Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive89

This is an archive page, last updated 15 November 2008. 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>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <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)

Taking it on the chin

Philip J. Rayment has been exercising self control when Bungler humiliated him. He has been Taking it on the chin. Bungler wrote most of that article. Proxima Centauri 09:11, 11 November 2008 (EST) You get blocked for being clueless. Belabouring a point is a blockable offence. Why isn’t Aschlafly blocked? these two contributions merit an infinite block. Conservapedia editors must take a lot on the chin. Proxima Centauri 09:25, 11 November 2008 (EST)

PJR doesn't get a lot of respect from anyone these days. Ken doesn't seem in much of a hurry to talk to him, although he's got loads of time for self-promotion. --Kels 20:08, 11 November 2008 (EST)

[1] Ed Poor Blocked him. He had to unblock himself. This could lead to something. Proxima Centauri 12:28, 12 November 2008 (EST)

They’re not taking it on the chin. They’re all upset and angry because their darling Republicans lost both elections. They’re taking it out against each other and against ordinary users who get blocked for nothing. Aschlafly is as upset and angry as any of them. He’s unpredictable. Aschlafly thinks he’s more intelligent than he is. That means he’ll have confidence in any silly decision he takes. They could lose one or more longstanding sysop there. Little Philip overlooked that now isn’t the time to get into this mess. Proxima Centauri 13:19, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Moarhitler.com

We need to coin a new wiki-site that adds Hitler referrences to every article in ever increasingly more bizarre and tangential ways! Or maybe it's just me. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:57, 11 November 2008 (EST)

I love that last one too.... I'm not comparing Obama to Hitler, but let me compare Obama to Hitler.... I still love the in the news template... It's the only place that is a 100% percent parodist free zone. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 11:05, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Armondikov, how about doing it at RWW? Each RW user article could rate them from one to ten hitlers (or some such), with worse and worse images for each level? ħuman 17:26, 11 November 2008 (EST)

I fancy summat in the style of this on the main page or WIGO:

Rationalwiki Hitler Advisory: Elevated - Significant Risk Of Hitler --Robledo 17:44, 11 November 2008 (EST)

I like that, remind me to boot up illustrator and do one when I'm back from working. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:19, 12 November 2008 (EST)

CLEP

Teh Assfly recommends the CLEP. Conservative CLEPtrap? JJ4e^{I love you} 13:54, 11 November 2008 (EST)

That's hardly surprising. It's much harder to teach students to respond in detail to a question than it is to teach them to regurgitate facts through rote memorization. Given his past comments about how he wouldn't be able to grade an entire stack of essays in one night, he strikes me as the sort of "teacher" who wants to do as little actual work as possible. --Phentari 18:26, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Besides, he, himself has stated that you can often "work out" a multiplechoice question with logic... yet now "it's as good as an essay test". Lordy, the man is an idiot.--En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 18:47, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe he just doesn't understand what an essay is? Barikada 21:33, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Multiple choice quizzes are so easy to mark that even an idiot could do it. Oh! What am I saying? _and marmite 21:44, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Not only do Essays take time to grade, you actually have to know MORE than the students to grade them. I can write a test using wiki on any topic in the world. But if i give an essay on, say, the Theromodynamic beta in the Bolzmann distrubition - well, i'd be farked as I have no idea if what a student wrote was correct, mostly correct, not correct, or just bullshit. Andy's issue is he doesn't know anything about history except what he makes up.--En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 11:20, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I gotta add some of this bullshit to the Andy no jokes page. This idea that writing a detailed analysis for 45 minutes straight is no more rigorous than circling an number is just classic Andy self-delusion. DickTurpis 11:38, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Mortal Kombat!

Great WIGO item! There is less than a one percent chance of Andy admitting that he is wrong. Deny this and lose all credibility. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 21:55, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Wonder: did he intentionally wait 'til Bugler had gone to bed? _and marmite 22:01, 11 November 2008 (EST)

It has begun! --Kels 22:07, 11 November 2008 (EST)

He still hasn't figured out how to revert while leaving an edit comment? Even when it comes to fellow sysops? --Toiretni 22:10, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Corry, you swine! you beat me to it by seconds;) _and marmite 22:12, 11 November 2008 (EST)

(somehow I accidentally deleted this- sorry! -Corry) Still, I wonder what prompted his sudden attack of conscience. Could he have realized the same thing that occasionally filters into Ken

's lizard brain, that the raving insanity that Andy posts in places like the B.O. article and the Main Page totally negates the efforts they've made to make the place respectable (utterly futile, in Ken's case) and influential? --Kels 22:14, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Oink. Regarding fellow sysops, Andy seems to have stopped respecting PJR a while back because he isn't a sycophant. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 22:14, 11 November 2008 (EST)

careful Toiretni stop polluting talk pages & CONTRIBUTE!. _and marmite 22:16, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Are the emails flying between New Jersey & Australia? _and marmite 22:34, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Apparently... the vandals seem to have the run of the place. And I seem to have been confused for someone else. (though I'll note that my edit was completely factual) --Interiot 22:50, 11 November 2008 (EST)

(unindent) Though I respect PJR, I am doubting his claim of ignorance to the Barack is Muslim bullshit. This picture sums it up best... how could he NOT know? And as usual, I expect him to get told down and he'll just roll over and comply. It'll be sad. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 22:45, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Ummmm...did you upload the right picture link? PFoster 22:50, 11 November 2008 (EST)

My point was that he couldn't watch Futurama without knowing the tied up girl wanting some hawt seckz was in front. I mean, he couldn't just sit there editing all this time and not know about Obama and the Muslim crap. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 23:14, 11 November 2008 (EST)_{Edit: He reads WIGO, commented numerous times on Obama talk sections on the main page, and the Muslim reference was all over the site where he's been.}

Wow that picture is a good way to derail this conversation. I had something to say but now I can't remember it anymore. JazzMan 01:40, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ah, Buggerer wakes up and sticks the (jack)boot in once again. PS Ken's articles could do with more Futureama. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:06, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, Buggerer ups the ante:

In view of your treasonable remarks, your time to depart has come. I advocate the merciful option, the equivalent of the bottle of whisky and the service revolver, in recognition of your past service in debunking Evolutionism. Better that than being publicly stripped of adminship and blocked. But, after what you have said, go you must. Bugler 06:22, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, dear leader ASchlafly, you'll have to back one of them, i.e., you have to make a decision. Awful! The great leader will not be pleased when he awakes.

--LArron 06:30, 12 November 2008 (EST)

"the merciful option, the equivalent of the bottle of whisky and the service revolver" - what a great and compelling example of the Christian virtue of Charity. One of the few instances where I'd actually be glad to discover that he's a parodist. --Just passing by 07:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I'd say what a great example of mockery and parody, ridiculing CP and its "Leader". My respects to Bugly. JJ4e^{I love you} 08:03, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ooh! Ed weighs in. This block is gonna hurt. Liberal namecalling indeed. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:35, 12 November 2008 (EST)

it's shapingup to be Ken & PJR against Ed and Bugler. Some strange bedfellows here. Terra 07:38, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Whose side will Andy take. That's the question. Terra 07:41, 12 November 2008 (EST)

He'll hide in a corner & let them fight it out. _and marmite 07:44, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Andy *might* say something, but won't do anything. He sometimes made a tiny "plz don't fite" comments between sysop giants like TK and Conservative, but it's obvious he'll side against poor PJR. Funny how he sits there and talks about discouraging competition. Oh and the picture, like my belt? ;) Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 07:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(Undent)

such a pity (not) that they've nowhere to talk this out in private! (Oh for the SDG) Terra 07:53, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Andy has just logged in. Let's go! --Toffeeman 07:56, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I have a feeling this could well be PJR's last stand. He's clearly shown his distaste at the Obama article (and for CP as a whole), he's being ganged up against and let's face it, apart from making everything YEC compliant, what role does he really serve there. Bungler might well succeed in driving him off. Question is... who will be next. And Ed has been an absolute smarmy swine since his return. Clearly, he has some frustrations to work off. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:27, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I was about to make the same comment. I can see him (PJR) going to CreationWiki or some similar site. Ed's just a wanker. Terra 08:32, 12 November 2008 (EST)

The right wing attitude is anathema to the good old Aussie Phil - he'll get fed up & go, later if not sooner. _and marmite 08:35, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler's plan is to remove the editors who want to make a difference, Phil and HelpJazz. That's obvious enough, so I'm feeling pretty bad for those two when it's like predicting the future but being unable to do anything about it. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 08:52, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Plus the fact that they're essentially on their own over there. Anybody (without block rights) who stands up for them is going to be out on their ear. And best of all, Andy has really bought this upon himself, by favouring people who act as his echo chamber. Like he says, CP isn't a meritocracy... it's something far, far worse. At least the former would have given some powers to non-parodists over there (I was going to say sensible, but this is CP after all), which would give it some semblance of balance. btw - has Deborah also thrown in the towel? Haven't seen her on there for ages. Things are getting out of control over there. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:20, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(undent)

Just remember that the ultimate act of vandalism to CP would be to drive out every semi-rational editor/sysop until the site has gone completely Lord of the Flies, and is ridiculed even by reasonable conservatives and homeschoolers. Andy's too vain to see what's obvious to every sane person looking at this site.

What I wonder after days like yesterday, though, is what his mother must think if she bothers to spend any time reading CP. I doubt she does, because she's got better things to do with her time, and probably knows she'd be disappointed if she did. --SpinyNorman 09:28, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Do I have this right?

