Talk:Main Page/Archive19

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>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>

, (new)(back)

Wiki publisher

Has anyone using Star office/Open office tried this?   ^Contribs_Talk 16:02, 4 June 2008 (EDT)

Interesting Susan. I have OpenOffice on one of my machines but tend not to use it as it completely mangled the formatting of a Word report. However, I have been looking for a better wiki editor. It's a pity that things like AutoWiki Browser are only for Wikipedia. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 23:01, 4 June 2008 (EDT)

Looks quite interesting. I've also had compatibility issues with open office and word, but it could be an nice wiki editor. I'll give it a shot later. Thanks Susan.--Bob^{bing up} 05:23, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I tried it out somewhere else. It works quite smoothly, but it's perhaps a bit limited in what it does at the moment.--Bob^{bing up} 15:18, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Another country heard from

Anyone read any of this guy? (His site's referred to from Deborah's main page entry) (at this time of day my connection's down to dial up speeds so I can't really see these sites.   ^Contribs_Talk 15:13, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

I thought the name was familiar, but I don't remember why. His site has all the appearances of a typical internet loon/kook, though possibly slightly more successful in selling his stuff. There is a link to a children's sight supposedly inspired by his teachings, though I can't tell if it's his project or not. It's pretty disturbing though: http://www.for-children.com/ -Smyth 14:56, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Sirbrina Guererro

Has anyone done any news relating to her? ^{— Unsigned, by: Storytellershrink / talk / contribs}

Not as far as I've seen, why? (I've never heard of her but just googled & she seems to be a Celebrated(?) Lesbian)  ^Contribs_Talk 21:52, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, she was in the news recently because she is a lesbian who, in Seattle, the second most gay friendly city in the US, at a baseball game was told to stop kissing her date. Because someone next to her was "uncomfortable". The comments about it from people are ridiculous. The main thing was that the people who complained would need to explain to their kids why two women are kissing, which apparently requires a Harvard degree to do now. Anyway, the people who run the stadium said it was because they were groping and being distracting, but Sirbrina at one time said there were tons of couples kissing, all heterosexual. She even took pics of the straight kissers. She was also on the second season of tila tequila, according to sources. Dan Savage (gotta love the guy) commented on it as well. The event happened on may 26 and just appeared in the news around the 3rd or so. Just seemed newsworthy for RW. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:00, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

There's always someone ready to be offended and somebody else frightened of offending them. I'm always careful where I display any affection.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:14, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

"second most gay friendly city in the US" - surely, reality must intrude. San Francisco is #1, right? If so, Providence Massachusetts is #2, and always has been. I don't care if you're gay, straight, furry, or whatever, if you aren't HAWT, don't make out in public </just kidding, but still...> ħuman 23:35, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, based on "tolerance", perhaps but Seattle ranks #2 in amount. It was an original quote when I said second gay friendly. Also, did you see this girl? She does not look bad. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 14:25, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

"She does not look bad."! So, lesbians shouldn't be attractive? (first warning salvo)   ^Contribs_Talk 14:39, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

*somehow avoids salvo* Obviously I did not say that. I was merely responding to Human's humorous comment with an attempt at a humorous, albeit factual comment. The woman was quite pretty. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 14:48, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

We...ell OK. She certainly looks like the sort of person bed out of kick wouldn't I (given chance the)   ^Contribs_Talk 14:59, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Crackers even not for eating, true dat. ħuman 15:06, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

¿Qué pasó al wiki?

Anyone else get a "server connection lost" message for the last 10 or so minutes? Lyra § talk 01:23, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes. I'm still timing out on pages every now and then. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 01:27, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Ich auch! (if you kann speek forrin, then sow kan eye)   ^Contribs_Talk 01:30, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Ich bin ein Berliner ist da ünly Deutche Ich spëchen. Lyra § talk 01:33, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Suben estrujen crujen bajen. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a RWW article.} 01:35, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

¿Cómo traduciste ese? Lyra § talk 01:39, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Pues por mi cuenta. Por cierto, es "tradujiste". NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a RWW article.} 03:21, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm going to need a translator here. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 01:40, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Qui est-ce qui veux parler un peu de français? J'ai besoin de pratiquer. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a RWW article.} 03:21, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Spellito corman croizler Ha! Ha! - smertlint.   ^Contribs_Talk 01:42, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Yah, I went back out to my little campfire a couple hours ago leaving my watchlist a blank screen. Things are still a bit clunky. Slow loading, and all. ħuman 03:06, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Way to violate the state burn ban, Hiu. SHahB 03:10, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Gotcha covered, Hank: http://www.leefirerescue.com/view.php?section_id=17 (for future reference, today it says "fire danger LOW today"). Hell , the wood I was burning was wet. We finally got rain here. ħuman 03:31, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I stand corrected. I hope you will forgive. SHahB 03:36, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

You've outed yourself, Huw! We now know where you live! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 15:27, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, come on, Susan posted pictures of the signs for the Nudist Camp and the race track just up the road months ago... And also, my address is two clicks away from my user page. ħuman 16:04, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

100 best novels

Readers? err ...AAAaarggghhh!. But at least they've got my all time best @ #7 & #12 (same book different lists)   ^Contribs_Talk 04:50, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Rand and Hubbard. Lovely. Though besides that, the lists seem a little, I don't know, Anglo-centered? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 04:59, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Clearly novels told in illustrated form don't qualify either. Otherwise, why not include Transmetropolitan? In terms of quality, it's actually far better than a lot of the Readers' picks. --Kels 10:13, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The Modern Library should know better than to do a "reader's list" the way it appears they did, that is the inaccurate "vote early and vote often" method of visiting a site. Obviously there was a concerted effort by the Objectivitsts and the Scientologists to get their messiah's books into the top then. Also, I didn't see Harry Potter on the readers' list, do books have to be published before a certain date? I'm sure in any actual poll of the population today, they and The Da Vinci Code would be righ tat the top. DickTurpis 10:35, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The lists and the poll is from 1998, I think. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:44, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

'Also, I didn't see Harry Potter on the readers' list' That's not writing. It's typing.--PFoster 11:12, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa! Back up.

