Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive78

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

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <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)

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

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <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)

Kenservative's Greatest Hits

Responding to questions of why he deleted the fossils article:

It was evolutionary propaganda. Joseph Goebbels and Hitler would have loved it if they had seen it. Perhaps, you might want to write an essay on evolutionary propaganda. Given the amount of evolutionary propaganda throughout history such an essay could rival Conservapedia's homosexuality article in length. —Consevative[1]

...Buwahahahaha! Oh, dear God, what a mighty TURD that was! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:53, 26 September 2008 (EDT)

And if it were to rival homosexuality in length, that would be truly frightening. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:53, 26 September 2008 (EDT)

Kendoll seems to be as obsessed with length as Aschalfly is with "getting it over with" (=conciseness) ħuman 00:33, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I think we can all understand why it is that Kenny Boy is obsessed with length. Also, perhaps girth. DogP 13:25, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Kenny's getting a bit loopy in his old age. Not only does he replace the loopy rant about Google on the front page, but he deletes it again, only to restore it yet again, killing someone else's entries in the process! The screaming movie quotes at the bottom are pretty funny though, although not in the way he meant, I'm sure. --Kels 14:32, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Chipster for breakfast

Whilst my liver is grateful that due to time zones I was sleepypoo while the debate was on, The Chipster has just made my morning with this "concise" piece of gibberish. Enemas are injected? That's a thought too horrible to contemplate before coffee. In other news... who won? --Strangle Thicket_{I just had to...} 01:22, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Give the boy a break--he didn't write that, he only copied it.--WJThomas 09:21, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

For the next debate do what I did for this one, get a bunch of friends and alot of alcohol. We divided into sides with the Obama's taking a shot every time he tied McCain to Bush and the McCain's taking taking one every time he talked about experience. It made for a fun time haha --BoredCPer 01:26, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Sounds good - I was drinking everytime either one used the word "and", but in the middle of Obama totally pwning, I got a phone call from a friend who "couldn't take it any more", so we barked at the moon in unison to random made up lyrics to "With a Little Help From My Friends". ħuman 01:38, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Been catching up on the early takes (h/t to Break the Terror and it seems as if a) McSame was pwned and b) he did plenty of ignorant lying himself. Be interesting to see how that gets spun over there... oh wait, they don't have to spin, they can block and revert. --Strangle Thicket_{I just had to...} 02:24, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Debate Reviews Here

Actually, I was disappointed in both of them. Obama turned in a pretty good performance, but he needs to learn how to lunge for the kill when an opportunity presents itself - at one point, McCain ended a comment about Obama's proposed tax policies with "Maybe you should ask him how he defines 'rich'". Obama's punchy debate-winning response should have been "My definition of rich would include being unsure of the number of houses I own", but he phaffed on about some crap or other and missed a golden opportunity. McCain did well though where he needed to, but is not as telegenic. Obama did well in looking Presidential and sounding intelligent, but when McCain described him as being far on the Left, I spurted a malty brew out my nose. McCain fluffed majorly though when he bumbled into claiming that both Petraeus and bin Laden defined the battleground as Iraq - after all, bin Laden said that after the US invaded Iraq - the battleground was always going to be wherever the US soldiers were. All in all, I call it a draw.

Now, stock up your booze cabinets for next Thursday's Palin-Biden festival. I'm hoping that Biden tears her limb from limb, but of course the hockey-mom defense may work well against the attack dog. In an ideal world we would see Palin blubbing and Biden spewing invective and "factual innacuracies". We'll see, but I'm sure it'll be top quality lulz. DogP 13:38, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

My impression was it was a "wash" with both candidates doing just okay. I think it was infinitely forgettable and so will have very little impact on the polls. Unless you buy into what some pundits have claimed, that Obama's major road block with undecided voters is that he is "not presidential enough" if that really is the case than a tie with McCain could start to have those undecideds fall into place for Obama.

I start believing polls the a week or so into October, that is when they start getting predictive value, that is when people start making their decisions. If the VP debate goes as expected I might start to get excited about this thing. tmtoulouse 13:46, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I agree with Dog about that "define rich" thing. Obama's response was "OK", but bland, when it could have been total pwnage. I concur on the draw, but I forget to score each round on the "ten point must"* system. (*Ask and I shall explain) ħuman 13:50, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

What the hell is going on at CP? Their debate summary is... an actual debate summary. It's fair and even-handed, with almost no cheap shots and only a slight lean. I am surprised, to say the least.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 21:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Be a homeskooled kid!

While I'm usually too mature to troll or do anything mean or discourteous ( seriously, unless I'm drunk, but I always feel bad afterwards ), I need to know how to sign up for Professor Andy's homeschool course. Does it cost money? I can write some funny satire about it and be able to retire? Teabag 06:25, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Answer can be found here Candlewick 12:55, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

What would I have to do to get my karma back to even if I paid Andy $250 for his class? I don't think I could justify it, but it would be fun. 204.214.148.1 05:10, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

"Muslim pronunciation of Pakistan"

My God, we've hit a new depth in stupidity. That's right, Mr. Andy Schlafly--Muslims everywhere, from Egypt to Indonesia, from Nigeria to Qatar, from London to New York and from Iran to Pakistan Pokistan all pronounce their words the same, all the time.Moreover, this holds true no matter if they are speaking Arabic, Farsi, Dari, Pashto, Bengali, French, or English. You know what, Andy--if I'd had the chance to go to Yale and Harvard instead of the local community college where I did my undergrad, I probably would have taken the chance to get the world-class education that those institutions offered. You are a pathetic, ignorant idiot.PFoster 09:34, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

It's actually got me wondering, is Andy starting to believe his own hype? That is, does he actually believe Obama is a secret Muslim who's going to Destroy America and free all the Terrorists to go kill him and his family? I figure it all started as his attempt to be Karl Rove II, smearing him with whatever he can get because, well, he's the enemy. I can see that, and it's obvious the ones publicly supporting him like Bungler are on the smear train too, but it seems like Andy's actually starting to believe in it. --Kels 10:03, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

To determine how Christian you are, Andy takes the number of syllables it takes to pronounce the phrase "The Lord Jesus", divides by 4, and then multiplies by 100. Since Obama only says "The Lord Jee-zuss", he only gets a Christian Quotient of 100. Andy says "The Lord Juh-eez-uss" so he has a CQ of 125. But both of them are pikers compared to John Hagee, who says, "The Lord-uh Juh-HAY-eee-zuh-us" for a CQ of 200! Teresita 10:44, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Aw! My CQ is only 75! :( (Thlord Gee Zeus) --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 10:59, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Your unsubstantive, muslim pronunciation shows are obviously a liberal baby eater. Godspeed! Totnesmartin 11:34, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Sir, it is you who are the LIEberal, not I, as a Real True Christian (RTC) would not question my pronunciation of The Lord Thlord G. Zeus, thlord and saviour. Godspeed times infinity +1! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 11:56, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

So if I say Lordy Jesus H Fucking Chrispy (nine syllables), does that make me some type of uberKristian? I sure hope not. weaseLOId~ 12:22, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Now see, right there, that's just sad. That's the reason Andy had to delete all the math articles. Teresita 12:25, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Weaseloid, I read that as "Uzbekistan" at first, and immediately thought "Yes, yes it does." --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 12:38, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

West! I say Pakistan. Does this mean I am a Muslim? 217.205.188.114 03:26, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The Talk page is again displaying a recent trend - Andy plonks some of his steaming piles of shit somewhere prominent, but nowadays he almost never, ever shows up to defend it. I doubt we'll see a single comment from him. He's spiralling ever inward into his own little bubble. Does he have friends who might call an intervention and get him into some therapy? DogP 12:40, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Does he have friends -- I can only think, "No. No he does not." PFoster 12:42, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

How many MDs does it take in the states to get someone committed?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:50, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

And can one of them be PalMD please? it would be delicious. Totnesmartin 12:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Somehow, it was always going to end up this way. Schlafly Jong Il slowly disappearing up is own arse as his empire warp speeds its way to laughable irrelevance. It's the inevitable destiny of an uncompromising ideology - they all go gaga in the end. What that Karl Marx said about history repeating itself? Totnesmartin 12:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I think if anyone could cause Marx to give up on humanism, it would be L. Ron Schlafly. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:04, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Back to topic a moment, but I always find it polite when people try to pronounce my name, or a city's name, or a nation's name the way it's pronounced by thsoe who live there. But I guess you can't be "America is always right", if you point out to americans that they are woefully ignorant in other cultures and languages and even mere pronunciations. And for what it's worth, Andy, Urdu is an indo-irainian language, not a "muslim" language (whatever that might be.) Silly rabbit, you debate like Sar--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 13:09, 27 September 2008 (EDT)ah Palin.

I thought it was neat that he (Obama) actually bothered pronouncing it (close to) correctly. As someone who loves language, and the differences in things like pronunciation across languages, it insults me deeply that a moron like Schlafly could make it the subject of an idiotic smear. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:16, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

To be pedantic, it's completely normal for major placenames to have a standard pronunciation in other languages that differs from the local one (or indeed, from the variety of local ones in places with more than one widely-used language). Pseudomonas 04:59, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Obama was using one of those standard pronunciations, though. Both are acceptable in English. One just happens to sound closer to the native pronunciation. Sounds closer, mind. The proper pronunciation is more like "puck-ih-stun", with the "T" pronounced against the teeth instead of the soft palate ([paːkɪst̪aːn], for anyone who can read IPA). Obama's "pock-ih-ston" sounds closer to this than the alternative, but it's certainly not the Muslim pronunciation Pakistani's would use. Which makes Assfly's bullshit innuendo even more ridiculous than it is at face value.

Anyway, I'm inclined to agree with WfG. I think it's courteous of him to approximate the native pronunciation. Though, it's entirely possible he wasn't consciously trying to do that, and he really does just say it that way because that's how he learned it. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 07:14, 29 September 2008 (EDT) I don't mean to come off as a smart-ass, I just find this stuff fascinating...

Well many Americans tend to pronounce the capital of Russia (MossCOW) which is close to its true (well as true as you can get in a transliteration) Moskva. And as for having some uniform pronunciation across Muslim countries well I think that I have probably worked in more Muslim countries than anyone else on Conservapedia or RationalWiki (Algeria, Bangladesh, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Iran, Indonesia, Malaysia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Mauritania, and Pakistan) and can unequivocally state that there is no universal Muslim pronunciation. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 08:01, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

It's amazing how stupid the idea of "Muslim pronunciation" is, even for Andy. He really does seem to be acting more crazy than usual. I also love the implication that Christian and Hindu Pakistanis must pronounce it differently from their Muslim neighbours. Or like Schlafly does. :p --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 08:27, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

It's just occurred to me that the vowel in question was probably not /ɒ/. What was it? Pseudomonas 08:13, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

/ɑ/, I think. Are you referring to Obama's pronunciation of Pakistan? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 08:22, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I was. The transliteration "pokiston" imagined in a London accent is bizarre in the extreme. Pseudomonas 08:30, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Pɒkistan is where pocks come from. PS: I see what happened. Sorry, my West Coast Canadian accent (if there is such a thing) doesn't distinguish /ɑ/ and /ɒ/, so I didn't consider the ambiguity of my transliteration choice. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 08:37, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Unfortunately, the printout got cut off before it reached "Aschlafly"

Whenever you think Aschlafly has bottomed out in terms of stupidity, he finds a way to plunge to new depths Bondurant 09:03, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

How does he remember to breathe? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 09:24, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but how does he pronounce "Nicaragua"? That's how we can tell if somebody is un-American or not. Secret Squirrel 09:17, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The answer will prove once and for all that Obama is Spanish. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 09:24, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

"The rain in Spain falls mainly in the plane..." I've this weird dream of Prof. Higgins paging A. Schlafly... --LArron 09:35, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

(ok, folks, cover your ears -or eyes, as it is- cause i have to yell. I have to get this off my chest even though others have stated it far better than I. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MUSLIM LANGUAGE. MUSLIMS COME IN ALL SHAPES, COLORS AND LANGUAGES!!!!!!!!!! SECOND, PAKISTAN IS NOT AN ARABIC WORD. GROLWS... (ok, done, sorry)--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 11:56, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Harbinger

Doesn't this guy know ANYTHING? obviously a noob. Bannination coutndown in 3...2....1 DogP 13:42, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Even better... basically, "I'm not going to address this "must be addressed" bit, but I'll grab the upper hand by making it look like you sweared your head off in a rant. Shame we check the diffs, "minor" is too strong a word. (Oh, and naturally this looks like it'll be a 90/10 job. Stick me down for £5 that it's the reason given.ArmondikoV^bomination 14:48, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

And to continue, his comment on the pronounciation thing is brilliant, I'm starting to like this guy; which one of you guys is it :P ? ArmondikoV^bomination 14:52, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

The staggering predictability of it all is tedious. DogP 15:14, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

And he's down. for "intimidating behavior" no less. Luckily my irony meter packed up long ago. Totnesmartin 15:16, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm more concerned about this edit which Foxtrot reverted for "unacceptable language" and then blocked the editor for "intimidating behaviour/harassment". What part of that post was unacceptable language? it can't be "bigot" because Conservapedia has an article on bigotry. Ditto paranoia. Kennedy? Pope? No, CP has articles on both of those too. So where the inappropriate language? weaseLOId~ 20:18, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Hey kids. I was Harbinger on Conservapedia, for the day or so that it lasted anyway. I saw that one of my other CP accounts, "Redoubt" (my edits were bit more checkered in their "brilliance" on that 'un, but who's keeping score, right?) was mentioned here so put I Harbinger and RationalWiki in the old Googler and presto, an Italian word! And for the record, I've been banned 8 times from CP. I'm really not even trying to infiltrate it anymore, because I'd rather just McVeigh their servers someday. 24.3.14.157 18:28, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Bugler vs TerryK

Five bucks on Bugler coming out swinging with a block and a revert for this--BoredCPer 14:38, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, if he just quietly reverts, he's not a very smart parodist, that's for sure. He should say something pompous first. --Kels 14:41, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

In from his blind spot comes Foxtrot to handle the bannination duties. DogP 14:59, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

OPERATIONS GRASS ROOTS AND FORTESSES HAVE BEGUN!!! I REPEAT, OPERATIONS GRASS ROOTS AND FORTESSES HAVE BEGUN!!!!!

did you say something, Ken? Also--I see that he's learned to protect his message pages after AliceBG got to yesterday's missive. Clever.PFoster 17:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I got a screenshot, but I'm gonna wait and see if he makes any big additions to it before I post. --Kels 18:03, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

(EC -- stupid Kels :P)Don't panick, everyone! Luckily for all of us, a contact of mine has acquired a copy of Ken's hypersecret notebook, so I can break down the details of these operations for you all. Here goes:

• Operation Grassroots: Ken tells a website about his atheism article. They do not respond.
• Operation Fortesses: Ken tells a website about his atheism article. They do not respond.