If someone posts links to various CP articles (say, Ken's pets) in the comments of every youtube video they can, as well as comment posts in blogs and any place that takes them, google will wise up to the spam and remove the articles from their searches entirely? Is this true? If so, what are we waiting for? DickTurpis 00:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I would think the number of "bad" links would have to be proportional to the "good" links, otherwise anyone could use this technique to knock Amazon off the charts. But getting even halfway there might decrease its standing some. And Ken has been courting some pretty iffy links on his own anyway. --Toiretni 01:24, 12 November 2008 (EST)

This strategy won't work, otherwise it would be used on a daily basis by businesses to knock their competitors off Google. The one thing which to the best of my knowledge does hurt your ranking is if you have lots of outgoing links from your site to "bad" sites (low ranked link farms etc...). MediaWiki's "nofollow" attribute might prevent this though. However, one might think of informing Ken's link swappers that precisely because of the "nofollow", links from CP are pretty much worthless; maybe they'll reconsider linking to CP.... --Just passing by 03:14, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Google likes to alter the algorithms a lot and keep it fairly secret, so I suppose we'll never really know. But regardless, for every blog praising Conservapedia by linking to it (probably via some linking deal or whatever) there'll be at least 10 linking it to say "look at these idiots", which has to count for something. So whatever CP's position on the search rankings it's going to be effectively surrounded by things mocking or refuting it. Also, it'll never top WP for non made up terms. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:29, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Interiot

You've got to stop polluting talk pages, you're ruining the dear leader's day. Int, old buddy, old pal, you ought to go back over there and tell him point blank that you don't do articles. You do all the stuff that noone else wants to do; categorization, undeadending, etc, etc and you use talk pages from time to time. If he bitches at you about 90/10 you can show him how he's wrong on the tool you built. End result is that he's in no position to make demands of you. You do the work that keeps his blog wiki running. Stile4aly 03:28, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, you and your ~1,534 edits are complete pollution. How dare you Interiot, how dare you! Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 07:52, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ken again

Wow (ok, this is the first of his million edits on the subject), but wow. Kenny comes out attacking the Obama article again. There is truly trouble a-brewing in Andyland. 2 sysops going up against him? Expect to hear the distant sound of Andy's blood boiling. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:21, 12 November 2008 (EST)

PJR fighting for the truth doesn't surprise me... I think YEC is wrong, but the man has great integrity. But Conservative displaying some? Very weird. I don't think it will amount to much, since he certainly doesn't have the guts to go against authority now that he's been told to heel, but the very fact that he made a cogent argument against something that he thought was wrong is astonishing.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 08:00, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I think Ken has a simple, selfish motivation. He wants sites to link to link to his pet articles, and to score recommendations from people like Dembski. The vitriol of the Obama article would put off too many of the people he's trying to attract, and some may even remove their links to avoid being associated with CP. Ken's put too much work into his wet dream to have it undone, so he's joining the ranks of the tone-down-the-Obama-Libel crowd. --SpinyNorman 09:41, 12 November 2008 (EST)

WIGOBarack

Looks as if we're going to need a page solely for the Obama:PJR:Ed:Ken:Bungler:Andy mess. _and marmite 08:21, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ha! ED: "I'm probably the most willing of all sysops to change mind" _and marmite 08:26, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Well, to be honest he is. He has gladly unblocked people in the past. I don't know if it is his sense of humour or his bipolar disorder, but he is not as consistent as some Karajou, Andy or Bugler would be (and I wrote this after having been banhammered for 5 years, by Ed, after two innocent edits). Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 08:37, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Yes, he probably is, although that's not saying much at all... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:30, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I can't keep up. The infighting is sprawling all over the site. Blimey! What good value our box seats are, eh? DogP 13:30, 12 November 2008 (EST)

When conservatives loose elections they resort to cannibalism to find enough vitriol to survive upon. This way it insures only the meanest and nastiest of the conservatives is around for the next election bid. Kind of like the Aztecs, who believed eating the body of a warrior made you stronger, Conservatives believe eating the brain of another conservative makes you smarter. PJR is lucky that he is in Australia rather than the Schflay kitchen. --Shagie 14:20, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I'm still catching up (clicking through the diffs with my deleted comment in the clipboard to put it back), and there is an amazing amount of sanity occurring on that talk page - PJR, Ed, and even 12-edits at a time Ken! Andy: "lalalalala I can't hear you!" ħuman 14:58, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Did somebody call the FBI?

This piece of wandalism reminds me of Stevecarson and Jayjay. JJ4e^{I love you} 09:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ace McWicked's handiwork. It's beautiful in that so many edits were made with such an obvious edit summary. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:47, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Indeed, truely a work of beauty (though not as good as the edit history where you took the first letter of each page and it spelled "ASchlafly is a &*$^&" :P ). Still, the Hitler Megazord is awesome. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 12:07, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ed demonstrates his scientific bent

Ed reverts what seems to me a reasonable edit by JohnD and then tells him to avoid nonsense and join in the gay bashing. _and marmite 09:54, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ed's certainly touchy today. He just blocked DinsdaleP for a month after I asked why he reverted JohnD's nano edits without comment. --SpinyNorman 10:08, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(Edit conflict). He blocks DinspdaleP & JohnD for disagreeing with him &/or asking why the nanotechnology edit was reverted. & Now the US National Holocaust Museum is a "biased source" promoting gay rights activism. weaseLOId~ 10:14, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Ed's course

Ed ... is ... teaching ... writing! The blind leading the blind, or what? Terra 11:10, 12 November 2008 (EST)

You can just imagine the wholesale deletions and the added conciseness, not to mention the "If I can't understand it, it's rubbish" comments. He's being paid for this? _and marmite 11:13, 12 November 2008 (EST)

There has got to be a way we can have parents' children taken from them for sending them to Andy and Ed for their education. This is just plain child abuse. DickTurpis 11:23, 12 November 2008 (EST)

This is awful news for American children. Aside from being a horrendous writer, the man has no heart. Remember: dying minorities isn't a cause for emotion.-caius (soldier) 11:34, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I assumed that it was for adults, for some reason. Terra 11:38, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Yes, with the demand led growth (!) I agree, - night school or similar? _and marmite 11:40, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I live in Queens - I'll see if I can find his course. --Composure1 11:51, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Please infiltrate his course & throw eggs at him. It would mean so much to me. (Take photos too). :-D weaseLOId~ 12:23, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Look on the bright side, even if a parent was dumb enough to send them to Ed, you'd have to be an absolute turnip not to see that he's a fucking moron. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:04, 12 November 2008 (EST)

A little wikistalking found this: My new job involves some translation into French (and maybe Spanish), as well as some Korean to English. So perhaps I can contribute occasional terms from those languages. --Ed Poor 14:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC) (Wiktionary after he was turned down for sysop _and marmite 12:08, 12 November 2008 (EST))

I have come to the conclusion that Ed is just a monsterous tool, and is making shit up again (or maybe in his mind he really is teaching somebody). He wouldn't know how to teach a cow to moo. The idea that anyone would send their child to that grinning idiot is just absurd. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:21, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Translation into French? Goddamn, that's anti-American! Ajkgordon 12:29, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Speaking Korean would tally with his Unification Church interest - he's all over the articles on both CP and WP. Furthermore, ED has him working at ABC - I'll see if I can find anything. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Lets see if Ed reads WIGO Talk: HEY ED, YOUR RELIGION IS A SHAM AND YOU ARE A FUCKTARD!!!!!!!!!! I post on Conservapedia as JPatt. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 13:07, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Thanks for fuckin with me Jpatt :P EternalCritic 13:27, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I do teaching writing! LANDRU SCHLAFLY!

Honestly, on wikis I don't mind typos and grammatical mistakes on talk pages, the DISCUSSION is what counts, if I can understand what the person is saying. I DO mind them on article pages though, and correct them a lot. But dear, dear Landru, if you are going to make stupid mistakes like "I do teaching", then please, please DON'T pick on other people, or worse (like me) block them because they make minor mistakes on talk pages. This is just being holier than thou, stupid, and drives people away from your pathetic sight (sic). Check your spelink if you are going to abyews others, you toad eating pumpkin roller....(Twain). Jimaginator 13:15, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Gee, you've noticed their double standards :P They're just trying to eliminate the English language so they don't have to refer to it as English and can call it something of their own. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 13:20, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Like Newspeak? Totnesmartin 13:22, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Orwell put some thought into his works, I suggest Dopespeak Jimaginator 11:58, 13 November 2008 (EST)

The Emperor's New Clothes

I've long wondered whether Andy really actually believes the "Obama is secretly a Muslim" claim. But now PJR suggests the emperor has no clothes, and Bugler and Ed Poor insist that he does. Is this just sycophantic theatre, or do they really believe these are reasonable claims? Okay, sure, it's easy to make guesses, but there's actual truth here somewhere. There's also real danger. Sooner or later, they'll let the truth will slip out, and either PJR will be shown to be full of shit, or Andy+Bugler+Ed will. So why do they firmly stake out these positions? --Toiretni 13:36, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I think a whole lot of conservative positions are the equivalent of believing forwards. It makes the person reading it feel like they've learned something useful, regardless of the amount of factual information it contains. Hence, even if Andy didn't believe it as well, he has the echo chamber to back it up. They all reinforce each other until they don't remember believing otherwise. -Lardashe

