RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive167

This is an archive page, last updated 24 July 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <224½>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>, <347>, <348>, <349>, <350>, <351>, <352>, <353>, <354>, <355>, <356>, <357>, <358>, <359>, <360>, <361>, <362>, <363>, <364>, <365>, <366>, <367>, <368>, <369>, <370>, <371>, <372>, <373>, <374>, <375>, <376>, <377>, <378>, <379>, <380>, <381>, <382>, <383>, <384>, <385>, <386>, <387>, <388>, <389>, <390>, <391>, <392>, <393>, <394>, <395>, <396>, <397>, <398>, <399>, <400>, <401>, <402>, <403>, <404>, <405>, <406>, <407>, <408>, <409>, <410>, <411>, <412>, <413>, <414>, <415>, <416>, <417>, <418>, <419>, <420>, <421>, <422>, <423>, <424>, <425>, <426>, <427>, <428>, <429>, <430>, <431>, <432>, <433>, <434>, <435>, <436>, <437>, <438>, <439>, <440>, <441>, <442>, <443>, <444>, <445>, <446>, <447>, <448>, <449>, <450>, <451>, <452>, <453>, <454>, <455>, <456>, <457>, <458>, <459>, <460>, <461>, <462>, <463>, <464>, <465>, <466>, <467>, <468>

, (new)(back)

Uh,...

http://i48.tinypic.com/dvorjc.jpg

Anyone else see this? --Revolverman (talk) 01:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

No. Тy^talk 01:51, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

It appears to be a cat sticking its head out of a box instead of osci-blahblahblah--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

For anyone that didn't catch it, it normally looks like this. No cat, no box.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I like the cat better. Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:37, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't know. It's in a weird position, makes it look unnatural.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm intrigued. Can't see any tampering with the file or abstract which could have caused this. Revolverman, are you seeing this at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page, or some other location? If it's still there, click on the image & see what the file name/location is. Weaseloid^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, is your computer running some sort of internet filter? Is there a web content filter that replaces images of quack pharmaceuticals with adorable kittehs? Because if there is, I want it. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

What do you see here?

My guess would be some weird caching thing, but I can't see how that would happen like this. rpeh •T•C•E• 12:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

This is what I'm seeing. This is getting seriously weird. Wéáśéĺóíď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you need new glasses. --2.36.64.127 (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

RationalWiki isn't a secure service. You can download a program off the web that would let a moderately intelligent younger brother prank their entire family's shared Internet connection by replacing images in (unsecured) web pages. Find whichever family member / colleague / flat mate / other customer at the coffee shop is pranking you and punch them in the arm, problem solved. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ You may have a virus. See this page asap. rpeh •T•C•E• 18:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Unlikely. DNSChanger wasn't pranking people when it was active, it was 'serious business' defrauding advertising companies. Now that it's defunct and the servers are being run down by the Internet Systems Consortium that's even less likely to result in pranking. When you see the trollface image, think schoolboy prankster not criminal mastermind. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, its back to normal. Still no clue, and it only happend here. Huh. --Revolverman (talk) 19:54, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Someone on your network having a play with Anti's "replace images" PoC function? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 08:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

How accurate is this demotivator?

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/343989-us-healthcare-reform-obamacare Thoughts?Ryantherebel (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The numbers may be right or not, but without comparable numbers in the US, it's meaningless. And there should be one for the US reflecting wait times for the uninsured, each of which would read "forever". DickTurpis (talk) 16:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I doubt those numbers are accurate. 126 days for an MRI? That would fluctuate greatly depending on the circumstances. Sometimes such procedures need to be done right away, and I really doubt someone in the ER is going to wait 4 months. DickTurpis (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

They're all for procedures where the patient was referred. That is, they met their GP, the GP decided they needed to see a specialist and wrote a referral letter, then the specialist offered an appointment, the patient visited the specialist and either the procedure occurred immediately or a further appointment was made to actually perform a procedure. Hence they're measured in days or weeks. I've been referred in an hour before, but that's exceptional. So, not emergencies, but not necessarily what you as a layman would think of as "non-urgent" care. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Whether they're accurate or not is pretty immaterial. The only valid figure is outcomes where the US performs OK, until you add in the cost factor. In short, if you find you have cancer or ingrowing toenails then the outcome is pretty much the same throughout the western world but it's going to cost you most in the states. Oh, and don't be poor and ill in the US. Bad Faith (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I really wouldn't much much stock in the medical veracity of something that purports to list "common surgical procedures" and lists "MRI", "CT Scan" and that highly specific surgical procedure, "Prostate Cancer". ^pathetic 17:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I imagine the source is [1] but the original data is no clearer in how it divides things up. It's a lot of work to precisely define what you wanted to count, and often it's just not worth the bother. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm suprised no one has pointed out the completly misleading "trend" this graph is showing. The graph shows an increasing of waiting times as you move right but the bottom axis isint in any kind of order and therefore the "trend" is meaningless. The bottom axis should be in alphabetical order or something, but it's order is determined by the end results to try and imply a trend where none exists and to make the data look more dramatic. Ydam (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Dick made the best point, frankly. Even if the chart is 100% accurate and it takes 291 days to get knee replacement surgery, that's still better than "you don't ever get a new knee because you're too poor to afford it". X Stickman (talk) 20:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I think many of you are missing the point. The bill Obama passed was nothing like the Canadian system, and the Canadian system is not the only type of Universal Health Care system in the world. The argument is a strawman at its finest. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that point is entirely lost, but if we assume the comparison (or lack of, in fact) was valid there'd still be numerous problems. ^sshole 10:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Release your tax returns!

I am loving this so much. I want to marry it and make little conspiracy theories with it. --Rutherford (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I'm looking forward to the spectacle of a man going though an entire presidential campaign without ever outlining a single concrete policy he'd try to implement if elected. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Jesus, Take the Wheel Day.

Awesome bit of satire. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 16:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Though the apparently serious comments of "yeah, you stupid Christians, do it so you all die!!!!!" are both disappointing and disturbing. ^pathetic 17:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if this was the same group...

The Onion is losing to reality.

Not The Onion. Please rich douchebags, tell us more about how it's a shame Obama isn't doing more to help your looting. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Surely, when you're entertaining rich campaign donors it just proves you want the money to be elected for the sake of being elected. Otherwise you'd be out there canvassing with people who were representative of the actual majority of your people. ^gnostic 20:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Ugh, who'd want to party with them? --Kels (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

From personal experiences, the parties of the upper crust aren't worth going to, at least not here. Тy^talk 20:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The wealthy have better ways to... a-hem... experience altered states at parties. The regular people are more fun to be with when everyone is in an altered state, though. 20:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

(ECx2) Actually, I disagree. Candidates entertaining rich donors is a political necessity, because without the money they don't stand a chance of election. A sitting senator has to raise an absurd amount of money every week - something in the order of tens of thousands, probably more, but I can't recall exactly - just for their re-election bid, no matter how populist their aspirations. For Presidents it's much worse. Go America! Still a city on a hill! Blue (is useful) 20:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

"I just think if you're lower income -- one, you're not as educated, two, they don't understand how it works, they don't understand how the systems work, they don't understand the impact." Quick, ship the looters off to the Randroid Re-Education Camp! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I've done it

I have found, without a doubt, the most retarded man in Congress. More retarded than Michele Bachman or Rand Paul. His name is Krayton Kerns. Just read that page. I'm utterly speechless. But that's only what he boasts on his front page. This is the craziest I've seen. Please tell me he's a Poe. Please, please. Mr. Anon (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The United States must be the only first world country with a legislator who runs a blog entitled "Ramblings of a Conservative Cow Doctor." Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

To be fair, we are the largest and most diverse first world country. But I still feel ashamed that people like this guy being at the same level as people like Barney Frank and Dennis Kucinich. Mr. Anon (talk) 04:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Our political diversity only applies to the far right, though. The members of Congress most usually referred to as leftists really can only take positions that would be centrist in, say, most of Europe. And as for the couple you mentioned: Frank is retiring next year; and Kucinich was gerrymandered out of his district. At least Bernie Sanders will probably still be around, though he's getting up there in age...

By the way, that guy's surely crazy, but those positions are pretty standard for Republicans in red state legislatures (he's not in Congress). Q0 (talk) 08:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Fortunately, Frank and Kucinich aren't the only progressives in Congress, just the most vocal. There's still nearly 80 members of the Progressive Caucus. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

This guy is not in Congress. He is in a state legislature. In Montana, that means he has to impress probably twelve people.--^talk 12:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a huge element at this level that only the loons get elected because only the loons can be bothered to go through the political process. It's the same here with Union reps. The regular, middle of the road, union member cannot be bothered to go to all the union meetings, and all the rest of the palaver, so it's only the hot heads that stand and the union gets a reputation of being rabid. Bad Faith (talk) 12:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Not only that... since redistricting is now done with computers, you can set up electoral districts that are very heavily Democratic or Republican. Since a member of party X is pretty much guaranteed to win in a district now, you don't have to be moderate to attract swing voters anymore. So, that makes it easier for nutters to be elected. MDB (talk) 14:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

And incidentally be the ones to appoint the people who are in charge of the next redistricting efforts. A one way track to your very own sort of rotten boroughs. Wonderfully 19th century. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, he's just a state legislature. OK, I feel better now. Looks like Rand gets back his spot as the most retarded. Mr. Anon (talk) 01:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The word you wanted is legislator, legislature refers to the entire body of people and sometimes (as a metonym) to a place where that body conventionally meets. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 11:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

This is good to see

Thoughts? Mr. Anon (talk) 01:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Should I feel bad that my first thought when I read the first sentence was "Is this just a joke?" But yeah, this is the type of Christianity I like to see. Sam ^Tally-ho! 01:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

For all Americans that have wondered what the Christian mainstream looks like in Europe: this is it. --Rutherford (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

What a lot of Americans forget is that you don't have to be atheistic to be secular. Mr. Anon (talk) 05:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

"Chris Ians for a Change", eh? Never heard of this fellow before. He some minor celebrity I don't know about? DickTurpis (talk) 05:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I swear to god I thought that said Chris Chan for a Change. I've spent WAY too much time on the internet. --Revolverman (talk) 06:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Now this is where antitheism gets into problems. Osaka Sun (talk) 05:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. You will note that these "Christians for Change" do not manage to make a single reference to the Bible on the page outlining their creed. You will also note how they say "Faith in Christ's Love" instead of "Faith in Christ." My guess is that they believe in the broad message of Jesus's teachings, but are not quite so enthusiastic when it comes to believing that he was God incarnate. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

My guess is that it's more to attract progressive Christians from a wide range of denominations. They're focusing on social teachings, not theology.

