Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive58

This is an archive page, last updated 5 May 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>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <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)

Page Views

This edit comment is hilarious. I'm sure mediawiki's anti-conservative programmers did this to spite CP. Jrssr5 08:36, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I thnk what happened was the new page view count only counts those pages that are currently extant. Previously when Goat (for example) got to a million and was reset to zero, then the overall pagecount was not affected. I have a mini-project on the back burner to actually total the page views from individual articles and see how that compares with the system count. I'll let you know when I have done it. Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:35, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Interesting theory, and I bet you're right. After all, the new MW also let them delete a lot of redirects to "deleted page" that had histories (like my user & talk page, among many others) - bang! go the pageview counts. Their pageviews did crash by like 50% with the upgrade... ħuman 16:18, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

DECEITS!!!!!!! Also, puerility. Take it like an adult, Andy. --λινυσ^(☮) 08:26, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Informal poll

Moved to Debate:Do you know what deceit is?

Not that I care much, but...

• this "poll" (discussion) was more about Deceit and teaching of it, than about who went to public school, and
• wasn't there already a page "who went to public school?" (or private school, I don't remember)? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 06:26, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I well if you can think of a better place please move it. I just stuck it there as it was more off topic than usual. $\approx$$\pi$ 07:41, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Okay I moved it. $\approx$$\pi$ 19:28, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia Main page humor

Anyone else snort when they read this? first the guy drags the BBC into court over blasphemy allegations (welcome the new millenium) then bitches and moans when he has to deal with the backlash that comes from his actions... classic irony. SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 13:09, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

see [The Main Page Talk] Some hours ago   ^Contribs_Talk 13:12, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

They have this at the top "The Christian Voice ... the enemies of God are all having their say!" Then in the article I found this: "The BBC is currently wasting £18million a year on a Gaelic TV channel". Them there Gaels, they speak the devil's tongue.

Gun sealladh Dia oirnn! Auld Nick 16:28, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, like they say in Texas, English was good enough when god was writing the Bible, so it should be good enough for you! Also, don't forget, God sends you seekrit messages using imperial measures! --81.187.75.69 16:47, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

What I don't get is that this is a UK Christian site, but, if a I remember correctly, is there not a church of very devout Christians known as the 'Wee Free Church', that is predominant in the Gaelic speaking areas of Scotland? If so, I dare say they'd be most upset at a place calling itself the 'Christian Voice' saying a Gaelic TV channel is a waste of money. Zmidponk 16:58, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Christian Voice are generally recognised in the UK for being a fundamentalist/right wing/extreme organisation (by the people who've heard of them, anyhow). Not many people will give them any attention, aside from the converted they're already preaching to, as it were (remind you of anybody?) They made the news over the Jerry Springer things a couple of years ago, but otherwise are pretty much a fringe group. Alt 18:01, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

OMFG, I'm sure this isn't new, but it's the first time I've looked at this is a long time... how the fuck is this piece of shit considered a concise entry? SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 18:04, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

It's Ken. Presumably, anything less than the size of an entire encyclopedia on its own is concise by his standards. --Kels 18:10, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm no lawyer, but surely if he lost the case it would be dismissed with costs? So so much for "hounding him into the poor house" it's his own bloody fault. --Psygremlin_Whut? 18:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

He never even got to court. The costs were in "Requesting permission to go to court" i.e trying to show cause. In effect it was "No case to answer".   ^Contribs_Talk 21:33, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, he's DEFINITELY...

drunk! (And kinda creepy too!)--Jdellaro 19:18, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I dunno why, but that "let's par-tay!" conjures up images of the Blue Oyster Bar. --Psygremlin_Whut? 19:28, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

For me it's someone's father trying to "get down with da kids"   ^Contribs_Talk 21:30, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Atheism and conceit

What an excellent wigo. I know it's sort of a typo... (only if screwed up and let the spellchecker make it worse) Hmmm, I think it's more likely the next Kendoll opus to grace teh tubes? Anyway, congratulations, idiot. ħuman 21:19, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

What a utter teacup. I would like to meet him so I could ask "What the fuck?" Ace McWicked 21:53, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Front page rules

For those who care about the front pagem, I have just created RationalWiki:Frontpage Rules Please come let your voice be heard SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 02:45, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

LarryFarma

Any idea why a guy with this track record would get edit rights whereas a guy whose done http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/HelpJazz all this] didn't? 144.131.67.187 08:18, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

That is a bit weird. He does have a special downer on Lenski - Andy's current preferred hate figure - so that might explain it. But never edited an article and only used CP for his personal crusade. as he says: I never before had such a good opportunity to publicize my views.--Bob^{bing up} 08:23, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, he is clearly on Andy's side, he has an anti-Lenski blog, and he, not knowing CP rules, wondered why he couldn't edit for six hours. This is more like "temporary (?) edit rights for an honorary guest". On a side note, a suggestion to potential socks: start a right wing blog and praise CP before making a career as CP editors. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 08:29, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

He also found in his blog how to "attack" Lenski: criticizing his assistants and asking the oh-so-important question: was the E.Coli evolution a goal or not of the study? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 08:31, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I saw that. I think he's got the question wrong anyway. The question shouldn't be "What was the goal of the experiment?" but "What hypothesis was being tested?". Or is there a problem with my philosophy of science?--Bob^{bing up} 08:37, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Farma is also a Holocaust revisionist. [1] [2]

Heh. He's capable of being honest, though. For example, when I talk about Darwinism, some people who agree with my anti-Darwinist views overlook my holocaust revisionism, but many of the same people would make ad hominem attacks against my holocaust revisionism if I supported Darwinism. --Phentari 12:49, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Coarb 09:50, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I didn't think I would live to see the day where a (as written) 90/10 warning would be appropriate. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 09:55, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I'd like to apologize for sending Larry CP's way. He only found out about CP because he started trolling my blog, and then I mentioned CP... and then he went over there.... I'm so sorry. I created a future CP sysop. Whatever good my blog will ever do, it will be offset by the bad of creating a new CP'er. Ugh. And I had no idea he was a holocaust denier. Ugh. I think he should die now.-caius (decider) 22:37, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

He's already been blocked once at CP, and is up in arms about it. He has no future there. I wouldn't sweat it, if I were you.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 23:04, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm too thick

Drochld (isn't that Scottish?) doesn't believe in Particle Wave Duality or that the Cosmic Microwave Background is valid apparently. Or is he just stupid?   ^Contribs_Talk 09:32, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

My parody sense is tingling. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 09:59, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Mmm. Wasn't gonna say anything!   ^Contribs_Talk 10:05, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

In Gaelic, "droch-" is a negating prefix, meaning something akin to the English "mal-", "anti-", "non-" or "un-". Drochld itself isn't a word, though droichid means "bridge". I don't know if this indicates anything or not. ^{— Unsigned, by: 194.125.78.5 / talk / contribs}

Well, I was going to mention this but Poe's law got in the way again. Darn. --Psygremlin_Whut? 12:27, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Lenski getting the Dawkins treatment

Now CP has a page on Lenski. Andy has not mentioned this yet, but anyone want to lay odds on how long it will be before he says Lenski is not really a professor?--Franklin 11:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

We'll wait and see. The article is pretty funny as it stand though.--Bob^{bing up} 11:17, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

"No one else has reproduced Lenski's findings." Well, I wonder why would that be? NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 11:28, 28 June 2008 (EDT) Also, the quoted text thing was answered by the microbiology other guy in the lenski dialog talk for whoever is interested. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 11:25, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Presumably it's got nothing to do with the fact that he only released them earlier this month (and that they took him 20 years).--Bob^{bing up} 11:27, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Funny! LAFFOWTLOWD  ^Contribs_Talk 11:32, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Any bets on how long the Drochld edits stay up? I want to say that nobody could be so blind as to miss the parody there, but...--Phentari 12:09, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Doesn't matter to them as long as the parody defeats Poe's Law.   ^Contribs_Talk 12:15, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

But if he's not a Professor, he won't be subject to "Professor Values"!!!! Armondikov 17:41, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

It's nice to see our refined side by side template being put to, er, good use (making CP look stupid, in this case). We should copy theirs and do a side³ of it! ħuman 17:04, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Aziraphale

...teeters on the brink. http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAschlafly&diff=483344&oldid=482762 Fretfulporpentine 11:51, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

The peasants are revolting

What is this I see.--Bob^{bing up} 12:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

It's been building a while. He asked Andy to read it t'other day - dunnowhat reaction he got.   ^Contribs_Talk 12:04, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

How long will the Conservapedia dinosaur lumber on?

