RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive41

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. 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>, <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>, <167>, <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)

Recursive nightmare

I thought you'd all enjoy this one I uploaded from the awesome Armstrong and Miller. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I hate when that happens, totally fucks with my lucid dreaming. My record is about 4, once even managed to get up, dressed and all the way to work before I realised I was still asleep. ^pathetic 23:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Merchant

My eyes are filling while watching The Merchant of Venice! Does that make me a sentimental old moo? (I do feel sorry for Shylock though) I played Nerissa in the school play - a (hell of a) while ago! _& marmite^chat 01:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

That was back when ole Willie would drop by to see how his play was working in local productions? ħuman 02:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm watching Kurosawa's Ran right now, and I'm just being overwhelmed by the sheer artistry of it all. --Kels 02:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Frost/Nixon, me. Sterile paperclip 02:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I have got to get my own copy of Being John Malkovich.--Thanatos 02:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't that comment be in the section above? ;) ħuman 02:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

PPPPPS, I thought this section was about Natalie. ħuman 04:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

And I thought the title was rhyming slang. Merchant banker. Totnesmartin 13:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Π becomes one of the cool kids

This is my first edit free of the Microsoft shackles. I just wanted to share that with you all. - π 12:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's very liberating, isn't it? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 12:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

DON'T DO IT PI!!!! --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 12:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Way to appropriate for you. - π 13:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC) @Tetronian It looks kind of like a fancy new version of windows. It is nice to see that GIMP, Firefox and a lot of other things I use came preinstalled. GIMP especially without the annoying long load time. I am contemplating whether to wipe my uni computer and install Ubuntu on that. Upside, I will have a computer that works. Downside, ITS will lose their shit if they find it, not because it is wrong, just because it wouldn't fit into their Mac/Windows world. - π 12:59, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah another Firefox fan? Good, good. Strangely mine didn't come with the GIMP though, I had to download it. Personally I have to wonder how many more years Microsoft can stay afloat, particularly if Windows 7 isn't as good as they say. I just don't see how they can compete with Mac/Linux. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much because the only way you can buy a complete computer is with Windows installed and you have unwittingly paid out a couple of hundred for a licence. I built this box myself, but I still installed XP on it. I think the next box I build I will go straight to Linux. I tried Vista once and I am unwilling to ever try another new Windows again. I was told that Vista is quite good if you set it to Windows classic so that it looks like 2000. - π 13:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I've never used a Windows computer significantly; I used a Mac until recently, then Ubuntu. Cubic bastard Hoover! 13:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm very happy with Ultimate 7. (Especially as I got it for free.) I was tempted to go for Ubuntu while I still had Vista, which drove me crazy, and probably would have if I'd have had to pay for 7. It was being too lazy to figure out compatibility that always held me back. Fox 13:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

windows is the superior operating system *runs for the hills Javasca₧ What the hELL is that P at the end of my sig?! 14:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

WHAT?? *spasms wildly* (But seriously, what makes you say that?) Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I used Linux from the time RedHat 5.2 was out to about four years ago, and while I liked it and all I found it much tougher to use than Windows. I've tried RedHat (up to the point they got seriously proprietary), Mandrake, Slackware and OpenSUSE, and they all required a rather daunting learning curve for someone like me who's not very technically minded. When I moved and no longer had someone I could call at short notice for technical help in figuring this stuff out, I quickly foundered. If you're into the tech and have a head for that sort of problem solving, I'll easily say Linux of whatever variety is superior, but if you're not, then it's not. --Kels 15:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Ubuntu is totally load & run. You don't need any know-how (I can use it for Drake's sake). I think it was the users who complained along those lines that made someone do it. The sheer amount of free software and the ease of installing it is enuff reason to use it_& marmite^chat 15:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what I was told about RedHat, Mandrake and OpenSUSE, so forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical. The time I tried to install a webcam still haunts me. --Kels 16:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

<Thinks back> Yes, it did take me some time to get this mobile broadband dingus working, But that's the only trouble I've had. _& marmite^chat 16:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

A note to PI. You can buy a complete custom computer from any number of vendors without an operating system installed, including these guys (http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/) from whence I got my last gaming machine. NOTE: This is not an endorsement, I wouldn't recommend them over any other gaming machine vendor. I've had the typical number of problems from them, but they re an example of a vendor with the option of buying their machines sans Windows. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 14:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Π the n00b asks stupid questions

What is a good Latex editor for Ubuntu and do I need a compiler or does one come preinstalled? - π 23:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Assuming you've got Karmic Koala. Take your pick. _& marmite^chat 23:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)]

I'm a big fan of emacs+AUCTex+xdvi. I've also heard good things about Kile -- it's a KDE app but I think it'll run under gnome. I assume ubuntu has it in their repos. --Pyfgcr 23:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Editor fans are worse than OS or browser fans. _& marmite^chat 23:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Toast. I just got my new editor installed, works great. No lengthy install, everything I needed was there. - π 23:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's fun to wander round the "Software centre" (& note the spellinge) _& marmite^chat 23:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It occurs to me that the spelling might be 'cause I've specified Brit English on my install. Is it "center" on US install? _& marmite^chat 00:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. The executable is software-center. Cubic bastard Hoover! 08:07, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Know what's a really good editor? WinEdt. (Joking aside, Kile is good.)-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 02:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

If you don't use vi you're a pansy. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 08:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I used LaTeX manually, and I still do for complex documents, but mostly it's LyX for me nowadays. It looks like a clone of Wordpad, but it's actually very user-friendly, and you can still insert LaTeX-code manually if you wish. Give it a try for a week or two. Pietrow 11:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't use macros as I write, I just like to have an editor with a one click complier. - π 12:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Look Everybody, I'm infamous

So a while back I contacted this blogger about my story. We met, he recorded and took notes, and the final product is now available right here. Gotta say, I wish he hadn't used quite so many quotes... It comes off pretty harsh, I sound like a Black Panther.... Either way, I can't help but smile. I figured I'd give him the old RW Bump, so I hope you guys check it out. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Way to go Chuck! Although the blogger does come to the conclusion that you are exaggerating... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

TL;DR. Who's the guy with the chip on his shoulder in the video at the bottom, btw? Fox 20:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I know, right? ;) ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Fox you should definitely read it, it was very interesting. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I did! I did! j/k! I liked the routine, btw, and hat off - stand up must be one of the hardest circuits imaginable. Fox 20:43, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, and as I think about it, I'm pretty sure that I'm letting my anger at the way I was treated affect the way I'm remembering a lot of my time there.... But I still stand by my statment. The counselor is a liability and should be fired... But oh well... and the bottom is my stand up... Don't take that as anything but pure comedy... Pretty much everything in that clip is made up. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Interesting; on an unrelated note, you look exactly how I pictured you would look IRL. Z3ro^talk 20:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I like you better in Harold and Kumar Go to Whitecastle. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Zero, I don't know if that's complimentary or creepy, but I'm gonna air on the side of caution and say thank you for the nice compliment. :) and I wasn't in Harold and Kumar, Neveruse, I was in American Pie. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It was mostly meant to be sarcastic. I totally don't have a shrine built to you in my bedroom, complete with artists conceptions of what you look like. Cause that would be weird. Z3ro^talk 22:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I have such a shrine. ChuckB is my hero. ħuman 03:29, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Zero, I had guessed as much, I was just trying to keep the joke going... and Human, that's SIR ChuckB to you. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 08:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Internet sarcasm fail :( Z3ro^talk 15:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

What I don't understand is why you're wearing clothes. I mean, the rest of us are naked, right? If you needed pockets to hold your chapstick you could have just gone with a man purse. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 13:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Good post. I really like the conclusion that we're moving away from blatant displays of racism and into something a lot more subtle (and just as, if not more problematic) and almost unconscious. It's these small left overs of a much less subtle time, but it's going to take a while yet for it to fizzle out to nothing. ^pathetic 19:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree Armond, it was great... I think I got some rough treament... I lot of my qualifiers and track back statements got erased and I sound really awful I think, but oh well..... I guess Jim got a few nasty emails from the counselor involved. He won't show them to me, but he said they were full of personal invective against me and ended with (of course) a request to take the whole post down. Jim said it was funny because he didn't answer hardly any of the points I made. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it was well-written and interesting, and I don't think he was as hard on you as you think - presenting the counselor as a threatening, lawyering-up anger head was a pretty subtle way of showing who he really believed without giving up his pretense to neutrality. ħuman 20:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he definitely wasn't too harsh on Messr Charles B. Saying that he can only really tell "his side of the story" is a little chiché and a cop-out, but it's the only decent appraisal of a situation you can give without blatantly taking sides and dropping into some very black and white (no pun intended, srsly) thinking - which wouldn't help in this situation. If "Casey" did ask for a take-down of the post, and the only email worth putting up mostly concentrated on threatening legal action, that's quite suspect I think. ^pathetic 20:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Never really thought of it like that... But I certainly see what you mean... I'm really pushing Jim to show the emails, but he won't do it.... I really wanna see them. I guess Casey sent a really long response, but then ended with "please don't post this." Jim wants to run it, but won't do it without permission..... Maybe it's time to bring back Boom Goes the Dynamite. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:35, 7 November 2009 (UTC) PS: Now that I ponder a little more, I think Casey made things worse with his response.... I mean, if someone sends a message asking for comment and you reply with "I have no comment, but I'm calling my lawyer" it doesn't exactly warm up their opinion.... and after hearing all I had to say...

You're black?! I'm kidding... I remember you getting fired and telling us about it here - we all bought you drinks. And it was really five months ago? How time flies... Good job with the article, Casey sounds like a dick, and as for your stand up, it's pretty damn funny. Drawing from real life experience is the good way to go. Keep it up.SJ ^Debaser 13:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Josh. I love that the article is up. I think he did a good job of being balanced and now I think Casey is gonna show his true colors for the world to see. I'm hoping he tries to sue me. It'll be great for my career. As for the job thing, yeah, that was back in May. Crazy isn't it? So much happens in such a short time. Also, another thanks for the comment about my comedy. I'm really excited about getting it going again. I learned from one of my comedy heroes, Bill Cosby, that the key to good stuff is to take everyday experiences and just exaggerate it enough to get a laugh, but keep it plausible. Wish me luck as I keep going. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 20:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Do you plan on uploading any more to Youtube? I subscribed just in case, as I also found it excellent, especially for a first time. I'd literally be a bag of nerves. Literally. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 20:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I hope to, but I've been concentrating a little more on school and theatre... But I will do more and upload them asap. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 23:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Maus II

Wow, what a horrid weekend I had. I felt the need to vent this one in the bar because I feel really bad. Basically, the wife screamed to me saying that the chickens had found a dead mouse (they often come across ones left behind by the cat and run around after each other trying to eat it) and so I went out with a bag to take it off them and throw it in the bin. As I was just approaching the chook who was currently dribbling the ball I heard a squeak (as she bashed it hard against the patio) and so I quickly took it off her only to find it was still alive. Yup, they'd cornered a little field mouse and were in the process of ripping it apart, alive.

I held it for a bit, realising that just about every bone in its body was probably broken and that I really should put it out of its misery. Unfortunately by this point I had an audience, including the wife's very young niece, and was told to bring it inside. They kept it in a box for a while until it came round, and it was dragging itself around the box (obviously had a broken back, and one broken front paw, and by the feel of it, its ribs were all smashed up as well).

So after the sister-in-law had left with the kids we realised we couldn't leave it and had to deal with it. I couldn't bring myself to whack it with a shovel, and so I put it in a bag, expelled the air, and filled it with the CO₂ being expelled by a rather violent wine I have on the go. It stopped breathing after about 20 seconds and a few twitches, and so I think I did what I could. Unfortunately I love animals, and rescue mice from the cat all the time (unharmed, he likes to play with them when he brings them inside) and am now feeling guilty about killing one "Nazi gas chamber style". Help! Feed me some reassurance! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 19:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Here's some: you did everything you could to ensure that the mouse died with as little pain as possible. You could have left it for the cat or just allowed it to die slowly and painfully. Instead, you gave it a quick and less painful death. Though it may have seemed cruel to you, try to imagine it from the mouse's perspective - the "gas chamber" is probably the most pain-free death it could have had.

