Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive26

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, (new)(back)

hang on until archive[edit]

Can people hang on to their (feb) wigo items until this stuff gets archived and the "counter" reset? And can someone who remembers how we do it stick all this stuff axcept the top 3 or 4 in the 0801 archive that already exists?

Thanks! humanUser talk:Human 11:56, 2 February 2008 (EST)

By the way, I emailed Trent to ask him to pop in and help. humanUser talk:Human 15:26, 2 February 2008 (EST)
I moved the BoCP worthy enties to that page and de coded (the |12x= crap, replaced it with *) and archived it all over to the already existing archive. Miller time. Warren Terra 15:45, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Can we hold off on archiving the entries from the last few days of the month, especially if they've been subject to updates? Some of those things are only up for about a day, which isn't enough time for them to be seen, let alone garner enough votes to make it the best of. I added one disappeared thing just this morning that I liked quite a bit, expanding how CP criticizes WP for "freedom fighter" to include how CP uses those exact words to describe the Contras. DickTurpis 18:48, 2 February 2008 (EST)

I agree. What we need to do is write upa nice, simple (!) set of instructions for how to do the monthly archiving. Basically, we should probably let ten or so "roll over" into the next month rather than get archived. If we added "weekly" header breaks it would be easier to see how much to leave (the last week...), but that might get messy. It would, however, also make editing late in the month easier. humanUser talk:Human 13:00, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Heh - the power of "rational dishonesty" and delusion[edit]

"Teh Foxpuppet makes a series of replies to user TheGuy, immediately after blocking him for a month. Dude, if he's pwning you in an argument, be a man for once and just admit it and move on." The "series of replies" consists of a comment telling him he is being blocked, followed by a comment from another user, followed by a reply to that user. Wow, you really are scraping the barrel and distorting the facts to feed your fractured worldview, Kels. Wait! You've turned into the very thing you seem to be accusing the "dark side" of. How quaint of you  :D Reynard 15:49, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Wow, we'd better just shut down the wiki and hand the keys over to Andy, then. Should I shoot myself now or later? I'm Canadian, so I'll have to borrow a gun. --Kels 16:44, 2 February 2008 (EST)
That was... pitiful. Are you really that concerned about that plural? NightFlareSpeak, mortal 16:49, 2 February 2008 (EST)
Wait, according to that Columbine film, you guys are as armed to the teeth as USAians are. Ya just don't shoot each other as often. Worse aim? humanUser talk:Human 16:51, 2 February 2008 (EST)
I'll be honest, I don't know anyone with a handgun. Or guns in general, for that matter. I grew up in the country, and there were hunting guns around, but even there nobody had much of a collection of them. One or two, maybe, but more than that was pretty rare. --Kels 16:54, 2 February 2008 (EST)
I knew 3. One is dead, the other is in jail for murder. Everyone else keeps it seekrit? PS, I think the neighborhood hooligans think I might have shotgun, hence they don't vandalized my shit. Hmmm, let Andy know about that version of preventative terror? humanUser talk:Human 22:28, 2 February 2008 (EST)
Everyone knows that Michael Moore is un-American and that Bowling for Columbine is full of Liberal deceit and left-of-centre lies. -Pretzel 06:01, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Reynard, the Fox did behave below measure when he banned the Guy. Nothing shows better that the Fox was the loser in this argument than this pathetic ban. If anyone was a troll in this thread, then it was the Fox, Reynard. Tohuvavohu 21:12, 2 February 2008 (EST)

I just thought I'd point this out in case anyone missed the reference. Future suggestions: Todd, Kitsune, Mulder, McCloud. -Pretzel 04:52, 3 February 2008 (EST)
I just thought you know too much about foxes... ;-) Editor at CPBring TK back 07:03, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Are we sure they're not a furry? --Kels 13:31, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Not sure if this might be relevant, but "renard" is French for Fox. See, that proves I'm a liberal, I speak French! Stile4aly 13:47, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Not a furry, Kels, but I am a Canuck. Although I don't speak French, so I guess that proves I'm not really Canadian, or liberal. XD -Pretzel 16:08, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Haha, I was talking about our friend with the fox fixation, not you so much. And not speaking French in Canada means you live in Alberta, or something. --Kels 19:19, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Brace yourselves[edit]

Looks like we're going to have to put up with another round of the blame game. Who'll it be this time? Liberals? Atheists? Of course, it appears that the fellow was Black, so Uncle Ed might play that card as well. --Hojidie! 18:49, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Dang. You know, I'll bet he wouldn't have been able to get that gun if it weren't for affirmative action...--WJThomas 19:11, 2 February 2008 (EST)
I reckon' it was Conservapedia. It's only a matter of time before some poor homeschooler gets filled with enough hatred by CP that he goes out and starts killing liberals—and by "liberals", I mean "anyone not on CP". --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:15, 2 February 2008 (EST)
Ya think I should start locking my front door? And buy, maybe, a shotgun? humanUser talk:Human 21:19, 2 February 2008 (EST)
Two shotguns. And a bazooka. -- naebnamuħ   03:01, 3 February 2008 (EST)

