User talk:AKjeldsen/Archive4

Your castle is on fire

Have you looked at your user page? I think you must have left a tag unclosed. I would've fixed it, but I don't know how.</concern> <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 18:27, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Looks fine to me. What does it look like to you? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:31, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

It has those creepy "shrunken buttons" at the top. And the navigation bar is at the bottom of the page. I hear Stephen King is using it as the monster in his next short story. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 18:35, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Hmm, yes - I think I see the problem now. The problem probably is that you're using IE. I suggest you solve this by switching to a browser that doesn't suck. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:38, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm using firefox. Your buttons are pwned.

Deal with it :P <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 18:44, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

*grumbles* Right, right. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:46, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Verily it doth suck, what hast thou done, Dane?   ^Contribs_Talk 18:49, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Bohdan left a little <div> gift that I think messed things up a bit. Should be fixed now. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:52, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

FCK

You don't support FCK? Are you a moron or something? SHahB 20:02, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

...And your motive for the random userbox wandalism finally becomes clear. I should have known, really :) <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 20:04, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Known what? That Copenhagen dominates, and only a fool would cheer for anyone else? SHahB 20:07, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Have a look here. SHahB 20:12, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

I really don't know why you do this, Shabby. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 20:20, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Plus, you haven't changed your name for a while. I can't wait to see what you've got in store for us! <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 20:21, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

JahJD would work well. ħuman 21:22, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't know about that. I was expecting something more epic. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 21:30, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

For the record, I neither support nor oppose FCK, as I do not, indeed, give much of a damn about football at all. But if I did give one, I would probably support FCK. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 04:26, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

And you call yourself European... lol. SHahB 22:28, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but not necessarily a good one. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 07:43, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Bohdan, did you have to put up a header that reads dangerously close to a swear word? Shame, you naughty boy! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:30, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Fickle is a dirty word? ħuman 23:51, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Man! How can you use such fowl language? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:08, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Priceless art?? Come closer so I may sting you

He prolly only grabbed it from somewhere. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 19:28, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

That is undoubtedly true, but that does not diminish the pricelessness of this work. Indeed, it only increases its artistic merits by highlighting the transient and fluid post-constructionist nature of internet art and culture. [/smokepipe] --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:32, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

If I understand you correctly, you're arguing that its value lies in how easily it was ripped off by Grawp? Are you quite sure?? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 19:36, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Er. More or less. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:45, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

So are we going to put this priceless treasure on display somewhere in our Museum of Unnatural History? ħuman 21:01, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Nay! If we don't know where it comes from it could easily be copyrighted! Or worse -- quote mining! <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 21:08, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Or ideally, both! ħuman 21:42, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

If you would be so kind...

You seem to be the in-house philosopher here. What is this philosophical critique of Ayn Rand's objectivism even saying? I tried reading it, and past the first eighth I couldn't understand it. If you would be so kind as to paraphrase it in layperson's terms for me? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:28, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

First, Ayn Rand's definition of "rational" was "what I [she] think[s]". Contrast that with the hurly-burly on this site... ħuman 00:36, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Uh, is that your critique of Rand, or the critique I asked for help with? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:42, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

It was my response after reading the first two paragraphs. I do intend to struggle forth more fully, do not feel slighted by my quick response. ħuman 01:08, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Ah, okay. Sorry if I went off a bit there. And thanks. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:14, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

No offense, I didn't really address your question. But I do have that window open to struggle through! ħuman 01:18, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't know much about either Rand or Jacob Fries, so I don't know how much more sense I can make of it. But I'll take a look at it... (*glances at rapidly onrushing deadlines*) ...in a few days. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 07:59, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Long ago, on a website far far away... [1] Think of everything2 as "a website where anyone can write anything, everyone votes (WIGO style) on articles and is rewarded for doing so and the admins occasionally delete the junk." A couple of people clashed with an "ayndroid" who had the annoying habit of posting Rand quotes without any original material. --Shagie 20:10, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Football

You really don't care? Is that some liberal thing? Or are you some kind of pervert? --SHahB 13:24, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Not to speak for AKjeldsen, but I don't care about any sport. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 14:25, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Hear hear. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 14:32, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Sport are for doing not for watching/supporting get out there and sport, Sport!   ^Contribs_Talk 05:39, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Sometimes it's fun to watch ;) ħuman 14:11, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Euro

Remember when you started spreading your propaganda about the Denmark and the Euro? [2]. Leading bankers (not politicians) have said this is a bad idea. But what do they know about the economy? Its not like they're SCIENTISTS or anything. SHahB 22:10, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

The danish currency has hearts on it. That can't be good for the economy. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 22:15, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Indeed. Because the modern Danish Empire is built upon love. Just not of those inferior Faroese. Or the Greenlanders. SHahB 22:18, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

You associate love with money? Whatever happened the ideals of Free Love? Isn't Denmark supposed to be chock full of hippies, you filthy corporationist? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:31, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I can't help but wonder 1) who these "prominent bankers" are, and 2) why they are not mentioned by name in the article. Is the journalist too lazy to research such a simple fact? The "Lars Lokke Rasmussen" on the other hand is hilarious. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 05:03, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

What are you implying? SHahB 18:18, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm not implying anything, I'm saying that this article is, at best, useless. It tells us nothing. It is not journalism, it is gossip. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:34, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Your hatred of Icelanders is far too obvious. I should be discussing this with a Dane who isn't a chauvinist. SHahB 18:36, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

I have nothing against Icelanders. As long as they share my unquestioning love for the Euro, of course. I don't know whether this particular Icelander hates the Euro or whether he's just lazy, but I'm watching him. Carefully. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:40, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Ahhh-haaaa! I have gotten you to admit your bias. SHahB 18:41, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

There is no bias here, I am simply neutral to the facts. If one of those facts happens to be that anyone not unquestionably loving the Euro is a dark-hearted, hate-filled reprobate with no hope of redemption - well, I can't help that, can I? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:45, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Miss Headscarf 2008

