Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive34

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

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Ed, Modern Science, and the growing dent in my wall

Oh, Ed... how dearly I wish you were just a parodist. But no, you're serious, and you just used Creation On The Web to define start an article about Modern Science - conveniently reminding us that There Is A Creator and that Atheism Is Wrong.

I'm seriously bashing my head against the wall here. Not even because it's propaganda, mind you, but because he doesn't even take the time to weave the source into an article. He just writes articles by dropping some quote he likes into an empty document, and then he walks away. Nothing says "I don't really give a shit about this..." more than that. And then he claims that he's a great encyclopedia contributor and gets a "Wow! Great job, Ed!!!" from Andy. GRAH! Why must the stupid hurt so much? --Sid 17:51, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

If only stupidity was as painful to the stupid as to the rest of us, eh? --Kels 17:59, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Yes... yes... but there they are, merrily going on and on. What's worse is that any attempt at fixing this one would be screwed up because the sysops would insist to credit Christianity every other sentence and to point out that Atheism is totally bad. Oh, and they'd have to find a way to blame liberals for something! BWAAARGH excuse me, I need a brief CP break. Gotta vent all this crap into creative writing of some sort. --Sid 18:07, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget Script Frenzy is coming up. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 18:12, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Interesting! I think I heard of it, but I never checked it out before. Don't think script writing is my thing, but I know a few people who study things related to theater and plays in general, so I'll forward the link to them. :)

(In other news, Ed refuses to stop being a liberal-hating ass. *sigh*) --Sid 20:43, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

( undent) Articles like that are a great thing as they make it more likely that a casual reader coming to CP is going to stmble across a venomous hate screed early on in their browsing and thus know exactly what CP is about -- hate. That is why I've stopped my sock activity on CP. As every bit of non-crazy content I added only served to camolfalge the crazy stuff. That I suspect is the purpose of all the cutting and pasting activities. Ed is just a pathetic and disgruntled WP editor who wants a site to be important on. That is CP. Since its members are contracting -- Only Andy and his butt boys ( sorry kids that is what groomers like Andy, Ed and Karjou do afterall) -- Ed has a good chance of maintaining his status of big turd floating in a small pond. Obviously the intertubes exist only to feed his pathetic ego and provide him with fresh young boys to diddle. Hey Kids, Uncle Andy is going to teach you about man-parts today. Let's all suitup for gym! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{I said what?} 21:16, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

What a sad and bitter nobody you really are. V. vulpes 21:59, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

And what are you? A happy and satisfied nobody? or simply some sort of conservative shill? Grow up. There's is seriously purient fascination over at CP as a former admin you apparently either you shared it or ignored it. Which is it? ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{I said what?} 22:16, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Go fuck yourself TK. V. vulpes 22:17, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Now you're just being an asshole and your making me want to travel to RAtionalwiki and kick your ass! HHAHAHAHA . . . your behaviour marks you as a simp and a trol 22:19, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

And yours marks you as a spotty teen with a child-porn fixation. V. vulpes 22:20, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

hmmm . . . Ok . . . I don't see the connection, but whatever. Have another drink! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{I said what?} 22:22, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Goodnight, TK - and remember -- you'll never be allowed back at CP. Hurts, doesn't it? V. vulpes 22:24, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

This conversation is about to go badly downhill, inevitably ending in comparisons to Hitler, and hurt feelings all around. Stop now. Step away from the keyboard. Go pet a jerboa, or milk a goat.

Pinto's5150 ^Talk 22:25, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Apparently, everyone here is either Ames, Icewedge, or TK. Busy, aren't they? --Gulik 22:42, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

I thought I was human? Who am I supposed to be now? --Kels 22:45, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Why is Fox accusing Sheesh of being TK? Ah, RationalWiki, where CP sysops come to edit when they are "in their cups"? human 22:49, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

1) Can i start drinking too? and 2) why can't CP have it's own section for vitriol?-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 22:51, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Why do you assume that everybody drinks? You don't need a drink to be annoyed when toerags start accusing you of being a paedophile. As for "TK" - lol, right, it doesn't need a genius to spot him and his style when he pops up at CP and here in his several guises. V. vulpes 22:55, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

I think that "in their cups" could be broader than drinkin'. Anyway, if you're convinced that Sheesh is TK, the perfect place to add that data is at RationalWikiWiki! Although, I suspect you are right. Or, more correctly, I agree that Sheesh is not the most impressive contributor here. human 23:03, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm neither TK nor the "most impressive contributor" here ( Thanks Human for pointing that out! I didn't know there was a contest on! my aim is not to impress but to abuse . . user:Smyth). Further, while There does seem to be a fascination at CP with the purient, I was not accusing Fox of anything -- all the while assuming he was not a active editor of articles like gay bowel syndrome or the like. I am drinking a beer but have not drank enough to make me go all crazy, start foaming at the mouth or calling other folks toerags ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{I said what?} 23:10, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Just testing my new sig. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 23:21, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

That's a mighty big sig. Personally, I think Fox is just trying to get back in the correct mindset for editing CP. I offer him a simple guide to help:

1. Hate Liberals.
2. Hate Liberals.
3. Hate Liberals.
4. HATE LIBERALS!!!!1!!@!!!one
5. Repeat previous steps as necessary. --Gulik 23:25, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