Conservapedia is stupid over large, inefficient. The site is a source of lulz for atheists and an embarrassment for Christians. How long can this continue?
It can continue as long as millionaire Andrew Schlafly and his millionairess elderly mother are prepared to finance the site. Conservapedia could still be embarrassing Christians ten years from now. Proxima Centauri 12:47, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

THIEF

Marge has nicked our side by side template cp:Talk:Richard Lenski!!!!   ^Contribs_Talk 12:13, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I think we should be honored. Anyway, we've not been above the odd spork ourselves in the past.--Bob^{bing up} 12:58, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Actually looking at it, where does the left hand side data come from? The paper?--Bob^{bing up} 12:59, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Someone should ask what wiki that's from. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 13:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

If it's ours, it's a copyright violation unless they attribute it and make it available under GFDL. Someone should send Andy a Very Important Email about this. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 14:14, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Good point, I will go do that right now... tmtoulouse ^beset 14:19, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

It would be a good idea to include an invariant section html comments and in there too. As it stands, Andy could GDFL it and the derivative works (not likely, but he could) and that would be the end of it. However, if there was an invariant section saying who created it and credit to RationalWiki it makes it even more fun for someone to remove. However, I'm not sure that if we did put an invariant section in there now we couldn't force Andy to include it if he was to GDFL the version he worked off of. --Shagie 14:38, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Also, remeber that if Andy doesn't respond to the request for copyright, send a DMCA takedown request to his provider. One might also want to go after them for copyright infringement if that doesn't work. --Shagie 14:40, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Do the takedown request anyway. You also have to make a note about the fac that they really haven't used the template that well, it's shittier than most CP artiles even by their standards. DATA!!! Armondikov 17:44, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Interestingly, Marge is that woman who was claiming she left when her husband claimed biblical authority over her. At the time we weren't sure whether she was a mischief-maker. And now we know she reads RW. Matt 18:27, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Definitely a sock. I wish my email at CP actually worked. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 18:33, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

What is there to say to parodists, anyway? Disapproval? Advice? Caution? (FBI!) Uchiha^KATON! 11:40, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Andy declaring victory

Wtf....Shangrala 13:34, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh! He knows all the world of blogs is watching CP right now. And still he is willing to get ridiculed even more. Andy is dense has guts. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 13:43, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Start the revert-and-block countdown for DinsdaleP. Andy had to be called on this one.--SpinyNorman 16:20, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

...and, blocked. By Ed, unsurprisingly. --SpinyNorman 23:09, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Crap! Andy broke yet another irony meter!

...with this gem, from the people who consider atheism a religion and then proceed to criticize it. --SpinyNorman 16:40, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

It gets better - apparently, quotes by church founders are meaningless unless they made it very clear that they are speaking for their church and unless the church approved of it. And now, let's look at anything related to atheism on CP again... hmmmmmmmm... ;) --Sid 21:31, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget to examine Andy's occasional habit of informing the world of the Catholic Church's official positions on various things, actual official positions notwithstanding...--WJThomas 22:19, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

SpinyNorman, Sid, WJThomas?

You're clueless.

You have clearly forgotten that CP sysops are infallible -- this is proven, gentleman. We know this. Andy can speak with authority on the subject of Catholics (people who are addicted to cats, so I hear), and DeanS can tell us all about Mormons -- there is no contradiction! _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 22:25, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

"I told him that if he wanted to express the doctrine of someone else's church, then he should bring in a leader of that church to do so. Quoting from people who were members or even leaders of the church long ago, or even today, is not the way to explain church doctrine."

So he should only quote church leaders from the FUTURE!!! NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 11:57, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

So critics of a religion can't explain that religion according to Conservapedia. Atheism is a religion according to Conservapedia. Critics of atheism can explian atheism according to Conservapedia. Now there's logics for you. Proxima Centauri 12:36, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Ancient astronauts

When will JGlenn be joining his friend? ħuman 17:13, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Arfworthiness

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=American_History_Final_Exam&diff=483538&oldid=483511 Fretfulporpentine 18:41, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

HAHA... oh wow. That was actually some classy vandalism there. Uchiha^KATON! 19:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Next time he should provide the correct answers too, though. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 19:05, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Wait... I thought he did? Pretty much, anyway. ħuman 21:05, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Peer reviewer

So, Andy's got peers, I thought he was the supreme being, without peer! Wonder what he claims to have reviewed. (Oh & "don't talk down to us" from the arch downtalker himself.)   ^Contribs_Talk 20:58, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

After the obligatory "Andy's a moron", and probably a liar, peer review can be very rapid. All it takes is for the handful of people doing it, to do it right away! How long was Lenski's paper, 8 pages or something? ħuman 21:09, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

2 weeks ago he wasn't really sure what peer review was. Now he has done it. He's just a lying troll. ^{— Unsigned, by: 72.218.143.101 / talk / contribs}

True, how true!   ^Contribs_Talk 22:09, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

That's Andy encapsulated. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 22:10, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

(get your Andy Schlafly in capsule form: easy to swallow & no nasty taste in the mouth) Sorry!   ^Contribs_Talk 13:09, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I for one am looking forward to seeing a list of these papers that Andy has supposedly peer-reviewed. Given that a conservative would never engage in deceit or claim false credentials, I am confident that he would have no objection to releasing this vital data for public scrutiny. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:40, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Peer review (at least, proper peer review) is generally confidential, so asking for a list of papers might be counterproductive. There's no reason he shouldn't tell us which important and respected journals he has refereed for, however.Alt 15:27, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

It will turn out that Andy has read and commented on some random draft documents ( his turn at the school newspaper?) or has lead "peer review" exercises for some of his students. He will then define peer-review in a fashion that is both vague and convoluted so as to include whatever minimal activities he has done while discounting legitimate and well understood peer-review processes common to professional journals, specifically those involving the Lenski affair. When his painful distortion is questioned, his lackeys ( the cowardly Karajerk and lying Ed to name a few) will block all comers, leave their questions but delete their arguments for reality so as to make it appear that Andy has mastered all comers and codified the correct definition of peer review. Thereafter anyone who uses peer review the way the rest of the world does will be shouted done and blocked as a vandal. And this will come to pass. Thus spaketh ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:58, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Didn't Andy work on the Harvard Law Review? Coarb 15:37, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I only know about peer review in my area, but I would imagine that it works differently in each academic discipline. For instance, in all the hard sciences it is straightforward to check all of the claims directly. In the social sciences you can check the stats, but the rest may be hard to judge, and in the arts it's anyone's guess... If he is talking about legal papers it could just mean spell-checking... Not to downplay spell-checking of couse. We all know that misspelled werds are red flags for librul bias.Antifly 15:57, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Best guess for his peer-reviewing = some rich cranky goodness that's appeared in JPANDS. If memory serves, the AAPS likes to pretend that their froth-mouthed newsletter is a serious peer-reviewed journal. --Robledo 17:16, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh yeah. I forgot about the quack factory. He and mommy probably peer review for each other. 72.218.143.101 17:56, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

The sad thing is that this is not the first time I have seen "peer review" employed as a euphemism...Antifly 19:34, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Sock Action

I don't want this to sound critical because frankly I love this sight. But on the subject of socks I have to admit that I'm slighly non-plussed. Why is the whole Lenskie thing so hilarios? Because it is people in an earnest persuit utterly making a mess of things. There's no inside subversion just genuine low IQ.

