Conservapedia discussion

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


[view] [edit]

What if CP gets a lot of its data from RW...?

Well, I've been thinking lately, what if CP in fact gets most of it's info from RW but puts a conservative spin on it? I mean, they seemed to learn about TK's passing right after us and based off of some leads I've followed, the Sysops seem to frequent RW. I know correlation does not mean causation, but it's still an interesting theory. And think of the implications... >;) --At (talk) 02:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

... what?--MikallakiM 02:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This has been going on since the very beginning. TK and Ed Poor were regulars here. SophieWilder 07:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Why, I bet some of them have even looked at this page! I'm going to break the fourth wall by saying 'hi sysops!'

--At (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

i wonder if they have wifi where TK is. SophieWilder 13:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Six feet of dirt probably means bad connectivity. I've become really interested in the unhealthy relationship between RW and CP recently, could you list a few other examples, At? --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 14:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
We have lots of short articles on sex because of a "look at us, we're not inhibited like those awful CP puritans" attitude. likewise, CP's mathematics articles were rubbish, so people here wrote good ones. They have nothing to do with anything else. So yeah, unhealthy relationship. SophieWilder 14:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm detecting sarcasm. I'm not declaring a false equivalence. What I'm curious about is if At has more evidence that Conservapedia is actually doing what they suggest. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 15:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I think he could find plenty of evidence in the WIGO archives. Lots of times we mention something and a CPer corrects an article. Seemed to happen more in the first couple of years though, IIRC. SophieWilder 15:23, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I will try that, then, thank you. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 15:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I propose an experiment to (partially) test this hypothesis. A few random users will make sock accounts on CP and make them so obviously similar to their RW accounts that the sysops will figure them out instantly. If they are banned for being socks but the person who banned them does not say who's sock it is, iris a partial confirmation. What we could also do is change a few important articles in RW and make them very distinct. Then we could monitor CP and see if anything similar comes up. I hope this will help confirm my idea.

--At (talk) 22:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

No,thanks. TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 23:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Do you have a better idea?

--At (talk) 00:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

There are an unlimited number of better things to do with your time. WéáśéĺóíďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 00:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Like editing RW? Sorry, I'm just bored. --At (talk) 00:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I considered your idea and thought "hey, that's a good use of my time" but then boned my wife and drank a beer instead. Oh well, better luck next time. Acei9 01:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
It's truly amazing what inspires a happy marriage sometimes. -- Randolf
Well, I'm sorry I suggested testing my hypothesis. The sysops probably saw this page anyway and will be on high alert for a while now, so why bother?

--At (talk) 16:38, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Why bother in the first place? SophieWilder 18:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, it would be really embarrassing for Conservapedia, but beyond that, not much value in it.

--At (talk) 00:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

I think karjou likes star wars and dr who.

Well, I was looking on conservapedia and I saw someone had edited the articles on Jedi and star trek to say Jedi were linked to Satan and dr who was liberal. Well, I checked back later and Karjou had blocked the guy who edited it. This doesn't break any of the rules, so now we know Karjou is a sic-fi geek. Maybe. --At (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC) Wait- I think it was star wars and star trek instead. --At (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Nah, he's just a jerk with power. On CP nowadays, if you aren't one of the sysops/admin, you're guaranteed to be a liberal troll, a liberal parodist, or a liberal vandal. They've chased away any legitimate editors, aside from AugustO (and some people aren't sure about him, either), so there's nothing left. Or, at least, that's what they seem to want by giving new editors and entire swaths of the Internet multi-year blocks. Ochotonaprincepsnot a pokémon 22:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

well, he also reverted any changes to the articles. I know star trek is sort of left leaning, but it would be funny to showcase that crazy "occult Jedi" thing. Too bad I didn't get a picture of it. --At (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Andy on Twitter

Apologies if this has been brought up before, but has anyone seen Andy's "insights" on twitter? Man, these are good! So good to see my fellow admins (he's talking about Karajou) sticking it to those liberal vandals. Also: There are dead fish...liberals can't explain it. It must be in the bible...somewhere... This is more disgusting than it is funny but: god punished Japan and New Zealand with earthquakes because they don't read the bible.... --Andy Franklinson (talk) 00:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It says it's a parody. But JPatt is for real. Peter Rapidly running out of marmite 00:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I'm an idiot... --Andy Franklinson (talk) 01:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

My impending ban from Conservapedia

I removed David Beckham, Michael Schumacher and Sol Campbell from their "Overrated sports star" list. The reason they were listed has nothing to do with sporting ability, more to do with their beliefs. I don't know enough about American Sport to edit them, but I am guessing they are on the list for similar, non sporting reasons. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs 2012-08-21T15:46:45‎

And? SophieWilder 15:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
(EC - god will get you for that) And we should care about your demise why? Which has, by the way, become even more likely since you posted here. --PsyGremlinZungumza! 15:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't see where Beckham is overrated, and the other guys I never heard of. Now Dallas Cowboy draft picks, they tend to be overrated, but Beckham surely is not. Good luck making your case, though. nobsCorporations are people, too 22:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

"Socialist" Spanish soccer team

I think this quote from Conservapedia's page Previous Breaking News is worthy of inclusion in Conservapedia:What is going on at CP?:

The Olympics soccer team of socialist Spain is forced to confront its own total failure and bad sportsmanship.[1] On a related note, Spain's socialist economy has been a colossal failure.[2]
This is further evidence that real men don't want a Nanny state and liberal wimps do. Spain has embraced socialism and "fascism light" and these ideologies are very similar.[3] See: Obamunism and Similarities between Communism, Nazism and liberalism

I have two main problems with this:

  1. The current Spanish government led by Mariano Rajoy (since November 2011) is not socialist by any means. True, it's not as conservative as Conservapedia, but it does support austerity and social welfare cuts, subsidized religion even in public schools, more power for businesses and so on. It's a conservative, pro-Christian party. The previous government led by Zapatero can be called socialist, of course - but the origin of the Spanish crisis (that is, the Spanish housing bubble) can be traced even further before Zapatero took power.
  2. Even assuming that Spain is still socialist, wow, the national soccer team has had a pretty long run of failures lately: Euro 2008, World Cup 2010 and Euro 2012.

That said, of course the soccer team failed hard. But that doesn't make socialists (or conservatives) the culprits, does it? (talk) 14:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Can't believe I didn't see this nugget of wisdom before. Rajoy is a socialist?! RAJOY?! OMFGs... The man is a steaming heap of reactionary right wing horseshit. And the housing bubble clearly has it's roots in the Aznar era - another great testament to the financial prudence of conservatives, along with autovias to nowhere, and the Iberia and Trasmediterránea privatisations. <rant> Fucking PP, piss on everything that is decent and turn the world to shit. </rant> --TheEgyptiansig001.png 00:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Spain is so "socialist," its Constitution was written by the remnants of Francisco Franco's dictatorship! —Sesel (talk)
Yep, and he was another atheistic LIEbrul, too. Typical European. *headdesk* --TheEgyptiansig001.png 09:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Coming late to the party, I guess

Schiafly (don't care if it's well-written or not), or whoever put that crap, shows again its lack of knowledge about Spain (the Conservapedia's article on the country is quite poor, especially in what respects to the images that illustrate it). I don't see at all the relationship between soccer and Spain being a "nanny state" (other EU countries have more extensive welfare systems than Spain's one).

The PP (Partido Popular) is right-wing, yes, but while it's a catch-all party (from centrist people to some who miss Francoist era and its values, standard conservatives, Catholics, and finally libertarians, even if libertarians there mean "privatize everything, but give it to our cronies, let us live of the State as politicians, if things go pear-shaped time to bail-out the thing with public monies, and of course just economic freedom, not the other type of freedom") is moderate compared with US Republicans, or at least looks like that (not that they more than often attempt to emulate them). Oh, and it's corrupt to the marrow (this is just the tip of the iceberg, and the same can be said of its opposite party, PSOE, the party that was governing in 2011).

Schiafly or whatever also ignores how the late times of Zapatero's goverment were marked by cuts everywhere courtesy of Brussels. Including to reform an article of the Constitution in accord with PP, to basically put to pay public debts above all else.

Alas, in 2012 PP was governing with an absolute majority and was Rajoy, not Zapatero, who was in charge and the one who bailed-out savings banks with EU monies (and, to be fair, at least he managed to avoid a full bail-out of Spain's economy a la Greece as some people at EU wanted.)

--Panzerfaust (talk) 13:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Conservapedia ruined my life

Has Conservapedia ruined your life? Can you not, as happened to me, hear YMCA without thinking of the list of greatest conservative songs? Is your enjoyment of the Olympics ruined by wondering if the sport you're watching is obscure and the competitors overrated? Give us your examples of CP tainting your everyday life. SophieWilder 20:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, to reiterate for the record, definitely hearing commentators say "two meters" repeatedly during the Olympic high jump was painful. I imagine for a lot of people they won't be able to watch any current events without thinking "I wonder how Schlafly will report this". Scarlet A.pngmoral 20:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
All it has done is ruin the name 'Ken' for me. And Andy, Ed, and Rob. Peter This is not my first temporal anomaly 21:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I used to help out on a communal allotment. Two of my co-workers were called Andy and Ken. That was... interesting. SophieWilder 21:45, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Not exactly ruined my life but I have several broken keyboards.  Lily Inspirate me. 21:53, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
(EC) Words or word clusters permanently stained for me:
  • Godspeed
  • "growing rapidly"
  • "overrated"
  • "underarchieve" - particularly because it references an expectation, that isn't even there for Andy
  • "conservative"
  • "declared" (because it Ken's world, people don't say things, they always declare)
  • "bible-loving" (went from bad aftertaste to "I need mouthwash")
  • "god-fearing" (became synonymous with "bigot" to me)
--K. (talk) 21:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
"In regards to" and any variants. «-Bfa-» 01:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
"Open minded". --Night Jaguar (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey...My name is Andy. :( --Andy Franklinson (talk) 15:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

To the list of tainted words I will add

  • "underrated"
  • "outspoken"
  • "lose all credibility"
  • "kitty"
  • "bunny"
  • "debate"
  • "list of"
  • "machismo"
  • "Hispanic ladies"
  • "Indian dancers"
  • "¡Olé! --Spud (talk) 10:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I was watching water polo a few days ago, and they kept saying "two meters." :/ --Andy Franklinson (talk) 12:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Just now, I was reading yahoo's article on Neil Armstrong's death [RIP :(] and I saw this...And of course, I thought of CP. CP has ruined my life... --Andynot Schlafly 20:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)


I went to a pub quiz last night. One question began "in the equation E = mc2..." and I instantly thought "liberal claptrap!" SophieWilder 08:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, now I can't think of the words "conservative" or "creationist without thinking batshit crazy basket case. I know most of them are not crazy, but why do the lunatics get all the press?

--At (talk) 02:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

How are creationists not crazy? If the thunder don't get you/Then the lightning will. 02:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
It's only their beliefs that are crazy. Some of them take them more seriously than others.

--At (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Andy's Psychological Well-being

I know I can't be the only person who has wondered whether or not Andy has a disorder of some kind beyond just being ridiculous. Of course, as far as I know, nobody here has ever met Andy(I know I haven't) so diagnosing him would be not only ridiculous but also unethical from a psychological perspective. But it is interesting and I've spent some time pondering over my DSM. In particular I'm not entirely unconvinced that Andy doesn't meet a dual diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and Paranoid Personality Disorder. He almost certainly meets the criteria for NPD though there's a ton of other questions that would have to be answered. I did wonder, for a while, whether or not he might be slowly descending into a late-onset Paranoid Schizophrenia but I'm not sure that fits. Any thoughts?Ayzmo (talk) 19:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Fair warning...this might be inappropriate for discussion. Similar questions about Ken's mental health were summarily reverted, and we almost never revert discussion threads. -- Seth Peck (talk) 19:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Diagnosing someone with disorders in absentia, and on the internet, is a bad idea to start with. It could also be legally construed as libel. ERK! | Complaints Hotline 19:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I'm aware of that and I just mentioned speculation. But it appears this thread may have been a bad idea in general. Ayzmo (talk) 19:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, clearly none of us can diagnose the guy with any disorders; I doubt anyone here is qualified to do that even if given the opportunity to do a proper evaluation in person. But there's a difference between diagnosing someone with a mental disorder and us musing "what the fuck is wrong with this guy, seriously?" looking at various symptoms he seems to possess. I don't think libel is much of an issue. Wouldn't he need to prove damages in some capacity anyway? I think part of the problem with doing any sort of honest examination of what's going on in his tiny little brain is that we can't know if he means what he says, or if putting on a show and supporting his side no mater what. Some people have to do that because it's their job, and Andy, as a trained lawyer, has been taught how to do this. He's either taking this training into the real world, or there is something mentally wrong with him. We can say that much without fear of libel, to be sure. The only issue I know of with Ken was that someone posted a link to the facility where she claimed he was institutionalized. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Andy's brain runs on God. That's all you need to know. --PsyGremlinSprich! 16:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Careful :-) it's a pretty well educated community, you'd be surprised who might be qualified to diagnose mental disorders. ERK! | Complaints Hotline 02:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Andy's brain does run on God--Opcn with regards to regarding my regardliness 09:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

To quote Cardinal Richelieu, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged". The problem with DSM diagnosis — especially untrained armchair diagnosis of someone you've never met — but even with the real in-person psychiatrist stuff — is that the DSM is so vast and broad and vague that you can find something to diagnose anyone with if you try hard enough. A lot of psychiatry is of questionable scientific value. I remember a friend of mine — it was obvious she was very troubled, no doubt — but every psychiatrist she went to had her or his pet diagnosis to diagnose her with. The symptoms stayed roughly the same, but the diagnosis always changed. Oddly enough, many consultant psychiatrists diagnosed her with their research speciality — what a coincidence! (Both her, and her parents, cycled through psychiatrists a lot, "This one isn't working, try another!") My personal belief is that Andy Schlafly is perfectly sane, he just believes different things from what you or I do. Claiming that people you disagree with politically have psychiatric disorders is what the Soviet Union used to do; it concerns me that people seem to be laying the groundwork for a repeat of that episode. (((Zack Martin))) 22:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Andy is just a a hugely arrogant ideologue who think the world owes him something. This whole forum page should be closed up. AceModerator 22:59, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Captioning Kenny-style

The rules are simple. Find an image and add a Ken-like caption to it. The more inappropriate, the better.

Why won't atheist Richard Dawkins debate Dr. William Lane Craig? Is he afraid that atheism's Twin Towers of Evolutionism and Obesity are no match for Creation Ministries International's machismo? Olé! Olé! Olé!
Prominent athiests are mostly considered disgusting or very disgusting or extremely disgusting according to a Creation Ministries International poll in regards to atheism (See: Atheism is a plate of sick and does not know it)
Obese atheists like PZ Myers cannot find a hand to beat the Four Aces of the Question Evolution campaign! When will they give it up and fold?
What makes atheists scared to concede the fact that Isaac Newton was Christian. Is it the fact he didn't have a weight problem?
When will atheist Richard Dawkins admit that atheism is being destroyed from within by the virus of Christianity?
Hurricane Question Evolution overwhelms the levees of evolutionism while atheist PZ Myers flees to higher ground to avoid debating William Lane Craig! Does Myers not remember that fat floats?
By sometime in late 2019, Andrew Schlafly will likely be slaying atheism and evolution on the internet with the two machine guns of Conservapedia's cp:Atheism and cp:Evolutionism articles that I manufactured. Atheism and evolutionism have no bulletproof vests, and atheism has already been shot dead.
[view] [edit]

Making Karajou funny, part duh

Toon 53 - DNC Oil

10Oil parody.JPG (PsyGremlin)
7Oil parody 2.JPG (PsyGremlin)
23SR-WToon53 DNC Oil.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 54 - Rinewt

28Rinewt-parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
6RinoNewtParody.jpg (Colonel Sanders)

Toon 55: Auto standards

4Autostandards UHM-parody.png (UHM)
3Autostandardsp2.jpg (Röstigraben)
6Autostandards parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
19Autostandards SR Parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 56: American Leech

22American leech SR Parody 1.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
7American leech parody psy.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 57: Triple Handout

4ExtendaHand - SR Parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
13ExtendaHand parody psy.png (PsyGremlin)

[view] [edit]

RationalWiki's policy on Conservapedia

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki:Saloon bar.

I guess I slipped in while the registration was open. What should I do with it? I made a few edits, but they were immediately reverted by The Man himself. It was kind of an honor, really. Any suggestions?Roofus (talk) 18:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

ROAR. Z-Rex (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Dunno, RW isn't a base for people to launch attacks on Conservapedia. What were you thinking of doing? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit nicely. </washing hands> Aboriginal Noise Oh, what a lovely tea party! 18:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Outright attacks aren't creative. Anyone can blank pages or fill them with penises and swear words. I want to toe the Poe line. It's not easy over there though...I don't know if you know this but, I think Andy might be crazy. I think Karajou likes me though. Roofus (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Respectfully, this isn't the place for soliciting this kind of advice. I would suggest 4chan /b/. Nutty Roux (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Vandalize the shit out of the place, get banned, feel butthurt, repeat. Occasionaluse (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
You could always try to contribute seriously. Smiley.gif (((Zack Martin))) 19:15, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, and look where that got me (and many others). Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 19:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Nutty is right, we respect Andy and no one here has ever parodied CP on CP. Rationalize (talk) 19:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Encouraging Andy is his lunacy is about the only thing that I think makes a lot of sense. It isn't vandalism, it's amusing for the rest of us, and any harm it does to CP is all Andy's. Trying to flank him on the right could be an interesting challenge. Has it been done? DickTurpis (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
"Andy, do you support forcing public school students to pray or not??" Occasionaluse (talk) 19:50, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I think the only way to flank Andy from the right would be to call for the US to be placed back under the authority of the British monarchy. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

If you have joined CP why would you do anything other then follow their rules? We do not encourage vandalism at other wiki projects.--BobSpring is sprung! 20:09, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
OLD. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
It is a sad day indeed when people think that we are some sort of covert site for vandalising CP. Mockery may be a liberal trait but the Devil cannot stand mockery. Make of that, what you will.  Lily Inspirate me. 20:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
RationalWiki doesn't endorse parody blah blah blah. Lucky for you they do host a how-to guide by two of the greatest parodists that has some (occasionally dated) tips: Essay:A Parodist's Guide to Villainy. You'll also find archives of old parody if you need inspiration: Category:Conservapedia spoofs. And there's always moral support to be had as the obsessives in WIGO:CP cheer your every move. It is truly a mystery why people think RW has something to do with parodists at CP! -- (talk) 21:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
We do not condone vandalism of other wikis--BobSpring is sprung! 21:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware that that's the party line (whatever that means in practice). However, the up-and-coming parodist will still find useful resources here, as I listed above. -- (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

If someone can't figure out how to write parody, or what to do when they get a CP user name, then there is no way for others to explain it to them. This is like asking Jonathan Swift "how do I write satire?" ħumanUser talk:Human 04:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Conservapedia's D&D article

As a first time poster I'd like to say I wandered in here while searching for articles on Jack Chick and scientology to see if the old nut had ever attacked the Co$, and read the D&D article, then followed the link to conservapedia's article on D&D.

I must say it was more fair and balanced than I'd expected, and in fact seemed to state that in 30 years there had been no proven acts of satanism or the occult linked to D&D.

It did air a lot of the extremists viewpoints, but made it clear these were opinions and not facts.

Wow, conservapedia did a fair article? maybe that whole 2012 thing has some validity to it after all...

a lot of their stuff is fair. quite a bit of their fair stuff was copied by Rjensen from Citizendium, where he wrote them. The rest was hijacked by either moderate conservatives or liberals, who, in spite of their valiant efforts, are (probably) now all banned.--brxbrx-brxbrx 03:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Wingnut wiki merge?

To remove Conservapedia's massive visibility on this site, while preventing loss of content that people clearly want to see (as per Larron's data), I suggest a merge of WIGO:CP with WIGO:ASK and possibly WIGO:4R. I see the benefits of this as follows:

  1. The site remains on mission; eviscerating wingnuts everywhere.
  2. HOWEVER, the site does not lose clearly popular content and discussion.
  3. Newcomers to the site do not find the ConPed element so obvious andin-thine-face as it currently is.
  4. It provides potential growth to the site; as ConPed dies/strangles itself, there is a wealth of sites that can be added to WIGO:wingnut blogs/wikis. CMI might be a good place to start.

On the other hand I do see potential downsides, mainly that the decentralization of ConPed will change the 'feel' of the site, which may well be offputtingvto core users. In conclusion, I have chucked this onto forum space to be discussed, amended, commented on etc. until something approaching consensus shambles out.

TL;DR: Merge WIGO:CP with other wingnuts. NoodleDickSissyPantsTalk! 20:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree, but it probably won't happen. ThunderkatzHo! 21:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Likelyhood=0. ТyTalk. 22:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Massive visibility = ~2.25% ~ Kupochama[1][2] 02:57, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
This is something that needs to be done at some point in order to reduce RW's reliance on CP. RW has something of a reputation of being a reaction to CP - far better if the reputation was that RW is a reaction to irrationality. How this should be done is another question. Maybe just put all the WIGO entries for CP, ASK etc into the same list, maybe with an icon to indicate the source?
It's a shame that the other WIGOs are not as active as CP. It is probably because there isn't as much interest in them, but it is certainly the case that you have to jump through a few hoops just to find them. The entertainment value for me is the behind the scenes shenanigans - it's like a soap opera or an internet version of Big Brother. This is what sets it apart from the Clogs and Blogs, which (although interesting) are just another aggregator.
Whatever the case, it should not be a matter of abandoning WIGO:CP, but expanding it.Gomer (talk) 09:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
At the moment this is a bad idea. The other WIGOs would be swamped by the huge preponderance of CP material. If/when activity on CP drops substantially, it's probably the way to go but that time is a long way off. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 09:15, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Conservaleaks III


Please to enjoy Conservaleaks III: Book of Revelation:

  • Now includes Zeuglodon Blues II: The Missing Year, which was a pain in the vagina to parse.
  • Easier navigation. Index pages now show the complete calendar instead of first, prev, last, next links. Thread pages show five instead of three threads for context. It's more natural, and I think it looks less cluttered now, even though there are actually more links.
  • Some people didn't like the way I tried to use lots of whitespace to separate postings from each other. Two people suggested I use background colors and borders instead. I tried doing that. Let me know what you think about it.
  • At least one person was unhappy threads didn't indicate which leak they came from. Every link to every thread now contains a leak symbol - SDG, ZB1, etc. The background colors also help; if there are threads from two sources in one month then links to them will have different background colors.
  • Less crap; the parser much better now at removing trailing quotes, dead links, and signatures from freemailers ("Do you Yahoo!?") than it used to be. There was a bug in the last version that would cut off (cause to be omitted from the output) the last message each in a number of threads in the SDG. The main problem with ZB2 by the way was the Terry's choice of MUA. He was using some shitty Microsoft mailer that would dump five imperial gallons of gratuitous tag soup into every single message. Oh well.
  • The whole thing largely validates but is not tested in anything but Firefox. Please tell me if it looks weird in your browser.