Please tell me you did not say that. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 15:32, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

And I'll say it again, if you like. PFoster 15:36, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Please outline your objections in a specific and orderly fashion, heretic. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 15:38, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Poor writing. Derivative plot. No sense of character development. No message beyond telling a simple story. Poor writing. Given that it's a list of the "100 Greatest Novels of All Time," there's no way that there's any room for that kind of mass-produced pap - What, you're going to leave of Ngugi or Naipul for a second-rate Tolkein wannabee? Come on. PFoster 15:43, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The writing is agreeably poor, but the story is much more than "simple." Great books are made by great interest, not by some guy's opinion. If the public likes it, as they overwhelmingly do, it's a great book. Lyra § talk 15:47, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

No. Public opinion and popularity have nothing to do with literary merit. Were that the case, McDonald's would be haute cuisine, the Spice Girls would be better musicians than John Coltrane, and Star Wars a better film than anything by Jean Renoir. Come on.PFoster 15:51, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

(Edit conflict) I'm going to have to disagree with both of you, actually. I don't think Harry Potter is poorly written at all, and it is only derivative in the same sense that all fantasy is. If you want mass-produced pap, take a glance at an Alex Rider book some time. And public opinion is irrelevant, I'm afraid -- I agree with PFoster on that, even though he did shamelessly edit conflict me :( <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 15:53, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

High art is for those who can afford it. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:02, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I object mightily to the presence of Lord of the Rings on that list. I'm sorry, but Tolkien was not a particularly good writer. In fact, I think he's downright crappy. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:00, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Disagree! Regardless of Tolkien's skill at writing, he was a fantastic storyteller. Take it back, or I'll pinch you. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 16:04, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

(UNDENT)High art is for those who can afford it Betcha a cheap second-hand paperback copy of Naipul or Midnight's Children costs less than what all those people paid for the last Harry potter hardcover at midnight the day it was released.PFoster 16:11, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

You assume the "cost" is monetary. BTM 16:13, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

That's deep man. Really.PFoster 16:14, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

What I meant is that in order to grasp most of the highbrowed elements that literature buffs insist make literature "great" requires putting a large amount of work into learning to comprehend literary elements (most of which consist of references to other "great" works of literature and mind-boggling leaps of symbology), something that the average reader has neither the time nor the inclination to do. The average working class person doesn't have the time and money to invest in learning such things anyways, even if they wanted to. Hence my claim that high art (high literature, to keep things on-subject) is for those who can afford it. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:37, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Don't listen to those people. Reading great literature no more requires you to learn literary theory than listening to Bach requires you to learn how to construct a fugue. Knowing that theory tells you why the works are great, which of course might increase your enjoyment, but they're by no means necessary. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:46, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

It's interesting how much sci-fi (broadly speaking) is high on the readers' list. The Randroids (Randbots?) made their ploy too obvious, though, by pumping all her dreck so high... ħuman 16:16, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

As a matter of fact, I was too busy fuming over how little sci-fi there is on the "official" list to notice. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:19, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The Scientologist have them beat though....fucking Battlefield Earth? Really....BTM 16:18, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I know, I know :( Apparently most people are just incurably stupid. Sad. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 16:26, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I think the problem rather is that Scientologists are really, really good at voting in polls. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:31, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Clearly the Scientologists are very good at voting in polls like this. There's no way Battlefield Earth would be a blip on the radar if that were not the case. It probably wouldn't be tough to track down sites encouraging votes for both Hubbard and Rand. Rand books are a bit less an obvious fix, as there are a fair amount of people who mistake them for literature.

I didn't realize I'd open up this can of worms with Potter, but if the list is from 1998 that would explain the absence. Whatever one's opinions of the books are (personally, I think they're good, but overrated, and I certainly don't get reading them over and over again when there is no shortage of books out there; however, if nothing else, Rowling is imaginative) there is little doubt that if an accurate survey were done today of what the general population thinks the best novels are, they would be near the top. This is, of course, why the Modern Library has a critics' list which they emphasize more, and why the Oscars aren't done by popular vote (except, apparently, the years when Braveheart and Gladiator won; who was asleep at the switch then?), else they'd look more like the MTV music awards. DickTurpis 00:42, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

The Oscars are still relatively pathetic. But anyways, on the original link, it wasn't bad, IMO the Critic's list was more consistent, but the Reader's list did have some awesome books in it, such as Dune, which was missing from the other list. Unfortunately, well... Ayn Rand first? L. Ron Hubbard in the top 10 (I wonder how that happened)? Orwell, but no Zamyatin? Tolkien third? The lack of Dunsany from both lists was pretty bad, but Tolkien being 3rd in a list without Dunsany is just plain bad. I would also comment on the lack of Stendhal and Simenon (for his romans durs, mainly) from the list, but I can't be bothered. Ah well, at least there's no Twilight, Harry Potter and Eragon. Neither of the lists are exceptionally bad, I guess. :D -Judas Reward 09:39, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

"Battlefield Earth" is in the top five and five by Ayn Rand in the top ten or so?? What the hell? "Battlefield Earth" is a poorly written teriibly long adolescent male fantasy novel (yup, I read when I was of a appropriate age) Did one geeky, new age libretarian 15 year old compile the readers choice list. We're doomed. We should all just stop reading, sit under a tree and pick at lice. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 11:27, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

man, I just read the rest of the readers list. I stand by my judgment of the pimply faced little wanker who single handedly compiled the list. Robert Heinlien, Stehpen King, and Orson Scott Card -- jesus. I need drinks after that. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 11:31, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

what makes kids read?

We shouldn't forget that whatever its literary merits may or may not be, Harry Potter is bringing lots of both kids and adults who mmight not otherwise have done so to actually pick up a book and read it - or seven books, in fact. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:17, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Which is great, really, but then what? They keep reading the same damn 7 books over and over. I have had this argument with several friends who just keep reading Harry Potter again and again. There is so much out there why waste the time? Harry Potter is as much a gateway book as pot is a gateway drug.....BTM 16:20, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

^win -Smyth 15:06, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Y'know, AKJ, when the first and second HP books came out I was working at a summer camp and I saw all the kids devouring the things I believed exactly that - but once the books became a medium to sell second-rate movies and videos and t-shirts and happy meals and t-shirts and collector's figurines and everything else, I gave up on that in a hurry. And I'm really, really curious as to how many kids or adults have gone on to read much else besides - have literacy rates/book sales of non-HP books/library memberships gone up noticeably, and if so, is it really because of the books or is it a marketing phenomenon? More importantly, is a new generation of critical readers being created? Of people who will seek out good literature (and history, and poetry, and criticism and and and...) and not read what just whatever Barnes and Nobles and the publishers tell tehm they should? PFoster 16:23, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Obviously I don't know that, but it's a given thing that none of those things will happen if they don't start reading. As for the rest, the teachers will have to take it from there. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:30, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I am of two or three minds here (hello in there!). Once, I worked at a factory, and one woman there read dime novels on all her breaks. At first I thought, "what a mush-mind" - but then I realized, odds are she does it home, too. And her kids see her... reading. Content doesn't matter at the "less intellectual" level - simply using books as tools for entertainment, and being "familiar" with reading, is a good thing. When I was a kid, I had a few classics of the day - Treasure Island, Wind in the Willows, probably Jungle Book, and the Narnia series. Those are some bumpy reads at 6 or 7, I may have had some read "with" or "to" me, who knows. But also, my parents read a lot, subscribed to magazines and newspapers, etc., so, as in my example above, as a kid it simply seemed natural to me that reading was a route to entertainment and information. Now, it certainly helps, a lot, to have an easy route out of simply reading a small number of "canonical" entertainments (think Tao of Physics, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Hypnosis, Shatlas Rugged, etc.) to broaden the mind with exposure to more ideas. But it has to start somewhere. After all, look what Oprah pulled off on her "book club" people - she made them read "real" literature, what, last summer? In the end, I think that anything that promotes reading (and writing!) is a bonus to society. ħuman 17:29, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Sounds like you're pretty much just in one mind, and that that one mind makes good sense. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:46, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Agreed. Certainly here in the UK, Harry Potter has been one of a few things that has lifted the popularity of books for kids. The others being much better bookshops, the end of fixed book pricing, and Amazon. And as with all forms of entertainment, kids' material will (probably) mature with them. Ajkgordon 04:38, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

