Information icon.svg Our Community Standards are under review. Your comments and inputs are welcome on the relevant project talkpage.

RationalWiki talk:Pissed at us

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Missing site[edit]

Is RationalWiki a Left Wing Hate Website?[edit]

Q: All of their articles are sophomoric screeds against Christians. The whole website looks like it was designed by some pasty nerd in the suburbs who still listens to Marilyn Manson LoL

A: No.

αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 18:57, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Apparently this book mentions us[edit]

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki_talk:Mentions#Apparently_this_book_mentions_us.

But for the life of me I can't find it, nor am I sure I want to. The Self Perceiving Universe: A Quantum Intelligent Design Evolutionary Metaphysics αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 14:00, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

How do you know it mentions us if you can't find it yourself? Christopher (talk) 14:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
One is on page 227 - "According to an irrational website calling itself 'Rational Wiki' taking quantum mechanics as being significant should be considered to be a 'misunderstanding of how science works.'" Attributed to the Alex Tsakaris page, though I can't find the quote in the page (is it possible to search the fossil record for a particular string?).
Also, internal footnote 107 cites the fish_that_survive_on_land#creationist_responses section, but the page itself wasn't included in the sample. Daev (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't think we need to mention every time a crank notices us on this page, that's what RW:PISSED is for. Christopher (talk) 19:43, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Why; you're starting to sound a little RW:PISSED yourself. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
References to us on pages 66 and 227, with mentions in the bibliography on pages 483, 484, and 490. Vive Liberté! 02:36, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Science and Math Defeated[edit]

Poe's law aside, I think the idea is that by having an article about that blog, searches for the blog will pull up RationalWiki as well, thus stealing hits. —Kazitor, pending 10:36, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Tent quote[edit]

Who said the relevant quote, of whom, and can it be adapted for RW purposes? (talk) 21:25, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

what tent quote? I can't find it. Nudescendant (talk) 21:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Rotten Websites Wiki[edit]

Seems like RationalWiki found there's a page about you guys in RRW wiki. Any reason to debunk it? Anyone? Mar9122 (talk) 12:52, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Full on debunking haters is an infinite well of wasted time, you end up debunking their response to your debunking of their response to your debunking. It's mostly best to stick to our mission and just list the people who don't like us and why, then ignore them. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 16:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I may need another Bingo card after looking at our entry. It's... cute. Lots of right-wing and far right buzzwords and dog whistles. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Another amusing feature is their need for "balanced articles" and disdain for the tone of our articles all the while emphasizing how serious they are in comparison to us. Overall their article made me laugh. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
As in like charity is a guilt reduction? Mar9122 (talk) 08:01, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
If nothing is done to address the cause that the charity brings attention to, then yes, it is mere motions. Let's take starving children, the example in the article. If, all I do is donate money to a charity, then, I am merely assuaging my own guilt, not helping end the problem. A better model, would be to actually address the root of the problem (poverty, overpopulation, sex education, raising the minim wage, etc), thus making the charity redundant. Then repeat as needed with each issue. The Charity article actually mentions this, but I suppose you either didn't read that far or are being redunctionist to the point of misrepresenting the article. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 12:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The Rotten Websites Wiki is no more than a hobby site and thus probably irrelevant. — Dysk (contribs) 12:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Looks like Dysklyver, who I spoke to him on Meta Miraheze, saved the day. My mission is complete. lol Mar9122 (talk) 08:57, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
@Mar9122 I would probably have removed it, if you know, you'd actually asked me to. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 14:51, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

In a nutshell...[edit]

In a nutshell, with superior editing quality. The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭 talk stalk 03:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)