Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive50

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 4 January 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:
<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <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)


Sidney Pollack just died. Too bad. He did some good stuff. Think Andy will finagle a way to blame it on Hollywood Values? DickTurpis 22:23, 26 May 2008 (EDT)

No, he'll just imply that he's in hell now, peppering his words with 'we'll pray for his family' and 'godspeed.' Czolgolz 01:21, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Aw, and here I thought somebody had sent me my very own "T0 gentleman at another site" shout-out. And if I'm looking at a non-vandalized version of the WP article, he died of cancer, so Andy might try to fit it into the "Hollywood Values cause cancer" theme. --Sid 07:56, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Double standards?[edit]

I wish you could put {fact} tags on editorial comments, like this one Bondurant 08:02, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I started to comment on this but thought "Oh what the F*** - It's just CP's Double(triple? quadruple?) standard again." SusanG  ContribsTalk 08:07, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Interesting case of "He does the right thing for the wrong reason" - should we cheer or should we protest? --Sid 08:34, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

That Homeschool Video[edit]

I'm late to this (bandwidth stopped me watching the vid) but how is that video homeschooling? He's got a respectabl are) e sized class there. Surely that's a "private school". Isn't there legislation - or something? If this was an extracurricular club then OK but it's apparently how they are full time. Something's rotten in the state of NJ. SusanG  ContribsTalk 10:32, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Susan like all liberals, you are guilty of taking things too literally. I am 97.68% certain that you believe that "Hollywood" is a an actual location on a map, too. Srsly, though- the difference between what you see and a private school is that Andy teaches a history class (as a historian, I'm appalled...) to kids who get schooled outside of formal institutions, public or private - there's little chance that any kid's parents could expert themselves up enough to teach everything at a Grade 10-11-12 level, so they'll pick and choose tutors in group and individual settings...PFoster 10:39, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Exactly (the only thing scarier than Andy teaching history is being taught by a parent with Andy's views but without any knowledge of history at all; it seems Andy has at least some, warped view it may be). Now what makes you say these kids are full time? I think Andy is only teaching them a world history class, surely that's not 6 hours a day 5 days a week? I think these kids are taught at home, but come together for this class, I'm guessing for a few hours a couple times a week or something? I don't know. We could ask Andy; it seems to be one of those things he likes to talk about. Or Fuzzy must know. Fuzzy? DickTurpis 10:45, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
When does a "group become a school?Th unsure.gifSusanG  ContribsTalk 10:47, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
1. When all the kids get all the schooling in the same setting from the same staff of educators. 2. and this is key to understanding homeschooling (an aside: you see Andy, some of us are very much willing to engage with some of your ideas on your terms...) When the school, and not the parents, has the last word on curriculum and other related questions...PFoster 10:50, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I see (I think). Andy's (or his minions are) apparently teaching about the evils of homosexuality and also (?) science. We know his maths is dodgy so who's teaching that? Is that done in a group? Seems like a dispersed school to me. I suppose that without knowing what each of the 'pupils' curriculum is, we can't answer. SusanG  ContribsTalk 11:01, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
We know his maths is dodgy so who's teaching that? "Maths". That's sooo cute. Well, if a particular kid has a mother who's an engineer, she might teach that kid math at home - maybe along with a few others (I've seen that sort of thing happen) - or maybe some of them from the same group go see some other tutor for math. I gotta say, as much as the content of this particular homeschool crowd's education troubles me politically, the concept has a lot of appeal - if I had a kid, I would be tempted to explore something along these lines - with a worldview which I believed in underpinning it, of course...PFoster 11:13, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
For cute read British!(last person who called me cute is still in traction!) If I had the knowledge & the friends/aquaintances with the ability or the money to buy them then I'd prefer to self educate too, but what I'd wind up doing is starting my own school and expect to be regulated as much as any other. SusanG  ContribsTalk 11:24, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
What? He teaches for two hours once a week and it lasts just as long as a normal semester. This past semester he taught writing, next semester he's going to teach US History. Is that all you wanted to know? =-= Candlewick 12:48, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
You know that doesn't really surprise me. So he doesn't have a real job to speak of, just putting a good face on a bunch of quacks at AAPS and putting in less hours a week than I spend in the bathroom actually teaching. Of course, his user page brags about all those former students who went on to college (to consort with Liberals and earring-wearers, horrors!) as if he was their main source of education. Some might call it deceit. --Kels 12:53, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, that's basically what I wanted to know. Thanks. I was going to say 2 hours once a week seems really brief, but I guess it's not all that much less than kids in school get (I'm thinking about 40 minute classes 5 days a week means 200 minutes rather than 120, but there's more than just quantity). I guess the kids might be getting a half decent education, in some manner. If the exams he's posted at CP are for that class, and if they're reflective of what he teaches, then most of it seems to be rather straightforward stuff, much like you'd get at a public school, actually. I think there were only 2 or so questions out of 50 that actually had an anti-liberal bent (I'm thinking of his US government class here). I don't recall for sure. I remember I got almost all the questions right without having taken the class, but I'm not high school/junior high student, and I'm pretty well informed about US government and politics. I have a feeling his actual lessons in class contain a lot more commentary on the evils of liberals, however. His Supreme Court class (the one which since September is said to be starting any day now) seems to have anti-liberalism as it's raison d'etre, and I imagine any students in that class, should it ever start, will be getting an even more warped view of the world. I was going to say a writing class sounds rather innocuous, then I remembered some of his writing assignments ("Liberals are evil subhumans who should be shipped in cattle cars to camps. Here's why..."). DickTurpis 13:26, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Yes, it is interesting that the least "politicizable" course (writting) is the one with the most politicized questions. On the other hand the Supreme Court course lectures don't seem too nice: "How did our country go from being the world leader to a nation with more metal detectors than Bibles in our schools, some of the highest taxes in the world, and an ambiguous definition of marriage? Liberal judges, and particularly the Warren Court (1953-1969) but continuing until the present, are responsible for our transformation from moral and economic leadership to widespread despair, particularly among our youth." First paragraph of first lecture. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 13:48, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
So, that "schoolroom" is used for two hours a week? Or do other non-teachers take over when Schlafly (who's name be praised) isn't there. If they do then it's a school, if they don't then it's a waste. SusanG  ContribsTalk 13:52, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I'm sure it's used for something. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a church basement or something. The actual building its in has little significance. DickTurpis 14:00, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I second the church basement (or affiliated building). It's almost a certainty, really. ħumanUser talk:Human 15:22, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

PJR (Again)[edit]

PJR mainpages "Another teacher sacked for briefly telling his students about Intelligent Design tells his story[1]". Shouldn't the question be " What was the school doing allowing an unqualified musician to take a science class? SusanG  ContribsTalk 12:16, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Well, he was only supposed to be supervising the class in the original teacher's absence while showing a science video. Hardly anything unusual in that. Ajkgordon 12:22, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
And even aside from that, teachers are often assigned classes outside their areas of expertise, especially in the lower grades.--WJThomas 12:33, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Are they? Times change! SusanG  ContribsTalk 12:35, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
My favorite part of the article, by the way, was the writer's mention that the fella who did the suspending was "an earring-adorned young man". We all know what that means, eh? They're everywhere--and they'll stop at nothing!--WJThomas 12:33, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Those gays and thier gaygenda are trying to ruin it for everyone. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 12:40, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
"two-day assignment in a middle school science class" "Just showing a video"; "lower grades"? SusanG  ContribsTalk 12:39, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
What's your point?--WJThomas 15:17, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
My point(s) are 1) Some video that takes 2 days; 2) Dunno about the US, but when I was at school in the UK we didn't ever get a part time music teacher taking over a science class. It might be different now - I'm probably living in the past. SusanG  ContribsTalk 15:26, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
1) A two-hour movie, a one-hour class = two days 2) Yep, music teachers sometimes have to teach science class. Goes a long way towards explaining crap like Conservapedia, don't it?--WJThomas 16:11, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

How sad is it that whenever I see something posted on the front page over there, I immediately reach for Google to find out what actually happened? --Kels 12:50, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