Also note that the web site linked to above is for the PAC started by these folk. MDB (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The antitheist position is that the caring & sharing side of religion still enables the more negative side: if you use religious faith as a justification for tolerance & progress, then you could just as easily use it as a justification for hate & suppression; neither is more valid than the other if they are both religiously justified. This is quite a big theme in The God Delusion. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

From where I am standing, that still takes an overly Abrahamic view of things. The nasty part of the Abrahamic religions is not the theism, but the insistence that everyone in the world needs to hew to a given orthodoxy. This feature is also seen in some atheistic political ideologies (communism, for example) but is entirely absent in many religions.

Liberal Christianity is, as Prof. Dawkins said at one point, an "inoculation" against the nastier forms; but not everyone is inoculated, and inoculating everyone would rather defeat the point. ListenerX^TalkerX 23:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Gateway religion could probably do with an expansion in that sort of direction. ^pathetic 08:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to point it out, mainline protestantism in the U.S. DOES teach that not everyone needs to hew to a given orthodoxy. Both the McCormick Seminary and Lutheran School of Theology of Chicago teach both value pluralism and religious pluralism. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 13:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Cracked does it again

WTF, Stalin? Osaka Sun (talk) 05:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh jesus, Bill Clinton, wat? Ochtonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 09:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Just think - if they'd distributed pictures of Hitler on a sled at the Nuremburg rally, WW2 would never have happened. --PsyGremlin講話 09:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Holy hell. Hitler on a sled and WTF CHURCHILL?! --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 10:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The first one did it for me. Although Einstein lounging was a close second.Ryantherebel (talk) 13:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm a little bemused that the Cracked audience are surprised that these people are, at the end of the day, people. Even Hitler had time off from being Dr Evil. The worst concentration camp guards went home and cuddled their kids. Yeah, Bill Clinton had long hair in the 70's - we all did. Nothing to see here. Bad Faith (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. The photos don't deliver on the promises of the list's title. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Churchill was compensating for something.--User:Brxbrx/sig 21:59, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Fuck anti-science

A righteous rant from Natalie Reed. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 06:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

What she discusses has been going on for over 20 years, in case she has not noticed; pinko splinter-sects squabble amongst themselves, and postmodernists pooh-pooh science, and that noted imperialist cultural construct, gravity, makes things fall down. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

She used the term "BFF"... I... I don't even know you anymore. You are dead to me, Natalie. ^sshole 08:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

If the Earth was about to blow and I had the world's only escape pod, I'd give it to Natalie Reed. Blue (is useful) 10:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh. Fine. /amends Xmas card list. --PsyGremlinFale! 16:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

tl;dr. What is her main point? Doctor Dark (talk) 00:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Why science is better than "other ways of knowing", and why the previous statement is not racist or imperialist or sexist. Blue (pester) 00:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Video games and sexism

Blogger criticizes treatment of of women in gaming, the dark underbelly of the Internet emerges.

Immediately thought of this. Osaka Sun (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

What's really troubling is that the original cause of all this, Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games, is far from radical or contentious. It's really pretty fucking mild as far as analysis of the perception of women goes--User:Brxbrx/sig 23:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Sarkeesian has not yet released her vids, so how is it "far from radical or contentious". Unless I"m missing something, which happens often, she starts filming this month. GodotToilet paper bondage 23:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Brx is talking about her older videos. In other news, the boys want their toys back. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

On the video in question, I had to argue with some misogynists. I actually ended up getting both top comments at one point. These guys try to swarm the comments in order to troll, but they really represent a rather small amount of the gaming community. I think Sarkeesian is right to ignore them and I fully support her attempt to raise awareness on this issue. Mr. Anon (talk) 05:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

REPENT NOW!!!!!

Will a famous cannibal, rapist, pedophile, homosexual, and murderer get to Heaven before you?

Oh Ungodless of RationalWiki! If you do not repent your Godless Ways many evil people will enjoy eternal bliss in Heaven while you languish infernally in Hell! Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

yeah, of course Dahmer wasn't actually executed and the rest of his post goes downhill from there. PsyGremlinSiarad! 16:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

He was, however, beaten to death by another prisoner. And since US prisoners are 99% Christian (or thereabouts), clearly his executor was acting on behalf of Gawd! -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikia is such a terrible, terrible site. Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Only parts of Wikia are terrible, if I generalised like that at least one user would be down on me. Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Only if you washed first. Silly twit (talk) 17:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Will a horrible person get to heaven before you?! Statements like this make it sound like a game show, like Legends of the Hidden Temple.YOU COULD START by running to the room of the three gargoyles, push in the right tongue and the door might lead you down a staircase to the throne of the Pretender... sit on his throne and you will fall down into the pit of despair. If you escape, you could plow through the wall into the shine of the silver monkey. Fit the monkey into the correct slot, and a door will open, revealing the treacherous swamp. Reach into the tree and find the switch to activate the elevator to carry you to the room that holds THE HEAVEN. Then, you can exit through the trapdoor, leading you into the catacombs. Push in the correct skull and you will end up in the torture chamber. Find the key and escape and climb up the rope ladder, which will take you back into the Throne of the Pretender, back through the room of the three gargoyles, down through the temple gates TO WIN THE FINAL CHALLENGE!!! ±KnightOfTL;DR^{garrulous en guerre} 16:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

So... whats your point here prox? --il'Dictator Mikal 16:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Knight, i sometimes feel that way about all religions (or at least the ones that have some life after death). Push the right button - no no not that one you idiot!, say the right things "but not that way!". I'm so much happier knowing my choices here and now are what matter, cause i can actually evaluate them against real time things. And if i'm totally wrong, and zeus is there waiting for me with his golden hen, i'll deal. ;-) GodotStop the damn screeds! 16:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I prefer just a simple question and answer show, but with women in bikinis holding up the scores. ^bomination 18:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikia aside

Okay please show me one thing on wikia that is not terrible. Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Physics Wiki Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Nope still terrible, like all wikia sites it has the aesthetic appeal of a mid 90s geocities site, and absolutely shit usability with about as unintuitive an interface as one could imagine. Wikia was okay when people could do custom work before they force fed the same skin and interface across all sites. Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia's take on that skin The skin isn't the best part of Wikia. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/User:David_Gerard - David Gerard (talk) 16:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

"This wiki has 65 articles, no users and the last activity before today was in june!" @ David, no--il'Dictator Mikal 16:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

"Featured Problem: For what length of the tube will the particle leave the tube when <math>\dot{\theta}=\omega</math> is a maximum and <math>\theta=\theta_m</math>? Your answer should be in terms of <math>\omega</math> and <math>\theta_m</math>." Yeah, that's not terrible Not in any way. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 16:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

muppet wiki is good. GodotStop the damn screeds! 17:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Can we make RationalWiki as colourful as Muppet Wiki? Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Trent: CHALLENGE ACCEPTED. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem isn't specific to any given wikia wiki but the wiki interface and aesthetic itself which is common to every wiki on that site, and its horrid. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, well, that's not what you asked. :D -- Seth Peck (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

We could reskin RW to not look like a cheap WP knock-off, but to describe that as going down like a fart in a spacesuit would be an understatement. ^bomination 18:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Uncyclopedia. My God, I can't believe I ever found that place funny. What was 2007-me thinking? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

One problem with Wikia is they don't allow ordinary wikis check-user. On Atheism Wiki there's been a massive flame war between Awobbie of the wiki above and Oblivion26. I can't find out if Oblivion26 is abusing his own Sock puppet. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Why repent?

I just pented yesterday morning. It seems a little soon to do it again. #rimshot# MDB (talk) 16:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Can I depent after I pent, if I change my mind? -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Why so liberal?

This site claims to be rational but ignores the fact that many conservatives and christians are rational and reasonable. This site claims to be fair minded but hates dissent with a passion. How do you negotiate this inherent contradiction? ^{— Unsigned, by: 86.43.97.192 / talk / contribs}

That's quite a non-sequitur. Mostly because everyone thinks they're rational. However, the fact that some people can be "reasonable" - by which, I presume means "doesn't froth at the mouth" - doesn't make an ideology empirically (or "rationally" if you insist on using that term) justifiable. When it comes to "liberal positions" on things such as Barack Obama's birth certificate, for instance, or Fox New's accuracy and apparent "fair and balanced" nature, you'll find that reality has a notable liberal bias. As for Christians, I assume that's off the liberal/conservative spectrum and talking about religion, which isn't empirically justifiable at all as most religious apologetics and theology actively avoid making their beliefs empirically falsifiable (i.e., open to any form of interaction with human experience). Non-religious views have very little to do with political liberalism beside a mild correlation. ^moral 17:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Because liberals. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

First drink of the day. Silly twit (talk) 17:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

We're not going after the rational conservatives and Christians. If someone says, "I've considered it, and I think Obama's economic plans are wrong for the country. I plan to vote for Romney", he's not going to get noticed here. We might disagree, but he's not going to get mocked.

If someone says, "Obama's a socialist Muslims Nazi who was born in Kenya!"... he's going to get mocked. MDB (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

"But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki!" Drink! ListenerX^TalkerX 23:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, MC! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 19:01, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

That's an MC IP? ^bomination 19:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Could be... Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 19:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Obama's a socialist Kenya Nazi who was born in Muslim! I knew it all along. --2.36.64.127 (talk) 19:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

*mock mock mock mock* Also, your mom. Ochtonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 21:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

People aren't looking hard enough if they think there's an issue with 'dissent' here. You're not going to find anti-scientific nonsense, but I'm sure you'll stumble across completely opposite political and economic views on different articles if you look hard enough. Q0 (talk) 22:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, let's look at specific articles:

• Communism, socialism, and libertarianism are lambasted for their inadequacies, and the analysis of capitalism borders on the positive.
• Democrats are criticized for poor decision-making and indecisiveness, and Republicans are mocked for...well, making any international conservative laugh.
• Mohammed and Islam are taken for what they are, the same with Jesus and Christianity.

