Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive37

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <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)

Assflyc doesn't like liberals

Someone tried to improve the Conservapedia article on Liberalism. Assfly reverted it. I don’t know if the unfortunate contributer has been blocked yet. He's been warned I'm getting close to Headdesk Barbara Shack 00:42, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Kind of a redundant headline, I've been reading through some of mom's columns, now I understand where he gets his views on vaccination, higher-education, he was obviously molested as a child by a liberal. The user formerly known as DLerner 00:57, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Of course he was molested by a liberal. Conservatives don't molest anyone. They don't even touch themselves, nevermind anyone else they aren't married to.

Incidentally, has Andy ever confirmed if he has stopped beating his wife? Bondurant 08:08, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Hey, Philip J. Rayment--I'm calling you out!

Over on Conservapedia, you said, with your bare face hanging out: Which religion? Christianity, the only correct religion. Now if you don't agree, prove me wrong;.

(I was going to post this there, using an obvious name and everything, but now it seems even the TALK PAGES are locked to prevent lowlives like me from besmirching Conservapedia's Purity with our vile heresies. Go figure. (Ah, nope--it's just some sort of extra-obnoxious psuedo-block. I can log in, but I'm not allowed to edit ANYTHING. Classy....))

To most rationalists, this would be a pretty tall order. How does one go about DISproving the existence of a being defined as omnipotent AND willing to go to a great deal of trouble to conceal any physical evidence of His existence?

Fortunately, I'm a Discordian, so doing the absurd and impossible comes easy to me, so I'm challenging you to an Elijah-style Test of Faith. Your miracles vs. mine: spontaneous combustion, levitation, water-walking, raising the dead, snake-handling, you name it! Loser has to convert on their deathbed to the other guy's religion. I'm pretty certain I can win this one as my Holey Writ states that Eris won costody of the material universe in Her divorce settlement with Jehvah-One. fnord How about it? Willing to put your $30 where your mouth is? --Gulik 04:19, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

The very existence of conservapedia proves that there is no god. BeastmasterGeneral 07:33, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm always bemused by the fact that many on RW hold PJR up as a paragon of niceness. I suppose in contrast to the slavering ban-junkies that surround him, he almost looks human. But when he anounces that Christianity (and I assume by that he means his version of that religion) is the only "correct" religion, he is damning an awful lot of people to eternal torture by his angry god. Doesn't sound very nice to me. Rational Ed^{5 or 6 edits} 08:27, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, PJR is a nice guy... as long as you don't touch the entire YEC/Christianity/Bible sector. As long as you stay away from those things, you're dealing with a fairly reasonable fellow who is actually concerned about the site and who is willing to speak up against Andy to a certain degree. --Sid 09:18, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I'd guess you got hit by the Night Time lockdown. You'll need to make a hundred anti-liberal edits, openly worship Andy ten times, and give your real name and full address to The Ten in order to get the "right" to edit whenever you like. --Sid 09:18, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

My definition of nice doesn't include someone who decides that everyone who believes in any other religion than his own is damned Rational Ed^{5 or 6 edits} 09:59, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Isn't that the basic tenet of most of the world's religions? Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 17:43, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I reckon I could happily have a pint with PJR. He's caught in the same squaring the circle trap as any biblical literalist, but at least he tries to do it civilly. This place would likely not exist if he'd been running the CP show. --Robledo 11:31, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Ah, looks like you're right. It's up now, so check it while it lasts. --Gulik 12:24, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

About PJR, he seems relatively reasonable on matters that don't involve religion (including things like abstinence and ID), but more importantly, he welcomes discussion and rarely attacks personally those who are arguing with him (he does end up degrading a bunch of people in the process, but not specifically his opponent unless he is part of the previously mentioned "bunch of people").

Plus, he's one of the few sysops that can be bothered to disagree with Andy. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 14:10, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Interestingly, it's Karajou who's blocked me now for 'sarcasm', not PJR. Gotta give him credit, even if it's just for being slower with the block-button. --Gulik 18:39, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Obviously a miracle due to prayer!

The defibrulator was a coincidence! [1] ^{— Unsigned, by: 90.202.164.123 / talk / contribs}

And he was already decomposing! I take back everything I said about PJR. Rational Ed^{5 or 6 edits} 08:56, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

OMG, I am decomposing right now!!! Come on people, how moronic do you have to be. Your cells are dyeing off every second, and being broken down, that is decomposition! Even after you are pronounced medically dead there are many cellular processes still going on. This just goes to show the hype associated with the article. "The leading cause of death of gun shot victims is: gun shot wounds"--TimS 09:39, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

It's too bad these people chose prayer instead of doctors Parents pick prayer over docs; girl dies. I imagine this won't be found on the front page of CP anytime soon. --Jdellaro 17:23, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm at loss of words. I really hope that the parents open their eyes, with the help of an incrimination if needed. I mean, they still have three children, who don't deserve such parents. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 17:40, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Another article about prayer and medicine. Girl dies of diabetes after parents choose prayer over medicine Czolgolz 21:28, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

MargeryCampbell?

Don't know if this one is a parodist or not but this strange exchange with PJR seems worthy of a WIGO entry. --Kamuy8 14:00, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Old gnus - see the last archived WIGO talk page. PFoster 14:03, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

But yeah, it was crazy :-). The consensus seemed to be that she's a parodist, but I thought she was real.-αmεσ (tinker) 17:56, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Cool. I wasn't sure if it was already in there. --Kamuy8 13:55, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

What's this?

