the others, if they all were put together then he would have to explain what they are, and he clearly doesn't understand that. --Opcn (talk) 06:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because... Andy is prepping to give us the greatest lulz ever! "Critical Stupidity in Math"! ħuman 07:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I admit I have not studied maths for the best part of 15 years, but I thought I had a fairly clear idea what eigenvalues and eigenvectors are. Having read the CP page I had to go to Wikipedia and read their page to check, and reassure myself that I wasn't going mad, because the CP descriptions completely confused me. Now this may, of course, be down to me being inept, but I'm not totally convinced that is the case :) Worm(t | c) 09:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because... Andy is prepping to give us the greatest lulz ever! "Critical Stupidity in Math"! ħuman
- They can't have just one page because each page just references the others, if they all were put together then he would have to explain what they are, and he clearly doesn't understand that. --Opcn (talk) 06:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not as good as his classic, pseudo-Shakespearean "moare", but it'll do. DickTurpis (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone know the names of the first editors that came from Conservapedia?[edit]
I'm writing a song for Conservapedia: Teh Musical called "Trolls on the Other Side" which is about ColinR getting CP editors on his side, I was wondering if anyone had the names, or could direct me to where i could find the names of these editors? If you could help, it would be very much appreciated. --Skeptical Moonbat is Skeptical (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- See here, and here. Many now gone. :-( --BobSpring is sprung! 15:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Making Karajou Funny (Redux)[edit]
Well, if he's going to keep on drawing them, it is our duty to at least make 'em funny. --PsyGremlinParlez! 17:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Taking the urine[edit]
Now. Andy is a bit of a male domestic fowl who fails to teach mathematics, but this twat shouldn't be allowed glue, let alone sharp things:
On another note, speaking of the source material, how is this guy even making that comparison with a straight face? Modern video games sell for $60. Movie tickets average between 10 and 12. When you divide out the differences, that comes to about 5 million, 166 thousand, 167 units for GTA. and about 4 million, 916 thousand, 967 individual ticket sales for Spiderman, which was hardly a record setter. GTA still sold more units, but it's not nearly the beatdown this guy is making it out to be. Not to mention, when you add the difference in audiences (Nobody buys a video game on its second weekend because they don't like a crowded living room) the comparison is further sunk.
Sphincter (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Any particular reason you started a new section for this? Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 01:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I should think it was the sudden realisation how really batshit Andy is. Sometimes you just have to shout from the top of a hill - or create a new section. 06:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- He's not trashing Andy. He's trashing SirChuckB. I'm just a bit curious as to why he chose to make this passive-aggressive maneuver rather than addressing SirChuckB directly. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 18:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I should think it was the sudden realisation how really batshit Andy is. Sometimes you just have to shout from the top of a hill - or create a new section. 06:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I started this because it was the latest in a long line of stuff by people who think they are cleverer than Andy but post like the moron he is. Passive aggressive? No, slightly aggressive. You male domestic fowl. Sphincter (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Calling a guy a twat without referring to him by name strikes me as pretty passive-aggressive, but whatever. Is there a particular reason why you find that comment so stupid? Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 23:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- No kidding. If you have a problem with my analysis, how about you state your actual objections rather than just make snide comments and reposting my material. Pull your head out of your username and stop trolling. PS, what the hell does Andy even have to do with that post? SirChuckBCall the FBI 07:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Why do we care about Conservapedia?[edit]
Over the last month I've started to wonder why I'm paying attention to Conservapedia at all. Nevermind that their intellectual quality is moribund; that they continually raise arguments and points that are divorced from reality; that the things they say and write are so far removed from Christianity that they are arguably not Christian. Nevermind all that. What's troubling me is that I'm paying attention to a bunch of hacks and whack jobs who are not even taken seriously within the conservative movement. I might get some smug satisfaction in ridiculing and laughing at Conservapedians; but since they don't really matter: why do I care? Why do any of us?
I can see the early days of RW's focus on CP, when they were new and fun to taunt. As time as gone on, though, it really does seem like--as one person put it on here--punching children in the face. Every one of us could name ridiculousness both small ("a normal person's fist response isn't to litigate" - what Bizarro World America does TK live in?!) to large (the 'Ban fags from hospitals but nobody else' reasoning of Andy Schlafly). But so what? These guys don't matter. I also don't like Aryan Nation, the Hutarees or the Nation of Islam, but none of those groups matter, either. So...why am I stuck watching third-rate conservatives masking hatred in biblical verses?
Not really a point, as much as open fretting. --Leotardo (talk) 14:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- In the old days, you used to be able to pay a fee and go and laugh at the crazies in Bedlam. However, thanks to the internet in general, and CP in particular, we can laugh at the crazies for free. EddyP (talk) 14:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- (EC)For me, it's not so much the political persuasion of the place so much as the downright idiocy of the administrators though. Aryan Nation and Nation of Islam aren't enough in the public mainstream to be taken as acceptable, whereas Conservapedia is. They're something far closer to home, as far more people in the West would undoubtedly identify with being a conservative or fundamentalist Christian rather than an outright white supremacist (as with Aryan Nation). Not to mention the personal psychology behind Andrew Schlafly publicly making a twat out of himself, refusing to acknowledge defeat, blocking anyone that challenges him, and all the while claiming to be "rational." SJ Debaser 14:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think I've made this point before, but I think people pay attention to it because Schalfly teaches. If it wasn't for this, he'd just be another whack-job on the internet, but the homeschooling brings the sad reality home for many people. Thus making it more a more compelling car crash. bomination 14:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I rather think it depends on who you mean by "we". I've been around as long as anybody and I lost interest some time in 2008 I think.--BobSpring is sprung! 14:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know, and I also enjoy the mocking (and I certainly enjoy reading the witty gems on this page), but I guess I'm...getting bored with CP? I would understand more so if this was, like, Newt Gingrich's Conservapedia. It would be more mainstream, and might actually have an impact. Instead, Koekritz, Schlafly, Poor et al. come across as Hutarees with a blog. It's incredibly delightful that they are willfully ignorant of how they come across (on the 'Best of the Public' article they actually use the Lenski dialogue as a victory for themselves - lulz). I dunno... I think that I am concerned that my intelligence, creativity and focus could be better spent on people and ideas that are actually having impact; as opposed to people who are generally disavowed (certainly rarely cited) by the movement of which they claim to be part. It's like focusing on Westboro Baptist Church as an actual threat to gay rights, when evidence is that the opposite is true. --Leotardo (talk) 14:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Personally I think it is a fascinating case study of the views of the Evangelical/Fundamentalist mindset here in America. There are a great many people who actually believe all the conspiracy theory and unsubstantiated, religiously motivated misinformation that is regularly featured on CP. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 17:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I find that interesting, too, particularly in the context of all the 'liberal deceit' they talk about. This seems relevant to the Conservapedia banhammer. --Leotardo (talk) 18:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Very good article. And as far as CP, while in some quarters here it may seem like an obsession, there are also people who spend all their time dealing with other loonies, some more and some less "influential". ħuman 20:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- The "letters", or comments, are also very well worth reading, especially in the context raised here. ħuman 02:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- The "letters", or comments, are also very well worth reading, especially in the context raised here. ħuman
- Very good article. And as far as CP, while in some quarters here it may seem like an obsession, there are also people who spend all their time dealing with other loonies, some more and some less "influential". ħuman
- Funnily enough, I find it interesting from the other side of the pond where this kind of stuff is so wacko as to be laughable. Same with ASK. It's pretty much my only exposure to it. Ajkgordon (talk) 20:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's laughable on this side of the pond as well. Keegscee (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I feel as though CP is a few months ahead of the Teabaggers and Gop fundies--Thanatos (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Funny thing is, CP has literally no influence among the Tea Party set, they are generally ignored by conservatives of all stripes. Their Conservative Bible Project killed any goodwill the fundamentalists had towards them. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- I feel as though CP is a few months ahead of the Teabaggers and Gop fundies--Thanatos (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's laughable on this side of the pond as well. Keegscee (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I find that interesting, too, particularly in the context of all the 'liberal deceit' they talk about. This seems relevant to the Conservapedia banhammer. --Leotardo (talk) 18:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Personally I think it is a fascinating case study of the views of the Evangelical/Fundamentalist mindset here in America. There are a great many people who actually believe all the conspiracy theory and unsubstantiated, religiously motivated misinformation that is regularly featured on CP. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 17:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think I've made this point before, but I think people pay attention to it because Schalfly teaches. If it wasn't for this, he'd just be another whack-job on the internet, but the homeschooling brings the sad reality home for many people. Thus making it more a more compelling car crash.