What will Bugler do when he finally do when he decides to execute his long drawn out plan? Block everyone for a couple of hours? The laughs come from genuinely misguided low intelligence people being misguided in a low intellgience manner. The most a parady soldier like Bugler can do is be about 1% as amusing as Andy getting angry about a random mutation. 86.137.243.209 21:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

And what exactly gives you the impression that Bugler is our doing? Pinto's5150 ^Talk 21:05, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

(Edit conflict) Not sure what you mean about the Lenski thing -- but as far as socks are concerned, blocking isn't the half of it. There are several very damaging things that you can do to a wiki once you get to sysop level -- Bureaucrat is much more interesting, though. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:07, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

And Pinto is right -- I'm not omniscient, but Bugler almost certainly isn't a RW sock. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:08, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

The thing that Samewell and Richard messed up in doing was blocking the administration before driving away the other contributors. Bugler, so far, is doing a good job of getting these priorities right while making Andy look like even more of a fool. He's still not at the same level as Ed though. Writing assignments are a genius way for driving away people who might otherwise become good contributors. Wether these are socks or true believes - thats another question that I don't know the answer to... and Hanlon's razor compels me to believe they are true believers. Still, the end results appear to be the same. --Shagie 21:12, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm beginning to think Bungler might be for real. Horrible thought that there are Brits as spoon bendy mad as Andy!   ^Contribs_Talk 21:14, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I know the feeling. I was so sure that Jinxmoron was a sock -- until I realised I just didn't want there to really be people that infuriatingly close-minded in the world. Sadness. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:19, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

And which of you is this?--CPAdmin1 21:23, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Not me. I don't know anything for certain beyond that, but he hasn't tripped any of my parodist alarms. Do you really think he's a sock? _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:26, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

What about this, and this? --CPAdmin1 21:30, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm... That is quite suspicious. I'm changing my official position to "ambivalence". Their user page reminds me of Lyra, as well -- but she's been busy a lot lately, so it's not likely to be her. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:32, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't think that someone could possibly have that big of a change that quick, to actually unsign the petition. --CPAdmin1 21:35, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I agree. That's really two big changes, if they're implying that they've become a Young Earth Creationism and decided that all Liberals are degenerate. Very odd. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:39, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Why did you block him, CPAdmin1? What rule did he break? I was just going to praise you for your actions at CP and hoping for more Sysops like you, but now I'm not so sure anymore. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 10:36, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

CPAdmin is it not a little nieve to come here and ask us? Besides we are not ever parodist on CP. About the only real people are you, Andy, Ed, Conservative (probably, however I would have got over the joke faster), the two sysops that just walked out and the little homeschoolers. About half the sysops are taking the piss and Andy is handing out blocking rights to more and more parodist everyday. In about two years CP is going to be a paradoy site and Andy is going to be the only one who doesn't get the joke. $\approx$$\pi$ 22:01, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

On the subject, WTF is this? --Psygremlin_Whut? 22:53, 28 June 2008 (EDT) Never mind, somebody's on the ball over there... or reading us. --Psygremlin_Whut? 23:02, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Our old friend Bohdan! _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 23:07, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

In regards to the atheism and evil of one astronaut named AShephard, who couldn't even spell his name right the first time... see two or three headers above. Come on, if you can't see psrodt when it hits you in the face, then what? Is it one of "us"? I doubt it. With the Lenski affair Andy the idiot invited every grad student with spare time (it's June! they have it!) to come and play. And visit and play, they will. These are people who can figure out the game really quickly - they are, after all, scientists. And since they are underpaid, their only reward is pwning morons like teh assfly. (ok, shooting fish in a barrel, but still) ħuman 00:10, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

There's something about Bungler that doesn't quite gel. I'm not sure what it is, but he almost seems too good to be true. He's been there what, 3 months max (looking at the welcome note on his talk page), and he's already swaggering around the place, cracking his whip and jumping all over peons who dare to take on Andy (A perfect addition the the Schlafly Rearguard team). If anything, I find him more objectionable and thuggish than Karajerk at his worst. Now I see he's blocked somebody for mentioning Wikipedia, as an "unacceptable site". It's almost as if he's been watching Andy, identified all the characteristics Andy likes to see in an acolyte and combined them all into one boorish thug, which Andy immediately welcomes into his bosom.

If he is for real, then he's a really nasty piece of work and if he's not, then somebody has knitted a very good sock. --Psygremlin_Whut? 07:46, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Bungler is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma;. I hate what I see but cannot believe that anyone could really be that yobbish so consistently. He's also always there. Could it be that there's more than one of him trolling as a unit?   ^Contribs_Talk 07:53, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I presume that DanielB mentioned RW somewhere, but I can't find it. He (DanielB) has been sorting out the mathematics articles nicely - they were a right mess before. He's the sort of editor they need for an Encyclopædia [sic] but the idealogical side has beaten him.   ^Contribs_Talk 08:05, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, Daniel mentioned "RW" in a talk page post. Check Bugler's contribs around that time, and you'll see him censoring that sentence. I think it was on Talk:Richard Lenski, where he pointed out the stolen template. --Sid 08:26, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes it was there. Bugler zapped the questions about Lenski being a "real" professor at the same time. Guess they don't need another embarrassment.--Bob^{bing up} 10:45, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I am sure that someone mentioned in WIGO Talk is a definite vandal, and not very good at that either - or better, not my style of vandal, but since his (or her) CP position is rising fast, I should not criticize. For me, his English is sometimes too error-less, his irony too striking; and he is too smart for a CP Sysop, even when he hides his smartness behind typical Sysop behaviour. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 09:28, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

And AShepherd gets the rocket. So, 'fess up, was he one of ours, or a hapless victim of a combination of CP's general paranoia and Poe's Law? --Psygremlin_Whut? 10:49, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Yerranos (again)

This isn't Conservapedia but it's as ridiculous.

Citizens for Stupidity. I suspect the author is yet another of Andy's homeschooled prodigies. Proxima Centauri 08:28, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

See User:Yerranos   ^Contribs_Talk 08:33, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

The poor sod's getting wandalised unmercifully - I almost feel sorry for him.   ^Contribs_Talk 08:38, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

That's a bit rough. It's not like he's got a community of sysops to protect the place. On the other hand I think he's annoyed people at other sites and spammed his site about a bit so it was sort of inevitable. But that's still no excuse to trash the joint.--Bob^{bing up} 09:01, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Mmm. I even went in & corrected a "smart quote" for him.   ^Contribs_Talk 09:07, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh damn, man. His questions for atheists are so wince inducingly stupid, they give me a headache. I see many rationalwikians have answered, but I think I'd be laughing too much to put my thoughts to keyboard. Seriously, I knew where this motherfucker lived, I'd go round to his house and claim to be a messenger from the LORD his God, and that the LORD needed his stereo for a mighty purpose. I bet he'd give it to me, too. --81.187.75.69 14:19, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Yerranos blocked me for spamming a link to an atheist blog. The link is on the words, “righteous and holy”. Proxima Centauri 16:50, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

When he finds this he might lengthen the block.

Off topic but...