So, were you disappointed with the results? I was cheering for the runner-up. SHahB 18:07, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

No, I think the best scarf won, really. I like blue. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:13, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Figures. Blue is the color of sadness. Much like... your face. SHahB 18:17, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

My face is a colour of sadness? That doesn't even make sense. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:28, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

No, no, no. Your face represents sadness, like the color blue. SHahB 18:33, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Actually, I think about the only thing my face represents right now is moderate unshavenness. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:35, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes. And thus, sadness. SHahB 18:36, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

You don't even know what my face looks like. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:41, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Sure I do. SHahB 18:43, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm the Prime Minister? Hey, I didn't even know that! Excuse me, I need to go make a few phone calls. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:46, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

No, fool. You look like him. SHahB 18:48, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Do not. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:49, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Do to. SHahB 18:49, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

That guy looks like a caveman. I don't. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:51, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Then you must look like Seebach. SHahB 18:52, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm sorry, I don't look like a miserable, failed pop musician, either. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:03, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

:D Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:05, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Looking at that header sets off the "sexism" alarm bells in my head for some reason. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:05, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

[3]. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 09:11, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Hm. It seems I was right. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 10:09, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Not at all. It's to highlight the participants and cast them in a positive light, as well as to slightly satirize a current political debate. No sexism involved at all. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:35, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

His concerns are valid. You are a theist, so therefore you must be a sexist. Anything you talk about needs to be scrutinized for sexism, religious bigotry, hatred of the environment, or pro-Danish nonsense. SHahB 12:32, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

I have replied to your very important message with a childish joke

I have replied to your very important message with a childish joke. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 18:20, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on finishing your project! ...Whatever it was. Come to think of it, you haven't been very forthcoming about what your project is. Is it a secret? C'mon, you can tell us! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 09:03, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Nothing particuarly interesting, just writing abstracts for a bunch of historical articles. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 09:11, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Yah, but forty-four of them? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 10:10, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Thirty, actually, but about half of them are double the length of the others, so they count as two in my mind. But yeah, that's your average-size batch. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:33, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Remind me never to be a Danish historian. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 10:40, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Someone's got to do it, I guess. Though as a matter of fact, the company I work for is located in California, so I don't think you're safe anywhere in the world. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 10:58, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

So the Danish Empire is expanding into the USA? SHahB 12:33, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

I saw someone wearing imperialist clogs in Manhattan on teh tellytube news the other day. They're everywhere! ħuman 14:49, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

It's globalization, Henry! The wave of the future! All the cool countries are doing it! --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:43, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for logging on at such a convenient time. Are you, Andrew, a supporter of globalization. SHahB 17:48, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

All the way, Hippolytus. It is the only path forward. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:50, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

But Aadu, anarchists oppose globalization. SHahB 17:54, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Good thing I'm not an anarchist, then. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:19, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for getting back to me. Au contraire, you are clearly an anarchist wanna-be. It's every liberal dream to be an anarchist. That and to commit genocide of conservatives. SHahB 18:24, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

How about globalizing anarchy? That'd get on their clogs! Tammy Seabuck for President! ħuman 21:27, 11 June 2008 (EDT)

Your taste in books is lousy

This probably confirms what SHahB has been saying all along. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:52, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Your louse in taste is booksy. Well dog my cats, just goes to show ya, whodthunkit, hard tellin', not knowin', eh? ħuman 02:27, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

I must object. Cheap books are not necessarily bad books. Although this site seems to be just a price comparison portal. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 03:57, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

It was a play on words, you silly babbit. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 04:47, 12 June 2008 (EDT)

Query

[4] What do you think Kjeldo? Is the crown infringing on their rights? SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 13:32, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

No. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 14:22, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

But doesn't this violate the principle of tolerance, upon which civilized society is based? Have you turned your back on this liberal doctrine? SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 14:30, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

No. No. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 14:48, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

You are a bigot. A conservative fascist bigot. How dare you tell these people they don't have the right to mutilate their children! BIGOT. CONSERVATIVE. SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 14:53, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Come on Henry, you can do better than that. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 14:57, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Fascist bigoted theistic conservative. I hate you. SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 15:01, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

This is really substandard, Henry. You're just rehashing old material here. Fail. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:14, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Ethnocentric anti-SCIENCE genocide-commiting fundamentalist religious nut. SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 15:15, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

That's not very original. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

farvel

You always were a rational one. I truly enjoyed conversing with you, even if you were hopelessly confused about a great many things. I now realize that these wikis are not worth my time. I leave you with this chilling tale of treachery. I, as always, blame the ultranationalists (basically you and your friends). And I do hope you and yours stay safe in our Denmark given the serious warnings of potential terrorist attacks. Stay vigilant, and I seriously hope all is well. So farvel, dearest Andreas. Farvel. SHahB^{You can't spell success without SHahB!} 14:24, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Aww. Don't leave, Henry. Who else is going to call me nasty names and complain over my completely imagined ultranationalism? :-( --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:12, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

AndrasK

Isn't he you? --Lyra § talk 21:29, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

I can't really speak for AK, but I doubt it. AK isn't really into CP-socking. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 21:34, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Bah! Fie. Lyra § talk 21:40, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

Fie to you too, Miss Belacqua :P Are you having a nice time at CP? They don't seem to mind you being there and here at the same time for some reason. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 21:44, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

The name inconsistency. --Lyra § talk 22:17, 15 June 2008 (EDT)

He's not me, nor am I he. In fact, where Jelly says "isn't really into", one may safely substitute "never has perpetrated, nor will do so." --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 04:34, 16 June 2008 (EDT)

Belgium button

You can't stop what I've set in motion! <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 07:46, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps I can't, but entropy can. Just wait. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 07:51, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

I'm not sure entropy applies to something as simple as adding the word button. This has all the makings of a MIGHTY MEME! <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 08:04, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Entropy aplies to all things great and small. Also, I maintain that forced memes are phailmemes. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 08:16, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

I think this one has legs, akshully. Button! <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 08:38, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Legs? The meme? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 08:48, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Yep! It'll never die! Not while I'm in charge around!