I probably shouldn't mention this, but when I read your post your sig's talk page link said "putting the cute in execute." Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Shoulda let the chickens finish the job. It's that random "non chicken feed" diet that makes their eggs to awesome. ħuman 20:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

@Tetro: Lol @ my random talk line. I guess I should remove that now. @Human: You're a bad person, and besides, their cat-poop diet is what makes the eggs so special. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Moar more lols: when I reloaded the page just now, it said "at least I have chickens." Is it a day for weird coincidences, or what? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Chicken! At least I have chicken! Y'know, from Leeeeeeeroy jenkiiiins! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I sympathize with your squeamishness but I loathe rodents of all varieties (yes, even squirrels) so you did me a favor in the most gentle way possible. Thanks for that. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 20:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ohhhhhhhh. I get it now. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:00, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not squeamishness, it's just a sense of guilt. Ffs, I studied pharmacology at uni and was experimenting on whole guinea pigs, lung suspensions, and illeum without a care in the world. It's just the action of killing the poor things in the first place. It's not for me. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 22:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't help but agree that killing things is difficult. I also have that problem, unless the target is of the insect variety. You did the best you could, considering the fact that left to its original fate, it would have suffered much more than anything you would have done. The gas effect was probably the best option, as the creature didn't suffer any more than it already had. I doubt that any kind of rehabilitation for the mouse would have had any effect, as it was so near to death anyway. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 01:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Our cats regularly bring meeces & voles and the odd sparrer. I've rescued and released several but most are beyond recall when I first see them. The first time I had to kill a sparrow I was sick afterwards (literally sick as in vomiting) - not from squeamishness but from guilt. btw, I smashed its head with a hammer. _& marmite^chat 01:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Nature happens. It's not really our place to interfere unless it's one one of your animals (to which you owe some responsibility). I know it's sometimes difficult but we shouldn't try and impose our ethics on other species. Some of the cameramen for the BBC Life series had similar feelings when filming predators in the wild. It's tough but it's going to happen whether we're there or not. I had a similar experience when one of my dogs caught a rabbit and broke its back. I probably caused the rabbit more pain by trying to kill it than if I'd let the dog eat it there and then. A similar thing happened when one of our cats caught a rabbit and failed to kill it. I was away but some vegetarian friends of my wife were staying and ended up clobbering it with a brick. They were quite traumatised by it and were glad to get back to their urban utopia away from the nasty countryside. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 09:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's the other thing. It isn't really 'natural' for chickens to do that. The problem is, they've been bred to be mindless zombie eating machines which will ruthlessly kill and devour anything organic in sight. Cat shit, plants, frogs, mice, fish food out of the pond, and recently each other (one was eating the arse feathers out of the other). They really are horrid horrid creatures. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 10:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Live chickens are indeed foul (hehehe) but they make up for it by being tasty when dead and giving up their embryos which are also tasty. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 13:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Curse my metal body!

I've just been over to this lovely little wiki, and I think they could really use an infobox to go on their character pages. However, I have no clue whatsoever how to create one. I took a look at the documentation on WP, and didn't understand it one little bit. It's clearly not designed for someone who's not hip-deep in wikicode on a regular basis, nor is it really a how-to at all. I checked a couple of the templates here, but I'm still in the dark. Can someone give me a hand? --Kels 01:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I could polish up CUR's magic do everything box for you? - π 01:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Magic box? If it works as a sidebar infobox thing, then I'm all for it. And, of course, providing I can understand it in any way. --Kels 01:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

It was suppose to but he never got it working. I'll have a play with it. - π 01:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate it. I'm mainly interested in giving a little quick info for various characters. Series, first appearance, place of origin, that sort of thing. --Kels 01:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty sure I can do it as a html table. It might take me a bit more time, though. - π 02:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, it may not be necessary over there since it looks like one of the guys there is working on a version. But it would come in handy here in any case, so worth working on all the same. Thanks so much for the effort. --Kels 03:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, I have all the mechanics in place now at Template:Infobox and Template:Infoboxline. Need prettying up though. 03:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I read that webcomic, too! Come to think of it, you might have even been the one who pointed me in that direction. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 02:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Been following OoT too? I'm interested in seeing how he'll be able to wrap this story up in only one more book. --Kels 03:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Awesome Youtube channel

I stumbled upon this channel the other day. Loads of good doco's. Ace^McWicked 03:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Could Someone link me to a bullshit documentary

I have a love-hate relationship with bullshit documentaries about supposed paranormal activity that exaggerate things and pull information from unreliable sources. I think they're fraud, but they also amuse me in a horror-movie sort of way. But, I don't know the names of any such documentaries I haven't seen, so I can't type them into Youtube. Could anyone give me a name or link? (I've already seen "Vampire Princess")--Mustex 01:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

This one is horrifying. 02:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Seen it. And I'd prefer vampires/ghosts/mummy curses/whatever (maybe aliens on a stretch). Horror movie stuff.--76.18.115.64 02:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ever seen Jesus Camp? Horror to me. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 03:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I've seen it, but not really the type of horror I'm feeling like.--Mustex 16:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

No titles come to mind, but the TV channel Discovery Civilization used to be pretty notorious for airing bullshit. I recall one in which Erich von Däniken was given free reign to push his ancient astronauts theory with nothing in the way of serious criticism. Their late night paranormal stuff is also pretty bad, normally with the narrator trying to be so neutral. Their "perhaps we'll never know" phrases are overused to the point where the narrator appear to have the credulity of a very poorly educated child. Jesus Camp is actually a pretty fairly balanced documentary, with the fundies providing the rope that hangs them. --^{Ask me about your mother} 11:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, check out Loose Change and Zeitgeist. You'll probably find them on YouTube. Farenheit 9/11 also contains some rather dubious facts.--^{Ask me about your mother} 11:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

If you stick "paranormal documentary" into YouTube I'm sure you'll get loads. I found one a few months ago on aliens being among us (I too still have a weakness for watching these things) but I cannot remember what it was called. You could possibly look up Arthur C Clarke's documentaries from the 80s and early 90s as they report paranormal stuff including vampires and so-on. ^pathetic 11:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

This came into my inbox this morning. Totnesmartin 13:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ahahaha that guy has obtained an alternative PhD in Transpersonal Counseling (Psychology), a Masters in Metaphysical Science, a diploma as a Mind Science Healer. He is also a Certified Hypnotist and a Certified Paranormal Investigator. He also has a degree in Assclown Studies. 20:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Is this for real?

Gene Ray's twitter page. - π 06:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I just saw that on Pharyngula. It seems nutty enough to be true. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 08:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

It looks like someone was pulling random quotes of the website and twitting it, but gave up out of lack of interest. I would say it is fake, but he is so serious time cube even appearing on TV to defend it. - π 08:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

95% sure it's fake. It's just pulling random strings out of the main website. ^pathetic 19:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks faek to me. Wéáśéĺóíď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Dynamiclear

As a coldsore sufferer, I tend to get people sending the latest gimmicks to help, the most recent of which is "Dynamiclear". Having a quick scan over, it just seems to be St Johns Wort and lysine, so not looking too good so far. They claim that it has been proven in clinical trials, but the only reference I found to this is on their site and looks a bit simplistic, as well as not being double-blind and against "leading brand" and not a placebo (look under "Study Synopsis"). In addition, a few things catch me:
1) Googling the name shows up loads of links which use the name and either "scam" or "hoax" in the title, but then go on to give a glowing review of it. I suspect the company has deliberately flooded the interwebs with positive reviews to show up when people Google "Dynamiclear scam", which is a questionable tactic at best, and
2) Their entire website has a "antiselect" javascript code block to stop you copying and pasting data. If this was legit then they would actively encourage people to copy and paste the wonderful data from their site.
What do you think? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I think you now know why you shouldn't make out with strange goats. 15:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Dyknow, I got infected before I'd kissed a girl, which means that I must have picked it up from some aunt (or even that uncle) slobbering over me as some kind of greeting. Oh for a time machine. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Most men have their first goat experience before sexual contact with a female. This is normal. 16:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, stop banging on about me shagging goats and answer the damn question! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

"One thorough application of Dynamiclear and the sore immediately begins to dry out and within hours forms a scab. Follow-up results are promising with most patients reporting a reduction in the frequency and/or intensity of their outbreaks and occasionally, no further outbreaks for several months and sometimes years."" That's pretty much what happens if you don't do anything anyway, isn't it? By the way, any "medicine" web site that features a "doctor of naturopathy" in a nice white coat is almost certainly a bunch of deceptive woo. Also also, if there really was an effective treatment for herpes sores, the ads would be all over TV because there's a huge market. ħuman 18:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. All these kind of people do is find a plant which has some references somewhere saying it might help a particular ailment, and then they put a pharmacologicaly irrelevant dose into, for some reason, usually some topical (cream, lotion etc) and then flog it at an inflated price knowing that anyone who questions its efficacy can just be told "look, here's some examples of how good the ingredients work". Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

FSTDT

I'm 100% sure someone here has already bought this up, or users from this site are editors at this site, but we're linked to on the homepage of "Fundies Day The Darndest Things." SJ ^Debaser 15:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Already noted on the article. Or at least the footnotes ^pathetic 15:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm so lazy I didn't even bother to check we had an article on them. I love being the last to find these things =) SJ ^Debaser 17:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, thanks for reminding me about them antyhow. I've just spent a happy 15 minutes or so going through some random quotes. Phil isn't the maddest twat cur out there. _& marmite^chat 17:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm one of those people who is an editor at both. There's a lot of stuff as fstdt that makes CP look like the height of rationality. My all time favorite was one from a woman who was very very concerned about her teenaged son. It seems she found magazines with pictures of scantily clad men in his room. This worried her, because her son was much too young to be dating, because obviously he had a girlfriend who was leaving the magazines there... Its not just a river in Egypt, folks. MDB 18:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

My only problem is that after a while you get desensitised to the insanity. I find myself thinking "Well that's stupid but not head-spinningly insane so I won't vote for it", even if the quote in question would normally result in a tea-drenched keyboard. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 18:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Tolerance

Quite a few people have posted lately about developing a "tolerance" to the insanity they see on various webshites. I think this is an interesting topic we should explore in depth, maybe even write an article on it. ħuman 18:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Someone qualified in scientific analysis needs to perform a proper, peer-reviewed study to confirm our assumptions. Then it'll be science! Z3ro^talk 19:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

The whole thing about being desensitised? Perhaps. After all, you check WIGO:CP and relatively new watchers are like "OMG!! LOOK AT THAT BLOCK REASON??! JUST FOR TALK TALK TALK?!? LOL" and everyone else is like "meh?". ^pathetic 19:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean CP - I mean religious insanity in general. I found myself (yesterday) talking to somebody and saying that Old Earth Creationism was a reasonable point of view. It's not. It's really not. It just seems that way compared to the YEC of Andy and PJR. On FSDT... well let me pick one:

"[Would you care to explain for me then? Are Christians more honest than everyone else in the world? Jews, Muslims, other religions and non-believers are all less honest and greedier than Christians?] NO OF COURSE NOT, I ONLY SAID LOWERS THE ODDS, AS CHRISTIANS ARE TAUGHT TO ABHOR EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD AND TO NOT BE LOVERS OF MAMMON. OUR ATHEIST DRIVEN SOCIETY TEACHES US TO BE MATERIALISTIC. AND YES OF COURSE JEWS ARE GREEDIER. IF YOU HADNT NOTICED THAT YOURSELF YOU REALLY ARE BRAINWASHED LOL

Now, that appeared on the Yahoo! Manchester United board so I have an instinct to vote it up on football rivalry alone, but despite the egregious misuse of words (I assume he meant "adore", not "abhor") I still didn't vote "WTF!" on this one because there is far, far worse. Does this mean I now accept positions like this? That I ignore them? I am honestly worried about this.

