Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive91

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <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)

Separate ongoing discussions for Conservapedia Day (Friday Nov. 21!):

• Conservapedia:Next sysop pool
• Debate:CP's biggest idiot 2

Now, were the Republicans Red or Blue

Karajoke uploads a pretty picture of the 2008 electoral college voting. Look at the legend! _and marmite 11:34, 18 November 2008 (EST)

(And I've got a copy for when he vanishes it!) _and marmite 11:35, 18 November 2008 (EST)

A FAIL so epic it might be a WIN? Stile4aly 12:26, 18 November 2008 (EST)

What an idiot.... and oh yeah, he doesn't read classic literature, Big surprise SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 12:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Took me a while but I suppose he meant "a dumb ass". Which was probably what was intended. :) _and marmite 13:08, 18 November 2008 (EST)

That's what he thought, it was actually Alexader Dumas, author of Three Muskateers. SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 13:28, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Queue mandatory Shawshank Redemption quote. -Hactar, too lazy to sign in.

<--Am I blind or did he fix it? I don't see anything weird. Jrssr5 14:30, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Take a closer look at right side, where it says that the RED states belong to Obama while the BLUE ones belong to McCain. The map, however, uses the more traditional colors, so the Color Fail isn't even consistent. --Sid 15:11, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Also, in the top-right, it says McCain=blue, while in the bottom-right, we have McCain=red. --Toiretni 15:57, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Surely this should be WIGOed. weaseLOId~ 16:47, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It is amusing, but basically it's a typo. Not really WIGO worthy. (disclaimer it was I who spotted it) _and marmite 17:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, and Kowardjou, if you're reading this, please note that the state abbreviations for Nebraska and Iowa are NE and IA, not NB and IO. But it's not important. You're only writing for an alleged goddamn encyclopedia. DickTurpis 17:15, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It only took 27 hours to sort. _and marmite 12:57, 20 November 2008 (EST)

It's time to bring out the big guns...

...someone get George Lucas on the phone...PFoster 12:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Second opinion needed...

In this lulzy discussion, there's something that caught my eye.

RobNewberry says: "I say drop the deceit and just ban people with the comment "We don't like your viewpoint. Goodbye." It's about being honest about what kind of place this wiki really is."

TK replies: "RobNewberry, I know that when I was an administrator, I often followed Andy's lead in doing just that, block with the comment "Bye"."[3]

Is... that... an open admission that "Bye." meant ideological blocking?! Or do my failing eyes deceive me? Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 12:36, 18 November 2008 (EST)

You have 20:20 vision my old Viking. _and marmite 12:38, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Ed & Obama

Considering that Ed now largely opposes the "Obama is a Muslim" theory, I find it ironic that he was the one that put the first instance of insinuation that Obama is Muslim with this change --Composure1 13:47, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Captcha

Does anyone else find CP's captcha program almost completely indecipherable? Bjones 13:53, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, it's awful.... I think Andy set that up to counter a bot someone (from here?) made that could do the simple math of the old verification system and create mass socks by the second. Shortly after that, he added the new captcha, which is blury and confusing.... It really slows down the Lulz rate. SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 13:55, 18 November 2008 (EST)

If your eyes aren't clouded by liberal mind control, it's easy to decipher. --Composure1 13:56, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Didn't it appear when he updated Mediawiki? I know there was a lot of discontent after it started. _and marmite 14:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It might have been an update and it just happened to coincide with the mass socking... I may be mistaken... and Yeah, so many people complained that he created a special group that can avoid having to do it. SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 14:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It's not absolutely terrible, but it is definitely a WTF that the captcha uses a sans-serif lowercase "ɑ" that's hard to distinguish from an "o", when there's a perfectly good glyph for "a" that's not so ambiguous. On the whole, I think the new captcha reduces the likelihood of automated bot attacks, reduces the incidence of new "honest" contributors, and does nothing to the incidence of new parodist/wandal contributors. --Marty 22:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Well, it's confuddled me out of socking up a few times. However, as parodists and real users are both human, they're both subject to being pissed around by it. It'll stop the bots but face it, that's the least of Assfly's worries! ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:56, 19 November 2008 (EST)

If you take off reading glasses or sit back from the screen that lettering looks much clearer. I try to read the words and not decipher the letters - seems to work for me . It appeared after the software upgrade and only seems to appear when adding external links 67.72.98.45 16:32, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy admits he's a Muslim!

See [4]:

“”Someone is missing the the point about my Muslim faith

Going by the Andy Standard, this is undeniable proof that Andrew Schlafly is a Muslim and not a Christian. ;) --Sid 14:15, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Of course, the second part of that, 'How about someone saying "Allah the Creator"?! Christians don't use the phrase' is further proof of Andy's status as a Muslim - he used the phrase "Allah the Creator" by posting that, so by the very reasoning he is setting forth there, he CANNOT be a Christian, and is therefore a Muslim. 92.10.76.43 15:52, 18 November 2008 (EST)

See, quote mining works both ways. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:57, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Guardianistas talk about Conservapedia

here: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX/.7760beac/324?14@742.YwIWdCEO7bu@ Fretfulporpentine 14:27, 18 November 2008 (EST)

That gave me some good laughs. Nice to see we aren't the only ones reading CP and going WTF? er... unless those comments were all added by RWeans. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:56, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Probably not, I think we should always link to RW if discussing CP elsewhere. A) increases the profile and B) allows people to get access to the info on Conservapedia quickly. This isn't the only forum responding to CP, although it's at least the most consistently active. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 11:00, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Abstinence versus contraception

Buger bugler & Ed wrote a new article on Teen Pregnancy. SandraD added a sensible comment. She was told to shut up and her edit reverted. Proxima Centauri 14:37, 18 November 2008 (EST)

That reminds me, is that Palin brat hitched to her hockey package yet? ħuman 21:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Shut up? She can't, she's Sandra DeeeeEEEE!!! (I hate that f**king musical, it's marginally worse than Wicked! :S)ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 11:03, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy, master of grammar

• Say what? -Master Bra'tac^Kree! 14:59, 18 November 2008 (EST)

What I love most about comments like this, are the flip side when he banhams (or threatens to banham) for "poor spelling" "bad grammar". muwhahaahahha.

It's like the good old times again! (Ed, TK, Jazz, etc.)

It's so horrible, it's almost beautiful again. TK, Andy's Alpha Rearguard is on patrol again (especially noticeable on the Obama talkpage), Ken suddenly finds himself on the side of sanity (Obama again), PJR and Tim finally push back (Obama, Bugler, etc.) and Ed solidly sides with the trolls/parodists and against people who already got shafted again and again despite (likely) having one of the most solid records EVER (Jazz, duh).

I'm genuinely impressed. I haven't felt so much "ARRRRRGH" since months, I think. So much WTF piles up into a gigantic trainwreck that it pushes me straight past the "Headache and Depression" zone and back into the "Warm Fuzzy Feelings" zone. --Sid 15:19, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I think the term "headless chicken mode" applies. I don't think anyone noticed, because it snuck up on us. JazzMan 15:28, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I was gonna post this one on WIGO, but we've been so Ed Heavy lately that I decided to just mock him on talk. Why to Go Ed, This is the epitome of collaboration and teamwork and oh yeah, he doesn't know German either SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 15:29, 18 November 2008 (EST)

What the Hell? He made up his own Talk Page Commandment now? "It's good to be King! =D" (And God yes, that Nachtzug block comment was sad. And it came from Ed "Use Google!" Poor. Ow.) --Sid 15:36, 18 November 2008 (EST)

And since Chuck mentioned that Ed's making up his own rules now, WTH is this about? "You just now refused (in writing) to use IM for CP business, although the guidelines mandate it." (From his "Maybe we should take away your remaining user rights..." post.) The guidelines mandate that you have to use your IM to talk to other editors? Since when? We can't even get Karajou to enable his mail, for crying out loud! --Sid 15:51, 18 November 2008 (EST)

They're downright allergic to airing their dirty laundry in public, since that lets us point and laugh at them. We can only imagine the behind the scenes negotiations that go on when Ken decides to do a little more remodeling of the world's greatest dictators gallery on the front page. --JeevesMkII 23:43, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I always thought of Learn together as a bit of a sycophant but admired this put down of Ed and support of HelpJazz.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 00:11, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Jesus on Conservapedia

Our article on Jesus has replaced the official Conservapedia article. There was no reference as that would risk it being found faster. Naughty naughty. Fuck and RationalWiki trigger the spam filter unless removed. How long will this stay? SandraD has already been blocked presumably for writing sensible stuff stuff about teenage pregnancy. The change to the Jesus article was noticed about 10 minutes after SandraD was blocked. I've lost another sockie. Another vandal added something else. Ed Poor reverted the second vandal and left the RationalWiki article. It lasted twenty minutes. ROTFL. Jesus is protected till Nov 25th now. Proxima Centauri 15:32, 18 November 2008 (EST)

That seemed to go on for a few good edits, though when the article changes size that much, alarm bells ring. Providing you don't read much past the first paragraph, it does look legit by CP standards. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:54, 19 November 2008 (EST)

There are plenty of other RationalWiki articles that would look nice at Conservapedia. Proxima Centauri 10:56, 20 November 2008 (EST)

TK's "Parthian Shot" to Andy...

We used to have it on here, here it is again:

I cannot believe that Andy wrote the above. Things I told him in casual conversation, private things, making points about things that were happening then; he has saved up and trotted out and made them dirty and evil, made me seem dirty, and I guess, to somehow justify his own betrayal, his being an ugly man....an evil and vile human being, bent on making me look bad for what? For 35+ years working in politics? For who I know? Spending hundreds (thousands) of hours helping him? Doing what he himself asked?

I won't embarrass him, for now, for he is quite obviously not himself, by sending on to you his IM's about blocking people, being aggressive with it, then two day later worrying about blocks, only to have him change his mind three days later again! I have previously shared some of these IM's with a few of you, and you know he is not being honest.

I worked with Ed Meese for many years, on many projects. This is something Andy could have easily verified. Mary Matalin and I started out as volunteers, for God's sake! When I was a protégé of Lee Atwater, she was his main aide! And poor Andy....I told him about the Nancy Reagan deal, it was not some assassination attempt, the IM logs clearly show this, but a man thought to have a gun in a crowd, and the Secret Service pushed the two of us down! We were talking about the mean climate today, and I expressed concern about his Mother! Silly, stupid me! To have some compassion and concern for his old Mom, who is about my own Mom's age. What a stupid jerk I was to express simple human compassion to a man bent on doing me harm.

I drove away CP's best editors? Who would those "best editors" be? Liberals like AmesG? And who drove them away, really? Karajou, do you think I was blocking people with no justification? If so, you never mentioned it to me. Do any of you not realize I have unblocked (with Andy's permission) more blocked users, returned more editors who attempted to contribute, than any of you? I am proud of actually receiving many emails from the small amount of long-time current editors we have left, thanking me for being reasonable, and helping broker compromises with other editors and Sysops, of making it bearable to stick around. These are both conservatives and more moderate editors, and now very worried that they are next. And they will be.

And to cap it all off, Andy is so sick, misinformed, or really evil, he makes the bald faced lie that I have had little productivity? Does he really lack the ability to actually look at my contributions? And if he says that about me, which of you is next? Does Andy have the personal integrity to admit to you all he asked me to keep communication between all of us open and flowing? And now he brands me as "constantly demanding attention from some of us"? Who would those people be? Ed Poor? He called me often! TerryH? I have talked to you, you never once, plain spoken man you are, asked me not to call you. I think I have four times? Who among you complained to Andy I was demanding your attention needlessly? Who among you would be so deceitful as to say one thing to Andy, another to me?

How can anyone be so twisted, so mean, to someone who has given him absolute loyalty? How can any of you allow him to do so? Andy emailed me and asked that I apologize for calling him a vulgar name (now it seems as if he reacted so because I had hit the nail on the hammer!), so we could put this behind us, and get things "back on track". That I did. A few hours later, he sent the above to several of you, ignored my sincere apology, and never responded. I tried him on IM, he was talking to others, and ignored my message.

If Andy is indeed a Christian person, he will apologize and right his wrongs. If not, he faces a higher judgment than I or any of you can give, and deserves our compassion and prayers. At least he will know now that four of you, unbeknownst to the others, sent me a copy of his inaccurate and mean charges against me, that he, like a vile Liberal, circulated in secret, behind my back....a private Star Chamber. How proud he must be!

I want each and every one of you to know Andy has managed to do something few have in my public life; Hurt me deeply. He has actually made me realize I am a stupid and silly old man to have trusted him, invested my time in his project, believing him to be a good person. I do not know what I have ever done to deserve this massive disrespect, this slander, this smear and malice. Vandalize Conservapedia? Betray his confidences? No. All I was is trusting of him, and committed to his project. Shame on me! Shame on all of you for allowing this... shame on, and my personal disgust to, those of you who suggested to the others I would join up with RatWiki.