I shall ignore your silly ultra-nationalist take on entropy. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 11:21, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

I can't imagine how a meme could possibly have legs, unless you mean that in some obscure, jellyfish-esque abstract sense. And that ultra-nationalism thing isn't really working when it isn't Henry doing it. Sorry. :-( --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 11:27, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

It's a common phrase, down our way.

<groan induction>Ultra-nationalism not working? Of course it is! It's SCIENCE!</groan induction> I'll stop that now. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 11:32, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Around here, when something "has legs" it means it will disappear or run out shortly, but I guess that's not what you mean. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:20, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

In Jellyville, "has legs" means "is untrustworthy". But that wasn't how I was using it :) <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 12:46, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Then how - pray tell? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:51, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Round here it means "has longevity". And your feeble challenge has been knocked aside like an empty carton of grape juice. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 12:55, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

So I can see. Clearly, I am being too subtle here. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:57, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Clearly you are. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 13:06, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

...We have too many Danes on RationalWiki. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:17, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I know. They really can be a bother sometimes. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:19, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

New topic: Belgian Beer - Sublime in its Perfection, or Merely Sublimity Perfected?

Discuss. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:12, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

New topic: Care to share something with us, AKjeldsen?

I thought good Catholics didn't marry outside their religion, AK : ) Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:21, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Would this be a bad time to point out that Google displays those based not only on the context of the page, but also to a large extent on the viewer? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 16:26, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Ooooh, that's gotta hurt. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 16:32, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

If that were true it would read, "Chat with single atheists". Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 16:37, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Chat with real sharks. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^{Slime on the beach. Don't step on it!} 16:46, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

I hardly ever get any of those, anyway. I mostly get offers about audio editing software or learning Hebrew. Or sometimes one about the "Seven Great Myths of Organized Religion". It's actually a bit disappointing. I mean, who's to say that I wouldn't like to chat with single Arabs? I might! --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 17:07, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Block hagger now

Block hagger now ^{— Unsigned, by: Proxima Centauri / talk / contribs}

Henrietta and her Bridesmaids

Bohdan has been writing some evil pro-Danish Imperialism claptrap over on CP! Don't say you weren't warned! ħuman 20:05, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Amaranth

I guess it's stuck, now :) _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:16, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Nightwish? Argh. Before or after Tarja? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 19:21, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I think after, but I'm going to have to suspend analysis on the subject for a while due to a sudden wave of nausea. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:24, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

After. Why the sudden nausea, if I might ask? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:36, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Not my thing. No offence meant to Nightwish or their fans apologists, but... their appreciation of music is incompatible with mine.

Don't shoot me! _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:40, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

[squints] That phrase is incomprehensible to me. Are you writing in a foreign language? Or some sort of code? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:46, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Jellyfishian. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:48, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Ah, that explains it. I can understand why you'd need to use your native language to properly express your boundless love for Nightwish. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 19:49, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I am sensing a certain amount of fanishness from you, Amelia. Let the teasing commence. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:53, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Your comment, while still practically incomprehensible, would seem to suggest that there exist people who are not fans of Nightwish. I don't think such creatures have ever been reliably reported. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 20:05, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

That could be the next edition of News from Jellyville!

Urge to tease... rising... _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 21:03, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

I see you're engaging in your usual Scyphozoan deceit. And denying logic. That will get you nowhere, however. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 05:58, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

A message

A little orange message I'm sending to people. --Bob^{bing up} 11:51, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Thanks! Healthy and aesthetically pleasing! --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 12:32, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

forum

Come on Kjeldo, give me access. You know you want to. Folkets kærlighed and all that. Bohdan2 13:21, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry. Can't. Highly confidential. National sikkerhed and all that. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 13:55, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

You must be a fascist. Bohdan2 14:49, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Obviously, Bohdan. All theists are fascists, because they presume to apply the laws of their "God" to everyone. Tsk tsk tsk. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:54, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Prove to me your not TK. 75.161.36.101 14:54, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

His not TK what? Thunderkatz^Ho! 14:56, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

You're wordism leaves much to be desire, TMT :( _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:02, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Not so much a fascist as a prisoner of the mob. They'd gather together, with torches and pitchforks, and lynch me most horribly if I displeased them; this we all know. So I'm sorry, but I can't really do that. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:13, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Not even for a Danish brother? Bohdan2 15:14, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:17, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Figures. I wouldn't expect an ultranationalist (such as yourself) to ever let a tolerant person in on his plotting. Bohdan2 15:19, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, but we have highly confidential discussions about goat-related issues in there, which are not to be disclosed to the public. If they existed. Which of course they do not. Why are you even talking about something that doesn't exist, you silly person? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:24, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

You and I both know that you use that forum to discuss site policy, which goes completely against the idea of the mob. Maybe I should email TK to come and discuss this here. Is his block over? Bohdan2 15:28, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

This site does not give in to blackmail. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Besides, we don't discuss site policy in there. It is a well-established tradition to discuss policy out here in the open where it can spark magnificent, delicious bouts of Headless Chicken Mode. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:33, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Why do you need secrets?Tolerance 15:27, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

We all need secrets to keep our lives interesting. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:30, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I shall need to take your wrd on that.Tolerance 15:36, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Give me access or TK will be emailed. Bohdan2 15:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Please tell him that we all some of us miss him. And convince him to go back to CP too. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 15:38, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Oh and AKjeldsen, Bohdan2 is an impostor, but I know the names of at least one Danish football player and a couple cyclists. Don't I deserve the title of Honorary Danish for that and free entrance to that secret place? (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 15:40, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Could you just briefly explain why exactly I should be frightened of that? Do you mean to imply that if dear TK were to return - which I doubt he will anyway - it would not be as a productive editor, but only as a disruptive influence?! Oh, my. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:41, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