Do you want me to continue? Osaka Sun (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The articles on capitalism, socialism, and communism are the way they are largely due to the efforts of just a few editors. ListenerX^TalkerX 23:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Do (mostly) positive articles on libertarians count? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Given that you're one of those editors, what do you mean by this? Q0 (talk) 14:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

ListenerX is one of our top purveyors of REDSREDSREDSREDSREDSREDS!!!!!! If he doesn't think we're critical enough of the hard-left, expect to see dozens of edits and copious amounts of Truthout. Osaka Sun (talk) 15:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Man, I bet that Truthout article would be pretty funny if I weren't such a pinko. :( Q0 (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Am I the only one here besides LX who doesn't care for "Truth"out? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I can never figure out if it's one of the "good guys" or not. No, I don't care much for it. ^postate 19:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Me either actually. Тy^talk 19:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

It's political influence makes WND look mainstream. So no. Osaka Sun (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Truthout does not have anything like WND's "WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?" billboards, but it did manage to get the Air Force to stop teaching religion to its nuclear technicians. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, what? Granted I haven't actually read through the site in ages, but last I did there wasn't anything even close to resembling religious fundamentalism, pseudoscience, birtherism, or Ann Coulter. I never thought too much of it myself; as far as leftist stuff goes I found it tame and was bored pretty quickly. Q0 (talk) 21:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I meant in popularity, not content. When we first heard of Truthout, RW was exactly like the liberal reaction during the Ward Churchill controversy: who? Osaka Sun (talk) 22:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, true story. Q0 (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Instead of fundamentalism, wingnut pseudoscience, birtherism, and Ann Coulter, Truthout has secular messianism, moonbat anti-science, a lot of truthers in the comment sections, and some old-fashioned left-wing conspiracy theorists.

Interestingly, Truthout's general position on the major political parties in the U.S. is about the same as ours — Republicans blasted for being a general laughingstock, Democrats for being indecisive. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Now, I'm not sure we Democrats are indecisive. There's good arguments to be made on both sides of the issue... MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 12:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘That's why I joined the Official Monster Raving Loony Party years ago. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Trolls as the mentally disabled?

Not sure which WIGO to put this in. Is there in fact anything to that idea? Peter ^{This is not my first temporal anomaly} 05:39, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

WIGO:Blogs. There is at least a kernel of truth in what he is saying — we have had experience here with a few young "Aspies" who had difficulty fitting in — but a disability is a poor excuse for that kind of behavior. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't WIGO this junk. "They're still people". No shit Sherlock; thanks for clearing that up. Wëäŝëïöïď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly, I just read a few minutes ago this comment on Lousy Canuck, about excusing trolls, harassers and the like as "aspergers" so they can't help being jerks. Seems appropriate here. --Kels (talk) 19:18, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

“”Hiya, actual person with Aspergers here (officially diagnosed), and let me say, that whole “these guys may just have Aspergers” thing? 100% pure, all-natural, organically-grown, hand-picked, dry-roasted Columbian fail. Real Aspies generally have an acute understanding of the flaws in our social understanding. Some of us, like myself, compensate with a mixture of silliness, self-deprecation, and frank disclosure of our limitations. Others try to learn the rules by rote, and get very upset if they screw up. Hardly any (I have seen one) will try to excuse social faux pas with their diagnosis. And please, don’t whip out that “lack of empathy” canard. It was bullshit when Uta Frith came up with it in the 80s, it’s bullshit now, and forever more shall it remain the fetid, steaming leavings of the male of Bos taurus. Lack of automatic social learning does not equate with lack of empathy, and only someone lacking in empathy would come to that conclusion. Asshole is not on the autism spectrum, and I’ll thank people to stop pretending that it is.

Real Aspies use vim. ^theist 20:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

99 Problems

Not quite WIGO-able anywhere, but when a law professor takes the time to go through Jay-Z's 99 Problems line-by-line to check it for legal accuracy, the world has clearly gone mad. rpeh •T•C•E• 11:06, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

A fascinating article. It was clearly done for humour with a side-order of insight. I would love to see how it applies under UK law though. Edit: never mind - I thought it was just an article but the article is a summary of the 20-page paper. ^{ONE / TALK} 11:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, if the summary had been it: "The police don't need a warrant to look in your locked glove compartment or trunk", it might have been amusing. The whole 20 pages make it amusing with a huge slice of WTF. You've also made me realise that I know more about US law than UK law on this subject. rpeh •T•C•E• 12:07, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Because of the preponderance of US culture, and the fact that you generally don't need to know about the law until you need to, if you see what I mean, the average British understanding tends to be based on the things in US films - which don't accurately reflect US law either (there's a good Cracked article but I can't be bothered to search for it) (ah, found it).

In reality, in the UK, the police can do whatever the fuck they want and the best response is to bend over and spread 'em. Bad Faith (talk) 12:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I love watching various cop shows and seeing people say "YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!" to the police, who then turn around and say "actually, yes we can." Like "do you have a warrant?" "no, pet, don't need one as you're hiding a suspect in there and we've seen him in the window. Now open up or we're going to use the big red key." ^{d hominem} 12:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The last time I was arrested it was for 'assaulting a police officer' - which was total bollocks. Insulting, maybe, assulting, hey, they're bigger, meaner and tougher than me and I'm not that dense. After a long and uncomfortable night in the cells what am I going to say to the beak

• The police are lying and I want to make a major case of this

or

• I agree to being bound over to keep the peace for a year. Thank you very much, I won't do it again.

There's an old saying. A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, a liberal is a conservative who has been arrested. Bad Faith (talk) 12:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Fortunately, I've never been arrested. I was pulled over on suspicion of having robbed a bank, though. (Short version: my cat matched the description of the getaway car.) MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 14:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

That must be one weird-looking cat. Vulpius (talk) 14:30, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Uuuuuhhhhhh.... yes! MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 14:34, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Momentousness occasion in Australian wingnuttery

Today I opened my mailbox and I found an actual, hard copy, coloured (cover at least), Chick Tract. Can't find it on his website though, it was about Muslims. First time I have ever encountered one in its physical form. I kind of always hope that breed of fundgelicals stayed in the US. - π 13:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Some chap was handing them out in Stratford the other week. Sadly it was a fairly inoccuous one - 'jesus is your pal' type thing.No one went to hell or anything AMassiveGay (talk) 20:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

They uesd to sell them in PolyEster Books. I actually bought a copy of "Lisa" from PolyEster in 1995. Fuck knows what happened to it. Most fucked-up thing I'd ever read - David Gerard (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Bristol Palin: Life's a Tripp

This reality show, which follows Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol (the one with the baby), is marvelously, amazingly terrible. It is a whole new class of terrible. It's like the Jersey Shore, except the star is entitled, bigoted, and spends a great deal of time being a poor mother, very publicly. Long portions of the show are spent discussing how terrible is Levi, her baby-daddy, and she has the unusual habit of referring to specific babies as "it":

Sarah Palin:"They're saying Trig's not mine."
Bristol:"They think I gave birth to it?"

I highly recommend it. Catch while you can, since the viewership is so low, it was pulled from its spot on Lifetime after the second episode.--^talk 14:18, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

A review that shares your assessment. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The art of defending the indefensible

One of the upsides of the 'bagger wave of 2010 is watching the water-carriers defend the latest piece of batshit. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Templates on this wiki aren’t working properly

There’s a problem with the {{raycomfort}} template and there may be similar problems with other templates, see Talk:Kirk Cameron. I’ve told one Computer wizard. Can other computer experts look into this? Proxima Centauri (talk) 08:46, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

We should upgrade to DPL 2.0. It doesn't clear the parser state like 1.8.9 does, so we won't get this problem. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 11:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

There was a non-existent template {{ns}} & some other unidentified code in it. I didn't look into it closely enough to figure out what it was supposed to be doing, but have removed it. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

In this old revision of the Kirk Cameron article the problem still exists.

Why I'm ashamed to be a member of the human race this morning

Mother abandons eighteen year old 'special needs' daughter in a bar, calls the controversy a "hoopla over nothing". MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 13:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Paging Larry Summers

Stereotypes and women in science. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Photoshopped. --151.68.87.125 (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Surfing goats

That is all. Vulpius (talk) 18:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice. Now do a surfing ostrich. --2.34.113.53 (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Better add this to the extensive list of why goats are best animal. Blue (is useful) 20:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Really Embarassing Atheists, part umpty

Minnesota Atheists and American Atheists are sponsoring a game of the St Paul Saints, who will be called the Mr Paul Aints for the night. Or something. --PsyGremlinTala! 16:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

What's embarrassing? I think it's funny. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Meh, cringe-worthy puns are the least of our recent problems. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I"m actually surprized the Sts were willing to do this. It's a pretty serious statement. good on them, actually. but just watch the religious nuts come out in force! Blasphemy!GodotToilet paper bondage 17:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Not likely to happen (at least not on a grand scale), actually. The Saints are well-known for having games with sponsored theme nights, so this won't come as a total shock to fans. Incidentally, I do have tickets to see that game. And I didn't even know about this until just now. The Symphony of Noise ^{The official spikey-haired skeptical punk} 13:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I dunno, I kind of like them for doing this. If we ever want people to stop bugging us (and maybe like atheists or just nontheists enough to elect us into public office) it might be valuable to... I don't know... be relatable and funny? Because at the end of the day, while normal people remember what their pastor tells them, they also remember, 'hey, they like sports, too.' ±KnightOfTL;DR^{critical thinking is the key to success!} 13:46, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I'm getting too thick-skinned but I don't find it at all embarrassing. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 19:47, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

An honest crank

I've come about this website, and it seems to be quite beneficent. Apparently, they don't charge for anything! They just give you instructions on how to protect yourself (although you may have to purchase materials independently, such as velostat). I found the testimonial to be particularly uplifting

“”Since trying Michael Menkin's Helmet, I have not been bothered by alien mind control. Now my thoughts are my own. I have achieved meaningful work and am contributing to society. My life is better than ever before. Thank you Michael for the work you are doing to save all humanity

Sounds like a great placebo treatment. I mean, yeah, obviously these people are nuts, and apparently the site owner is an autism denialist, but I found it all to be remarkably refreshing compared to the assholes out there that either have crazy beliefs or exploit those with crazy beliefs.--User:Brxbrx/sig 22:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I thought it was nice because when I come across something like this, I look for red flags and I found surprisingly few.--User:Brxbrx/sig 04:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thunderf00t again (and Youtube articles)

So I had a look at some of his videos. His most recent clusterfuck is practically a replay of some anti-Islam shit-stirring from a while back:

• Thunderf00t parrots some wingnut talking points.
• Halp! I am being persecuted in the name of tolerance!
• Now watch me call 2 billion people idiots by using some completely arbitrary measure!