...I have spent more than an hour looking for it and I can't find it. I want to do some work on the Last Wordism article and I am trying to find the time Andy warned someone not to have the last on his talkpage and the other person said something like "I am trying to save you from the indignanty of having the last word". It isn't in his talkpage archieve (unsuprisingly). Does anyone remeber seeing it here or on WIGO? $\approx$$\pi$ 07:34, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I believe the Main Page talk page had many "last word" scenes. Maybe look in those archives? I vaguely recall one or two people telling Andy that they'll voluntarily commit Last Wordism, but I also forgot the details. I'll get back to you if I remember it. --Sid 08:23, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Lenski template

Now maybe it's a common template. But hmm, MargeryCampbell. That's pretty familiar looking. What other wiki is this? Thunderkatz^Ho! 14:37, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia_Talk:What_is_going_on_at_CP?#THIEF--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 15:36, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

My bad. And two things re: your link. 1, you don't need underlines for intra- and inter- wiki linking; spaces will do fine. B, when you're linking to something on the same page, you can start at the #. Thunderkatz^Ho! 16:03, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

...uh, I just clicked on the Table of Contents link above. Sorry it didn't meet your linking specifications O.o --Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 16:10, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

South African racists

. . . love Conservapedia! (In case his recent contributions hide it in the future, here's what he has to say about it.) Coarb 14:52, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Vowels

Q. What is a vowel? A. Anything that isn't a consonant. Q. What is a consonant? A. Anything that isn't a vowel. That's very useful to know. Alt 16:12, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

As everyone knows:

Vowels

things that get said at a wedding

consonants

Things in mathematical equations that don't change e.g. God's love.

Feel free to ignore the wisdom of Sheesh! at your peril ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:08, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Obama

My fucking god... how low is that man willing stoop? I sent an email to the Obama campaign, not that it'll do much... he should have the whole place shut down for libel SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 00:01, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

They're just citing an independent news source, it is clearly not libelous. Stupid, but not libelous.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 02:19, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Yep, this one really bothered me as well. Their article on him is vomit-inducing enough that I'm not sure if they have any legitimate criticism of his policies, or if it's all just speculation about his blackness and patriotism. - Lardashe

I'm not sure the Obama campaign are particularly bothered by CP. Their readership falls into two categories, those who would never vote for him in the first place and those who are there for the lulz. If anything it might boost him - anyone CP hates that much must be good! Personally I would be honoured to be called a gay, unpatriotic, liberal by CP - when they're shooting at you you know you're doing something right. Silver Sloth 09:31, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Furthermore, taking any action against them would increase their credibility in the loon group they exist in.   ^Contribs_Talk 09:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Agreed (with SusanG). However, it is stuff like this that makes me, an often-times pacifist, want to kick Crazy Andy, Lying Ed, and cowardly Karajou in their pointy yellow teeth. 10:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

CP saying bad things about you is similar to what Seth McFarlane (Family Guy) said about the Parents Television Council bad mouthing him: "It's like getting hate mail from Hitler." --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Tsisnaajini!} 10:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Down?

Can't get 'em again   ^Contribs_Talk 00:09, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Me either. I'm getting a "can't connect to server" error. Hope this time it's for good, but I know better...-caius (decider) 00:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

They're back!   ^Contribs_Talk 00:39, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Unnoticed vandalism

Since it isn't for that, is there any place we can talk about parody or vandalism? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 00:21, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Ask User:AmesG about the secret forum. Bohdan2 00:31, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

There is no secret forum.-caius (decider) 00:35, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

The secret forum is secret!   ^Contribs_Talk 00:36, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

IRC?   ^Contribs_Talk 00:27, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

What, I'm sorry, the words "secret" and "forum" have been purged from my vocabulary temporarily. That and "shrimp" when used within three words of "bisque". --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 00:38, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

The secret to life is butter ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:02, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Don't tell Ken that! Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:16, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Andy is all alone

He must attack Lenski all by himself, now that his ally has been blocked for three days, after this and this. Kudos to British_cons for posting this. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 04:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

lol, British_cons said Aziraphale was a sysop, and didn't notice the sarcasm either. >_< Norseman^Wassail! 08:56, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Reprieve! CЯacke® 10:46, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

...And "12 Angry Men" is a great movie despite Henry Ford's Nazi sympathies

Librul school teacher JDavidson mentions in passing that we shouldn't stop using electricity just because Thomas Jefferson had interracial affairs with his slaves. Marty 04:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

What does carmaker Henry Ford have to do with actor Henry Fonda's 12 Angry Men?--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 05:01, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I can answer your question with another question: What does Thomas Jefferson have to do with electricity? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 05:32, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I think he meant to say Thomas Edison.... oh well, not like anyone at CP would ever notice the difference, they're too busy hunting Boogeymen SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 05:42, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Now that I think about it... I don't see a serious teacher screwing that up... either this guy is a sock (and a pretty poor cover) or he did it on purpose as a parodist.... SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 05:47, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm sure he meant Edison, I was just explaining the joke in the headline. And I don't think JDavidson is a parodist if only because he's not siding with ASchlafly. Typically, parodists (like Bugler) do everything they can to emulate and bolster Andy's insanity. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 07:07, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

True, but when a teacher mistakes Thomas Jefferson for Thomas Edison, I question how they make that mistake... throw in that I laugh right away when noone bothers to correct an obvious mistake... my opinion anyway.... SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 07:13, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I strongly doubt he meant Edison. Coming from a not-too-well-off family from the North, I don't think Edison would have had much opportunity for "interracial affairs with his slaves". --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:54, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

EDIT: Maybe he was thinking of Benjamin Franklin, what with the kite and all that. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:56, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

THERE IS TOO MUCH STUPID, I CANNOT COMPREHEND IT ALL--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 12:59, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Lockdown?

Is CP is general lockdown again? There's been no movement on there for hours now. I'm still within the night edit block, so I'm not sure if everybody else is locked out too. --Psygremlin_Whut? 07:03, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Looking at the Recent Changes, I see no reason for a full database lockdown, so I'll just guess that those who can edit are asleep or away. Ah, and I see that TerryH started editing just after you posted this... --Sid 07:13, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Proxy

Anybody know of any proxy sites that haven't been blocked yet? If so, please email them to me, I don't want to expose any of them here. Thanks though SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 07:44, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

There's always tor.Shangrala 15:08, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Stumble

Just stumbled on the Lenski affair. Heh!   ^Contribs_Talk 07:57, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't get it. I even searched the page for 'stumble*'. I hate it when grown-ups tell jokes that are over my head ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 09:59, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

[3]   ^Contribs_Talk 10:26, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks. You owe my boss an hour (so far) ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 12:48, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

CONTEST

Don't anyone dare comment - anywhere please!   ^Contribs_Talk 10:19, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

As commanded, ma'am. Comment has been... er... swallowed. --Psygremlin_Whut? 10:28, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

That Roger sure is a colourful character. Famous lover of women, and epicure too? Whodda thunk it? --81.187.75.69 10:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I thought they were talking about John Schlafly at first....Shangrala 10:41, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I'm sure they're one big 'ol family of repressed hotdog gobblers. --81.187.75.69 10:43, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I thought gluttony was one of the seven deadly sins--Franklin 10:52, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

It's the first time I've seen Andy putting in a denigratory & amusing (?) entry. (I'm premusing that he had his tongue firmly in his cheek - probably pre-empting us?)   ^Contribs_Talk 11:58, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

This discussion is a typical liberal tactic to belittle the significant accomplishments of conservatives. As someone who has tried it, I can tell you swallowing hot dog shaped objects is 96.8% tougher then it looks. Plus, Roger included the buns -- that must be even tougher -- aschlafly

A thought occurred. You remember the chance card in Monopoly, "you have won second prize in a beauty contest. Collect..." I think it was £10, or £15, I forget. It always seemed kind of insulting to me. Well, now I see it could be worse, you could win second prize in a hotdog eating competition. Something for the inevitable Conservative monopoly set when it comes out, anyway. --81.187.75.69 14:28, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Conservative Monopoly! I love it. Surely this is the next Fun project. Things like Creationist Museum and Jesusland instead of stations - No blaspheming! Go to Hell! - Get out of Hell Free. And Monopoly is just so Conservative in the first place. Wonderful!Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 14:59, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Couldn't stop myself googling "major league eating". From their About Us section:

Major League Eating (MLE) is the sports franchise that oversees all professional competitive eating events and competitive eating television specials. The mission of Major League Eating is to maintain a safe environment for all events, while also seeking to create a dynamic and enjoyable fan experience.