Before I joined RW I thought - I honestly thought - that YEC was a joke. Having "met" people like Andy and PJR, and experienced the paranoia of people like RobS... the "average" opinion I've experienced has shifted so far to nuttery that even OEC appears sensible. If I've taken anything from this site it is the knowledge that there are many people out there that share my open-mouthed, horrified disbelief at the bullshit that flows from these idiots. That's the main reason I had a need to come back after I fucked up under my usual nick of rpeh. I don't agree with all the politics that appear on here, but we can all agree on a solid, rational base for the universe and its marvels. That is an incredibly valuable thing. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

He meant "abhor" not "adore". Wéáśéĺóíď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell. I thought Christians were supposed to love everything? –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

CP was just an example. You can definitely start off thinking "come on, no one really believes the Earth is 6000 years old" and then you're like "oh shit, they really do" and eventually someone out there declares that they're YEC and you don't care. Then they say the Earth is flat and the cycle starts again. Right now, I feel I wouldn't be shocked if someone genuinely though that the sky was a carpet painted by god. The level of crap I've seen just makes me immune from 95% of everything out there that would make otherwise sane people curl up and cry. ^pathetic 20:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I see where Hooman is coming from, but I think the opposite also has rays of truth; we're becoming intolerant of teh crazy. Recently, it's dawned on me (again) that Andy actually has serious mental problems, yet we still point and laugh like it's a big joke and he's just an idiot. Ken is also similarly insane, and sometimes I think Trent should be a little more scared than he might already be. They're complete insanity is normal to us and we pawn it off like it's not a serious (perhaps even debilitating) problem for a real, live persons.^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

That didn't make a whole lot of sense. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I get what you mean. And I'd agree with you if some of these people weren't in po3 Internet 1sitions of authority. Andy teaches children. He teaches this shit to children. "Don't listen to facts - listen to ME". Ken is clearly in denial; RobS is paranoid; Karajou has masses of barely-repressed anger at not getting more promotions; TK is a parodist; Ed is... I really dunno - he had teh powah at WP and lost it. The point is... what is it all doing to us? –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it is doing two things: first, we are desensitized to craziness, as is thoroughly proven by ArmondikoV above. We have more exposure to fundies than most people, and are less amazed/amused by them and their beliefs. However, I think we do have a distinct anti-fundie (and perhaps also anti-theist) bias that comes from reading and writing RW articles and participating in discussions. I think we have a tendency to feed off of each other and form something similar to groupthink. Compare a new user to one who has been here for a while: the former will have not yet formed an opinion on CP and similar craziness, while the latter has a condescending attitude to such things and is impatient with anyone who does not see the craziness of fundamentalism. Also, we are more aware of the extent to which fundies are influencing policy (which is a paranoia of sorts), which makes us angrier and more paranoid about it (if that makes any sense). Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I Think that developing Tolerance is a Good Thing.--Tolerance 22:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes, but not always. I'm about as tolerant of kid rape as I am for teaching children that science is a big conspiracy. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 22:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Tolerance, the "tolerance" referred to in the header is not that kind of tolerance. It's like the kind of tolerance one develops to a drug, for example. If someone drinks a lot, their tolerance goes up - it takes more alcohol for them to get "high". In our case, it takes more batshit lunacy to make us say "wow, that is crazy", because we absorb so much it. ħuman 22:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, at the end of the day, someone who has never encountered a creationist (at least in the UK) would be shocked that they actually believe the earth is only 6,000 years old and that evolution is a big government conspiracy, whereas we would just be like "Yup. That's what they're like" when we spot a psychotic wingnut statement. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Some things I think I have been desensitized to, other things make me cringe every time. Sterile paperclip 03:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I cannot be tolerant of the fact that these idiots are spreading their rubbish to the impressionable, whether that be the young or the ignorant or the stupid. _& marmite^chat 03:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

What is your D&D alignment?

As for myself, I am "Neutral Good/Lawful evil" (it was a tie). Go knock yourselves out ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ My computer has two mowses! 19:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

D&D alignments are bullshit anyway. Yeah, because chaotic good and lawful good are so different. I'd be chaotic evil just to kill the kind of people that make these quizzes. Z3ro^talk 19:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I knew today was going to be weird, and sure enough I appear to be back in 2002.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 19:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't get it to give me a result at the moment. I guess "Chaotic Good" though. I'll try again later. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 19:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm neutral evil apparently. Kif, what makes a man turn neutral? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. It's not loading particularly well for me, but I guess "chaotic good" from the questions and answers. I may end up with "neutral" considering I rarely click the extremes (1 and 5) on this sort of quiz. ^pathetic 21:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Lawful evil (with neutral good close behind). Cubic bastard Hoover! 22:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been playing a ROM of Shin Megami Tensei II for the SNES and my alignment shifted to Lawful, despite me being a believer in Chaos. I am too much of a good guy (and I shouldn't have started recruiting angels). Now I got to build YHVH's Thousand Year Kingdom.--Thanatos 00:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Lawful evil/chaotic neutral. I'd rather be a lich. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 00:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Neutral Good for me. I guess I'll have to put my application for Paladin School on hold. (For the non-gamers out there, Paladins are the classic Knight in Shining Armor. They have to be Lawful Good, at least in 1^st and 2^nd edition AD&D.) MDB 12:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Internet snoopers

I am having a hard time with a cursory glance and a bit busy...but if anyone is bored and wants to try their hand at some internet snooping I am looking for an e-mail contact for a man named "Sid Ryan" who is the president of CUPE ontario. He is a public figure so there should be something....tmtoulouse 02:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

How deep do you want us to dig? He haz wickypedea artikle. ħuman 02:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

His phone number is here. ħuman 02:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's sryan@cupe.on.ca 02:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah ha, thank you very much. Guy is a piece of work I will say that much. tmtoulouse 02:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The majority of what I saw about him on Google wasn't nice. Answer your phone. 02:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Prison fellowship

I just went outside and got my mail and found that some organization called the Prison Fellowship had sent me 5 letters, each containing a brochure. According to them, Christians are "discriminated against and abused" in American prisons, and prison Bible study groups are "forced to shut down." I figure this is mostly bullshit, but I thought I would ask if anyone knew anything about it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Seems very unlikely, but if they are being discriminated against and not being allowed to pray etc then I agree with them. As much as I hate religion I don't see what the problem is with giving people somewhere to pray and congregate. Perhaps this is one of those "creationist science teacher" situations whereby the inmates are hassling all the other inmates and trying to force them to go to their prison church, and so the guv'nor told them that they either play nice or not at all. Did they give you a phone number? Give them a bell and ask. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I did some research, and apparently it is a combination of (a) bullshit claims about Christian prisoners are being abused and not allowed to study the Bible (totally untrue; US prisons allow inmates to attend religious services, but just not every hour of the day), and (b) their desire to convert people in prison to reform them via Christian faith. So it's really more of an evangelical organization than anything, which the brochures I got in the mail tried to mask. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I can't imagine a US prison doesn't hand out bibles to everyone (even the jews and the muslims). Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

This just in, from the curator of the "Nothing new under the sun" department: Prisoners at penitentiaries in Atlanta and San Quentin have formed the Church of the New Song (CONS). They claim that their ritual requires them to eat porterhouse steaks and drink Harvey's Bristol Cream sherry and are suing prison authorities to get the needed ingredients for their menu. Dated Monday, May. 13, 1974 Sprocket J Cogswell 14:04, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Email

Bloody hell, HSBC have lost my details again! That's the third time this week. And no matter how quickly I go to the site and give them all my details, I still find all my money gone within an hour anyway. Honestly, no wonder the banks are in such a crisis! Apparently Nationwide lost my details as well yesterday, and I don't even bank with them. Idiots. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Halifax (or whoever they are nowadays) won't lose my details: I get about 3 emails & 2 snailmails a week despite my repeatedly asking them not to. _& marmite^chat 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, halifax ask me to log on as well. At least I'll have loads of cash after this Nigerian guy who contacted me gives me 10% of his dead uncle's cash or something. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I haven't got time for all this banking - I'm too busy collecting the parcel that UPS were unable to deliver. Bob Soles 15:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

DEAR FRIEND, I'm the MANAGER of YOUR BANK. Feel free to mail me your account details, DEAR FRIEND, and I'll ensure that your account issues are resolved. bankmanager77@hotmail.com.--^{Ask me about your mother} 16:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm planning on using the money from the Nigerian guy to buy some Viagra at 90% off. MDB 16:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm not going in to detail, but if the email I just received is right, I'm going to need underwear that's 20% more roomy than I currently wear. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 17:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, then let me forward you this e-mail from a lonely Russian woman looking for a man. Its no good to me, since I'm really not interested in women, lonely or not, Russian or not... MDB 17:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

They should have Facebook look after their login security - despite not having a Facebook account, I keep having to change my login details with them, which must mean they're very secure. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 17:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, I got a phone call from my 79 year old father one time. Dad is about as technically literate as, oh, the flatbread chicken sandwich I had for lunch. The conversation went something like this:

Dad: I just got an e-mail from Citibank that said...

Me: It's a fraud.

Dad: But it said that...

Me: It's a fraud!

I went on to give the standard lecture that no financial will ever e-mail you about your account details, to call their 800 number if you have questions and use the number on the credit card, not the e-mail, etc etc etc. I still worry about him or Mom falling for something like that... MDB 17:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

They're a long way from alone. Gartner estimated phishing losses for the US for 2007 as $3.2bn - M$ say this is vastly overinflated by a factor of maybe 50. So we're talking a mere $60,000,000 for 2007.

If it didn't work they wouldn't do it - oh, and I had exactly the same conversation with my 85 year old father. Bob Soles 17:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My Mom and Dad aren't unintelligent, but they are rather too trusting. (Mom, for instance, was rather surprised when I explained that Eyewitlness news would not get into legal trouble for reporting something that turned out to be untrue.) I really worry that they're going to be the victim of a financial scam someday. (And not just because its my inheritance. I've told them I want them to spend it all before they go, anyway. I want them to enjoy retirement.) MDB 17:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My mother-in-law is a scammer's wet dream. She outright believes absolutely anything anyone tells her, except for me and my wife. It's infuriating to have to explain to her what's going on with something when it's just common sense most of the time. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 17:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My Mom's big weakness is the inability to recognize bias. For instance, she once remarked that my Uncle, who worked for AT&T for decades, said the Bell System break up was the worst thing to ever happen to the American phone system. "Mom," I said, "don't you think Uncle _____ might be a little bit biased when it comes to AT&T?" She acknowledged that, but the fact she didn't realize that someone who had a career at AT&T might be biased when it comes to a court decision that completely changed how they did business.... oy.... MDB 18:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not that people who don't think about this stuff are stupid, it's more a case of lack of knowledge than intelligence. Once someone's highlighted certain things to you, biases, scams and ingenious trickery, you become more aware that A) they exist and B) what to look for. 90% of the time it just doesn't apply in real life so no one needs to be aware of it. ^pathetic 18:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Then you run the risk of becoming overcynicall. _& marmite^chat 18:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, but I always like to think that a healthy dose of cynicism is a nice shield against bullshit (or perhaps I'm doing that thing where I confuse cynicism and skepticism again...). ^pathetic 19:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course, the only way Microsoft know that Gartner have got the numbers wrong is because they're testing this new email tracking software and will pay you thousands of dollars just for passing the info on. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 05:46, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Which logical fallacy is this?

Speaking of the mother-in-law, I noticed something she does a lot which is really starting to piss me off. Here's an example: She will cook a large bowl of rice in the afternoon and then leave it on the worktop until the evening (about 7 hours) before microwaving it and serving it. I have told her that cooked rice needs to go into the fridge within an hour, otherwise you are at a massive risk of contracting bactillius cereus food poisoning. I have shown her health and safety websites which list rice as the number one food for causing food poisoning. So all she has to do is put the bowl in the fridge, right? What's her response? "Well, I've been doing it for years and I've never become ill". I hear a lot of people use this argument, "X is bad for you", "Well, it never did me any harm". It's basically like a "Never did me any harm" fallacy, but I can't believe it doesn't already fit into an existing category. Anyone? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 18:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Possibly several, it's certainly one in its own right but the name escapes me. But, it could very well be a case of Spotlight fallacy in that you're taking your past experiences and assuming these are something to do with what will happen in the future. ^pathetic 18:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hah! "My uncle fred smoked 40 a day all his life and lived to 90". How often have you heard something like that? _& marmite^chat 18:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

At least three or four times a day, in my own head. Its a filthy, disgusting habit I regret ever starting. MDB 18:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Converse accident perhaps? Although it's a very specific case, it is just a hasty generalization that past experiences apply to all experience. ^pathetic 18:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's also selective observation and has problems with the misuse of statistics (n = 1). Sterile paperclip 18:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

One might also ask how often the Ma-in-law had a slight tummy upset or similar some time later (can take up to 48 hours for bacterial food poisoning to show) without connecting it with the rice. _& marmite^chat 19:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a kind of "reverse anecdotal evidence", I think. ħuman 20:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I always called it the "I know a guy" fallacy. tmtoulouse 21:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It'd be the fallacy of false induction (WP:Appeal to tradition). ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 21:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Aha! That looks like it. Also from that page I like "Appaeal to novelty", which the senior developer on our team is a victim of. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Pink slip campaign