You want him to return? Bohdan2 15:42, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

As a sysop - even a reluctant and disgruntled one - I am completely neutral on the subject. In fact, I am completely devoid of any opinion on it. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Then will you sign the "please come back email"? Bohdan2 15:48, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

If I did that, I'd hardly be devoid of an opinion any more, would I? --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:52, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

So... you plan to do nothing? That's not very Danish. Bohdan2 15:55, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Mildly annoying

Sorry. I will stops. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:43, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Appreciated. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:45, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Did you see this? Bohdan2 15:49, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

That is remarkably factual for a CP article. And concise. Good work. Just needs a picture of his ugly appearance-challenged mug. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:52, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Please do not mock the man. He is dead, and I know you are happy. Tommy was the quintessential Dane, in both personality and appearance. Bohdan2 15:54, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

That is unfortunately quite true. Although I wouldn't say I'm happy that he's dead. --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 15:55, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Your bignature

Is far too sig. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:08, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

It's not only sig, it's GRRRREAT!! --AKjeldsen^{Potential fundamentalist!} 18:12, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Nah, it is too big to suit you ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 18:15, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Better, gentlemen at this website? --AK 18:18, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

No! I meant you should transclude it, you silly Daneitant. Double template. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:20, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

I have no idea what you're talking about. --AK 18:26, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Look at what my signature leaves behind in the source code. Do you know why it does that? _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:34, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Considering you seem to have far much more crap in your sig file than I do in mine... no. Divulge your secrets. --AK 18:37, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, I went to sleep. Let's tackle this in an orderly fashion (otherwise I'll tie my tongue in knots).

Chaos!/sig12 -- contains the code for the signature itself.

Chaos!/trans_chaos_sig -- contains "{{Chaos!/sig12}}"

The signature field in My Pref -- contains "{{Chaos!/trans_chaos_sig}}"

Doing it like this means it drops the Chaos!/sig12 template into the text, rather than automatically copying out what that template contains. Savvy? :) _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 13:33, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

...parlay?

Alright, yes. I think. --AK 14:12, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Then again, Chaos!/trans_chaos_sig seems to be fundamentally empty. Is that working as designed? --AK 14:18, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

As long as it has "{{Chaos!/sig12}}" in it, it's working perfectly. It's not supposed to really change anything, only force the wiki not to copy out the signature in "longhand". Is that what you meant? _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:23, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Nevermind, I was just being clueless. So, barring the expectable Scyphozoan deceit, this should work: --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:33, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes! Hooray! _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:35, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Indeed, so it does. Now, the only thing that leaves me wondering is why I had to do that positively enormous amount of work just because you people want less cluttered talk pages. This is likely a mystery that will persist through the ages. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:36, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Nothing to do with clutter. It's more so that we can tell when you've written a long comment. It's disappointing to see +373 on RC and then find "OK. --KJAldsen^{Can soup!}" in the page itself. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:41, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

[squints] So what you're saying is that I should write longer comments. Yeah, I can do that, no problem. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:55, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks...

...for picking up on that Revelation vandalism. Tsk. I'm here 5 minutes and someone's dicking with my talk page Crookedmouth 13:07, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Not at all. This type of vandal usually targets recently-edited pages, so I guess that's why they picked yours. There's usually someone around to clean up after them. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:38, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Good work, Kjeldsen

Consider yourself retained. --Helena Bonham Carter 16:43, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you, ma'am. I'm sure you'll find my rates quite reasonable. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:14, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

No doubt your advice will include suggestions about the better part of valour. --Bob^{bing up} 17:38, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

I'm afraid the exact nature of my advice is covered by client privilege. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:02, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Tanks

Vary muck. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 07:10, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Jur velcom. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 07:16, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Non theistic interventionism

Further to your mention of your experiment at Talk:Faith, could you give me some idea of how long you intend to let this little social experiment run? And will be we allowed to see a pre-release copy of the paper?--Bob^{bing up} 09:17, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Experiment? What experiment? There's no experiment going on here. Keep up the good work, though. I'll... just be hiding in the bushes over there with a spyglass and notebook. Don't mind me. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 09:33, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure, no experiment, but let me peer review your no-paper when you no-finish your no-experiment. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 09:35, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

What!!! ????? But you said: Sorry, Ed, I'm running an experiment. I'm trying to see how radically atheist the gentlemen at this website are willing to be when I'm not whining about their fascinating insights. Interfering in this way would obviously interrupt the experiment. No re-writing oh history allowed here! In passing, I trust that you will supply us with all the data when you publish.--Bob^{bing up} 09:38, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Unfortunately, speaking entirely hypothetically, allowing the objects of the study to know that there is a study going on would also have griveous consequences for its validity. Virtually all the defenders of anthropology admit this much. So anturally, even 'if' there were a study going on, which there may or may not be, I couldn't really comment on it. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 09:42, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Right. I seeee.... So ..... when you say : "I'm running an experiment.", what you mean is, that you're not? I really would like to know how long the non-experiment will last. --Bob^{bing up} 09:50, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Maybe. Or maybe I'm running an experiment to see how y'all would react if you thought there was an experiment going on. Or maybe I'm just mking you think there is an experiment for my own much more nefarious and mysteriouly unknown purposes! MWAHAHAH! ... Maybe. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 09:59, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, all these are possible. Consequently I shall start my own non-experiment to monitor the level of "whining about their fascinating insights" in which you indulge. Should such whining cease I take this as evidence that your experiment is underway. In the event that the level of whining remains the same or (save us) increases then I shall have counter-evidence. My fully-public counter non-experiment begins today.--Bob^{bing up} 10:08, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

