# Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive63

This is an archive page, last updated 31 March 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: , (back)

## JJacob

Sycophantic sockpuppet makes good! [1] Block rights, awarded for defending the tough-as-nails swabbie's bunk from desecration. [2] ħuman 19:52, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

And he's only 19 days old! Would that any of my socks had succeeded so quickly in getting such rights! Meanwhile, in a dark bar somewhere, hunched over his fifth drink of the morning, sits Helpjazz. Bitter. Lonely. Spurned. Vengeful. DogP 20:08, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Wow, that is impressive. I'm just happy to have avoided a block so far. I thought I was going to get one from JJacob, until I realized he was a parodist too! The Lay Scientist 20:47, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm delighted to say that my own socks with blocking rights remain under deep cover, but it took most of them a lot longer to get such rights. I think it's a real sign of how slack the place has become that someone can get such rights 19 days into their tenancy. BTW, please don't keep outing suspected parodists, Lay Scientist. It reduces potential lulz in the long run. DogP 20:53, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
I think we should do a Spartacus and just out every sysop as a paradost, lol. Uncle Ed is my sock folks, you heard it here first! 194.66.0.146 04:56, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Haha, I only referred to JJacob as a puppet because he/it seemed like an ass-licking troll. I had/have no evidence that he/she/it is not "for real". ħuman 05:09, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## Tyops and missspleings

It makes it kinda hard to jump on Cpers when they lambaste BHO over gaffes and such if we're going to do the same gotcha! shtick to them, not that it isn't lulzy, but it ain't WIGO quality lulz. CЯacke® 20:03, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Maybe but from someone who spends a great deal of time giving everyone shit for typos I think it makes his fair game...but then you get into an infinite regress since we are doing it.........but anyway, its the hypocrisy angle again. There is a lot of things that I mock CP for that I would not if it wasn't for the abject hypocrisy it exhibits. tmtoulouse heckle 20:13, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
PS I think this is an example of what the voting system is for, and it should stay as a WIGO item and just let the "users" decide its value. tmtoulouse heckle 20:14, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Also, we work our asses off fixing each other's typos, etc. We critique because we care. Remember that teh assfly is famous for critiquing others' spelling while making his own errors. When I read that line over at CP, I thought "well, if you speak as well as you write, it's you that is going to get pwnzored". ħuman 20:19, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
I think we should point out his typoes but we should also include a blanket disclaimer on WIGO.Maybe even a footnote! Something like: Andy has discounted people here, here, and here because of minor typographical errors. Hre is one of his. discount him too— Unsigned, by: Sheesh! / talk / contribs
Hell, any lowly editor who deigns to "correct" His Poohbahness is liable to be blocked, hence his keyboard hiccups stay there until he Hisself fixes them. Points taken above, but I think (given that it's a talk page post), it's a bit picayune. CЯacke® 20:38, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Considering he thinks he is above fault and a teacher to boot, using and adjective instead of an adverb is pretty bad. It's not a typo, it's carelessness at best, and perhaps even a slight illiteracy showing through. Minor WIGO? Sure. Worth ripping on him for? Sure. His best stuff, of course, gets added to his article... ħuman 20:40, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Hmmm, at the rate things are going, my correction of Andy's "typo" is gonna be the last edit of the evening. Wake up, CPers with edit rights! ħuman 22:51, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## Thanks for making them dance

I'm not sure who to thank for goading ashfly into his correspondence with PNAS, but thanks. Hopefully PNAS will print his questions and a response. I'll make the popcorn! Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 20:10, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Will PNAS give us a group rate on copies of that issue? I know I will want to frame it. ħuman 20:20, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm sure on Planet Andy, this is a win-win situation. If the PNAS doesn't reply, it's Liberal Censorship. If they DO reply, it's Liberal Deceit. :-P --75.71.18.186 23:52, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
The real problem is that Andy doesn't get that PNAS comments are not newspaper letters to the editor; they're real articles that an editor will promptly reject, and that you actually have to give evidence for your assertions. Sterilesnore! 08:40, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Wait, you're not saying that Schlafly only 'skimmed' the PNAS submission instructions too? Inconceivable! In any case, I think the biggest thanks go to Dinsdale. The letter might not get published in PNAS but it will be spread far and wide. I agree that in Andy's mind it will always be 'win-win', but does anyone expect otherwise?--Neon 21:16, 23 July 2008 (EDT) (aka Argon)

## HPV vaccine hysteria

Andy has posted a HPV vaccine=death new link. It took more than a few clicks so here is the original source. I have some suspicions about whats going on but will sober up first. Other should explore. tmtoulouse heckle 23:04, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I saw that and "wondered" about interesting things like math, and facts, and data. None of which matter to teh assfly. Since he Knows The Truth. ħuman 23:25, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Just FYI:
"Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations and public outreach. "[3]
"Judicial Watch was created to serve as an ethical and legal watchdog over our government and judicial systems and to promote a return to ethics and morality in our nation’s public life."[4]
So I think this source should be treated with a grain of salt.Shangrala 23:55, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
Don't we have an article on those idiots yet? By now? ħuman 05:13, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Judicial Watch From Sourcewatch, it turns out that Judicial Watch has received over US\$7m in funding, mostly from three sources: the Sarah Scaife Foundation, The Carthage Foundation and the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. [5].

The first two are part of a group of foundations run by the very Conservative Richard Mellon Scaife until a few years ago. According to SourceWatch"Although Scaife has dedicated vast sums of money to influencing the way the public thinks, he prefers to operate behind the scenes, granting few interviews. When former Wall Street Journal reporter Karen Rothmyer attempted to interview him in 1981, he responded by calling her a 'fucking Communist cunt' and telling her to 'get out of here.'" Olin's foundation is similarly Conservative.

So basically, Judicial Watch looks to be a very socially conservative group, opposed to HPV vaccines on moral grounds. The Lay Scientist 06:34, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

That was my first question. is Andy objecting to HPV on moral or medical grounds. thanks for looking that up.--WaitingforGodot 13:48, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## "Quotes"

What's with "ASchlafly's" tendency to "frequently" use "quotation marks," especially around "words" he doesn't "understand"? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 23:24, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

He's trying to be "lawyerly"? ħuman 23:26, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
More importantly: heeee's baaaaack, and editing at 11:30 at night again! Long Live Conspwervapediophile! (lulz ensue for all who are addicted to them) ħuman 23:28, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
OK, Scchlafliyieies's been on vacation, we need to start a pool betting on whether he got his monkey spanked laid or not. ħuman 23:30, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
He's been editing very sporadically lately, but was he really on vacation? Looking at his contribs, he only missed July 18. It's got to be a really shitty vacation if you still have time to edit your personal wiki. And as far as sex goes, I'd prefer not to think about it too much, but still, I doubt a vacation is going to get in the way of he and his wife's weekly-scheduled 15 minutes of clinical, unfulfilling, missionary-only marital act. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 23:42, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
"Quasi-vacation"? Maybe they went somewhere, maybe not, but he brought his laptop. And has a hard a time accessing CP as us the last 2-3 weeks. Things seem to have gone "live" tonight though (he paid siteground the bandwidth fee?) - or is it just me that can get through again for once? ħuman 23:53, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
PS, sorry, I only mentioned the sex thing to gross everyone out!! ħuman 23:54, 22 July 2008 (EDT) (you succeeded!   ContribsTalk 23:58, 22 July 2008 (EDT))

No, no. The schlaflys dont have sex. Andy releases his seeds into the air like a dandelion while his wife runs around trying to catch them in her egg sac. Ace McWickedInteresting 00:11, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

I have often wondered what Andy's wife and family do whilst he is on CP having an argument with some people he doesn't know, with some people he will never meet on a topic he knows nothing about. I am sure he would every now and then get all worked up. To be honest his wife is either extremely sympathetic, or must have a lot of hobbies that keep her out of the house. 3.14159 (not signed in)
Remember, as was said before by a wiser tongue than mine, she might be glad something keeps him in his den until after she is asleep... ħuman 01:11, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
That's even worse: you used tongue in the same sentence as a Schlafly sex reference!   ContribsTalk 04:17, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Wow, yeah, the same "sentence"..... but far from the same "clause"... ħuman 04:28, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## He's back!