I don't get what's going on here. Is Ed arguing with himself or what? -Smyth 17:45, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

And then there's this. Did he create the page with a merge template in it? Am I missing something, or is Ed getting even wackier? -Smyth 17:50, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Okay, now he's responding to people on someone else's talk page [2]. -Smyth 18:12, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, that last bit is just him having a ping-pong conversation (He's not really saying that Geo is a bit junior, as amusing as that may be). Check out his talk page for the other half of the discussion. --Sid 18:31, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Ed occasionally mock-argues with himself. Takes some gettin' used to, but it's not really too weird. Creating an article with a merge template, on the other hand, is weird. I wouldn't even shake my head that much (It's CP - weird is what they do), but this is Ed "I would have helped God creating the Earth, but I was busy editing on Wikipedia" Poor! He should know better than that... Especially since CP has so few editors that Move/Merge Proposals (just as AFDs, Speedy Candidates, fact tags and stubs) are basically left to rot for all eternity. --Sid 18:31, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

The first one makes sense if he mindlessly copy/pasted something like he usually do THEN argued against it (though a quick google search finds nothing). NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 18:35, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

To me the first one makes "sense" - he is setting up an attempt to show the "choice" movement as having internal contradictions. Too bad he doesn't say who said what he says someone said. Maybe a footnote followed in a later diff... human 19:03, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Liberal hate is approaching critical mass!

Seriously, Ed and Andy must surely run out of nouns any day now! There are just that many ways to say "Liberals are evil, conservatives are saints!"

I just clicked the Recent Changes on CP... and the majority of edits seem to be to hate-articles. "Liberals and reason", "Communism and feminism", "Liberals and academia", "Feminism and choice". Plus some other "normal" articles and talk.

Gotta say, Ed and Andy really drove the parodists out of business. I see no way anybody would be willing or able to create more WTF articles than they do. --Sid 20:01, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Liberals and Reason? Surely that a typo for Liberals and Treason? DickTurpis 21:49, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, the title is misleading since it instantly turns into a "They don't mix! Liberals suck!" rant. Deceptive marketing and all that. --Sid 19:22, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Since it was an update to an "old" item...

Ladies and gentlemen Fellow crazy people, hear me out! There is another borderline sane sysop on CP, aside from Dan, PJR and CPAdmin1! Conservative just deleted that "Mystery of Life" "article" with the YouTube links after verifying that the material was indeed posted without permission! He actually put site rules, laws and common sense before his own ideology! My mind, it is boggled! --Sid 20:18, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

He's still a nutjob. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 20:30, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Well... yes. But it's a start! Compared to the current craziness, his behavior does stand out in a good way. --Sid 20:36, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Aye. We should probably try and muster a little polite applause whenever something halfway sensible happens over there. In Ken's case, it's a struggle, but positive reinforcement n' all that: *applauds* --Robledo 20:51, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Come, come, now. We can do better than that. *Applauds* Keep it up, Conservative! -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:56, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Should we give him the clap? Genghis ^Marauding 14:05, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Claps are cheap, so I don't see why we can't afford to give him some. They come in bulk anyways. -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:54, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Always buy wholesale. --Kels 18:41, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

And VAT free, if possible. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 18:43, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

"Many" = "Less Than 20"

A Conservapedian spoke at Princeton University concerning the link between breast cancer and abortion, proclaims the "Breaking News" headline. Of course, there's not a single link to be found in the "News" to get more info about the event. In fact, a user even asks for details but to no avail. Of course, the reason for no link about this "event" is that CP has made it much grander than it actually is. As amusing as that is, though, the real winner is Andy's response:

the size of the attendance enabled full and thorough answers to all the doubts about the abortion-breast cancer link. Many gained a new realization that, yes, childbirth does prevent breast cancer....There is no denying that logic, and by the end of this event no one did.

Nobody disagreed at the end? Even The leaders of the pro-"choice" group that Andy says were there? Hmmmmm...Just one speech and the leaders all believed? It would be great to have some kind of verification of any of this info. If only there were some kind of information about this "event". --Jdellaro 10:29, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

No wonder only 20 people (including, presumably, the "leaders of the pro-choice group", the speaker, and Andy) attended. There's no mention of it on Princeton's Calendar of Events, and their Pro-Life group hasn't updated their website since October 5, 2007. --Jdellaro 10:36, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Andy is caught in an undeniable, bald-faced lie! It's one thing to stretch the truth, but this is absurd! GrandSoviet 13:13, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, it gets better... "I do know that the only informative and provocative talks on college campuses are the ones arranged by official student groups, as mine was." For which someone named JanetR proceeds to pwn him, not that he noticed. human 13:55, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Aww, Human - you're too kind. --Huey gunna getcha 14:00, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Haha, hi there Huey, long time no see! human 15:27, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

God, Andy is such a fucking idiot it is truly difficult to fathom that people so stupid exist, let alone get degrees from prestigious schools. I'd really love to see him attempt to argue in court. I imagine it would be easy for anyone who know anything about him to beat him handily, you just have to push the right buttons and goad him into one of his anti-liberal rants, then the judge will see what a raving lunatic he is and it's all over. It would be a lot of fun. DickTurpis 15:46, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

You've got no idea how hysterical Andy's lawyering can be, Dick. I forget where, but I know there's a page on this site that has links to a couple briefs that he submitted to various courts. His argumentative "style" is present in all of them. Though, he keeps most of his "x is bad and therefore liberal" nonsense out. --Huey gunna getcha 16:13, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I am FULLY confident I could take Andy on in any High Court in the world. I could drink two bottles of Mescal for a week, then drop acid two hours before court time, and STILL be better at debating than Andy. Seriously. The guy can't write, spell, argue a position, stay on topic, maintain a coherent thought or keep his temper under control for more than three seconds. I could be mumbling "oooh, look at the pretty colours" into my drink and the judge would STILL gavel Andy out for contempt of court. DogP 20:27, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Your comment officially made my day! :D --Sid 21:08, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Not directly WIGO, but definitely close enough to home

