RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive59

This is an archive page, last updated 25 April 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <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)

Please help an old guy with his meths...

Have you got the price of a cup of tea guv? --Silly twit (talk) 03:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's a quid for a tin of spesh... DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 09:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

we need to act.

I'm so scared right now... the polar cap are changing and volcano are erupting... THIS IS THE END! we all gonna die in less then 10 year! run for your live! /become a survivalist Waronstupidity (talk) 04:49, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Nope. Sorry, you don't have ten years. You have only two, according to the Mayans who ended their calendar at 2012. Refugee^{talk page} 05:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I saw a cartoon recently where the guy who had inscribed the Mayan calendar basically ran out of space. The verdict being that it would do for the next 400 years or so.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 05:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I had the impression that good Christians would escape all this as a consequence of the rapture.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 06:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

seriously i hope the raptur happen so we get rid of the christian.Waronstupidity (talk) 07:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

In case of rapture, can I have your minivan? ħuman 07:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Did we talk about this before? Atheists who will take care of Christians' pets if/when the rapture occurs?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 07:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll take care of their daughters. ħuman 07:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey that's a good idea. If they are not included in the rapture they must be athiests and consequently they must be immoral!--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 11:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Isn't the rapture when a 32 bit timestamp, using the founding of the modern state of Israel as the epoch, overflows? The Christian trinity always struck me as 3 2 bit deities. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Неужели мы действительно рационально?

Я думаю, мы не то рациональное, большинство людей этого сайта хардкор-атеист, убил бы каждый христианин, если они могут.

Мы безбожного! мы должны принять Иисуса Христа как нашего Спасителя!Waronstupidity (talk) 04:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Извините, но атеисты (хардкор или иным образом), не хочу никого убивать. Когда вы решите ли вы мормонов, агностиком или атеистом? Вы, кажется, очень сбивчиво.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 05:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

damn you! i though no one would understand me with my clever use of Google translate! :-( Waronstupidity (talk) 05:35, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fail level: Moderate. - π 05:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fy faen! Du skinkerytter! DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 09:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Корабът ми на въздушна възглавница е пълен със змиорки. А Гугъл май не прави разлика между множествено число и учтива форма. --ZooGuard (talk) 14:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC) Всъщност, Гугъл май не прави разлика между "ти" и "вие". Опитът за превод води до забавен резултат. --ZooGuard (talk) 14:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fgbc ehvavat zl jvxv jvgu lbhe ha-Nzrevpna frpgvba gvgyrf. "EngvbanyJvxv:Fnybba_one#.Q0.9Q.Q0.O5.Q1.83.Q0..."? Trg n erny nycunorg. ~ Kupochama^[1][2] 16:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Rao! Fryd dra vilg yna tuehk?! Kettle Kin (Version 2.0) 22:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Rapture fiction and the Guillotine

I've been looking over various 'after the rapture' type fiction, such as the Left Behind and Thief in the Night series, and noticed that one of their things was the ebil anti-christ and his minions going nuts through the use of the Guillotine. This came to mind again when I read about yet another conspiracy theory that held that there were warehouses full of ready to be assembled guillotines seeded throughout the nation ready to be unleashed on America.

So, what is the facination with this particular form of execution? It isn't like it's described in Revelations. Is it related to the condemation of the French Revolution by Rome (and I'm sure some other demonations)? Is it due to the fact that it's a particularly gruesome form of execution performed with mechanical impersonalness? --Ravenhull (talk) 09:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Dunno, but a quick Google shows it's a remarked-upon theme. I think you just volunteered to write it up - we could easily have the best article on the topic - David Gerard (talk) 09:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Nothing to do with Rome for a start - the fundies detest the Catholic Church. Totnesmartin (talk) 09:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems to be a lot of weird stuff out there, but as far as I can see it comes from Revelation 20:4

• And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, ...

If you're going to behead lots of people the guillotine may be the most efficient method.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 11:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Wonderfully loony article here which develops the theme. Apparently tens of thousands of guillotines are already being stockpiled in the US.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 11:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

More on secret storage of guillotines here. Is nowhere safe?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 11:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Article? Totnesmartin (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good conspiracy to me. But I have to make one slight comment on the "mechanical impersonalness" idea regarding Old Choppy. This is something that people have been doing for years to get around "killing" people themselves. For many centuries it's been easy peasy to kill someone; lethal stab wound, choke them with your bear hands etc. etc. So there's been a steady move away from things that require the input of an executioner to work. The gallows (trap door does the dirty work) the guillotine (supposedly designed to overcome axemen with bad aim, but it also takes the actual killing to the equivalent to flicking a switch) electric chair (really does change it to flicking a switch) and the worst offender IMHO the lethal injection. It's changed from an "execution" to a "procedure" and from an "executioner" to a "doctor", and there's several people involved, so responsibility is diminished to the point where it hardly matters. I wouldn't be surprised if in the future they found a way to coerce convicted criminals to press the button themselves. So no, I don't think there's anything about the mechanics or impersonal nature that make the guillotine a particular focus as there are far more prominent examples. However, it is grusome, it is immediate and there is a macarbe fascination with what it would feel like to have your head cut off. So maybe it's because there is the right balance between an impersonal nature (compared to directly stabbing or shooting someone) and the cold clinical conditions of an injection. ^sshole 12:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I want some bear hands. Do they come with bear arms? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget the Firing Squad - idea being that only one of the rifles is live and the rest of duds, but nobody in the firing squad knows whch rifle they've got. Like the others, it's a rather insidious method of reducing responsibility for another person's death. 194.6.79.200 (talk) 15:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Only one blank. ħuman 15:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I know this is effectively the Nurenburg Defence but ultimately the responsibility is with the court and that is why it has to be removed from the executioner. Jack Hughes (talk) 16:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Got to admit, my knowledge of Revelations is weak (tried reading it once... my head hurt...), so I didn't know about the specific reference to beheading in there. With that, I guess Lady Guillotine would make a little sense. On the other hand, I love the shear numbers cited in those pages. The 30,000 from the first one is amusing, but the second said there were millions. Its almost like the bad guys were planning on making them one use items. Of course, all of this goes back to the idea that a government that has as many leaks and such as it is can hide such a plan that includes so much physical evidence. Ah well. --Ravenhull (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I think its just a cheap shot at the French revolution. Libertines like guillotines so they will be killing all good conservatives believing in authority and religion with those, again, kind of thing. Sen (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

No, it's from Revelations. Do a quick search on google.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 13:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, technically speaking it doesn't say guillotines, it says beheadings. Thus it could equally mean robotic buzzsaws. Sen (talk) 14:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. But the question was why guillotines turned up in Christian rapture stories. But it's all fantasy from start to finish, so arguing about what it really "should" mean is not very fruitful. --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to Godwin this, but... There was this group of deluded people in the middle of the last century that needed to find a way to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. Why are the crazies concerned about a device that was high-tech centuries ago? Shouldn't they be concerned about chemical factories* and airtight rooms? And even that is obsolete now. Forget gas, if people are in concentration camps, wouldn't it be easier for the US government to put a tactical nuke on a tower in the middle and set it off? Oh, wait. These people don't know anything, don't think critically, and trust only their interpretation of the Bible. Which book shows an understandable lack of imagination. Beheading is so 5th-century, but no matter on how much shrooms he was, John the Revelator couldn't have hallucinated a nuclear explosion, could he? (* Phosgene is both a chemical weapon and an industrial chemical.) --ZooGuard (talk) 20:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Well yes. But the idea is that individuals who refuse to submit to the beast and have the number 666 on their hands and foreheads will be identified individually and assassinated. A nuclear weapon is a perhaps a little bit like overkill. Also if you've taken on board the rest of the fantasy previously mentioned then you want to find some way to behead them as well. Nuclear bombs don't really fit. But it's all bollocks, so trying to be rational about it isn't very useful.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Symptomless Coma

Woah, I forgot about this old sketch from "Jam". Very disturbing, but weirdly amusing. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 10:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Lizard and the sexline doctor were always my favourites. Bring on Four Lions! Webbtje (talk) 12:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Trailer for those who haven't heard yet. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 13:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Forums

"Why don't we at least take all the volcano threads (four of them?) and bundle them into an Iceland volcano forum? That would help, and also use the forums for what they are for - things that might stay interesting for a while. ħuman 00:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)"

On those lines: individual forum threads for just adding anything relevant to any particular subject of interest (Pope & paedophilia; National day of prayer; British libel laws; Volcanoes; Homeopathy; Tea party etc etc) Just random (linked) facts, and (linked)opinions. I know there's talk pages (often cluttered with extraneous comments) and "See also" for that sort of thing but a separate place (linked from the article if there is one) would allow more stuff to be referenced especially for as yet non existent articles. Then when there was enough on the page a new article or section of an article could be made from the stuff in the forum. Sort of like a selective Google on a specific topic. 19:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I'd be for that, but we've found that it's difficult to tell when something is going to be "big" enough to warrant a thread so it's just a case of moving things when they do get to the right size. On the other hand, we could also get used to discussing current events on WIGO:World and specific things on the relevant talk pages. Then the SB gets changed to something where you just "flag up" new discussions occurring in other areas - something that would be difficult for people to get used to now we've got stuck into this system, but pretty well organised I think. ^sshole 23:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Start of life

"In environments like hydrothermal vents it is likely, but as yet experimentally unproven, that a range of amino acids and nucleotides would be formed by the laws of chemistry," he says. Local currents, he adds, would probably draw the molecules together, making it more likely that self-replicating chains of RNA could form and associate with amino acids.

Once that happened, the emergence of life was all but inevitable. "The Darwinian game was fully on," says Yarus. New Scientist. 19:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Cool stuff. It's always interesting to see what people are up to on the abiogenesis front. Although I'm not sure what to make of them naming these molecules. Makes me wonder if I can get away with it in my final thesis rather than a bland numbering scheme. "When a 5 mg sample of Brian was reacted with 4 mmols of Deborah acid...." nah. ^sshole 23:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Chemicals should have descriptive names. Just because physicists can call things "charmed" doesn't mean biologists can call a molecule "Queer as folk". ħuman 02:04, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

TV Tropes

Does anyone else notice persistent problems with non-ASCII characters? It seems to be only there. Bastard cubic Hoover! 21:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems to have occurred when they did a hardware upgrade a few weeks back. I've noticed that pages are slowly being editted to fix it. -Ravenhull (talk) 00:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The (Unofficial) Manga Guide to Woo Arguments

Thought this may get us some chuckles: The (Unofficial) Manga Guide to Woo Arguments

An earlier work by her: The Spontaneous Toaster Effect

--Ravenhull (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Very nice, thank you. Don't we have a blogroll thing or something where that can be preserved for posteriors? ħuman 02:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Frustrating

Why do they put so much goddamn crap on television? Aceⁱ⁹ 08:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

No imagination -Ravenhull (talk) 09:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

So you'll spend more time on RW - David Gerard (talk) 09:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

After about 2 days at university I didn't miss television. El Taj^{Don't make me do stuff} 01:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I spent four years without telly in the early eighties, and didn't miss it much. When I get my own place I'm not even going to buy a set. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I would be much more self-righteous about my lack of television viewing if I didn't spend my life glued to teh intarweb - David Gerard (talk) 18:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

But the internet informs, educates and entertains! Totnesmartin (talk) 21:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Battlefield 2142

I bought MW2 on the SexBox because my brother was insiting that I play online with him, only for me to find out that it's just a clone of CounterStrike with progression like in the Battlefield games. Which then reminded me of how cool Battlefield 2142 is, so I reinstalled it and started playing. Such an awesome game in Titan mode. Anyone else here play and want to swap usernames for a game sometime? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

MW2 is ok. I'm not really into FPS, but play a few matches online a night. (My PS2 finally bit the dust and I can't finish Persona 3 FES)--Thanatos (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

What version of MW is RationalWiki running now? DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 10:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

*Rimshot* Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 10:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Badger

Quick, before Channel 4 nick it back! Watch the best joke setup ever!! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Something odd going on here. If I preview the above then it's fine. I submit and the link is all screwed up. Any ideas? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:06, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I get the same. But the link has been taken down anyway :( –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Twas my fault : left out a "]" above. Sorry. The link is dead anyhoo. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 21:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Try here instead Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 10:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Unschooling?