- (EC)For me, it's not so much the political persuasion of the place so much as the downright idiocy of the administrators though. Aryan Nation and Nation of Islam aren't enough in the public mainstream to be taken as acceptable, whereas Conservapedia is. They're something far closer to home, as far more people in the West would undoubtedly identify with being a conservative or fundamentalist Christian rather than an outright white supremacist (as with Aryan Nation). Not to mention the personal psychology behind Andrew Schlafly publicly making a twat out of himself, refusing to acknowledge defeat, blocking anyone that challenges him, and all the while claiming to be "rational." SJ Debaser 14:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I care about mocking CP because these people are in MY country voting for who they think are "fit" leaders. I don't want idiots running my country and these people promote it --rational ghey (send a message) 21:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- For me it's a case of "Know your enemy". The American Conservative "mind" is beginning to appear in the UK and I want to be prepared. Plus, no matter how many times I think things are getting predictable over at CP, Terry Koeckritz and Ken always come up with something laughable. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 22:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- As Einstein said, stupidity is forever --rational ghey (send a message) 22:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Honestly speaking, I feel like CP is a good place to learn English. That is, if I got some other place to ask about it like here. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- As Einstein said, stupidity is forever --rational ghey (send a message) 22:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- For me, I started for the reason Armondikov mentioned - this was supposed to be a site for homeschoolers, and the thought of this being fed to them as "the truth" made me want to get in the mix and at least challenge some of the more onerous bullshit. As I sit on the sidelines now and watch others there, it makes me wonder why I even tried, but it was interesting while it lasted. As for Schlafly, he's still invited to places like Rutgers University to represent the conservative view on issues like healthcare, and it boggles me why anyone other than his mom and the CP sysops consider him a credible spokesman for conservatives. If he shows up anywhere I can get to, I'll be there to question him in person on the Schlafly Statistics and other B.S. he pretends is critical thinking. --SpinyNorman (talk) 02:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
For me it's the lulz and only the lulz. If CP didn't make me laugh on a regular basis I just wouldn't fucking bother. ONE / TALK 08:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's all lulz for me. Perhaps at some point CP had the potential to be a serious place for espousing conservative principles, but it quickly descended in to a nest of paranoia and lies in support of the personal gripes of its main bloggers. I do find it fascinating that they may actually believe what they write, and aside from comedy, the sole purpose of CP is to remind us of the dangers of uncritical thinking and unchecked power. I was thinking about Andy the other day and wondered how he'd behave if given real power to support his whacky views. Would be draw back from the brink or would he deal with "liberals" in the way that Stalin dealt with dissenters? I honestly don't know, since it depends on how sincere Andy is in his beliefs. He has clearly dehumanised everyone who disagrees with him, and that leads down a troubling path. --Ask me about our nuclear reactor 09:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
regarding the facebook attention[edit]
Holy shit. I checked because my last edit took so long to process. ħuman 02:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Still crunching numbers but it looks like the second wave of hits roughly doubled the previous spike which was several orders of magnitude greater than our usual traffic. About 40,000 people accessed our site on the 26th. tmtoulouse 05:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- For those of us not in the know, what's happening to draw in all this traffic? --Opcn (talk) 05:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Facebook, to one of our tumbleweeds articles. See Saloon Bar maybe? ħuman 09:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- How long until Human appears on the Colbert show? Basic math would suggest it should happen twice as fast as it did for Conservapedia, since we are twice as popular right now this very second, but that would result in Human speaking at very high frequencies and not being heard. We should reconsider this. Mei (talk) 19:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Facebook, to one of our tumbleweeds articles. See Saloon Bar maybe? ħuman
- For those of us not in the know, what's happening to draw in all this traffic? --Opcn (talk) 05:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oops. Sore point![edit]
"I notice your[sic] a Wikipedia Adminimg Says QK (real name & last initial?) to Ed. 05:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- Thatimg was surreal. Where's the fucking magic capture button in the edit box? I cam't spel camture enouf to do it ħuman 09:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Latest Canada WIGO[edit]
I'm not sure the latest WIGO quite captures the insanity of Ken's news post. I understand Wayne Gretzky is from Canada and I understand he is arguably the best hockey player of all time (I personally think Mario Lemieux was better in his prime), but what does "the Wayne Gretzky of Canadian creation science" even mean? Is he referring to himself? Please, someone help me understand. Keegscee (talk) 09:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ken is just ill. He really needs to see his doctor, and TAKE HIS FUCKING MEDS! ħuman 09:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's baffling, but he does have a fairly high opinion of himself. I'm confused by the YouTube link in the edit comment. Any idea why he'd link to a fairly uneventful video of a train? --Ask me about our nob 09:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- My guess is that he thinks the anti-evolution and anti-abortion movements are like runaway trains: once they start, they can't be stopped. Keegscee (talk) 09:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Would have been more apt if the video featuring Ken, on a moped, racing through the crossing in the belief that trains do not actually exist. Sure I'd feel some sympathy for him, but the only purpose Ken could possible serve is as a cautionary tale. Kids, eat your greens and stay in school or you'll end up like Ken! --Ask me about our osteoporosis 10:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Minor point, but he spelled Gretzky's name in two different ways in the same headline! First he spells it "Gretzky" then spells it "Gretsky". 72.224.42.45 (talk) 11:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- And it was never fixed. ħuman 20:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- And it was never fixed. ħuman
- Minor point, but he spelled Gretzky's name in two different ways in the same headline! First he spells it "Gretzky" then spells it "Gretsky". 72.224.42.45 (talk) 11:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Would have been more apt if the video featuring Ken, on a moped, racing through the crossing in the belief that trains do not actually exist. Sure I'd feel some sympathy for him, but the only purpose Ken could possible serve is as a cautionary tale. Kids, eat your greens and stay in school or you'll end up like Ken! --
- My guess is that he thinks the anti-evolution and anti-abortion movements are like runaway trains: once they start, they can't be stopped. Keegscee (talk) 09:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's baffling, but he does have a fairly high opinion of himself. I'm confused by the YouTube link in the edit comment. Any idea why he'd link to a fairly uneventful video of a train? --