I just found this video (via Boing Boing), and it felt a lot like watching the whole "Earth is 6000 years old because the Bible says so and your science is wrong." arguments. This is an Iraqui TV debate between a guy who claims to have evidence that the Earth is flat and a guy... who basically represents everybody else. And what is the evidence? Redefinition of how the eye works, claiming that the Sun's diameter is just twice that of the Moon (and that the Sun is smaller than Earth), and when all else fails: The Koran says so! Yeah, this is going to piss off the radical Christians who lurk here, but NEWS FLASH: THIS IS BASICALLY HOW YOU GUYS LOOK SOMETIMES. --Sid 16:25, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Only sometimes? : ) -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:57, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually, that's pretty much how I imagine Ken, only a bit more comprehensible. --Kels 18:25, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Put it on "According to"? human 19:09, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Materialism, the unseen and Andy

Bwuahahahahahhahahahahahha. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 21:43, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

What, no IPU? Genghis ^Marauding 21:52, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Without even following the link, I know whereof you speak, and that was my ????! also. human 22:55, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Wow, his idiocy knows no bounds. Yeah, materialists (ie liberals) don't believe there is such a thing as an economy, ideas, love, intelligence, or radiation. Brilliant. Though the best part is, that by including the effects of prayer, he's admitting that prayer has no discernible effects. DickTurpis 09:50, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Holy crap, I finally looked at the history and realized that this isn't parody. Damn, could've fooled me. Adding to WIGO, if nobody minds... --Sid 19:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

WP Professor Values and Ireland

The article's currently up for deletion, and the only person defending it is an anonymous user from Ireland. Anyone know if this is a genuine CP defender (and if so who is it, Fox is from England, not Ireland?) or if not is it somebody from here? RyanC 02:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

No, I'm not in Ireland. Nor am I a "CP defender". My contributions were not deemed worthy there, so I'm playing Guild Wars instead :) V. vulpes 16:09, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

For the lazy among us, would you mind providing a link, either to the article itself (good) or to the nomination for deletion (best)? -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:52, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Just in case you couldn't get there from the anon's contributions, this is the article, this is the article just before the anon removed the prods and it went to AfD, this is the AfD, feel free to add your delete to make it a snowball. RyanC 07:14, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Its me, kinda taking the piss with things like, 'open your minds'.. MarcusCicero 08:12, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Gone

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=Professor+Values 217.171.129.68 15:19, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Has the whole of Conservapedia been locked to prevent editing?

I’ve started an account with the enemy , Conservapedia. Today every time I tried to edit I got a message saying that page was locked to prevent editing. I started using random pages and found all of them were locked to me as well. The obvious explanation would be that I’ve been blocked. Well I’m not a good Christian. I checked in my block log and found no matching items. Has Assfly locked the whole Wiki? Alternatively has he found a new way of blocking me without it being obvious? Can the rest of you edit? Is it only me who can’t?Barbara Shack 05:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Nope-- Assfly locks the entire place up at night. Of course, there's no mention of this anywhere on the wiki... Because Andy's either a dick or very stupid. Barikada 05:47, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually, it is being mentioned in the Editor's Guide. However, CP by now almost has as many rule/guideline pages as Wikipedia - something they tried to avoid (this is why the Commandments page has the sentence "This page is the only rule page on Conservapedia." on it... even if that's total bullshit). So it's unlikely that people actually sit down and read all commandments, guidelines, help pages and sysop user pages (for those custom rules that are being enforced individually) before trying to say on their User page who they are - and that's where the Night Time Lockdown already strikes. --Sid 08:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Really? I spent about an hour looking for something when I signed up my first account and turned up nothing... D: Barikada 15:49, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

(Edit conflict) Schlafly locks the entire wiki when he goes to bed. 10:00 PM EST, I believe. Night editing is a privilege granted only by ASchlafly himself. -- Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:50, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, in future I won't worry that I've been blocked.Barbara Shack 08:08, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Don't worry; in the future, you will have been blocked. ;) --Sid 08:14, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

But seriously: When you're blocked, you will get a huge and ugly "YOU HAVE BEEN BLOCKED BY X FOR Y UNTIL Z. HERE IS WHAT YOU DO..." text above any edit box (instead of the "This page has been protected" one). --Sid 08:15, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

I fear you’re right. I was trying to be good and do edits that aren’t controversial. I’m waiting for the next liberal revolution. I’ve already got into trouble because I did an edit which I didn’t think was controversial. A sysop thought Jesus would have done things differently. Barbara Shack 09:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm well familiar with that message! They never did catch most of my joke articles, thought. Czolgolz 09:45, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

It locks at 1:30AM (on the dot) on weekdays. Don't know when it unlocks because I hate to wake up in the morning. Don't know about weekends, except at least once on a Sunday it took forever to turn editing back on. Lurker 12:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Don't know the exact time it opens up, but I'm usually OK by 10pm in eastern Australia, which is 6am on the east coast of the US I think. Matt 17:06, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Topping from the bottom - TK's display of power

Wow. Just... wow. I love how TK called in a Divine Airstrike there. And I'm absolutely not surprised to see Ed jumping at the opportunity.

