Difference between pages "Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?" and "Fun:RationalWikiWikiWiki"

From RationalWiki
(Difference between pages)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Why ...: new section)
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{AOTW Navigation}}
+
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Main Page}}
'''As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting on existing topics.  This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts.  Thank you.'''
+
<div id="mainpage"></div>
 
+
{| style="width:100%; background:#fcfcfc; margin-top:+.9em; border:2px solid #ccc;"
'''When adding a link to Conservapedia that is not already on [[Conservapedia:What is going on at CP?|What is going on at CP?]] please place <nowiki><capture></capture></nowiki> around the link.'''
+
|style="width:5%; color:#000"|
 
+
|style="width:30%; text-align:left; white-space:nowrap; color:#000;"|
For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the [[Rationalwiki:Saloon bar|saloon bar]].'''
+
<div style="font-size:225%; border:none; margin:0; padding:.1em; color:#000;">Welcome to ''RationalWikiWikiWiki''!</div>
{{Template:Talkpage/Pibot
+
|style="width:40%; color:#000"|
|search = yes
+
|style="width:25%; font-size:95%; color:#000;"|
|maxarchivesize = 150K
+
*{{RWWW|User Profiles|RWW User Profiles}}  
|counter = 176
+
*<span class="plainlinks">[http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3APrefixindex&from=RationalWikiWikiWiki&namespace=106 All pages]</span>
|algo = old(48h)
+
*{{RWWW|Policies}}
|archive = Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive%(counter)d
 
}}
 
{{RationalWiki:Community Chalkboard}}
 
 
 
== March 2010 and CP and RW ==
 
 
 
{|
 
|[[File:Pie-Conservapedia-2010-3.png|thumb|right|edits and editor's rights at CP Mar 2010]]
 
|[[File:Pie-Conservapedia-2009-3.png|thumb|left|edits and editor's rights at CP Mar 2009]]
 
|[[File:Pie-RationalWiki-2010-3.png|thumb|right|edits and editor's rights at RW Mar 2010]]
 
|}
 
 
 
{|
 
|[[File:Table-Conservapedia-2010-3.png|thumb|right|edits vs account creation at CP Mar 2010]]
 
|[[File:Table-Conservapedia-2009-3.png|thumb|left|edits vs account creation at CP Mar 2009 - a more diverse picture]]
 
|[[File:Table-RationalWiki-2010-3.png|thumb|right|edits vs account creation at RW Mar 2010]]
 
|}
 
 
 
*RJJensen edited only once more than CollegeRepublican
 
*the editing sysops are divided into two groups: the old guard, who created their accounts in 2007, and the not-yet-outed-parodists of the year 2009
 
*last March, 501 editors made 13,009 edits, this March, there are only 226 editors, making 7481 edits. This site is growing rapidly!
 
RW is more vibrant, counts more edits and more editors. And it is not dominated by an old guard...
 
 
 
 
 
{{User:LArron/sig}} 13:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Spiffing! [[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 15:29, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I love your graphs.  Good work! [[User:Senator Harrison|Senator Harrison]] ([[User talk:Senator Harrison|talk]]) 17:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Maybe you should graph pageviews since that is the most telling sign of progress, 7 mil homepage. Check out their ranking among Conservative blogs. Oh it's they all come there to laugh, sure you can say that to make yourselves feel better. RW views/ page manipulation bots only affect no more than 5% of the results, if that. Have a Holy Thursday.--[[Special:Contributions/193.200.150.137|193.200.150.137]] ([[User talk:193.200.150.137|talk]]) 18:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I think it's telling that 348 editors at RW made 16,600 edits last month - and only two (TK and RobSmith, btw) got blocked {{User:LArron/sig}} 19:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Yah, awfully closed minded, intolerant and oppressive of minorities.  Thanks for highlighting that.  [[User:RobSmith|nobs]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|don't bother me]]</sup> 19:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Thank you, Rob, for pointing out more obvious facts about CP. What would we do without you? [[User:DickTurpis|DickTurpis]] ([[User talk:DickTurpis|talk]]) 19:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Wow, RW is the place to complain about CP '''and''' RW. Doesn't sound too ''closed minded, intolerant and oppressive of minorities'' for me. {{User:LArron/sig}} 20:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Thanks everybody for appreciating! {{User:LArron/sig}} 20:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Seriously, man, your charts are works of art. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 22:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
lol, CP as a whole is waaaay under the 90/10 rule!!!! [[User:Alain|Alain]] ([[User talk:Alain|talk]]) 20:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
BTW, dear BON, all the numbers have to be taken ''cum grano salis'': while clicks may originate by clickbots, many of the edits aren't legitimate either - it will be quite amusing to have Aschlafly comb through the Bible ''translation'' when JacobB is outed as parodist...
 