This comment always struck me as odd. I'm with Fox and H. And if it is TK, then he's even more of a tool than I thought he was. --Robledo 23:33, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

And since I'm not TK we can assume that you think that I, Sheesh!, is even more of a tool than you thought because I pointed out (as has been done before) that CP seems fascinated with pornography and sexual behavior? hey have a higher ratio of articles about "deviant" sexuality than WP does. Or is there an issue with my defending myself against Fox's attacks? I don't remember the impetus of the comment you linked, but reading it over it seems to accurately reflect my experience over at CP. What seems odd about it to you? ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 23:44, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

Weren't we all gonna drop this stupid drama? That's right, we were. Here's a reminder. --Kels 23:48, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

This conversation is about to go badly downhill, inevitably ending in comparisons to Hitler, and hurt feelings all around. Stop now. Step away from the keyboard. Go pet a jerboa, or milk a goat.

New Topic

I'll start a new discussion and see if we can avoid fuck you's and others various insults being thrown around.... always remember, there is neither wit nor courage in fighting over the internet... that being said, lets go to my new topic... I sometimes wonder, with all the conservative claims of Judicial activism and judges following the liberal agenda... shouldn't the US be a haven for "liberal Thought?" I mean... If we have these judges, all over the country creating new laws, shouldn't we have gay marriage in 85% of the country, not too mention on demand Abortion, sex toys given out with school lunches etc.... It seems that the judges are not quite the danger conservatives make it out to be... I have a theory, but I wanna hear from other people first. SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 00:44, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

The sarcasm I detect in your comment is plauditworthy, oh deep seer of the truth. "Judicial activism" is a conservsative "movement" neologism intended to anger the socially conservative unwashed into voting for neo-conservative candidates. human 00:56, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm not sure it was sarcasm. I took the question to be "How can some people maintain the doublethink necessary to believe these two contradictory ideas?" I think it has to do with the persecuted minority / actual majority concept, which I'm fairly sure has been explained somewhere else on this site far better than I could at the moment. If you were looking for a logical inroad, SirChuckB, it's a sound argument, but I'm not sure how much that would matter.Arcan 03:46, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

The doublethink is indeed mighty. --Gulik 15:44, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

There’s some ‘’’cool porn’’’ on Conservapedia this week

Have you seen the Conservapedia Main Page this week? Just look at the Masterpiece of the Week? It’s a man looking up a lady’s dress. And at the time that picture was painted women didn’t wear knickers. We can all imagine what he’s looking at. LOL! So that’s what the tender adolescent home schooled kids can look at for a week.

What will they feature next? Gay anal porn? there’s a thread running at the Internet Infidels at the moment about Immorality among Religious Believers.Barbara Shack 07:17, 16 March 2008 (EDT

Actually I'm thinking the next masterpiece (sorry, you'll see why) of the week is going to be an original composition by Ed Poor consisting of a picture of Richard Dawkins studded ( sorry again) with human vulvas ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:11, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Poor poor DHayes....

It looks like he's really trying to actually help them, and they just spit in his face whenever he asks a question. I wonder how long it'll be before I slip and get myself banned.. It'll be sad, I enjoy the insanity of it all ד.לערנער 10:06, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Worst part of it is, DHayes is actually the sort of person they should be dying to get over there, willing to go through with a fine-tooth comb and make the place look more like an encyclopedia. But they've been doing that a lot lately, they turfed a guy who was interested in functionality because he wasn't just pumping out the articles like Andy wanted. More evidence that Andy only wants an "encyclopedia" as window dressing, and Ed's only too happy to climb on board. --Kels 10:08, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

*looks over that talk page and Ed's talk page* Wow, that's fairly messed up. I'm also impressed that he somehow managed to squeeze almost 50 edits (most of which are actual contribs to the "encyclopedia", it seems) into his less than 12 hours of being unblocked (wasn't there a night-time edit block in those 12 hours, too?).

I know that Andy doesn't like people asking for sources (with his "ideological fact tags"), but Ed really pushes things into the extreme there.

It's weird, especially since several other sysops have zero problems working with that guy (PJR helped with template stuff, Conservative(!) fixed his article, Crocoite(!!!) de-linked dates and refs to deleted templates as had been suggested here and here). Only Ed can't accept that somebody voices criticism or questions a claim. --Sid 11:42, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

56 and counting

Couldn't think of proper snark, so I'll just drop it off here: Kektklik will quit once he reaches 1000 edits --Sid 13:51, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Or is made a sysop? Genghis ^Marauding 13:57, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I find his user page hilarious:

Points?
PRs

(+1,215) 1/11/08 9:20PM EST
(+202), (+113), & (-4) for fixing layout error
(+486), (+218), & (+8) on Talk:Zombie
(-971,027) on a revert for Ronald Reagan [1]

Spelling fixes

m protégé fixes (+125)

Someone should invite him over here. human 19:27, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

40 and counting. Genghis ^Marauding 17:18, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, Fuzzy's gone past 1000 edits and doesn't seem to have realised. Maybe with Fox being given the boot, he's next for sysop. After all, if he fucks up he doesn't get to grope Phy! Genghis ^Marauding 18:16, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Judging from some of his updates, it seems he's only counting mainspace edits... and I detect a slight eagerness to finally depart... --Sid 23:49, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Revolt

I was off over the weekend enjoying Liberal pre-marital sex, liberal alcohol abuse and liberal television watching but for some grandiose reason I was hoping that maybe I sparked a revolt. However, Monday morning at work and I discover my harsh remarks had little effect. What did expect really? Meh. MetcalfeM 16:19, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

What the fuck is up with Andy and higher education?