I don't think that has anything at all to do with conservatism, just some conservatives. JazzMan 14:59, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, the modern GOP has destroyed the meaning of the term with their embrace of the fundy loons as a major chunk of their base. Where it used to mean ideas of the sort espoused by people like WF Buckley Jr., now it is often associated with the gibbering of idiots like A. Schlafly. I hope they get their act together again. I also hope the Greens (or someone) builds up a decent liberal party in the USA - we could use it. GOP conservative 30%, Dems in the middle (where they are now) 40% and something on the left at 30%. Then we'd have some fun politics! ħuman 16:42, 12 November 2008 (EST)

But that would be, like, European or something! Ajkgordon 04:06, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Tragic Incident in Public School

Thanks to whoever WIGOd this. Although it may not be a barrel of laughs it reminded me how deeply unpleasent some of the people at CP are. One minute I'm laughing working my way up the WIGOs. Next minute I'm reading and re-reading in horror hoping I've misunderstood. They are worse than ambulence chasing lawyers how quickly they will leap on a story like this for their own gain. 86.131.227.59 15:06, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah that was me.... I was also the one responsible for this little bit of wandalism. I watch a lot of Conservapedia and I chuckle and maybe feel sorry for some of the misguided people... but I swear, if I were to meet Karajou, I would punch him right in the jaw and hope for a fracture. He is the most disgusting excuse for a human being I've ever had the misfortune of running across and I'm includeding Andy and Ed in that list. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 15:18, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Any excuse. It really is sick. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 15:24, 12 November 2008 (EST)

EDIT CONFLICT: I'm still blocked for the day.... Anyone want to sock up and tell Koward that the worst thing to happen to schools before the 60's was not "unauthorized gum chewing." In fact, after a small investigation, I have a body count of approx. 70 deaths (25 if you don't count the Bath School Massacre of 1927). I also have an injury count of 37 (or 95 including Bath) That's only counting the records I could find in about five minutes of searching, and only goes until 1959. Furthermore, maybe the increase in gun violence has a little something to do with the increase in gun availibility you fucktard (edit that out if you post it) and, in conclusion, I hope you get raped. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 15:27, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Could you share your sources? I've tried looking for this stuff occasionally, since my co-workers seem to think that this sort of thing didn't happen before the 90s. -Lardashe

Except that he has like a billion papers on gays, I'd say he was a troll or parodist... but that would mean he has no life outside of the parody (and while i find it not unlikely a non parodist has no life, i find it hard to belive a parodist spends 24/7 on gays)...i sware he's surreal. i guess if there were bibles in schools, no violence would ever happen. and the 50's only had issues with chewing gum, not gangs (see west side story), or you know teen pregnancies (see any book about pregnancy in the 50s') or drop outs or or or or. sick fucks over there.--En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 17:43, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I was IN high school in the 1960's and it was no bed of roses. Druggies, rapes, gang action with knives, bats and chains. It was lucky nobody could get a gun that worked. Chivelry vs knife , give me tyhe really big knife every time . Andy must have lived a sheltered life 67.72.98.45 00:28, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Sheltered life? He's arich american white-boy by most accounts, it's about as sheltered as you can get with without being part of the UK's royal family. But when you're regressive (they've stepped beyond the original definition of conservatism), you have a rose tinted view of the past so all the real research that says things are actually getting better (like the well known fact that drug addiction in the Victorian era was miles higher than it is now) you just ignore it or don't believe it. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 05:23, 13 November 2008 (EST)

AshleyS

I was about to WIGO this one too, but I noticed Ed deleted the userpage, which I imagine said something like "my name is Ashley S[some anagram of Andy's name]." I think even Ed isn't stupid enough to think AshleyS somehow morphs into Andrew Schlafly on its own. Of course, since we can't see the deletion, I guess we'll never know for sure. DickTurpis 15:11, 12 November 2008 (EST)

But Ashley already has an S in it. If it was an anagram of Andrew Schlafly, the surname would have to begin with another letter. & I think you're underestimating Ed's stupidity. Have you seen how many people he's blocked today? I think he just gets trigger happy & blocks people on impulse without thinking it out properly. AshleyS looks a tiny bit like Aschlafly so that's as good as an anagram for Ed, & down comes the banhammer. weaseLOId~ 15:24, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I'm surprised I somehow got out unscathed myself after the NOI discussion. EternalCritic 15:38, 12 November 2008 (EST)

While it's not an anagram, this should perhaps be taken into consideration. DickTurpis 15:52, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I noticed that too - I kept looking for a parodist edit by AshleyS and that was at the start of the line. Was this meant to be the only clue, I wonder? --SpinyNorman 16:20, 12 November 2008 (EST)

AshleyS was Asphalt P. Stanky at first, but was blocked to recreate a new name. The user even referred to their old name in talk edits. Still not sure how it pertains to Andy's name, but whatever. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 16:38, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I'm sure it's been asked before, but...

It seems like the concept of Conservapedia was good, but instead of it being run by a smart, capable professional like William F. Buckly, or a smart, capable layman like Hsmom, we had the misfortune of it being implemented by Andy. After reading a day's worth of Ed Poor's idiocy at work, and now Karajou's twisted, insensitive opportunism, I have to ask - is there a website out there that took the concept behind Conservapedia and got it right? I've looked around but haven't found any, and that gave me an idea...

Why not us?

Two years later, I think nothing would be a more fitting way for RW to celebrate Conservapedia Day on November 21st than to launch an online Conservative Wiki done right, from the people who brought you RationalWiki. After all, as Andy states in his American History Lecture 10:

"There is nothing wrong with that, and unfortunately many do not achieve their potential because they are unwilling to use someone else's good idea."

I believe that the Andrew Schlafly implementation of a wiki-based reference for conservatives and homeschoolers is a miserable failure, but could be done right by others. The admins would be fair, professional administrators instead of divas and acolytes, and differing views would be accepted as long as they were respectful and family-friendly. The wiki would have a conservative bias, but unlike both CP and WP, it would be done through explicit namespaces for Opinion and Essay pieces, and not by hijacking topics in the Encyclopedia section.

I think that nothing would be a more fitting answer to Andy's delusion that he's running an online encyclopedia instead of a wingnut blog than to build an actual conservative encyclopedia, and watch people start using it instead of CP. I'd also want to extend an invite to people we disagree with but respect like PJR to join from Day One, so they can apply their energy to something meaningful for a change. Nothing would be sweeter justice than watching the pageviews for articles the new wiki top those of the corresponding articles on CP, and there would be no better day to announce the project than November 21st.

Thoughts?

--SpinyNorman 16:58, 12 November 2008 (EST)

It would mean you would have to give conservative ideas, christian ideas, antiwoman, anti gay, anti other of all times, real "space" and respect. I can't stomach that idea. Even "edits" i do there when I had a sock puppet, gave me the hebbies. --En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 17:06, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(EC) Putting all the conservative ideas into the essay space defeats the purpose of having a conservative wiki. Somewhow, though, I doubt that Rationalwiki is comprised of the right group of people to start a conservative wiki anyway (as demonstrated by WfG above). JazzMan 17:08, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Certainly a group of people like us are not the ones to implement any conservative wiki. Besides, the idea of a conservative encyclopedia just feeds into the myth that there are liberal facts and conservative facts. If people want a free online wiki encyclopedia, one exists already, and as imperfect as it is, it is better than anything we are going to come up with. The main problem is it is not always suitable for children, so maybe someone should make a wikimirror edited of such material. Does something like this exist already? In any case, the failures of Citizendium and the other wikipedia alternatives shows that there just isn't a market for another such project. DickTurpis 17:15, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I know, it seems counter-intuitive. I wouldn't endorse any YEC stuff myself, for example, but it deserves a fair article that explains it without proclaiming it as the absolute truth, either. The idea is to offer conservatives an outlet for expressing their ideas constructively, without necessarily having to say the ideas are correct or incorrect. In fact, what I'm envisioning is more of a kid-friendly version of WP that a homeschooling parent could let their kids use safely (can't do that with WP). That doesn't mean stating that all kangaroos came from Noah's ark and hopped to Australia. What I want to see is an option to CP that reasonable folks could use, and if there isn't one why not start it ourselves? --SpinyNorman 17:17, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Wikifor kids. Conservatives are anathema to most on here & "facts have a liberal bias". So - silly idea really ; ) Terra 17:19, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Wikifor kids. Conservatives are anathema to most on here & "facts have a liberal bias". So - silly idea really ; ) Terra 17:19, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(EC and I think others have covered my same arguments) Another large problem is that an Encyclopedia, by itself cannot have a preconcieved bias. Having a "Conservative" encyclopedia is like having a Conservative dictonary... or a conservapedia thesaurus.... You can't have a slant to something that is simply there to present facts. By that same token, I don't consider Wikipedia a true encyclopedia, I consider Wikipedia..... Wikipedia... Good for references, a great jumping off point, but not exactly something I'd base a major research paper on. Conservapedia, started by a madman, hijacked by lunatics, but it was destined to happen. If the liberal bias in everything is so bad you have to create an alternative to counter it, you're obviously a little deranged. Then take a look at the history of those involved: Andy got the boot from Wikipedia because they didn't accept his "Abortions cause breast cancer and if you get a vaccine you'll catch Autism" nonsense, Ed Poor was promoted to high rank because he was in early and then got stripped off his powers and booted for.... Actually the same shit he does now, and ever since his second RFA was laughed off the tubes, he's been even worse. Karajou was kicked from Wiki for being an arrogant asshole and trying to impress people with his NAVY acronyms, and the list goes on. When your site is simply a haven for those forcibly removed from it's "rival," you don't have a good foundation to build on. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 17:23, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Also, much of the sane material on CP is added by RW socks trying to keep their edit/talk ratio up. Take the RW folks away, take the parodists away, take the clueless away, and who is left? PJR, pretty much, and a bunch of "out" liberals. Eliminate the cut-and-paste fests and you've got nothing left. --Too tired to log in 17:39, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Wikipedia certainly is a real encyclopedia. Quality and accuracy have nothing to do with it though, all told, most articles on WP are pretty good. I could see value in a kid friendly encyclopedia (no hard core goatse or advanced calculus) but a conservative encyclopedia seems as whacky as a liberal encyclopedia. WP aims to be a comprehensive and universal reference. It also aims to be objective. While I understand that these are problematic terms, they should make for a fine reference for people of any political stripe. The fact that WP doesn't for Andy et al and that they felt the need to form their abomination says more about Andy and his acolytes than WP. Andy isn't looking for an alternate reference. He is living in an alternative universe. All the cogent and insightful conservative essays in the world aren't going to make any difference to him. He doesn't see what everyone else sees. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 17:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)

(undent)

Points taken, and after careful consideration - you're all correct. I had to stop and think about what my goal was, and it wasn't to create a forum for articles I couldn't stand behind. Wikiforkids addresses the kid-friendly part of the equation, so this is a dead end proposal.