Kajagoogoo's back after showing himself up at WP - Zap!! Pow!!! Wham!!!! The invincible Petty [sic] officer blocks with his magic banhammer. (wonder if he thinks he is Batman defending against the forces of evil?)   ContribsTalk 04:13, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Gee, how exciting. He logged in blocked four vandals? As if there weren't many waiting? Methinks, Susan, you are little obsessed with RC@CP, and nothing else? ħuman 04:30, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Karajou must be pretty sensitive if this can count as intimdating/harassing behaviour. I'd really expect a little more... sang-froid from a former Navy man. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 04:50, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
NO IT'S JUST ANYONE WHO EDITS!!!!! ...IS SUSPECT!!!!!!!!!! SO I BANNED THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just in case? ħuman 05:16, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
That seems to be his standard m/o - ooh, somebody's querying something I did... let me ban them, then I don't have to answer and risk exposing myself as an even bigger jerk. He must have hated his brief sojurn on WP, where he couldn't wield the banhammer and had to fall back on his old, tired mantra. --JohnQThe Poster Formally Known As PsyGremlin 05:36, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
An now he is being tempted to submit a letter to an academic journal... ho ho ho, he he he, ha ha ha!!!!!!!! ħuman 05:46, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Nice non-sequitur, Human - edit the wrong section, did we? ħuman 20:34, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## Anybody wanna bet...

...what the result of this (very polite) appeal will be? --JohnQThe Poster Formally Known As PsyGremlin 05:36, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

I will bet a 30 minute block that the user will be shot down in flames by Assfly, called a liberal, and reminded that only people in the U.S. can POSSIBLY be true conservatives. Will you take the bet? ĵ₳¥ášÇ♠ʘ and his Sword of Wiki-Editing!
I see your 30 minutes and raise you an hour. I think she'll get it... dunno why. Maybe coz she's a girl, she doesn't seem to have caused trouble, and she seems to write sensibly. Then again - Andy is a misogynist, she hasn't really kowtowed to the party line and yup, she's not American. (Karajou will probably ban her for bombing Pearl Harbour). I'm still rooting for her though. If she goes the way of Helpjazz, I'll spend an hour in the cooler... --JohnQThe Poster Formally Known As PsyGremlin 11:46, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
I Think she'll get it too. She's a rarity on CP - someone who just likes to create useful content about subjects that interest her, without feeling a need to put a conservaspin on it. Given that she's been helping Poor Ed out and that he thinks well of her, too, she should pass muster with Andy. --69.248.132.97 12:55, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Of course her edits are 100% C&P, but that's pretty typical at CP. 'Course it's kinda hard to put a conservative spin on Chess or Kanji. --WaitingforGodot 13:10, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Liberals attempt to use the genderless plural pronoun 彼等 rather than the masculine singular pronoun 彼 in order to obfuscate the differences between men and women (replace those with "they" and "he" respectively and you've got an actual argument he's made).
If Andy has taught me something, it is that you can attempt to spin ANYTHING. NightFlareStill doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article. 13:34, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Ah well, it looks like she wound up being the first victim of the post-BlockStock paranoia that's bound to kick in. How is Andy to know what all those Kanji characters are really saying, anyway. --SpinyNorman 20:35, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Ah dammit. I lost that bet! ĵ₳¥ášÇ♠ʘ and his Sword of Wiki-Editing!
Heh, heh, heh... You're outta here. See you in an hour. Although... she didn't get approval either... which means... oh rats... --PsyGremlinWhut? 04:50, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Christians who can't take Assfly any more

Another Christian can’t stand the Assfly. And this one blocked our poor little JeIIyfish before he left. Proxima Centauri 10:07, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Uh... that happened more than a month ago... --Sid 13:08, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Quiet you little angel. Proxima Centauri 17:26, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
I remember 1987 fondly. It was a good year. But not as good as 1992. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 14:07, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
I think we all have a soft spot for the year of our birth. ;) GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 14:10, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
And whose year of birth is that supposed to be? Not AK's, surely. He's ancient :) <blink></blink> 14:13, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
(I believe that Genghis may have, in jest, suggested that I am of a somewhat younger age that is actually the case. Hence the smiley.) --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 14:18, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Hmmm...1987...not yet drinking age, but, hey, it's ann arbor, so who cares? 1992...sitting at the Blue Danube cafe in San Fran, studying chemistry, watching the fog roll in and out...-- -PalMD --Goatspeed! 20:01, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## BlockStock

Well, someone can come up with a better name for this summer festival of blockage. The interesting thing to observe will be how long it'll take someone to spring them, and who. Jinx? PJR? --SpinyNorman 19:11, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Jinx unblocks the Boss first, like the proper crawly bumcrawler he is, then the rest of them. Damnit Jinx, you're no fun. DogP 19:16, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
To be fair Jinx did unblock them all in the same order they were blocked --BoredCPer 19:21, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Move along now folks, nothing to see here, move along now. DogP 19:19, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
So I wonder: was it Jinx who vandalized the WIGO page? Cranky, cranky. --Phentari 21:18, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Haha, well, whether he did or not, he appreciated the shout out! Hi Jinx! You can use the Red Telephone any time you want! (I also have a private extension.) PS, have you tried linking to this den of iniquity from CP? I think even "preview" will show you that you weren't the first to "find" us. ħuman 22:14, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

## Message to Jinx

Jinx you are a dumbass. Truly. It is a public forum. The only person that is denying this place's existence is Andy's "spam filter". We don't care if you are monitoring us. We don't care if you edit here. We don't even care if you vandalise the site, we can just hit the revert button. Seriously sign up. We don't care, it is just text on a screen. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 23:02, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

And what does he mean, "gone quiet"? I think it's more that most people have "gone to bed". BTW, Jinx, since you're "monitoring" us, I don't think your recent wandalism and language were very Christian. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 23:06, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Just for fun, a glance at 67.135.49.186(talk)'s "contributions" on wikipedia. --Shagie 23:15, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey you know what would be funny? if it wasn't us he was referring to! Hey, Jinxmyshoes, can you throw down a quick shoutout so we know it's us? Just type "throwing the rats in the trash on the wiki" in a block or revert comment... ħuman 23:17, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
White supremacy, eh? Wouldn't have thought it of him. For all his faults, he doesn't seem the type. I suppose Mr. 67 could be someone else. --Phentari 23:41, 23 July 2008 (EDT)--Phentari 23:41, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
Well, Jinx did add the item about the "ChristianMeansFreedom" name to the "Bias in Wikipedia" page, and that seemed to be something 67.135.49.186 was interested in. It's not conclusive evidence by any means, but an interesting coincidence, nonetheless. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 00:00, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

What the fuck is Jinxtard going on about over there? Surely even he isn't stupid enough to think he "discovered" RW and it's some sort of great find they know nothing about. Is he? DickTurpis 09:47, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Have no fear, citizens. I am on Conservapedia, monitoring Mr McHue monitoring us. There is no problem as long as he does not start monitoring me monitoring him monitoring us...
...
OH SHI- --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Before I leave.....