You methodology seems very sound. However, I see a potential problem regarding where you set the zero-value for the purpose of determining these increases or decreases. For instance, my level of whining is considerably lower right now than it was three months ago. So if you set the zero-value at the present level, you might get a false negative if the level increases to its previous, natural level. On the other hand, if you set it at the higher level of three months ago, that decline in itself might cause you to (possibly erroneously) think that an experiment has in fact been going on for those past three months. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 10:21, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, life is so much easier in Conservapedia! no experiments, non-experiments or counter-experiments! Just a tiny suspicion of Experimentism and you are banhammered for good. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 10:28, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

I do not see these issues as insurmountable. Your level of whining, while admittedly considerably lower that at other times, has never been zero. My assumption, from reading your note above, was that it would reach zero for some indeterminate time. I base this assumption of zero-level whining on your use of the words "not whining" and I get the indeterminate time from "I'm running". Indeed, my initial question was crafted with the intention of establishing the duration of said "Indeterminate time". Consequently my assumption is that a zero level from this day would indicate such an experiment. I accept that any or all these assumptions may be faulty, but hopefully my observations will demonstrate this.

However your response above may put in doubt my fully-public, counter, non-experiment; as you now seem to be (albeit tacitly) admitting the existence of the experiment again. As you know, I am not one to wildly bandy about phrases such as, "Shifting ground", "Denying the blindingly obvious" or "Re-writing history as it is being made" but I can't help but feel that deceit may be raising its over-used head.--Bob^{bing up} 10:48, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

I see that I have not expressed myself clearly. When I refer to "zero-value", I do not mean that my whining will ever reach zero - this is indeed highly improbable - but am rather referring to that arbitrary point from which you start measuring the increases or decreases. I am unsure what the correct term for this is - index point, perhaps? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:46, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

Your cowardly attempt at negotiating a ceasefire has failed

Therefore, prepare your weapons, rogue. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 04:08, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Sir: You are sorely mistaken - sorely mistaken - if you think that your crass attempt to ignore the ancient and unwritten rules of teh Intarwebs will go unnoticed. There can be no ceasefire here, only unconditional surrender. My retaliation will be swift and merciless. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 06:51, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

You can read my blog while you're waiting. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 06:58, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Read and commented.

Guess I'll have to go work now. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 07:28, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Last chance

Secret forum access. Now. Or else I will reveal the content of the private and subversive emails you have been sending me. Bohdan2 22:17, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

By all means, go ahead! I can't wait to see what sort of mails I've been writing. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:02, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Dear Olaf, (that's me -Bohdan)

I hate rationalwiki and I am going to report User:Human to the Politiets Efterretningstjeneste.

Sincerely

Andreas Kjeldsen,

Don't make me reveal the rest of them. Bohdan2 23:21, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Whoa...."Politiets Efterretningstjeneste" is a real think I thought "Efterretningstjeneste" was just you smashing the keyboard with your fists. tmtoulouse ^oppress 23:24, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

If you pound your fists on the keyboard you will write Danish words, guaranteed. Bohdan2 23:27, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Can I quote you on that? After all, that's what I do to spell Densklandd. ħuman 23:32, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I wrote that? I didn't realize I could write that... succintly. Still, I see it has my name on it and everything... --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 05:00, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Ooh, ooh, don't leave me out, Bohdan! Reveal my emails, too! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 04:05, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

A present

A present for you, Andreas, in commemoration of our glorious struggle. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 04:52, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Interesting...

I was digging into some primary sources out of curiosity regarding the Cracker Wars, and as far as I can tell, John skips completely over the whole bread and "contents of cup" scene? John goes from the prediction of the betrayal (by Judas) to the prediction of the denial (by Peter), but never does the whole body and blood thing -- then talks about some values stuff, then it goes straight to the arrest scene. In fact, he never even mentions the menu! (The first three (M,M,L) all talk about the "first day of unleavened bread", which answered what I was curious about) Did I miss it? Or am I right? (This isn't an argument, just a curiosity). Signed, atheists for Jesus ;) PS, I'll have you know I once scored a free muffin for the answer: "Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John". Hehe. ħuman 21:56, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

No, that's right. As you've probably noticed, John differs from the other three Gospels in a lot of ways, and this is just one of them. You could say that John is much more abstract than the others - he's more interested in the sermon that the menu. He does mention the wp:Foot washing, though, which also became an important rite later on. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 05:59, 13 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, as I recal he spent a lot of time on the foot washing. I kept waiting for the cleanup to end and the meal to begin, but he skips right over it. I also noticed what looked like evidence of widespread plagiarism between M, M, and L - sections that read almost identically. While if three witnesses were telling a story it would be very "similar", the wording wouldn't. Of course, these weren't written by eyewitnesses, were they? They are three early written accounts of a common oral history, as I recall.

Although, I did clear up one thing I was curious about, and that's that the bread in question is unleavened, so a cracker/wafer is a reasonable substitute (for a pita?). Interestingly, wine is not directly mentioned in my version (UCC, 70s, I think), just the "product of the grape" or some such. ħuman 16:39, 13 July 2008 (EDT)

Mmm, grape juice! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:10, 13 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, exactly. The similarity between those three is known as the wp:Synoptic problem, and has been discussed from one end to the other and back for centuries. The most widespread, but far from unanimous theory is that Matthew and Luke draw on Mark plus at least one other, now lost written source (the "Q document"). Another theory is that Mark was written later and is a sort of abridgement of the other two. There's really not way to tell for sure. However, it's almost certain that all three were written sometime during the second half of the 1st century, when it became apparent that Judgement Day wasn't coming in the immediate future, and it would probably be a good idea to write down what had happened.

Also, despite their similarities, they differ a lot in their intended audience. For instance, Luke is written for Gentiles, while Matthew was mostly written for Hellenized Jews, whom he's very much concerned with convincing that Jesus is in fact the Messiah and that he fulfills all the relevant prophesies. Mark is probably written for a more general audience. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:27, 13 July 2008 (EDT)

I have verbed your nouns.

