Talk:Main Page/Archive15

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 3 May 2016. 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>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, (new)(back)

We're no longer a sponsored link for "Andy Schlafly"![edit]

Bummer. That was awesome.-αmεσ (soldier) 23:32, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Just curious - did they take notice of the posted plans to increase the cross-wiki links, or did your sponsorship simply expire? DanH 00:38, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
Dunno, I hope we can get it back, that was awesome. Also, it was way uncool of you to revert my open letter. Andy's homeschooled kids are going to grow up seriously fracked up. I'm just trying to help!-αmεσ (soldier) 00:41, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
It would have lasted at most three or four more minutes if I hadn't, and I assume most of the kids have gone to bed by now. Ah, I miss the pre-college days of having a semi-normal sleep schedule. DanH 00:43, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
Ah but the night's so fun! There's something to be said for cuddling up with a corporate law book at 1AM.-αmεσ (soldier) 00:44, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
I'd rather cuddle up with a corporate lawyer. GrandSoviet 01:53, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
I would rather cuddle up with my cat.  :P --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 04:19, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
Those three are not really mutually exclusive, are they? Unless you have a really small bed. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 05:26, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
That sounds rather kinky. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 05:39, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
Depends. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 06:59, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

I know it's rather late to be asking this, but what's a "sponsored link"? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 07:21, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

When you search for something on google, the right hand side has paid advertisments based on the search key. For a period of time, someone had paid google some money so that a search for "Andy Schlafly" would always have a link to Rational Wiki on the side. Does wonders for your ego when googling your own name. --Shagie 17:13, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
The associated page for signing up for it is https://adwords.google.com/select/Login The cost is based in part on how often people search for that and how many other people have that adword. --Shagie 17:19, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

One wonders if Mandy had it shut down? DogP 17:26, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

spelig era[edit]

My apologies for anywhere on the wiki I spelled Eliot Spitzer with two "l"s. Pleez to fix if you find? humanUser talk:Human 02:10, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

We're Number 2[edit]

Just Googled "Pseudoarcheology" - We came up number 2! (OK it's a bit of a con because most spellings have an "a" in (pseudoarchaeology) but ... HEY! We're a world authority) Susanpurrrrr 03:28, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Furthermore, we're numbers one, two and three for "(Teh) Assfly"; a surprisingly low fifth place for "Goatspeed"; numbers one and two (out of three) for Jebbist; and number four for "Psrodt". Killjoys will, no doubt, argue that these are not common terms. --Bobbing up 05:54, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
<pride> Jebbist was, I think, mine. </pride> Susanpurrrrr 06:02, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
I would never kill joy. Beat the living daylights out of it, yes. But, heavens, not kill it. What kind of barbarian do you take me for? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 06:05, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
"Science woo", with the quotes, comes up #5. New Gwenson comes up #s 1 thru...never mind. Secret Squirrel 07:59, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
Working through the "DysLexicon" I find that the only four hits for "TrashionalWiki" all referring to us. To my surprise there actually is a ratiwki, and it's for sale as well.--Bobbing up 17:09, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Despicable[edit]

This debate was getting TOO DAMN LONG, and has been moved to RationalWiki:Epic debate. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 13:30, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

RW:Epic for you lazy typists. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 13:30, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Relevant to nothing...[edit]

An utterly irrelevant news story here, but I found it hilarious. What the hell was this idiot thinking? His fiancee sounds like a real catch to boot. DickTurpis 18:49, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

1) He should have been more careful. 2) You'd think the girl would have been a little more understanding, unless she only cared about the ring. /eyeroll GrandSoviet 14:15, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
I'm just wondering why he didn't fill the balloon with, you know, air? DickTurpis 14:33, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
If it had been something more serious than a simple ring it could have qualified for the Darwin Awards. (Remember that guy who attached helium baloons to his garden chair?)
Well the ring story must be completely true. After all it was in The Sun!!--Bobbing up 14:57, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
Would you want to take a chance on someone so obviously several cards short of a full deck? PoorEd 15:04, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Awwwww. He was being romantic. Don't you remember what it was like to be young and in love? (Also having $12,000 to blow on an engagement ring would indicate that he'd at lest be good for a nice divorce settlement.)--Bobbing up 15:54, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks[edit]

I live in with a strict fundamentalist family, whose lives are governed by what the Bible says [my mother believes the earth is 7000-15000 years old]. Thanks to RationalWiki I am stepping in to the glorious light of reason. Also my natural intellegince[when I did the SAT at age 13 I did better than 82% of college-bound seniors in english and 59% in math] has finally been able to develop. Thank you RationalWiki, Sorry that sounded too much like a testimonial of what Jesus did for some converts life, given at a megachurch. Keep up the good work.Also I'd like to clarify my life is not completely controlled by the bible.

Actually maybe you should add a testimonials page

86.41.196.100 12:54, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

You're welcome. Don't be shy. Create an account. We love the newly de-converted. --Edgerunner76Your views are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter 14:56, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I'm impressed. I too originally come from a fundamentalist background, but I hadn't realized that we were actually able communicate with that part of the spectrum. I had assumed that we were simply reinforcing beliefs that RW posters already held - so that's a surprisingly positive post. Hey, I may even increase my level of posting again.  :-) --Bobbing up 15:49, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Please register an account, it gives you a higher degree of anonymity than just using your IP address - unless you're a real geek and are using a proxy (and someone could probably help you with that, if you wish). We are not all atheists or agnostics here but I don't think any of our believers are fundies. So, if you would like any support, then leave a note on your user page and we'll do the best we can to help you. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 16:03, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Georgia snark[edit]

Too acerbic, perhaps? --Linus(plot evil tech) 15:01, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I don't think so, although a straight news story about it (as well) would be nice. Of course, the petition being at IA sells it well to me (ie, it's not just his family or buddies trying to get him off). humanUser talk:Human 15:39, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
To what does this refer?--Bobbing up 15:55, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
An "according to" link. humanUser talk:Human 15:59, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

pope adds to list of sins[edit]