Is this worse than Andy teaching kids? Kinda close to me--Thanatos (talk) 23:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Fucking hell, yeah, good luck with that one. Good luck Mum & Dad when your kids are still dossing around the house in 30 years' time. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Doctors and Nurses.

I have always had a respect for the team that runs the emergency department in the hospital. Paticularly on Friday and Saturday when they have to treat hundreds of abusive drunks all clamouring for immediate care after stupidly cutting their feet off or picking a fight with a lamp post. It really must get depressing to know that for every vomiting idiot you treat theres another 10 behind them. I personally have added to this in the past by dropping off a couple of OD cases though I have never been a patient myself. So it was great fanfare this morning that I hobbled in and collapsed on the floor at reception, doubled - tripled over in extreme pain. Was it my appendix? Stomach ulcer? I don't know but fuck it hurt. My fiancee kindly took care of all the paper work and I was ushered through and a drip was swiftly attached. There was some prodding and they took samples of every bodily fluid I was willing to provide and could produce. After some time, all the results came back and they sent me back home to recover. Giving me two days off work and stating that if the pain got worse I must come back. High white blood cell count indicating an infection somewhere and the possiblity of appendix issues. Meh, I got some nifty pain killers for the pain so all is well.
But the staff were swift and courteous. As was I in kind. Impeccable bed side manners.
All the more respectable when I saw the next case they had to deal with....A lumbering whale of a woman had entered the ER with her simpleton husband. When she went up to the counter I half expected her to say "Call me Ishmael". She demanded immediate attention because she had forgotten where she had put her wallet twice that morning and her thinking was a bit fuzzy. Therefore she must be attended to post-haste! And make it snappy because she had a benefit appointment in 2 hours and her husband had to get to his drug and alcohol counselling........Aceⁱ⁹ 01:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

See now, when you described your symptoms I would have put it down to liver failure, y'know, being you and everything. Speaking of which, I still haven't sent your beer. Get well soon anyway. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:50, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

A doctor acquaintance once told me that a stomach ulcer is instantly diagnosable from the expression on the sufferer's face. 10:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Just been sent home from work due to this illness. Which is fucking me off as its my second week at a new job. Not a good look but not much I can do about it. Aceⁱ⁹ 00:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

US politics and republicans

Could someone explain a little bit of the background to this video please? Is it that the republicans are blocking people from taking up non-elected but powerful positions because the democrats nominated them? DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily powerful but yes. That was a big problem when Obzma took office. Nutty Roux (talk) 12:31, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Zat's Bazack HUZZEIN Obzma? - David Gerard (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, The republicans have decided to shut down the federal government until their super secret Reagan clone reaches maturity. I think they've even blocked the restocking of TP in congressional washrooms^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 01:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Let's rock!

Tonight, apparently, is peak traffic for the Lyrids meteor shower. They're best seen just after the moon goes down (after midnight). Totnesmartin (talk) 18:20, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Really? Blast - cloudy here. :-( --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 18:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh: "The source of the meteor shower is the periodic Comet C/1861 G1 Thatcher."(WP) That bloody baroness just won't go away! 18:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

She's looking down on you Toast! But I thought the the sky over the UK was clogged volcano dust anyway? --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 18:50, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you know, since that volcano started, The weather has been rather nice, there's a slight overcast now but loads of blue between the grey. The dust 'n' stuff only showed as red sunsets. 18:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Really? I thought that everybody was washing dust of their cars and wearing SARS masks! :-) (I was joking about the masks.) --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:04, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ajjj!!!! I just realised - talking about the volcano again!--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:07, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

You started it! 19:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Hands up who remembers the Mt. St. Helens sunsets? ħuman 22:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Battle of the Republic

For no good reason other than creepy, [1] ħuman 03:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Even better ħuman 03:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

South Park

Did anyone see the South Park episode '201' last night? Not only were they not allowed to show an image of Muhammad, which they have never been able to do, but they weren't even allowed to say his name. This is especially weird in that the previous week's episode was allowed to say 'Muhammad' uncensored. There is an article about it here. Do you think this was the work of Comedy Central or the will of the South Park creators due to the threat of the Muslim organization? Keegscee (talk) 23:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I just watched it on the net earlier. I thought the bleeping of "Prophet Muhammad" was a joke, but then they didn't bleep Tom Cruise's name, so I dunno. The episode wasn't that great anyway. I thought the first episode "200" was funnier. SJ ^Debaser 23:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

They did get away with showng a depiction of Muhammad in the "Super Best Friends" episode a few years ago...why was there no loonie outrage then?..I suppose that they were still somewhat "under the radar" at that point...PACODOG^{woof, bitches} 23:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

i hate south park its a show full of tasteless joke and i hate how they portray us :-( my upper jaw is not disconnected from my body!(im a canuck) Waronstupidity (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

But Terrance and Philip are hilarious. I love the queefing episode. Keegscee (talk) 23:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

There is an interesting lesson that I learnt from Southpark. My Father was a very big Southpark fan when it first came out, used to watch it religiously and thought it was great. Right up until the episode that mocked the Catholics (he is a devout catholic). After this episode he stopped watching it and thought the whole show was awful. What I deduced was that he enjoyed watching others getting mocked but was totally unable to take it himself. I was somewhat disappointed by this as Southpark seems to be equal opportunity mockers. I think they mock all people and cultures more or less equally. Damo^Hi 08:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I've never been much of a South Park fan, but one thing I will say is that truly great satirists offend everyone eventually. If you can't take being offended, then you shouldn't read/watch/listen to satire. MDB (talk) 11:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep, they outright refuse to put anything off-limits. In fact, in the one about Family Guy (where it was Family Guy that was going to get into trouble for depicting Mohammed) they outright mention it "either everything is okay, or nothing is okay" based on the fact that the writers of Family Guy stop working if you take away one of their ideas (I refuse to spoil in for anyone who hasn't seen it yet). However, the reason that it was okay in Super Best Friends is that this show aired before a few Danish cartoonists drew a couple of pictures and caused a bunch of morons to try and kill them. ^sshole 12:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

This whole thing about Mohammed cartoons is fairly recent. Nobody kicked off when Gary Larson did it. Totnesmartin (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Absurd traffic spike

We are getting an utterly absurd traffic spike, referral traffic is from facebook but I can't find the source. Any facebook experts hunt it down for us? tmtoulouse 00:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Here [2]. tmtoulouse 01:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Or I could be wrong. Guess it doesn't matter. BTW how has the site been, have there been connection issues? More slowdowns than usual? It is an interesting load test since we have never had anywhere close to this level of spike traffic. tmtoulouse 01:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Had MAJOR slowdowns this A.M. P-Foster (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It seemed somewhat slower this morning, enough to notice, but it still loaded. Šţěŗĭļė bazooka 01:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well cheers that it still loaded....tmtoulouse 02:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It was unusable for me for a while yesterday.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 05:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't load for me at all earlier today - mid-morning PST. Were we Stalwined? Hitlined? Maybe it was a vast blob of woo that descended upon us? DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 06:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks like we were Dawkwined.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 06:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I love the smell of Dawkwin in the morning. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 06:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Was all but uneditable yesterday afternoon, around 14:00 GMT or so. Check the RC, there was a spell there with three edits in an hour - David Gerard (talk) 07:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I could edit, it just took ages to load yesterday afternoon. SJ ^Debaser 11:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

So moral of this story is that our current equipment is ill prepared to function if we reach 10-12k visits an hour...tmtoulouse 07:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

You know those tumble weed articles have brought us our two largest traffic spikes to date....tmtoulouse 06:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

They're pithy.--^talk 07:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you see what page they are linking to? That might give us another clue? Refugee^{talk page} 07:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

There was a Facebook link to this page just before the site became unusable yesterday Scientific evidence of evolution being a hoax, and God's existence. Is this where the traffic spike came from? Secret Squirrel (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

This is the group if you need to know. If you filter it to the group's postings alone, the link to RW is still near the top. Interesting to read the comments: "Chester Frazier I have people read this link or am I not understanding it? It appears to be anti-evolutionary site." Bah. It's still getting comments so I assume traffic to the site will still be higher than usual for another day or so. ^sshole 12:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Btw, the sound file on the cricket template is a copyright violation, and the site we're leeching bandwidth from probably won't be too happy about that either. We already got pwned once when the previous sound file was replaced with a "don't hotlink please" file [3] -- Nx / talk 12:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realise it was actually leached. I'd say just leave the sound out entirely. Sound on websites tends to be just an annoyance anyway. ^sshole 13:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

The link is http://media.freesound.org/data/22/previews/22368__monterey2000__R09_0038_Garden_Cricket_3_preview.mp3, which is the preview you get before downloading the file (for which you have to sign up). So yeah, I'd say it's not intended to be used on other websites. -- Nx / talk 13:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Noticed that it's linked on reddit too, which is a semi popular digg-clone. --GTac (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

"The Freesound Project is a collaborative database of Creative Commons licensed sounds." So why don't we upload it, credit it, and host it ourselves? ħuman 17:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

So much discussion about doing the bleedin' obvious.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 02:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

St George's Day

Happy St George's Day, all. SJ ^Debaser 11:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

According to my Simpsons Wall Calendar, its also the birthday of William Shakespeare and Michael Moore, and the New Orleans Jazz Fest begins today. Note that, based on my many years of buying Simpsons Wall Calendars, and Life in Hell calendars before that, the criteria for inclusion on a given date is apparently "Matt Groening thinks its cool".

Also note that next Friday is Arbor Day, which is, in the immortal words of Sally Brown, "the day all the ships come sailing into the 'arbor!" MDB (talk) 11:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

On this date it is traditional to make a pilgrimage to Asda to commemorate when St George defeated St Michael. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 11:57, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure there was a movement to change the patron of England and date to something much cooler, but I can't remember what it is. And I mean a serious and wide reaching one, not just 10 people in a Facebook group wanting Wallace from Wallace and Gromit to be the new patron saint... ^sshole 13:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

In England it is traditional to not even acknowledge the day, or remember when it is to within 3 days' accuracy. Totnesmartin (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It's sometime in the first half of the year, I know that much. ^sshole 13:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Google has it on their logo today! Ha! It's religiously inspired idea, it's on Google's logo, suck that Mr Persecution Complex from a blog that shall remain nameless for the rest of this conversation!! ^sshole 13:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Is there a patron saint of total indifference? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Who cares? Totnesmartin (talk) 13:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I’ve proudly got a St george’s flag flying at the bottom of my garden. It's a flag I borrowed off my neighbour, a former French soldier. All I had to do was paint the cross on it. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Buttsex Tweety^{let's have buttsecks} 14:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

So I tried to find a patron saint of indifference but while looking I came across Saint Christina the astonishing which is a hell of a name even for a saint. Her entry begins:

"Born to a peasant family, orphaned as a child, and raised by two older sisters. At age 21, she experienced a severe seizure of what may have been epilepsy. It was so severe as to be cateleptic, and she was thought to have died. During her funeral Mass, she suddenly recovered, and levitated to the roof of the church. Ordered down by the priest, she landed on the altar and stated that she had been to hell, purgatory, and heaven, and had been returned to earth with a ministry to pray for souls in purgatory."

Why don't we get them like that any more?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 15:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I was wearing my England football top today, and I've seen literally no one wearing any England-esque clothing, and about 3 cars with England flags on them. Bit of a shame. SJ ^Debaser 16:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's just that we're so convinced of our innate superiority that we've no need to advertise it. Bragging is so ... non English, you know. 16:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

But you just did... ħuman 17:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Would that Scots would be the same. Or even that their national food wasn't made of offal. Bastard cubic Hoover! 18:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Why do we even need a patron saint? I'm sure many countries get along fine without them.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 05:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

"We" don't have one. Geddit? It's an awesome pun! ħuman 05:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Cricket sound is cc-sample, not copyvio

The version from freesound.org is under the CC-sample licence. [4]: "All audio content you download from the freesound project is licensed under the Creative Commons Sampling Plus 1.0 license. This means that if you use the files you need to attribute the creator of the file (i.e. say who made it)."