I suggested this for the front page yesterday. Along with a story on life possibly originating in ice. Shockingly but not surprisingly, both of these were ignored in favour of... Wait for it... FOOTBALL! YEAH! DON'T MESS WITH FOOTBALL! Barikada 09:55, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Who said Conservative was obsessive?[edit]

Not sure it's WIGO-worthy, but I found this fascinating. The existence of the page, not the contents. Matt 22:30, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Yes, he/it is utterly fascinated, and always has been, by stats. Hi Matt!!! humanUser talk:Human 23:19, 2 February 2008 (EST)
It might be a thought to back it up, before it disappears in a memory hole. Tohuvavohu 01:48, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Off his meds[edit]

Seriously, I can't explain this comment any other way. What a collection of non-sequiteurs! --Kels 00:19, 3 February 2008 (EST)

All he's missing is a reference to Hitler or Stalin.Shangrala 11:45, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Liberal until proven otherwise. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 12:01, 3 February 2008 (EST) Note: Good actions count as proof.
I knew he was gonna jump on the guy for not voting Bush in 2000/2004! Supporting Regan and Bush's daddy isn't enough, you must be ideologically PURE! --Kels 13:02, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Wait wait wait... I seriously wonder if they would make the same argument about all people who steal US flags. (Wow, the article is even from WorldNewsDaily...) --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 10:00, 7 February 2008 (EST)

contest 5[edit]

The fifth team COpy aNd pasTE feST is in sight, as Iduan attempts to keep developing the scoring into a system that makes sense. Tracking at RW will be at Conservapedia:Team Contest five, when we bother. humanUser talk:Human 13:18, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Silly Iduan. The point isn't to make a rule system that makes sense, it's to make one Andy can win! --Kels 13:30, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Andy's whole attitude amuses/amazes me: were it my blog I'd hold myself out of any contest & be the judge/referee/umpire, watching teh peasants fight. He seems to get a charge out of demonstrating his prowess (or not, hee hee). It's like the schoolteacher competing with his pupils, unfortunately it's a no-win situation 'cause if he wins it's only to be expected, but if he loses he just looks silly. His repeatedly being on the losing team must be really irking him. It's the class bully being defeated again & again by the class wimp. SusanPurrrrrrr 14:05, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Perhaps the whole thing is dependent on holding back like an adult playing chess with a five-year-old. -Pretzel 15:57, 3 February 2008 (EST)
So we have to fight Andy blindfolded and with one hand tied behind our backs? humanUser talk:Human 13:44, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Baninininination candidate[edit]

It's the final countdown, [na-na-nah-naah na-na-nah-nah-nah]. Ajkgordon 14:09, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Update: They don't do rhetorical at CP. (Ban is expired as of this posting) -CЯacke® 17:17, 3 February 2008 (EST)

So there![edit]

Generally speaking, cryptography has been the sole domain of governments, which is as it should be.- cp:cryptography* SusanPurrrrrrr 18:18, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Nah, Elassint has the right idea - you may think it's companies, businesses, and individuals who use cryptostuff, but they're all the NWO CONSPIRACY AND SENDING RECORDS OF YOUR MOVEMENTS TO EACH OTHER! --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
I love their first version of cryptography. Julius and Ethel Rosenburg are irrelevantly mentioned mentioned (and still are, as of this post), but it's the warning at the end that makes me chuckle: "As you can see, cryptography leads to nothing more than trials and death. It's not something that the average person should get involved with." So, while guns never lead to death, cryptography does? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 19:16, 3 February 2008 (EST)


*Eff me, they're watching us, watching them, watching us - "authoritarian nonesense" gone! SusanPurrrrrrr 19:27, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Alert to anyone alert on conserapedia - what's wrong with this? humanUser talk:Human 13:47, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Whois[edit]

Doc, izzat you in the FBI now:[1] SusanPurrrrrrr 18:42, 3 February 2008 (EST) Well at least someone's watched you on't box: Did I see you on TV the other day Agent Lipson? Disguised as a doctor perhaps?- --Horace29 18:16, 3 February 2008 (EST)SusanPurrrrrrr 18:49, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Careful now...Impersonating a Federal Agent is probably some sort of crime. -CЯacke® 19:05, 3 February 2008 (EST)
I don't think im cleaver enough to have come up with that one, but I assume there will be an insta-ban. Never should have given up total anonym..--PalMD-Did that sound a little harsh? 19:12, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Nah, me, I'm afraid. Also, I think you'll find that that was an FBI representative. Whence comes this 'federal agent' business? Also, TmT got a mention. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
Pardon, mea culpa and like dat, "Special Agent" is the standard issue "title" for Federal Bureau of Indigestion folk, hence the conflusion. CЯacke® 20:09, 3 February 2008 (EST)
Wow, blocked the same minute that the account was created. Good job. --BillOhannitygodvelocity. 20:14, 3 February 2008 (EST)