And then PJR confounds my anticipations by censoring Conservative. SusanG  ContribsTalk 13:03, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Substitutes were often "teaching students" in my day (70's). They knew "classroom basics", but mostly either led a pre-arranged lesson plan or showed a movie or told the kids to read something. Longer terms subs would be closer to a specialty. And in the lower grades specialization matters a whole lot less. ħumanUser talk:Human 15:24, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Regarding regards[edit]

I wonder how many times Conservative uses regards and regarding in his addressing to the masses? Perhaps we should chart it?--TimS 13:59, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I have often wondered that myself. All one has to do to parody his writing is use "regards" twice in every other sentence. Another broader issue that I have noticed are the words and phrases that will never be the same for me when I encounter them: Trustworthy, Godspeed, "As regards to" (which I now consider bad writing by association!), and probably a couple more. Well, there's Goat, of course, but that's different ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 15:28, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
The sheer rigidity of his constructions is what gets me. That, and the monstrous adverbial clauses he often kicks his sentences off with. It all seems to get plugged in to the same godawful framework every fucking time. I've never seen writing like it. --Robledo 15:51, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
In regards to Conservative and Human's reply, Sid wrote thaDFJSLDKAJL*HEADDESK* Yesssssss, those phrases have been ruined forever for me, too. Godspeed! You're clueless! Trustworthy! Bias! Values! *shoots self in the face* --Sid 16:06, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Regards/Respect--Oh, yeah, Kenny, that's a whole bunch better...Keep up the good work.--WJThomas 17:18, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Omigod, Kendoll, it's not just the word that you overuse (now you overuse "respect"), it's that your constructions of sentences around it are horrible. Often, the phrase "in regards to" is simply not necessary. Wanna unblock me for a day or two next week and I'll copyedit some of this stuff for you? Oh, you'd have to unprotect the articles too, but that's no big deal. Check back with me Tues 6/3, and when unblocked I'll get a writing plan approved by Ed so you know what order to unprotect them in. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:49, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
After talking with/mocking Conservative for a short while, I unfortunately found myself using the same terms. I marvelled at how incredibly easy language seemed to use with these; sentences practically constructed themselves, as nothing associated had to be introduced or described fluently - you needed only "with respect to" and "in regards to" to string your points together.
My friends noticed though... and were irked by it. UchihaKATON! 21:26, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
That's where you differ from Kenny: you've got friends. 21:30, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I think we've discussed it before, but I love how he links the same article three or four times in every post.... Is that his new tactic to googlebomb and artificially inflate Conservapedia rankings or something? Or is he just so stupid he forgets that he linked two lines ago SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 21:44, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Eh, Andy does that too - he links to every time he uses the words "liberal", hollywood", "deceit", etc. Of course, that's because Andy is also an idiot. ħumanUser talk:Human 22:10, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
So which enterprising individual wants to feed the Ken Opus into wp:Dissociated press and create our very own Ken-o-matic? -- 00:32, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I don't even need to look who wrote this on CP's Mainpageleft:Are you a fan of Conservapedia and want some suggestions in regards to letting more people know about Conservapedia? If you want some suggestions regarding sharing with others regarding Conservapedia, please go here. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 08:13, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Ken would be well advised to read this excellent article on the English language. 08:59, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style says, "The singular noun is correct. The plural form (as in with regards to and in regards to) is, to put it charitably, poor usage....The plural regards is acceptable only in the phrase as regards" (Garner 286). I wonder if Kenny was homesckulled?--TimS 09:34, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Who the heck is "Franklin"?[edit]

From the article Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al FRANKEN:

It is ironic that Franklin, while trying to sell a book that shows that conservatives are misleading and uses some form of the word lying three times in the title, would blatantly lie to try to promote it.

Friggin idiots! --Jdellaro 15:43, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Now, now. That's unfair. It's just one friggin idiot: Learn Together, and he's at least consistent: First time and second time in that article. Come to think of it, didn't they make a huuuuge fuss about some "Expelled" reviewer getting a name wrong? --Sid 16:02, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
How could they do this? 'I'm'Franklin!'

Shouty and Stupid[edit]

Is it just me or is CP exceptionally shouty and stupid at the moment? RedDog 16:41, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

It's certainly more shouty than normal ;) --Sid 16:48, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, well, to be fair, some of them are: and a lot of them are being goaded into it, mostly by people around here. The way I see it: Conservative and PJR don't want to come talk to us, and we all know that even if they did - especially in the case of Conservative, it would only end badly. Walk away, let them yell...There's no point in trying to engage in constructive dialogue with people who aren't interested.PFoster 16:50, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Gentleman Gentlemen, the report is in. Conservapedia has always been an exceptional example of stupidity, but, upon factoring in the steady increase of said stupidity, I have concluded that its current state represents "the stupidest it has ever been" at any given time. Which is bad, presumably. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!Chaos! 16:54, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I guess it's just Ken trying to troll everyone into a fight and gain Google rankings for his fucking rubbish article. I was beginning to wonder if this was the Ides of March where CP conquers the world. The big push! Go Team CP! Go Ken! Go your fucking rubbish atheism article! The world lies at your feet! RedDog 16:57, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
  • In that case it's perfect timing for a WIGO embargo. Ajkgordon 19:16, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, we were talking about an embargo last week, but it sorta died. If we start one this weekend, someone remember to go play with template:holydaze to load the banner, and conservapedia:embargo (?) to turn the light green and note the dates. I'll be out of town a bit and I'd hate to see it not done. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:39, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Did somebody say "embargo"?


Actually....maybe not. There's a lot of good shit going on now. I'd hate to miss it. Actually, I think it's time for another of Andy's contests. Those always bring out the worst in everyone over there. I'd love to watch everything fall apart over there. Whaddaya say, Andy? DickTurpis 21:33, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

It was Iamdun that was the contest organizer. Without him there's no one that wants to take on the tedium of arbitration and counting points. And in a "they were sour grapes anyways" remember that its not the article count that is important. --Shagie 22:09, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Ken's Sex (or not) Obsession (or not)[edit]

Ad Hom Follows, pass by on the other side: Don't suppose that Ken is the original model for Ken (of Ken & Barbie (Barby?)) fame, and he hasn't got any "private parts"? SusanG  ContribsTalk 20:02, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

First against the wall[edit]

Did anyone notice Andy boy's edit summary when he blocked JBrown (an otherwise consistently good contributor) for calling Ken on his shit? "...namecalling in talk, e.g. "look like ____ idiots" Does Andy perhaps think "narcissistic" is a dirty word that needs to be censored? Or does he just not know how to spell it? --Kels 20:09, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

He assumed that anyone reading it wouldn't check and would believe that JB had used a naughty word such as "Silly" or sumfink SusanG  ContribsTalk 20:14, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
They really love to poke fun at that guy, it seems. First the hilariously misleading block message, and now Ken's almost-reply in the Talk:Main section. Love this quote, though:

Now I realize that "professional" encyclopedias do not challenge certain groups of people or individuals but I would state that Conservapedia is not out to make money so offending certain individuals or segments of the public is certainly not a concern of Conservapedia.