The fast-growing brand combines the appeal of traditional sports with the most extreme of all extreme sports. Renowned eaters Takeru Kobayashi, Joey Chestnut, Sonya Thomas and Patrick Bertoletti are all Major League Eaters. Their records are legend: 58 Bratwurst in 10 minutes, 66 Nathan's Famous hot dogs and buns in 12 minutes; 103 Krystal hamburgers in eight minutes; 65 hard boiled eggs in six minutes and 47 seconds; 21 pounds of grits in 10 minutes.

The Major League Eating franchise leverages interest in the sport on behalf of sponsors to secure media interest. Each year Major League Eating's live and televised events are watched by millions of fans and generate more than 800 million media impressions for sponsors. Major League Eating coordinates events in the United States, Japan, England, Germany, Canada, Ireland, Thailand and the Ukraine, helping to promote the sport in local, national and international media.

I don't think we're in Kansas anymore. There's no place like home, no place like home...--Robledo 14:32, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

10 Kg of grits. In one sitting. The mind boggles. How can anyone eat 10Kg of anything in one day, let alone 10 minutes? --81.187.75.69 14:39, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I'd kill for a photo of Roger's face-- during and after the contest. And why do I have the impression that Andy is making fun of his brother?--JayJay4ever^??? 16:01, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Because a PhD outguns a BSE? (tho' Rog might have that too, after all those mechanically-recovered-meat-like-products) Fretfulporpentine 16:22, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

It's too bad there isn't a decent photo of Roger in the article - he did come in second, after all. And why must we not comment on this? Why not add it to our article on him? (And a ref to where he discusses eating contests v. marathon running on his blog or dating site thing?) ħuman 16:18, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Consider how badly Andy has failed at... well, everything. Meanwhile Roger has gotten a fair bit further in academics. So Andy promotes the trivial accomplishments of his brother - came in second in an eating contest - to make his brother look like more of a fool than Andy. Andy would never tarnish his reputation take part in such mundane acts as an eating contest. Instead, Andy feels he has a much higher purpose in life - to annoy professors and senior lectures while filling the minds of children with the same hatred he feels... and in doing so, sets them up for another round of failing at life. The circle of life. --Shagie 16:33, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I went ahead and started Fun:Conservative Monopoly. It's a very basic start from a template ripped off from Wikipedia. I only added a few things that immediately came to mind. This needs y'all's help. So far I'm trying to keep these basically physical places rather than websites or events and the like, but that isn't set in stone. Have fun. DickTurpis 17:02, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Those evil state run schools

Does anyone fancy seeing if CP can be goaded into running with this? All my socks are a bit busy at the moment. Andy would love it. RedDog 11:49, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Fuck off! (3 marks: note Exclamation point)   ^Contribs_Talk 12:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I can top that. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:41, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Anyone care to bet...

On whether Andy will side with his newest, bestest buddy (and big toe) Bugler and ban Tim for rationality unbecoming an admin? --Phentari 16:22, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Why, no side of course. Andy will do what he does best in these situations, and pretend they aren't happening. He doesn't want to lose his inner arsehole (Who if he is a parodist, as I strongly suspect, has certainly hit Andy's g spot with deadly accuracy) and he doesn't want to block a sysop which would be tantamount to admitting he is wrong. As we all know, if Andy were ever to admit he was wrong, the universe will segfault and God will call the panic routine (Incidentally, love the use of the old school UNIX terminology on WIGO! Encore! Encore!) --81.187.75.69 17:03, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Tim: Where's the evidence for the block?

Bugler: The evidence is there.

Tim: I looked. Can you show me specific evidence?

Bugler: The evidence is there.

Jinx: I see the evidence too.

Tim: Where is the evidence?

Bugler: <insult to derail and troll>

How does this remind me of the Lenski debacle except the roles are reversed? Norseman^Wassail! 17:38, 30 June 2008 (EDT) Edit Forgot to mention, Andy just doesn't tell any of his sysops on what to do. They just freeball it and its amazing how he never shows his face in the disputes.

Daphnea

We now have two wigos, separated by one other item, referring to their Parthian shot... I know it's hard not to dupe thiese things, especially when the earlier wigo doesn't really say what it's about, but still... </whine> ħuman 16:22, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Daphnea's block and unblock caused an amazing fight over at Tim's talk page. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 16:57, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh I should have noticed the Wigo Talk item above this. Sorry Human, don't get mad at me! (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 17:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

No big deal, s'ok. Trent: Note that #105 and #107 add up to over ten, and are the same item, basically.

I wonder if CPAdmin is supecting Bugler of being a parodist too...[4]

I disagree, I did deal with User:Daphnea, and there was no evidence that she was a parodist. A parodist would be acting like they agreed with Andy on everything. Parodists don't fight against the law, they join it, and act even more extreme than those in charge. You should know that. She did nothing to deserve getting blocked, especially infinitely. The edit that jinx points out does not justify a block either. --Tim (CPAdmin1)^{talk Vote in my NEW polls} 15:51, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

All emphasis mine. --Shagie 17:16, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Surely a puppeteer smart enough to create Bugler would also be intelligent enough to realise the danger they're in? Doesn't quite add up, in my opinion. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 17:24, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Pure conjecture here, but maybe that's the plan.... get all the syops and Andy to turn on each other ala TK. SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 17:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) I have to give him props for staying in this long. I mean, he's a bad parodist, pissed people off, makes sweeping statements, and is even British. We even said he's a parodist, yet Andy still believes in him! For outlasting all those odds, wow. Norseman^Wassail! 17:43, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Depends on the goal. There are some that are interested in long term disruption (though most of those tend to be editors who insert facts in articles that don't mesh with Andy's worldview). There are some that are interested in getting permissions and going *boom* - Samwell and Richard being the best examples there. There are others who want to see how far they can push the envelope before being blocked. The last type has the goal of being blocked at some point but instead slowly ratchets up the rhetoric. Personally, I love it that Bugler is there and driving away real contributors. And he very well may be a true believer. However, my troll alarms are going off. Give http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?TrollingTactic a read. Consider that Bugler exemplifies AppealToAbsentAuthority (how often does Andy actually make a decision on things?), SelectiveFlattery, JugglingMisrepresentations, MisAttribution (remember the blocking of the wrong person for cleaning up the signatures list?), GoodPointDefence (in the Conservative mindset), BackRoomDecision (though most of the CP sysops are guilty of that - CPAdmin, have you ever read the special discussion group archives?). --Shagie 17:43, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Bugler is so clearly a puppet it hurts. He's not even a very good one (which may be deliberate). That makes it all the more funny that Shafty just doesn't see it. Matt oblong 18:27, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I must say that Tim is showing amazing restraint. I would have whacked Bugler immediately for this one. --AK 18:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

That one is clearly parodying Lenski's response to Andy - "here is the data, you refuse to look at it, you don't even know what you're talking about." Andy just grabs at the most conservative sounding person after a sysop leaves - Bugler happened to be in the right spot at the right time. I assume we all have deep cover socks in place ready to parrot Andy again and get another sysop in place soon? Something to consider - if one of us was to fess up to being Bugler, (even if not) would that give Andy enough reason to kick him out? Poe's law is so much fun to play with. --Shagie 18:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