<-With everybody "here" I almost wish we'd open the IRC chan. CЯacke®

Which is irc.freenode.net #rationalwiki CЯacke®
IRC! Come on, people! --Linus(plot evil tech) 21:20, 3 February 2008 (EST)

I'm lagging behind here. What's this about TV? ThunderkatzHo! 21:26, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Apparently the good doctor was on t'telly tother day. SusanPurrrrrrr 21:30, 3 February 2008 (EST)
The hospital PR people occasionally make me go on TV to tell people not to be dumb, but in nice words. User:PalMD

CP traffic goes off a cliff[edit]

CPvsRWtraffic.png

- Icewedge 02:17, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Wa' happen? SusanPurrrrrrr 02:27, 4 February 2008 (EST)
The Amazing Schlafly, of course, can kill anything. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 02:45, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Somebody set them up the bomb. Barikada 02:48, 4 February 2008 (EST)

I'm going to suggest its more a alexa technical problem. Every site I've looked at has that same dip. Wikipedia, slashdot, google. --Shagie 03:19, 4 February 2008 (EST) CP views.gif

Well the views have certainly been slowing down recently but have not yet plummeted to zero. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 06:48, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Wow. Our audience is... 0.0005% of the internets. Is that depressing, or what? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 03:20, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Not at all. It may be small, but it's teh bestest and most awesumest 0.0005% of teh Internets! --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:31, 4 February 2008 (EST)


CONGRATULATIONS! 99.9995% OF PEOPLE HAVE NEVER HEARD OF US!!![edit]

Wooooooooo! Party! --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 03:20, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Tumbleweed.gif
Tumbleweed.gif
Tumbleweed.gif
Tumbleweed.gif


...Oh, never mind. Party poopers... --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 03:20, 4 February 2008 (EST)

We're like six months old; I'm not concerned :-). Even if we're talking to ourselves, it's a fun conversation. -— Unsigned, by: AmesG / talk / contribs 16:22, 4 February 2008 (EST)
This site is rapidly treading water! Stile4aly 17:20, 4 February 2008 (EST)
As long as you talk to yourself at least you always have an intelligent debate partner. Problem is even idiots think that such a debate partner is intelligent. Debate needs external challenge and information in order to breath and increase its abilities. This is why I like the crazy fundies (sometimes), they will find the most absurd, but faintly logical arguments I've ever seen. Without seeing their side, I cannot know how my side is. Frankly, I'm just happy the grass is greener here at RW. --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 09:55, 7 February 2008 (EST)

IMPROVEMENTS![edit]

MINOR IMPROVEMENTS Seriously, does he ever have an edit statement that doesn't glorify his own work? I've only been there for a few weeks, but damn, that is REALLY annoying. Barikada 09:30, 4 February 2008 (EST)

That whole article is a crock of shit. If he really wanted to make "improvements" that would be worth his self-congratulation, it'd be to remove the "affirmative action" rubbish. Or the subjective (and gramatically laughable) phrases such as
"he voted "present" rather than "aye" or "nay" nearly an astounding 130 times."
Nearly an astounding!
But CP has become very boring of late. I can't wait until there is an "affirmative action" president; that should spice up Andy's rhetoric somewhat. He already seems to be increasingly paranoid that teh Liberals are closing in around him and when the administration is Liberal as well, his own cherished government will be against him as well. Bondurant 12:27, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Yes, one wonders if he will still loves him his America... humanUser talk:Human 13:53, 4 February 2008 (EST)
What? Like when he's walking down the street and people are having Hollywood values right there in public!CЯacke® 14:26, 4 February 2008 (EST)
I'm sure he worries about being Hollywood-Valued as he's walking down the street at night. PoorEd 15:08, 4 February 2008 (EST)
At least we can be sure he will continue to Value his homskollars, the little Hollywood squares. humanUser talk:Human 15:36, 4 February 2008 (EST)
"Hollywood Values" sounds like the name of some outlet mall shop that peddles "Looey Vitton" handbags and "Rolleckz" watches. -Pretzel 16:03, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Bah[edit]

Didn't even think that it might be contentious. Ajkgordon 16:34, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Well, of course--anything with a whiff of old-earth stink is going to be problematic.--WJThomas 16:56, 4 February 2008 (EST)
That needs to be changed to state that the Pyrenees are the product of the Great Flood, like every single other geological feature on the face of the earth, and that they are in fact younger than how old those godless commies in China fancy their civilization to be. -Pretzel 16:58, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Er, yes granite is a nice soft sedimentary rock. But I thought all mountains were made out of limestone? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 17:24, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Why do we always talk about such trivial things, like the kind of stone? For once in you life, can't you just be content knowing it's stone? -- naebnamuħ   17:32, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Well, yes, but I didn't even think about it. I was just idly drinking my afternoon tea and editing CP when I wrote that. We have a place in the Pyrenees and the age thing is interesting. Being a Yuropean, YEC is not something that ever impinges on the consciousness in normal real life. I am a mere apprentice in being able to switch to that kind of thinking. Damn my classical Christian yet progressive (and no doubt liberal) education! Ajkgordon 03:17, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Dirt[edit]