First* it was professor values, now this. (its a bit too old for WIGO imo) NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 17:03, 16 March 2008 (EDT) * maybe not

Oh, boy. Here's yer list of no name higher education establishments. Hey, kids! Get a third rate education thanks to your parents' political affiliation! Kids, pay back your parents by sticking them in a third rate home when they're old and senile. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 17:19, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

"...there are reasons to question whether they really qualify as conservative" Not going to tell you what they are, but there are reasons! --Kels 17:32, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I believe the reasons are something along the lines of "not everyone on campus is dressed in bobby socks and walks around looking terrified with a bible clutched to their chest in a white knuckled grip." --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 17:36, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

it is simple elitism. Andy thinks it should be home schoolin or nothing. If you happen to come from a family that can't educate you for whatever reason, welcome to the working poor, where you belong. You see this world is full of haves and have-nots. Andy is one of the haves ( via his familty of course) thus his job is to crap all over the have nots and the American college system whixh seeks to displace them from those ranks. Claro? ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 17:35, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh dear God, I couldn't stop laughing about the "American colleges" entry. Does Andy design slogans for Despair, Inc. in his free time? --Sid 17:37, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, at least now we know what his homskollars do instead of sex ed. Quiet down kids, now I'm going to tell you about University. Many of you are getting to the age where you're going to want to get educated for the first time. Let me tell you, if you don't practice safe matriculation, you could become depressed, addicted, or otherwise lost spiritually and mentally. So, remember always to wear a mental condom and if a professor is wearing birkenstocks and has an unkempt beard, don't enroll with him or it'll fall off. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 17:47, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

You mentioned bobby-socks| Now I'm going to have a five-minute time out. Genghis ^Marauding 17:55, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Y'know, by this point, I'm just taking refuge in the thought that Andy, upon seeing us not convinced that he's a parodist and this is some sort of cynical, passive-agressive way to get back at his mom for his disasterous childhood, is just upping the ante until we get it. Barikada 22:23, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Debate? Why should there be debate?

Debate question: hasn't any scientific evidence of intelligent design been published? Andy's response: Don't disagree with my belief even on a debate page or I'll ban you. No comrade, you may not debate issues. ד.לערנער 19:05, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

What's even more hilarious:

• Saying bad things about St. Behe "is libelous".
• However, repeatedly claiming that Dawkins is not a prof (even after Oxford University said Andy is wrong) is okay.
• Oh, and saying "evolutionists are censors and do everything they can to suppress other viewpoints and research" in the same edit isn't hypocritical at all.
• Come to think of it... a ban threat in an edit claiming that "evolutionists [...] try to suppress other viewpoints" earns him Extra Hypocrisy Points.

But yeah, block threats on debate pages are even worse than 90/10 blocks. --Sid 19:12, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

simple confirmation that Andy et al are a collection of tools and none of them are all that sharp. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 20:44, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

"Proof" that liberals aren't really friends.

Well, Andy has proven once and for all, that liberals pressure friends into being liberals or else! his source: this page ד.לערנער 20:45, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I love how, to prove his point about how "often" liberals practice this, he cites a site that doesn't even register on alexa. Christ, Rationalwiki has more page views! DickTurpis 21:38, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm amazed it isn't more popular. I for one have been wondering exactly how we are going to turn conservatives into the persecuted minority they so long to be ( half the time). Here is the answer! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 09:43, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Impressive. It appears Poe's Law works both ways!! He certainly can take some things to heart a little too much. Armondikov 10:12, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Burden of Proof

Did PJR forget the first rule of holes here? As far as I know, Science and Nature actually do make public a lot of information about their peer review processes, whereas that Creation journal doesn't. Wonder if anyone's gonna pick up on that? -- Kels 22:22, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

The first rule of holes? It was sad indeed to see PJR slipping a cog there, he's usually not that ignorant-seeming -- in his argumentation, at least. human 15:01, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

First rule of holes: If you've dug yourself into a hole, STOP DIGGING!! --Kels 17:44, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps there's an amusing little pastime for us here, write a scholarly paper rebutting a recent paper in Creation and submit it to same for peer review and publication. Do we have any PhDs here to headline? My degree is in Computer Science, so not a lot of help there except possibly vs. Dembskite information theory nonsense. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 17:55, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Doh, thanks! human 17:56, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

There have been plenty of blogged rebuttals (including my own) but I don't think the journal is real into accepting alternative views. In fact their mission statement forbids publishing stuff that isn't "creation friendly". "Let no truth stand in the way of truth!"-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 18:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

The second 'Truth' needs a capital T. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 18:03, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Dean Martin + Salma Hayek = Three Stooges