Seriously, why don't they just make it official and give him his sysop rights back? His parole already got quietly nullified, so this should be a no-brainer. --Sid 20:44, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

I just hope Ed used a good lube. I've never seen him so fast to jump to TK's call. --Kels 20:50, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Either this is damage control, or Ed is just plain confused. He "didn't know 'BCS' was admin Bethany"? The Hell? Had the block seriously been about the merge issue? Talk about trigger-happy! --Sid 20:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Either Ed and TK are working together to bring CP down (wouldn't put it past Ed's recent behaviour), or TK knew just which buttons to push to make Ed freak out and remember that he's supposed to be pretending to be the fair one afterwards. --Kels 21:03, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, the article's still protected, so it was maybe a combination of Feminism (which, if I recall corectly, was also one of Ed's current issues) and the merge? Overall, the entire incident just makes me headdesk.

I can't wait for April 1 - then we'll at least know what was serious and what was just Ed's perception of humor. My worst fear is that issues that got people banned (like the guy(s) who clashed with Ed about sources for some hate article) are later revealed to be an April Fool's joke. "I drove people away from CP in disgust! LOL!" --Sid 21:09, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Obama a professor

So apparently Dawkins, although technically a professor, has not been called a professor by his school, so therefore he is not a professor. On the other hand, Obama, who has been called a professor by his school, is not technically a professor, so therefore he is not a professor. Wtf.Shangrala 21:29, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually the person saying Obama is not a professor is probably a troll considering their name....Shangrala 21:33, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

It's actually quite easy. Liberals aren't professors until they get arrested (-> "Professor values"). They get promoted 0.001 seconds before committing a crime. Anything else would mean that liberals like Dawkins might actually have achieved something or that they might have some degree of expertise in some field... and that would make the heads of conservatives explode. Obama may safely be considered a prof since anything he achieves will just be filed away under Affirmative Action by Andy. --Sid 21:35, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

HelpJazz and Nighttime Editing

I think he's in with a chance now that he's got the support of sysops, anyone want to start a betting pool? RyanC 02:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Nah--anytime you have to try to convince Andy of something, you've already lost. To give in would be an admission that he was wrong in the first place, and we can't have that!--WJThomas 03:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

If he's smart he should be able to pull something out of his hat, "You didn't satisfy requirements before but with your latest edits/blocks and sysop support you can have them" RyanC 05:23, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

If he wants Night Editing, he must not care for it. His insistence on it is a clear give-away in Andy's mind of a subversive vandal with destroying intent. "I don't need Night Editing. Ah, by the way, I wrote a wonderful article about Homosexuals and Atheism in Liberal sauce, but can't upload it", something like that has worked before. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 06:25, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

With open sysop support, he may have a chance, but I wouldn't bet on it. It's much easier for Andy to simply move the goalposts again. I'm 95% certain that Jazz will continue editing without those rights anyway, so Andy wins without having to promote a guy who dares to think for himself every now and then. --Sid 07:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Nah, Iduan had to fight with tooth and nail (or something) to even get Andy's attention, and he had the advantage of having never disagreed directly with Andy and having the support of virtually every important contributor. If he gets them, it won't be soon. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 10:56, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

He might get nighttime editing, but he'll never be a sysop. DickTurpis 11:36, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

HelpJizz need to chill out. Wanting something too much puts people off. HelpJizz should follow TK's example with his "please can somebody fix this, I'd do it myself but I'm just a lowly editor and can't do anything" stance. Really TK is such a wanker. In the feminism talk page he says to TheGySom:

Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it.

then one post later:

I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this.

What a frickin' creep! A real snitch. I can see now why you guys here don't like him.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 14:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

That's pure art. He should be praised for his sense of humour. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 14:59, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Two notes:

Jazz (and Iduan) tried effectively every possible approach to get edit rights. Seriously, we've been watching. Jazz has been very active all the time, improving stuff and maintaining things. He kept quiet most of the time, then he tried dropping subtle hints, then asked, then was quiet again... nothing helped. Why? Because in Andy's book, Jazz and Iduan are not conservative enough. They show(ed) liberal tendencies (such as... you know... actually using common sense every now and then... and occasionally questioning Andy's bizarre claims...), and that immediately disqualified them FOREVER. Trust me, Jazz deserves the promotion. Heck, he should be made sysop. He's done more for the site than most of the current sysops. But... not gonna happen. He's liberal, and that means that Andy will simply ignore his pleas until he finally leaves or gets banned. Andy sees that Jazz did much cheap work so far, but he thinks that the moment he gives a bit more power, Jazz will transform into BizarroJazz. So he just keeps him around, hoping that Jazz will do as much work as possible before he leaves.

TK on the other hand... is a special case. He has tons of private contacts from before his ban, and his first hours of being unbanned have shown that several sysops are already willing to help him out any way they can. His parole was silently lifted by Geo, too. So right now, TK is officially a fully reformed editor, but his contacts make him infinitely more powerful than Jazz (who technically has more user rights and authority). Andy consults other sysops for some decisions, and when those other sysops only get to see TK "Savior of CP" side, they may poke Andy into giving TK at least the Block/Upload/Edit combo. If I had to bet, I'd almost bet on TK getting edit rights before Jazz. --Sid 15:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm betting on TK too. If Fox has really left, there's nothing in TK's path. Andy is fast to forget when it is one of his old faithfuls. Helpjazz has done much for CP, but so have done many of today's RW members - and they could still do, if they had a chance. It was the cabal that kept CP going before the Night of the Blunt Knives. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 15:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but Andy doesn't WANT most of us to improve CP, since our idea of 'improvement' would involve more scholarship and possibly even facts that might make Conservatives somewhere look bad, and less multi-page screeds about how Libruls r t3h 3v1L. --Gulik 15:56, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

"Modern"

Andy's (and Ed Poor's!) claims about feminism are ridiculous, but I'd point out that the term modern may have many meanings. At least in my country, in school modern history/literature/arts referred to the 18th and 19th centuries, while the history of the 20th century was called contemporary. This in the 1990s. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 08:09, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

You're right, of course - "modern" is not set in stone. I'd say that the term depends heavily on (1) when the subject first hit off and (2) how quickly it progressed. For example, computer technology and art epochs are moving at vastly different speeds. A 486 with 66MHz is most definitely not modern. History and art epochs on the other hand take a long time to develop and have centuries of backstory.