Janet Porter's Faith2Action, after heavy promotion on WorldNetDaily, are sending pink slips to congressmen and senators about how they will lose their jobs if they pass certain legislation. They are boasting about how they have got enough donations to send over 4.5 million. A pile that would be three times higher that the Washington monument ect. But something that occurred to me this. There are 535 congressmen and senators. That means only about 8,412 people have cared enough to actually do this. Not an impressive number when you look at it that way. - π 22:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

That's assuming each person is responsible for an equal amount of "pink slips". That number could be much smaller if someone donated a larger portion, meaning even more pathetic. Z3ro^talk 22:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

They are sold in lots of 535, so 8,412 is a maximum. You are right though, if some on got excited they may have bought two or three. - π 22:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

That's hilarious. Do we have Faith2Action? ħuman 01:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

We should really or at least Janet Porter. A lot of people commented that the idiot's convention looked like a torch passing ceremony from Mumma Schlafly to Porter. - π 01:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Their polls are funnier than WND's. - π 01:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Those polls are hilarious. I wonder if most of them are subject to Poe's Law? Then again, maybe not, because the majority of people visiting the F2A website are probably ultra-conservative... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Though only 97 people have voted over five days - hardly heavy traffic. RagTop^{Gone sailing} 11:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It's considerably higher than our pointless polls and marginally higher than the upper range of WIGO:CP votes. But yes, hardly heavy traffic. ^pathetic 13:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

SMBC

...is brilliant. Yesterday's and today's really hit the spot.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 12:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

There have been some brilliant religious ones: [1] [2] and [3] for instance. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 08:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

There are many brilliant SMBC comics with a religious theme. Here are a few examples.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 03:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Right-wing paranoia

I think this is a great article explaining the recent right-wing paranoia in the US. Just thought I would share it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The article makes an interesting point with "Because these people aren’t interested in actually governing, they feed the base’s frenzy instead of trying to curb or channel it."- that's definitely the case. Regarding paranoia, there was an interesting piece of research (that popped up on an older WIGO) stating that it really is the case that people on the right are paranoid. They determined that people who identified as right-wing were more jumpy than those on the left. Although which was the cause and which is the effect still isn't known. ^pathetic 16:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Very good piece, thanks for posting! ħuman 20:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Human. To respond to ArmondikoV's point: I think the most interesting part - which the article doesn't talk about very much - is that the line between GOP lapdogs and true wingnuts is blurred. There are many people, most of them the "people not interested in governing" who only care about their moralistic agenda. Others, though, are more influenced by the Republican party and allow their interests to take second fiddle to the GOP's. For example, someone like Glenn Beck exemplifies the former category and Michael Steele the latter. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I read the article when the link was first posted and didn't quite "get it". My reaction was, essentially, "So the US has right-wing nutters. Film at 11." Reading it again I begin to understand the problem. In the UK, if people tried to set up the sort of tea party movement you have over there, they'd be laughed off the streets. In the US, they are gaining real political power. It must be quite scary living over there at the moment. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 21:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not scary, it's just a bit troubling. It's not like they are going to take over the government tomorrow, it's more like the religious right is a portion of the population that is worryingly large and can influence public policy. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hence why I've always thought that the UK has a healthy dose of cynicism to protect it from such things. People are very ready to call bullshit on anything, which is why American style patriotic pandering doesn't work. That said, the UK is usually a couple of years behind the US and perhaps the current rise of the BNP and their whole "British people first" thing might be the first sign that the collectivist rhetoric is kicking in. ^pathetic 18:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Only a Matter of Time

Anyone know who Jeff Roberts is? Or anyone who uses this alias? He broke onto Jim's blog and post this really long rambling comment about me being a member of Rationalwiki and about how, since I hate all religious people to no end, that the problem wasn't that Casey was a racist douchebag (which, for the record, he is) but that my intense hatred of all things religious caused the problems.... It's really a beautiful site.... Anyone wanna take a crack at it? I'm too tired to care. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 19:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, who would call RW "atheist-fundamentalist"? And obviously its someone who repeatedly brings up the LA Times article. Possibly Conservative? ^pathetic 19:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

No, too sensible. It's probably TK. Cubic bastard Hoover! 19:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Way too coherent to be Conservative.... and not one In Regards To.... Interesting though.... I feel like a detective SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC, also add that in hindsight I agree with the above that it isn't Kenny)Actually, scratch that, he'd probably take the opportunity to plug Conservapedia directly rather than simply referring to it as a "Christian website". Perhaps PJR as he has a thing against RW and CP so would use the LA Times thing to denigrate RW without plugging Conservapedia? That's of course, assuming that Jeff Roberts (far too common a name to figure out an alias from) is from that crowd, there may be a much more general set of people who are critical of atheist blogs - and their are many who are vehemently opposed to us even existing, yet alone daring to speak - who would have RationalWiki on their radar as a matter of course. ^pathetic 19:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Jinx _{hi Jinx! & marmite}^chat 19:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

(ECx10)Not enough misspellings and swearing for Jinx _{hi Jinx!}. Random acusations, no care for pimping CP, irony of criticizing anonymity while anonymous, my money's on TK. Z3ro^talk 19:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Is it Jim who's just responded? ^pathetic 19:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, JDcl97 is him.... This should be fun. I don't think it's Jinx.... Not enough profanity or penis references. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 19:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It reads like TK minus the persistent over-punctuation. 19:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC)What if it's "Casey"? Wouldn't take much hunting around to find that you're a member of RW and the LA Times thing is a fairly prominent reference to the site. And if they're not an established member of Conservapedia that would explain referring to it as "a Christian website" while not plugging it. Also, as the opening phrase criticizes the angle (which may have been one of the crits sent in via email) and the second and third paragraph seem to hint at some additional knowledge. And it fits in with the fact that the major players we know don't have this style. ^pathetic 19:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm gonna have to go with Fox.... It's not his normal style, but Jim emailed me and said he thinks it's Fox..... SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 19:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Fox, TK... whatever. It's just another piece of proof that there's just as much Conservative Deceit as any other kind. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I never got to know him, but was I right to summarily conclude that Fox was a rotten Jew bastard? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd go with mean drunk but I'm just guessing ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 23:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Fox was the one given to get very angry very quickly, and start saying really awful things but usually was an OK guy. It doesn't have the vituperative spite that I've come to know and love in the TKster, though, nor does it touch his typical topics authority here, etc, instead focusing on religion, which TK was never big on - I'm guessing probably Fox. --䷉䷻䷶䷈䷰䷒䷰䷈䷶䷈䷡^䷶䷀䷵䷥

Also, didn't Fox get pissed at you and make a "kill whitey" reference? Maybe he has a bit of a vendetta going on? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

To my mind it doesn't read like any of the usual suspects at CP. It isn't vituperative enough for TK, too educated for JPatt or Jinx, not enough verbal constipation or spamlinks for Ken. I also think it is written by an American rather than a Brit - note the use of 'Z' in words like patronizing or phrases like "big bucks". Also not knowing much about the blog I wonder who at CP would be reading it, has it been highlighted somewhere. It doesn't seem like the sort of thing that most of them would be reading in the first place. On the other hand the author clearly knows something about Chuck's activities here and CP's distorted view of us. Perhaps Geo.Plrd (Geoffrey = Jeff?). Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 11:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC

He makes pointed reference to our alleged hypocrisy of tolerance which was Fox's last fixation when he was on his bender. Also, while I don't really know him it seems just the sort of dickhead move he would do when his dander is up. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 14:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Well several people have also made similar accusations and I don't believe Fox would have used US spellings. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Just curious, but is it possible that it's someone like Bradley over at ASK? Mostly in terms of writing ability. --Kels 02:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Jim emailed me and said that he was 100% certain it was Fox. He didn't say why, but he did mention that he had access to details as moderater. I'm gonna go with his thought. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 03:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Bot request (really lame)

Can someone fix the links at [4] from punish to punish? Where is Radioactive Afikomen when we need him? ħuman 04:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

That's what redirects are for. -- Nx / talk 08:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but over-reliance on them leads to double redirects. Oh, that's right, we have a bot that heals them, right? ħuman 19:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Done, except for the link above and a list of redirects. Ta-da! Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 14:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! ħuman 19:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Fetch the party poppers!

It's been a year and a day since I made my first edit; not the greatest, I must admit but I've changed since then. My deceptions are a lot harder to spot now. EddyP 21:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

hELL, even a bad excuse to party is better than no party at all. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 22:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I give up.

After years of resisting, I will finally give in and learn a programming languange. Two questions;

1. Which one/ones should I spring for at first?
2. Any good online resources for learning them? I'd rather not pay.

Thanks. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the clan. I started with Java, which isn't too bad, but I think C is better to start with. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I recommend either COBOL or FORTRAN. SmartBASIC for the Coleco Adam is pretty good, too. Corry 01:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

PL/I has its place as well.

Though in all seriousness learn an object oriented language, probably C++ would be best. tmtoulouse 01:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Learn C & work on from there. Many current languages have their roots in C so you should be able to pick & choose from there on. _& marmite^chat 01:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't "spring" for one, use one that is open source. Basically unless you have a reason to learn a language you won't be able to. Computing languages are something you learn through necessity rather than sitting down and studying. First find a project you want to do and then work towards it. - π 01:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

@ Pi: I see your point, but I think Theemperor Thedictator is asking because he wants to learn from enjoyment. There's nothing wrong with buying (or in my case borrowing) a textbook to learn purely for fun, and if you are a self-motivated person it is very easy.

@ Toast: Lol, I was beginning to worry that no one else would say C. (Although Trent does make a good point about C++.) Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

COBOL & FORTRAN are commercially oriented & scientifically oriented respectively -specialists only IMHO. As Pi says, without a reason to learn, you probably won't. Try Php or Javascript - you can use them on your website. (don't have anything to do with anything that includes "basic" in its name & avoid Microsoft like thye plague)_& marmite^chat 01:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My dad was a COBOL programmer, last time anyone wanted him for that was during the Y2K compliance-update-thing. He hadn't programmed in it for about 20 years before that. - π 02:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I was a COBOL programmer: professionally taught - finished course 2 weeks before being made redundant approx 30 years ago - never had anything to do with it since. _& marmite^chat 02:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I wish I could find a picture of Bob the Dinosaur for you. - π 03:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Ignoring my 14 year-old tinkering with BASIC, I've never been able to learn a computer language unless I needed to do something with it. Hence Perl, in my case (is that a real language? I dunno, it runs my websites) ħuman 02:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

There are some fine lines between "scripting languages" and "programming languages" but they are not really that important to this discussion. tmtoulouse 02:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Pascal. Perfect language<not> to learn on, being too prudish to do any real work withso strongly typed that you will not fall into erroneous ways of coding. Sprocket J Cogswell 02:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I you want thorough basic knowledge, start with C, then choose something else. If you just want to get programming, use Python. Elegantly written, strongly typed, excellent documentation. I would suggest to avoid Perl and PHP as I feel these are not really well constructed anymore (the cruft builds up), but that's highly subjective. Pascal is imho the best language ever designed, but it appears to be dwindling away nowadays. With Python you also have the spectacular advantage that you can try everything on the command line. Pietrow 08:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

BB: What are you learning programming for? If it's for a potential career change then learn C# or Java (unless you want to work in the gaming industry, in which case learn C++), or is it just for fun? If the latter then start with something easy like PHP and make yourself a practice website. The basics you'll pick up will be transferrable, but as someone else said, try and move to something OO. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 08:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Sprocket. Start with Pascal - the original one by N. Wirth (?) - learn all the theory behind structured programming and become fascinated by it. You'll have time to learn more useful and practical languages afterwards. Also be sure to find a generic "computer programming" book for undergraduates (?), that explains the basics of programming and data structures without any particular programming language in mind. Not because you'll need all this knowledge, but because it makes the experience more rewarding. Editor at CP^{mały książe} 09:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Not quite a threadjack, but kinda. I could use some programming/web development advice. I haven't touched programming since the 8-bit days. Basically I want to set up an online database, something fairly simple, for interrogating stored texts in plain text format. Any ideas on a good solution to use? It would need to be open source, and something reasonably easy to learn. Help pls! --TheEgyptian 10:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I was being facetious when I suggested Pascal. It amounts to a toy language in my opinion. You may apply disciplined structural style just as well in C, and will still have the freedom to massage your data effectively. Forth seems like another good choice, but it takes discipline to keep from creating write-only code with it. Sprocket J Cogswell 14:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't. It is that lack of freedom that makes it a superior language to C. And also because it was the language I studied at university not SOOO many years ago. Editor at CP^{mały książe} 09:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

p.s. Showing my age, but has anyone done something better than Knuth's Art of Computer Programming? Some of the volumes that actually got written were pretty good, as I recall. Sprocket J Cogswell 14:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