After seeing DanH, say that such things aren't good, I went through a bunch of articles deleting them (for the simple reason that they make no sense) AND THAT MOTHERFUCKER JOAQUIN BLOCKED ME FOR A WEEK ד.לערנער 22:27, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I'll invoke the Victim Rule (which I just made up) and merge my section into yours, DLerner:

First DHayes (1 day), and now DLearner (1 week). Apparently, sysops really, really can't stand it when people get into the way of their pet projects. Anybody got an idea which comment actually earned him the week-long vacation? --Sid 22:25, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Seriously, WTF about your block. I hope that somebody reverts it. --Sid 22:30, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh, and like I said in the edit summary: Feel free to change the WIGO entry (5?) as you see fit. I just had it typed out when I realized that you're hanging out here, too. (Premature WIGOlation, I guess - they make pills against that, don't they?) --Sid 22:33, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm a little amazed that it was Joaquin, of all people. He's usually one of the less insane ones. --Kels 22:32, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I think Conservative dragged some sort of disease in. Ever since he returned, he, Andy, Ed, and JM have been orgasming about Google. And Ed and JM also cranked up the Superdickery (Andy already was there, but Conservative is fairly relaxed, it seems). --Sid 22:36, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Ah, crap. Does this mean I have to delete my own WIGO entry now? --Kels 22:34, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I dunno. I like yours better than mine somehow, so merge it down? --Sid 22:36, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

It's one of his pet projects in order to raise the Google ranking. BTW, how long before they realize that I write here too? ד.לערנער 22:35, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm actually curious who is right there, Dan or JM. Then again, Dan cites Conservative, who has been obsessed with Google's algorithm to the degree that he counts as authority on CP.

But common sense says that including those links is laughable. Just like the "See also: Gay Bomb" link on the "Bill Clinton" article is idiotic (see the Clinton and Gay Bomb talk pages for Extra Lulz during your newfound free time). --Sid 22:39, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

UPDATE: I've sent emails to DanH, Andy and even JM challenging my block, how long before any of them bother to respond? ד.לערנער 07:56, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Excellent question, I don't think I ever exchanged mails with either of them... Dan strikes me as an okay guy overall, so he might reply at least, even if it's just to say "I agree that it's an odd decision, but it's JM's block, and I'm reluctant to undo it, so maybe consult him first...". JM... he seems more or less rational in terms of pushing ideology (read: I never saw him pushing any, he just seems to edit tame stuff like Baseball, actors, or healthy living), but he recently took on a rather nasty blocking approach. Check out how he upgraded other sysops' blocks for Barikada (2 hours by Kara upgraded to 1 month, 1 week by PJR upgraded to 3 months). So I don't really think he will unblock you unless you sign a document stating that you are vile scum and that you appeal to his mercy to undo a completely justified block. But hey, maybe his reasonable side wins out? I wish you the best! --Sid 08:31, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

But I wasn't even trying to do harm... Ah, fuck it ד.לערנער 09:38, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, the CP Karma balanced itself: You are unblocked, and DHayes got ownz'd after going on a quasi-hiatus. Happy editing, just watch out for those land mines! --Sid 18:30, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Minor Lulz

I was gonna post this in WIGO... but I figured it was too petty and anal... but would someone please sock up and tell Phil the line is "When did you stop beating your wife?" If you're gonna use hack lines and nonsensical replies, at least get your cliches right SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 23:04, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

Does it really make a difference? I always see it in the form Phil is using. GrandSoviet 00:03, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

It's not a huge thing, which is why I didn't throw it on WIGO, but in the form of "Did you stop...?" it doesn't seem to work, comedy wise.... However, it may be just me being anal about humor things... But the original form of the joke is "Senator, when did you stop beating your wife?" SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 01:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

That's right, it works better in the past tense. PoorEd 14:50, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

More minor lulz (unrelated). Uchiha^KATON! 19:48, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

WIGO @ Craigslist

Occasionally I look over the best of at craigs list. There are some fun things there like the upholstered vagina couch or a story that is worse than a textual goatse (read at your own peril). But my friends, I come before you to stand behind you and tell you of something else. Anti-atheist Backlash on R&R is some interesting reading about why some Christian fundamentalists pick atheists as targets for their rants rather than other religions. --Shagie 01:41, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Good article, although the author does give an inaccurate description of moral relativism as a philosophy that necessarily carries with it multiculturalism and respect for others' beliefs. Anyway, I have a lot of Christian friends (including my girlfriend) who have said something along the lines of, "I don't care what anyone believes, as long as they believe something." When I ask why, the response is usually "I don't know" or "Because I like to believe that something's out there." GrandSoviet 11:42, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

The multicultralism and respect bit is Americanism talking. Once again returning to the explorer of all things - science fiction - I suggest reading Otherness by David Brin. Aside from a number of interesting short stories, there is "The Dogma of Otherness". The introduction for this can be read here. The dogma that there must be no dogmas is explored. Another bit Brin has written on the subject can be read here. --Shagie 13:47, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

It goes back to the fact that uber-Christians are obsessed with the idea that atheists are in rebellion against god. They see it as an active attack on their beliefs no matter how many times you try to tell them atheism is more often than not merely a lack of belief in god. Jews and muslims, for example, at least believe in god. Even if they are doomed to damnation anyway. PoorEd 14:57, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