Have fun. Mountain Blue 04:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Random praise and stuff

Awesome. Yet more hilarious outpourings of bile to read through. For convenience, could you stick a google box up on the front page please? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 04:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes, search box. Lemme see. Mountain Blue 04:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

OMG. Did Ed "Two Meters" Poor really accidentally forward a fab five thread with TK slagging Kendoll to ZB? If so, Kendoll must know all the CP sysops think he's a fuckup. Why on earth does he stay? More to the point, why does he keep making the same outrageous claims it is clear not one of them actually believes? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 04:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks you so much! I'd like to have a possibility to search this heap, too... larronsicut fur in nocte 04:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Excellent work. Awesome. Looks good in Chromium, too. P-Foster (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I should be doing homework, but now I'm suddenly distracted...looks great. ~SuperHamster Talk 04:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Great work, MB, great work. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 06:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
It's great... but can we have a download too? There's no regex facility on the site, and I prefer having local content for when I'm offline. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 06:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah, what a thing of beauty to behold first thing in the morning! And the Conservaleaks thing is pretty awesome too. :) MB many thanks for all your hard work on this! --Ψ Gremlin말하십시오 07:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Search would be great too; I'm scrolling through it in Firefox though and it looks fine to me('cept I can't stand when they copy all of someone's contributions into their messages...). Nice work! αTalk 08:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Onya, mate.RagTopGone sailing 09:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Is there a raw download for ZB2 the way there were for the other groups? I didn't pay close attention to all sections here, so maybe I missed it... --Sid (talk) 09:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Hang on, I'll upload one for you. Gimme 5. --Ψ Gremlin講話 10:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. And I just realized that my post sounded somewhat ungrateful, so let me clarify that I'm not. I've worked with mass-replace in the past and know how messed-up these group files look internally, so I know that this must have been an insane amount of work. So epic kudos for that! I just like to have a "traditional" offline backup copy I can quickly search. In other news, Ken suggested that Andy should challenge Jimbo Wales for an evolution/atheism debate... --Sid (talk) 10:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Here you go. --Ψ GremlinSnakk! 10:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
You're all very welcome, guys; I'm happy you like it. You shouldn't thank me, you should thank Psy for rescuing the delicious treachery out of TK's mailbox before it could fall prey to bit rot. In fact, I would like to thank Psy for leaving me the honor to be the one to actually publish it.
I'm still not absolutely, perfectly happy with how the whole thing looks and feels. Minor tweaks will continue to be made at unpredictable intervals. I will probably also create a version you can download and extract into your local filesystem for offline browsing, or into your web server's document tree as a mirror. This is not going to be very hard because the site consists of static HTML files already; I would basically just have to add .html suffixes to the HREFs so the links will work without mod_rewrite.
Mountain Blue 01:37, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Just fabulous chaps, it makes for a brilliant read. DogP (talk) 21:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Scary things

What's the only thing scarier than middle eastern unrest and the idea of North Korea having WMDs?
I'll go ahead and buy my gun first...H&K .40 semi-auto
I have an H&K knockoff G3 assault rifle, semi-auto, 7.62mm NATO rounds, bi-pod
[4] CrundyTalk nerdy to me 10:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I love Ed's random non-sequitur in the middle of that thread: "I sometimes wonder if they engineered and manipulated the housing bubble so it would "pop" exactly 2 months before the election last year." Um, what? Tetronian you're clueless 13:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, the housing bubble discussion is nice. The Homos did it, but perhaps The Jews had a hand in it also. Hateboy (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Voluptuous breasts and bulging vulva anyone? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 10:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes, I remember that one well.(self-promotion alert!) Creepy Uncle Ed at his finest. Bonus points for Kara "large breasts does not make a woman slutty; if that was the case then we’d run half the women on earth to a jail cell for prostitution." --Ψ GremlinParlez! 10:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, Psy! Also: Find out who supported the "Go to Colbert!" thing, who came up with the laughing strategy, and the post-battle thoughts. --Sid (talk) 10:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Lobarse in the Colbert reaction thread: "That guy should have known better than to take on a citizen journalist." Ooh, scary. Webbtje (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Interesting to note that in that same message TerryH opts to congratulate himself by the use, borrowed from the film Anatomy of a Murder, of a term normally employed by defendants offering a plea of temporary insanity. Tylersboy (talk) 11:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
In the same thread, I see Chuckarse has a thing for V's Anna. I thought true-blue conservatives didn't like dominant women. Or is that only if they aren't wielding handcuffs and a whip? --Ψ Gremlin말하십시오 11:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Aha! So Ken's phobia of pronouns isn't related to Ken's SEO antics... it's just how Ken types Ken's comments. Good to know. ONE / TALK 11:43, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
No it is part of his phobia of saying anything definite least he be proven wrong. Talking to him is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. - π 11:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


One thing TZB II has, is their reactions to reception of the CBP. First one I've found is Johnny X-Ray moaning about the Christian Science Monitor ripping CP a new one. Of course, the writer is a professor (of religion) at Butler U, so thus a liberal, so can be ignored. Heads back in sand everybody, carry on as normal. --Ψ GremlinZungumza! 11:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Most amusing in my opinion: Karajou calls for caution as Jack Chick doesn't like the CBP (relevant tract)... larronsicut fur in nocte 12:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Fair play to Kara, he's been consistently vocal behind the scenes that the CBP isn't a good idea, shouldn't be done and they shouldn't be messing with God's word. But note that he never tackles Andy directly on the matter. That would require a backbone. --Ψ GremlinFale! 12:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a trend I also noticed during my initial skimming. Think it was related to the Obama article, but everybody is really careful whenever they feel that they're entering Andy's territory. Even when they assume themselves to be on Andy's side, you can feel that every post is worded with the greatest care to be 100% certain that Andy won't consider it contrary to The Truth. --Sid (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Poor Judgement

"[T]he work I did from 2001-2004 helped solidify WP's future." -Ed Poor, here Hateboy (talk) 14:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


This thread reveals so much about the CP mindset, from Ken's weird idea for revenge against Trent to Kara's belief that every troll on CP is Trent. 江斯顿What is it now? 15:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

In fact, everybody on RW is Trent, too. --Sid (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Is TK suggesting that they Denial Of Service attack us??? my name is slugboy 02:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


Oh nice[5]

I think it's time for Jews to grow up and show some adult responsibility
—Ed Poor

CrundyTalk nerdy to me 17:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I like his qualifier below - "And no one can call me anti-semitic, because I myself am Jewish; both my mother's parents were Jewish." Wrong Ed, a bigot, is a bigot, is a bigot. --Ψ Gremlin말하십시오 17:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC) Ed is saying that he is Jewish just because two of his grandparents were? Come on, even he must see how silly that is. If I met him on the street and asked him about his beliefs, he certainly wouldn't refer to himself as Jewish. Tetronian you're clueless 21:47, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
He's saying that he's ethnically Jewish, which is valid. (I'm ethnically Jewish, and I actively oppose religion.) However, as Psy said, "a bigot, is a bigot, is a bigot." --Cyan mowse 2.png λινυσ() 00:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense. (I'm ethnically Jewish as well.) Tetronian you're clueless 00:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The first month

I was highly amused by the postings going on during their "infiltration" of RW before they blocked us all, and the build up, meetings, grandiose planning and revenge fantasies. Worth checking out. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I like their fantasy world threads. It's such child-like wonder that I see in their posts. --Sid (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
This is a good one. Hee hee! And here too. Apparently Ed has done detective work? Tetronian you're clueless 21:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Best bit of that:
TK: After our little meeting later, I am going to respond to each of them, with an appropriate link to their little "rational wiki", with the information it has all been copied and sent to the authorities.
Kara: We do have to wait for confirmation that the Feds have been notified, otherwise our threats at retaliation won't work.
Shit, it's been a long wait, guys. --Ψ GremlinParla! 22:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

April 2010 - Rob and TK on Wikipedia

ZB2 is full of background talk (mostly senseless bragging) about that month of trolling Rob and TK orchestrated on WP.

Especially amusing from my POV is the part where TK tried to get one of my comments oversighted for mentioning a certain name (guess which one) that appears in the LA Times article. Best of it all? In the same thread, we get these two quotes by Rob (one before and one after TK reported me) which look hilarious side by side:

  1. If he atttempts to "out" you, User:TK-CP as Terry Koekritz anywhere on the wiki, he's toast. Give him room, watch him close, and bait him into it if possible subtley.
  2. TK, Sid used the post as an excuse to beginning pasting your name on whatever page posssible. This shows bad faith on his part -- definitely.

And of course, when the sysops are flailing aimlessly, you can count on Ken to actually pinpoint the real problem (emphasis mine): "The Wikipedia article on Conservapedia will not get much better. The reason I say this is because the main problem Conservapedia has is that it doesn't have very many prominent conservatives or conservative organizations saying good things about it, but I do think this could be improved."

Also of note is that other than TK, Rob and Karajou, I rarely saw others participating in those threads. People politely looking away again? --Sid (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the string of "we gots them now!" post lead me to poke at Rob again. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
TK's posting fom Apr 8, 2010 in the Progress in NPOV for WP's CP related entries is incomplete; it can be found in its entirety here: RationalWiki 1.0 user:icewedge/Archives. nobsdon't bother me 23:38, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The registration switch

Apparently, they didn't even keep proper track of who had the ability to flip the switch. The non-idiot ball is held by Jpatt this time, who wonders why the webmasters implemented a switch, but no logging mechanism to keep track of when registration is on or off. --Sid (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Under most obvious, reasonably straightforward, or even just remotely plausible implementations of this kind of switch you could have just grepped the access log. Then again, you would have had to know what an access log is and where to find it. Mountain Blue 01:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I thought this account creation / editing revelation was a brilliant example of Hanlon's razor. We all thought that TK was surreptitiously turning one off whenever the Assfly turned one on, in order to prevent new editors signing up/sticking around. But alas, Assfly himself was doing this, as he could see no reason to allow someone to sign-up and edit an article on a wiki-encyclopaedia. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 02:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

"Only now am I beginning to force some of his cards on the table"

"Oversighted from Jensen's talk page":

  • Ken has an IQ high enough to get into Mensa, according to Ken.
  • Jensen is a deep-cover liberal. Proof: a book he wrote in 1989 cites scholarship by future Obama appointees Ben Bernanke and Larry Summers. Mountain Blue 20:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I think you're missing the point on that one; Larry Summers worked in the Reagan White House. Ken DeMyer did a despicable hit piece on Summers and copy pasted the entire text into the Barack Obama biographical article. By enlisting Prof. Jensen to address the "hit piece", I could have been in a better position to revert & undo some of User:Conservative's mainspace bullshit. This is how backstairs at CP operates. nobsI am a fugitive from an ideological fever swamp 21:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
And here is where I "force some of his cards on the table", i.e that Prof. Jensen's use of the term, "suppply side" was novel or unorthodox, that it constituted Original Research by Wikipedia standards. nobsI am a fugitive from an ideological fever swamp 21:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and Bernanke was appointed by Geo. W. Bush. nobsI am a fugitive from an ideological fever swamp 21:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Ken & Mensa

Aren't Mensa members disproportionately relative to the general population gay & atheist? nobsI am a fugitive from an ideological fever swamp 21:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


Should we link to these archives as MountainBlue has them hosted and posted, or is there a way we can move them on-wiki? There's so much good material to back up our various RW articles on CP here, but is linking to a resource that is given to us by the good grace of others the right thing to do? Are we just going to have to relink later? DogP (talk) 21:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I would say yes, that's a good idea. However it was decided after the original ZB leak not to host the messages locally, for various reasons. Perhaps the community would like to reconsider this proposal now? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 22:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
(1) The archives are meant to be linked to. I actually replaced most old file references I could find with working hyperlinks myself. I keep URLs stable across updates. I also took steps to make sure the site can be moved onto another server, should the need arise, on very short notice without breaking any links. It's and not specifically so it can have its own DNS A record.
(2) It's Mountain Blue, not MountainBlue. Mountain Blue 04:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
MouthfulOfGlue, it's just fucking fabulous what you're doing! (No, seriously, thanks for the answer and all that hard work MB) Godspeed, MoundOfStew! DogP (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


Version III.01 is up. I kind of announced this two day ago.. As I keep trawling the leaked discussions, I keep finding places where the parser fucked up and the pages still contain tag soup, mail provider banners, or quoted previous messages. Sometimes this will annoy me into updating the parser and recompiling. Sometimes I will then update the version on the server. Mountain Blue 22:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

As always, Mounted Shrew, we are deep in your debt. --PsyGremlinFale! 22:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Version III.02. Some more personal information redacted out. Mountain Blue 13:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Version III.03. Some phone numbers redacted out, some minor parser tweaks. Mountain Blue 13:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
III.04. Tweaks. Mountain Blue 12:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

RW in a Panic

The subject postings for 2010-04-7, RW in a panic has been cropped and edited. Would it help if I disclosed the redacted content including TK's response? nobsdon't bother me 16:17, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

You mean the bit about you saying "He he I said, we can force them to moderate their behavior"?
and TK saying "Along with his idea of forming a LLC for Rationalwiki, this seems a convenient way to completely erase their history, user names, etc. Read between the lines there." --PsyGremlinPraat! 13:04, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and this is in keeping with longtime discussions on this site to make RW "less CP-centric". nobsI am a fugitive from an ideological fever swamp 22:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Personal Info

I have noticed a couple of phone numbers in the SDG pages. Should these not be removed?  Lily Inspirate me. 17:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

They probably should. Do you think you mail me the URLs? I'm georg at noym dot net, in case the button is still broken. Mountain Blue 17:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

More missing emails

There is an exchange of the fist 7 emails not found on this discussion thread, and it relates to some of the problems User:Iduan currently has regarding his request for sysopship. And the editor of Conservaleaks should have that message because it was included in the first published email on this thread, which begins, "I went on facebook..." nobsViva la Revolución! 23:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, in the raw source the first email has a few Original Messages attached to it. The parser automatically removes any Original Messages (that it recognizes as such) because nineteen times out of twenty they're just useless gunk. Mountain Blue (talk) 01:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Latest dump discussion

Same Forum, different layout. All the interesting stuff from the latest leaks.

Techy Things to do with showing/hosting logs


It might be worth, at some point, migrating some of the many posts mentioned above to the relevant articles: Conservapedia:Fab Five and Conservapedia:Conservapedia Group. I'd do it, but I've been drinking vodka and Red Bull since lunch. --Ψ GremlinSprich! 13:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Fully agreed, and it's likely what's going to happen once we're past the initial binging. It'll take a bit to figure out what are larger trends and what are simply tiny trivia blips. For example, Karajou versus the Bible Project seems to be larger, but him being a complete asshat may just be a collection of blips. Not sure myself, yet. --Sid (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

More Readable Versions

Currently hosting more readable versions of the dumped logs. If someone could mirror this zip, I'd appreciate it. Click to download. – Nick Heer 21:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Good work, I will mirror it here for a while. (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks a lot. Second mirror here. mb 23:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I still can't read it. It's not exactly easy for me to read anything with my eyesight, but CSS? WTF is that? Goddamnit. It's either between text that goes beyond the left of my screen in terrible format, or a bunch of squares with numbers. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 00:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Have you tried completely disabling the CSS? It's View -> Page Style -> No Style if you have Firefox. You'll have to scroll over lots of crap the CSS is normally hiding but you'll also have a reasonably large font and nothing will run off screen. mb 01:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Awesome, this makes it much more simpler. Thanks, Mountain Blue. Next time I watch porn, I'll think of you. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 01:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Pared down

Hey, I've pared down all the extraneous html from the fab five files, now it's mostly plaintext and actually readable: is the link. Other one should be coming soon. ThunderkatzHo! 05:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The CP archive is here. I can do .tar.gz if people can't open .zips. ThunderkatzHo! 05:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone explain to me how to read these? I just get a ton of numbered folders, with individual pages? how can I read and navigate all of them? Or can I not? On a Mac here. DogP (talk) 05:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
That's some serious regex foo. I'm way to goddamn lazy to do that. But, on the other hand, I was thinking of doing it for everything and creating an indexed, searchable database of all four leaks. Uhh, meet me in the Forum. – Nick Heer 05:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
@DogP You basically have to look at each page individually. When you double click a page, it'll open up in your default browser. If you want, I can give you things to type into your Terminal to concatenate all the pages into one, but it won't tell you where one discussion topic ends and another begins (though I could probably give you code to show that too, if you really wanted). ThunderkatzHo! 05:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
OK, so if you have enough Unix-fu to get to the main folder of all the number folders (if you type "ls" you'll see a list of the different folders, just google "unix cd" for moving around) in the Terminal application (in your Utilities folder), you're going to type two things: first, you're going to type "bash" and hit enter (this enters the bash shell, in case you're not in already, and we need it for for loops). Then you're going to copy and paste this in:
for f in [0-9]*; do for j in "$f"/*.html; do cat "$j" >> all.html; echo \<br/\>\<HR\>\<br/\> >> all.html; done; done
Once you hit enter, you should see a file called "all.html" appear in the folder where you ran this. If you double click it, it'll open in your default broswer, and have every conversation in that archive in one giant page, which each discussion topic separated by a fancy little bar (I didn't keep dates when I pared everything down, so I have no idea if there's any order to any of it). ThunderkatzHo! 05:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much for all the help, but now that I know they won't build into an actual site, I'll just search them for thing - that works fine. I just thought I was missing something. DogP (talk) 05:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Realized there might not be pared down versions of the other archives, so ZB is here. Special Sysop group possibly coming soon. Also realized that each of these pages has a topic title I haven't been including. Worth redoing to include it? ThunderkatzHo! 06:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Topic title would indeed be useful and also if you could put in some delimiter (like a bunch of dashes) to separate the threads. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 09:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

More pared down

TZB, CP, and Fab Five archives, all pared down to mostly plaintext, with topics at the top of each page, all in one archive: [6]. ThunderkatzHo! 18:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Fixing the formatting

I wrote some code to fix all of the formatting and URLs in general: Code available here feel free to run it on the source files, and then redistribute. Runs in a POSIX environment. ("But I run Windows" I hear you screeching. I wrote it on CYGWIN, and ran it on CYGWIN). --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 05:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Slap the whole thing onto the webs somewhere?

Seeing how inconvenient it is for many people to browse and read these things offline: how about we put all those leaked discussion groups on a web server? Not as yet another tarball, as an actual browsable collection of actual pages? I have the space, the bandwidth and the regex fu. If it turns out there is demand I may do something. Comments please. mb 11:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Would love to be able to translate all these links to the discussions into actual workable links, so I can see what people are talking about (haven't downloaded the entire file yet). Of course, this comes across as "I'm too lazy to download and see what people are talking about, so do the work for me" but, well, I am lazy and it would make it easier :-) (talk) 14:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I'd find it easier to read them that way. It'd probably turn out like PJR's behind the scenes at CP site. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 15:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Turn out like... what? Good or bad? Please elaborate. mb 15:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Turn out good I think. I'm one of these people having display problems, particularly with the left margin, and something that allows me to view the leaks without messing around with computer stuff beyond my ken would be excellent. It'd also be a useful resource to link directly to, as we're currently using references which mean people have to go into their own copies to find any reference. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 16:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, the display suck and the referencing thing were what I what thinking about. What I meant to ask was: what's PJR's behind the scenes at CP site? mb 16:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
You haven't seen this site? -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 16:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion Group Details Lists

Although this may end up like the bible project I have created 2 lists from tables generated by Larron. Here and here. if anyone thinks this is wrong stylistically or just too obsessive please inervene but for my own sake I intend to work through the lists highlighting any important or interesting bits in an additional column. It will help me cross reference in the future etc and may be of use to others. StarFish (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I have moved them out of the mainspace. - π 13:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Pi. StarFish (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

CP dump on the web, browsable

All threads from the recent CP dump, sorted by date of first post: The layout of the index page may still change but the URLS are stable, ie. threads can now be linked to. Is this useful? Would anybody want me to do the same thing with the Fab Five archive? mb 19:39, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Damn son. Puts my stuff to shame. ThunderkatzHo! 19:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Would it be possible to use the versions that fixed the style sheets? (talk) 20:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Eh? I did use the versions that fixed the style sheets. Of course we can change the style sheets even further if that's what people want. Ask for something specific. mb 20:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Maybe just my browser then. (talk) 20:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Doesn't work for me in any browser - the stylesheet isn't loading so the left margin is still trimmed. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
+1. Also, I've read the CP leaks with bad formatting, do the Fab Five ones first. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 21:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Eh. I'm on it. mb 21:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
PROBLEM SOLVED. I uploaded text-only versions of all pages, helpfully provided by User:Thunderkatz. These don't need any style sheets at all. mb 03:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Everything looks awesome now, thanks mb. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 13:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Meanwhile, please to enjoy The Fab Five on the Web. mb 21:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Also, The Complete and Unabridged Zeuglodon Blues. mb 03:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks - one minor item: the title of is "Fab Five", instead of "Conservapedia Group"...
And what about the Special Discussion Group? The material is a little bit dated..
larronsicut fur in nocte 13:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Holy crap, we do have the SDG? I was blissfully unaware of that. Aside from the SDG, what do you mean the material is a little bit dated? Is there newer sauce I should know about? mb 14:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
No, he just meant the contents of the SDG are pretty old (3 years?) by now. --Ψ GremlinKhuluma! 14:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Miscellaneous with interesting commentary by the native wildlife of Rationalwiki

Zero Header

My fave so far is CP/31-60/22fabadcccb44b2a.htm, where Ed says "all the new users with a name like mine ("Ed") are parodists." Occasionaluse (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

My fave there has to be Kara - he is seriously nuts. However, I love the couple of posts where first he's complaining that the Rats are sending spam to the zoho account - clearly forgetting Andy had it on the Main page and clearly not knowing how spammers harvet info. "The first one so far is a "request" to send money out of another country. Next will be Russian dates, porn, quack medicine, and so on *ad nauseum*."(CP/91-120/13b6c329d74631eb.htm). What I really loved tho was (Fab Five/271-300/33af99353c2d9156.htm)
This time, and I assume it's still him, has placed my name and email addy on a Russian "mail-order bride" site, and now I have messages from a "Yekarterina" who's a little more-than-desperate to leave the confines of the Lake Baikal area. The only question I had for her was where and how did she get my name...which she has refused to answer. I have this person blocked.
Lol! Awesome! He even interrogates desperate Russian brides. --? GremlinRunāt! 14:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Karajou sure does talk to himself a lot there... Occasionaluse (talk) 14:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Is there a reason we are using references like "Fab Five/271-300/33af99353c2d9156.htm" instead of the normal way we cite things on here? --Leotardo (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it's the same convention as with SDG and TZB. The actual files aren't on RW, but the link is a reverence to their location in the archives. --? GremlinPraat! 14:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Psy, you're the best. My morning will be fun-filled now. PubliusTalk 14:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
It brings a tear to my eye to think that never again will TK be around to leak CP's email lists to us. RIP TK, you faithless shit. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 14:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