C++ is the language to learn. After that, you'll be able to pick up lots of other languages (and know what's wrong with them). ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 14:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what everyone has against BASIC anyway. Sure, VB6 is pretty damn awful, but it did help a lot of companies out. And now with VB.NET you have a simple to learn language on top of an excellent framework, all topped off with the best IDE in the world. Personally I think anyone who wants to get into programming should mosey on over and get themselves a free copy of Visual C# Express, learn that, and then should you want to switch to C++ / Java, you'll find it an easy transition. Or, just get Visual Basic Express and learn that. It's the easiest way to learn as the tools are extremely user friendly. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

BASIC made for a good introduction to simple concepts of programming. But after that... ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 14:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

EC)N I agree, but I have to stick up for VB.NET because the cool thing about .NET is that you can write it in any language you want (seriously, anything! You can get COBOL.NET and even Whitespace.NET) and it all gets compiled down into the same language anyway (MSIL). Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I learned basic first but had to unlearn almost everything later: it's undisciplined (or at least it was - not tried any of the later versions) I just put "programming C" (no quotes) into google & got 000s of hits. The first page at least seems to be almost all tutorial oriented. C gives a good grounding in discipline & C++ in Object Orientation. With either of these under your belt you should be able to take on anything IMHO. If you just want to script for the web then begin with Javascript → PHP. _& marmite^chat 14:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

A word: whatever you learn, get into the habit of commenting within your code: even the simplest of statements can appear opaque when you return to them a year or even a day later. _& marmite^chat 14:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. There's nothing worse than going back to your code and saying to yourself "What the hell is this idiot doing here? Oh wait, that was me!". Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Good code documents itself. Also, java is a scam. Is it 80's? Rather slit your wrists than lose your innocency learning java. --194.197.235.240 22:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

C is useful for low level system programming. I wouldn't recommend starting with that. I wouldn't recommend it for writing anything but low-level system stuff, yet there are people who disagree. Those people are obviously insane. C++ is powerful but most of the time you don't need that power and it just makes things more complicated and error-prone. Contrary to the uninformed opinions of some, Pascal is also a very powerful language, and overall it's my favorite. C# (which is in many ways closer to ObjectPascal than C/C++) is also nice, and programming in Visual Studio is so easy it's embarrassing. -- Nx / talk 14:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The first thing I learned to program in was 8086 assembler under DOS. Using Debug. After that, pretty much anything else is a piece of cake. These days, I mostly use C# because Microsoft have already written so much code for you, you get to deal with the interesting stuff instead of worrying about how to implement a dictionary. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 15:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I've made a career out of pretending I can code with Visual Studio :) Seriously though the new LINQ functionality is fucking awesome. I wrote an entire database driven app without a single stored procedure (used LINQ-to-SQL instead) and I use straight link to cut down on the number of procs we have because I can join business object collections together into anonymous types. Behold:

       Me.gvwMissing.DataSource = From em In colMissing _
                                  Group Join emp In colEmployees On em.EmployeeId Equals emp.EmployeeId _
                                  Into eGroup = Group _
                                  From e In eGroup.DefaultIfEmpty() _
                                  Select New With {.EquipmentMissingId = em.EquipmentMissingId, _
                                                   .EmployeeName = If(e Is Nothing, "", e.Name), _
                                                   .EmployeeId = If(e Is Nothing, 0, e.EmployeeId), _
                                                   .QuantityMissing = em.QuantityMissing, _
                                                   .DateMissing = em.DateMissing}

Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and P.S. TFS is freakin' incredible. Behold my gated checkin app which stopped all the dipshit contractors at my last place fucking up the build just before a code freeze! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It all boils down to why you want to learn. _& marmite^chat 15:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I would advise you to learn Brainfuck. Cubic bastard Hoover! 16:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that just reading Conservapedia? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I would advise Python. It's object-oriented, the syntax is logical and simplistic, it comes with an extensive and easy to use standard library, it's cross system, and a breeze to learn. Here's a sample:

print "Hello world!"

That prints, "Hello world!", this next example does a bit more by querying the Conservpedia API for information and prints it:

import json
import urllib2
req = urllib2.Request('http://conservapedia.com/api.php?&action=query&meta=siteinfo&format=json', headers = {'User-Agent':'Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.2; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0)'}) 
#The headers part keeps the server from flagging the program as a bot
inf = urllib2.urlopen(req)
jso = json.loads(inf.read())
for key in jso:
    val = jso[key]
    strg = key + ' = ' + val
    print strg

So Python is really easy to use, try it at http://try-python.mired.org/ --Ipatrol 22:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm almost positive that significant whitespace is the devil. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 22:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I started reading this thread thinking - hey this could be interesting. Which language would be bes to learn? HA! Every opinion is different! I'm more confused than when I started.

Being serious, I would probably go with Python. Cubic bastard Hoover! 22:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

In all seriousness, I think Python is a horrible language to learn first. Stick with something more like a programming language and less like pseudocode. BASIC or C++. Then come your perls and pythons. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 22:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Below is a semiproper browser in python. Just to show gnome's actually sanity. Also to tell you that java is a pile of bullshit. I laugh at any java trying to match this with anywhere near the same portability.

#!/usr/bin/python
import gobject
import gtk
import webkit

gobject.threads_init()

window = gtk.Window(gtk.WINDOW_TOPLEVEL)

scrolled = gtk.ScrolledWindow(None)
scrolled.set_policy(gtk.POLICY_AUTOMATIC, gtk.POLICY_AUTOMATIC)

webview = webkit.WebView()
frame = webview.get_main_frame()
frame.load_uri('http://www.google.com/')

scrolled.add(webview)
window.add(scrolled)

window.connect('delete-event', gtk.main_quit)
window.show_all()

gtk.main()

--194.197.235.240 23:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Meh, I really don't want to get back into IT, just know enough to get on with my projects. VB Express looks pretty well suited to my needs, provided it works well for web deployment. I'm so damn out of date with computers. --TheEgyptian 00:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

(undent)

My two cents starts with a pair of questions - why do you want to learn to program, and what do you plan on applying that new skill towards? If you are looking to get a job based on programming, think about the kinds of settings you want to work in and the needs those employers have. For example, if I wanted to work for a bank or brokerage house then a language like C, C++ or java would be appropriate, as would scripting languages like Python or Perl. In other settings SQL and XQUERY might be more in demand, and if you're into web design then HTTP, AJAX or Flash would be good. Focus on what you want to do, and a little inquiry into the tools used there will guide you. If you're just looking to tinker, try BASIC, Visual Basic or Perl. I'd also look at sites like w3schools, which offer great free online tutorials that give you a sense of various languages. Good luck, and have fun. --SpinyNorman 21:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

On the death penalty and being a bleeding heart liberal

This discussion was moved to Debate:On the death penalty and being a bleeding heart liberal.21:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Remembrance Day

There is a moving slideshow on the BBC website with commentary from those who fought in World War I. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses row on row,

That mark our place; and in the sky

The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago

We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,

Loved and were loved, and now we lie

In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:

To you from failing hands we throw

The torch; be yours to hold it high.

If ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

In Flanders fields.

MDB 12:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

"Pack up your troubles in your old kit bag..." Such a lovely song with such a sad meaning. Peace. SJ ^Debaser 13:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Guy Empey's "Over the Top" was written by someone who was there. I think that's where I read the bit about the company mascot sucking in his frothy green last breath with his paws over his nose, as low to the ground as he could get, without a doggy gas mask. Forgive me if I've applied some creative mis-memory and artistic license there. Once heard an elder male relative, a career artilleryman, say, "War is a wasteful process."

My own meager experience is consistent with that observation. Sprocket J Cogswell 14:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I would like to add my utmost respect for those who put their lives on the line in the defense of what they hope was the right cause. As a pacifist, I would never risk what they have, but I respect that, over time, many of them have made it possible for me to hold my position. I thank you, my fallen friends. ħuman 06:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm a great fan of comic strips, and I always appreciated the Charles Schulz would commemorate Veteran's Day and D-Day in Peanuts.

There's also a User Friendly strip I appreciate enough I keep a print out of it on my office door. I can't get through to the strip's archives now, so I'll describe it

Panel 1: One of the characters is at his computer: Man, I do love these World War II shoot-em-up games. One more try at taking that hill and...

Panel 2: He looks up, sees the date is November 11

Panel 3: The computer stands alone, with a poppy next to it.

MDB 16:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

protecting high use templates

I think we should protect high usage templates. If a template is edited, all pages that use it have to be reparsed, which puts a lot of load on the server. I've already protected Template:! after some vandalism yesterday (see the talk page), and now I've created Template:Doc to move the documentation out into a subpage so it is still editable. I've added this new doc template to the top 30 templates, although some of them don't have a documentation subpage. These are here (wait a bit for the category to fill up, all this editing I've done is slowing things down), and you're welcome to write some. If you click the create link on the template page, it will preload the basic structure. -- Nx / talk 12:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Very good idea. Arguably, all templates should have at least semi-protection. Why would a BoN want to edit one of our templates? –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 12:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

In some cases such as Template:= there's no need for anyone to edit it (now that the documentation is on a separate page), but with others that's not so clear. Why shouldn't a BON be allowed to add a random verb to Template:Verb, for example? I can give you an example of me editing a template before I was a sysop (and before I had the number of edits required for autoconfirm). -- Nx / talk 12:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a trade-off. Which is of more help to the site: users not being able to edit a template for a few days until they make their edits, or stopping server-hitting changes to templates by spam/nonsense bots? Fair enough about Template:Verb, but what about ones like Template:Welcome or Template:Unsigned? In general, I don't think there's any need for new users to be editing those. Having said that, I'm not going to get dogmatic about it. Most things on RW are left open on principle so I wouldn't oppose keeping them unprotected. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 13:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with that. What I'm saying is that only those templates that are used a lot should be protected, not all of them (and semi-protection is not very useful because people generally become sysops before they reach autoconfirmed status nowadays.) -- Nx / talk 13:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, if RW expands and its reach increases then the amount of vandals that it will attract will increase. People with relatively minor technical knowledge know what to edit to cause havoc, there may even be bots out there just going to random websites and trying it out. Basically, the whole thing about the wiki being totally open was fine when it was small and unnoticed but it's getting to the point where we need to more seriously consider those policies in the face of the wiki growing larger - and by this I don't mean putting it to a vote, I mean having the guys with server access and expert knowledge figuring out what could go wrong, how to fix it and just doing it. So basically, if a wayward edit could cause severe hassle (like bigdelete, which I think you've already removed from normal sysopship) it should be prevented - there's no reason to edit these, and any edits to well established templates or settings should be discussed first anyway. ^pathetic 13:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to speak out against the protection of high-use templates. High-use templates are a potential target for some very funny vandalism. Reverting unfunny vandalism to high-use templates is no more difficult than reverting vandalism to lesser-important pages. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 21:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but vandalism to these templates adversely affects site performance. The work required after editing a template is done over a long period of time to prevent a DOS attack, but it's still unnecessary server load. -- Nx / talk 08:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I vote yes to protecting high use templates, but not to the sysop level. Making them protected for the "User" level is good enough, in my opinion, as the attacks, as of late, have been by anonymous IP vandals. The Goonie 1 ^{What's this button do? Uh oh....} 21:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree, though we can only protect at the autoconfirmed level, so it won't make much of a difference most of the time. -- Nx / talk 08:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I've just done the top 12 as after that (Template:Unsigned) the number of places linking to them start dropping more dramatically. ^pathetic 14:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Pages are only reparsed when they're requested, right? It seems to me this is a work around for a really trivially technical fix. That is to record for each page marked dirty the revision ID of the edit that made it dirty. Then when an edit is reverted, you can perform two separate database updates. One which marks all pages including this page as dirty where the page is not currently dirty or the revision ID of the edit which made it dirty does not match the edit we are reverting. The second query marks pages as clean where the page is currently dirty and the revision ID of the edit that made it dirty matches the edit we are reverting. Wouldn't that solve the problem? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

They have to be reparsed even when not requested to update category and linking information (and maybe more). Apparently MediaWiki is smart enough to detect that the doc subpage is included in the noinclude section, so it doesn't trigger an update for every page the main template is included in.