There is almost a conspiracy of belief amongst the major religions. They prefer that you believe something rather than nothing. Believers can often be converted to a different belief but disbelievers are anarchists. In the UK, Prince Charles has said that he would like to be seen as a defender of faith, rather than "The Faith", in a move to appease the multiculturalists. I have often worked in Middle Eastern countries where on the visa form you had to put down your religion. Putting atheist or agnostic was a definite no-no, yo didn't get a visa. However, for several years I got away with putting down "hedonist". Genghis ^Marauding 15:20, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Ed Poor, meet Tolkien. Tolkien, meet dimwit

Ed seems to be worried that there's more than Satan out to corrupt him. Psygremlin 10:52, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Sounds to me like he thinks Morgoth Bauglir is Satan. "...he was cast into the void. His example was used to provide later ages with cautionary tales, warning against pride, wrath, envy, lust for power, and greed." PoorEd 15:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

He'd be more or less correct, too. Especially Milton's Satan from Paradise Lost. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 15:10, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Undergarments!

So, now we know why little Ms. S wants to live in the past. It's not the disease, or the hours of toil 't'mill. It's the layers of frilly undergarments! --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 16:27, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm, little Miss BCS, expert on 19th century undergarments and the colonial era life of wimmin. You know, most of these people who wish they lived in the late 18th century read about people like Jefferson and Franklin (etc.), and think "that's the life for me", without realizing that's like thinking they can be Bill Gates or Malcom Forbes or that guy who founded Virgin Atlantic in the 20th. IE, the richest people, as opposed to the unwashed masses, which, of course, most of us would be members of. In fact, as she appears to be an eldest daughter, right about now, age-wise, she would be shifting from caring for her youngest six or seven siblings to her own line of spawn. human 18:20, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

That's what history education does to you. If you aren't careful, you can come away with the impression that history has been a long line of wars and rich people doing interesting things. I guess I was lucky in my own history lessons since my history teacher, who despite what Conservapedia would have us believe is the only hardcore lefty I ever encountered in the education system, was terribly keen on social history in particular. I could easily have come away with the impression that the Peninsular and Napoleonic wars lasted about a fortnight for all they were mentioned in passing for their economic impact on Britain's trade. Of course, there were the yer Humphrey Davys and yer IK Brunels, but I think that was more the curriculum than what he wanted to teach. Learning social history has a way of curing you of wanting to live in the idyllic rural past. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 18:32, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

There's a an old joke that goes something like "as people get older, they tend to long for times that never exsisted" or something like that. It's very true... I deal with it a lot when teaching students. Ask a student what life as a Pirate was like... or a knight. 9 times out of 10, you get the response you'd expect from someone watching Johnny Depp movies all their life. People think these times are fun and inviting, simply because they fail to look past the glamour we add to them and see how terribly, terribly shitty life was for Johnny Average... Like Monty Python said "He must be a king... He hasn't got shit all over him." SirChuckB^{Obama/Biden? 2012} 18:41, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

On the other hand, it shouldn't be painted as too dystopian either - that's just going to the opposite extreme. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 18:47, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

No, but life before indoor plumbing, penicillin, and vaccination was a lot more Hobbesian than life (in the West, at least) is these days. They just didn't know it at the time, having nothing to compare to. human 18:50, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Short, nasty and brutish. Bizarro Ed^{Alternate Realities} 19:12, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Let's leave Kowardjou out of this, shall we? --Kels 19:19, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Poor Ed sets 'em up, and you pot 'em, Kels. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן ^{שְׁלֹום}

I would love to have lived like my great-grandparents, just not died like them (typhoid, cholera). Actually, i don't think I'd like to live like them either. Ekeing out existence in a muddy shtetl, hiding from rampaging Cossaks in the root cellar during Easter or whenever else the Czar felt like killing jews...-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 19:22, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

As long as we're at it, fuck subtlety: Karajou is a cowardly bully who wouldn't know his own pupick from his asshole, where his head is frequently buried.

Surely a better description would be a lousy

, lousy , lousy

chickenhawk? --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום

OK, who's been fooling with the ad hom generator? --מְתֻרְגְּמָן ^{שְׁלֹום}

That would be me :) human 19:34, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

You Word evil word!
--מְתֻרְגְּמָן ^{שְׁלֹום}

The undergarment argument among the conservatives is quite interesting. Sad it ended very tamely. --Braden 19:38, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I do find it interesting that it's not only French hooker's jugs and little Grecian penises that are censored by Conservapedia. You're not even allowed things that are only suggestively naughty. At homskoll, apparently, impure thoughts are a crime too. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 06:17, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Which is why they have to make do with old paintings of men looking up women's skirts. Bizarro Ed^{Alternate Realities} 08:24, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

"AP" style guide

is a bit of conservative satire but it is not presented as such. I couldn't figure out how to post the dif so I didn't add it to WIGO. I am continuely surprised at what a bunch of hypocrtical lying tools all those CP admins are. Lies, more lies and the lying liars who tell them ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 19:33, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

If anyone bothers to read the article you'll see that it purports to providing a 4 step guide to defending Barack Obama, and then lists 5 different steps, using the "Step 4" heading twice for different things. I'd tell Andy about it but I'm always on during the lockdown 121.216.77.250 04:44, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Linkie? Couldn't find something that relates to this on the WIGO page... human 13:37, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Liberal

StinkyCheese7 rewrote the article liberal so it actually had some sense, the response: blocked. ד.לערנער 22:34, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

He didn't re-write it, he copied it from wikipedia and said it was his own. TmtamesP 22:40, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh, sorry ד.לערנער 22:44, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I think that was why he was blocked, not for the actual content changes made. TmtamesP 22:50, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Hell, it's CP, they were blocked for both. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 00:17, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Eh?