How strangely flattering: RonLar is Larron backwards...and he is taking our POV apart with Larron's typical boatload of charts!
Everyone wave goodbye to him.
--TK Fab Five/31-60/cf3a5abf9e43cf64.htm
larronsicut fur in nocte 14:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not totally sold by the "TK leaked the ZGB" line (hopefully someone can let me know which editor it was exactly which rewrote all those URIs accidentally in the last archive), but I'm pretty damned sure TK didn't leak this lot. Whoever did pull these down did a better job of forging the data this time, but there's a bloody obvious error in it. MaxAlex Swimming pool 14:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
And that would be? --? GremlinSermā! 14:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh, fie and tush. You're just trying to start a witch hunt to find out which of the other CP sysops is the RW mole... We know it isn't Kendoll or RobS... Hrm. Could it be Karajou? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 15:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
@LArron: I think it's in that thread, but somewhere Andy asks people not to block you. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 15:16, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
There's a bit of speculation that CPalmer is a sock of Bugler in 391-420 0038. Either way, it's always nice to meet a local. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 15:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Which of the sysops is supposed to have leaked this latest batch? It has a thread about TK's passing so I assume it wasn't he... --Benod (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, quite, amongst other issues. I put some thoughts on my user page, MaxAlex Swimming pool 20:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
TK probably disclosed his access details to another user rather than manually copying everything. Don't forget Occam's Razor. Despite what they do over there, TK is the only senior sysop who was called out as a parodist and traitor. After all it's hardly the first time he let other people into their discussions.  Lily Inspirate me. 20:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I put both possibilities in the discussion. But it's not just the dates that are wrong, the whole thing smells. There is a simple, easy explanation for all this other than TK leaking stuff cackhandedly, so I know where my Occam's razor is cutting. MaxAlex Swimming pool 20:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I promised never to rat on TK's feed but now that he's gone and Psy has made it public we had access to the account on solemn promise that it was read only. It's a great loss now that he's gone. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 22:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
So could someone clear up once and for all what TK's deal was? What was his aim for CP? EddyP Great King! Disaster! 22:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'd also be interested to know who "we" is... –SuspectedReplicant retire me 22:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I kind of figured that would be the reason used, but it simply doesn't add up. TK used that mail account for years, I don't get why he would let someone in there - with google's predilection for never deleting data, there would almost certainly be juicy gossip in there. And he would share that with a site that was trying to out him as a homo? What would TK gain from such an arrangement? Doesn't add up. MaxAlex Swimming pool 08:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Quick fix to make it more readable: do a find and replace across all files, replacing @import "/groups/


@import " Heer 21:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Better Yet: Currently hosting readable versions of the dumped logs. If someone could mirror this zip, I'd appreciate it. Click to download. – Nick Heer 21:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Right, this is going to sound incredibly ignorant, but can someone tell/show/message me how to read the archives, or point me to where it is explained? This whole thread sounds interesting but I have absolutely no idea what to do to read the stuff.AlexR4444 (talk) 00:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

403 Update

In CP/90/f6f01b662eb84088.html, TerryH is complaining about being 403'ed. Looks like it might be another victory for cockup vs conspiracy after all. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 14:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

This made my day. Editor at CPma?y ksia;z.e 15:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
There's also talk by Andy and Jpatt (he claims something like "20 rangeblocks in 5 seconds") that I'm too lazy to look-up. It seems they are 403'ing ip addresses, especially from Europe, to prevent DDoS attacks. --? GremlinSermā! 15:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
My address has been going in and out of 403 mode for weeks, at completely unpredictable intervals. Whatever it is they think they're doing there isn't to much rhyme or reason to it. Hateboy (talk) 15:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
More likely that your IP is changing.
CP/31-60/727da2ed08f13d44.htm seems to where Andy asks about blocking IPs from the server, and it was on Dec 21 last year, which is roughly when the 403 problems started. Could be coincidence... –SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes. In CP/31-60/a2416fb4e4eb26a1.htm, he says he's blocked 77.*, 80.*, 81.*, 82.*, 84.*, 85.*, and 86.* (117,440,512 IPs). That certainly explains one of my ranges. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear fuck, I'm just having a read through and some of it is seriously unhinged. I mean, seriously, there is so much hate in there. Paranoia, distrust, desire to embarrass, remove, even harm anyone they label "liberal". If you stop treating it as a joke for a moment some of it's pretty scary. Scarlet A.pngbomination 20:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
It's funny how Karajou always accuses us of being "hate-filled" and then quite happily spits the bile he does. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in Fab Five right now. --? GremlinTala! 20:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Most likely they've skipped to yet another SDG. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 21:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I would typically consider it to be scary, except that there is no reality to it. It may show that they have a desire to embarrass and harm people, but they can't, and they won't. They simply don't have the ability and power to do so. When they actually do try, they fail. Nothing on Conervapedia is taken seriously, so whatever posted there is basically a rant to thin air. Look at the FBI incident. Look at Karajou's supposed reportings of people to local governments. They don't work out so well. Just recently, Karajou apparently tried to get me, and other RationalWikians, blocked from Wikipedia, but that too, of course, failed. They may show a desire to do nasty things, but they simply cannot do anything as I see it. All talk, but no successful action. ~SuperHamster Talk 22:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


"Since it's creation, the Fab Five has expanded to include Karajou and TerryH." So it would be more like the Sweaty Seven then? Hateboy (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Or now TK is no more, perhaps the Subnormal Six. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 15:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Although I didn't like the guy I have to say that TK was probably the smartest of the bunch. He certainly managed to lead them a merry dance. Ken, Karajou, Ed, Jpratt and RobS are all dunces; Andy and TerryH ought to be smarter than they appear as they have had reasonable educations but they have a degree of madness which over-rides critical thinking. Of course the really smart ones like DanH, TimS, Bethany and Sharon left in disgust; I wonder if we'll ever see Jallen back?  Lily Inspirate me. 19:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Zeugloden Leak

Has anyone found any messages from when the Zeugloden Blues was leaked? It would be interesting to see what they said. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 21:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I did a quick search for Zeuglodon, Blues and ZB within all files. Only stuff posted originally to TZB was uncovered. Nothing reactionary. – Nick Heer 02:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Radioactive Afikomen a traitor to RW?

Perhaps he'd like to explain himself? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 23:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that too. His plan was pretty poor though, so no harm done. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 23:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hah, yeah that's a pretty weaksauce plan right there. I guess it didn't appeal to the super spy within TK either. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Reference ? P-Foster (talk) 23:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'd like a reference, too. The Goonie 1 What's this button do? Uh oh.... 23:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
/Fab Five/271-300/649aef7b2eaa5226.htm and meh and erm. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 00:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I think it says it pretty plainly in the link. He was pissed off at us and wanted to lash out, I get pissed off at you guys (I.E. the amorphous blob that is RationalWiki as an entity) sometimes too. No harm no foul and all that jazz. Tmtoulouse (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
It's nothing I haven't considered before, like leaking the Super Secret Contents of the Super Secret Forum. Scarlet A.pngbomination 10:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

*snort* Hahahahaha! I'm flattered you thought me capable of being selfless enough to betray this place. I'm far too vain to ruin my own image with betrayal. My intent was to spur participation in the RationalWiki Folding@Home group. I figured no one would give a crap unless it involved Conservapedia, and so I hoped to CP to start their own F@H group Surely, RW's sheer spitefulness would drive many of you to participate in RationalWiki's own Folding@Home group? But, alas, it was not to be. TK never expressed any interest. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

On Armondikov's note, however, there was a time where I gave serious thought to sabotaging this wiki as much as possible. You know, rename everbody to an absurdly long name and strip everybody's user rights, move all the high-revision-count pages to include characters MediaWiki didn't like then delete them, and put up a copy of the secret forums for Conservapedians to read. The only reason I didn't was because (1) it would've been easily fixable, if still tedious and headache-inducing to repair, and (2) vanity again; any infamy I gained would be short-lived and quickly forgotten (RationalWiki has a terrible institutional memory). Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

But, that was a very angry time in my life. I'm happy to say I've largely moved on. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


Can anyone find which file has the comments about how we attacked citizendium with the skills we honed on CP and ASK? Tmtoulouse (talk) 04:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

/CP/241-270/adc41bff0d91cc83.htm Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 04:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Another (unexpected) keyword to look for

Just do a search for mentions of the Guard Dog. I'm too sleepy to do a timeline analysis or anything, but Ken apparently suggested asking PJR to whip up a new version of it (I guess because PJR likes Conservapedia and all the sysops who backed him in his struggle against TK and Andy. Er... wait.), which was met with (somewhat surprising) hostility. Bonus points for Ed suggesting that he could write a PHP bot/extension for MediaWiki that acts as a guard-dog before the edit even gets logged in the database - the ultimate oversight. --Sid (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I would have loved for someone to have called Ed's bluff on that. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 09:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ides in the TZB archives

FUCK YEAH! They totally bought the Ides! Brilliant. TZB/730/7c8a048fb3fc1560.html DogP (talk) 06:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Also PJR freaked out about them here. DogP (talk) 21:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Titles of Threads

Activity at the SDGs
I just made a list of the titles of the threads at CP and Fab Five. Have a look here.

--larronsicut fur in nocte 09:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Superb. IMO this should be moved to mainspace and linked to the articles about lists in question. Another column added with a brief description of the contents. I'm happy to work on this if others agree. StarFish (talk) 10:01, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The date the thread was started could be useful also. The thing with this volume of data is that it is only meaningful if we are able to cross reference it with other "real world" events that we know about and as a huge mess of html text it's difficult to get to grips with. StarFish (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course I did this using a small perl script. The date of the first edit is already in, I may add the author. Feel free to move wherever it fits best, and to add content... larronsicut fur in nocte 10:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
yes I see the date. It's nice work larron. The author would be a good addition too. This makes the data MUCH more manageable. StarFish (talk) 10:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Andy Schlafly

aka teh Assfly aka AndyPandy aka The WonderWannabeFailure

Backbone of the United States

This one actually made me LOL! CP/CP/61-90/3113befb9b6ab337.htm Take it away, Andy:

The rotating image of Conservapedia is powerful in many ways. But Iwill take it down Tuesday morning unless someone objects, because I think it may be slow to load and thereby limiting our traffic and number of visitors. Those who saw it Monday night and Tuesday, however, are likely to be persuaded by the message it conveys: Conservatism is the backbone of the United States, and freedom in the world.

SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Assfly on Page Rank

Also of note regarding page rankings (CP/91-120/0016091b2735e999.htm):

"Traffic is strong so far in November.
One note of caution about Alexa traffic: it only measures traffic that finds websites using the Alexa search engine. It does not capture our large amount of traffic resulting from users typing in "Conservapedia" directly, or bookmarks. A relatively small percentage of our traffic comes from search engines, and a very small percentage from Alexa.
Our ranking based on fuller measures of traffic should be much higher than our Alexa ranking.

Quite a serious misunderstanding of Alexa's rankings... while Schlafly speaks true that they can only gather proximal data from a small number of Alexa users/volunteers, this is true of ALL websites. Thus every site should be higher than shown - which means Alexa shows all sites fairly accurately! That's why the stats are measured by rank or percentage rather than by solid and absolute numbers. Scarlet A.pngbomination 20:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Night Editing and Registration

From CP/211-240/0592d85440f3a0ec.htm

We always thought it was the Team Killer, but "NEVER HAVE BOTH REGISTRATION AND EDITING ON AT THE SAME TIME for a while. There is no reason to." comes straight from teh Assfly's keyboard. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Great find! That needs to be added to some of the CP pages, and probably the Timeline.  Lily Inspirate me. 19:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

/8 blocks

I lost my place (I think it's in the "CP" archive), but Andy proposes blocking the world. He then says he executed 6 or 8 /8 blocks. I was interested to hear this didn't come from TK. Occasionaluse (talk) 16:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Andy blocking the planet: CP/31-60/727da2ed08f13d44 Occasionaluse (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
7 /8 blocks by Andy: CP/31-60/a2416fb4e4eb26a1 Occasionaluse (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Been There, Done That, Had The Edit ConflictsSuspectedReplicant retire me 20:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Cocksucker. I'll find you. Occasionaluse (talk) 21:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll put the kettle on. You bring the Manglide. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

All Germans are Sid - unless they are not Germans. Then they are Auld Nick

Clement B. was one of my favorite editors at CP - remember thisimg? He somewhat exclusively quarreled with A. Schlafly - or, in A. Schlafly's words: His constant insulting of our editors over nit-picky issues seems designed to drive them awayFab Five/301-330/16807cf73c7b86a7.htm So, what to do? Try to counter his arguments? Or go on a wild goose-chase/Fab Five/301-330/a80d395d3244d7fd.htm? And one has to love A. Schlafly's knowledge of the German schools:

TK, thanks for the quick block and revert of "ClemB", formerly ClementB. I think the chances of his being a history and math teacher from Germany are less than 1 in a million. I've never known someone who taught both history and math, for starters. That's like coaching football and conducting the orchestra. The two skills just don't mix. And from Germany? I find it absurd, frankly.

I've never known someone who taught both history and math - unless he is sitting in a church basement and thinking about a course on critical thinking in math

larronsicut fur in nocte

That would be "teach history and math with a modicum of skill in either subject". Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 09:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I was taught French by a history teacher once. He was really bad at it. --Kels (talk) 22:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

TK's obituary

won't happen. As thus spoke Andy:

Unfortunately, I don't think we can confirm or deny anything about TK at this time. He chose not to use his real name on Conservapedia, and I think we need to respect that. Posting about him might just bring out abominable, sick comments by liberals. In Christ, Andy
cp/1-30/300d458b1c474f25.htm - Reagan's 100th and TK

larronsicut fur in nocte 09:31, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

If nothing else, the sysops' silence on this, part from Jpatt's "Oh, I hope the rats aren't lying," is a fairly good indicator of what a truly miserable bunch they are. Dean's wife's passing received more attention, even behind the scenes, than TK's. They are an utterly nasty bunch of individuals. --Ψ GremlinFale! 10:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Pageviews = book sales

Andy, from CP/151-180/ccb8c...:

But now "Biblical scientific foreknowledge" has over 34,000 page views and I'm convinced it has opened many hearts and minds to the Bible, with the result of converting many atheists and potential atheists to Christianity. Note that a typical best-selling book on the New York Times best-seller list has sales of about 30,000 copies. This entry has surpassed that.

Makes sense to me! It's also interesting that apparently, no other group member was able to reply to this post with a straight face. --Sid (talk) 12:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, with that logic my user page with 7,669 views did alright and I should get another deal - π 12:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Damn! My blog's had nearly double that. Do you think I should start negotiating a movie deal? --Ψ GremlinParla! 12:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Try to get Michael Bay, he is the only one that could do it justice. - π 12:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Their obsession (especially Andy's) with Pageviews is particularly laughable. It's as if they see every pageview as another liberal converted to conservatism, whereas most of the time it's people coming to laugh at them. Do a search for Conservapedia on Twitter and it's all people commenting on how ridiculous it is - mainly about  K e n D o l l ' s  current obsession with ponies and his previous one with obesity. They see record pageviews as proof of the power of their conservative message; I see it as record numbers of people coming to see how ridiculous the extreme right wing of American politics has become. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 12:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Best of all, even if somebody is converted and signs up going, "Thank you for your valuable insights. I have finally seen that conservatism is the way and I'm willing to help," one of the nutters there will go, "Liberal! Die! Die! Die!" --Ψ GremlinПоговорите! 12:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, their pageview obsession is laughable, and they know they're inflated. But this is the part where it gets good: They try/tried to use bot inflation to selectively seed their own Top 10 by only deleting/restoring articles they didn't want to see there. See "CP/61-90/23d7f..." - Hitler goes out, CPB gets to stay... McCain was kicked out, but that was a bad call... and of course, Karajou has his own take on this situation, thinking that the bot inflation will make people go "I wonder why this has so many views..." (so far, so good), which will then of course lead to their conversion and salvation (...huh...?) because they will of course be convinced by the high-quality work on CP (hahaha). --Sid (talk) 13:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Andy knew they were being inflated back in 2007, it's in the SDG archive. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 20:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Delusional or The Best of teh Assfly


  • 'Unlike most websites, including Wikipedia, every one of our visitors is looking to us for life-changing answers, and we are not disappointing them. Thanks for helping educate a world hungry for the truth, which is a scarce commodity. Andy. '--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 16:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Awesome find. Am adding to the quotes on Conservapedia. --Ψ GremlinPraat! 16:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


  • ' Andy: (the editor) Seems to be from Mississippi, but that's an unlikely source for an editor... '--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 16:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

RobZ legit???

  • But I have a bad feeling about RobZ. His IP seems to be a proxy from Oklahoma, not a State having a large number of Wiki-style editors. Few people are named "RobZ" either. That looks suspicious to me. I'm going to block this one. But other new editors are worth watching. In Christ, Andy


I keep reading Andy's comments about a young Earth (mainly in the SDG) and am gob-smacked at his ignorance. (

  • One can form an opinion about age without seeing alternatives. Lack of erosion in sharp features, for example. High concentration of freshwater. If I walk outside and see puddles, then I can conclude it has not been long since a rainfall, without any comparison needed.
More generally, I've noted a tendency for creationist organizations to officially reject an argument that may be persuasive to others and to me, and then that rejection is spread in a dogmatic way. I ran into this with the implausibility of a whale having evolved, with User:Conservative declaring that such argument had been "officially" rejected, despite its persuasive power and use by an established scientist to criticize evolution.

Basically he rejects the pseudo-scientific approach of the hardline YECs and goes with his "it just looks young to me" the same way that his beautiful fall foliage is proof against evolution. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 15:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Delusions of grandeur

Andy's megalomania in a nutshell (CG, January 31st, 2011):

We've broken our record for unique visitors in the month of January. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL!!!

All of our traffic sees the conservative message, and with our high volume, our site could be the single biggest reason American culture is moving to the right.

So there you have it, a backwater blog with half a dozen dim-witted regulars is the single biggest player in American politics. Fox News, eat your heart out. Röstigraben (talk) 15:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

How about a picture of an orangutan, crying?

Duh..... Jesus wept. DogP (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Well it's good to see that even the sysops have realised they aren't building an encyclopaedia anymore. --PsyGremlinFale! 10:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Mr Schlafly goes to Washington

Recently, Andy has had delusions of grandeur regarding Conservapedia's place in the world, making such claims as Glenn Beck wouldn't be losing listeners, if he read Conservapedia, the millions who have dumped MySpace would be turning up at Conservapedia and even that Conservapedia is responsible for America's turn to the right.

But he takes it to a new level, in the comments below:

After watching and dealing with more than 3 years of liberal deceit attacking our site, we have accumulated valuable experience in recognizing and eradicating the liberal tricks and traps.

Now it's time to share that with our allies. Some will listen and vastly improve because of it. Some won't, either because they've been infiltrated themselves or they don't take good advice. But enough will listen to make our experience very, very worthwhile for many people.

Training sessions for others in various cities like DC may even be worthwhile.[1]

— Unsigned, by: Psygremlin / talk / contribs
I openly admit that some RWF discussions between Trent and I have had delusions of grandeur but nothing on that scale. Scarlet A.pngbomination 14:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


aka Kowardjerk aka Kajagoogoo aka Karajerk

Battlestar Galactica

Quoth Karajou:

...and user Gaius (AmesG, after a character in *Battlestar Galactica*).

I don't know whether to laugh or facepalm. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 15:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I remembered seeing this before:
That brings up Galactica, specifically a character who shares the exact same traits as Ames: Baltar. According to the series, Baltar sold out his people in exchange for power and prestige, totally uncaring that what he did was cause a lot of destruction. In the new series, Baltar was cast with a first name: Gaius.
from 150\c0ad2e1142f1d091.html in the old ZB files. Popeye seems to have a fixation. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 15:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I bet Karajou loved series 3... -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 15:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

That swabbie sure is angry

His conspiracy theory in Fab 5 61-90/58db5878324af749 has me in hysterics. Everything is an RW plot to steal his precious bodily fluids. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 16:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

And one day we shall obtain them! EddyP Great King! Disaster! 16:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Any more spoiler you can provide, for those of us who haven't been able to download the RAR files yet? (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Whats particularly great about that sequence is the complaints about steal user names. What happened was that a series of pages were imported onto the wiki page. When you export a page from a site and import it into another wiki the act of importing attaches however much of the history of the page was exported, and thus creates false edit entries. So none of those accounts were ever actually created, its just a by product of how the export/import feature of MW works. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajerk on Page Rank

From CP/CP/61-90/66f70e2ada966533.htm: (paraphrasing)

Karajerk: Ha! RW is practically the least-viewed site on the entire internet!
Karajerk: Look! Look! RW hardly exists at all!
Rob Smith: You're looking at the wrong site.
Ed: (random nonsense)
Karajerk: Well... they don't matter anyway.