To be honest, I was thinking about how Andy deludes himself into thinking CP is actually achieving any of the objectives it claims to, and that nothing would show him up like having someone execute the concept properly, and by comparison revealing CP as the fringe blog it's become. That's not for us to do, though - if Conservatives want it badly enough someone true-believer will step to the task instead.

Once in a while I just get frustrated at being sidelined for no valid reason as Ed did to me today, and I needed to vent. I'll just have to content myself with finally having the time to work on a RW project I never seem to get around to. --SpinyNorman 18:37, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I think part of the problem with the whole "conservative encyclopedia" thing is defining conservatism. Not all conservatives are fundamentalist creationist homophobic Bible-thumping misogynists, but that's the kind of conservatism promoted by Schlafly & the chief sysops at CP. Trying to do a more relaxed kind of conservative encyclopedia would still end up with conflicts in terms of the POV (e.g. creationism v. evolution; pro-life v. pro-choice). weaseLOId~ 19:37, 12 November 2008 (EST)

That's one of the most annoying things about Andy: he's absolutely convinced that his particular views on politics and religion are the "one true path," he's completely unable to consider viewpoints other than his own, he makes up ways to refer to opposing viewpoints as psychiatric disorders, then accused other people of being closed-minded. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 20:04, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I thought the original idea was a good one, and who better to implement it than this den of deceivers? We certainly have the skills and manpower, so we could hit the ground running. Of course, as I read it, I interpreted "conservative" to mean the Buckleyesque version, not Andy's ridiculous extremism. But then, the whole idea that WP was so horribly biased came from Andy and similar wingnuts. Is it really? Someone pointed out the wikiforkids fork, and for the religious stuff there's creationwiki etc. For the racism there's metapaedia, for the sexism, soc.men or whatever, and for incompetence there's CP, the shining example of how not to implement or run a wiki. ħuman 21:01, 12 November 2008 (EST)

For what it's worth, I was thinking Buckley, too, as opposed to a kinder, gentler version of Andyland. Glad that part came across. --SpinyNorman 23:13, 12 November 2008 (EST)

That's the thing. There are always religious divisions. In my mind, a proper conservative wiki should embrace all main-stream conservative viewpoints. It should be sympathetic to YEC and OEC. It should be sympathetic to catholics and protestants. Yes, I think we can do better. Especially if we start it, but then hand over much of the reins to Christian theologians, or other people who have broader knowledge of the various christian denominations. --Toiretni 23:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

FWIW, I haven't read much William F. Buckley, but I thought he was basically just a slightly more mainstream-kowtowing version of Aschlafly? I mean, this is the National Review guy, right? The guy you can see on YouTube spewing crazy crap?   Also, there's nothing "Conservative" (to use Buckley's capitalization, at least according to Wikipedia) about creationism (the AiG crap that CP is full of) or dispensationalism (the Left Behind crap of which CP is strangely free) — they're both very creatively perverse and not at all like your grandfather's religion. But then, everything interesting is perverse in some way. Every year I feel like "conservatism", even when it's not of the American "Christian conservative" variety, is more and more obviously a mere rejection of whatever the Other happens to be saying at the moment. Even if that rejection (Creationism, "Obama=Muslim", abstinence pledges, War on Drugs,...) is quite obviously more outlandish than the status quo. --Marty 00:22, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I don't agree with a lot of Buckley's positions, but what I admire about the man is that he was intelligent, a lifetime learner, and most of all, genuinely interested in understanding all of the perspectives on an issue before interpreting what he considered the conservative view to be. He was the kind of guy who could beat you in a debate on abortion while representing the pro-life position, but then switch roles if asked and beat you up just as easily representing the pro-choice side. Buckley believed that people would be drawn to conservative values if they were presented thoughtfully, and by having a convincing refutation to differing views - the opposite of Schlafly Statistics, the Schlafly Reversal, 90/10 censorship of dissent and other Andy-isms. Buckley also had a rare trait among modern conservatives - he was a gentleman. My DinsdaleP CP User Page on CP has an example of this.

Am I a conservative fanboy, then? Not at all, but I wonder what a site like CP would have been, could have been, if it was done by someone more like Buckley instead of Andy. The closest they have to that is PJR, and combination of Bugler & Ed attacking him plus Andy's increasing denial is probably going to send him to saner pastures soon. --SpinyNorman 19:19, 13 November 2008 (EST)

(undent)

I think the idea of a conservative encyclopedia (or a liberal encyclopedia, or a men's encyclopedia, or an encyclopedia for redheads, or any other "niche" that's based on descriptors other than common interests) is just plain ridiculous. But if someone really wanted to do it, I think the place to start would be Simple English Wikipedia. It's like Wikipedia, but for people who don't write good and want to learn how to do other things good too. Unlike the English Wikipedia, it has a small userbase, which means less quality control (good for people who want to add spin without being challenged); but unlike Latin Wikipedia, it's written in English (good for people who subscribe to Conservative Values). Not that I'm advocating a hostile conservative takeover of Simple English Wikipedia (no, seriously, I'm not; I think that would be terrible, except insofar as it might cause the Wikimedia Foundation to take a closer look at their liberal hah! policy on creating new projects), but that's what I'd do if I were like Andy only smarter. --Marty 00:22, 13 November 2008 (EST)

A conservative may be able to co-opt a minor wiki project to have some of what they want... You might be able to get someone of the David Brooks persuasion to do it and succeed. The problem is that if it is lead by someone with the Andy persuasion, they have difficulty working within the system. That really is the key there - within the system. Andy cannot be subordinate to anyone (which is why he is a home school teacher). Kookie isn't happy unless he has a gun or a banhammer. Conservative would never be able to go on with his articles at such a place. PJR might be able to do it, he is respectful enough, but he would have to work within a system where people are not going to let you put 'secular scientists claim that' in front of everything that dates older than 6000 years. Ed would rapidly annoy any admin on any project. A hostile wiki takeover never would work - someone has the admin account and the vision. It takes more than Andy being smart to do it - it takes Andy playing well with others, which would never happen. Can you see any of the CP type crowd being able to play well with others? They can't even play well with themselves. --Shagie 00:44, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Egads!

I've been run through by the schlafly reversal! EternalCritic 17:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Congratulations. And nice user name! Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 17:58, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Funny how the name was below the radar until I spanked the assfly. EternalCritic 18:17, 12 November 2008 (EST)

The first time I said something that made too much sense, he called me "Jazzman___". (This was when I was signing with my full username, including the numbers). JazzMan 18:24, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Andy has decided that he needs to reassure everone that attacks on schools simply do not happen if the school is religious. MOre over, *chivalrous* students would not have been scared, and would have secured teh attacker before the cops got there. Andy has rarely been sicker. --En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 18:28, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I don't know why this edit by Andy pisses me off so much when all the others just slide off my brain without any problem. Actually, I do: the claim that Godlier students wouldn't have let the assailant get away. No doubt Andy's cock plumps up a bit when he imagines himself back in high school, going all Chuck Norris on some greasy psychopath outcast, his SAS-honed lethal killing fugue taking over until all the busty, busty cheerleaders in their slutty, slutty, dirty silky panties are saved by his manly prowess. But why would school prayer equip a bunch of high school kids with the wherewithall to subdue an armed psychopath? Perhaps in a Godlier society they would all pull out their defensive weapons of gun and cut the assailant down in a perfectly synchronized hail of gunfire. Because doing the Rosary in school is better crisis preparation than SWAT training is. And prayer is a perfect defense against random acts of violence. Andy really is worse than having a colovesical fistula and getting a piece of shit jammed in your urethra, resulting in urinary obstruction and renal failure.--Martin Arrowsmith 19:03, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Has anyone given him the memo about chivalry being more of a romanticism than reality? In all of history. EternalCritic 18:35, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I think I'm going to be sick now...... Such a blatant disregard for..... you know what, I can't even finish this. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 18:48, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I guess I'm too liberal, and too godless, but if i had been a teacher there, and any chilverous student had run after that kid, i'd have told the pursuant to sit the fuck down and wait for the cops. I'd rather the assilant not be caught, than that he turn around on some kid who just wants to help, and shoots him dead. if you are willing to knife someone, lord alone knows what other weapons you might be carrying. And then to suggest that these kids are not "religious" enough... god i hate that man. he is vile, he is full of pure derision for the entire world, and he has nothing of any redeaming value in his soul.--En attendant Godot_{"«Her intense and pure religiousness took the form of her having equal faith in the existence of another world and in the impossibility of comprehending it in terms of earthly life. V.Nabokov»} 20:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Well, if they were appropriately chivalrous, they would have horses, swords, crossbows, and (largely defensive) weapons of bags of plague rats at hand. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 22:16, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe Andy has the idea that if you die as a martyr for the cause of Godliness or Chivalry you wind up in the big H with a herd of virgins to do stuff with... not sure what you'd do though, seeing as you've sworn to abstinence...--PsyGremlin_Whut? 23:53, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Andy needs hope that he'll get laid someday. EternalCritic 00:08, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Its well fucked now

