RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive334
Great News Everyone![edit]
I am more than pleased to announce that my Stephen Miller page is now officially in the mainspace. I have to thank two amazing people: Soundwave106 for helping me edit the draft, and Bongolian for moving it to the mainspace. Check out the page if you like!!!— Jeh2ow Damn son! 00:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Nice work! Kudos. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
The fragile internet[edit]
Some BoN just updated No Bullshit by replacing a YouTube reference to "This video is unavailable.Sorry about that". I don't really like that kind of edit; it seems to be a cop-out.
What should we do, as good RationalWiki janitors, when an article references a video from youtube or some other source and that video has disappeared from the net? If the video is gone and the reference in the article has no other supporting reference or artifact for the claims in the article, should the artcile be pruned and the reference removed? This, I'm afraid, is a problem we're going to face in the long term since there is no archive.is or archive.org equivalent for videos. This is a big problem for articles on youtube personalities who got their channels deleted for violating terms of service, and the article relies mostly on youtube references. --Cosmikdebris (talk) 04:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- In this case there appear to be 3 copies on the internet (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vxI74O5Q1M, https://np.nax-vlip.lv/video/DjC8nNT7K8m%2FNEY%3D.html, and https://az.yes-vlip.lv/video/aYyMyElAbKlOEHw%3D.html), but in general it's a problem because archive.org doesn't archive many videos and archive.is doesn't archive any. Doing a Google search on the video ID ('34GBOxPbaKI' in this case) sometimes turns up copies. Bongolian (talk) 08:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- One possible way around this is to archive people's videos. This has happened to but a many YouTubers who's channels were deleted (whether voluntarily or terminated by violating the TOS). The infamous Chris Weston Chandler has had several channels deleted but there's entire alternate channels dedicated to archiving his old work. Aaronmichael5 15:57 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Christina Chandler, she's trans now. I`m going to hold off on commenting about her other than to state that the losers at KF are still stalking and harassing her since they have nothing better to do than be hypocritical basement dwellers harassing people on the internet. — Oxyaena Harass 18:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- OK then @Aaronmichael5, which web service will archive videos on demand? Archive.org won't do it as far as I can tell: they have videos but do not archive them when you tell it to archive a page. Bongolian (talk) 18:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena KF stands for The Farms? Tinribmancer (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- That wretched hive of scum and villainy that's filled with literal pond scum harassing, stalking, and doxxing people different from them? The one that caused a teenage girl to commit suicide, which the basement dwelling owner then self-righteously congratulated himself for "being the only person who cared" about said teenage girl, and then proceeded to deny all responsibility for? The one where the owner received a dose of karma when Smith caused his mother to be fired from her job? Yeah, that one. — Oxyaena Harass 19:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Bongolian Try this website https://en.savefrom.net/. People use it to download MP4 files to their hard-drive. People do this to re-upload them should the original gets taken down. Chances are, it's not quite the same as what your talking about (pretty sure your talking about actual archiving sites like Waybackmachine), but it at least allows for the video itself to be preserved and re-uploaded as "evidence".Aaronmichael5 19:12 6 December 2019 (UTC).
- Speaking of that suicide thing, why was this removed from our Doxing Farms page? Tinribmancer (talk) 22:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- That wretched hive of scum and villainy that's filled with literal pond scum harassing, stalking, and doxxing people different from them? The one that caused a teenage girl to commit suicide, which the basement dwelling owner then self-righteously congratulated himself for "being the only person who cared" about said teenage girl, and then proceeded to deny all responsibility for? The one where the owner received a dose of karma when Smith caused his mother to be fired from her job? Yeah, that one. — Oxyaena Harass 19:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena KF stands for The Farms? Tinribmancer (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- OK then @Aaronmichael5, which web service will archive videos on demand? Archive.org won't do it as far as I can tell: they have videos but do not archive them when you tell it to archive a page. Bongolian (talk) 18:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Christina Chandler, she's trans now. I`m going to hold off on commenting about her other than to state that the losers at KF are still stalking and harassing her since they have nothing better to do than be hypocritical basement dwellers harassing people on the internet. — Oxyaena Harass 18:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- One possible way around this is to archive people's videos. This has happened to but a many YouTubers who's channels were deleted (whether voluntarily or terminated by violating the TOS). The infamous Chris Weston Chandler has had several channels deleted but there's entire alternate channels dedicated to archiving his old work. Aaronmichael5 15:57 6 December 2019 (UTC)
It looks like 'savefrom' does not actually store videos for more than a short period of time as there's no permalink. Bongolian (talk) 19:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Landlords[edit]
@Ace McWicked The talk about landlords is off-topic for the Xi Jinping page and I want to continue it here, you see, landlording is inherently exploitative, it relies on rent, you're exploiting someone else by charging them for protection from the elements. As I've stated multiple times the problem with landlords is a systemic one, not an individual one per se, there are fair landlords out there, but they're the exception, not the rule, and the power relationship between landlord and tenant is still an unequal, exploitative one. I recommend reading Proudhon's What is Property, it's an excellent thesis on the problem with private property, and is not a Marxist analysis, but a mutualist one.
One of the core differences between Marxism and mutualism is that Marxists view capitalism as being rooted in exchanges, whereas mutualists see capitalism as being rooted in property. Marxists also disagree with mutualists about states and capitalism, altho the Marxist definition of a "state" is a bit different from the Weberian one, since according to Marxists the Paris Commune was a "worker's state," or a "dictatorship of the proletariat," whereas the society we currently live in is the "dictatorship of the bourgeosie," Marxists view states as entities formed by class rule. That's probably an oversimplification but it suffices for now. Mutualists believe that capitalism and the state are linked, they form an inseparable bond. Capitalism, according to mutualists, requires the state to exist, and the state exists to protect and uphold capital, or "property."
I think saying "kill all landlords" is less problematic than saying "kill the homeless" because of the vast power difference between landlords and the homeless, the homeless are outcasts from society, whereas landlords actively benefit from the status quo. Does that suffice for an explanation of my viewpoint or no? — Oxyaena Harass 08:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena killing all americans is a good idea for very similar reasons. EK (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @EK Your average Walmart worker making $7.25 an hour and is dependent upon food stamps doesn't really have much of an impact on American policy, so your logic is flawed once again. — Oxyaena Harass 11:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I have recently read a book that at some point talks about how saying that a certain thing is "problematic" (more or less) is like saying nothing, unless the kind of problems caused by such thing are explicitly stated. In your case, what do you mean by ""I think saying "kill all landlords" is less problematic than saying "kill the homeless."" What kind of problems are caused less by saying "kill all landlords" and more by saying "kill the homeless" ? They are both statements inciting violence in the most explicit possible way. I don't think ranking them according to some kind of problematicness is something we should engage in.--A678 (talk) 11:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I`m ranking them in terms of power differentials, your average landlord is far more powerful than the average homeless person is, and with far more social capital to boot. — Oxyaena Harass 11:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- and... so what? I can't see anything good coming from such a ranking of statements inciting violence, and I can see many bad things. Especially, using such a ranking as an excuse to incite violence or even do violence toward a certain class. Killing a landlord (because its a landlord and for no other reason) is bad as killing a homeless (because its a homeless and for no other reason). Same goes for inciting the killing of such people.--A678 (talk) 11:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Typical liberal, it's no wonder libs always give way to fascists. They're too cowardly to do anything, direct action is necessary to enact change, whether you like it or not. I don't consider the lives of exploiters to be more valuable than that of the exploited, they sure don't see us that way. Pacifism is a privileged position, and I am not privileged enough to be a pacifist. Now will I go out into the street and murder someone just because I suspect them to be a bourgeois pig? No, of course not, I`m not an idiot, but moralism is bourgeois in and of itself, I shed no tears. — Oxyaena Harass 11:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- "direct action is necessary to enact change" <- What kind of direct action?
