There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
Essay talk:Translation: Rules of Chivalry for Students
This reminds me of a certain troll we once had. Except he wasn't taking the piss. narchist 17:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- This is a little bit harsh. I agree that Schlafly is a complete misogynist, but this is going a little too far. Especially the "boys" section. Tetronian you're clueless 17:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- The whole point was to take it too far. Goatspeed! δij 17:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Fight fire with nukes. Tetronian you're clueless 17:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Congratulations, you made Andy Schlafly look good. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Somehow my satire can make Andy's truly hateful views look good? Um...no. δij 17:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Totnesmartin means good by comparison. Tetronian you're clueless 17:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Still...not possible. δij 02:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have made a slightly less harsh variation on the same theme.
ListenerXTalkerX 06:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have made a slightly less harsh variation on the same theme.
- Still...not possible. δij 02:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Totnesmartin means good by comparison. Tetronian you're clueless 17:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Somehow my satire can make Andy's truly hateful views look good? Um...no. δij 17:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Congratulations, you made Andy Schlafly look good. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Fight fire with nukes. Tetronian you're clueless 17:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- The whole point was to take it too far. Goatspeed! δij 17:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I know this is an "essay", but can we at least copyedit the grammar/spelling errors? ħuman 22:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
grammer/spelling re: human[edit]
I agree...any objections to a proofread? I was very entertained by the essay, but somewhat put off by the fact that apparently aschfly(assfly...ashlafay...whatever...)has a much better spellchecker....but like i said, fricken hilarious....the bot checker must work, cause i barely got past it...better make a profile....[edit] I made a couple spelling and grammar corrects...nothing that would detract from his essay, just enhancing readability....