User talk:Bicycle Wheel/RationalWikiWiki OP

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Pronoun trouble :) Jellyfish! 17:04, 1 June 2008 (CDT)

Hm. Jellyfish has been referred to many times as "he." Do you want to refute that (85)? Sic Vita Est 18:02, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
Sadly, I can neither confirm nor deny that. Jellyfish! 18:20, 1 June 2008 (CDT)


Could someone who was around RW for it explain the circumstances of Human's unilateral decrat? The last time Human decratted unilaterally (Gerard), he was rebuked by the mob, so Pink must have done something much worse than Gerard... Bohdan 19:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

she fought human, and when he couldn't win he took a shit on her and the sheep just ignored the smell. --Test fail 10:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
If you have a good grasp of this issue (I don't, like "Bohdan" here), would you mind expanding the current article? Right now it's quite unclear. Liveware Problem 20:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I would like to reiterate my request for more detail on this. MOAR PLS. Liveware Problem 03:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd help out, but it was before I really got involved in the RW community's affairs. RA might be a good person to ask, though, if you dare venture onto RW to ask. Punky McPunkersen 14:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I dare not. Perhaps RWW, though. Actually, IIRC, RA was LANCB at the time. Liveware Problem 15:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
(oh wow over a year later) Okay, since I was bored during lunch: I trawled through human/RA/Pink talk page archives. Nothing of note. Trawling through their contributions: this appears to be the only thing going down at the time. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 17:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Wow. I sometimes forget that no one really noticed what was happening then. OK, let's see if I can remember.
Note: None of this is intended to rake up old arguments. This is ancient history.
Yes, the Documentary Hypothesis talkpage is where it started, although I doubt anything we said there was particularly relevant, except as an indicator of how hostile we'd become to each other. The comments right at the bottom of that page coincide with my user rights reshuffle. Here is what happened, hopefully in the right order....
  • 03:48 - We have this exchange, in which Human accuses me of ad hominem attacks, and I claim that calling him a liar isn't an ad hominem.
  • 03:50 - Human decrats and desysops me. Note that most of the things in my user rights log are meaningless titles Tmtoulouse gave me at one point, which can't be changed by anyone with mere Bureaucrat powers. Human's edit removes everything that can be edited, apart from "town crier".
  • 03:51 - Human blocks me for five minutes. It's a tiny block, but the abuse of blocking and user rights together for such a frivolous, spiteful reason is what makes me say "fuck this, I have better things to do".
  • 03:54 - I log in as Barack Obama, an open sock I'd had for a while, and leave what I intend to be my final message. I also blanked my user pages... although RA reverted me a minute later, which kinda brings the drama down a little.
  • 04:04 - A few minutes later, Human restores me to sysop, but not bureaucrat. My RWW page says he includes "liar?" in my user rights, which is untrue and probably impossible. "Liar?" is the comment for the edit, which I don't really understand.
  • Nothing happens for several days. At some point, RA and AK both separately have words with Human about what happened, but nothing really comes of it.
I think that's everything...? I have delicious pasta waiting for me right now, and I must dash. Ciao. The Sea Technologists 19:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Huh. I thought it was a result of the massive fight that broke out during the to-have-rules-or-not-to-have-rules debate of October of 2008. Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" (cover your eyes!) 03:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
(Or, the over-ongoing debate about whether to have rules.) Sterile 05:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Sure, but I'd say it was an indirect result of that. Debate:Mobocracy was why we stopped even vaguely getting along, but it was pretty much over by the time we were arguing about the Documentary Hypothesis. The Sea Technologists 10:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


The article says: "When discussing people, post-Conservapedia refers to those users who joined for reasons other than Conservapedia."

I'd say this in untrue or at least misleading. All the old-timers like me joined becasue of CP, but I've pretty much lost interest in it now. So the fact that somebody initially joined becasue of CP shouldn't have them forever linked to the place.--Bob M 16:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


Make a cat? Blue, Goonie, me, Bertran, etc. Tyrannis 00:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Well then. Guess no-one has any objections, so away we go! Tyrannis 16:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


The article says when talking about a reduced interest in CP:

  • That, and most of the Cabal isn't that active anymore.

I think this is a bit of a slur on the cabal. Those members of the cabal who are no longer active have clearly lost interest in both RW and CP. Those who are still active have generally little interest in CP.--Bob M 20:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

When was the last time we could have said that there was an effective cabal? 2008 at the latest, surely. Armondikov 20:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


Post-CP these days is more, as ADK put it "Operation Get The Fuck Over It Already", so I'm going to try for a rewrite later, but I am biased on this issue, so expect a major bit of a slant. Ty 19:57, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Isn't this just a previous incarnation of the matrix the more recent New Culture idea?--False Flag 21:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
If you consider it a coherent movement, then yeah, me gibbering in the corner would be similar. The drift from CP-related stuff has been happening for a while though, Sterile mentioned an essay he wrote and then deleted(I think) to that effect. TyrannisAn iron, yet caring fist 22:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)