- "I don't consider the lives of exploiters to be more valuable than that of the exploited" <- Me neither. In my last post I said that killing people of one or another category is "as bad as." It seems that it's you that consider some lives more or less valuable depending on certain categories the belong to.--A678 (talk) 12:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Typical liberal, it's no wonder libs always give way to fascists. They're too cowardly to do anything, direct action is necessary to enact change, whether you like it or not. I don't consider the lives of exploiters to be more valuable than that of the exploited, they sure don't see us that way. Pacifism is a privileged position, and I am not privileged enough to be a pacifist. Now will I go out into the street and murder someone just because I suspect them to be a bourgeois pig? No, of course not, I`m not an idiot, but moralism is bourgeois in and of itself, I shed no tears. — Oxyaena Harass 11:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- and... so what? I can't see anything good coming from such a ranking of statements inciting violence, and I can see many bad things. Especially, using such a ranking as an excuse to incite violence or even do violence toward a certain class. Killing a landlord (because its a landlord and for no other reason) is bad as killing a homeless (because its a homeless and for no other reason). Same goes for inciting the killing of such people.--A678 (talk) 11:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I`m ranking them in terms of power differentials, your average landlord is far more powerful than the average homeless person is, and with far more social capital to boot. — Oxyaena Harass 11:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I have recently read a book that at some point talks about how saying that a certain thing is "problematic" (more or less) is like saying nothing, unless the kind of problems caused by such thing are explicitly stated. In your case, what do you mean by ""I think saying "kill all landlords" is less problematic than saying "kill the homeless."" What kind of problems are caused less by saying "kill all landlords" and more by saying "kill the homeless" ? They are both statements inciting violence in the most explicit possible way. I don't think ranking them according to some kind of problematicness is something we should engage in.--A678 (talk) 11:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @EK Your average Walmart worker making $7.25 an hour and is dependent upon food stamps doesn't really have much of an impact on American policy, so your logic is flawed once again. — Oxyaena Harass 11:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
The "wealthy" (whoever they are. I just checked and I am in the top 8% by wealth, and top 3% by income) do not have a collective mind, so your questions are meaningless. You also ignored my question about what kind of direct actions.--A678 (talk) 13:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Aren't wars typically controversial, even among the wealthiest classes? Isn't police violence controversial, even among the wealthiest classes? There are specific rich people who are problematic. There are specific people who have worked to cause problems in this country except for themselves. Lumping everyone together, especially an often middleclass position like "landlord" into some giant cabal is overly simplistic. According to this site, the average earning of a landlord is around 70K. Decent money, but not exactly elite. On average, engineers make more money. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 13:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @A678 Okay, pig. Go lick some billionaire boots while you're at it, and as for "direct action" any and all measures, if necessary, are acceptable. — Oxyaena Harass 13:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- So anyone who isn't willing to straight up murder the wealthy in cold blood is a boot licker? You want a French revolution on your hands and millions dead? Because that is what you would get from such a bloody revolt. There are solutions that don't involve barbarism. You may be too impatient to see them through, but setting fire to the system will put more people in even greater poverty and leave many without food. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I admit I am impatient, I`m poor and we barely have enough money to afford food for the month. So, yes, a French Revolution style scenario is appealing to me, I`m that desperate. — Oxyaena Harass 13:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- The battle is with cruel politicians who don't fund social assistance properly through redistribution...not someone who has property or wealth. All dehumanization is equally "problematic". Calling for the murder of a group of people per their race/glass/gender/occupation/status is vile, barbaric and the behaviour of mob justice...not social justice. ShabiDOO 13:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I am sorry for what I have said, but desperate times require desperate measures, and I am desperate. I personally have zero net worth, I am poor, broke, and disabled to boot, I got fucked over by the system early on, I don't think reform will cut it. I admire the efforts of people like AOC, Bernie, Omar, and the rest of them, but they're folly to believe that socialism can be achieved via the current system. — Oxyaena Harass 13:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- The battle is with cruel politicians who don't fund social assistance properly through redistribution...not someone who has property or wealth. All dehumanization is equally "problematic". Calling for the murder of a group of people per their race/glass/gender/occupation/status is vile, barbaric and the behaviour of mob justice...not social justice. ShabiDOO 13:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I admit I am impatient, I`m poor and we barely have enough money to afford food for the month. So, yes, a French Revolution style scenario is appealing to me, I`m that desperate. — Oxyaena Harass 13:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- So anyone who isn't willing to straight up murder the wealthy in cold blood is a boot licker? You want a French revolution on your hands and millions dead? Because that is what you would get from such a bloody revolt. There are solutions that don't involve barbarism. You may be too impatient to see them through, but setting fire to the system will put more people in even greater poverty and leave many without food. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @A678 Okay, pig. Go lick some billionaire boots while you're at it, and as for "direct action" any and all measures, if necessary, are acceptable. — Oxyaena Harass 13:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
@Oxyaena You said that you are poor and disabled to boot and that a French Revolution style scenario is appealing to you. In reality, I believe that such a scenario would be very bad for somebody in your conditions. Revolutions do not magically move wealth from powerful people to poor people. They usually move wealth from the current group of powerful people to the next group of powerful people. Of course some wealth goes to poor people, which often constitute the critical mass of the revolution and therefore need incentives, but you can bet that most of such wealth goes to the most powerful among the poor people, not to the least. Melody (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena "as for "direct action" any and all measures, if necessary, are acceptable." <- Gimme one concrete example. You are dodging the question.--A678 (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
(reset) There is nothing intrinsically wrong with landlords - eg providing for students in university towns - only with certain categories of landlords (and not just Rachmanism). Anna Livia (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Depends on how you look at it, I am against private property in general, but some "landlords" are just people renting out spare rooms, which I don't think is fair to call "exploitative," context matters. — Oxyaena Harass 16:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Some of my formative years were spent living with 4 other guys, always changing personnel based on who could afford it in half a crumbling duplex. But it was understood that the landlord didn't care. The landlord didn't care about us, and we didn't promise to perform anything less than nonsense. A cooler set of heads kind of took over before I moved in, but it was a place that had grown psycadellic mushrooms in the attic and had been known for parties for years, some that sparked wonton destruction. We Let some people crash, but we had to turn people away. Thankfully, it was a duplex, and after a lot of bargaining, only one half of the duplex was underage party nonsense and then ours was casual music-making and dog-fun. But we, regrettably, had to police the back door ourselves. The landlord did not give a shit, but my rent was $180 a month, so how much of a shit could I give back?
- And I mean this place had nothing. No central air. The internet, like anywhere was attached to the side of the building, but got wired through a window and caulked off. I lived in the attic, had to have my window open at night during the summer, once fought off a bat and landed on a cactus I'd inherited from the previous resident. If you want to own a plant, and you settle on a cactus, give up. You can either do better than a cactus, or you didn't want a plant. Nobody NEEDS a cactus. I needed a place to live that was under 300 a month, and I'm still in close contact with some of the people I met there. And it's for grown-up things, not drugs. What a world.
Being said, I'm talking about a bunch of kids living in a crumbling duplex, and it wasn't like it was always cool. I just like to remember it that way.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 07:12, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So what exactly is so wrong with landlords "exploiting" renters? In the broadest meaning of the word every company with employees is also "exploiting" them. So is every shop keeper who sells you an apple. It's how capitalist democracies work.