How can anyone take a religion seriously that insists one is doomed to eternal damnation for practicing contraception? And now they've decided that it is a mortal sin for anyone to "take drugs." I wonder if alcohol, tobacco and cafeine are included? How, I wonder, does the infallible pope decide which drugs and how much qualify for eternal damnation? PoorEd 15:12, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

For the record, as far as I can see, this is not an infallible teaching, just the Ordinary Magisterium of the Pope. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 15:47, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Aren't they really just updating "old words" for "modern times"? Like, saying "these modern things are subsets of the deadly sins"? humanUser talk:Human 16:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
The commandments definitely need modernising. I haven't coveted my neigbour's ass since she had her second child. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 16:05, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
It looks as though the Catholic Church has added this to its list of Mortal Sins along with pollution and genetic manipulation. the Catholic encyclopedia has a concise description of mortal sin:

Mortal sin is defined by St. Augustine (Contra Faustum, XXII, xxvii) as "Dictum vel factum vel concupitum contra legem æternam", i.e. something said, done or desired contrary to the eternal law, or a thought, word, or deed contrary to the eternal law. This is a definition of sin as it is a voluntary act. As it is a defect or privation it may be defined as an aversion from God, our true last end, by reason of the preference given to some mutable good. The definition of St. Augustine is accepted generally by theologians and is primarily a definition of actual mortal sin. It explains well the material and formal elements of sin. The words "dictum vel factum vel concupitum" denote the material element of sin, a human act: "contra legem æternam", the formal element. The act is bad because it transgresses the Divine law. St. Ambrose (De paradiso, viii) defines sin as a "prevarication of the Divine law". The definition of St. Augustine strictly considered, i.e. as sin averts us from our true ultimate end, does not comprehend venial sin, but in as much as venial sin is in a manner contrary to the Divine law, although not averting us from our last end, it may be said to be included in the definition as it stands. While primarily a definition ofsins of commission, sins of omission may be included in the definition because they presuppose some positive act (St. Thomas, I-II:71:5) and negation and affirmation are reduced to the same genus. Sins that violate the human or the natural law are also included, for what is contrary to the human or natural law is also contrary to the Divine law, in as much as every just human law is derived from the Divine law, and is not just unless it is in conformity with the Divine law. Biblical Description of Sin

So I hope that's clear to everybody now.--Bobbing up 16:09, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Actually, this is something the Times article has misunderstood. These are not deadly sins, but mortal sins. The deadly sins are the good old seven that we all know and love - lust, wrath, pride and so on - but they're actually not mortal sins in the canon legal sense. They're more like categories of human failings than specific sins. Mortal sins, on the other hand, are those specific actions that can get you thrown in Hell if you don't repent. They are defined by canon law (pace Augustine above), and new ones are added occasionally, as the times change. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:14, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I repeat, how can anyone take this claptrap seriously? BizarroEdalternate realities 16:22, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Well, if you have any good reasons why dealing in drugs, causing social injustice or polluting the environment should not be considered mortal sins in the Catholic context, I'm certain that Bishop Girotti will be fascinated to hear them. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:24, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
As I pointed out in the original post above, taking drugs is condemned equally with selling them, and there is not, as far as I can tell, a clear distinction between harmful drugs and recreational drugs, or those that provide a little help in the workplace, such as alcohol, tobacco and caffeine. Whence my question as to how the pope has decided which ones and how much his god would damn you for. Jesus had nothing against wine, and famously provided more for a wedding party that was running short. So, AK, do you have insight into how the pope, or god, view the issue of taking drugs, and where god draws the line between good ones and bad ones? BizarroEdalternate realities 18:05, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm not entirely sure that genetic modification should be a sin. Anyway the initial definition of sin from the catholic encyclopedia follows:

Since sin is a moral evil, it is necessary in the first place to determine what is meant by evil, and in particular by moral evil. Evil is defined by St. Thomas (De malo, 2:2) as a privation of form or order or due measure. In the physical order a thing is good in proportion as it possesses being. God alone is essentially being, and He alone is essentially and perfectly good. Everything else possesses but a limited being, and, in so far as it possesses being, it is good. When it has its due proportion of form and order and measure it is, in its own order and degree, good. (See GOOD.) Evil implies a deficiency in perfection, hence it cannot exist in God who is essentially and by nature good; it is found only in finite beings which, because of their origin from nothing, are subject to the privation of form or order or measure due them, and, through the opposition they encounter, are liable to an increase or decrease of the perfection they have: "for evil, in a large sense, may be described as the sum of opposition, which experience shows to exist in the universe, to the desires and needs of individuals; whence arises, among human beings at least, the suffering in which life abounds" (see EVIL).--Bobbing up 16:33, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

The media seems determined to make 7 sins also. From -- the statement:
"You offend God not only by stealing, blaspheming or coveting your neighbour’s wife, but also by ruining the environment, carrying out morally debatable scientific experiments, or allowing genetic manipulations which alter DNA or compromise embryos," he said.
Bishop Girotti said that mortal sins also included taking or dealing in drugs, and social injustice which caused poverty or "the excessive accumulation of wealth by a few".
Thats 3 or 4 (or 5?) depending how you count "scientific experiments" being grouped with "genetic manipulations" and compromise embryos. I read it thus:
... carrying out morally debatable scientific experiments including allowing genetic manipulations which alter DNA or compromise embryos.
And as mentioned above, deadly (the big seven) != mortal (puts soul in danger) != venial (forgivable). If you want to get more into sinning and the Catholic stance, give http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm a read.