PS: ''works of art'' jeez, thanks! Upps, April 1st... {{User:LArron/sig}} 07:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
{|
 
|[[File:DiEb-CP-ActiveEditors-90-days.png|thumb|active editors at CP]]
 
|[[File:DiEb-RW-ActiveEditors-90-days.png|thumb|active editors at RW]]
 
|-
 
|[[File:DiEb-CP-ActiveEditorsUnblocked-90-days.png|thumb|active '''unblocked''' editors at CP]]
 
|[[File:Api-active-editors-unblocked-RationalWiki-short.png|thumb|active '''unblocked''' editors at RW]]
 
 
|}
 
|}
''Check out their ranking among Conservative blogs.'' Conservapedia is one of the leading conservative blogs. No doubt. But is it a wiki? It becomes less and less so: there is only a handful of contributors, and a discussion on content doesn't take place any more. {{User:LArron/sig}} 07:14, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
: They are bloody impressive graphs, how long does it take to pull together that data? Didn't realise we have more active editors than CP now... Pretty sweet. yay RW! --[[Image:TheEgyptiansig001.png|link=User:TheEgyptian]] 00:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::I try to be micro-invasive: so, it takes up to one day to gather the data via some perl scripts. Then, it's a couple of minutes for the R scripts to produce the pics... {{User:LArron/sig}} 15:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Thanks for the graphs you've been knocking together. Interesting to see the sites compared - particularly with the distinction made between blocked and active editors. --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 22:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== Making Karajou Funny (Redux) (sticky) ==
 
 
Well, if he's going to keep on drawing them, it is our duty to at least [[Forum:Making_Karajou_funny|make 'em funny.]] --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 17:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== Rob is loading for bear ==
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User:RobSmith/Workspace1]</capture> --[[Special:Contributions/129.19.137.241|129.19.137.241]] ([[User talk:129.19.137.241|talk]]) 04:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Wow, this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conservapedia&action=historysubmit&diff=351596689&oldid=351581751 "citation"] is remarkably dishonest.  <s>ShadowRanger</s> Rees11 (in the revision that Rob '''hides''') [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conservapedia&diff=next&oldid=351581751 removes] the POV tag, ''and'' Sid doesn't edit the article for many revisions after that.  Pretty deceitful, Rob.  --{{User:Arcan/sig}} 05:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC) <small>Edit: had the wrong name. 08:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)</small>
 
::::Where I come from, that's called "lying".  I doubt wikipedia admins are stupid enough to be taken in by such chicanery. {{User:Human/sig|}} 08:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I edited your comment with a link to the Rees11 edit. {{User:Human/sig|}} 08:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Also, I notice he brings up the removal of the COI tag, but never mentions the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#RationalWiki discussion] that preceded it. --{{User:Arcan/sig}} 05:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
: "Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried:" ...empty. As such, it will get tossed out. But if this thing is actually completed and accepted, this would turn out to be a really interesting case. --''[[User:Wwwwolf|wwwwolf]]'' ([[User talk:Wwwwolf|barks]]/[[Special:Contributions/Wwwwolf|growls]]) 11:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Nah, he's going to put his attempts at private discussion there. --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 11:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
Everyone shut up and enjoy it. Every problem we point out is a problem that ArbCom doesn't see and doesn't act on. Wait until he submits it to rip it to shreds--[[Special:Contributions/129.19.137.241|129.19.137.241]] ([[User talk:129.19.137.241|talk]]) 08:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Ok, BoN, but one last thing.  Now he's [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conservapedia&diff=354277574&oldid=354275271 talking about himself in the third person.]  If you read it in Gollum's voice, it's quite entertaining.  --{{User:Arcan/sig}} 08:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::It looks like his statement will be a sort of Gish Gallop of lies and half-truths. Debunking it all would just take up precious space, which is exactly what Rob is hoping for. Ah, this is going to be hilarious. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 12:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::If he was serious he'd compile his "evidence" off-wiki. He's just trolling. {{User:Toast/Zug}} 12:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::And playing to his audience. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 12:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::@Toast: [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:RobSmith/Workspace1 Oh hai!] {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 16:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::"off-wiki" as in "in private and not openly on a wiki", not as in "not on Wikipedia". --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 21:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::It's all got such a TK sort of feel about it, doesn't it?  The whole desire to say things off WP, so they're less likely to be used as evidence of things like harassment and so forth.  Which is probably why, when he got blocked for harassing and threatening here, he didn't repeat a single word of it over at WP, where he could easily post to your talk page.  Funny, that. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] ([[User talk:Kels|talk]]) 21:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
  
This is funny indeed.  While I can see the advantage of using a wiki to "prepare" his "case" (formatting, etc.), he could use ''any'' wiki.  But as I was "analyzing" some of what he has typed, I suddenly realized that CP is the dumbest one to choose - he can't type "rationalwiki" on that wiki! 16'll get you twenty that that page is dead and he's working on it elsewhere, once he realized what a pain it will be not being able to actually type his adversary's name.  Oh, and far as the "TKish" aspects, you do know this is a TK joynt, right?  Look at the goal - to inconvenience as much as possible the backbone of the RW "cabal". {{User:Human/sig|}} 02:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<center>'''Hello, dear reader! And welcome to the looking-glass world of RationalWikiWikiWiki, a wiki all about {{el|http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page|RationalWikiWiki}}.'''
:And he [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:RobSmith/Workspace1#Violations_of_NPOV_.26_BLP can't even spell Trent's name]. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 12:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::By "inconvenience" you mean "incapacitate through spasms of laughter", right? --[[User:Kels|Kels]] ([[User talk:Kels|talk]]) 20:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::If he actually brings the "case" to arbcom it could range from a minor inconvenience (being "summoned" to turn up and watch him get slapped down) to a pain in the butt (actually having to read difflinks and type stuff). Oh, and Tet, well, anyone actually, please don't help him copyedit his "case".  I should have said that before. {{User:Human/sig|}} 00:12, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
  
===Braggin' rights===
+
'''RationalWikiWiki currently has <big><font face=times>π</font></big> articles.'''
  