Now let's get cracking on our plans for counter-attack while there's still time, people. Pink_{(Astronomy Domine)} 18:07, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm saving the versions at User:SusanG/Gentlemen for what it's worth. but it's getting boring.   ^Contribs_Talk 18:07, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Agreed.--Antifly 18:11, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, Ken's off his game lately. He needs to ramp up the crazy, maybe add a few copyrighted images with wacky captions or something, spice it up a bit! --Kels 18:12, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

(edit conflict)For posterity. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:09, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Gotta' love those "fortesses". : ) Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:09, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

"...the various operations for the atheism article were a smashing success in terms of the web traffic generated don't you think?"

That "traffic" was my clickbots, you dip! I'm feeling mightily underappreciated here. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:11, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, apparently it's TOO LATE!!!! Operations have begun. Gentlemen, I suggest we declare defeat and quietly disband. I know when I'm licked _{all over}.PFoster 18:21, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I woke up to an earth shattering KABOOM this morning, must have been Ken's operation in full swing. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 18:49, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Im now getting: Network Error (tcp_error) A communication error occurred: ""The Web Server may be down, too busy, or experiencing other problems preventing it from responding to requests. You may wish to try again at a later time.For assistance, contact your network support team.   ^Contribs_Talk 18:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Kens operation must be so extreme it blew the server. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 18:54, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Well I am shocked and awed, congratulations on your mission accomplished Ken. tmtoulouse 18:57, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I am on the other side of the world and everyone here is talking about Conservapedias Atheism article. Its all over the papers and the TV. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 19:01, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

If he added a picture of Hitller to his messages it would be good. DRamon points out Ken's dumbness. Meanwhile, an open invitation has been thrown down.

Well, he was bloody retarded with that block - bye DorothyL!   ^Contribs_Talk 19:31, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Snif. Bye Dorothy, you'll be sorely missed! Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 19:35, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, oh. It looks like Ken's starting to doubt himself. Stay strong, Ken! Post five or six more Hitler pics on the front page, maybe some stuff from the camps, you'll feel better. --Kels 19:41, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Stuck it on your WIGO, Kels.   ^Contribs_Talk 19:49, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

But this is so sudden! --Kels 19:53, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Not at all, I've always secretly lusted after your WIGO.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:00, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

And you went and stuck an entry in it, without my consent! I feel so...so...violated! --Kels 20:03, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

mmmmmmmm violation. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 20:04, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

"...and one moving violation." --Kels 20:12, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I thought you'd prefer it stuck in at the back end. Shall I take it out & stick it in at the front?   ^Contribs_Talk 20:17, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, I usually don't like it at that end, but it seems surprisingly comfortable there. Maybe next time. --Kels 20:21, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Besides, you know you'd have to boil it first. ;D --Kels 20:30, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

's OK it's plastic!   ^Contribs_Talk 20:38, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Operation Guesses!

The only thing in the universe more dense than a black hole is Ken . In contrast his latest "Operations" have as much weight behind them as a photon.

My guess is, both Operation Grapenuts and Operation FORTRAN are just Ken continuing his usual "Blow jobs for links" strategy, but with fancy new names. What do I win? --Kels 18:05, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Regardless of what they are Sarah Palin would have called them: "Buster Taint Palin" and "Khaki Salmon Palin" plans. tmtoulouse 18:15, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Way to go, Kenny-boy! Some random guy endorsed the articles you told him to in a brief and underwhelming essay buried deep within the bowels of a rambling website in a section no one would ever find if you didn't link to it specifically. They were so impressed they added Conservapedia to their endorsed links section!

Oh. Wait a minute. No they didn't. DickTurpis 18:24, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I have a guess. It's much like the Nigerian money scam, only instead of asking to send money, it's "pleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleaseplease look at my artiklez." DickTurpis 18:24, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

We scarcely need to guess. Operation grassroots is where he reads his homosexuality articles and masturbates. Operation fortess is where he sticks a rather large dildo up his arse. Concerned women for America (You know, all those women who are actually men) are extremely interested in this. --JeevesMkII 18:28, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken - my guess is that Operation Fortess is you, lying on your back, with a banana shoved up your arse. Operation Grassroots is probably you taking a picture of that and submitting it to ebaumsworld.com. Am I correct? (I don't want the banana as a prize). DogP 19:14, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Just ignore it. He's only doing it for attention. The more we comment on it, the more he'll keep doing it. Another vacant message to us gentlemen, another half a dozen minor edits to swap a few words & correct his spelling, another vapid picture or pointless link to an inane YouTube video. Last time it was a clip from Field of Dreams. Next time, maybe Animal House or Mrs Doubtfire. Who knows. 20:24, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Lemme get this straight. Every time we comment on his posts, it encourages him to do it more, making himself look like a fool, CP look incredibly unprofessional, and Andy look even more incompetent and ineffectual. Remind me why we shouldn't comment again? --Kels 20:32, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Meh. You have a good point. Continue. weaseLOId~ 20:40, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

If we ignore the red telephone next time, it might prompt him to try something even more ridiculous to get our attention. weaseLOId~ 20:43, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Satire?

Does anybody see the "satire" in this? (Direct [link)   ^Contribs_Talk 20:42, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

It appears that Ken couldn't either on second thoughts.  ^Contribs_Talk 20:45, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

No, I couldn't see anything coherent or intelligent in that, let alone anything connected with evolution. Thanks for wasting 80 seconds of my life, though. weaseLOId~ 20:47, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

You do realize he's deleted that damn thing and recreated it about four times so far, right? I expect it'll be back eventually. --Kels 21:00, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

HAHAHA!! He's gone and burned the whole main page and recreated it! So do we go with the "Ken's embarrassed that we're making fun of him" or "Ken is such an incompetent he can only fix a minor formatting issue with THE BIGGEST FUCKING HAMMER HE CAN FIND". Either way, Ken loses. What fun! --Kels 21:03, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I see! His latest jiggery pokery seems to have wiped out all the images on the right side. And since he just nuked the history, he can't go back and see which one of his 500 edits to that paragraph fucked it up. Nice going, Ken! --Kels 21:06, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I like his deletion comment that "content refused to change technical problem". Not that Ken created a technical problem he couldn't figure out. No, the content itself was being obstinate & refusing to co-operate. weaseLOId~ 21:08, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

My Gods, but this is priceless! Ken, if hitting it with a hammer doesn't work, HITTING IT AGAIN WON'T FIX IT! --Kels 21:10, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Ohhhhhhhhhh I am so using that at my next committee meeting! Look, professors, it is not might fault my paper is not written, the content is being obstinate and not appearing on the page. tmtoulouse 21:17, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

No, THIS is satire! I love the related features part of Pootube. ArmondikoV^bomination 20:20, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Human intercourse

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't human intercourse mean conversation and interaction and stuff, not necessarily sex? Maybe Foxtrot's fantasizing about sex with Human? --Kels 21:08, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

No, there was definitely an article there very recently about actual sex and how to do it. Obviously it didn't last last without being deleted. weaseLOId~ 21:11, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but why not actually replace it with an article about what the term means, instead of just redirecting to sex? Oh yeah, that's what encyclopedias do. --Kels 21:12, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I was wrong, the article I was thinking of was human reproduction. Regarding redirects, 'sex', 'sexual', 'penis' and 'vagina' all redirect to the gender article, which doesn't say anything about any of them. weaseLOId~ 21:15, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Can you imagine if kids grew up and all they knew about sex was this? Hrm, what takes place in marriage? Arguments? Joint accounts? Tax exemptions? Is sexual intercourse am obscure part of the tax code? No, wait. Actually, I already know. --JeevesMkII 21:19, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Maybe more like this. weaseLOId~ 12:27, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

If home-schoolers want to know about straight sex, CP is as vague as episodes of the 1960s television show Bewitched were about that. But if they want to know about male-male anal sex, they not only get that in more detail than anyone wanted to know, but they get full color microphotographs of the flora and fauna of the colon as well. Teresita 21:46, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

You beat me to it Jeeves... Priceless.--Antifly 21:50, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm impressed they managed to grow up to the point of being able to write "sexuality" yet alone have an article with "intercourse" written on it. So, has anyone popped up about how it's pure filth and doesn't belong on the family friendly encyclopedia yet? I remember one like that from a while ago that shot the Poe meter to pieces. But it all comes down to what has been said before, CP has about 12,000 words dedicated to explaining to girls why they shouldn't have abortions, but shit all telling them how they'd get pregnant in the first place.

Also, can you imagine that because they wouldn't know what sex is, they could be doing it all the time but just some manipulative bastard is telling them that it isn't sex? Then they'll get pregnant and very truthfully claim that they've never done it therefore their child would be immaculately concieved! The mind boggles, really. ArmondikoV^bomination 09:46, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Conservative deceit

The tendency to "clean" page histories through mass deletion is getting annoying. Should we start thinking about "screen capturing" diff links as standard operating procedure? tmtoulouse 21:24, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

It won't affect server space?   ^Contribs_Talk 21:31, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

1/2 Terrabyte of storage, £40. A million screenshots of Conservapedia, 15GB. Remembering that time when Andy made an arse out of himself? Priceless. --JeevesMkII 21:41, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Meh, I am not worried about the storage it is more the practical issues. My immediate thought is to create a template that dual links one to the CP link one to a local image of the link. Ideally, we would automate the screen grabs, some sort of bot that would follow all CP links screen capture, upload and then replace the link with our template. Maybe this is too cumbersome a solution but that is my idea. tmtoulouse 22:04, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Wait, is this why he's editing and undoing all the time? Candlewick 22:14, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

He They delete and recreate without history quite often to obviate searches and links to embarrassing events. The editing/re-editing is just Ken's incompetence.   ^Contribs_Talk 22:17, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

It's kind of like pounding the side of a TV to make it work, Ken's basically trying to fix something he presumably fucked up earlier in the evening by hitting it with a hammer. And if that doesn't work, hit it again! --Kels 22:23, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Pounding on TVs must be kind of a lost art now no one has CRTs any more. The difference between pounding on a TV and what Ken does is that often pounding on it was an efficacious fix for a loose connection. What Kenny boy does is more like pounding on an LCD. --JeevesMkII 22:37, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

More like putting his foot through an LCD, to be honest. --Kels 22:47, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

When I was a kid, pounding on a TV to make it work was called an "American repair". --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 10:30, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

So do I figure out how to generate automated screen shots of WIGO links or nay? tmtoulouse 00:52, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I thought your idea had great merit. ħuman 00:55, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Well hot damn, looks like it is possible to automate the screen grabs. So before I barrel ahead anyone have any suggestions, comments, etc? tmtoulouse 03:22, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes, thousands, of course. What was your question? Aren't you gonna beta it first, so I can whine about what I really wanted it to do? ħuman 03:32, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Bah, who needs beta, I am just going to turn it loose and upload hundreds of images to the wiki! The question is how do we want to deal with the screen grabs, I assume we want to keep the link to cp, not just replace it with a screen grab. Do we do some sort of dual link like I suggested or what? tmtoulouse 03:35, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I mean look at this Image:Capture test04.png fully automated screen grab and upload, but not just any screen grab, it is cropped down to just the diff table. It is a thing of automative beauty I tell ya! tmtoulouse 03:40, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

That is shit hot Trent I can't believe you can do that. I assume that as you automatically grab screen shots you can also do something as mundane as putting them in category as WIGOCP month year or something. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 05:35, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Very cool. And, yes, ideally any difflink to CP gets converted to the difflink and a link to the automated screencap, as you said. How about "category:conservapedia screencaps" for simplicity? So, how to format the "new" link? Add ^img after the link as the text for the link to the screencap? ħuman 14:09, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Why you need screen crap robot? Entire Conserpapedia is huge pile of screen crap already!