There were other letters, but I don't know where they are.-67.69.254.244 16:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Ugh, this is going to be one of these senseless TK Drama Weeks again, isn't it? --Sid 16:10, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Hopefully not. Doesn't this fall under the aegis of SDG material anyways? I'm tempted to delete it, or delete it later.-caius (spy) 16:11, 18 November 2008 (EST)

PS - seeing this again is funny. I forgot how much they hated me.-caius (spy) 16:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)

leave it for a while so that all the CPers (who of course never look here) can see it. Just don't archive it when the rest of the page is archived. _and marmite 16:38, 18 November 2008 (EST)

(undent) This reminds me. If the holy trinity of Andy, Bugler, and TK cause CP to explode, will someone finally post the juicy SDG stuff? Bjones 17:23, 18 November 2008 (EST)

"now it seems as if he reacted so because I had hit the nail on the hammer!" Wait, what? -Barikada, too lazy to sign in.

• Holds out hands with puppy eyes* SDG nao plz. I didn't even get to see the awesum sekret infoz from the first time. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:00, 18 November 2008 (EST)

If you do decide to hand out SDG info, I'd be grateful for a copy as well. I find the inner workings of cultlike groups fascinating. --Gulik 20:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

If I recall the SDG was pretty tame, except for the end, where it was full of TK ramblings (like this), and TK convincing CP that EVERY SOCK WAS ME.-caius (spy) 23:35, 18 November 2008 (EST)

You? Who are you? I remember him talking about this Ames guy. --Kels 23:49, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Good girl. Again, I haven't heard of this Ames guy either, but I bet he's sexy.-caius (spy) 02:31, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Why did we decide not to post that stuff in triplicate? privacy issues? Liberal morals? 216.54.39.107 09:08, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Broadly, as I recall, privacy issues. These were comments people made in a "private" forum, for each others' eyes only. One of them betrayed that privacy by publishing it all, we would be an accomplice to that betrayal of privacy if we "published" it. So, ironically, the quote above gets around that qualm, since it was written by the person who made it public. An interesting loophole, that. ħuman 15:41, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Wait, every sock isn't caius? I'm shocked! Sterile^rationalize 15:45, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Meh, I really fail to care about what they personally posted on that forum considering how much they criticize Wikipedia for, among other things, lack of transparency.

However, there is the privacy of third parties involved, namely, those who got stalked by Karajou and got a LOT of personal information retrieved from them (in a particularly nasty example, family member's names). NightFlare ...but a^3 + b^3 = c^3 has no integral solutions other than the obvious {1, 1, 1} case.[1][2] 17:18, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I don't doubt that he did that, but I can't remember who he did that to.-caius (spy) 00:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Does anyone know where TK's been hanging out these last months? He seems to have thrown open the door with a loud bang, upset a few people and decided to suck up to Andy by playing the all-American conservative fighting off those Euro-commies. But I can't believe that he could get by not being able to wreak havoc with other people's lives so he must have been shitting on somebody's lawn.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 00:25, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Check the list of recently deceased Wikis. CreationWiki, maybe?-caius (spy) 00:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)

No TK, but looks like Ed Poor recently joined. To get an account, you have to e-mail their founder, who tends to rubber-stamp them, but run you out as soon as it's revealed that you're an evilutionist... if anyone's interested in trying to beat my record, it's ten days.-caius (spy) 00:40, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Ed? What?

"Acne Vaporised" is an anagram of Conservapedia. Is it necessary to make a redirect? Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 16:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I think he's drunk again. Smyth 16:15, 18 November 2008 (EST)

or I advance ropes? Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 16:16, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Per WordSmith, Ed's A Naive Crop.-caius (spy) 16:23, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I like "Ed's a Ravine Cop" myself. PenguinLust^{Give me herring or give me death} 16:30, 18 November 2008 (EST)

How about A Ravine Scoped? Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 16:36, 18 November 2008 (EST)

My favourites: "Ed's a vicar peon" and "Ed's a rap novice"...also, I think that redirect indicates that Ed now believes Conservapedia is a kind of skin cream. _{What? Makes as much sense as anything else.} --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 17:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)

[pulls out pad of paper] ... How about "Conservapedia = as a porn device"? Pseudomonas 18:11, 18 November 2008 (EST)

or "porn, a Sade vice", as you wish. Pseudomonas 18:20, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I wish it were "Konservapedia", to allow "Ken avoids rape". As is, I might have to settle for "penis o' cadaver". Pseudomonas 18:28, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Personal favourite: A craven op dies. --JeevesMkII 18:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

We should add an anagram subpage to Conservapedia - and link through all the ones that actually go somewhere! ħuman 22:18, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Either way, these all seem to be double redirects. Naughty naughty, did no one ever tell these people how Media Wiki orks? ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:52, 19 November 2008 (EST)

There was a ... er ... legit user in CP named Anagramer. It took them a while to figure out the anagrams on his userpage, but he got banned. Sterile^rationalize 15:48, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Ken breaks another irony meter

It looks like our assumptions on why Ken suddenly and uncharacteristically cares about false accusations on sheer ridiculousness in articles, it is affecting google rankings; Conservative sites don't want to link to it, and surely that is affecting links to his own articles too. But best of all is his spiel about how not to write a quality article. You certainly do not heave a myriad of unfounded and poorly conceived accusations and hope some of them stick. No, Ken would never write an article like that. DickTurpis 17:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

We should have known that Ken stance wouldn't have been a principled one. He is only concerned about the search engine rankings.--Damo^Hi 04:05, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, but he's pragmatically bad, rather than ideologically so (at least, as much as Ed or Andy). --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Who spiked the water cooler at Conservapeia ?

They all seem to have gone strange , well stranger than usual , the past few days . People blocking each other , unblocking , and even blocking themselves . Rude things said to Andy. 5 year blocks for the 90/10 rule , its a madhouse peoples... 67.72.98.45 18:26, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Well, TK's back, but that can only explain part of it. JazzMan 18:46, 18 November 2008 (EST)

TK's return certainly hit the afterburner for this whole mess, but things had started to spiral downwards before his arrival. Just look back at Bugler repeatedly challenging PJR, or at Andy overriding more and more sysops in the "Obama is a Muslim because I say so!" issue, or at Jazz (and others) and Bugler/Jpatt arguing over blocks. Oh, and don't forget Ed and his Crusade against anything that's not written for three-year-olds. It all built up over time, and the current state of affairs is just the logical (though earlier-than-originally-anticipated) conclusion. --Sid 19:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)

To put it in Weberian terms, what we're witnessing is a breakdown of Charismatic Authority. The great leader has shown himself both flawed (the Obama thing) and unable to provide leadership during a time of crisis (infighting among his henchmen), so the Charisma is fading. Unless Andy manages to rebuild his authority by some sort of miracle, the only thing that would have been able to save the project was a transition to Bureaucratic Authority, and considering how they have usually dealt with rules, that just isn't going to happen. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

He doesn't have the balls to press authority in the open, only behind closed doors like a coward. Even then, he isn't very successful in that they keep escalating arguments over several talk pages (reminds me of the cartoons where they break out into fights in a painting, and the fight rolls over into the next painting, etc.). The isolated incidents in the past was like watching two animals gripe over dominance in the African plains, but this time it involves almost ALL of them instead of just two, and the problems just snowballed together in a perfect storm sort of way. I ate half my damned tin bucket of popcorn from watching the drama over there today. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 20:04, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, cool, I almost forgot about the Charismatic Authority deal! I always liked that one. Combining your required miracle and the Africa mental image, I had to think of The Lion King. You know, that parallel-invoking scene at beginning and end at Pride Rock where all the animals bow down to young/old Simba? Andy would need something like that. Some major event that establishes his power again for all to see. Right now, only a few animals are bowing (like Bugler), and some more are reluctantly keeping their head low (like Ed "I almost joined the opposition against the Muslim-Obama assertion, but then remembered who has Bureaucrat power" Poor), but everybody else is snickering quietly, trying to keep a straight face. --Sid 20:20, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Nice. I was actually going to rant at HelpJazz last night about charismatic authority and how CP was done for if Bugler managed to drive PJR away or achieve sysopship while in the throes of insomnia, but I ended up thinking better of it. I’ve decided to post it here anyway.

The way I see it, the two main threats that Conservapedia faces are a loss of legitimacy and the loss of Andy’s actual power.

Here’s the thing: Wikipower is decidedly different from real world political authority. On a wiki, it doesn’t really matter what most folks think of Andy—he has control over the whole shebang because he has blocking rights, user group rights, etc. So, the system isn’t necessarily going to collapse just because Andy and his friends have lost their credibility, since Andy and the sysops—unlike most political leaders, who need to maintain some modicum of support in order to keep from getting overthrown—are guaranteed power over the site. In terms of the site’s continued existence, it doesn’t matter that Andy is no longer a valid charismatic leader anymore. Nobody needs to see Andy as a leader who will lead Conservapedia to a glorious future which transcends the “injustice” of Wikipedia and merges traditionalism and modernity. The only thing Andy needs to do to stay in control of the site is maintain his powers.

Unless Andy gets disillusioned, passes off his status as site owner to somebody else, shuts the whole operation down, or refuses to exercise those powers, he will maintain control of CP. The question is, however, whether CP will be worth keeping by the time Bugler and TK are done. In lieu of abdication or a hack, Andy will remain in control of the encyclopedia no matter what, but without some modicum of credibility, and with TK and Bugler savaging most of the newbies as soon as they show their faces, nobody apart from the obligatory parodists and vandals will join, and CP will essentially lose itself to trolls and lunatics. (I mean, CP will completely lose itself. CP’s not all the way lost—not yet, anyway.)

The more rational sysops and senior editors, such as PJR, represent the last vestiges of Conservapedian legitimacy. They protect innocent newcomers and struggle on their behalf against the more truculent admins, which helps bring non-troll/lunatic/parodists into the Conservapedian fold. They generally act in accordance with the CP rules and commandments, which gives those rules more legitimacy because they seem more relevant and applicable to the actual goings on at CP. They do their best to curb the more outlandish instances of lunacy on the site’s articles, which (on the rare occasions they succeed) makes CP seem that much more credible and attractive to outsiders—which means that said outsiders are more likely to join, forestalling the devolution of CP into a parodist haven.

Right now, HelpJazz and PJR are being systemically crowded out and marginalized by other sysops and by Andy himself. This is bad for the system, because HelpJazz and PJR (as noted above) have been some of the few rational members of CP, and their participation lends legitimacy and credibility to a system that desperately needs all the credibility it can get. However, if Andy and HelpJazz are kicked out by Andy or a sysop, this will not necessarily spell the end of Conservapedia. It will certainly accelerate its progress towards becoming a mockery of a mockery of itself, but it will not destroy Conservapedia as a site, because Andy still has absolute power over the site’s fundamental workings, even if nobody’s around.

And the only user I see that is capable of destroying Conservapedia as an extant community right now is Bugler. Right now, no matter how de-legitimized their regime is, Andy and his cabal remain in control on the basis of Wikipower. They can simply eliminate their enemies, and people stay in line because they fear that Andy or a sysop will strike them from the site if they speak up. Bugler has proved otherwise. He has proven that, if you are smart enough, you can attack many senior editors and sysops without serious reprisals. He has proven that, if you are lucky or smart enough, you can fly under Andy’s radar while still being pretty much the most flagrant parodist and rabble-rouser on the site. And, by doing so he has proven that, if you are lucky enough or smart enough, the “Sysop>User” rule doesn’t apply to you. The whole basis of Andy’s authority is the “Andy>Sysop>User” power structure. Bugler poses a threat to that structure itself—and if it comes crashing down and Andy is unwilling to exercise his power (for whatever inscrutable reason that’s keeping him from coming down on Bugler), that’s the end of Conservapedia as we know it.

(TK has bullied sysops without possessing sysop power himself, but he’s something of a special case, since he is an ex-sysop and since he used to be in a position of power over most current sysops anyway. Besides, TK hasn’t really gotten away with trying this tactic ever since he was first demoted, and something tells me that he probably won’t get away with it this time, either.)

God, I must be really, really, bored. A Writer of Vaudevilles 22:18, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Take a bow, sir. ^{— Unsigned, by: 90.194.176.12 / talk / contribs}

Wow, that is a great analysis. The only thing I would point out, is that if Bugler succeeds in taking out the "rule defending editors", then his tactics don't work anymore. Bugler can only push around people who don't have the support of the rest of the sysops. Once he gets rid of me, PJR, Tim, the more rational students, and maybe Learn together (though he's not really a "rule defender" in the sense applied above; he allows the rules to be broken as long as Andy is the one breaking them), then Bugler has nobody left to Bugle anymore. He might try taking on, for example, Karajou, I think he will soon find out he's wrong. So I think the real hierarchy is "Andy > Sysop > Bullies (Right now only Bugler, but Jpatt is getting braver by the day) > Rule Defenders > Editors". JazzMan 22:48, 18 November 2008 (EST)

If Bugler takes out the rule defenders, his tactics don't need to work. Because by then there'll be no check on the behaviour of the crazies (Andy, Ken, Ed) or the parodists. So it'll just keep going down the road of getting more and more extreme, with Andy screaming that it's a legitimate encyclopedia all the way. --Kels 23:46, 18 November 2008 (EST)

The other fly in the ointment here is that Andy seems to be willfully ignorant about Bugler's nature. No matter how obvious his parody, no matter how much his own sysops and editors talk about his parody, Andy's instinct as a dyed-in-the-wool conservative is to close ranks with his fellow conservative. PJR and Jazz can't be true conservatives because they've disagreed with him and therefore their comments about Bugler are suspect. This is the part of Bugler's strategy that is brilliant, exploiting Andy's own tendency to overcommit to insulate himself from retribution. Let's face it, Jazz and PJR are are too principled to sink to Bugler's level, so his attacks can become more audacious. If they retreat, he wins. If they stand their ground he can continue to argue, and if they fight back he can play the victim and further inure himself to Andy. Bugler cannot lose because he's not playing their game.

