Conservapedia talk:You're clueless

Shouldn't this be in the CP namespace? human 13:59, 2 April 2008 (EDT) Yeah, guess so...DogP 14:20, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Thanks... now can we haz dates and "speakers"? As in:

• 11/16/66, Assfly: "linky crap"

human 15:26, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Curious - one wonders what was the problem between late November and February, when he never used the phrase? DogP 16:28, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm, what did you do, search the entire site for the phrase? Perhaps he had no clueless interlocutors? human 17:56, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

In a moment of unutterable boredom, I decided to search all Talk pages for the phrase, yes. A noble and bold endeavour, it is the kind of activity that pushes us all forward. The time I spent working on this fantastically useful article was arguably more important to Rationalwiki - nay, Mankind - than the Moon mission, the discovery of Penicillin, or the discovery of fire. I am a great Rationalwiki editor, and this is the kind of direction in which we should be going. DogP 18:06, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

In accordance with RW:WWOR I think you have done a dimmed fone jib! Genghis ^Marauding 18:11, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Accuracy of the phrase "you're clueless"

Nice article, but maybe Andy's use of the phrase is in fact unerringly accurate. Those to whom it is directed are indeed clueless - they don't have a clue what Andy is talking about. They lack the essential clue to unlock the thought processes that have led the Schlafly-brain to whatever it is they are commenting on or complaining about. I frequently find myself quite at a loss in this way when poking Andy with a stick discussing matters with Andy on his blog encyclopedia, and I'm proud to say I have been called clueless by the great man more than once. And in each case I think it was an accurate description of my state of mind. GNUSMAS : TALK 17:12, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Can you rephrase that a bit and add it to the article? It is a valuable constructive contribution indeed, I enjoy so much learning as I read our work together here. Godspeed! human 20:28, 5 April 2008 (EDT)

Trends

In 2007, the year of the Phrase of Death's discovery, the phrase was used 9 times in 6 months, giving an average usage rate of 1.5/month (although with a large Standard Deviation due to a spike in usage in July). Despite an inexplicable lull in use of the PoD over Christmas and the New Year (the reason for which has caused much speculation), Mr.Schalfly's use of his brutally savage locution has markedly increased, and we have seen the weapon unsheathed in all its awesome steeliness an average of 5 times a month in 2008.

However, this overall figure cloaks within it a real, dangerous truth - for his use of the idiomatic force majeure is actually increasing. Despite a terrifying four uses in February, Mr.Schlafly continued to pile the pressure on his opposition, and used the textual object of war to bludgeon his defamers into submission six times in March.

Finally, we are greatly concerned to note that although April has as yet another 13 2 days of life, the battle formulation has been used five six seven(!) times already. Five Six Seven times! As many times as More than it was savagely unleashed in the hostile territory of July 2007! Clearly this horrifying instrument of war is the powerful secret at the very heart of Mr.Schlafly's empire. One wonders if the great walls of the castle can take much more of his unmitigated ferocity, and we advise participants to fully understand that should they enter combat, the likelihood of their falling mortally wounded at the utterance of this monstrous force increases by the day.

We will continue to report data on this weapon with the power of a thousand suns. DogP 03:08, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

I'm a gonna make a graph and .gif it into the article... hmm, sound like he's almost fibonacci'ing his usage per month... human 17:35, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

He's going to stop. Eventually he stopped casual use of trendy phrases such as "Godspeed!", "In Christ!", Last-wordism variants and "[Conservapedia] is a high-quality site" (this one didn't last long). As far as I can tell the only one he has used constantly since its appearance is his liberal+deceit combo. NightFlare^{Speak, mortal} 19:32, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

NightFlare, you're clueless - it's is clear from our data that only conservatives would deny his ever-increasing use of the term. Goatspeed. DogP 19:36, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

Incredibly high quality awesome spreadsheet work and image showing trend

(re-uploaded 4/29) human 23:37, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

Note: This image is not merely decoration, it tells a thousand educational words, when used fairly! human 22:25, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

PHENOMENAL WORK, Human!! A big barnstar for you. DogP 17:01, 22 April 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, thanks :) (blush) human 17:22, 22 April 2008 (EDT)

I will update this when the month is over, asshat still might leave a few more liberals less a clue in the next few days... human 00:13, 28 April 2008 (EDT)

I have a couple of updates pending validation. Update to graph may be necessary. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 04:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Ed Pwnage

Someone should sock up and paste in the source of our documentation of Andy's usage on that user page where he condemns it, and on his talk page. Please? ħψɱ₦ 16:55, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

Oh, OK then. DogP 14:28, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

Sweet, thanks! ħψɱɐ₦ 15:03, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but I can only imagine it will be 'disappeared' very soon by one of the henchmen, or by Ed the minute he gets back from wherever he is. DogP 15:07, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

It will still be interesting to see their response. Undo? Delete and recreate to purge the diff from the history? Actual discussion? ħψɱɐ₦ 16:00, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

No, no discussion. I just have to come up with a writing plan, apparently. DogP 14:30, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

And you apparently put words into his mouth. Writing plan, my ass. No one else on the site ever picked up on the concept, why does he still waste people's time with such a silly concept? ħuman 15:03, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

We should write a "boiler plate" writing plan people can just copy and use when required ;) ħuman 15:07, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

Inclusion of non-Andy data?