JK Rowling does get a load more mooney than she deserves, though. Or, at least, should deserve, if literature being successful wasn't based on advertising rather than literary merit. -Judas Reward 09:39, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

I used to read a lot (of books)

Then I got a computer...suddenly book reading fell WAY off. That was in 1994. Last year was the first year I had read with any degree of voraciousness; I think I read a total of, oh, say, twenty real books, mostly non-fiction. The "urge" to read comes from a need that not all people realize they have: a need for intellectual stimulation. It, so often, these days, can be substituted with video games and movies; but the shortfall of those media is the lack of depth to them. The same went for "comic books" back in my yout (circa 1960's), it wasn't that we weren't reading it was that we were reading pap.
Check out an online "writer's forum" and muddle through some of the dreck those people "write", (truly nauseating). If you cannot tell a good, long joke, you've got no bidness trying to sell prose.--20:16, 8 June 2008 (EDT) CЯacke®

Cleaning up the main namespace

Do we really need 200 crazy redirects to Andrew Schlafly? tmtoulouse ^nettle 16:32, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

We definitely need Conservative drivel :) <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 16:34, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Realistically, we could probably do without most of those. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:42, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The list of redirects is here remove any from the list you think we should keep. tmtoulouse ^nettle 17:13, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't think they would be missed (other than the obvious; Aschlafly, Andy Schlafly, etc.) ħuman 17:20, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I'd' miss them. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:40, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Badly? Shall we just keep the vegetables? ħuman 17:49, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Let's go for the minimalist approach and keep just one vegetable. RA can get to decide which one. [/evil] --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:52, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I am opposed to this anti-lulz pogrom. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 19:57, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Why? It isn't really "anti-lulz" -- being stricter with what lulz with indulge makes our lulz much stronger (and lullier) overall. You don't really think we need all those vegetable redirects to get the joke across? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 20:01, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

(undent) First they came for the vegetables... ħuman 20:03, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't see why we can't leave them. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 20:58, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Because the main namespace should have some level of integrity to it and not just be polluted and diluted into nothing. tmtoulouse ^nettle 21:29, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Stay undented, damn you. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 21:34, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Just for clarity, redirects never turn up as "random" pages, but they do get listed under "all pages", right? Anywhere else? Search results? Kendoll's "google results"? ħuman 21:36, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Damn you Tmtoulouse! I can't think of a comeback to that. In fact, I agree with you. Aaargh! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 21:48, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

the End of the World

Seems like the world is going to end in a couple of days. End of the world story. What plans do people have?--Bob^{bing up} 16:52, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I hope to get laid, but then, I always hope to get laid... Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 17:31, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Dinner, perhaps the Daily Show, with any luck some good WEC Wrekcage on Versus. Why? ħuman 18:45, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

For the first time in my life, I'm unhappy not to be in Texas. Sitting outside this guy's compound with a lawnchair and some popcorn sounds like a fun way to spend the day. --Gulik 14:52, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Side by Side

So when can we expect work to begin on the RationalWiki:Annotated Bible? 75.161.33.251 17:28, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

After we finish the RW Guide to the Bible. The RWAB project ought to be completed in late 2023. ħuman 18:41, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

TeeHee

This is the funniest bit of vandalism I've witnessed on CP, because it's so true. Got whacked by Deany in six seconds. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 23:34, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Really? I'd say that the "Wretched-Assbag Reagan" one was the best, by virtue of having stayed up for over 12 hours, or the Ecuador-South Africa one, which needs no explaining. Lyra Silvertongue 00:05, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Adsense Report

So the Adsense has been going a little over a month and I have some data on it. It has potential for bringing in some income, but not enough to support the site alone. The biggest issue is that you have to make $100 before they even send the check. That means that basically I can pay for the site out of adsense money once every 1-2 months. For those months which the Adsense is not paying the donations to the site would still be appreciated/needed. Basically, we get $20 a month or so in subscriptions, the site costs $60-$70 a month depending on disk space and bandwidth. I have added a little script thing that accepts donations through paypal and tells how close we are to paying for the site for the month. I will adjust the "total" needed based on subscription payments as those are increased or canceled. As always feedback is encouraged. Though I doubt I have to encourage it. tmtoulouse ^nettle 23:29, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Feedback has rarely been the problem, unlike COLD HARD CASH. I like that little widgety-thingy, it's kinda cool. I hope this gets figured out TMT, I hate that you're sucking this up all the time. But I do appreciate it. DogP 12:33, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Link between IQ and belief in God

Here is a story I don't think we'll be seeing on CP any time soon. Alt 08:19, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

I also spotted this during my lunch break. As ever, El Reg's phrasing made me smile. Bondurant 08:46, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

"...as average IQ in Western societies increased throught the 20th century..." That statement is questionable on so many levels, it's almost exhausting. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 09:00, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Correlation equals causation not. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:01, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

But then again, it is Richard "Black people are stupider than whites" Lynn, so I guess you have to expect these thing. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 09:04, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

"Lynn pointed out that most children do believe in God, but as their intelligence develops they tend to have doubts or reject religion." But I thought IQ was relatively constant during a person's life. Thunderkatz^Ho! 10:06, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

I always thought it decreased with age.Shangrala 10:28, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

IQ is BS. BS is constant. QED IQ is constant. Otherwise I'm with AKjeldsen ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:29, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

The real answer is that there isn't a legitimate way of measuring IQ even if something like a IQ as unitary value exists. There are ways of comparing sets of people in specific ways, and people have widely held these comparators as an absolute measure of IQ, but upon examination that proves to be a pretty bogus method. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:32, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

"...as average IQ in Western societies increased throught the 20th century..." - what has happened is that IQ test scores have gone up, at a rate of several points/decade, over the last century. My simple theory is that since the tests try to measure abstract reasoning (basically), people being surrounded by more and more technology, moving to cities, etc., teaches them these particular skills better. The testers pretty much have to reset what they call "100" every decade or so. But, I agree, the trouble with using the results of these tests as being any more than "the results of these tests" runs into insurmountable problems. If I took an IQ test in French, I'd probably score about 30-40. Does that make me an idiot? No, it means my French is very weak. ħuman 13:12, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Google Ads