I,m not gonna go diff hunting, but sometime last year Conservative was giving shout-outs to some Canuck YEC blogger, part of one of the "Operations." That guy was the Gretzky reference... P-Foster (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think the funniest part is the general "Screw CP, it's MY ARTICLES that matter!" tone to the whole thing. CP is merely an annoying necessity to getting his own work known far and wide. --Kels (talk) 14:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Should we get Gretzky to file a lawsuit against CP for using his name inappropriately? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
ZOMGimg — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- I see he's (presumably)reinserted it and ANDY's (presumably) removed it [oversighted out of view but the edit size indicates that's what happened.] 22:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- They have no idea what a wiki even IS, do they? But yeah, I love it when they snap at that ridiculous little bigot. -- YossarianThe Man from the USSR 00:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- They have no idea what a wiki even IS, do they? But yeah, I love it when they snap at that ridiculous little bigot. --
The site is growing shrinking rapidly[edit]
I see new sysop, Douglas Adams... oops... sorry, DouglasA has gone on another deletion spree.img I wonder how Ed will take having his "My Neighbor Totoro"img deleted because it's "pop-culture"? Especially now that we've proven that "Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon"img isn't pop culture.--PsyGremlinZungumza! 17:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Isn't it Douglas Allenby? He does list his email address is dg.allenby. Keegscee (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because no one ever makes up a name to go with an initial--Opcn (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- His name is Brian Ugler. His name is Brian Ugler. His name is Brian Ugler. Nutty Roux (talk) 19:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Haha! Nutty wins the thread, I think. Tetronian you're clueless 20:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh god, why did you need to remind me of Ed's weirdness? Professor Moriarty 19:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Who is the "Troublemaker/Troll/Liar" whose articles are being deleted? Most of those anime articles were created by JessicaT, who was certainly not a troll. This alone suggests that Doug is either an idiot, a vandal or a power-mad nut. Maybe all three. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 20:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've no idea what he's really up to there, but it's damn amusing. He's deleted a lot of cruft as well as some fairly significant articles. cp:Adventure remains (tip for you there, Douglas) but Ed Poor's writing is a tribute second only to a lunatic writing it in human shit on the side of a dead horse. --Ask me about our pizza 21:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh that is truly a thing of beauty, watching Douglas delete all those articles. So now, thanks to him, the "trustworthy encyclopaedia" has even less info. Still, at least he's saving them from liberal multi-culturism. I love the "untrustworthy" because he's too stupid or too lazy to Google a couple of facts. As parodists go, I'd say he heads the list of doing the most damage to CP. Maybe we should e-mail him a list of articles to delete, i.e. all of them, except for Ken's abortions. His scatter gun approach is commendable too - he just deletes half the emperors and leaves the rest. Still, he hasn't found the Battleship Big Penis yet. --PsyGremlinParla! 17:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've no idea what he's really up to there, but it's damn amusing. He's deleted a lot of cruft as well as some fairly significant articles. cp:Adventure remains (tip for you there, Douglas) but Ed Poor's writing is a tribute second only to a lunatic writing it in human shit on the side of a dead horse. --
- Who is the "Troublemaker/Troll/Liar" whose articles are being deleted? Most of those anime articles were created by JessicaT, who was certainly not a troll. This alone suggests that Doug is either an idiot, a vandal or a power-mad nut. Maybe all three. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 20:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- His name is Brian Ugler. His name is Brian Ugler. His name is Brian Ugler. Nutty Roux (talk) 19:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because no one ever makes up a name to go with an initial--Opcn (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Addendum. Douggie-baby says he hasn't deleted Sailor Moon, because Ed is a "long-standing administrator and a valued contributor to the encyclopedia". Parodist. 'nuff said. --PsyGremlin말하십시오 18:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Wow. DouglasA's not finished yet. How does that stand up to scrutiny, I wonder. I'm waiting with bated breath to see his end-game. JacobB's too. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- The only rationale I can think of is that somebody (i.e. TK) has bullied the other sysops into agreeing that every article ever created by a banned user is suspect and must be deleted. That saves TK from having to actually do work and check facts, plus it plays along with his soopah seekrit plan to bring CP down from the inside. Douglas Adams appears to be his willing sidekick.
- Btw.. how did user QK manage to slip through the cracks. Don't they have "similar to existing user" block reason? --PsyGremlinZungumza! 18:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Wow. DouglasA's not finished yet. How does that stand up to scrutiny, I wonder. I'm waiting with bated breath to see his end-game. JacobB's too. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh hell, he is deleting all of JessicaT's articles! I guess he saw that she was blocked and decided that all those articles were fair game. I don't know about this one . . . he could be a parodist, but I'm getting the feeling that he's just a complete and utter moron. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 18:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I just had a thought. Andy and co. have been announcing more and more openly political projects, such as the big abortion project going on now. Conversely, there has been no real effort to beef up the encyclopedic part of the encyclopedia since the ill-fated article creation drives. While I doubt that Andy has actually endorsed DouglasA's deletion spree, I wouldn't be shocked if Andy at least approves of it. If Andy has finally given up any pretense of being a true alternative to Wikipedia, then this rampage might actually be in line with his "vision." They're going to destroy CP in order to fulfill Andy's ideal. Of course, I may just be thinking this because it's amusing to picture Andy smiling as his project collapses around him. Colonel of Squirrels白山羊不山羊。商讨。 19:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- All that hard work... ''*sniff*'' I need a hug. --PsyGremlinPrata! 17:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ah but: "Troublemaker/Troll/Liar: Serial material thief"!!!!
19:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- Jessica was real - I know this because she even posted a photo of her and her sister. :p I liked Jessica Kotomi. But no matter, some of those articles they deleted were pretty good, and better than a lot of the crud they are keeping on the site. Refugeetalk page 00:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- i think deleted article is a pretty cool guy. eh kills ignorance and doesnt affraid of anything. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Jessica was real - I know this because she even posted a photo of her and her sister. :p I liked Jessica Kotomi. But no matter, some of those articles they deleted were pretty good, and better than a lot of the crud they are keeping on the site. Refugeetalk page 00:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ah but: "Troublemaker/Troll/Liar: Serial material thief"!!!!