Besides the massive amounts of drama I see documented on his page, you think stuff like this might have tipped FTB off that he ain't the sharpest tool in the shed. More importantly, this brings up the issue of how much whitewash there is on our YouTube section in general since the fanboys seem to largely deal with that stuff. (Cough) Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:16, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

There is a lot of whitewash in our Youtube user articles. I even proposed deleting most it, since most of them were about obscure nobodies, but no one was interested. The TheAmazingAtheist article was horrible for a while, with DasRationalPersone reverting anything remotely critical about his beloved "TJ." I wonder why everybody else always seems so much more persistent and determined than me when it comes to edit warring.--User:Brxbrx/sig 03:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Fuck. I'll try to go through some of them, but I can't stand vlogs and YouTube drama. Is it safe to assume that most YouTube celebs are trolls and/or fucking idiots? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:29, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

YouTube vloggers? It varies. The comments are the larger source of idiocy. But we're seeing a growing trend in atheist groupthink. TF00t and TJ are prime examples. Osaka Sun (talk) 03:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Atheist Groupthink, or Youtube Groupthink? --Revolverman (talk) 03:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

This goes back to Dawkins' "Dear Muslima" days. For some reason, the controversy is entirely gone from his page. Osaka Sun (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

De-whitewashed now. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:03, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Somehow, it gets even worse. The article linked in the third video is paywalled, but the interview on the same site with the author totally undermines his own point, so I'm going to venture a guess that the original article does too. So much for that logic and reason stuff... Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

He's been known for singling out Muslims for extra-special treatment for some time, but he's argument has always been "even your most hardcore fundamentalist Christians don't threaten to throw a fucking riot and kill people when you annoy them". And he has a point there. As for whitewashing, pretty much any article that doesn't have vile Encyclopedia Dramatica style hate-on could be accused of being whitewashed. TF's creationism videos are very good, and I think it would be absolutely criminal to throw that out as "fanboyish" just because he decided to whip his cock out at FTB. ^gnostic 14:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

That riot argument is silly and ugly. Look at the 1992 Los Angeles Riots and the "race riots" of the 1960s in the U.S. Would it be fair to say that at least white Americans "don't threaten to throw a fucking riot and kill people when you annoy them", so black Americans are worse? Take a look at the context in which riots by Muslims generally occur - in very poor countries, that have often been poorly treated by wealth, Western "Christian" countries, and by people that feel ignored, powerless, and oppressed. I am by no means condoning or excusing a riot because some knuckle-head burned a Qur'an, but it has a helluva lot more to do with poverty and political repression than with the particular strand of Abrahamic monotheism the rioters follow.67.209.18.8 (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Have to agree with the whitewashing bit. There are already plenty of articles out there which are written in a negative manner, despite the fact most of the community holds that person/movement/idea in a generally positive light. Don't get me wrong - I've no love for Thunderf00t or TheAmazingAtheist, and I've only come across them once or twice in the past. But one significant gripe I've had people repeatedly voice to me about RW is that that too many articles lack perspective and give undue weight to criticism. I mean, if we had an article on W. E. B. Du Bois, it would probably be a stub with one of the three sentences stating how he was crazy because he didn't let anyone call him by his first name. Then again, RW isn't meant to be an encyclopedia, and I know I'm guilty of this same type of thing myself. Q0 (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

@ADK: Did you watch the videos? It's about the "Ground Zero mosque" with talking points fit for Fox News. I never said anything about turning the entries into ED articles -- it's not impossible to have articles that say "Here's some good stuff he did, on the other hand..." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I saw his "Ground Zero mosque" thing and thought it was proof that supposedly intelligent people can be pretty fucking stupid. I'm just warning against confusing a whitewash - where you'd say something like "he did this, but it's not important to GO LOOK OVER THERE A SQUIRREL!!!" - with articles that don't make the negative the single central focus. I imagine certain audiences would love the opportunity to, say, change the opening of Dawkins' article to "Richard Dawkins (b. 1941 as Clinton Richard Dawkins) is a well-known misogynistic asshole and occasionally a biologist." Hell, even as much as I think TJ is a piece of slime, I think the article on TheAmazingAtheist could be considered a blackwash because it barely even mentions his atheism-related material and gives the impression he spends 110% of his internet time telling women he wants to rape them! ^theist 18:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the term is "Hack-Job" that you're looking for.--Revolverman (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

You mean "hatchet job"? Isn't that what we do best? All kidding aside, I wasn't talking about whitewash on the TF article, but in the YouTube articles in general. The TF article is not overly fanboy-ish, though "outspoken criticism of Islam" is a nice euphemism for Islamophobia. Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks so. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:02, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, "hatchet job", I forgot that term existed. I thought it said "dickish attitudes to Muslims" last time I checked, not "outspoken critic" (although I agree, it's a good euphemism for that sort of thing). ^moral 19:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

(on theamazingatheist thing, the issue isn't that we are dismissing his atheism, but that he's a fully irrelevant human if it were not for his anti women tirades. Before he even started that, i was saying he should not have his own page here, cause he's a video blogger who has nothing novel to say about atheism.). I still have a hard time with the "not as bad as" defense. Christian terrorists (in the west, anyhow - looks like things are changing for the worst in the orient) really are "not as bad as" muslim terrorits. Yes, they do things that are abhorant. the shoot doctors who perform abortions, they bully young 13 year old atheists, they push gays towards self loathing, etc. But last time I checked, they didn't openly encourage others to bomb actual mosques, or to blow up trains with hundreds of muslims on them. Granted, it's not the religion but the entire economic, socio-political status that might well make the difference, but it is a distinction. (I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, so sorry...)GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 17:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It's no more safe to assume "YouTube" celebs are trolls and/or fucking idiots than any other group of celebrities. Even assuming we're using the rather snarky definition of a celebrity as someone who is "famous for being famous" and thus ruling out people who actually do something that still leaves the fact that articulate people whose lives are the least bit interesting can attract a following on Youtube without being a troll or an idiot just by talking about their lives. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 09:04, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Tablet of the gods.

If you're a Christian, don't even think about getting an iPad. You need the new Edifi Tab for all your mobile praising needs. I presume it comes in its own Ark of the Covenant presentation box. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

From within their paradigm, I can understand the creation of this thing. They don't want to buy a tablet from a secular company that might practice good gay rights practices, for example. That would only encourage the "evil."

That said, it's probably going to turn out the same as Christian rock. Christian label + crap ≠ whatever it was inspired from.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

1: Buy the cheapest electronics you can find. Probably a reskinned Maylong

2: Call them Christian

3: ????

4: Profit! Sen (talk) 09:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Just don't tell them that the computer was invented by a gay man (I'm going to stick my neck out and assume that anyone who would explicitly buy something "Christian" is that sort of Christian, because, you know, normal well-adjusted people don't need streaming access to 27 Bible translations built in). ^moral 21:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Although it's conceivable, even likely, that some of the other people involved in the development of the computer were gay, the most obvious candidate for your "invented by a gay man" comment is Alan Turing. But Turing didn't invent the computer. As with so many things, the programmable digital computer was a product of its time more than the work of a single gifted individual. Turing worked on computability and is justly sometimes called the "father of Computer Science" for that work, particularly because his demolition of Hilbert's great project is relatively accessible/ intuitive compared to Church's approach. But the story of the programmable computer begins almost a century earlier with Babbage's never-finished analytical engine, and the practical application to our modern world owes lots more to Shannon and von Neumann than to Turing. Turing did design a computer, but by then it was just one of many being proposed, and it was never built. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 14:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Is hyperbole not allowed? ^theist 18:16, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

No, it's punishable by death. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 19:09, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Not cake? ^postate 14:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

We're all out of cake. I haven't seen him live for ages, maybe I should check tour dates. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 15:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh Dear, not the English Defence League.

Got this friend from back in the day. Nice girl. Didn't see her for years until Facebook brought us back into contact a couple years ago. She's a passionate devotee of the most anti-religionist/extremist part of the gnu atheism movement, and her entire interest in Islam is limited to how less progressive Muslims treat women--for her, that's the whole religion. Today, she started sharing FB posts from the English Defence League. I haven't really taken the time to read the posts carefully, but I'm guessing they do a good job of getting out a message that an anti-theist can get behind while obscuring the nastier parts of their worldview/ideology/methodology. I'm really not in the mood/don't really have the time to dedicate to trying to get her to do her due diligence re: the kinds of groups she supports. It's remarkable how easy it can be for someone to just go "hey, this sounds cool" and help to spread something so problematic in an unwitting way. Le sigh. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 14:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

It's the Reblog problem. She probably saw it on a friend's feed and was like COOL and reblogged the post, which leads back to the source, without ever going to the mother page of the content at all. It happens on Tumblr all the time, and it happens on Facebook just as often.±KnightOfTL;DR^{garrulous en guerre} 14:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I went to high school with a guy who became a fairly prominent member of the EDL. He got jailed for a football riot a couple years ago. He was actually quite a cool guy, the few times I found myself hanging out with him, when he wasn't smashing people's faces in.

Political crap on Facebook pisses me off. I either ignore the people that post it or delete them if they're saying something particularly stupid. I deleted someone yesterday who I haven't seen in over a year because he shared a picture of an aborted foetus with the caption "Women, say no to abortion!" I don't need that on my newsfeed tankyaverymuch. El Taj^{Don't make me do stuff} 14:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

The most rabid anti-theists tend to latch onto anything that will discredit religion. That's how you end up with stuff like Zeitgeist or atheists lifting canards right out of the playbook of rabid fundamentalists. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

What Neb said. I don't many people look at the detail and small print too closely providing the gist agrees with them. The number of times I've voted on a WIGO without clicking the link... man, that is just embarrassing. ^theist 21:18, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Send her Muslamic Rayguns - David Gerard (talk) 22:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I love the "Jungle Remix" of that one.... fracking hilarious, it's on my youtube favourites. -- 10:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

For those who remember...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U-NHTW2-Ps

ħuman 07:48, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Means nothing to me! Scream!! (talk) 10:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, shaddup you face. Sophie^{because liberals} 10:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Quantitative predictions for winning an election

Of course it's always interesting to see the Sensible Party candidate in line to defeat the Silly Party candidate in any election, but can it be predicted? What do we think of analysts who put together numbers like this or this or this or this or this? (I tried to find one on Fox News...but they don't have one...I guess the math is just too difficult for them). -- Seth Peck (talk) 23:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

RW Opinion Poll on the 2012 Election

Because we all know how fantastically objective and reliable opinion polls are, I have created one just for the RW community. Feel free to join in.