And here I was thinking "wow! using those square bracket thingies does some really cool stuff on here" when tmtoulouse added another layer to my finely honed inferiority complex. I have no idea how you did that, but I'm impressed. By all means implement and I'll leave the nagging about feature creep to those who know what they're talking about. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:28, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

The thing that occurs to me about all this burning of histories, is that a) it's relatively easy to induce, and b) it presumably prevents easy reversion to previous, perhaps less humorous, versions. Pseudomonas 05:06, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

What is worth grabbing

Okay, I got most of the kinks worked out and am ready to start grabbing, my question is what is worth grabbing? Links in wigo often include whole articles or talk pages, do we really want to SS the whole pages? What about logs? Do we just want diffs? Most of it is pretty straight forward, but what seems pointless to me is when people are linking to 3-4 successive page IDs of evolution or Schlafly's talk page. 16:18, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

They can't hide logs but they roll over quickly if there is enough activity so we may need them. Diffs and permanent links are going to be needed as with enough ridicule the thin skinned (Ed and Ken

) will delete a page. The pages themselves aren't needed as if we want a specific copy place are permanent link. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 20:53, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Images again

Where do you start with this one? --Kels 22:46, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Which bit the guy almost getting kicked in the nuts or the cute soccer girl bit? Thankfully it is not from Ed. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 22:49, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I was thinking of the trustworthy sourcing, but yeah the whole thing's pretty funny. --Kels 23:01, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget the creative captioning.--Antifly 23:05, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't think he knows his cute soccer girl's a LESBIAN though. Who's gonna tell him?   ^Contribs_Talk 23:21, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Wait—what? I don't see a girl anywhere in those pictures. What are you all talking about? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:15, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Look at where it says "source" on the CP page. ħuman 00:58, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

PS, I see two energetic men about to become much less so... ħuman 00:58, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for this, I nearly spat pie all over the keyboard while laughing. I'd expect that sort of thing here but I didn't think Conservapedia had a sense of humour that they were aware of. ArmondikoV^bomination 09:52, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Maths again

Foxtrot has another offering which is interesting. Apparently numerical calculations are tainted. Does anyone know much about Foxtrot he seems to know a lot about higher mathematics and is interested in it, but succeeds in being grossly ignorant about basics and has poorly formed ideas? $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 23:23, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't know anything about Foxtrot, but I would agree with your comment and add that his applied/pure mathematics definitions are exactly what you would expect from a creationist. Sometimes the dictionary doesn't give you the right answer...--Antifly 23:39, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I have a Poe headache. cp:Pure mathematics, coupled with Foxtrot's contributions to cp:Soccer (above), seem totally like the work of a not-so-subtle wandal. But I thought Foxtrot was for real? and if he weren't, would he really blow it this way? --Marty 04:44, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

At least he is not a liar, as our "pi" is. You sign as a perfect "pi" while in reality you are just a crude approximation (3.14159). That's an error of almost one in a million! Shame on you. ;-) Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 04:47, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

It is an approx pi my signature. Set your preferences to always render png. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 04:52, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

What the hell that's the worst definition of pure mathematics I've ever seen. While there's less emphasis on numerical calculation, there sure is a lot of it.Shangrala 12:43, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Roger has been reading? $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 23:38, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure numerical calculations are listed as "unclean" in Deuteronomy ... yes, pretty sure about that. Just like all the other stuff chosen at random, like camels and mixed-fabric clothing - numerical calculations fit well into that list. Etc 06:00, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Armageddon!

The PJR v Bungler saga gets really interesting - I think he (Bungler) has really nailed his colours to the parodist mast now.   ^Contribs_Talk 09:17, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

The most interesting aspect is that they are arguing over one of Andy's edits, so he won't be able to hide under the covers until it all blows over...--Antifly 09:21, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy has ignored arguments on his own talkpage in the past. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 09:23, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

(EC) Sure he will ignore it--he'll come home from church, write a thought-piece on "Liberal X" and pretend like the whole thing never happened. PFoster 09:25, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Has anyone noticed that Bugler has started to call Andy the "Leader of Conservapedia" or "Leader" for short with the capital L. Sure parodist. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 09:37, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

If he starts calling him "Dear Leader", that will be fantastic. weaseLOId~ 09:55, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps Bugler can print up the CP commandments in a little red book and mail them out to the sysops. Teresita 11:01, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Bugler wouldn't know what the Commandments were if you beat him in the face with them. JazzMan 14:12, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

PJR vs Bugler

This has to be the finest fight yet. Outcomes?

Bugler finally is outed as parodist

1. Safe money's on number three, though I was never much for gambling. But if this pony wins, man, you should see the odds Vegas is giving. "And in all of this, on the wild shores of Raymentland, it is Bugler who is the miscreant." Can't you just picture the Snidely Whiplash moustache? Pure pantomime -- so very British. The man is a genius. If he's not a parodist, he's probably clinically insane. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 10:15, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy sides with Bugler causing PJR to leave

1. This option's getting lonely, so I'll take it. It would make a lot of sense, given what PJR's been through there in the past. Hey, if being a prima donna works for the Koward and JM, maybe it'll work for PJR too. --Kels 10:29, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
2. (EC)Again, the smaht money is on option 3, but don't count this out. Andy has been on his knees in front of Bugler for a while now. PJR can be a bit of a pain in the ass, and might very well have had enough if Andy doesn't take a stand on this. PFoster 10:31, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy sides with Bugler but PJR doesn't leave

1. I think that, since it was one of Andy's 'Obama is a Muslim' edits that Phil removed, Andy is bound to side with Bugler & reinstate the 'Muslim pronunciation of Pokistan' thing somewhere (at least on the Obama article, if not on Main Page news). I doubt that PJR will quit CP over this one thing, but it might be another major PJR & Andy confrontation, like the Pope's view of evolution thing. weaseLOId~ 10:51, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

They fight over two or three pages until this blows over causing even further deep seated resentment

1. This is what normally happens. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 09:19, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
2. Oh noes, another poll. But I just can't help myself... Bondurant 10:37, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
3. But Bungler'll keep on sniping at PJR until he finally snaps & banhammers him making Andy finally take notice.   ^Contribs_Talk 10:43, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Poo

1. My vote. ħuman 23:26, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

They exchange snippy remarks before Bugler finally is forced to let it go, perhaps after whining some more. They are both admonished lightly about behaving, and things return to the same way they were before.

1. Inevitable.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 10:52, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
2. It makes for entertaining reading (and Buggerer has really let rip this time), but I don't think it'll amount to much more than a bit of bickering (and Buggerer blocking anybody who steps in) between the two of them. Andy won't intervene, as it would involve him having to actually exercise some sort of control and management over there, both of which he's clearly useless at. It'll be interesting to see how PJR reacts to that last insult, knowing he can't block Buggerer effectively. It's an interesting gameplan launched by him, but I can't see how alienating everybody will help... oh wait... isn't that what all the sysops do anyway? Come on Booger - block PJR - I DARE you. --Strangle Thicket_{I just had to...} 11:12, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

They solve the dispute peacefully and apologize to each other.

You do realise that these polls on CP behaviour are self defeating prophecies? If we say "X" they're bound to say "Y" out of contrariness.   ^Contribs_Talk 10:46, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

HE (bungler) has just pushed the irony meter one notch further by creating "courtesy"   ^Contribs_Talk 10:51, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Whoa! weaseLOId~ 10:55, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Wow, I've been called a lot of bad things in my life, but "Australian?!?" Them's fighting words. 10:58, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Hell of a gamble for him, given that going after PJR, the most "reasonable" of the bunch, is exactly what a parodist would want to do, and take that last vestige of sanity out of the place (even if he's only sane some of the time). Doing it by defending Andy's BS "news" item/smear is smart enough, but it creates a very real impression of deliberate parody. --Kels 11:05, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I just like the irony that this is between two people (on opposite sides of the planet, no less) who don't even have a say in who wins the White House- arguing about the Presidency while their respective missiles cross in flight over us. Ooooooohhhhh, aaaaaaaahhhhh! Kallium 12:08, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

{indent}I really don't know how Bungler manages it (if indeed that is his intention) - once again he has managed to sow discord amongst the acolytes (no doubt allowing him and Andy to smack down dissenting voices and remove more editors from the blog), dent the image of a sysop in Brother Leader's eyes and increase his own shares with BL. He's either Andy's sock or playing Andy like a cheap violin. Personally, I despise the "thing" that is Bugler, but whoever is pulling the strings behind the scenes has my respect. You are a master. (The alternative - the he is a real person - is actually too horrible to contemplate.) --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:38, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

"Pokistan" back

"...improperly censored," says Beloved Leader. PFoster 11:45, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Predictably, Andy sides with the parodist. So the question is, is PJR gonna grow some, or is he just going to slink off and let Bugler's stock on CP rise even further? --Kels 12:15, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

He'll fuck off! (straw/camel's back)  ^Contribs_Talk 12:20, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Nah. He'll do what everybody else does - shrug his shoulders, think "what a mad wanker" (or whatever YEC Baptists think) and carry on. It must gall him that Andy sided with Bugler though, especially as everybody there, except Andy, seems to know he (Bugler that is) is a parodist. PJR is one of those who needs CP more than it needs him - like all the other mad wanker sysops. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:45, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Imagine, Barack Obama pronouncing Pokiston the way Pokistonis do (I heard a Pokistoni on the Dave Ross show the other day, so I know). The next thing you know, Barack will start pronouncing other words like "nuclear" the way they do in furrin countries, and not like we do here in Amurrica. Teresita 15:06, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

And of course the million dollar question is when will someone tell Andy that "Muslim" isn't a language, and therefore there can't be a "Muslim" pronunciation of anything. Also, one might make his head explode by telling him that when Arabic speaking Christians pray, they use the Arabic name for God which is "Allah." Therefore, according to Andy Arabic speaking Christians are really Muslims. Stile4aly 16:09, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

He's already been told that several times, and that "Pakistan" is an Urdu word, not an Arabic one. It doesn't matter, this is Andy's very own smear machine and facts have no influence on it. --Kels 16:34, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Does that make it a rationalwiki insight that Obama is in fact a Hindu? --JeevesMkII 19:58, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I shudder to think of what Andy means in this edit. Is he planning on running with this one? --Kels 20:06, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

He seems to have hit on a brilliant plan for spreading his gospel of nonsense. Step one: have an "insight" (i.e. pull a prejudice out of your ass). Step two: post said insight on CP to "test" the insight (i.e. ban anyone who objects citing censorship until people stop complaining). Step three: write secondary articles expanding your prejudices, when asked for evidence, cite the insight (the survival of which is a testament to its veracity). Operation circlejerk: complete.--Antifly 21:08, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I think Antifly just about nailed it. That should be added to our assfly article. ħuman 23:29, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Is it just me, or is PJR being rather cheeky here? I mean, unless he means "liberal spin" in a different way than the established CP standard...?

This is probably the most bizarre to date... anyway, I didn't see the debate with Obama allegedly saying "pokiston", there certainly isn't Pootube video of it that I can find so it much just be in Andy's imagination. Besides, Obama has an accent where he basically would pronounce it closer to pokiston compared to, say, myself with my shorter and less rounded a vowels that make it sound more like pAAkistAAn? ArmondikoV^bomination 09:58, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

It was the recent presidential debate. The pronunciation thing had to do with Obama going with one of two legitimate ways of saying "Pakistan" in English. I don't think it had anything to do with his accent (the vowel wasn't a rounded one, anyway). Hey, what is Obama's accent? Or, at least what is it closest to? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 10:43, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I think this is that moment for me where one becomes convinced of something beyond a shadow of a doubt. I've always believed that ASchlafly was weird and crazy, but there was always a figurativeness to that belief. Now, the veil is lifted. I am positively convinced that he is mentally ill in the extreme. And, for the record, was is with "Pokistan"? The "Muslim pronounciation" that I hear is "Pwakistan". Anybody else hear that "W" in there? --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 10:41, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The Apocalypse of Andrew Schlafly! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 10:46, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy final word's the subject and quotes a source that gives Pokistan (sort of) as a viable alternative.   ^Contribs_Talk 12:06, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Well of course, duh. you might be right, which would make me look bad, so before you get a chance to really look things up and PROVE you are right, stop talking already. Gosh, the world would be so much better if people shut the hell up and just did my bidding and accepted me as thier Lord and Savior, I swear!--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 12:10, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Phase two has begun! Perhaps "Operation Buttress?"--13:30, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Every day is "Operation Buttress" at Conservapedia... --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:40, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Let's teach a little French to Andy

I was very amused seeing that even PJR is not creationist enough for Andy here.

Andy finally gave up inserting the translation "more than one hypothesis" in the article, but added a link to a website which defends this translation.

As a French, I can confirm that this translation is stupid. Yes, in "Plus que une hypothèse" ("que une" => "qu'une"; although these contraction are not facultative in French, here I separate words for clarity) "Plus que" can be translated as "More than", and "une" can mean "a" or "one".

But there is a simple way to disambiguate. The trick is to look at more than one word at once (I didn't say it's so simple that creationists could do it). In French, we have two expressions for "more than": "plus de" means "superior in quantity"; "plus que", "superior in quality".