So using the sound is fine. However, leeching it is rude. So putting a copy of the mp3 on the RW server, and suitable attribution (e.g. a noinclude on the template page) would be fine. If the mp3 wouldn't melt Trent's DSL - David Gerard (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a copyvio since we didn't attribute it. -- Nx / talk 15:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but doing so is easy enough. Mind you, we should still use a local copy (or a copy on a well-connected server elsewhere that RW has been authorised to leech from). Pity there's nothing suitable on Wikimedia Commons, which is fine with leeching. Hmm, wonder if Commons accepts cc-sample ... - David Gerard (talk) 15:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I know, it's a technicality, the leeching is the more serious problem (and the bandwidth requirements if we host it)

Yes there is, commons:File:Field_cricket_Gryllus_pennsylvanicus.ogg, see Template talk:Crickets.

Probably not. -- Nx / talk 15:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Commons is expressly fine with hotlinking/leeching (I know, I wrote the page that says so, and InstantCommons is specifically to make hotlinking of this sort Just Work). CC-sample-plus fails 'cos it's "To perform, display, and distribute copies of this whole work for noncommercial purposes". Ew.

I would suggest that yer field cricket ogg be used - HTML5 for Firefox or Chrome, Flash for lesser browsers, iPhone users can sod off. Is there a suitable Flash Ogg player? Or just use the HTML5 element for now - David Gerard (talk) 15:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Mind you, I just tried adding it, and the <audio> tag is just rendered as text ;-) - David Gerard (talk) 15:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

We have ogghandler, but it can't do autoplay (who cares) and looping (some backends don't even support looping, like Cortado). Plus the file needs to be on this wiki, unless I can set up cross-wiki media reuse like wikipedia has with commons. (btw Cc-sample-plus fails because it's yellow :) ) -- Nx / talk 15:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

InstantCommons! - David Gerard (talk) 15:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't work with oggs unfortunately. -- Nx / talk 18:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Just frigging upload it here already. We should serve our own shit. ħuman 01:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Glenn Beck Vs. Edumacaton

Seems kinda familiar--Thanatos (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Boobquake

Get 'em out for the boys quake ^{Hat tip} 16:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

That.

Is.

Awesome. SJ ^Debaser 16:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a great idea, but I could see that backfiring rather badly if there actually WAS an earthquake, by chance of course. --Grey (talk) 16:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Dunno: we could just threaten to send lots of nekkid women to trouble spots & watch them crumble. 16:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

In either case the experiment would have to be tested again for reproducibility. ^sshole 16:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

which one is caused by the boobs? 16:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Actually, now my brain has managed to process this properly, isn't this a little bit of confirmation bias? So the actual experiment should be for the women who normally "get it out for the lads" to cover up and we see if Earthquakes go down in frequency? ^sshole 17:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Should be easy enough, given all of those promiscuous atheist women. Bastard cubic Hoover! 17:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

According to this link the UK should have the most earthquakes! --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't surprise me in the least. There are a rather large amount of whores over here, including a fair few of my friends. SJ ^Debaser 11:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

What I love about these stories is how they must put people on the Christian right into a state of cognitive dissonance. Can't associate themselves w/the Muslim clerics (even though they both agree that women should be more modest) because they're Muslims and therefore always wrong, can't support the anti-Muslim protests because it's being led by a bunch of whores women taking pride in their bodies and sexual identities. There's no possible good that comes of this....P-Foster (talk) 19:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Watching fundies squirm is always good. ^sshole 11:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This is an absolute good. Except it is Indiana, and I have been there. Muncie, Indiana was designated the fattest city for a few years until recently, when some town in West Virginia took the cake (literally and figuratively). Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 03:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

For literature lovers

He ain't just the good Gatsby, bitches! --Kels (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I have so much lol in my heart for the third strip on that page. Mei (talk) 05:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Everything Kate Beaton does is gold. Her stuff about Mary Shelly is hilarious. --Kels (talk) 14:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that was a lot better than I expected. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I know where to find quality stuff, man. I can hook you up. --Kels (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Gawd bless you, Jon Stewart!

"I say this to anyone who's threatening death in the name of religion or politics, go fuck yourselves." according to his response to the controversy involving South Park and its "portrayal" or the prophet Muhammed. Frankly, I couldn't agree more, so long as the standard is universal. AnarchoGoon ^{Swatting Assflys is how I earn my living} 05:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

So it wasn't a meta joke. We all laughed when the "network" censored the Family Guy depiction inside the South Park episode, but they actually did it. ^sshole 11:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, to drag up an old essay that I've posted numerous times, when are people going to learn? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I still like Stewart's reaction, though. I consider myself a religious pagan, but I would never in a million years get pissed off at someone poking fun at my religion. Hell, I put up with you guys, don't I? Lord of the Goons ^{The official spikey-haired skeptical punk} 05:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Google and Fair use

Now Youtubers can claim fair use if somebody whines about copyright. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 10:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I followed a link to a related post that Viacom uploaded its own pirate material.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I remember the Viacom accusation getting brought up on WIGO. Quite scary stuff that a company would do that sort of thin. But is it just me or is that "fair use" button too easy? Fair Use is a justification not an outright claim. You can only outright test the validity of the claim and reasoning in court, but I can't help but feel that this makes it too easy for people to seriously infringe copyright. Downfall parodies are one thing, but this could really mess with people who can't afford to go to court. For instance, this is a blatant copyright violation, but I don't have the funds to go to court over it if some guy just claims "fair use" on it (the guy attributes it and it's shit quality so I don't particularly care, but the principle is the same). ^sshole

"fair use" used to be a defense only but it has been written in to the copyright act so it now has legal standing as a right, but only under the specific conditions indicated. There are a few US law firms that will take good cases (that they will win) at no cost, they get paid by the loser Hamster (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

It signifies "no, actually, I'm willing to argue this one. Do you feel lucky, Viacom punk?" Your qualms about the quaint old-fashioned notion of "due process" seem odd to me - David Gerard (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Hee!

homeopathic bomb ^{Hat tip} 17:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I supposea "lol" is in order. ^sshole 23:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

One of the comments on the bottom has it right: wouldn't the device be a cure because "like cures like" in homeopathy world? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

A bit late to the volcano party...

...but here are three webcams set up to observe Eyjafjallajökull. ħuman 23:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, first one is down for maintenance, but the third one is pretty awesome. I'll have to look at it tomorrow morning to see it in daylight. --Kels (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

strange sound in my computer air vent.

since yesterday i keep hearing a clattering sound (like a small piece of plastic keep getting hit by the air vent) but im not sure what it is since most of the time the sound is not there but today it keep making that damn sound and its starting to piss me off.Anyone has an idea what it might be ? Waronstupidity (talk) 06:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Reinstall Windows, see if that fixes it - David Gerard (talk) 06:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Did you try turning it off and on again? It is possible that your shift key got in there somehow, that would explain two problems. - π 06:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

06:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Your computer is processing too many 1s. Zeroes are round so sort of slide through, but Ones can get stuck, with the result you describe. Try holding down your 0 key for a while and see if that helps. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 07:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

.... ok which one of these amswer is a serious one? Waronstupidity (talk) 07:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Seriously can someone give me a fucking intelligent amswer for once? did you have your fun? can we be serious now? Waronstupidity (talk) 07:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ignore all these smart-asses. It sounds like you have an overheating problem. This is often brought on by an accumulation of dust and fluff on your internals. You need to completely dissemble your PC and scrape off all the accumulated gunge on the cooling fan with a Q-tip and denatured alcohol. Make sure you have a wrist earthing strap to eliminate any static build up in your body. To avoid any possibility of damage you should wait at least 48 hours maybe even a week before switching the machine back on. If you still get the same noise it may be that your fan has worn bearings caused by the rotational imbalance. Replacement fans are quite cheap so buy the best you can afford and you will be able to hear the silence. If this still doesn't solve the problem check that there isn't a small piece of plastic hitting the air vent somewhere.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 07:31, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

that a pretty hardcore amswer(I'll try it though).Overheating? really? my computer brand new.... but what funny is i blown some air on the vent (while the comp was off) and the noise has stopped.... for now.What is that static thing you talking about? O_O and i really need to disassemble the whole thing? Waronstupidity (talk) 07:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

i dont think its overheating since my computer didn't slow down or another problem,the problem is only that clattering noise. (it stopped now since i blew some air on it but it might come back )Waronstupidity (talk) 08:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Static electricity can zap components on your motherboard that's why you need to ground yourself. Rotating fans build up static which attracts dust and stuff (check out any ceiling or desk fan) but if your PC is pretty new then it probably won't be fluff. Many cheap PCs use the cheapest components but cheap fans can make a noise, especially if they are damaged or unbalanced. Any self-respecting modder will install quality oversize low speed brushless fans both for inhaust and exhaust to improve airflow. Also the noise might only appear when the bearings warm up.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 08:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

do you really think it might be a overheating problem ? i don't have any other problem except for the noise :-(. I worked hard to get this computer. the Noise appear on Start up then disappear and sometime come back at random during the use of my comp, i paid around 1025$ for my comp. Waronstupidity (talk) 08:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

What make of PC do you have and where do you keep it - on a desk or on the floor? If it's new perhaps you could get it repaired under warranty but cheap fans are probably the problem unless something is actually pressing against the fan. When things warm up they can distort also check there aren't any internal wires near the fan blades.. One good tip is to give it a light kick when it starts to make a noise.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 08:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

My computer is on the ground far from the wall there plenty of space around it, and yes there a small wire going near the vent but if it kept hitting the wire wouldn't the sound be always there? Also i have a Pretty decent one the piece are not cheap, i have a quad core processor, 4 gig of ram, the latest graphic card.Waronstupidity (talk) 08:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

i do hope its not a overheating issue. Waronstupidity (talk) 08:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not clairvoyant so I can't see inside your PC but if the wire is close to the fan tape it away from the blades. You may have variable speed fans so that when it warms up the fans go faster and suck the wire in (or something). You can spend a lot of money on the electronic guts of a machine but it still might only have a cheap fan. I would move your PC onto a desk or table so that when you hear the noise you can listen to it and even have a look at what's happening.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 09:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Wipe your hard drive and install MS DOS. MS DOS has a utility called chkfan, which will run a series of tests on each system fan, e.g. slowing them down, speeding them up, testing temperatures etc. Goat only knows why Microsoft didn't update that utility for Windows. Sadly, you can't run it through a virtual machine, as chkfan needs kernel level access to your hardware. And as I recall, you'll need an extended memory manager, and set up a boot disk, as it uses more than 640kb of memory to run. Once all that is done, you should have a good indication of what is wrong, and you can go get a warrantee repair. Bondurant (talk) 09:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Enuff is enuff: If it's irking you that much, take it back to where you got it. If not live with it. If you've had the case off your warranty's probably blown though. Clean the fan and check for wobbly bearings. The wire might gret near the fan under certain conditions of heat & airflow: do what lilly said (you still stuck in Oz, Lil?) 09:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

3 May is current ETD. :(  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 09:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

what funny is the noise stopped(it happen at random interval), and sometime the vent is working really hard (like when i play a game that is very demanding)and the noise doesn't come.the Sound only appear at random and that's what make me paranoid. sometime it appear when the vent is working calmly or sometime it happen when it working harder.Waronstupidity (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Buy yourself a Commodore64 - no fan to worry about then. (and great music) DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 10:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

iPhone owns commodore. --Swedmann (talk) 11:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, a few diagnostics you can work on yourself:

1) Listen to the sound closely. If it sounds like a clicking noice, like plastic on plastic, then your fan might be hitting the grate/other piece of computer. Check the fan for wear on the blades, and the case for strikes/scratches. If found, then either tighten the screws holding the fan in place or or bend the fan back into it's regular shape. Cleaning the gunk off the fan can work, but you might have to replace it if it can't be bent back into it's original shape. If it sounds like a grinding noise [smoother, usually lower] then it's the bearings. Replace your fan.