--Shagie 16:35, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I would remind that The Catholic Encyclopedia should always be read with the very important caveat that it is from 1905 (or thereabouts), i.e. significantly before the Second Vatican Council which introduced some very fundamental changes in Catholic dogma and practice. It's often useful, but also very outdated. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:48, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I didn't know that. Where would one go for an up-to-date, on-line description of catholic dogma?--Bobbing up 16:51, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
The definitive text is the Cathechism of the Catholic Church, which contains all the main points of belief. Then there's the Code of Canon Law, which regulates how the Church implements the dogma and otherwise functions in practice. Like most law codes, it's not the most exciting read, though. The various documents from II Vatican are also sort of important for understanding the modern Church, but they're even more obscure. And then of course, there's an endless amount of papal letters and ecyclicals and apostolic constitutions and so on - but that's probably much more detail than you'd ever want. :-D In general though, there's a lot of informative material on the Vatican website if one is willing to dig a bit for it. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 17:04, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for the references, I shall bear them in mind. I now find the the updated (eternal?) definition of mortal sin is here- I'll spare people the big cut-and-paste though. I admit that it's a tad more readable that the catholic encyclopedia but it's still a bit of a mouthful.--Bobbing up 18:19, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Yes - unfortunately, the Holy Mother Church does not realize that it is in dire need of good writers. I sent in my resume, but they must have forgotten to reply. :-/ --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:24, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
From what I've read of the catholic encyclopedia, if you can make even one paragraph comprehensible they should make you Pope.--Bobbing up 18:39, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I must admit I find your ideas intriguing. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:49, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
"If you want to get more into sinning" - depends on the sin... humanUser talk:Human 16:50, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Hmmm; "the excessive accumulation of wealth by a few" - excluding the upper echelons of the Roman Catholic Church of course. Dealing in drugs - which ones? Those defined by a secular state or by Marx, as in "religion is the opiate of the people". "Ruining the environment" as in encouraging unnecessary population growth with its ensuing demands on the earth's resources? "Causing social injustice" like preventing poor people who cannot afford large families from using contraception? God, it's hard to be a pope! Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 17:00, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Hello all I'm new here ![edit]

Just wanted to say Hello to everyone. Much to read and learn here, I'm sure I will enjoy !

Hi. Why not create an account?--Bobbing up 16:52, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Also, it's good to sign your posts either by typing ~~~~ or clicking on the squiggly signature button - the next to last button on the right above the edit box. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 17:02, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
I figured that out eventually. :P Armondikov 12:15, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Main Page Header[edit]

I see that one of the headers on the main page under "Welcome to RationalWiki" reads as such: "'I think rationalwiki is a pretty cool thing; they debunks the anti-science movement, and DOESN'T AFRAID OF ANYTHING!'"

Now, the proper format for this meme is: "i think (vidya game, meme, band, or movie name) is a pretty cool guy. eh (verb)s (noun)s and doesn't afraid of anything." The way it looks now is just silly. GrandSoviet 23:05, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Huh? Bizarro EdAlternate Realities 08:30, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
It is one of the many random slogans that appear in a few places. Someone edited it already, I don't really see the problem with it saying "thing" instead of "guy", but, whatever. humanUser talk:Human 13:46, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
Because the original content was, "i think halo is a pretty cool guy. eh kills aleins and doesn't afraid of anything." It was funny because "Halo" is the name of a video game series, not the protagonist's name. That's why alterations of the meme follow the same formula, such as "i think 300 is a pretty cool guy," "i think star trek is a pretty cool guy." Using "thing" in its place makes the sentence make more sense, thereby reducing its humor level to just under 9000. GrandSoviet 22:08, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Wow. You're RIGHT! I thought it was very dull before, but in this new context it's HOLAIRIOUS!!!!!!!!!! ONE!!!! DogP 22:11, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

</sarcasm>! Haha. GS, I had no idea where it came from and I thought it was funny. If it hadn't been, I woulda deleted it ;) Anyway, memes undergo evolutionz (via mutation and natural selection), that's how they survive in new environments. humanUser talk:Human 22:17, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
Oh well, agree to disagree. GrandSoviet 22:29, 18 March 2008 (EDT)
We know change is difficult to adjust to for some... Rational Edwelcome to the bizarro world 08:23, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
That's right. Just like it was difficult for the Jews to adjust to Hitler, right?!?!?!?! GrandSoviet 15:59, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
Godwin!!! Ding! I win the prize! humanUser talk:Human 16:03, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
No, I believe the random reference to Hitler was aimed at me, so I win. Rational Edwelcome to the bizarro world 21:41, 19 March 2008 (EDT)
No, you win the argument. I win teh prizes! Yippeeee!!! I like prizez!! Goatspeed, humanUser talk:Human 22:02, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

GOAT MECHA THINGY[edit]

Straight from the "OMGWTF?" section of the Internet comes The Fuzzy Wonder Goat (work-safe, unless you start crying/masturbating at the sight of a mechanical goat... thing)! --Sid 16:33, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Tu kil kittehz oar knot tu kil kittehz?[edit]

RationalWiki:Cat_fight: Come join the fray, all and sundry who might care about our imminent category crisis! humanUser talk:Human 22:32, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

A bit late…[edit]

…but R.I.P., Arthur Clarke. :`( --Linus(plot evil tech) 22:11, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Yes indeed. We updated our article like WPbots. At least it would seem that he lived a very full, long, and enjoyable life. humanUser talk:Human 22:13, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Expelled[edit]

The science blogs are hot with this one. I am very interested to see what comes from the DI and the Expelled group as to why they "expelled" PZ, a professor who is part of the film.--TimS 09:54, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

I think we have an article on the film; but I suspect it needs more work. It could easily become cover story material if we do a good job of it, I'm sure. humanUser talk:Human 14:20, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
WARNING this blog link crashes browsers:
Lot of potential to exploit their stupidity.-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 20:23, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
WARNING that blog link crashes browsers (thanks again, Doc). Don't click on it unless you want to take that risk. Will someone who can get to it please ask the blogger to remove whatever [window:close] or whatever javacrap is on their site? Thanks humanUser talk:Human 20:57, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Facebook Group to Protest Expelled[edit]