I lol'd. The discussion there has been particularly amusing as of late. UchihaKATON! 17:31, 4 February 2008 (EST)

 :D I try. Barikada 17:57, 4 February 2008 (EST)
"...any drop in Fox News' ratings is likely due to the liberal MSM, trying to draw viewers away from responsable, balanced reporting with their liberal propaganda." —Feebasfactor
I can never tell when they're being serious... --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 19:29, 4 February 2008 (EST)
I think feebas is a parodist. But it meshes so well... Barikada 19:43, 4 February 2008 (EST)
He's just being sarcastic, he has valiantly fought against the empire in epic battles regarding Dawkin's professorship (last time I watched anyway), breast cancer and other stuff I forgot. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 23:13, 4 February 2008 (EST)

DO NOT LOOK UNTO THIS EVIL![edit]

Jinxmchue takes a stand against ratings!

... Also, I don't know who that guy is, but going by this he seems to do little beyond jumping on whatever I say. :/ Barikada 17:57, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Well, from what I recall, Jinxmchue was booted off Wikipedia for doing exactly that—harassing people. He was quite unpopular and not good for anything productive. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 20:21, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Harassing people? Unpopular? Not good for anything productive? Sounds like CP Sysop material!--WJThomas 20:27, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Yeah. After my ban is up I might attempt to report him for that. Barikada 21:05, 4 February 2008 (EST)
Correction. I'm going to complain on the pages of several syssies about it. Barikada 21:05, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Chirality[edit]

I just love this topic when creationists feel the need to spew forth some actual chemistry terms. Too bad chirality has been shown to be effected by simple swirling of the liquid as the molecules are forming. Not really a problem when you think about how evolution works.--TimS 09:02, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Have to admit my ignorance here: I have no idea what this is all about, so I don't know if it's worth a WIGO vote. Perhaps we need a chirality article on Rationalwiki to explain it in idiot-sized (i.e. Bondurant-sized) chunks. Bondurant 09:26, 5 February 2008 (EST)
I had to go to the bastion of evil, wikipedia for an explanation. Jrssr5 09:31, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Many molecules, including 21 out of 22 amino acids and all carbohydrates potentially come in two forms that are mirror images of each other. Your one hand, for example, is the mirror image of the other, but is not superimposable on your hand. Creationists think that just because all molecules are of one form (of one "handiness") that is evidence of a designer. Perhaps when there's more free time, I'll write an article. Sterilexx 09:55, 5 February 2008 (EST)
The most important bit is that molecule with a different chirality just behave very differently, and on a molecular level they won't be confused. If only one of them can engage in a reaction, then the other just won't react. They are two different molecules, just like any other to types of molecules. Some molecules of different chirality, like sugars, do even taste different, so our biochemical tonger has little difficulty to pick the right one. Tohuvavohu 18:38, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Fucking idiot....GoD DID IT!!!!!111. And I intend to RUIN IT!!1Phallus of Satan 18:40, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Dextromethorphan (DXM) the cough suppressant ingredient in many OTC cold medicines, is the chiraltic mirror of morphine. Warren Terra 19:00, 5 February 2008 (EST)

I think it's "handedness", not "handiness". Handiness is what I have with tools, according to my user page.Do You Believe That? humanUser talk:Human 18:59, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Every word's a jewel![edit]

ought we to copy every talk page entry by Andy to WIGO? It'd save time: [2] SusanPurrrrrrr 09:32, 5 February 2008 (EST)

My word, that is simply wonderful. Nearly every Shlaflyism in one edit - all that's missing is a comment along the lines of "95% of public school proponents believe in gun control." Bondurant 09:36, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Bizarro world, too. The city wants to send its poorer kids to college, and teh assfly thinks it's about the public schools? humanUser talk:Human 16:32, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Remember, on Planet Conservapedia, the whole purpose of college is to brainwash innocent children into homosexual Darwin-worshipping communists, and poor people with insufficient whiteness are especially at risk. Perhaps the 1940's G. I. Bill was responsible for the greatest era of prosperity in American history.... BUT AT WHAT COST TO THEIR SOULS?!?!?!?!? --Gulik 16:54, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Won't someone THINK OF THE CHILDREN?! Children often learn best when they are instructed in the home, by people who can focus attention very strongly upon their child, and the education can be molded to promote strengths, and target weaknesses best. Clearly, children should not attend some other form of indoctrinating facility similar to public schools, but rather should develop those skills in the home, where the parents can continue to provide the best education available to their children, even at college level! --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 09:51, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Don Hamprick[edit]

I really can't believe that they accept the spam from this guy. This sets a precedent that they probably will regret, but hey, who am I to help them out? However, this sentence from his hagiography really gave me a WTF moment.