So, assuming JP2 knew French better than Andy (which I have no doubt on), the pope did say "evolution is more than a hypothesis". Barraki 12:47, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Your liberal French fools nobody here. Open your mind and you shall see that the Pope meant exactly what Asclafly wants him to have meant. Godspeed. Bondurant 12:52, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Given that Andy's been making this particular argument (and getting schooled on it) for years, I doubt he's teachable at all. This was one of his hobby horses back in the old talk.origins days, well before CP even existed. --Kels 12:57, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes, at the time of the Big Bang, Andy used to listen contradictory arguments. Too bad Andy thinks the universe is younger than the Big Bang. Barraki 13:01, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

French wasn't one of the things I wouldn't have expected to be better at than Andy. NightFlare^{i haz a talk page.} 17:55, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

HelpJazz vs. Bugler

Now, after bitching at PJR, Bugler has returned to his old foe Helpjazz. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 15:52, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm not sure how Bugler was "schooled" by Phillip--Andy basically said that he was right and called Phil a liberal censor. PFoster 16:00, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

No, you're right. But he is slamming into HelpJazz again and Andy is just an ineffectual moron, unable to moderate his own blog. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 16:04, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Bugler's finally hit the TK event horizon, where he's so locked in with Andy that no matter what sort of shit he pulls on the editors and sysops, it won't affect his position at all. He's clearly testing limits here today, and finding that they're much bigger than any of us expected. --Kels 16:37, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy isnt going to do shit unless HenryS, DeanS, Ed Poor and everyone comes to him about Bugler, then he'll have to. And unlike TK I cant see Bugler ever challenging Andys ownership of the site. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 16:41, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I think Bugler is now well established as a parodist. I mean, I know Phil has actively called him a parodist several times, as has HelpJazz... and the other major players seem to be avoiding him. I think Andy has hit a paradoxical wall of inaction. If he steps in and outs Bugler as a parodist, he's admitting that all the praise and rights heaped on him were misplaced, something Andy can't stand (being fooled by that liberal deceit and all). So I think everyone is resigned to just accepting him and hoping he does something big enough to be actionable without having to admit it publicly. Kind of like what happened with MexMax and Samwell (and I think a few others as well) SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 17:13, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

And so goes the downfall of CP. Drive out the sane ones, then drive out the marginally sane ones, eventually all you've got is Andy, Karajou, DeanS and Conservative, with JM off doing things the rest don't care about, and Bugler alienating and driving off pretty much anyone who wants to make an actual encyclopedia. Lovely! --Kels 17:16, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken's asking bungler a strange (pointed?) question.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:04, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I can answer that one: Remember one of Ken's previous "operations" where spammed loads of people in the UK over his Atheism droolings? I think he is hoping that Bugler will stroke his, uh, ego. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 20:19, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Aaaah! Of course, silly me!   ^Contribs_Talk 20:24, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

No no, not silly. Just misguided. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 20:32, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) this was posted on WIGO, but without the really funny sidebit. After Andy made his second Fuck You Phillip post, he corrected the punctuation... Perhaps we should tell the great educator (with the world's largest pre college homeschool class) that periods go on the inside of the quotation marks... What a fucking moron. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 22:07, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Or even better tell him that us Brits put full stops (periods to you) outside the parentheses. So he's not wrong - he's unAmerican   ^Contribs_Talk 23:30, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Not to rain on the Andy bashing parade, but he's okay to do that, unless he's actually quoting someone. In this case I think he's just emphasising what he believes is Obama's supposed Islamist phonology. eg.: Andrew Schafly is really "smart". --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 07:47, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I think TurdBurglar's answer to Ken gives away his parodist credentials. Saying that he probably discovered CP on the Grauniad website is surely a gross slip. First what would he be doing randomly reading the Grauniad if he was so conservative (and not in a UK party political way) in the first place and all mentions of CP that I have seen in the Grauniad has always been to mock and deride it. No, in character Bugler would be a Daily Mail reader or Telegraph at the outside. He's getting too cocky and his guard is starting to slip. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:54, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

There seem to be plenty of references to Conservapedia in the Guardian, so it's concievable. Very bizarre choice of paper for someone who's now editing CP. Died-in-the-wool-conservatives hate The Guardian almost more that your wooly-liberals hate The Daily Heil Mail. And he certainly doesn't appear to have the IQ to be able to stomach The Times. ArmondikoV^bomination 12:02, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken, WE DONT CARE

We get almost as good of a laugh out of Ken 's shout-out as Richard Dawkins does when thinking about how creationists, and their little websites, are somehow going to tip-over the volumes of actual research that takes place every year by actual scientists at actual universities.

Now just what the fuck does ken want? Take a serious guess about his operation? OK, I think its a plan to fellate yourself. Am I close? Idiot. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 21:13, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I feel slighted. Mine were serious guesses. --Kels 21:19, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Is he married, does he have children? What the hell is wrong with him? No one gives a fuck about his grossly fallicious articles. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 21:22, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I think Ken has made a mis calculation, he has confused our interest in the fact that he makes these stupid messages with interest in what the messages actually say. Ken keep doing it, we get a real kick out of it, but don't think we actually care about the message content. 24.141.255.97 21:25, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Hey Kels! You got a shoutout from Ken himself! Can I have one too pleeeeease Ken! Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 21:29, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I got it! I know why Ken is doing these shout outs. If you look at his replies to Alice on his talk page it is obvious he is looking for new ideas and is betting on us giving them to him. --BoredCPer 21:32, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, oh, oh! Ken! Can you comment on my guess, you know the one. The one about wanking? --JeevesMkII 21:33, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

LOL I can picture him furiously trying to figure out how logs can be used to boost CP traffic...--Antifly 21:37, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Aww, I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for the big sap. He's like the fat kid none of the other kids'll play with because he's always talking about boring stuff. Here you go, Ken, I guess your Operation Grapenuts or whatever will have your article getting a mention in someone's e-book. Be happy! --Kels 21:43, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

How old is he? He acts about 13 - 14 but he's been around too long.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:44, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Tsk, Kels. Don;t be so bitter. You've been promoted to honorary gentleman status. Surely that makes up for some of the disappointment of losing out in the great guess what pathetic thing Ken DeMeyer is doing now sweepstake? --JeevesMkII 21:47, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Decades of feminism has led us to this point. I'm a little misty. --Kels 21:49, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Reminds me of Huck Finn on Jim: "he were white inside."-caius (decider) 22:55, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

-

Grassroots is obviously a local level thing, so maybe there is some community group is so hard up for a speaker that they invited Ken

to talk and he is going to beat off over his article in front of the local CWA. End result a few old ladies, who don't have great analytic abilities, will have their creationist views reinforced. A fortress in terms of evolution would be a university, so maybe there is some student bible group is so hard up for a speaker that they invited Ken

to talk and he is going to beat off over his article in front of the local EU. End result a few fundie students, who don't have great analytic abilities, will have their creationist views reinforced. $\approx$$\pi$ Mowse 22:41, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I like how he now locks to talkpage on his shout out and images so we can't make fun of him over there. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 22:46, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

If grassroots is something more expansive then that it is not grassroots now is it dip shit. You need to work on your operations names. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 23:33, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I think 3.14 just cracked the Ken Code: very well reasoned.-caius (decider) 22:49, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken is like a cryptic crossword written by a child. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 22:53, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

@Susan (and anyone who doesn't know). I think we have previously established that Ken is 45 (or maybe 46 now) and still lives with his parents. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 12:00, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken Quote-Mines a Video

Watch these videos Caius posted, because our wiki shits on Ken's

Epic fail, buddy. [2] [3]-caius (decider) 23:13, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

To answer the question Dawkins was asked see; Blount, Borland, and Lenski (2008), "Historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of Escherichia coli". Ken

this is what you fail to understand this argument is not won with who is the best quote miner or who has the most web traffic, it is won by the person with the best quality evidence. Now Blount et al. is one of thousands of papers published ever year which support evolution because when actual research take place, which involves moving away from your computer in your lounge room, the evidence is more than a few picture grabs. $\approx$$\pi$ Mowse 23:19, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

I've argued before that Ken argues like it was a game, of rock paper scissors, say, as if a debate was won by stating propositions that are self-evident and needn't be defended. Obviously, debating the merits of something like science is a little more complicated than throwing down your scissors and expecting everyone to understand it and recognize its authority.-caius (decider) 23:24, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

The other day Ken was going on about how evolution was losing support with the American public and how CP was winning the internet, but he fails to see that it is not winning any ground academically. The Discovery Institute has been an epic fail. No creationist is ever going to receive a research grant and none of this is due to bias as they cry but because there is no evidence, beyond Ken's quote mine level, supporting it. As Andy said "the beauty of truth is it is true no matter how much people deny it" the irony is it actual applies against Ken and him. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 23:29, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, assfly does the same thing - he thinks science is a courtroom, where if he can get a "gotcha", he wins, end of story. Sadly, so sadly, he does not understand how science actually works. And probably never will. Reference: The "devil's mountain" silliness at talk origins. ħuman 23:33, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Science may be courtroom like in that process matters more than the answer. But in oversimplifying the process to a game of "gotcha," that's where Schlafly goes astray in both law and science.-caius (decider) 23:39, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah but Andy gets most of his understanding about court cases from Perry Mason as he has never been in a courtroom, what can you expect. $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 23:46, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes, at Caius. At Pi, can you please kill the flashing sig? I keep getting epileptic seizures, which makes editing more difficult. ħuman 00:02, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Mowse attack Human. MWAHAHAHAHA! $\approx$$\pi$ _Mowse 00:08, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I'll re-upload some of those mowsey pikchers next time I flatten one, 'k? ħuman 00:15, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Better? User $\approx$$\pi$ 00:11, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, yeah, but there's still a bunch of flashing lights all over my screen that I didn't sign up for :( ħuman 00:15, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Ah, man (or woman) I loves me a flashing mowsie. Looks like some kind of strange mowsie xmas tree!--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 00:30, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken again

He's still talking. Over the course of the red telephone series, I've gone from amused, to ambivalent, to annoyed, to almost pitying. I mean, this is his sad existence. He is the laughing stock of everywhere he sticks his head. They don't even really like him over at Conservapedia. There's something perversely quixotic about him, and I almost feel bad for him every time he posts one of these things, since it seems like his only form of communication with other people. Then I read it, am exposed to his aggressive ignorance, and my sympathy is strained. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 03:08, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

What I always find fascinating about Ken

is almost pathetic attempts to sound intelligent when he writes. He fails to under stand that it is the content of you write not how you write it. So academia is becoming more casualised, it doesn't matter how much they lower the bar the would never let Ken

and his ilk in. I don't know where he expects intellectual discourse to take place, it is not in books as they are just a popularity contest. It is certainly not the internet, the lack of any accountability or peer review means that it is packed to the brim with quacks like, well Ken

. Looks like academia is here to stay and your poor intellectual position, and your article packed with every logical fallacy you care to name, will always remain impotent. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 03:17, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken

where in the article is the evidence for the lack of transitional life forms, all I could find were quotes? - User $\approx$$\pi$For best results always render PNG 03:25, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

He would make a fascinating psychological study. He reminds me of Gareth from The Office (UK BBC) fantasising about war games, espionage, etc. It seems so childish and is certainly pitiable. Does he think this site is engaging him? As far as I can tell the only attention this site is giving him is to openly mock and laugh at him and to preserve his bizarre, menatlly unstable messages for the world to see. StarFish 03:52, 29 September 2008 (EDT) 03:32, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The saddest part of all is he thinks he is winning some game. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 03:40, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Holy shit... he IS Gareth! That is an absolutely perfect characterization!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 03:55, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

"The Discovery Institute has been an epic fail."

From Pi's post earlier up there.

No, it hasn't!

This is what academia and science completely fail to grasp. Think about it. What are The Discovery Institute's aims? The same, essentially, as any other science group, to discover the truth through the scientific study of evidence and the drawing up of conclusions, hypotheses and theories based on that study?

Of course not.

It's the search for and manipulation of evidence that backs up their Bible-derived conclusions, hypotheses and theories, the partisan politicisation of science, and, most importantly the invention and promotion of the evolution controversy.

In this they have been undeniably successful.