I'm reminded of a quote about trolling in Second Life that applies equally here. "You may be playing Second Life, but we're playing Something Awful." Stile4aly 00:59, 19 November 2008 (EST)

ARGHH!

That was a whole lot of wasted time. Because you’re right, Jazzman—that’s the thing my analysis/rant fails to take into account. My theory that Bugler poses a threat to Conservapedia as a regime based solely on Wikipower fails completely to address that issue—that there are tiers of sysopship. On Conservapedia, Bugler can get away with (figuratively) telling PJR to commit suicide. However, if (as you say) he were to try to take a similar tone with Karajou, he would almost certainly end up facing serious penalties. Karajou’s sysop status trumps Bugler, but PJR’s sysop status does not. How can one reconcile Bugler’s ability to pick on some sysops—which seems to indicate that the system of Wikiprivilege-based power is broken—with his inability to pick on other sysops?

That’s when it hit me—I’ve been thinking about the whole structure of Wikiprivilege-based power all wrong. I’ve been assuming that, in such a regime, the sysops always have more power than editors, simply because they have more privileges and can therefore control the site to a larger degree. But what I missed was that there is a common source for all that privilege. That common source is the true master of a Wikipower-based regime, because he controls who has the privileges that confer Wikipower. If that master does not back a user—sysop or otherwise—in a conflict, it doesn’t matter what kind of privileges that user can throw around. After all, he that giveth can taketh away.

So, in practice, Bugler does not pose a threat to the Wikipower regime of Andy, because, on Conservapedia, Andy is the ultimate source of Wikipower. Andy will always be its de facto ruler—as long as the only source of authority on Conservapedia is Wikipower—unless he abdicates or there are technical problems with the site, and there’s nothing Bugler can do about that.

Looking back at my last post, I think that what I was trying to get at was that Bugler posed a threat to the Andy<Sysop<User relationship as an institution. An institution is basically a set of authoritative, standardized rules for patterning human behavior, and for a while, that relationship seemed to have been one of the few things that stayed constant and authoritative on Conservapedia. If you were a regular editor and you screwed a Sysop, you were banned. If you were a Sysop and you screwed Andy (a la TK), you lost your power. Jazzman would probably be in a better position to answer this than I would, but it seems to me—as an outside observer—that these rules stayed pretty standardized for a while. Bugler is creating this new sort of “class of his own” on the hierarchy—the “bully” class—which is superior to some Sysops and inferior to others. By doing this, he has effectively destroyed the Sysop<User relationship as a consistent relationship. Some users can now bully some Sysops, so the Andy<Sysop<User relationship is now no longer standardized, and thus no longer an institution.

Andy still maintains his power, simply because he is the source of all Wikipower on Conservapedia, but his authority now comes from that power and not from charismatic or hierarchical relationships. In other words, the rationale most editors will have for staying on Andy’s good side right now in the wake of this institutional collapse won't be “He’s a really great guy” or “He’s the site’s owner, and that means he runs the community”—it’ll just be “He’ll ban me and take away my block rights if I irritate him”. It’s been moving that way for a while now, but I think Bugler’s actions may represent the final destruction of any pro-Andy institutions or rationale other than fear and the simple computerized rules of the wiki.

I just didn’t articulate that idea in my last post very well—I said that Bugler poses a threat to Conservapedia itself, but he really just poses a threat to its legitimacy and to the Andy<Sysop<User institutional heirarchy, which I promptly mixed up with Wikipower, something that’s entirely different. I think that Bugler is forcing Andy to rely completely on Wikipower instead of on charisma or on institutionalized hierarchies, but I also think that Andy can still control Conservapedia because Wikipower still gives him power over its content.

This is not to say Bugler’s not a danger—he’ll still turn the site into an autocratic, intellectually stagnant cesspool if you let him, and he still poses a direct threat to the few users that might be able to slow Conservapedia’s descent into marginalized madness. But it does mean that Bugler can’t take down Conservapedia itself. He can only make it into a sort of mockery of a mockery of itself—which is every bit as bad.

But, what do I know? I'm not the one who spent months there as a respected editor . Hell, I've never even had a CP account. A Writer of Vaudevilles 00:28, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy broke the normal Wikipower-stucture of Siteowner>Bureaucrat>Sysop>User, by with holding all bureaucrat rights to anyone other than himself and two rather passive teenage girls and creating the block right group, a group of users immune to most of the sysops powers. - User $\pi$ 00:44, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I don't know that Bureaucrat really factors into the power dynamics at all. As Pi mentioned, the only one who ever does anything with their Bureaucrat powers is Andy, so you might as well say that that particular level of power doesn't exist. If I remember correctly, CPWebmaster only used the power to grant rights one time, then quickly reversed his decision, saying that Andy was the only one responsible for granting user rights. (This happened when I pointed out that by no objective standard could he give that particular user rights and not give them to me. Read it, it's kinda funny.) he used them a couple times (see here), but there's no indication that he wasn't just doing it for Andy. It is pretty well known that Andy's not very good manipulating the software.

AWoV: I think again you make a very astute assessment, especially considering you were never an editor. To my memory, the first time the Andy>Sysop>Editor relationship was ever breached was when TK was desysopped. Part of the reason this was never breached was because TK was such an ardent enforcer of the hierarchy -- he would enforce it in ways that it wasn't written, and sometimes, even logical. One might argue that (and TK indicates this often with his "I talked to Andy behind closed doors, and even though you didn't see it this is what he said" approach) the hierarchy was actually closer to Andy>TK>Sysop>Editor. But when he was demoted, he still held command over the sysops, and bullied the "rule defenders", which at that time were Fox and PJR, but not me (because he was keeping control over me privately through IM). I don't think that his actions necessarily lead to the current state of affairs (largely because the important players are radically different now than they were before), but I think this was the very first shimmer of the power structure changing.

At the risk of sounding full of myself, I think it can be argued that I was the catalyst that lead us to the current situation. (Well catalyst isn't the right word here, since the catalyst doesn't get used up in the reaction!) As far as I know, Bugler was never out-and-out disrespectful until I came around. He had disagreements, but it was always with an air of respect, due to the fact that he could be blocked at any minute. Then I came (back) to town and started reigning in some of the crazy. We had warm (but not heated) "discussions" over some of Bugler's blocks, then it cooled down. There were minor arguments on various pages, but nothing worth as much as a warning. All semblance of powerstructure got rewritten the day that Bugler said "Keep your Liberal tanks off my lawn". I can honestly say that I was bemused and somewhat mystified at the time. Insults were thrown but Bugler was not blocked. One might argue that it was chance -- there was no sysop there at the time, and I couldn't block him, because we would just get into a useless wheel war. BrianCo came in a half hour later and blocked both of us, on the assumption that a sysop would decide what to do. No sysop did, and Bugler's attacks got worse and worse, and expanded to other users. I think Philip broke his sysop-insult cherry; but Philip is too good a sport, too level-headed, and too good a "rule defender" (and thus has little support from his fellow sysops) to block Bugler.

It can't be said that Bugler wasn't (and isn't) smart, though. All along the way he took the tiniest of steps forward, never too big that he called too much attention to himself. When he finally did or said something that would normally cause trouble, he was already in a proctected enough position that he could get away with it. He never said or did anything that would raise flags with editors until he got blocking. He never said anything that would raise flags with sysops until he got away with the things he said about me. It makes one wonder what he will try to get away with (and probabbly succeed) if he gets sysop, or heaven help us, Beaurocrat.

I think your end result (barring any "coming out") is pretty spot on. The only people affected by the headless chicken mode here are the good editors and "rule defenders". The normal sysops, the parodists, of course, Andy will come out unscathed; they will be tighter, more sure that their ways are correct, and less likely to let anyone else in.

This doesn't really change your analysis at all, but I did realize that we missed a level here: the people with block/edit (or in very rare cases, just block) can be thought of as their own separate group. These seem to fit somewhere between sysop and editor, but it's a very mushy relationship. Editors have no actual mandate to listen to block/editors, but they would be wise to do so lest they be blocked. At the same time, though, they did not need to listen to a block/editor who was in the wrong (this is, of course, in the DBB: days before Bugler) because they could appeal to a higher level editor. And now with the asention of Bugler, the aspirations of Jpatt and the twinges of Foxtrot, block/edit is being treated almost in the same manner as a sysop (and as in all levels of the power structure, all block/editors are equal, but "rule followers" are less equal than others). In fact, now that blockers have free reign to block for any reason whatsoever (a really stupid decision), the only de facto difference between a sysop and a block/editor is move, protect, and delete. You don't need to go to a sysop anymore for sysoply duties, like solving disputes or blocking vandals, or stifling dissent CP DOESN'T BLOCK FOR IDEOLOGICAL REASONS JazzMan 02:35, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I have worked out who Bugler is: He's the reincarnation of Lyndon Johnson. --Damo^Hi 04:16, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Writer and Jazzman, your analyses make a lot of sense, but I just have one comment - the fact that Andy has final control over the server of course means that his power is secure in that regard. However, that doesn't mean that he is immune from the mechanics of legitimisation. His problem is that if his regime gets delegitimised enough to appear as simply a raw exercise of power even among certain of the sysops and block/editors, they will probably respond in the only way they can - by leaving the project, and that's just as damaging to a Wikiproject as a political upheaval is to a state. These people are more or less the ones who do the actual work, and without a healthy foundation of editor who add content, the project as a whole will have lost its raison d'etre. To continue the state analogy, Andy would be left with an army and police force, but no citizens to support the economy. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:37, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Of course the question is: would it bother Andy to be the only editor of his website? I'm not sure it really would; no matter what happens there will always be vandals and trolls, so he always has someone there to argue against and he still has a "liberal conspiracy" to expose. JazzMan 13:11, 19 November 2008 (EST) PS: I read your charismatic power essay thingy yesterday; it was really interesting reading!

Following in the steps of such great analysis, I would assert that Andy started to break his holding and use of charisma-based power in March 2007 when he granted sysop rights to a handful of "grownups" he didn't know, who essentially brought no support for the charismatic aspect and were only there for the "wikipower", really. People like TK, and Ed and Kookoo, and now the Bunglers of the world, don't belong in a "community" that consisted of a teacher and his "personally known" teenage students. Were Andy to do the smart thing and ax the "grownups" (except the decent ones like PJR, jazz, etc. who seem appropriate to have around teenagers) and limit editorship to the students, he would re-assert or re-create the source of his charismatic leadership (not owner>crat>'sop>editor but teacher>"prefect">student). But people like Kels and I have been saying this for about 16 months now... Keep in mind that when TK says "the site owner" he is not perpetuating Andy's "power", he is asserting his own ("the boss says I am right so do it my way", essentially).

If anyone is interested, go back to pre-March 2007 CP, check out, say, the original students talk pages, etc., and you'll a bunch of kids having awkward fun (awkward because they didn't know the software, fun because they knew each other) while sort-of working on a weird assignment their teacher had given them. They were almost like a more innocent version of RW1. Then came the blogrush, and Andy is still clueless about what to do. ħuman 15:54, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Excellent Wandalism

Sorry, but this one did make me almost piss myself. Crundy 18:30, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, and now it's protected. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 19:29, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I noticed that too. Who knew that an entry about "fly" would generate such controversy? Perhaps because flies are products of evolution? In any case, let's keep up with a version for the Fly here.--Neon 21:07, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It's also at Fun:Assfly Proxima Centauri 04:58, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I take my hat off to the user responsible for that. Though if it were more subtle, I bet we could get Assfly as a page. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:47, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Obama

http://www.conservapedia.com/First_Black_president

Using liberal deceit, Obama claims that he's black. But he's probably a closeted white. Or maybe Ronald Reagan was a black actor playing a white president. Barraki 19:51, 18 November 2008 (EST)

... --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 19:57, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Caption: No one predicted the merger of CP and 4chan, but the signs were there if you looked hard enough. Coarb 20:08, 18 November 2008 (EST)

The mistake is to assume there was a difference in the first place. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 20:21, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia: not even pretending to not be racist anymore. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 21:02, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Grain of salt people, grain of salt.... BHarlan is an incredibly obvious parodist... I know that hurts CP in that they haven't blocked him, but it's as if this is a real person. SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 21:39, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Fair enough...I figured he might have been. Still, he wasn't the one who put it there intially.--Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 23:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, it's weird. I know he's a parodist, but he still really pisses me off. Talk about conflicted emotions. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 22:08, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Obama is "a black". Also, too awkward to be a real one. Coarb 22:24, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Hmm. So...Obama is not the first black president, but he is the first "Affirmative-Action President". Presumably, then, those other black presidents were elected solely on the basis of their qualifications. I guess that would then make Obama the Least-Qualified Black President Ever. Andy should add this insight to the Obama article.--WJThomas 22:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

don't forget that Obama is also the first gay president.--En attendant Godot_{"«Curiosity is insubordination in its purest form. V.Nabokov»} 23:57, 18 November 2008 (EST)