In the Venn Diagram of usage, are ALL uses of the term in the set, or are ONLY those uses by Andy in the data set? This is a perplexing challenge. DogP 19:44, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

WEll, we add any significant usage (ie, other sysops...) but they aren't in the graph. The graph should be all-Andy. What Venn diagram? If it's two circles in space, Andy is one and sysops are the other, all data is in "sysops" or "sysops + Andy". usage by others is in "space". ħuman 20:10, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Standards have been slipping here

I am increasingly concerned about the reporting of non-Andy "cluelesses". This is a very serious matter. It is like watching the ship I launched turn into a floating gin-palace, filled with hookers, carpetbaggers, cheap hucksters and smartasses trying to become famous by repeating the Great Phrase. This mission creep is yet another sign of the decline of Western Civilisation. God help us all. DogP 03:47, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

It's ok - we report on major cluelessnessesses that are not Andy - just sysops,etc - and what, one snarker last month? But Only Teh Andy Makes teh Graph!!! So quit whining! ħuman 04:20, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Correlation

There's a clear correlation between Andy's usage of this term and the price of oil, with both coming off an obvious peak. It is undeniable-you have free will to deny logic, but the relationship is obvious. DogP 21:16, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

My theory is proven correct with 95% certainty. With oil nearing $50 a barrel and Andy barely using the Phrase of Death any more, the correlation is established beyond all doubt. DogP 15:23, 17 November 2008 (EST)

The shocking decline of cluelessness - is it the ultimate sign of the collapse of CP?

We are all looking for evidence of the decline in CP in complex statistics and tables produced by LArron, number of edits, number of editors, etc. But in an unexpected and extraordinary turn of events, the truth stares us in the face when you look at the ultimate determining factor - cluelessness is down, down DOWN - having dropped to a mere 14% of its peak usage last summer, and a 33% drop off since Christmas in regards to the usage of the term. This amazing turn of events is rocking the world in regards to a site beginning with C, and further operations will be blowing it out of the water sometime in the near future. Olê! DogP 04:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice catch, Dog. ħuman 04:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Does these count?

• This. It's "They" however.
• Here. It's on National Review.
• Here. Maybe Crocoite learned the trick as well?
• Here. The corresponding unobscurity of truth.
• Here. Not sure if it is appropriate.
• Here. From someone else. And check what Ed Poor said below (Did the guys here do the list on "Clueless"_warning Ed's talk page afterwards?).
• This. TerryH learns the trick too.
• [1] some other user (Kajillion) jumps on the bandwagon.
• "Why don't anti-Democrat protests ever turn violent?". Jinx _{hi Jinx!} got hit by AliceBG (sock?) as well.
• This one. AliceBG really got the hang of it.

Comments? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes! If it says "clueless" and Andy said it, it belongs, please add! If someone else said it, please add it as "others jump on the bandwagon" etc type comments. ħuman 04:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

We may need to break out two graphs, one just for Andy and one to decrypt the trend of others using it. This is an important development. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 15:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Should we overlay the two graphs? And move the occasional "other" user from the Andy section to the ones K is working on? Oh, and K, can you format the "others" like the AS section, by month? If it's not too much trouble? ħuman 01:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I am surprised the Ed Poor warning bit isn't on WIGO; Also, I found a pattern the "you're clueless" seems to be evolved from "you have no clue" used by other people earlier. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 02:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: the "evolution" yeah, I saw that. Question is, can we prove that Andy was inspired by the previous meme? Probably not, but it's still funny. ħuman 03:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

PS, K, when you're done, can you ping my talk page so I can come massage the phrasing? No offense intended, but you have a very interesting way of presenting the English language ;) ħuman 03:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

So should we move the couple of non-Andy instances in the top sections to the new sections? ħuman 22:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

"Often Unerringly"?

How is it possible to be "often unerringly accurate"? ^{— Unsigned, by: 194.66.226.95 / talk / contribs}

Hmmm, good point. How about "Ironically, Andy's use of the phrase is often appropriate"? --PsyGremlinTal! 09:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)