"Self-studied in matters of congressional affairs, constitutional and civil rights laws and even in international human rights through six years of federal litigation over the Second Amendment as an unrepresented civil plaintiff fighting for First Amendment right to petition the Government for redress of grievances and the Second Amendment right to "openly" keep and bear arms from a U.S. merchant seaman's point of view but never getting past the Motion to Dismiss because judicial bias and corruption in the federal courts and misconduct in the U.S. Department of Justice blocked his pursuit for his day in court."

Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 15:53, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Short sentences are for gay gun control evolutionist liberals. Ajkgordon 15:59, 5 February 2008 (EST)
I'll award it a prize for the longest unbroken string of gibberish on CP. PoorEd 16:01, 5 February 2008 (EST)
And if you can get round the minglish then this quote really takes the biscuit for misrepresenting gun control:
"The fact that the United States has the most people per capita in prison than any other country in the world says a lot about the conditions of life in the United States as becoming, or already is, a police state. It is a question on whether strict gun control laws invite crime as one of the causes of high prison populations."
Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 16:07, 5 February 2008 (EST)
We absolutely have to write a rebuttal of Don Hamprick ...er, sorry, Hamrick now. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:03, 5 February 2008 (EST)
But CP's parody entry on him will always be funnier than anything we could ever come up with. I suppose we could write a serious article on him? humanUser talk:Human 16:44, 5 February 2008 (EST)

He also mispelled "Excell" (sic) on his chart. You'd think Excel would be smart enough to prevent that! humanUser talk:Human 16:47, 5 February 2008 (EST)

I had already noticed that and would like to add:
  • empeachable
  • greviously
  • communicaitons
  • Proctection
  • defese
  • piopulation
  • auxilliary
  • tht
Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 18:05, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Actually, it's only a precedent in the obviousness. Okay, and the fact that it's openly and explicitly acknowledged is sorta new. CP already had "I write my own article" cases: Stephen Black and John Rook are the examples I can name without even thinking too hard. --Sid 17:07, 5 February 2008 (EST)

You are right Sid. I was certainly aware of the Stephen Black "article" but Hamprick takes it to a new level. Not only is it vanity publishing but he's using the site as an electioneering platform and that undermines the whole "encyclopedia" ethos. Oh, I forgot. It's been undermined already. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 18:18, 5 February 2008 (EST)
The Hamster is gradually being pruned, probably by RW watchers.SusanPurrrrrrr 20:08, 5 February 2008 (EST)
It looks like Hamfist didn't appreciate the copyediting of his puff. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 11:39, 7 February 2008 (EST)

How dare they?[edit]

Can someone tot up how many have dared to directly criticise the Schafter. Memory tellls me its quite a few recently. SusanPurrrrrrr 20:08, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Update: Just goes to show: Honesty doesn't pay. SusanPurrrrrrr 20:20, 5 February 2008 (EST)
The SNAFU Principle strikes again. --Gulik 02:10, 6 February 2008 (EST)
And the Peter Principle. Which CP is a wonderful example of. And thanks for adding yet another article to my watch list, Mr/Ms/It Gulik! humanUser talk:Human 03:38, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Do not touch our Homosexual parts[edit]

Not sure if this is Wigo-worthy, as I don't want to draw too much attention to their despicable entries on Homosexuality, but I found this quite amusing. A user makes a tiny amendment to this and gets blocked for 5 years! How uptight are they about their homosexual articles that they'll block someone without even checking whether it was a constructive edit?! Bondurant 06:18, 6 February 2008 (EST)

It was probably this edit that caused the problem...--WJThomas 06:22, 6 February 2008 (EST)
But that was an old edit, and hardly against the "spirit" of CP's stance on homosexuality. I think it has more to do with Iduan trying to look like a hardass by blocking anybody that dares to meddle with CP's cherished articles. Bondurant 06:30, 6 February 2008 (EST)
I suspect the earlier edit was missed when it was made, and the second one brought the first to attention. If you manage to sneak a good one in, ya' gotta resist the temptation to go back and call attention to it. My fixes to CP's John Lott article stood for months until one of those crazy liberals splashed attention to it all over the main talk page...--WJThomas 07:18, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Heath Ledger[edit]

Geez, Andy seems awfully obsessed with the fact that Heath Ledger was found naked, doesn't he? Also that it was Ledger's masseuse that found the body. Naked naked naked! Masseuse! Do you reckon Andy's mental image of Ledger has him face up or face down?--WJThomas 06:19, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Do you think Andy has even seen a naked man before? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 06:34, 6 February 2008 (EST)
I'll bet Conservative has! --Kels 07:12, 6 February 2008 (EST)
And I'll bet Andy wants to!--WJThomas 07:19, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Maybe Andy has inside info - could it be that he was "hanging out" with Mr. Ledger the night of the misadventure? humanUser talk:Human 13:33, 6 February 2008 (EST)