Stick to swabbing the decks, Popeye. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

This may have been just after Rob tried that same shtick here until we politely informed him that was replaced by several months ago. Indeed, if you stick them side-by-side on Alexa you can see the switch over clear as day. Scarlet A.pngbomination 18:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

{rest of lulz moved to Andy's section above}

The very first post in the very first folder of the Fab Five

"Is there any evidence of a bot that would set off alarms with RW users, alerting them to open access in Conservapedia? Consider this...They use this bot to commit vandalism, thereby disrupting our website.They coordinate amongst themselves when they do it; they have worked amongst themselves the details of this bot. Does the term "conspiracy" mean anything here? Can these people now be charged a crime? " Angry Bear thinks we're all going to jail, and the outlook for me getting any work done today now looks pretty grim. P-Foster (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Would you people cut me in on this cloak and dagger secret activity I keep hearing about? I'm currently the most prolific (read "saddest") RW editor and I have never been invited to one of these meetings where we co-ordinate attacks on CP! I feel properly left out... Scarlet A.pngbomination 18:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Says November's Botter of the Month. Your denial won't save you from RICO my friend. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Trent, we had an agreement, I'm the plausible deniability in the plan! Scarlet A.pngbomination 18:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
That was before I realized how much Karajou had all ready weeded out and sent to the authorities. If I am going down, y'all are coming with me!Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Fine, I'll leak the secret forum contents to Schlafly and co! Scarlet A.pngbomination 20:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Do that, and you'll never see your goat again. --? GremlinParlez! 20:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I think most of it's safe to leak, but I'd keep the messages for Jan 5-7 secret - for obvious reasons! –SuspectedReplicant retire me 20:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I thought it was 15-17th December.... Scarlet A.pngbomination 01:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou aka Will-E-Coyote

I know its a bit self-centered but I can't help but be drawn to the revenge plans foisted at me personally. So far my favorite was the plan to try and attack my research. I will try and get the location but its on my home computer. Anyway roughly here is the plan:

  1. Take the conference papers I have published on my user page and send them to bottom-feeder Denyse O'Leary
  2. O'Leary will find a conservative psychologist to "rip them apart"
  3. Make them as negative and nasty as possible, publish them
  4. Wait for me to sue them
  5. In court I will say that they are slander and damaging to my future
  6. In classic Parry Mason fashion, yell out to the judge, "A ha! He dost convict himself from his own words, for is that naught what RW is all about?"
  7. ...
  8. Profit

There are several wonderful points here I would like to point out. First, the whole idea of a "conservative psychologist" as needed to "rip apart" my ideas. This shows the total black and white nature of his thought process. The whole idea that everything must have a conservative and liberal view. That since I am a liberal I must be pushing the liberal view on dopaminergic mediation of reinforcement learning, and that there must therefore be a better conservative view. Next, that they assume my reaction to criticism would be to sue instead of engage the critic and the points they raise. And most laughable is the shear Rube Golderberg approach to the plot. Its straight out of an Acme box, convoluted, strange and obviously doomed to failure from the get go. Tmtoulouse (talk) 17:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I think step 7 is "get sentenced to a week of community service for contempt of court" isn't it? --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 17:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
More Karajou genius, from 31-60/76371: "And I'm willing to bet ten bucks that says new user RonLar is Sid. RonLar also has a German IP, he appeared very soon after JacobB was booted, and his first edit? A "maths" article!" They also discuss JacobB's parthian in that post. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 17:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Shit, I'm apparently WAY late to this party and won't get around to looking at these files till "tomorrow" (read: after I wake up again since it's way late now), but... wow. I usually try to hold back, but... *facepalm* --Sid (talk) 03:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear... imagine if our secret stash was leaked!! Scarlet A.pngbomination 18:22, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I thought our secret stash was grown hydroponically by Ace? --? GremlinSnakk! 18:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Someone posted here a week or so back how most of the their machinations here had in fact all been a complete disinformation exercise. It looks like the suckers fell for it hook, line and sinker.  Lily Inspirate me. 19:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
You mean the Ides, perhaps? That was our high water mark. With the right kind of eyes you can still see where the water broke... ħumanUser talk:Human 03:56, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Violent Video Games

Young people can't be trusted, but in CP/211-240/764e8ad5af39568e.htm Popeye and Pratti express their love for Lara Croft and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Quoth the swabbie:

And if racing is in your blood, how about a beautiful woman...on a Ducati Monster bad guys with one hand on the throttle and the other wielding one of her special H&K .45 longslides?

I only hope their parents are supplying adequate supervision! –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Didn't Andy do an Amicus Curiae brief about video games?  Lily Inspirate me. 19:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I thought Karajou was against killing endangered species. Hurr hurr. Vulpius (talk) 19:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Yup. The brief is on our serious Andy article. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Libel and slander

From: CP/1-30/e5037a239379b6dc.htm

"The following was sent to the press liaison at Wikipedia
This is a message for you and Jimbo in particular, and Wikipedia as a whole. If you will look at the above links, there is an accusation against my website, Conservapedia, which involves an individual who allegedly committed suicide after being banned from the site. This accusation is completely unfounded and false; it furthermore would have been all over the news if it were true. The second link is from user Dmcq, who states on Jimbo's talk page that it is I - and I alone - who is engaged in personal attacks, as if the slander of murder/suicide never took place. The individual who is identified as user "CTown" in the first link - the alleged suicide victim - is actually the creation of a user with the website RationalWiki, as is the individual who reverted the edit, SuperHamster (; I suspect they are one and the same.
This is slander and libel, and I'm not going to tolerate it one bit. You have a bunch of users within Wikipedia who are part of a website that has engaged in malicious attacks not only against Conservapedia, but against anyone who happens to disagree with them. These attacks have included DDoS against our servers, links to porn, the uploading of vile graphic images, attacks based on outright lies via the press and blogosphere, and now a bit of libel via Wikipedia which, for all intents and purposes, involves a dead body. Wikipedia has been in the news the past several years because of similar edits directed against people from malicious users, and this is just the latest one. Should Wikipedia stomach another scandal in the press?
I for one, am not going to wait for the silly arbitration committee to take action on this; it's going to be settled NOW. I am of the opinion that malicious edits belong to the individual who posted them, and not to Wikipedia as a whole. But Wikipedia admins need to take severe and decisive action, not only against those individuals who made the edits, but against those who support them as well. You can start by removing users Dmcq, SuperHamster, and all other individuals associated with the website RationalWiki.
Brian Macdonald
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
user Karajou"

This is a pretty impressive overreaction. Scarlet A.pngbomination 20:22, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

And from the press liaison, doubtless *crickets* --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 20:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Both slander and libel, is it? Let the bumfly do the lawyering, Koward. Webbtje (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
CP/211-240/c7841a1b815917eb.htm Karajou admits he knows the DDoS attacks (the only one I've seen acknowledging a DDoS attack as it happened) are from... 4Chan. Scarlet A.pngbomination 20:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Most of the vandalism over there comes from 4chan. Clearly they know this, so why the obsession with RW? ???What is it now? 20:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Ahh what slothful detecting skills he has. Does he not realize that DMCQ is their very own DMorris? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I mean PCHSNJROTC. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I might be wrong, but for all Karajerk's posts about 'I informed so-and-so that such-and-such did blah-blah to my blog' there's not one post reporting any feedback, or action taken. --? Gremlin話しなさい 20:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
It seems I have a better success rate than the swabbie. About 3-4 years ago on UESP we had three users from a school in Kent who kept editing from school. One was really productive and helped out a lot; the other two were real pains in the ass, and kept re-registering accounts and then adding crap all over the site. Nothing too problematic there, but they were also using the site to bully the other kid reasonably seriously and eventually I decided it had gone too far. Email duly sent, talking mainly about the bullying and less about the editing and we got a nice post from somebody claiming to be the deputy headmaster (IIRC) - it could have been too, because it was much better spelled than their typical stuff - plus posts from the other two saying they'd been "told" to write apologies for the trouble they'd caused us. Nothing else from them after that, and I get to keep use the "This user has had his sexuality questioned by vandals." userbox. :)
I suspect the difference might be in tone. My email was along the lines of "I'm writing about a problem..." whereas I imagine Popeye starts "I DEMAND that..." and goes downhill from there. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Holy schmoly, Karajou's email is both sad and hilarious. Not only is his theory that I am CTown on Wikipedia a completely platformless, wacko assumption (Why would I remove my own comment using another account, or even make such a comment on Wikipedia in the first place using a sockpuppet when I'm an established Wikipedia editor?), but does he honestly think that a private request for established Wikipedia users to be blocked simply because they also participate at RationalWiki would actually be taken seriously, based on the false observations of some random guy from Conservapedia? I do also like how Karajou says that "Wikipedia admins need to take severe and decisive action" by removing RationalWikians, when at least one RationalWikian is an administrator at Wikipedia. I'd like to know what reply Karajou received, if any. My guess is that the guy who was reading the email gave an odd "O_O", and then deleted it. ~SuperHamster Talk 21:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

And the unsubstantiated assertions that RW engages in cyber terrorism continue in CP\31-60\2f3b5583293e8df4.htm where Karajou seems convinced that we (especially the ones in the UK according to TK) are behind attacking PayPal in an Anonymous operation.
With the news coming out that people are now being arrested for

WikiLeaks-related cyber-attacks, I wouldn't doubt that the rats are laying lower than dirt so they wouldn't be accused of being part of it. Still, I think just ONE of those people would be stupid enough to go to one of those sites and say "Conservapedia is attacking Wikileaks; can I get your retaliation software?" ...Their idiotic website and forum may not have clues to it, but the long arm

of the law may be standing by with a shovel, ready to do some digging.
I normally don't care for CP at all, but I have put a lot of effort into writing for this place. I have a vested interest and an attachment to it (not to get all sentimental). Seeing this cunt talk like this genuinely makes me really fucking angry. Put up the evidence that RW's primary activity, as a site, is DDoS attacks on Conservapedia already.I'm sure Karajou will read this now and absolutely love how "the liberal rats are getting worked up" but you know what? I am worked up. I have quite an affinity for this site and the people who use it and I do not like one bit how its badmouthed with unsubstantiated claims. That cock needs to come over here and put up or shut up, not whine with little conspiracies in closed circles. Scarlet A.pngbomination 02:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Have you found the part where Karajou fantasizes about hiring the hacker that shut down wikileaks to shut us down? I am sure the hypocrisy never registered. Tmtoulouse (talk) 03:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, you just reminded me of that one. Kowardjerk - striking out and up at random.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 03:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Two days after Karajou made the above post on January 4th, he made this one at CP\1-30\4a42ab3d840cccb2:

Below is the screenshot I saved from the Wikipedia page where I had it out with this "Sean Townsend." The page in question will be deleted by Jimmy Wales upon my recommendation, as this individual could not or would not answer a demand for proof by me that his allegations of "suicide" were true. Wales also personally blocked the guy's IP; I ran this IP within Conservapedia, and it came back as user "SMiller1," a sock account created in December; this account was blocked today. RW had they hands all over this, and they were exposed right in front of Wales. He was skeptical at first, but was very cooperative when he was shown evidence of what they engage in, including the masking use of proxy IPs, their cyber-bullying ways, and so on. I also told Wales that I wasn't going to tolerate going through a silly arbitration hearing, as something like this needed a decisive, immediate decision. And it worked. RW has been exposed for what they are, and what was absolutely needed in this case was for Wales himself to see it. This is now a major failure against Trent Toulouse and his gang.

Now this is odd. Karajou says that Jimbo is going to delete a certain page, and also says that Jimbo has already gone ahead and blocked the IP address. However, according to Jimbo's block log, Jimbo hasn't blocked anyone since May, and according to his deletion log, hasn't deleted anything since September. Am I missing something, or is Karajou simply lost and deluding himself to believe that Jimbo is working with him? And somehow, this all turned out to be "a major failure against Trent Toulouse and his gang". Also, considering that Karajou's original request was to have Dmcq (who, as far as I know, isn't a RationalWikian), me, and all RationalWikians removed from Wikipedia, I fail to see how he succeeded in anything whatsoever. The next day, Karajou followed up by saying:

If anyone here wishes to join in on the Wikipedia page, I would suggest that the edit be supportive of Wales, Wikipedia editors, and myself doing what we can to prevent another major scandal against Wikipedia being created by a malicious editor.

Nice to know that Karajou wants to get his gang to help him make RationalWiki look bad by kissing Jimbo's ass. ~SuperHamster Talk 04:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Again, what evidence? I'm sure "hey look, it's a proxy IP so it must belong to RW" might wash with Sclafly, but I doubt Jimbo Wales even cares about CP or RW or this tiny little raving lunatic sack of shit Karajou. Scarlet A.pngbomination 04:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
You're right about that. When Karajou proudly brought his "evidence" to Jimbo on Jimbo's talk page, this is all he got from Jimbo: "It's worth noting, though, that this has nothing to do with Wikipedia at all. It's a fight between Conservapedia and RationalWiki as far as I can tell." In other words, "I don't give a damn." I certainly do hope that the conversation on Jimbo's talk page that I just linked to wasn't the one that Karajou was referring to in which he proved to Jimbo that RationalWikians are all filthy, evil people, because that would just be pitiful. ~SuperHamster Talk 04:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou's Cartoons


I'm not too concerned with the taking and/or altering of my cartoons by RW; they know they cannot do it without some sort of backlash against them...and if one of them tries to add their own name to my work and pass it off as theirs, well, they'll be explaining to a judge how I have the originals.

hehehe --Night Jaguar (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

He does like threatening lawsuits, doesn't he? No one carries a grudge quite like Karajou. ???What is it now? 20:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
He really does. he's at it again here. /391-420/8b5097a677b5088b.htm He's an angry, angry man. StarFish (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Like anyone besides him would want to put their names on those crappy cartoons. --Night Jaguar (talk) 22:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Unamerican Activities

Anger bear is charging his godspeed:

There's another thing we could do: remove on sight any new user who comes in

via RIPE in Europe, the Asia-Pacific network, and the Latin America

network. We've had nothing but trouble from those users.

(From Fab Five 121-150/e9d1b616a7a5eef4)

Well, I'm glad Africans are still allowed at CP. Everyone else who isn't a merkin can apparently suck it though. Also, I'm not entirely sure Karajou understands who RIPE are. That's the problem of giving whois to angry morons. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 22:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou is an asshole

Yeah, that's been pretty well established from this latest batch, but this one is just stunning. From CP/181-210/f70bf25e8c40908c:

It was physics - and not God - that created the universe, according to scientist Hawking. Now, I wanted to put my question to him in this fashion on the main page, but it possibly might cause an uproar: "Stephan Hawking says God wasn't involved in creating the universe; it was physics. Well, Steve, if you know that much about the universe, then try getting out of your wheel chair!"

He also consistently misspells Hawking's name, in spite of it being in the article to which he's linked. What a classless prick. ???What is it now? 01:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Jeez, what a fucking arse. And I thought Kendoll's "If you're so smart, why are you fat?" was obnoxious. At least Kendoll thinks he's joking. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 01:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Damn. That's disgusting. Karajou must be a liberal. ~SuperHamster Talk 01:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Just stumbled on that one, at least Ed tells him it's out of order. Scarlet A.pngbomination 04:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
This as well: A nice Christian thought about Darwin burning in hell (1-30\c27dfc4b6d3de86a):

One side states that he died a Christian; the other states he died an...well...he's now roasting at 450 degrees since 1882. Which one is valid? Could both accounts be included?

CrundyTalk nerdy to me 10:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

This also in

Apparently water is wet. SJ Debaser 20:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou again

From Fab Five/90-120/6da5feea74fd22aa, engaging in mutual self-congratulatory back-patting for "not marching in lock-step":

That's a double-darn right we don't march that way. And the trolls hate us ?for blocking their own goose-step marching. Oh well. Meanwhile, us courageous admins will endeavor to keep our steel-toed boots nicely polished after every troll removal. TK, put a mirror shine on your's...use spit!.

Alluding to his patented "liberals are fascists!" rant while proving in the very next sentence what a nice brownshirt thug he would've made...farewell, irony meter. Yup, that's first-class admin material right there, Andy. And the rest of the thread is also worth a read for their totally oblivious boasting about how individualistic and independent-minded they are. Röstigraben (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

RW article


Karajou:Andy knows that I want to make an article about RW, and I think a couple here know it as well. The reason for it was supplied by Trent Toulouse himself when he blogged on Tony Sideway's page, and previously to Denyse O'Leary's; each time he defended RW as though it was a serious, scholarly, professional site that had much to contribute to mainstream science, even though what he said was in total contradiction to what is actually there.

Contrary to what he said, RW is an internet anarchist/vandalism website, and Trent is in a state of denial about it all. He denies that he is doing anything wrong to our site, yet the attacks continue against us from his. His people still boast of what they have done.

I have come to the conclusion that if a court case happens, it will be started by them. They will file the papers; they will make the complaints, and it will be based in slander and libel. Because they will be the plaintiffs, they will have to bring to a judge probable cause as to why a trial should occur. And they will also have to explain to that judge as to why they felt they had a right to do what they did to our site. I challenged AmesG to do that very thing a few weeks ago. When he demanded I stop slandering him after I made a block with his name on it, I said "If it's slander, make the most of it!"

So, here's my idea for the article...

First, we do the history of RW as we know it, how it was created and by whom.

Second, we do an analysis of what they actually accomplished as far as what their stated intention is as posted on their main page, to wit: do they refute the anti-science movement successfully? As far as I'm concerned, their pages aren't even valuable to a five-year-old, let alone anyone in main stream science. Even that idiot Richard Dawkins - who they actually contacted on his forum - won't put a link to them on his website.

Third, we describe their hostility against Conservapedia, Creation Wiki, and other websites and blogs that they do not agree with, but we do it using the First Amendment clauses on religion, speech, and assembly. We want to show the readers that they are just another whiney bunch of liberals who hate the thought of Christians and conservatives in their midst. This includes the cyber-terror tactics they admitted to.

Fourth, we get, upload, and include various RW screen shots to support our point; they cannot be links. They have restored the Flippin letter, and we can get that. But we do not tag these images as well; we do not put information as to their origin, copyright status, etc. Just the words "fair use" is all that is needed. My guess is that Trent will be in denial mode again, but will be forced to admit everything to a judge should it go to court. And if it is going to court, I think it's a good idea to have Trent and his buddies pay for everything to get the thing started. After all, why should we?

Any thoughts?

Yes, you are a deluded fucktard. - π 11:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

It's really funny to see the guy who screams "LAWSUIT!!!" and "CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!!!" more than anybody else constantly assumes that we will sue them. He keeps insisting on how we are criminals who need to be brought to justice and how our site is some vile, evil pit where we openly plot to destroy the site because we cannot stand the truth of the Bible... and yet he just leans back and goes "Yep, they're gonna sue us... aaaaany second now... and THEN we got them!" --Sid (talk) 12:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Jesus fucking Christ he has some crazy arse ideas. From: Fab-Five/211-240/83b...

Question: Can a "cease and desist" order be filed within the cities of New York and Toronto against the law firm employing Grawert, and against McMaster University hosting Toulouse?

Really? - π 12:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
When did we contact Richard Dawkins? The only time we've ever been mentioned by the usual suspects has been positive. Again, the phrase "lying sack of shit" comes to mind. Scarlet A.pngbomination 19:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

PJR is a liberal

From: 331-360/285a4a5239115f3a

Although he is undoubtedly sincere, it's plain that he simply doesn't realize when his remarks about others become personal and hurtful. Like most liberals, he thinks phrases like "I'm just asking a question" or "I'm only telling the truth" can justify everything he wants to say.

Also laugh a minute funny is Ed's hypocrisy. He kicks PJR out of the group for making personal remarks about TK, his personal remarks being complaints that TK is insulting him. No punishment for TK and Ed defends himself on the grounds he said it to PJR's face. Ed come over here so I can tell you what an ugly little two-faced maggot you are to your face. - π 12:01, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

PJR is irrelevent, after all according to d15754bb9169d795 we're in charge of ASK:

PJR's website is under almost-full control by RW.

And it was Brian McDonald that said it, so it must be true. ASK is our summer wiki, where we go to escape the city air and relax whilst watching sunsets. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 13:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Let's get the facts right here. His name is Brian Macdonald - he explicitly says so in an interview with Bob Smeitana of the Nashville Tennessean in "Fab Five/181-210/88a35..." (Yes, somebody interviewed KARAJOU about the Bible Project, but apparently not TerryH?) --Sid (talk) 13:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou takes on malware developers

It seems from CP\271-293\4bcece79792f9094 that Karajou fell for the anti-virus malware thing. Maybe he should sue them!

I just spent over 90 minutes removing the thing, and the next thing I want to do is to get a hold of people high up to hold the creators of this program accountable.
(step) 5. Beat the living daylights out of the &^#%(^% clowns who created it, then sue them for $100,000,000,000,000. Beat them some more.

I wonder what he's going to spend his one hundred trillion dollars on? Perhaps legal defense for his impending assault court case? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 15:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I get the impression that Karajou spends all day every day daydreaming revenge fantasies. It's sad. Very sad. ONE / TALK 16:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Like those guys who wander into the bar at opening time, and spend the rest of the day bemoaning their lot in life as they get tanked. They also tend to be mean drunks too. Sadly, I don't think Kajagoogoo has the charisma to hang out in bars. --Ψ GremlinRunāt! 16:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Violation of Federal law

Apparently, creating rude usernames is now classed as a federal offense and is termed a "break in" (Fab Five\1-30\76ca184fb955e81c):

(Email to ISP) Between 4:30 and 5:01 AM eastern this morning an individual attempted a break-in of our website Conservapedia, and to do so he used your servers at Hurricane Electric as a proxy. This time, he got no further than to create user names based on vulgarity; he was thrown out before he got further.

Since this unauthorized use of your servers for this purpose constitutes a violation of Federal law, is there anything you can do about it from your end? It would be appreciated if you can.

Looks like they didn't learn their lesson from the original FBI case. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 16:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Lemme guess - Popeye? ONE / TALK 16:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Yep.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 17:36, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
What lesson? They never knew a damn thing about it. Andy basically led them all down the primrose path. Karajou jibbered about the FBI nonstop but Andy didn't have the heart to tell him that nothing ever came of it. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 16:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
They constantly moan about big government, restrictions on free speech and judicial activism but then whenever someone they don't like shows up on CP, they want the full arsenal of state power deployed to bring them down. If Karajou could have his way, the NSA would monitor all of CP's incoming web traffic and immediately dispatch SWAT teams to take any suspected liberals out. His fantasies are really something to behold. Röstigraben (talk) 16:39, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Even more Kajagoogoo


  • 'Conservative, I have read many of the RW troll edits to PJR's site; not only are they hassling him repeatedly, he's allowing it to happen with no retaliation, no punishment, no blocking.' Amazing how CP sysops still completely fail to understand how wikis work, and can't make the connection to why CP isn't successful.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 16:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I noted another sentence from the same file in the earlier PJR section, apparently we control ASK. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 16:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Well, it's good cover for that fact that we really run WND.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 17:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
But they obviously think CP is successful. It's hard to understand how these people can be so delusional and not get killed walking into traffic. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
They are suckered by Ken's SEO antics and despite the blatant clickbotting they think that pageviews are an indicator of their success. I'd like to say that CP is just an ant farm but their set-up is more like a bee colony with a handful of drones sucking round the Queen Aschlafly. Any workers that fly in are assumed to be from another colony and are summarily killed off. In real life they wouldn't be worthy of any note except that their antics are fascinating. I think that most of the parody and vandalism is really along the lines of "I wonder what would happen if I poked this stick in here? - Oh look at them run round in circles." Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 20:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The Three-way

Karajou (Fab Five/211-240/deb33d131898c01c.htm):

Three-way alliance: Conservapedia, Michael Savage, and WND

This could very-well be another half-baked idea of mine right off the top of my head, or it could be a blessing in disguise...

Suppose we did a sort of alliance with WorldNetDaily? Joseph Farah was keen to Conservapedia some months ago, but he hinted at ideas that he would like to see happen on the site; what they were I don't know, and I'm assuming he may have discussed them with Andy....

Joseph Farah is also friends with Michael Savage, and he has the third- largest conservative radio talk show in the country; a link with us to WND will definately be mentioned on the Savage show. That's a minimum of 8 million listeners a night, and they talk.

The man reminds me of Dwight from The Office. Anyway, I think CP is too crazy even for WND and Savage. --Night Jaguar (talk) 19:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I presume this was before Farah posted his "What the fuck?" review of the Conservative Bible Project? ;) --Sid (talk) 19:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karajou for the rapture

Has this been mentioned?