2) If a new fan doesn't work, then you've narrowed it down to either the case [it's common to have cases get bent/warped during build] or a wiring problem. Check the case near the fan for parts that appear to be scraped or scratched, and you've found your 'strike point'. File down the area on the case, taking care that you're not destroying any electronics/structural necessities.

Toast is right on the warranty point. IF you've taken the case off of a new computer your warranty is done. Check to see if you can't send it in for repairs for free. -- CodyH (talk) 11:31, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, this is going to sound stupid, but do give it a try. You say you notice the sound on Start Up? The next time you hear the noise during start up eject all your CD/DVD trays and see if the noise stops. Because I've had exactly the same problem, a loud rattling noise that sounds like a fan hitting a bit of plastic or a wire. This occurs during start up and the sound builds up and then disappears. I thought it was the fan, turned out to be the Game CD in the drive rattling around while the drives were being read.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 16:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

What component is it coming from? It is safe to run a computer with the case open; the only component you need to worry about is the PSU (power supply unit), and it has its own case.

To open an upright push to left panel away from you (when facing the front of the machine)

For a desktop, pull the lid towards you.

However if the machine is still in warranty, take it back for repair. CS Miller (talk) 18:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

And if you need to be directed as to how to remove your computer case, skip it and consult a professional. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 19:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

thanks all for the quick amswer :-)Waronstupidity (talk) 20:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

All those great answers and no one brought up the possibility of gremlins? He could also try something I've used for grow-dee keyboards. Run it through the dishwasher. the trick is to make sure the machine is thoroughly dry before turning it back on. It totally works for keyboards. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 01:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Nobody suggested prayer?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 06:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to formally suggest prayer, with acknowledgments to Bob M (if that is even his real name). It might not help, but it sure can't hurt ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 01:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

This is a common problem. You need to remove the case fan by unscrewing it, clean it well, then spread peanut butter on it and microwave it on full for 60 seconds. Works every time. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks like Arizona might end the birther movement, not with a bang....

If this birth certificate law passes in Arizona, what will basically have to happen is in 2012, when Obama runs for re-election, he would have to show his certificate to the AZ secretary of state (or whomever), which he will do, and they will have no choice but to admit he is indeed a US citizen, born in Hawaii. That would really have to take the wind out of the sails of the birther movement. Of course, they'll just demand a law that he would have to show said certificate to each and ever US citizen so they can determine for themselves if it is legit. DickTurpis (talk) 20:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

WHERE IS THE LONG FORM!!!?!?!?!?!! I must know the doctor's name who delivered him for me to believe it. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block} 20:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

If I can't hold the original in my hands, I ain't gonna believe it. --Kels (talk) 02:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I won't believe it until I see a personally autographed foreskin. ħuman 02:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

If I can hold the original in my hands, I ain't gonna believe it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

You'll need bigger hands - David Gerard (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Paul Westerberg

Who's with me? The greatest fucking singer-songwriter ever. The more I drink the righter I get. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 00:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

He had his day. Let It Be and that other one Please Please Me Pleased to Meet Me are brilliant, indeed. Trouble is, then someone called him a great fucking singer-songwriter and it messed with his head. I think Paul McCartney and his sidekick John Lennon, and some Jew from Minnesota easily give Westie a run for his money. ħuman 01:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

New (?) thing I found on wikipedia.

Look at source. ħuman 01:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Those other fuckers are so mainstream that it is difficult to distinguish their output from pap. Also you've missed PW's DIY output from the last several years (49:00 especially). And besides Stereo/Mono kills, absolutely kills. I don't see nothing in the source ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 01:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Look again only more carefully

They're only mainstream because they defined the fucking mainstream. Linkies to utubez for PW's apparently genius work? I'm curious. ħuman 02:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoa whoa whoa whoa. MEI has joined the DEFENDING BEATLES group. Mei (talk) 05:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

a gift of a joke for human - wp:WP:Be bold Mei (talk) 05

22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Mei gets it. ħuman 05:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it. I guess it is some sort of format thing. There isn't such a great representation of PW's most recent work that has made it to Youtube. Here is a smattering--mostly from Stereo/mono-- a great fucking set of albums.

• "kentucky risin" from 49:00
• "Be my Darlin" from 49:00
• It's a wonderful lie
• "devil raised a good boy" from 49:00
• Knockin on mine
• As far as I know
• Crackle and Drag (slow version)
• Two days till tomorrow
• Dirty Diesel
• Eyes like sparks

I find I care much less about spreading the good word about PW this morning than I did last night. I guess that's the crucial difference between coffee and alcohol. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 12:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the effort. I shall explore these at my leisure. The formatty thing is that a simple semi-colon at the beginning of a line makes it bold. ħuman 00:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Initial comments: As far as I know sounds like everything he has been writing for the last twenty years. Good, but not really "news". ħuman 02:19, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

So does love you in the fall, although I don't know how old that is. ħuman 02:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I think Love you in the Fall is a few years old from a movie soundtrack he did.

The formatty thing is actually one part of the wikicode equivalent of definitions lists. like so:

Paul Westerberg

The greatest most under appreciated contemporary singer songwriter. His singular voice and his roots inspired style may not appeal to modern more pedestrian pallets

or in HTML

Paul Westerberg

The greatest most under appreciated contemporary singer songwriter. His singular voice and his roots inspired style may not appeal to modern more pedestrian pallets

^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 16:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Question on Late-term abortion

Ok, want to know if I'm alone on this: does anyone else think that, if a woman wanted to induce labor early (like, 6-months or so), or have a late term abortion, it would be unreasonable for the state to offer her some money to carry the child until it was less likely to be disabled for life? This came up on blogtv, and another guy was totally against it. I'm pretty against late-term abortion, but I think offering money to carry the baby longer would seem reasonable, since it could be the difference between a disabled individual we're all paying disability checks too for the rest of his/her life, or a tax-paying citizen (who would likely pay back teh money we gave his mom many times over). On the issue of how we regulate this: money is offered to women who give up their babies for adoption (I don't think women who wanted to keep the baby would give him/her up just to get a few grand from the government).--Mustex (talk) 04:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Some of these late-term abortions are because of severe abnormalities anyway. I don't think anyone even in the pro-choice movement "likes" late-term abortions as it becomes riskier but then so does childbirth. The earlier an abortion is carried out the safer it is. Those who put obstacles in the way of abortion probably contribute to more late-terms. But those who campaign against abortion are also often those who object to proper sex education and the provision of family planning. It is much, much better to prevent pregnancies in the first place. Also you cannot argue that any individual will pay more in tax than was given to it's parent. It might end up on welfare and actually use more resources. But if you are interested in more debate on this I suggest you take it up on one of the abortion-related pages (see User:Earthland) rather than hammering it out here.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 05:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I read an extremely good interview with one of the last guys in the US to perform these late-term abortions (the kind of guy who has to check his car for bombs every morning and has armed guards and bullet proof glass to protect him from the pro "life" movement). And he talked a lot about why it was done. These abnormalities aren't just a cleft lip, they're cleft heads. They're things where child birth is seriously dangerous to go through, while the abortion procedure he does is the considerably safer option. I do 100% with Lily that "those who put obstacles in the way of abortion probably contribute to more late-terms" - if you removed the stigma and let people go through it at the right time, then you wouldn't have to do this sort of thing unless it was an extreme emergency (that "cleft head" thing). But on the original answer, I'm not sure. A finanical incentive always makes things a hell of a lot more complicated, and you don't want people having kids just to get the money. I don't think it's a very good option, but if a government holds an ideology that "abortion is baaad, m'kay?" then they should start putting that money where their mouth is and pay up for forcing people to go 9 months of pregnancy plus whatever else an accidental child will cost someone. Or, more realistically, they put that money where it's needed, in education and prevention - but like fuck is that going to happen. ^sshole 11:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

So, a healthy person who might be on welfare, versus a disabled person who will be on welfare. Which is cheaper?--Mustex (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I remember the abortion doctor interview, I think it was a Guardian G2 article but I can't find it. About the financial thing it's probably only the poor who would be persuaded to carry a baby to full term solely for a government handout. So already they are starting with a disadvantage.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 11:58, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it was probably in G2. But I think if you could be persuaded to carry a baby for a bit of cash, it's probably a sign you shouldn't be having children. Which sort of makes the entire concept lose-lose on all fronts, really. And you're right about such a thing only affecting the poorest, we have a society where the rich easily buy their way out of any problem - I can easily imagine there are far more abortions going on among the moralising middle-classes than anywhere else because you canpay for it to happen quietly and effectively. ^sshole 17:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I find the whole question absurd. Induced labor at 6 months? Who the fuck does that? ħuman 18:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

It was in response to something ScouseCaspaXS said. Basically, she thought that a woman should, at no point, be forced to carry a fetus, but if it was late enough that the fetus has a chance it should be delivered instead of aborted. (needless to say, my opinion on this doesn't apply to special circumstances, such as when the woman's life is in danger, and when the baby is horrifically deformed and doesn't have a chance). I freely admit that this isn't a common situation, but I still think its worth discussing.--Mustex (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

According to pro-life stats, 6 months is viable. Not particularly well viable, but apparently capable of surviving. However, it's worth noting that from the interview Lily and I was talking about, induced labour at that time is more dangerous than an abortion at that time for various procedural reasons. ^sshole 22:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Even when abortion was illegal in the UK the rich could get it done in Harley Street whilst the poor visited their local Vera Drake.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 01:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Excellent Poll

Well I laughed. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 14:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

'Twas funny, yes. ħuman 16:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Black Writer says Teaparty Racism/Violence is a falsehood

Smoking some good ganja?--Thanatos (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Glenn Beck lives up to Liberty U's standards

See here. Does Falwell Jr. know that major Christian organizations have problems with what Beck says, or that he tells parents not to send their kids to college?--Thanatos (talk) 21:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Or better yet, does he know the guy's a mormon?--Mustex (talk) 23:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

for christ sake LEAVE mormon alone :-(. i'm mormon and i don't consider Glenn to be a true mormon .Waronstupidity (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Foreign Office apologises for Pope 'condom' memo

A lowly civil servant "suggested the Pope be invited to open an abortion clinic and bless a gay marriage during September's visit." [5] He's been disciplined. 21:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

BAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!! That guy should be fucking promoted. I wonder if they also suggested that he should meet personally with abuse victims while here. I'd be up for that. Either that, or we find where he's going an errect a giant billboard of a small child being buggered by a bishop - that would be fucking sweet. ^sshole 21:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

PZ.s found it 23:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

Why did I not have to click that to know what he was going to say? ^sshole 23:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

He said: "This is appalling. You don't invite someone to your country and then disrespect them in this way". Did the UK invite him or did he just decide he wanted to come? Is this another reason not to vote for Gordon Brown?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 00:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

"The news of Pope Benedict's visit comes after Gordon Brown extended a formal invitation to the Pope during a private audience in February." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8271556.stm alt (talk) 01:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that Nick Clegg would have done that.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 01:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

He might if his (Catholic) wife had asked him to. 01:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I heard recently that though Clegg is an atheist his kids are raised as Catholics so as to not upset his wife.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 07:31, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

And he sends his kids to a CofE school, which is hypocritical according to the Daily Heil, you seemed not to notice that it's the church his wife's been at for several years... ^sshole 12:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey! I base my knowledge on the Vote Now Show podcast--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

This has really, really pissed me off. Yes, the memo was a piss-take (and a funny one!), but let's look at the suggestions that have caused this great offence

• Visit an abortion ward

Last I checked, abortion is completely legal and the majority respect the fact that it is a decision for the woman (and often her partner) and no-one else.

• Bless a gay marriage

Last I checked, gay marriage (or rather civil partnerships) are completely legal, and the majority couldn't give a flying fuck about it.

• Something about condoms

Erm, well, condoms eh? Now that's offensive! Fucking hell.