- However if by "exploiting" you mean "charging excessive rents" then that could be fixed by government regulation. No murder is necessary to resolve the issue. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:34, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oxy is a crazy commie (Mao-apologist aswell, it seems...). She mentioned her hatred towards this before when I talked about lottery winners being seen as "enemies of the state" by communists. Tinribmancer (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Poisoning of the well and refusal to address arguments noted. — Oxyaena Harass 13:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Capitalism isn't democratic. — Oxyaena Harass 13:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Neither is Communism nor Generalization. Tinribmancer (talk) 13:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- You don't know what you're talking about, Marxism-Leninism isn't democratic but not all commies are MLs. Most aren't, actually. Learn something about your enemy before creating strawmen of them. — Oxyaena Harass 13:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't agree on either point, Bob. While it's important for affordable housing to exist, landlords get to pick and choose who that housing goes to. So that's not exactly bad, if you've got impartial landlords But when landlords pick and choose which properties are worth keeping up, you get some shit that goes down. And yeah, properties are all worth keeping up, in an ideal world, but it's not like every property you own you can rent out high enough above value to turn a meaningful profit, and then you've got a property housing people who subsidize your money-making properties. People who maybe can't make rent, but what do you do? I've had a couple very patient landlords, and I've never had my rent subsidized. I've gone broke for it before, subsidized rent would have made a huge difference a couple of times in my life. So do I think the majority of landlords are out there taking advantage? No, I don't. Do I think the scary not-to-code housing should be easier to fix? Yes I do. Is there a way to give people the means to afford housing and get landlords enough money to keep all their property up to code? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 23:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- You don't know what you're talking about, Marxism-Leninism isn't democratic but not all commies are MLs. Most aren't, actually. Learn something about your enemy before creating strawmen of them. — Oxyaena Harass 13:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Neither is Communism nor Generalization. Tinribmancer (talk) 13:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Capitalism isn't democratic. — Oxyaena Harass 13:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Poisoning of the well and refusal to address arguments noted. — Oxyaena Harass 13:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oxy is a crazy commie (Mao-apologist aswell, it seems...). She mentioned her hatred towards this before when I talked about lottery winners being seen as "enemies of the state" by communists. Tinribmancer (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
speaking as a Londoner, in the uk, its a case of private landlords vs public housing vs housing shortages. since right to buy, housing stock has been sold off and never replaced, ignored by successive governments, none of which have ever met their targets for providing affordable housing. theres been too much reliance on the private sector to meet the short fall, who focused on the easy money of luxery flats, the buy to rent market and student accommodation, often weasling out of the social housing requirements or half arsing them with abhorant poor door type contrivances. as a result there is too few properties available for public housing, so many are dependent on private landlords, who are a mxed bag with legislation only slowly getting to grips dodgy tenancy agreements, rent increases and generally fucking over the tenant. assuming you find a property where the landlord who isn't a flatout crook you will be dealing market value rents, which in places like London, is extortionate. a significant portion peoples incomes goes on rent, 2 thirds I think, and often people receiving housing benefit are turned away by private landlords. even housing associations, social housing that isn't council housing, are being allowed to offer more and more market value rents, further diminishing access to affordable housing. in short a lack of housing, public or otherwise = more private landlords = skyhigh rents. the solution cannot rely on the public sector for new builds, and requires legislation to tackle the many properties that lie empty, tightening up protections for tenancies, and requires a non fuck headed government to get it done. so fuck all of use will get done. IMHO housing is one those areas like health and policing that is so fundamental to society that it cannot be left to the private sector. yet here we are AMassiveGay (talk) 23:48, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- California also has the same problem. Near where I work there are condos that are in the middle of a major intersection going for the price of the ones on the beach. To this date, only one person lived in there.Tanker One (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Ezra Pound[edit]
I used to like his poems. I thought they were really colorful. Sadly, I found out that he was a racist and a Nazi sympathizer. We should make an article about him. Put him under the portals Books and Race.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Go ahead and draft an article. He is of peculiar interest as he was a fascist who is highly regarded for his poetry. Probably the only one there is. I'm not certain that is relevant today however. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Ariel31459 We should've had an article about him a long time ago.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- This will require nuance of the sort that's mostly dead here. Fascism was attractive to many intellectual figures of the interwar period; the only reason why T. S. Eliot's politics aren't as notorious as Pound's is that Pound went full Tokyo Rose on us. Then you have the defenders of Roman orthodoxy like Chesterton and Belloc, who were drawn to fascism because they belonged to a fascist church, and most of their political writing was spent in defense of its claims. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 19:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's not being nuanced so much as it is being a bootlicker to fascists. Sometimes separating the art from the artist is impossible. — Oxyaena Harass 19:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Then there's no time to waste. Get to work! Also, when you get around to it, Plato's Republic is still giving people fascist ideas, probably more than Cantos.Ariel31459 (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- The only reason people admire Plato is because of tradition, Plato was a shit philosopher who hated those who actually had to work for a living. — Oxyaena Harass 17:02, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Being first in something always gets an honorary mention.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- The only reason people admire Plato is because of tradition, Plato was a shit philosopher who hated those who actually had to work for a living. — Oxyaena Harass 17:02, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Then there's no time to waste. Get to work! Also, when you get around to it, Plato's Republic is still giving people fascist ideas, probably more than Cantos.Ariel31459 (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's not being nuanced so much as it is being a bootlicker to fascists. Sometimes separating the art from the artist is impossible. — Oxyaena Harass 19:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- This will require nuance of the sort that's mostly dead here. Fascism was attractive to many intellectual figures of the interwar period; the only reason why T. S. Eliot's politics aren't as notorious as Pound's is that Pound went full Tokyo Rose on us. Then you have the defenders of Roman orthodoxy like Chesterton and Belloc, who were drawn to fascism because they belonged to a fascist church, and most of their political writing was spent in defense of its claims. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 19:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Ariel31459 We should've had an article about him a long time ago.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Another day...[edit]
... another mass shooting. And to think that gun control would've prevented this is really depressing. So why the fuck won't Mitch McConnell do anything about it?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 22:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Because it's much easier to blame evil violent video games for it. Tinribmancer (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Because this is what he stands for.
- Also, you're still on my turf. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 22:55, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mitch McConnell: #MakeGunsGREATAgain Tinribmancer (talk) 01:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- You missed the other big burst of violence that happened in Florida, a jewelry store robbery in Coral Gables that ended in a car chase and two people dead (one hostage, one bystander) before the crooks were gunned down by the police. That's the one that was all over my local news today. To think, this isn't even the first time when I've had to ask "which one?" about a mass shooting in the last 48 hours... KevinR1990 (talk) 08:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- What would have prevented this is opposing Neocon wars for Israel and immigration. Geniveve (talk) 10:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I would change it to neocon and paleocon wars against gun control. Because that would've prevented this and other mass shootings.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- What would have prevented this is opposing Neocon wars for Israel and immigration. Geniveve (talk) 10:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
"Capitalist democracies"[edit]
There is very little economic democracy under capitalism, with workers having almost no say in the workplace where they spend a third of their life at. The term "capitalist democracy" is an oxymoron. — Oxyaena Harass 16:54, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- You are killing me with all your logic! Just absolutely perfect!— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:57, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- The rich determine who you vote for, superdelegates, the electoral college, you need to have a certain amount of money to be a candidate etc. Your dismissal doesn't count as an argument against my point, capitalism isn't democratic. Why else do 50% of the American electorate don't vote? They know it's a farce. — Oxyaena Harass 16:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:02, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- You still haven't put out anything that refutes my argument. Mockery does not an argument make, it does nothing to refute my actual points. It's a kneejerk dismissal, nothing more, nothing less. — Oxyaena Harass 17:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- But what if I'm not mocking you?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I`m literal minded, it's sometimes hard to tell. — Oxyaena Harass 17:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- If you are literal-minded, then why would you have interpreted the comment as meaning anything other than what it says?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:13, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Autism isn't like what you see in movies, I knew the meaning of the statement was in doubt but it looked like sarcasm to me. It's like filtering out white noise, but unlike neurotypicals you have to do it yourself since your brain doesn't automatically filter 90% of sensory information out when you have autism. — Oxyaena Harass 18:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- If you are literal-minded, then why would you have interpreted the comment as meaning anything other than what it says?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:13, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So the US and Europe are not capitalist or not democratic? I'm guessing that you are claiming that none of them are democratic. But I don't want to put words in your mouth.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:32, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Essentially, yes, that's what I`m claiming. Or at the very least they may be "political democracies," (key word being "maybe"), but they exist ultimately to further class interest, so "oligarchy" is a better term. The average American has no influence on government policy, like determining tax cuts for the rich, whereas the wealthy and politically connected (often one and the same) do. So they have the trappings of a "democracy" enough to convince some of the proles a la bread and circuses but they're anything but. — Oxyaena Harass 17:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So Sweden, The UK, Australia, Canada, Spain and a list of other democracies as long as your arm are not democracies? Do you think, perhaps that your definition may be non-standard?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- They're political democracies, but not much more than that. Sometimes thinking outside the box is a good thing. As Zizek said, "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism," and Spain is actually pretty shitty, especially in regards to Catalonia. — Oxyaena Harass 18:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Zizek was referring there to Children of Men. In how the film portrays the death throes of the human race, which is something that is quite easy to represent, and yet its harder to show a society in which there are no multi-natinoal chains. (The bomb blast as we leave the coffee chain with take out coffee.)Cardinal Chang (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So they are Capitalist political democracies? (And, by the way, I live in Spain. Be careful of taking stories at face value.)Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- In regards to places like Sweden which follow the Nordic model, social democracies are an improvement in material conditions in the short term, and are definitely better than what we in the States have now, but they're still ultimately exploitative, albeit they export that exploitation elsewhere, to the Third World, and states still enforce conformity to authoritarian degrees regardless of the state of material conditions. Catalonia is a matter of self-determination, if the people of any given region want to leave let them, self-determination matters far more than bullshit notions of "territorial integrity." — Oxyaena Harass 18:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- They're political democracies, but not much more than that. Sometimes thinking outside the box is a good thing. As Zizek said, "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism," and Spain is actually pretty shitty, especially in regards to Catalonia. — Oxyaena Harass 18:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So Sweden, The UK, Australia, Canada, Spain and a list of other democracies as long as your arm are not democracies? Do you think, perhaps that your definition may be non-standard?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Essentially, yes, that's what I`m claiming. Or at the very least they may be "political democracies," (key word being "maybe"), but they exist ultimately to further class interest, so "oligarchy" is a better term. The average American has no influence on government policy, like determining tax cuts for the rich, whereas the wealthy and politically connected (often one and the same) do. So they have the trappings of a "democracy" enough to convince some of the proles a la bread and circuses but they're anything but. — Oxyaena Harass 17:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I`m literal minded, it's sometimes hard to tell. — Oxyaena Harass 17:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- But what if I'm not mocking you?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- You still haven't put out anything that refutes my argument. Mockery does not an argument make, it does nothing to refute my actual points. It's a kneejerk dismissal, nothing more, nothing less. — Oxyaena Harass 17:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- The rich determine who you vote for, superdelegates, the electoral college, you need to have a certain amount of money to be a candidate etc. Your dismissal doesn't count as an argument against my point, capitalism isn't democratic. Why else do 50% of the American electorate don't vote? They know it's a farce. — Oxyaena Harass 16:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
In regards to them being capitalist "political democracies," capitalism and democracy are diametrically opposed. Capitalism requires unequal allocation of resources and hierarchical political structures to enforce its societal hegemony, so in any way any form of capitalism can co-exist alongside a democratic system, even if only partially democratic like representative democracies, requires heavy regulation. — Oxyaena Harass 18:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- All these countries are undeniably capitalist. Your own description of them was description of them was "political democracies". Logically - using the terms you used to describe them - they would be "capitalist political democracies". Which terms do you want to change?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:28, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I don't think they're actually that democratic to begin with, anything that requires force to maintain is a sham, some of them are more democratic than others of course but my point is that they're at best partial democracies, capitalism and democracy can only exist in a partial, bastardized version of it. — Oxyaena Harass 18:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So you are pulling "political democracies" and going with "partial democracies". Is that it?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:37, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's exactly it. I should've clarified tbh, but political democracies are by definition partial democracies. Economic democracy in particular is pretty important, as is social democracy. — Oxyaena Harass 18:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- OK, but before you said: "capitalism and democracy are diametrically opposed". I guess if what you now define as "partial democracies" can be capitalist, you might want to row back a little on the "diametrically opposed" as well. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:57, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- True, but imo democracy can't exist when wealth is hoarded and monopolies exist, which capitalism left unheeded tends toward, so capitalism may partially coexist with democracy in so-called "partial democracies" but only with heavy regulation, otherwise what you will develop is an oligarchy (specifically, a plutocracy, unless the ruling class wants to style themselves as aristocrats again), not a democracy, and its in the class interest of the plutocrats to rollback regulations that prevent monopolies from forming and wealth from being hoarded at the expense of everyone else, which if not curbed in the butt will eventually result in the fall of even that partial democracy in favor of capitalist oligarchy instead, hence why I consider capitalism and democracy to be diametrically opposed. One can see how regulations tend to fail in the long run due to persistent class warfare on the part of the bourgeosie to roll them back in the rise of neoliberalism and its associated austerity programs, which really only fuck the poor over in the interest of increasing profits, hence "profit over people," that capitalism is inclined towards. Social democracy can prevent this from occurring but only for a time, it's why I call social democracy a stopgap solution at best. — Oxyaena Harass 19:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- OK. I don't like enormous wealth disparity which modern capitalism is responsible for, and I think that many implementations of democracy which we see are imperfect. (Well they are all imperfect, but some are more imperfect than others.) But I don't feel that capitalism cannot coexist with democracy.
- The problem, as I see it, is that democracy has become (or is becoming) subservient to capitalism. It should be the other way around, but that will entail a massive restructuring of the world economy. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Neither of us are reactionaries, I can see that, we just disagree how exactly to restructure the world economy, but we shouldn't let our disagreements get in the way of achieving meaningful progress. Left unity is important to maintain, especially in the face of our adversaries, who only love to exploit leftist infighting, and centrists, who tend to favor fascists and other radical rightists over leftists and progressives. — Oxyaena Harass 19:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's evident that while I'm social democrat, you are a democratic socialist. No doubt one of us will end up against the wall. :-) Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 19:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Neither of us are reactionaries, I can see that, we just disagree how exactly to restructure the world economy, but we shouldn't let our disagreements get in the way of achieving meaningful progress. Left unity is important to maintain, especially in the face of our adversaries, who only love to exploit leftist infighting, and centrists, who tend to favor fascists and other radical rightists over leftists and progressives. — Oxyaena Harass 19:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- True, but imo democracy can't exist when wealth is hoarded and monopolies exist, which capitalism left unheeded tends toward, so capitalism may partially coexist with democracy in so-called "partial democracies" but only with heavy regulation, otherwise what you will develop is an oligarchy (specifically, a plutocracy, unless the ruling class wants to style themselves as aristocrats again), not a democracy, and its in the class interest of the plutocrats to rollback regulations that prevent monopolies from forming and wealth from being hoarded at the expense of everyone else, which if not curbed in the butt will eventually result in the fall of even that partial democracy in favor of capitalist oligarchy instead, hence why I consider capitalism and democracy to be diametrically opposed. One can see how regulations tend to fail in the long run due to persistent class warfare on the part of the bourgeosie to roll them back in the rise of neoliberalism and its associated austerity programs, which really only fuck the poor over in the interest of increasing profits, hence "profit over people," that capitalism is inclined towards. Social democracy can prevent this from occurring but only for a time, it's why I call social democracy a stopgap solution at best. — Oxyaena Harass 19:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- OK, but before you said: "capitalism and democracy are diametrically opposed". I guess if what you now define as "partial democracies" can be capitalist, you might want to row back a little on the "diametrically opposed" as well. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:57, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's exactly it. I should've clarified tbh, but political democracies are by definition partial democracies. Economic democracy in particular is pretty important, as is social democracy. — Oxyaena Harass 18:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- So you are pulling "political democracies" and going with "partial democracies". Is that it?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:37, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I don't think they're actually that democratic to begin with, anything that requires force to maintain is a sham, some of them are more democratic than others of course but my point is that they're at best partial democracies, capitalism and democracy can only exist in a partial, bastardized version of it. — Oxyaena Harass 18:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
The problem with even light forms of generalizing[edit]
In the US due to the free speech Amendment the supreme court strikes down financial contribution limits to political parties, well oiled and powerful lobbying machines, agressive cultural waves of libertarianism, indifference to the marginalized and downtrodden and minimal conflict-of-interest laws for politicians...business interests frequently trump voters interests. It's very out of control and the push back is pretty pathetic. Canada has harsh limits on political donations and relatively generous social welfare spending to soften the social damage of capitalism. There is a far less severe destructive force from capitalism on society (but by NO means ideal). They have been more successful in Norway. In South Korea its complicated, they have good social welfare spending but big business owners are often the politicians (or their puppet masters). Similar in Japan but less severe and in more subtle ways. New Zealand has recently achieved an impressive balance between capitalism and social policy because their Prime Minister expressly wants to achieve it. And we haven't even gotten into the very complex Chile or South Africa or Russia. Generalizations re: "the problem with capitalism" are never helpful. And the solution isn't overthrowing the corporations or hating on business. The real evil comes from a lack of controlling the engine of capitalism which unchecked can easily go crazy and set things on fire though the greatest evil IMHO is leaving the people who got burnt to fend for themselves. Demand tax raises. Demand regulations. Demand social spending. Demand constitutional change. ShabiDOO 22:36, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Some rare good news[edit]
My friend, who was a diagnosed sociopath, apparently no longer meets the diagnostic criteria for sociopathy. — Oxyaena Harass 18:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Congrats?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 18:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- There's a treatment for sociopathy? Bongolian (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- His sociopathy was learned, not innate as it is with psychopaths. He worked hard on it and he no longer meets the criteria. — Oxyaena Harass 19:57, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Bongolian (talk) 05:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- No problem, I`m happy for him. He still struggles with empathy and shit but he's gotten a lot better, when his father committed suicide he felt guilt for the first time in his life, which caused him to do some soul-searching, a lot of soul searching. He also is bipolar, so a lot of his more antisocial tendencies come out when he's manic, or literally psychotic. — Oxyaena Harass 16:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Bongolian (talk) 05:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- His sociopathy was learned, not innate as it is with psychopaths. He worked hard on it and he no longer meets the criteria. — Oxyaena Harass 19:57, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- There's a treatment for sociopathy? Bongolian (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
National Socialist Movement[edit]
I'm surprised we didn't have a page on them yet, since we do have one about Wilders and his cult. But not on the collaboration party from the Netherlands during WO II.