Whats gonna happen?
+
'''Check out our new [[Fun:RationalWikiWikiWiki/Dive Bar|Dive Bar]] !'''</center>
  
<multi poll=arbcom>
+
{|style="width:100%; background:#ffffff; vertical-align:top;" cellpadding="8"
'''RobS won't ever get it done.'''
+
|-valign="top"
'''Arb com refuses to even hear the case.'''
+
|style="width:49%;background:#faf5ff;border:4px solid #F2A500;text-align:left"|<h2 style="margin:0; background:#FFD06B; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:2px solid #880088; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"><s>Goals</s> Goats</h2>
'''Arb com hears the case but dismisses it and takes no action.'''
+
[[RationalWikiWiki]] is the most average website made by <s>[[User:Radioactive afikomen|Radioactive afikomen]]</s> <span class="plainlinks">[http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/User:Hans_Johnson Hans Johnson]</span>. By observing RationalWikiWikians' behavior in their natural habitat, we aim to:
'''Arb com hears the case and finds against RW members issuing sentences up to and including bans.'''
 
'''Arb com hears the case and finds RobS is in violation of harassment rules and bans him.'''
 
</multi>
 
  
== Menendez recall committee ==
+
=== Identify anything happening ===
 
+
Seriously, if you see anything happening - at all - please add it to our news ticker
[http://www.examiner.com/x-34769-Essex-County-Elections-2010-Examiner~y2010m4d5-Menendez-appeals-recall-decision-to-NJ-Supreme-Court Andy might actually have a chance]. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 13:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
=== Observe conflict resolution procedures ===
:You'd have thought, by now, that Hurlbut/TerryH, as an Andy fan, would have asked Andy to take a more flattering photo of himself. Ideally one which doesn't make him look like a sex offender. Though thinking about it, that photo of Hurlbut is deeply disturbing too. [[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 13:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
RationalWiki doesn't really have a conflict resolution procedure, as a result when slighted the offended RationalWikian will run over to RationalWikiWiki and moan about it. We hope to be able to see who these people are by their tiresome whining.
::Terry looks as if he's leaning in, telling some small child to remove their pants, while styling that crazed smile. There, I said it. --Bunchanumbers {{unsig|70.119.42.172}} 14:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
|style="width:49%;background-color:#f5faff;border:4px solid #F2A500;"|<h2 style="margin:0; background:#FFD06B; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:2px solid #880088; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">What is going on at RationalWikiWiki?</h2>
::There is a fairly decent AP photo by Rich Schultz, only the shirt Andy's wearing looks like it's from a Moldavian sales bin. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 15:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<vote poll=RWW64>RationalWikiWiki [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=What_is_going_on_at_RationalWiki%3F&curid=1337&diff=13030&oldid=13021 has a funny WIGO] (apparently). Wish we did, we only have shit like this to WIGO.</vote>
:::This one? [[File:Andys_Monitor.jpg|200px]] <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 15:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<vote poll=RWW63>If it is [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=RationalwikiwikiUndergroundResistor&page=User%3AWaronstupidity&year=&month=-1 offensive enough to block for] why is it [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Waronstupidity&curid=1391&diff=12965&oldid=12964 not offensive enough to revert?]</vote>
::::No, the one from the Hurlbut piece about the March for Life. It's the same shirt though. Come to think of it, the shirt in the AACP video doesn't look all that different either. Either this man owns exactly one shirt, or he has a real hard-on for PET polyester filament yarn in 1972-formula Columbia blue. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 16:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<vote poll=RWW62>MarcusCicero gets [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMNpunkboy&diff=12755&oldid=12754 pwned!]</vote>
:::::IIRC he wore a different shirt (white) for his appearance at the ''Colbert Report''. but the tie looks the same however. {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 17:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<vote poll=RWW61>RationalWikiWiki is now a forum dedicated to the discussion of [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:MNpunkboy&diff=12704&oldid=12606 beer, pizza, chips and other carb-heavy foodstuff.]</vote>
::::::[[File:Andy.mplayer.1.png|200px]] [[File:Andy.mplayer.2.png|200px]]
+
<vote poll=RWW60>New Leader of RationalWikiWiki (?) MNpunkboy realises giving MarcusCicero [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&curid=510&diff=12578&oldid=12572 a carte blanche to write his thoughts on RationalWiki, would not be a good thing.]</vote>
::::::BZZT WRONG BITCH. It's blue. It does look like a slightly paler blue on my monitor but that means absolutely nothing. Look at the 70s collar and the button on his cheapo pseudo-Italian cuff in the right picture. It could EASILY be the same shirt AGAIN. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 18:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
<vote poll=RWW59>Trent [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&diff=12518&oldid=12487 lays down the law].</vote>
{|align="right"
+
<vote poll=RWW58>Fall down [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Rationalwiki_Awards_-_2009&curid=1288&diff=12270&oldid=12269 reappears] to object to his nomination for "most abusive editor." He is promptly [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=MNpunkboy&page=User%3AFall+down&year=&month=-1 blocked for two days.]</vote>
!colspan=2| Lookalike
+
<vote poll=RWW57>It appears that, thanks to some diplomacy, [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:DiplomaticMarcus MarcusCicero is finally gone] from both RationalWiki and RationalWikiWiki. Yeah, right.</vote>
|-
+
<vote poll=RWW56>RationalWikiWiki [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=next&oldid=12161 brings in night mode] to deal with MarcusCicero's tantrum.</vote>
|[[File:Andy.mplayer.1.png|130px]]
+
<vote poll=RWW55>MarcusCicero wants you to know just how many [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template_talk:News/Archive2&diff=12006&oldid=11998 sexual favours he is getting.] Curiously though - he doesn't make mention of the gender of those providing him with said favours. I'm just saying.... *Update* A sexually self-sufficient walrus offers a hint as to the source of Mr Cicero's sexual favours: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ros73m7xBRA&feature=player_embedded Walrus pleasures itself] (NSFW, unless you're a zoo keeper) .</vote>
|[[File:Lord charles.jpg|80px]]
+
<vote poll=RWW54>False Flag proposes a [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Rationalwiki_Awards_-_2009&oldid=11795 "RationalWiki Awards Contest,"] which in English means [http://rationalwikiwiki.org/wiki/Rationalwiki_Awards_-_2009 "a free-for-all of copious namecalling."]</vote>
|-
+
<center>{{RWWW|archives|Older news}}</center>
|<small>'''Lord Charles'''</small>
 