Conservapedia is well fucked now - I have never seen this screwed. Ed Poor is running amok, PJR and HelpJazz are being pissed on by Bugler, Andy's being spanked by sysops (even Ken!) on his Obama bullshit and the place is over-run with parodists. Andy is completely incapable of controling it and, in the midst of it, are the homeschoolers who are being exposed to this jibber-jabber. Its a total fucking mess. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 18:53, 12 November 2008 (EST)

All good experiments include explosions ;) EternalCritic 18:57, 12 November 2008 (EST)

If you scripted this as a Television Sitcom, it'd never get past the first proposal. "It's just too unbelievable" - "people don't really act that way" - "nobody could be so stupid" _and marmite 19:26, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Now aren't you glad Andy is running for president in 2012? Kettle o' fish 19:36, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Palin/Schflaly 2012 Schflaly/Pain 2012 God bless America and nobody else! ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 19:45, 12 November 2008 (EST)

No, the mystic goat says it will be God bless America and Godspeed everybody else!--stunteddwarf 19:48, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I like the typo(?) there , sheesh (Palin->Pain) _and marmite 19:58, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I hadn't spotted that - that's genius!--stunteddwarf 20:01, 12 November 2008 (EST)

More like God bless _{my conception of true}America_ns and Godspeed everybody else _{and the dirty un-American Liberal "Americans" who didn't vote for me"}! (Saying that as an American myself.) Kallium^talk 22:44, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I mark these days as golden ones, in the twilight of a joyous 18 months watching these fucking nitwits stab forks in their own eyes. I am tremendously enjoying all this madness, tremendously. DogP 23:27, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I agree at DogP. ħuman 01:41, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Is it wrong to enjoy someone elses project crumble? Hang on, feeling sympathetic? Go read the homosexuality article! Ah, that's better. Let it burn! _{Hmm, an online dialogue with myself, haven't done that for a while.} ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 05:12, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I was slowly reintroducing myself, first with genuine edits but slowly sliding into parody, but I've given up now. The place is turning into a huge, unintentional self-parody. C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre. Totnesmartin 05:47, 13 November 2008 (EST)

"Is it wrong to enjoy someone elses project crumble?" No more than enjoying an apple crumble. I could try adding a gag about how CP resembles an apple crumble, but frankly just the apple crumble gag stretched my wits. Wibble--stunteddwarf 12:28, 13 November 2008 (EST)

So what would it take for CP to actually collapse?

There was some discussion about this recently. I agree that CP is fucked, but I can't see it actually closing down anytime soon. Almost every new user is either a vandal or a parodist, the gene pool of active contributors is very small & credibility is close to zero, but I think CP will keep going regardless. Even if the sensible editors (Hsmom, JessicaT, HelpJazz, etc.) all gave up on it, & it was just Andy, Karajou, Bugler & Ken, it would still carry on. But what would it actually take for CP to fold completely? weaseLOId~ 10:09, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Mama Schlafly pulls the plug. out of fear CP is contaminating Eagle Forum by association. PFoster 10:35, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Actually, as soon as the few real editors (assuming there are any left) get sick of the bullying and leave and/or get blocked for questioning the wrong person, it'll just be Andy and his cronies and eventually, they'll start attacking each other. People like Ed and Ken need the rush they get from holding power over someone else. When they no longer have that, they'll either quit to find it somewhere else or turn on their "friends." SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 14:25, 13 November 2008 (EST)

The respect meter is reading zero

Just when you thought nobody could have less respect for the Assfly than you do. Kid, just demand your money back. You know it makes sense. --JeevesMkII 22:55, 12 November 2008 (EST)

So that's what, a 95%? --Kels 23:03, 12 November 2008 (EST)

I wonder, should we be doing Andy's homework as well to show those kids what a real answer looks like? Stile4aly 23:41, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Is JoeB (the student, not the 19th-century member of the Know-Nothing Party) one of us? I thought he was for the first couple homeworks, but then he wrote something that implied he was physically present in Andy's class, so now I'm just assuming he's one of the good ones^TM. --Marty 00:57, 13 November 2008 (EST)

News Story of the Year?

I may have to WIGO this, because Ken's such an attention whore that he apparently needs to keep hiw precious Demski plug at the top of the news section. --SpinyNorman 23:17, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Got yer plague rats right here. --Kels 23:40, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Was that post meant for "Egads!", Kels? --SpinyNorman 23:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Love it how they say that the evolutionary position is being undermined by Science (the gold standard of academic journals) and then link to an anti-evolution site. Linkthewindow 01:41, 13 November 2008 (EST)

We've already established that they can't link directly to a journal. Official Reason: "Liberal Bias", Actual Reason: "Too many big words". ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 05:08, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Stopping new accounts

It's still possible to log in at Conservapedia. I can't create a new account. Well I have stated 3 new accounts in the last week. All 3 were blocked after a short time. Is it only my range of IP adresses that can't create new accounts? Have they stopped all new accounts? Proxima Centauri 03:03, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Yep, the 'create account button' is gone from where I'm standing. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

I would imagine they would put up barriers in time for Conservapedia Day. Seems a little early though. StarFish 04:54, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I can just imagine Andy as Prince Humperdink from The Princess Bride telling his men to clear out the Theive's Forest before the big event... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 05:05, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I know! The ironic thing is I think Conservapedia Day will be all the funnier if the vandals lay off and allow them to show themselves for what they really are. The poetry competition should be a scream. I hope they do it.

Oh Conservapedia I think you're great.

Free from liberal bias.

Unlike other wikis so full of hate

And edited by liars.

etc. StarFish 05:51, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Eewww... poetry. Anyway, I though someone said that CP Day deserved "something special" and I assumed they meant this... Not that I'd endorse it, but it would be the funnier of all options. :P ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 05:57, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Which are the countries where this...is legal? Proxima Centauri 06:45, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Isn't this their normal practice? You can login, but not edit or create new accounts at night. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 06:01, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Probably nowhere...grey area it appears, essentially I think it's because they can happen unintentionally. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 06:57, 13 November 2008 (EST)

They switch off creation quite often - triggered by excessive vandalism from time to time. _and marmite 08:21, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I was able to get in and at least set up an account just now. Maybe it does have something to do with IP addys. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 08:47, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Ability to create accounts varies with Andy's paranoia level. It happens to be up right now (20:00 GMT, 13 Nov 2008) but it could go away at any moment. I once saw it go away before my very eyes. It was correlated with a wandalism spree. Watch for openings. They'll probably get harder to find as Conservapedia day (and the Bugler/Ed/PJR/Andy apocalypse) approaches. Gauss 15:04, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Aschlafly syndrome

How long will this last? Proxima Centauri 08:48, 13 November 2008 (EST)

About as long as it will take me to type this line. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 08:51, 13 November 2008 (EST) UPDATE And it's gone. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 08:53, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I've rescued it. It's here Fun:Aschlafly syndrome

Also, there is the tombstone, or is there any way they can whitewash that too? Etc 11:58, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Technically, they can of course whitewash it (by directly editing the database), but it's unlikely that that's going to happen because it's nothing you can simply do with point-and-click. They'd likely have to poke CPWebmaster, who would (hopefully) tell them where they could stuff their petty requests. :P --Sid 14:07, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia Death Watch

So, lots of us have made predictions concerning the death of CP. I have my doubts as it takes so little to maintain-- all you need to do is to turn off editing rights and leave it be. Be that as it may, it might be fun to start a CP death watch. Perhaps as simply as tagging certian WIGO's as Death Watch and make guesses within them as to what impact this will have on CP's projected date of demise (My dart board informs me that is November 23, 2009). Maybe we could put a counter on WIGO that someone could adjust. It would be our version of the dooms day clock. In the event we're wrong and the date comes we can just rejigger the clock -- like the Gregorian calendar

I can comfortably suggest this as I don't read CP directly much anymore. I rely on WIGO and follow links to CP reluctantly and with some trepidation. So absolutely no change in my behavior is necessary to accomplish this goal. As for the rest of you, get to work. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:48, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia will shut down on the day of the Rapture - since all the editors are true evangelical Christians, they will all be raptured into heaven and there will be no conservatives left to edit the wiki. --Composure1 11:02, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I'll still be there. I'll never make it onto the mothership when if everyone is called home. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 11:33, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Unfortunately, to die, I think CP would have to wholly lose Andy. If Andy were to get a real job, and make something of his life, then CP would lose the one man insane enough to think it's still going well. Alternately, the loss of PJR, if he ever wakes up to smell the Karajou, could prompt such a loss of confidence that the site would never recover, as the "moderate" crew would desert in droves. I don't think it's likely that we can do anything to bring either outcome about. Unless Bugler is someone's sock. In which case, just keep proving how hateful the fundies really are.-caius (soldier) 11:38, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Even if it does die in it's current form, someone will pick it up sometime. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 11:42, 13 November 2008 (EST)