- All that hard work... ''*sniff*'' I need a hug. --PsyGremlinPrata! 17:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Aah, so that's why[edit]
(added reference tag so references show up)img. He's learning this wikitalk, isn't he? 19:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk
- He's also starting to sound like Ken. -- YossarianThe Man from the USSR 22:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, that's how I write my comments. I'm kind of hurt now :'(
Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 18:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, that's how I write my comments. I'm kind of hurt now :'(
this is going to be good[edit]
That Noah's Ark thing has sprung up againimg...perhaps they should try this link Jammy (talk) 21:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Omg dude put it up there. That is going to be AMAZINGLY funny! --rational ghey (send a message) 21:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- How many times now has the "Ark" been discovered in the Turkish mountains? Feels like four, but I think I'm underestimating. --YossarianSpeak, Memory 22:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Andy should demand to see the data behind the claims and request to be sent some of the beams. Acei9 22:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- There is no data, just a bunch of people in the putative structure taking photos. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I read that carbon dating revealed that the wooden structure is ~5000 years old. That's right, the same carbon dating that YECs deny when determining the age of anything over ~6000 years. Keegscee (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Carbon14 was underage when the world was created and could not give consent to being in wood. 23:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC) C®ackeЯ
- I wonder if they have checked it against the result given by Dendrochronology. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Carbon14 was underage when the world was created and could not give consent to being in wood. 23:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC) C®ackeЯ
- I read that carbon dating revealed that the wooden structure is ~5000 years old. That's right, the same carbon dating that YECs deny when determining the age of anything over ~6000 years. Keegscee (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- There is no data, just a bunch of people in the putative structure taking photos. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 23:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Andy should demand to see the data behind the claims and request to be sent some of the beams. Acei9 22:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- How many times now has the "Ark" been discovered in the Turkish mountains? Feels like four, but I think I'm underestimating. --YossarianSpeak, Memory 22:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Terry Hurlbutt blogged that it was a hoax and linked to his blog from mainpageright today. ħuman 21:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- You said "Hurlbutt". Sorry but that name always cracks me up. Lily Inspirate me. 07:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm no photography buff....[edit]
but is this not the worst picture of the Statue of Liberty that you have ever seen? Keegscee (talk) 22:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not only a pretty awful picture--at least from the perspective of showcasing it as a "world treasure"--but he's set the pixels too large, rendering it blurry and even less attractive. -- YossarianThe Man from the USSR 00:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Somehow they are more interested in her ass than her face... but then again, did they take that picture all the way from New Jersey (as hinted by the caption)? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Personally, I have trouble finding anything attractive when its primary purpose is for pooping. Keegscee (talk) 00:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's awfully sad, Keegscee. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware the Statue of Liberty was used for pooping, Keegscee : ) Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 00:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it is closer to New Jersey, but it doesn't suck, so it's part of New York. --Opcn (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's not that bad a pic if you're doing an article about New York Harbor or maybe Liberty Island itself. If it's about the statue itself, then it's an awful pic. --Kels (talk) 01:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's a very nice pictureimg. So shut up! 01:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC) SusanG (oops)
- Haha. Hi TK! Keegscee (talk) 01:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's an awful picture, but I have a worse one, that I took with an Instamatic from the QE2 in July 1969. On top of being poor quality, the print has been disintegrating. ħuman 01:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Typical to see that The Klepto (Terry Koeckritz) doesn't bother with licensing matters when he uploaded the file from Wikimedia Commons, which should be Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. It would be nice to give William Warby his due credit and extend the license to future reproduction. Lily Inspirate me. 07:45, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's an awful picture, but I have a worse one, that I took with an Instamatic from the QE2 in July 1969. On top of being poor quality, the print has been disintegrating. ħuman
- Haha. Hi TK! Keegscee (talk) 01:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's a very nice pictureimg. So shut up! 01:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC) SusanG (oops)
- It's not that bad a pic if you're doing an article about New York Harbor or maybe Liberty Island itself. If it's about the statue itself, then it's an awful pic. --Kels (talk) 01:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it is closer to New Jersey, but it doesn't suck, so it's part of New York. --Opcn (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware the Statue of Liberty was used for pooping, Keegscee : )
- That's awfully sad, Keegscee. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Personally, I have trouble finding anything attractive when its primary purpose is for pooping. Keegscee (talk) 00:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Somehow they are more interested in her ass than her face... but then again, did they take that picture all the way from New Jersey (as hinted by the caption)? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 00:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Punctuation![edit]
I'm not particularly good at finding new stuff on CP (I prefer to leave it to other people to find the stuff, then I'll comment on it, because I'm lazy and useless), but thisimg lovely news item made me laugh. Apart from his source presumably being the german equivilant of the daily mail (referenced through the Christian Broadcast Network which gives it as "A german newspaper", no less), the fact that he uses italics and *three question marks* on the front page news headline of an "encyclopaedia" actually made me nearly choke on my tea. X Stickman (talk) 02:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Nice catch. ħuman 07:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Capt.Sec.Lt. --ZooGuard (talk) 07:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)- Before I clicked your link I thought it must be the work of Ken, but lo and behold it's hoamskoolar-extroodinare Mr Assfly! DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 14:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Wikignorant[edit]
You cannot change it, because it is a linkimg says TK. Or rather you wikidiots just don't know how to. Lily Inspirate me. 09:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Capt. (Ret) –SuspectedReplicant retire me 10:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Has Ken never heard of a preview button?[edit]
Check out the number of intermediate revisions on these edits. – Nick Heer 17:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- No. Next question. --Kels (talk) 18:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- You're obviously
Nick Heernew here, Ken's inability to use preview and to take umpteen edits to get a single post right are well documented. Lily Inspirate me. 18:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)- Those particular two amused me highly, despite it being a discussion point for the nth time. – Nick Heer 04:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. People have been commenting on that for approaching three years now. Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 18:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't like to disclose personal information, but I have it on reasonable authority that Ken lives in a house built out of fireworks and petrol. This would be bad enough, but he also juggles burning torches while editing. It's quite sensible that he saves whenever possible since he'll never know when he and his house will explode in such a dramatic fashion that his neighbours will wonder suspect that Jerry Bruckheimer has come to town. Sorry Ken. I think you'll agree that revealing this information helps explain a situation in which you appear to be a buffoon. --Ask me about our mycobacterium 18:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- "umpteen edits to get a single post right" correct, except for the "getting it right" part. ħuman 19:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's "right" for him, I never said "correct". Lily Inspirate me. 20:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Tbh, I think he does it partly on purpose, since he's a giant attention whore. Same with the constant creation and deletion of empty pages in his sandbox, I think he just hopes someone watching the recent changes will take notice of him. Attention is like boiled hotdogs to him, he lives off it. --GTac (talk) 22:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yay boiled hotdogs!
05:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yay boiled hotdogs!