Really, this is truth in advertising at its best! --Sid 21:06, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I am wondering how long it will take Andy to tell kenny-boy to cool it. He is using CP as his own soapbox to spout his own brand of gibberish. Will Andy even do so? Probably not but, jeez, he is getting pretty rabid over there. And Ken, I know you read this so I would just like to add that its "Which he'll never 'Do'" not "Which he'll never 'due'" Idiot. Submit me a writing plan. Ace McWicked 21:21, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I think the total collapse of what little community Conservapedia has is fairly inevitable. I can't think of even one community that hostile, unstable, and prone to internal bickering that has lasted in the long run. Eventually it'll just be a few sysops fighting each other and becoming increasingly out of touch with reality. assume  21:30, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Eventually? SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:32, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I think Andy will let his sysops do whatever they like as long as they don't cross his path. Andy doesn't have specific interest in Atheism/Homosexuality/Evolution, so he won't interfere. Andy just cares about homeschooling, public schools, breast cancer, liberals and Hollywood. He occasionally develops an interest in other things, which instantly leads to friction (see for example the Bible clash with PJR).
The end result will be a complete partitioning of the articles, like territorial borders. PJR will own the Bible continent, Ken will own the Homosexuathevolution continent, Ed will own the Global Warming continent, etc. Heck, if you look closely, they're almost there already. --Sid 21:35, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Don't forget TerryH who's arguably the only one really editing an encyclopaedia with his Solar System articles - Oh & Bert Schlossberg, who's got KAL007 totally sussed. SusanG  ContribsTalk 22:34, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm I guess thats right. Most proper editors only last a few weeks if that before getting burned and leaving in disgust. I am suprised AdenJ (particulary after that whole NZ and guns bit) and Jimmy lasted this long without permanent banning. Soon it'll just be Andy harping on about liberals, Karajou banhammering vandals and writing about big boats, Conservative drooling about how no one can challenge his Atheism article, PJR will end up leaving I am sure (or least toning down) and Ed Poor writing his 2 liners. No one else is really as active as those guys and dont really get a mention. What will we do then? Ace McWicked 21:42, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Funny part is, reading the old stuff (fascinating reading, really), Andy's style at that point was surprisingly similar to Ken's. Assertions, out of context comments, declarations of victory, and on and on. Mind you, he got called a moron to his face a lot more often back then, and Roger tended to back him up with his own special blend of delusion and dishonesty. --Kels 21:46, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Sh.. he's watching [2] SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:55, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Here's something else interesting about the first diff of the announcement: "[Y]ou have yet to point out a single error in the Conservapedia theory of evolution or cp:atheism articles." Well, here's an error in the very next sentence: "There is entirely too many citations in the homosexuality article from mainstream medical sources for you to contend with..." Yeah, there is a lot of citations in that article, all right. In a sentence, a subject should always agree with its verb, unless you're homeschooling, in which case a subject should always agree with a right-wing political agenda. --Elkman 22:01, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

I thought a subject only had to obey its Leader? DogP 22:03, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Re: CP community... there was one, once. Basically before last March (07). There were a bunch of teenagers, most of whom knew each other IRL, having fun, exchanging notes on talk pages, clumsily learning the wiki syntax. In March, a few control freaking psychotics who were kicked off wikipedia joined (along with many other types of people) - and it is hard to get kicked off wikipedia - and all that remain of that wave are the psychotics. And they are sysops. The teenagers, are any of them even still slightly active? Surely a few are? ħumanUser talk:Human 22:05, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Interesting. That was well before my time, but I think you hit the nail on the head there. There are, however, a few of the teenage homskoolerz left, though it may be only Bethany and Sharon now. I gotta say, I like the image of CP as a combination social/learning site for teens rather than a haven for sociopathical Wikipedia rejects like Karajou, TK, Ed, Ken, and whatever other fuckheads they have there. I guess that's the natural state of things: the assholes prevail. DickTurpis 23:00, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
I've said that a number of times. A resource entirely for and by homeschoolers would be an amazing idea. It would empower the kids, encourage them to read a lot outside of their own normal areas of interest, and really bring some positive attention to the better aspects of homeschooling. Plus the social aspect and a degree of pride in having created something themselves. But with a rabid ideologue like Andy in charge, there's no way something like that could happen. And that's a crying shame. --Kels 23:10, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
My fantasy girlfriend (Kels) and I have always agreed on a number ways that CP could actually "work". Sadly, Teh Assfly has no clue. Oh, and that fantasy thing... it's not based on much. But it is easier for me to acknowledge that than it is for Teh Assfly to acknowledge that his blog is biased against "reality" in too many ways. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:53, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Oh, is Kels female? Man, I gotta read userpages a little more. I need a new fantasy girlfriend myself. My current one (Tina Fey) is a bit too unobtainable and married. Good to know we're not 100% an old boys network (only 94%). DickTurpis 01:05, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Well she alleges lady bits, and if I liked lady bits and their superstructure (brainz, and I do) I'd like her and hers. Oops, I do like her and hers. She iz teh smart and all. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:10, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I think Kels is a pretty cool guy. She mocks teh assfly and doesn't afraid of anything. DickTurpis 01:19, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Indeed, that is him! She also admires Helena Bonham Carter. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:29, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
As do I. Gettin knocked up by lower class prole who is later killed by uppoer class bastard who hits him with a sword and bookcase falls on him, exacerbating his heart condition and killing him...classic. DickTurpis 01:46, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
WOT'S ALL THIS, THEN? --Kels 07:55, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Holy crap, I got my own shout-out! XD
You pretty much missed my point there. Let me make it more clear: Your articles don't go against Andy's ideology, so he doesn't interfere. He may like your articles (which I don't doubt, even though I do doubt that he actually read them in-depth), but he has no real interest in the subjects because his agenda isn't really about them. Andy knows you're in the "liberals are bad" camp, so he simply lets you do whatever you want, regardless of how many people (including sysops) you piss off with your attention whoring - as long as you don't wander into his territory.
That's what I meant with the partitioning: You get to go nuts in your Evomosexuatheism corner, Ed has control in the Global Warming corner, and Andy gets the Hollywood/liberal/abortion/breast-cancer parts. As long as everybody stays in those boundaries, there are no problems.
But awwww, you deleted it already. :( So much for my 15 minutes of fame... Don't bother creating another shout-out, though - I'll be offline now since I need my sleep. Go make some more shout-outs to others; I'm not really interested in these cross-site "discussions", anyway. Thanks for the attention, though. --Sid 22:33, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Andy vs. FernoKlump[edit]

I must say I love the way Andy is defending himself, in only three short paragraphs he writes:

You make mistakes, cause embarrassment for others, but then refuse to admit that it was your mistake...We all make mistakes, but most of us admit them, especially when our mistakes cause embarrassment to made a mistake that caused embarrassment to someone else...admit your own mistake...who won't admit his own mistakes, even when it causes embarrassment to someone else...admit your own mistake, which embarrassed this site...""embarrassing the site with his own mistake, and then refusing to admit it"...who embarrass the site with their own mistakes, and then refuse to admit it.

NightFlareSpeak, mortal 23:27, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Pleez to ad linx? ħumanUser talk:Human 00:55, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Here you go. --Horace 01:39, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Thanks :) ħumanUser talk:Human 01:45, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Doubler thanks. Pleez wow, can you add that somewhere as a little CP article??? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:46, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Is it just me, or did Andy accept an apology that sounded more like a fuc godspeed? The levels the man stoops to never fails to amaze me. I can't believe they went through such contortions over 6 x 8 = 40, especially as the initial "article" never mentioned taxes. --PsygremlinWhut? 01:53, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Nope, it's not just you:

"Fine, Go fuck yourself, you moron. FernoKlump 23:15, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

OK, thank you. I respect that, and look forward to your future contributions.--Aschlafly 23:34, 27 May 2008 (EDT)"

ħumanUser talk:Human 01:58, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Anyone else find it interesting that they're using math to warp reality? I mean, seriously, how long until we here that 2 + 2 only equals four after taxes? Barikada 02:35, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Am I the only one here who didn't think there was a maths error in the original "parable"? I'm pretty used to the idea that there's a difference betweeen the amount I get paid and the amount I take home, and it did say "about 6 hours" (my emphasis). (if it was a maths error, why didn't it just say 6 hours? So what that the original article didn't say "after tax"? Pretty much everyone pays it.) I think the storm it has caused at CP is pretty hilarious, mind. Alt 05:25, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
This whole incident is just scary. Andy makes a mistake and when someone corrects him, he comes up with an excuss why he his right. Normally this ends with Andy looking a prat but now he breaks his "difference with Wikipedia" and beats a user into submisson on his user page talk. Conservapedia has finally crossed the boarder into totalitarianism where the leader can't be wrong on a simple multiplication. I have been keeping screenshots incase this goes the way of the FBI incident. 3.14159 06:08, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
You definitely want to keep screenshots - Ed's gone censor-happy as noted in the WIGO about "tolerance". --SpinyNorman 12:47, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
You know who else thought 2+2=4? HITLER, that's who!!!@!! --Gulik 15:42, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I have no idea if it was an error either, and I'm actually willing to give Andy the benefit of the doubt there, though he's still an asshole for being such a dick about good faith edits to fix it. He did say "about" 6 hours, and being a conservative, of course he's going to be thinking about the taxes stolen from him by the socialist state. It's probably more on his mind than the actual money he takes home. DickTurpis 10:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Jesus Camp[edit]