|<small>'''Andy Schlafly'''</small>
 
 
|}
 
|}
:::::::What a good looking man. [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 19:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
__NOTOC__ __NOEDITSECTION__
::::::::Fact of the day: Andy shops at a Sears stuck in the '80s. – [[User talk:nickheer|Nick Heer]] 20:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
+
{{keyword|wikikey=RationalWikiWikiWiki}}
:::::::::If that's the same shirt, then it all makes sense now.  The [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag0iPi-Fyfg AAPS video] has the intermediate shade of blue, and so the same shirt is getting paler as time goes on.  What bleach is Andy using to have that uniform colouring again?  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 05:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
+
{{wikinav}}
::::::::::What an uncanny resemblance to the ventriloquist's dummy Lord Charles. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 09:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
===Returning to the original topic===
 
 
 
As per the topic of the header, I think it is kind of interesting actually. The NJ state constitution clearly states what I think are the recall parameters. The state courts of NJ are constricted to what the state constitution says. The argument from Menedez is that there is a conflict with the Federal constitution. I don't think that can be settled in state court. The ruling they did get though was not that the recall was constitutional but rather that you could not stop the petition processes on the claim alone. That "standing" wouldn't exist for the constitutional claim till the signatures had been gathered and a recall election was put forward. Ultimately, I think the NJ state courts are bound to rule that the petition is valid under state constitution. However, whether there is a conflict between the state constitution and the federal constitution is a more interesting question. Has Andy ever argued a case before the national supreme court? I know he filed amicus curiae briefs all the time, but hell anyone can do that. I don't think he has ever actually been on council for a major enough case. I am interested. tmtoulouse 19:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:It is very interesting, especially as an NJ resident. Initially, I was surprised that the case made it to the Supreme Court so quickly, but Trent's point about the state constitution conflicting with the lack of federal precedent explains why. The problem (which I think Nutty brought up previously) is this: the Supreme Court doesn't like to set major precedents when they don't have to, and siding with the state constitution would mean giving states the power to interpret Article 1 of the Constitution (since it does not mention recalls), which would be a dramatic and earth-shattering verdict. I would think that they are more likely just to strike down the clause in the NJ state constitution that allows recalls, which they can certainly do under the Supremacy Clause. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 22:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::It is still in NJ though right? I thought it was before the NJ Supreme Court, and if my legal understanding is correct they would still be obligated to find based on the NJ state constitution. tmtoulouse 22:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Strike that, apparently a state supreme court does have authority to rule state constitutional clauses as violating national constitutional clauses. tmtoulouse 23:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Right. Since the problem is that the clause indirectly contradicts Article 1 of the Constitution, striking the recall clause seems like the most likely option. If the Court gives the go-ahead for a recall, they will be doing something utterly without precedent ''and'' messing with Article 1, so I doubt that'll happen. I'm not sure if this can be appealed to the US Supreme Court, but I doubt it will. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 23:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::What do you think of the lower courts decision that says, basically, until a recall election is actually called there is nothing for a court to do? tmtoulouse 23:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::It seemed like they were just passing it on to the higher court, since they didn't (or can't) strike down the clause in the NJ state constitution, which of course is the heart of the problem. So, they just passed the buck and said that they couldn't do anything until someone forced their hand. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 23:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::I don't think it would hit SCOTUS until/unless the petition succeeded, creating a federal issue - a state actually recalling their Senator.  And Andy is disingenuous, I think mentioning CA - if he's referring to the recall of their ''Governor'', a state office of no federal impact.  Let's face it, Senators don't work for their states, they work for all of us, in that the federal gov't pays them, not their state. I doubt that is "legally" interesting, but it is still interesting.  To me, anyway. {{User:Human/sig|}} 02:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
Why can't you damn yanks just do it like we do? Don't have anything written down, and let the lads in the HoL/Supreme Court argue it out and not dare to mention that we have a deeply unrepresentative and corrupt parliament which is meant to be supreme. Great fun to watch.[[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 10:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Once more Andy makes capital out of the misfortunes of others ==
 
