User talk:99.74.34.52

Your welcome to RationalWiki is lukewarm at best, 99.74.34.52. This observation is due to the nature of your initial edits. Pull up a goat and try not to make trouble. We realize it is possible that you do not understand the nature of the site or our objectives. Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards to clarify things for you. If you're still interested in contributing, please see what our articles are intended to be.

Comments go on an article's talk page. Тy^{communications wire} 01:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

please don't do that. Ace^Moderator 03:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

If you continue to make vast deletions and/or insert your own commentary into articles, you're going to be put into the vandal bin. Blue (pester) 03:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

...and there you are. Blue (is useful) 03:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I apologize; I didn't realize that the website name was a FARCE.

I apologize for the grossly innapropriate amendments(This MAY be satire).

Where could one comment on the ENORMOUS discrepancy between the objectivity on pages regarding President Obama and say... ANY of his opponents?

This website is a joke, the site ranks lower than StarTrek Wikis(!), and the label "rational" is a farce.

Hand the whole thing over to the Administration. Even they would probably use less logical fallacies.....

What a pathetic excuse for a digital billboard for collectivism, atheism, and alternative medicine. You constantly tout pseudo(medicine) as (pseudo)medicine. Yet you call any traditional science pseudo-science. And then you have a jack-off mural of Michael Moore that is his page!

This "wiki" is pseudo-rational! ^{— Unsigned, by: 99.74.34.52 / talk / contribs}

But then it turned out both my eyes were lazy so I said "medication be damned" and the ventriloquists doll never spoke to me again. Ace^Moderator 05:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

"But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki!" Drink! ListenerX^TalkerX 05:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

HHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!! HHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!! STOP IT, MY GUT IS ABOUT TO BURST HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

You asses equate the advantages of libertarianism to the efficacy of homeopathy AND to a proclamation of racial superiority in your second sentence!

RIIIIGHT! That convinces me that this is a community worth joining! SIGN ME UP!!! LOL No thanks. A bunch of numbers will always be more rational than these jokes...

Every article in here comes from the perspective that: Every white man in America is a neo-conservative, fundamentalist southern baptist who wants his wife chained up in the kitchen so that he can be free to catch non-whites. VERY rational! What a bunch of race-baiting,arrogant half-wits! ^{— Unsigned, by: 184.154.206.13 / talk / contribs}

Excuse me if I'm a little late here, but what the hell are you talking about? Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 05:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Essay:I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki. ListenerX^TalkerX 05:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

We could probably give specific examples for those, that might help. But where is Mr BoN getting his last line from? Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 06:07, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Beats me. KKK people and neo-conservatives are usually at loggerheads. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

EL OH EL !!!

Are you people ACTUALLY trying to refute the sentiment of my last comment? REALLY? You want SPECIFIC EXAMPLES????? Here is a specific example of where that perspective shows itself: click 'RANDOM PAGE'! Have fun, kids. ^{— Unsigned, by: 184.154.206.13 / talk / contribs}

Actually, I was suggesting we give examples of these homeopaths etc that have shown up over the years—these people did indeed turn up, and you're just sounding like you're the latest in the line. Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 07:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I clicked "Random Page" and got greed. I clicked it again and got 1337. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

"Second sentence" of what exactly? Blue (is useful) 06:45, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Come on guys, it's always nice to get a real ranter once in a while.--Bob^{"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."} 06:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Essay:I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki. ListenerX^TalkerX 06:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

"EL OH EL"? Monoprise, is that you? --Revolverman (talk) 06:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

How to debate on a wiki

Hi. I've just had a look at your article contributions all of which were reversed. If you wish to take issue with the content of articles it is best to make the point calmly and logically on the talk page rather then make massive and controversial edits to article pages. Such edits will almost certainly not stand.--Bob^{"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."} 07:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)