This has probably been explained before (if so, then I apologise), but on most pages I see on RW, there are creationist adverts in the Adds by Google section at the side. How do these ads get here? Are they searching for key words or are creationist organisations specifically targeting this site for their ads? And is the revenue from these ads actually contributing towards RW? Bondurant 13:25, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

The pro-creationist ads are triggered by certain keywords, though we don't know if they just search for "creationism" or look for "creationism debunked". As far as I know, you cannot target Adsense ads for a specific site. (Unless "RationalWiki" is one of those keywords. Hmmm...) And yes, as Tmtoulouse explains here, revenue from clicking on the ads really does contribute to RationalWiki. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 14:37, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Where's the pledge/contribute button gone?   ^Contribs_Talk 19:11, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

The good news is that there was a spurt of donations recently, when added to the standard subscriptions will pay for July. Then by the end of July I should get google ads funds which should pay August, and a good chunk of September. If the pi subscribers stay on the site should be able to pay for itself through September. tmtoulouse ^nettle 20:05, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Wow, that is good news. ħuman 20:13, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

I gotta John McCain for President ad...

on the front page... Sterile^snore! 12:34, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Tim Russert Died

Tim Russert died. How the fuck did that happen? DickTurpis 15:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Wow, he was only 58... ħuman 17:00, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

In other news, R. Kelly was acquitted. Man, if they weren't going to lock him up for statutory rape they should at least give him 10 to 15 for Trapped in the Closet. DickTurpis 17:05, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Screw you dick (get it, it's a joke) I like Trapped in the Closet.... Maybe you have to black or something, I don't know.... SirChuckB^{That is all} 21:48, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Okay, you can have your Trapped in the Closet, but I Believe I Can Fly is one of the ten worst songs ever. DickTurpis 22:11, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

That was R. Kelly? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:18, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, that was R. Kelly, written for Space Jam and I'll really have to argue that point. That song is, in my opinion, one of the best R&B songs in the past few years. I'll agree that I got sick of hearing it whenever anybody needed something inspirational, but the song itself is very solid. SirChuckB^{That is all} 22:27, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

To bring things back on subject, why is Tim Russert dying important enough to merit its own section here? Aside from his epic phail prediction of how the New Hampshire primary would swing... I just can't think of much. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Who knows... because someone started it? ħuman 00:01, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, that goes without saying. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:05, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Shankbone

This artilce was on According to for awhile, and I read it, but didn't think much about it. However, as I browse through Wikipedia, especially the talk pages (It's a hobby, I'm a pysh major remember) it calls his whole pov into question. The picture that comes out from reading his stuff is of a real jerk who can't seem to accept that he and his works are not perfect. On top of that, he seems to hold terrible grudges and becomes defensive at the first sign of dissent and does a great job of pulling other editors to his side by playing victim.... I just started to wonder if anyone else had an opinion on that or if I'm the only total loser in the group. SirChuckB^{That is all} 21:51, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, if by "total loser", you mean "person who reads Wikipedia talk pages", then yes : ) Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:49, 13 June 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, @Chuck, I guess I could certainly accept your interpretation. There is the issue of "being public" on the www, vs. "being intelligently private" (at which I phail, of course). As far as I can tell, you were a founding member of Public Enemy. Oops, that's ChuckD, never mind. Basically, the story is an example of the deep crap that runs in the rivers of wikipedia, the egos, the idiots who think they are important and all that. WP just happens to be the giantest "blog" ever created, for those whose "personality" Depends(TM) on their participation there. ħuman 00:05, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Why Not

This is worth putting up on According to, but I find this really funny.... It pretty much sums up everything that's wrong with the Evangelical movement today. Living a mere thirty minutes away from the Evangelical Vatican (Colorado Springs) I have to deal with these idiots everyday. I love it SirChuckB^{That is all} 18:06, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

It's a sad thing, really. And I think it all started with protesters at family planning/pruning clinics. The "no protest" zones passed court muster, and we just get more and more uses of these limitations as time goes by. All sides of debate get wronged in an attempt to allow people's competing rights to "go about their business"... sigh... ħuman 19:13, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Two silly sandboxen - what to do?

I have two sandbox "articles" that I am trying to decide what to do with... as they are, they aren't very complete or worth saving, but I'm not sure either one is worth moving to a place where the mob can have their way with them.

There's User:Human/sandbox5 a/k/a I see dead people, and User:Human/sandbox a/k/a 57 ways to abuse your children. Suggestions on their respective talk pages about possible likely uses for them (and titles, if they get moved) would be appreciated. Thanks! ħuman 20:37, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Just leave the links to them posted prominently here and we'll have our way with them. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 20:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

OK, I should add here, they are open to editing where they are now by the mob. Then let's decide what to do with them. ħuman 23:21, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Dead people - can't see any point except Hollywood values :-) . Homeskollars Eggsellent: stick it in mainspace somewhere.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:44, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

That's kind of what I thought... dead people, at CP:hollywood values? Ideas for title of the homskollar thing? ħuman 00:25, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

OK, I moved "I see dead people" to Conservapedia:Hollywood_values. ħuman 19:26, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Same-sex marriage in Norway

A little old news, but Norway legalized same-sex marriage. Don't know if you knew it yet, but still, pretty interesting. ^{— Unsigned, by: 96.246.211.227 / talk / contribs}

Thanks, I'll see if same-sex marriage needs to be updated... ħuman 19:00, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Goat Beauty Contest.

That's right, you heard right. A goat beauty contest. What did we do before teh internets?

We waited. We were bored. No, don't protest, we were bored to death, there's no denying it. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 11:09, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

We held our own, local goat beauty contests at 4H? ħuman 18:55, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Psychic Kids

One of the consequences of taking a trip back "home" is my mother's insistence on forcing me to watch parts of really terrible television. This particular horror was noteworthy. It is children whose parents decided their kids imaginary friends were really dead people and turned them into "psychics". tmtoulouse ^nettle 13:26, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Did you hold back from lecturing her because she's your mother? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 14:59, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Nah, my mother is not forcing me to watch it to convince me but rather to torture me. She is in fact a regular reader of RationalWiki and refers friends and relatives to some of our articles. tmtoulouse ^nettle 18:39, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

That's good to hear. I wish I had your mother. Would you loan her to me? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:40, 18 June 2008 (EDT)

He loaned her to me, let's not get into details... ħuman 01:38, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Gotta defray those hosting costs somehow! Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:14, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

RationalWiki the video game

So somewhere between the rise of Java and the dominance of Web 2.0 my Internet programming skills became outdated. Everything is now PHP, Actionscript, Flash, Perl, MYSQL, etc. RationalWiki offers a good medium to get some practice in but its limited. And if I break things people get mad.