My God in heaven. I couldn't watch all of that last night (More4 UK). Simply horrific. That is child abuse. (Sorry this isn't the right place but I am rarely genuinely shocked by anything on TV.) Ajkgordon 03:49, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Haven't watched it yet, but I downloaded it last week for later viewing. The trailer freaked me out before I have even seen the prog. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 03:59, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Where did you download it from? It's not on C4's watch again list. I might be able to stomach the rest of it tonight. Ajkgordon 04:02, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
You have to install 4oD. There's a lot more stuff there. Evidently it was shown before, so that's why it was available before the repeat. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 05:54, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Thanks. Ajkgordon 06:34, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Interesting comment from an IMDB user here. Ajkgordon 04:12, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I bought the DVD last year (US Import) and was horrified. I find it difficult not to cry when I watch it. The real shame is the kids come accross really well and have such huge potential - all being wasted. The bit I found hardest to watch was the kid knealing down and crying saying "It's so hard to believe". He had more guts than all the adults put together in the room. He was the only one being honest. RedDog 04:32, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
The most heartbreaking part is not the little girl's storyline or the very very end with the little boy and girl (though both of these are quite heart-wrenching), but watching the development of that boy. If you watch carefully, you'll see him recur every once in a while, and just the little glimpses the audience gets are enough to create an entire arc for this (AFAIK) nameless boy. The whole thing is hard to watch, but that boy really got to me. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:36, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
The blond one? Yeah, heart wrenching. Ajkgordon 04:45, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
It's a horrific documentary. That preacher woman even basically admits that if they can get the children young enough she can keep them (read: brainwash) as Christians. She, quite frankly, is evil. --PsygremlinWhut? 04:52, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Oh man, I missed it. Probably a good thing, given how wound up I was (and still am) by Dispatches last week, but I would have recorded it to watch at a later time. Will have to check 4 On Demand. Bondurant 04:58, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Yes, 4oD has it. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 05:54, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Undent. You start watching it thinking "Ah great, this will be choc full os lulz" but after about half an hour you realise that it's very depressing and a bit of a bummer. RedDog 06:03, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Kudos to Channel 4 for showing it, only a week after firing barrels in the face of the more unpleasent Christian minority in the UK. The Daily Mail must be itching to go after its old "filth peddling" bete noir again. On another note, I headed over to the other site to see their perspective on Jesus Camp and found a stub article. I half expected it to triumphantly say how wonderful it is to see children being brought to the light. Bondurant 06:27, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Believe it or not the people that run Jesus Camp ("Kids on Fire" - you couldn't make this stuff up!) believe it is a fair and accurate reflection of what they do. They are in no-way ashamed of it. RedDog 07:11, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
(ec)IIRC, there was a big issue over whether or not the movie was exploitative, with opinions split on both sides. A lot of Christians (including the people in the movie) viewed the movie as accurate and even positive. I don't remember what gay-preacher-man (can't even remember his name) thought about it, but I don't think he was too proud of it. The filmmakers say the film was meant to display a neutral POV, so I guess people read into it what their opinion already is. We think the indoctrination of children is despicable, so we see this as a depressing movie. Others *cough*CP*cough* glorify it, so they watch the movie with very different colored glasses. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 07:20, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Incidentally, I think "Kids on Fire" shut down because of vandalism to their property or something, presumably backlash over the movie. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 07:21, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Am I the only one who sees something similar, writ very small (read the fine print) in the CP video on YouTube? Specifically the kid going on about the evils of Wikipedia, she'd only have got that if it was drilled into her as truth, and she came off as well practiced. --Kels 08:27, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I wouldn't draw any strong comparisons between the two, at least not based on that one 3 minute video. I don't know what goes on in Andy's classes, though I imagine it's split between mundane teaching and scary prosthelytizing. Kids regurgitating dumb stuff they're told is hardly uncommon in any forum, so I wouldn't be overly concerned with Sharon's speech. If we got a look into the class itself and what is being taught, then we might see a mini-Jesus Camp, but I can't tell from a video which is mostly Andy sitting down and trying to put the best public face on his little group that he can. I have a feeling Andy is a slightly more reasonable guy when he's molding a group of like minded tykes than he is when editing CP, where he's on the front lines of the take-no-prisoners epic battle of him versus the secular world, which is hell bent on defeating him using mass deceit. A good full length documentary on CP, Andy's classes, and the Schlaflys themselves might make for some very interesting viewing, and might well compare to Jesus Camp. What I found most interesting about Jesus Camp is that the observer's paradox didn't appear to have much of an effect, and the kids and adults apparently acted as the normally would. I sort of doubt that would happen in most other circumstances. DickTurpis 09:54, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
"prosthelytizing" - trying to convince people that Jesus had an artificial leg. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 10:27, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
LOL! Ajkgordon 10:39, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
It was hollow which explains a lot... where he kept all the loaves and fishes, how he walked on water... shit, you should start a new sect. Ajkgordon 10:41, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I got to see Jesus Camp about a year or so ago, the whole movie was up on Google video, and it wasn't available anywhere around here. The highlight was when she talked about Harry Potter. I don't think that Andy reaches her methods exactly. Andy is more likely to just belittle anyone who disagrees, rather than the more gentle methods used here (gentle as in exclusionary, rather than saying something like "you don't know anything about ____" I'm curious how he behaves in class. I wonder if he gets a parental release form so he can institute corporal punishment. - Lardashe

A day in the life of CP[edit]

So I got bored while waiting for a conference call to start, and I gots me to thinking about how CP is developing to become a profeshunal encyclopaedia. Of course, this takes main page edits. This is what I pulled from yesterday's edit summaries:

  • Total number of mainspace edits: 306
  • Unique mainspace pages edited: 156
  • Number of edits of greater than 10 characters: 171
  • Vandalism: 2
  • Number of unique editors: 49
  • Number of new articles: 18 (including one essay and one conspiracy theory about KAL007)
  • Mainspace edits (greater than 10 characters) by:
*Aschfly: 3
*Conservative: 8
*DeanS: 10
*Ed Poor: 5
*Joaquin: 50
*Karajou: 1
*Learn Together: 15
*PJR: 5

So at this rate, CP will overtake Wikipedia in about 302 years in terms of new articles, assuming WP stops growing. The next time I get bored, I'll upload some graphs or something. Bondurant 07:49, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Interesting Read[edit]

Thought I'd pop this in - Steve Pavlina's (whoever he may be) 10 Reasons Not To have a Religion. Makes for interesting reading, and basically mirrors exactly what goes on over at CP.
heh - have to add this. Have you seen that Ken's 'awareness' drivel [3] starts off with a quote from Chuck Norris? Wasn't it Jeff Foxworthy who said, "If an episode of Walker Texas Ranger changed your life... you might be a redneck..." --PsygremlinWhut? 08:53, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Wow. That was actually worse than the stuff we usually see from Christopher Hitchens. I feel my horizons have been widened a bit. Although on reflection, I guess it is to be expected that a guy who earns his money writing about "personal development" would not be too friendly towards organized religion. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 10:11, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Stuff like that always seems to bother me.... When people simply spew opinion like that, it only serves to reaffirm a "They all hate us" mentality... The guy had one or two halfway decent points, but most of it simply served as "ME HATE RELIGION, ME HATE PEOPLE WHO DON'T RELIGION." I think there's better ways to do it. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 16:40, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

CP on the Hour[edit]

Did anyone notice how creepy Assfly looked during the Youtube clip? Kinda like a cult leader who rubs his hands together while thinking of ways to rid the earth of the libruls. Also that last shot where we zoom in on Andy in the group, kinda reminds me of that kid that everyone ignored but later in life found to be a child abuser...--TimS 10:04, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Bad wandalism[edit]