No evidence to the contrary[edit]

A likely troll suggests a news story saying that a study has found no link between the MMR jab and autism. Feebsfactor comes back with a WTF statement saying there is "no proof to the contrary." My brain is actually hurting at the stupidity of that comment. I think he may even, in a prerilously poor piece of logic be supporting that there is no link between MMR and autism. Bondurant 08:36, 6 February 2008 (EST)

There is yet another new study, and it's a good one. I'm not sure how anti-vax nuttery fits in with the Jeebus thing. User:PalMD
Andy's Momma is the connection. Andy's Momma is anti-vax ( as part of her paranoid things I don't understand or agree with are EVIL schtick) therefore the all of the Jesuses (Jezi?) from the sweet-baby-Jesus to jump-jesus-on-pogo-stick to wee-bobble-head-jesus all the way to Poor-suffering-Jesus-on-the-cross (who, incidentally committed suicide by roman soldier in order, 2 millenia later, to cleanse me of my sins. Thanks man!) are also anti-vax. Obviously Exasperate me!Sheesh!I said what? 11:37, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Teehee. Andy said the same thing two posts later. Suprised? UchihaKATON! 15:05, 6 February 2008 (EST)
I like how a recitation of real world fact, albeit italicized, that contradict his world view is a rant, but any number he pulls out of his butt (at dinner with an ex supreme court justice no less!!) is an obvious fundamental truth . . .204.248.28.194 15:15, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Pwning PJR[edit]

Could someone sock up & drop this on PJR - self replicating machines, which he's counting out. I know it's trivial, but it's there. (Only had to google self replication - on 1st page) SusanPurrrrrrr 11:42, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Update: Is Rodney someone's sock? SusanPurrrrrrr 12:25, 6 February 2008 (EST)
If he is then he's not being very covert:

"Fascism is a deformity of capitalism. It heightens the imperialist tendency towards domination which is inherent in capitalism, and it safeguards the principle of private property. At the same time, fascism immeasurably strengthens the institutional racism already bred by capitalism, whether it be against Jews (as in Hitler’s case) or against African peoples (as in the ideology of Portugal’s Salazar and the leaders of South Africa)."'- Rodney's Userpage quoted 'cause it'll probably be deleted Oh & MakeTomorrow has greeted him as a fellow commie! SusanPurrrrrrr 12:41, 6 February 2008 (EST)

PJR says ... nothing, so Fox rushes to the defence. SusanPurrrrrrr 05:37, 7 February 2008 (EST)

What It's Like to Be Andy Schlafly.[edit]

So first he makes this contribution on the Main talk page, and then he immediately makes this edit to his favourite article. Dude is fuckin' OCD about this. And what does the lovely Mrs. Catherine Agneta Kosarek think about her husband spending his evenings - all of them - typing away and cursing about "liberals" under his breath? Surely she MUST be getting a little annoyed after more than a year of this? PFoster 19:53, 6 February 2008 (EST)

If she's a good Xian wife she's on the same meds they have Laura Bush on. CЯacke® 19:59, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Well, first, obviously teh assfly is a liberal, since he lastworded. Then on to your more substantive point... let's see. It keeps him out of her kitchen. Second, how does she feel about a bunch of juvenile nerds calling her beloved "teh assfly" on teh innertubes on a daily basis? Third, formaldehyde, right, PomPom Boy? Fourth, grade. Fifth of Scotch. humanUser talk:Human 20:06, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Do you think that when she talks dirty to him, she talks like a liberal? "I'm a bad girl, I like universal health care and gays in the military. I need to be taught a lesson. I'm soooo deceitful." Stile4aly 20:49, 6 February 2008 (EST)
ROFL - Stile, that's just WRONG in so many ways. She looks at the ceiling and thinks of God and Ronald Reagan, of course.PFoster 20:56, 6 February 2008 (EST)
But not in that order... humanUser talk:Human 21:02, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Your pathetic attempts at mockery make you look stupid, and justify #18. Locke 21:00, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Do you think she calls him "assfly" in bed? humanUser talk:Human 21:02, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Ew. I'll never think of "assfly" the same way again. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:31, 6 February 2008 (EST)
What makes ya'll think The Missus wants Andy around? She's probably hap-hap-happy to have him squirreled away in the basement (or wherever) and out of her hair. His looney rants about liberal deceit and last wordism and Hollywood values are bad enough to those of us who subject ourselves to same willingly--imagine that soundtrack running 24/7. And then there's having the sick SOB pestering you for sex all the time. Hell...she probably gave him the idea for CP in the first place, just to get him off her back (literally).--WJThomas 21:04, 6 February 2008 (EST)
#18, #18, #18. Locke 21:05, 6 February 2008 (EST)

What the hell is #18?