- Yeah. It's not like anyone but obvious parodists and us interact with him at all. Note all the crap he's posted to Andy's talk page, and yet nobody responds. Not even the "good job" and pat on the head Andy gives to Ed when he sucks up. --Kels (talk) 23:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's like that in the ZB too. There oodles of threats that are just Ken posting something, then replying to himself a dozen times. --PsyGremlinParlez! 23:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Psy means "threads" not "threats", although it's an amusing typo. ħuman 04:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Quoth Pooh: "My spelling is good, but it wobbles and sometimes letters end up in the wrong places." --PsyGremlinPraat! 04:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Psy means "threads" not "threats", although it's an amusing typo. ħuman
- It's like that in the ZB too. There oodles of threats that are just Ken posting something, then replying to himself a dozen times. --PsyGremlinParlez! 23:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Tbh, I think he does it partly on purpose, since he's a giant attention whore. Same with the constant creation and deletion of empty pages in his sandbox, I think he just hopes someone watching the recent changes will take notice of him. Attention is like boiled hotdogs to him, he lives off it. --GTac (talk) 22:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's "right" for him, I never said "correct". Lily Inspirate me. 20:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- "umpteen edits to get a single post right" correct, except for the "getting it right" part. ħuman
- I don't like to disclose personal information, but I have it on reasonable authority that Ken lives in a house built out of fireworks and petrol. This would be bad enough, but he also juggles burning torches while editing. It's quite sensible that he saves whenever possible since he'll never know when he and his house will explode in such a dramatic fashion that his neighbours will wonder suspect that Jerry Bruckheimer has come to town. Sorry Ken. I think you'll agree that revealing this information helps explain a situation in which you appear to be a buffoon. --
- You're obviously
Hitler invades talkpages[edit]
This can't be good. Mei (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That screenshot is an obvious forgery. Keegscee (talk) 21:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- He vos only ensuring zat ze rrrights of ze tok pages vere not... Oh fuck. Godwin. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- /whistles Dambusters tune... --PsyGremlinRunāt! 21:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I personally can't wait to read the articles
HitlerKen is threatening here. Is he really going to write an article on "Richard Dawkins and Caucasian, Liberal, Male, Elitists" based on the evidence of quantcast, a peddler of unreality almost on scale comparable with Ken himself? That'll make Andy's blog even MOAR ENCYCLOPAEDIC! --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 04:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)- I'm looking forward to "Women's views on Richard Dawkins." I am a little interested in seeing why women have a different opinion of him as a group and why this is so important it requires a seperate article. SirChuckBLeave Death Threats Here 04:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, it may very well be the first time on Conservapedia that women's views or women themselves are considered worth listening to. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 18:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm looking forward to "Women's views on Richard Dawkins." I am a little interested in seeing why women have a different opinion of him as a group and why this is so important it requires a seperate article. SirChuckBLeave Death Threats Here 04:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I personally can't wait to read the articles
- /whistles Dambusters tune... --PsyGremlinRunāt! 21:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- He vos only ensuring zat ze rrrights of ze tok pages vere not... Oh fuck. Godwin. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Was Andy a piss artist?[edit]
"The main thing I took away from that is how obnoxious and rowdy Harvard Law Students are. They can't handle their beer at all." That's Greg Laden who was at Harvard at the same time as Obama and presumably Andy. (I am a person not a template) 21:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- So how do you tell the difference between a Harvard Law Student and an American then? Nyer, nyer, nyer. Sorry, a little Colonial Mothership humour there.--
Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 22:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Awesome, but not wigo worthy outed parody[edit]
Ken blocked the editorimg --Opcn (talk) 02:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- lol. Enid Blyton, now JK Rowling. What next/ Capt WE Johns, Dawkins flies undone. --PsyGremlinZungumza! 02:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- (e/c)Already mentioned here, but we also have this!img. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 02:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Adding Enid's contributionimg --PsyGremlinPrata! 02:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Btw, what was wrong with SThutmose's entries. They all looked kosher to me. Maybe it's because ken didn't think of them. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 02:22, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- They are still on the list, Ken deleted books, then remade it at the bottom of the list, then moved it back to the position it was in :/ --Opcn (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Bastard keeps deleting the article, but Richard Dawkins foundation has disappeared. --Opcn (talk) 02:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Now that Kenny's got this bee in his bonnet, can you imagine what a balls-up recent changes is going to be over there, with his endless deleting and recreating and 2 gazillion edits to move a full stop. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 02:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Is there any chance that his actions are why the server is all borken? --03:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Now that Kenny's got this bee in his bonnet, can you imagine what a balls-up recent changes is going to be over there, with his endless deleting and recreating and 2 gazillion edits to move a full stop. --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 02:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Bastard keeps deleting the article, but Richard Dawkins foundation has disappeared. --Opcn (talk) 02:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Someone's asked Ken himself hereimg, but why does he keep deleting and recreating pages? (especially when there's no history on some of them) Does he think it will have some impact on his precious search-engine rankings, or is it just to piss off the other sysops? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 13:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- All shall be revealed in the fullness of time. I used to think he simply did it to take credit as the sole contributor to these articles, but since nowadays, nobody else bothers to join his "projects" anyway, that would be meaningless. Maybe he's clumsily trying to hide the fact that he needs at least a dozen edits to get a single sentence straight? Röstigraben (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- They are still on the list, Ken deleted books, then remade it at the bottom of the list, then moved it back to the position it was in :/ --Opcn (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Btw, what was wrong with SThutmose's entries. They all looked kosher to me. Maybe it's because ken didn't think of them. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 02:22, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Adding Enid's contributionimg --PsyGremlinPrata! 02:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
April 2010[edit]
| vibrant | dormant | somewhat worse |
|---|
larronsicut fur in nocte 13:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, so 10 editors (of which 7 are sysops) are responsible for more than 50% of the edits. And given Ken's new summa Dawkins, that percentage is likely to increase. Yup, the site is growing rapidly. Andy might as well turn off registration and just let the existing goons run free, 'cos that's basically the only people editing there anyway. --PsyGremlinTal! 13:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- What surprised me is that, as far as I can tell without having gone deeply into the numbers, we're twice as active as Citizendium and going up - David Gerard (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter how large RW is relative to CP -- They need the imaginary enemy when RW is smaller (as they accuse away every vandal and troll comes from
RWa certain vandal site), and the persecution complex when RW is larger. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 14:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)- I thought Wikipedia was the "Evil Empire". --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 15:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- No, the evil empire consists of everyone else. We are simply more specific to CP then they would like. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, they must be a pretty busy bunch, because as TK has said, our size is only due to the original 5 or so creators making multiple socks to give the impression of size. Ok... so who's actually operating me then? Come on, fess up. --PsyGremlinPraat! 16:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, Psy. I had to do it to keep our stats up. Alas, at the end of the day, my friend, you are just a figment of my sick librul imagination :P --
19:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Wait... so that means the weird, kinky dreams I've been having are actually your weird, kinky dreams? Phew! --PsyGremlinSprich! 19:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, Psy. I had to do it to keep our stats up. Alas, at the end of the day, my friend, you are just a figment of my sick librul imagination :P --
- Well, they must be a pretty busy bunch, because as TK has said, our size is only due to the original 5 or so creators making multiple socks to give the impression of size. Ok... so who's actually operating me then? Come on, fess up. --PsyGremlinPraat! 16:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- The trouble with Wikipedia as Evil Empire is that it's too obvious it doesn't give a shit, either actively or passively. At least some on RW care - David Gerard (talk) 19:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I added the pics for Citizendium - it's dominated by two handful of editors, and isn't welcoming new editors, neither...