In fact, could we erect pages on all of them (Pretty sure this is on mission)? Tinribmancer (talk) 18:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Considering it's about fascist history, it definitely is. — Oxyaena Harass 18:21, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Fascism is based on authoritarian and or totalitarian ideals thus it is mission worthy. Hell, when I did articles on fundie schools- it was mission worthy as they promote pseudoscience. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Added to the "to do list". Btw, these clowns too? Their leader, which has already been added by someone on the "to do list", is a cultural marxist crank. Tinribmancer (talk) 20:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Fascism is based on authoritarian and or totalitarian ideals thus it is mission worthy. Hell, when I did articles on fundie schools- it was mission worthy as they promote pseudoscience. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Just be sure to specify that it's the Dutch wartime collaborationist party, not the American neo-Nazi group. When I first read the header, I thought it was the latter; they have been one of the most prominent white supremacist groups in the US for quite some time. KevinR1990 (talk) 19:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Banning/tech proposal[edit]
It has come to my attention that all of (or at least nearly all of) the proxy IPs used by DMorris to troll this wiki begin with "2607:FB90:9". Would it be possible to figure out how the Conservapedians (Morris's site) manage to block ranges of IPs with their range blocks in order to foil Morris's proxy-based vandalism approach?Summa Atheologica (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Range blocks are against the rules of this site, but imo recent developments are forcing us to reconsider policy. — Oxyaena Harass 18:51, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@Oxyaena That's basically what I was suggesting.Summa Atheologica (talk) 19:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Range blocks aren't exactly against the rules, just strongly discouraged and advised huge caution. Also those kinds of ip addresses, being ipv6, are tricky to range block but it can be done. --It's-a me,
🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 19:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Great. Which pages did he edit?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 19:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Dozens. Lefty, how could it be done?Summa Atheologica (talk) 19:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Great. Which pages did he edit?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 19:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Range blocks aren't exactly against the rules, just strongly discouraged and advised huge caution. Also those kinds of ip addresses, being ipv6, are tricky to range block but it can be done. --It's-a me,
I can easily range block that or any other range if needed and will do so if requested but would not do so otherwise in normal circumstances EK (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Given that I`m the victim of large scale harassment by this bastard, and range blocks will help curb said harassment, I`m definitely in favor of Summa's proposition. — Oxyaena Harass 19:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm not going to do anything personally without a mod asking me but here is an example range block to demonstrate that it is possible EK (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Can we get an idea of the collateral damage of this particular range block? E.g., Who owns or is assigned to this range? Bongolian (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- EK I would suggest range blocking that range please. I would've done it earlier but you know, the MediaWiki documentation had me crosseyed. Bongolian, not sure about collateral damage but the harassment is more than enough for me. I have done range blocks before, such as on that Discord user that yelled about mountain lions on the wiki. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 19:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @LeftyGreenMario This should be a last case resort but we've exhausted all other options. It has been done. — Oxyaena Harass 20:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Good. Let's watch for a few days and see if he comes back.@EK, did you check the "prevent logged-in users" option?Summa Atheologica (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @LeftyGreenMario This should be a last case resort but we've exhausted all other options. It has been done. — Oxyaena Harass 20:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- EK I would suggest range blocking that range please. I would've done it earlier but you know, the MediaWiki documentation had me crosseyed. Bongolian, not sure about collateral damage but the harassment is more than enough for me. I have done range blocks before, such as on that Discord user that yelled about mountain lions on the wiki. --It's-a me,
If this works, could we try doing this for Mike, TDM2 & Lomax too? Tinribmancer (talk) 20:41, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I would oppose such an idea. Those three are far less severe and urgent problems, and Mikev's Ips, at least, do not seem to be related.Summa Atheologica (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- This place is going to the dogs: Forum:Range_blocks#No_Rangeblocks.3F. Scream!! (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- This site has changed, I'd say for the better. We shouldn't tolerate harassers, period. — Oxyaena Harass 22:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- WTF? How am I supposed to know this? --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 22:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Scream!! That forum was 9 years ago. Site consensus is always open to change and renegotiation.Summa Atheologica (talk) 22:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- A decision made almost a decade ago by people mostly not here anymore shouldn't be given much credence. — Oxyaena Harass 22:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- And if you have to cite some buried forum topic, there's a problem of easy referral for newer users in the future! It's not documented at all in RationalWiki:Blocking policy you jerks. What other buried stupid obscure old guard crap rule am I breaking? --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 22:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ace was against this too, apparently. Tinribmancer (talk) 22:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, bringing up decade-old forum votes that no one here could possibly know about is stupid. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 22:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- And it's just pure laziness or serious oversight that no one bothered to update policy after that vote. This serious ticks me off especially with that quip of "this place is going to the dogs". --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 22:21, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Societal attitudes are changing, back in the day people here worshiped Obama and regarded socdems as "insane moonbats," not anymore. Back in the day this site was okay with reactionary bullshit and worshiped reactionary bigots like Dawkins and Harris, not anymore. Old is not always "right" is my point. — Oxyaena Harass 22:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Not too mention that back then, elevatorgate had yet to happen, aswell as several editors & mods leaving the site (we even had Kiwi's on this site editing pages before GG. iirc, one or two of them had a mod position?) during the GamerGate controversy. And the Mona/Arisboch thing in that same year... Tinribmancer (talk) 23:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- And it's just pure laziness or serious oversight that no one bothered to update policy after that vote. This serious ticks me off especially with that quip of "this place is going to the dogs". --It's-a me,
- And if you have to cite some buried forum topic, there's a problem of easy referral for newer users in the future! It's not documented at all in RationalWiki:Blocking policy you jerks. What other buried stupid obscure old guard crap rule am I breaking? --It's-a me,
- WTF? How am I supposed to know this? --It's-a me,
- This site has changed, I'd say for the better. We shouldn't tolerate harassers, period. — Oxyaena Harass 22:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- This place is going to the dogs: Forum:Range_blocks#No_Rangeblocks.3F. Scream!! (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@Ace McWickedWe had exhausted all other decent options, and resorted to this one. How do you think Morris should have been stopped?Summa Atheologica (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- As a newcomer, I am in favor of Summa and Ox's purposal. I think we should have a mob vote to block IP ranges after this though, as we will be treading new ground.Tanker One (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
DNSBL[edit]
I encourage everyone to download Tor Browser (or Brave) and try to create a new account or edit a page, you'll get the following error message:
- Your IP address is listed as an open proxy in the DNSBL used by RationalWiki. You cannot create an account.
That's right. RationalWiki already has a measure it place to prevent open proxies from editing (Tor isn't really a proxy but whatever). DNSBL is not part of RationalWiki, but rather, is an anti-spam blocklist that a handful of wikis use. It just happens to block IPs that are proxies as well. I'm sure you can contact DNSBL to have an IP range flagged.