If this was someone here, you need to work on your wiki-skillz. The new parable didn't even show up because the wandal broke the ref tag. Jrssr5 15:38, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Why Phillip J Rayment is actually an ass, no matter how polite[edit]

referring to two people who died in a plane accident as compared to two people who did not, and I quote:I wouldn't be too sure about that last point. Also, perhaps in the other case, the people weren't Christians. Translation they likely died because they weren't praying and weren't Christian. subtext: They probably deserved it. The guy is a as jerky as they come. Don't believe any different. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 16:08, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I'm not going to defend PJR (again) and if I'm talking pigs garbage I appologise because I am currently smashed off my trumpet. However I may have misunderstood but I read it as the first person was saying that the two guys who died in the plane would almost certainly have prayed as well as the two guys who survived (who we know prayed), so why did God not hear their prayer. PJR was responding saying they might not have prayed because they might not have been believers. I don't think he was saying they deserve to die in a plane because they weren't believers. No, this is no good. Where's my pipe? RedDog 16:12, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Hey, getting trashed and defending PJR is my department! Step off! But seriously, I think the "they deserved it" subtext is putting words in PJR's mouth. Not praying or praying to the wrong god might have, in his mind, made the difference between crashing to their deaths and a soft landing next to a Baptist pot-luck, but that doesn't necessarily equate with them deserving their fate. I think he'd say praying to the wrong god is like pushing the wrong button, cutting the engine. It's mistake that caused their deaths, but it's not punishment. Of course, the number of people who do pray to the "right" god in times of imminent death and still die is high enough to disprove the "prayer works!" argument, but that's pesky atheistic science talking, not superior, solid faith. DickTurpis 16:26, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I wonder if PJR actually means that they deserved to die because they were not christian? Christian, Jebus will save you. Not christian, your plane will crash you heratic swine! Hmmmmm Ace McWicked 17:03, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

This ( Also, perhaps in the other case, the people weren't Christians) is the part that makes me think PJR is as jerky as the rest of 'em. Y'all are correct in that it could be parsed to mean that perhaps since they prayed (or didn't) to the wrong god then the "real" god did not intervene. To my mind this makes his imaginary god a jerk as well. If PJR was simply saying that we can't be sure they prayed--period--without assuming they died because of it (or not) than that is not offensive to me. However, I parse it to mean perhaps they died because they weren't christian. This makes PJR an asshat of the first order. Since we know he reads this perhaps he will respond and set the record straight. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 17:25, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Conservative deleted "Talk:Atheism" (request of deborah and PJR)[edit]

Does anybody have a link to the part where Deborah and PJR requested the entire talk page (with history dating back to the beginning of the site) to be nuked? I find that hard to believe, but I joined late, so maybe I missed some development that justified a whitewash of this dimension... --Sid 17:33, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I remember yesterday that Deborah thought the shoutouts and the like were unencyclopedic. Obviously we were not the only ones to think Kennyboy is a bit of a clown-shoes. Ace McWicked 17:40, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Ah, so the "delete these shout-outs" became "delete the entire history of all those pages"? WHAT THE HELL? --Sid 17:43, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Oh well, it should be lovely to see PJR's face once he discovered that Ken screwed up so badly in his name... --Sid 17:43, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I was right. It blew up in his face and he deletes everything pertaining to it. But no, this is too much... too much. NorsemanWassail! 17:59, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Could this be sanity rearing its (ugly) head at CP? SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:02, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Please, oh (your) god no. Hold me, Susan! NorsemanWassail! 18:06, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
"Sanity" usually doesn't involve nuking months of edit history... --Sid 18:10, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
"Sanity" usually doesn't involve Conservative for that matter. Ajkgordon 18:12, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Combine the two & you get "Nuking months of Conservative's edit history" Now that's sanity SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:23, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

(undent) ....and, Ken forgets to protect the left mainpage template. PFoster 18:26, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I gotta agree with Wanderer there. Ken's really starting to sound unglued, I can imagine him cackling aloud as he posts each (supposedly) cutting riposte. --Kels 23:16, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

I saved the full talk page of his public awareness piece. He only deleted and restored without burning anything, but it seems he's done it again... too late Cowardservative! NorsemanWassail! 01:55, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Broken Links in WIGO[edit]

There are loads of links to pages at CP that don't exist anymore in the WIGO list. Spica the Hiver If you tolerate this, then your children will be next... 17:46, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

You mean the Talk:Main_Page deletion fallout and stuff? If so: Argh. I'll see if I can handle a few, but OMFG. Long-term project. --Sid 17:51, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I suggest we team up and archive those that point to CP main talk page and talk atheism...we might wanna lock WIGO while we're at it. CЯacke® 18:08, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Some could be salvaged via perma-links to the now-initial version, along with section links. But that may be more work than it's worth. Opinions? --Sid 18:11, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Damn, that's a lot of lost lulz! Etc 18:21, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I managed to save the Talk: Main Page, Ken's user and user talk pages as well as the Public awareness... page and its talk, the Talk: Main Page was while it still had Ken's shout outs if anybody is interested (though I presume others did too). NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:33, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Can you dump it on a page somewhere to allow comparison with the new version? SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:40, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Right away. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:43, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Another side effect of Ken's nuking: Admin CollegeRepublican now has zero edits. DickTurpis 00:50, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

It's kind of dissapointing as I don't think CP has been as funny in the short time I've been here. I suppose it just leaves a blank canvas for more deluded madness (Go team CP! Go deluded madness!). RedDog 05:40, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
I notice he is still haning on to the stolen AP image. Well I guess when you have a gag as good as that it's hard to let it go. RedDog 05:44, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

UPDATE: Inertia worked in our favor, the pages have been restored. Thanks, Philip, I had hoped you'd do that once you realized WTF Ken had done in your name :P --Sid 07:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Hooray for PJR!! Etc 09:50, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Ireland pre-dates God[edit]

"The earliest inhabitants--people of a mid-Stone Age culture--arrived about 6000 BC." CP's Ireland article - wonder if Phil realises that the Irish were there before God? SusanG  ContribsTalk 20:23, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

From what I know of Irish history, that would explain a LOT. :) --Gulik 00:26, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Crocky's talk page....[edit]

Who did what to Dean/Crocoite's talk page to warrant it being mammary memory-holed?

ascii art goatse. --Shagie 22:21, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!PFoster 22:24, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
I thought it had a kind of jarring beauty set against a back drop of Conservapedia. RedDog 03:41, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
It was a bit more than the E@3 version (which you don't understand unless you know about goatse in the first place). Though, still, yea for nano-porn (porn in 10 bytes or less). --Shagie 03:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
I don't know... that type of vandalsim seems so juvenile.... I mean, it's so stupid... I think the best stuff is the subtle changes they don't recognize right away, those are the ones that make them really stupid... especially when they get pointed out here and fixed within five minutes... It's great. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 04:56, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Especially, no wandalism should be obscene enough that they delete the history! Imho, Conservapedia doesn't need to be vandalized at all in order to be funny. Ed and Andy alone are able to provide entertainment enough for everyone. Etc 12:08, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Do realize in no way am I advocating vandalism, nor the propagation of goatse to anyone who is not already familiar with it. The nanoporn version was not the one used there. I'm just amused by the concept of minimalistic ascii porn (10 bytes or less). And E@3 isn't traumatizing unless you know what it is supposed to be in the first place (I know of some other nanoporn that is much more explicit and doesn't need an imagination). In the meantime, do a search on for goatse for some amusing reading. --Shagie 13:57, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Unblock for a special project[edit]

Anyone know why Tmtoulouse‎ was unblocked but swiftly blocked again? looks intriguing.... Ace McWicked 23:15, 28 May 2008 (EDT)

Easy to see why he was blocked, he made fun of YEC. As to the unblock in the first place, who knows? --Kels 23:57, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
Bohdan wanted his help, but doesn't dare let him do anything without watching him every second. --Gulik 00:19, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Thats annoying when you need to use the restroom. Pee time is me time. It would also be kind of creepy when you wake up and see him there watching you. --Shagie 00:21, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Slow morning[edit]

After over 3 hours of tumbleweed over at the other site, we get... Liberallulz. I think I see how this is going to end... Bondurant 06:21, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

CP:Homicide Bombing[edit]

Forgive me for being dumb, but what happened to it? I seem to recall Andy and co redirecting "Suicide Bombing" to it and criticising/blocking other editors for pointing out the redundant adjective. Now all I can find is CP:Suicide Bombing... Was it all just a dream? RyanC 09:21, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

No, it wasn't, but the article name was cp:Homicide Bomber. And cp:Kamikaze still redirects to it. --Sid 14:52, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Joaquin antics[edit]

This guy cracks me up. Check out his cp:author article: An author writes stuff, here is a haphazard list of books written by authors...