On the French Uncyclopedia, we wrote this: [5]. Summarized: Obama admits that he is member of Al-Qaeda and a gay, but denies being black. Funny to see how Conservapedia competes with Uncyclopedia. Barraki 10:51, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy needs to make his mind up. Was Obama elected because of voter fraud, or because of affirmative action? Dreaded Walrus 10:46, 19 November 2008 (EST)

And the fact that he's an atheist... no, muslim, no... atheist. Wait, he can be BOTH! In Andyland, is he black or not? Personally, I don't give a shit if he's blue or green, I'm begrudgingly using the term "black" just to be understood, but you're going to use racial terminology to slander someone, can they at least be consistent. Is that too much to ask?!? ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:50, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's conspiracy theory is not consistent, definitely. The only consistency is his Manichean division of the universe into "liberal" and "conservative". Under the liberal umbrella goes every single Bad Thing there is - atheism, Islam, abortion, global warming, racism, Nazism, everything. And every single Good Thing goes under the Conservative umbrella. That's how Andy can get away with saying such obviously contradictory things about Obama: atheist, Muslim, liberal, whatever, he's definitely Bad. It's also, by the way, how he can claim that John 7:53-8:11 were inserted by "Liberals" in the fourth century. To the rest of the world it's obvious that there was no such thing as liberalism in the fourth century, but to Andy, Liberals have been on the wrong side of the cosmic dichotomy ever since Satan, that known Democrat, left the Republican administration of God. Bluefish 12:33, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Well, evolutionists could tell that Obama is not the first US president who comes out of Africa. Basically, homo sapiens first existed only there. What a shame Andy doesn't believe in serious paleontology. Barraki 15:21, 19 November 2008 (EST)

No one likes a smart arse :P ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 16:25, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Why didn't I think of that?? Kallium^talk 22:42, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's theory of who the first "black President" was has a(n un)surprisingly racist background - the "one drop" theory, under which any African lineage works a corruption of the blood, destroying the purity of the white lineage and damning the individual to a lower legal tier. This was, of course, the pervasive view in the nineteenth century - when blackness was considered "bad" enough that it trumped whiteness by merely coming into contact with it. Only under that racist theory is Obama not the first "black" president.... and that should give you an idea of what Andy's thinking.-caius (spy) 23:59, 19 November 2008 (EST)

It's reunion time

TK back and now foxy. Who next, RobS? _and marmite 20:37, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Didn't he pop up about a month ago? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 20:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Yep, he briefly returned "to save the planet from Obama bin Biden," vanished days later and only popped up again a month after that to make one minor edit. --Sid 20:49, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I should ask Ed to unblock the cabal for CP day. I have, after all, made over ten substantive edits to CP, so I can post on his talk page without fear of the insta-swat. ħuman 22:57, 18 November 2008 (EST)

The last time I saw Fox was the day I was leaving for a two-week hiking trip and he was showing some serious crazy on RW and CP as I recall. When I got back he was gone. Anyone have any idea why he, Ed and TK should all come out from under their respective rocks during the same time span? Obama's win got the fundies riled up? Or do people just want to say that they were there for the End Days? PFoster 23:56, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It's beginning to feel like an episode of Derek Acora's Most Haunted. Don't forget Geo.plrd's emergence from the wainscotting as well.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 00:27, 19 November 2008 (EST)

When there's no more room in Creationwiki, the brain-dead will walk the Earth. --JeevesMkII 00:28, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I think we need to add fox to the CP's biggest idiot2 list. I think his brand of idiocy and paranoia should get some recognitionDamo^Hi 04:20, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Even Deborah reappears for the first since Oct 2. Guess they're all going for one final suck-up before the new sysops are announced. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:59, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Deborah is going apeshit over there. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 12:13, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Shocker!!

Ed isn't up to date on internet memes. He thinks this is Hillary. Jrssr5 10:26, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I'm pretty sure thats an adaption of a different cartoon. The protagonist (Represented as Hillary wearing a 'Mainstream Media' tee shirt) wails to leave Obama alone - ie, the media defends Obama at every turn.

If you ask me someone has to. If racist bigots like Andy got their way, everyone would believe Obama is a sleeper Al-Qaeda agent. I think the latest South Park Episode (Though quite poor in reality) paints this picture also. MarcusCicero 10:38, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Why Ed thinks that Hillary is mysterious; it clearly isn't (would that even make sense? Why would Hillary be representing the media?). I also like the way he claims fair use when its only use is to post on a talk page. If he used it in an article he might be able to make such a claim, since Conservapedia is a *snicker* educational *guffaw* resource. But a "hey TK, isn't this funny?" don't cut it. DickTurpis 10:43, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Not that it makes a difference in the legality of it, but TK asked him to upload it. He sent it to me the other day on IM (it was his excuse to start talking to me so he could find out who was in charge at CP). BTW, I had totally forgotten about Chris Crocker! The comic is actually funny now. JazzMan 13:16, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Well, it looks androgenous and is blonde. For people who think Obama is black therefore a muslim, this is good enough reasoning. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 10:45, 19 November 2008 (EST)

If you didn't know, the protagonist is a guy in drag who, 6 months or so ago, made a youtube video wailing "Leave Britney Alone!" Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 12:25, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I gathered as much, but I managed to stay away from the video until now. It's one of those things that eventually you just have to watch. It's the law. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 16:22, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Off topic, but now that Ed reverted, I can point it out... this not so subtle vandalism took place exactly five minutes after Ed unlocked the page and practically screamed Vandal in the edit summary, yet it took an hour and a half to be noticed and reverted.

Christopedia

I just discovered (via reddit) that there's another Conservapedia out there: http://christopedia.us/wiki/Main_Page   This one is clearly parody, though (or else its true-believer core is even smaller than CP's). (Of course Encyclopedia Dramatica claims it's for real.) Everyone knows the British can't take a joke.

Not to be confused with Christopedia or Christopedia, both of which wear their parody on their sleeves. --Marty 12:36, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Looks like Christopedia is all the work of one guy right now. --Gulik 14:15, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, and doesn't strike me as parody either. Smyth 14:16, 19 November 2008 (EST)

More nutters than parodist. --Toiretni 14:27, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I looked poked around and it seemed like vast amounts of content were copy/pasted directly from Wikipedia, redlinks and all. JazzMan 14:42, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Is "nonsense/gibberish" a common wiki phrase, or what? [6] JazzMan 14:45, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I bet it is. Of course, it's incense/gibbering here, but that's about par for the course. Smyth 14:48, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Yes, "Inserting nonsense/gibberish into pages" is a block reason that comes built-in to the stock version of the MW software. ħuman 16:03, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Wow. It just sounded like such an Andy thing to say. Good to know. JazzMan 16:12, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I saw the site but didn't look too much into it. Their Obama article pretty much mirrors CP's, but its comparing a blow gun to a railgun in lulz. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:56, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Ed and Paul Cameron

Again and again. If it wasn't playing into such an uncomfortable joke, I'd suggest that someone has a crush. 76.105.223.176 13:26, 19 November 2008 (EST)

The whole homosexual thing grows creepier by the day. _and marmite 14:25, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Way to promote family-friendly content, Ed! Apparently CP needs coverage of sexual fantasies now? weaseLOId~ 15:04, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Losing the debate with me was also apparently worthy of a two hour ban =P EternalCritic 15:09, 19 November 2008 (EST)

But Ed, I don't want to hear about your parent/child relationships! --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Damnit, Ed! Italics for titles! Also: ew ew ew ew ew ew ew icky. -Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 07:43, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Something that Ed missed, even if we take what he says the cite says at face value - unless I'm missing something, if 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys, that means 60-75% prefer girls. This means that, whilst it is the case, according to this source, that the rate of homosexuality is far higher amongst pedophiles than non-pedophiles, it is still the case that the majority of male pedophiles are heterosexual. However, given the source used was an interpretation of the study by an obviously biased third party, rather than the actual study itself, I would not be at all surprised if the results of this study are either misinterpreted, quotemined or skewed in some manner to try to make homosexuals seem more prone to pedophilia than they actually are. Zmidponk 17:16, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Ed Poor, writing teacher and senior wiki sysop presents...

...a completely butchered two-sentence stub that contains at least two typos, doesn't have a "Reference" section (but does use a reference tag, which now of course leads nowhere) and didn't even properly format the "See also" section.

The best part? He didn't even bother to write that stub himself, it's basically transcribed straight from the book he tries to cite. (Normally would've WIGO'd it, but decided against it since WIGO is Ed-focused enough already) --Sid 15:36, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Ed does a book report!-216.165.95.70 16:04, 19 November 2008 (EST)

We need to create a seperate WIGO Ed page to chronicle his idiocy.... I hope he's just making a really hard drive as voting ends to retain his title.... On a seperate note, creepiest thought ever SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 16:10, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Now, I'm as critical as Ed as the next guy, but I think we're misunderestimating him. If you read his contribs against his edit comments, there's a call-and-answer, almost poetic quality to it. Like Plato's dialogues, if Plato underwent a lobotomy --

In Eye of the Dolphin, Teenager Melissa wakes up from an aquatic nightmare and tarts herself up for a day at school.

She responds to some teasing by her single mom by twitting her about her dates and handing her a condom.

PG-13 or R?

Then she smokes pot in the bathroom.

Why watch it then?

Grandmother

Oops

And gets suspended

All this in the first 4 minutes!

No?-caius (spy) 16:13, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I think we're seeing a bold new form of article-writing: the liveblog method. 76.105.223.176 16:18, 19 November 2008 (EST)

"Suprise, You have a dad!"

I have to find this book. Or is it a movie, as I doubt you really measure books in minutes... well. Ah, never mind I♥IMDB: [7] ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 16:19, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Is he writing a live commentary as he watches the movie? This is a new and fascinating form of stupidity. weaseLOId~ 16:28, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Can't be the movie - the movie's protagonist is named Alyssa, not Melissa. Unless of course Ed managed to write a movie summary without even getting the protagonist's name right. Which I would never suggest, of course. ;) (And isn't it silly that we're looking at an encyclopedia article and can't even use it to figure out basics like "What are you writing about? Is it a book, a movie, or something else?"?) --Sid 16:38, 19 November 2008 (EST)

'only 2% of 66 children of heterosexuals said they practiced homosexuality' says Ed. Much more mathematically accurate than 1 out of 66. Matt oblong 17:02, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I really think he is live blogging the fucking movie SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 17:11, 19 November 2008 (EST)

This is hilarious. I hereby declare "Then she smokes pot in the bathroom" a new meme. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:20, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I am now officially convinced. Fellow Rationalwikiers, we are witnessing a new moment in CP history and Ed Poor stupidity.... He is live blogging a goddamn movie Words fail me.... SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 17:27, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I don't get it. Why is Ed, allegedly a grown man, watching this straight-to-video epic let alone live blogging it for Conservapedia? Is this some kind of secret mission from the right reverend moon? --JeevesMkII 18:57, 19 November 2008 (EST)

My guess is, reviewing the family-friendly nature of a movie for a youth group or something. Or maybe it's a writing exercise for his students? Can't decide which is sadder.-caius (spy) 19:01, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Now live-blogging Expelled:NIA. So presumably he's finished watching Eye of the Dolphin but not bothered to finish his synopsis (unless the film really does end after she passes out on the beach). weaseLOId~ 19:08, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Yep. Liveblogged.-caius (spy) 19:47, 19 November 2008 (EST)

(unindent) Will somebody please to be going to Conservapedia and writing an article on "Chasing Amy" that starts "Chasing Amy is a movie about a troubled girl named Alyssa." Linking up Ed's awesome movie reviews with his reprehensible homophobia would make me so happy. --JeevesMkII 20:22, 19 November 2008 (EST)

This entire Eye of the Dolphin thing was the funniest I've read in a long time. Two parts of this story made me literally LOL:

• He openly admits that he "just watched it", removes a fact but keeps the reference that supports it, all in one diff.
• His conclusion about what the main themes are - seriously, how is "what will happen to her father's dolphin research" a "main theme" of a movie?

Thank you Ed for brightening my day. Etc 04:59, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Not CP but ...

The Onion has a column that could be out of Conservapedia. _and marmite 15:45, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Sweet. Didn't "she" used to have an account there? Someone should burn a sock and add that as a reference to some CP article... ħuman 16:09, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Ah, the Onion still has it! ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 16:13, 19 November 2008 (EST)

The only way it could have been better is if they used a slightly different closing phrase. That would have been, well, awesome. Kallium^talk 22:46, 19 November 2008 (EST)

article Boner

I are hiding here till the temptation to edit Boner article goes away... 67.72.98.45 maybe a proxy and new user enrollment ...