And they were adjective. Fight! _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:50, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Uh. Wait. What? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:52, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:53, 14 July 2008 (EDT) ?tahW .tiaW .hU

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 18:57, 14 July 2008 (EDT) !gniliec eht ot kcuts m'I !pleH

Well, what do you expect me to do about it? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:00, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

.flesruoy htiw noitautis eht etabed uoy elihw ereh pu dnuora gnah tsuj ll'I .dnim t'nod yllaer I -- srednA ,yllaer ycnaf ruoy sekat revetahW ?yrtne golb a esopmoC ?erutcip a tniaP ?skramer yttiw ekaM

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:10, 14 July 2008 (EDT) ...pu sdaeh ...yaw evig ot tuoba eb thgim gniliec eht kniht I ,yllautcA

At the very least, I can assure you that I certainly emphasize with this baroque situation that you seem to find yourself in... and through no fault of your own, I'm sure. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:15, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:18, 14 July 2008 (EDT) ."esihtapme" naem uoy epoh kniht I

Whatever. The point here is that I, unlike other less ethically-minded individuals, care about your situation. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:25, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 19:28, 14 July 2008 (EDT) .noitaicnune ym rof srednow gniod s'ti kniht I .syad wef a rof ereh pu yats tsuj thgim I ,wonk'Y .yltnerappa ,sisahpme htiW

Not for long, I hope. It's impacting quite severely on my reading speed. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:37, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} .namenaD ,taht wonk ydaerla dluohs uoY .yllis ot detimmoc ma I tuB .llew sa ,epyt ot eramthgin a s'tI

Oh, I certainly do, and I must commend you on the many different and creative ways of being silly that you come up with. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:51, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} .taht gniyas tsuj er'uoy ,hO

Yes, basically. But it sounds nice. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 20:10, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} .uoy etah I

--AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 20:36, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

smetsys noitaluger ciffart nredom tnevnier s'tel ,derob m'I

_{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 21:19, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, went to sleep. But that sounds good. We need an objective for the project. I propose that we aim at creating a system that causes as much unnecessary annoyance to car owners as possible. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 05:16, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

politics

Anders, what party do you support? I am thinking of actually voting in the next elections, and I would like to know who you support. So who is it? Det Konservative Folkeparti? Socialdemokraterne? -- Sir Henry

Neither. I thought you had left? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:13, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

There is a chance I am not who you think I am. But this is important. Answer the question. And do you want to be unblocked on Conservapedia? -- Henry

If you must know, I usually vote Social Liberal. And no, I do not want to be unblocked. I have no wish to be associated with Conservapedia again. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:20, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Drop the facade, Kjeldsen. You asked me to unblock you. Stop acting. Bohdan2 19:07, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Why in the world would I do such a thing? I have no interest at all in returning to CP. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:09, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Look, I don't know why you did it. Nor do I know why you vote radical left. I really don't care. I did what you asked. Be happy. Bohdan2 19:11, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Is this some sort of obscure Conservative joke? In that case, haha, very funny. Now block me again. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:12, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Write an article on the Danish Social Liberal party and then I will. Bohdan2 19:14, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd ressurect the CP Column on your user page if I were you, Anders. A swift ban from Karajou should follow. Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 19:15, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I thought of doing that, but unfortunately, they're protected.

Hmm...

Hey Henry! Now that you've unblocked me, could you help a guy out and unprotect my user pages as well? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:17, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

This is begining to seem like a mass jailbreak. Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 19:19, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

All I can say is, they're lucky I'm not amused by vandalism, because I've had 35 minutes to run rampant over there. Doesn't even seem terribly active right now. Can't be many sysops around... --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:22, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Now this is strange. I tried to log in at CP, but all it says is "Login error: There is no user by the name "AKjeldsen". Check your spelling." Wonder if I've been purged from the database or something. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:25, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Couple of comments... "User is begging and whining to be unblocked." Now, Shabby, that's not nice ;). AK - your contribs list still works, so you must be in the database somehow. Oh, also, your user & talk pages are not protected. ħuman 20:50, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Account

You are right, your account no longer exists. I have recreated it. Your userpage is lost, but your talk page is still there. I can email you the password if you want. Bohdan2 19:43, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Alright, but tell me: Doesn't it concern you in the slightest to give an acknowledged opponent of your site access like this? Seems like poor security to me. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:46, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Anders, I consider you a mature person. I am not worried. You were blocked for what? Bohdan2 19:48, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

And your "us versus them" mentality is frightening. Open your mind. Bohdan2 19:49, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I was blocked by TK for, and I quote, "Personal attacks on his page, said he was quitting". The latter is absolutely correct, while those "personal attacks" are of course now published for all eternity at http://cpcolumn.wordpress.com.

However, I really think you should much rather unblock Chaos, seeing how he actually wants to be unblocked, you know? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:55, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

He is a vandal. You are a Danish brother. You know? Bohdan2 21:24, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I thought you were an American-assimilated Ukranian? --λινυσ^(☮) 22:51, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

He's Ukradanian. ħuman 22:53, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

All Europeans are brothers, Human, whether they be Danish, Ukrainian or Portuguese. Except for the Norwegians. They're such silly persons. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 05:32, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I agree - I feel like a brother, or sister, to the French, and to the Spanish - and, I suppose, by geographical default, to the Ukrainians. But not to some of the sillier countries. And I am but an islander! ħuman 05:42, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

"You guys"

Anders, this whole "us versus them" thing was cute at first, but now your taking it too far. I blame silly usernames and obvious vandals on you and Ames all the time. Despite what you might think, this is not part of a cp sysop plot. In fact, if there really is a cp sysop plot, tell me about it. Please. I will have you know I am not part of any "you guys" group. No cp-er communicates with me except on wiki, and that's indeed the way I like it. So withdraw that foolish statement, now. Thank you. Bohdan2 04:06, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Okay. I hereby withdraw any and all foolish statements I have made in the past. Satisfied? Now give me my password. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:17, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you. Now I am not so sure I want to give you the password. Are you planning to actually edit and obey the rules? Bohdan2 04:26, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

If you would care to review my past edits, you'll find that not only have I myself always scrupulously followed the rules, I have also made a point of encouraging others to do so. Especially the sysops. In fact, I have always acted with the best interests of Conservapedia in mind. Even when management didn't. Besides, I'll remind you that this wasn't even my idea in the first place. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:36, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

password

Anders, its pretty slow around here. Can I just post the password here, and you can go change it there? Bohdan2 16:42, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure, that's fine. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:48, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

The password is: rational. I chose it specifically for you. (just kidding. it was random). Bohdan2 16:52, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you.