Karajou: This video of the demonstrations in Egypt is pretty interesting, as well as very ominous. At the 1:17 mark something shows up in the video that could either be a reflection of a flag, an image of an individual on horseback deliberately-placed via Photoshop...of it could very well be the first appearance of the "Pale Rider", aka the Fourth Horseman of Revelation. To me, this is just more evidence - rider or not - that Jesus is coming back with the next few years.

CP/1-30/716a53263f6e3909.html 19:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC) SusanG Toast

He really is an idiot. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
"Here's a video showing the Fourth Horseman of Revelation, but even if it's not the Fourth Horseman of Revelation this video showing or not showing the Fourth Horseman of Revelation is just more evidence that Jesus is coming back." Nutty Roux (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

User: Qwest

Kajagoogoo suggests that he is blocking every user that logs in using the Qwest ISP and that they all must be my old friend "Qwest." What he doesn't realize is that Qwest serves something like 14 states (mainly red states) including some major cities (Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc). It's gratifying that my long term effect on CP is to deprive them of anyone using the Qwest network. Stile4aly (talk) 22:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Mock them liebruls

Now we know where the lipstick monkey originated:

"When it comes to off-beat stories involving atheists and evolutionists and anyone who believes in scientific quackery, always use photos of monkeys to illustrate; especially those that are shown in drag, in makeup, doing human things, etc. It's a subtle way of mocking their beliefs.

 Lily Inspirate me. 15:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

That is particularly subtle, yes. DogP (talk) 17:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Enemy Getting Wiser

True paranoia at work:

If anyone noticed, nearly all new user accounts now involve one, non-foreign, legitimate IP address that is not connected to previous trolls. The enemy is aware that we are using check-user, and removing users with provable past behavior problems.

Wonderful! "Hey guys, people are signing up who aren't on our checkuser list. But that's because the enemy know we use checkuser, not because they're genuine editors." --PsyGremlinHable! 16:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

OMG! It's the Pale Rider

What a bunch of uneducated halfwits - it really is fucking ludicrous what those dingdongs can get excited about. See this footage of riots in Tahrir Square? See the reflection of something behind the camera in the window, as the camera pans across the scene? r It's obviously one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse!. I mean, fucking hell, of all the assumptions you might want to jump to, that's got to take the biscuit. He's more gullible than a five year old. DogP (talk) 23:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Ed Poor

aka Pisspoor Ed aka Ed 'Badtouch' Poor aka The Loony Moonie

Delusional in the Ed

121-150/81551e4a86b12733.htm is a goldmine of Ed. I've added one quote to his page but another highlight is:

Why do you think the rats are always putting me down for "nothing more than quoting others"? It's not because they think I'm a crummy writer. They are *furious* with me for giving prominence to information that proves Wikipedia is biased and/or just plain wrong.

No, Ed. We're not furious, we're amused. You're a shit writer with an unhealthy fixation on little girls. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

PJR does the same thing, which makes sense, because at the heart of it, they are both really stupid people. Apparently fundamentalism/parody is just as ambiguous as rage/amusement. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

This never gets tired: Fab_Five/Fab Five/181-210/500ab25bba45c87f.htm:

  • '*Sigh* I wish you guys had agreed to let me be an assistant webmaster. All these problems would have melted away. You know, I used to coordinate technicians at ABC. And since leaving the corporate world, I've supported websites on three different servers. I'm the "go to" guy, when you need technical help. I find the right person to talk to; I explain the problem; I request immediate assistance; and the problem gets solved. Should I have boasted sooner or louder? I'm a shy, humble man. So I don't like to exalt myself, but Conservapedia is the target of a coordinated Denial Of Service attack, and I'd like to help. Andy, would you like to give me the authority to deal with this problem? Ed Poor.' --Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 21:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Fab Five/241-270/d7980b7d150a4d0d.htm:

  • 'Also, WP writers are amateurish. We need not copy everything they do: only the good stuff! Ed. ' I need say no more.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 22:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Fab Five/301-330/16807cf73c7b86a7.htm May 5 2009, 6:23 pm

  • 'TK has pointed out the the main reason National Level conservative writers stay away is that they simply won't tolerate working conditions that include falsehood, quarreling and other such unpleasantness. If we want best-selling authors to drop in and donate their time, we must make a congenial environment. They will come, eventually, and maybe they'll even send their staff (or students). So let's get ready! Ed Poor. ' Still waiting Ed.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 23:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Jesus, they're STILL waiting for that magical influx of conservative writers? Seriously? It's been FOUR YEARS. CP once had a bunch of people willing to write articles. Then those people moved on and worked on some other site. Forgot the name... something about rats? --Sid (talk) 03:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Fab Five/361-390/8e7a49ea7f7eb15e.htm

  • ' Jimmy Wales only listens to VIP's. If Andy Schlafly contacts him, he might listen. He's sensitive to being embarrassed. Ed. ' Ed 'Cocksucker' Poor strikes again. In fact, a lot of the leaks tend to end with Ed rimming whatever hole is available.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 00:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

He even rims  K e n  D o l l  in CP\121-150\81551e4a86b12733.htm:

  • We have quality, based on our honesty and trustworthiness. We also have User:Conservative's amazing wizardry with Search Engine Optimization.

Interestingly, Googling "atheism and ponies" right now leads here rather than to CP. Has "The Selling Wizard" copied CP or is he ken? –SuspectedReplicant retire me 04:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of which from noting the link, did anyone notice that 27.2% of the poll taken would object if their daughter intended to marry an african-american? CLUEBOT to fill in all the people who claim that racism is gone. --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 06:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
"When I was at Wikipedia, I was BOLD. I tried out new things, and if it didn't work I could undo it. People in the early days really liked that. I instituted more good things there than I can remember. Perhaps I took Rev. Moon's dictum, "Give, and forget the given gift" too much to heart? Before the liberals took over there, I was one of the must trusted and respected sysops. Then those clever politicians figured out how to get rid of me. " DogP (talk) 06:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ed on Ken

"I think he needs the attention" - FabFive/301-330/76f712... EddyP Great King! Disaster! 19:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

This Guy Knows Stuff? Must Be Liberal!

This is a neat little exchange between Bad Touch and Tight Knickers from Fab Five/271-300/97386a87e8230f03.htm:

Is this guy on the level? If so, it would make the first new user in MONTHS with any substantial knowledge to share.
—Ed Poor
No doubt a liberal, and RW, but like many of them, will contribute lots until he needs to be sent packing.

CP in a nutshell. So to speak. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 08:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful. Sign on to CP to argue - you're a liberal and will be blocked. Sign on to CP to add good content - you're a liberal and will be blocked. No wonder they have no editors left. --? GremlinSnakk! 08:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The TZB era saw some discussion about some Warrior's Handbook or so (or more than one, I forgot), which basically amounted to "Parodists will act and edit like normal people. This means that anybody who acts or edits like a normal person is a parodist". I think only PJR called them out on that, but to no avail. To be fair, they're basically assuming what we also take for granted - that other than us, absolutely nobody gives a damn about CP anymore (aside from random vandalism). --Sid (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Papa Ed doesn't like kids that fight back...

So, yeah, allow me to present from this one:

When I taught Sunday School, if I saw two children abusing each other,

I rarely punished both. One "time-out" per incident is enough to get the message across: we are here to do class work, not to hurt each other. Sometimes I'd deliberately choose the "less troublesome" of the pair. I don't believe we have to get to the bottom of it; it doesn't matter who started it. I told the kids, if someone in class is hurting you, don't retaliate. Come to me if you need help.

Now I train Sunday School teachers . . .
—Ed Poor

Conclusions: No regard about objective justice. No regard about the concepts of proportional (or even reciprocal) punishment and fairness. No regard about responsibility, and that would be the case if he just picked who to punish at random. But noooo, for proper conservatives values you also have to mix a bit of sadism & cowardliness there in order to be as much as a fuckup that scews with other people's lives as possible, thus deliberately punishing the "less troublesome" one is actually a bragging point. Sen (talk) 22:40, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Wait a minute, aren't they liberal viewpoints? He's taking away the constitutional right of victims to defend themselves and instead is forcing them to rely on him for protection, precisely what the Nazi's did and what Obama's doing with expanding the federal government. These arguments copied from CP's article on gun control. -- Iscariot Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012! 18:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Following are just Amusing

Ed on CP

We, on the other hand, are America's premier on-line collaboratively written encyclopedia. We take America as the center of the world, and while we are concerned with our fellow human beings who live abroad or speak other languages, our focus is on America and we write in American English.
CP/91-120/6add1ebd4860f06b.html Ed Poor
My emphasis. 22:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC) SusanG Toast
That makes me want to just repeatedly jab my finger into my eye sockets. Never since the dawn of time has the word "premier" been so resoundingly abused. He gang-rapes the word. DogP (talk) 22:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Ed on Nixon & Moon

For what it's worth, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon told Richard Nixon during the Watergate Crisis (1) Do not resign, and (2) Do not withdraw from Vietnam.
I've generally found that people who listen to Rev. Moon prosper, and those who don't (um, well) tend to decline.
Ed Poor
00:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC) SusanG Toast

Ed and math

From here. Ed at first goes: I think that a 760 SAT in math (in high school) qualifies me as a math expert. Followed by posting three more times, each time getting more grandiose by adding An experienced math teacher followed by Ed Poor, Substitute Math Teacher, PYE Education Center Queens, New York. Ace McAwesome 00:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


aka Far too long to go into

TK vs. RJJensen

There's some grand stuff in the Fab 5 list with TK squaring off against RJJensen.

This email from the doc hits the nail on the head:

TK claims he is maintaining conservative orthodoxy by erasing true

information he does not like to hear. But what are TK's "orthodox" positions? Does he really have any? he never tells us--he never writes

articles, he only erases the work of people who do the writing here.

Of course, TK denies it and claims it's suspiciously like what RWians say about him. I wonder why that is... It certainly explains why RJ disappeared abruptly in early 2010. The Knife scores another one behind the scenes. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 19:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

In Fab Five/121-150/79543b21c409fc70.htm, I love RJJ giving TK the smackdown: "oh come on TK you're a mall cop, not an encyclopedist" & "It's a pain to see a bully who has never written any actual content try to rule an intellectual enterprise by means of a billy club and a gallon of white out." Sounds like all of CP's sysops really. I'm glad RJJ finally took the hint to leave. --? GremlinSermā! 19:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Yup. One of the few good, prolific writers they've had and TK took real pleasure in driving him away. RJJ has gone back to Wikipedia, where he's doing good work keeping neo-confederate bullshit off the civil war pages. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:22, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course TK took real pleasure in driving RJJ away, that was the plan. Just like he did with Fox, Iduan, DanH, BrianCo, HelpJazz, the aim was to stifle CP by forcing out any editor who looked like they might actually be useful to the project. The only sysop left who actually thinks that they are still trying to build an encyclopaedic resource is Karajou but he can only copy and paste from PD sources and has to many anger management issues against anyone who has a differing viewpoint. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 09:36, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Ultimately, the blame has to rest with Andy, for standing back and letting guys like TK get away with murder. Yet, he seems to place greater emphasis on "finding vandals" than "creating serious content." I'd love to find out just what hold TK had on Andy. I have some snooping to do. --? Gremlin講話 09:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

TK vs. Gay Bashers Anonymous

In CP/181-210/a252107c89791fd0, TK gets very upset that everyone else is dog piling on the gays. Eventually, as all such arguments amongst "Christians" do, it devolves in to a debate over who god hates the most. You can tell when TK is angry, he starts putting "Conservative" in scare quotes. Best thread I've read so far. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 20:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Given that Terry Koeckritz was a not-so-closeted gay guy, it doesn't actually surprise me. Gooniepunk2010 Oi! Oi! Oi! 23:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Did anyone else see the one regarding the "transgendered activist"? Scarlet A.pngbomination 03:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Fuckin' Creepy

Fab Five:

  • ' TK: Hsmom appears to have recently moved..... ' followed by her change of IP address via CheckUser and nothing else.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 00:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

TK's demise

They most certainly didn't know before us CP/1-30/9ddbc42ce58246dd.htm Ace McAwesome 02:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I haven't read through all of this stuff yet, but is that the sole discussion of TK's death? I can't even tell if JPratt is being sarcastic. I think we might have liked TK more than they did. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 03:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
\Fab Five\181-210\69407a14b05567e3.htm Discusses TK's very serious medical condition in Sept 2009. Scarlet A.pngbomination 03:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that one as well. Makes it even creepier that the folks at CP didn't know that he was dead for so long. If someone I knew went through something like that, I think I'd be asking little questions every now and again, just to make sure that they were ok.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 03:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
So they knew he had a serious medical condition, and no one of them bothered to call him after more than one month of inactivity. I think Jpatt was sincere in his mail though, and that Karajou response was also sincere. I only saw Andy comment once on the case, Jpatt wanted to honor TK on the main page, and Andy said no. Thats on fab5/1-30/300d458b1c474f25. --Tlaloc (talk) 06:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
"Karajou's response was sincere." You mean the one (CP/1-30/9ddbc42ce58246dd.htm) where he says "looks like we've got some very bad news"? A very sincere comment indeed, stating that the death of a fellow human being was bad news. A really fucking heartfelt comment. SJ Debaser 20:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


Fab Five/361-390/b00c22fcef528e45.htm:

I think that HsMom, Umlaut, RobertWDP, PJR and myself (Ieuan on CP at the time) really managed to piss off TK with what has to be the one solid memory I have of editing at CP, remembered solely for the lulz and the the very mild rebellion it caused on the Commandments Talk Pageimg from the Glorious 28th February 2009 to the Only-Slightly-Less-Glorious 5th March 2009. For those who don't know about it or can't remember it (which is probably everyone) 18 USC § 1030 once more reared it's ugly head and all of a sudden the game was on to bait Andy about the law and the unmentionable FBI incident, something that Umlaut and RobertWDP managed excessively well, managing to provoke TK into responding to protect Andy, who was having his arse handed to him on his refusal to explain how the law applied, and then being challenged on the law itself by PJR. In I step, to take over from Umlaut who was looking at the wrong end of the banhammer, and then me and PJR managed to completely dominate that discussion, ripping Andy's argument apart (without a peep from the great man himself, who didn't seem all that keen to go up against somebody else with actual legal knowledge), with the occasional jab by Kowardjerk to try and draw a reaction. It ended up with TK trying to archive the whole thingimg, with PJR reverting him, a whole revert war goes on, and then Hsmom steps in asking for the discussion to continue, causing TK to go into a raging hissy-fit. Brilliant.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 02:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

HSMom is another classic example of a decent, hard working editor, who actually believed CP could be so much better and railed against the constant mismanagement of the site, and thus had to die. TK in particular had a huge hard-on for her, and the rest of the cowards just went with the party line: "She say something bad! Librull! Librull! Librull!"--PsyGremlinSpeak! 15:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

"True face"

CP\151-180\05d3deca51dbe19e.htm Supposedly sent from "Willminator" to TK, who promptly shares it. Karajou takes the bait.

"You may have it figured out, but you can never stop us. Let this be a warning to you: I am pro-abortion. I do support population control. I do support letting the weak die (or even helping them die). I do want to take your guns away you. I will see to it that no prayer is ever given in a public school. I will fight to destroy the institution of marriage as you know it. I will indoctrinate your children and insulate them from your religious dogma. I will fight the conservative myth of american exceptionalism. I will fight for a one world government. I will fight for gays in the military even if it weakens it. I will lie, revise history, cheat, steal and censor to further our goals. What are you going to do about it? I will stop at no end, but you have to operate within the fictional bounds of your morality. How can you win this game when I can break the rules? Give it up and get out of america while you still can because nothing will stop us. Do you think you're going to fight? Do you think we would have any problem using chemical warfare or weapons of mass destruction? Do you think we care if women and children get in the way? Face it, we will win. Liberalism and atheism will prevail. The conservative movement will be systematically dismantled and there is NOTHING you can do. Wake up to the facts. Wake up to a war that you simply cannot win."

Apparently this is taken in by all present as representative and genuine... I mean, I'm very aware Poe's Law applies on all sides of the political spectrum but, seriously, do they think this is real or are the contents of the group spiked with fake conversations (I can't think of any other reasonable explanation for this level of gullibility and paranoia) that is supposed to attract our attention? Scarlet A.pngbomination 02:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

And in light of CP\241-270\4a6ab2e60391979b.htm
"This can also happen to someone whose picture of the opposing position is such a grotesque caricature that it renders them unable to tell parody from reality. " (Definitely true of rat wiki, and of perhaps the bulk of evolutionist, atheist, and pro-homosexuality writers.)
Scarlet A.pngbomination 03:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

So much for "private" discussions

Of course, any "private" conversation with TK wasn't, as can be seen from Fab Five/391-420/c4a726a041ede704.htm (more here Fab Five/391-420/514511068e1d8662.htm). Did rather enjoy Dean's "Boy, she sure is fiesty (sic), isn't she.." I did rather miss arguing with TK, it made life interesting. --? GremlinPrata! 09:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

TZB Discussion

TK talks about the leak here (CP\241-270\814567755f8658ec). It's clear from Karajou's reply that TK managed to convince them that it was JessicaT who leaked the info rather than him. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 15:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


aka  K e n  D o l l  aka Kenservative aka Ruy Lopez aka Lumenos aka The one who gets no respect, even on Conservapedia

Poor Kendoll

Even when he's the voice of reason (only on CP could Kendoll ever be the voice of reason) he's ignored by his fellows. In CP/91-120/1bcedf3ac170522c all the sysops go nuts about how Google's veterans' day logo looks like it has an Islamic crescent in it.

Kendoll disagrees:

I think the "crescent" charge is silly. It is just the bottom of the e in the word Google. Some people have too much time on their hands.

But Ed plows straight back in with the conspiracy theories. God damn but they're fucking nuts over there. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 21:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

It blows my mind that Ken said that. Occasionaluse (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Wait, where does Ken say that? Occasionaluse (talk) 21:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't appear in the main thread, you have to expand the quoted text from Ed's reply to see it. See below, I think TK had Kendoll in his killfile. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 21:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

 K e n  D o l l  and access to embedded videos

Fab Five/271-300/2fcb4cfddbaf9904.htm:

  • ' TK - I agree with TerryH about the video. So much valuable content is available there...but I am responding to this via Fab Five because it should be a very limited user right, perhaps just limited to the members of this group, or to just those few with the "Oversight" function. I grow queasy thinking what "Conservative" would do with that ability... '
He's totally right though, isn't he? Goat help CP if Kendoll ever had the ability to play video. Doubly so if he ever found out what to append to the URL to make them autoplay. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 23:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
He's right, but think of the lulz!--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 23:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


New Users

  • I am always on the lookout for fakes, as we all are. When a user signs up with the perfect first name last initial without being told so...I smell rats.
  • I trust Andy is making Christianity interesting to those who would otherwise not touch Christian topics.

Mcmaster uni

"Is it time for a mcmaster article on CP? Only the truth." Oh yeah, that would be an interesting article, given that the only thing CP knows about it, is the alleged head-terrorist and high-priest of the Rats attends it.


aka 'Who?'


DeanS studied our use of the exclamation "Ahem", and used it to try to track us as he noticed me and "Other users using "ahem" on RW". In so doing, he accused a bunch of CP people who weren't me. Fab! In TZB/520/29d5b16ac477b88f.html. DogP (talk) 06:36, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

tl; dr

Was I mentioned in any interesting way? I thought not. PS, I love you. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

What? Who are you? --Idiot numbre 188 (talk) 10:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually human, I do seem to remember seeing you mentioned a couple of times in the Fab Five communiqués (cucumber and tomato sandwich anyone? - you'd have to know about Enid Blyton to get that joke).--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 16:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I could see things were about to kick off, so I got out of there! CrundyTalk nerdy to me 09:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Range Blocking

I have just been reading some of the leaked CP stuff, about how they were discussing blocking all foreign IP addresses, and Andy even boasts of blocking, if I understand what he's saying correctly, slightly under 470,000,000 IP addresses in 90 seconds. I know that a few here have been chortling themselves silly at the fact that the folk over at CP have range-blocked vast portions of the world, more or less, in order to 'block parodists', and are thus letting their own paranoia make them destroy their own project. However, as you may or may not have heard, the internet is coming close to running out of IP addresses. Most people who actually know what they're talking about agree that the best solution to this is to migrate from IPv4 to IPv6, but I think this means that those range blocks are likely to disappear. In addition, as the total available number of IP addresses will go from a little under 4.3 billion to 340 undecillion, it might be very interesting as to how CP handles that. (talk) 20:01, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

"I'm a treatcherous twickster fwum Bulgawia"... is this coincidence or are they still butthurt about how they never quite managed to properly block the archiver bot? Aw, those were the times. Mountain Blue 23:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

A pale/sour apple green rider

Oh man. I've been busy elsewhere, an hence behind the times on this, but this conversation is straight awesome. Corry (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I swear, if any Conservapedian ends up fighting off the Feds from within his barricaded compound, my money's on Kara. --Ψ Gremlin話しなさい 07:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Now that shit is scary! DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:52, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Keep hands and feet inside the car at all times

Ed: Why can't I find Andy's, Karajou's, or my talk pages?
Dean: Er... I think Andy was doing something.
Andy: (ACTUAL QUOTE) I tried something new in deleting "KevinW"'s edits: I deleted them directly from the mySQL database. To read my talk page afterwards, I had to delete it and then recreate it. There must be an easier way.
All: ...
Ed: Relational. Database. R-E-L-A-T...
MadameHardy (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

In fairness, Andy only claims to have worked as a full-time professional computer programmer for a few years, or something. Mountain Blue 02:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
"Relational" is the same as "relativity" which is a liberal fallacy (TM). MadameHardy (talk) 05:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Heh, and twice in one thread Ed Poor begs for access to the software. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 06:12, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm collecting those.  Lily Inspirate me. 11:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Was it good for you, too?

Tim resigns, Andy ripostes:

AS: "Conservapedia, like a gym, is there for your benefit. You don't seem to be getting much out of it, based on your posting. But that's not because the gym is broken. I get something new out of Conservapedia every day. Joaquin posted on my talk page yesterday, "Thank you so much for this magnificent opportunity that you have given to all of us." "

MadameHardy (talk) 03:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

OMG the sky is falling!