I wrote a section on Ruling class for Conservapedia as JJacob which Ed Poor promptly decided was "Jargon" due to its overuse of the english langauge. Not to be put off, I came here as Ace and wrote this little number. Imagine to my surprise when this appeared on the other side. I had a giggle. All right then, see you fellas and gals. I had a ball so thanks. Ace McWickedInteresting 00:53, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Are you going? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 00:55, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Keep in touch (Them Hugs was me)  ContribsTalk 01:17, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Who was that masked man? ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 01:05, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Just a little Giggle

1. (diff) (hist) . . m Liberal Hypocrisy‎; 01:15 . . (+8) . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (→No to gas-tax holiday: grammer)
2. (diff) (hist) . . m Liberal Hypocrisy‎; 00:55 . . (0) . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (→No to gas-tax holiday: spell)

(emphasis mine)   ContribsTalk 01:40, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Would posting the same thing twice be considered a bigger giggle? — Unsigned, by: Jinxy jinx jinx / talk / contribs
Don't you do that all the time, J? :) People in glass houses can feel free to Giggle at... other people in glass houses... when they're bored. <blink></blink> 02:01, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Thing is I'm not pretending to be edumakaschional.   ContribsTalk 02:03, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

1. (diff) (hist) . . m Essay:Liberal Intellectualism‎; 19:21 . . (-4) . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (→Superiority Complex: grammAr)
2. (diff) (hist) . . m Essay:Liberal Intellectualism‎; 19:20 . . (+39) . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) (→Superiority Complex: spelling)

Hee!   ContribsTalk 19:23, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Foxy Strikes Again

Fox is not content with branding the American Family Assoc as anti-semitic -- he's now going after Stormfront. Watch this space!   ContribsTalk 06:47, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

And Ron Paul!   ContribsTalk 07:40, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Ron Paul was outed as a closeted white supremacist a while ago (not that anyone would notice), too many of his positions are but shadowed versions of old-fashioned pre-WWII Republicans. DLerner 20:01, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Favourite JJacob moment

I was always suspicious of JJacob until I saw this post. I didn't want to out him but after I saw it I knew he was a parodist. Do you guys have any favourites? --Damo2353 07:42, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Why? Because if you replace "evolutionists" with Schlafly's Acolytes you get a much more meaningful phrase! :P Armondikov 07:59, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Exactly. How on earth did Andy not see it? He is more naive than I thought.--Damo2353 08:11, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
It seems its Bugler's too. Hey Bugler--Damo2353 10:19, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

I knew for certain that JJacob was one of us when I criticized one of his edits, calling it a parody, and instead of getting banned like I expected he pretty much just kept his mouth shut. The Lay Scientist 15:11, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

That was because I didnt have the block rights to ban you...otherwise...

## Jpatt on Knol

See here for the CP article. Opinions?

I think both "Effects on" sections are quite a bit off. I do love the "As we all know, Google hates conservatives and will bury their opinions" side comment, though. The Wikipedia section seems to completely misunderstand how a wiki project works (which doesn't surprise me since nobody in charge of CP seems to understand it, either). You can't simply overshadow Wikipedia by creating a platform and throwing money at it. You need tons of editors, and you need to give them incentives to stay. Just look at promising projects such as Citizendium, which had been praised as The Magic Cure for all of WP's problems. Today's status? A quick Alexa check says that it's not even as popular as CP right now. (WTF.)

As a general comment about Knol, I feel like pointing out this quote from the linked CNET article:

 “” Authors can choose to close their knol so that no one else can edit it, make it completely open to others to edit--like a wiki--or keep the default "moderated collaboration" mode in which the author selects which edits to allow. "We think moderated collaboration mode will solve a large part of the problem" of complaints about accuracy that have plagued Wikipedia, Dupont said. There will, no doubt, be multiple knols on any one topic.

This sounds a lot like CP to me (Ken's pet projects as examples of closed knols and the "Liberal [noun]" ones as examples of moderated knols), with the only difference that Knol at least allows multiple knols on a topic. Still, my own quick prediction is that Knol will become a nice platform for CP-style "Teach the controversy! The Truth shall set you free! Liberals are atheists are homosexuals are deceptive cowards!" hate-blogging. --Sid 08:05, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Knol seems to me at what is on there at the moment to be another expert driven site. They have really only been moderately successful (although more authoritative). Andy could in potential go on there with his usual abortion causes breast cancer crap but with any luck about 10 experts will write counters if they care enough. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 08:41, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Jinx v. Fox

So, I'm guessing Jinx didn't know who he was dealing with and thought Fox was just another plebeian editor to push around. Either that, or Jinx knew and was just being a total moron. Hmm, that's about 50/50, isn't it? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 11:33, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Jinx has been around a while. It would surprise me if he didn't know who Fox is. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:34, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I thought that, but Fox has been relatively inactive lately, and I question Jinx's capabilities for long-term retention --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 11:39, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Yep, he knows, and it seems like he's counting on that to win Andy over in his protest. --SpinyNorman 11:57, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Maybe it's staged to provide some entertainment for RW considering the total lack of anything interesting on CP recently. (save for the increasing absurdity of the Lenski affair, of course) Armondikov 11:42, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
But which side of the fence will Andy fall? Or will he just mix his metaphors and shove his head in the sand, as usual? Fretfulporpentine 11:45, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Unless it becomes completely disruptive then Andy will ignore it just as he has ignored other sysop disagreements. (I know, these two only have block powers not the full nuclear arsenal.) GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 12:01, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Jinx, interested isn't the quite right word. Amused is more accurate. The only reason this is a blip on our radar, so to speak, is that the rest of you are so utterly boring at the moment. In other words, thanks for going out of your way to make an ass out of yourself. It made me chuckle. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 11:58, 24 July 2008 (EDT) P.S. Good to know you read us so frequently!

This presents us with a quandary: Whether to play up the "Jinx Fox is one of us" or keep (relatively) quiet and pop the corn, melt the butter and see what shakes out. I like that we're able to "control" what happens over there by what we do and say. CЯacke® 12:06, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I don't think Jizzonmyshoes will win many brownie points from Andy with those comments - mentioning those who must never be mentioned. GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 12:08, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, those fucking hypocrites gentlemen at the other web site read this site closely, use us for a proofreading service, punish editors there for stuff done here, and send us indirect messages, but they don't officially recognize our existence and can't type the name. Pretty sad and funny. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 12:43, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
If they watch WIGO so closely (and possibly the talk thread) then what if I was to openly declare that I'm Jinxmchue and its the only sock account I have to mess around with? Or perhaps I'm Fox... or perhaps both. Hi Andy, I know you're reading and getting hyperparanoid now... :D Armondikov 13:20, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Don't say that ^ young Jessica-chan will never get her edit rights and she'll end up all wrinkled from all the late nights editing on CP. --PsyGremlinWhut? 14:20, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
^Sheesh, they may not be able to type our name, but I'm sure I've seen that they are perfectly capable of typing "metapedia." Does that mean they consider us worse even than them? Bondurant 13:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Does that shed some light on how Jinx has reacted to this suggestion of Antisemitism?--Chris111 13:33, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Perhaps someone should ask him who he thinks runs the international finance system. --Helena Bonham Carter 13:39, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Interesting that he's going after Fox right after Fox went after Stormfront. Maybe that anonymous editor trying to pretty up the Stormfront article at Wikipedia WAS Jinx, after all. More's the pity if that's true. --Phentari 14:15, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I think we all here know that Fox didn't get that user name without being as clever as a etc... Not only is this some heavy-hitting trump card which effectively deletes everything Jizzyshoe has ever said anywhere about the quick red one, but it is quite an audacious claim in its own right. One has to ask - what unseen machinations are afoot..? 67.159.44.138 14:25, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Ohhhh shiny media attention! That's a trump card indeed! --Sid 14:53, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Wow! Peter Hitchens is a journalistic heavyweight in the UK. The younger brother of atheist essayist Christopher Hitchens he has very different views. I believe they were not on speaking terms for many years. Hitchens writes for The Mail on Sunday, sister publication of Fox's newspaper of choice, The Daily Mail; a right-wing, rag that specializes in frightening pensioners, home-owners and conservative Christians. If Fox gets PH to do an article on CP in the Mail it will far outdo anything that Ken has managed and will surely reinstate him to sysop. Personally Hitchens really gets on my tits but I can't deny that he has some mainstream influence. GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 15:00, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I wonder what they'll make of the newspaper Peter Hitchens works for? I find it hilarious that he left "Teh Express" because the owner was associated with pornography, yet he now works for The Mail. Sample headlines from their website today: "Why Are Big Breasts So Much Trouble", "Party animals Chanelle and Chantelle", "Supermodel Petra Nemcova enjoys passionate kisses with mystery man", and so on and so forth. It's Hollywood Values gone mad I say. The Lay Scientist 15:17, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Um, Peter Hitchens has turned up on his own article's talk page. Either that, or it's a helluv'n opening gambit for a sock. --Robledo 19:41, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