That academia and science resolutely refuse to accept this is one of the reasons for this success. Ajkgordon 05:01, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I see your point. I mistook the Discovery Institute as serious academic undertaking not opinion pushers. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 08:16, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Take a look at this, their infamous "Wedge Document", preceded by a "defense" of it. Example: "we are challenging the philosophy of scientific materialism, not science itself." Except that their phrases like "teach the controversy" are used specifically to misrepresent the vast majority of the scientific community, not to mention their efforts to base science on court decisions. If they aren't fundamentalists as they claim, it's an amazing coincidence how much they sound and act like they are. Kallium 09:06, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Gentleman Conservative

First of it is Gentleman, singular, even then you are assuming I am male but I will treat your statement as gender neutral. "Just because ... does not mean I am not a member of academia or will not soon be a member of academia". Really? What university are you teaching/studying at that allows arguments from authority and quote mining pass for academic rigour. If I handed up something as a half baked as your three pet articles to my supervisors (obviously I wouldn't as a mathematician) they should rightfully have a fit at me. There are members of academia who are creationist, that doesn't surprise me, there are a full spectrum of people as there should be. However if you think your intellectual deficient thesis on evolution should be submitted for a biology degree they should be in their full rights to not award you the degree as it over looks even the most basic tenants of science, e.g; evidence. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 08:16, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I'll hazard a guess that Ken made an attempt at university of some sort but never made it there, probably failed first year (it's easy to do). Since then he's basically gotten by on posturing and pretending, as we see in every single one of his writings, where he attempts to wear the trappings of intelligence but without any of the substance to go with it. Ken, you are a pretender, no matter how much coy "plausible deniability" you try to snow people with. The only person you're fooling is yourself. --Kels 11:25, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

For those that never knew or have forgotten - Ken was previously known on Wikipedia as kdbuffalo. The first two letters being his initials and buffalo signifying that he was in Buffalo N.Y. His sockpuppetry and ban evasions showed that he used multiple IPs from the library at the State University of New at Buffalo. So maybe this is the academia he is referring to. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 12:20, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Maybe he cleans their toilets (possibly even as a job), and uses their library in his spare time? --Kels 12:27, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I certainly wouldn't preclude him spending a lot of time in the men's toilets, but it's highly unlikely that George Michael would visit that neck of the woods. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 12:29, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Maybe his home address was blocked and the university down the road had the largest number of spare IP addresses he could use. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 18:42, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Dancing Queen

JamesP's wandalism, while crass, was funny enough to merit a screenshot.--Antifly 09:53, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh yeah, that's real wandalism at it's best! ArmondikoV^bomination 12:04, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

• See next but one below - some edit conflicting?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:33, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

No EC, the edits are a good 5 minutes apart. My "insight" was simply passed over...sniff-Antifly 13:17, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Capturebot

Anyone that wants to comment the "beta" version of Capturebot just finished a run using User:Capturebot/wigo you can goto that page to see how it would work. tmtoulouse 02:20, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Doing well Trent. Can you fine up the cataloging to the month, otherwise as superb effort as always. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 02:25, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

First class!   ^Contribs_Talk 07:25, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Great! --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 07:33, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm being a bit dense here (not as dense as some, however) but I assume Capturebot semi-automatically screencaps stuff on CP to preserve it? ArmondikoV^bomination 09:39, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Depending on what is meant by "semi-automatically" the answer is, yes. tmtoulouse 11:44, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

ArmondikoV - does your denseness extend to being unable to read what has been posted higher up this page? ;)
Trent, this is sterling work that you are doing! Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 12:24, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Mr. James P, please take a bow

Conservapedia editor conservative dons his dress and does an Irish Jig to celebrate his evolution article reaching 19...no 20...the top 25...actually just for showing up at all in a google search!

That's lulz we can believe in, my friends. Bjones 09:58, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Piccies here and here   ^Contribs_Talk 10:04, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

And for good measure the actual thing on the right!   ^Contribs_Talk 11:19, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

You'll have to return that .gif it its rightful owner. If word got out about Conservapedia's love of young girls in short skirts... ArmondikoV^bomination 12:14, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Can you smell that a block is cooking?

Norman seems a little too on top of things this morning. The Dear Leader indicated that was his FINAL reply. By pointing out that his FINAL reply is bullshit, you are engaging in last wordism and talk,talk,talk. GODSPEED! Bjones 12:01, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Time to fire up the quote generator to see if it can predict the outcome correctly then :S ArmondikoV^bomination 12:07, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I added a reference to the Muslim debacle this morning, and keep trying to see if I can get a fairly realistic answer out of it so we don't need to even bother reading the real one. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:50, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

First he begs to be embarrassed by questioning if an obviously conservative columnist is really conservative, and then tosses a softball about the pronunciation of "Pakistan" over the middle of the plate. I tried to resist responding - but - couldn't - fight - urge - to - call - out - stupidity. So yeah, I'm expecting a 90/10 block, because those were so inviting that I kept hearing Admiral Akbar shouting "It's a trap!" even as I typed my responses. --SpinyNorman 12:27, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

As to the first, I think he was serious there. Andy would consider the ghost of Saint Ronnie himself a filthy Liberal if he mouthed even the mildest criticism of a Conservative candidate. It doesn't matter what their credentials are, what they've done, or how deep into the Conservative cause they are, the moment they become a liability to Andy's view of the world it's under the bus they go! --Kels 12:35, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

You nailed it Kels. When determining Liberal or Conservative via the Andy scale, history, overall worldview, positions, etc are not important. The only thing that matters is whether or not Andy agrees with your published statment at that moment. This is a great example, as is John McCain. Before he was the nominee, he was a dirty liberal socialist. Now that he's the Republican candidate, he's a damn fine war hero conservative maverick. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:43, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm still trying to figure out why being a "maverick" is supposed to be a good thing in a President. Aren't Presidents supposed to actually work with people rather than randomly go off on their own? --Kels 13:16, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The only person who could change Schlafly's mind is Mother Schlafly. She could vote Marxist-Leninist and he'd still say she was the paragon of conservative wisdom. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:53, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Straight out of left field...--Antifly 13:14, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, classic Andy. The "Reply" is to an unrelated downstream statement, instead of his "final word" being handed back to him. --SpinyNorman 13:51, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I have a horrible sinking feeling from reading his reply that Andy's next crusade is going to be to prove that them Ay-rabs didn't invent our numerical system. All it'll take is one of his insights to dispel millenia of liberal numerical deceit. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:36, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

What are you talking about Psy? You're clueless. Everyone knows that the "arabic" numerals were invented by Christians while they had a brief stopover in the holy land during those pesky crusades. It's also well known (to anyone with an open mind) that his scratchings in the dirt were found by a "moslem" and stolen from the him. Only God could use his divine influence to tach those. This would have been exposed a long time ago but the liberals and their atheistic affirmative action prevent teaching this. TEACH THE CONTROVERSY SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 15:09, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

You know, the comment about Andy saying that Ol' Ronnie was a filthy librul reminds me of the family guy episode where Peter's dad meets the Pope. The Pope says Peter's an okay guy and well, he's the frickin' pope so it must be true. Peter's dad's response: "You've gone soft ya bastard!!". I could even imagine doing the voice if I hadn't already heard his rather deadly serious and scary tone in a youtube video. ArmondikoV^bomination 17:38, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

More Bugler Fun

Apparently, Andy is not interested in having a conversation about Bugler. Bjones 15:22, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

As AliceBG is about to find out after this comment... --SpinyNorman 15:27, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

This isn't quite Wigoworthy, but how funny is it that while Bugler is attacking Alice about her spelling, he uses the wrong tense. I guess the article is constantly being recreated, therefore it is always in the present tense. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 17:12, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

But in an art gallery one would say 'This painting is by Rembrandt'. Bugler probably was complimenting Alice's prose as being beyond the moment. Fretfulporpentine 17:21, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The mask slips!--Antifly 17:30, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but by Andy's logic a lot of things make sense: [4]

Sometimes I think the Bugler character is like Humbert Humbert. Utterly repugnant, but brilliant (in his way). And through that mask, that "bizarre cognomen...two hypnotic eyes seem to glow." --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 21:37, 29 September 2008 (EDT) I used this comparison before, but I'm rather fond of it...

Was anyone else curious as to why Conservative asked Bugler how he found conservapedia? i had two thoughts, either he is trying to find ways to promote the site and thought bugler may help him think of new ways, or those TerryK comments have him suspicious about bugler being a parodist. --TheSkyIScrape 22:02, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

What Paper Does Bugler Read

Bugler quotes the Guardian - and he's done it twice today and many times in the past. The Guardian is well known as the paper of the educated liberal left, hardly the sort of thing you would expect a true Scotsman conservative to read. I'd put him down as the Mail or the Torygraph. Silver Sloth 08:59, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm not so sure the Guardian falls into easy categorisation like that. There are some instances where it is quite conservative (in the US sense, at least), e.g. it is very pro-Israel. It probably does reflect the general trend of Labour in the UK moving to the right since Blair, but the quality paper most associated with the "left" would be the Independent. That said, the Guardian is still waaaay to the left of the Telegraph.

But that aside, Bugler doesn't read the Guardian rather than the Telegraph probably because he's a lefty parodist. Bondurant 09:28, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

And I read Fox News, every single day (and a host of other corporate-owned media. Reading only the stuff you agree with is BORING--and it doesn't let you know what message the "other side" is trying to get out. PFoster 09:30, 30 September 2008 (EDT) (Off to see listen to yesterday's "Democracy Now.")

Instructions per new bot

Seems to be some confusion, nothing changes in how you make wigo items, the bot adds the img=on tag when it has uploaded all the screen captures, this "turns on" the image tags. Just add wigo like always, only worry about the poll tag. tmtoulouse 15:47, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Sweet... That clears everything up with me... Thanks SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 16:04, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Hey TMToulouse, just wanted to thank you for putting in the work in coding and debugging this. As always, you are indispensable. Thank you!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 05:34, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

It's therapy for him, I think. & an nexcuse not to do any real work.   ^Contribs_Talk 05:37, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

We should put that basic instruction in a comment at the top of the ez edit section... ħuman 15:25, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Crisis? What crisis?

I notice that there has been scant mention of the current financial meltdown on CP. In fact nothing of this major news story has been mentioned. Obviously because the liberals cant be blamed and because conservatives are never wrong there is therefore no crisis. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 19:41, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, silly me, something has been posted. though no mention that it was voted down by 2/3 of republicans. They were probably concerned about maintaining liberal friendships. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 20:04, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

They got all offended that Pelosi should dare actually lay some of the blame at their feet, so they decided to retaliate by punishing the American people. That'll show 'em! --Kels 20:10, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

You know, twice to day I've herd people ob TV saying a better use of the 700 billion would be to give $1 million to everyone in the country. Now are they really that bad at math, or do they just pick this up from some random guy and repeat it without bothering to check its accuracy? The annoying thing was nobody corrected them. DickTurpis 00:12, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Snopes had this one the other day with someone claiming that it works out at $450,000 per person. If the government could get anywhere near $450,000 per person a year in taxation there would not be any need for income tax to begin with. I seriously think we need to start another portal on the front page, pseudohumanities or something to cover the growing trend in things like pseudoeconomics, pseudohistory and other pseudothings that floats about. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 00:37, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Great idea. You could start with innumeracy--an important part of getting people to believe economic woo and bullshit. PFoster 00:41, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

The local radio station read that junk forward on the air the morning. I can only hope someone corrected him on his math. My feelings about people who forward this sort of junk is that they're worse than spammers. With spammers, you know that it's junk, and people (very rarely) take the contents seriously. With these forwards, people tend to unconditionally believe it, or at the worst, think that there's at least some grain of truth to it. -Lardashe

Nothing annoys me more than when some talk DJ repeats something he gets in his inbox without checking its contents for facts. These are suppose to be people doing a journalists job are they not? - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 09:04, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

DJs???? Journalists?????? Their job is to keep insipid music playing 24/7. itunes can do their job, and that's a free download. DickTurpis 09:35, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

I consider it a human responsibility to not lie. This responsibility is only increased in proportion to their audience. - Lardashe

There's a reason I hate radio morning shows so, so much. The last thing I want to hear that early in the morning is "The morning show with Rhino and Barb" or whatever other two otherwise unemployable assholes they could find. Which Adams book had the spaceship full of useless people? Life, the Universe, and Everything? Well, morning show DJs would be at the helm. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 12:18, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Helm (here)= bath? CЯacke® 12:25, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I forgot about that. It's clearly been too long. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 13:20, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

DJs and fashion designers have my votes. Actually, anyone involved in the world of fashion. DickTurpis 12:28, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Kens Latest Rubbish

Now without delving into the hilarity of Ken espousing the wonder of the Gay Bowel Syndrome article, he has thrown us a challenge to make an article that people might want to read (In other words - in Kens world - this means has high search rankings), intoning we have yet to do so. Now, at the risk of playing Kens little game, I suggest he google "Andrew Schlafly". Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 20:47, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I like his comment about the 'Gay Bowel Syndrome' and 'Homosexuality and Parasites' articles having Google rankings of 1. Kendoll, that's because Conservapedia is one of the few, if not only, place that is daft enough to have articles about such nonsense that treats it as if it is true. It would be like us having an article called 'Closet Homosexuals who are Conservapedia Sysops', then masturbating frantically when it came up as the number one search result for that term on Google. Zmidponk 21:35, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I also like the way he has suggested that because we are atheist (mostly anyway) that not having a high ranking might throw us into such depression we might top ourselves. Which is funny because we are not the ones having seed spraying excitement every time an article rises a notch. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 21:39, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Even better, google "Ken DeMeyer." By Ken's criteria we are more of an authority on him than he is...--Antifly 21:44, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

PNAS Letter - (no quotes needed)   ^Contribs_Talk 21:49, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Heh! I hadn't realised Ken was Belgian!   ^Contribs_Talk 21:52, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

(EC) There's Andrew Schlafly, Poe's Law at least all coming at the top at least. And remember, these are real terms, not something made up (well, is Poe's Law? Wikipedia gives it an "honourable mention") by pairing atheistic, evolutionist or liberal with deciet, creep, values etc, if we searched for various less common terms we'd certainly get some top hits. Evidence against a recent creation is no.1 when searching for that term tpo. RW isn't far off for Conservapedia either, only being pipped by the the actual site itself and wikipedia (although it'd make me instantaneously orgasm happy if we could pip it above CP itself, the latter I'm sure can be cracked if we tried). ArmondikoV^bomination 21:54, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, and this. ArmondikoV^bomination 21:56, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Then there's the traffic comparison between CP and any internet purveyor of pornography. Poor Ken, it hurts to be pwned by your own argument...--Antifly 22:09, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The ironic thing is that people actually source our articles as information pieces, as in "hey go here and read this it has good info" versus linking to Ken's shit as "hey go laugh at this." tmtoulouse 22:20, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I think Ken is confused. We don’t have a “Flagship” article do we? I would have thought, if any thing, WIGO CP would be our chief function. Besides, isnt it Ken and Ken only that gets all hot and bothered about rankings? Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 22:44, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