I started a Facebook group to protest Expelled - there're already like 4 supporting it, but none protesting it! - and if you're on Facebook, I'd really appreciate it if you join it, too. Blogger PZ Myers (the real one, judging by his network!) has already joined it, which is kinda awesome. So if you want to be as cool as PZ Myers, you should join too.-αmεσ (soldier) 15:56, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm hoping if we get a big enough NYC protest, we could get on the news.-αmεσ (soldier) 16:18, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
To what end? It would just be more publicity for their crappy movie, and the producers would just spin it as "Hey, look at all these people trying to censor us! Big science, oh noes!" If it's half as bad as the people who have seen it have made out, the critics will murder it anyway. --JeēvsYour signature gave me epilepsy... 17:08, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
Stein has a monopoly on the media right now; maybe he won't, but my hope would be that people would learn of, and eventually learn about, all the ways in which Ben Stein is wrong. And they'd maybe not go to the movie in the first place.-αmεσ (soldier) 17:11, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

"Stein has a monopoly on the media right now". And you claim I believe in conspiracy theories? TmtamesP 17:26, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

The media, by their nature, are compelled to promote anything if it is repulsive enough. And just because someone else also has a tinfoil hat on doesn't make yours any less shiny. --Gulik 17:51, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Everyone getting very cross[edit]

Shall we head over to our IRC channel to sort it out. I'm going to be working at my computer for most of today, so we can possibly gather there, rather than leaving arguments cluttering up the wiki.

/server irc.freenode.net /join #rationalwiki

--מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום

Its not letting me on without authorization. MarcusCicero 07:58, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

It should. What sort of error message are you getting? Anyways, it's very early morning for the Americans among us, so perhaps we can go later. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
Could you give me a direct link to it? MarcusCicero 09:35, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Is it just me or is everyone blaming me for everything around here?[edit]

First you lot claim Susan left because of me, and now I'm just waiting until the mob comes round to my page for supposedly 'forcing' Jeeves to leave.

I have been accused of the following:

  • Starting flame wars. (By displaying righteous anger at all mormons being called nutjobs, all YECers being called nutjobs, for calling someone up on using a source from 'internet infidels' in order to enter a 'rational' entry to Pontius Pilate.
  • Being TK. I don't know where this came from.
  • Being an ass. I tend to have a sharp tongue and make no apologies for it.
  • Being a dickhead. See above.
  • A hypocryte. Well, I don't hold myself to a particularly high standard. I do hold a website that aims to refute the 'anti-science movement' to, you know, have some 'rational' articles. See my objections to Ron Paul, Libertarianism and Pontius Pilate or the new monstrosity, Surviving Crucifixion.
  • A Christian. (for refuting crackpot theories)
  • 'Forcing' Jeeves and Susan to leave. Perhaps they should carry their angry coat-tails into a 'rational' website.
  • Not doing anything to any articles. Not only is this not true, (I've added stuff to articles, albeit not too often) but its true for 99% of the people here.

So, do you think its that you hate me, or is it because I'm pointing out things that don't exactly reconcile you with your site ethos? MarcusCicero 10:50, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

wonderful. by writing all that, youll just start more bloody flaming, i can tell --RyanB 10:53, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Every man has a right to stand up for himself. MarcusCicero 10:55, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

yes, true, but it will start more flaming in nthis situation i reckon... thats basically what i tried to say --RyanB 10:56, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Ryan, if you look at my talk page it was RA who started the flaming. I was asleep all last night when I woke up and saw what happened. In this thing that started it all, I made an argument against including some fringe theory that Christ survived the Crucifixion in the Pontius Pilate article. RA basically came on to my page to say I was being an ass. I didn't start any flaming, I'm just reacting to what I see as unfair victimisation aimed at me. MarcusCicero 11:01, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

i said that people might start flaming, that about it --RyanB 11:03, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
Stop sign.svg

This conversation is about to go badly downhill, inevitably ending in comparisons to Hitler, and hurt feelings all around.
Stop now. Step away from the keyboard.
Go pet a jerboa, or milk a goat.

Please, just move on. You're not helping anything. Sterilexx 11:10, 25 March 2008 (EDT)
if that is directed at me, well, look, i am trying to help, i have the right to do that, even if it doesnt help, i can try my best --RyanB 11:13, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

So what, I have to let all the unfounded accusations against me just drop? Basically what we saw last night was a mob ganging up on one person. Its not right and unless its dealt with now the same thing will happen to another person who happens to disagree with the abandonment of the sites ethos. Either change the ethos (Or name) or these problems will just continue. MarcusCicero 11:14, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

yeah --RyanB 11:16, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Er, what has this personal issue got to do with Main Page Talk? Ajkgordon 11:18, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Marcus, you have every right to express your opinions. You seem somewhat unwilling to consider the possibility that your "sharp tongue" gets in the way of rational discussion (I know, I've learned the hard way that I need to curb mine to avoid derailing interesting internet discussion.) Might I suggest that you take the higher ground and respond to characterizations that you think are unfair or extreme (nutjobs, morons) with a more reasoned approach. Rational Edthink 11:19, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

The reason this is here because inevitably the blame game will start. I will be blamed for Jeeves leaving (Though in fairness, he'll be back in a few days) and the irony of his userpage is amazing. He accuses me of being uncivil. Just read his userpage! The community has a whole needs to know whats going on, and this needs to be resolved so it doesn't happen again. MarcusCicero 11:21, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

MC, may I remind you of your previous comment. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 12:22, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

By that I meant arbitration committees and all the other spiel on Wikipedia that makes you want to pull your hair out. Resolution, as in, the individuals resolve the argument themselves. Please don't play with words. MarcusCicero 12:29, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

lolz im doin a Samwell[edit]

OK, people, in the interests of people keeping their heads, and before we lose anyone else, I've decided to block pretty much everyone for twenty minutes. It worked last time, but please please please don't unblock yourselves to continue the 'debate'. Go out and enjoy the sunsh- ... well, it's dark, rainy, windy and horrible where I am, but it'll be good to clear everyone's heads. I apologise to everyone who is working on something important, or who is uninvolved in the conflict, but fair's fair's arbitrary. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום

Because you need a funny. Communists, Porn, and Pandas[edit]

[1]. I wonder if panda researches are considered voyeurs? Not quite as eloquent as an older article which, if pandas could read, wouldn't do anything for the male's ego. That can be read at [2] under the title "Panda Lust". A tad inept? --Shagie 17:00, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

I totally read that as "Furry Panda Porn", to which I reacted, "seen it, what else ya got". --Kels 21:25, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
But... its real panda porn. And its not for humans, its for pandas... because the guy was a 'tad inept'. --Shagie 03:13, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Community Standards[edit]

Please visit RationalWiki talk:Community Standards to help progress the conversation in a new direction. I am asking for people to discuss this on a communitywide level, not nitpick about one person's case. Sterilexx 17:47, 25 March 2008 (EDT)

Is this serious?[edit]

http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/ASchlafly/blog/&blogId=1596#undefined

Is someone here impersonating him or what? MarcusCicero 16:33, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

As I recall, yes, I believe so. After his disastrous attempt at running for Congress, I don't think even Andy is quixotic enough to try running for president. Also, note that his "friends" list includes a die-hard Obama fan. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:36, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Who do you think did it? MarcusCicero 16:40, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Bethany and Conservative have rallied to his guard. Hilarious.-αmεσ (soldier) 16:42, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Most likely, one of us here (even if they won't come forward). --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:44, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Have you tried searching the site (this one) for the url? That might at least show who brought it to our attention. Oh, shoot, I do recall hearing about it in the chatroom, I think. There may be no record. PS, I am at least one of that "Andy"'s fans ;) humanUser talk:Human 16:52, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
God, I love HopeNation's comment: "...he is his own Vice President as well as his own campaign manager, speech writer, muse, voting base, and interns. His office would be very lonely if it were not for the new fern that he bought for himself from misappropriated funds which he had earlier donated to his own campaign." --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:59, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

Layout[edit]

I know it's been gone over before but shouldn't there be something under the "News from Conservapedia" header - it is a Header after all. I suspect that most people on here don't actually look @ the main page very often bu to a newcomer it'll look as if there is NO News from Conservapedia, specially if they don't realise that there's a link in the header (which a casual visitor mightn't) Marghanita Laski 19:19, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

I don't know if it is such a big deal, but I guess you're right about wiki-noobs not figuring it out.
As far as redecorating, what we usually do is create a mockup in a sandbox (of our user space) and show it to the mob before changing the look of the main page. Those drop shadow things looked really strange on my monitor. If you go back one revision, though, you can copy your effort to sandbox it, put link here, see what everyone thinks? humanUser talk:Human 21:13, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
Drop shadows! How about some lens flare, make it look really awesome? ;D --Kels 21:20, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
I just smeared Vaseline all over my screen, does that count? humanUser talk:Human 23:54, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
And just what are you doing with Vaseline by your computer? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 09:39, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Oh yeah.... Since Human just reminded me.... I finished some designs for a Debate Banner... I have my final three up Here Please put in your vote so I can get it up and running. Thanks.. and check out the talk page for some extra info. Thanks SirChuckBLeave Death Threats Here 01:38, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Important question![edit]

I see the server time lags five hours behind Central European Time, that is, four hours behind Greenwich. Is it located in Montreal, or have the United States already moved to Daylight Saving Time? Superstitious animistEd at CP 07:04, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Nay. We just moved out of Daylight Savings. Fall forward; spring back!  : ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 07:19, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
Wait. You moved into. I mean, Sun is about South at 1 p.m. for you now, not 12, right? Superstitious animistEd at CP 07:27, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
Uh... *sheepishly* I stay in my room all day. I wouldn't know. -_- --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 07:28, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
Easy mnemonic rule: In spring, garden furniture goes out, in autumn back in - in spring, clocks are set forward, autumn they're set back. (Ok, maybe it works better in Danish... but you get the idea!) --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 08:11, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
My parents use "spring forward, fall back", which I deliberately confused a few posts above. And you're right, it does sound better in Danish.  : ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 08:14, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
Honestly, does anything sound good in Danish? ;-) Superstitious animistEd at CP 08:19, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
We could always try Google Translate and see for ourselves. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 08:20, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
No: Danish and Swedish (of Swedish Chef fame) are nearly identical on paper or Google Translate. It's the pronunciation that makes Danish the second most ugly language in the world. The ugliest being Swedish as spoken in Finland. Your language expert, Superstitious animistEd at CP 09:35, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
Oh, I don't know. Many things sound good, many more don't. ;-) However, I now feel obliged to point out a few of those that don't suck too badly (and are available online): Outlandish: Kun Min, Kai Normann Andersen: Musens Sang, Anne Linnet: Barndommens Gade, the musical Atlantis, and Isam Bachiri's version of H. C. Andersen's I Danmark Er Jeg Født. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 10:09, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
In my experience, it all depends on who is doing the speaking. There are some speakers of every language who are wonderful to hear, and others who grate like nails on a chalkboard (see G.W. Bush). Rational Ed5 or 6 edits 10:20, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

(undent) Just to clarify the mud, we are on Daylight Savings now. It is used in the "summer" (=not winter) to "move" an hour of daylight from the wee fishing hours of the AM to the cookout and playing in the backyard hours of the PM. In the winter we revert to "real" solar time. humanUser talk:Human 14:13, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Yep. Instead we in old Europe are still in solar time. Akjeldsen, I'm sorry to say that my DSL connection died a few days ago. Thus, I'll have to pass on those beautiful Danish sounds for the moment being... Superstitious animistEd at CP 14:18, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

Thank you![edit]

KitKat.jpg

Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Goddamn it I hate conservapedia so much. I ♥ this site.
From an English, middle-class, white, atheist agnostic, homosexual, economically-left, social libertarian, polyglot male student in Dorset. — Unsigned, by: 86.144.232.162 / talk / contribs