- larronsicut fur in nocte 20:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Wow, that does look bleak for CD. --PsyGremlinPrata! 20:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- It's because it has a silly name. ħuman 21:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- It's because it has a silly name. ħuman
- Wow, that does look bleak for CD. --PsyGremlinPrata! 20:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- CP likes to pretend they are in some David and Goliath battle with Wikipedia, even though you are right, Wikipedia doesn't care. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- No, the evil empire consists of everyone else. We are simply more specific to CP then they would like. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I thought Wikipedia was the "Evil Empire". --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 15:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter how large RW is relative to CP -- They need the imaginary enemy when RW is smaller (as they accuse away every vandal and troll comes from
- What surprised me is that, as far as I can tell without having gone deeply into the numbers, we're twice as active as Citizendium and going up - David Gerard (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
@k61824 - RW needs CP as much as (or more than) CP needs RW. It is amusing that a site devoted to satirizing another site becomes much larger and healthier than the original target. What will RW do when CP goes down? Bluefish (talk) 04:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Survive on our mainspace, which is why we are getting bigger anyway. 04:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
HSMom[edit]
Returns after a 4 month leave of absence sanity. --PsyGremlinFale! 19:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- [1] 4 posts on mainpage talk about grammar. --Opcn (talk) 19:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Holy shitimg --Opcn (talk) 19:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- EC'd me on that! Op. (I am a person not a template) 19:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oh my God, it's ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!! SJ Debaser 19:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- on her talkimg--Opcn (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- And once again, Terry Koeckritz demonstrates that a small, small man can be an enormous cunt. --PsyGremlinSermā! 20:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Lol. JPratt addsimg a mangled word salad to the Arizona guv'nor's article (I honestly can't tell if the first paragraph is for or against her). Good ol' HSMom (dammit, why did she back down to TK?) has to go and cleanimg itimg allimg up.img Remind me again which one's the administrator at an encyclopaedia. --PsyGremlinSprich! 22:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- And little Johnny's response? Straight from the Terry Koeckritz book of manners. Yeah, yeah, just fix it.img Loads of fucking chivalry going on on CP these days. Not to mention the sulky little twat can't even get the correction right. Try "with wild allegations of racism and civil liberties' infringements." You're welcome. --PsyGremlinSprich! 23:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- The CP male sysops aren't going to be chivalrous towards a woman unless she is already completely subservient. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. Cookies or a sammich & beer before referring to her as a human being is teh rulz of chivalry. ħuman 01:19, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. Cookies or a sammich & beer before referring to her as a human being is teh rulz of chivalry. ħuman
- Lol. JPratt addsimg a mangled word salad to the Arizona guv'nor's article (I honestly can't tell if the first paragraph is for or against her). Good ol' HSMom (dammit, why did she back down to TK?) has to go and cleanimg itimg allimg up.img Remind me again which one's the administrator at an encyclopaedia. --PsyGremlinSprich! 22:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- And once again, Terry Koeckritz demonstrates that a small, small man can be an enormous cunt. --PsyGremlinSermā! 20:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- on her talkimg--Opcn (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oh my God, it's ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!! SJ Debaser 19:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- EC'd me on that! Op.
- Holy shitimg --Opcn (talk) 19:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Anyone take a look at the Barack Obama article recently?[edit]
How long has it said that he was named after her second husband at birth? To my knowledge she was married to Obama Sr. at the time. and stayed married for a few years, and had not met Soetoro. --Opcn (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, that's just crazy Bobby doing his thing again. Notice how he uses Pravda (yes, the commmie rag) as a reference for the Barry Soetoro thing. But my, what a hate-filled screed that article is. --PsyGremlinTal! 21:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but even his sources don't say that. --Opcn (talk) 22:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I want to marry HSMom, so she can have my babies.img --PsyGremlinSpeak! 22:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Personally the part about how Obama pronounces Pakistan as evidence of his soooper-secret Muslim faith is the most hilarious. Thanks to CP I have now learned that I too am a Muslim as I pronounce Pakistan the same way as the President, who knew that was the real way to become a member instead of all that believing in Allah shtick. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 23:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I bet you don't dance either. Another dead give away. --PsyGremlinSprich! 23:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Personally the part about how Obama pronounces Pakistan as evidence of his soooper-secret Muslim faith is the most hilarious. Thanks to CP I have now learned that I too am a Muslim as I pronounce Pakistan the same way as the President, who knew that was the real way to become a member instead of all that believing in Allah shtick. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 23:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I want to marry HSMom, so she can have my babies.img --PsyGremlinSpeak! 22:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but even his sources don't say that. --Opcn (talk) 22:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Richard Dawkins Project[edit]
It seems Ken is about to start a new progressive rock band continue breaking articles up into dozens of stubs. Why is he so concerned about Richard Dawkins if he's not secretly lusting for him? Röstigraben (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- TerryH, might be interested in spearheading the start of a Conservapedia Anti-Evolution Project as well for those who are interested. I am sure I could generate a list of 100-150 topics for this subject. Great idea Ken. Create 150 red links for parodists to fill in. Lily Inspirate me. 09:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That 'why is he so concerned'? argument has to be one of the weakest I've seen in quite some time. We could all come up with a few examples along those lines I'm sure - ie. Why are Conservapedians so concerned about evolution when they don't believe it exists? Worm(t | c) 10:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear. Looks like it could be another long session for Ken. Expect some real crackers as the sleep deprivation takes its toll. Lily Inspirate me. 11:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well at least with his "anti-evolution project" he is finally being honest about the fact that his Evolution articles are just anti-science screeds by a fundamentalist. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 13:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Surely someone on here is on the RDF forums, I think someone should put up a thread over there linking to the RDP and to other relevant resources here, I'm sure they would get a kick out of contemplating exactly how the matrix is being completed. --Opcn (talk) 23:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Whilst it was obviously nothing to do with me, I think a Richard Dawkins / Enid Blyton mashup produces some interesting titles!img –SuspectedReplicant retire me 01:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Someone needs to tell me, is it funnier if parodists fill the matrix in Ken's project, or is it funnier if the links stay red forever? --Opcn (talk) 05:13, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Nuts, strolled over to post on the forum and they've been 'read only pending the new website' since Feb.He apologises for it here. Popped it on his FaceBook page instead. --PsyGremlin말하십시오 05:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Someone needs to tell me, is it funnier if parodists fill the matrix in Ken's project, or is it funnier if the links stay red forever? --Opcn (talk) 05:13, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Whilst it was obviously nothing to do with me, I think a Richard Dawkins / Enid Blyton mashup produces some interesting titles!img –SuspectedReplicant retire me 01:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Surely someone on here is on the RDF forums, I think someone should put up a thread over there linking to the RDP and to other relevant resources here, I'm sure they would get a kick out of contemplating exactly how the matrix is being completed. --Opcn (talk) 23:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well at least with his "anti-evolution project" he is finally being honest about the fact that his Evolution articles are just anti-science screeds by a fundamentalist. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 13:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear. Looks like it could be another long session for Ken. Expect some real crackers as the sleep deprivation takes its toll. Lily Inspirate me. 11:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- That 'why is he so concerned'? argument has to be one of the weakest I've seen in quite some time. We could all come up with a few examples along those lines I'm sure - ie. Why are Conservapedians so concerned about evolution when they don't believe it exists? Worm(t | c) 10:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Ed again[edit]