• User:Voxhumana/2012 Election‎‎

VOX^HUMANA 23:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Webhost wondering

It's time to get a website for my stuff. What's a good webhost for a site that will end up hosting mp3s (probably quite long), photos and probably a bit of video? Sophie^{because liberals} 14:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Youtube. You mean a public website, right? My apologies if you're just looking for a storage service (although Youtube could work for that as well)--User:Brxbrx/sig 15:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd say MySpace, but you'd probably hunt me down and kill me. Doesn't your ISP offer a web hosting service? --PsyGremlinПоговорите! 15:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I was thinking of a website of my own, so I was in charge of content management. Sophie^{because liberals} 15:56, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, I won't kill you for suggesting myspace, but I invite the RW community to visit South Africa for their holidays just to point and laugh at you. Sophie^{because liberals} 15:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I have been running that co-op server for a while now (where RWW is) and still have space for a couple more accounts. Let me know if you want more details on that. Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Will I get any RWW on me? Sophie^{because liberals} 20:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

RWW is a like a terror squid spreading its venomous tentacles everywhere. Simply by speaking of it, your website has been poisoned. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

For something a bit smaller, they're far from perfect, but Dreamhost are competent and offer fairly cheap virtual hosts which have served me well for a bunch of years now. They're employee-owned and they support charities and all that good stuff.

However wherever you land up I would generally caution ordinary users that administrating a web site is a bunch of work. Check what the web host will support for you at the price stated, and reconcile yourself to customising as little as you can bear beyond that. The more you tweak the more of the rest of your life will be spent keeping things working and secure. And if you're not getting paid that will get old fast. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

True. RIP Blightynet. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I second Dreamhost. I've been a satisfied customer of theirs for several years now. They're good people. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 06:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, after thinking about it a moment, if you want hosted content management as well as hosting (in other words, a built-in front end), you might want to give SquareSpace a try. They offer two-week free trials without demanding a credit card or anything, and everything is WYSIWYG, including changing the layout (but it's sane, not Microsoft Frontpage 2002 all over again). Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 06:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Dreamhost is awesome. I use it for my website. It costs me $70 a year. If you don't care what the domain name is, I'll put up an FTP account and rent you however much space you want for much much less than that. Then again, it sounds like Google Drive might be for you, if you just want to store media? ^{ONE / TALK} 11:21, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Liquefy?

It's about time we put LQT in the Saloon Bar. Maybe have a separate Pub (old) and Nightclub (LQT)? Bootmii^{wanna play nomic?} 00:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh hey Lumenos (or otherwise Lumenoid individual). Blue (is useful) 01:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

That would be the worst idea ever. LQT sucks ass, and is awful to navigate and archive. ħuman 08:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I oppose this in the strongest terms possible. Doctor Dark (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Not until LQT is reconciled to enhanced recent changes. The Saloon Bar is so active, RC will be clogged constantly with each new post. And getting the browser to save text that hasn't been submitted yet would be a major plus, especially since we always block each other around here.--User:Brxbrx/sig 16:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no effing way. Sophie^{because liberals} 16:19, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I vote no as well. Sam ^Tally-ho! 18:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Nope. And I even sorta like LQT. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Sweet Jesus, that's a horrible idea. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 18:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

No. Just no, without the faintest glimmer of negotiability. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 23:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Which troll drag this out of the back alley where it had been rightly ignored for 2 months? And why after 2 months did Human dignify this idiocy with a response? For fuck's sake I am sure some of you just enjoy the drama. - π 03:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sophie; He doesn't give two shits; Probably. Blue (pester) 03:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was two months old. Funny.--User:Brxbrx/sig 04:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Tea party thing? Freeman thing?

Republican quits mainstream politics to form her own government, sorta. Is this a new trend? and old trend? or just one stupid woman? --GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 18:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks like sovereign citizen stuff to me. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks like sedition to me. Theory of Practice Peer-reviewed articles for everybody! 18:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I look forward to reading about her arrest for tax evasion. -- Seth Peck (talk) 23:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll make the popcorn if you guys bring the drinks. I look forward to hearing her delicious bugfuck arguments about how, like, Clause 37(b) of Section 5 of the Food and Drug Administration's 1977 bulletin on what crops [totally just made that up] means that she is not a taxable entity under the Constitution so HA. And the judge's pained expression as he realizes he's going to have to deal with this woman for several days before he can throw the book at her. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 09:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

LIBOR scandal

Our financial wizards never fail to amaze. Taibbi has a series of posts starting here. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I come from a family of financiers. Nothing surprises me anymore. That being said, hopefully this scandal will force top bankers to realize that no, they can't capture every regulator and no, they can't get away with every way to cheat the system to make more money. Blue (is useful) 04:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Homo economicus comes crashing down again. Osaka Sun (talk) 05:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

It's interesting that the US actually warned the Bank of England some time ago that "we just trust whatever they tell us" isn't a sane approach to constructing a rate like LIBOR. I couldn't understand at first how that had been allowed to happen, and then I found out LIBOR rates sometimes track numbers that are purely theoretical anyway. "If you had to lend Tiny Bank some Venusian Plinks, what would the rate be?" "Um, but we didn't lend them any?" "No trouble, just guess". "Uh, let's say 4.26?" "Hooray, the Tiny Bank Venusian Plinks component of LIBOR is up 1% compared to yesterday". So they couldn't insist on any standard of evidence because by their own admission the numbers were sometimes completely fictitious anyway. Idiots. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The trippy bit is you can probably buy Tiny Bank Venusian Plinks derivatives based on that value, even if no one ever lends them money. - π 03:47, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I have a sneaking suspicion that the entire worldwide financial system is based upon theoretical constructs of fictitious numbers into vast systems of fictitious transfers of fictitious money. Blue (is useful) 03:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

When I have had the misfortune of teaching financial modelling courses the big problem I have is trying to get the students head around the idea that nobody ever takes possession of the things they buy. The common example is if you buy 1000 options to buy at $20 and at expiry the stock is worth $21, then you just get $1000, you don't have to ever have to be able to purchase the 1000 shares for $20000, or for them to even be available at that price for you to buy. - π 03:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh, we're into the world of perfect and imperfect wp:arbitrage, where conspiracy theories run amok. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Not the entire system Blue, but the same applies as in writing software and probably many other things in life. There is a handy abstraction (say, a financial instrument like a Credit Default Swap) but abstractions are leaky, so it is vital that you understand what's actually going on beneath the abstraction, even if you still regard the abstraction as useful. If you begin to think of the abstraction as real itself, you will get burned. Lots of people at investment banks had begun to imagine that the abstractions they dealt with were real, but perhaps worse ordinary people who don't think of themselves as financial experts have begun to believe in instruments like mortgages, insurance policies, etc. without grokking those abstractions either. My parents nearly lost their house because they wrongly believed the endowment they'd signed up to was guaranteed to pay off their loan but in fact it was only ever projected to pay off, and in their case the estimates were badly wrong.

Of course this situation is also, to a point, responsible for our whole modern civilisation. Fiat money is an abstraction, and having the populace understand why it's a good idea is a lot more effort than just letting people coast along believing that the coins in their pocket are valuable but not knowing why. Probably it would be useful if we all spent a bit more time acting like a small child and following every answer to our questions with a further, "But why?" 82.69.171.94 (talk) 09:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

You know who I miss?

Carptrash. Whatever happened to that guy? Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 13:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Compared to the weirdos who came after him, he's almost normal, and at least he played nice. Perhaps he can give us a wave if he's lurking. Sophie^{because liberals} 15:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Last edited early 2009. Time sure does fly. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Raspberry Pi

So my Raspberry Pi's came in...now what? I'm thinking about installing one in the car. Any other ideas? I'm kicking around the idea of making my cat a cyborg. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Child forced to wear a dog shock collar and live in a chicken coop

• Fifteen-year-old homeschooled girl forced to live in chicken coop and wear a shock collar; parents say they did what the Bible says

The case hasn't come to court yet but it should be worth watching out for it. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't know Ty's parents had other kids. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

one thing that shockes me is how many neighbors saw things, and said nothing. huh? You see a kid lugging rocks up a road in "bad shape" you report it.--GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 17:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Side effect of the individualistic culture in this country, especially in certain areas like rural environments: other people's business isn't yours. Even when it should be. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{critical thinking is the key to success!} 17:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't like being nosy, but wrong is wrong. If I ever saw something like this I would call the appropriate authorities. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

If they were really doing what the Bible told them to, the kid probably would have been dead a long time ago. Occasionaluse (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Maybe they thought somebody else had reported it? We talked about this in a psychology class, that people won't because they think somebody else will, or they just don't want to get involved. il'Dictator Mikal 19:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes yes, we all know the story about Kitty Genovese from PSYC 1001 or The Boondock Saints or The Watchmen. There's a reason why it's not a great excuse. -- Seth Peck (talk) 20:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I shouldn't have laughed at that... ^pathetic 18:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OMG particle

Give it up, atheists! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

It burns!!! Occasionaluse (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

God of the gaps in perfection. --Rutherford (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm tempted to put this in the External links section of conservatism. Almost all of them appear to be serious. Osaka Sun (talk) 21:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

"Jesus is the only God particle in my life...and the bible the only particle accelerator i need." Though, considering this is by someone called "@notkirk_cameron", I doubt it's sincere. Blue (pester) 23:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

This'll help with arguing and citing

Because I'm peed off with being charged ridiculous sums to read a paper. Sophie^{because liberals} 07:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

So what does this mean for any of research joint funded by both industry and public research councils? ^bomination 09:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

As an alumni of Manchester University (yes, the same physics department as Brian Cox!) I recently discovered that they are currently providing free online access to JSTOR. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 14:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

If you are in the US, most State Universities offer public library cards, and with those, you can access their article references pages. You can't provide a link online, of course, but you can at least read them - which is something.GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

About time. Science for the people! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

But you've met people, right? ^pathetic 09:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I met one once. He lives in my bathroom mirror. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I also forgot, if I'm going to mention Science for the People, the obligatory REDSREDSREDSREDSREDSREDS!!!!!! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 00:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

My uni (Liverpool) has free reference access to the public, which surprised me. Down in London most of the Uni of London colleges (where I was before coming ooop north) charged a fortune for public access, and even then you still didn't get access to electronic resources at most of the libraries. Anything which makes research more publicly accessible is a step in the right direction, and from the article, I'm glad to read the EU is considering a union wide move in this direction. -- 18:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Michael Moore is intellectually dishonest.