Ketä kiität? Tervetuloa! (who are you thanking? Welcome!) Superstitious animistEd at CP 09:36, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
whats a chocolate/biscuit bar got to do with it?--Warty 09:46, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I know, I know[edit]

I am amazed that I would find a story like that on FOX. Prayer did not heal that 11 year old. I hope that the parents receive a long time in prison for their willful ignorance.--TimS 09:29, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm ambivalent. While they probably deserve jail time for child abuse, I'd like to think that this is the ultimate object lesson in the power of prayer (ie null), so they won't make that mistake again, and the loss of their daughter should be punishment enough. Since they have other kids, I'm not sure their interests will best be served by having their parents on jail. So assuming it's established they've learned something, having them go through all sorts of parenting and deprogramming classes should hopefully be enough. If, after this, they still refuse to seek medical help for their kids when they desperately need it, lock 'em up. DickTurpis 00:00, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Another nightline to watch[edit]

ABC Nightline, the Friday Night one. Tonight's had a preview of "Sunday school for humanists." - a young girl (much younger than teenager) was asked "Do you believe in God" by the interviewer and she answered "No. I believe the possibility exists, but I don't believe in God" (or something very close to that). Might be an interesting watch. I'll give a link to the ABC website once it shows up there (this is in part a reminder to me to do it). --Shagie 03:10, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

It does sound interesting. I await the illegal copy on Youtube.  ; ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 04:08, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
I usually have a big problem with things like this. Kinda like the 'freethinkers camps' that exist in some parts of the US to counter the God camps. Just let kids be kids and when their older it'll be their choice if they even want to consider religion. MarcusCicero 06:51, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
But kids need training and education on critical thinking, and the ideas need to be out there. Otherwise, when they're adults, most of them will either not think about it at all or make uninformed decisions. GrandSoviet 10:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
Yes. In the form of critical thinking lessons. Do you think that those should be given by, say, Andrew Schlafly and his ilk? Why, then give them to the other side of the debate? It's best if they are taught in a neutral setting, rather than allow either side to spin it their way. I learn critical thinking at school; I don't have to be taught it by Ben Stein or Internet Infidels. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן שְׁלֹום
I learnt critical thinking myself, school tends to transfer knowledge, experience cements the knowledge but critical thinking comes from your own self-directed learning. Thats just my opinion anyway. MarcusCicero 13:03, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
School can teach critical thinking, but it has to take the trouble to do so. I agree that that kid's quote sounds just as much like "programming" as "Andy's kids", though. At least the kid was programmed to have an open rather than a closed mind (IE, not taught a "doctrine" of strong atheism). If the number ever increase to the point where it's a problem, though, let me know - you know, when the "strong atheists" among 8 year olds reach, say, 10% of the number of 8 years olds who know "Jesus loves me... because the Bible tells me so". humanUser talk:Human 13:49, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
Until they contact with people who are different and allowed to think different (or rebelling against parents), most of what children will say will be recitations of whatever their parents believe. At 8, I could recite the catechism fairly well. The question is how well are these children prepared to enter a world where contact with other cultures and societies happens much more frequently than before? Thats Palo Alto - chances are there is a Hindu shrine not too far away, along with a Buddhist temple (you'll even see a Jain temple just a bit further away), Mosque, Synagogue, and a few churches. When having friends from this multi-ethnic area, would a child who says "I don't believe there is a God, but there is a possibility that there can be. I don't really think there is." get along better with all of these groups than someone who says Christianity is the only correct religion? Isolation, dogamism, and nationalism are not the way the world is moving. There are some groups that are becoming increasingly that way within their own groups, but they are the ones who are likely to find themselves left behind as the rest of the world gets along and gets things done. --Shagie 14:31, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
Hehe, by 8 I was turnign into a real PITA, arguing with everything my parents said. But, of course, they taught me to do that, so it's confirmation of Shagie's thesis. And, hehe, you said "left behind". Isn't that one of their mottoes? humanUser talk:Human 15:41, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, [3] is the link for the text version. I've found that that fairly much covers what is said in the program. As to illegal youtube links, ABC is quite good at putting up all of their content online. --Shagie 13:48, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

I haven't checked lately, but it wasn't always available outside USA. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 14:01, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
I was joking, Shagie. Or did I not wink enough?  ; )  ; (  ; /  ; \  ; |  ;O  ;D  ; ]  ; [  ; }  ; {  ;&  ; ) --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:30, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
HAhahaah: "What's interesting about this non-church is some of its churchlike aspects. There's a hymn book, talks that sound like homilies and, at one point, an actual collection plate passed through the aisles after one song." Funny, sounds like the open mike/hootenanny nights I used to go to. Hymnbook = the classics solo acts cover; homilies = polite applause and introductions of players; collection plate = glowering bartender who wishes these bums would drink! If all there is to identify a "church" is a book of songs, some nice sayings, and a voluntary tax... hmmm... humanUser talk:Human 15:32, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

In my experience, the American schooling system SUCKS at teaching critical thinking. (But I have few doubts that learning critical thinking from Andy's homeskollaring group would be much worse.) --Gulik 22:50, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Who do you want to win the Presidency?[edit]

I know this was done before, but I thought I'd give it a new shot since a lot has happened since the last time. And I assume most of you will go with Obama...

(And let non Americans vote... We feel the brunt of most of your calamities too you know...)