I must admit this is a strange feeling. I think I will need to reflect on what to do now. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:56, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

:(

You want some pointers? _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:35, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

No, I just want that game to die. That box is too slow. And the balls are too fast. And there's not enough room. And I hate the colour scheme. And the programmer's cat. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 14:49, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

It's quite easy after a while, akshully. Did you watch the video I posted in the Fun:things page? That makes the basic dodging routine much easier to fathom :nods infuriatingly: _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 14:53, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, yes. I watched your silly video. That guy was obviously cheating. There are programs that can do these things. I even noticed how he cunningly let the program die once to make it seem like he actually played it himself. I know of these things, and I know them well. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:12, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

You just be thankful I didn't ask you to play Rescue Rover. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:21, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

That looks... well, I'm not quite sure how to put this.

Oh, wait! I am sure! That looks mind-numbingly boring! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:28, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

You have not the stomach for serius puzzles, Daneman. Dismissed. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:30, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

I was cheering for the robots, actually. Can they crush that little guy if he gets too close? Or the dog? It looked like he was close to getting crushed just after he got to the dog. That would have been fun. ^_^ --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:36, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

The green ones shoot you. I think the red ones just run you over, but I can't really remember. Frankly Anders, if you've reached the point in your life where you're cheering on dog-stealing robots, there's something wrong with you :P _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:42, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I've known there was something wrong with me for years. I think it started back when I discovered the infinite joys to be found in unleashing unspeakable disasters on your unsuspecting electorate in SimCity. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:48, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of games: I Lose. That is all. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 15:41, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

You lose what? _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:42, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

DAMN!!! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:48, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

The Game Chaos, just The Game. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 15:49, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

I didn't think anyone still played that. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:50, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

We all do, Chaos, it's just that some haven't realized it yet. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:51, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Exactly. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 15:52, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Exactly wrong, you mean :P _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:55, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

No, it's true. Dostojevsky invented it, you know. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:58, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Damn you and damn your convention-breaking transliteration. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 16:00, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you. It is a cunning combination of the English and Danish conventions, designed for maximum annoyance. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:03, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Or is it perhaps a Chekhovs Gun in disguise? (Well, no, it's not even close, I've just been reading too much Tv Tropes lately) Pinto's5150 ^Talk 16:05, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Gah! Do not mention that! Do not link to that! It is the time killer! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:06, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

You're telling me, I just closed the last of about 60 tabs I had open from that site. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 16:09, 23 July 2008 (EDT) Oh, and P.S. You're welcome Pinto's5150 ^Talk

... oh, well. It's not like I was doing anything important tonight anyway. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:12, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Was that really necessary?

  ^Contribs_Talk 05:48, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

No. I'll clean up now. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 05:49, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Your award

I stayed out of the whole affair because I am a former very strict Catholic. I felt my emotions might get the better of me and I'd say something I'd regret. I didn't even read the debate until a few minutes ago and I'd have to say I do admire what you said. I wonder if the critics of Catholic Doctrine take the doctrine too literally. I read the silly debates on CP about Catholics not being Christians and I am reminded of when I was a catholic I was always getting into ridiculous arguments about how we "worshipped" Mary and other misconceptions. I don't really understand why Catholicism gets such a bad rap when they are, for the most part, the one of the most liberal, tolerant and understanding denominations in Christianity. So congratulations for sticking to your guns.--Damo2353 08:07, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks. It's a good question. I guess the answer depends on who we're talking about. In the case of other Christian denominations such as evangelicals and such, I think it's mostly a question of partly some very deep and significant theological differences, but also partly of a historical tradition of conflict. Many of these group originally appeared in opposition to the Catholic Church in particular or to organized religious worship in general, so the Catholic Church is more or less the big historical opponent, the Great Other.

The activist atheists like Myers, conversely, are more in opposition to Christianity in general, and here the Catholic Church is a natural target. It's big, it's mainstream, and it has a lot of little funny traditions and practices that few people outside the culture really understand.

Finally, it shouldn't be overlooked that there is a strong tradition of political anti-Catholicism in the US, which ties in with of course the strong Puritan roots of the early settlers, but also the nativist anti-immigrant Know-Nothing movement and the Manifest Destiny of the 19th century, and the isolationist trend that also has been present to varying degrees in US politics since the independence. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 11:06, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Re:Myers. I am surprised he doesn't take a leaf out of Sam Harris' book and realize that atheists and more importantly secularists have a lot in common with moderate religious groups. As an atheist myself I think we must seek common ground with religious moderates not seek to inflame differences.

Re:anti-catholicism. This might surprise you but Anti-Catholic feeling has even been strong in New Zealand. My Father and my Uncle have told me they used to get beat up after school by Anglicans! (and they both played for the first XV so they were no pushovers)--Damo2353 15:02, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I must admit that's not exactly the conclusion I got from Harris, but then again, I usually develop acute hypertension whenever I try to read him, so I've never actually finished one of his books.

But I'm actually not surprised by New Zealand. I guess these are conflicts that have their faint roots way back in early modern UK and have been exported to the colonies as well. And combined with the usual neighbourhood/competing groups dynamics found more or less everywhere, I guess. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:23, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Hey, just to congratulate you on your award. It is well-deserved and definitely better than my Honorary Danish Citizenship. (Editor at) CP:^{no intelligence allowed} 16:40, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

"My dog"

Please tell me you don't have a dog. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:17, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't. But I'd like one. Or a cat. Or both. Regrettably, current residential circumstances make that impossible.