"over-reliance on mockery" - follow the second link in the lead to this section. We should have a competition to see how many "Styles" we can use in one legitimate sentence! humanUser talk:Human 21:10, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Being that there are 45 characteristics of liberal style, you'd have to embrace #31 to do that.--WJThomas 21:28, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Why? Just to re-affirm Schlafly's point? Locke 21:11, 6 February 2008 (EST)

I guess I have to point this out to all of you, conservatives only have missionary style sex. So Assfly is never on her back, never on the bottom and always feels the need to be in control. I feel sorry for his wife, no wonder she has no problem with his editing late at night. She is probably doing what Lindsay Roberts was caught doing, with the Assfly's underaged homeschooled males.--TimS 10:08, 7 February 2008 (EST)"

Hey, we rank #2 on Google for "Catherine Agneta Kosarek". Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 11:43, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Andrew Schlafly and IQ[edit]

In this entry to the "breaking news" section Andy uses Bobby Fishers death to bash what appears to be people with a high IQ. It seems to me that the only kind of person who would act gleeful over the death and insanity of a person with extremely high tested IQ would be a person who has in the past tested as having a relativly low IQ. But we already knew that didn't we... - Icewedge 20:47, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Well, it is true that "IQ isn't everything", and also, certainly true that many very high IQ people have difficulties "fitting in", and gittin' happy in their lives. Me, I used all my points over 90 to make myself look pretty to women so they'd, um, smile at me. (Because I like women to, um, smile at me). Before that, nothing made any sense except maybe geometry and physics. humanUser talk:Human 21:07, 6 February 2008 (EST)
That is true, the IQ scale is not a true reflection of intelligence but it seems like the only kind of person who would attack the scale in such a way (delighting in the failings of people with high IQ's) would be someone with a personal grudge against IQ testing, probably from having themselves tested at a level of intelligence they did not like. - Icewedge 21:18, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Non sequitur. Locke 21:20, 6 February 2008 (EST)
No, I think I see his point… the same line of thought ran through my mind when I first saw it, to tell you the truth. Of course, I put very little stock in IQ anyway, so… --Linus(plot evil tech) 21:23, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Pure speculation. Locke 21:26, 6 February 2008 (EST)
This is a bit too speculative for me. Can't we just content ourselves knowing Schlafly overdoses on schadenfreude? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:27, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Remember when Falwell passed on to his Final Reward and they drooled while eulogizing him? If anyone Andy has any "dirt" on dies, FRONT PAGE NEWS WITH THEIR SINS! Andy is doing god's work, to save the Almighty some trivial labor. humanUser talk:Human 22:08, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Anti-intellectualism is, sadly, as American as syphilis and lynching, but I do think the current crop of conservatives over-do it a trifle. --Gulik 03:41, 7 February 2008 (EST)
  • I agree it does seem strange for him to bash IQ without some kind of resentment towards it, especially considering that he has come up with even more relatively arbitrary measures of quantifying things that can't really be quantified, like liberal quotient and openmindedness. As for what he actually said about IQ, of course it isn't everything. They just needed some kind of measuring system for the 49 states not named Texas so they could determine when someone could or could not be executed. The biggest problem I see with IQ tests is, sure, they can give a vague idea about how intelligent someone is, but your score depends a lot on experience (in knowing how to look for patterns, in thinking about questions multiple ways, etc), even though it supposedly shouldn't. --BillOhannitygodvelocity. 09:40, 7 February 2008 (EST)
I'd say the issue has some relevance when we are executing people with an IQ of 60 or 70 for murder. PoorEd 13:06, 7 February 2008 (EST)
You heard him, Mr President, you should be safe. CЯacke®
Best. Joke. Ever. Lurker 14:14, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Another explanation could be that there are stats (I believe) that show that, in the US at least, liberals have higher IQs, or Christians have lower IQs (on average), or some such. In The World According to Aschafly, that makes high IQs bad and all he needs to do now is find a couple of stories to "prove" it. Matt 17:21, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Kookooajou and being an asshole[edit]

The "Justice may not be swift but boy, it is long!" wigo entry is even funnier when you look at teh jarhead's first block reason (for only one month) before he got pisseder and went 6 months on the editor: "Canadian citizen demanding First Amendment rights under our Constitution, when he hasn't sworn to uphold and protect it"