So I have been playing on my own just trying to learn all the various languages and be more up to date. Most of it is not very interesting but I have been playing with flash and actionscript. I have been building a game that is a homage to old school RPG turn based games (ala early Final Fantasy). The theme I have been messing with is RW vs. CP. The only thing I have completed so far is the "core" fight engine. I plan to add in all the elements of RPG with the ability to select a class (sockpuppet master, rational poster, meat puppet manipulator, etc.) with different abilities, an experience/leveling/stats based system and a series of encounters occurring with references to the major characters as you progress through your battle.

It is early yet but I decided to make the fight engine "public" if anyone wants to play with it and offer feedback. Remember I am a programmer not an artist! Though if any artist want to help out let me know :).

It can be found here:

RationalWiki the RPG.

tmtoulouse ^nettle 23:43, 18 June 2008 (EDT)

Cool, but I ran out of places to click? (Also, I am clueless in the world of RPGs) ħuman 00:36, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

You misspelled "already" as "allready". Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:41, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

If there are no buttons and it is "paused" just click anywhere on the game to continue. tmtoulouse ^nettle 00:43, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

RA, you know by now, if you have improoved TMT's work on this site, that he can't spel to save his lief. Thanks for the tip, Trent. ħuman 01:01, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

The Parthian Shot message goes away too quickly to read all of it... ħuman 01:02, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

PWNED. The game is rigged by the builder's sentiments ;) Just place mouse in one place and click, click, click... PS, the "web 2.0 applauds" screen also goes away too quickly :( ħuman 01:06, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the feedback, I will alter the timing on the splash screens. tmtoulouse ^nettle 01:12, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Big T, you value others' honest opinions, right? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:20, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Sure. tmtoulouse ^nettle 01:27, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Don't be cruel ;) I had fun. ħuman 01:28, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

The game was, uh—how to say?—kind of lame. Maybe I've been spoiled by playing Pokemon or something... Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:30, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Yea it is not designed for anything more than an exercise in programming, and my own entertainment. Programing is a nice form of open ended logic puzzles. Just thought I would drop it here for the hell of it. The "game" will have more elements to it over time, if you check back periodically. tmtoulouse ^nettle 01:36, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Interesting. Also, there's a "fuled" on the run message thing. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 02:07, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

And "apocolypse" now! Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:19, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Also, when it says vandalism distracts CP for 2 turns, they only "sit out" for one... ħuman 15:11, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Folding@home team

<sheepish>I probably shoulda' mentioned this back when I started it around March, but I founded a RationalWiki folding@home team.</sheepish> Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:18, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Gee, that's certainly a lackluster response. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:42, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

I would've commented (For I am your only friend here, RA -- the others plot against you and call you "bicycle goblin" behind your back.) But I don't know what one of those is. Please to explain? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Sock of OmesGn} 17:45, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Folding@home is a program run by Stanford University. It's a "distributed computing" effort—hundreds of thousands of people are lending a small part of their computer's processing power, and their collective processing power is greater than any supercomputer. You download a program that, in a nutshell, analyzes proteins, bringing researchers a step closer to understanding the mechanisms behind many diseases (such as Alzheimer's, Huntington's, Parkinson's, and many kinds of cancer). The program runs unobtrusively in the background and only uses the unused portion of your processor at any one time. The effort has produced real results, as you can see here (yes, all 54 of those papers have been peer-reviewed). You get awarded points depending on how many proteins you have "folded", and you can work alone or be grouped with a team of your choice. If you have any questions about the specifics, see their FAQs page, and to download it go here

The RationalWiki team as it is now is kind of sad—just me, all alone—so if you need an idea of what a "mature" team looks like, see old Team Uncyclopedia. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 19:33, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

I have been contemplating moving to Folding@Home, I was an early adopter of Seti@Home but after that was done I never picked up on any spin offs. When I get back to Canada I will look into it. tmtoulouse ^nettle 23:46, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Yah, I cranked out a zillion Seti@Home units, or at least 7, but I never got any ribbons. It is harmless though, and works well. Distributed processing is brilliant for all of us who leave our 'puters on 24/7. ħuman 00:33, 20 June 2008 (EDT)

Data mining polling information

As the general election race for the US Presidency gears up, how much do we want to play with it? I am contemplating setting up a system to mine polling data both for national polls and state polls and storing them locally here. That data could be used to create our own electorial maps, templates, or whatever. Is there much interest in setting this up? Would people want to play with it if I brought it over? tmtoulouse ^nettle 14:27, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

While I appreciate the importance of the event, in what way would it align with RW's mission? Or am I (once again) taking the Rational part too literally? Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 14:34, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Our mission clearly encompasses politics, anyone who wants to do more than describe but also advocate has to deal in the political realm. Political issues are also prevalent across the site, from our count down template till Bush leaves office to our article on the various candidates. And there are certainly issues surrounding the voting process that lend them selves to our particular brand of analysis such as the United States Electoral College, red state, blue state and Jesusland. tmtoulouse ^nettle 14:43, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Lets see if I can find it again... Back in '00 (I think) there was a website set up by some CS professor that I thought I should know (Lanwebber?) who was in France(? Maybe Canada?). He had access to a large amount of poll data and constantly was replotting extrapolated outcomes of the election based on trends. It was actually fairly accurate. I think he also had information for grad students on how to apply to work for him (and thus move out of the US). I'll see if I can hunt it up again. --Shagie 14:59, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Basically I plan to data mine the polls just to do it, both for fun and practice. The question for me is if I just go ahead and do it over at my playground or if I bring it over here for people at RW to play with as well. If there is interest I will bring it here but if most of you guys feel that it doesn't fit then no biggie. tmtoulouse ^nettle 15:02, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

If we do it I'd like to also see the exact poll questions and possible answers, so we can analyze them, too. (I got push-polled, sort of, yesterday, over expanded gambling in my state, which was weird) ħuman 15:15, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Well it would probably just be places like Gallup and Rasmussen, pretty standardized procedures. "If the election where held today who would you vote for?" questions. tmtoulouse ^nettle 15:23, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

It would be more fun to track the "crappy" polls! We could refute the implicit assumptions or biases in their questions. ħuman 16:01, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

I asked my old college friends and I got the answer (its not what you know, its who you know that knows what you want to know). Tanenbaum who now lives in the Netherlands and http://electoral-vote.com/ (this is not the answer to Clue - there was a Dr. Fun on that) --Shagie 16:59, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

This completely justifies our existence

Sarcasm Seen as Evolutionary Survival Skill. What better excuse do we need than we are furthering evolution? --Shagie 14:46, 20 June 2008 (EDT)

RIP

Apparently, George Carlin is no longer with us. He will be sorely missed. ħuman 04:03, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Er, not by me he won't. I've never heard of him on the bright side of the pond. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 04:33, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Me neither - sorry!   ^Contribs_Talk 13:27, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

You're kidding, right? Granted, most (if not all) of Carlin's routines were America-centric, but still, I assumed he was a big enough figure on the comedy scene to have at least some name recognition across the pond. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:30, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry!   ^Contribs_Talk 13:33, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Have you looked him up yet? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:38, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