You can look at it with a positive outlook: you have an extra phalanx to type with. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 17:52, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Andy the quizmaster

I wish my high school AP history teacher asked gems like these: Which question did you like the best? Give your views on Teddy Roosevelt. Write on any topic in the lecture. Sheesh. Czolgolz 17:12, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, we spent about 10 weeks on WWI in my year 11 history class, about 2-3 on the cause of the war alone. In Andy's if you blinked you would have missed it. 219.90.133.165 17:23, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Is it just me, or are his homework assignments getting more and more worthless? Is Andy running out of steam? Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 17:29, 19 November 2008 (EST)

$10 bucks for anyone who socks up and says that their favorite military tactic in WWI was the use of mustard gas because they really like spicy mustard. Stile4aly 18:27, 19 November 2008 (EST)

"4. Do you think the United States should have entered World War I, and why? " So Andy's students are able to answer in two sentences questions which have been disputed for 90 years in entire books by the best historians? Barraki 18:30, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Don't be foolish. Andy is the best historian. He's got a Bible! --Kels 18:43, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Hmm. I've got five Bibles. Does that make me five times as good an historian as Andy? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:44, 19 November 2008 (EST)

None of those beat the classic "Describe what you like best about the Monroe Administration." Godspeed 18:45, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Well, I don't know about you, but I for one look forward to hearing exactly what his students think about his midterm exam. I hope at least one of them tells the misogynistic prick exactly what they think in all its four-lettered glory. --JeevesMkII 18:48, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Here's another good one: "Your thoughts on the progressive movement, please." Oh, Andrew, you said "please." How chivalrous! Godspeed 18:51, 19 November 2008 (EST)

It's very common for American classrooms to blitz through WW1 in a few days of lessons, the better to get to WW2. A large amount of time is spent on WW2, because we are still pretty self-congratulatory about ourselves in that one (especially in comparison to others).--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 01:40, 20 November 2008 (EST)

For 15/16 year olds its not too bad. I remember at that age were asked broad questions like that in exams. Weren't too difficult if I remember right. MarcusCicero 19:06, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Depends on the class and how much you expect from the students. Does the teacher require a two paragraph essay or just one or two sentences? Keep in mind, these questions are all open book, open notes, open internet and graded by a moron.Czolgolz 19:14, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I wrote an article on Teddy Roosevelt once. Might mail it to him and get him to grade it for a laff. MarcusCicero 19:16, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Ok, Student 11 has to be a parodist: "4. I agree with the United States entering World War I because we were telling the world that we were not going to sit around and let innocent American citizens die without a fight (i.e.- Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the Lusitania)." Stile4aly 11:21, 20 November 2008 (EST) (comming into the convo late:) AKjeldsen:Hmm. I've got five Bibles. Does that make me five times as good an historian as Andy? -- Well, of course not silly. There is only ONE bible. the ENGLISH KJV. everything else are Liberal Revisionist Bibles trying to prove god and Jesus *like* sinners, and dislike lying.--En attendant Godot_{"«Curiosity is insubordination in its purest form. V.Nabokov»} 12:23, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Ed demonstrates how smert he is

I'd WIGO it, but it's a bit too esoteric. Dear Ed, yes a dolphin can be taught to win at tic-tac-toe (noughts and crosses to us on this side of the pond.) The winning strategy is trivial. An automaton can do it, I've seen a computer made out of small pots of DNA beat a human at the fracking game. YOU ARE A MORON! --JeevesMkII 19:03, 19 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, I get it now! I was wondering why the article existed when it was flagged up before, but now I know. It has a Hollywood Values link, i.e., the entire article exists to link back to that. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:47, 20 November 2008 (EST)

There's actually a computer make of tinker toys at the Museum of Science in Boston that never loses at Tic-Tac-Toe. Tinker Toys.

O brave Philip

He's blind about science, but you gotta admit it: he's brave and honest. JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 22:25, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I disagree with Philip about several things, but he's always been reasonable, respectful, and willing to discuss his points of view without resorting to the BS that Andy, Karajou, and the others employ in order to "win." He's better than CP, plain and simple, though I doubt our praise means anything to Andy et al. In fact it may even be held against him. Stile4aly 23:09, 19 November 2008 (EST)

It's refreshing to see a conservative Christian who's acting like they think "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" DOES NOT have "...unless they're Liberals, in which case you can make up whatever shit you like about them." on the end.

Refreshing, and depressingly rare on the blagowebs. --Gulik 00:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Philip confesses to being torn between whether Andy is lying (he can't believe that Andy believes the things he is saying) or, by implication, a gibbering idiot (he can't believe Andy would lie). It makes me think that Andy is bullshitting, saying things for effect with no regard to whether or not they are true or false. Although I don't think bullshitting is quite on the money, Andy doesn't think he is bullshitting, he has a convoluted justification for being dishonest that stops it being dishonest: "I am right." "I must be seen to be right." "It doesn't matter what I say in order that it is seen that I am right - what is important is only that I am seen to be right." "So I should say things even if they are downright dishonest." "And if I should say them, then they can't be dishonest." "And if they're not dishonest they must be true". "Which means that I am right." --Toffeeman 06:58, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I think the fact that PJR used the word deceit is a subtle hint that he does think Aschlafly is deliberately misleading in the Obama-Muslim link. Bondurant 07:59, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I suspect that Toff is on the right track here. For Andy, "factual" seems to mean something like, "an assertion which serves as a means to the end". Whether that idea is "Obama is a Muslim", "abortion causes breast cancer", or whatnot, Andy starts with a conclusion and works backward. Anything that would support his conclusion, if it were true, that could be true if you squint hard, is "factual".--WJThomas 09:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Well, as a YEC-ist, we all know that's how his brain must work... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 09:44, 20 November 2008 (EST)

It's not just that he's a YEC, he's a particular brand of American conservative that serves two Gods: The Bible and the Godhead of Conservatism. Articles of faith include belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, resurrection of Christ, life beginning at conception (possibly at ejaculation), and the invisible hand of the market. Because Andy is incapable of seperating his political beliefs from his religious beliefs, he treats them the same. Because his beliefs are true, all external facts must conform to those beliefs. No political opponent can be an honest broker, they must be the embodiment of all that is wrong with humanity. Andy would probably admit if pinned down that Obama isn't a Muslim, but that's not the point. The point is that Muslims are bad, and Obama has enough circumstantial connections to Muslims that he can be smeared with the association. Stile4aly 11:17, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Andy might worship the invisible hand, but he somehow thinks that free trade is wrong. He's not a conservative; he's a neocon. (He also thinks neocons are people who themselves were liberal, and then newly turned conservative). JazzMan 14:04, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I wouldn't applaud PJR too much, his Andy is lying/Andy is confused line does seem to be just a rhetorical ploy when coupled with the I've laid it out simply, so you can't be confused bit above. This tells me the Philip is telling a little white lie at the very least. He is, in fact, calling Andy a liar and probably doesn't have any trouble reconciling Lying Andy with whatever other opinion of Andy he has. As a liberal I, of course, embrace deceit, especially when it is used for rhetorical effect. However, I suspect PJR has a discourse engine similar to the one "Toffeeman' (if that is even his real name) aptly describes for Andy above. This discourse engine which makes certain lies look like the truth is the thing that allows PJR to participate in RW and, more sigificantly, to be the warmest and most civil fascist I've ever encountered. Goat's Pee. Disclaimor: I employ a similar discourse engine just to convince myself to get out of bed each morning, except I turn the irrefutable fact that "I suck" into the lie "everything will be fine" ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 09:56, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's a lawyer. Lawyers are paid to lie, as long as they can pretend they aren't. They also judge all outcomes on a win v. lose scale. However they achieve a desired outcome is irrelevant if it works and they don't get indicted for it. ħuman 17:40, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Atheists do things that Aschlafly won't admit to doing

Atheistic tools Proxima Centauri 10:43, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Start the timer, this is clearly an article matrix thing, and since it's been brought up here, it'll be noticed :S ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 11:02, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Always handy when a helpful CPer plonks a category on it tho. I think it'll stay. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:13, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Another $10 for anyone who socks up and adds "User:Aschlafly" to the list of tools. Stile4aly 11:18, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Two of us have done it so far. They reverted it fast. Proxima Centauri 11:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Aschlafly personally blocked HappyA. Proxima Centauri 11:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

That was created by a user whose only edits were that article. I'm guessing Proxima wrote it, since he has a history of pimping his own vandalism. JazzMan 13:56, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Jazzman831 I feel like blocking you for saying something bad about me. Of course I won't. That's not how RationalWiki operates. Anyone who criticized a sysop over at Conservapedia the way you got at me would certainly get a block. Proxima Centauri 14:13, 20 November 2008 (EST)

And RationalWiki sysops never avoid questions by changing the subject, like they do on Conservapedia.... 131.111.8.102 15:47, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Is it not true? Do you not pimp your own vandalism? I can give you links if you like. JazzMan 14:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

PC, what did Jazz say "bad" about you? Jazz, you're a sysop, right? Let the block war begin! I could use some petty entertainment on CP Day Eve... ħuman 17:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Ha. Pwned by Jazz and a bunchofnumbers, not your day is it Proxima? - User $\pi$ 18:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

You're right, Human, I don't abuse my power nearly as much as I'm legally obligated to. JazzMan 19:12, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Because it's been shown that abusing power requires effort. And that just isn't going to happen is it? ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 07:19, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Obama and dancing

So who will burn a sock to post this over on cp's Obama's article?--TimS 12:31, 20 November 2008 (EST)

That was already posted a while back. Didn't seem to faze 'em.--WJThomas 12:48, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Ed's Reading Comprehension

Ah, Ed, you bring us so much joy and lulz in our dreary lives. I have imposed upon myself a WIGO freeze on all Ed related matters, unless they are jaw-droppingly stupid. However, Not content with performing the internet's first live blog of a movie already out on video, he has decided to take a look at the talk page. Upon editing out Ed's stupid comment about Dolphins not being able to learn to play tictactoe (he considered it science fiction). CP:User:StephenK added links to a few articles about Dolphin intelligence. After Ed reads them, he has discovered that Stephen was stretching the truth a little in saying that Dolphins can understand basic numeracy, and added a nice little threat. However, when Ed read the article, he seemed to miss something..... LIKE THE FIRST FREAKING LINE!. The article in question opens with "Study makes waves by showing for the first time that dolphins understand the concept of numerosity." Is Ed that stupid, or does he just respond to any perceived slight with threats and idiocy? SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 12:55, 20 November 2008 (EST)

The funniest thing about the liveblog was reading the edit comments and getting a peek at how his mind works. I thought it was actually really interesting. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 16:08, 20 November 2008 (EST)

"I have imposed upon myself a WIGO freeze on all Ed related matters, unless they are jaw-droppingly stupid." Cripes, we're gonna have to archive on the hour! --Kels 16:22, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Personal boredom

I'm pretty much on thin ice at CP as it is, so I'm thinking about just waiting until Andy says "this isn't a blog" again, and just reply that the FBi disagrees with him. Think that'll get a perma ban? Burnout on CP is pretty quick for me it seems. EternalCritic 13:26, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Mentioning the FBI ever will get you a ban. Bonus points for mentioning the phrase 'ongoing investigation' in the same sentence. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Zuh?

How is this Mormon bashing? Bastard harmonic Hoover!

Read up on the origins of the Mormon faith. It's no kookier than most others, it just happened more recently, so there's better documentation. (Joseph Smith read golden plates using two magical stones while looking into his hat.) -Hactar, too lazy to sign in again.

It is demonstratively kookier than Christianity because it sort of starts with volume one and two of the christian bible and continues, and then guess what happened? So you get all the Christian kookiness plus the new Mormon kookiness built in. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 15:46, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Yah, but the WIGO is obviously from a CP detractor. Smyth 10:54, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Bugly has surpassed himself!

Best parody ever!!!!!1 Some gems:

"Two years on, Conservapedia is more than a resource for homeschool students. Thanks to its many active and expert editors, inspired by the example of Andrew Schlafly and guided by his wise tutelage, it is a successful online encyclopaedia, growing faster than its rivals, and a respected part of the Conservative intellectual firmament.

"But their work has been made harder by the efforts of frustrated and embittered Liberals to destroy the project..."

LMAO JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 14:10, 20 November 2008 (EST)

(FFS, you edit-sniped me when it came to WIGOing this, and now you sniped me here, too? Boo! :P)

Bugler's whitewashing is epic win. I thought it had reached its peak when he compared liberals to the Nazis. But then he went on and praised Andy's Great Victory over Lenski and how only CP can save America after the "catastrophic error" that was Obama's "flawed victory". Kudos, Bugler. Kudos. --Sid 14:13, 20 November 2008 (EST)

If the American right needs Conservapedia in order to succeed it will certainly fail. I just wish it were so weak. Unfortuanately it isn't. Proxima Centauri 14:21, 20 November 2008 (EST)

growing faster than its rivals - absolutely true. I mean, just check Alexa: Conservapedia's ranking is greater than fourty thousand!!! While Wikipedia's ranking is what, eight? That makes CP's ranking five thousand times greater!!! Wikipedia is history!!! In no time it's ranking will be zero or less, wihle CP's ranking continues to grow rapidly!!! (Why aren't these statistics mentioned on CP?) --Just passing by 14:23, 20 November 2008 (EST)

This is Bugler's finest parody. I can't wait to see the reactions. JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 14:26, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Well, here is the first reaction: Silly parody apparently attracts silly vandalism - of the somewhat weird kind that fixes your wikilinks while adding a Hitler pic. --Sid 14:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Alex Krycek? --Just passing by 14:35, 20 November 2008 (EST)

gratuitous picture http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/funny-pictures-squirrel-has-leverage.jpg 67.72.98.58

Leverage indeed. --Sid 15:05, 20 November 2008 (EST)

(undent)

I hope folks leave this essay alone. Trying to add parody to it is like trying to glue arms onto the Venus Di Milo - an unnecessary change to a piece of art. --SpinyNorman 15:27, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I came. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:44, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Too ... much ... information! _and marmite 18:49, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Who puts cheese on their toast? You're a parodist! :P Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 19:31, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Take care Viking! You'll have the entire population of a Great Nation snapping at your toes (once they've finished having their way with the sheep that is) _and marmite 19:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I dont quite remember it the same way , but would Conservapedia LIE ? "Andrew Schlafly gained lasting renown in 2007 by his successful debunking of the so-called 'proofs' of the theory of evolution being trumpeted by Richard Lenski. His debates with Lenski, and the subsequent attempt by PNAS to suppress news of these events, have been a highlight of the past twelve months." 67.72.98.45 19:54, 20 November 2008 (EST)

The cranky one has a sense of humor

Allison O pleads for the fighting to stop. For the sake of the lulz.