What would be so horrible about that, anyway? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:24, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't like dogs. Get a cat. _{↳ <blink>↑</blink> ⇨ ↕ <blink>▽</blink> ←} 15:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, but you don't like Tori Amos either, and I think that says everything I need to know about your tastes. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:31, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

stub

Contribute a Dane stub now, or I will block you again. You know you couldn't handle that. Bohdan2 18:06, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

I probably could, but... --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:20, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Hey, HenryS, why don't you invite him (AK) into the space on RW where we conspire to imrpoove CP? ħuman 04:58, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Who is "AK"? Bohdan2 17:59, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

No need to sulk

I thought it was a brilliant retort...just thought I would roleplay "Ed Poor" and compromise. tmtoulouse ^oppress 17:49, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Christopher St Thing

This might be a good time to test your mystic powers of renaming. ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 20:11, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd considered doing that, but it would be a bit like vandalising the vandal?   ^Contribs_Talk 20:13, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I sure hope so! ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 20:15, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

It does have a certain ring of poetic justice to it. I like it! What should we call him? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 20:18, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, "Chris Fanshaw" is nice and easy to remember, I guess. Easier to put in the vandal box, too. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 20:21, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

(ec) I've called him Chris Fanshaw. Chris cause it's ambisexual & Fanshaw cause that's how it's pronounced.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:22, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

What's that supposed to mean? Chris Fanshaw 20:30, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

SHIFT

Can we move all conversations to your talk page, rather than mine? Bohdan2 17:23, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Fine with me. More orange boxes for me. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:29, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Aren't they yellow? Bohdan2 17:30, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Look orange to me. Might depend on screen settings, though. Or eye settings. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:38, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

They're orange, you bohdanical heretic. ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 17:46, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Now, now. We shouldn't assume that all the world sees the world with our eyes and screen settings. The truth about the boxes is sometimes a relative thing. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:50, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't you get all allegorical on me. The box is orange :P ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 17:53, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Actually, that was not at all allegorical. It had been allegory if I had said that the box represents our existential yearning for contact with other human beings in a feeble attempt to validate our own identities. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:56, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

You're insatiable in allegory! Stop now, for the sake of your immortal soul! ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 18:02, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

In this case it's easily solved, look at the color in the code..... Pinto's5150 ^Talk 17:59, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

I did. It said color="orange!" ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 18:02, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Your status

I have been informed that, despite your self-proclaimed German heritage, you do indeed count as a full Human being. Just fyi. Bohdan2 02:00, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you. That's a relief - the uncertainty was quite stressful. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:50, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

To say nothing of the potentiated fractionation! ħuman 05:03, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Hey Anders

You think I picket a lot now? Just wait until you try to pull some crap on me.. I will picket you way more, I will make your stats crash so bad. I will be there on days you don't expect me... --71.8.59.31 17:14, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah right. I bet OSA are laughing their asses off right now! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:20, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

But you can't possibly advocate what Gabriel did. Although granted, it seems that Tommy is making more of a fool out of himself than anything. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 17:29, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Gabriel? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:35, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Do you know anything about the actual story of Tommy Gorman or are you just lulzing randomly? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 17:37, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, Gabriel Williams. What's he got to do with it? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:42, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Do you know anything about the story or did you just google Tommy Gorman Gabriel? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 17:44, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Do you even know why Tommy Gorman protests Scientology? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 17:45, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I know about his wife and that he was a member of OSA and all that. That doesn't excuse threatening Anons with bodily harm, even if Tory Christman set him up to it. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:49, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I mean his wife was kinda raped. I'd of done a lot more than sue and threaten bodily harm. Why so many protestors go after Anon I still can't fathom. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 17:54, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I think we're sort of talking past each other here. Just to make sure that we're on the same footing: A couple of weeks ago, Gorman was at an anti-Scientology Anonymous protest in San Francisco, where he verbally assaulted an Anonymous protester for about an hour and a half and basically threatened to beat him up, because he had been told that this person had flamed Tory Christman on the Enturb forums. This just got out on Enturb a few days ago, so needless to say, neither Gorman nor Christman are very popular people right now. Thus the "tommygormantommygorman" stuff. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:02, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Yep. We were nowhere near the same page. That part of it really doesn't interest me quite as much as the whole Rape thing. Obviously he really had no good reason to do that. I apologize for accusing you of being ignorant when I was ingnorant. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 18:05, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

No worries, it's not something anyone outside the "community" would know of. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:12, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

• gasp* Are you an anon? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 18:15, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

If I were, it would sort of defeat the purpose to say so, wouldn't it? ;-)

But no, not really - I sympathize with their goal of getting rid of Scientology, but I'm on the fence regarding their methods of doing so. I'm also fascinated by this whole subculture that's developing. So I guess you could say I'm on the periphery of the "movement", watching but not participating. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:27, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I just think the Gorman story is so interesting because he could potentially destroy the entire movement. Or he could get himself killed. He's like Harvey Dent. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{GET TO THA CHOPPER} 18:30, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

A year ago maybe, but these days when there are thousands of people protesting against Scientology all over the world on a monthly basis, the question is whether people like Gorman matter all that much anymore. The anti-Scientology movement has changed fundamentally just since February. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:42, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

It was supposed to be "suspicious"

I think it was partway there "_" ^{That one is "hopeful"} Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 17:20, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Suspicious was fine. This one's horrible. Sorry. :-( --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:21, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

<gloom>I know.</gloom> It's because there are only so many characters with bits at the top. To coin a technical term. Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 17:23, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

*_*

`_`

\_/

...

Hmmm. Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 17:24, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

I suggest sticking to the classics. Sometimes, innovation can go too far. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:43, 31 July 2008 (EDT)