We have a few solid articles in the main space that get regular links and traffic, mostly positive. Of course are main giant is WIGO CP, which is certainly a interesting creation of Web 2.0. It merges a wide range of technologies from blogs, wikis, and aggregators into something uniquely us and I think fun. There are many people that visit WIGO CP, and participate in it. Remove all the artificial bumping to Ken's article and WIGO CP is on par with them. tmtoulouse 22:49, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Get it straight, Ken

Dear Gentletwat at another website, people aren't laughing with you, they're laughing at you. (Also, I heartily suggest you replace the slogan "The trus[t]worthy encyclopaedia" with news.com.au's suggestion "Conservapedia: as accurate as a catatonic drunkard’s line of urine." It's far more descriptive.) --JeevesMkII 22:39, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Jeeves, you should elevate that critique and commentary to the CP namespace, at least. I found it very inKenimating. ħuman 02:04, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

It is brillient Jeeves a complete pwning of Ken

please move this article to the Conservapedia space. - User $\approx$$\pi$For best results always render PNG 02:56, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Try again to get your attention

Ken

, I could not be moved either way even if 50,000,000 people had read your article and only 5 have read ours. As I have said before and it will always remain true; THE TRUTH IS NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST. Now in the past I have made illusions to the fact that your apparent obsession with Page-Rank steams from a feeling of insecurity regarding either your own intellectual or sexual short comings, so I will not dwell on these point any further. However, the fact remains that your evolution article (and others which you are the primary contributor) is a quote mine devoid of any factual statements, other than opinion polls which commit the argumentum ad populum fallacy. No matter how many people you get to see your article it is still does not contain anything that can be considered serious support of your position. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 00:55, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Now in light of your recent comments I have to point out your article contains no factual information to be an error in the prose. IT IS A COLLECTION OF QUOTES. You have committed the argument from authority fallacy in spades, there is nothing to rebuttal. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 05:20, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

And how is that irony, Ken? Also, Jeeves gave you an excellent dressing down above, and since you are obviously reading this, why not respond to that? There's no doubt people are reading your shit, but it's overwhelmingly recognized as being shit. Your page rankings may make you well-known, but they don't make you popular.

Which brings us to why you're sending these shots across the bow, doesn't it? If we're such a lowly site, so far beneath your attention, why even bother to single us out? Truth is, you want to talk to us. You desire this communication, any communication, but you want to communicate from a place of relative safety, a place where you have some sort of power. Still, despite your sysopship, you don't really amount to much over there, do you? You're certainly not one of Andy's darlings and hardly the most social. You toil at your articles, but the others never really notice (hence your Google rank fixation). You are merely tolerated, and on some level, I think you know that. These shout-outs earn you attention, not from "your" "side," because your histrionics are largely ignored by the others at CP. No, the whole point of this is to make us appreciate you, or, at the very least, interact with you, something you've long given up hope for with the people on your own site. Your "Gentlemen" pages are plea for contact you make from a place where you feel empowered but undervalued and to people whom you want to be "greater" than and to whom you hope come to respect you. Hell, you even say "please" in this one.

But Ken, we will never have respect for you, at least not in the way you want it. The most you'll ever get from your "Gentlemen" pages is attention, though again, not in the way you want it. But by all means, keep up this game. It certainly amuses us, though you'll never get what you want out of the exchange. Crow and crow if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day, well, we both know that you haven't accomplished anything here, don't we?

By the way, your "Gentlemen" page isn't in your user space. You put a ":" instead of a "/". Goodnight, Ken. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 06:17, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Given that these messages from Ken

are clearly how he gets his jollies and he's too cowardly to allow us to respond over there (yeah, like Andy and Bugler would let that happen) - it doesn't really serve any purpose other than him being smarmy and us hurling insults. I say let's just ignore his messages from now on and let him explode with frustration. --PsyGremlinWhut? 06:23, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

It's a shame that there isn't a hard and fast way to tell the difference between a page view that is meaningful and a page view that is meaningless, although the statistic of how many pages someone views in a session helps towards that (CP is about 3, while RW has an average of 5 wasn't it?). Of course, it's very easy to draw a conclusion from the fact that the most popularly viewed page on RW is the main-page, rather than the homo-obsession that CP has. It's already been discussed previously in talk:WIGO that it's easier to judge the sites via the recent changes log to track activity and the stats regarding user retention and the rate that people complain, quit (one nameless drama queen notwithstanding) or get permanently or lengthy blocks (which I believe is so far only Fred for inisting on blanking the mainpage every so often). Then you adjust for media and blogosphere exposure (which we have half a line at the bottom of the WP article on conservapedia, and CP has set the blogosphere on fire several times; almost invarianbly leading people to visit it for much the same reason they visit Uncyclopedia). In which case, RW does indeed beat the shit out of CP for popularity as a third to half of the traffic from 0.1% of the exposure is fantastic. It's a simple task to justify and play with the statistics to prove who is "better", but it's a needless question as RW isn't about the exposure, sure we'd like it, but who here really gets their rocks off Ken-style over google rankings? ArmondikoV^bomination 07:38, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Regarding the social dynamic at CP, I think it's notable that after Ken posted his "Ken's CP's Evolution article is gaining MomentuM!" blurb on some talk pages, the only pat on the back/acknowledgment of his existence was one word from Andy. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 13:08, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Alice

To bad your gone now Alice with this edit you would have become my second favorite person at CP (Bugler is the best because no one provides more laughs each day then her) --BoredCPer 23:05, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

What can I say? I love my work. PFoster 23:11, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't want to blow my own horn...

But this was totally worth the five year block.PFoster 23:06, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

The only thing that could have made that edit better would have been getting away with it. May I suggest in future hiding the lulz in plain sight with an expansion to the article. --JeevesMkII 23:09, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

You were lovely while you lasted, Alice.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:19, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Yup, good show. I am pleased also as I was accused of being Ames, thats like being mistaken for the king of the vandals! Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 23:26, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Wait, do we even have that on our assfly anagrams page? ħuman 02:02, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

If Governor Sarah Palin needs something else to do come November, she should look out for a vagina-rash porn role. Matt 06:05, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was every male's wish - that he could blow his own horn, (sorry)   ^Contribs_Talk 06:31, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Em... not every male, that's as made up as the thinking about sex every 6 seconds (because if that was the case, we'd have a lot more traffic accidents). ArmondikoV^bomination 07:41, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken's email spamming

Found this:

The Work of Author "Anonymous" is Featured in a High Web Traffic Article.

Recently, there has been an essay critical of the theory of evolution which enjoys a lot of web traffic due to the popularity of the website it is published on, and because it ranks high on some search engines for theory of evolution. It cites the work of the Investigator Magazine author who goes by the name of "Anonymous". Although "Anonymous" is an evolutionist he/she does make some excellent points which are duly noted in the article.

The article on the theory of evolution is located on the website Conservapedia located here:

www.conservapedia.com/Theory_of_evolution

Currently, the article is receiving 500 plus views a day…and is creating somewhat of a stir on the internet.

As the web traffic of Conservapedia likely grows there should be web traffic flowing to the Investigator Magazine website. Robert Miller - [5]

  ^Contribs_Talk 23:29, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Better living through dishonesty, that's the Conservative Way! --Kels 23:41, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

500 hits a day? That's all Ken's getting? That's nothing. That's a low- to mid-range blog. Pfft. Ken. We're not impressed.-caius (decider) 01:42, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh English, my mother tongue! How can Ken mistreat you so? Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 01:54, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd suggest you run out and buy a new mother tongue soon. I mean - you're about to have a VP of the USA who speaks something rather like English, but not really actually anything resembling true english. As for Ken, well, see, he is delusional. He thinks people looking at his site means they agree with him. AND likely forgets that every time he goes to his own site to say "Ahhhh...." and smile pretty at the camera, he's adding to "visits".--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 17:12, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

That's a rather pessimistic view of the situation. Unless you mean Biden, who it seems speaks English (and speaks it, and speaks it, and speaks it...). DickTurpis 11:22, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

How long will RJ Jensen last?

On Sep 1st, 2008, he was granted night-edit privileges - a speedy procedure for someone who created his account two days ago. But now, he has a major set-back: A carefully crafted revision of neoconservative (with references and all this naughty stuff) was reverted by Aschlafly himself.

Granted, Jensen is indeed privileged, as Aschlafly undertook the unusual step to explain his on the corresponding talk-page:

I reverted some pro-neoconservative propaganda (which had at least one glaring mistake in it).--Aschlafly 23:06, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

Can someone spot the glaring mistake? --LArron 02:32, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

P.S. :

We do not drive away experts by pretending that some random anonymous user who just signed up is as knowledgeable and authoritative as a scholar with decades of experience in teaching or research.¹

Hm, Aschlafly is at least not anonymous.

As a conservative, retired academic I should imaging RJ Jensen would have something of a neoconservative streak to him (especially as he defines neoconservative as someone who was liberal that is now conservative) and as a result is not Conservative^TM enough for Conservapedia. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 02:44, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Well he is quite right, NeoCons were liberals. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 02:51, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

I can't think of a clever and consise analogy so I'll just go out and say it simply: They were liberals in the sense that they were more liberal than they are now, on account of actually getting more conservative (i.e., turning to the full on regessionist stance). ArmondikoV^bomination 07:54, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

A challenge

Seeing as how Search Engine Optimization is the single greatest metric in the eyes of Ken DeMyer, I have an absurd proposal. What we need to do is get Conservapedia:Sysops/Conservative as the number one return for one of Ken DeMyer, Kenneth DeMyer or Kenneth D DeMyer, so we can piss him off. Basically if you find a forum discussing on of Ken's pet articles, show them this article on him. We also could do with a bit of a rewrite but quality is second to quantity in Ken world. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 07:28, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Very interesting. Although we rank high on those searches, very few of them actually link to Conservapedia:Sysops/Conservative, although many do link to related articles like Conservapedia:Summa_Homosexualita, which may as well link back to Conservative's page here. ArmondikoV^bomination 07:56, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of which, we are far and away the #1 google hit for "Summa Homosexualita" (hey! That's one of my articles! I must be extra special superawesome!). It also has the advantage of being the only article I know of that Ken has insisted we delete. Anyway, looks like we have to start linking to Conservapedia:Sysops/Conservative more. DickTurpis 09:52, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

but quality is second to quantity in Ken world Have you read the evolution article? Quality isn't second to anything, its completely irrelevant. Bjones 09:47, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Noone has read the evolution article! (To be read with the same flow as "Noone expects an inquisition!") JazzMan 11:46, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Actually, I'd be rather surprised if anyone other than Ken has read the Evolution article. It is essentially unreadable. Most sane people would give up after about ten paragraphs. --JeevesMkII 13:15, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Ugh I just tryed to read it and gave up a third of the way through, and I've read timecube the full way. Maybe its because timecube doesn't actually mean anything so it has no logical fallacies, or maybe its just that the evolution article is even worse. 70.91.248.249 13:41, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

A pair (defense)

Hey! I totally did not mean it sound like that! I was merely surprised that homeschoolers aren't getting into better colleges. If homeschoolers are so smart and successful, then why don't we see some of Andy's students getting into the Big Four or Top Ten? Candlewick 10:24, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy's defense: liberal atheistic government universities (like Yale) are prejudiced against homeschooling. PFoster 10:28, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, it does say that they are admitted to their "first choice" of university. Note that the schools on the list are largely "schools of faith" (i.e. Liberty University, private catholic universitites, etc.). So Andy's teaching is incredibly effective at indoctrinating his students with the Schlafly worldview, and convincing them that these "schools of faith" offer some sort of educational value.--Antifly 10:37, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

What does Andy have to do with them getting into college anyway? Doesn't he just teach a history class? I thought these kids were home schooled. Bjones 10:44, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

This semester he's teaching history. Last semester he taught writing. He was a part of their learning process, so he can claim royalties on their success. Candlewick 13:16, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Eagle University is home schooling. Remember, Andy doesn't even make minimum wage for his teaching.--Antifly 10:55, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Actually, wasn't the reasoning that Andy doesn't make much based on the idea that he did more than 10 minutes a day of actual work? We've all seen him mark his history assignments, and he doesn't put much more effort into his online "lectures" either. No reason to think he takes his "in person" classes any more seriously. --Kels 23:03, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

It's also another case of the wheels on the goalposts being very well oiled. Oh, and homeschooling doesn't necessarily mean in the home, dontcha know (well, I suppose technically he's right on that front). ArmondikoV^bomination 11:21, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

My Goodness

I just took a prolonged spin around Conservapedia.... They are absolutely overrun with parodists... I mean, really, there are so many over there it's hard to discern the regular idiots (Ken, Ed, Andy and his brother, etc). Wow, they're really suffering at the moment aren't they? SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:32, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

It's pretty much in a state of anarchy right now, mostly because Schlafly won't rein his dogs in. He refuses to do anything but snipe at perceived "liberals", and let people like Ken make pages their personal fiefdoms. The sysops of CP are almost like warlords, with Schlafly ostensibly controlling the site as a whole. To be more specific, Conservapedia is Afghanistan. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:18, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