So many people seem to have missed the main issue that there's nothing offensive about these things, and that if some prick (or large bunch of pricks) as so backward that they disagree with three things that are completely normal in modern Britain then the problem is with the pricks in question. Fuck them all, and when I saw a senior Labour MP saying it was 'despicable' and 'vile' (the suggestions, not the pope's ridiculous views!), well, that's the final slither of Labour voter leaving this RWian. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 19:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Add to Papal visit to the UK 2010. :-) --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oooh! He might not come! ^{Hat tip}. Threats like that really worry me, NOT. 19:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I agree with all the stuff that was in the "memo". However, working in the Foreign Office you are expected to be a little diplomatic.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Anzac Day

Happy Anzac Day to all the Aussies and New Zealanders. I am holding a little ceremony here tomorrow on the 25th. local VFW is having a rememberance session at the church. Hamster (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Why thank you. Aceⁱ⁹ 04:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, happy whatever the fuck it is and all, you upside down people. Can template link to fun: article or some shite so those of us who "care" (as if) can know what we are drinking to? ħuman 04:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Fuck you, how would you feel if someone talked about 9/11 or Veteran's Day like that? - π 11:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Is rememberance day for the Australian and New Zealand Army Corp (ANZAC) WE dont discuss if Gallipoli was the greatest battle, biggest fuckup of the war or both. It was fought valiently and April 25 is the day its celebrated. LINKY oops fergot login again , is Hamster, ex Aussie now in the USA 67.72.98.45 (talk) 05:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! ħuman 15:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Everyone who dies for their country deserves to have their country pause and remember their sacrifice at least once a year. That's pretty sappy and maudlin, I know, but a soldier's blood is a sacred thing.--^talk 15:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

More than anyone else's? Bastard cubic Hoover! 21:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Anyone who puts themselves on the line for others should be remembered, but soldiers do it professionally.--^talk 22:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

(EC)I'm a vegetarian pacifist hippie with hair down to my arse but I realise that without those soldiers fighting for us I wouldn't have the right to be. Remember them. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This isn't some jingoistic claim that dulce et decorum est pro patria mori - just a way, once a year, of remembering those men and women who have died during wartime. I don't want to go as far as the slightly ghoulish way the media have to cover each memorial parade these days (BREAKING NEWS: Person dies in war!) but once a year isn't too much to ask. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Both sides, or only "ours"? ħuman 21:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

All the poor bastards getting their arses shot off. Even the pacifists go for that one - David Gerard (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

(It's worth keeping in mind in the present discussion that ANZAC Day commemorates a piece of blithering military incompetence.) - David Gerard (talk) 22:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I sort of have a congenital problem with people who sign up to kill people. Can't get over it. "Young men die for old men's dreams, is that what we call wise?" (google it). If no young people could be convinced to sign up to kill other young people, the old fuckers couldn't play "chess" with regular people's lives. Not to detract from the tremendous sacrifices many have made in some wars to maintain western democracies... bumper sticker seen today "my son is fighting for your freedom" with USMC logo. Really? Is he? I think he's just a pawn in the oil wars, sorry. I seriously doubt what happens in Iraq or Afghanistan is even vaguely related to my freedom. ħuman 00:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You know, that's something I respect. But then, I used to live in Halifax, home to possibly the world's largest monument to military obsolescence. --Kels (talk) 22:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

“”Ah, yes, the 'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed that great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is always unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it is always vanquished. Of all the so-called 'natural human rights' that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The noblest fate that a man can endure is to place his own mortal body between his loved home and the war's desolation.

—Robert A. Heinlein

That is all. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 02:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

*applause* Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No. I wasn't going to say anything, but since Human already went there I guess it can't hurt. Flame me if you want, but this must be said. When you become a soldier you are volunteering to murder people. This doesn't become OK just because it's approved by the government. To be completely clear, I don't think that being a soldier necessarily makes you evil - if acting without being aware of the implications was evil, we would all qualify - but the idea that people should be celebrated for this vocation is disgusting. Some soldiers are heroes, but it is not just because they are soldiers, and they could undoubtedly have done much more if they hadn't dedicated their lives to being told what to do. Call me a fanatic, but I think if someone intends to kill other people for their principles, it is sort of their duty to develop and criticize those principle for themselves, and not just pretend it is noble to accept things without questioning them. But I guess that's just the skeptical liberal in me talking. And finally, @theemperor - It's a good thing everyone decides exactly which state to support before joining an armed force, otherwise what you just said would have been pretty hollow. Mei (talk) 04:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

War is obviously a terrible thing, and military spending is usually a fine waste of money - but (at the risk of invoking Goodwin) I rather feel that it was necessary to fight the Second World War.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 09:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Dulce et decorum est. Which is not to say there's no such thing as a necessary war... --УФББДЯЇДИ^{Bend Sinister} 10:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not into all this fighting stuff but there was quote on the ex-servicemen's building in Oz that people do not deserve freedom if they are not prepared to defend it (or something like that). Let's not forget that most of the people who died in the service of our country did not volunteer, they were conscripted. Most of them were ordinary blokes who gave their lives fighting for what they considered was a just cause whether they wanted to or not. It's a sad fact that sometimes when you stand up to tyranny you have to be prepared to stand your ground.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

War is inevitable. Thats the nature of the, our, beast. It cannot be avoided and saying so may set loose a siren song of protest but the self must still be defended against those who have less forbearance. Aceⁱ⁹ 10:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

CP fork

Did anyone notice that TK also posted an ANZAC Day acknowledgement on MainPageRight? Using just the two flags as was posted in our holydaze template I presume that he copied the idea from here. Despite that at least he did something decent for once.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 11:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

is hard to forget Anzac day if there is an Australian anywhere atound. Perhaps he could have spell checked sacrafices but its the thought that counts. Hamster (talk) 15:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Doing it right

My niece, who's a 10th grader, comes to me for help with a project. Seems that in light of the discovery of Australopithecus sediba, they have to do a project on the coelacanth, the evolution of man and Archaeopterix. Having read about how Texas wants to go back to the dark ages, it made me kinda proud that a tatty little 3rd world country is teaching things properly. --PsyGremlinTala! 11:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

That is because as a third world country you can't afford to have those that will get an education wasting it. Only the wealthy can afford idiots. - π 11:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Well said, Pi. RagTop^{Gone sailing} 11:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Aside: it's not like all of the US is backward when it comes to evolution. Some communities are highly religious and take issue with it, but the rest of the country accepts that evolution is taught in schools even if they don't believe in it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

In my experience it's not the religious per se who have an issue with evolution. Most Catholic countries openly teach evolution and old-Earth viewpoints it's the fundie evangelicals who insist that every word in the Bible is true and therefore insist on a 6000-years Earth. I don't have a lot of time for the Catholic Church but they at least take a more pragmatic approach than trying to twist their world view into knots so as to accommodate this one "fact". As most of the protestant fundies originated in the US (or moved there) they probably get a bigger shout than they are entitled to because of the dominance of American media. Why little Catholic Andy Schlafly went down this route is a mystery.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 00:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

We do like to think that the Europe-centred Catholic Church is all progressive and accepting, and indeed, compared to evangelical Christianity in the US and most Islamic countries, it is. But let's not forget that it took until recently to do it. It was 1996 when John Paul II fully affirmed what his predecessor suggested in 1950 (three years before Watson and Crick found the structure of DNA, so evolution and genetics were taking off and well established at this point) and the current Pope may be leaning towards intelligent design rather than theistic evolution. And it was again the 90s when they got around to accepting Galileo's views. Although they're slightly faster now, as they've just forgiven The Beatles for saying they were bigger than Jesus - although that might just be back rubbing ahead of the state visit. ^sshole 08:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't deny that the record of the Catholic church is poor but a friend who visited Mexico said that in a rinky-dink town the local museum which was filled with fossils explained it all in old Earth evolutionary terms and there were several classes of local primary school children taking lessons there. Most of the Filipinas who work in our hospital are Catholic but accept evolution.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Living in a supposedly Catholic country it quickly became apparent to me that there is a difference between what the Catholic Church believes and what average Catholics believe. I only know one professing catholic who believes that the church is right on birth control in general and right on condoms in particular. I've spoken to a catholic priest who said, "That's just another one of the Pope's stupid ideas". I had a student who went to a catholic school and was told by a nun: "Obviously Christ had a human father and the idea Mary was inseminated by God is just a myth." To be fair, I'm talking about smart people with university level educations and I'm sure that there are a lot of people with other views though. The one "fundamentalist catholic" I do know is member of Opus Dei who seem to the the Catholic Church's version of the Taliban.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I think you're hitting on the real underlying point that it's not so much to do with different beliefs as different types of believers. There's the kind that says "oh, that part, I don't take it seriously, it's a myth or whatever, I can ignore it if I like because I can think" - that's fine by me, quite cool in fact because if you can select the ideas from those presented to you and even synthesise them into new ones, it shows a remarkable degree of intelligence. On the other hand, we have people like that tit on Question Time a few weeks ago who said something along the lines of "well, I think homosexuality is fine, but my religion says otherwise so I have to believe that..." I mean, what an idiot. So there's clearly cognitive dissonance involved, and only two ways out of it; 1) you drop the dogma and synthesise your own interpretation, which can include becoming non-religious to merely dropping the idea of literalism in the holy texts and calling bullshit when you see it or 2) let faith shit all over reality to quash that mean old dissonance down and go all out fundie. And thus, we see the dichotomy between sensible and moronic emerge. Although that model does put moderate believers and non-believers in the same boat which some would consider a little wrong. ^sshole 02:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Can't get blocked by Nuclearnight

For those of you not familiar with NN, she's a batshit crazy pseudo-feminist who thinks that sexism will end when porn is illegal, and that she's the only non-racist white person. I consider being blocked by her channel a mark of honor, so I made this video requesting that i be blocked: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tQ2APR6oQs , yet she's refusing me (figured that she wouldn't think it was worth it to not block me out of contempt). Any tips on how I can push her over the edge (I know I win either way, since I can still comment on her videos, but still would rather be blocked than not blocked.--Mustex (talk) 23:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Nothing against you or anyone else, Mustex, but I think what you just said is a microcosm for what's wrong with the whole so-called "culture war" between religion and the "New Atheism": it is a battle for attention, not a search for truth. You just said that you would rather be blocked (causing the Youtuber in question to make themselves look bad) than have a chance to rebut said person's views. Isn't that sad? It's only a difference of degree away from Ken DeMeyer's obsession with Google rankings, as if the number of Google hits that an article gets is somehow a momentous achievement or insightful argument. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

EC (somehow) - relevant link Mei (talk) 23:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I'm going to refute her too, and I've been posting such arguments on her videos, but lots of people have already done it far better than me. Honestly, I consider her less worthy of attention than James the Preacher and NephilimFree. But, youtubers I respect have been blocked, and I want to be in their category. At least I sense real conviction from them. From her, all I get is a whiny, self-important brat, who knows she doesn't live in the real world, but doesn't care (if she doesn't block me soon I'm going to do a response to her video on racism, where she basically proves herself a hypocrite by complaining about white people who think they know more about racism than black people).--Mustex (talk) 00:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

i tried to argue Rationally with her and she didn't respond.Waronstupidity (talk) 00:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Did you ever stop to think that she's just ignoring you? ħuman 00:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

If she's ignoring me, why has she posted on my channel three times in the last six hours, saying she won't block me.--Mustex (talk) 02:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

maybe but it would be stupid seeing that i tried MY BEST not to insult her and worked hard on my argument.

if you could read it you would shit brick. Waronstupidity (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes sometime Waronstupidity can be smart and sometime i do make sense, really Waronstupidity (talk) 00:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've never really engaged with the phenomenon of people with their own YT channel before, but, man, what a stupid and shitty thing--they want me to sit there and listen to them drone on and say "like" and "y'know" and take eight minutes out of my life to consume as much information as I could by reading a well-written blog post in three minutes? Fuck that noise. P-Foster (talk) 01:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