When will the list be "complete", I wonder? DickTurpis 10:19, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

That's an impossible task! Unless ... book burning time, perhaps? Etc 12:05, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, it reminds me of my all-time-favorite movie, it's so different each time I watch it..the cast MUST be made of thousands of people, you've probably seen it and passed it by cause the title is so obscure:Security Device Enclosed. Destined to be a classic. CЯacke® 10:28, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
My, I feel dull-witted. I actually checked IMDB for that title. - Lardashe
Oh my god (well, not mine I suppose), many of those aren't even books! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 18:48, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Ed Poor and comprehension[edit]

Ed links to to show that Intelligent Design Isn't the same as Creationism. Trouble is, the reference says they're so nearly the same as to be indistinguishable:

"Yet as far as its strategic behavior goes, ID actually appears to represent a kind of natural culmination of the "creation science" movement, which originated in the 1960s and 1970s for specific legal and educational reasons. When compared to "creation science" on a strategic level, it turns out that ID proceeds still further in the direction of PR-oriented pseudoscience and the denial of religious intentions in argument. In fact, we can detect many rudimentary elements of the current ID approach among earlier advocates of "creation science"—though ID has improved and perfected them."

"In all of these ways, ID represents a strategic upgrade of "creation science." In fact, it turns out that ID's "teach the controversy" program—which advocates instructing public school students in the alleged weaknesses in evolutionary theory, rather than in ID itself—appears to have originated with "creation scientists" as well."

and the final paragraph of the article:

"So, in short, even though ID may not be young earth creationism, and may not be "creation science," it nevertheless seems doomed to recapitulate that prior movement's errors and failures. That doesn't necessarily prove that ID is like traditional creationism in any detailed way. Rather, it simply just goes to show that both are forms of religiously inspired anti-evolutionism, and will automatically have a near-impossible row to hoe thanks to the firm place of evolutionary theory in modern biology."

Quote mining I know but its there in black and white.

Oh and has anyone looked at Conservapedia's "Frog" article & spotted all the "errors"?

(PZ Myers blog gets credit for my sudden interest in Conservapedia and Rationalwiki)


The Kool-Aid/Flavor-Aid discussion[edit]

The Kool-Aid/Flavor-Aid thing going on at Karajou's talk page remind me of this. The guy really needs to stop being an over-reacting, self-righteous buffoon. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 13:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

F**k me! SusanG  ContribsTalk 14:47, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Rhetorical, I presume? Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 18:53, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
OCD much? CЯacke® 15:15, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
It's interesting to see PJR wading in again. [4] He might have an odd worldview (and his comments re: the microlight thing were particularly tasteless) but it seems as if he's starting to have a bellyful of some of the idiocy going on over there. --PsygremlinWhut? 15:18, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
I wonder if he'll have anything to say about K-dub bullying Tom or not. --Kels 15:23, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
I so love Kara-Jerk's over-the-top tone and criteria, 2 months of incident i.e. pre-internet era, and within less than 24 hours. What a pompous fool he is, just another intertube troll. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 15:30, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
PJR is a piece of work. It's okay if God lets two non-Christians die in a plane crash, but you better not bully an editor who tries to correct an error regarding the beverage used in the mass suicide of a Christian cult. Rational Edthink! 15:34, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
TOM MOORE, is staying on CP worth $4? From the Washington post. Its contents are supposedly this. I think this counts, right? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Silly Tom Moore. Don't you know defending yourself is a capital offense in Koward-land? Shall we start the block clock? --Kels 16:14, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Karajou-jou is just an angry old fuck isnt he. Ace McWicked 17:10, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Kara is not "just an angry old fuck" - he's an angry old veteran fuck. ;)
As an aside, I'm stunned to see even CPAdmin1 chiming in on this. --Sid 17:42, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Tom should make up some newspaper site, e.g.: Cleveland Plain Dealer, Nov. 24, 1978, p. A2 "...apparently cyanide, mixed with Flavor-aid brand drink mix, caused more than 900 deaths at Jonestown this month...." Leave it up to Karajou to go to his library and do the research to prove him wrong. Fucking veteran asshole. DickTurpis 17:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

I wonder what happened to make him so freaking mad? PTSD after being forced to swab the deck by a liberal? Having to clean the latrines? Raped by a meat cleaver? The "dont ask, dont tell policy"? Someone should ask him. I often wonder what he looks like and I get this image of a grizzled old fart with an eye patch waving a bottle of scotch at the computer screen. Ace McWicked 18:05, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

"a grizzled old fart with an eye patch waving a bottle of scotch" is much too cool a description for Karajou. Probably more like some semi-retarded overweight raving lunatic shouting "respect me! I worked on a BOAT!" DickTurpis 18:27, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Heh. Sitting on a porch in a rocking chair waving a shotgun typing the while, (I like te eyepatch though) SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:30, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Hmmmmmm you maketh a good point. An overweight, pasty skinned fucktard with part of yesterdays fried egg breakfast still hanging from his 5'o-clock shadow sounds a bit better. After all I often wave a bottle scotch at my computer screen/TV screen/washing machine and I am waaaaaay awesomer than karajou-jou. Ace McWicked 18:33, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Particularly if it's a single malt scotch (from Islay, maybe). No if Karajou waves anything it's probably a bottle of Jim Beam, or a cheap Jack Daniels knock-off. Or a loaded gun. ----
Ardbeg Rules!! SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:42, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

More likely some kind of libation brewed from oprphans tears and liberals blood, fermented for two weeks in one of the volumous folds hanging from his torso. I feel sick now. Ace McWicked 18:46, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Karajou's military record consists of twenty years sitting at a desk staring at a gray wall "standing watch." End of story. What else would he be good for? look at his resume on his user page. Take note that he never has any sea stories. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 22:04, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Lying Ed lives up to his name with a conservative interpretation of what Tom Moore said. And is promptly owned. Who is on the block clock? Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 22:12, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
"I once drank kool-aid, and look what happened to me!"
Bullshit, Karajou. You just read RW, and took the article I gave to Tom. That's why you've had a change of heart, when everyone knows you don't have one.--Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 04:53, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Eh, the entire "discussion" had been priceless: "You do what I tell you to, or else!" - "Yeah, whatever, piss off." - "Hahaha, I was just kidding, but I hope you learned your lesson!" --Sid 07:33, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Today's Conservapedia lesson: Liars and bullies go to heaven Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 07:36, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
This is priceless. Ed's apparently going for the "Historical Revisionism of the Month" award: Considering how Tom got into trouble because he provided three references (which just happened to prove Kara wrong), it's fairly interesting to see Ed's accusation that Tom was "arguing without providing evidence". Seriously, few things are worse than Ed and Karajou tag-teaming against a non-sysop who only tried to help. Oh, and further up in that discussion, Ed scolds Tom for not even trying to give in to Karajou's threats. --Sid 13:00, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