There's some good stuff in the deletion log right now: in addition to the perennial cp:Pokistan, we have cp:Sudden Crusade Syndrome, cp:Muslim pronunciation, and cp:User:Conservative/Gentlemen-I-just-want-to-dance-the-night-away. I wish I'd been able to see the actual contents of any of those pages... --Marty 13:22, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

here and here PFoster 19:13, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Screenshot of the "Gentlemen" parody here. A copy is also currently visible via Conservative's user page history here. JuanK 14:49, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Thought this one was quite funny too

I had to sock up and put the Sudden Crusade Syndrome article up there. It hit me the previous night like a bolt from the blue. Preserved on RW for posterity. Stile4aly 16:56, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

With all of the problems, this is the main priority.--Antifly 17:38, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Mussolini

Hmmmm in regards to Ken DeMyers infantile ramblings. Sure keep the pics, we love them but I dont recall Mussolini ever mentioning evolution or using eugenics or, well, anything to do with evolution. Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 19:05, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh and Ken, I reckon you should put a photo of yourself at the lead of the article. An example of who might be first to go under a states eugenics plan. "Ken DeMeyer - the sort of person we could do with out" or some such. What do you reckon? Ace McWicked^{cast ye the first stone} 19:20, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken is the very example of "polishing a turd", he constantly adds 1, 2, or 3 words to his "flagship" articles or his "gentlemen" screed. He's really a very sad person.   ^Contribs_Talk 19:22, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

The RationalWiki web-site is ranked number 1 on the Google search engine for searches on "Ken Demyer and homosexuality", doesn't that make us special? Oh, Ken, this illustrates just how crap your writing style is. Really, your writing skills are well below the youngest of Andy's homeschoolers. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 19:46, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Gentleman - Your Grassroots Have Been Salted, Your Fortresses Breached (Red Telephone)

Kenny boy -
You now claim that we've yet to point out a single error in your "material," and lord your traffic above us. Both are inaccurate. First, we've yet to point out an error to you because you banned us from your site for pointing errors out, and because you decline any invitation to debate the merits of your article. If you'd really like to claim that your article is inerrant, then man up and prove it! But, more importantly, we have numerous articles on this site, and on my personal blog, debunking your "social effects of evolution" claim. Speaking of my site, onto the second point, if your evolution article really only gets 500 hits a day, I've got you doubled, buddy. And RW has you by more than a factor of ten.-caius (decider) 21:32, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

of course it's inerrant. Just like teh bible. I think, therefore it is. - or something like that.--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 22:22, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Does Conservative realize that the number of people viewing a page doesn't actualy tell you anything? How many of those people have already seen the article? How many of those people actually read the article? How many of those people are swayed by the article? How many are there to learn, and how many are there to laugh? Better yet, how many visit the main page of Conservapedia? Interestingly enough, we would have a much better idea of what those 500 views (not people, views) were all about, if the article was unlocked. JazzMan 23:42, 30 September 2008 (EDT) Can you tell they turned off night editing early tonight?

I invited him here to come play "red telephone" on our site where, of course, he wouldn't be able to delete the messages, or, of course, edit/delete the replies - but I did also offer him a "secure" space where his "messages" would not be wandalized. What, do I need to make the fucking offer on CP at the risk of my cherished wiki-neck there (as if)? Ken, be a "gentleman" yourself and come here and discuss your issues with us in person! We don't delete talk page comments (whoa!), and you don't even have to avoid swearing here (ain't hurt JunkieMcChew, has it?). Silly Kensoivative, stop playing silly games. ħuman 04:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Yep, JazzMan, that's what we're all thinking (i.e., that's what we all know); page views are completely meaningless metrics for site success and validity. All it tells you is how many people are viewing the page, not how many are meaningful. But if we look at the ratio of active CP users to permanently banned ones (possibly taking into account sock-puppetry) and apply this to the number of page views, we could have a basic indicator of how many people are there to laugh and how many people are there actually read it for truth value. Even doing this however, doesn't take into account the number of people who read it for truth/lulz but don't sign up (for active contributions or wandalism).

Human; Ken is never going to debate on anything but his own terms and his own terms only, no compromises. That has been made explicitly clear with the Red Telephone stuff. There is no room for compromise when "discussing" his propoganda piece on evolution. I'm pretty sure every editor on RW would be happy for him to log in here, have his own talk and then not wandalise it at all. For a start it would make for a more effective dialogue than this sub-page crap that he's doing that even CP editors are beginning to notice and get pissed off with. The offer has been made and rejected, as it can't be made fairer, the world will just have to accept that Conservative isn't willing or able to defend his propoganda openly against both active critics and other readers who will have access to unedited and unmoderrated dialogue. ArmondikoV^bomination 07:20, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Armondikov, you take "page views" too literally. The page view count is purely the number of requests the server gets for a particular page. It doesn't actually mean that human eyes even see the page. I think everyone knows that the CP counts are inflated and that there is even evidence that Ken has engaged in this himself. Also do you think Ken can't use the preview button when he edits a comma? He knows very well that every save counts as a page view and with the number of edits Ken needs to get just one sentence right (in his mind) then it's quite likely that there are very few genuine page views for any of his "articles". Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 08:09, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I know that as well, though I admit that I don't think I quite took it into account with the massive blasting rant above. In fact, I'm pretty sure Lay Scientist mentioned how wiki's by the definition of how they work will automatically inflate their page views. Regular use alone by the editors counts as a couple of page views per edit; so you're certainly right about certain people's inability to use the "preview" button being able to quickly inflate the page views. But this fact just really just proves the point that it's yet another thing you need to take into account if you want page views to be meaningful. So by the time you take all of it into account (how many views are regular editorial use, how many are passers by, how many are regular readers etc.), you have something even more vague and variable than the Drake Equation! ArmondikoV^bomination 09:43, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

The Website that Ken is all Hard about...

is a real big deal on the interwebs...PFoster 21:35, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps not Wigo worthy but still

Obama Syndrome talk page I lol'd. 75.169.199.92 21:48, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

You mean the link to this perhaps? I mean, it's an actual genuine coined term (even if it does mock libruls and defend bush) not something that His Schlaflyness just made up by putting his index finger in his rectum, pulling it out again, examining the contents, showing it to Ken and Buggerer for a nodding approval then smearing it across his keyboard and onto the servers (poor things, what did they do to deserve such a fate?) that host CP (if anyone cares to expand on this theory of how Andyxander the Great generates articles, besides checking RW's article matrix, please do). ArmondikoV^bomination 09:51, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Your description of the physical process is fairly accurate, however the "mental" process seems to occur two ways: One is when he comes up with a new brilliangism to win an argument on some talk page, gives it an article-matrixy name, and runs off to write it, the other is each Sunday he comes home from brunch after church with new ideas for an essay or matrix piece churning in his "brain" as a result of the topic of that day's sermon. ħuman 17:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Anagrams

I have to admit, at least they are trying. Surely some of theirs are as funny as ours, for, say teh assfly or Sarah Palin? If you admit that humor can be (doh) partisan from either side? ħuman 01:52, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I was looking at the upcoming set of U.S. history homework...

And Andy just really doesn't like Jefferson. He seems to be dabbling in a bit of revisionism, and don't the conservatives normally rail against that? I love how ridiculously slanted these questions are, with questions about what was the most amazing thing about Columbus, just how awesome WAS Washington, and just how much did Jefferson suck? It's fine to have these views, but the dearth of independent thought this "teacher" encourages is remarkable. I hope some of these parents look at the quality of this course and put a stop on the check. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 10:09, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Well, you know Thomas Jefferson was the guy who was really for that wall of separation between church and state. Andy can never forgive Jefferson for denying him the theocracy he so badly craves. And of course it wouldn't be a Schlafly homework if it were to ask questions of fact, evidence and conclusion as opposed to "remind me what moronic opinion of mine I ranted about in the lecture." --JeevesMkII 10:56, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I eagerly await the creation of cp:Jefferson Syndrome.--Bayes 11:13, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I Was going to offer that we all take a question and write a real answer, but then I wondered something that Joe Biden must be contemplating tonite -- How exactly do you reply to moroniclly staged questions without saying simply "WTF?"--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 11:15, 1 October 2008 (EDT)(edit conflict)

On these homework assignments, have we seen any students strongly disagree with Andy on anything? I know some people have not always fully supported his dogma, but has anyone directly contradicted one of his holy tenets? I would like to see Andy, who gives out a 10/10 for answering "What do you admire most about Columbus?" with "His faith," grade someone who writes several sentences on how Columbus wasn't all that great, backed up with specifics. Can he really justify a lower score for contradicting him if the student actually gave a reasoned response? (And what is a low grade in Andyland? 9/10?) We need a sock in his next class. DickTurpis 11:19, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

One of the students (I think I remember them being #30 or something) seems to have a mind of their own. They disagreed with Andy on his "Africans couldn't possibly use European finished goods because they were all primitive and shit, living in mud huts with bones through their noses therefore the triangular trade couldn't have existed." bullshit. That one student was the only one I could see who wrote semi-literate, decent paragraphs (considering the limitations of the questions) and seemed to show a glimpse of independent thought. The rest just depress me. Oh yeah, and his grade for disagreeing? It was "OK" which as I've said before, in Andyland this means "fuck you liberal." --JeevesMkII 11:31, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Argh. I must stop this. The more I read the homework and the answers to them the more depressed/angry I become. Example: "The American Indians could've come from anywhere, when the world was supposedly one continent, and then after it split, they moved on to America, separated from the rest of the world." Andy's response? "Good."

Good? GOOD? GOOD? Don't correct the run on sentence. Don't correct the stupidity of bringing up continental drift and then saying humans moved to the Americas after the continents split, which I'm sure wasn't the intention. Don't even mention that mainstream science believes humans only evolved millions of years after the continents split and that the only reasonable way humans could have got to the Americas is across the Bering straits while frozen. Anything that supports your worldview is a good answer, no matter how it retards a child's education. I suppose mentioning the tower of babel would have been "Superb." Ugh. --JeevesMkII 11:48, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

You hit one of my single biggest complaints about Andy's style of "teaching". Even if I accept the premise that ConPee-WorldView is the right one, students must still be graded based less on their ideas than on their ability to communicate those ideas. Grammar is a must. I failed more tests in my life cause I can't spell or use commas correctly than cause I don't know facts - but that is part of a good education, if not the most important part. Can you *possibly* actually teach, Andy? 'Cause a student who is not shown his grammar and spelling mistakes, and then shown how to correct them, will not learn by osmosis, regardless of how much he agrees that "Jefferson sucks, long live King George".--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 11:54, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

You're 100% correct Godot. Regardless of whether or not you like their ideas, you need to grade based on what it presented to you. You can't just look at the shit and go "Ah, they agree with me, A+." And there is no such thing as a perfect paper. Even it is excellent, there's always something that can be corrected. As to your point earlier, I'm very tempted to write an extended essay and watch Schlafly's head explode. My money would be on this, he'd look at it, say "you need to give concise answers, no points." SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:49, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Student 7 has added some things that will, no doubt, have SirChuck screaming. Firstly we have "The thing I find most admirable about George Washington was how much he really cared about being the President of the United States, and actually doing something about it. Unlike some previous presidents who only wanted to be president for more power, George Washington was the exact opposite.". Previous Presidents? Really? And then there's "...just didn’t have a function government." Will Andy correct this hideous grammar?

Here's a link to those answers. Ok, so I figured out that Seven really means modern presidents ("previous" in relation to our current president), but if Andy doesn't say something about that ridiculous phrasing, I'll scream. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 22:06, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

1951 UK election

Just a small point. Conservapedia's news section (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template%3AMainpageright&diff=526585&oldid=526577) refers to the UK general election in 1951 (yes, they're that up to date) as Labour being "kicked out, bag and baggage". As you can see for yourself on the wiki page, Labour actually won the popular vote by a large margin in 1951 (48.8% compared to the Conservatives' 44.3%) and even increased their share of the vote from the last election.

However, due to our first past the post system, the Conservative Party ended up with a handful more seats and managed to form a government with the help of the National Liberals. So Labour wasn't an unpopular party kicked out "bag and baggage", but basically lost out because of a political anomaly. Al Gore would have felt their pain.

Bot Attack?

So apparently someone has developed a CP bot that, when you put an ampersand at the bottom of a page, leaves a message in the edit summary. See this user's edits. PFoster 11:36, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

More likely the bot is programmed to put the ampersand there and that message in the edit summary. Some change has to be made to the article itself for it count as an edit & leave an edit summary. & Presumably, it must've been set up by somebody at this site, since Googling "conservapedia commandments broken" brings up RationalWiki at the top of the stack. weaseLOId~ 11:58, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Ah. Tha makes sense...I have a Ken-DeMeyer like knowledge of wiki-coding myself (look at my edit history for proof). these things are beyond me. The big question though---will somebody CALL THE FBI??!?!PFoster 12:02, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Not enough edits to be a bot; I bet the user is just doing it with Ctrl-C Ctrl-V. (That user has some socks too, FYI.)