P^n.S. I'm not sure Andy could block Bugler without him doing something even more obvious (like a Samwell) though. He's thrown so many compliments to Bugler that to block him for "suspect for being a parodist" wouldn't sit well with anyone. Nor would the "we don't monitor other sites" difference with Wikipedia. Whats the difference between a parodist and true believer? --Shagie 19:03, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

And even if someone here did openly confess to being teh Bungler, would Andy believe it? And for Andy to admit that Bungler is a parodist would mean he was admitting that he'd screwed up big time. They look (to all outward appearances, at least) to be pretty chummy... Alt 19:07, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, excuse my ignorance, but: what's a Samwell? Alt 19:09, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Someone who becomes a sysop and then blocks everyone. --Shagie 19:13, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

If Bugler did come out and admit he was, and Andy did have to fess up to his mess up, I would imaine he would say something like "Greater men than me have been duped by liberal bias, although it would be really funny to see if anyone would attempt a full on coup if they saw their valiant leader falter. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 19:15, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Heh, thanks for the link Shagie. And Shrink: if Andy were to say that he'd be admitting there are in fact greater men than him around. I'm not convinced he has that within him. Alt 19:24, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, if he were to do it, it would be Ronald Reagan and thats it. He would say Judas was duped by the evil roman liberals and jews of their time. My guess is that if he was forced to accept it he would blame us. Or Wikipedia. Or Al Gore. Or Bill Clinton. Or Obama. Or Charles Darwin. Or Evolution. He wouldn't say it was his mistake. He would ban, delete and never speak of it again. He allowed Samwell to get through, but Bugler is just good, he hasn't done anything revolutionary, except last this long. But if he were to overload and crash the system, he would be honored and we may change the name of the site to Buglerwiki. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 19:37, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm Spartacus Bugler SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 19:52, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

While Bugler appears to be making mistakes, he isn't rocking the boat - just constantly tipping it to one side. To admit his identity would be foolish - it would end his game of seeing how far he can go before getting blocked. Additionally, without admitting his identity and constantly pushing the envelope further with Andy laying more and more praises on him... well, Andy isn't going to block him anytime soon. No matter how much it looks like he's deep down mocking Andy, Andy is a bit too dense or full of himself to realize it. The only thing that cause Andy to ban him would be if he went too far... but as of yet he has just been following in Andy's foot steps of what acceptable stances on subjects are and then attacking anyone who varies from them. Bugler is good enough to not go any further than Andy has gone, but yet mocks all the other sysops and editors behind Andy's back. --Shagie 19:54, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Once again, mocking Andy's and Ed's style of "you go find the references to prove yourself wrong." --Shagie 15:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Free userbox

This user is BUGLER.

--Horace 21:20, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, I needed that! ħuman 22:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, look

I just checked Alexa to see what the Lenski Affair had on their traffic, and it seems like rationalwiki wins the Ken DeMeyer award for victory on the internet. Clearly, Atheism is victorious on the information superhighway (Who the fuck still says information superhighway without intent to be retro?) --81.187.75.69 18:05, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm not usually up at this time of the night, but are they a bit overwhelmed at the moment, or is the present level of activity usual?--Bob^{bing up} 18:29, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

This article on salon.com might explain some of the traffic:

http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/?last_story=/tech/htww/2008/06/30/evolution_and_conservapedia/

and

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/30/93525/3649/33/544056

Anyways, speaking of Lenski, whats this shit on CP's front page about "Conservapedia humiliating Lenskis study"? It was the other way round i thought.... 203.96.84.33 19:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT) Ace McWicked

Uhm . . . they put their contact lenses in backwards? Actually, the truth is they are preaching to the choir . . nut jobs who believe whatever the voices in the head ( god? is that you god? No? Bowser? what are you doing in my head?) tell them. These nut jobs get together and pretend they all here the same voices ( how did you know my old dog, Bowser? Oh, it was god! silly old dog . . . ) ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 19:49, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Wait, what? I thought it was a rationalwiki-type bitching about the table, and because we find it hilarious. Or is "wikipedia" now a shorthand for the wiki that shall not be named over at CP? --81.187.75.69 20:02, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, it is one step closer to him admitting our existance. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 20:39, 30 June 2008 (EDT) Also, someone should insist on him showing the complete e-mail, you know, for public scrutiny. Also, does anyone know exactly what Trent said that that Andy misconstructed as him being from Wikipedia? NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 20:46, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

What a strange front page news story. It only contains links to CP articles... does one of them contain the reference to the "the Canadian psychology doctoral student"? After all, there is a quote attributed to them. ħuman 20:48, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of the template (were we?), I wrote the latest version that Marge borrowed, building on prior art by AmesG and I think PalMD. Of course it is gfdl - meaning that that page on CP must also be gfdl (explicitly). Of course, it's funny to see them do so badly at using it... almost worth the copyvio. ħuman 21:00, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

It would have been better if they copied it properly instead of making a dog's breakfast of it. As for Andy by claiming it was Wikipedia instead of us and using it as an example of Wikipedia bullying, isn't he indulging in the Liberal practice of deceit? - π 21:51, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Cooler Andy

I hope you don't think I'm presumptuous by calling you by your first name, but you're a fuckwit. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 20:31, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

We Have a Dirty Sock in our Group

I'm not quite sure exactly who it is.... but I give the general warning to be careful what you say and/or do around here... Looks like some Conservapedia sysops are slumming again. SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 21:00, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Aw, that's sweet. Why should we change what we say or do? They read this whether they log in or not anyway... How else would they figure out how to proofread their articles? ħuman 22:35, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Keep an eye out for "trumpeter."Antifly 22:46, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Why, what are they going to do, read what I wrote on a public website? I'm nervous already! ħuman 23:35, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I was referring to something else... I sent an email to some supposed Rationals, one of them then blocked my sock account and my IP address on COnseravpedia.... good thing I've still got me proxies. Fuck you Henry S... have some balls and show yourself. SirChuckB^{BATHE THE WHALES!!!!} 01:36, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I would imagine there's quite a few but that's half the fun isn't it? And it would be a little hypocritical to complain seeing as I seem to have one or two on the go myself. Appreciate the warning though. RedDog 07:45, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh! HenryS = Bohdan(x) = ShahB = whatever he's calling himself now.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:55, 1 July 2008 (EDT) (thought he was still ShahB - dunno what he is now :-(   ^Contribs_Talk

RedDog, on the other hand you don't user your sock at CP to block people at RW. Oh and don't forget CP Commandment Number Something, about not blocking based on what one does on other websites. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 07:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Name

Do they not realize their name sometimes gives more away than their summary? [5] --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 21:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

About dotherightthing changing his name, has he ever said it to....anyone else. I know he prefers it, unless it's some sychophantic happy name like LT's. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 22:17, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Someone should ask him to change his to AndrewS. How long can this go one before repeats anyway? $\approx$$\pi$ 22:37, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Misusing copyright....