Karajou responds with a quality block comment Bjones 15:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

TK's a PUMA!

Holy crap! I always knew it! He actually reminds me of one of the big PUMA writers... I wonder if that's where he's been...-caius (spy) 16:44, 20 November 2008 (EST)

If anything, TK hugs the center pretty well. He may well have actually been a PUMA. JazzMan 17:09, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Is it just me, btw, or have his suck-up missions gotten a little more obvious lately? I couldn't tell if this was a joke.-caius (spy) 17:18, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I think he's always been that way. He just added the nod to godspeed so that we would all know that he was always faking it. JazzMan 19:10, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Insanity, pure insanity

Dear god, have you seen this paragraph on the two years on essay?

This has not been without a struggle. Andrew Schlafly, his senior administrators, and a host of editors have worked hard to make Conservapedia what it is today. But their work has been made harder by the efforts of frustrated and embittered Liberals to destroy the project. Enraged by the expression of views inimical to their own, they have launched wave after wave of attacks on the encyclopaedia, all beaten off by watchfulness, dedication, hard work, and intelligence. The struggle for truth and freedom continues daily, and the Liberals and atheists continue in their twenty-first century equivalent of the Nazi book-burning campaigns of the 1930s.

OK, so their obsessive policing of a site populated with nonsense is "intelligent", and we're all nazis. Well done CP on invoking Godwin's law even without an argument. Morons. Crundy 18:03, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I totally agree that The struggle for truth and freedom continues daily. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 18:51, 20 November 2008 (EST)

At least Crococrap is impressed. JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 18:58, 20 November 2008 (EST)

See this _and marmite 19:56, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I can admit it. Andy beat me off.Czolgolz 20:08, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Conservative mindset

Elseblog on 538...

There are a certain segment of conservatives who literally cannot believe that anybody would see the world differently than the way they do. They have not just forgotten how to persuade; they have forgotten about the necessity of persuasion.

John Ziegler is a shining example of such a conservative. During my interview with him, Ziegler made absolutely no effort to persuade me about the veracity of any of his viewpoints. He simply asserted them -- and then became frustrated, paranoid, or vulgar when I rebutted them.

I will point out that this is very much like Andy. It is interesting looking at Andy and seeing someone who believes if you don't agree with him, you are mentally ill. There is no persuasion, just assertions of "truths". I challenge people to find one example of Andy trying to persuade a person that goes beyond asserting what he believes as true. --Shagie 19:07, 20 November 2008 (EST)

He says "open your mind" a lot, as do other Conservapedians. It's not exactly persuasive. I don't know whether he even understands what it really means. weaseLOId~ 20:34, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I think what he means is "Open your mind so that I can insert some idiocy, then you can close it again"  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 01:33, 21 November 2008 (EST)

"There are a certain segment of conservatives who literally cannot believe that anybody would see the world differently than the way they do. They have not just forgotten how to persuade; they have forgotten about the necessity of persuasion." That is not exclusive to conservatives. Ajkgordon 08:54, 21 November 2008 (EST)

By no means is it exclusive to any group of people. It is not difficult to find a liberal who wonders how any person capable of rational thought can be a conservative. However, I do believe that conservatives have a monopoly on shouting at people with only their own assertions to back them up. The article itself is in the context of is how the McCain campaign was about stimulation of the base - not about persuading the middle... and in doing so, handicapped itself in the election about issues. There are now more people listening for a message and plans than just having their own beliefs reinforced with sound bites. To bring this back to conservapedia, look how many times people get banned for adding fact tags - looking to be persuaded and material backing the message up. --Shagie 14:24, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Gun Control and Australia

Ahhhhh that conversation takes me back. I remember under the moniker of AdenJ I had a conversation about gun control in NZ. I mentioned to Andy that NZ has tight gun laws and gun control is NOT an issue here and we have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. This flew in the face of all he believed and he stated that liberals pushed for greater gun control after a guy went on a rampage with a AK-47. Because of course, before then, we used to wander around with assault rifles all the time (to control all the sheep). When I told Andy that A) That wasnt so, no NZ political party pushes anti/pro gun issues and that B) he knows nothing about NZ I was promptly told I was "clueless" and that unless I agreed with him he would block me. I told him I could not agree with something I know to be false and was banned for a month. Memories....Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 19:47, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Funny how Andy ends these conversations by suggesting that the other person is the one who doesn't have an open mind. --Toiretni 21:27, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Begin to understand Phil too - he's never drunk alcohol! what a depressed youth he must have had. _and marmite 21:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Andy doesn't rate Phil's conservatism. _and marmite 21:54, 20 November 2008 (EST)

To quote the asshat: "Philip, a right to meaningful, personal self-defense is fundamental to conservative principles. You've stated your opposition to it in the form of gun control, and that probably means you are liberal on other issues also. Government-funded health care? I'd expect you to favor it. Government-controlled education? That too. Lower taxes for the wealthy? I doubt you're a fan. And so on." I had to come here 'cause I'm sure I wasn't the only one reading it and going WTF ANDY!? ħuman 22:23, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler'll probably take that as a green light to attack in force on Conservapedia day. _and marmite 22:27, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Me too. I actually went and checked the page history, I thought it was a parody at first. PJR a closet liberal. Who'd have thunk it? Andy really is a dickhead, carving the world up in to two factions with no shades of grey in sight. He can't seem to grasp the concept that one might share all the ideals of conservatism except that people shouldn't be allowed to own firearms of certain types. Does the real world ever impinge in this spoilt rich kid's little fantasy? --JeevesMkII 22:36, 20 November 2008 (EST)

(edit conflict) NOW I see what the disagreement over fall foliage was really about: we see this perfectly explainable phenomenon, but Andy, who sees the world in black-and-white, is instead privileged to see its true stunning beauty. Kallium^talk 07:08, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Yes Andy is correct, the conservatives in Australia didn't push the issue of gun control at the last election, they were the ones that brought it in, it would have been political suicide anyway even if they had proposed it. Why does Andy feel he has the right to lecture others on the politics of their country? Only the most extreme elements support lessening gun control and no government health care. We had this debate years ago, nobody wants guns, everyone wants to be able to get into hospital when they are sick. All politicians in Australia promise is more hospital beds without blowing the budget, there is not much difference between them anymore. - User $\pi$ 23:02, 20 November 2008 (EST)

He thinks he knows *everything* about everything better than you do. He once tried to tell me what grade I was in. JazzMan 01:55, 21 November 2008 (EST)

You know, the National Review once ran a cover article for the conservative case against the death penalty. Would that make them liberals in Asshole's worldview? Researcher 01:00, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I am pro gun-control (just how much force do you really need for self-defense? My jujitsu has served me well over the years.) However, the USA is probably a lost cause as there are so many weapons around anyhow. It would take years to phase them all out of existence but perhaps it's time to make a start. Elsewhere gun control works. Andy is stupid because he can't see that the social conditions are different in other counntries.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 01:56, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Some of us are too fat to rely on jujitsu ;-) JazzMan 02:08, 21 November 2008 (EST) <-- not that he has any guns of his own, either....

I don't bother with guns, too much hassle to own one. Instead I have a collection of swords. :D Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:34, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I too own a collection of swords. I'm pretty agnostic on gun control in general (it doesn't always work well in the US), but I also do appreciate an antique firearm or a nice hunting rifle. Researcher 22:33, 21 November 2008 (EST)

This is a common trend I've seen on CP. As well as the all or nothing, black or white, with us or against us dichotomous nature of Schlafly conservatism, there is also the minor issue that the only true conservatism is Schlafly conservatism. Step outside that definition on one issue and you ain't no conservative. Have a little sympathy with gun control? Closet liberal. Universal healthcare? Filthy lefty. Agnostic? Get thee behind me, commie. Not American? Socialist scum. There is no middle ground and PJR ain't no true Scotsman. Ajkgordon 04:06, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Look who Andy agrees with

Andy posts a bit about a court decision saying parents have no standing to sue to enforce No Child Left Behind. He has some interesting support on this. DickTurpis 23:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Dembski goes 404

Dembski about Ken

Remember Ken getting Dembski to pimp his atheism article? Not any more he isn't. _and marmite 02:23, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Lovely - originally, it was a match made in heaven: Uncommon Descent has a history of wiping out, well, histories and blocking users: Their censorship is akin to that of conservapedia, and the protagonists are only slightly more mature...

--LArron 05:13, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Just to preserve what Dembski wants to hide, from google's cache:

--LArron 06:16, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I think it's WIGO-worthy myself. Working on it now... --SpinyNorman 09:39, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler. Nice.

I couldn't easily say "Bugler" and "Nice" in the same sentence, but maybe someone has hacked Bugler's account. Bondurant 05:36, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It's because Fox did what Ken did when Ames made RobS. Ken asked him to fetch some files he sent Rob, which was a way of proving it's really him. Fox was sort of doing the same thing - trying to see if Bugler is who he really was. Bugler saw through it and made nice-nice to avoid any suspicion from someone who really can find him out. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:31, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It's Open Season!

er... I mean Conservapedia Day. Editing is up for those with available IPs. Go forth and play nice. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:10, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Apparently Andy forgot about Conservapedia Day. weaseLOId~ 07:51, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Aw! That means the Sysop pool is scratched... and I was so looking forward to Buggerer going berserk with his new bureaucrat powers. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:57, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Do you think he forget's his wife's anniversary too? From his activity, he must be practically married to Conservapedia so if he forgets the date there... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 08:01, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It's times like this I wish I had socks, but I am a sandals sort of person, and socks and sandals are never to be combined... Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 08:04, 21 November 2008 (EST)

...unless you're German... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:54, 21 November 2008 (EST)

...Or, if not German, really fucking strange Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 08:58, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Hey! My mom wears black socks under sandals! But she's also blind, so she doesn't know how silly it looks. -Lardashe

Hmm, it's been pretty quiet so far. cp:Atheistic tools is going strong, but there's not a lot else...--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 09:33, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Wandalism after wandalism after wandalism, and they've shut down new user registration. What a way to celebrate CP day, "Welcome to Conservapedia, now move along". Happy CP day, everyone! Update: Who says wandals aren't courteous? -Redback^G'day 12:44, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I'm not surprised the new-user registration's been shut down - they're spending more time reverting wandalism than doing much of anything else. I'm disappointed that Andy's been so low-profile, though. Two years later, his project has become a verbal game of paintball, with plenty of "blue team" moles hiding among the "red", so maybe he's just as happy to show up late, make Bugler a sysop, and call it a night. --SpinyNorman 19:55, 21 November 2008 (EST)

"God Delusion / Suicide" News Story

Wow. That one left me with mixed feelings on many levels, and I wish Dinsdale wasn't in the penalty box so I could bring it up on CP. First and foremost, it's a tragedy to see anyone take their own life out of despair, no matter what the supposed cause is.

What struck me about this article being "news" on CP is the irony of it. A deeply fundamental Christian raised in a deeply fundamental home reads The God Delusion, and his Christian beliefs are rocked to the core and lost:

"He mentioned the book he had been reading 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins and how it along with the science classes he had take[n] had eroded his faith. Jesse was always great about defending his beliefs, but somehow, the professors and the book had presented him information that he found to be irrefutable."

This is what Andy and the die-hard acolytes fear the most - if you take an open, inquisitive young mind and offer it equal exposure to rationality/science and religious dogma, it's pretty damn hard to not choose rationality. All it took for a smart kid to realize the truth was for him to be exposed to it through well-structured arguments like Dawkins does.

The poor kid was raised all his life to put religion above reason, and he was surrounded by friends and authority figures who reinforced that. His experience was like mine, though - when I got to college I was removed from the sheltered religious bubble I was raised in, and had to decide for myself when faced with sound arguments for reason. In my situation, my upbringing was conservative but not overly so. In the case of Jesse Kilgore, I suspect that his friends and family were so extremely fundamental and opinionated that accepting his choice of reason over faith went hand-in-hand with the prospect of losing the love and support of his friends and family. I'd like to think that this wouldn't have happened, but I've seen good kids disowned for less so it probably felt very real to him, and led to despair.

His parents are choosing to blame his teachers and a book for their son's suicide. This is ridiculous of course, but as a parent I'll never judge the actions or statements made by a fellow parent caught up in grieving over such a tragic loss. I don't directly blame his upbringing for his death - depression is physiological and more complex than simple "he was distraught because of 'X'" causes.