 
 
Andy says: <capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&curid=85316&diff=767673&oldid=767663 "And his suicide was not because he was bullied in school, which is what liberals usually claim in order to promote their harmful agenda further."]</capture> with no evidence at all.{{User:Toast/Zug}} 14:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Makes me wonder if it really would be a bad thing to giggle like a monkey if Andy and his ilk were to contract particularly painful and terminal ailments. He's a nasty piece of work, and only gets in to the human race on account of a technicality. --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 19:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Added to [[Conservapedia:Cheap shots|cheap shots]]. What a gigantic tit (not the fun, bouncy kind). – [[User talk:nickheer|Nick Heer]] 20:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::If there's really a Hell like Andy believes, he'd best pray that Jesus is more compassionate and forgiving than Andy seems to think He is.--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] ([[User talk:WJThomas|talk]]) 23:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Andy, I have nothing but contempt for you. Fuck you. --[[User:Ireon|Ireon]] ([[User talk:Ireon|talk]]) 08:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Andy's a cunt. If people like him are going to heaven, I'll gladly go to hell. {{User:SuperJosh/Sig|}} 13:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== JDWpianist ==
 
 
 
Andy has decided that JDWpianist (contributor of many knowledgeable pieces on classical music) is  a <capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&curid=97948&diff=767677&oldid=767668 liar]</capture> - or at least quite an oddity. The whole discussion is typical: Andy decided what the truth has to be - and to hELL with reality!
 
 
 
{{User:LArron/sig}} 15:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Yup! He's cruisin' for a bruisin'. {{User:Toast/Zug}}
 
::It's Ok to make poorly informed and nasty personal remarks about a person, but when he refutes their basis you get to shut the discussion off by saying you won't address the specifics because they're allegedly as anomalous as a marathon runner smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day? Andy Schlafly in a nutshell, really.
 
 
 
::Are there any references to the day-age and framework viewpoints to the Genesis creation story on Conservapedia? Anyone? This "literalism" in a vacuum shit to support a YEC framework is getting out of hand. It seems the only biblical hermeneutic Andy and these YEC fundamentalists are capable of employing is EVERYTHING THE BIBLE SAYS THAT AGREES WITH ME IS READ "LITERALLY"/EVERYTHING ELSE IS ALLEGORICAL. In other words, Andy's faith isn't remotely informed by his reading of the bible, rather his reading of the bible is informed by his own ad hoc religion. He is a Christianist. {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 15:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::"Andy's faith isn't remotely informed by his reading of the bible, rather his reading of the bible is informed by his own ad hoc religion." Sounds a lot like your <s>evisceration of</s> diatribe against Phil. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 17:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Fair enough, although PJR's religion has a name - YEC. I'm not sure what to call Andy other than an apostate Catholic or a Christianist. In other words, you know what to expect when you talk to PJR. Andy's a whole 'nother ball of wax, just a hodge podge of extreme views. {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 17:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I'm just sayin that PJR's religion informs his reading of the Bible, similar to Andy. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 18:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Yeah dude, it's the same made-up shit. But at least PJR's cult has a name. {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 20:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:For what it's worth, JDWpianist has always been striking me as a kind of expat Jensen. Having grown up in Vienna, I happen to know that he's not always completely accurate, but he seems to be sincerely interested in building a genuine encyclopedia, quietly adding useful article after useful article in exchange for no recognition whatsoever. He may be their absolutely, definitively, irreversibly last and final bona fide contributor. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 16:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
::''"...sincerely interested in building a genuine encyclopedia..."''  So you're saying he's opposed to Conservapedia's goals, then. --[[User:Kels|Kels]] ([[User talk:Kels|talk]]) 16:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::It's true! Some of us actually did attempt to build a genuine encyclopedia by writing real, factual articles, then we ran afoul of Conservapedia's Number One Unwritten Rule: "Andy is always right", and that was that. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] - Just an astronomy guy 17:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Indeed. Of course, some of us built it by copy/pasting WP articles. Just an aside here: I wonder how Andy deals with the fact that there's quite a few global-warming deniers running around, who were also paid by the tobacco companies to say smoking doesn't cause cancer (names escape me at the mo - remember it from 'the denial machine'. Are they now good people because they agree with Andy? --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 17:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Agreeing with Andy is what gets you ahead on Conservapedia, it doesn't matter if you are a decent or honest person or not, just if you are sufficiently sycophantic on issues dear to his heart. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] - Just an astronomy guy 18:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
:''"Obviously you won't address that Jesus expressly confirmed the occurrence of the Flood, so maybe you're picking and choosing passages that match your own preferences."''
 