I've never gotten over my profound disappointment in the Big Man, whose early work I loved, after he decided that it was okay to lie if it served his agenda. Specifically, it was one of the centerpiece arguments in Bowling or Columbine, the idea that Canadians own guns but school shootings are somehow an American problem, that ended my love affair with Big Mike. Really Mike? Really? You sure, Mike?. At least this guy waited until after you won the Academy Award for your mendacious work. Reason I bring this up? Another non-existent gun-related tragedy in Soviet Canuckistan. Guns. I hate them. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Wait before making a political analysis on this. I'm a Torontonian myself, and by all accounts these past few months have been rare. Gun crime rates are significantly lower up here regardless. Osaka Sun (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

No doubt gun crime rates are lower. But to make a movie about school shootings and use Canada as an example of a gun culture that works while ignoring its own school shootings was reprehensible. And that lower rate doesn't make me hate guns any the less in the first place. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

And arguably Coloumbine is fairly well-researched and balanced in comparison to what he did afterwards. ^sshole 18:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think Moore makes any claims of being balanced, does he? I sort of see his movies as presenting one side of an argument, which is fine, if that's what you admit you're doing. I think of a movie like Sicko the way I think of a prosecutor in a criminal case; they present the evidence that supports their position, but leave the counter arguments to others. I think Sicko does a decent job of presenting problems with the US healthcare system, but does a terrible job of presenting problems with the alternatives, instead making France seem like the land of milk and honey. But we hear about all the evils of socialized medicine from enough places that I guess we don't need him to tell us them as well. Just don't watch his movies thinking your getting a balanced argument. DickTurpis (talk) 22:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Isn't the fact, that he is selling his movies as "documentaries" kind of contradicting your argument? I was under the impression that documentaries were supposed to be kind of impartial. Don't get me wrong; I support Moore's standpoint but everything he did after Columbine was just purest partisan propaganda--Th. Bernhard (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that "documentary" implies "NPOV". I don't read it that way, at least. They are nonfiction and are supposed to be basically factually accurate, but that doesn't mean they don't conveniently leave out facts that don't support their hypothesis. Yes, a very good documentary will be largely impartial, but I wouldn't call Moore's films the paragon of the genre. DickTurpis (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I had many many discussions about the NPOV of documentaries. All of them kinda pointless. I would say this: A documentary filmmaker may of course hold his/her own views, but they should not be forced upon the viewer. One of my most favourite documentaries is Fog of War. I've seen Errol Morris talk rather badly about McNamara, but his documentary leaves me the option to make my own decision about McNamara. That's something Moore rarely does. Btw: One of the scenes of Fahreheit that irritated me the most was about members of Congress volunteering their children. Would that even be legal in the US?--Th. Bernhard (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Having a point of view is fine. Leaving out easy-to-access information that directly contradicts the argument you are trying to present is what we call "lying." Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 00:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I was also a huge fan but I lost faith in him with Farenheit 9/11. When I found myself defending Bush against his accusations, I knew he had gone WAY too far. (Case in point - "Ohmigod! The Secret Service are guarding the Saudi Embassy! What dubious, dodgy business is going on here???". Um, yeah the Secret Service also guard all of the other embassies, that's part of their freaking job. It's a requirement under Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention, thus the Australian Federal Police guard all the embassies in Australia, etc. VOX^HUMANA 00:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

To echo Theory of Practice's point: I Hate Guns. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeesh... dare I ask what people think of John Pilger documentaries? Q0 (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh course he is intellectually dishonest, he is Michael Moore. Talsley (talk) 23:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hollywood values redux

Since The Dark Knight Rises will be in theatres by the end of the week I'd suggest we start cracking down on "Christopher Nolan is pushing PATRIOT" and other claims.

See WIGO:World. Batman is now an Obama propaganda series to the far-right, apparently. Osaka Sun (talk) 01:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Kryptonite is a threat to God's intelligent design! ^{— Unsigned, by: 99.235.129.26 / talk / contribs}

Glad someone's already noticed this, I read the MJ version and was about to be scathing about this idiocy. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 03:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The issue has been raised at CP.

A few points as a comic book fan:

• Bane has been a Bat-villain for nearly twenty years now.
• He's already appeared in a Batman movie -- the abysmally bad Batman and Robin from 1997
• The writer who created the character (Chuck Dixon) is a conservative Republican, and one report I've read says he's concerned about the name similarity hurting Romney. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Trolling Shell

Sorry to just linkspam, but this is brilliant. Basically, Shell are trying to crowdsource a new advert, and the Internet has responded beautifully. I don't imagine it'll stay up for long... rpeh •T•C•E• 10:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

How is it brilliant? Because it fooled you into thinking it was actually by Shell? It's apparent that this does not require brilliance. It's crudely done and I'm surprised it survived a second glance. Or maybe you didn't give it one? 82.69.171.94 (talk) 10:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

No, because it's a damn funny parody of the real thing. The Symphony of Noise ^{The official spikey-haired skeptical punk} 10:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Meh, sure enough KYM has an entry on this attempted forced meme. The Yes Men correspondingly go further down in my estimation for working with Greenpeace on the campaign. Would they still be "culture jamming" if they made a video where a fake Obama aide seems to admit that he's a Muslim intent on enforcing Soviet style central government? How about if they did it for the Republican party? Or would that finally be the moment where somebody realises "You're just another PR agency". 82.69.171.94 (talk) 11:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Because we burnt all the oil, and people still want plastics, dyes, medicines, coatings, fabric and so on, we need to go drilling for it in obscure places. This isn't entirely Shell's fault. ^theist 19:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what is going on above (troll quotes go?), but damn this is hilarious. Q0 (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Best. Trolling. Ever.

Srsly, get there before they catch on. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:55, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Update: Poe'd Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Oy Vey.

There's this idea floating around in my (WOEFULLY UNEDUCATED) family (who's misson is to stop me from going to medical school) that "Obamacare" is causing doctors to quit in droves and clinics to be shut down. The supposed reason for the Systematic Destruction of Healthcare As We Know It is "doctors aren't getting paid anything anymore!!!" No other reasons were shared. Naturally, they heard this on Fox News. Do we have any healthcare professionals who'd like to comment and/or give me some choice quotes to explain WHY they're full of shit? :P 108.236.160.94 (talk) 15:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

With the health insurance mandate, doctors may very well be making more money, since more people will have health insurance. Actually, while I'm technically a healthcare professional, I'm not a doctor and I'm unemployed, so ignore what I said if you want an informed opinion--User:Brxbrx/sig 15:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

"so ignore what I said if you want an informed opinion." Hammer. Nail. Head. Theory of Practice Years of being an atheist: 30. Instances of persecution on that account: 0. 16:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

We had that quote that was making the round on how 85 percent of doctors say ACA makes them want to quit, but when you actually looked at it was totally full of shit. Anyone have the link to that blog post dissecting it? Tmtoulouse (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure there's a record somewhere about the same stories floating around when universal health care was introduced in other countries. I was quite young when it happened in Oz, but I remember hearing people talk about how "all the doctors are quitting" and there would be "people dying in the streets". Now not even the most extreme right-wing politician would dare to suggest dismantling it. VOX^HUMANA 01:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

In 2022 someone will call the US health care system "Obamacare", (probably as a lark) and the Republicans of the day will rise in protest saying that it was NEVER called "Obamacare" until some democrat [sic] called it that trying to make it theirs, (the dems). C®ackeЯ 01:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

@Trent, I think you mean this post. rpeh •T•C•E• 05:59, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Last time I checked doctors are some of the most well paid professions in any place anywhere, ie all of socialistic Europe, with some quite steep educational life investment in order to get there. if they are "quitting" I'd like to know what else the hell they are doing. Working in McDonalds? Sen (talk) 14:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

There was recent talk in the UK of doctors going on strike because of possible cuts to their £60K pensions, I can only dreeeaaam of a pension of that order, and I'm sure British docs are grossly underpaid in comparison to their US counterparts. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 00:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The doctors did in fact call a strike (those complying refused to do non-urgent work for 24 hours so e.g. too bad if you were scheduled to have elective surgery that day) yes. Bevan wrote that he had to "stuff their mouths with gold" when the NHS was founded, significantly increasing pay to experienced doctors under the NHS so that their professional organisations would cease to oppose it. The justification for striking over pensions was that senior civil servants (who made the pension decision) did not receive an equivalent hit to their own pensions. That is, other people's belts were tightened, but not the people making the decisions. British civil servants have a reputation for being rather self-serving, perhaps some of it due to instances like this, and a lot due to the popular BBC comedy dramas Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

So adding 30 million healthcare consumers to the demand at a time when there's a shortage of 250,000 doctors in the United States will have no impact on cost or quality of care. Good. I get to spend 10 minutes with my doctor when I see him. Not adding a single doctor but 30 million more patients should cut that down to 30 seconds. That's called "improved efficiency". nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 17:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You're so hilarious, Rob. I wonder if you really think this is a bigger problem than the original fact of there being 30 million people in the country who don't even get that 10 minutes with a doctor in the first place. I also wonder what you think about countries with dirty communist healthcare systems such as Cuba, which has the second highest doctor to patient rate in the world, and a higher life expectancy than the US to boot. Let's allow the free market to decide who and how many go to medical school, eh? Q0 (talk) 22:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

That's a good point about Cuba. Once Castro being dead is certified as official, Cuban doctors will migrate enmasse to the US. This explains the reason for so many foreign born doctors (from Pakistan or India, for example) now in the United States. It's not that among 300 million idiots our public school system can't graduate enough qualified doctors even with Pell Grants and Student Loans, it's that foreign born doctors are motivated more by higher pay scales, greed, and the almighty dollar rather than some humanitarian desire to serve their fellow man members of the species. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 00:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Pioneer anomaly solved

"The unexpected slowing of NASA’s Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft – the so-called “Pioneer Anomaly” – turns out to be due to the slight, but detectable effect of heat pushing back on the spacecraft." Fight amongst yourselves. --PsyGremlinParlez! 14:55, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

"Psygremlin" (what a ridiculous name), I've read your rant and I'm 95% certain that your clueless acceptance of relativity means you're a liberal who opposes classroom prayer. If you open your mind you will see that the theory of relativity is wrong. rpeh •T•C•E• 15:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

You found me out, curses. It's all true - I oppose gun control in schools and eat babies for breakfast. --PsyGremlinTal! 15:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Funny, I oppose baby control in schools, and eat guns for breakfast. (The AK-47 needed salt this morning.) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

What kind of heathen puts salt on an AK-47? That's a steel barrel, use mayonnaise bitches. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

10 more to 6k

With ten more content pages, we can reach this next mark--User:Brxbrx/sig 16:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

And Human has 18000 pages on his watch list. What am I missing?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 20:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk-centric (Saloon Bar, forums, debates, WIGOs) pages, redirects, templates, subpages, help pages, and maybe some other stuff--User:Brxbrx/sig 20:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

so what? Quality before quantity please, before we start going "this site is growing rapidly." Sophie^{because liberals} 10:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

This is getting annoying

The Daily Fail just brought out the climate deniers again. Gore's Law erupts, and then the scientist in charge of the study tells the media to STFU. Osaka Sun (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Daily Fail? Sophie^{because liberals} 10:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Stephen C. Meyer

I have created a lot of articles recently on ID guys and I think most of them have been debunked now there are very few mainstream ones left to cover however an article on Stephen C. Meyer is needed desperately, he is one of the mainstream ID guys but I don't see much criticism of his work. His Signature in the Cell book is a piece of creationist poop that needs shooting down. DinoCrisis (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I thought that was the person who wrote twilightAMassiveGay (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Attention: Obese atheists

Just a reminder to join our fitocracy group. I don't know if you still need a referral to join, but if you do you can use mine http://ftcy.me/MQvy6g If enough people join we might be able to have another challenge. - π 11:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I just signed up (though I'm not an atheist. More of a nominal Christian leaning towards the agnostic.) I've just started walking regularly. I've been putting on weight since I quit smoking. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

You just got your first follower. - π 12:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Odd that a fitness site accepts e-cigarette ads. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Really? I use ad blocker so I haven't noticed. - π 12:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Really. There was one right on your page.