I'm sure somebody else has brought this up before, but my mild-mannered alter-ego just found this little gem: "A disproof, or anti-proof, is a well-reasoned counter-argument against a strongly-asserted claim. Disproofs are possible in the not-so-unlikely case that someone has over-looked an implicit (and false) assumption. For example, the kangaroo, the snake, and the papaya disprove the theory of evolution, while volcanoes disprove global warming (both that it exists and that humans are the cause)." No references or cites, of course. Certainly earned a WTF from moi... or did doofus me misread it? Psygremlin 06:56, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

That... looks odd, but I think it's right on the fine line between "typical CP WTF" and "parody". It's hard to tell when the resident YEC crowd and Ed basically same things as crazy with a straight face. --Sid 08:47, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Ed must be a parodist, surely? Ajkgordon 10:43, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I dunno, but I see he's at it again - Liberal Code Words now. Psygremlin 11:13, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Oops, I should read the talk page before posting on WIGO. Sorry for the duplication, but I found Liberal Code Word hilarious. Bondurant 12:25, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Judging by his brain-damaged definition of "progressive", he's either stupid or a parodist - I lean towards the latter. Bizarro Ed^{Alternate Realities} 13:31, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Personally, I think it's a random article that they're generating just to link to other articles. Namely, evolution, so they can bump it up google with the minimum of effort. Plausible conspiracy methinks. Armondikov 12:34, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Uncyclopedia - my take

I'd like your comments. Thank you ד.לערנער 11:04, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I dunno. As soon as the words "Blue Collar Comedy" and "funniest people" appeared in the same sentence I sort of stopped listening. DickTurpis 11:42, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

WHAT? Git 'r' done doesn't make you squeal with laughter?! "You might be a redneck" doesn't make you piss yourself?! Get out!

But seriously, I enjoy CP - as insane as it is. I'm just trying to get my point across. And BTW, Foxworthy has sold more albums then any other comedian in history, so he must be doing something right.

I personally would have stopped reading when I saw Dennis Miller. Is there something about going conservative that dries up humor? ד.לערנער 11:49, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

If by "squeal with laughter" you mean "roll my eyes so hard that they fall out of my head and I have to bend down to pick them up, but I can't find them because I don't have any fucking eyes anymore." GrandSoviet 12:00, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

See Sarcasm ד.לערנער 12:18, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think it's possible that being conservative precludes a sense of humor beyond the "Boy's Life" Grin and Bear It page. Bizarro Ed^{Alternate Realities} 13:48, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I get the impression that Dennis Miller is one of the many, many people who just kind of broke on 9/11. It's hard to be funny when your every waking moment is spend being VERY VERY AFRAID. --Gulik 17:53, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Ed vs. Fox

Who do you think will win? Will Ed flood the site with anti-liberal trash or will Fox get away with purging it? Will Andy intervene? Place your bets! NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 12:25, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think Andy will win either way. He always does.

Alternatively, Fox will delete a few more of the Liberals and X articles, get bored, threaten to go away for a long time, then come back within a week to post more Daily Mail links on Mainpageright. And then Andy will win. Bondurant 12:36, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Hmm, Andy has to love the "Librulz iz teh suck" attitude of that stuff, but he can't be all that thrilled to have dozens of random sentences turned into "articles" that any psrdst would be proud of. Or can he? I think Ed's a favorite at -210. The over/under on the number of "articles" created before Andy intervenes is 152.--Bayes_yikes 12:38, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Andy wouldn't care in the slightest bit if others thing those articles are parodies, as long as he personally likes them. On the other hand he doesn't seem to care enough about those to question one of his sysops, lest he looks like he made a mistake in appointing them. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 13:51, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Ed keeps getting crazier! The "articles cited to blog" thing is getting bigger & bigger!-αmεσ (ninja) 12:52, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

This reminds me of a bit I heard from Satanic Verses. The particular section being read was about a scribe who was taking notes and writing the Koran and deliberately inserting mistranslations and mistakes from what was actually said. If I recall correctly, the intent was to see if it was the spirit of what was being said or the letter that was important, but I could me mistaken and that is a whole 'nother debate and I'd have to go hunt down a copy of it and read it to find that passage. Anyways... eventually a fair bit of what was taken for the word of God was deliberate mistakes. I wonder if Ed is doing the same thing (either intentionally or unintentionally). Slowly adding things to see if Andy likes it or not and getting further and further away from original (homeschool) message. --Shagie 13:46, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Liberal code words

Commented out, because I had added it as an update to the "liberalism and the arts" wigo entry. However, if someone thinks that the new one shoudl survive, and the update shoudl not, please remove my comment brackets & the old one :-)-αmεσ (ninja) 12:32, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

And the source is... "Mongo's Mutterings". I'm floored. Good thing they banned that DHayes dude - poor guy would have pestered Ed with things like "sources should be authoritative" and other annoying quotes of the Commandments. ;) Come to think of it, Ed started his rambling about liberal code words before:

“”"Simple question" is a liberal code word for, "I am trying to score a point."