I don't think your solution is so trivial, but in any case this would be a better place to suggest it. -- Nx / talk 09:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone else think Kent Hovind is funny?

I don't even mean in an unintentional way. When I listen to his bullshit, I honestly start chuckling sometimes because I think he has a good sense of irony, and knows how to structure a joke. If he were a stand-up comedian instead of a creationist, I really think he'd be incredibly good, and I'd love to watch him. Does anyone agree? --Mustex 23:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I think his "good sense of irony" is actually a bad sense of irony, as his intention is not to be funny. As for knowing how to structure a joke, I think that is another example of his bad judgement, as his arguments are supposed to be persuasive. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. He is very charismatic, well-spoken and has nice delivery. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 15:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

No, he isn't at all funny. His jokes are terrible. And often extremely mean. Example: San Francisco: the land of the fruits and flakes. That's his idea of humour. And worse, the audience yuk it up. Twats. I will say he's funny in a schadenfreude kind of way now he's in jail. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Get out of my head, RW!

As much as I love RW, it is definitely influencing me a hell of a lot more than I thought it would. In my World History class yesterday we were discussing Europe and Christianity in the 500-1500 BCE time period, i.e. when Europeans began to study Greek philosophy again and eventually created rationalism. So we were talking about that and I found myself launching into a long and rambling rant about the rationalist viewpoint, complete with snarky attacks on dogmatism, fundamentalism, and creationism. Somehow I ended up talking about creation science, Hovind, and ID. At that point I realized that everyone was looking at me with that "What the fuck?" kinda look. It was pretty weird. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

You need to make sure you keep calm when ranting, otherwise you're always in danger of running off-topic and making no sense. Perhaps you just went off on Gish Gallop without realising. ^pathetic 14:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I did. Which is sad, because I am on a debate team and am one of the best in the state. I guess I got a bit worked up about the topic, so I went on a rant. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

One of the best in the state??? One of the best in the state?? Only an American would make such a shamelessly absurd and self obsessed comment. Wanker. MarcusCicero 22:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

"Europe and Christianity 500-1500" - so a pretty narrow topic then! Bob Soles 14:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Well we started off talking about Byzantium and the public works projects created by the Emperor Justinian (especially libraries), and that led to a discussion of the re-translating of Greek philosophical works. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it could have been worse. You might have accidentally parroted one of the Assfly's world history "insights" and got yourself a failing grade. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Matt Bors

I know it pales in comparison to Karajous mini masterpiece, but Matt Bors one of my favorite artists, had a great one up yesterday. SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 19:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

In case anyone followed this story a while back...

A 13-year-old boy in Minnesota gained national attention a while back when he stopped leukemia treatment after one session in February and fled, citing his religious beliefs. . This fired up the crowd who felt that big government was telling this family what to do despite their beliefs, and some even saw it as an attack on faith-based healing. Doctors said that non-treatment would be a death sentence, and eventually the boy and his mom returned and agreed to conventional treatments. I'm glad to report that he's been declared cancer-free following his final chemo treatment.
I feel bad that he was sick in the first place, that he wound up in the media spotlight, and because chemo's certainly an ordeal in itself. This story just frames the anti-vaccine hysteria, and why it's okay to question if a new vaccine is safe, but to not fear and avoid them irrationally either. --SpinyNorman 21:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a happy ending. Glad the kid is doing well. ħuman 06:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Another reason I'm no longer a practicing Catholic...

Because this makes a lot more sense than spending $10K feeding the hungry or sheltering the homeless... --SpinyNorman 21:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

In a business sense, I suppose it was a wise investment and churches are businesses, after all. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 22:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Could someone paste this into a word document and email it to me? Firefox shuts down whenever I try to access it--Thanatos 00:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

“”ST. LOUIS - The Archdiocese of St. Louis says Archbishop Robert Carlson used $10,000 in discretionary funds to support the successful effort to prevent legalization of gay marriage in Maine.

I think that's all you really need to know. ^pathetic 09:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see climate changes is not occurring

Seeing as the mild summer in New Jersey has conclusively disproven the effects of global warming, I have to chalk this up to one of those things. In March Tasmania had its first ever heat wave and we have had another first. Where I live back on the mainland, we have had our first ever heatwave in November - it is still spring and we are having heat wave. Five day so far above 35C (95F) and the next three are going to be 40C (104F). I am just bitching because it is hot. - π 22:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

It's fucking freezing, windy and constantly pissing it down here. My heart bleeds for you. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 08:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Fundies, Fundies everywhere, and not a brain to think

So I'm listening to a radio talk show, where they're interviewing the guy who lead the team that discovered our newest dinosaur (no, not Winnie Mandela, Aardonyx celestae) and they open the lines for callers. Within the first couple we get a Gish Gallop "Evolution is a lie! Earth is only 6,000 years old. You're wrong to say it's 170 million years old! The Flood killed the dinosaurs! Why don't you open your mind?" The last bit had me thinking Andy had phoned in. Response in studio - quiet chuckles. --PsygremlinParla! 18:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Do you remember the 80s teen-angst movie Heathers with Christian Slater and Winona Ryder? The principal in the movie dismisses a touchy-feely comment by the guidance counselor with the sentence: "You'll let us know when the shuttle lands." I have no idea what that means in that context, but it just sounds damn dismissive. Either way, that is the first thought that goes through my head when I hear things like that. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 18:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

"Do as we say, not as we do", Part XXXVIII...

Why was I not surprised to see that the GOP's own healthcare plan provides coverage for elective abortions, and has been doing so since around 1991. Apparently they passed up several chances over the years to opt out of that coverage, until it was pointed out to Michael Steele, who's moving quickly to make the issue go away. After making sure this coverage was pulled from the House healthcare reform bill, it would be a little awkward going through the Senate vote with that bit of hypocrisy hanging over their heads. What I'd love to know is if there's any way the GOP could be pressured into reporting on how many elective abortions were covered under their plan since 1991 - reporting the total count would not be a violation of anyone's privacy. --SpinyNorman 20:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Such pressure would be counter-productive. It would be very easy for them to respond with a simple lie, saying that no abortions were ever paid for by the plan. And in fact, that might well be true.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 20:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, it's worth noting that the number of female staffers has probably been miniscule, so it's not exactly going to preserve their privacy if the GOP were to release stats.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 20:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

So hi

Maybe it's silly, maybe it's unwise, but I've had a couple of glasses of wine, and my ears were burning, so I signed up for an account here. Hi. Now you can talk about me in front of my back. Or possibly standing over my snoring, drooling, unflatteringly unconscious body, depending on whether or not I decide to finish this bottle. --4perf 01:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Heh, no problem, although it's usually best on this page to just edit one section, or use the "new section" link. Anyway, about that wine, does it go well with mushrooms? ħuman 01:54, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Oops. I'm new at this whole wiki thing. Hey, what's this button for? Oh crap. Undo! Undo! --4perf 02:02, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That seemed to work perfectly! ħuman 03:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You fool! Never edit the interwebs when pissed. Bad things happen. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Onion: Portrait of a teabagger/birther

This worries me. When the Onion is starting to run truthful news stories, I think it might be time to re-stock the fallout/y2k/2012 shelter. -- CodyH 17:43, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That's the thing about satire; it doesn't have to be wrong, or even funny. It just has to take things almost literally and show them up as absurd. ^pathetic 17:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Very nice. Too bad they beat us to it ;) Oh, and the combined term is "birthbagger"... ħuman 18:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Dr. George J Georgiou, Ph.D.,N.D.,DSc (AM).,MSc.,BSc

I occasionally get spam from this remtard, and so I thought I'd share it with you lot before reporting it to spamcop.

Dear friends and colleagues,

You have not heard from me for quite a while now as I have been quite busy researching and writing my latest book entitled “Curing the Incurable with Holistic Medicine.”

As you are all supporters of natural or holistic medicine, you are probably aware that many of the allopathic doctors tend to look down on many healing modalities that use natural methods of treating. Their argument is that it is not scientific or “evidence-based.”

I therefore took on the task of writing this 610-page book on many aspects of holistic medicine with over 800 scientific references to prove that holistic medicine is as much “evidence-based” and scientific as allopathic medicine - this has been two years in the making.

Please feel free to read some sample chapters as well as read all the 15 case histories of “incurable” cases treated using the holistic medicine model at the DaVinci Holistic Health Centre in Larnaca, by visiting www.docgeorge.com or www.collegenaturalmedicine.com

The book has just been released and is available for sale on amazon.com and other major online bookshops.

I will be back shortly to share with you some other interesting topics that I have been researching.

Best regards,

Dr. George J. Georgiou, Ph.D.,N.D.,DSc (AM).,MSc.,BSc Holistic Medicine Practitioner www.docgeorge.com / www.collegenaturalmedicine.com admin@docgeorge.com Tel: 24-82 33 22 Fax: 24 -82 33 21

A book? Oh fuck, we're all doomed!! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I took the liberty of adding a couple of redlinks to the spamtext in hopes of inspiring some creative writing here. ħuman 21:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Reading his diplma mill line, all I can think of is "Richard Lenski signed his letter as Richard Lenski" ^pathetic 20:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Human: I made one of the links unred. Hope it's up to your standards. --Irrational Atheist 01:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I have no standards other than using complete sentences. And not pissing me off when I'm drunk, but that one's random and everyone ignores it, luckily. I go read now :) ħuman 02:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

He lists his bachelor's and master's? Why would he do that? Also, why did he list his doctoral degree twice... or does he have two? And I will admit I had to look up "N.D." (Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine). SUSPICION.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 08:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC) Ah, I see his doctoral degrees are different, although not equivalent (DSc in other countries apparently being equivalent to an LLC or the like.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 08:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It seems none of his qualifications included any kind of mention of internet mailing etiquette. Considering he's spamming people who haven't opted in to his mailings in any form, there is no unsubscribe link in his emails, and he thus far has not responded to two of my replies to have my address removed from his mailing list. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 11:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Did I make a good point?

I'd like opinions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiTGxTl3dAk --Mustex 18:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think it's a good point, but not "very" well made, IMO. The editing when you introduce the main points (who can breed with who) makes them a bit rushed and unclear. If I didn't know what you were explaining, I wouldn't have been able to follow it. ħuman 19:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, xtranormal tends to do that. I don't have a webcam, so I'm as much hoping to inspire others to make videos on this subject as hoping to convince anyone personally.--Mustex 19:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ring species are a good argument for evolution but, as the editor above mentions, unless you've already got a good grasp of the issues then you won't understand the video. And if you've got a sufficiently good grasp of the issue then you don't need the video. I didn't even notice you giving a simple introductory definition of ring species. Incidentally, we have many ring species on Jupiter. They live on our rings.--Skynet 21:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion - redo it by first writing a clear script (defining ring species as our jovial friend suggests) and instead of the goofy animatron narrating, use images that clarify what you are saying. They don't need to move, just to be easy to understand. If you want to experiment with those two steps in a sandbox here on the wiki that would be cool, I'd be glad to try to help, at least offering suggestions. ħuman 23:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

There's never a bad time to link to Icanhascheezburger

Hippy goat! Totnesmartin 23:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ahahahaha! That's great, thanks for posting. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, Marty! You so crazy! SJ ^Debaser 13:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

anybody want to play?

Took some mushrooms. Your move. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse / talk / contribs}

Oooh, pizza! ħuman 01:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

thanks buddy. Wish you were here. For cereal, I'm off my fuggin rocker so have fun with it.

Qxg7# --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 02:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I fucking LOVE magic mushrooms. Love'emLove'emLove'emLove'emLove'emLove'emLove'emLove'emLove'em. Enjoy. Go ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall. TheoryOfPractice

Thanks TOP. Ate another couple grams for you.

your changes will be visible immediately.

Some changes take time to appear, others appear before the time they are expected....

can't find the tilde on my blackberry. Mop on.

Can't you just copypasta or press the magic signature button.

I'll take a threesome over mushrooms, alcohol, or any "drugs"... any day Udon 04:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You and two hot young boys in tights?