### Place yer bets!

• Fox will lose - 80% sure simply because his edits are considered liberal and Andy will side with Jinx because of that. The other 20% is Andy will completely ignore the entire thing. NorsemanWassail! 14:38, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• Fox will win because he is a CP institution, and cannot be defeated. However, I think Andy will keep out of this as much as humanly possible. <blink></blink> 14:40, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Chaos! expressed my thoughts exactly (with a special mention to Bondurant and NightFlare too). (Editor at) CP:no intelligence allowed 16:35, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• That's easy - no score draw to coin a football pools parlance. Nothing will happen to Fox as he is a quality editor and Schlafly is afraid of appearing anti-semetic, and nothing will happen to Jinx because he's one of Schlafly's enforcers. It'll be like an ice hockey fight, he'll let them slug it out as long as it stays contained. Bondurant 14:45, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• This sounds a lot like those "Unstoppable Force vs. Immovable Object" problems. I think Andy will look away while Learn Together intervenes and either removes or defuses Fox's edits with some lame excuse about keeping the article "on topic" (with "topic" being "just the nice things"). Maybe he'll offer Fox to branch the criticism out into some minor external article. --Sid 14:51, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• Hmm, going out on a limb, I'll see your LT intervenes and raise you a long silence while the issue is resolved "backstage" and an article gets protected. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:10, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• No score draw Andy will pretend this never happened and never saw anything despite the fact a big red message pops up whenever someone edits his talk page. NightFlareThis is a talk page. 16:03, 24 July 2008 EDT)
• Ed Poor intervenes As a Jew himself (Isn't he?) he has a stake in this, sort of. He'll complain at both, assign a writing assignment, and then begin referring to himself in the third person. Barikada 16:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
• Fox will win, if only for the fact that he seems like a decent bloke, (bonus: knows how to write his name in Hebrew, I bet that I can type it faster though, בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ, see how fast that was?)— Unsigned, by: DLerner / talk / contribs
• I will wager a 30 minute block that Fox will win the Assfly attention, seeing as to how he has been on the site for MUCH longer. ĵ₳¥ášÇ♠ʘ and his Sword of Wiki-Editing! (didn't log in)
• It'll die down and stopped before he takes any notice.Armondikov 07:39, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
• 99.99999% RationalWiki will continue circle-jerking each other over this issue. 67.135.49.186 10:41, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
99.99999% You're Jinx but can't admit it due to conservative deceit NorsemanWassail! 14:33, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

### Round 2

Ding ding ding! Seconds out... have at yer again --PsyGremlinWhut? 11:01, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

This has echos of playground fights where all the non combatants stood around in a circle chanting 'Fight! Fight! Fight!'. Personally I'm on Foxy's side. He at least has manners, whereas Jizz... Silver Sloth 11:11, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I think this is a better diff. GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 12:46, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Indeedy. Well done, Sir. Your Czech is in the mail. --PsyGremlinWhut? 15:08, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

### Round 3

• Foxy will knock the living daylights out of him because a)pissing off Peter Hitchens would not be a good move and b)there is plenty of evidence that Jinx has been (at least) "plainly insulting" towards Jewish people.--Damo2353 18:26, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
• Foxy will knock the living daylights out of him because there's nothing worse than a pissed off Jew who has just located an anti-semite. Last one got a face full of stitches and cost me a £1500 fine and 100 hours community service. But he will wake up every day and see that scar Fox 19:16, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Vandalism

I know that CP seems to think that there's some sort of conspiratorial thought process going on between people here, that we coordinate vandalism or whatever they perceive as attacks. I'm just curious - is this true? I am not active enough to be part of anything like an inner circle. But my impression is that any vandalism committed by members of this site is done of their own volition. Not that Andy would consider that to be true. There's also a question of what constitutes vandalism, which has already been discussed. It's probably safe to say that the constituency here does not engage in obvious vandalism - like writing "U SUCK" all over the main page or the like. - Lardashe

HHFS 54DC OOJ7 B4SS PP8G HHEA MAKI LFFX 7MM4 DogP 12:41, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm trying to figure out if that's a code or something, or if it was a joke about vandalism.... - Lardashe
Those are the license plate numbers of Conservapedia's top brass. You know your mission. DickTurpis 12:56, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
That was a joke, obviously. Pinto's5150 Talk 13:08, 24 July 2008 (EDT) yyE0NSEhMTEhVhsBITAhITAhLYN4wxeWZlFUsS8=
Indeed. Run silent, run deep. --Helena Bonham Carter 13:13, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Oh, NOW I get it. They'll never figure that one out! Heh heh heh.... - Lardashe

Gurer vf ab pnony. Barikada 16:34, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I think it used to be more in tune. We don't advocate controlled vandalism and virtually all vandals/parodists work of their own accord. We didn't pull together Samwell or MetMax or JJacob and we frown upon stuff like "USUCKCP!!!!111one!" because its retarted. Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 17:16, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
So, philosohpical question. If you think something (big or little) is particuarlly wrong at CP (other than "the entire site") would you bother to create an account to try to change it? or leave it to let CP show its own ignorance. Like... there are lots of small history errors, they know nothing about language development, and for some reason, even an attorney doesn't know "it's" from "its" and there from their. every time i read the site, i want to edit it. yet i keep thinking "don't... it will show them for the ignorant fools they are. Comments? --WaitingforGodot 17:25, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
But to answer your question, I leave it unless it just pisses me off too much. Then I must comment. Unfortunately, at that time, my IP is usually blocked. Karajou always knows when it's me...-- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 17:37, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Some people sign up there and fight the valiant fight - maybe not typos so much as the truthy stuff. Others specialize in obsessively "recent changes" there and updating WIGO CP every few minutes. Still others largely disengage except for looking sometimes, and write stuff here, sometimes to directly counter them, and sometimes just to provide a, er, "rational" perspective + lulz. ħuman 17:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Parody. Bugler, JJacob, Samwell. It's one of the coolest feelings ever as a parody account to hear Andy himself give you praise. It's an attempt to show them the real them, point out the ridiculous comments by writing it in plain sight then watching them remove the very stuff they beleive because it will allow others to see how utterly mad they are. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 17:36, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I guess I fall into that group that just can't stand seeing some the of the stuff posted there without having to weigh in now & then. I've often been tempted to just sit back and let the idiocy speak for itself, but what pulls me back in time & time again is the realization that there are homeschoolers & other impressionable types who might actually believe some of that stuff is true. So I post edits there that try to call out the facts or suppressed side of a topic, being a lot more polite than I feel like. I'll help move things along like Andy's PNAS response not out of parody, but to put his protests where they have to be defended fairly, and where critics are not subject to the censorship of the acolytes. I've never felt the urge to sock up or wandalize though - while I won't stop anyone from doing it or out a suspected parodist, I don't want to give them the satisfaction of feeling victimized by anything but their own nonsense backfiring on them. --SpinyNorman 17:53, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Interestingly enough Norm, when you foray back into it as Dinsdale or Doug or anyone else you never seem tempted to fake it. And somehow, andy never seems to hate you. Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 17:56, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
See, I got so ticked at something that Ed said about the Cherokee that I came here and posted a new page just to get it out of my system. The history lessons (world and US) make me want to put a big ol' Chinese style Internet block on thier site. "if you are under 18, this site is seriously hazardous to your future success".--WaitingforGodot 17:58, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
His stuff in AH Lecture 6 about Johnson and the Radical Republicans just really REALLY pissed me off. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 18:05, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I found CP first, and joined to sort a few things that seemed to be wrong for a conservative wiki. Of course, I quickly found out that CP is, in fact, a fundamentalist Christian creationist blog, not a conservative wiki at all, found RW, got banned from CP for...well, basically, trying to insert truth into articles here and there (like daring to suggest that Professor Richard Dawkins of Oxford University is, in fact, a professor, going by the incredibly weak evidence that a direct enquiry to Merriam Webster had them state he fits the dictionary definition of 'professor' and Oxford University, in response to a direct query, saying he holds the position of the Professor of the Public Understanding of Science), and now view CP purely for the lulz factor of the various insane ramblings that go on over there. Zmidponk 15:35, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

My thoughts on this topic go back to my original thoughts on the Obama article, and that is that it either has to get 100 times better or three times worse, and there is obviously only one way Andy is going to let the site go. It's actually hard for CP to get much worse, but not impossible. Trying to make it better is an exercise in futility. So I got a parody account and made the Obama article as ridiculous as possible. I think just about every edit I made was endorsed by Assfly himself, so it can hardly really be vandalism. I was banned for a parodist, but I don't think a single edit was ever reverted. DickTurpis 19:41, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## What the...