In the case of feminism, I'd say that it's not extremely old and that it developed a lot during the past 40 years. Andy and Ed are focusing on the most radical eras of feminism and simply declared that to be "modern", even though today's feminism is light years away from that. --Sid 08:25, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

My point above was that, at least in school in my country, 'modern' meant 'before than contemporary' - maybe a Pentium II today. But I agree with you about Andy and co. And I wonder, where do miniskirts fall in their classification. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 08:59, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, not all things comply with this terminology, I think. (And when I see "modern" as one of the definitions of "contemporary", things get even weirder.) However, I could very well be wrong - English isn't my first language, and I have no idea how exactly US/UK scholars define certain eras or what these labels apply to. Plus, I didn't have any caffeine yet, so my reading comprehension might be a bit low...

I guess that, lacking any properly defined and commonly understood standard for what counts as modern/contemporary/etc, it would be best to go with dates instead of simply implying that "anything that happened in the past 60(!) years is modern". (The same applies to history and art - better to at least once give a rough date frame to avoid ambiguity) Of course, that would mean that Andy and Ed would have to admit that society and feminism evolved since the 70s. ;) --Sid 09:12, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Really, the normal meaning of modern, modern = now-a-days, is the most common one and certainly valid. I just wanted to boost my ego with my encyclopaedic knowledge and offer an alternative meaning too, which could very partially justify Andy's use of the term. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 12:29, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

In the absence of a scholarly structure that is widely accepted, "modern" should always mean "now and a bit before now". Another example of it not meaning that, as a term of art, is "Modern Art", which was back in the mid 20th century or so. Hence "Post Modernism", etc. human 13:25, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually, I was studying that not too long ago, "Modern Art" was actually referring to the Modernist movement in painting, largely driven by the influx of Jewish intellectuals in New York City in the 40's and 50's. It was the Modernist movement that drew the focus of the art world from Paris to New York, no mean feat! Very interesting stuff. --Kels at work

Sweden

Personally, I'm very sad to see the Sweden article just became a lot more uninteresting. Perhaps it now contains mostly truth, but that was never what we wanted from CP. Ah me, I get misty eyed to see such things happen - no arboreal octopi, no Viking Phil Lynott's, no peculiar British foodstuffs - what's to become of all that wonderful writing, condemned forever to the eternal graveyard of 'hists'? I better have a nice cup of tea and a sit down, I'm feeling a little faint. DogP 11:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Pretty sad. Karajou did the same with Finland a while ago. What was it, ducks living in Finland (I'm asking the Uncyclopedians here)? Besides, it's pretty sad when you, in good faith, contribute to an article, make it better, remove SOME vandalism, and then Karajou comes and copies a few thousand words from a .gov site, without a sweat. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 12:32, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

His collection of African country articles, all copy-pasted from the CIA World Fact Book, is an awesome bit of work. PFoster

Ides of March (speculation 2)?

So, I guess the Intelligent Design article, and the atheism notes, are parts of a Conservative pre-Ides warmup thing? How immensely disappointing. I love the idea, though, of Ken tilting at windmills here. "Boy, are those atheists ever going to be disappointed!" "Boy, that ID article really showed them!" Errr.... no.-αmεσ (tinker) 15:41, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Seems like Ken got his Googles mixed up. cp:Atheism is #14 at Google.ru, not #5. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 15:47, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

In Soviet Union, Google searches you? --Gulik 15:57, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

...I'm actually speechless. Ken really thinks that people all around the globe (aside from us) read Conservapedia for more than purest Lulz? Also, he actually checked Google CUBA for results of his articles? THIS MAN HAS TOO MUCH FREE TIME! --Sid 16:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm sure Ken will be happy to learn that CP Atheism is #9 on Google Mongolia! It would seem that the Mongolians are slightly more fond of atheism than the Cubans, but less so than the Russians! --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 16:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Especially since the Russians and others will surely search for "Atheism" and not whatever it translates to in their own language! Success! --Sid 16:25, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I eagerly await ru.conservapedia.com. They need to translate all the pages. --Shagie 16:37, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

ru.stupid.com Genghis ^Marauding 16:42, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

ROTFL! human 20:06, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Seriously, his "CHECK THIS OUT, COMRADE" thing on the front page made me come perilously close to laughing out loud. Not a good idea at work! --Kels at work, shh!