Now a threesome on mushrooms... if you can stop giggling for long enough, of course. Hope you had awesome music to go with them. --PsygremlinParla! 05:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Nono, it was my fiancée and another woman I suggested to her. My fiancée agreed, and yea.. now I'm exhausted. Udon 21:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

As Lucy hit the sky and all kinds of apple pie...? SJ ^Debaser 16:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

What kind did you take? I took some "philosopher's stones" back when they were still legal in the UK, but none since. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You people make my life seem so boring, mundane and suburban. The highlight of my weekend was a community theatre production of Little Shop of Horrors. MDB 13:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Buy some acid off some of the kids hanging around outside. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I doubt I'd have the nerve to take acid. Though if I did, the place I saw the play (Greenbelt, MD) would be a good place to find some, I'd imagine. It, along with Takoma Park, is one of most "hippie" towns in Maryland. MDB 14:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

MDB, the highlight of my weekend was finding out my ex-girlfriend has found someone new, and me spending Friday and Saturday night alone getting shitfaced and smoked out of existence - I'm a STUDENT and that was my weekend! SJ ^Debaser 18:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

@Josh: That sucks. Be strong big man, plenty more sperm-recepticles in the world and all that. @MDB: Acid isn't as bad as people make out. Anyone who tells you an acid horror story involving demons or fruit (e.g. I thought I was a banana and tried to peel myself) has never taken acid in their lives. To get that kind of trip you'd have to take an A4 sheet. The best thing is to titrate your gear; take half of your tab, wait an hour and assess how fucked you are, and then take the other half if you are still coherent. Works for me. Mainly you'll just find yourself staring at the carpet and giggling rather than screaming about dragons and the floor eating you. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

HA! Cheers Crundy. I'm OK and pretty much over her, we've been split up for nearly 6 months now anyway. I just found out via Facebook "Such-and-such is now in a relationship!" in the middle of my radio show. As we're on the topic of drugs, I just finished watching Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and man was that one weird fucking film. Pretty funny though. SJ ^Debaser 00:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Awesome film, but not to be copied. Anyway, fuck her, go storm the fresher's parties. You would not believe how up for it first year nursing students are. Getting laid at uni is like walking through a forest at night. Sooner or later you'll hit a tree. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not be copied? Why not? I have come close but never to the same degree but that was due to lack of funds as opposed to fearing for my health and sanity. Ace^McWicked 00:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Indeedio, that's what I've been doing! I can easily imagine Ace running around like a mad eejit, pimping fifteen year-olds and having a ciggy dangling out his mouth for every second of the film his life. SJ ^Debaser 01:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I have got a three day long party to attend this weekend up on the coast. Things are bound to get weird. Ace^McWicked 01:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll be the one with a .44 Magnum and a handful of pills in an Hermes briefcase. 01:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ace, check back in with us when it's over so we know that you're alive and well, and that after a day your eyes didn't start to bleed for whatever bizarre reason. I'm going back home this Friday for a friend's party, and OH we're going out on the town and I am going to regret it the morning after. SJ ^Debaser 01:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Dembski's vague wackings off

He is threatening us with a law suit^img, do we ignore him or laugh? - π 02:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

We laugh. Until his lawyer figures out how to contact us, at which point we should probably check with someone who is 100% certain of the law before we keep laughing.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 02:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Both. He's an idiot, and might actually finally make us notable to WP! Quoting in full context is the utmost level of respect for sources. Would he prefer we quote-mine him? ħuman 02:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Actual as the IEEE is the copy-right holder (he signed it over when he submitted the paper) we should check he is not violating the copy-right by putting it up on his website. - π 03:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That's an awesome point. Can we add that (c) thing to the article? ħuman 04:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point. Although if he is violating it, doesn't that mean we are too? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 03:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ohhhhh interesting. Ace^McWicked 03:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I would say that we are using it for criticism of the subject material, which means we would be protected by fair use. So yes, but... - π 03:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

But what? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 03:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

No buts, we are in the right here. ħuman 04:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The but was, but it is permissible in some circumstance to violate copy-right, which we are probably covered by. - π 04:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Note that for many journals it is understood that authors will include preprints or drafts on their websites even if the journal has the copyright. This means that Bill is *techincally* violating copyright but in a way that everyone takes for granted is acceptable (some journals even explicitly give permission. These things are complicated). Now, it likely means that the journal, not Dembski is the holder and so they would need to make the relevant legal actions. However, if this is based on an early draft it is possible that Dembski retains some copyright rights. I don't know. I'm not a lawyer and these things are complicated. However, there's almost certainly a fair use claim here given the critical commentary that makes this completely acceptable on RationalWiki's part regardless of who owns the copyright. JoshuaZ 04:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Let us see what exactly Bill decides to do, and what the situation with the copyright actually is. In the mean time I think it is safe to say that article will be getting some attention, let us make it as good as we can. tmtoulouse 05:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, Larron is gonna love that I made him put this in the mainspace. Ironically, of course, Dumbski links to the old version in the essay space. Larron, you're FAMOUS! ħuman 06:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow, what a tempest in a teapot! BTW, the IEEE (probably) is not the copyright holder of the article in question: W. Dembski only announced that it is to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, but didn't say in which... The previous article - which I excerpted to a lesser degree - was published in an IEEE journal.

The excerpts of "The search for a search" were taken from a draft, published on R. Marks site, and linked-to by the evolutionary informatics lab. It is not longer available on these sites.

Sorry, I didn't want to be the cause of trouble, I think that there is nothing wrong with my deconstruction of his article. We could drop the uncommented section 1, though.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Nah, nah, nah, we like trouble. Thank you! Lets hold tight for now. Make improvements if you think they will help but don't do anything yet because of the threat. tmtoulouse 07:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - I'm glad to have written the article here on RationalWiki! BTW, I tried to comment on UncommonDescent:

Dear Dr. Dembski, the easiest way to get the article taken down would be to show how embarrassingly wrong the critique is.

But alas, comments are closed now... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Also remember what we learnt from Schlafly when he tried this trick. Even if he sends a formal letter, we don't pull it down. We usual have a statutory time in which to formulate a response. - π 08:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't you have anti-SLAPP laws in canukistan? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

On WPability - it pleases my post-CP heart that we could pass Wikipedia's notability rules for a non-CP event. Totnesmartin 10:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I added a few lines to wp:William A. Dembski#WEASEL controversy, though I'm obviously not the best choice to do so... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Deleted as not-noteworthy. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"Yes Mr Dembski, I can assure you and your colleagues that we will remove the content as soon as possible. OK, thanks and goodbye" (leans into microphone) "Kill Them!". Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 10:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The only reason he could have to request a take-down is that he's unhappy with being critiqued at all. If we did the same with, say, Richard Lenski's paper, I'm sure Lenski wouldn't have an issue (and doesn't Conservapedia have a side-by-side of that one?). So, what's the best that can happen from Demski's point of view? The original gets removed but LArron's half stays and we just link to a source and selectively quote (mine), a take down order can't remove the annotations at all so let him bark all he wants, he doesn't have much to stand on with respect to removing what he really disagrees with. Or, we can request that he does the more noble and certainly more scientific thing and actively responds rather than shouts about infringement. ^pathetic 13:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The number of views for the article doubled since yesterday (~840 today, 430 yesterday) , so it's a minor Streisand effect. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ames

http://acandidworld.com/2009/11/16/copyright-threats-from-creationists-nothing-new/ - π 22:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

New Scientist on Swine Flu myths

For those who might be wondering about vaccination, this NS article is interesting.--Bob^{Not Jim} 11:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The comments on that site are full of the stupid. People go nuts when you mention vaccines. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 11:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the article is very good but the comments make you despair for the human race.--Bob^{Not Jim} 12:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The anti-vaccination people drive me up a wall. Smallpox has been eradicated. The only known smallpox virii exist as laboratory samples, and the scientific community debates whether those should be destroyed (what if we do need to sutdy it again vs what if it escapes/someone with evil intent gets a hold of it). Polio isn't quite that gone, but its close. And both of those occurred because of vaccinations. But yet, you get these morons running around like headless chickens, fearful of things they just don't understand. It pisses me off royally. MDB 12:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow. After reading the comments I feel so much stupider. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 12:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep, the comments fail to disappoint from the very beginning... ^pathetic 13:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for sounding a bit sexist, but why are the majority / the nuttiest of the antivax comments made by women? Are women more succeptable to bullshit? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 13:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

There have been one or two theories/observations to that effect but I'm not 100% sure the effect is there or significant. ^pathetic 13:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm just speculating, but perhaps because women as less likely to have studied science than men? (This isn't to say that women can't or shouldn't study science, just that more men study science than women.) MDB 13:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That's the sort of reasoning that gets brought up when the question is asked. However, I'm not sure if there are actually any studies showing the prevalence of irrationality - just theories as to why it would be and a few anecdotes. So until we figure out if the effect is real (if someone knows, please let me know, this has been bugging me for ages), remember this phrase, supposedly attributed to Frederick Beiser: "Facts without theory is trivia. Theory without facts is bullshit." ^pathetic 14:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep in mind the area we are in. Anti-vax woo is all about "for the children" a line of reasoning that is probably more likely to resonate with women than men. Other areas of irrationality are clearly dominated by men, for an extreme, look at tax protesters. tmtoulouse 15:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Trent. There is definitely a psychology to irrationality, and certain things appeal to certain groups. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Cover feature of this month's Wired is about Paul Offit and the Anti-Vax movement. 16:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a nice feature. I can never shake off the "unholy crap" reaction I get from seeing the reactions Offit got from the Antivax crowd though. Some of the anecdotes from the Autism One conference are absolutely unbelievable (to my unjaded eyes.) I am too easily frightened though... Frummidge 16:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Isaac Asimov

I just read this and since it is (a) about religion/logic and (b) full of win, I figured it was worthy of putting here. See also this one, which is amusing as well. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 17:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I think more Americans should read his short story "Life Without Fuel"--Thanatos 02:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Dammit Asimov! One short story pretty much explains everything in the whole world. ^pathetic 11:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

6th sense

Am I a bad person for thinking that the kid's mum is seriously fuckable in that movie? I'd make her see dead people...
Wait, that didn't sound as cool as I thought. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Since when does thinking people are hot make you a bad person? And no, that did not sound cool at all. A little creepy actually. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

YEAAAH, I'd love to strangle her... is it bad that that's the first place I go to? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Fuck's sake, editing when pissed on homebrew is a massive massive chore. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It isn't either "good" or "bad," it depends if you are into that sort of thing. BTW, what kind of wine do you make? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

This, but with chopped and boiled dried apricots and lalvin D47 yeast, left on the (non-gross) lees for a few weeks. Fucking incredible. Fuck, I forgot how awesome this movie is. Now I'm scared I'm going to have stay up all night watching it with a gallon of wine in the fridge. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

You make it sound like a bad thing. I wish that's how I could waste an evening. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"Stuttering Stanley, Stuttering Stanley, Stuttering Stanley, Stuttering Stanley, STUTTERING STANLEY!!!!!" Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn it, now I really want to watch that again. BTW, have you ever seen this? Bruce Willis's best film IMHO. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That movie is also full of win, however, it was massively spoilt for me, having had to view it at the cinema on release with a group of school friends, including a German fucknut who I had to sit next to, who insisted on asking me what was going on every two minutes., Visualise the movie, then imagine having to explain it every two minutes. You dig, blood? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a damn shame. Although I recommend seeing it again if possible, it was greatly improved the second time. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Seen it many times, and loving it. As an aside, that was the first movie that let me know that Brad Pitt is one of my most favorite actors ever, along with Johnny Depp. Two absolute masters of delving into the very soul of the person you are portraying. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Fight Club. 'nuff said. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

'Nuff said is right. That movie will never, ever, ever stop being awesome. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Wait, I think we're breaking the first two rules. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Shit, you're right. Now Ace Tyler will hunt us down and beat us up. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(UI) FUCK YEAAAH!! Just got to the "I see dead people" scene. Much awesomeness. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice. I may have to go watch it on Youtube just for that part. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

No no, doovde is the way to go. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, I love this moment so much I want to have sex with it, and have lots of little moments (which would be 6th sense and alcohol related) Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, did you ever see the "Spaced" piss-take of 6th sense? Awesomeness. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You lucky bastard, you sound like you are floating on air right now. Just make sure you can remember this bliss tomorrow morning. And yeah, I've seen that. Awesomeness is right. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I honestly can't recommend this wine recipe enough. Absoltely incredible. Seriously, give it a try. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:33, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure. My dad makes some kind of dry red wine in his garage, so I'm no stranger to homebrew. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Poisoned small girl funeral scene) Can I just point out that if it wasn't for woo-merchants and bullshit-peddlars the world over, we wouldn't have severe win movies like this? Viva la bollocks!! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hell yeah! Life would be boring without bullshit. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(UI) Ohshitohshitohshit, gonna cry. It's the car scene. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I cut a piece of paper in half with another piece of paper