Because we all watch Fort Apacheimg to see the daughter who wears pretty clothes and pouts. --PsyGremlinParla! 14:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've had enough of creepy Ed. So help me god, if I ever find out he's in contact with children I will make appropriate notifications. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Someone help me make sense of this.... TK goes on a deleting binge, getting rid of everything that is "pop culture." His habits has become so deep that parodists are now picking it up and copying, like they do with Andy's batshit logic. At the same time, Ed keeps creating "articles" that are nothing more than movie reviews ("The picture is saved by John Wayne? Really ED?) as Ed just kind of live blogs his life. How do these things work out? Why doesn't Andy just divide CP into sysops spaces and let them do whatever the hell they want so long as they keep off each other's grass. SirChuckBI have very poor judgement 18:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Such a division would be an admission that the blog has descended in to some kind of odd Lord of the Flies situation. Everything is working fine, and perhaps the problem is that you don't fully understand the genius of Ed's in-depth study of young girls in the popular media. Open your mind! --Ask me about our hobgoblin 19:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Someone should hack into Ed's Netflix account and add the box set of Little House on the Prairie. Assuming he doesn't already own it. Ew! ħuman 19:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Someone should hack into Ed's Netflix account and add the box set of Little House on the Prairie. Assuming he doesn't already own it. Ew! ħuman
- Such a division would be an admission that the blog has descended in to some kind of odd Lord of the Flies situation. Everything is working fine, and perhaps the problem is that you don't fully understand the genius of Ed's in-depth study of young girls in the popular media. Open your mind! --
- Someone help me make sense of this.... TK goes on a deleting binge, getting rid of everything that is "pop culture." His habits has become so deep that parodists are now picking it up and copying, like they do with Andy's batshit logic. At the same time, Ed keeps creating "articles" that are nothing more than movie reviews ("The picture is saved by John Wayne? Really ED?) as Ed just kind of live blogs his life. How do these things work out? Why doesn't Andy just divide CP into sysops spaces and let them do whatever the hell they want so long as they keep off each other's grass. SirChuckBI have very poor judgement 18:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't resist "watching" Fort Apache via Ed's diff-by-diff updates (yep, I have no life!) and discovered that Ed left us with a live-blogging cliffhanger. His edit comment is "a suicidal charge into rifle fire" and the edit itself is "As the mounted soldiers come into the mountains, they are met with rifle fire from less than 50 yards." What happens then Ed? Who lives? Who dies? Inquiring minds want to know. --NotANumber (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Arizona[edit]
So not only is Arizona simultaneously liberal and conservative (either that or Andy thinks his blog forms part of the librul meedya), but it also has a dead singer/actor looking after its finances Iatrogenic (talk) 18:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I was gob-smacked by Andy's comment - Its legislative session just ended without passing a meaningful pro-life bill. So states are expected to be continuously passing pro-life bills? Lily Inspirate me. 10:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
lolwut?[edit]
Random article on CP gave me: Nineteen Eighty-Four. Highlights include:
- Oceania has "liberal paganism as a ruling ideology"
- It's ruled by a "hyperliberal dystopia" where "liberal fanaticism and ignorance are promoted by Oceania through relentless propaganda"
- Oceania's government "seems like a parody of the worst aspects of liberalism."
I have never in my life witnessed a more bizarre perversion of Orwell's ideas. Why on earth is Andy et al. so eager to claim that Orwell was a conservative? I just can't understand it. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 04:30, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Lolwut indeed. Andy is insane. Anything "bad" = "liberal". Gawd, look at his borken news posts where "liberal X" becomes the subject of a sentence with an action verb... ħuman 04:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- And any similarity between Julia's anti-sex league and the promise bearers (or whatever those ring people - no, not Frodo - are called) is purely coincidental and you'd be a pinko librull to suggest otherwise. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 05:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hasn't he read Animal Farm? (which IMHO is an easier introduction to Orwell's ideas). Animal Farm is clearly about a betrayed Communist revolution, where the leaders are more equal than the workers. In 1984 it is not clear what The Party's economic policy is; I got the impression that they don't even bother with the pretence that they are the same as the Proles. Both books are however clearly anti-authoritarian. CS Miller (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm assuming pointing out that Orwell was a life-long Labour supporter would not be taken well.Webbtje (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- What's labour? In the schlaflyverse, there are only conservatives and liberals. As Orwell was no liberal, he was a conservative: he most certainly was pro-guns for republicans (at least in the Spanish civil War). Therefore, he was even more conservative than M. Thatcher, as she was pro-gun-control. larronsicut fur in nocte 09:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder if he'd support Sinn Féin, as they are a Republican party. But wait! They have socialist policies. So confused.... CS Miller (talk) 09:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Many American Catholics did support Sinn Féin, well the Provisional Irish Republic Army, through Noraid (allegedly). Lily Inspirate me. 09:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- There's an irony there - the US has the War on Terror, but half of Boston and New York has been funding it for years. slight exaggeration warning Then again, I shouldn't speak, I have family members back in Wales who were involved in the burning down of English settlers' holidays homes during what passed for the Welsh "troubles". --PsyGremlinSiarad! 09:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Orwell was in the Labour party in order to introduce people to conservative ideas. Come on people, I thought that much was obvious! SJ Debaser 10:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- The Orwell article is great, if only to further illustrate Andy's bipolar view of everything. The rationale for describing Orwell as being a conservative seems to be based on his opposition to Stalin's fruity regime. That's similar to his RINO obsession, where the slightest deviation from
Minitrue'sAndy's definition of Republicanism results in the offender being cast out as a heretic. It requires some pretty heavy cognitive dissonance for CP editors to read 1984 and not see any how it describes what's happening at CP. --Ask me about our dot 11:03, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- The Orwell article is great, if only to further illustrate Andy's bipolar view of everything. The rationale for describing Orwell as being a conservative seems to be based on his opposition to Stalin's fruity regime. That's similar to his RINO obsession, where the slightest deviation from
- Orwell was in the Labour party in order to introduce people to conservative ideas. Come on people, I thought that much was obvious! SJ Debaser 10:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- There's an irony there - the US has the War on Terror, but half of Boston and New York has been funding it for years. slight exaggeration warning Then again, I shouldn't speak, I have family members back in Wales who were involved in the burning down of English settlers' holidays homes during what passed for the Welsh "troubles". --PsyGremlinSiarad! 09:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Many American Catholics did support Sinn Féin, well the Provisional Irish Republic Army, through Noraid (allegedly). Lily Inspirate me. 09:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder if he'd support Sinn Féin, as they are a Republican party. But wait! They have socialist policies. So confused.... CS Miller (talk) 09:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- What's labour? In the schlaflyverse, there are only conservatives and liberals. As Orwell was no liberal, he was a conservative: he most certainly was pro-guns for republicans (at least in the Spanish civil War). Therefore, he was even more conservative than M. Thatcher, as she was pro-gun-control. larronsicut fur in nocte 09:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm assuming pointing out that Orwell was a life-long Labour supporter would not be taken well.Webbtje (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hasn't he read Animal Farm? (which IMHO is an easier introduction to Orwell's ideas). Animal Farm is clearly about a betrayed Communist revolution, where the leaders are more equal than the workers. In 1984 it is not clear what The Party's economic policy is; I got the impression that they don't even bother with the pretence that they are the same as the Proles. Both books are however clearly anti-authoritarian. CS Miller (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- And any similarity between Julia's anti-sex league and the promise bearers (or whatever those ring people - no, not Frodo - are called) is purely coincidental and you'd be a pinko librull to suggest otherwise. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 05:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
(unindent) Is Andy only capable of thinking in black and white? Listing to the electioneering going on here (UK), I was shocked to find myself agreeing with two of UKIP's policies, namely
- The UK should not provide foreign aid to India, they've got a fricking space program for FSM's sake!