Guys, you've got to see this... http://www.conservapedia.com/Political_spectrum

I'm almost certain that it's an article on politics which is fair and balanced.

And it's written by RobSmith of all people.Shangrala 14:04, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I had to check I was actually reading Conservapedia. After they've toned down the crack at cp:kangaroo, and conceded that vaccination got rid of cp:smallpox, is sense beginning to creep in? Totnesmartin 14:12, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
A quick stroll over to the "liberal x" articles and "x Lenski y" articles demonstrates that TruthTM is still dominating over sense.Antifly 14:16, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Looks like they're insisting Hitler was a Liberal. Fail. --Gulik 14:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
And the Ba'athists. And every fascist movement in the history of Man. Barikada 16:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
The only reason the vaccination line got reinserted into the Smallpox entry is because I put it back (as SSchultz). Of course, I also originally wrote the longer smallpox article that Andy hated (as IWonder). In fact it was his banning me over that edit that prompted me to sock up several more times to challenge him on vaccination, shaken baby syndrome, and some of his other favorite topics. Stile4aly 17:50, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Luminous Sock

Is RoyS the most obvious sock yet? http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=492509&oldid=492501 Matt oblong 17:34, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Stroke the ego. Don't act like you want to fuck him. He's too....peppy. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 17:39, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
JJacob did it so well. He subtly used all of Aschlafly's little catchphrases without coming off as Eager McBeaver as RoyS is doing. Heathen 17:52, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Bah, that noob is just over the top. Andy never replies to that sort of thing. What JJacob nailed was doing or saying what Andy would say, using almost the same words, which saves Andy work. After seeing a few dozen of those sorts of things, Andy's guard goes down, and he starts getting all sorts of icky homskollar feelings for the now-trusted editor... while JJacob's flameout wasn't much to watch, the process of getting block rights was pure science. Hot science. ħuman 18:02, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah the reason I JJacob'ed wasnt to make an epic MexMax moment, it was to see how easily I could actually get block-rights and to show Andy (or anyone else for that matter) how easy it is to fool him just by saying a few catch-phrases and creating the "liberal obsession" page. Worked too. Ace McWickedInteresting 19:04, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I noticed how you conflicted with several other lesser parodists and somehow came out on top. That's really showing your ability. -- Darth Harrington No, I am your salesperson 19:08, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't know about RoyS.. I think he's actually being quite clever, using a different style than others have, being really 'genuinely' enthusiastic.— Unsigned, by: 86.158.221.125 / talk / contribs

## Does this make you randy?

Huh? Does this make you randy? Does this make you horny? If so, you may be a homsexual. Yeah. Naughty hospice. You're a tiger. RAWR. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 18:25, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Rule 34. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
What about HOM Furniture? And yes, have some furniture porn while you're around! --Sid 18:35, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Rule 34: Confirmed! Again! --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:40, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
When I get off the easy chair I get the easy chair off! CЯacke® 19:07, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Couldnt stay away

I tried but I cant stay away from here or Andys House Ace McWickedInteresting 19:46, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

## Peter Hitchens

Doesn't this make the biggest media attention ever? Wow. Assuming it's true, (which I do, it's written far too well to be from a sock :)) DLerner 20:13, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Obviously I don't wish to go into great detail of personal correspondences on public forums - TK is the only person who has ever goaded me that far =/ - but I can confirm that the user is in fact the real deal, unless the Mail on Sunday now allows random passers-by to use its email facilities.Fox 20:20, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
I'd laugh my ass off if he gets banhammered for his name or 90/10. Really, you should maybe tell some of the trigger-happy sysops that he's the real deal (if you haven't done so already). --Sid 20:24, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Outstanding. Get him to write a CP article on council estates! He's bad enough when he's got some form of editorial restraint - I can't wait to see how much of a lather he can work himself up into when he's properly off the leash. --Robledo 20:29, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
That would be outstanding. Get Christopher Hitchens to edit the Atheism article that would be outstanding to watch. What would Andy do if a real qualified jouranalist started editing and writing articles? (Personally, I don't think he'd have much sucess writing articles, Ed would delete them 'cause he wouldn't understand a well written and structured article). DLerner 20:35, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
While we're on the subject of the Hitchens' and Conservapedia, here's Christopher's latest piece for Slate which deals with Creationism. enjoy! DLerner 20:43, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Please add that CH piece here I'm too burnt out to do it myself.... ħuman 21:07, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Done. (Funny thing, I personally don't really care about the whole argument, but that's a topic for a different time) DLerner 21:52, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Thanks, I 'preciate it! ħuman 22:33, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Shouldn't What's Going On In The Blogosphere have a decent front page link to it? The Lay Scientist 22:59, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
Yes, especially if RW turns its attention elsewhere rather than just Conservapedia. Armondikov 11:21, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I think the tactics could be wrong. Couldn't someone get Bugler to ban him? As loathesome as the sysops are a ban is annoying. Annoy Peter Hitchens and see what you get: a public (well Sunday Mail) load of vitriol!--Toffeeman 15:35, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
@ TLS and Arm. - don't know if you saw the "new" front page or not yet... but it done been done :) ħuman 16:03, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Word count

Did anyone else pick up on what Andy's doing to the PNAS letter? Knowing that there is a word limit of 250 words, he's expanded the letter to over double that. My theory is that it's intentional: Bolster the word count, claim the letter can't be edited (using some asinine excuse like "The Truth can not be reduced"), ensuring that the letter won't be published (and you won't become an even greater laughingstock) and still allowing the "They censor the truth!" tack. Or maybe I'm seeing deceit where none exists? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 23:32, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

250 seems an incredibly short word count for a journal, other than maybe abstracts. I'll check PNAS policy, but I would be surprised. I think the 250 words came from an editor Andy has chosen to ignore. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 23:49, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
(Side note Lenski's paper is the 10th most read paper at PNAS of all time.)
250 words it is. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 23:56, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
My guess would be that there is a word limit on letters (maybe 250), as there is usually little space in journals for letters. Of course if Andy can't fit the TruthTM into 250 letters he could always expand his objections into an article. But then he would have to provide enough proof to convince the reviewers to publish it...Antifly 00:05, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
How much you want to bet that "placing arbitrary restrictions on published works (eg. 250 words) to stifle debate" makes its way onto cp:Liberal style? - Icewedge (*bleet*) 00:12, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey Arcan, difflinks are better because they show the change - the version you mean to link to... but good point. PS, Lawyers don't get "word limits" in their training, eh? Hi, Ice! ħuman 00:14, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Plus, didn't teh assfly notice his acolytes made a special page for this letter already? ħuman 00:15, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Icewedge, nothing now that you have mentioned it. It seems that they are using Jinx's revelation to get ideas for all of their recent content.Antifly 00:18, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
What is with cp:Liberal Style it seems to be just a template which is protected to prevent editing? ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 01:19, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Well, at this time of night, only the privileged can edit anyway. What is it? A laughingstock? An example of ashfly's intellectual bankruptcy? ħuman 01:22, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Checkout the source code it is just three templates. This is a strange way to run a wiki. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 01:40, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Wow, that is weird! ħuman 01:43, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I just noticed #54. That from a guy who's promoted how many parodists? DickTurpis 07:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT) (#54: inability or unwillingness to differentiate between genuine conservative arguments and parodies of conservative arguments. Inserted Dick's reference   ContribsTalk)