I did promise fitocracy I'd walk tonight, but I'm looking at the weather forecast. Feels like index of 99 degrees when I get home from work. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Aight, I joined. Too bad I just lost 17kg since I quit smoking which hasn't been logged :(. --GTac (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

But I enjoy my general state of appalling health. ^gnostic 19:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course. You have no reason to live so why be healthy and prolong your existence? Talsley (talk) 23:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Considering that e-cigarettes are a healthier alternative to regular cigarettes and their primary market is existing tobacco smokers, this isn't too odd. (Aside: why 'electronic cigarettes' rather than 'electric cigarettes'? The latter is more logical and sounds steampunk-y.) --Tweenk (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, electric cigarettes sound awesome. I want to taste the lightning. --GTac (talk) 05:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

E-cigs? Terrorist! Sophie^{because liberals} 08:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thought Michelle Bachmann couldn't get any crazier?

Think again! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That's not crazy, that's scary. She's basically advocating McCarthyism for Muslims. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:08, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Not that that's anything new. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

On a related note, John McCain reminds us why he was once the Republican Democrats admired. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

McCain is getting a lot of credit from teh eevil liebural media for this. I'd also like to raise a glass to him for taking the time to do something like this. rpeh •T•C•E• 18:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That's refreshing to hear from McCain. Unfortunately, he will probably die fighting the war on homosexuality, even after it's long over. Like one of those Japanese guys stranded on an island. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

McCain was once the one Republican that the commie libs loved. By the summer of 2008, he became Hitler reincarnated (n the same vein that Hitler's ghost had migrated from Nixon to Ford to Reagan to Poppy Bush to Bob Dole to GW Bush; it's currently in transit from McCain to Romeny.) nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 22:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You mean when he sold out everything be believed in try to placate the noisy minority on the far-right of his party and then picked/got saddled with (depending on who you ask) an unvetted nutcase as a running mate? Couldn't imagine why. Romney is lucky things have gone so bad for Obama that he is neck and neck, otherwise he would return an even poorer result then McCain. Tmtoulouse, and nobody else 12:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm really looking forward to the MN political fights between her and Keith Ellison. I got a call from Ellison's office yesterday telling me to call Michelle Bachmann and tell her "that using scare tactics for political gain is not the American way!" The Symphony of Noise ^{The official spikey-haired skeptical punk} 11:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Why didn't he just call her himself? Tmtoulouse, and nobody else 12:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Jesus, even John Boehner is trying hard to distance himself from this whole thing. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 22:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

So Bachman's off the short list of VP choices; BFD. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 11:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party, Rob? Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 11:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I was forced to join when I went under deep cover. One of the hazards of being a professional operative. But my heart was never in it. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 12:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, you must be Robert-ski from the party meetings back in '88! Pleasure to see you again, comrade!

I always suspected you were an FBI plant. When you sang the Internationale it sounded too rehearsed. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I should wooooosh Rob for missing my point, or if he gets it and is just playing along. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 12:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

So Rob's a plant? That explains the lack of intelligence. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

That gun thing

Home Office reports homicide rate at 30-year low. Good to know that atheistic Britain England and Wales are doing something right. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Ironic, after you have the prior article suggesting god tells mexicans to shoot black kids. ;-) --GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 18:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

An Hisanic born in the United States is not a Mexicans. Neither are they a "Mexican-American". And refereeing to an Hispanic as Mexican some Hispanics would consider a racial slur. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

White Hispanic--99.108.68.168 (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

And yet so many of them (the vast majority in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado) self identify as mexican.GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 19:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hispanics in New Mexico have been in New Mexico for 400 years. They are not now, nor have their forebears ever been, Mexican. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 20:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Not even when New Mexico was part of Mexico? Sophie^{because liberals} 20:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Instead of telling us your bullshit of what YOU think, Rob, how bout actually talking to the people you are speaking for. I know here, there is a serious sense of pride in being Mexican. not hispanic (which still relates to the dominant Spain) but Mexican. "mexican american" often, but not "hispanic american". You make me laugh, cause you speak out of how you think the world should be, instead of how it is. GodotQu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons 23:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

"A" hispanic, not "an" hispanic. I hate people who don't know the correct use of indefinite articles. If you pronounce the 'H" you use an "a". If you think there are exceptions like "an historic..." you are wrong. People used to write "an historic" because it used to be pronounced "'istoreek" (up until about WWI). However the pronunciation changed, but ignorant people thought they should keep using "an" because they were told to do so in outdated grammar textbooks. Likewise I write "a herb" and Americans write "an herb" reflecting the variance in pronunciation. VOX^HUMANA 21:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Jesus, it's no wonder nobody likes you. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 23:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Duuuuuuude. Am I on RW or WP here? There are bigger fish to fry in this discussion alone. Q0 (talk) 21:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Are you trying to suggest that making a huge fuss about something completely trivial is in any way unusual on RW? :) VOX^HUMANA 11:11, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Vox, this is a written medium, so how do you know how Rob is pronouncing "Hispanic"? Even on your own wrong terms, you are wrong.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

If Rob is from northern England or Essex where the 'H' in 'hispanic' isn't aspirated - then I'll concede. (But of course, then he has a whole new set of problems, mainly, he comes from northern England or Essex). VOX^HUMANA 11:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Alrite marra, calm doon, nowt wrang with up nerth. ^moral 13:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Whut ah ya'll tahkn ahbout? Тy^talk 14:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

The most likely thing is that Rob puts on an exaggerated Spanish accent especially whenever he says the word "Hispanic". Rob can you confirm/deny?-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 15:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘For what it's worth, I used to work in a shopping mall in a primarily Spanish-speaking area, and there were a number of stalls there doing a brisk trade in t-shirts proclaiming that the wearer was Mexican, and emphatically NOT Hispanic, generally accompanied by an image of Zapata. Ethnicity is a complicated thing, even more so when you start ignoring and/or marginalizing the way people self-identify. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 17:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

You have to remember that the wing nuts always to get to define who is what; whether it be liberal, atheist, anti-American, commie, Christian or Mexican. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 19:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Hispanic is a complicated thing where I live, commonly marked by four distinctly different uses of the Spanish language. First there's the local descendants of Conquistadors. Then there's the influx of a different localized dialect from California. Then there's Mexican brand of Spanish (which is basically divided between a Mexico City accent, and more provincial version; Hispanics from Texas and along the border share these). Then in recent years there's a fair sized Cuban community, which uses many different idioms from what is used in Mexico and the United States. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 20:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Zimmerman: It was God's plan to have me shoot an unarmed child.

Nice god you have there. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 18:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

St. Skittles, a 6' tall child.--99.108.68.168 (talk) 18:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The only way Jpratt could be a more disgusting human, is if he wrote that whilst raping a 6-year-old in his basement. --PsyGremlinFale! 09:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Irrelevant whether he was 6' gang member or a 9 year old.

Anyways, is Zimmerman retarded? In a list of things not to say in your own defence, this is in the Top 5. Osaka Sun (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

So he reiterates his apology to the Martin family, yet maintains that he wouldn't have done anything differently and that, basically, God wanted him to do it. Dafuq? Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Is he trying to establish that he's insane? --TheLateGatsby (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

The onion hit me pretty hard today. Occasionaluse (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I've been away for some time

Whatever happened to our good friend Jinx? I haven't seen anything from him. It seems that Rob has taken over as the site whack-job..... Such a shame, he can't hold a candle to Jinxy. SirChuckB^{That is all} 15:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

IIRC he went off to answer God's call for him to minister to men. --PsyGremlin話しなさい 15:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Minister as in give comfort to? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Jinx? That's going back a bit, right? ^bomination 16:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Every once in a while, I'll see a post from him on a few rightwing hateblogs I frequent. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah he roams around a lot of fundie blogs and stuff, but he gets bored easily and doesn't stick around long. Cow...Hammer^time! 20:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Worst job in the US this week

Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates barely keeping composure in a press conference. Osaka Sun (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Who should you support in the US Presidential Election?

Yes it's another of those answer-a-load-of-questions-and-get-told-who-you-should-support sites, but they're often interesting. I got a 96% match with the Greens, 89% Democrats, 84% Socialists, 43% Libertarian (!) and 7% Republican. I agree with Mitt Romney on "No major issues", which suits me fine. rpeh •T•C•E• 10:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

56% Libertarian and 20% Republican? What the fuck happened?? ^bomination 10:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

92% Democrats, 91% Greens, 23% Libertarians. As expected. Blue (is useful) 10:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

But "Should Congress raise the debt ceiling?" is an incredibly stupid question. Blue (pester) 10:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Wait.... I just noticed one of the alternative answers is: "The Federal Reserve should destroy the $1.6 trillion in government bonds it now holds." My God... does anyone actually endorse such a solution? That could crash the economy of the whole world! MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 16:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's a government bond, so...Gold! Gold! Gold! Osaka Sun (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, that's just money that the treasury "owes" the Fed, i.e., money the government owes itself. It would be the most common sense thing to just rip them up -- they don't really have any purposes outside of internal accounting and some bonus bucks for the Fed from the interest on the bonds. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

86% Democratic, 83% Green, 51% Libertarian, 16% Republican. I come very close to Ron Paul on social issues, but we're radically apart on other issues. Which is that I've long noted about the Libertarians -- most people are very impressed with some of their stances, then they say "are you fucking crazy?" about some other stances. (And Ron Paul is an evolution denier? I knew he was a libertarian zealot, but I thought he was intelligent at least.) MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 11:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Paul was always an evo denier.