It's easier to let you explain :) ^{— Unsigned, by: 85 25 151 22 / talk / contribs}

For those unforunate enough to not know Carlin, google Seven Dirty Words and read "When Will Jesus Bring the Porkchops?". He is seen by many as a successor to Lenny Bruce (I happen to think George kicks Lenny's ass) and there will be an outpouring of grief by everyone from Kevin Smith and Lewis Black to....me. He paved the way for Trey Parker and Matt Stone, as the ultimate free speech advocate. Now I have six weeks to cross him out of my book. "Facts are facts Fuck you, you're dead." --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 13:44, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

This is when he's younger. A bit newer. Religion is bullshit --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 13:48, 23 June 2008 (EDT) 101 Greatest Quotes --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 13:50, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

At least SNL had the class to make tonight's repeat/rebroadcast an episode the Carlin hosted. Nice move, Lorne. (it's easy to do right when it's obvious, of course) ħuman 00:02, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Christian Hypocrisy

Ok, I'm not one to brand a religious people into one group. They obviously have seperate morals and are not one entity. But whenever I see stuff like this I just wanna slap myself. A little background. For those of you not familiar with Christiananswers.net, it's a site dedicated to providing answers for questions Christians may have or they may be asked. They also have a christian movie review section. This is their review for Get Smart notice the overall rating and section on violence. Here's The Incredible Hulk again, notice the section on violence. Catching a theme? Ok, now take a look at the review for Christian propaganda disguised as entertainment film Prince Caspian Do you notice a change in tone? It's this kind of hypocrisy that drives me absoultely crazy. ^{— Unsigned, by: SirChuckB / talk / contribs}

Oh, if you like this one you have to check out Capalert. I highly recommend the South Park - Bigger Longer and Uncut review, and the Tarzan review gives some great repressed homosexual lulz. Stile4aly 19:15, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Capalert ħuman 20:04, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Loved this bit from the Get Smart(movie) review (yes, I saw it when it was first shown on UK TV in the 60s):

“”There is no sex, although a couple of kisses were exchanged between the Maxwell Smart character and the Agent 99 character. They are shown to truly care for one another and respect one another over the course of the film. The Smart character cares about his job and has a proud work ethic.

That's what movie reviewing is all about. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:03, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

That sounds quite... Soviet communist to me. On a side note, for all those intending to learn Russian, find online for free A Russian Course, by Alexander Lipton, 1977. It's amazing. Chapter 1: "How do shock-workers live? Shock-workers live well. Where do they work? They work in factories. How do they work? They work with enthusiasm. What do they do in parks? In parks they think about life. About what life? About life in factories. That's how shock-workers live." and "How do loafers live? At work they steal pencils. In parks they conduct themselves badly. Yes, comrades. That is how loafers live". Etc. etc. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 17:12, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Ummm...

Ummm...God has been arrested. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 16:28, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

A personal CP Parodist list?

I wondered how would it be considered if I - or anyone else! - put on my user page a list of those CP users who I believe to be parodists. The first answer would probably be "no, it's a no-no, you traitor". But...:

1. it would be MY list of suspects, without any endorsing by RW
2. I have no access to secret information, not part of any inner sanctum, not exchanging e-mails anymore; I judge only on publicly available material (CP article and talk page edits, WIGO items), from which everybody can make up their mind by themselves
3. I would just keep a list of CP usernames, not pointing out to specific vandalisms that somehow have passed unobserved
4. the list would largely be made of people already publicly suspected on RW, such as powerful editor Bugler
5. Poe's Law would still be valid. I might be wrong, and I don't think any CP Sysop would consult my list. Let me repeat: I would not mention the suspect's specific writings on CP, just mention his/her username

What do you think? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 13:42, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

I quite like the idea (indeed I've considered a similar concept before), however there are some concerns about outing deep cover agents. But if we're not using any inside information, just speculation based on edits, then I guess the worst that can happen is increasing the level of paranoia over there, which would be a Very Good Thing. Chalk me up in the "pro" column. DickTurpis 14:05, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm afraid I must disagree. Even pointing to the user could easily lead to valuable parody being deleted. We'd only be hurting our own cause, really. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:14, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, many have already been quite vocal about Bugler (with good reason;)), would it be that bad to throw a few others names into the mix (some already have)? DickTurpis 14:24, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm going to introduce Shagie's Wager on Poe's Law:

	Parodists help RW	Parodists hurt RW
More Parodists	Exposing is bad	Exposing is good
More believers	Accusing is good	Accusing is good

This boils down to 'does a parodist help us' (people point at CP and say 'ha ha they can't tell a parodist from a believer') or hurt us (ohh... that site is full of parodists making fun of conservatives and they are so understaffed and beleaguered by those evil liberals). The related question is are there more parodists than believers? Assuming no inside information and parodists... pointing out names parodists/over the top believers its a question of which has the higher density? If there are more believers you've got a better chance of hitting a real one and getting them banned. --Shagie 14:34, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but the thing is, we're quite intelligent -- I think the chances are greater that we'd be targetting real parodists, and making it more difficult for them to operate. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:42, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't see parodists as being harmful to us either way. Even if people do take the "poor Conservapedia, constantly under siege parodists" approach, it may garner some sympathy for them, but it still is further proof that they are not a reliable source. The real question is, will a list of speculations likely out parodists who wouldn't otherwise be outed, or will it merely make them question everyone who seems a bit too far-right? I really don't see them banning anyone based solely on their name appearing as a potential parodist on an RW page. DickTurpis 14:52, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

But if they did ban based on names appearing here it would prove A) They watch RW closely, like RW watches CP, but at least this site admits it rather than denies the existance of the other and B) They're more paranoid than anyone has previously given them credit for. Armondikov 18:01, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

We have nothing to gain, and everything to lose, from outing parodists. A) it's their problem, not ours; B) If we got all the parodists banned, things over there would be less funny; C) if we got all the parodists banned, we would never have another MexMax-ification, which I am keen to see again; D) it's quite likely many of the parodists are RW-ers, in which case you'll ruin their fun too. The Parodist must operate under deep cover and spend months lying through his or her teeth, very carefully, and to have that hard work ruined by some casual outing over here is would be very frustrating. DogP 11:26, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

You are assuming too much, Dogged. I am not a secret agent and not even very smart. I would not be outing, just guessing, as you do and anybody else. I'd never 1) get all the parodists and 2) get them banned. So I feel your points B) and C) don't apply. Point D: again, I don't know how a parodist's fun would be ruined if he was suspected on RW. It's not that CP Sysops would take action based on the clueless suspicions of an (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed}. Let's distinguish here: there are parodists and parodists. It seems clear to me that Bugler, just to make an "outed" name, got fed up and wants to leave CP soon (otherwise, Bugler, I'll suggest to you that going over the top is not very smart). Instead deep cover socks won't be touched. And finally point A: it's their problem, but our fun and/or frustration. A parodist on a puclicly readable wiki exposes himself to public scrutiny. It's part of the enjoyment we are denied and it is frustrating to us too having to keep these "secrets". Let me repeat: I would not expose specific vandalisms and I would not "out" deep cover vandals.