This is partially off topic, but this is a webpage to contact your hellbound friends and relatives after you get sucked up in the rapture. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 11:52, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Now that is a site that's begging for some sort of long-term hack/log-in block thingy, so we can watch all hell break loose in a week's time when people start receiving "Hey, numbnuts, I'm in heaven and you're not!" e-mails. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:05, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Scam egg scam scam bacon and scam. Wish I'd thought of it. --Robledo 14:51, 13 November 2008 (EST)

CP won't die. It's death has been foretold for as long as I've been here at RW - about a year now - and it won't happen any time soon. If nothing else it gives Andy somewhere to run his blog, Ken somewhere to vent his pent up emotions on homosexuality, Ed somewhere to feel big, Kajacoward somewhere to strut his stuff, Bert somewhere to do his commies shot down my family bit, etc. etc. Silver Sloth 11:59, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I already commented on this above, shortly before this thread was started, but I can't see CP folding up. It will carry on the way it's going, getting ever more cranky and incestuous. Some of the sensible editors might give up on it altogether, & some of the cranks might move on to other projects too, but as long as Andy's there & has one or two fellow cranks to lean on, CP will still keep going. weaseLOId~ 12:31, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Wasn't it about a year ago that Schlafley stated Wikipedia as we know it will be gone in another year?Czolgolz 12:33, 13 November 2008 (EST)

CP won't die until people stop trying to kill it off. 95% of the activity over there is vandalism/parody and efforts to fight same. If the vandals and parodists were to stop vandalizing and parodizing, there wouldn't be much left to do. Andy would be left to his crazy obsession of the day (plus doing teaching), Kenny would be rubbing himself raw over his own wonderfulness, JM would be uploading pretty pictures, and Eddie would be posting crazy Moonie quotes. Karajou would be unemployed, since all he does these days is revert and block, and Dean would shut down his PC to watch "Dancing With The Stars". Most of CP would dry up and blow away.--WJThomas 13:16, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Actually, the wandalism serves a purpose in my mind. It serves to make CP ever more insular and paranoid. If all the wandalism ceased, then Andy and his crew would putter along in obscurity, but they would putter along. If they are consistently challenged and made to show how foolish they are, then those that would assist in a more moderate version of the project (as I would have at the start) will be turned off by their true colors. Stile4aly 13:35, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I don't disagree, but I think they've reached their maximum nutjobosity, they've plateaued. If the vandalism and parody stopped, I suspect CP would fizzle out, that most of them would grow bored and find new hobbies.--WJThomas 21:31, 13 November 2008 (EST)

CP will live for as long as Ken can milk it for free hosting of his blog - I mean articles. --SpinyNorman 19:24, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia could be in trouble if Andy is ever admitted to an institution and is incapable of looking after it or the psychiatrists advise against him dealing with it while he is there.

The Joaquín of Old

Here's something we haven't seen for a while. CP's resident artiste takes somebody else's article, sticks a bunch of unrelated pictures in it [2] [3] [4], then sulks when they point out he's messing up their work. This will end in tears, no doubt. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:23, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I feel kinda bad for JessicaT. She obviously puts so much time & effort into the articles on Japanese culture & history, but I doubt that anybody reads them much. & She seems kindof oblivious to the rest of the chaos on CP. She'd be much better off on a more reasonable wiki like WP. weaseLOId~ 18:24, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I love this. Do all the other sysops have an agreement to ignore him?--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 07:31, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Wikiindex on Conservapedia

It's time to update the Wikiindex article on Conservapedia. I've worked on it. Proxima Centauri 12:53, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Ed's gay sex

Ed says that if you repeatedly have sex with someone of the same sex, then you could become addicted. News flash, Ed, if you're repeatedly having sex with a man, then you ARE GAY (not that there's anything wrong with that).Czolgolz 13:10, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Ed is just paving the way for his "one time at band camp . . ." disclaimor. That wasn't just the holy spirit that was filling him up after the Jesus saves campfire rally . . . not that there's anything wrong with that ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 13:34, 13 November 2008 (EST)

You mean Ed say "if you're repeatedly having sex with a man, then you ARE GAY" whatever you are a man or a woman? Barraki 14:42, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I have it on good authority that Ed's male. Whether he's a man is up for debate. --Kels 17:03, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Also, the idea that sex is fun, and people want to do it more than once, is wholly non-revolutionary and non-exclusive to gay couples. See: boobs.-caius (soldier) 16:18, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I think I finally found Ed's primary sources of information. Old PSAs. What do you call it when someone is mentally stuck in the 1960s?--ScottA 17:02, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Ed's information on usually hidden subjects is chilling. How does he know that one man can personally sodomise 100 boys in a day? The mind boggles! Silver Sloth 17:52, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, that one's going to put me off my dinner tonight. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 17:54, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Does this technique involve setting up a phony writing course? I kid, I kid! Don't kill me! --JeevesMkII 17:59, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Memory banks....engage! Our Uncle Ed is quite the S&M lit. aficionado. I thought Dpbsmith's polite wtf? was worth digging out, too. :) --Robledo 19:29, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Where are the parents of the kids involved in CP? Seriously. This is starting to go beyond the pale. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 21:18, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Update on Ed's course

I have a feeling Ed doesn't actually teach a writing class as he claims. My "friend" on Convervapedia, HenryG, inquired about the course, at which Ed literally "LOL"ed, and said that one would have to "move to New York City" to take his course. When I pointed out I am already in New York, Ed no longer commented on the topic (neither on HenryG's page, nor his own talk page, where I duplicated the question). --Composure1 13:38, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Writing class? Ed? A writing class taught by Ed "Kickstart an article with only a random quote and call it a day" Poor? AHAHAHAHA. --Sid 13:59, 13 November 2008 (EST)

If you have a conduit to Ed still, tell him I'd like to observe his class. Let me know how that goes...-caius (soldier) 16:19, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe Ed has an ad in the Learning Annex? Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 16:47, 13 November 2008 (EST)

A Question for my Right Leaning Friends

Looking over Ed's new obsession with the Gay Nazis and also looking at some recent trends from prominent Conservatives, I have a question for my more conservative friends (I'm way too far to the left to see this from your point of view). Does the right think that once you've established a link, no matter how filmsy with Nazis or Hitler, you can claim victory and assume that your opponents is finished? I mean really, I'm not saying that liberals don't do the same thing... but it seems like the Nazi connection is step one in the Conservative playbook. Is this your version of the first 10 or something? "Nazi connection, Athiest, against the bible, foreign, Muslim, liberal, elite, unpatriotic, socialist/communist, engaging in fraud?" Is that how it works? SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 16:09, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I don't think it has anything to do with being on the right, I think it's more about not being good at making an argument. I don't see why a conservative would be more likely to use this type of argument than a liberal, especially since a conservative is probably more likely to be sympathetic to Hitler in the first place. JazzMan 16:21, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Tsk. As a Conservapedian of repute, Jazzman should know that Nazism is a doctrine of the extreme left. Fretfulporpentine 16:40, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Re "a conservative is probably more likely to be sympathetic to Hitler in the first place" - I think that's the reason for it. Conservatives aren't Nazis, but they have a few similarities - e.g. extreme patriotism, intolerance of homosexuals - & are afraid of being seen as Nazis because of this. So they bring up the subject of evil Nazis & Hitler as often as possible with the suggestion that 'we're not Nazis; it's the gays & liberals & evolutionists who are really the Nazis'. weaseLOId~ 16:44, 13 November 2008 (EST)

That's a very interesting theory Weasel old chap, I'll have to think about that one a bit. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 16:49, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Your average conservative isn't like these guys, and would laugh at Conservapedia about as much as we do. In fact, they would probably get angrier because it is such a caricature of a conservative viewpoint that it likely does more harm than good to conservatism.

This whole "Is like the Hitler. I wins!" business is not the norm with conservatives, and I think that we should avoid making the same mistake by comparing conservatives to Nazis. Anybody who wants to link a person, group, or idea with Nazism or something similarly evil can always find a way to do so. If we use the same childish arguments, are we any better? Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 16:59, 13 November 2008 (EST)

The Nazi thing has nothing to do with real conservative arguing, and anyone who suggests otherwise is guilty of a Godwin's violation. I've seen people from all over the political spectrum do it--think of all those e-mails circulating a few years back applying the "14 Elements of Fascism" to the Bush administration. One could even make the argument that by adopting the pink triangle logo, gay activists are trying to set up their political opponents (like Barack "I don't believe in gay marriage" Obama...) as Nazi sympathizers. PFoster 17:35, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Since Ed's "evidence" for all this rests pretty much solely on that "Pink Triangle" book, this refutation becomes quite interesting. Certainly ammo for the socks and people actually interested in, y'know, facts. --Kels 17:38, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I seriously doubt that Ed has even read the book. As usual with the CP gang, he's just borrowed & quoted from conservative blogs & reviews. weaseLOId~ 18:39, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I showed an older rightwing friend CP and then asked him about it a couple of weeks later. He practically snarled at me something like "I don't pay attention to that kind of stuff." Him saying that is burned into my brain a little. I dropped the subject. I don't think sober and serious conservative would like Andy. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 21:04, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, come on, people. Corry makes an excellent point. Conservapedia is not conservatism. And from a perspective outside the US, even less so. I wish people would stop confusing the two. Ajkgordon 04:28, 14 November 2008 (EST)

The fun thing about CP isn't the conservative viewpoint, it's that the sysops are total jackasses. For me, CP has always been sort of a parody lesson on how not to maintain an internet community. 83.254.86.73 06:31, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Danger, danger! High voltage!