What happened to Ed? He's pumping out a new anti-liberal article EACH DAY now! --Sid 15:03, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think he's decided he hates fox so much, he needs to ban him by the back door. Create so many liberal articles he gets pissed off and bans himself. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 15:11, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Quite possible. Right now, he's apparently trying to push all the right buttons. And it would nicely explain why he suddenly produces so many rants like that. --Sid 15:14, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Ah, actually it's not a source, just an External Link. Which means that this rambling is... uncited! Wheeeee! --Sid 15:13, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think the backdoor ban is probably what he's doing. It's uncharacteristically wily of him.-αmεσ (ninja) 15:15, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Fox does a 180, apparently realizing that if you can't beat them, join them: LIBERAL ANGER! --Sid 15:19, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh Fox, and I thought you were better than that. (Cue cp:Liberal disappointment) --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 15:30, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

In the meantime, the heat is on on the talk page as both HelpJazz and Bohdan can't help but frown at Ed's "article" and his choice of source/link. --Sid 15:27, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think he's an impressionable kid and has really been digging into his Ann Coulter and Michael Savage books lately. It's probably screwed his whole head right up and playing about on CP isn't doing him any favours. MarcusCIcero 86.40.103.192 15:20, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Negotiating with Terrorists

I mean, the more I look at this, I'm wondering if Ed isn't the Master Parodist? It's just stunning - not only is it completely true, but Ed knows it. And on top of that, it's quote mining in the extreme, and on top of THAT, it's utterly changing the meaning of a quote, in a way. In so many ways, it's both astonishingly wrong, and yet superbly RIGHT. I'm gobsmacked, and dying to see what happens to this article. DogP 13:14, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

So how does this apply to CP?

Fundamentalists believe they have a unique relationship with God. Check.

They and their ideas are God's ideas and God's premises on the particular issue. Check.

...anyone who disagrees with them is inherently wrong. Check - everyone who challenges Andy!

...it makes your opponents sub-humans.. Check - TK.

...can't bring himself or herself to negotiate with people who disagree with them... Check - block them for trolling!

Genghis ^Marauding 13:59, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Not only is it all that, but it's Jimmy Carter! DogP 14:02, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

To top it off, he's replying to this question:

“”SPIEGEL: One main points of your book is the rather strange coalition between Christian fundamentalists and the Republican Party. How can such a coalition of the pious lead to moral catastrophes like the Iraqi prison scandal in Abu Ghraib and torture in Guantanamo?

Anybody going to include this in CP's Guantanamo/torture-related articles? After all, Ed verified that it's a Trustworthy Source already... --Sid 15:08, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Fox

Ten Euros say he's finally just given up and is now full blown taking the piss. MarcusCicero 15:31, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Concur.-αmεσ (ninja) 15:32, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Yep yep. A magnificent sight - Fox is good at doing stuff like that with a straight face (as far as that applies on the Internet). --Sid 15:39, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think this new page seals it. Hilarious. -Smyth 16:14, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Yes, that one made me snicker! Fox is seriously switching into Awesome Overdrive there. --Sid 16:17, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

This can't be good for him - he's referencing Bertrand Russell in a not negative way. --Shagie 16:32, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

And somewhat related, though not another Liberal___ article, it looks like Ed has really lost it. -Smyth 16:39, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

HAHAHAHAHAHA!! That's up there with his "one meter" article!-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 16:42, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

"Two meters", but yeah, it's seriously making my head hurt. --Sid 16:51, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

DanH and Jazz feel like the last sane CP members right now... (Edit to add: And Bohdan!)--Sid 17:25, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

And Fox delivers again with Liberal Quakers! Awesome! It's like they're having a contest to see who can go the deepest off the deep end, only one of them is joking. At least I think only one of them is joking. -Smyth 16:44, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Good point. I also fear that only one of them is joking. Which would mean that the others actually mean it. --Sid 16:51, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

If Ed is serious, I fear for his sanity. -Smyth 16:52, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

OH SHI-! --מְתֻרְגְּמָן ^{שְׁלֹום}

One awesome possibility: completion of the Liberal Kübler-Ross stages. Liberal Denial and Liberal Anger are covered. Have Liberal Bargaining, Liberal Depression, and Liberal Acceptance been created yet?--Bayes_yikes 17:00, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

OMG! Its the CP equivalent of The Deerhunter. Which Liberal article has the live round? Genghis ^Marauding 17:06, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

P.S. Surely Liberal helping is waiting to be grabbed? Genghis ^Marauding 17:07, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