Cripes, is raving incoherency catching over there, or what? Check out this gem from Andy, where he apparently compares HSmom to a hypocritical, ivory tower Communist. Wadda froot loop. --Kels @ work

All I can say is that I find the idea of a former Harvard Law magna cum laude reduced to sitting around and pontificating on the finer political implications of female attire simply hilarious. Surely, this must be the crowning achievement of his career. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 16:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Could we position it on a Laffer curve? Genghis ^Marauding 16:41, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Dixit Assfly: "The sine qua non of modern feminism is for women to act like men." Wow. Just, wow. human 20:09, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Atheism ranking explained

[3] Note that it's categorized under humor... I wouldn't be bragging so much if I were you, Consevative. Barikada 16:10, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Bragging about an article rank on Google Cuba is like bragging about having the best air conditioner in the north pole.Shangrala 19:57, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Sure, take away my only point of pride! D: Barikada 20:22, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Another one bites the dust

Poor old CharlesT. First he makes the mistake of changing one of Ashuffley's beloved articles, but also annotates it with "improving" then he removes that silly brain cartoon of BathanyS. Result? Kajagoogoo to the rescue[4]. But bullying, Kajagoogoo? Really? Or is that just your word of the day? Psygremlin 17:49, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Is he?

please excuse me if this has already been brought up, I've been off in my own little world... but is RKline a parodist? His posts seem to be a great example of that Liberal writing what Andy wants to hear mentality... For example this this this (for sure) and this, his user page SirChuckB^{I have very poor judgement} 17:59, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Poe's Law? Genghis ^Marauding 18:55, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, if he IS, don't ruin it for him! (oops, probably too late...) --Gulik 19:04, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Maybe SirChuck recognizes that RKline is an honest and earnest conservative, and knows that calling him a parodist on this page will ruin his chances over at CP, thereby depriving them of a potentially talented editor. Of course, if that was his intention, I've ruined that, too...--WJThomas 21:30, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

WJT, I looooved your edit comment. Quoting Simpsons = win. "No no no, I don't know anything about that customer's offshore secret Swiss bank. Oh crap. I shouldn't have said said he was a customer. Oh crap. I certainly shouldn't have said it was secret. Ehhhh, it's too hot."-αmεσ (tinker) 21:34, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I think I've been misunderstood.... I simply wanted to see if anyone had the same thoughts.... I really don't think we're good enough to get people canned at CP....I mean, people were speaking about TK for years and nothing happened there... and if he is real, we better keep at eye on him, he should give us some good stuff SirChuckB^{I have very poor judgement} 22:43, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

The more they get paranoid of parodists, the more likely they block a conservative. If we point out both, they may very well bloc them both. I still think Ed and TK are parodists that are intent on taking CP down. Its just a matter of time.

"Gentlemen...."

Is Kenny calling out to us with these two edit summaries? If so, does he know we're not all men here? PFoster 23:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Maybe he's just tired of the place looking like an encyclopedia. --Kels 23:15, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Maybe he is just talking to me, I always whine about not being able to read things. And we all know there are several of me on here. Naaaah... he's just an accidental sexist. He should say "Gentlemen, Ladies, and the rest of the mob at that other place". human 00:00, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Something I came across that is somewhat related to this - a rather interesting study. Basically, it seems that liberals are more likely to handle and accept ambiguity and information that challenges their beliefs than conservatives, due to differences in the way their brains work. Of course, how this squares with the idea that 'evul libruls' are doing things like stifling Intelligent Design due to them not accepting evidence challenging evolution is a bit of a mystery. Zmidponk 00:59, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I've seen that study before I think. The big difference is that Liberals react positively to novelty and Conservatives to familiarity. Neither is more intelligent en masse than the other. Sorta like the tendency for men to do better at technical stuff like science and math, and women tend to be better for English and languages, poetry and creativity etc. MarcusCicero 07:20, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I always think that last part about men being better at technical stuff is funny, since I remember reading a bit about the culture in Japan, and over there it's taken as a given that girls are generally better at math and so forth, and routinely tutor the boys in high school. I suspect a large amount of the "biological" basis of differences like that are cultural, rather than biological. --Kels 08:43, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh, yes, there is no 'x is more intelligent than y' thing going on, but one of the major things that certain people at CP seem to constantly say is that free thought and free speech are stifled or even stopped entirely due to liberals not accepting information or evidence contradicting their established ideas. This study seems to suggest that, if anything, it is actually conservatives who are more likely to reject such information and evidence. Zmidponk 09:35, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I guess I disagree with Cicero's rather glib and simplistic conclusion. The willingness to accept ambiguity is essential to survival in a rapidly changing world. Reality is almost never purely black and white. An inability to deal with grays is a sign of fossilization in the face of a complex reality. Conservatives try to "keep it simple" - the result is foolish consistencies like a refusal to recognize the horrendous failures from the begining to the present of the war in Iraq. Rational Ed^{5 or 6 edits} 10:01, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I was tempted to edit "fossilization" to "ossification", but I'll just type it here. Yes, "liberals" suppress new ideas, and "conservatives" are for change. Sure. human 14:40, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I think I prefer fossilization because it has the connotation of something so old, so behind the times, that it should be extinct. Ossification is a gentler and kinder way of suggesting inflexibility and an inability to change. But with your obsession with fossils, I thought you'd prefer that. :-) Rational Ed^{5 or 6 edits} 18:36, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I don't agree. We are making the same mistake of black and white judgements that conservatives are being accused of. Sure, they're are some conservatives who are like that - they refuse to accept ambiguity. But then there are plenty of liberals like that too. No, the reality is much grayer than that.

Take Victorian Britain, for example. Social conservatism was considered by many to be an absolute necessity to the advancement of Empire. Without that deep social sense of being rooted in belonging, how could pioneers, inventors and scientists make the advances that they did? The social niceties in the midst of war, changing for dinner in the bush, stiff upper lip, the class system in the industrial revolution... all that. It was rooted in conservatism and yet paved the way for the most powerful empire on the planet. People often scoff at these claims but they were absolutely a part of the structure of how it was achieved. Compare Victorian Britain to the rather more avante-garde societies in Europe at the time - France and so on.

Take the US astronaut corps as another example. A bunch of the most old-fashioned social conservatives you are ever likely to meet. Yet they are the frontiersmen. In fact, they take it even further. They root their whole procedure in conservative safety - so deeply rooted it is often criticised as being stifling to progress. And yet these individual men and women are not afraid of doing something extraordinary. Indeed they probably couldn't if they didn't have that foundation of conservatism that enables their risk-taking adventure.