What P Foster said. Right on! It's a hellish way to communicate, especially with the inarticulate.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 09:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, depends who you're watching. Some have a decent charisma that comes across, others put some effort into their production making it worth watching. Kind of like comparing a blog written in the hideously dry style of Wikipedia with a blog written in the considerably less dry, if not, anti-dry and postively soaking style of Cracked.com. Sometimes it's worth taking the extra time out of your life for it. ^sshole 02:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thunderf00t gets angry

Really, really angry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEvwfvRpqCA&playnext_from=TL&videos=C4mYcxbo_o4&feature=sub I really don't know how to feel about this.Ryantherebel (talk) 01:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Who is thunderf00t? Waronstupidity (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Who is Thunderf00t? Why, I think we have a whole article on him. Yes, we do! Punky ^{Your mental puke relief} 02:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Or, alternatively, I believe there is this newfangled thing called Google... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

WARONSTUPIDITY, THUNDERF00T DIED FOR YOUR SINS, YOU UNGRATEFUL BASTARD!--Mustex (talk) 05:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

That's not him at his angriest. You want to see the ones against that twat-bag Dan Brown, although he did later make a vid when he was in a better mood apologising for it. ^sshole 07:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, having got to the end of that, maybe yeah he's a bit angry. ^sshole 07:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh come on. Dan Brown is just a fantasy writer, I'm surprised that people take his stuff seriously. And while I admit that his writing style is not great and his plots a bit formulaic he does tell a pacey and absorbing story. Fine for a bit of light holiday reading over half a dozen rum and cokes.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Wrong Dan Brown. Bastard cubic Hoover! 16:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Copyright claimed by Viacom. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 21:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

So today i was praying for your poor damned soul

And no one answered me... why god didn't amswer me! i though he liked me! Waronstupidity (talk) 03:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Yawn....Keegscee (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

"Then I say to you [that] Gawd is dead!!!!" - From Arthur Miller's The Crucible Lord Goonie ^{Hooray! I'm helping!} 04:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

- actually from [6] Mei (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I also like MORE WEIGHT Mei (talk) 05:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that Giles Corry is by far the best character in The Crucible. The Goonie 1 ^{What's this button do? Uh oh....} 05:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Definitely. Mei (talk) 05:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I had to read the Crucible in high school. In an essay I wrote about it I vaguely remember referred to Abigail as "cunning," "devious," and a "slapper." (British word for whore.) SJ ^Debaser 09:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we can all relate to this...

Comic P-Foster (talk) 04:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC).

Gawd knows I get that feeling when I read CONservapedia. Especially if it's something Assfly, Ken, or Ed did. Gooniepunk2010 ^{Oi! Oi! Oi!} 05:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

This has some good points. --Ravenhull (talk) 03:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Elsewhere on RationalWiki

I know that WIGO:CP is the main point of interest here but I just read WIGO:Blogs and discovered this excellent piece about "Black Tea Parties". Just thought I should spread it round a little.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 11:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Mike Malloy is reading it right now. ħuman 02:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Facebook

Try this.

As discussed elsewhere, the RW Facebook group is now up and running. Don't all rush at once. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I are there (the cute one, in case anybody cares). --PsyGremlinSnakk! 17:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh wait... we're trying to attract members, right? Ok, ignore the cute bit. --PsyGremlinSnakk! 17:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

<old fart warning> Explain facebook groups & stuff to me please</ofw> I got a facebook thing yonks ago but forgot my name & password. 18:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ^Contribs_Talk

That link isn't going anywhere for me. ħuman 18:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Works fine from here. Is your piece of string taut enough? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I advise you to update the logo. Professor Moriarty 18:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't it link to RW somewhere? ħuman 18:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I created it in a spare five minutes between cakes. I'll go and evolve it now. Trent, Psygremlin and Kels are now admins. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Post it up to the evo group. As they borked the connections to the server (and the repercussions appear to still be going) they can at least bring some traffic to the FB group. It's likely more people who are "based" (i.e., don't have the imagination to find an internet community outside of the one prescribed to them) there would join the group and perhaps eventually be brought over to contributing. Just a thought. ^sshole 19:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather people found it by themselves, rather than have a load of people who join whatever group is put in front of them. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Good idea.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've joined (after going through all my old emails to find my name & pwd). Now tell me what does it do that we can't do here? 20:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ^Contribs_Talk

Normally I would agree with you Totnesmartin, if the Facebook group was an "end in of itself." But the goal I think is to try and capitalize a bit on the current facebook interest and produce perhaps recruitment to the RW site itself. So if the group is promotional in nature, it might worth whoring the link out a bit for now. tmtoulouse 20:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the link in. What is this "wonky thinking" to which it refers? ħuman 20:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

And to bitch about the site being down, of course. ^sshole 20:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

feel free to spam other groups, I only "own" the group in as far as I started it, I'm not going to control what people can or can't do, or I wouldn't be handing out adminships. Incidentally if anyone wants to be an admin there but I don't recognise your name (eg Armondikov or Ace McWicked) then email me from here. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Joined and commented about everyone being old farts. Fuzzy =^_^=

(or however many colons it is) "wonky thinking" covers all pseudoscience, bad arguments and logical errors. I like it, although there's a possible confusion with wonk. Change it if you like. and the brain pic. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I changed it to our mission statement, basically. Why does arsebook not have "preview"? ħuman 02:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

My RWW sense is tingling. Professor Moriarty 21:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Is that thing still going? Totnesmartin (talk) 21:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and you've just set up a massive data mine. Professor Moriarty 21:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I'll be scrupulous. Professor Moriarty 21:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to. RWW can't use it per its own rules. Bwahahahaa! Totnesmartin (talk) 21:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Poll

Interesting poll about Americans' economic views. I figured it was interesting enough to post here. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Definitely. ħuman 20:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

60% is much lower than I'd have guessed. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Also 76% of investors favour capitalism? I suppose there are non-capitalist investors but I hadn't imagined there were so many in the US. Looking at the numbers I suspect that they may have been convinced by "Obama is a socialist" rhetoric, and then thought "Hey, socialism isn't that bad." But I'm sure that a US native can set me straight. --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

The other 24% lost everything they had in either the Reagan/Bush depression or the Bush II depression. They aren't so thrilled. ħuman 02:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Let's also not forget the part where it says that most Americans don't know that "capitalism" = "free enterprise system," which in my mind means that a lot of respondents aren't that knowledgeable. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

But they aren't the same thing. ħuman 02:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

(EC) There is a line of thought, not that I necessarily agree with it, that capitalism exists by the grace of the government, in such things as legal recognition of corporate personhood, protectionism of some industries against others, and foreign policy aimed at defending certain corporate interest (i.e., oil.) Interesting that only 60% say capitalism is better than socialism, but if the question is reworded to whether they prefer a free market economy or a government managed economy the percent preferring free market goes up to 77%. Only 35% believe the two are the same thing. Secret Squirrel (talk) 02:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Sleep paralysis

Anyone have much personal experience with this phenomenon? Particularly interested in the sensory aspects of it beyond the mere paralysis. I am particularly interested in some neural modeling hypothesis about it, particularly as it might relate to dysregulation of proprioception. The "sense of a presence" is an odd phenomenon, and might be explainable as the normal proprioception some how becoming external. But it gets more complicated as people report being able to apply cognition, intentionality even gender to the presence. It is "focused" on you, it has attention, and its universally malevolent "pure evil." What the heck is going on here? I would be interested in any experiences anyone might have had. I have been trying to purposefully induce it and have some luck but only the paralysis part. I get the "awake but can't move" thing but I can't seem to tap into the sensory hallucinations or "abject terror" so often associated with it. tmtoulouse 05:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You take too many interesting drugs... ħuman 06:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Trent, I'm off to bed, but send me an e-mail reminding me to get back to you, I may have something you'll find interesting...P-Foster (talk) 06:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I used to experience this quite a lot, but now only occasionally. It was frightening when I didn't know what it was, but once I read about it it stopped being so horrifying. Sometimes however I seem to be both dreaming, awake and immobile and a bad thing is happening in the dream, the conscious part of me knows that I've got to break sleep paralysis in order to "wake up". It really takes a hell of a lot of effort and sometimes the muscle of the limb I move hurts from the effort. I also experience "lucid dreams" - but in that case you've got to make an effort not to move! More later If you're interested.Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 06:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I've actually experienced it - i.e., "awake but can't move" - or just suffered a really fucked up dream due to a bout of illness. It kind of felt like I was in a dream but so tired I couldn't actually bring myself out of it, which is both unusual and scary because I can do that fairly effectively as I lucid dream fairly regularly. I've also had a dream that I was convinced was real for a couple of days and even with hindsight what I was seeing was a perfect representation of where I was at the time, so it wasn't a case of "oh, of course it was a dream, it looked nothing like my house even though I thought it was at the time". So given that, I can't tell if my sleep paralysis experience was me actually awake (and viewing the real world while paralysed) or asleep (and viewing just a very accurate picture while my head went mental). I can't really recall any other specifics that would be of help though, but should it happen any time soon I'll let you know. ^sshole 07:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I experienced it once for a few seconds, it is not fun. Afterwards, when I could move again, and sure there were not things moving around me (I remember lights even though it was dark, 3 I think, not bright more sort of shadow lights) I realized that it was sleep paralysis. - π 08:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

When I was very young, I had this. I didn't really have a focused presence thing so much as the abject terror. I did get the awake but paralysed thing later, but I haven't experienced it in years. -- Yossarian^{The Man from the USSR} 09:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I find the concept very interesting. There are a few documentaries on the subject. What creeps me out is the similarity of sleep paralysis experiences. The succubus "old witch" presence and the "dark man" are commonly reported across all spectrum. A curious happening. I have had the frozen sensation and other weird things take place (bed shaking and sleep walking) but not as severe as real sufferers. Aceⁱ⁹ 09:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I used to get this quite regularly, although I have not experienced it for a good few years now. It was very scary at first, as I would still be vividly dreaming about something happening within my bedroom. Often it involved some kind of intruder(s) in my room (from alien monsters to to Ben Elton - really), and I would be awake, but experiencing a very real 'dream' and unable to move. After a while I realised that all I had to do to make it stop was to switch on my bedside light, but this was a huge struggle. It sounds really weird, but I was able to abstract away so I'd be lying there thinking "Fucking hell, here we go again. Why can't I reach that fucking lightswitch so this episode will be over and I can get on with a night's sleep". As I said, I no longer get this, but I do sometimes get extremely vivid dreams (or even hallucinations, as when I'm in this 'mode' as soon as I close my eyes it starts) which can be somewhat disturbing. This usually happens when I'm sobering up after a few days on the booze, I've heard it refered to as 'getting the electric dreams'. Hope this helps and people don't think I'm a weirdo. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 15:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont know much about it but there was an article that said at a point in the sleep cycle , your brain disconnects from concious motor control of the body. This seemed to be a protection so you dont move during a dream phase and hurt yourself. This motor control should re-establish itself without you noticing. A sleep study would be good if its a recurring problem. That would identify if you are actually awake and unable to move , or dreaming that you are .. etc. A neurologist would likely be the person to ask or your family Doctor to start with. Hamster (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes on the sleep paralysis and yes on the lucid dream thingy. Not so much about terror and presences but maybe thats because it happens so often (compared to other people) that I've got used to it. So I am more: "oh, it's this again".

However here one experience: First off, one thing to keep in mind is that if I do get sleep paralysis while falling asleep (doesn't only happen when you wake up), then it almost assured to be able to turn that into a lucid dream. Another thing to keep in mind is that lucid dreaming isn't so much as being in a holodeck, rather simply being "your normal self" aware in a world you can't control. However often you can make "suggestions" interacting with the content. I have noticed that often lucid dreams have something to do with the last subject I was thinking when awake. Finally, a third thing to keep in mind is that little Sen was never afraid of "monsters under the bed / ghosts" etc. I was an atheist/sceptic as far as I remember. On the other hand I had once seen a "documentary" regarding alien abductions which had terrified me (you can see where this is going no?), especially an interview with a guy who said that first he work up in the middle of the night paralyzed, and then was taken up the ship etc etc. Come some years then and a sleep paralysis event happens, and at that point I happened to remember about that interview for a moment but shrugged it off. Realizing that I am getting lucid, I start thinking about castles (hey, I had to think of something) in order to try to control the scenery a bit and suddenly: Bam, Grey Aliens, because "the last thought before falling asleep" was guess what.