I would also give some benefit to the confusion it would create. If you really feel that my guessings are considered by the CP Sysops, wouldn't their doubts and suspicions and possible friendly fire (blocking of 'real' right-wing fundies) be even more beneficial? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 12:06, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I agree with DogP. There are plenty of lulz at CP just with the usual gang. Just in case anyone is under any illusions that this wiki is private I think the evidence of changes at CP proves conclusively that all of the major players read at least WIGO and much of what else is posted here. I also know of evidence that shows Andy is no stranger here, although not as an editor. (I wonder how much lulz they get out of our musical project.) Pointing out suspected parody is counterproductive. Sometimes you can only see the parody from the outside, by highlighting stuff here it often causes the CP sysops to take a second look at edits. Fox cleaned up a lot of parody at CP by following trails from here. I know that I often do or say stupid stuff and then only really realize it when the wife points it out (usually in front of everyone else). We shouldn't be the fresh pair of eyes to help them. We actually help them enough as it is. I am aware of a lot of fun stuff on CP and would love to share it, but it would just get wiped if I mentioned it on RW, so I keep shtum. Poor information on CP either parody or genuine heartfelt crap affects the perception of CP as a reliable source. Most of the original members of RW did not start out as parodists they actually tried to improve CP unfortunately our definition of improve (i.e. present scientific facts and present some balance) did not align with Andy's mission. I must admit that I exposed some parody in the LA Times article on CP but as it had the effect of making CP look stupid in the mainstream media it was worth it and it did not compromise anyone. The problem with exposing parody is that because of Poe's Law you cannot always know who is and who isn't a parodist. Now when it comes to the ennobled, those with blocking power, then I do believe they become fair game. TurdBurglar might be a parodist but now he wields his power like a prick so we can speculate about him as much as we want as he has a safety net. Ordinary editors have no such safety net and I don't think it is our job to out them. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:50, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

P.S. If you want to share lulz why not start a private Google group? I think you know who to trust from here, email them privately to see if they want to join. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:01, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Strange, I agree with almost all you say, but my conclusion is opposite from yours. Anyway, since there is no clear consensus, I'll let it be for the moment being. Google group? Seeing how little activity the IRC channel or the Forums get, I'll pass: I don't think that making it private would make it suddenly popular. Am I wrong? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 13:19, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Ed, I'd just like to say that I have personally had my efforts undone by loose tongues. If people sign up to a user group then they will probably participate. And don't forget updates are delivered to your inbox, but if you've got stuff to share, send me a p-mail and I can let you into some of the stuff I know of. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 17:12, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm still pretty much on Edcp's side here. Genghis, you said "The problem with exposing parody is that because of Poe's Law you cannot always know who is and who isn't a parodist." That's not the problem, that is the entire point of the operation. CP is not going to ban any user because RW thinks they may be a parodist (if they did, we could get lots of their users banned, which would be great). They may be more suspicious of that user, but they will also be more suspicious of the non-parodists we point to as well. It might well up the level of suspicious paranoia over there, and that is good for us. We've done this less formally plenty of times in the past. People have asked on WiGO talk "is x a parodist?" and no harm came of it. If we don't point out specific revealing edits and we don't use actual inside information, then I see no harm. I mean, Bugler's a parodist, and he hasn't even had is sysop-lite rights taken away. DickTurpis 09:12, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

We have also speculated on whether DeanS/Croc was a parodist but like turdBurglar he had a safety-net of block rights. It almost seems de rigeur to go let the power go to your head so anyone who trots out the crap that the bowelBugle blows and does not have block/edit rights probably is a parodist. Leran together also turned into a shit-head when he got sysop rights. Once they have rights then there is a track record and they are probably safe from our are they/aren't they discussions. I would recommend laying off the new or not yet empowered editors. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 11:36, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm with Genghis on this one. While I accept it could be argued either way, I'd say on balance, it's a negative action.--Bob^{bing up} 11:43, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Is it me or is Recent Changes broken?

_{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 20:39, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

'tis thee.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:43, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Why is it broken for me, then? I can't function properly without RC! _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 20:48, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

In what way is it broken? tmtoulouse ^nettle 20:49, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

It gives me an incomprehensible "fatal error". _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 20:50, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Could you paste in this fatal error? tmtoulouse ^nettle 20:51, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't know about that, sport. It seems to me that if I'm the only one experiencing this error, then the report it shows me is quite likely to contain information about my own computer. Besides, it seems to work fine on my other browser. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 20:55, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Probably you, then. Try logging out and logging back in, just to be sure. --λινυσ^(☮) 20:57, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

If in doubt "restart". Anyone with FFox3 having any problems - mine shuts down about every 2 hours!   ^Contribs_Talk 21:01, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Mine works beautifully… --λινυσ^(☮) 21:10, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

Hey, 85, whenever Trent is around the wiki "playing" those messages occur from time to time. He often disconnects the flux capacitor ro forgets to refill the blinker fluid when he's tinkering with the software. I got a few errors, all I did was reload them a minute or two later & all was fine. ħuman 21:16, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

But don't worry, once he gets the Scabius Spheres back up and running, everything works great. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 12:21, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Too obscure. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 12:25, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

site statistics

Do we have any site statistics for either us or CP following the Lenski activity?--Bob^{bing up} 10:26, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

We have seen about 2.5x increase in visits and a fairly substantial increase in page requests. It isn't our biggest traffic jump to date, but the previous jumps were due to one page and were "here and away" visits. The traffic we are pulling from the Lenski affair is getting more return traffic, and traffic that explores more. End result being this is the largest jump in overall bandwidth and page requests, but no the largest jump in terms of absolute users. tmtoulouse ^nettle 11:35, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Unfortunately the Lenski dialog at CP is in Conservapedia namespace so page views do not get included in the popular page listing nor contribute to site statistics. That said, the daily page view count of their Mainspace is up about 50% over the last two days. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:19, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Really? Only 50 percent? They are down so much that I had thought their server was overwhelmed. Would that sort of increase crash them?--Bob^{bing up} 13:04, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Date	Views to date	Daily total
22/06/2008	49717379	76194
23/06/2008	49791789	74410
24/06/2008	49896005	104216
25/06/2008	50007945	111940
26/06/2008	50159284	151339

These values are taken at about 8:00 am (GKT) every day (or as soon as the site comes up). Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 08:44, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks.--Bob^{bing up} 11:38, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Site Performance

Anyone else noticing RW is very slow over the last 12 hours? DogP 11:30, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I've seen ups and downs. Looks like CP is down again.--Bob^{bing up} 11:36, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I am pretty sure any of the issues are related to the traffic spike, once that settles it should return to normal. tmtoulouse ^nettle 11:38, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