It isn't as simple as stating that conservatives are sticks in the mud and liberals are free-thinkers. It's under what circumstances individuals use those traits and what they use them for that defines us and blows simplistic labelling out of the water. Ajkgordon 04:40, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Breaking news and the links they don't like to advertize

I wonder why they didn't mention - and link - to the Blue Star Mothers when they had the chance with their New Jersey news item? It's articles like that which are the reason why I left CP, and also why I was desysopped. There was nothing wrong with the "Liberal ___" articles I posted (all of which are still up), they were just a piss-poor "excuse" for getting rid of someone who was showing them up for being the anti-semitic, bigoted Nazis that they really are. cp:Christian Identity must have stung them, too. I seem to recall that Weird Ed tried to redefine "right wing" after a few of those articles were posted. The reason I stopped editing at CP was because it no longer even tries to be "conservative" or Christian. There is a big difference between conservatism and right-wing bigotry/hate, and although you people here don't need to be told that, a lot of people over there can't see it. And the appalling lack of Christians (and I'm using the term loosely) there should seriously worry the few that profess to believe. Okay, so we know that TK is a filthy, grandstanding liar whose "holier than thou good Christian" preaching is a cringe-worthy act of the utmost hypocrisy, but when you look at the others too... There's LearnTogether, PJR, Crocoite and er... that's all. CPAdmin1, too, but he's not active. A grand total of four editors who are actually Christians. Andy rewrites the Bible to suit himself, WeirdEd belongs to the Moonies cult and the rest are just "yes men" paying lip service to Christianity when it suits them. Behold the wonder that is cp:God. Calling Andy out on this was bound to earn a desysopping. As was this. Beating them on their competitions, knowing something about scripture AND being a filthy kike I was lucky to survive there as long as I did. As for the return of TK, well, most of you know that I predicted he would come snivelling back in the minute I left, which is the only reason I hung in there as long as I did. V. vulpes 04:34, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Wise words my friend. Ace McWicked 04:47, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Shame that you left then. Of course you were too good for them, especialy at spotting parody. The fact that the Exxon-Mobile (sic) quote was allowed to stand for so long in the George Bush article shows that they can't see when they're being sent up for the right-wing loonies that most of them are. In some ways it's good that you've left and TK is back. The place can only get more bonkers and at least that should give us our daily lulz. Genghis ^Marauding 05:10, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

It isn't just the - to us - more obvious parodies, I also had to revert edits I found in "technical" articles, which you would need to have a good understanding of to see how the extra few words totally falsified the entire article. On humour, however, I have to say that one of the most hilarious parody entries on CP was placed in there about a week ago. I was tempted to log in and revert it, so ridiculous is it's claims, but I really can't be arsed. I'm not a sysop there, its not my job to police everything. That's TKs job :) It makes me smile just thinking of it now. V. vulpes 05:20, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

To use a Lord of the Rings analogy here, Andy is like Theodan, who has been ruined by Wormtongue (Crocite/Ed Poor) and their master (TK). You, Fox, are of course like Eomer the dashing young prince who knows everything is fucked up but alone cannot do anything to stop it. And yes, I like to make things as epic as I possibly can, even on the net. MarcusCicero 07:24, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Ehm, nice idea, but equating Andy to Theoden or Fox (sorry!) to Eomer seems quite far-fetched to me... Not to speak of TK (Saruman?). I see TK more as the prodigal son of Bible memory. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 07:30, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

"Prodigal" son? Pfft. I see him more as the son in "The Monkey's Paw". V. vulpes 07:39, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Does that make Phyliss Schlafly Sauron? BeastmasterGeneral 08:13, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I think Catch 22 is a better analogy. Andy is General Dreedle, TK is Colonel Cathcart, Ed seems to have become Colonel Korn, etc... Bondurant 08:32, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

TK makes me think of a less savoury version of Wormtongue, actually. But to look back at what Vulpes was saying, I don't even know if I'd call most of his list of Christians actual "Christians". I always took Christian to mean "follower of Christ", but what you've got there is just a bunch of Old Testament Fanboys, who skim over most of the Christ bit, lingering over the persecution a bit, then going straight on to Revelations. The actual teachings of Christ, and whether he actually existed or not is irrelevant to the fact that there's actually some pretty good advice in the Gospels, get glossed over in favour of the Vengeful God and YEC stuff, neither of which Christ really seemed to care all that much about. Although I expect there's a certain degree of putting it on in Crocoite's case, which is why he kinda comes off as a parodist at times. I believe he saw the writing on the wall, and just added "whatever Andy wants to hear" on top of whatever his true beliefs are. --Kels 08:40, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Fox, your departure was Sign #3 of the Apocalypse of CP. It's done for now. You were absolutely right, as you now know, that Tk would be back when you left, and that's Sign #4. I'm sorry you had to put up with antisemitism and whatnot from these fellows. There are a few things, to me, that just resound with the Utmost Evil of Humanity, and antisemitism is one of them.