Note that there is absolutely no mention of Conservapedia in the RW thread below.
Clickbot (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Shit I remember this - it was some halfbaked scheme of Humans to freak out people on RW and had nothing to do with CP. Brilliant. Ace of Spades 06:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Lol, do I get a gold star, or a purple pimpernel, or something? This place used to be so much fun, scaring the natives was just a side line. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Talk about rampant paranoia. As if we'd discuss such matters openly. That's what the soopah-seekrit Google group is for... --PsyGremlinParlez! 11:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Btw Clickbot, all those wonderful refs you added - they're wrong - take you to "Rat page view bot targets" not the relevant talk below. --PsyGremlin말하십시오 11:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Fixed. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 11:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
That's incredible. So someone starts a discussion about some secret project using PHP and all the CP sysops start foaming at the mouth. Astounding! CrundyTalk nerdy to me 10:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
"A good chunk of vandal members are Brits, EU states, and their admins are S.Africa, New Zealand, and of course Canada" - Oh yes, those nasty Canucks always have it in for the US!  Lily Inspirate me. 12:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
It's just another symptom of their crushing persecution complex - 'Look! The whole world is against us? Why does everybody hate us?" --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 12:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
I remember the very phone call in which Huw and I hatched the Ides of October plan. Make some obscure computery references with a slightly siister overtone and wait to see who wants to have fun. Purrrrfect. Oh and WTF Rob?! Do you really get off on pot stirring so much that you'd ratchet up the paranoia of a raging paranoiac like Karaturd by claiming your RW password was stolen? Come on, man. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svgUser:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 13:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Operation Undercover

Keep it still, but the php is loaded and works. The "cover" html is running as expected. ħumanUser talk:Human 05:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll email you about what my guy is doing with the code. But this is very exciting. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 05:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Very good, it looks like it is all coming together. Got a few stragglers and new helpers, but that's all good. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Ooh, ooh, I can code PHP, can I play? Please? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 20:53, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I can get a good swing with a golf club, can I play? Stupid wisest Hoover! 21:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Great, you're both in! ħumanUser talk:Human 21:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "security"?--BobNot Jim 21:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Just get everyone doing whatever you're doing to promise they aren't TK. Broccoli 22:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Hu check out the private area where I've posted an interesting workaround to the MediaWiki problem. It looks promising. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 23:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I will. I hope it will work, it would be nice to have full use of that exploit. ħumanUser talk:Human 23:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Cloak = dagger. AceMcWicked 23:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Human, the brute force dictionary exploit WORKS. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 23:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I've a couple of spare machines which are largely idle whan I'm at work so you could offload the workload onto them. However they do share a 20Mb uncontested broadband pipe. Is the bandwidth the limiting factor or the processing power? Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? 23:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I think it might ending up being a problem - the dictionary is astonishingly large and is located on another machine so I'm taxing my connection up and down. Let me experiment with getting the dictionary local. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 23:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Did you get my email Hu? I sent it from the hotmail address I set-up for this purpose. AceMcWicked 00:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Ace, yes, your suggestion is superb. I'll try to run a beta version of it on some random wiki that no one loves in the next day or two. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

RS: Anyone know anything about the brute force dictionary? RW has a team ready, some with several spare terminals, ready to begin a brute force attack. [2]

Bad news's a passwrod cracking device that uses "brute force", which in our case will compromise every password available.
If you notice the RW posting on tailoring the program to MediaWiki use, which means they now are going to seize control of Conservapedia.
I suggest shutting down access to the site and the servers for the time being. [3]

GP: Just backup the site on a separate machine and alert the webhost. A brute force attack is hacking and would be grounds for FBI intervention [4]

BM : Just in case they want to hide the's saved and uploaded. [5]


This FBI thing will go nowhere unless we force the issue. I suggest we send a threat of legal action against certain officials at the above link, telling them that they will be held legally and criminally responsible for the acts against Conservapedia by their "student" Trent Toulouse. [6]

JP: It may be time to cut off foreign edits. Sorry Geoffry, we'll keep you Justine and few contributors but from a security standpoint it makes sense. A good chunk of vandal members are Brits, EU states, and their admins are S.Africa, New Zealand, and of course Canada to name a few. If you prevent editing you just may throw a monkey wrench in their schemes.

God is on our side, who can be against us? [7]

RS: What if the attack is aimed at key Sysops e-mail accounts? [8]

TH: Well, I defy them to get my e-mail account. Its password has thirteen characters, including letters, numerals, and punctuation marks, chosen totally at random. And worse yet for any enemy, it's not the same as my password for CP or anyplace else. [9]

JP : Is it time for a mcmaster article on CP? Only the truth. [10]

BM: From the looks of it, the user who's concocted the scheme and is about to make the first "test" is Human. What we could do is to keep an eye out for the website subject to this "test", find out what happened, when it happened, and notify the administrator of the site just who did it. [11]

PB3: Just ran a fresh backup to a separate location. [12]

TH: Have you any advice for me, in my role as senior administrator and developer of CreationWiki?

For everyone's information, we have a comprehensive backup program in place, that runs a backup every single day, at 1:30 a.m. Pacific Time.
But: should I encourage my fellow administrators to get hard, random passwords like the one I use?
Should I log in under secure-shell access and download the latest backups to my own machine? [13]

BM: How about making it a rule for all sysops on up, to have a secure password. Couldn't hurt! [14]

GP: I'm going to change mine shortly. Lets see them use a dictionary to crack a password composed of a nonexistent word or 6. :D [15]

GP: I don't really see how cutting off foreign edits will help. There is nothing that these overgrown children can do that will harm CP. Worst case, we just reload from backup and call it a day. [16]

PB3: Terry,

I would suggest that you (and all persons with any sort of authority) change their password to something random, and change it frequently (every month or so).
I use this website to generate a strong, completely random password when I need one -
This is considered standard procedure in the IT world because it is the easiest (and fastest) way to increase security. [17]

RS: Get ready. It appears my password has been stolen from my RationalWiki account. I thought I had a pretty strong 16 character code with both upper and lower case letters, numbers, and symbols. It was stolen in a about one day. [18]

BM: Anyone logging in to RW and setting up an account has to realize that the password their has been compromised already; we have to assume that Trent has access to all of them and has probably shared them with his cronies like a carcass is with buzzards. [19]

TK: Exactly so, and he can also change them at will and lock users out, then switch them back. [20]

AS: Just changed my password to something that is virtually unbreakable.

Thanks for the intelligence.
In Christ,
Andy [21]

BM: I changed mine too; I don't like it - too complicated - but I know it'll work. [22]

EP: When I signed up at Rat Wiki, I used 'edpoor' as my password there.[23]

That is not my CP password. [24]

EP: Perhaps we could program the system to:

(a) Record the IP of every attempt to log in.
(b) Cut off that IP's access after a certain number of failed login attempts [25]

TH: Just so everyone knows:

I never use the same password twice, and certainly not at Wiki projects.
Every password that I have ever used to create an account at a Wiki project is unique to that project and that account.
So even if Trent Toulouse thinks he can pull some monkeyshines by using the passwords I used to create (thus far inactive) accounts on RationalWiki, it wouldn't do him any good. He's not going to be able to use the password I created at RationalWiki in order to log in to CP or CW or even to Wikipedia, BugZilla, etc.
Frankly, I'm surprised that he can get away with this. Does his being in Canada grant him some kind of diplomatic immunity? How does such activity square with international law? That is, what treaties might he be breaking? [26]

PB3: When I signed up for RW, I set my poassword as "nicetry" haha. [27]

BM: I never signed up there, except that one time when I went looking for their site back when it was hidden in 2007.

It's the principle of the thing. It's the difference between diving in the pool versus diving in the dumpster. [28]

RS: Do we have a contingency plan? In the event of a widespread and simultaneous hacking attack, where would we meet up? I'm assuming they may try to hack our e-mails first to disrupt our private communications, then go after the main server. How would we maintain communication with each other? [29]

BM: I'll get a new group created immediately, and I will get that info to Andy.

Give Andy your phone numbers as well. [30]


  1. pro-aborts flying circles around pro-lifers in court
  2. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  3. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  4. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  5. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  6. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  7. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  8. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  9. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM
  10. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:45 PM
  11. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 9:45 PM
  12. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 9:55 PM
  13. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:44 PM
  14. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:51 PM
  15. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:46 AM
  16. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:48 AM
  17. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:19 AM
  18. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:23 PM
  19. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:50 AM
  20. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:29 AM
  21. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 6:38 PM
  22. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 6:58 PM
  23. It's been changed since, don't bother.
  24. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Tue, Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:15 PM
  25. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:17 PM
  26. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Oct 30, 2009 at 7:24 PM
  27. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM
  28. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:26 PM
  29. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 5:41 AM
  30. ZB2: brute force dictionary - Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 6:52 AM
[view] [edit]

Indexed DB of all four leaks

The leaks are good to download and all, but I have a great mediocre idea on how to make it better. If all of the four leaks could first be pared down to relatively plain text (maybe really basic HTML with h2-s for the authors and blockquoted text), then we could do a searchable, indexed and easily readable directory of all of the leaks. It would offer several benefits over the current method (they'd be online so we could ref them properly, they'd be viewable to all rather than making people download them, etc.) Currently, the dumps are over 300 MB total, but in plaintext, it shouldn't be more than a few dozen MB. Thoughts? Oh, and it doesn't have to be on the wiki, or even on the Rational Wiki domain. – Nick Heer 05:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

We should have a wiki we can put leaks like this up on and maybe even more important ones, like private company documents or maybe even secret government correspondences if we know someone that can get them for us. We could call it LeaksWiki, it would be awesome. - π 05:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Funny. WikiLeaks doesn't want some crap from a weird extremist website. Would help here though. – Nick Heer 05:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
There was a lot of discussion when this last happened and a general consensus that we would not host the actual full leaks. If anyone wants to revisit that consensus I can see what we can do. Tmtoulouse (talk) 14:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

2010 Conservapedia Day Awards

The 2010 Conservapedia Day Awards will be awarded on Conservapedia Day, November 21, 2010. Please restrict this page for nominating and voting. Arguing about nominations, the process and any suggestions can go on the talkpage.


Nominations will close on 12th of November, with all sysops active in 2010 being automatically nominated.


Sysops active in the last year

  • AddisonDM
  • Aschlafly
  • BenjaminS
  • BethanyS
  • CPWebmaster/PhilipB
  • Chippeterson
  • DeanS
  • DouglasA
  • DuncanB
  • Ed Poor
  • Geo.plrd
  • Joaquín Martínez
  • Jpatt
  • Karajou
  • PhyllisS
  • RJJensen
  • RSchlafly
  • RobSmith
  • TK
  • TerryH

Place your nominations here


Categories from previous years can be removed, and new ones suggested. Last year's awards are here.

Category Description Name
Arrogance A person whose behaviour show disdain for other and a sense of superiority. The "A light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, ‘I have to vote for Barack'" award for arrogance.
Bigotry A person who has an irrational dislike for people different from themseleves. Jesse Helms Memorial Award for Bigotry
Delusions of grandeur A person who believes they have achieved a great many things despite evidence to the contrary. PRESIDENT OF THE HARVARD LAW REVIEW'S PARTICIPATION AWARD FOR DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR
Homophobia A person whose hatred and loathing for homosexuals seems to indicate only one thing... FRED WOULD BE PROUD OF YOU AWARD FOR HOMOPHOBIA
Idiocy A person who demonstrates a lack of intelligence in their edits. The Ed Poor Idiot of the Year Award
Inaesthetic A person who has no sense of arranging things in a visually pleasurable manner. WILLIAM DEMBSKI INTELLIGENT DESIGN AWARD FOR AESTHETICALLY UNPLEASANT DESIGN
Liability A person whose actions are detrimental to the project as a whole. Sarah Palin Award for being a liability to the cause
Liar A person who says something they know to be false. The "I don't recall ever being at a meeting where that subject came up" Award for Lying
Misogyny A person who just seems to hate women, or is against equality for women. PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY MARITAL RAPE AWARD FOR MISOGYNY
Paranoid A person who believes everyone's out to get them. JOSEPH McCARTHY "I HAVE A LIST" AWARD FOR PARANOIA
Power-crazed A person who tries to acquire, or refuse to relinquish, any authority they can gain. DICK CHENEY EXTENSION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH POWERS AWARD
Puerility A person who acts in a childish manner, particularly in their humour. GLENN BECK CRY-BABY AWARD FOR PUERILITY

Other Suggestions

Who cares, Cp is dead, there's no-one left but the regulars who already got these awards, so it's pointless -- Nx / talk 18:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm with Nx, I don't see why the winners would be any different from last year. Why not make this the all-time CP awards since presumably there won't be anything new next year either? We can give Top Five Biggest Idiots Ever, Top Five Greatest Parodists, whatever, including long-gone users. --Benod (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Basically, this is true. It seems we're likely to have a reply of last years awards. However, I believe Jpatt has really given a strong showing for the biggest idiot award of late. I'd like to see him win, or at least be very competitive in that race. DickTurpis (talk) 19:11, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Let's cancel Christmas too - it's only going to be giving presents to the same people as last year. Totally pointless. If you liked people then, you'll like them this year too so why bother re-affirming it?
One award I'd suggest is the "Scott Rasmussen Award for Accurate Polling".  K e n  D o l l  is a shoo-in, but who cares? This is supposed to be fun. — Unsigned, by: SuspectedReplicant / talk / contribs 01:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, but it's not. It's just a few loons on some worthless website no-one really cares about any more. Don't feed the idiots. -- Nx / talk 06:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


I'd rather scrap the idea altogether. It only boosts their egos to know that Liberals are taking notice of them. I'm sure they carry the awards as badges of honour. — Unsigned, by: SusanG / talk / contribs 20:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, scrap this or make it an all-time, last-time award and then close the book. CP is down to the same few people doing the same old things, and I can't see the situation changing unless Andy gets a grip (yeah, right). Totnesmartin (talk) 21:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
People enjoy it and its fun, as long as someone wants to organize it and people want to participate I think there is no problem with it. If no one votes its time to scrap it. Tmtoulouse (talk) 21:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
The only thing is, is if we go over there to post the awards, it just gives them another chance to bitch about "vandals" etc, etc. Let's face it, CP is nowhere near what it was 2 years ago, or even last year for that matter. It's become a circle jerk of fundie nut jobs, not taken seriously by anybody. If we have it, post the awards on their pages here, but I'm still in favour of awarding them a lifetime achievement award for stupidity / bigotry / misogyny and leave it at that. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 10:35, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Once the thugs start wearing ASBOs as a badge of honour it is time reappraise the situation. Things have changed at CP; now they've locked themselves into a dark closet the only things of note are the body odour and the farts. Let them suffocate.  Lily Inspirate me. 11:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Participation Prizes

I wouldn't object to scrapping or making all-time awards, but Human's suggestion for Ken raises another possibility: make a list of the regulars, and then vote on the name of one award specially created for each of them. This avoids rehashing the "stupidest" debate again, and has the extra benefit of being a participation prize, surely a liberal invention. --MarkGall (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

How about something completely different

A while ago I wrote the page for Andy's greatest insights (originally as a "vote for the best" kinda thing). I think a similar thing can be done for each of CP's main players - Ed's creepiest moments, Rob's unlikeliest conspiracies, TK's dickest moves, etc. People could nominate the events they remember and then others could do the digging to bring up the choice quotes. The comedy potential would be a lot higher than these awards doohickeys. ONE / TALK 13:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Goodpost.gif Hi, I'm Psy, and I endorse this message. --Ψ GremlinHable! 13:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Well stop wasting your time posting here and get on with it One! (Great idea BTW) DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Best idea of the bunch; we can choose from Best of CP and the Timeline. Whatever. --JJ4etalk 18:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Not just Conservapedia

My suggestion is to keep the basic format of these awards, but rather than just making them for Conservapedia Day, throw them open to any mission-related people or organisations. So nominees could include editors at CP, aSK, CZ, RW, etc. but also bloggers, YouTubers, & public figures like Phyllis Schlafly, Glenn Beck, Pope Benedict, etc. The awards could still be in the kind of categories they are now, with a few changes. Of course there'd be no need to tie it to Conservapedia Day, so they could just be crank awards (or something) at the end of each calendar year. WėąṣėḷőįďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. - π 21:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Actually after thinking about it, that is a fucking great idea. CP is nearly dead, CPers can be nominated still, but I say lets drop this pseudo-tradition and start a new one. - π 22:01, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Despite setting up this forum, I agree. Firstly, the awards are likely to be given to largely the same candidates as last year. Secondly, some of them seem to take it as a badge of honour. Instead, I propose we begin to work on a quarterly or bi-annual set of awards which are given by nomination and then a vote. There would be a series of positive awards, given to politicians, scientists or bloggers who make steps towards combatting fundamentalism, refuting nonsense 'science' and helping public understanding of science. Then the series of negative awards for exceptional stupidity, pseudo-science and the like. We could even have separate categories for awards for bloggers, etc. We could also have 'ad hoc' awards which aren't on a regular timing, but when someone does something great; a user may nominate them and we vote. What do people think? Dalek (talk) 22:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I had this idea a YEAR ago. You all IGNORED me. Time time Hoover! 22:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I created a forum about this very idea MONTHS AGO and all you fuckers ignored it. Aceword up 22:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I had THIS FUCKING IDEA in 1983 AND you ALL hated ME for HAVING it! ħumanUser talk:Human 02:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Well ground support seems to be increasing for the idea. I say we start nominations again in December and make the final decision just before new years. In the mean time we can start determining categories and a voting system. - π 22:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Though there is little doubt that the Melchior Inchofer Award for the Advancement of Science will go to Andy this year, I like the idea of widening the field of contestants. The only problem I can see: the nominations have to be much more elaborate, as we leave common ground: most of us are somewhat aware of the latest shenanigans of our friends at Conservapedia... larronsicut fur in nocte 22:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think nominations need to be elaborate. Once we've roughed out some categories, people can start making nominations along with what categories they're nominating the person for. We don't have to limit how many people are nominated. WėąṣėḷőįďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 22:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
How about we drift over to the RW annual awards for these various achievements? It's a great idea, btw. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Since Schlafly has been brought up by numerous sources for his relativity thing, I'd have no problem giving him an award for it. I've taken the liberty of editing the RW Awards forum page to bump it onto recent changes. Scarlet A.pngbomination 13:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


If we care, we are up against a week or so now to get 'er done. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we are moving on to Awards 2.0 and merging any awards to CP into that. - π 01:25, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
But do we award on CP Day, or is the move to award at end of year? Just curious, I agree with Awards 2.0 of course! ħumanUser talk:Human 02:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


I nominate the cp:Obama administration for the Advancement of Junk Science Award this year. nobsdon't bother me 19:08, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
The fact that anybody who thinks that Conservapedia is a credible resource could throw around accusations of "Junk Science" is frankly laughable. DalekEXTERMINATE 00:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
May I suggest that you copyedit the second fricking sentence of that O A article to make it first, English, and second, make sense? "President Obama had a bad summer of 2009, as his popularity slumped, his party weakened and opportunities for celebrating achievements happened." is brilliant, but only as parody. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Now that I've read the rest of the paragraph, please turn some of the fragments into sentences, and fix the rest to make them make sense, even they are still partisan attacks. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Lol, I read your source (did you?), and it says "The inspector general does not assert wrongdoing, however, and the administration (which later apologized) makes a plausible case that it was exercising its right to issue policy after consulting the science. A simple reading of the final report offers some evidence for this. After all, one set of recommendations is clearly attributed to the report ("The report recommends...") and a second set of recommendations - including the moratorium - is clearly attributed to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar (The Secretary recommends..."). The moratorium is described as a temporary pause that would allow for "implementation of the measures proposed in this report", and the word "moratorium" doesn't appear in those detailed recommendations." Whatever. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Yep I read it and used it here to give the godless-commie-libs-who-worship-at-the-alter-of-science perspective. Other reports are so redeeming. [7][8] Thanks for the headsup on the Obama administration article, I think Prof. Jensen wrote that so I'll delight in correcting the Yale alumni's grammar. nobsdon't bother me 18:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Actually, looking at the history it's fairly clear you can look closer to home for the grammatical fuck-ups than maligning the now-come-to-his-senses prof. See, when you keep branding people you disagree with 'liberals' they eventually leave, taking the last shred of credibility CP had wth them.
Oh yes, just think - without science, you'd have to use a quill and ink to eply to this. Unless, of course, you'd died from - oh - polio, smallpox, or something penicillin can cure. Guess those godless commie scientists can do something useful now and again. --Ψ GremlinParla! 18:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention Childbed Fever. [9] (See: cp:Germ theory of disease). nobsdon't bother me 19:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Whose turn is it to call Rob an incomprehensible fucker who doesn't know what he's talking about and to point out that not only doesn't his link work, most of the links on the CP article don't work either? TerrenceKoeckring (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
A book from 1910? Struggling a bit there aren't we Rob? And your point being? People didn't wash their hands? Until scientists proved otherwise? Don't forget it was the church that decreed washing off God's dirt was a sin in the first place. Hell, Andy even believes Jesus said washing hands before meals is a no-no. --Ψ GremlinPraat! 19:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
S'not what happened. Medical science invented a disease (childbed fever) to diagnos a disease the practice of medical science caused (childbed fever). Here's another example: Homosexuality was considered by our enlightened medical scientists to be a mental illness until our enlightened scientists became enlightened that it was not. But here's an other idea: by making homosexuality a psychiatric disorder again, like bipolar disease or drug addiction, persons diagnosed with the disorder could qualify for Social Security disability payments ("loony checks" in street parlance) and we could create a whole new dependent class of voters helping to fuel the deficit agasin. Sounds like a winner, huh? nobsdon't bother me 21:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Really? Show me where homosexuality is being reclassified Rob? Or is that just wild - and off-topic - speculation on your part again? I await your reply - which will be all about Obama - in anticipation. (By the way, you also fail in understanding science - the very fact that they moved on from childbed fever is called "scientific process". That's why science evolves and Christianity remains a Bronze-age zombie cult. --Ψ GremlinSnakk! 21:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Did science at one time consider homosexulaity a disorder? Yes or No? nobsdon't bother me 21:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
They also believed once upon a time that diseases were caused by humors. Totally immaterial Rob. Show me where it's going to be reclassified so people can claim benefits, like you said. --Ψ GremlinRunāt! 21:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
The key is that science is self-correcting. When it finds it is wrong, it undoes the wrong. And thus improves, incrementally, and sometimes hugely, our understanding of the biniverse in which we live and die. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
That is only a theory. Here's what Robert Oppenheimer says,
In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humor, no overstatement can quite extinguish, the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.
Just what the hell does a moral reference like that mean, coming from so great and much admired scientist? nobsdon't bother me 21:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
It means you still can't concoct a cohesive argument, and lack the mental ability to engage in a rational discussion. That's what it means. DickTurpis (talk) 23:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
He is saying once invented, you can't uninvent the atomic bomb. I thought someone with even a basic understanding of the history of that time could see that. - π 23:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh I gitit. The invention of the atomic bomb was a great boon to humanity; spending 50% of the GDP of the planet for x number of decades on the insane nuclear arms race was these brilliant genius contribution to posterity. Praise Jesus for our blind faith in science, scientific progress, and scientific achievement. And just think, any punk-ass terrorist with a fdew bucks can now assemble a dirty bomb! O joy! O wonder! Halleluja! nobsdon't bother me 21:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't scientists who started the arms race, it was politicians. Science is just a tool - utterly neutral to morality. It is the person who wields the tool that gives it meaning. In the case of nuclear power, we had the choice of using it to produce cheap and ready power or produce a terrifying weapon. The latter came first. That's what Oppenheimer was talking about. Colonel of Squirrels医药是医药,和那个不是医药。 00:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Really? The Scientists didn't have a clue about the can of worms they were opening up; thier only moral argument was, "if we don't, Hitler will." Well, guess what? Hitler was not any closer to WMD than Saddam was. nobsdon't bother me 20:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations on your anti-war stance with respect to Iraq, then, you massive hypocrite. DalekEXTERMINATE 11:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
RobSmith - π 12:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

How Active is Active?