Classic. Please, Kookookajoob, please, please, do not ever talk to anyone outside the US ever again. You are an utter embarrassment to this country, a complete jerk and asshole, and a dishonor to any uniform you ever dressed up in. KKJ, I do now formally request that you go into a small room without much light and fuck yourself! humanUser talk:Human 00:03, 7 February 2008 (EST)

here's the link for whoever is interested (interesting enough, Karajou seems to imply there that Incide got blocked for not having first ammendment rights rather than not swearing to protect it). NightFlareSpeak, mortal 00:36, 7 February 2008 (EST)
This seems like a good time to... bash his service record! --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 01:33, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Yes, nice work, RA! humanUser talk:Human 04:12, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Also, does Karadipshit not realize that you can be an american citizen and live outside the US? How's he know that incide isn't an ex-pat? Jrssr5 15:20, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Well, it's a statistically safe assumption. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:33, 7 February 2008 (EST)
But they don't understand statistics over there. Jrssr5 16:12, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Oh, they understand. They understand statistics are EVIL!!! --Kels 11:12, 9 February 2008 (EST)

SSchultz's block log[edit]

[3] "...linked to a site that tries to smear others." Oops, so have I. Good thing we're not on CP, otherwise I might be blocked for that. --BillOhannitygodvelocity. 09:58, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Note they're not blocking him for the traditional 5 years. Maybe it's finally dawned on them that banishing all the productive editors forever does not help their blog grow? --Gulik 17:12, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Maybe. That could explain why I only got a one month ban. Barikada 00:41, 8 February 2008 (EST)
I think it has more to do with the fact that TK is gone and Rob is missing. They were probably the worst "block first, ignore questions later" offenders. Karajou is also one such offender, but he doesn't seem to be hanging around the talk pages as much. Look at who does the heaviest blocking nowadays (in order of the block log): DanH, Crocoite, Taj, MexMax, HelpJazz and Iduan. Andy's probably shown the most change. He's been blocking people for 90/10 more often, and reserving the permabans for the dubios "use your real name". Lurker 00:56, 8 February 2008 (EST)
Ah, the real question is, does the taste of power overcome the "morning after" struggle to deal with the blood on one's hands? And who will now step up to be assfly's "shadow enforcer" now that TK is disempowered? (for using a naughty word to teh assfly in pmail, as I recall) humanUser talk:Human 01:30, 8 February 2008 (EST)
It's a good question. So far it seems that when someone starts to be bulldogish, they only do it for a short time then stop. I think what made TK so unique is that he purposefully went farther than he needed to in order to keep up his image. Most of the people who are left genuinely believe whatever they believe and, while they have no qualms throwing down the iron fist when things don't go their way, they aren't out there to project an image. Lurker 14:45, 8 February 2008 (EST)

Interesting stuff on CP[edit]

There are a couple interesting things they've posted today. First of all there's their comments about "24 hour drinking" and 13 year olds. I'm not sure what "24 hour drinking" is (are they planning to introduce "drinking hours" or something?), but if it refers to the extended pub hours (which I didn't think were extended that much, though they are some places here) it has nothing to do with 13 year olds, as they don't drink in pubs. More interesting, however, is the story on how colleges try to ban conservatism. The article they link to gives some story of some pretty bum raps, but the cases are interesting. While no one should ever be required to sign a petition for anything as part of course work, the student's views on homosexuality were somewhat relevant in that she was getting a degree in social work, where she doesn't really get to say "I want to help people, but no fags." Best is the guy who was suspended for writing a letter advocating allowing concealed weapons on campus. Again, the guy got a bum wrap, but read his letter. Is it just me or does the guy sound like a Nazi, railing against Jewish professors and making a fuss over European ancestry? I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was the one who drew those swastikas in the women's room. -DickTurpis 11:05, 7 February 2008 (EST)

He clearly has his own spin on things, but he isn't anywhere near Nazi-level yet. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 18:56, 7 February 2008 (EST)

A thought relevant to nothing[edit]

Anyone noticed how the online press is behaving more and more like Wikipedia? On yahoo just now I clicked the link to a story saying that Romney was going to withdraw from the race. Here is what the article said: "WASHINGTON - Mitt Romney will either suspend his presidential campaign or withdraw completely from the presidential race, The Associated Press has learned." That's it. That's the sort of thing you see on Wikipedia all the time, as lazy people want to do as little as possible and let others repair and expand their entries. I wasn't aware til now that major media companies, in their effort to break a story as fast as possible, are doing the same thing to this extent. -DickTurpis 12:40, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Happens quite a lot on breaking stories on the BBC. That's partly because they're hamstrung by their strict accuracy codes and their desire not to look hopelessly slow. It's not necessarily a bad thing, as they're always titled breaking news anyway. Ajkgordon 12:53, 7 February 2008 (EST)
imagine a news organization concerning itself with accuracy! That's un-merican! Shame on the BBC. Why aren't they worried about accuracy in spelling words the color and fiber??? 204.248.28.194 15:19, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Yeah, goddamn British Broadcasting COMMUNISTS! Ajkgordon 16:20, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Don't be silly. Everyone knows that America invented Communism. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:45, 7 February 2008 (EST)
Sadly, guys like Hunter S. Thompson or Edward Murrow are very much the exception in American journalism. Copy-pasting press releases is so much EASIER and ECONOMICAL.... (Very good essay on the problem) --Gulik 17:22, 7 February 2008 (EST)