For some reason I am immensely proud of this. Cubic bastard Hoover! 10:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Gosh, I wish my Sundays were as exciting as yours. --PsygremlinPraat! 10:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

It was actually on Friday, I just forgot to mention it. Cubic bastard Hoover! 11:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

remind me never to play scissors paper stone with you. Totnesmartin 17:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Well since no one asked I guess I have to: how? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 03:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Mei seconds this. Mei

The first piece of paper is money, with it you go and buy a scissors. Cut the second with the scissors. Voila! --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 03:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I sawed at one with the edge of the other. Cubic bastard Hoover! 17:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow. How long did that take? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 17:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Between half an hour and an hour. Cubic bastard Hoover! 17:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it may have been less; I wasn't counting. Cubic bastard Hoover! 17:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That's pretty cool. I respect anyone who has the time, initiative, and skill to cut paper with paper. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:00, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Outstanding work, well done Sir! Keep it up. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 22:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Quick brag

Holy fuck! I just racked off my latest homebrew wine into my serving box, and I kid you not, it's fucking awesome. Absolutely incredible. Comparible to a £10 bottle of supermarket wine, and yet it cost me less than 50p a bottle. This honebeww laarky is a fduck1ng godo 21hobbe i tell ya hdjythdrunk11! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 23:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Shit, I think I might have spilt my smack supply into this wine, because the sheer smooth feeling of awesomeness should not be achieved through alcohol alone. It really is that good. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Very mashed now, and I sjhould point out tht I flushed a gram of mephedrone (4-mmc) earlier because I knew it was no good for me. being fucked on homebrew as I am I realise how much of aq good decisions that was. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 00:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

What the hell are you doing with a gram of mephedrone? Take it easy man.--الملعب الاسود العقل ^{There's no love in fear} 07:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I would be very surprised if your homebrew really is comparable with a £10 barrel-aged wine although it may well be adequate for everyday drinking. I know that I have made and tasted quite a few homebrewed wines and you can't get the complexity and roundness of flavour in small quantities fermented and condtioned only in polythene or glass. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 23:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Depends on what you do with it. I used Lalvin ICV/D47 yeast and left on secondary lees for a month. The mouth feel is excellent. Very smooth and creamy. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Gold Standard Video

It's surprisingly intelligent sounding, please tell me if this video is reasonable at all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtF_zbI5j7M --Mustex 01:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not really, printing money is largely a figure of speech. The Government borrows money in the form of bonds, essentially taking the money out against future taxation. This increases interests rates, as they have to pay the money back with interest, and devalues money - what we call inflation. He is right only in a figurative sense. I remember reading somewhere once that if everyone went to the bank and asked for their money we would only have enough legal tender to cover about 1/4 to 1/3 of it any way. Money is extremely fictitious these days. When was the last time you were actual paid your wages other than by electronic transfer? Money is actual the measure of the perceived value of a persons time. - π 04:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's funny, really. Most of the "money" that passes through my "hands" never exists as any form of legal tender that I know of. Checks and EFTs handle most of the work. ħuman 20:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

CHEQUES!!!! Cubic bastard Hoover! 21:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not for us 'Merkins. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The interesting thing is that while checks pretty much represent some "money" that must already exist (or they'll bounce...), EFTs can be purely fictional - essentially privately printed money. Hmm, wait, no that's not really true. Customer gets credit card, bank is "creating" the potential for money by offering a loan. Customer uses it to buy parts from me, when I charge their card the bank pays me with "real" money, which if they didn't have on hand, they borrow, ultimately from the money printers. So I guess the private sector can't run "too far" ahead of the government agencies in "creating money". The real art for the Govt is to only create as much new money as represented by wealth creation in the economy, with perhaps a slight overspill (at the cost of "some" inflation) to make sure future growth is not held back. The wealth is created just as gold is mined - by people putting the value of their time into the economy, with the result being worth more than their time. Since we need a way to exchange the "more" part, we need an increasing money supply. Oh, and, yeah, the "gold standard" would strangle an economy by limiting growth to how much gold can be mined. ħuman 21:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not surprisingly, much of this has been thought of all ready, and by a Canadian no less. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

For UK RationalWikians

For those interested in politics and rational scepticism (whatever that is) some guy left a post in the forums that may interest you. - π 12:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Rational skepticism is basically rationalism. It differs from philosophical skepticism in that it only questions non-falsifiable claims. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Magnetic water treatment - woo?

Since we're now in the business of debunking consumer products sold by footpads and bloodsucking insects, I'm wondering about this one - http://www.sophtecwatercond.com/ It claims to treat hard water using special magnets at $389 you clamp onto your incoming pipes. "This amazing magnetic effect super-cleans the interior of water pipes, reducing the extensive damage to these surfaces caused by build-up of lime scale. By changing the physical characteristics of water, hard water will perform like soft water." Is anyone here familiar with the science around this and whether there is anything to it? It sounds like rank woo to me. But if not, it's a lot cheaper than a conventional water treatment system. Here's another company selling something similar, and they even have a science page: http://www.scalefighter.com/ And this "electronic water conditioner" that appears to possibly just be an electromagnet: http://www.waterking.co.uk/domestic_home.htm Secret Squirrel 23:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, first, scalefighter can't even spell "TARTER". Second, yeah, I think it's complete woo. What exactly is the magnet going to do to the calcium/magnesium, etc.? I have a magnetizer and raw ceramic magnets so I could experiment, but... I have virtually 0 ppm soft water (just a little iron and sulfur, if I can trust my senses). ħuman 00:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Interestingly the Scalefighter website has a "science" page that cites what appear to be real journals, with claims a magnetic water treatment alters calcite to aragonite. Assuming this is valid in the first place, is argonite less likely to cause scaling and buildup than calcite? They're both CaCO3. Then there are too many other variables: what sort of magnetic fields were used in these studies and how do they compare to magnets you clamp on your pipes? What if the stuff clogging my pipes isn't calcite to begin with? Then of course they cite studies but one would have to read the whole thing to draw any conclusions from them or even whether the studies were conducted properly; an abstract doesn't cut it. I agree, still sounds like woo. Secret Squirrel 01:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The same can be said of Purity Products' webshite giving so-called "scientifically proven" testimonials without citation. It's typical woo-meister mumbojumbo. Conservative Punk 01:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I fixed ur link. - human

Well yeah, that and anyone can put four citations to scientific journals to make their product "look" scientifically based, even if the studies don't really have anything to do with what they're selling. It's having them there that counts. Most consumers are just going to skim it, see "magnetic" and "water" and not look further. I checked and they do appear to be real journals, but I have no idea if they're peer reviewed. Something for future research. Secret Squirrel 01:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

One of the papers theorizes that the magnet does something to silica causing it to outcompete the reformation of solid CaCO3, and I guess it forms a goo that flushes out? Not sure I want to drink that. Not even sure what sand is even doing in a potable water supply? How much Si is in "typical" hard water? ħuman 01:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

There should be very little of either silicon or silica (not the same), as in single milligrams per liter. Methods for measuring water hardness almost always look at calcium, magnesium, calcium carbonate, or calcium sulfate concentrations, which seem to be more soluble in water and harder to remove. Water is a polar molecule, so magnetic fields can exert forces on it, but putting a magnet around the pipe results in a field running along the pipe that doesn't change the flow in any significant way. It isn't going to change the flow or behavior of the ions or other dissolved stuff, either. OneForLogic 08:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Capturebot space saving proposal?

Know ye that I know fuck all about computers. Now, about my idea: I seem to recall that RW was having problems over the huge amount of CP screencaps taken for use in WIGO. While the screencaps are really useful in case something is oversighted, some of them aren't necessary; the CP sysops can't delete the block log (AFAIK) but capturebot still takes a picture of the log when someone links to it. Similarly for deletions. Also for posts by Andy; I can't see any admin oversighting them and living to tell the tale. Could the bot be programmed to not take pictures of edits filling the above criteria, and would this be desirable? EddyP 13:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

"I used to skip certain links to log files or anchored talk pages but I think I removed those restrictions once we got 300gigs of space" -- Nx / talk 13:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Procrastination

Anyone have any tips for beating this? I'm a uni student and my procrastinating tendency, combined with a high workload, is getting pretty annoying. Drinking vodka while working only helps a little bit. EddyP 21:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I hate to say this but my worst source of procrastination is RW. I don't have a solution to your problem, though, as I can barely solve my own. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You could try to develop some sort of power word that you habitually repeat in order to foster motivation. Something like if-i-keep-dicking-around-I'll-become-a-loser-and-a-alcoholic should work. Perhaps some creative avoidance? Do some chores. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 21:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I was a procrastinator at university until I saw my grades drop to the point that I couldn't get into the School of Pharmacy, and my procrastination stopped immediately. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 21:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I was pretty bad at uni too. The only thing I can suggest is to tell yourself that doing your work as soon as it's been assigned to you will allow you to reward yourself with a good piss-up afterwards. Do this once and the sense of relief should be enough to convince you to get your work out of the way quickly in the future. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Rewards are good. Also, it's a good idea to set your own deadlines - obviously in advance of the real deadlines. Milestones also useful, particularly in larger assignments. It helps you keep track of your progress, and you get a decent feeling of achievement as you reach your milestones. You might want to have someone else checking in on your progress. I do this once a week with my projects and it generally keeps me on track. --^{Ask me about your mother} 18:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Meet "A Conservapedian" Live this Wednesday...

Apparently Andy has broken from his usual M.O. and announced^img one of his public speaking appearances while there's still time to attend. Here is the Facebook invitation for anyone who's able to make it to the Rutger's campus tomorrow evening (11/18) at 8:00 PM. It'll be interesting to see if Ed Poor or any of the other NY/NJ acolytes show up as well. --SpinyNorman 22:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I will be on the livingston campus and will be getting out at 7:30, would anyone mind if I write an investigative piece on it? Greepigfoot--If you want to experience the medieval rituals of faith, the candle light, the incense, music, important-sounding dead languages, nobody does it better than the Catholics 00:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Video or a mp3 would be nice.--Thanatos 01:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Or audio. Yes, please take notes- I wish I could go. Hopefully somebody will ask Andy if he believes that Obama is using mind control techniques to pass health care reform, seeing as how the AAPS, in their fake journal, accused Obama of doing the same to get elected [5]. Corry 03:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I would die to see Andy looking over his shoulders waiting for someone to "block" a real live person arguing with him... I so hope Rutgers posts video of this event. ħuman 04:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

It could well be like the handful of times Rush Limbaugh has ventured into a forum where he's not in complete control and dealing with a sympathetic audience. He will make a complete ass off himself.

For instance,

* When Pat Sajak had a late night talk show on CBS, Limbaugh guest hosted for him for a week or so. Some people opposed to Limbaugh (gay activists from ACT-UP, I think) managed to get into the audience one night, with the express intent of disrupting things. It got so bad they cleared the entire audience.

* Limbaugh once appeared as a guest on David Letterman's show. Letterman asked him, point blank, "does it ever occur to you that you're nothing more than a ball of hot gas?" Limbaugh was speechless.

Just like any bully, when people like Schlafly are confronted and they can't control the situation, they lose quickly and thoroughly. MDB 18:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Which is obviously why he feels king of the castle when he can block people and very rarely do any of his acolytes come over here for any real discussion, instead preferring just to shout and moan if they do. ^pathetic 18:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Quote

I'm writing a paper at uni and found this quote in the book "The Rise and Fall of Phil Spector" (He was a record producer.)

“”The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one insists on trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

—George Bernard Shaw

The first man this made me think of was Andrew Schlafly. SJ ^Debaser 14:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a great quote. I'm going to write that down. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Except in this case the unreasonable man doesn't want progress - he thinks everything has been going downhill for the last 6,000 years. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 14:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

All Andy controls is Conservapedia, and he is under the illusion that that is progressing - which is arguable, as it has gained more attention in the last year. Although the actual efficiency of his editors? No progress obviously, they chase away the worthwhile ones. SJ ^Debaser 14:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy isn't trying to adapt the world to himself. He's just adapted a virtual one instead. EddyP 15:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Dude, I totally just Facebooked that. No, I'm not kidding, I really did. I have a lot of Christian friends and I enjoy pissing them off." SirChuckB^{El...ipses are Cool...} 21:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hooray! SJ ^Debaser 12:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)