He also seems to want to make it as rude as possible, presumably for the same reason. I am still skeptical that he'll actually send anything though. He might even be stupid enough to pretend to send it and then claim victory when nothing happens.--Damo2353 07:09, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

As for the word count, the 250-word limit on PNAS Letters is why I had to trim Andy's original list down to a summary, with a link back to the CP page for the fully-detailed text. What's annoying is how folks ignored the instruction to keep the submission to 250 words while adding or revising the CP Page instead. Looks like Dinsdale's got to move this process along again, because I want Andy to have his full, fair, unedited shot at the paper without any censorship of his objections - and then see how science really works. --SpinyNorman 09:50, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Someone's reminded him & he's asked for help!   ContribsTalk 09:56, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
(Shuffles about town) Dinsdale! Diiiiinnnsdale! --SpinyNorman 10:02, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

## Not WIGO-worthy but....

In case you had any doubt that Bugler is a parodist....PFoster 12:17, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

See also - Petula Clark. Don't you just love JM's contributions? GenghisRationalWiki GOLD member 12:22, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Still not a parodist, in my opinion. I've seen Andy do things like that many a time. <blink></blink> 12:24, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Yep, with the edit comment "removing liberal bias/creep/obfuscation". NightFlareThis is a talk page. 12:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah - but this is particularly over-the-top in a mocking Assfly kinda way, and as I recall, the Woody Allen article was the site of edit warring over the question of highlighting Allen's "crimes and misdemeanours" maybe a year or so ago - I think someone with a long institutional memory knows what buttons to push.PFoster 12:54, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I like their entry on Roman Polanski... now he really did cross a few lines. But digging back to see who the fan was (who else has ever heard of The Tenant - awesome film) and it was Fox who knew it had a wee bit of crossdressing in it. ħuman 22:35, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

<unindent> Anyone else notice the link to Shia LaBeouf, Dean Martin & Salma Hayek? They had NOTHING to do with Woody Allen. NOTHING! To our readers from the Conservapedia (especially you JM), THE SEE ALSO LINKS HAVE TO HAVE A CONNECTION TO THE FUCKING ARTICLE, GODDAMN IT! <<expells the spirit of Howard Beale>>, it's bloody ridiculous!

I think it had been explicitly established (either during the "Clinton + Gay Bomb" affair or when somebody complained about JM doing exactly that) that "See also" links don't need to have any direct connection with the article subject. In theory, the Obama article could have "See also: Homosexuality, Westboro Baptist Church, Adolf Hitler", and it would be perfectly acceptable for CP's "See also" standards. --Sid 06:51, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Our Assfly article illustrates that well. DickTurpis 12:14, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

"'Liberal' sanctuary law"? Bugler's starting to push it. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:33, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## John Schlafly

Car accident earlier this month [6]. I read a comment in the youtube's CP on the hour video, the commenter mentioned that none of John's family has even visited because of his lifestyle. That rumor aside, this could explain Andypant's recent lack of CP priorities. Thoughts? NorsemanWassail! 14:56, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

"Published: July 4, 1981"?Shangrala 15:31, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
If Conservapedians see this, they will be laughing at us. --JayJay4ever??? 15:37, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Or just at me. >_<
I think this will probably go down in history as the silliest thing ever to be mentioned on tWIGO :) Epic <blink></blink> 16:02, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Hee Hee - loved it. Teh poor guy was in a car smash, so the sentiments were OK - just temporally misplaced.   ContribsTalk 16:11, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm just glad we didn't WIGO it... -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 16:14, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

## Jinxy....

Not antisemitic? You're worse than Coulter "Jews are only unconverted Christians" -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 16:05, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Absolutely. I've been having sly digs at him on his talk page here on RW, but there's no doubt in my mind he's a pretty big anti-semite.--Chris111 16:48, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I have no doubts that the majorty (70-80%) of users at ratwiki are anti-semites also. Bohdan2 18:00, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Based on what, Henry? PFoster 18:07, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
It was sarcasm. Anti-Semitism is not a joke, and accusations like that should not be thrown around like you throw around the "conseravtive" or "wingnut" labels. Bohdan2 18:20, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I think the folks you're talking about are more anti-theistic, which I think is quite different. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 18:09, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Explain in detail what is anti-Semitic about said edit. 67.135.49.186 17:55, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
If you can't see it then you are truly anti-semitic.   ContribsTalk 18:03, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
From where i sit, it's the word "unconverted." It seems, to me at least, to imply that there's an expectation that "converting" is somehow relevant to Judaism - what should they be converting to and why? Isn't their faith good enough on its own merits that we just refer to them for what they are "Jews," or perhaps more specifically, "Orthodox Jews"? it's reminiscent of Anne Coulter's crack about Jews being "unperfected Christians" or whatever it was she said. PFoster 18:05, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
"If you can't see it then you are truly anti-semitic." Yeah, that's what I thought the response would be. 67.135.49.186 18:16, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
I read on your (or Jinxmchue or CMF or whoever the hell it is) blog some of your personal information. You seem to be a relatively nice guy when it comes to a lot of stuff. But I sincerely hope that you do not practice what you preach, or teach others your idiotic brand of not just antisemitcism but your entire messed up view of the world. You can't seem to realize what's wrong with your words, and frankly that scares me. You seem to think you are intimidating us by adding in ridiculous stuff and acting so goddamn cocky. I just hope you aren't really that insane outside of the internet. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 18:24, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
There is actually a more detailed response above ("From where I sit..."), awaiting your reply.PFoster 18:19, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
(ec) Wow, you only read what you want to see, don't you? Considering that there are comments directly above and directly below that state exactly what the problem is. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 18:20, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Okay then, lets try the socratic method and perhaps we can work it out. Why would someone call someone an "unconverted jew" as opposed to just a jew?--Chris111 18:05, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of Jinx follow his link here Dobson has fitting company with Art Bell. Both are big proponents of make believe fairy tales for adults. tmtoulouse heckle 16:51, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Right. Okay Tommy. Bohdan2 18:00, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
That's where I got that link for Tyson Gay Homosexual.   ContribsTalk 17:23, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, and just ignore all the other inductees. Inconvenient truths and all that. 67.135.49.186 17:56, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
?   ContribsTalk 18:00, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
He's saying that we're ignoring the other "Radio hall of fame" members in order to make Dobson look crazy. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 18:09, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Being a Jew (and a very Jewy Jew), I will speak with the authority of all my peoples and say this: WE DON'T LIKE PEOPLE THAT TRY TO CONVERT US. WE ARE QUITE CONTENT TO EAT OUR GEFILTE FISH AND MATZAH BALL SOUP, GO TO SHUL FOR THE OCCASIONAL BRIS ETC. WE DON'T LIKE WHEN PEOPLE TRY TO CONVERT US!

Now, when people christians come and try to convert us, it really pisses us off. We don't go into your WASPy (Catholics aren't that evangelical towards us anymore so my rant isn't directed against them so much) neighbourhoods or into the country clubs and ask you to have a bris. (If we had done in the days of the shtetl there wouldn't be many of us left).

To all the readers let me make something clear: Evangelicals are the worst kind of anti-semite, they are trying to eradicate our faith from the face of the earth. (And until recently in history, you would preach the gospel with a sword in the hand...)