Anyways, 97% Green, 88% Dems, 39% Libertarian and 13% Republican. I was stuck with the birth control question - isn't coverage by prescription the exact same as giving a Yes answer? Osaka Sun (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

For amusement value, I decided to imagine I was Bizarro MDB, and give answers as far removed from my personal opinions as they quiz would allow. Virgil Goode was my candidate of choice. MDB (the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear) (talk) 17:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

96% green, 86% Dem, 54% Libertarian, 13% GOP. Тy^talk 17:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

75% Greens, 72% Dems, 31% Liberts, 7% Retards Republicans. --Rutherford (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I find it interesting that my stance on evolution will change who I should vote for in this quiz, Also 85% democrat, 83% Green, 64% libertarian and 39% Republican, though Jill Stein was 2 points off from Obama (83 to 85) for who i should vote for--il'Dictator Mikal 18:03, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

86% Socialist, 82% Green, 71% Democratic, 5% Republican. I find it hard to believe I side with Obama anywhere near 71% of the time, though the others sound about right. Q0 (talk) 19:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘89% Libertarian, 84% Republican, 57% Democratic, 33% Green, I be the odd one here. :P--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 20:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

87% Anarchist, 59% Astronaut, 0.4% Philatelist and 110% The Simpsons. What do I win? --2.34.113.53 (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

89% Democrat, 87% Green, 43% Libertarian, and 25% Republican Sam ^Tally-ho! 02:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

85% Republican, 83% Libertarian, 67% Democratic, 13% Green. I side with Mitt Romney 84%, Barack Obama 67%, and American Voters 58%. Pretty mainstream American, huh? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 03:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Parties: 79% Democratic, 78% Green, 57% Libertarian, 7% Republican. Candidates: 79% Barack Obama, 78% Jill Stein, 46% Ron Paul, 7% Mitt Romney, 15% "American Voters" (whoever the fuck that is suppose to represent). - π 03:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

87% green, 83%- I didn't see the option for ending the class struggle by returning the means of production to the people and creating an egalitarian society where all share freely of the public bounty. I would have selected that one--User:Brxbrx/sig 04:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

83% Green, 76% Democratic, 64% Libertarian, 28% Republican; although, I feel I should mention on a number of issues I had no opinion on or didn't know enough about to have an informed opinion, and since I couldn't "abstain", I just guessed my opinion. Also, apparently there are no Pirate Party Presidential candidates in the US, since they have they frickin' Rent Is Too Damn High guy on there of all people. I think I'd agree most with them. --CoyoteSans (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

82% Green, 81% Democratic, 69% Republican, 63% Libertarian. Likewise. Some of the questions I didn't even understand, like "Do you believe in the theory of evolution?" I mean, what sort of question is that? And a few others like those on USian healthcare I had to guess. Also there weren't any questions about Obama's muslimness or which country should they nuke next. Ajkgordon (talk) 07:55, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I was 95% Green, 89% Democratic, 64% Libertarian and 13% Republican. This is weird since I would never vote for a Green politician. --Tweenk (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Green party in the US is less about environmentalism and more about democratic socialism. Honestly, I would have figured you for more of a libertarian. I'm pleasantly surprised--User:Brxbrx/sig 17:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

83% Jill Stein, 79% Barack Obama, 74% Stewart Alexander, 59% Ron Paul, 21% Mitt Romney. I wanted Jimmy McMillan though. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

81% Green | 67% Democratic | 51% Libertarian | 18% Republican - 51% Lolbertarian?! WTF?! I'd rather gargle with my dogs puke. -- 18:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

According to the quiz, 93% Republican, 79% Libertarian, 31% Democrat, 7% Green. Talsley (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm shocked; because up to now it has seemed pretty reliable. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 00:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Brx: in that case it's sensible. To be fair I do support most of the Green agenda (environmental conservation, strong civil liberties, limitation of intellectual property rights, government regulation to strengthen competition, significant efforts to stop global warming, etc.) with the notable exception of energy policy and agricultural policy, where the Green position is absolutely unacceptable to me. My impression is that in Europe these two are basically their only campaign issues. --Tweenk (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Are the Greens pink or red? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 17:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Economically and socially US Greens belong to "American Progressivism" (Not command economy but a strong state and socially liberal to libertarian) with a slice of environmentalism and pacifism on top. The euro-greens range specific from country to country from centrism (social democracy) to center-left (welfare-statism) and left (democratic socialism), but because for all of those other parties already exist, they focus on environmental issues in their programming. In your world they are radical marxists and babyeaters. --Rutherford (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Translated that means environmentalists are anti-business, anti-capitalist, anti-progress economically. In short, Greens are a Red front group. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 01:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

People's opinion of the Green's are a little bit like a Rorschach inkblot test. I think your description of them sums you up pretty well Rob. Damo^Hi 02:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Well I was lookin' everywhere for them goldarn Reds, got up in the mornin' and looked under my bed... Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

When the Progressive movement started over 100 years ago, the idea of Progress meant economic development. Today Progressivism stands for anything that retards economic development. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 04:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

So, Bush was a progressive? He turned a surplus into a deficit and lost more jobs than he created. Deny this and risk losing credibility whoa, you're ahead of us on that part Sophie^{because liberals} 09:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

George W. Bush was a big government liberal. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 19:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh Robbie dear, that statement will live in infamy... -- 23:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

New Wikipedia milestone

Don't know if anyone noticed, but Wikipedia now has over 4 million articles in English. Even though people all over the world have had eleven years and counting to create articles, that's still an impressive accomplishment. Sam ^Tally-ho! 03:46, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Even though it was created by a Randroid, Wikipedia is one of the best things about the internet--User:Brxbrx/sig 03:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

14 to go until we hit 6000 here. We hit 5k last march.Тy^talk 03:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

even though some of the articles were created by Brx, Rationalwiki is one of the best things about the internet. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 03:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

^{[citation needed] — Unsigned, by: Doctor Dark / talk / contribs}

. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

<rant> Wikipedia was not created by a randroid. Jimbo merely paid for the servers (or more correctly, they were funded by his soft-core porn site Bomis). Larry Sanger (for all his other faults and failings) was the closest thing to a true creator WP ever had. Jimbo regularly refers to his Jan 2001 email laying out the "five pillars" as proof he "created" WP, but those five pillars came about as the result of discussions with Nupedia contributors, and for the first year of WP Jimbo hardly visited the site. Most editors didn't even know about him. Larry, on the other hand, was involved in every aspect of getting the site off the ground. </rant> VOX^HUMANA 04:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Who cares, half of Silicon Valley are/were Randriods. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I know, I'm more ranting against the whole "Jimbo created Wikipedia" myth. Because most of the 2001 WP data is lost, the only people who can debunk the myth are the handful of editors who were actually there at the time. But there are not enough of us to drown out the "official party line". VOX^HUMANA 04:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Shall we ask Ed Poor to weigh in? Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:38, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Ed didn't even arrive until after Larry left. WP was a year old at that point. VOX^HUMANA 04:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I was being a seafish facetious. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 04:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, yes I knew that :). And I'm wrong anyway, it looks like Ed arrived just prior to LMS leaving in Dec 01 - there's an unsigned post on Nostalgia which I suspect is LMS telling Ed off for presenting his opinions as "fact" (scroll down two-thirds of the page, it starts with "Ed, with all due respect...") VOX^HUMANA 04:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

This stuff is fascinating and please keep sharing recollections about WP's early wild west days. Do you have any tidbits about User:172?. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 18:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad to learn this, thank you VH--User:Brxbrx/sig 04:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

No dramas. FWIW, during my little trip over to Nostalgia to look up Ed Poor I discovered the evidence of my very embarrassing LANCB from WP in Oct 2001. Lame, lame, lame. VOX^HUMANA 05:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Was it as lame as your LANCB from RW? Heh. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 05:04, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Worse. My RW LANCB looks quite dignified by comparison. VOX^HUMANA 05:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear... Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 05:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow, LANCBing Wikipedia in October 2001 practically makes you a LANCB pioneer, at least as far as wikis are concerned. I suspect the first LANCB would have taken place on usernet back in the late '80s. - π 06:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

LOL... believe it or not, I'm pretty certain I was far from the first Wikipedia LANCB. I don't have the who/when/why details (the data is lost), but even back in Oct 2001 my LANCB was considered a banal event. VOX^HUMANA 06:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The first ever LANCB happened of course in 4004 B.C. and is documented in Genesis 3:23. Read your Bible. In regards to Wikipedia, see Genesis 11:4-9 and fear God, because what He did once He could surely do again. Secret Squirrel (talk) 12:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Ed, with all due respect, you are apparently using the Wikpedia partially as a forum for the expression of your opinions, and for debate, discussion, and commentary (and also encouraging others to do the same). While a certain amount of this is necessary for the Wikipedia to be built, the main purpose of Wikipedia is to be an encyclopedia. Please make a serious effort to minimize these other activities. Please try to reverse your priorities - don't ask "Is there any change I could possibly make to this entry? / Comment I could possibly make? / Discussion I could possibly encourage?" but rather "Can I possibly restrain myself from changing this? / Expressing my personal views? / Encouraging unhelpful debate?" Please don't put in your 2 cents, 5 cents, or other amount of change unless you are quite sure it will be a valuable and helpful contribution.

I like that. And even Ed Poor's (he wasn't Uncle Ed yet) answer: This is possible the most constructive piece of advice I've received to date and will accordingly be quite a challenge to put into effect.

The earliest (surviving) entry by Ed is from Nov 29, 2001 larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 13:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Administrators

The flip-side of the 4,000,000 articles is the insufficient number of administrators: 3 charts that show how wikipedia is running out of admins... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 13:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It's more like the lack of admins who are specialists on a particular topic. Arbitration on WP is such a recipe for it to be balance fallacy city, I'm impressed it's survived this long. Spotting that flaw was where CZ got it right, although managed to completely screw up the implementation. ^{d hominem} 10:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Pamela Gay's TAM speech

Read it! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

So, shall we get up off our asses and do something or just troll the internet? ^postate 23:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you know the answer. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

You want to... block content in my country on copyright grounds?? ^pathetic 15:09, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Bah, link fail. Fixed now. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Not this, then? ^pathetic 11:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Michelle Jenneke

So how many times have you watched the video? I think I'm up around 15... Occasionaluse (talk) 18:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that, man. --2.34.113.53 (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm the one who should be apologizing. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Control your penis. Osaka Sun (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I like the Sabrina Salerno background music. Fitting.--User:Brxbrx/sig 15:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Any woman that can rock this outfit deserves a gold medal. --K. (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Cracked delivers again

The 11 Most Unintentionally Hilarious Religious Paintings. --PsyGremlinTala! 14:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Whut? That second boxing Jesus looks like a beefier version of the Dude from Big Lebowski. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 15:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Moar Colorado conspiracy

Here. We may need an article on Natural News. Oh, wait, good. We have one already. Theory of Practice "the standards of the site are ultimately an expression of the community makeup, and not a set of rules or policies." 20:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)