Does anyone have any idea what PJR's talking about here, when he says, "at least one committed evolutionist elsewhere thinks I am [the biggest threat to the "liberal" viewpoint] (if I remember accurately), because I argue the case for creation so well (logically and accurately)"? I honestly don't remember anyone here saying that. --Kels 17:44, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe if he was to link to the diff in question? Shouldn't be too hard... we don't expunge things from our archives or talk pages. --Shagie 17:51, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Well, he might not be referring to us. He has a good point though, but I wouldn't frame it in terms of threat to a viewpoint or idea. I would simply say that Philip is more likely to convince people of his way of thinking than some clown like Bugler is. I don't like the word "threat" because that implies some kind of malice on one side or another. There are people on each side of the creationism/evolution debate that are malicious bastards, but Philip is not one of them. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 18:00, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I personally don't see PJR as a threat to anyone, or anyone's viewpoint. The people he enables are a potential threat to children's education and funding of real science in favour of myth, so the rational must always be on their guard against them. But he personally doesn't come across as any particular threat. --Kels 20:12, 13 November 2008 (EST)

He is as bad as anyone over there. His posts just seem less moronic but his morals are in the toilet like all devout fundies. He'd gladly institute a Christian theocracy and all the ill that would entail. He has said as much. Just because he is calm and polite as he defends the inerrant nature of the particular font his bible is printed in doesn't remove the stain from his bigot's heart. Fuck PJR. He'll burn in imaginary hell just like the rest of them. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 20:57, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, he's a threat alright, make no mistake. Ajkgordon 08:14, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Jesus Christ, what the hell is wrong with Ed Poor...

So I'm on record several times on this here blog as saying that pedophilia isn't funny and thus reverting edits that tried to paint Aschafly and other Conservapedians as having those sorts of leanings. But Jesus, Ed, with this edit (already WIGO'd thanks to the wonderful Kels...)--I might have to reconsider. PFoster 17:49, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Someone needs to point the officials that enforce COPPA at them. The requesting the phone number is in clear violation if the person might be under 13. --Shagie 17:53, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Ed is sooo going the Mark Foley route. "Let me have your email so I can stay in touch". --SpinyNorman 19:26, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Seems likely, seeing how excited he gets when he thinks about pinning a man to the wall. --Kels 10:11, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler bit off more than he can chew

He blocks ChrisS, a sysop and student of Andy's, for reinserting comments that Bugler took away and screamed at him in an edit summary. Bugler realized who he blocked and simply vanishes from the scene, as is the usual motive for abusers who can't abuse (i.e. Karajou quitting and such). Andy's retarded 1% Schlafly Statistic is the icing of the cake in this incident. Bravo! (I will post links if anyone cares, just too lazy at the moment) Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:21, 13 November 2008 (EST)

If you follow the Obama wars, you'll notice a lot of dismissal of comments as being illiterate, poorly written etc. If you look at the "liberal style" page (or something similar) you'll also notice this exact type of argument enumerated as librul and evil. Further evidence that the idea tank is on E and the engine is sputtering. The further irony is that this is coming from Andy "Weapon of Gun" Schlafly and Ed "Quote Stub" Poor. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 18:35, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Obama exceptionalism

Andy continues to generate bullshit on the fly. No table of contents? Huh? --Toiretni 19:45, 13 November 2008 (EST)

At moments I find it difficult to believe what a sleazy stupid cooze Andy is. I don't even know words dirty enough to describe him. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 20:48, 13 November 2008 (EST)

WTF? Now he's making a newspaper? What happened to that whole "encyclopedia" thing he always tries to convince people of? --Kels 21:47, 13 November 2008 (EST)

This would be an exceptional time for somebody to suppress the TOC on every page about a person in the news. What a load of bullshit- just come out and say that you want the religion-baiting visible without scrolling down. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 22:38, 13 November 2008 (EST)

The Kids that are "learning" from CP...

RW is fun and all, and pot shots at CP is a blast, but someone's comments here got me to really start thinking about the kids that are using CP to actually try to learn. This really bums me out. The diarrhea of words is filling their minds with such unspeakable drivel, that, well, Zeus dammit, there outta be a law! I have nothing against the concept of home-schooling, but this nonsense truly is awful. The one and only mostly home-schooled kid that I know from a short class I teach on Sunday at our Unitarian church is incredibly smart, social, kind, tolerant etc., but he is being brought up in an environment that values free discourse. I shudder to think what it would be like to truly isolate a kid in a bubble of intolerant nonsense and force feed him/her such close minded baloney. This perpetuates from one generation to the next what I can only think of as a truly damaging, and downright dangerous, mindset. Fuhrer Schlafly, I beg you to consider the children in your web of corruption, and cease your plan to destroy their minds. Jimaginator 20:57, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Don't worry. It's only a hundred or so kids over the course of a couple of years who have had their minds corrupted and their imaginary souls doomed by non-ironic (sincere?) contact with CP. New kids are born every day. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 21:10, 13 November 2008 (EST)

It's inevitable that someone will learn and think the same drooling diarrhetic crap from Andy's fingers, but I hope one day that someone takes it seriously enough to get a righteous pwning, one so bad that it sheds a terrible light upon that "encyclopedia" to where copyright, libel, and other horrendous forms lawsuits plague that retarded blog into oblivion. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 21:19, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I'm not convinced that anyone but Andy's kids get near it. The homeschooling moms I know (both Christian and not) wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole - it's NOT family-friendly. That said, I really pity those kids whose parents paid for a decent high school level history class and instead got one guy's rantings and not even a decent textbook. At the same time, I've got to wonder what they were thinking - how many questions did they ask up front about his plans for the course? Surely the no-textbook, no-essays approach should have been a tip-off. Hopefully some other teachers will get their hands on those kids before they graduate. --Too tired to log in 22:35, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Jim, FWIW, I wholeheartedly agree with you; there should be a law against it. Educational malpractice? He's actively making these poor kids stupider. I wrote a long article on this.-caius (soldier) 23:08, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Move to California... there is a law against it.[5] --Shagie 03:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Wouldn't happen here (UK) either. Homeschooling is allowed, but only if it's of an equal standard to school. A British Andrew Schlafly wouldn't pass muster and could even be prosecuted. Totnesmartin 05:11, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Thank you all for your comments. I know we can't save the whole world, but this is so blatantly destructive, that I can't help wondering about those kids. The kids in my class (only an hour a week) are all Bright (sic) and inquisitive and simply blow me away with their thirst for knowledge. The things that they know always astounds me. One of the Unitarian principles for the class is a "safe" environment, which means that nobody is ever put down for what they say. Sure, we are certainly trying to guide them, but if you say you are a pastafarian (nobody has!), so be it. Often the class consists of me or another teacher simply asking them "so what do you think of this or that?", and getting their minds to work. They are 8 and 9 years old, and what a great group. It truly is exciting without layered on dogma that you simply MUST believe. The kid who says "I think Jesus was the greatest person who ever lived" gets the same respect as the one that says "Jesus didn't even exist", and that, I think, is what we really are teaching them. How to be accepting, rational, and to THINK! Thanks for putting my mind a little more at ease about how much the CP nonsense is really getting out there. I notice they have removed the number of articles they have now, just the number of article EDITS. My hope is the same Zeus damned bunch endlessly reworking their same lies to make them just that much more pithy and liberal hating is what is happening. Jimaginator 10:14, 14 November 2008 (EST)

T-shirt experiment

Has anyone else read the CP news item about the girl getting bullied for her McCain t-shirt in school? I won't bother pointing it out at CP, but the experiment proves above all that 8th graders are good at bullying one another for failing to conform. This happened in the middle school where I did my student teaching (and I'm about 90% sure that I had this girl's older sister in my class), and Oak Park is indeed about as liberal a town as you can get... and now I teach in a conservative Christian school where I saw kids get picked on when they said they supported Obama. ... Not really a WIGO item, b/c there aren't many lulz, as you all would say. But that's my 2c on the matter. Bluefish 23:00, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Eighth grade girls make the best objective witnesses of things happening to them. You have free will to deny this truth, but you will not censor it from others who are interesting in finding out reality.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 23:52, 13 November 2008 (EST)

Having worked with 8th graders in the school system, I can tell firsthand that the hive mentality and groupthink is amazing.... Kids at that age are just starting to have their own opinions, but for the most part they simply echo their parents... As for their behavior, yeah, 8th grade girls are mean and spitefull.... Stop the presses. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 01:57, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Not to mention the fact that an 8th grade girl who constructs and carries out an experiment like this, and isn't worried about what affect it might have on her social standing, probably isn't one of the most popular students to begin with and likely catches flak for lots of things she does. Smyth 14:24, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Bigotry

They've actually got an entry for bigotry: It's just gotto be quoted:

"Bigotry is the expression of hatred or aggression towards those who are different. Examples are: racism and religious intolerance.
Bigotry is a common, and indeed a defining^{[Citation Needed]}, characteristic of atheists, elitists, liberals, and homosexuals, who react violently to any who disagree with their views. Liberals continually deceitfully claim to uphold equality of all viewpoints and free speech, but are in fact routinely prejudiced against opposing viewpoints. They are particularly bigoted against Christians (and indeed Faith in general) and Family Values. It is typical to see liberals refer to their opponents as racists, fascists, nazis, rednecks, fanatics, or any number of more profane slurs. "

Merriam Webster could have been reading CP to come up with their definition:
"a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"
It's fun when their definition shows them to be full of it! _and marmite 23:03, 13 November 2008 (EST)

They're not very good at avoiding this sort of unintentional irony. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 23:43, 13 November 2008 (EST)

If RodWeathers isn't a parodist... then I'm scared for my fellow humans. JazzMan 01:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)

More like: If __________ isn't a parodist... Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 02:19, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Touché. In this case, though, I was talking about the author of the above statement. JazzMan 02:26, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Liberalism is a mental disorder

Has anyone else gotten that as an email forward? Like, 4 years ago? Bluefish 00:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I don't remember any forwards, but I Medlined the guy WND was talking about and didn't find any publications. I didn't look very hard, though. Corry^{You can always tell a Milford man.} 00:55, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Same here. Couldn't find much by the 'top psychologist'. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

At the very least, the subject of this "News" item already appeared two years ago over at WND at least. --Sid 06:01, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Not WIGO Worthy

But Andy "open your mind" Schlafly has a way of just nagging at you like an open cold sore. I don't blame him for refusing to come debate me, I wouldn't debate me either if I said the stupid shit he did. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 02:06, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Stockholm syndrome

Has Bugler gone too deep?