Conclusion: Lucid Dream of Alien Abduction and seeing that "childhood fear" played out startled me so much that I kept feeling feeling paralyzed and unable to wake up. (for a while) So basically I self-abducted myself in very nice and vivid detail. Hows that for "entities"? :P Sen (talk) 01:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

"I have noticed that often lucid dreams have something to do with the last subject I was thinking when awake." That's why I think of sex as I drift off. I also have what I call "building dreams", a continuing series that mixes up many buildings I have interacted with into one great big place, sort of. Including fiction. They are fairly consistent, ie, the same weird shit from one dream to the next. For instance, in one version I have some waterfront property at the end of where I live now. The fucked up chimney is an old standard, as are the holes/gaps in the walls in some rooms. But you all knew that already. ħuman 02:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Building stuff? ^sshole 02:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Had a bout of sleep paralysis a few days ago, the alarm clock went off, but I physically could not move to turn it off for what I would estimate was 15 seconds. My body just would not respond at all, then I could move again. I didn't have any terrors or anything else, though. Javasca₧ Who said anything about fair?! 03:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the very interesting responses and feedback. I have become increasingly interested in examining cognition from angles where normal rational and mundane experience breaks down for "normal" people. A lot of focus has been put on cognition changes and breakdowns of the more permanent type, but there are many incidents where normal fully functioning people with no significant psychological diagnoses have major, temporary, disruptions in cognition. With sleep paralysis the "paralysis" is interesting but fairly easily understood aspect of REM sleep. But the cognitive breakdown is not so easily understood.

This whole idea that we have some sort of mild sensory modality for detecting "presence" of other people is interesting. The question is whether that really is the case. We clearly have proprioception of our own body, and there is some interesting research that shows that can be disrupted. For example, transcranial magnetic stimulation against posterior areas of the temporal lobe known to be involved in proprioception will cause participants to report the sensation that there is someone else in the room, behind them or to the site. Most interesting is that they almost universally report that it is malevolent in nature. This sides well with a lot of the reports from sleep paralysis. Disruption of proprioception could fit in the model. This becomes particularly interesting because it suggests that the feeling of the presence comes first and that the hallucinations are the brain trying to make sense of that perception in a half-dream state. Bayesian cognition in your dreams? Perhaps...

The most interesting aspect of both the TMS research and sleep paralysis is the seeming ability for people to assign qualities to the perceived presence. It often has a gender, and not only does it have intentionality (malevolent, evil) but it has attention (it seems focused on the subject). Very, very strange. Is this some sort of predatory/prey type adaptation like I have talked about with pattern recognition? Maybe...

I really wish I could have more luck purposefully inducing this. I have been working on it for a week. Usually early morning a few hours before I would normally get up I have a lot of success introducing brief bouts of the paralysis. About 10-15 seconds, I get a bit panicky towards the end but nothing like some people describe, and I have had never had any of the sensory hallucinations or illusions. Maybe I am being to cognitive about the whole thing. One interesting side effect of playing around with it though is that it has drastically increased the incidents of lucid dreaming. I get them now and then but they are usually short and not very clear. Today I had my first ever fully lucid dream where I felt completely cognitive about the situation and had near perfect control over the dream. I decided to fly....why is that what everyone always wants to do? It lasted a good long while too, and I have full memory of it.

This should also be of interest to some more general issues that RW is interested in. Sleep paralysis illusions and hallucinations are probably at the root of many, many mythologies and monsters. And disruption of proprioception as a means to explain sensations of presences, even with attentional and motivational characteristics could explain a host of other phenomenon. I also think some of this might be relatable back to differences in dopamine regulation in the dorsal striatum. Massive dysregulation is clearly involved in positive symptomatology of schizophrenia. However, there is clearly differences in the more normal populations as well.

My recent behavioural work in the lab used a schizotypal personality questionnaire on psychology undergraduates and found a wide spread of scores in this population. More interesting than that we were able to correlate higher scores in cognitive-perceptual effects with behavioural tasks with a known sensitivity to dopamine levels. People have naturally different endogenous dopamine levels, and this lead to significant differences in cognitive proccessing.

My models of the dopamine system link it to motivational salience and probability assessment. Higher levels of dopamine lead to an higher abundance of type II errors when processing environmental and cognitive noise. Ideally, it would be really interesting to show that peoples beliefs in fringe ideas, paranormal, woo, quack medicine, what-have-you is related to large levels of dopamine and larger scores in disruption of cognitive-perceptual effects.

Coming back to sleep paralysis, I think the frontal lobe is primarily responsible for "damping down" salience effects of the striatum by being able to process direct sensory information and mix it with context. The classic example is that we don't need to be afraid of a rubber snake. The frontal lobe function is greatly diminished in REM sleep, and still even during sleep paralysis stages. I think this leads to a hyperinflation of the effects of lower brain regions. So the pons-adrenal system is allowed to run unchecked producing what amounts to a basic animal terror of overwhelming threat. And heightened salience of cognitive noise or environmental noise as being interpreted as something with incentive salience. So general audio white noise, whether random neuronal firing, or the sounds of your ceiling fan are perceived as having incentive salience because of a lack of frontal lobe inhibition. This salience has to be explained somehow, and when mixed with the pons-adrenal system running away with itself things get interpreted as threats. The illusion and hallucinations are emergent properties of the continuation of dream like REM sleep being overlaid on the brain going haywire with salience cues.

Teasing this all apart is not easy, but I think there are some interesting pieces to this puzzle to be found in half-sleep states, whether lucid dreaming, or sleep paralysis, sleep terrors or what-have-you. Personal accounts and experiences really help to understand this stuff because I just can't seem to replicate in my own mind. Ah well, here is hoping aliens come abduct me tonight. tmtoulouse 20:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Personally I am still not over that whole "sleeping" and "dreaming" thing. I mean, am I the only one that finds it rather amazing that the entire humans population occasionally falls into a mini-coma-thingy, it's conciousness essentially destroyed without even being able to tell when exactly that happens and on top of that, generates mini-trips as well? And the processing power that reveals! I mean, I have spend a good chunk of my time waiting in front of computers to complete some "ray tracing" and "global illumination" calculations, and I can't help but look at dreams and think "wow, that's some good real time shadow maps here". We are talking "realistic" lighting calculations, parallax movement calculations & pespective for the background, "random" folliage generation, bucketloads of textures and shaders, physics simulation (aka, when swinging from a bar, pushing doors/water with realistic mass, flying through the air with "realistic" momentum). I do realize that the brain probably doesn't actually "simulate" things rather makes a patchwork out of memories, but still, that's some procedural generation there. Interestingly mirrors are almost always screwed up or lead to screwed up results. Sen (talk) 21:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It certainly sounds like interesting research Trent! How exactly are you trying to induce such events? I don't want to sound like a twat, but be careful - of course it's very interesting from a science perspective, but from a personal point of view I can tell you it is not nice. I still sometimes literally leap out of bed and run on to the landing, my heart absolutely pounding ten to the dozen, it is extremely unpleasant. And this is from someone who is extremely rational and doesn't believe in any of the woo you mentioned above. I am aware that my pons-adrenal system is a little bit over-zealous, and I suppose that to my sleeping brain this shit is REAL, but waking up with one's heart racing out one's chest does not set one up well for further sleep. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 01:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Just a timid of information I just remembered. I have heard (and it seems to be true for myself as well) that you have a greater chance to get sleep paralysis if you sleep on your back. So there's a helpful tip or placebo suggestion. Sen (talk) 06:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

What does that picture remind me of?

Clangers, anyone? 20:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC) ^Contribs_Talk

Are they searching for ice or blue string soup? Totnesmartin (talk) 21:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Aw! Toasty just sent me on a 30-year nostalgia trip with one word. I used to love the Clangers. PsyGremlinKhuluma! 18:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Meme Poster

How many can you name?. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 12:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, there's House with a Darwin Fish lapel, he's standing in front of a box of signed xkcd books, xkcd appearing several times with a raptor shadow in the background and a ball-pit to the right. There's ceiling cat looking in over proceedings while Pedo Bear cautiously eyes up David Caruso taking off his sunglasses and putting them back on again so fast it looks like he's a in a quantum superposition where they're both on and off at the same time. The FSM is crawling through the ceiling and seems to be reaching for a snake, but it's not, however, on a plane. The narwhal is wearing Magical Trevor's hat, and the TV suggests that there are over 9000 memes in that picture, so good luck finding them all. ^sshole 15:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The IPU, DFTT sign and hypnotoad. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The guy with the bag over his head appears to be wearing Chuck Taylors. ħuman 17:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

"snake, but's not, however, on a plane"? Like this? Sen (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

NOOOO! NOT THE HYPNOTOAD!--Thanatos (talk) 00:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Does the axe on the wall represent Leroy Jenkins? --Kels (talk) 00:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert is on the TV, there is ASCII art on the bulletin board, a Ron Paul bumper sticker, and House is wearing the Gmail symbol on his t-shirt. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 00:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was supposed to be the reddit orangered reply envelope. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 01:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Either way, he's got Gordon (not John) Freeman's crowbar. --Kels (talk) 02:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Marriage is for making babies...

Me heartie Tom be runnin' fer.... eugh I cannot keep that voice up. Anyway, a friend of mine lost a bet and is now running for MP. Last night was the hustings and I only wish I had a video of it because - and this is what accidentally got him elected last time he tried this - he's quite competent and witty on occasion. So when one candidate went on an anti gay marriage screed, saying something like "marriage should be for making babies" and the Mad Cap'n responds with "will ye be makin' couples take fertility tests first, then?". Which is a pretty good response I think! ^sshole 15:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, a very good response. Good luck to him. --^{Ask me about our oak} 20:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Technical issue

EL's in brackets with alternate text appear to be parsed incorrectly. Look good in preview. Fail on page. Might be my mouse, of course. ħuman 04:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmmm...... Gooniepunk2010 ^{Oi! Oi! Oi!} 04:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed now. The Goonie 1 ^{What's this button do? Uh oh....} 04:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

'Twas the naughty Armond! 04:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ^Contribs_Talk

Left unclosed tag or sumthin? ħuman 05:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah: missed a "]" out. 05:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ^Contribs_Talk

Anyone ever been to Spain?

I'm going in July for study abroad and would love to know if anyone's been. Thanks! rational ghey (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

*insert bad Three Dog Night joke here* Secret Squirrel (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I have been there. Bastard cubic Hoover! 20:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Bob M lives there. 21:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I do indeed live in Spain. But I've lived here too long to be able to answer questions in one-line stereotypes along the lines of "Spain is X" or "All Spaniards are Y" . But ... having said that ... what would you like to know?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

(But I'm just turning in .. so any answers may take a while.)--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

In Spain you wear hats on your feet and hamburgers eat people. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've been. Well, Menorca if that counts. It was touristy. ^sshole 23:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I went to Ibiza last year just after I turned 18. I don't remember any of it, which meant it was fucking awesome. SJ ^Debaser 00:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Either it was awesome, or your drink was spiked on the first night and you were kept drugged in the room of a large spaniard called Camilo, who used you as a week-long sex toy. I guess that might also be awesome... Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 17:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I took a leak over the border from France while spending a week sleeping on the beach a few years ago. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Barcelona, Figueras, Mallorca, Seville, Grenada, Denia. But only for holidays (vacations). Depends what you want to know.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 00:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I too have been to Spain. On a number of occasions. Is that the only information you are seeking? DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 01:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

aside

This thread caused me to look at some Spanish stuff on WP:

“”a devotion to the traditional role of women in society, that is: loving child to her parents and brothers, faithful to her husband, residing with her family. Official propaganda confined her role to family care and motherhood. Immediately after the war the situation of women suddenly became adverse, because most progressive laws passed by the Republic were made void. Women could not become judges, or testify in trial. They could not become university professors. Their affairs and economy had to be managed by their father or by their husbands. Until the 1970s a woman could not have a bank account without a co-sign by her father or husband.