Also, on the note of fictional parallels, I really like the Wormtongue parallel. I'm glad someone else thinks it's valid. Although it does place Andy & co. as innocent heroes who ought to be redeemed, and that thought doesn't sit well with me.-αmεσ (tinker) 09:49, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Wormtongues all the way down, then. --Kels 10:01, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Correct. Fox, are you liking TK's new campaign of pissing off PJR? It's kind of sickeningly sad to watch.-αmεσ (tinker) 10:10, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

TK has never been concerned with "creating an encyclopedia", just power-tripping. You can be sure that he has a list of names from Weird Ed of those sysops that did not openly express support for him when I blocked him, and he will go after all of them. V. vulpes 10:34, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Following the LOTR analogy, Conservative is Gollum with his "precious" Google rankings. Genghis ^Marauding 10:11, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Filthy little gayses. Wicked, tricksy, false. Ajkgordon 10:29, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

LoL V. vulpes 10:34, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I wouldn't discount TK's real motives. But I'll leave it at that. I personally am happy that he is back there, I was missing good ol'd Conservapedia. And if he contributes to definitely bring CP down, it's good for me. Having relied on my daily WIGO lulz, sooner or later comes the time to move on in life. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 10:38, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I was delighted to see TK back there as well, but not so much after he actually emailed me last week after I'd posted on my talk page here that I wanted to "punch him". Wanker. DogP 11:29, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

It was probably me or Trent or someone like that who sent you that email, posing as TK to undermine his saintliness. Or so he'll probably claim. V. vulpes 13:36, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

That's the reason Trent doesn't contribute much nowadays, he's too busy manipulating the database jut to make TK look bad. Genghis ^Marauding 15:27, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

You know it occurs to me, and probably you also - I aint speaking anything new here, that Andy really is going further and further round the bend. I read some of the Archives, way back to Achive 1 and 2 of the Main Page Talk and Andys Talk, and Andy actually started out quite jovial and convivial but slowly, as the Liberal Menace perforated Andys brain, he began to lose it. Since Andy found a medium to project his hatred and after finding a few lackeys to support his crumbling pysche and paranoid ideas he has become completely disjointed from reality I think. All I can say is "Wow, its really amazing how fucked up some people can get" Ace McWicked 16:32, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Yes, you are perfectly right. Andy is the most eclatant (?) case, but take other sysops too, from Ed Poor to Joaquin Martinez, even PJR! But yes, Andy is the most worrying case. His downward trend is amazing. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 16:40, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Funny how we've been saying exactly the same thing for the last 10 months. Genghis ^Marauding 16:57, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

And still it applies day after day. I'd almost say you could guess the month from the content of a posting of his. Superstitious animist^{Ed at CP} 16:51, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

He is the web equivalent of the nut ball that hangs out in street near my office screaming about Jesus and end of times. When someone has a disorder as such then having a window to express their views only goes to reinforce their worldview. Throw in a few foaming nutballs like Karajou to back him up and its gonna spiral why down. He has really gone quite round the bend now. I wonder what his wife thinks? Ace McWicked 17:11, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually

I've been playing Hellgate: London all morning, 'tis my day off. What a lovely pack o' lies to find when I take a break for lunch. --Kels 12:35, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Meh, I quite fancied Hellgate, but I was really deep into EVE when it was released so never got around to it, and now, with AoC on the horizon (beta key please... beta key please... ) I'm tying up some loose ends in GW. Hellgate remains on the list of things to do though :) V. vulpes 13:36, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm gonna finish Hellgate to take it off my own list, then maybe have a good go at the first two Fallouts (I missed them first time 'round, and the third is comin'). With time for Second Life, WoW and actually getting some drawing done in the meantime, with luck. --Kels 13:53, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

I just want Clancy's Endwar. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 17:05, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Did anyone here ever play Final Fantasy XI? I did for a while, but cashed out my account for a Video iPod :-).-αmεσ (tinker) 17:12, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Too many good games, not enough time.... I'm partway through Starcraft, just in time for SC2 to come out. (On the MMO front, I'm a big fan of City of Heroes/City of Villains--hey, I like comic books.) :-P --Gulik 22:51, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Unless you know something I don't, SC2's a while away, isn't it? I hope you know something I don't, though, I can't freakin wait.-αmεσ (tinker) 22:52, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Any chance of moving this to alt.games.video.thatIlove, or something? human 01:08, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Goddamn gaming geeks! Ajkgordon 03:38, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Anti-American Blood Lust

Now that's the TK we all know! Although he usually hides stuff like that in email and denies he said it later. Hey Phil, you might wanna school him on 90/10 and bullying while you're at it! --Kels 10:29, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

He can always claim later that someone must have hacked his account. BeastmasterGeneral 10:35, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

I admit, it's nice to see his "talents" turned towards a more desirable end. Uchiha^KATON! 10:37, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Hey, I'm just in it to watch the brawl. (press "show") --Kels 10:45, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

On the subject of 90/10, I see good ol' Ed just slapped somebody[5] with an infinite ban and quoted 90/10[6]... after he'd made one post[7].Psygremlin 11:18, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Gets worse, there was a 50/50 block just now (WIGO'd). I love how Geo and Ed so openly side with TK, blocking people who get in his way and helping him to enforce his will. TK is the best thing that could happen to Ed, Croco, Kara and Andy: A fellow bully finally returned and is willing to take on opposing sysops! --Sid 12:22, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

"It wasn't Philip who blocked you Terry - it was ME. And the main thing you were blocked for was being a bully. Which is a blocking offence. And which you are continuing to do, in breach of your parole. Fox (talk|contribs) 15:19, 1 April 2008 (EDT)" on PJR talk. Go Fox! human 18:16, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

"Unlike some well-known "liberal" wiki's and sites, at least CP allows others to voice their opinions, and doesn't seek to silence/remove them unless and until they become abusive in being repetitive and intolerant of those who oppose them they start name calling." TK quietly discussing whether "the only informative and provocative talks on college campuses are the ones arranged by official student groups, as mine was" or not. Somehow he dragged censorship and Coulter into the discussion. (all at talk main right now, Princeton section)human 19:01, 1 April 2008 (EDT)