:That's a bit fucking rich coming from a man ''rewriting the Bible.'' {{User:SuperJosh/Sig|}} 17:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Should we now add "psychics" to the list of Andy's expertise, now that he can get to know a person better than the person himself with little or no physical/verbal interactions?  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 17:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Oh no, that's not new. Andy can tell with 95% certainty that you are liberal, atheist, support gun control and eating babies simply from the taste of your semen.  --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 17:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I LOL'ed. JWDpianist is an arse. Even if he believes in the idea of creating an encyclopedia, it should be pretty clear that CP is not the place where it's going to happen. The best he'll ever achieve is to create tiny fragments of scholarship in a sea of vitriol and junk. Andy's just accused him of being a liar and a false Christian. What else does Andy have to do to get rid of the guy? --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 19:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I can't believe that JDWPianist is still around. Andy and co. have given him so much shit. He's been blocked, had articles deleted, and I think he even had an article swiped JacobB-style. In spite of that, he still sticks around. The guy's either a masochist or a complete moron. [[User:Colonel of Squirrels|<b>Colonel of Squirrels</b>]][[User_Talk:Colonel of Squirrels|<sup><i>白山羊不山羊。商讨。</i></sup>]] 20:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
:Did any of you here read the pianoman's <capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=767668 latest edit]</capture>? He's perfectly polite and sober by any reasonable standard... but he does point out Andy is not arguing in good faith and the CBP is a disaster. I guess that's it then. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 20:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I read that, and it was a good reply, but ultimately pointless. JDW should know by now that Andy is not going to back down, and that even if JDW manages to prove that Andy is wrong, his comments will be quickly oversighted and we'll end up with yet another odd talk page conversation in which Andy appears to be arguing with himself. Even if the comments remain, I'm not sure who else is left to be warned by them? It's hardly a secret that Andy is a deranged lunatic intent on remaking Christianity in his own image, with Jesus being nothing more than a figurehead or a rubber stamp for Andy's Sermon on The Blog. --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 20:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Andy already replied in a predictable manner complete with red herring.<capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAschlafly&diff=767677&oldid=767668]</capture> --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] - Just an astronomy guy 22:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
My favorite Schlafly Classic: "There is a high correlation between belief in evolution and liberal political beliefs; that correlation alone demonstrates that evolution cannot be factual."  Them's logics, you can't argue 'gainst them, I don't who you are, them's true. {{User:Human/sig|}} 02:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:"[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=next&oldid=767706 Auf Wiedersehen, Andy] Update: apparently this was an act of wiki-[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vwzfg5NmUY suicide]? {{User:Human/sig|}} 03:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
=== JDW Pianist Says Buh-Bye... ===
 
 
 
<capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&curid=97948&diff=767788&oldid=767706 Screencap]</capture> [[User:P-Foster|P-Foster]] ([[User talk:P-Foster|talk]]) 22:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Poor bugger. At least he can salvage some dignity by walking away before TK came in to ban hammer him.  --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 22:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:: Thousands upon thousands of productive edits (Or are they? ;) A civilized, faithfull parting shot. What a loss.  Please go help Wikipedia, JDW [[User:Alain|Alain]] ([[User talk:Alain|talk]]) 03:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Pasted in from later section. {{User:Human/sig|}} 03:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Yes, JDWpianist has excused himself very gracefully. Perhaps this is my brie-nibbling, latte-sipping Eurosocialist elitism talking, but it was obvious to me from his articles this man had too much taste and style for a madhouse like Conservapedia. I've been waiting for this for almost a year, i. e. from back when he was one contributor among, er,  several. I've updated the archive so the circumstances of the pianist bowing out will be preserved for the benefit of future historians. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 03:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::JDWpianists's comments in this [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:World_History_Lecture_Nine#Non-German_.27Great.27_Composers section] are amusing to read, too. Indeed, the ''world history lecture'' provided us with numerous insights: ''English is the best language'', ''Prussia is Germany'', ''Orwell was not only a republican, but a '''Republican''' '' {{User:LArron/sig}} 07:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
===Classic difflink, courtesy of some asshole===
 
[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=next&oldid=767795] {{User:Human/sig|}} 03:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Wha? [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 04:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Is this some oversight magic at play? [[User:Colonel of Squirrels|<b>Colonel of Squirrels</b>]][[User_Talk:Colonel of Squirrels|<sup><i>白山羊不山羊。商讨。</i></sup>]] 04:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Nothing has been oversighted, not as far as I can tell. On the contrary, watch <capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JDWpianist&diff=prev&oldid=767812 TK being considerate and sympathetic]</capture> .[[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 05:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::JDWpianist's ''wiedersehensgruß'' wasn't oversighted, but the (perhaps sympathetic) comment of another editor. Obviously, if not done by TK, commenting on such is thing is a violation of <s>CP</s>TK's MYOB-policy... {{User:LArron/sig}} 06:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Ah yes, obviously. Very stupid of me. Thanks for setting me straight. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 07:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I [[:File:HectorJ Parthian.png|capped Hector's comment]] before going to bed since it was just the sort of parthian shot that gets oversighted quickly. Nothing we haven't seen before, and I'm mostly just uploading it since it was oversighted before most people here noticed it. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 10:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Oh well, you're right. The comment is true, the comment is perfectly accurate, the comment adds absolutely nothing of value. Some random parodist who got bored before he found his voice, as it were, and decided to go out with a bang. Thanks for capping it anyway; it's good to know we didn't miss anything of importance... or creativity. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 11:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Yup, yup, yup, aaaaaaaaaaaand yup. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 11:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
This confirms my view that Schlafly is secretly an atheist, communist evolutionist and that his master plan is to drive away any decent human being who happens to be a conservative. Either that or he's a total freaking moron. [[User:The Real James Brown|The Real James Brown]] ([[User talk:The Real James Brown|talk]]) 22:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== There are no women on the Internet... ==
 