HOWEVER
@Summa Atheologica: What about the range "2607:FB90:9" makes you think it's proxy related? Doing a whois on 2607:FB90:9:0:0:0:0:0 reveals that this is in fact a T-mobile IP address range, not a proxy. Do you really think it's a good idea to block every T-mobile address? I don't think so. We already had a conversation about whether or not to block all T-mobile IPs a year ago. The consensus was a strong "no". So here we are, discussing the same thing ... again, but for a Morris instead of Grawp. Only this time, we thought a mobile range was a proxy range.—チーズバーガー • めん 
(talk • stalk) 05:28, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Bury me not[edit]
— Oxyaena Harass 22:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Good hit. I'm not big on Cash, but today that really hit me. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 00:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm Bored[edit]
There is literally nothing to do. So what can I do?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 22:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:To_do_list Tinribmancer (talk) 23:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Change your signature colors. ;) 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 23:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@DuceMoosolini Been there, done that.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario who should I block?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Learn to count to 10 in another language. Now come back tomorrow and tell us what language you picked and spell out the numbers by memory. ShabiDOO 00:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Make an account on Conservapedia and annoy this piece of shit! Hehehe. Tinribmancer (talk) 00:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- We've got a page for it: Help:Bored. Bongolian (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- LSD is the best cure for boredom in the world, if you’re into that sort of thing. Could also try to learn a new art form that you’re interested in but have never tried, that’s always fun. 🖤 ASELAಮಾತು 🖤 07:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Take up World of Warcraft. Hey, it worked for me, and still does from time to time... Kencolt (talk) 17:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Find a corner or a good window, and then stare blankly at the sky and the area around you for fiveish hours. It amazing how much you notice.Tanker One (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- This is a good chance for me to deal with my second cousins who are burgeoning on 4 years old. If that wasn't the intention, well, you all are insane. Scribblenauts is a pretty good game.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Write some fanfic. Anna Livia (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- This is a good chance for me to deal with my second cousins who are burgeoning on 4 years old. If that wasn't the intention, well, you all are insane. Scribblenauts is a pretty good game.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Find a corner or a good window, and then stare blankly at the sky and the area around you for fiveish hours. It amazing how much you notice.Tanker One (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Take up World of Warcraft. Hey, it worked for me, and still does from time to time... Kencolt (talk) 17:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- LSD is the best cure for boredom in the world, if you’re into that sort of thing. Could also try to learn a new art form that you’re interested in but have never tried, that’s always fun. 🖤 ASELAಮಾತು 🖤 07:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- We've got a page for it: Help:Bored. Bongolian (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Make an account on Conservapedia and annoy this piece of shit! Hehehe. Tinribmancer (talk) 00:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Learn to count to 10 in another language. Now come back tomorrow and tell us what language you picked and spell out the numbers by memory. ShabiDOO 00:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Any other fundie schools that could make good articles?[edit]
I want to make another article relating to a fundie school but cannot seem to choose a good one. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 01:45, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- This one? I looked one up on wikipedia (I just picked one from a list of "independent Bapist" schools on wikipedia, since I'm not american and don't know any fundie schools). Tinribmancer (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- How about Grand Canyon University? It's own slogan is "Private, Christian, Affordable".— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:24, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's an odd case. They used to be a Southern Baptist school, but they operate on the cusp of respectability, and do have a physical campus in Arizona and even athletic teams on campus. The most interesting thing about them is their attempt to finagle 'non-profit' status while being a wholly owned subsidiary of a publicly traded corporation. Now Dallas Theological Seminary
might be a meatier subject; they're basically the Vatican of dispensationalist heresy and false end-times prophecy. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 21:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's an odd case. They used to be a Southern Baptist school, but they operate on the cusp of respectability, and do have a physical campus in Arizona and even athletic teams on campus. The most interesting thing about them is their attempt to finagle 'non-profit' status while being a wholly owned subsidiary of a publicly traded corporation. Now Dallas Theological Seminary
Kissing cousins[edit]
Recent evidence shows that Neanderthals and modern humans engaged in some pretty..... friendly contact, ie literal kissing, suggesting that this Neanderthal-modern human pair may have been..... lovers? — Oxyaena Harass 15:49, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Sure. We all have some neanderthal genes.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, I was wrong about the "all" part. I was thinking that, as Neanderthals were a European species, it might be difficult for their genes to get to all existing human populations. Sure enough, when I checked, sub Saharan Africans do not share Neanderthal genes. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- "Human and Cavewoman make snoo snoo!" "There was a bone found from Homo Erectus in her cave." Cumulus Discuss 11:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Alice: What's 'snoo'?
- Bob: I dunno, what's snoo with you? 😜
- I think it may have been Desmond Morris who speculated that kissing developed as foreplay from socialized and/or maternal food sharing + the ability to walk upright that afforded the ability of face-to-face sex. Bongolian (talk) 20:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Geoengineering and rewilding[edit]
I know that in the popular vernacular, geoengineering brings to mind science fiction solutions like aerosols or carbon capture, but do reforestation and other methods of ecosystem restoration count as geoengineering? Technically, I'd think it falls under the category of modifying the Earth's processes to change the greenhouse gas concentration (as well as food production), and it's far cheaper, with a much larger built-in knowledge base for carrying it out since humans, mostly indigenous groups, have been doing this for millennia. Yet I rarely see the two linked that way. Colossal Squid (talk) 18:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- If it needs nature, it counts. Studies show that reforestation has a positive effect on the environment.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 18:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes it counts - the conspiracy loons all focus on chemtrails, HAARP, etc..... while reforestation and many other unsexy actions goes on quietly in many places - used to try pointing this out to them on Above Top Secret - oddly enough they weren't interested...... it's just not evil enough! see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_engineering for list of various types of geoengineering that are actually happening, most in small scale :) Aloysius the Gaul 22:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
If a mathematician were to use Set Theory: would it be possible to figure out the largest possible number?[edit]
From what little I know, there are large cardinals which represent infinite sets one being Aleph Naught (I might be wrong). Using infinite sets, would finding the largest number even be possible? --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 17:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, but no. Infinite sets aren't actually "numbers" per se. They are symbols telling you that it goes on forever. Because of this, it is impossible to find the largest number.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The largest possible number is 24. Nobody I know has any more fingers and toes than that. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 17:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- 42. — Oxyaena Harass 18:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The largest possible number is actually 1. Because no matter how big a number is, it is still just one number. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 15:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- 42. — Oxyaena Harass 18:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The largest possible number is 24. Nobody I know has any more fingers and toes than that. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 17:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- No, representing something symbolically is not the same as being that thing. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:53, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Suppose one calls the set of all mappings of a set X into itself, Map(X,X) = X'. In transfinite arithmetic cardinality of x < cardinality of x'. Even if you consider transfinite numbers to be numbers in the ordinary sense, there can not be a greatest one.Ariel31459 (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- The greatest number is nothing, for the sequence is infinite. Zero rules all! — Oxyaena Harass 22:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Figured I would ask. Saw this one YouTube video called "How to Count Past Infinity" by vsauce. It made me think of that. Thanks for the info. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I recognized that question. vsauce is fun youtube, and Michael is a naturally charismatic guy and they do a good job. Veritasium is really good too, the only agenda is to make math or the scientific method fun to think about. Have you seen Michael drink Ayahuasca? He's not reporting on any burgeoning untapped science, per se, but the "let's check it out" mentality is great. Radiolab is really good at this modality too. The difference being when I heard a repeat RadioLab yesterday, I couldn't skip it. But it's good content in that it doesn't have answers, it has epistemological premises, "what if we try" or "would it make a difference if" or "is this the full answer" that holds the charm. "but if not, then what?" is the single most humbling question I can think of, and vsauce Michael frames it as an exciting new endeavor, which is why I love the channel.