This suicide, though, is a timely warning on Conservapedia Day that when logic and reason are demonized because they undermine religious beliefs that don't hold up under scrutiny, there are going to be insecure, vulnerable people like Jesse Kilgore who will be deeply affected by the acceptance of reason. If you're raised to believe Andy and the propaganda on CP, then this acceptance comes in two steps. The first is the realization that religious dogma, YEC and the like just don't hold up to reason despite jumping though logical hoops to try otherwise, so in the end they can't be true. The second step, and the one Kilgore didn't get past, was to realize that all the vitriol heaped on rational thinkers and agnostics/atheists was equally invalid. Using your mind to determine the truth doesn't make your life immoral, purposeless or irrelevant. Unfortunately, Kilgore needed support at a time when all he could see around him was what his thoughts and choices were (potentially) costing him.

I can only hope that some people read Jesse's story, and remember that helping people see reason over dogma is not an "I-win-you-lose" debate, it's about challenging someone to decide if they can let go of a moral and support system they've lived with their entire life, and that letting that support go needs something and someone to replace that support, encouragement and validation to make it a positive transition, not a traumatic one.

Sorry for the ramble - I just needed to get this out of my system. --SpinyNorman 10:31, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Another question: is this even true? It's WND for chrissakes. You can usually bet that if they say something then the opposite is true. Googling "Jesse Kilgore" Dawkins got me nothing but WND and blogs citing WND, and 0 google news hits apart from WND (why does that show up as "news"?). Furthermore, unless I missed it, the article has a pretty serious omission in that it does not say what college this occurred at. I'm skeptical. DickTurpis 10:45, 21 November 2008 (EST)

News Link for the lazy. Can't find any other news mentioning Jesse Kilgore either. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 10:52, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Good point bout WND being the source. I was so caught up in the idea of the story that I didn't stop to consider its veracity. The college is mentioned in the story, however. SUNY Jefferson Community College in NY. --SpinyNorman 10:56, 21 November 2008 (EST)

biog with condolence messages Wilf Brambles 10:57, 21 November 2008 (EST)

He gives his location as Fort Drum, NY, which is military base, the chapllain there being Major Keth Kilgore. Related? Father? Wilf Brambles 11:06, 21 November 2008 (EST)

"Keith E Kilgore Fort Drum, 13603 Chaplain Keith Kilgore is a United States Army Chaplain. Is endorsed as a Chaplain by the Southern Baptist Convention. Chaplain Kilgore served in Operation Iraqi Freedom in Kuwait and Iraq Why I Signed: I remember the day my High School principal confiscated my Bible for just carrying it in the hallway. That was the first time (but not the last) I was persecuted for my Christian faith. The discrimination did not come from some foreign enemy, but from my own puplic high school. I should not have to separate my faith from my education. Moral and spiritual values should be the foundation of my children's education. Why would I send my eight year old Christian son, to a 40 year old socialist, relativist, and athiest to undermine every moral value I want my child to hold? And then be expected to pay that teacher my taxes to corrupt my own child?" Major Kilgores entry at http://www.schoolandstate.org/view/display.php?state=NY Wilf Brambles 11:09, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It is the father. See here Wilf Brambles 11:10, 21 November 2008 (EST)

That's the dad all right. He also http://www.legacypublishingcompany.com/LatestNews.php uses] the Total Transformation method to help kids of army families adjust to difficulties in a "quick fix" approach. Starts to make sense why his son would be conflicted. --SpinyNorman 11:11, 21 November 2008 (EST)

And sadly, the death really happened. I found the obituary on a newspaper website. --SpinyNorman 11:17, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Devastating. There are a lot of tasteless comments on his blog now, I hope none of those are from anyone here. Etc 11:21, 21 November 2008 (EST)

As sad as the story is, you can bet CP (and other nutjobs that rightwing woman whose name escapes me) are going to spin this for what it's worth (expect an update on Dawkins' page soon) and of course and attempts to tone it down will be "liberal something-or-other" - the liberal press aren't mentioning it after all. I sometimes get the feeling they wait for tragedies to happen, so they can gloat. (and the people making nasty comments on the bio are just as vile). --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:27, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I don't see any nasty comments on the blog, just 2 condolences in the margins. Am I missing something? DickTurpis 11:37, 21 November 2008 (EST)

There's a little IM-style window in the left margin. Some whacko messaged how funny he found the situation. Wilf Brambles 11:52, 21 November 2008 (EST)

One thing that leaves a bad taste in the mouth is the fifth paragraph of the WND story. It's an advert for a $20 book about how atheism is being "sold". Even CP spin it just to support their opinions. Trying to make money put of the tragedy is just sick. --Toffeeman 11:56, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I dug through the guys blog last night and it appears that his girlfriend was pregnant, he was NOT the father , but he had concerns about criminal charges being laid by the girls father. He obviously had things happening other than mean professors. removed comment - factual mistake 67.72.98.58 12:00, 21 November 2008 (EST)

If you're referring to obviously photoshopped picture towards the bottom, that's a joke of his that he was dating Jamie Lynn Spears. Nothing to do with this. DickTurpis 12:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)

my bad :( I just read the text - struck out comment Hamster 12:36, 21 November 2008 (EST)

CP shouldn't post news articles like that - it says Dawkins is a professor. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:48, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Creepy and sad, so sad. At one blog most of the comments are by the father. I'd comment more, but it's really none of my business. ħuman 15:37, 21 November 2008 (EST)

its very sad, and one wonders what hasnt been said. The guy has a photobucket account , and when I was teaching those pics would have earned a session with a counsellor. The suicidal smily faced ones I mean . this or This .. the whole thing is somewhat off.. HERE Hamster 16:56, 21 November 2008 (EST)

The absolute worst part is that unbdoubtedly the poor kid will just get used as ammo just like Cassie Bernall. The facts will be distorted (one could argue that they already are) and some half-truths will turn into whole truths and before you know it, "The God Delusion killed my son" will be the actual fact, rather than what it currently is, which is the opinion of his father (and WND, clearly). Someone taking their own life is never as simple as these people want to make it out to be. I would be interested to know if anyone else thinks this topic has evolved beyond WIGO:CP and may need to be taken elsewhere? ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 18:23, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I had considered an essay at CP, something like The Fragility of christian Beliefs, but then good taste showed itself and said NO. I doubt there will much public info available. There are enough Blogs kicking the subject around, I was saddened that no one at CP was talking about it , they been to busy vandalising or eriting Atheistic Tools . Hamster 19:25, 21 November 2008 (EST)

There's more The suicide of an Atheist Proxima Centauri 15:57, 22 November 2008 (EST)

On the one hand, I must admit that my first thought when I heard about this was that if that young man lost his faith because of "The God Delusion", it couldn't have been a very strong faith in the first place. On the other hand, it was Dawkins's explicit motivation for writing that piece of crap book, so who knows. Either way, I'm not surprised to see that both sides are already milking this story for all that it's worth. So it goes. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:44, 22 November 2008 (EST)

More idiocy from Ed

I know we probably shouldn't comment on every stupid thing that Ed does, because that would be liveblogging his life, but what the fuck is this? It doesn;t even mention homosexuality. On a related note, I think we need to update our Summa Homosexualita article, as it now seems to have a co-author. DickTurpis 10:51, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, Ed is rapidly catching up with Ken in the homophobia stakes - currently overtaking him in fact. Foxtrot deserves special mention too (Brokeback mountain anyone?). weaseLOId~ 11:13, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Just wow. Smyth 11:53, 21 November 2008 (EST)

The Homophobia Stakes? Is that the third leg of the Conservapedia Triple Crown, following the Evolution Derby and the Atheist Cup? DickTurpis 13:07, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Homosexuality and Scotland... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 17:55, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Bugler wins

Teh Assfly has spoken: apparently, promotions will go to Bugly, Chippeterson and BrianCo. Take that, Rayment! JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 11:12, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Unless I've missed something, I don't think he promised to promote those people - only to honour them on the front page. weaseLOId~ 11:26, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, two obvious parodists and one not so obvious parodist.... Great work there Andy. SirChuckB^{Whatever happened to Skip It?} 12:04, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Good to see Chippers, the copy/paste king, being rewarded for what most CPers do anyway. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:55, 21 November 2008 (EST)

You're right, those are just the Top 3 slots that were promised Main Page featuring. See cp:Wikiproject:News for that announcement/promise. As of right now, nobody has been promoted to anything. --Sid 16:19, 21 November 2008 (EST)

That's why I said "apparently"... Anyway, it's been really slow over there. Are they boozing hard or something? --JJ4E^{Veritas vincere tenebras} 19:06, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Whither Admin

In the absence of any admins there's a rather witty revert war going on over there. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:24, 21 November 2008 (EST)

The best examples of the revert war can be seen in Atheistic tools and Kangaroo. Many lulz to be had. Happy CP day, everyone. -Redback^G'day 13:01, 21 November 2008 (EST)

HeeHeeHee. I've never had so much fun edit warring! (as JohnFoole). Thanks to HenryP for joining in, & to JessicaT for being a good sport & having a sense of humour, unlike most of the gang at CP. JuanK 14:02, 21 November 2008 (EST)

You were JohnFoole? I salute you. My alter ego, HenryP, sends his regards. I quite agree that it would not have been half as fun without JessicaT. -Redback^G'day 14:38, 21 November 2008 (EST)

This edit war is also interesting. Explorer 13:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I do have to admit having a giggle at this one by Taciturn, especially the Hitlerised version of the Badger Song. Zmidponk 15:16, 21 November 2008 (EST)

(This much Hitler should be enough to make you guys cream your pants)... So. Much. Win... Can't. Hold. On... ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 17:36, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Ames?

Who the hell is Ames, and when did I become him. if there's two people in my body I want to know! EternalCritic 13:36, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Constant comments like that make Bohdan deserve much higher than 4.63 on the puerility scale in the latest contest. I think I gave him something like an 8. (Oh, and if Kenny doesn't win that one there's no justice in the world.) DickTurpis 13:51, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Ames was a constant thorn in CP's side a long time ago. For some time anybody posting anything strange was assumed to be him and being blocked for "Being Ames" was a common occurrence. (Another possibility was being blocked for "being Icewedge")--Bob^{bing up} 13:53, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Makes me think of ... what was that pig's name? Snowball, was it? After Napoleon chased him off the farm, everything that went wrong was one of his plots. Bluefish 23:34, 21 November 2008 (EST)

There's a little Ames in all of us. Fortunately, there are surgeries to take care of that now. --Kels 13:56, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Kels - that's what she said.

And to Eternal Critic - sorry buddy. It's true. I don't think I was ever actually that big of a thorn in their side; I wasn't a massive sock puppeteer, I just made good arguments when I was on their site, and TK fanned the flames of my legend for some bizarre reason until they saw me around every corner.-caius (spy) 13:58, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Ames is the alter-ego of Andy, whose very name strikes fear into the hearts of all fundies. Bohdan just likes blocking people with the excuse that they're Ames, because he has deep, deep feelings for him. My theory anyway. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 14:00, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, Ok. I was just confused. had never heard that before, and it made no sense. 14:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It's a gag that was funny the first couple of times he used it, but now it just seems old and sad. I suspect him of trying to get a spot on Saturday Night Live. --Kels 15:35, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Statistical analysis. weaseLOId~ 21:21, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Oh also I managed to piss of Karajou, as should be obvious from my block log: "DO NOT UNBLOCK EVER WITHOUT(#*%PU!!!O!"-caius (spy) 14:09, 21 November 2008 (EST)

The question is, have you ever found yourself under ASchlafly's pleasure? And if so, did you enjoy it? --JeevesMkII 14:41, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Man, after one particularly hot night, I ended up with Andy Schlafly's pleasure all over me - it seemed like gallons of it. Getting it out of your hair is a bitch. DickTurpis 14:45, 21 November 2008 (EST)

It makes a delightful cooking ingredient though. --Toiretni 17:22, 21 November 2008 (EST)

My kind of subject! Too bad Andy had his way and then "Bye."'s me off in the morning. :( Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:47, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Please tell me that is not a real book. DickTurpis 20:53, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Too late

JessicaT thinks tragic deaths should not be used to score cheap political points. Other than the fact that the main page already does just that, has she not seen this gem? DickTurpis 13:38, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Well, it is obvious what has to be done. Etc 13:55, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I do believe it's time more MOAR HITLER!!11! --JeevesMkII 13:58, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Well, it only lasted three minutes and got me banned until the heat death of the universe, but it was totally worth it. --JeevesMkII 14:44, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Ah, that was you - I just posted about that above. Well done, sir - managed to make a valid point, take the piss out of CP, reference an internet meme and be funny in one bit of wandalism. Zmidponk 15:22, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, well done! Pseudomonas 15:26, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Hey, that "perrow" thing in the gallery tag is cool! We should fix some of ours up with those. Moar Hitler! That section should be pasted into hundreds of articles by tonight. ħuman 15:48, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Ooh, there's a redlink to "atheistic values" there, if I remember correctly that was one of mine from a while ago :P. Please do reinstate it guys, please. You know you only deleted it because you noticed it was written by a sock-puppet, not because the badly concieved content was something you disagreed with. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 17:32, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Actually, never mind, there's another, just with a capital "V" instead that's just as bad. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 17:33, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Well done, Jeeves! Highlight of my day. Bluefish 23:29, 21 November 2008 (EST)

TK's Wonderful Ad Hominizing

I can scarcely believe that's real. Is he a known parodist? For that matter, who is a known parodist (other than Bugler, the patently absurd). Publius 19:52, 21 November 2008 (EST)

They're pretty easy to spot, although the true artists make you wonder sometimes. TK, unfortunately, is for real. He's not a parodist - just a royal pain even many of the acolytes can't stand. --SpinyNorman 19:57, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, it's wonderful! TK is back, all the sysops are at each others throats! PJR is making liberal demands for apologies from the Assfly for calling him a liberal! The wandals and parodists are out of control! The only thing that could make this Conservapedia day better would be if Brian Blessed were to show up and type articles about himself in ALL CAPS BOLD. Merry Conservapedia day, fellows, and dog bless us every one! --JeevesMkII 21:17, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I'VE LIVED EVER SUCH AN INTERESTING LIFE, YOU KNOW! WHAT'S THAT, YOU SAY? YOUR NAME'S ANDY? AND THIS IS YOUR BLOG? SPLENDID! NOW AS I WAS SAYING...