 
 
...or at least on CP. Remember the good ol' days of Deborah, Justine, Bethany, Sharon, Jess, HSMom? Now, if memory serves, there isn't a single member of the fairer, cookie-baking sex left on CP. Just sayin'. --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 18:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Oddly enough I just saw a wonderful bit of parody on CP, in which someone has managed to sneak in a brief guide to masturbation. I suspect that advice is pretty useful now that the boys have managed to drive all the girls out of their fort. I won't link the page in question, but well done whoever managed that. It's been up now for over 2 years.--{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 18:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Mama Schlafly would be proud. [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 18:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Ooh! You e-mail linky nao pleez? Erm... just so I can read the parody, of course. --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 18:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Me too! I was asking first, Psy just outeditconflicted me. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 18:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Mails sent. I wonder if women are leaving because of the sheer aggression from Andy and and a few of his fellow sausage wielders. The JDWpianist comments were amazingly harsh and fairly typical of Andy's "You're a fucking liar and you're going to burn in hell" approach to handling those who don't fully embrace the Schlaflyianity. --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 19:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::"Concerned Resident", women are more likely to be atheistic, feminist and liberal. Using basic [[Schlafly statistics|statistics]], one can deduce that the number of women on Conservapedia is inversely proportionate to the number of individuals who have accepted that Jesus Christ confirmed the flood. Seeing as how 100% of Americans know the Flood is real and that evolution is evil, you can draw your own conclusions. Godspeed. -- [[User:Vradient|Vradient]][[User_talk:Vradient|<sup>Hit me up</sup>]] 19:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Thanks for the mail mate. I LOLd. Several times, actually. Work of art. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 20:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::It's a safe bet that Opcn would want that link too ;) --[[Special:Contributions/129.19.137.241|129.19.137.241]] ([[User talk:129.19.137.241|talk]]) 20:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::I can haz e-mailz? [[User:EddyP|EddyP]] ([[User talk:EddyP|talk]]) 20:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::I like emails. -- [[User:Vradient|Vradient]][[User_talk:Vradient|<sup>Hit me up</sup>]] 20:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::I want to see! {{User:FineCheeses/sig}} 20:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::I'd like to  see too, but dont email it too much, 8 clicks the same day on a non-homosexuality-related page will blink red on TK's radar... He will notice something strange and fix it. [[User:Alain|Alain]] ([[User talk:Alain|talk]]) 20:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
(undent) Yeah, I'm hesitant to send on any more copies. We do not own Conservapedia. We merely take care of it for our kids. --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 21:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:: Heh! I will so HomeSundaySchool my kids with RW!!! tanks for the idea, ConcernedR! [[User:Alain|Alain]] ([[User talk:Alain|talk]]) 03:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Well, email it tomorrow then? plz? [[User:Senator Harrison|Senator Harrison]] ([[User talk:Senator Harrison|talk]]) 01:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Screenshot and send to every e-mail on the planet except TK and Rob, plz? ~ [[User:Kupochama|Kupochama]]<sup>[[User_talk:Kupochama|[1]]][[Special:Contributions/Kupochama|[2]]]</sup> 06:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Sign me up as well.  Thank you.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 15:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Sumbuddy Email it to mee pleeese! --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 16:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Shouldn't we create a private forum for this kind of stuff? [[RationalWiki:Guide to the Hidden Forum (or there is no cabal)|Oh wait...]] --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 16:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::CR, the Super One awaits your email, if you'd be so kind... {{User:SuperJosh/Sig|}} 19:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Fidel Castro ==
 
 
 
According to those Obama-loving lieberals at the CIA, Fidel Castro is alive [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/cu.html]. [[User:Csmiller|CS Miller]] ([[User talk:Csmiller|talk]]) 22:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Eventually Castro will die. How is Andy going to react to that? [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 22:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::It'll be another FBI incident. Anyone drawing attention to Andy's earlier and incorrect claims will be removed. I don't think Andy would admit to being wrong, but I also doubt he'd postulate some kind of "Weekend at Bernie's" conspiracy to suggest that Castro had actually been long dead, but his corpse had been carried around and brought to cocktail parties in order to create the appearance of being alive.  --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 22:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Weekend at Bernie's.  Haven't seen that in years.  Time to hit Amazon and purchase my own copy I think.  And while I'm watching it I also get to have the lulz of watching it and comparing it to Andy and Ken dragging around the corpse of Conservapaedia.  Oh, and what was the name of the one with Elliot Gould as the zombie news reader?  Might get that at the same time.--{{User:Stunteddwarf/sig}} 23:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Link not work well from what I could see.  Better one? {{User:Human/sig|}} 03:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::That addressed to me? Open the "Government" tab, and then scroll down to "Political parties and leaders". Or for a different page, [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2118.html?countryName=Cuba&countryCode=cu&regionCode=ca&#cu]. [[User:Csmiller|CS Miller]] ([[User talk:Csmiller|talk]]) 20:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Thanks! {{User:Human/sig|}} 02:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::When Castro finally meets his end Andy will be like "A severe blow to the liberals as they finally admit their deceit that fidel Castro is dead."  The problem is that whether Castro will live surprisingly longer than Andy.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 05:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
While we're on the subject of Cuba, CP has a thing up about Elian Gonzalez(sp?) on the borken news template.  Why is it that conservatives hate illegal immigrants, but they make a giant exception in this case? {{User:SirChuckB/sig|}} 07:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Part of the conservative ideology is no need for consistency. Unless of course you're a liberal, in which case none of your views may be contradictory. [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 08:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes." -- Walt Whitman [[User:MDB|MDB]] ([[User talk:MDB|talk]]) 16:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
:"Do I contradict myself?  Fuck you, open your mind and you'll see that I and the Bible are always right!  TK, ban this idiot." -- Andy Schlafly --[[User:Kels|Kels]] ([[User talk:Kels|talk]]) 20:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Uncle Stubby ==
 