  • AddisonDM - Last active 8/JAN/2010
  • BenjaminS - Last active 22/MAY/2010
  • BethanyS - Last active 24/JUN/2009
  • DeanS - "Retired" on 08/AUG/2010 by Andy. Last edit before this was 09/SEP/2009
  • DuncanB - Last active 30/MAY/2010
  • Geo.plrd - Last active 26/JUL/2010
  • RJJensen - Last active 17/APR/2010

Fair enough we are looking for nominations over the course of the whole year, so any edits within that period could be said to be valid, but DeanS and BethanyS definitely don't fall into that category, and AddisonDM cannot seriously be included either. He made two edits in 2010 (7th and 8th of Jan), one of which was a revert.

I think if there are to be any new awards, there should be a certain activity criteria for nominees. I'd go with them having at least one edit actually adding content (i.e. not revert/page blanking/blocking) within the last 90 days. --TheEgyptiansig001.png 11:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

RJJensen should get some award, as he was able to complete a full circle of editing: wp:Special:Contributions/Rjensen -> cz:Special:Contributions/Richard_Jensen -> wp:Special:Contributions/RJJensen -> wp:Special:Contributions/Rjensen
(Runner up: the omnipresent Ed Poor Special:Contributions/Ed_Poor, cz:Special:Contributions/Ed_Poor, wp:Special:Contributions/Ed_Poor, cp:Special:Contributions/Ed_Poor, ask:Special:Contributions/Ed_Poor!)
BTW, for the Conservapedia:Active_users#Notably absent users, I looked at those whose current period of inactivity is longer than any of their previous ones.
larronsicut fur in nocte 11:52, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


I should've addressed this earlier, since I started the Forum page. Apologies for letting it slip. Given the response, I'd say there's a loose consensus to just not bother with the awards. I've been convinced by the arguments. There's no convincing reason to think the awards would go to anybody other than who they did last year, and some of the sysops at CP do wear them as a badge of pride. I think we should just go ahead with RW awards which're more general that CP, and maybe look into a final, "All time Conservapedia Awards" as has been discussed? Am I judging the consensus correctly, or is there still a core of people in favour of annual awards? DalekEXTERMINATE 18:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm in favour of putting them out of their misery, and not further inflating TKs warm feeling of power. I vote to exterminate them. --TheEgyptiansig001.png 00:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Turded. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I have nothing to contribute to this forum except to agree with the above. Blue Talk 05:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. Let's start a new thread about the Gray Matters Awards (see, it's a pun, and also my suggestion for the name). --ADtalkModerator 06:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I think we could make it a project page of it. - π 07:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

JacobB a troll/parodist? knew it!

i think this is really ironic

(Block log); 00:11 . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked JacobB (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) (Inappropriate or vulgar name: bye toad)

however karajou did go a bit far with these words

(Deletion log); 00:33 . . Karajou (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:JacobB" (Creation of Troublemaker/Troll/Liar: All you did, JacobB, was to prove our point. You've really, REALLY, proved beyond all doubt what we've been saying about liberals all along.)

discus. --Slugboy (talk) 06:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Nice! I hated Jacob B all along anyways. Gooniepunk2010 Oi! Oi! Oi! 06:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Everyone knew JacobB was a parodist and he/she offered the password up here, on RW. This was a year ago. TK knew it, we knew it, Andy should have known it. All this has done is prove that on CP, toe the line and you'll do fine. AceX-102 06:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
He wasn't quite up to Buglar's levels, but he fitted the mould of a typical playground bully to a T. So that makes 4 - Jacob, Bugler, RodWeathers, Jess... who's next. --PsyGremlin講話 06:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Grrrr!!! Been trying to look at the RC there to see what went down, but it's been clogged by KenDoll's nonsense! Lord Goonie Hooray! I'm helping! 06:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I put a list of the block list/deletion log that happened on cp on talk:JacobB--Slugboy (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

looking at the block log: i noticed this 06:47, 24 July 2010 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked SergeantYork (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ (Multiple accounts; same IP(s) as existing/previous user(s): Same as "Terminator" series, 101, 800) --Slugboy (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Conservapedia uses Perelman's proof to poo poo on peer review

From their front page.

Note to liberals: Perelman posted his solution on the internet, eschewing peer reviewed journals.— Unsigned, by: MJMelcher / talk / contribs

Such comments normally go on WIGOCPtalk It has been noted on WIGOCP 18:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
My bad, just learning things around here. I'll keep that in mind.--MJMelcher (talk) 18:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
EC No harm done! My mistake, it wasn't WIGOCP, it was talk 18:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Yeah, 'cos liberals never go near arXiv. OTOH, Andy would be a great contributor to viXra - David Gerard (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Unnecessarily long and controversial thread about the Cumbria rampage and questions as to Andy's silence on the topic

How long before........

....those sick idiots at CP post something to the effect that 12 people wouldn't have died in Cumbria if everybody had guns and had shot back? Mick McT (talk) 17:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This is bad, bad, bad shit. We aren't used to this kind of shit here in the UK. Hopefully even Assfly et al won't try to politicise it. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 17:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh, he sooo will. All Brits are atheist, gunless morons (except for guys like the mass killer who had largely defensive weapons of gun).--Brendiggg (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
People dying can always be slanted to an agenda. I just hope they don't snicker when they write it up. This is no laughing matter. Jimaginator (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
You guys can dream. The facts are, Britain is dominated by atheists and people don't have guns to defend themselves from them. The shooting is a logical outcome of that scenario. That's legitimately how Andy sees this. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
This is just horrible. I'm hoping (in vain, as Andy has proved time and time again that he has no sense of when to shut the fuck up and show a bit of respect) that Andy just leaves this. But as NU points out, he won't. SJ Debaser 17:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I hope it doesn't turn out this guy is an atheist or we'll all hear a tremendous 'boing!' sound coming from the direction of New Jersey as Andy gets the biggest boner of his life. DickTurpis (talk) 17:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
If he is Christian (and he probably isn't), he's likely to be Anglican which is atheism in a devious cloak.--Brendiggg (talk) 17:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
"Even if he was a true Christian, the pressures and influences of atheism obviously got to him. Death is the wage of living in an atheistic society for Christians and atheists alike. " is something I'd expect. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Lurker here. I like you guys, but by pre-emptively suggesting that Andy might use this tragedy to further his own ideology, aren't you at least fractionally guilty of the same thing? (talk) 17:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
It's not the same thing, but I could see how some people believe it is. Most people think the publicized deaths of strangers should only be discussed with the utmost reverence. For those who don't, there's nothing wrong with speculations about Andy's reaction. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This "ooh, let's see what Andy says about this" attitude is in very bad taste. If you don't like it when CP use real life tragedies to make political cheap shots, then don't do the exact same fucking thing. WēāŝēīōīďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:44, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

"Andy's fucking insane" is not a political cheap shot. Get off your high horse. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Fox News readers are already on it. EddyP (talk) 17:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
You weren't kidding! wow... P.S. the Fox News comment system is the biggest joke... — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Goddammit, I hate those types of Americans. Fuckin' gun-toting, redneck, America-is-the-best-country-in-the-world cunts. SJ Debaser 18:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
They're smart cookies though - after a commenter points out that last year there were 14 gun murders in the UK compared to 9500-odd in the US, a reply points out that "HEY djmiles why not have some intellicutal honesty, the population of the USA might be at least thousand times that of Britian." Superb. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm actually with BoN and Weasel a bit on this, we are slightly guilty in that pre-empting the Assfly on this we are guilty of the same bad taste, but in our defence we have seen this so many times from him - if we didn't expect him to abuse a tragedy we wouldn't mention it. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 18:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I acknowledge that some people think it's in bad taste, but taste is in the mouth of the beholder, unless you want to go Assfly and claim that this is objectively bad taste. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
There is no bad taste in anticipating bad taste.--Brendiggg (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this have been in the SB anyway, since CP hasn't commented on it yet? X Stickman (talk) 18:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
That will have to be debated. But in the mean time, Andy is awake and arguing that speculation about who will get the Gore's house in the divorce is not idle talk about personal affairs of others. By the time we figure it out, it'll be on the main page. Has drudge/breitbart/wnd not picked it up yet? You'd think CP would be all over this... — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
"Most people think the publicized deaths of strangers should only be discussed with the utmost reverence. For those who don't, there's nothing wrong with speculations about Andy's reaction" - by the same argument, it's hard to see what would be so wrong with old Schlaffers using the killings as Bioglide for expressing his stupid opinions on the UK, but the impression I get from the above discussion is that it would be pretty awful of him to do just that. Obviously the suggestion itself isn't out of this world, given his sickening 'for those keeping the score' postings everytime someone in the entertainment industry dies, but if Andy does indeed invoke this tragedy to bolster an opinion, I don't see how you can say you aren't guilty of the same thing and to that extent as bad as him (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Could you rephrase? I'm guilty of _____ ? — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
To rephrase: You'd be guilty of jumping on a tragedy to bolster your opinion. I wasn't referring to you personally, Neveruse. My point is there's an inherent double standard in saying "This tragedy was awful - and Andy, nasty bastard that he is, will probably use it to make a point!" but that appears to be the thrust of some of the discussion above. However, I am starting to tie myself in knots and am feeling I should godspeed my way out of here. (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I think I understand what you're saying about what we're doing. I agree that the tragedy is awful and in a way I'm using it to make a point. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 19:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Amusingly enough, just a couple days ago when I projected from Coleman to Hopper, Suspected Replicant was all over me deleting the comment and yelling at me on my talk page. Oh well, c'est la vie. (PS, CP never mentioned Hopper's passing, as far as I could tell) ħumanUser talk:Human 20:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I've been trying to stay away but just noticed this post now so apologies to Human for not giving Mick McT and the other supporters of this bullshit the kicking they deserve before now.
People, trying to make a joke along the lines of "I bet teh Assfly will maek joak abowt tis! And it wil be teh funnie!!!!!!1!" is NOT cool. It is simply crap. There are plenty of cases where Andy DOES do this, and at one point it would have been worth highlighting them. Now, since so many daft twats here keep jumping the gun and posting what they think he will say, the entire point is lost.
Andy says enough stupid things without people having to put words in his mouth. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I think you're all missing the real point here. How long before CP and Assfly jump on the *next* shooting/bombing/etc.???! Oh the humanity. I'm already building up the bile and am prepared to be fully outraged. MaxAlex Swimming pool 06:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The last few spree killings, someone here has posted a "what will that evil bastard Andy say about this one" comment, only for CP to say... nothing at all. This really does paint RW in a bad light, and I agree with the comments that it makes us no better to be thinking of a "we're better than you" angle in relation to a tragedy. Bondurant (talk) 14:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Every one of the haters reminds me of Assfly saying that the beauty of foliage is quantifiable. You don't like our speculation. We get it. Don't participate. You're not "right" about this. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 14:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Who on earth are you to say that I should not express my opinion, or that my opinion is not "right"? Bondurant (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
The bitching is kind of pointless, and of course your opinion isn't right, unless you've bought the Andyism that the correctness of things like this are quantifiable. What a little bitch. "Who are you to say my opinion isn't right!?" Me and every other god damn person on this earth. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 14:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm just voicing my opinion about our own behaviour. Or are we only allowed here to post our opinions about what Conservapedia says (or in this particular case, hasn't said)? Do I have to go over to Rationalwikiwiki before I can comment on things that are said here?
People have been brutally murdered, families and communities torn apart. And the out of Rationalwiki and Conservapedia, the only one to have tried to make some kind of political point about it is.... That's right, folks, Rationalwiki. Bondurant (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm just pointing out that you don't like your opinions being criticized either. It's a personal matter as to what is right or wrong. If you don't understand that, you don't belong here. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 14:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
You telling me my opinion is "wrong" is different to you saying that you disagree with my opinion. The first implies that my opinion is not even valid. And why did you say I was a "hater?" Bondurant (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
It's so wrong for you to be making points over this tragedy. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 14:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad you agree. Bondurant (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
A high horse is also a slippery slope. Your criticism is essentially hypocritical. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
If that is what you think, then you don't understand the meaning of the word. You seem to be saying that if someone uses a tragedy to make a political point, then anybody who complains about it is guilty of hypocrisy. So we should just shut up. Is that what you are saying? Bondurant (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Precisely! You can't enter into a conversation like this without fueling the fire you so desperately want put out. People died, man. Do you really want to keep up this awful conversation over that? It makes us no better to be thinking of a "we're better than you" angle in relation to a tragedy. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I disagree. There is a world of difference to one person using a tragedy to make a point, and another person saying, "hey, you shouldn't be doing that" Bondurant (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
So if Andy had used the tragedy to make a point, you'd be fine with our comments. Interesting. I would have figured you'd still be up there. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 15:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Well - duh! - haven't I been saying all along that it's wrong to use a tragedy like this to make a political point? You get a gold star. Bondurant (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, so it's somehow objectively "wrong" for me to make a point (which I didn't realize I was doing, but I guess I'll take it that you think I've made a point, let alone a "political point" lol) about a tragedy. It's perfectly okay for you to make a political point about my point about a tragedy, because you fail to realize that your political point is still, in essence, about the tragedy, you self-loathing half-wit. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 16:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Troll Can we please let this section die? -- Nx / talk 16:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Only if you can bear not to comment in it. {{DFTT}} is nothing but troll food and you know it, troll. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 17:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Reality check

All this leads to the question: Why isn't Andy using this as an example? It's been reported in conservative land. It happened in atheist Britain. British people don't carry guns. The weapon of gun is largely defensive. Andy using this is as logical as 2+2=4. Someone must have gotten to him about how using murders to push political points makes him look, but who could that possibly be? — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 14:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually based on CDG and ZB archives, I think it's far more likely that someone said "they're just waiting for you to mention it on the Vandal Site(tm)(c), if you don't you'll drive them into a frothing rage, which will be funny and serve them right, plus foreshadow what hell will be like for them and so on and so forth. THAT argument would probably latch on to AS. (talk) 20:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
First, let me say that the whole "putting RW in a bad light" thing is a bit tenuous. We aren't putting this stuff on the mainpage or even WIGO CP, individuals are signing comments on a talk page.
Anyway, BON above is saying what I was thinking earlier. We all know TK reads talk wigo cp religiously. We know there are back channels at CP that are quite active. We know TK and Andy are on those channels. So when we put our feet in our mouths and engage in "pre-gloating", it's almost certain that TK will warn Andy.
Which does raise the amusing idea of playing this technique to the hilt, and intentionally trying to head them off at the pass. Nah... ħumanUser talk:Human 21:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
If our awful, horrible speculation which has put RW in a bad light has somehow deterred Andy from gloating about murder, I'd say this vandal site has done some good. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 13:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Guys, check out andy's talk page. He makes an idiot out of himself yet again and scares away a new user.

Guys, check out andy's talk page. He makes an idiot out of himself yet again and scares away a new user. — Unsigned, by: Dinko / talk / contribs 21:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah lets! Acei9 21:29, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
[view] [edit]

Conservapedia in bullet points


If you had to enumerate your gripes against Conservapedia or its sysops in bullet points of 10 words or less, what would you say? Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 05:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)



The Conservapedians:

  • Invariably pull the banhammer upon losing a debate
  • Groundlessly impugn the honor of scientists
  • Conflate liberalism and communism
  • Propound every logical fallacy known to man
  • Are like unto whited sepulchres


  • No gripes. They are mean-spirited idiots, but they are of no real import beyond their marginal website.


  • Conservapedia is simply one man's quest to manufacture his own variant of reality — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs


  • The Banhammer - Conservapedia's answer to Godwin's Law
  • To disagree with Andy/TK is to embody eb1l librulism.
  • TK is an asshole. Discuss.
  • TK is a parodist. Discuss.
  • TK is both the above. Discuss.
  • CP Logic: Banning user = I PWND UR ARGUMENT LOL!

--TheEgyptiansig001.png 16:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


While I do really like the BON's above, I'll go for something of my own.

  • Not an actual encyclopaedia.
  • Mostly hypocritical with respect to freedom and censorship.
  • A good idea marred by the paranoia of its owner and lead author.


  • Teaching lies and hate to children and claiming it's 'Education'.


Crap Obtuse Nonsense Supplanting Everything Real Vith[sic] Arse Poop - End (dia). yummy Toast&  honey(or marmalade) (sorry the imagination's not working this AM) 11:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


  • The bending or ignorance of fact to fit a preconceived story.

Auld Nick


  • You can't spell "Conservapedia" without "CON"

David Gerard

  • None really. They are of no importance whatsoever and all their traffic comes via RationalWiki - David Gerard (talk) 09:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


  • Conservapedia: no liberal bias allowed, full of conservative bias
  • anything can be disproven with a source or a fake statistic

Slugboy (talk) 12:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

[view] [edit]

Making Karajou funny

Kartoon Kontest

The following are edits to Karajou's toons to attempt to add what they were previously missing, i.e., some soulful laughs. The originals may be found here

Toon 02

105Noah parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)

Toon 04

130WeeklyToonAtlas.png (Redback)

Toon 06

230WToon6parody.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 08

65Josh weaklytoon 1.jpg (SuperJosh)

Toon 10

76WToon10parody.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 12

69Commandment-toon.png (Weaseloid)
26W12 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 13

105WToon13parody.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 14

19Tomtoon1.jpg (Tom Moore)

Toon 15

93WingnutChristmas.png (ListenerX)
56W15 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 18

108WToon18-DS.JPG (DeltaStar)

Toon 20

7Kartoon1.jpg (Wodewick)
15Bankers.png (Toast) Not funny enuff

Toon 21

106WToon21Fix.jpg (Barikada)
41PeoplesCourt.jpg (Wodewick)
65WToon21parody.png (PsyGremlin)
47Anothercourtkartoon.jpg (Internetmoniker)

Toon 22

22Kupotoon1.PNG (Kupochama)
75WToon22parody.png (PsyGremlin)
49WToon22parody2.jpg (PsyGremlin)

Toon 24

49WToon24-CR.jpg (Concernedresident)
52WToon24parody.JPG (PsyGremlin)

Toon 25

51Philtoon.jpg (Röstigraben)
40WToon25 001PARODY.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 30

72WToon30 001 parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)

New captions for original cartoon with hammer and sickle on ass's ass:

  • "sticks and stone may break my bones, but unfounded branding will never hurt me!" - human
  • "You can brand me communist, but that doesn't mean they own me!" - human
  • 'Conservapedia! making an ass out of conservatives since 2007." - psygremlin

Toon 31

35WToon31 001 parody.png (PsyGremlin)

Toon 32

51Weeklytoon32.jpg (Concernedresident)
Excellent!!! ħumanUser talk:Human 02:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
20W32 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant) - and yes, I know it breaks the rules. Sue me.

Toon 36

26WToon36 001parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)

Toon 37

7Wtoon37parody.jpg (PsyGremlin) (ok, ok, it's crap, but only took 30 seconds)
9Rinotoon.jpg (Röstigraben)

Toon 38 - Wisconsin Democrats

28WisconsinDemocrats - parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
31W37 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 39 - Wisconsin teachers

37TeachersFunny.jpg (Röstigraben)
59W38 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
13W38 pf parody.jpg (P-Foster)

Toon 40 - Liberal Reality

16Teabagger reality.jpg (ListenerX)
21W39 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 41 - Hippies Smell

42W40 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 42 - Liberal Philosophy

59W41 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
63W41 sr parody b.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
30Poored.JPG (Grumblejaws)

Toon 43 - Abortion Clinic

58W42 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)

Toon 44 - NPR Donkey

22W43 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
18Karajoushakespeare.JPG (Grumblejaws)

Toon 45 - Liberal Celebrities

29W44 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
12W44 sr parody B.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
9Sarah Palin.png (brxbrx)
41Karatoon W44-GK.png (Genghis Khant)

Toon 46 - Liberal Creation

41W45 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
11Liberal creation parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
9Liberal-creation-parody-ullhateme.png (Ullhateme) Note: The cover reads: "CONSERVAPEDIA - SELECTED ARTICLES"
33Zombie Reagan.jpg (Röstigraben)
18W45 sr parody B.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
5W45 sr parody ListenerX.jpg (ListenerX)

Toon 47 - Liberal Evolution

33W46 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
26Liberal evolution parody nj.jpeg(Night Jaguar)
28Liberal evo.jpg(PsyGremlin)
67Liberal-evolution ullhateme-parody.jpg(Ullhateme)
30Liberal evoDS.png (DeltaStar)
19Liberal evo Lily.jpg(Lily)
-11Liberal evo ugh.png(Linus)

Toon 48 - PeeZee Adventure

39W47 sr parody.jpg(SuspectedReplicant)
12PeeZeeAdventure - Lily.jpg (Lily)
21PeeZee-Adventure Ullhateme-Parody.png (Ullhateme)
16PeeZeeAdventureDS.png (DeltaStar)

Toon 49 - Transparency award

4Transperancy-award-ullhateme-parody.png (Ullhateme)
57W48 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
23Editspree.JPG (Grumblejaws)
28Transparency award parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
5Editspree2.jpg (Genghis - with apologies to Grumblejaws)

Toon 50 - Reid's Babies

32W50 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
23PalinsBabies.jpg (PsyGremlin)
2Reids-Babies-ullhateme-parody.png (Ullhateme)
16Schlaflydämmerung.jpg (Röstigraben)
8Mammasboy.JPG (Grumblejaws)

Toon 51 - Mr. Transparency

12Mr Transparency parody.jpg (Röstigraben)
9Mr Transparency parody2.JPG (PsyGremlin)
30W51 sr parody.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
16Hollowthreat.JPG (Grumblejaws)
-8Mr-transparency-ullhateme-parody1.png (Ullhateme)
6Mr-transparency-ullhateme-parody2.png (Ullhateme)
12Wtoon51 Minstrel.jpg (Lily)
7Wtoon51 Doonesbury.jpg (Lily)

Toon 52 - Abortionists Hate Moms

20AbortionistsHateMoms-parody.jpg (PsyGremlin)
34SR-AbortionistsHateMoms.jpg (SuspectedReplicant)
-11WToon52-quaru.png (Quaru)
-6WToon52-MsQuaru.png (Quaru's wife)

[view] [edit]

Favorite pages at CP

Please indicate (and update as time goes by) & sign your favourite examples of lunatic drivel on Conservapedia;
  • Kiwi - the fact that they're flightless didn't stop them walking from the ark to New Zealand. (Extra lulz for using AIG as a source for that gem.)--PsyGremlinWhut? 03:31, 14 January 2009 (EST)
I've screengrabbed both pages. Toast s.png (with butter!) talk to Toast 06:35, 16 January 2009 (EST)
I think it was me that WIGOed that a couple of months ago. Unfortunately it didn't get highly rated. But yes, it's like a prehistoric ruin from the Age of Contests. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 13:10, 18 January 2009 (EST)
Ah, those were the good old days... PS, it still illustrates the poorly written snartikle in question! ħumanUser talk:Human 00:05, 24 January 2009 (EST)
  • All of the "terms" pages which do nothing. Honestly, Andy seemed to encourage his homskollars to compile those things and then gave them sysop privileges on the basis of their edit count, but they could have just categorised the pages and the category page itself would have sorted them. Related to these terms pages I do like 900 BC. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 13:19, 18 January 2009 (EST)
  • Oh, that reminds me: CP's article on clothing, covering the full history of costume all the way from 900 AD to 1100 AD. (Am I adding too many of these?) ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:28, 18 January 2009 (EST)
"(Am I adding too many of these?)" Maybe? Yes, I think so. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:11, 24 January 2009 (EST)
  • Theater. Not the craziest, but the one that shows them up the best for the latter-day Puritans that they are. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 13:39, 18 January 2009 (EST)
If I'm not much mistaken you can see her nipples!! Is this right on a godfearing, conservative webshite? (also: "Motion pictures were a United States invention"!) Toast s.png (Crumpets) and butter 15:31, 18 January 2009 (EST)
  • "Two meters" will always hold a special place in my heart, but if deleted pages don't count then Liberal intellectualism comes close, it contains a little bit of many of Andy's favourite topics such as Dawkins' professorship or existence of black holes, ignoring others' achievements and smearing them with reasons such as "poor student" and "insisted that there must be life in outer space" and just overall poop-flinging. NightFlare 20:50, 23 January 2009 (EST)
  • The last sentence "On Feb. 18, 2008, a Conservapedia editor found flagrant bias in a Wikipedia entry concerning a textbook dispute over the theory of evolution. He corrected the bias, and predictably a Wikipedian reinserted the biased, incorrect material on Wikipedia within only eight hours" Shows another thing: two mentions of Wikipedia (at least one but probably both of which are superfluous) are wikilinked to cp:wikipedia; not to mention the linking of "Conservapedia" itself. Talk about overdoing it! Love² 10:53, 27 January 2009 (EST)
  • Oh, the evilness of WP can never be overstated. Just as the word "liberal" must be linked whenever Andy types it. KlapauciusEsteemed Constructor 11:02, 27 January 2009 (EST)
  • Here's the 15 - 17 ref. Love² 11:05, 27 January 2009 (EST)(it was taken out twice & re-inserted each time by Kajagoogoo) Love²
[view] [edit]

Who Here Has Read the Bible?