Regarding in regards with regards to this hilarity, could someone with a sock out please point out the irony of Andy Schlafly complaining about misusing copyright?-caius (decider) 22:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, it appears that Andy doesn't want to remove the side by side template.[6] The next step would be to send a DMCA take down request to Andy and his provider. Running a traceroute, it appears that his provider is theplanet.com. Their legal page is at http://www.theplanet.com/about-us/legal.asp and the page for the DMCA takedown of a hosted site is this. It might be useful to include https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/2007-05-08-fdl-scope which is FSF's comment on GFDL in which it says that anything that incorporates it is a derivative work and must also be GFDL. --Shagie 23:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

So is Andy admitting there that the GFDL is too complex for him to understand, in his "professional" capacity as a lawyer? Alt 06:52, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Biggest Idiot Debate

The final results are in. All we need is an ASCII award to post on the winner's talk page. See Debate:Who is the biggest idiot at CP? for details. DickTurpis 22:57, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Shoot, was I supposed to be working on the full-size papier mache model for us to photograph? I phail :( ħuman 23:31, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Why an ASCII award? Can't we knock something together in a div environment? $\approx$$\pi$ 00:36, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Each one of us should pass gas in the general direction of the wiener winner? CЯacke® 00:45, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure, a banner is fine too. Main thing is that we can't upload an image to cp, that's why I thought of ascii. However, a good banner with an image they already have would work just fine. Ideas for image, etc? ħuman 01:25, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I suggest using this in the banner. Everyone else come up with their own funny images from their listings, and keep them ready for when they delete this one. Don't post them here.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 02:00, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I have made an award on my sandbox if people would like to edit it when it is done I will sock up and go in. It is a pity they have deleted that particular image though. $\approx$$\pi$ 02:35, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

They did already?! Wow. Yeah, your banner thing uses an image they can't delete, so it's probably best.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 03:21, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

You should include a link to some sort of presentation page here. Use tinyurl or something similar.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 03:23, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

So richly deserved too. It brings a tear to my eye. RedDog 04:04, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

That sucks! Clearly Andy and Karajou are bigger idiots! I smell deceit! Can't we at least give the cowardly karajerk a runner's up prize. It will really piss him off. Especially if it is for cowardice and bullying when faced with arguments he doesn't really follow. pul-lease . . . can we do it now? Can we give it to him soon? can we give it to him in a couple of minutes? can we give it to me in a little while? please! please! please! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 07:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Feel free to make and award as many "runner up" banners as you like... ħuman 15:38, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Other categories

Should we give out other categories? Most ruthless? Most reasonable? Most likely to be a sock? Most likely to leave? Most active? There are many possible nomination categories. Would there be enough interest for a full Osaca Schlafly awards ceremony?--Bob^{bing up} 12:02, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, what comes next? Most difficult to tell from parody? ħuman 15:38, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Let's look at the biggest idiot comments to see if there's a good option. Worst plagiarist? Dumbest Quote Miner? ħuman 15:39, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Worst block? Worst block reason? I guess that awards should only go to sysops? Or expand it to editors? Bravest? most sycophantic without being a sysop? Best scientist (a kiss of death surely).--Bob^{bing up} 15:44, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Biggest Bully/Most Obnoxious is an obvious one. The winner is obvious too (Karajou), however, I though Ken was going to win the idiot award, so I may be wrong. DickTurpis 16:19, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I demand a recount...

...on that idiot competition. This Mainpage "news" item by Karamoron just takes the cake for me. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Clark's logic does not dictate that the presidents listed were not qualified to be president. The only thing that Clark's logic dictates is that you require more by way of qualifications than being shot down in a fighter plane. A statement of the bleeding obvious I would have thought.

Not so, apparently. Not for Karafool anyways.

I think he is trying to make a late run for the idiot prize. On his behalf I beseach you to reconsider your votes. --Horace 04:22, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Too late, my friend, polls are closed; results are final. You should have started your campaign earlier. DickTurpis 11:53, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Karajou will certainly be one of the key players in the next contest. Is it already planned, DickTurpis? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 12:07, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh... I see that CPAdmin1 went and removed the stupidity. Shame. --Horace 18:06, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Contortionist

I would love to see that perennial favorite of mental contortionist, PJR, figure where on the Ark these hardy little bastards were? Hmmmmmmm floating mats of vegetation perhaps Phil? Ace McWicked 06:27, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Umm... If you read the thing, it said they could survive at the bottom of the ocean, so I don't see what the problem is...--CPAdmin1 10:01, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Well yes, but if you read the Bible in a literal and straightforward way like some of them do over there, then Noah was ordered to take 2 of every living creature onto the Ark, and everything else got the chop. Which could mean 1 of 3 things... 1) God doesn't see microbes as lifeforms, 2) the Ark sailed away, surrounded by ducks (with apologies to Eddie Izzard) or 3) um... the Bible is wrong. --Psygremlin_Whut? 14:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Anyone Fancy a Competition

I propose a quick competition if anyone is interested to guess thet outcome of Bugler...

1) Time until he is exposed, banned or comes clean. 2) What he is aiming to achieve (if we ever find out).

Whoever gets closest wins a fizzy fish. RedDog 06:37, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

1)Actually, I think he could run and run.

2) I think we're back to Poe's law.--Bob^{bing up} 06:59, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Anyone else think it might be Fox out for revenge? Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 07:41, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

What Bob said. ... and what Genghis said. But I've another notion.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:45, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

No, no, no! I can't hear that! I am certain of two things with reference to Bugler. One is that he is British. Two is that he is most certainly NOT on the level. RedDog 07:46, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

1. Fox is (was) British.
2. Poe's law.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:49, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

ED PWNED

Ed has, I see been given his award. see :Debate:Who is the biggest idiot at CP?/Ed's Page CONGRATULATIONS!   ^Contribs_Talk 08:22, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

He just looks so proud of his award. $\approx$$\pi$ 08:28, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Sorry I stuffed this picture up I could go back and stage it. $\approx$$\pi$ 08:35, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Done! $\approx$$\pi$ 08:38, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. Brilliant. Matt 08:48, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

And the perpetrator is blocked by Crocodile (DeanS) - he's been watching then!   ^Contribs_Talk 09:07, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

And the offending material is removed. It lasted 58 minutes!   ^Contribs_Talk 09:09, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

It is a pity Ed didn't get to see it. If someone has an old sock they want to kill could they put it back when Ed's around. $\approx$$\pi$ 09:13, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

In the meanwhile, sorry for the OT, Andy woke up on the wrong side of the bed, just check his Recent Edits. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 09:11, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Someone's got to sock up and put a congratulatory message on Ed's WP page as well. I think it should go into more detail, linking to the debate page and stressing what an honor this is, as he has sme very, very serious competition. DickTurpis 15:04, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Too bad about the typo in the header... Sweet though! ħuman 15:42, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I see it got fixed. Can we delete the mispelled screenshot? ħuman 15:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I fixed the award so it sits center regardless of web browser. That particular CP logo doesn't work on CP, Image:Conservapedia logo.png or Image:Ed poor grinning.jpg, are good substitutes. He has been inactive the last two days when he gets back could someone try giving him his award again. $\approx$$\pi$ 18:33, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Crocoite (DeanS)

Deletes his talk page again.   ^Contribs_Talk 09:22, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Ahhh, it feels so good to see he is hurt. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 10:08, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Andy's really trying to get him back (without actually begging).   ^Contribs_Talk 10:17, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

And then ... CPAdmin goes head to head with Andy!!!!   ^Contribs_Talk 10:27, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Kudos to CPAdmin. Even if I still would unblock AShephard. Maybe a parodist, but there was nothing wrong in his/her edits, unless I missed some. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 10:31, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Andy responds - Obama's different (& besides his article doesn't upset our tame Mormon)   ^Contribs_Talk 10:44, 1 July 2008 (EDT) And Moer   ^Contribs_Talk

Not taking it lying down Respect for Tim. RedDog 11:28, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

you just repeated my moer link   ^Contribs_Talk 11:32, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Gosh Susan I seem to be treading on your toes today. Sorry and everything. RedDog 11:51, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

And now PJR comes to Tim's rescue. Some heavy words there. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 11:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Now it is protected. Shame, my next attack was going to be different. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 13:19, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd like to take this opportunity to express a little man love for Tiger Tim and the mighty PJR. The Assfly either finally listens to reason, or it's time to tear him a new one, fellas. No surrender. --Robledo 14:15, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I want to have their babies! Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 17:12, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Copying the side by side template