It varies. Incredibly slow occasionally, but zippy the next moment. I believe Trent's theory is of great verisimilitude. --λινυσ^(☮) 11:40, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

It's a pain.   ^Contribs_Talk 11:44, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I was going to ask if Trent would be willing to move to a faster server if we donated enough for it, but then I reconsidered. It would probably be best not to do so until the speed remains consistently slow. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 21:17, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

According to some people

Ever get the feeling that the news section is starting to look like CP's? I think it is best to refrain from things like "too bad we can't start pressing criminal charges" (especially when it isn't a complete sentence). BeastmasterGeneral 08:25, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

This has been mentioned a few times before. "According to.." should not be a WIGO for non-CP stuff. Let's have less snark and keep the descriptions short oherwise stuff has to be dropped off the list prematurely. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 08:38, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

My opinions: Snark should be minimal there. "Headline" should (must!) indicate clearly what the story is about. Avoid first person (of course). Try to minimize left/right type political things unless they relate to our mission - meaning "McCain is teh stoopid" is right out, but "Obama says he consults astrologist" is fair game. Ideally it should be a news ticker of things we could or should actually write mission-centric articles about. There's no need to update it for the sake of updating. I appreciate that at least the two of you (and I'm sure others) are paying attention to this section, and would like to add - these entries are not sacrosanct (one man's lulz...) like WIGOCP entries. If they aren't front page worthy they should be deleted. Copying them to talk when deleting is optional. ħuman 20:31, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

Adsense Link

Geology & the bible - quite amusing in that it has the really modern (1631–1686) "founder of geoology" as its hero.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:19, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

It's a beautiful read, the whole site, I recommend it to our readers.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:37, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

I should just point out that Nicolas Steno (or Niels Steensen) is in fact practically the founder of geology, or at the very least one of its absolute foremost pioneers. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but they're lauding him as a creationist - was there an alternative in 17th century Italy?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:23, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

No doubt in 1650 the bible was the basis for many things. But it's a bit rich to use it as a source for present day science. Anyway, I prefer this one. Where did the flood water go? did the earth move for you?--Bob^{bing up} 12:27, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

"I feel the earth move... I feel the sky come tumbling down, tumbling down... " --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:37, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Not really. Ironically, though, one of Steno's great accomplishment is that he didn't just take Scripture and the academic authorities as written, but preferred to do the research himself. Of course, then he interpreted what he found in terms of the Bible, but as you say, that was simply the available world view at the time. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:31, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I wouldn't doubt for a moment that he was a great man for his time. But as Susan suggests, and as I assume you would agree, to use his works to support a creationist viewpoint in the 21st century is simply absurd.--Bob^{bing up} 12:36, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, that is more or less my point, thickly veiled as it may be. :-) --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:38, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Is this the first time that the three of us have ever agreed on a subject tangentially related to religion?--Bob^{bing up} 16:02, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes ;) ħuman 16:23, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Back then no one had a good evidential reason to think the earth was older than 6-10,000 years or so. As the devout early scientists started finding things that had to be older, they just pushed back the date of "creation" as needed. Ending up where we are now. ħuman 16:25, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Anti-blasphemy campaigner

(UK) Stephen Green, who is the National Director of the prayer and lobby group Christian Voice. Looks like being bankrupted after failing to sue for blasphemy over a broadcast of "Jerry springer The Opera" so he's appealing for names & donations. wotawazzock   ^Contribs_Talk 12:08, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Ho ho. The only link I could find on it was this one from pink news. But it makes quite amusing reading.--Bob^{bing up} 12:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Picture

Does anybody have the link to the picture of Lenski's reply preserved for posterity or whatever the hell it was? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 21:32, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

What exactly are you looking for? We have the text here, did you mean some specific screenshot from CP? ħuman 21:35, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I seen to remember someone saying something about taking down a screenshot recently just in case CP purged whatever the content was, and it seems like it was Lenski. Or it might have been something else...--*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 21:39, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

You might find the thread at talk: WIGO CP? Also a better place to ask, more likely someone will remember. ħuman 21:42, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I'm not gonna worry about it. It's not very important. Ty though. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 21:44, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

Rules

I have just created RationalWiki:Frontpage Rules Please come let your voice be heard SirChuckB^{That is all} 02:43, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

It aint myspace

Suppose this is well known to all you youngsters out there, but it's new tome.   ^Contribs_Talk 08:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Happy Canada Template?!?!?

For the Recent Changes page? I'd do it myself? But I don't know how?PFoster 11:50, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Done. See what I did to template:holydaze (close the noinclude before the banner, reopen it after the banner). Sorry I didn't get that put up last night! ħuman 14:47, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

TK email

Who wants to write the "block is over, please come back" email? Bohdan2 20:34, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

-Gulik 20:44, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Gulik beat me to it! ħuman 20:48, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

You can put my name on the end (among others, preferably), but I really can't summon up enough of an opinion about it to write anything myself. _{↳ ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 20:51, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Lay Scientist is here!

Martin of The Lay Scientist blog has set up shop on Rationalblogs at The Lay Scientist: Meta-Blogging. He's here to teach us how to self-promote our site(s) (more specifically, how to promote the Rationalblogs project). Go have a look-see. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:22, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Cheers dude. I don't claim to be an expert, but over the last several months I've managed to push LayScience.net quite high in terms of audience (over a thousand unique visitors a day now) and rankings, and I've learned a lot in that time that I thought I'd start passing on. Anyone else who wants to contribute too is more than welcome to join in. I'll be updating about once a week The Lay Scientist 07:52, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Jefferson, Adams...

...And now another great American has died on the 4th of July. Can't wait to see CP's eulogy. DickTurpis 11:09, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Aaarrrgh!

I can't stand it any more! Can Linus or Trent please fix the box at the bottom of article pages that has the GFDL licence and Powered by MediaWiki so that it is aligned properly at the left hand side. It is really getting on my tits. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:17, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:20, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Wassup wi Image:Page bottom.gif that?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:27, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

I'm assuming that you mean that you don't like the full-width banner format? --98.105.150.182 12:30, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

Compare these:

RW - Internet Explorer Image:RW_ie.gif
RW - Internet Explorer Image:RW_ie2.gif
RW - Firefox Image:RW_fox.gif
CP - Internet Explorer Image:CP_ie.gif
CP - Firefox Image:CP_fox.gif
WP - Internet ExplorerImage:WP_ie.gif
Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:51, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

I would say that part of the issue is that IE suxxorz, but I'll look into it. --98.105.150.182 12:53, 4 July 2008 (EDT)

That may be so but CP and WP seem to have no problems. I should point out that in Firefox WP has a full width box but not in IE whereas CP manages to keep it neat. Genghis^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 13:11, 4 July 2008 (EDT)