Andy Schlafly thinks that most atheists haven't read the Bible. I don't see how that would change much, but let's prove him wrong all the same, and go one further, and see how many of us have read the Bible...

Atheists & Agnostics

  • Yeah, I actually used to believe that stuff until I got old enough to think for myself (I left church when I was 11 or 12) SirChuckBCall the FBI 18:26, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read Genesis through Numbers solidly, plus lots of other stuff. Taught Sunday School for about 3 years, too!

Yes, exactly. I know next to nothing about editing wikis. Partly because I graduated college before Wiki picked up.

  • I've read Genesis through Leviticus, Job, the Synoptic Gospels, Deuteronomy, the Gospel of Thomas, and various apocryphal works. I'm a NOMA agnostic, to clarify-αmεσ (ninja) 18:34, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Large chunks of it, sure. I skipped the boring bits though, maybe that's where the divinity is? --JeēvsYour signature makes me horny 18:38, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read the entire New Testament, most of the Old Testament, the entire Book of Mormon, much of the Quran, the Poetic Edda, the Book of Enoch, the Principia Discordia, and as much of the Urantia Book as I could stomach. Unconvinced one way or the other on any of them, but also unconvinced one way or the other about atheism. Agnostic, I suppose. I prefer "freethinker". But tommyknockers are real! Secret Squirrel 18:43, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Certainly not all of it, but I've read chunks - Genesis, Ecclesiastes, a Gospel or two, Job, Revelations, and probably some other parts, too. There's also a copy of the Koran around my house somewhere that I may read at some point. Master Bra'tacKree! 18:47, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Twice. End to end. Once for confirmation at a Lutheran church. Once for Catholic high school (Old Testament and New Testament were required religion classes for sophomores). --Shagie 18:50, 16 December 2007 (EST) (I'm a strong agnostic - note, this does not preclude theism, just rather a statement of skepticism of the supernatural)
  • All of it, dozens of times, particularly Proverbs.-Shangrala 19:08, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I read the Old Testament a long time ago. - Icewedge 19:29, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I don't think I've ever sat still long enough to read all the way through any one book, but I know my way around the thing, and consult it almost as often as my dictionary. Well, maybe a tenth as often. I also had church school through high school age, and even got school-prayered as a kid in Wales. None of it took. Strong atheist. humanUser talk:Human 19:32, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Haven't read it but I know lots of parts of the story. I don't think reading the whole thing would make me a believer, no more than reading the Harry Potter series would make me believe in witchcraft. --BillOhannity 19:44, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Only English versions, KJV naturally, RSV and NIV. Fair to middlin "dueling scriptures" player. Ex-semi-fundamentalist. CЯacke® 22:39, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read the entire NIV and some of the KJV, mostly the parts that are publicised to be quite different from the NIV. As for Aschlafly suggesting that an atheist cannot possibly have read the Bible, that is simply preposterous. I am an atheist precisely because I've read the Bible. But remember that this is a man that doesn't believe in tectonic plates or that keeping guns off of planes is a good idea. AdamNelson 22:49, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read Genesis, Exodus, a another book or two of the OT and various parts of others. Also a couple of the Gospels (been meaning to read Revelation for a while, it being probably the most ridiculous thing ever written). I obviously haven't read the whole thing, vast portions of it being unreadable drivel. Thought hardly anyone had read the whole thing, sort of like Finnegan's Wake (anyone read that?). DickTurpis 22:59, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read bits as a kid, I'd read Alice in Wonderland first though & took it in the same spirit. As Science Fiction goes it's not very good & the characters are poorly described, there's one ... God I think he's called who sounds like a right bastard. Its a bit too bloodthirsty in the first half, I'm surprised the politically correct brigade haven't called for its banning. The second half's just boring but ends well - on a high point. Oh! And, like Shakespeare, it's full of quotations. Susanpurrrrr ... 23:12, 16 December 2007 (EST) (Finnegan's Wake exxxxcellent!)
    • ROTFLMAO! humanUser talk:Human 00:54, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I haven't read it, but I have gone to Church (for most of my life) and have heard the prest read from the bible and discuss it. I found most of the things seemed to make no sense at all. -- 01:35, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I fell asleep after reading the front cover (which only had "HOLY BIBLE" on it) --Cheers,Ryanǂ wuz here ǂ 01:45, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Not sure if I've read all of it. I've read most of it but a long time ago and not at one sitting. Pragmatic atheist.--Bobbing up 03:10, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read bits and pieces here and there (mostly on anti-Biblical sources, admittedly), and of course I'd read a few pages at a time while in church. Pretty sick shit. Do you have any idea how long that book actually is?? GrandSoviet 03:54, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read all the regularly taught portions of it through school and Sunday School, and bits of it since for curiousity and education, but I wouldn't be able to quote any of it - I do think it's a wonderful, often beautifully written, important history text and set of stories of the times, and it's clearly intriguing given its cultural importance. However, it's anything but journalism, and much of it is clearly complete nonsense and entirely fictional - what, you think they didn't have novelists then? For the first 17 years of my life I went to Church every Sunday, even on holidays in foreign countries - my father was a lay reader and was heavily involved in the Church, as was my mother. I loathed it but I wasn't 'forced' to go, rather 'strongly encouraged', with no other real option.... Despite all this encouragement and exposure to the Word of God, neither God nor Spirituality ever took the slightest root in me. I remember standing outside Church after Sunday School at the age of seven and saying "But I just don't believe in a God" to the clergyman. He patted my head. The moment my parents declared me an adult and said I didn't have to go, I stopped going. Finally, yes, I have read Finnegan's Wake. A much better book! DogP 04:07, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I Haven't read any of the Bible proper or apocrypha. A long time ago, before my parents lapsed in their religious observance, I was probably forced to read the Book of Esther, and we still do Pesach, so I annually read at least a horribly abridged version of the Haggadah. Frankly, long, poorly written books do not hold my attention span, regardless of their influence over western civilization. I find I can get by with reading a lot of more interesting books that just cite the Bible a lot, and if I ever need something specific I can just go quote mining. --My cat is smarter than Andrew Schafly RA harass stalk 05:35, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Dear God, am I only one here who hasn't read any of it? ...It's so lonely being ignorant. --My cat is smarter than Andrew Schafly RA harass stalk 05:40, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read the Bible, taken 4 years of Catholic theology classes at a Catholic high school, and am now finishing up my fourth year at a Catholic University. Don't believe a word of it. 08:31, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I went to Catholic schools when younger; were basically told not to read the bible. (Some Catholics are funny like that, they encourage people to bow to the churches interpretation rather than formulate their own. Protestants tend to be more openminded on differing interpretation, though CP isn't a good example) I read the Bible several times in protest. Was quite religious for a while in my mid teens (I turned down the opportunity to have sex at fifteen! Should tell you just how religious I was at one time) but slowly realised the impossibility of some of the bullshit, even in the New Testament. I used to read the Old Testament like common folklore - in my eyes it wasn't the word of god, and if someone truly believed that, they were an idiot. To be honest, I didn't think anyone really took the creation story or the great flood literally until I began following events in America. You really have a big chunk of your population who are completely retarded. MarcusCicero 09:28, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I read the whole thing cover to cover (took about three years). Czolgolz 12:23, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read most of the Torah in various translations and parts in Hebrew. Read other bits of the Tanakh. Read Matthew and other fragments of NT. It really is quite boring, but I do enjoy the historic and textual analyses. Given its enormous influence and historical significance, it's a rather important book.--PalMD-If it looks like a donut, eat it 18:22, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Bits and pieces. I can never get over quite how much of a cunt Old Testament God is - just plain mean - and I'm especially fond of reading Revelation out loud in a Southern Baptist kinda voice to anyone who'll listen. Always good fun. I'm agnostic in the sense that the question's unanswerable (verification transcendent's the posh term, if memory serves), but if there is a god, then all the evidence suggests that it doesn't give a fuck about us. --Robledo 20:05, 17 December 2007 (EST)
    • Yeah, OT God is a lot like Santa from the "claymation" Rudolf. Don't believe me? Go watch Rudolph again. --Edgerunner76 14:52, 10 January 2008 (EST)
  • I've read at least half of the Bible. It's quite a piece of work to read it. I just can't really get how only one Gospel says "you're healed go tell everyone," and the others say "you're healed, go tell no one." Even with any crazy POV shift possible, you can't change that. In debates and questions regarding the meaning of the Bible, I like to be able to look at the English version (a modern one, but I quote from KJV, just because the ULTRAconservatives like it that way), as well as the original Lutheran in German, and the Vulgate. It gives you a more accurate approach to the understanding, where each strikes a line and all three narrow down the meaning further than any either one individually. (See: Triangulation for the idea applied to geography.) --Eira yay! 20:35, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Nope. Never. At least not in any way that I would consider reading. I'm much more of a prose person. The writing style of the Bible is simply horrid. On the other hand, I have looked into the encyclopedic version of everything in the Bible. Just because I don't care doesn't mean that I don't understand. Oh yeah, I consider myself a Philosophical Taoist (or, at least, I'm trying). --Edgerunner76 14:48, 10 January 2008 (EST)
  • I've read a lot of the Bible, some parts more than once, more for historical, cultural and literary reasons than for inspiration. It really is a fascinating document of human evolution (!), containing some beautiful poetry and insight along with the vengeful god stuf, and the outmoded views of the world that include such things as how to beat your slave properly. Rational Edthink! 11:17, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I've read every word of it, most of it more than once. I was raised in an uber strict Catholic household and I was required to read at least half an hour each night. I think that the more I read of it, the less I believed. It just didn't seem to make as much sense when I read it for myself compared to when the priest talked about it. --Damo2353 10:26, 13 July 2008 (EDT)
  • I've read a fair bit. My high school education was all christian, for some reason (I decided I was an atheist at about the age of 8 and my parents are agnostic) and so I had my own copy of the bible and that was fully accepted as something you could just whip out and read if you were bored of class. I flicked through Revelations in class one day, then as my mum was driving me home from the bus stop I told her "Mum, the guy who wrote Revelations was crazy. What introduced doubt into my mind when I was 13 (the only time I've ever seriously considered religion as possibly real) wasn't the bible, but the belief of the people around me. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 19:51, 25 November 2008 (EST)
  • Yup, cover to cover. The early bits are spectacular as myth, the middle part is painfully dry but interesting as history, and the last bits are spectacular as literature and poetry. But I'm not ready to throw the Bible on the nonfiction shelves yet.Barryap 02:45, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

I started reading it before college started, I plan to finish it in four weeks when the semester ends. Mr. Swift (talk) 20:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

  • I have, cover to cover. Sen (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I am from a catholic family, went to a catholic school and have sung in a curch choir for several years. So yes, I did read the not-so-good-book from time to time. Sometimes it just gave me headaches, sometimes nightmares. Gmb (talk) 22:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Yep. KJV, cover to cover. Thought the ending was a bit obvious, but at least the butler didn't do it.--Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 00:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Mine is in the bathroom ( with a Gita and the book of Mormon). I Read them regularly. The book of Jeremy is terrifying. Alain (talk) 02:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Even Leviticus (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I've read all of Genesis and some other early parts, but I haven't picked it up in years because its too boring for me. --Onion <talk> 00:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I've read the whole thing. More than once. I used to be a devout Baptist. Does he think Atheists grow up in a vacuum? Quarudaffodil - You can't explain that! 00:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
  • As I was raised in a fundamentalist family, I have read the Bible several times, cover to cover, plus endured hundreds of hours of "Bible Study" where I was told why my reason was wrong and their "twist everything so it doesn't sound bad" approach was right. VOXHUMANA 00:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)


  • Not all of it, I must admit. On the other hand, I've read other parts in several different languages, so I guess it all evens out in the end. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:53, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've been through it a few times, though not cover to cover (the middle bit gets a bit stale) but Pentateuch and the New Testament are interesting. It's been my experience that most people that deconvert from religion tend to go through a period where they consume a lot of religious information when deciding whether or not to believe in anything. I went through that process, and ultimately decided not to give up my faith. The Bible didn't convince me though, and indeed I am not a Christian. Stile4aly 19:30, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Not in its entirety; but I like to think that I'm quite versed in it, and I'm probably more acquainted than most with the more abstract theological implications. --Linus(plot evil tech) 23:16, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • Read the Pentateuch, some of the other Tanakh books (Job, Judges, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Nehemiah), all of the Gospels (read the four synoptic, skimmed over the other Epistles), and Revelations. Theist in the sense that I cannot deny the existence of some sort of higher power - not the Christian God. --Ζωροάστρης 01:20, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Jesus didn't read the Bible. Ajkgordon 09:11, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Do Catholics fit in Theists or Weirdos? Anyway, Catholics are not required to read the Bible, even if in Sunday Saturday school reading it was encouraged. Ed @Thanks SusanG for my nick 09:40, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I read the whole thing once. Whuh. It's hard work getting through 1 + 2 Chronicles, although the prophets (esp Isaiah) and evangelists (esp John) are the best bit. -- מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!
  • I once read a picture-book children's bible. A is for Ark, Z is for...did Noah have Zeebras? Also, per that guy above me, do we Catholics go here or in the weirdo section? (Dunno how I found this place, prolly a link to it from uncyclopedia...) – 23:47, 18 December 2007 (EST)
  • All of it.Tolerance 12:39, 15 May 2008 (EDT)
  • Well, I started to, but found myself fading away during Numbers. Aboriginal Noise with 4 M's and a silent Q 20:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Pagans (of various sorts)

  • I've read most of the New Testament, and bits and pieces of the Old (King James Version). Which I think is about opposite of what most evangelicals do. Paul turned me off finishing the NT, he was so distasteful to me and really not a compelling writer. --Kels 20:40, 16 December 2007 (EST)
  • As anyone who reads my userpage will see, I'm a former fundamentalist Christian. As such, I've read from Genesis to Psalms (got bogged down there--I don't have rhythm), and then most of Proverbs and Song of Solomon. I've picked up most of the stories between that and the prophets, thought the only Prophets book I've read all the way through was Malachi. I've probably read all of the Gospels at this point (mostly skimming), along with Acts. I'm fuzzier on the epistles (though I loved Ephesians as a kid because of the "armor of righteousness" imagery), but I've read Revelations over and over again. (I've also read bits of the Coptic and Gnostic gospels, but a lot of those are even harder than the Christian ones. I've also tried to start the Koran, and have read the Tao Te Ching and the Chuangzi. (Couldn't stand the Analects.) I've read the Eddas and a few other mythologically significant texts, so I have a wide range to draw from. Researcher 16:41, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read it. Knowing your Bible is vital for arguing with those idiots - sometimes you'll find you know it better that they do. I went to a Church of England school (not terribly brainwashy - the CofE doesn't do dogmatism very well) so I was spoonfed Bible stories from the start. - but to me they were always just...well..stories. Then I read Jack Chick, who taught me that rock music was made by witches, and I'm now a pagan. Cheers Jack! Totnesmartin 13:27, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
  • I'm Wiccan but grew up as a Lutheran, so obviously I've read a good chunk of the Bible, even though it has mostly focused on the Parts That Actually Make Sense. I've read most of the Gospels (though I can say I've only read Luke through-and-through), and bits and pieces here and there. Moses' Law quickly made me think "no one does this stuff here, so it's got to be a little bit unimportant". The Revelation made me think "okay, this is REALLY weird" (not in a good or bad way, just confused). Ecclesiastes is my favourite OT book, despite of it's grimness, because it's so beautifully written (and in case I get depressed, it's always fun to read about someone who's even more depressed =) As for the part I haven't read, I have to thank our excellent school system for good overview of what I missed, so I have at least a basic idea of what the Bible really teaches about the rest of the stuff. (A fun reminder our American fundamentalist friends: There are parts of the world where schools have religious classes, mostly taught by those no-good liberal theologians =) And for the record: Even when I don't believe in Christian salvation, I think Jesus had a lot of wise and insightful things to say. In summary - big parts of the Bible are dreadful outdated/incoherent/boring stuff, but some parts are just brilliant - and I don't really know why on Earth certain people focus so much on the dreadful stuff even at the expense of the brilliant stuff. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:26, 25 November 2008 (EST)
  • I have read Genesis, the Gospels, and Revelation from cover-to-cover; also large sections of Exodus and certain epistles. While speaking with a couple of fundamentalists who pretended to be interested in debating religion, on the strength of what I learned in those readings, I managed to get them to start gibbering about how I would soon be cooking on God's barbecue. Excellent giggle-value. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 12:01, 9 January 2009 (EST)


  • I've read it. The more I read the Bible (Especially the Old Testament), the more sensible Discordianism seems. --Gulik 01:33, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I've read it long ago as a child, when my parents forced me to for Lutheran confirmation. Naturally, forcing me made me turn away from it and distorted my views and beliefs. Even then I questioned the inconsistencies and hypocrisy, and I'm thankful I can't even remember a single passage. NorsemanWassail! 03:15, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Yes, I've read it. Part of my religious education at Anglican schools from age 7 to 18. And, of course, I've been exposed to it since then on a regular basis through church and cultural background. Ajkgordon 04:24, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Yes (King James Version), along with the Book of Mormon and part of the Koran - signed I Eat Glue logged off 12:58, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Yes, I've read it. Partly due to attending a Catholic school and partly due to travelling a lot on business. Some fellow called Gidgeon keeps leaving his copy in my room. Probably give it a D- overall but the pages from the small red Gidgeons bibles they hand out in school make a great substitute for rolling papers so maybe revise that to a D. HexspecimenIt's an X 13:30, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Aye, I've read most of the New Testament, but I gave up reading the OT after the Five books of Moses, save for a brief excursion to Solomon's books.-- Offeep 21:28, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Genesis. I plan to read more. - 13:33, 10 January 2008 (EST)


  • Sheeeeeit, I wrote the Bible, I just don't have the memory handy at the moment. In all "seriousness", I've probably read between 20% to 97% of the Bible with a margin of error of 8% to 13%. Having been raised by Christian fundies and gone to a few private Christian/Catholic schools my brain is filled with an embarrassing number of Biblical memes. Nowadays I do Bible searches mostly for critical purposes or to find prophecies about Lumeno and authoritative justifications for benevolent morals. ~ Lumenos (talk) (other talk pages: LI1, LI2, WP) 00:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I've never read it

  • Who's with me?--Closer government 09:34, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Er, me, apparently... now I feel I have to read it to fit in with all the "cool kids"... UchihaKATON! 12:36, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • Hay guyz. (Though I was considering starting soon.) NightFlare 16:10, 17 December 2007 (EST)
  • I guess I'm down here too. --Edgerunner76 14:56, 10 January 2008 (EST)
  • Beyond the occasional passage. I would have been more interested if it was marketed as a book of myths and legends. Cubic bastard Hoover! 21:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I've read part of it

  • I guess I am one of those "inbetween" people. ThiehCP≠Child Porn? 18:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
  • never read it cover to cover cause its fairly dull in spots. I think I know many of the hot spots in it. Hamster (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I remember getting a free copy at school during fourth grade (99-00). I read genesis and thats it. Also read a whole book of Bible stories out of the school library. (Suck on that Andy! I went to a public school in socialist Canada!)--Thanatos (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I actually read a sizable amount of it in an english class in my US public school. Tetronian you're clueless 00:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I read it actually on Conservapedia. It just helped me understand how moronic they are. rational ghey (send a message) 02:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • IIRC, I got to the book of Psalms before becoming distracted for some reason. Upto the point I stopped reading, the stories were interesting and provided a good history of the religion, as well showing practices that were performed by Judaism; later declared obsolete by the New Testament. A few years later, the subversions from the same Catholic school finally caught up, causing me to turn away from religion - and it was quite possible I could have remained a believer that a God created the Big Bang. --Sigma 7 (talk) 03:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I read most of it - revelation was my favourite. Acei9 03:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Only the bits I translated for the CBP. Quite dull, I can't imagine reading the whole thing. --Benod (talk) 03:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

See Also