HELLO! I'M BRIAN BLESSED! HAPPY CONSERVAPEDIA DAY! I'M BRIAN BLESSED! HELLO!

Personally, I wanna see the Time Cube guy as a sysop. --Kels 21:46, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Jeese, that was creepy. I see that image just as I watch Brian Blessed on Blackadder I. Publius 21:53, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Personally, I wanna see the Time Cube guy as a sysop. --Kels 21:46, 21 November 2008 (EST)

"Why the confusion? It's simple: ad hominem attacks are "not the American way....not the conservative way." But I don't expect you dirty Liberal Americans to understand that because you're not really American."

Sorry, guess I'm "feigning offense" again. Kallium^talk 22:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Something's been bugging me, though. Don't you find it the slightest bit odd that Ed and TK showed up at pretty much the same time, and now they're working together on a lot of things? Ed's spending way more time watching TK's back than Andy's, and they're both demonstrably the most destructive elements to CP as an encyclopedia at the moment. Bungler tries, but there's no way he can match TK in full Wall O' Text attack mode. I doubt either of those two (Ed and TK, that is) have Andy's best interests at heart, and they seem pretty determined to snuff out what little, illusionary credibility the site had left. Any ideas on what's going on behind it all? --Kels 22:22, 21 November 2008 (EST)

What she said :) ħuman 00:08, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Meanwhile, at Wikipedia, there are no less than four references supporting the fact that the sky is, in fact, blue. Etc 03:12, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Ed also used TK's trademark asterisk. JazzMan 13:38, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Its a sign of a really great parodist if even the parodists themselves stop to believe he is a parodist. I know for a fact, from my own Email dealings with him, and from the conservation Hoji posted on Andy's userpage way back, that this guy is up to mischief. Obvious as the day I was born.

A good way of finding it out is someone's excessive use of ! all over the place. TK and Bugler do this a lot, which leads me to think they are just writing like crazy, barely believing that anyone is listening to their shit, throwing exclamations left right and center in a display of mockery at the likes of Ed Poor! MarcusCicero 08:04, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Uh oh! User:MarcusCicero had e-mail dealings with Him! MarcusCicero may be infected with Tk-philia! Soon, put him to quarantine before he'll start spreading TK-verb to RW! Editor at CP^{Oh, Finland! Why?} 08:29, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I used to work with him on CP. He'd let some of my parodist accounts do some work while one of my other accounts would stir some shit, distracting the rest of the admins. If I'm not mistaken, he's still doing that. MarcusCicero 08:55, 22 November 2008 (EST)

TK's not a parodist, per se, because he's not pretending to be extremely conservative in order to make other conservatives look bad. He is lying about his conservatism though; he's basically a moderate, and he's pretending to be super conservative as a way to gain power. (And he's admitted this to numerous people through his favorite mediums of email and IM). He claims his goal is to force Andy to close off the wiki to outside editors so that he (TK) can ruin it from the inside; but frankly I can't believe that, since TK would no longer have any place to play. JazzMan 13:38, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Believe it! That is exactly what he did at HotorNot. He weaseled his way into an admin position, and over time built up trust and forced himself as a barrier between the top admin (equivalent to ASchlafly) and the other admins, (while convincing the top admin it was in "his best interest" to let TK "shield" him from others and deal with "problem people") then forced the other admins to go through him - he did not relay their messages, misrepresented what the top admin had said/wanted, supressed, bullied, intimidated, threatened and lied to the others, circulated falsified information and "evidence" of others supposed wrongdoings or "sock activity" while shielding the real socks (just like with Rationalwiki users), and worked to stealthfully undermine and bring down the entire framework of the site from the inside... when his bad deeds were exposed, he was de-adminned and banned by the HotorNot owners, but amazingly, was able to convince the top admin to let him log in and pretend to be him, andthen covertly did destructive deeds which resulted in the total desctruction of the HotorNot moderator community and boards. This is what he does as a hobby: he works from the inside to tear down sites, he has great fun playing people against each other, its all a game of a man with too much time on his hands and too little to do. Conservapedia isnt the first site he's done this too, and won't be the last. Just leave him to it.. he can bring down Conservapedia all by himself. btw - using proxy IP, other edits are not me 193.200.150.189 16:28, 22 November 2008 (EST)

No doubt TK's a hole in the fabric of the internet, but am I the only one that thinks it odd that his victims show up whenever we talk about him, always behind a proxy IP? While I don't doubt the story, I'm curious as to the frequent reappearance of the anonymous messenger. It makes me think T-Diddy is tooting his own horn.-caius (spy) 17:00, 22 November 2008 (EST)

CP Day

Well, CP Day has come and gone and once again I think we acknowledged and celebrated more than they did. Looking at their goals I see they met 2 of them (3 if Bugler's bit of sarcasm is taken as a "statistical analysis"). Andy himself was MIA. There is absolutely no organization, collaboration, or anything but pet projects and infighting there. They couldn't even get their act together to delete atheistic fluff. Such a sorry lot. DickTurpis 09:02, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Having noticed CP's failure to both promote a sysop or do any sort of statistical analysis, I took it upon myself to do a quick study of sysop activity on the site, looking at how recently all CP sysops have edited, and how many edits they've made in the last 6 months. If Andy isn't promoting anyone because he has plenty of active sysops, well, I'd dispute that claim. Study is here. DickTurpis 10:15, 22 November 2008 (EST)

So when do the idiot awards get dished out? weaseLOId~ 11:25, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I thought CP day was very active. Everyone seemed to want to edit Atheistic Tools and the Fluff article lasted quite a long time. The Moar Hitler thing got a bit old, though it gave them something to revert. Having Andy forget the day was priceless Hamster 12:00, 22 November 2008 (EST)

That's the point, the vandals and parodists were more active than anyone else, and they continued for so long because there were no admins around to block them. Other than list a few names on the mainpage, they didn't do anything they allegedly planned to do. For the earnest contributors it was a slower day than usual. DickTurpis 12:13, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Oh, and some sneaky sox with an impeccable sense of timing has to do a stealth revert of atheistic fluff to its article state, before they eventually delete it for real. DickTurpis 12:16, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Tried but failed, & "evolutionist fluff" only lasted a minute or two. Fox is no fun. :-( JuanK 13:54, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Sad little SusannaR got done for this. Now that was a disloyal edit wasn't it, Susie? Now do any other RationalWikians want to do anything similar? Proxima Centauri 12:40, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I'm so proud of myself

After some good, old fashioned MOAR HITLER-style wandalism (props to Taciturn for bringing the "gallery perrow" thing to my attention), I've been given my own block reason in the drop-down box! I've never been so proud of myself! However, I can't help wonder where I go from here... -Redback^G'day 14:16, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Use your dynamic IP for good! They've been sufficiently terrorized lately; it's much more fun, difficult, and effective to create socks to debate with them, prove them wrong, and back them into an intellectual corner :)-caius (spy) 15:16, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Wise words indeed. I may, however, use my switcharoo IP for a blend of the two activities. I get some satisfaction out of proving them wrong, however I think it merely bounces off them, whereas I'm more inclined to believe that mindless "copy-and-paste Hitler a million times" would be much more of an annoyance to them. I'll give it a rest for a while so that they can open up registration for more than five minutes (need to give you guys some time to register new socks) and think about what you've said. I'm still proud of what I accomplished though. -Redback^G'day 15:38, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Topic Suggestion

I'm wondering if CP's resident fangirl would consider making an entry on this lovely little manga? --Kels 14:23, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Odd. . . . weaseLOId~ 17:16, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I shouldn't be amused by this

Fox set his hand on fire. While I'm sure there's a regular explanation for that, my first thought was "that takes skill." Note, he did not burn his hand, he set it on fire. I actually want to send the guy some Aloe Vera or something, as the schadenfreude is mixed with sympathy.^{— Unsigned, by: 71.183.185.30 / talk / contribs}

Thanks for the kind thoughts. Remind me some day to tell you about the time I was meeting my prospective father in law to ask his daughter's hand in marriage, and while raising my glass to toast somehow scooped up a schweppes tonic bottle into my suit jacket sleeve, which then poured itself in a rather deliciously slapstick fashion out of my elbow. Fox 15:10, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Strange, I thought you were already married. In that case, congratulations. Nevermind, I didn't realize you were talking about an event from some time ago. Extremely belated congratulations, perhaps? --Kels 15:23, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Fox, I've told you before about not setting your hand on fire. Stop doing it before someone gets hurt. Matt 16:57, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Little help?

I'd love to WiGO this, but I can't really think of a way to word it. Basically, the disconnect between Ed insisting on not labelling Dick Morris a conservative with Andy's insistence on labelling PJR a liberal. There's gotta be something worthwhile in there, but it's just not gelling for some reason. --Kels 16:08, 22 November 2008 (EST)

How about: "Conservapedian labelling -- Ed didn't get the memo (link to Andy calling PJR a liberal)." Something like that? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 17:55, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Eddy P.

Ed has destroyed the article on Anne Rice. His reason? "I dislike her".--ScottA 16:30, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I was about to WIGO the kerfuffle over homosexual recruitment (Ed blocking Fox etc.) but somebody's beaten me to it. Truly WTF. I think it was the same author as the other gay-related parody that's just been deleted by Ed & DeanS. weaseLOId~ 17:15, 22 November 2008 (EST)

(EC) That man is such a bloody joke. Too bad he's not a funny one. What a moron. I'm not even a fan of Anne Rice, but that nonsense offends me. For some reason I've always felt he was the worst of them. Andy is...meh. He's his mother's son. The others are either parodists or paranoid bigots with delusions of grandeur, whose idiocy is a mere Internet magnification...in other words, a dime a dozen (or they're PJR, who's a complete anomaly to me). Then there's Ed. He really feels...vicious. Like he's a truly hateful person on the inside. Hateful, stupid, petty, self-important, bigoted, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic...he's a total contradiction of what he presents himself as, and what he actually is. Mr. Genial, Mr. Let's-All-Work-Together. That's what I really dislike about Ed. That utterly fake veneer of geniality. The "Uncle" business. It's such unmitigated bullshit. And to think he was a bureaucrat at WP. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 17:23, 22 November 2008 (EST)

While I know it's in bad taste to make accusations, Ed's "Uncle" business gives me a seriously creepy vibe. Like watching a groomer at work, although there aren't actual children involved in most of the interactions. --Kels 18:19, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Very true. He'd just be another normal CP bully if he didn't preach about cooperation and discussion right after completely overriding any sort of consensus without a warning. --Sid 17:27, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Precisely. From the WIGO: case in point. How did he ever get anywhere on Wikipedia? Surely this behaviour isn't something new for him. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 17:44, 22 November 2008 (EST)

From what I can see he was grandfathered (uncled?) in because he'd gotten there early and they didn't have the userbase they do now. But his ability and manner eventually got him stripped of title, and deservedly so. I agree he's a vicious thug, one of the more outright vicious ones there aside from Andy himself. But something seems weirdly off about him. He's got some specific agenda on CP, and so far we haven't really seen what it is. Although the way things are now, I expect it won't be too much longer. --Kels 18:15, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Anything in particular you get the vibe from? Or is it just a general gut feeling about him? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 18:40, 22 November 2008 (EST)

General, but I've been watching for a while and I've got this feeling there's a shape to all the shit he does over there. I'm just not perceptive enough to figure out what the shape is. --Kels 19:39, 22 November 2008 (EST)

The editor who wrote the majority of what Ed deleted has vocalized his dissatisfaction of the deletion. This is the result. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 18:17, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Don't forget: ed's got a higher loyalty: Rev Moon! _and marmite 18:27, 22 November 2008 (EST)

He's using the Moonie's encyclopedia, where the phrase "Concrete evidence for the theory of modification by natural selection is limited to microevolution" appears in no fewer than [http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Concrete+evidence+for+the+theory+of+modification+by+natural+selection+is+limited+to+microevolution%22&hl=en&filter=0 5 distinct articles. _and marmite 22:47, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Funny, I thought this was the actual result. --Kels 18:35, 22 November 2008 (EST)

My God. I must have missed the whining part. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans?} 18:38, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Fox vs Ed

Is Fox drunk again? --BoredCPer 17:20, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I doubt it. Ed's blatant idiocy just brings out the crankiest side in people, it seems. --Sid 17:24, 22 November 2008 (EST)