I assume someone from here sent Andy an email about their theft of CP's side by side template ( I saw a discussion somewhere around here but can't find it now), but the front page news on CP makes made it sound as if it was a WP issue. What gives? Who the hell is a Canadian doctoral student and why is that significant? ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:53, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Note (as you have) he's removed it, further: he never gave a link; further: think it's TMT who's the Canadian ...   ^Contribs_Talk 11:01, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Jumping-Jesus-on-a-pogo-stick! you mean all this time I've been contributing my valuable insight to an organization owned by foriegners?!? . . . anyway . . . I guess the real question is: was Andy's "news" bit naming WP an explicit lie or just an avoidance of the truth. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 11:20, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

1. TMT's not (AFAIK) Canadian.
2. Explicit lie.

  ^Contribs_Talk 11:25, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps Andy has been watching too much South Park? (Blame Canada!) Alt 11:50, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Aye, twas me, I am not a Canadian just ran away to Canada. I think this time the Wikipedia reference was just incompetency and lack of reading comprehension. After I explicitly corrected him in regards to who I was making the claim for he removed the Wikipedia reference. tmtoulouse ^beset 12:00, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for clearing that up. More Schlafly BS. He jumps all over people for typos and yet he posts a missive from the enemy (that's us!) right on the front page without even reading it very clearly. what a tool he is ( and not a very sharp one) BTW, you do know there isn't a draft anymore (yet) so running away to Canada is a bit premature. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 13:13, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Canada still has habeus corpus, eh? ħuman 18:47, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Congratulations Trent

Considering the massive crush the popular scientific community has right now on Dr. Lenski, you ought to be proud of being referred to as a Lenski-type - twice at the top of the front page! ħuman 19:31, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Bert Schlossberg

Something that's been bugging me for a while now is Mr Schlossberg. Where does he get off? I mean it's clear that he's on a mission to keep KAL007 in the public consciousness and from the sounds of it, he's got a good reason for that i.e. a relative lost on the plane. But is there really any milage in his claims about the passengers survivng & being incarcerated in a Siberian Gulag & the US govt knowing about it & covering it up?

It sounds like classic conspiracy theory paranoia and I've not found any independent suggestions on the WWW that anyone but him thinks there's any truth in the matter. But just about every edit he's made to CP seems to have a KAL007 survivors slant. Any thoughts? Crookedmouth 13:31, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

...and what I find even stranger is that Bert seems to have passed under the RW radar. Are you guys just being sensitive to his feelings or something?

Crookedmouth 13:35, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I think there was some talk on him on RW, but basically I agree with all you said. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 13:54, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

He's not amusing. And he's not targeted by our mission   ^Contribs_Talk 13:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Rather like the Shakespeare origins thing on our site. - leave 'em alone & they cause no trouble)

Bert wrote the book on the KAL007 conspiracy...literally. Bert gets a pass from RW since the KAL007 tragedy isn't all that notable, the Soviet military screwed up and shot down a civilian airliner. Those that cannot accept the cruel, tragic end of their loved-ones begin to see patterns of deceit where none exist...this leads to the conspiracy theories and books about the "cover-up". Now...if that congressman on KAL007 had been a KENNEDY... CЯacke® 14:10, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Conspiracy theorists are a dime a dozen at the corner store. They are part of the American identity from X Files to Who Shot Roger Rabbit JFK? They aren't inherently anti-science nor do they cause a systemic worldview that goes against what can be tested. While it is just as hard to reason with a conspiracy theorist on their chosen topics as a creationist, they don't try to inject that the CIA killed JFK into every history book. For that matter, conspiracy theorists will never say "goddidit"... they might say the Vatican did it - but not anything supernatural (aliens maybe). Outside of the range of the conspiracy, the theorists don't have any moral or legal agenda. They are not trying to stack the courts... or maybe that's what they want us to believe. Anyways... Some find them amusing. Some find them tedious. --Shagie 14:18, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Still they are not rational - so they belong to our mission, even if for a weaker purpose. Regarding aliens, I thought Crop circles to be vandalism. Instead it's a creation of JM. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 14:31, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd disagree slightly...when paranoia wears the clothes of rationality conspiracy theories are the likely result. It is the misuse of rationality, to be sure, but that misuse can sometimes be the result of serious mental illness or instability that I, (for one) do not wish to provoke, much less poke. CЯacke® 14:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Actually, we do cover conspiracy theories a bit, we even have a list of conspiracy theories but they usually seem to laughable to debate. Also I guess there is a question of notability - is this a notable conspiracy theory? If so then perhaps user:Crookedmouth should add it to our list with some data. I know nothing about it.--Bob^{bing up} 15:33, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I like the idea in principal but, in practice, I'm not really up to starting articles just yet. I don't really have the time to do the deed or even the research TBH. If I'm not a particularly frequent member, it's not coz I ain't interested. Crookedmouth 02:51, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

<stir>While not being an apologetic for any particular conspiracy theory, there is always the possibility that there is a grain of truth in one/some of them. Unfortunately, there are so many that it is difficult to sort out the wheat from the chaff. Being a skeptic does not mean rejecting every one of them out of hand but requires rigorous examination of the evidence without prejudice.</stir> "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get me." Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 15:52, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I agree. But there is a difference between a theory about a conspiracy and a Conspiracy theory as our article on the subject mentions.--Bob^{bing up} 15:59, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Personally, I like to make the distinction between "conspiracy theories" and "Conspiracy Theories," with the latter being of the crackpotty variety. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:08, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Psychoceramics! A lot of the wind went out of my paranoia about 9/11 when I saw a picture claiming the object shown was not the same as an airplane wheel as shown in piccie next to. It clearly was... now I just think it (any govt. fault) was incompetence magnified by ideological agenda. ħuman 18:51, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Gertrude Stein on CP

Did you know that the article on Gertrude Stein on CP([7]) has a footnote directing to IHR (Institute for Historical Review)[8], a Holocaust denial organisation. This was added by Joaquín Martínez. I don't know if this is the page to discuss dubious links on CP, but i'm anxious to know if anybody noticed it. My apologies if this isn't the correct place to report such matters. Also my apologies for my English. --81.83.193.236 15:10, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

THAT MOTHERFUCKING ASSHOLE IS RUINING MY FUCKING ARTICLE. God, FUCK that guy!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 15:23, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Sorry. --81.83.193.236 15:24, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't be sorry. The above wasn't directed at you, but at Joaquin. Thanks for noticing. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 15:29, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I wasn't talking to you. Thank you for pointing it out. It, um, bothered me mildly.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 16:11, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

There's a wonderful family called Stein,

There's Gert and there's Epp and there's Ein;

Gert's poems are bunk,

Epp's statues are junk,

And no one can understand Ein.

  ^Contribs_Talk 17:11, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Well spotted, Timmy!

Well spotted. So tell me, why does TonyT get banned and Bugler get promoted? DickTurpis 16:19, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

How can I take a look at the edits made by TonyT? Bjones 16:45, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Nevermind, I found the 'contrib' button. Bjones 16:46, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

democrat bashing

Ultimahero, how dare you mock the mormoms! what about the Demoncrats! 203.96.84.33 17:46, 1 July 2008 (EDT) Ace McWicked

Andy says "it's not fair to treat one entity in such a blatantly one-sided manner." Isn't that just adorable?--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 17:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

But the republican party was founded on bashing Mormons. The 1856 platform explicitly stated "It is the duty of Congress to prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery."[9][10] --Shagie 18:17, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but they were the liberal party back then... ħuman 18:58, 1 July 2008 (EDT)