I DLerner am a Jew and I approve this rant

DLerner 06:01, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

But, you killed the Baby Jebus! Ajkgordon 06:08, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
No no no. They killed adult Jesus. Baby Jesus is fine. DickTurpis 08:15, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
That had nothing to do with christianity, it was because he didn't want to be a doctor... DLerner 08:28, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Evangelicals are the worst kind of everything, Mr. Jewy Jew. What gets into some people - evangywotsits, missionaries, latter-day thinggumajigs, that makes them want to convert other people to believe the same thing is beyond me - it's just insecurity of the highest order. "My crackpot ideas are much better than your crackpot ideas - now BELIEVE THEM beotch!". DogP 12:06, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Take a look at ChristianityMeansFreedom's contrib dates, then compare to Jinx's contribs on CP. From September to December of last year, Jinx doesn't even contribute on CP, while CMF has less than a dozen edits during that same timespan. Suddenly, both accounts pick up editing on the exact same day, December 2nd, around the same time (WP's time is 4 hours ahead of CP). I found it a bit odd that Jinx would find this user's edits worth mentioning and defending, but after I compared contribs of both users, though with no conclusive proof, I have the suspicion that CMF is Jinx himself. NorsemanWassail! 11:31, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Well then, I hereby declare war on Jinx and devote all the resources of the international Jewish conspiracy to destroy him. הרב ד.לערנער Ask the Rabbi a question 11:34, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Stone him with the bags of Jew Gold hanging around your necks! NorsemanWassail! 11:43, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Better yet I'll use his blood in my matzah... (please, no hate mail for that joke) הרב ד.לערנער Ask the Rabbi a question 11:48, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
It isn't him. ~ Gloom(is never asleep) 11:55, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Can I stil haz Jewz destroy him? הרב ד.לערנער Ask the Rabbi a question 11:56, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Of course. This whole project is being run by Jews, anyway, so... --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:59, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Here is some more evidence to plow through. We can't convict yet.--Damo2353 11:58, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

This little beauty by an IP admitted to be Jinx [7] is not racist, but I wonder what they'd say over at CP --Damo2353 12:07, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Not proof its him either, but funny how JinxMchue is banned on the same day that ChristianityMeansFreedom goes on an editing binge; 2nd December --Damo2353 12:25, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
CMF's sickest edit (it may not be Jinx of course) [8] CMF whoever you are, is a scumbag.--Damo2353 19:33, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

### Edit button, it be here

So...

As a side question, does any wiki admin type want to take steps to verify that wp:user:ChristianityMeansFreedom and wp:user:67.135.49.186 are jinx socks? --Shagie 13:03, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I have taken on board that the community here does not approve of my use of the word "Nazi", so can I instead say that I personally think the guy is a total and utter twat, without a block? Just wondering. Fox 13:07, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Fox - Good to see you... Yes. "Twat" is okay, AFAIC - though stronger feminists than I may object...Hope all is well. PFoster 13:12, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Besides, I don't think you're saying something controversial anyway. I think pretty much everyone is in agreement on that point. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 13:13, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
About the .186 IP... a quick glance gives you this and this - if I calculated timezone offsets correctly, these edits are just minutes apart and about the exactly same subject - "Focus on the Family" and the Hall of Fame. And this edit in the same timeframe uses the exact same source Jinx linked to. I admit it's no 100% proof, but I think that, combined with the IP block being exactly the same, you can safely assume it to be Jinx. Whether that ChristianityMeansFreedom account also was a sock is another question (the IP says it wasn't linked to the name - oh, and the shared interest between Jinx on CP and the IP on WP is another major hint about their connection - but I didn't compare the edits of the IP and the Christianity name myself) --Sid 16:45, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Haha Jinx seems to have a hard time reading since he can't seem to see that Fox is taking part in this here as well. Also who wants to bet that Andy pretends nothing is happening again this time? --BoredCPer 18:38, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
OMG, the entire exchange is freaking epic. I'm still not 100% sure that Andy will interfere. He has looked away when people made huuuuuge cases against TK, Karajou, Ken and others. So two non-sysops bashing heads may not be enough to make him act. However, Fox makes a good point: The combination of Hitchens and "trusted editors" making "questionable" edits or defending such edits might end badly. Andy should really consider who he is endorsing by not doing anything. --Sid 19:28, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Happy Mothers

Just noticed this on cp:Homeschooling: "It should also be noted that stay at home moms, the most common teachers for homeschooling, reported having happier lives than their working counterparts.[1]" and I thought ......   ContribsTalk 22:23, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

You gotta love random sigs: "and I thought ...... SusanAm I the Anti christ?" ħuman 22:25, 25 July 2008 (EDT)
Oh, goodie. I think we should all drop our degrees, our 5 or often 6 figure salaries, our accomplishments, and the respect we get from doing a good job, our personal sense of strength in accomplishing something -- and be "happier" teaching something we aren't qualified for (in my case, math & spelling) to our kids so they don't get cooties.14:23, 26 July 2008 (EDT)WaitingforGodot
I enjoy homeschooling. There is no need for me to worry about unfairly imposed quotas or "teaching to the test"; I have (some) control over the curricula (within the limits of the requirements for the International Baccalaureate), control over the teaching environment and the pace of learning. The subjects I am tosh at (maths, for example) are easily catered for by engaging the services of a retired maths tutor at very reasonable rates. It isn't everybody's cup of tea, but then I'm not trying to make it mandatory for your family. What exactly is it about state schooling that is so wonderful that you want to make it mandatory for my family? Fox 14:37, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
I'm not sure anyone wants to make anything mandatory for your family, Fox. I see a lot of problems with the education system and would think long and hard about sending any of my progeny (I have and will have no actual children) to a public school. But not for any of the reasons that are outlined in CP/Andy's version of homeschooling....I've read his history curriculum, and if that man were teaching my kids, I'd want my money back - if that represents the best that homeschooling can do, it's pretty horrible. Raise your kids your way, I'd raise mine my way - no problem there....PFoster 14:46, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Personally, I feel it should be the families choice, no one else's. Whether or not your children attend home/public/private school is really none of my regard. Furthermore, it really depends on everyone's individual circumstance/preference. However, to answer you question of what's so good about public schooling, I would have to say that it's the wider course selection, and increased social environment. </mindless ramblings> Pinto's5150 Talk 14:49, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
[edit conflict] Is anyone advocating banning homeschooling? Well, I won't speak for anyone but myself here, but I have nothing against homeschooling if done right. What some of us object to is Andy's assertions that you can't get a good education in public school, that qualifications don't matter and any parent can do a better job teaching their children then someone who actually knows the subject, and, perhaps most of all, that he is some sort of qualified instructor. The truth is homeschooling isn't a serious option for most people. Too often both parents need to work to get by, and the number of people who are qualified to teach even one subject at a high school level, let alone many, is not large. Then there's this idea that any sort of standards for homeschool instruction is some sort of intrusion of liberty, even to ensure "homeschool" does not consist of reading "Hop on Pop" followed by 7 hours of X-box and TV. That's my take on it. DickTurpis 14:57, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
(another edit conflict, and a comment that probably says the exact same thing as the above, but, ah well) There is a lot of possible good to come from homeschooling (and public education is obviously far from perfect). Actually, my best friends were homeschooled, and they turned out to be healthy, intelligent, well-adjusted adults. There's nothing wrong with homeschooling at all. It's when homeschooling becomes indoctrination (e.g. Andy's revisionist history) that I become worried. I think the situations where homeschooling (and home-bound schooling, which is slightly different) are beneficial far outnumber the situations where this kind of indoctrination occurs, but I also think it's fair to be concerned with the negative situations. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 15:00, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Also, the ridiculous assertion from whence this conversation began - that mothers are happier homeschooling their kids than they might be out living their own lives and pursuing their own interests -a sexist blanket statement if I ever saw one.PFoster 15:04, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
That's the point I was trying to make - Kinder,_Küche,_Kirche.   ContribsTalk 15:36, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Hm sorry if I over emphasized myself. I don't profess to support or denigrate any other homeschooler/homeschooling method; I just know that I am very happy with the situation in my household, and gave up a pretty well-paid position to do it. I can see why other parents would feel happier being involved in this than wage-slaving for some ungrateful, over-qualified under-mannered "manager" in a cubicle in Reading or whatever (should qualify: this user created cp:The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists nudge nudge wink wink); the joy of reading your 7 year old's comprehensive essay on the Greek city states will never be matched by what is effectively Pavlovian slavering after a pat on the head for making the shareholders a little wealthier. It isn't easy, and it requires a massive leap of faith to throw away that 40k and car. But your life adjusts, and your children (may) become happier, more balanced, less prone to peer pressure and more liable to make rational decisions based upon their own reasoning. As for - and I can't pretend that this isn't a major factor in many homeschooling choices - religion - my own children are not forced to accept religion. It is put to them, and as they grow older they will have the information at hand to make a decision. My eldest daughter, for example, has rejected Yeshua and considers herself entirely Jewish. My next eldest, a son, doesn't have time to consider religion currently, as he is too involved in physics and mathematics: he tells me he'll think about it "later". Next, a son, waivers on belief/disbelief. Finally, a daughter, thinks angels talk to her often. And dinosaurs. There is a level of joy involved in homeschooling that I can see would result in the statement that homeschool moms are happier - in general - than working moms. Of course, this is a meaningless statement without any data attached, and the experience is skewed by thefact that the happiness levels of either type of mom may be based purely on having only experienced one type of domestic situation. I don't know about anybody else, is maybe what I'm saying, but subjectively I can say that I've never known a simple joy which comes close to that which I experience from teaching my own children =) Fox 16:15, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
As someone who was unpretty, undersized and intelligent, I was bullied at school (yes, we did have bullies back in the 40s & 50s) including by the teachers (I hated Games (as we called sport). I would have loved to have been taught by my parents who were both very clever (especially my mum). Financial constraints made this impossible, as I suspect it does for the majority of people today.   ContribsTalk 20:30, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Banner on the Liberal page