—wp:Francisco_Franco#Political_oppression

Remind anyone of anyone?

I was on the bummel around Europe in the 60's & avoided Spain like the plague. 01:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

thanks!

So whats the culture like? I know its a fairly liberal country but im living in salamanca (near Portugal).. but I still feel anxiety about going to a new country and being gay doesnt really help. rational ghey (talk) 02:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I think A Fistfull of Traveller's Cheques ought to cover it. It's every I know about Ibiza. Also, some people think John Lennon had sex with Brian Epstein there. ħuman 03:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I just googled expat american spain and got a whole load (594,000) hits. Do thou likewise. 03:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

How about going there, studying, enjoying yourself, but not getting off the plane shouting "I'm gay! I'm gay! Everybody look at me! I'm gay! Isn't that important? I'm gay I'm gay I'm gay!" - if you do that I'm sure you'll have a great time. (to answer your original question; yes, I have been to Spain). PS. One more thing: do you speak Spanish? DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 20:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Being gay doesn't help? Well only if you want to flaunt your sexuality. Being straight doesn't help in some countries if you behave in a manner that offends local sensibilities. Trust me, you can have a good time in a foreign country even without sex or getting your tits out in public (metaphorically speaking, as I presume your male). There probably is a gay culture in Spain but it's not as obvious as in the US or UK. They do have a more macho culture and hetero is the accepted norm.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest avoiding this conversation:

• You: Hi I'm Richard Gehay, and guess what? I'm gay!
• Some Spaniard: And what do you think of our find country Richard?
• You: It's great! I like the sun and the easy-going people. Are there any gay bars around here? (Because I'm gay you know.)
• Some Spaniard: Well the big cities may have some. I'm straight myself but, like most young people my age, I don't really care about your sexuality, and it's not necessary for you to talk about yours at every opportunity. Have you been to the beach yet?
• You: Are there a lot of gay people on the beach?
• Some Spaniard: There might be, I honestly wouldn't know.
• Well it's important to me. Did I mention I was gay?

Such a conversation might not be the best way to start.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 19:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm more modest in person. thanks rational ghey (send a message) 22:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Insanity

My last of exam of the year is tomorrow, and after that I just have some coursework hand-ins next week. I'm going a bit insane over the formulas I need for the exam - lots of electronic stuff. Entertain me, minions. SJ ^Debaser 16:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That's new. Back in the day when I need to take exams they list all the equations for us, let us take an aid sheet, or they have open book exams (of course that usually means the difficulty of the exam is adjusted accordingly). [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That didn't help at all. SJ ^Debaser 17:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

One time I let a monkry take notes for me in class. All day long I'd sit there with my mind a complete blank while the monkey scribbled things on little pieces of paper. Then, at the end of the week the teacher asked us to write a term paper based on our notes. This is what I wrote.eek eek I'm a monkey can I have a banana The teacher gave me an "F." When I got home and told my Mom about it she said "I told you to never trust a monkey!" The end. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 19:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

dont forget Ohms law , thats all I remember, the name Ohm. that and how to measure the resistance of a resistor after you burnt off the markings trying to solder it onto something else. Just remembered , capacitors, especially big ones, are pure evil, dont touch them. you are welcome. Hamster (talk) 19:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you and thank you. I haven't trusted monkeys since the great Tottenham Monkey Uprising of 1995. And Ohm's law is by far the easiest thing I have to remember. V = IR. Such a happy equation. SJ ^Debaser 20:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

To pass time, you could try hooking up an electrolytic capacitor using the wrong polarity. Anything in the uF range is pretty boring, but if you get something that is a few mF or even a 1F cap, well, watch out. Keegscee (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Just remember - "One over two pi, root L C, is the resonant free-quen-ceeee!". Since an instructor sang that little ditty, I've never forgotten that formula. (Never really had to use it much, unfortunately) DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 22:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That little jingle might get you into trouble though. If you are dealing with frequency in Hz, then it is fine. But if you are dealing in angular frequency, as electrical engineers often do, you'll be off by a factor of 1/2pi! Keegscee (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I've never ever seen frequency refered to as an angular velocity in an electrical context. Maybe that's because I'm a spanner-monkey and not a desk-jockey. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 14:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Omega, and I don't mean fatty acids from oily fish! ħuman 04:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Exam over. It went alright. Now I've basically finished my first year. It's now 3.23PM and I'm on my way to the shops to buy some booze. SJ ^Debaser 14:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Nobs being a knob again

Nobs emailed me a troublemaking rant to try to get me to take action against RationalWiki on Wikipedia. I forwarded it to the functionaries list for their digestion. Anyone else getting this sort of thing? I can post a copy here if anyone cares - David Gerard (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, post it on up. He's been trying to get people to unblock him here, so it'd be (ever-so-slightly) interesting to see what he's bitching about. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 22:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It's probably not a good idea to post a private email without Rob's permission. -- Nx / talk 22:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

He was asking me to take action as an administrator on Wikipedia with a list of evidence as to why I should; public action for private reasons isn't considered a good excuse on Wikipedia. But yeah, I'll offer to post it to the Wikipedia talk page for Conservapedia instead - David Gerard (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I understand, correspondence belongs to the recipient--it's DG's property and his to do with as he pleases. Redacting real names/e-mail addys is good manners, though...P-Foster (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It's rightly considered questionable and possibly very rude, though, in the general case - David Gerard (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

ToP/pee foster, the author retains ownership of emails and letters. You could assert fair use under the usual conditions (parody/critique/public interest etc.) --^{Ask me about our entropy} 08:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

This should do the job nicely - David Gerard (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I wonder why he chose you ... unless he sent the email to Jimbo and everyone else in the WP cabal. -- Nx / talk 22:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't believe he's still at it. Or maybe I can. Šţěŗĭļė bazooka 22:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I would be very amused if this if Rob gets blocked over there for this. It's got a serious crossing the line vibe about it. --Kels (talk) 22:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Just post the thing Dave. If Rob wants public action, then surely his reasons for this should be public. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 23:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, posting it here would probably constitute acting improperly in the dispute at Wikipedia. And I am a public face of Wikipedia (I go on telly and all), so letting my pissed-off side run rampant would not be the helpful response - David Gerard (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It's TK that's heading for the block, with his constant disregard for WP's rules and tendency to call people a "vandal" because he thinks they are rather than because they've violated any WP policy. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm a little surprised the both of them haven't had some official warnings by this point. --Kels (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I have asked for clarification on this point also (if it was just me or lots of people) - David Gerard (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

TK has also kindly pointed readers of the Wikipedia talk page to the discussion here as well. Hello and transparency, my fellow Wikipedians! - David Gerard (talk) 23:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, TK. You have to convince people that RW is a vandal site. You're not in Kansas on CP any more! Šţěŗĭļė bazooka 23:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

And Nobs has posted his email to me! And I have of course politely thanked him for doing so - David Gerard (talk) 23:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

We hoaxed Wikipedia? What? --Sid (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. What? - David Gerard (talk) 23:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I know he's accused us/Tmt/me of controlling the content of the article (too late to dig for links, but it's on my talk page here and in Archive 15 of Talk:CP on WP, I guess?), but us hoaxing WP? Man, it's a pity I have to go to bed now - I'd love to follow this trainwreck live. --Sid (talk) 23:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

His main point is that RW was founded before the night of the blunt knives, therefore Lipson was not actually ideologically blocked, but was blocked for vandalism (anyone who looks at Palmd's last contribs on CP can clearly see that this is a lie). Also, you mislead Simon by telling her that RW was founded by Lipson after the blockage. And he used Flippin's interview (Essay:Rational Response) to prove this ... an interview which was also given to Stephanie Simon. The logical conclusion is that Simon employed liberal deceit against Conservapedia. -- Nx / talk 23:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

What you have to realize is Rob is on to us, he knows all about how George Soros is actually funding this operation, you can check out his commentary in the google docs, he found that post about our budgetary agenda and itemization. Once you understand our fiscal and political backing it is easy to see how we are perpetrating a grand hoax on the media and the Internet in general. tmtoulouse 23:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Whereas it's actually Jimmy Wales. And most people will take me saying that as joking - David Gerard (talk) 00:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The best laid jokes of mice and men oft spawn into multibillion dollar industries. tmtoulouse 00:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Bono pointed out to me last week how we have a duty - to all of humanity, really - to get RW right - David Gerard (talk) 00:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Gawd. All that's left is Šţěŗĭļė bazooka 01:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

So much entertainment. I really loves me some Terry Koeckritz on Wikipedia. Fucking clueless idiot up against 100,000 sysops. ħuman 04:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

My favorite: TK being shut the fuck up for being clueless about what wikipedia is. ħuman 04:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

So, NobS/TK, why don't you idiot fucking write to Stephanie Simon already and get her to write a retraction/correction if she was so duped by the cabal at the vandal site and some guy named Terry Koeckritz who she also spoke to? ħuman 04:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

This is still going?!?!? ^sshole 08:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Rob and TK are rather good at digging holes but not so good at stopping. Human, I did enjoy that diff. Seeing Andy's boys on WP is like watching a spin-off series featuring familiar characters in an alien environment. Kind of like Forrest Gump appearing in The Da Vinci Code.--^{Ask me about our eel} 08:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd be amused to no end if this little stunt sent Rob to AN/I... again... --Sid (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

What's with the strange threats? What is actually 'at stake', beyond a brief mention of this wiki in an article about another wiki on Wikipedia? Or does Rob just enjoy melodrama and mysterious comments? Broccoli (talk) 10:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I have no trouble believing that Nobs and TK's concerns are one hundred percent sincere. Assume good faith, indeed. Sincere wrongheadedness is ten times as problematic as deliberate malice - David Gerard (talk) 10:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

TK just emailed me about this thread too, fwiw. It's not clear what he's asking me for, but he's very upset - David Gerard (talk) 10:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I know it's hard to decipher this through all RobS' strange perspectives and argumentation, but the underlying goal behind all this is to separate the monstrous internet persona that is the sysop at CP, "TK", from any mention of a real life person named Terry Koeckritz. By discrediting the Simon article (or any other way they can) they hope to get the name Terry Koeckritz removed from the wikipedia CP article. After that, they'll come here and make us do so as well. Or something like that. They're not very good at it. ħuman 20:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not like he hasn't tried to directly stop us from using his real name as well. I recall he was on an "outing" binge a while back, in an attempt to get us to stop. --Kels (talk) 20:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That's ... really dumb. Wikipedia is so sensitive to BLP issues that if he just asked outright there's a fair chance someone would think it was a reasonable request - David Gerard (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting to see TK and Rob struggle in this case, for which an argument requires premises and not mere assertions. Šţěŗĭļė bazooka 00:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I won't speculate what they're trying to achieve in the long run, but right now they're frantically trying to discredit the LA Times article and to push through some sort of "No names! Privacy!" policy.

And yes, WP would of course follow up on BLP issues. There's just one tiny problem: "Terry Koeckritz" isn't mentioned in the WP article and I don't think anybody was planning to insert him, so there is no BLP issue. That's possibly why they're trying to go with the "No names at all!" approach. The most anybody did on WP was me mentioning the name in this talk page post. Which directly led to this accusation of WP:OUTING. Needless to say, the Oversight panel didn't quite share TK's concerns. --Sid (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, RobS just went from "remove all real names" to "remove the entire breast cancer section" here. -- Nx / talk 01:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

He's also using the old "LA Times and Register said the same and there is consensus that they both contained errors!" approach again (in the post you linked and also in one of the collapsed sections of Talk:CP). I'd be bored if his stealth consensus lying wasn't so idiotic. He really goes by "If I repeat a lie often enough, it will become truth!" strategy. --Sid (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Woo, this is a good one. So you've got unsupported allegations of conspiracy, COI and article ownership, plus failure to assume good faith, Forum Shopping and threats of administrative action all in one post. Man, that post alone should get him topic banned, let alone his entire pattern of recent edits. --Kels (talk) 01:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)