- I'm going to try using language here. So we can quantify "anything" as in the largest set of possible numbers using infinity. Infinity by infinity to infinity means "anything." I think you're asking about quantifying "everything," which doesn't work mathematically because we don't know the limits of "everything" yet. So I, as a person who is really bad at math, see the mathematical variable of infinity as something like a placeholder or a tool similar to pi. Pi is such a funny mathematical tool. We can explain it, define it, but who can say with confidence what the last digit of pi is? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 23:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Pi is represented by an infinite, non-recurring decimal expansion. As such it neither eventually repeats with a constant finite sequence of digits nor does it terminate. This is in general true of the irrational numbers. That pi is irrational was proved in the 1760s by Johann Lambert. See the article for an interesting proof that you may find accessible.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Figured I would ask. Saw this one YouTube video called "How to Count Past Infinity" by vsauce. It made me think of that. Thanks for the info. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Samoa enforcing inoculations and arresting aggressive vaccine liars[edit]
Is it fair to call those who spend a notable amount of time spreading anti-vax bullshit online and via other forms of advocacy...murderers? ShabiDOO 18:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Heh, trying to cure measles with Vitamin C. Chalk up 60+ deaths for victims of orthomolecular medicine quackery. Since Mr. Tamasese apparently called the government vaccination campaign a "killing spree", I feel it is only fair to use such heated rhetoric back at him. So murderer it is. :) Soundwave106 (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- No - the reason for the outbreak and deaths is not actually this idiot and others like him - it is complicated but the main points are the death of 2 infants from botched vaccine preparations and a subsequent 10 month delay restarting the vaccination program - which created a great deal of distrust in the government and the program. Much as it appeals to blame the plague-promoters, most of this one is NOT down to them. Here's another summary of conditions leading to the outbreak. Of course plague proponents are trying to milk it for all they are worth..... or rather milk it considerably since they aren't actually worth anything. I've even seen an anti-vaxer on FB BLAME vaccines for CAUSING the epidemic! Aloysius the Gaul 21:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Don Cherry Edit Request[edit]
Hi everyone. I'd like to make a page about Canada's racist uncle, Don Cherry, but someone seems to have started several years ago, and never got around to finishing it. It's on their user page, so I'm not sure if I should edit that, or start a new thing entirely. Help please? KGlife (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Start a new article.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 19:47, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Very good idea. I copied the article and rewrote the introduction in my userspace here. Hopefully you can fill in more details and references. Feel free to make whatever edits or additions you like! ShabiDOO 19:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Better hurry. From the looks of him he won't last long. I don't imagine anyone will care much what he has said after he is gone.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Could someone move the article from Shabidoo's userpage to the mainspace? Make sure to remove the link to the current one too Don Cherry KGlife (talk) 02:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Better hurry. From the looks of him he won't last long. I don't imagine anyone will care much what he has said after he is gone.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Very good idea. I copied the article and rewrote the introduction in my userspace here. Hopefully you can fill in more details and references. Feel free to make whatever edits or additions you like! ShabiDOO 19:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
This is a strange landscape[edit]
Did somebody get pissed off and try on lawnmower? I mean, I know, the saloon bar gets pretty bogged down. But it's so intensely focused right now. I've never seen this before. This is not average Rationalwiki Saloon Bar, is this gentrification? Gol Sarnitt (talk) 00:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't come here often. Also, maybe the banning of trolls such as UT and Mike's sock puppets may have something to do with it. Lastly, I couldn't help but notice that many valuable users are leaving the site. G Man (talk) 02:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- P.S. I just realized that the BoNs aren't allowed to post here, momentatily. The protection will last until the end of the year. Perhaps that might also explain it?¯\_(ツ)_/¯-- G Man (talk) 02:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @G Man Yeah we're finally dealing with our chronic Morris infestation, and what do you mean by "quality users?" — Oxyaena Harass 09:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena well, let's see -- as finicky as he was, Nerd added a lot to this wiki. Again I don't come here often, but I noticed that Dysk left, too, even after they've contributed a good amount to this wiki. Oh, and I thought you left, too. I'm glad you stayed, after all. When I say "quality users", I'm referring to you guys in contrast to useless trolls like UT, Mike, Morris (not really familiar with him, to be honest), various BoNs, etc. (Although admittedly, the way users reacted to their Saloon posts have made me laugh, on occasion. XD) G Man (talk) 17:53, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @G Man Yeah we're finally dealing with our chronic Morris infestation, and what do you mean by "quality users?" — Oxyaena Harass 09:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Black Panther[edit]
Our article on the Black Panther Party could use a lot of improvements, like it calls the fact that the BPP were militant "bad" when the whole point of that militancy was to provide self defense for black communities, be it from Klansmen, Nazis, or pigs. I think the article is extremely amateurish and reflects badly considering today's political environment, and it should be improved to remove the ultra-libby amateurish bullshit that was so characteristic of this wiki's early days. — Oxyaena Harass 09:09, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Does the validity of a statement about history change with political environment? I do think there's a greater appreciation these days for militancy. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:01, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- The article in general is poorly written, and I think its conclusions are suspect to begin with. — Oxyaena Harass 15:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's absurd for an article that length to have almost no references. I can help out, but I'm probably not the one to take point on that article as I don't know a whole lot about them. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 19:27, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- The article in general is poorly written, and I think its conclusions are suspect to begin with. — Oxyaena Harass 15:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Paul Kohler[edit]
Video is 7 sec. and in english. This is in Wimbledon. 2 questions:
1. Who is he (besides the name and that he's a lib dem)
2. Does he have any chance in beating British Trump?
Tinribmancer (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- He might. Stop me if he's actually another moderate.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Lib Dems are fanatical neolib extremists, I'd hardly call them "moderate." — Oxyaena Harass 21:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena That's not what I mean. Is he center-left, or center-right? Because if he's center-right, I want him to be like Merkel.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Merkel's a piece of shit, have you seen what she's done to Greece? — Oxyaena Harass 21:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- "At least she doesn't fucking hate Muslims like other righties" is something I'll hear a lot. I hope Kohler is on the left side of the spectrum myself, but given the polls showing Britan as a two-party state, it's impossible a Liberal Democrat would actually gain traction.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:51, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Merkel's a piece of shit, have you seen what she's done to Greece? — Oxyaena Harass 21:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Oxyaena That's not what I mean. Is he center-left, or center-right? Because if he's center-right, I want him to be like Merkel.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Lib Dems are fanatical neolib extremists, I'd hardly call them "moderate." — Oxyaena Harass 21:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
what is this nonsense? if this chap is elected then he wins 1 seat. hes a libdem so likely not even 2nd largest party and I doubt there will be any vote where he has the deciding say. what is it people think this chap can do? AMassiveGay (talk) 22:53, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's why I asked. I've never even heard of this guy, but for some reason, he hit the news over here. So I thought: "Let's as the brits on RW, they probably know who he is". Tinribmancer (talk) 23:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you got a stupid American. Who likes Canuckistan more.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 23:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- hes contesting the seat for Wimbledon. hes not up against Johnson, just whoever else is contesting that seat. he speaks briefly about tactical voting as means of forcing a hung parliament being the best option to challenge johnsons government. not him personally challenging Johnson. there is nothing remarkable about him at all, and the way he speaks lib dems have never won that seat before so might not even have a chance. AMassiveGay (talk) 00:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Re: Oxyeana's highly sophisticated analysis of LibDems and Merkel. Could you please explain exactly how LibDems are extremists? That's a pretty incredible claim. Second, would you maybe reconsider calling Merkel a piece of shit? While her party sits in the centre right (thats right by European standards which is practically far-left by American standards) she's contributed to social justice in a way that very very few politicians in her place could ever pull off (re: convincing Europe and racist-Germans to take in millions of migrants) and has also helped the EU maintain its vision of a humanist project. Of course she has also done controversial things which she ought to be critizied for, but "a piece of shit"? Should we murder her like those landlords whose days are numbered? ShabiDOO 00:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- As I've noted before, nuance is dead. Everybody is either on the side of the angels or the devils, and there is no middle ground. And moral rigorism is such a pandemic that a single fault damns you as certainly as that Fatal Glass of Beer. All I can do in the face of this is go cultivate my garden. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 06:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I have to ask; is that a Rush reference? Because if it is, that particular song is really awesome. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's a Voltaire reference, Candide specifically. The Rush song is another. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 16:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ah. Another fine choice. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's a Voltaire reference, Candide specifically. The Rush song is another. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 16:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I have to ask; is that a Rush reference? Because if it is, that particular song is really awesome. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- As I've noted before, nuance is dead. Everybody is either on the side of the angels or the devils, and there is no middle ground. And moral rigorism is such a pandemic that a single fault damns you as certainly as that Fatal Glass of Beer. All I can do in the face of this is go cultivate my garden. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 06:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Re: Oxyeana's highly sophisticated analysis of LibDems and Merkel. Could you please explain exactly how LibDems are extremists? That's a pretty incredible claim. Second, would you maybe reconsider calling Merkel a piece of shit? While her party sits in the centre right (thats right by European standards which is practically far-left by American standards) she's contributed to social justice in a way that very very few politicians in her place could ever pull off (re: convincing Europe and racist-Germans to take in millions of migrants) and has also helped the EU maintain its vision of a humanist project. Of course she has also done controversial things which she ought to be critizied for, but "a piece of shit"? Should we murder her like those landlords whose days are numbered? ShabiDOO 00:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- hes contesting the seat for Wimbledon. hes not up against Johnson, just whoever else is contesting that seat. he speaks briefly about tactical voting as means of forcing a hung parliament being the best option to challenge johnsons government. not him personally challenging Johnson. there is nothing remarkable about him at all, and the way he speaks lib dems have never won that seat before so might not even have a chance. AMassiveGay (talk) 00:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you got a stupid American. Who likes Canuckistan more.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 23:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Swinson has outright said she'd rather Brexit with the Tories than remain under Corbyn, refusing to have Corbyn as No. 10 at all costs, up to and including Brexit, is pretty fucking extreme. — Oxyaena Harass 15:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Swinson has also been one of the most vocal critics of Brexit, while Corbyn supports Euroskepticism, just not without a deal.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 15:45, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- You have a very interesting idea of "exteme" madame. ShabiDOO 19:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Indeed. My favorite - though highly improbable - result of the ongoing election would be a Lib Dem victory. Corbyn's Brexit policy is incoherent and Johnson's is suicidal.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- What you'd get is only a continuation of austerity policies, which are social murder. — Oxyaena Harass 17:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Your knowledge of UK politics is absurdly off the mark.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 20:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- im guessing you haven't looked at their manifesto then AMassiveGay (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- No. I imagine Oxyaena has just skimmed the newspaper article and didn't bother to get a grasp of what the party is and what their history/platform is. Generalizing from one quote of a politician as an embodiment of the political platform of the party is probably, never a good idea. You are way off the mark on all three accounts. LibDem are not brexit supporters, are not right-wing austerity supporters and are not extremist in anyway. I cannot think of a more mundane party in the UK than the LibDems. ShabiDOO 19:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah. If I had bothered to vote (I have a UK passport and could have done an overseas vote) but my riding is so overwhelmingly conservative and the voting process is tedious and meh. But I would have voted LibDem no doubt. Would be my favorite outcome (a lib dem majority...because pigs can fly). But they probably gave up their chance of doing that any time soon with their disastrous fuck-up by forming a coalition with the conservatives (or at least their really terrible job co-governing with them). You never know though. There is of course a 0.000000000000000000000001% chance of some miracle result! ShabiDOO 19:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- what constituency you would be voting in would tell you if a lib dem would be of any use. we don't vote for governments in the uk, we vote for individual seats. general elections are basically 600 byelections at once. if its marginal, they do seem to be pushing the tactical voting angle, and a hung parliament seems to be biggest chance of a no awful result. i'm not holding my breathe though. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I noticed you used the word 'riding' are you...northern? or worse still, from Yorkshire? our blocking policy really isn't fit for purpose. for shameAMassiveGay (talk) 20:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- My father was born in county Durham. So yeah, they use the term riding. But actually, my constituency, where I lived for a couple years and registered, is Gloucester. There was no chance they wouldn't elect a conservative member this year. I have always utterly despised the Westminster voting system which they suffer in the UK, Canada, Barbados, Jamaica etc. At least in Australia, Ireland and NZ they've made their system proportional. The fierce resistence to a logical fair democratic system in the UK, Canada, Barbados, Jamaica etc tells us only one thing. The tyrrany of the minority. The preference of people to let their will and party rule despite an illegitimate mandate. A general lack of consensus building and tribalism. Doesn't bode well for the future. ShabiDOO 11:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- I noticed you used the word 'riding' are you...northern? or worse still, from Yorkshire? our blocking policy really isn't fit for purpose. for shameAMassiveGay (talk) 20:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- what constituency you would be voting in would tell you if a lib dem would be of any use. we don't vote for governments in the uk, we vote for individual seats. general elections are basically 600 byelections at once. if its marginal, they do seem to be pushing the tactical voting angle, and a hung parliament seems to be biggest chance of a no awful result. i'm not holding my breathe though. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah. If I had bothered to vote (I have a UK passport and could have done an overseas vote) but my riding is so overwhelmingly conservative and the voting process is tedious and meh. But I would have voted LibDem no doubt. Would be my favorite outcome (a lib dem majority...because pigs can fly). But they probably gave up their chance of doing that any time soon with their disastrous fuck-up by forming a coalition with the conservatives (or at least their really terrible job co-governing with them). You never know though. There is of course a 0.000000000000000000000001% chance of some miracle result! ShabiDOO 19:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- No. I imagine Oxyaena has just skimmed the newspaper article and didn't bother to get a grasp of what the party is and what their history/platform is. Generalizing from one quote of a politician as an embodiment of the political platform of the party is probably, never a good idea. You are way off the mark on all three accounts. LibDem are not brexit supporters, are not right-wing austerity supporters and are not extremist in anyway. I cannot think of a more mundane party in the UK than the LibDems. ShabiDOO 19:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- What you'd get is only a continuation of austerity policies, which are social murder. — Oxyaena Harass 17:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Indeed. My favorite - though highly improbable - result of the ongoing election would be a Lib Dem victory. Corbyn's Brexit policy is incoherent and Johnson's is suicidal.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- You have a very interesting idea of "exteme" madame. ShabiDOO 19:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
How to Create a New Portal[edit]
I would like to create a new portal, and call it "Tech".— Jeh2ow Damn son! 17:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Why? Bongolian (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- It would be nice to talk about technology, the industrial revolution, and how the tech giants are pretty much controlling our lives.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:06, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- We once had a forum portal but no one used it, so it was mothballed. Bongolian (talk) 21:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm talking about a portal on articles and stuff. A lot like most portals currently on RW.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Also, how do I develop an icon?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 23:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- The truth is we don't have any portals like that. Not like they do on Wikipedia. All the links to "portals" on the Main Page just go to the category page. And we already have a technology category. But I guess there's nothing to stop anyone creating a navigation template for that category with its own icon. Spud (talk) 06:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I understand how to do the basics. However, I need a lot of help making an icon. Can someone tell me how to create a portal icon?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Any art creation software like photoshop will work. Upload as a .svg. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 14:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I understand how to do the basics. However, I need a lot of help making an icon. Can someone tell me how to create a portal icon?— Jeh2ow Damn son! 16:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- The truth is we don't have any portals like that. Not like they do on Wikipedia. All the links to "portals" on the Main Page just go to the category page. And we already have a technology category. But I guess there's nothing to stop anyone creating a navigation template for that category with its own icon. Spud (talk) 06:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- We once had a forum portal but no one used it, so it was mothballed. Bongolian (talk) 21:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- It would be nice to talk about technology, the industrial revolution, and how the tech giants are pretty much controlling our lives.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 21:06, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Cover story Idea?[edit]
I wanna know if it's possible that Adolf Hitler will ever be on the main page. I already nominated it as a cover story article.— Jeh2ow Damn son! 23:25, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- No one even considered it bronze yet. I removed the nomination. Generally it goes: stub/draft -> OKish -> bronze -> silver -> cover nominee -> gold. Bongolian (talk) 08:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Silver discussion is open on the talk page. Zero (talk - contributions) 16:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- To dredge up a previous topic, this article could benefit from removal of the snarky strike-through comments. Nowhere Man (talk) 19:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I noticed that. if only it were the only issue. see the talk page for discussion. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- To dredge up a previous topic, this article could benefit from removal of the snarky strike-through comments. Nowhere Man (talk) 19:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Silver discussion is open on the talk page. Zero (talk - contributions) 16:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)