I thought we had a poll on this elsewhere already... humanUser talk:Human 19:11, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
Which Presidency? Superstitious animistEd at CP 12:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Hillary Clinton[edit]

--Bobbing up 14:34, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Obama[edit]

John Mc Cain[edit]

Ralph Nader[edit]

Lee Mercer Jr.[edit]

You know you want him. Really. DogP 03:42, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

"15. To prove I have intacted the New Redeveloped United States of America through the United States of America’s United States Department of Justice’s Research and Development Department and the United States of America’s United States Department of Defense’s Research and Development Department government testing program in Business and Commerce in a Business and Commerce Intelligence project/program National and International." He doesn't even make sense! 134.226.1.234 08:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Bunchanumbers, Lee Mercer Jr. is a genius, and will make a great President. He gets my vote. DogP 17:52, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Wow. Just. Wow. humanUser talk:Human 21:07, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
You seem incredulous Human? Why do you dismiss The Man who, once he is "elected to the office of President of the United States of America the thing I am going to do for the people is regulate the office of the President of the United States of America right and not wrong." Do you want it run wrong and not right? DogP 22:37, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Lee Mercer Jr.! From his platform: "To Prove the United States Government killed my sex life, my wife sex life, my daughter-in –laws sex life both may sons and other of my family members sex life with Espionage Experimentation and Espionage Exploitation sex killing." Secret Squirrel 11:15, 6 April 2008 (EDT)
Yup. His site is one of the richest, deepest sources of wonderfully mad quotes. But there comes a point when one begins to shudder uncontrollably and weep for the man. Let's face it, he's clearly in need of some psychiatric help, poor devil. DogP 12:30, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

I think DogP has the measure of this guy. He deserves protection, primarily from himself. SusanG

Al Gore[edit]

Anyone the Democrats Nominate, Including the Reanimated Flesh-Eating Corpse of Hubert H. Humphrey[edit]

I am SO sick of what the Republicans have done to this county. --Gulik 22:17, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Cthulhu for President '08![edit]

Good Nicholas Kristoff column in today's NY Times about the increasing stupidity of Americans[edit]

Have a read of "With a Few More Brains...".

LHC Doomsday[edit]

Ooh! I wrote a nice, lengthy blog post on this, that I intend to post later this evening! I'll take this opportunity to self-aggrandise. --Linus(plot evil tech) 20:35, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Here. Comments would be greatly appreciated. --Linus(plot evil tech) 22:36, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Should I link to it from the main page, under the relevant news article? Or should I refine it a bit, or what? --Linus(plot evil tech) 23:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Nice article, Linus, really well written. The grey goo will get us first anyway. Ajkgordon 13:36, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
Thanks. :) --Linus(plot evil tech) 11:43, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Fitna[edit]

For those that haven't seen Fitna yet, I recommend you watch it, and I say that as a Muslim. It is a prime example of poor scholarship, quote mining, and inflammatory rhetoric. It is the real life equivalent of internet trolling (ZOMG, the Muslims are coming!!!Eleventy). Of course we're all quite familiar with this style of argumentation from CP, but I would stress that this guy clearly was out to provoke a reaction and has gotten one. Naturally, I condemn any threats against him or the publishers of the film. The truth is it's such a poor piece of work it isn't worth getting bothered about. Stile4aly 01:05, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Well said. I'm continually shocked by the lengths people will go to to make their point: intellectual dishonesty, purposefully hate-stirring, etc. The comparison to CP is quite apt. Eww.-αmεσ (soldier) 00:46, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
He he. I can think of another site that really does use intellectual dishonesty and hate-stirring to try to make their points. Do you know what site I am thinking of? Bohdan2 00:54, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
Ratwikiwikiwiki? Pinto's5150 Talk 00:57, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
Nice try pinto, but ratwikiwikiwiki does not attempt to make any points. We simply argue with each other. Bohdan2 01:01, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
And we're not even very good at that! --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 08:04, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
Bohdan, are you really prepared to suggest that intellectual dishonesty is not frequently on display at CP? The Dawkins/Obama professorship is just one tame example of this. As we get into atheism, homosexuality, and the Theory of Evolution it's enough to make one's head spin. Though I'll grant that RW is far from perfect, I would suggest that because CP purports to be an educational resource it should be held to a higher standard that exists primarily to mock the inanities of CP et al. 171.159.64.10 12:46, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
Stormfront, Bohdan? They're pretty big on Hate as a substitue for logic.
Oh, and BTW, could you get Ed to unblock me? I was in mid-edit when the hammer fell for being in violation of the 50/50 rule. (And being a smartass, but that's not actually against the WRITTEN rules... --Gulik 22:44, 3 April 2008 (EDT) (5)

Has this ever happened to you?[edit]

With all the usual disclaimers and excuses (just waken up, no coffee yet, too much booze, too much real life issues to think about), has it ever happened to you to read Conservapedia's Recent Changes or interesting articles believing that you are reading Rationalwiki's Recent Changes or WIGO or WIGO talk instead? Or the other way round? I confess to such happening to me at least a couple of times when I used to read CP. Now I'm so lazy that I just read WIGO. Superstitious animistEd at CP 12:58, 31 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually, yesterday I tried to answer someone who thought Adventure and Zork were the same thing, and took a minute to figure out why it was saying I wasn't logged in. --Kels 13:05, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
I've gone from WIGO into CP following a link and then forgotten where I was for a minute. Cognitive dissonance to the max. It is a great relief to suddenly realize that everyone at RW has not actually morphed into an evil conservative. Rational Ed5 or 6 edits 14:15, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
No, but sometimes when I'm reading on the web and there's a typo I expect an "edit" tab so I can fix it... humanUser talk:Human 11:59, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
I've done that before. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 16:14, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

It used tobe easier when CP had a gray background. Sterilexx 16:29, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

New side by side template for comment[edit]

Hi folks, I came up with what I think and hope is an easier "template" to use to build and work on side-by-side articles. The main thing I did is make each section its own table, with a header above it.