- Personal aside - the Indian people should vote along class lines, not race/tribal lines, and get their government to spend more money on the poor. Congress is no longer the party that Mohandas Gandhi lead.
- The UK should be training its own nurses, not stealing them from developing countries like Mali, after their government has expensively trained them.
Likewise, I don't agree with all the policies of the party that I'll vote for. Having written this rant, I suppose allowing yourself to agree with some of your opponents' point of view, and disagreeing with some of your own sides', can lead to Cafeteria Christianity, which is a fundamental pun intended no-no with the radical conservative Christianity that Andy follows. CS Miller (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Don't forget, India also has nukes. Good incentive to keep the country stable methinks. --PsyGremlinRunāt! 12:36, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- What about Pakistan? I'm just glad that Bangladesh has too many other problems to join the party.
On India, one of its problems is the conflation of class and race into their caste system. CS Miller (talk) 12:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- The not using third-world doctors & nurses argument is really a liberal can of worms. While I appreciate that governments spend money training them, they also train other occupations, so should we deny those individuals the opportunity to earn more money to support their families? Maybe UK wages are not the best but they must be sufficiently attractive to get people to come here. Lily Inspirate me. 14:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is the NHS actively recruiting them and sponsoring them into the UK so as to avoid the wages and conditions an EU citizen would demand - David Gerard (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- The not using third-world doctors & nurses argument is really a liberal can of worms. While I appreciate that governments spend money training them, they also train other occupations, so should we deny those individuals the opportunity to earn more money to support their families? Maybe UK wages are not the best but they must be sufficiently attractive to get people to come here. Lily Inspirate me. 14:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
NNDB[edit]
I've mentioned this before, but I see they've updated the list showing a bunch of Harvard Law School alumnae. Make for interesting reading:
- 524 names
- Occupation break down:
- Politician - 102
- Business - 84
- Attorney - 82
- Judge - 81
- Government - 67
- Educator - 22
- Diplomat - 13
- Activist - 10
- Pundit - 6
- Scholar - 5
- Economist - 5
- Head of State - 4
- Publisher - 4
- Actor - 3
- Novelist - 3
- TV Personality - 3
- Philosopher - 3
- and First lady - 1
- There's an NSA advisor, 31 Circuit Court of Appeal Judges, 1 spy (Hiss), 2 Billionaires, 3 Presidents of the US & 1 of Irelabd, 46 CEOs & Chairmen, 35 Congresspeople, 31 Governors, ...the list goes on.
- And finally, there's Andrew Schlafly - Conservapedia founder.
That what two degrees earns him on the roll of honour. --PsyGremlinHable! 12:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose by their standard homeschool teacher does not count as an educator? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 18:09, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- He's listed as an activist. Which is a whole new kind of funny. --PsyGremlinPraat! 18:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Activist is the most diplomatic category they could find for him. Failed Unabomber was considered insensitive. (CR) 62.40.36.13 (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I note that the pres of the ACLU is also on the list. Bet he really hates that place in retrospect. (I am a person not a template) 21:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- I note that the pres of the ACLU is also on the list. Bet he really hates that place in retrospect.
- Activist is the most diplomatic category they could find for him. Failed Unabomber was considered insensitive. (CR) 62.40.36.13 (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- He's listed as an activist. Which is a whole new kind of funny. --PsyGremlinPraat! 18:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
CP edits[edit]
Has anyone got a graph of daily edits at CP stretching back to at least mid-08 (or failing that a graph just showing daily '08 edits)? I wish to remember with fondness the time when CP had a mildly functional community. EddyP (talk) 15:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- You mean the days when editors actually chatted on each other's talk pages and your life expectancy was somewhat better that a rookie pilot on the Western Front and there a modicum of civility there? Actually, I meant "the days when there were editors". He's the man to speak to. --PsyGremlinParlez! 15:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yup, those ones. The days of grand battles across talk pages (main page and Obama spring to mind). The pre-election, pre-TK days basically. EddyP (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yup, it's safe to say that 01 January 2009 was the beginning of CP's slide. With TK as admin and Andy going nuts over Obama, they never stood a chance. Who would have thought we'd be bigger than them now, back then? --PsyGremlinSermā! 15:19, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yup, those ones. The days of grand battles across talk pages (main page and Obama spring to mind). The pre-election, pre-TK days basically. EddyP (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
larronsicut fur in nocte 17:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Dear "Psygremlin" (what a ridiculous name!) If you open your mind you will realise that the only reason the so-called "Rational" wiki is only larger because most of its edits are talk, talk, talk, which is typical of Liberals. It is simple Deceit to claim otherwise. Deny this fact and lose all credibility. Now please try to contribute usefully, as I will now do. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- It must have been great to be around in March-May '07. EddyP (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- It was fun, we could openly mock CP on CP and make up whatever we wanted, almost. The mass coverage of CP in the media led to loads of parodists joining up and making merry. Inevitably the site fought back and blocked as many people as it could. this was pretty much the origin of its seige mentality - every newcomer is a suspected parodist until proven otherwise (ie if they suck up to Andy enough). Totnesmartin (talk) 22:00, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- It must have been great to be around in March-May '07. EddyP (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2010 (UTC)