What really gets me about this whole thing is that one off-hand reference in an article to 'Kool-Aid' (with this article being conveniently unavailable for reference) is seen as utter vindication of Karajou, and allows him to go about his business without even a 'sorry, perhaps I was a bit heavy-handed', yet you go to, say, here, which gives an excerpt from the book 'Ghosts of November', written by a member of the Joint Humanitarian Task Force, Jeff Brailey, who did the cleanup of the bodies at Jonestown, and he seems to think it was Fla-Vor-Aid. In addition, the site it's hosted on, which seems to have a pretty extensive collection of audio tapes and other material about and by the Peoples Temple, and Jim Jones, repeatedly refers to it being Fla-Vor-Aid, not Kool Aid, and only mentions Kool Aid as people who don't know any better saying, 'Jim Jones, wasn't he the Kool Aid guy?' Now, to me, it seems ridiculously unimportant which it was, but it does seem fairly clear that Karajou is actually wrong. Zmidponk 12:57, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Maybe there's something to be learnt from this. Remember how the Kool-Aid thing started with the 10 skeletons thing where somebody pointed out the error while mocking CP. What would Karajou do? Admit the error and fix the news header? Say that it's irrelevant what the name of a drink is? Point out how he should refer to the drink as the article says it is, regardless the truth? No, he flips out at the user while defending an incorrect point, and extrapolate the Kool-Aid vs. Flavor-aid into a conservative vs. liberal thing, as well as lashing out at the smaller peons who dare defend the user.
In other words, mocking CP on a pitiful point may cause lulz. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 13:30, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Creative Fair Use Commons?[edit]

JM seems to be slightly confused about licensing... CP's "we ignore all existing licensing standards and try to enforce our own anybody can copy anything unless we say they can't almost-license" position is getting weirder and weirder. --Sid 15:41, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Summing up CP in just one line[edit]

I think this is CP in a nutshell (from the Recent Changes; emphasis mine, of course):

contribs) (→legal right to abortion - )

Few things sum up the CP agenda better (or in a more concise way) than this, I think. --Sid 15:48, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia: A celebration of ignorance.

Just for the Hell of it[edit]

When I first read Andy's self congratulatory BS on the main page, I thought of two jokes... the first being the one I used in the WIGO, and the second was "Page views aren't important, only Wikipedia thinks so.... but YouTube views... those are Fucking HUGE." SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 16:32, 29 May 2008 (EDT)


Ok, this is too funny... I got to this site from something or another.... thought others might enjoy the humor too.... I was especially like to point out their Motto... that's my only hint. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 16:45, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

By definition their English must be right therefore those "S"s are now to be enforced throughout the Union! SusanG  ContribsTalk 17:23, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Also, is it my eyes, my browser or my screen, but is 'immigrants' in a different font to the rest of the "Motto""? SusanG  ContribsTalk 17:48, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
"Keep Rush on the Air..." Assuming that is the stratosphere, and only for about five seconds. Lyra § talk 17:53, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
In their "motto" the word immigrants actually appears to be in the same font but small caps. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.
I actually was first drawn to the incredible run on sentence. But you gotta love the irony of an English only group having massive spelling and grammar errors on their pages. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 01:14, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Defending what you don't believe[edit]

Learntogether already started bullying an user for the things going on at the relativity page. That plus a discussion that went on somebody's userpage I forgot makes me wonder. Why is it that so many people refuse to at least voice their disagreements on things they don't believe in (or sometimes even go to great lenghts to defend them as in this case)? Is being a sysop that great?

I'm assuming, of course, that Learntogether, Karajou, Ed Poor, etc. don't believe that relativity is a hoax or something, shaking babies is safe or that professors are criminals. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:17, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

It's called self preservation/promotion. Or is there some element of lynch mob? SusanG  ContribsTalk 18:25, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Well... yes, but is it really worth it? Is it worth humillating yourself to maintain a CP career? NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:32, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
When you join CP, there are three paths you can take:
  1. Don't do anything. Remain completely still and never attract attention AT ALL.
  2. Support Andy on the things you agree with and try not to seriously debate with him. A few minor disagreements are fine if you can live with Andy thinking you're not really a full conservative (see: PJR and gun control) and as long as you don't try to insert these "non-conservative" views into articles.
  3. Banhammer.
There are no other options. If you want to make progress on CP without being banhammered or threatened every other day, you will have to suck up. A lot. And stay completely out of the things where your conscience wouldn't allow you to suck up.
About the "why"... well, I got two theories: Either you want to establish a portal you can flesh out in your niche (Conservative's Evomosexuatheism, Ed's Global Warming, PJR with Christianity and YEC, etc.) and think that you can make a difference there... or you just enjoy the ability to bully whoever you want without fear of consequences. --Sid 19:22, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

or you just enjoy the ability to bully whoever you want without fear of consequences. That's what I think. They are, every last one of them, garden variety internet trolls. They've found a perfect home. No need for grandiose explanations of pedestrian anti-social behavior. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 19:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

I've never actually looked at the relativity article over there, believe it or not, but I find it highly amusing. They seem to doubt that relativity even exists, based on such overwhelming evidence as a random astronomer saying that GPS engineers don't need to know about relativity, as GPS clocks can be corrected by resetting them to tally with clocks on the ground, yet fails to address why the clocks go wrong in the first place, and what this astronomer said is taken as evidence disproving relativity above what unnamed 'obscure physicists' said, despite the fact the field that is most directly connected with relativity is physics. More 'evidence' is the 'fact' that random, uncited internet articles do not address the effect of weaker gravitation under Newton's theories, despite the fact the CP article even admits it's unknown whether there would even BE any effect under Newton's theory, yet there clearly is some effect happening. Yet more 'evidence' is the claim that NASA's spacecraft's timing devices fail to incorporate predictions of relativity, but the citation for this is simply a statement by someone at CP that, 'there is no reported reliance on relativity by any space probe', with apparantly an attempt not even being made to see if there's a reason why this is so, or even a link to a source confirming that this lack of reporting of such is due to a lack of this happening. Zmidponk 22:04, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh the Irony[edit]

Oh Ed, if only you knew!

Bahahahaha Ace McWicked 20:07, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps rationalwiki will know[edit]

Why is that there seems to be a disproportionate number of vandals on Conservapedia who register with a female "real name" (as opposed to those who register with a male "real name")?

Or am I just imagining that? 20:58, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

No, I don't think you're imagining it. I suppose that a lot of them might be me (or not) or folks think that females get an easier ride (we don't) or perhaps it's just contrariness. SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:36, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure Ed[edit]

really Ed? (Intelligent Design is an inference from biological data, not a deduction from religious authority)

Meyer graduated with a degree in geology in 1980 from Whitworth College and worked as a geophysicist for the Atlantic Richfield Company. Meyer won a scholarship from the Rotary Club of Dallas to study at Cambridge University in the United Kingdom. Meyer earned his Ph.D. in history and philosophy of science in 1991. His dissertation was entitled "Of clues and causes : a methodological interpretation of origin of life studies."
wp:Stephen C. Meyer

(my bolding) SusanG  ContribsTalk 20:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

My favourite hobby - deleted![edit]


From Conservapedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search

Tastyg (Talk | contribs) (Creation) Next diff → Revision as of 20:45, 29 May 2008

69 (action: 69ing) is the act of two partners giving oral sex simultaniously. This can be done male-female, female-female, or male-male. Usually a 69 involves one partner resting on the other with genitals placed near the partners mouth. This can also be done while laying on ones side, or while one partner stands and holds the other in a "standing 69" (this variant is particularily fun).

Oral sex is fun to give or recieve, so getting both at the same time is extra fun!