So it allows:

  • Much easier editing by the non-table savvy - adding sections is a simple copy/paste operation
  • You can see what you are commenting on in the edit box/preview window
  • A TOC will work properly, since each section has a normal header (of any level desired)

I put it here:

RationalWiki:Side-by-Side Template/version two

For discussion. I think we should simply replace the older version, which caused all kinds of headaches for non-table-savvy editors, and was still hard work to set up even for the savvy. But if people think we set it up as a separate option, that's cool too. Feel free to go check it out, make comments, copy and experiment in your own sandboxes, etc. (If you copy it elsewhere, don't grab the category & help tags at the bottom). humanUser talk:Human 11:56, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

It's much easier to use. Straight swap I'd say. SusanG 12:00, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
Hmm... It is easy... too easy! But anyway, it seems like it is easier, and it's not filled with random multi-line hidden comments (I can't tell if that's a pro or con) ThunderkatzHo! 15:04, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
I'm a gonna bounce this off AmesG. since the "original" (there were about 3, but he put his in the template space) was his joynt. humanUser talk:Human 18:06, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Somone's looking at us...[edit]

See here. Sterilexx 11:58, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

[edit]

IE engine
Safari
I've just started using Safari on my WinXP systems and noticed that the brain in the RWlogo is purple. Both Firefox & IE show it as gray. Anyone else noticed this? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 19:31, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
Safari on my Mac is showing it as gray, sorry. ThunderkatzHo! 20:18, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
Same as Thunderkatz. But Safari on Windows is not 'settled' yet, it's still early days for that browser/platform combo. DogP 20:24, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
Safari on my Vista shows the logo as gray. But - maybe we should play with the colour?--Bobbing up 05:46, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Actually, since this is a rare tech thread, can I thread-jack with another topic? Can anyone explain why, when I surf CP:WIGO on my iPhone, that some of the entries are tiny tiny tiny type, but the rest of the site displays just fine? DogP 20:24, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Hm. Your iPhone must be cursed. Have you offended any pagans lately? --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 23:30, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
Same thing happens to me, DogP. But Genghis, that's odd, I'll check on my mac tomorrow.αmεσ (soldier) 23:39, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
As another iphoner and seeing the same thing on this site and others, I believe iti has to do with the style sheet and tags within the item. I think its more an iphone bug, but worth looking at. Best program to diagnose this - CSSEdit. --Shagie 01:08, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
It's OK on my PDA - so it's likely to be iphone's browser. I'd guess) SusanG 04:53, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Wow, that's cool, I wish my browser did that. humanUser talk:Human 14:22, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Thinking this thing over, I wonder if it's a palette issue? What file-format is the RW logo? Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 14:55, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Actually the logo doesn't show up at all in IE at work, but is fine on FF. Sterilexx 15:41, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Last I noticed, it was a png. Linus theoretically has a hi-res svg somewhere on his hard drive, but he never sent it to me. But, yeah, palette issues coudl do weird things like that, although I've never seen it happen myself. humanUser talk:Human 15:42, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
T'ain't on his hard drive. 'Tis already here. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:24, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Strangely it only happens on one of my full size PCs not on my Vaio laptop. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 15:34, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
I just did a search for all the RW logo files and it is only the png that comes up purple. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 15:46, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm. Well I'll tell you what, there's something odd about that image, 'cos I've just noticed that the brain part of the image displays as basically pure noise on my iPhone. The brackets display perectly but there's no brain there-the outline is right, but the image has absolutely no definition.. (Bit like CP really). DogP 01:12, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

I was here for a minute or two...[edit]

...and said hello to a few losers on their talk pages. Sorry I didn't get around to everyone, so here's the cover-all: Hey everybody! Okay I'm out now. See you around, ГдлессЛиберал 21:17, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Halp! Forums not working for me[edit]

Every time I have tried to post for the last few days, I get this message: "Invalid Session. Please resubmit the form."

Any ideas? humanUser talk:Human 15:57, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

The forum has developed a mind of its own, and now refuses to post your crap. Try writing from a conservative POV and see what happens. Hope this helps, TmtamesP 16:01, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
You should redo your now-liberal sig so it skips the redirect. humanUser talk:Human 16:12, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Go join the Republican party, you spent-liberal. TmtamesP 16:48, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Have you tried clearing the cache, deleting cookies, all that stuff? Does it happen when posting both replies and new threads or only either? Which browser are you using, and have you tried posting with another one? Is anyone else having this problem? Is it an African or European swallow? --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:14, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Also, does it still happen if you use preview before posting? --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:17, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
You forgot the "have you tried turning it off and then on again" thing. Ajkgordon 16:18, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Right, right. *Ahem* Have you checked that the power cable is plugged into the wall socket? Is your keyboard connected to the computer? Your CD drive is not a cup holder. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 16:24, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Send me a check for $5000.00 and I'll fix it for you. Or yell at Linus. Sterilexx 16:27, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
And then, of course, the "have you still got the box it came in" stage. Ajkgordon 16:29, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Are you sure you're actually using a computer, and not, say, a toaster or a banana? ThunderkatzHo! 18:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

No forums, my blog hates you....maybe you need to futz with your computer...-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --It hurts when I do "this" 18:44, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

I went out to my car and closed all the windows and turned it off. I just tried a test "new" post, which worked, but so did a reply. So it's friggin intermittent. Also, sometimes in individual forums, the "colored folder" things that indicate new posts aren't "turned on" when they should be. FireFox/XP, which already had to repair itself once (!) since installation two weeks ago (FF, not XP). I suppose it might be cache issues. I'm still getting used to FF, as well, it's quite a leap to go from 3-4 year old Mozilla to it. If I hit the problem again I'll try clearing les caches & cookies, at least. And the old "close & open" crap... Thanks for the attempts to help! PS, yes, it is plugged in :) humanUser talk:Human 18:54, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

That reminds me. Ages ago, I joined the forums, then forgot about it. Last month I tried to log in (yes, using the correct password and username) and it wouldn't let me. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 15:28, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

RA - Think of it as a blessing in disguise for your education. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 17:07, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
Sometimes I canz & sometimes I cantz - seems to vary with the wind direction, or not, SusanG 15:34, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
RA - a while back the forums were "rebuilt" - and I think a lot of user names got lost in the shuffle. You may just need to sign up again. humanUser talk:Human 12:46, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
Ha! I can't log on now! SusanG 12:48, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
And I can't post again :( humanUser talk:Human 12:54, 5 April 2008 (EDT)