I'm not enough of a wiki expert to know how this was done:

And it might be better if nobody offers an explanation of how this works. Still..... [bunch-o-numbers] — Unsigned, by: 198.145.75.141 / talk / contribs

Whoa. That's friggin' awesome. If you look at the article in different angles, it looks right back at you! NorsemanWassail! 15:26, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Copied it as soon as it was done (see User:SusanG/test‎) not saying any moer though.   ContribsTalk 15:43, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
That's... awesome. NightFlareThis is a talk page. 15:53, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Sweet genius... it's still there!

Still there... and done as I thought it might have been. Very nice work, someone. ħuman 16:12, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Agreed, it's quite clever! XD Major kudos (even if the action itself is somewhat childish and still just, y'know wandalism). --Sid 16:17, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
fixed it. --CPAdmin1 16:38, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
It lasted from 18:36 yesterday, well done: JohanBerqvist.   ContribsTalk 16:42, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Nice

Nice. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 18:27, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Awww. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 18:31, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I would have blocked whoever it was for the atrocious grammar "He would of handled it" - this sort of thing must be stopped, I tell you. DogP 21:01, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

## Girls and Math.

What an asshole. Hey Fox, while you're defending CP against the antisemites (something that does need to be done), why not do the right thing and stand up for HALF the freakin' human race, and try to reel that hateful sexist nonsense, too? PFoster 20:22, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I think it's much worse than most people first imagine. This man is an educator, and presumably, that includes girls... --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 20:29, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Arc, my man, you have no idea how fuckin' worse I imagine it is....I think I'm about to pop a gasket here. Does this man have a wife, mother and daughter? Does he really think they're less capable than any man?PFoster 20:32, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Oh, not less capable, just...different. They're actually better at certain things. Sewing......petting kittens.....churning butter......cooking (but not really good gourmet food; you need a male chef for that). So, you know, just as good, really. DickTurpis 20:47, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
You need gay men for gourmet cheffing. It stands to reason :nods: ~ Gloom(is never asleep) 20:51, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Hm? What? I can't hear you guys over the sound of Andy adding this to the CP Conference article (an edit that also endorses "Theory of Relativity" as junk science, apparently)... --Sid 20:34, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
He's just spreading Mommy's gospel (she must be a man in drag) also (again): Kinder, Küche, Kirche   ContribsTalk 20:40, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Old Phil apparently thinks she has 7 kids, bad at math as I'm sure she is. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 20:43, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Probably because she's bad @ maths. (Couldn't calculate her "safe period")   ContribsTalk 20:45, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
No, see, Andy is obviously much better at math than any girl. No girl could have determined that 8*6=40. --λινυσ() 21:10, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Girls fail to accept that Liberal Numberology has inherent bias, making them forget that 8*6=40 for conservative values of 6. --Sid 21:19, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Yes, it should be obvious to all who have had their thinking adequately modified by testosterone that, when working in a non-liberal field with deceit-negative transformations, 8*6conserv=40. --λινυσ() 21:23, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Actually, um, I figured that one out finally - Andy is a mutant, with 12 fingers... ħuman 20:12, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

What an evil little pathetic man. tmtoulouse heckle 21:55, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

There is just no words.....he has no business being a teacher. Any parent that allows their child to be taught by this scum bag is guilty of child abuse. tmtoulouse heckle 21:58, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
What a fucking sexist asshole.Shangrala 00:31, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
Admittedly I failed Maths A Level (That's the University entrance type o' thing for you Merkins), but I know there's no difference except that geekiness & therefore maths is more socially acceptable if you're a male.   ContribsTalk 00:35, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
Math sucks, but I assure you there are just as many men who failed out of Trig as women. But I loved the little dig about how "the guys can do multiple choice and the girls can do essay" crap. I kicked butt on both, thank you very much.--Kip 11:53, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Sorry I got to this late, but does Andy have no ability to read? It says at the end of the article that more females than males sit this exam meaning that it is biased as females that are going to preform worse are sitting it were as there male counterparts are not. If the SATs had been a random sample he would have a point, in fact he would have a strong point, but as the SATs are self selecting you can not compare them that way. Schlafly statistics at its best. ${\displaystyle \approx }$${\displaystyle \pi }$ 18:25, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

## "Free from bigotry"

Fox, I like you a lot, I really appreciate what you're trying to do, and I think you're obviously in the right with the Jinx situation. But "free from bigotry"? With articles like these approved from up on high, I'm not sure that's possible --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 20:25, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

...And this...and of course, this...PFoster 20:29, 26 July 2008(EDT)
And when you're done standing up for Jews, African-Americans and women, ask him about Bosnian Muslim genocide victims. And Matthew Sheppard. PFoster 21:12, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
Eye can haz win bet nao plz? NorsemanWassail! 00:11, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
That reminds me, did one of the sanes bring this up at CP mainpage talk or something? NightFlareThis is a talk page. 03:28, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

## It's over...

Look Andy's idiocy has caused him to allow a vicious anti-semite with basically the same ideas as CP go through. This battle is over. But not done. Also, Henry, unblock DJ. Just because he reads it doesn't mean he has anything to do with it. While your at it, Block Jinx too. I'm pissed. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 20:54, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

It seems like it was....worth it. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink GET TO THA CHOPPER 21:10, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I'm saddened, but seriously not surprised to see Andy being too lazy to look at the big picture. Again. A hundred points to Fox for the effort, though. The discussion could have gone better (You started on a weak leg by assuming that ChristianityMeansFreedom (or whatever the name was) is a Jinx sock while basically ignoring all edits made by the admitted Jinx IPs), but the end result would have been the same either way. Andy likes Jinx. Jinx rambles against Wikipedia and liberals. This makes Jinx immune to all but the most waterproof case. And with IPs, there will always be a 0.000001% chance that any bad edit will have been made by somebody else. Andy doesn't want to admit that he gave a Bad Guy his precious rights package, so he will pretend that Jinx is an awesome guy until the entire thing blows up in his face. And then he'll simply blame liberals in some way. --Sid 21:16, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
(ec)Hmm, maybe it isn't. Backstage dealings FTW. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:17, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
...damn. Fox is very good at being ominous. --Sid 21:21, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
"A hundred points to Fox for the effort, though" meh...let's see him go mano a mano for a group he doesn't belong to - lots of opportunity for that on CP, and then I'll be doling out the points...first they came for the affirmative Action Presidents, but I never had Affirmative Action, so I did nothing...PFoster 21:28, 26 July 2008 (EDT)ht,