(Deletion log); 20:59 . . Learn together (Talk | contribs) (deleted "69": content was: '{{delete}}' Put together by vandal)
Have they no soul over there? SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:18, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Again, I go back to that great Bill Maher quote from a couple of weeks back. "They think sex is bad, because sex with them always is." --Kels 22:27, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

One of Kenny's pets is being ignored on WP[edit]

I told 'em you wanted it Ken - don't know if they'll take any notice though. SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:30, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Statistics, Conservapedia-style[edit]

I put this one on WIGO after it broke my hypocrisy meter - it's okay to say that IMDB rates Expelled as an 8.5 out of 10 because all those pesky votes of "1" were probably from liberals who didn't see the film anyway, and can be ignored. --SpinyNorman 21:46, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Wandering's either watching or doing his own research. SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:50, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
They sort of have a point, a lot of people will just click "1" without seeing it, although after seeing just the trailers I'd be inclined to give it 0 (Stein's voice alone...). I think it's more damning that so few people actually voted considering the hype they've tried to give it. The people voting for 10 are the choir that they're preaching to, the people giving it a 1 are the ones that look out for B.S. like it. Face it, most of the population don't seem to care. Armondikov 07:41, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

It's probably quite true that a lot of people have downvoted it purely for ideological reasons. On the other hand, there are probably a lot of people who has given it a 10 for ideological reasons as well - so, it actually makes sense in this case to cut off the extremes, but of course you would have to cut off both the 1's and the 10's to make it fair. That removes 82% of the votes, leaving 688 valid votes out of 3912. My calculations give an average vote of 6.3, which is, still, disturbingly high. Anyone dares to insert this argument into CP? Etc 08:01, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
If it's good enough for the Olympics, it's good enough for YOU! --Kels 08:03, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
I could almost live with the method, but the fact that this suddenly happens in an ID-pushing movie entry makes it clear that it's purest manipulation of data to better fit the desired result (see also LT's talk page post there). Also, somebody should try this one over at the entries for "Fahrenheit 9/11" or "An Inconvenient Truth". After all, it's reasonable to assume that those movies also received these ideological 1-votes, so, as per sysop Learn Together, we should calculate the "true" rating. But of course, knowing CP sysops like LT, for those movies, we must keep the 1-votes and instead take away the 10-votes. After all, only dirty liberals push ideology like that!!!!111eleven1 --Sid 12:50, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
OMG - removing the 1's from the votes for "An Inconvenient Truth" gives a rating of 8.6 - leveling it with "Citizen Kane" - this is, like, one of the best movies ever!!11! I can't wait to put that information into wait, WP is part of the real world. Perhaps I'll try CP... Etc 17:39, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Ed: educator extraordinary[edit]

Ed can teach 2 years of Algebra in 6 Months. SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:57, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure he can... but the post does seem to imply that "Hollywood Exaggerations" will be the next article in the "Hollywood Values" category! Armondikov 07:43, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

I don't believe Ed. He could not grasp enough technical english to understand genetics let alone mathematics beyond algebra.--TimS 09:38, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

I just love Ed's "article". He doesn't even say what Stand and Deliver is (Ed, it's a movie, jic). What sort of encyclopedia i he writing? I know his contributions at Wikipedia were shit, but were they this bad? DickTurpis 10:36, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Well you really need to define what 2 years of algebra is. I could probably teach many subjects that would take 2 years of a school curriculum in a lot less than 6 months if you crammed in more lessons for those subjects. Of course this would be at the expense of other subjects, and as one of main aims of education is to produce well-rounded individuals his claim is effectively meaningless. Of course Ed always likes to puff his own credentials and has a strange compulsion to show off to Andy about all the exceptionally poor articles he produces. It's rather like going to into someone else's house and seeing their children's crappy drawings indulgently pasted round their kitchen. Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 12:50, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Hey Ed... It's fiction, mofo.... Reminds of Lewis Black's definition of a Neocon... "These are people who watch the Matrix and think it's real." SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 13:44, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Actually the movie is based on a true story. Rational Edthink! 16:06, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
But the part that Ed says couldn't happen actually didn't (according to Wikipedia anyway). NightFlareSpeak, mortal 18:39, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

RobS and TK[edit]

Perhaps I'm a bit lost, but what the hell happened to RobS and TK? I haven't seen much activity from them. --JayJay4ever??? 22:56, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Not much, really. RobS hasn't been back in months and TK hasn't taken a peek since the JM vs. PJR copyright fight. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 23:07, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Rob, convinced that the communists had infiltrated his brain, put a bullet in his head sometime last December. TK currently spends his time patrolling facebook for any middle schoolers indicating they're looking for "random play". DickTurpis 23:08, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
Thanks. I kind of miss them. --JayJay4ever??? 23:11, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
LMAO, Dick--JayJay4ever??? 23:12, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
With Ed Poor having taken over TK's job as the creepy, block happy sysop, TK was feeling left out... Remember in A Charlie Brown Christmas when Charlie is all depressed and stand outside alone with his tree.... That's what TK is up to these days... I heard that Rob is managing a KFC in Buffalo, but you can't beleive everything you read these days. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 01:19, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
So that's why KFC always gets my damned order wrong. EVERY TIME! D:< NorsemanWassail! 02:11, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
It's only because Fried Chicken has a liberal BIAS!!!!!! SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 03:13, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Whatever happened to Rob is no doubt something sordid and/or embarrassing. Were his disappearance something mysterious or tragic, there would likely be chatter or announcements amongst the Chosen Few ("Where's Rob been?" "Let's keep Rob in our prayers", and so on). Instead, there's a noticeable lack of curiosity, a conspiracy of silence. PJR seems to know the scoop, for example--I'm guessing "other matters" means involuntary incarceration of some sort, likely in a mental ward.--WJThomas 13:00, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

Captured by Commies I bet.Shangrala 13:35, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

WTF? Either RobS has taken to reading here and reinstated his account, or someone here has access to his account? DogP 13:42, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

It's quite obviously the real Rob. --Sid 13:45, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Or at least a quite convincing parodist. It's hard to tell with some of the nutcases there. --Sid 13:48, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Hahaha, as if "Rob Smith" is lacking in anonymity.Shangrala 13:48, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Meh! You beat me to it. Although judging from his remarks to TomMoore, I'd say that's Robbo in the flesh. Things must be quiet at KFC. --PsygremlinWhut? 13:48, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Why did he create a new user? SusanG  ContribsTalk 13:51, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Lost password for the (moved) account RobSmith, according to Andy's talkpage, which admittedly does give me light impersonator vibes. Not that saying this really matters - Andy has Rob's mail address and is going to verify the identity anyway. --Sid 13:54, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
I'd like to go on record in saying "definitely an imitator". Am I seriously the only one who thinks this?? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!Chaos! 13:56, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
No, but you're the first to spoil it. NightFlareSpeak, mortal 13:57, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Hardly. Imitating one of The Ten is never going to work. The warning signs are obvious, and the entire thing takes just a single mail exchange with the real Rob to explode in the face of whoever controls the account. --Sid 14:01, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Personally, I really think so, too. But a part of me wants Rob to return, so I'll ignore the neon-colored warning signs for now. His anti-commie rants gave the place a certain flavor. --Sid 13:59, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
If it is an impostor, I am seriously disappointed in all of you for taking this long to register the "RobS" account once it became available. Really. PFoster 14:01, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
What is it about you idiots that you have to expose my disinformation and ruses? Can't you guy's just keep quiet for once? Jollyfish.gifGenghisOur ignorance is God; what we know is science. 14:22, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Sorry Genghis. Take comfort in the fact that you completely fooled Joaquin. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!Chaos! 14:25, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

I wonder if that KFC (KentuckyFied Chicken) serves only right wings? CЯacke® 14:26, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

I shall get my teacher to lead a classroom prayer that it really is him. just because CP needs more crazy people. 14:48, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
I just mentioned him and Rob's back. I hope TK stays in his hole. --JayJay4ever??? 14:49, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Right guys I'm new round these parts and you've lost me. Do we really think it isn't RobS? Or are we just saying that to instill paranoia in the hope of getting a sysop booted. What's the point in even asking? Whatever you say I'm still going to be unsure if you're building an elaborate smoke screen. Can one of you guys wink or something while you tell me? Thanks. RedDog 16:24, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Yes! Th unsure.gif SusanG  ContribsTalk 16:28, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
That doesn't help and you know it! RedDog 16:52, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
Heh! Shifty.gif SusanG  ContribsTalk 16:57, 30 May 2008 (EDT)
(Block log); 17:12 . . DeanS (Talk | contribs) (blocked "User:RobS" with an expiry time of 5 years: sock )" Aw, Shit! SusanG  ContribsTalk 17:33, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

<---- (unindent) The "racist troll vandal" summaries when reverting simple "Wikipedia > Conservapedia!" wandalism gave it away for me. (To the impersonator) You were too over the top (it's hard to, admittingly!), even though I can bet they figure ways of knowing you weren't Robby anyway. NorsemanWassail! 18:05, 30 May 2008 (EDT)

He's outed. But what I find particularly funny is Baby Ken's spluttering, illegible scrawls as he tries to find out seekrit hiddun info. DogP