I think it would be cool to make a bot that could register a few million accounts at one go, but not do any edits with them; then you'd have a pantry full of socks that you could activate whenever, instead of having to wait for CP to open new-account registration again. It would also have Karajou chasing his tail and barking for several days at least. :) --Marty 13:31, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

New accounts created like that would all be blocked, remember they have a captcha for new account creation to, requiring a significant level of complexity needed to automate. Few people vandalizing conservapedia would want to run OCR to crack their captcha. tmtoulouse 13:44, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

OCR my buttocks. It isn't an image, and it's trivial to automate even in Javascript (or perhaps especially in javascript, I started to write a little parser before I realised it'd be far easier just to eval the expression.)

// get the CAPTCHA text
var labels = document.getElementsByTagName("label");
var captchaText = null;
for (var i = 0; i < labels.length; ++i) {
	if (labels[i].getAttribute("for") == "wpCaptchaWord") {
		captchaText = labels[i].innerHTML;
		break;
	}
}

// ... and also the output box
var outbox = document.getElementById("wpCaptchaWord");

// compute the CAPTCHA and shove the result in the output box
if (captchaText && outbox) {
	outbox.value = eval(capchaText);
}

It doesn't work at all as a CAPTCHA, since computers are far far better at solving such things than humans are. --JeevesMkII 14:35, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Shit I didn't realize it wasn't an image, I just assumed...tmtoulouse 15:11, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Dangerous mistake assuming that anyone at Conservapedia would be competent enough to, you know, read the ConfirmEdit extension's instructions and not use the reference implementation like it specifically tells you not to. When you're a creationist, a computer might as well have god magic inside for all you know. --JeevesMkII 15:14, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Interesting point brought up by a bot that would register usernames but not edit. I thought of that recently (though I wouldn't have the know-how or the balls to impliment it), it's biggest effect would be to use up all the available usernames (due to the naming convention). I believe it's starting to happen in respect that people called John or Bob (I think, it was brought up before but I can't remember the exact names that are now completely filled and blocked) are screwed regardless of their surname. ArmondikoV^bomination 15:42, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

And away they go...

Too many diffs to post here, but Bungler and HelpJazz have an interesting little wheelwar going again at cp:Big Science and cp:Gender-neutral. Just when I was beginning to think CP was becoming nothing but wandals and Andy abusing his stoodense. PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I think Bugler is trying to get rid of HelpJazz and Phillip.... Just clear the waters of the intelligent, reasonable people (Phillip is much better by contrast) and really give the site hell. I love how the mention of RW is no longer Verboten (thanks Sid!!!) I've seen several people mention us (indirectly of course) lately and they havn't been banhammered. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 15:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

This latest exchange has changed my view on Bugler. I don't think he's a parodist. He's just a sociopathic asshole. I'll probably change my mind tomorrow, though. Bjones 15:32, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Yes, somebody has. --Marty 21:38, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I dunno. Posts like this weigh pretty heavy on the parody side. But I keep changing my mind about it as well. It's more than possible that he may be both a parodist and a sociopathic asshole. weaseLOId~ 15:47, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Since you asked: It's "verboten" - German for "banned/forbidden/illegal". --Sid 16:08, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Has anyone considered the possibility of Andrew Schlafly having multiple personality disorder, like in the Hitchcock film "Psycho," and that ALL of the major players on CP are just socks of Andy, with different personalities. --Composure1 11:22, 2 October 2008 (EDT)--

Whoa! If Andy is CP's Norman Bates, does that mean he dresses up as Mother Phyllis? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 21:35, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Or Andy and Ames are really the same person, a la Fight Club? Bjones 15:56, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

When Karajou becomes the voice of reason, it's time to take a step back. Corry^{Wow. We're just blowing through nap time, aren't we?} 16:33, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Bugler blocked again.Matt oblong 16:44, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

And HelpJazz. Will they crack? Or will they behave like gentlemen and take their reprimand for the whole 48 hours? Hmm, this could get interesting. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 17:26, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I think Bugler saw my userpage this afternoon then decided to up his efforts to boot me from the site. JazzMan 22:28, 1 October 2008 (EDT) PS: If you take bets, I wouldn't bet on me being the one to crack. I'll find things to do for the next two days....

Perhaps I'm a little sensitive, but Bugler's whole Cancerous Cell thing makes me want to throttle him. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 23:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)
Also, HelpJazz/JazzMan/Whatever, feel more than free to edit up a storm here to occupy your two days. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 23:29, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Considering that's what set Bugler off in the first place, it probably wouldn't be the wisest idea. JazzMan 00:21, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Hmmmm....

Jpatt makes this post on Terry H's user page which got my attention. And then TerryH deletes the post immediately. Wonder what is going on there. Bjones 15:27, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

TerryH probably assumes Jpatt is a troll and making fun of their range blocks. Jrssr5 15:43, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

RIPE are the top level org that manages the IP address space. Either this guy is a bit ignorant, or it's an evil plan to try and get them to block 0.0.0.0/0 --JeevesMkII 16:10, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Let's go with #2. Today I rather that people are evil than just stupid. Cause there is no excuse for being just stupid. (PS, americans here, CALL YOUR DAMN SENATORS. There is simply no excuse for 700 BILLION to go "nowhere" with "no plan" into teh ozone only to be needed again like any good black mailer in 6 months-- sorry, the bail out is all we can talk aobut here)--En attendant Godot_{"«I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child. --V.Nabokov»} 16:19, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Mediawiki won't allow you to block X.X.0.0/32. Though an extension could be written to extend that and suggested to them...tmtoulouse 16:26, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Do you think they'd accept your kind offer of help? Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 16:30, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

No, it would have to take an elaborate set up to work. All kinds of evil machinations have crossed my mind about constructing extensions that we would appeal to them, and put them on line in a way not traceable to me, that when used properly don't do anything "wrong" per say but have the potential to be misused and really have dramatic effects. This is one such example, some sort of "easy range block" extension that allows for much wider range blocks, and less thought needed in dropping them out. tmtoulouse 16:38, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Unless I'm mistaken (also working from memory here), I think you mean /8, not /32. Larger number means less IPs blocked. --Sid 16:47, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Your right, but its 16 not 32

The thing that occurs to me is instead of doing a MexMax or Richard with block rights, rather write a program that spawns a few thousand threads and blocks as much of the IP address space in parallel in /16 increments or whatever MediaWiki allows maximum. If you concentrated especially on the bits of the address space assigned to the USA (but not big pointless assignments like early universities and the MOD) then nobody would be able to edit Conservapedia and it'd be a pain in the arse to clean up manually (I suspect Andy really isn't bright enough to fiddle with the database by hand at the table level.) --JeevesMkII 16:52, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I meant that in the "I think you mean that MW won't allow to block X.X.0.0/8 (instead of X.X.0.0/32 as you initially wrote)" sense. Compare to the statement I replied to. :P The biggest block MW supports is /16 (which blocks... what was it? Fifty thousand IPs or so?). --Sid 06:33, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

(Not that Karajou is doing badly on this score, "15:56, 1 October 2008, Karajou (Talk | contribs) blocked 85.25.0.0/16" Way to block most of Germany you fucktard.) --JeevesMkII 17:12, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

An idea

I know I'm probably going to scupper this by mentioning it here (so if somebody does try, then delete this), but looking around cp:Featured articles I see that none of Ken

's little babies have been an article of the week (ok, so he managed to piddle on the mainpage and get cp:Atheism as AotY). Anybody feel like socking up and adding cp:Evolution and cp:Homosexuality to the list? He'll be too busy exploding in delight to remove them and it'll be interesting to see what the committee make of his stuff. If he gets slapped down by CP itself... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 21:47, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

It would be waved through because the other sysops will go out of their way to avoid getting lengthy talk page announcements about soon receiving lengthy mails which make up some bullshit about Operation Astroturfing or Operation Whore Myself Out. Anything to get Ken to shut up. They'll gladly sacrifice a week of featuring Ken's article in exchange for not having to debate with him.

And don't even get me started about the apparently non-existent quality standards of the FA team. The criteria seem to be "Did I understand it?", "Is it longer than one page?" and "Does it have few redlinks?". I mean... just look at some of the past choices... --Sid 06:27, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I have been thinking that we ought to make their AotW our AotW unless someone finds a real gem out there on tar webs. Does anyone care? ħuman 16:52, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of Ed Poor on Wikipedia...

Here's a creepy edit summary if I ever saw one...

When I saw "Uncle Ed" after that edit I thought of that show on the Hallmark channel: Touched By An Uncle . Or something like that. Francine 00:13, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

That sums Smeg Ed up very nicely, methinks. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 05:06, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

(I'm getting: "Network error on wp") There's some lovely stuff on Ed on there.   ^Contribs_Talk 05:46, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Palin Presidency Vid

(Yeah, yeah, I'm supposed to be on vacation, but I got a few minutes before my day fully starts, so...)

Linked to it via WIGO, I watched this vid, and my question is: What is the song that plays in the longest part of it (beginning to roughly 1:15)? I got the feeling I should know it, but I can't quite put my finger on it right now. Video comments so far didn't seem to mention it, either. --Sid 06:55, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Argh! You're right. I know it, but don't know the name. Somebody please step in and save us from a sleepless night! Btw,I'm assuming this trailer is a parody, right? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:15, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Not sure, but you could try asking songtapper Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 07:24, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Turns out it's Rio, by Duran Duran... Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 07:26, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Um. Unless we're watching completely different videos then no, no it isn't. --JeevesMkII 08:57, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

(edit conflict) Agreed with Jeeves. I'm a fan of Duran Duran, but...not really, I think. (Fancy tool, though.) I'm thinking along the lines of soundtracks right now, actually. Something from the Spider-Man movies, maybe? --Sid 08:56, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I know. Songtapper = pretty good for pop songs, not so good for soundtracks. It also thought it might be Stairway to Heaven. Maybe I'm just not that good with the spacebar. Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 09:03, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

The song is O Fortuna. - User $\approx$$\pi$_{For best results always render PNG} 09:11, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Bah, it's a rubbish tool. It failed miserably to get White Light/White Heat by the Velvet Underground or even Perfect Day. It also knows nothing about Hayseed Dixie or Half Man/Half Biscuit. It did however get All around my hat by Steeleye Span, but not Meet on the ledge by Fairport Convention. These are the bands the cool kids are listening to today, right? --JeevesMkII 09:19, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps you lack natural rhythm? Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 09:35, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Jeeves: this kool kid certainly listens to Steeleye & Fairport.   ^Contribs_Talk 10:45, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Maybe I'm a lousy tapper, but it failed to identify The Beatles' "I'm Only Sleeping" and The Smiths' "Girl Afraid". It did, however, get Bonnie Tyler's "Total Eclipse of the Heart". Maybe I'll try some Clash. Oh, and I'm a huge Steeleye Span fan, but I never pretended to be one of the cool kids. DickTurpis 11:19, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Just tried "Rock the Casbah" and no dice. That should have been a gimme, I'd think. (Am I doing it wrong? I'm just doing the spoken bits, should I be doing the bass riff between "Sharif don't like it" and "rock the casbah, rock the casbah"?) It did, however, suggest Rio for that one too. Maybe it's their go-to song. DickTurpis 11:23, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Another Span & Fairport fan. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:27, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Jesus wept. Maybe we should start a folk rockers anonymous wiki instead. --JeevesMkII 11:35, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Confession - I was once a Folky - performing & listening. (& also a Jazz trombonist - you should see my lips)   ^Contribs_Talk 11:45, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

“”I first met her when she asked to join the trad band, I encouraged her which may seem strange to you, She had no legs or hips but you should have seen those lips after playing trombone for a week or two. Then one day I got back home and found a message She carved it in my banjo with a knife it said I feel insecure and I'm tired of being poor and I hear Bob Dylan's looking for a wife. That's why my baby's become a folk singer I can't seem to find her no how well she sings of being free, but I wish it weren't from me oh there ain't no use in looking for her now.

Hah, busted. Bill Oddie was singing about you! Strangely enough, I play the banjo. --JeevesMkII 12:07, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Am I the only philistine on here who thinks Ladytron is pretty amazing. Altho, in my defence, I'm also a complete Joanna Newsom fanboy. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:43, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Someone mentioned that the song at the beginning is O Fortuna, but it definitely is not. The music in the second half is though. JazzMan 13:06, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Wish my computer at work had a sound card, I might be able to help. If the question lingers for a few more hours, I'll check it at home. Speakerface ^{with 4 M's and a silent Q} 13:10, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I recognized that song, Pi Dude, but I actually meant the song playing from the beginning of the vid up until the 1:15 mark. My initial request wasn't phrased 100% clearly, though, but I had already been out by the time that occurred to me. Even though I'll have to dig out my old Carmina Burana CD. Maybe it's just some other title from it? Until then, I renew my cry for help. :( --Sid 14:36, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I considered that as well, since they seem to be in a similar style. The only thing I know from Carmina Burana is O Fortuna, so I couldn't say for sure, but the beginning part sounds more modern, like a contemporary sound check. But what do I know, I'm just the JazzMan 15:10, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

It is not another movement from Carmina Burana, I went through a stage in my life where I listened to the whole thing almost daily. tmtoulouse 15:14, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

tmtoulouse is correct (about Carmina Burana, I mean). Kallium 18:31, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) Hey, as long as we're talking about Palin (sort of) has anyone else seen this? It's a lot like our Schlafly Quote generator... but a little more sad... this woman actually has power and may get a lot more. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 13:17, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Did anyone else notice that in the opening skit on SNL last weekend, "Palin's" last "answer" was a verbatim quote of an answer she gave, as opposed to a parody answer? ħuman 17:57, 2 October 2008 (EDT)