You can always recycle Conservative's articles: Liberal Agenda, Liberal Parenting, Liberal Men, Liberals and the Bible, Sexual Abuse Being a Contributing Factor for Liberals, Teen Liberalism, Liberals and English Speaking Countries, etc. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 17:16, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Aw crap, Wikinterpreter got infected as Fox's infection moves to the next stage. --Sid 17:13, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

And now it got HelpJazz, too. --Sid 17:15, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

This is the end of Conservapedia, I'm 70% sure. But I've been wrong before...-αmεσ (ninja) 17:31, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Hehe. I was just getting warmed up, too. V. vulpes 17:32, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Sorry about the Fall From Grace, but you picked an awesome way to go :D --Sid 17:35, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Fox, it was a pleasure watching your meteoric rise & fall. If you want to stick around and make us less vicious, we'd be happy to have you.-αmεσ (ninja) 17:37, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh dear: Awesome comment by Fox, followed by DanH completely missing the point. --Sid 17:42, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

This looks like the equivalent of the office watercooler, so... Found the site while following the awesomeness at CP and noticing how Dan and Fox apparently both hang out here (even though Dan instantly deleted the reference to this place, how weird). I can't comment on CP (5 years! *does a jig*), so I'll just say it here:

Fox, you are my hero for standing up against Ed's insanity. WP:POINT or not, but you really pointed out in a great way the WTF of all the anti-liberal articles they got there. It's a pity that they chose to keep Ed while shoving you off the road, though. Dumbest decision I've seen since finding CP. :( --DHayes 18:25, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think I think

That the sysops are trying to out-Schlafly each other in a (vain?) attempt to get a correction from the Fearless Leader.
The "reasoning" (such as it is):

1. Aschlafly creates "Liberal____" pages by brainstorming, using the wiki as a notepad.
2. Attempts to reason with him over these have failed, in fact leads to ever-increasingly deranged "Liberal____" articles.
3. If we (CP sysops) emulate Aschlafly we will come up with even wilder and less plausible "Liberal____" at some point something's got to give and we can ditch all the created articles and back to creating reality making CP a truly trustworthy encyclopedia.

OR

1. Since CP is viewed by nearly ALL the rest of the western civilized world as a bunch of YEC, right-wing, kooks, we should embrace that and run with it by
2. Creating ever more polemic articles that will seek to put a plain and unmistakable line in the sand which will
   1. Drive so-called moderate conservatives (Liberals who don't know they're liberals, yet) AWAY from CP.
   2. Attract only the most conservative (right-thinking) people to help create a Trustworthy Encyclopedia.
   3. Make it easier to spot our "enemies", i.e. anyone who bitches about said articles.
      1. CЯacke® 17:55, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I think they're all stoned. Bring out the Cheetos®!-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 18:02, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for sharing your rational opinion. TmtamesP 18:03, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

If that's PAL's professional opinion, that's good enough for me! --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 18:05, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Everything I say is inherently rational. You see, there is an "Ultimate Truth", and I am privvy to it. Want proof? Prove that I'm wrong!-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 18:08, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Just what sort of qualifications do you have, mister so-called internist? I speak with professionally stoned people every day, and am pretty drunk to boot, so I think my opinion is worth much more. Goatspeed to you sir! Genghis ^Marauding 18:24, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

And to think I thought Fox would keep the others in line. Liberal, Kansas. LOL. it's mocking CP without even mocking them! So, does leave me the last angry Jew on CP? Wow, this is funny ד.לערנער 20:12, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I was once an angry Jew on CP. Now I'm just an angry Jew.-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 20:19, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Agree, DLerner. I think Liberal, Kansas was the best. Its the sort of thing you come across and can't believe your luck because it's real. Genghis ^Marauding 20:23, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I like to think of you as the Once and Future Angry Jew of CP. One day, it shall be "ACHLAFLY'S PLEASURE" to unblock you, so it is prophesied. --Jeεv☭s^{Your signature gave me epilepsy...} 04:10, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

"Now I'm just an angry Jew." - Could you drop the Jewish bit and just be angry? Not that we have anything against you being a JEW mind you, but there's no need to rub our noses in it. Genghis ^Marauding 17:17, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Implode

Ames, you mentioned above that this could be the end of conservawhatthefuck. Perhaps your right, it looks like it is going to implode. What the hell will aschlafly do? He go completely bananas, convinced that the liberals shut him down he'll arm himself to the teeth and hunt them down. God, I cant wait. MetcalfeM 18:11, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

I doubt CP will implode, it has survived a lot of blows before. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 18:25, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Andy has had trust problems over the last year. First with the Richard incident, then Samwell and MexMax. So after Iduan and Fox he's really going to be worried about promoting anyone else to sysop. While I wouldn't characterise Fox as a liberal he was certainly one of the more sensible sysops, so as teh wagons circle ever closer expect even more batshit insanity. Genghis ^Marauding 20:08, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

As long as teh assfly can come up with "Liberal chickenhawk" he will keep CP going...and English has a lot of nouns.-- -PalMD ^{--Do I look like I care?} 20:11, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

How could you forget the Team Killer? NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 20:22, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

News Flash: Leda gets blocked for telling Andy that without Fox CP is fucked, of course Andy removes it from his talk page, no dissent comrade. ד.לערנער 20:31, 18 March 2008 (EDT)