Liberacebot

These contributions are hilarious.--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 04:29, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Awesome!! Crundy 10:32, 14 November 2008 (EST)

The best was the edit to "Gay Bomb", which sadly got lost in deletion, & to the Richard Dawkins article, which managed to stay up for an hour & a half. JuanK 12:20, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Ken's Stats - A Plea for Understanding.

Right guys you will have to forgive my crap ability at making wiki tables, my crap understanding of statistics, many typos and not really paying attention. But I was looking at Ken's stats here and couldn't get it to make sense (no suprise there!). I took 10 days worth of stats - actually it's 11 inclusive but the general point is good (I think).

I made the following table based on his stats...

Page	November 3rd	November 13th	Difference (10 days)	Per day (/10)
Atheism	4,478,727	4,487,014	8,287	829
Main Page	3,767,121	3,857,642	90,521	9,052
Homosexuality	3,204,342	3,212,002	7,660	766
Theory of Evolution	439,355	447,612	8,257	825

...and the thing I don't understand is how (if I've got this right) the main page is creaming him by a factor of 10 yet he claims to have over a million more page views. Have I got this right? Is it the result of a click bot running at some point on his articles? Is it lies? Is it that the main page stats were reset? Or is it that I have completly mangled the figures? StarFish 05:03, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Well the homosexuality page views were reset a while ago after a click bot attack. Call-me-Kenneth may still be including those. Or maybe it's a paranoid delusion of his. Totnesmartin 05:18, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I think for a short while a click-bot was run on atheism article hoping that the sudden jump would cause the page to be deleted, effecting the overall page counts (which Andy boasts about). 219.90.133.165 07:41, 14 November 2008 (EST)

It's no suprise that the Main Page is higher but the fact that their articles have higher counts (or even counts approaching Main Page views) is probably because when CP appeared the Blogosphere linked directly to them and people would have avoided the main page entirely. Click bots and whatever else (like the one that worked on Goat) probably account for the rest but I'd have no idea where to start figuring out how much exactly. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between something that's just good publicity or a click bot without having access to IPs and a lot better data. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 14:59, 14 November 2008 (EST)

This merits reproof.

ChrisS wrote this. Bugler's reaction. It's a hard life being a committed Conservapedian. Proxima Centauri 05:36, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Is Chris's first userbox for real? Totnesmartin 05:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Ask him. Proxima Centauri 05:53, 14 November 2008 (EST)

What can be verified is that he added it to his page and that it was created by fellow sysop BenjaminS. But to put things into context, it should be said that April 2007 was the time when people were still allowed to have fun on CP without getting 90/10 bans or Writing Assignments. Userboxes like "PhD awesome" or all the Donut ones were a good exercise in poking fun at yourself. --Sid 06:12, 14 November 2008 (EST)

This by Bugler just doens't read right. "I was unable to respond earler due to power failures in my district." I mean it sounds like a lie. I think we have established that he is from the UK but the use of the word "District" really jars. It just isn't a word that is commonly used in the UK, in that contect - although in fairness you could say the same with half the stuff Bugler says. I guess it's all part of trying to contribute in made up persona. Is there any way we can find Bugler's IP address? I would love to check for power outages in his 'district' StarFish 06:41, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Eh? There are District Councils and the word is used by utility companies. I don't think an American could be as convincing as Bugler is at being a Brit so Occam's says he is. Ajkgordon 07:03, 14 November 2008 (EST)

An American who has lived in Britain, or vice versa? I agree that 'district' is a strange phrasing. Yes, there are District Councils, but there are also Unitary Authorities and noone says that either. Charles SubLunar ^(mr) 08:37, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler is definitely British, although he's cranking the "Britishness" levels up to stereotypical levels. He's like the British people you see in American films, maybe Dick Van Dyke, but with a realistic accent. The District thing jarred with me too, so the most likely explanation is that he's in the US studying. Bondurant 09:11, 14 November 2008 (EST)

You guys are reading too much into this. Yes he might be a Brit living in the US but his use of the word district about a power cut does nothing to substantiate that. And even so, so what? He's still definitely a Brit and there's no reason to suspect he didn't have a power cut. WTF? Ajkgordon 09:27, 14 November 2008 (EST)

He's definitely A Brit in Britain. His editing time is very GMT oriented & his use of and familiarity with British idiom & culture is total. He's an atypical, hateful TWAT, (unless he is a parodist) but unfortunately is British. _and marmite 09:41, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I think, more specifically, he is Scottish. 76.121.187.126 17:33, 14 November 2008 (EST)

District was used in order to cater for a predominately American audience. Various lies and a CP persona are all part of the parodist's tool-kit. Auld Nick 11:07, 14 November 2008 (EST)

If he is Britsh I'm sorry someone from my country behaves so badly. Proxima Centauri 11:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)

(I must apologise for being rude to Twats [above] -unlike Bugler they're useful & functional according to Merriam Webster). _and marmite 11:50, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Who the hell knows what's going on with Bugler any more?! I still say if it's a parodist its a consortium sharing the same user name :P It's the best way to explain the inconsistencies. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 14:54, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Hmmmm, I like the consortium idea - a small group of, say, British graduate-level students committed to a carefully constructed character brief taking the mickey out of CP and that "special" kind of Junker, the British Junker. Makes sense to me. The character could walk right in and out of a MPFC sketch without appearing out of place at all. ħuman 15:47, 14 November 2008 (EST)

THAT'S IT!!! BUGLER IS JOHN CLEESE!!!!! ħuman 15:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Ed being honest about his Church

Arranged marriages, etc., after all, are nothing special. Besides, soon he'll entertain us with Purpose of Creation and Marriage in the Unification Church. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 06:36, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Yep, the first installment is ready: compulsory reading!. Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 07:23, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I'm sort of boggling at him trying to portray the Moonies as some tiny little Ma & Pa organization, persecuted by the athiests and perverts. "Being a small church - with no budget for fighting back in the media - it was easy for us to become a disinformation target." O RLY? --Kels 07:54, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Didn't that sound insane to him even as he was typing it? The reverend Moon can see in to the spirit world? See people's ancestry? WTF? Sounds like a testable hypothesis to me. Maybe we should present the chief Moonie with a dozen randomly selected sceptics and have him rattle off their genealogy from the voices in his head.

"Best" of all though is this bigoted screed on the talk page. If we aren't allowed to talk smack about gay people, we'll all be out at the bathhouse by sundown! It's the gaypocalypse I tells ya! --JeevesMkII 08:37, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I where he says if someone insults your wife, you can punch them and they'd be hard pressed to lay charges. No Ed, that's actually assault, and people do get charged for it. --Kels 09:47, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Kels, that almost made my head explode. I was working on proxying meself when someone beat me to the punch.caius (soldier) 11:30, 14 November 2008 (EST)

"Marriage in the Unification Church works the same way as marriage in every other religion or culture"... then WTF is the point in a separate article?!?! (and also note that other cultures and religions have different ways of doing marriage so strictly speaking the opening sentence doesn't actually mean anything) ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:20, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Notice that Ed, like Ken, still doesn't understand how sample size works. "Domestic violence and cheating are even worse in the homosexual community than in the heterosexual world. Around 5 to 10 times worse, if I recall the statistics correctly." Let me lay this out for you Ed. You have two groups, one group consisting of five people and one consisting of ten people. In both groups, there are two black people. That would mean that 40% of the first group was black, and 20% of the second group was black. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THERE ARE MORE BLACK PEOPLE IN THE FIRST GROUP YOU FUCKTARD. Homosexuals are significantly less represented than Heterosexual couples. I don't know the full stat off the top of my head, but I would hazard a guess of at least 4 to 1 (4 straight to 1 gay) That is why Homosexual couples have a higher percent of domestic violence. Got it? Good. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 12:51, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Hang on... if the stats are percentages of a population, it's valid. Of course, either way the argument is really invalid for many, many fucked up reasons. Well, the top hits I can find that seems legit-ish says it's more or less the same but under-reported because of hostility pretty much caused by the likes of Conservapedia. [6] [7] ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 14:52, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Oh yes, if the percents are adjusted for population size, they're perfectly legit, but none of the CP "sources" do this and the group is either too dumb to know the difference or they know, but ignore it because it's not convienient, I'm leaning to dumb. SirChuckB^{Boom Goes the Dynamite} 15:58, 14 November 2008 (EST)