 
 
I found what may well be Ed's <capture>[http://conservapedia.com/Police_discretion shortest article]</capture>.  Excluding the title and the external link, zero text.  It's a lot like copy/paste, only lazier.--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] ([[User talk:WJThomas|talk]]) 23:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I think there had been even shorter ones (where he didn't even give a link description), but I don't have any examples handy. --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 00:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I seem to remember one or two stubs where he just copied and pasted a link in. Even that, though, isn't as short (or as funny) as [[:File:TwoMeters.png|this]]. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 01:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::[[cp:Eft]] is another contender for the record. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] ([[User talk:MarkGall|talk]]) 01:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::That one might take the cake - he doesn't even bother to capitalize, though he does link to the "newt" article. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 01:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::They mostly come out at night... mostly.  [[User:Stile4aly|Stile4aly]] ([[User talk:Stile4aly|talk]]) 02:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::It's not that short though, really.  Sure it's his shortest?  Anyway, the other 187 editors will soon flesh it out! {{User:Human/sig|}} 03:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I found the shortest stub.  <capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Theoretical_physics&oldid=684231 zero text, not even external links]</capture>. (Somebody else is updating it for him with a stub tag and someone else changed it to speedy deletion candidate.) {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 04:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::KnThreeOhNine for he win! {{User:Human/sig|}} 07:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::What's remarkable about that is he added a category. Virtually every other stub of his is category-free except for the really stupid ones that he makes up like [[cp:Category:Movies about football coaches with 11-year-old daughters]] or [[cp:category:Microsoft Problems]]. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 09:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::I'm afraid, half of the 187 editors are blocked now :-) {{User:LArron/sig}} 06:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Why thank you so much for explaining the joke. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 06:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::Technically that was a new joke. <sup>[[User:1|ONE]] / [[User_talk:1|TALK]]</sup> 12:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::Irrelevant, it's not ''real'' humour. Sorry, humor.[[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 13:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::Let's not forget [[:File:Capture_a965a90767d9159057e504c80c0cb1f19a801b1e.png|smart growth]], a personal favorite. [[User:TheMayor|TheMayor]] ([[User talk:TheMayor|talk]]) 15:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::We should have a page of Ed stubs. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 17:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::There's a [[cp:Main_Page|wiki]] of 'em. {{User:Toast/Zug}} 17:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::::Haha, very funny Toast. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 17:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::::I was thinking that they would fit onto a handy single page rather than rooting round a grubby blog. Sorry but I'm a lazy slob. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 18:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::::::Ask and ye shall  [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Ed+Poor&namespace=0 receive] [[Image:Winking0001.gif]] [[User:Csmiller|CS Miller]] ([[User talk:Csmiller|talk]]) 18:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::::::Goddamn, is <s>Ken</s>Ed a worthless asset to that site. He writes like a fecking four year old. He [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hounddog&action=history started an article] on a movie called [http://www.conservapedia.com/Hounddog Hounddog] and from the edit comments it seems he wrote it as he was watching the movie. It's like reading a retarded kids blog. The last sentence of the "article": ''"Then the girl gets rape, having been lured to an isolated shack,"'' accompanied by the edit comment: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hounddog&diff=next&oldid=767381 "at this point, I stopped watching."] Too funny. {{User:SuperJosh/Sig|}} 19:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::::::::That brightened my day up a bit. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 19:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::::::::::I hope you don't mind SuperJosh but I took the liberty of changing Ken to Ed. --[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 20:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::::::::::::Not at all, dear NAN, not at all... {{User:SuperJosh/Sig|}} 23:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
(undent) I can't believe nobody has mentioned the [[User:Worm/PoorTwitaPedia|PoorTwitapedia]] in the course of this discussion. Maybe it should finally be moved to CP namespace and linked around. <sup>[[User:1|ONE]] / [[User_talk:1|TALK]]</sup> 20:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I have an idea.  Let's do this like the annotated Bible that can be extracted for quotes.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 21:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I wasn't aware of the PoorTwitaPedia. Awesome. Is this still work in progress? I could scan my archive for additional Ed stubs very efficiently; would it make sense for me to go looking? [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 13:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::It was originally created as a snapshot in time, but it can cetainly be added to, I can even hack together a script to pull out new articles to add if I can remember how I did it originally :) {{User:Worm/sig|}} 19:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::I maintain a complete mirror of the entire site on a local drive, so it's just a matter of a few finds and greps. The are are currently 798 pages in the article namespace less than 200 characters long. Many of them are "Terms" list pages with just one or two terms on them but fully 495 are classic stubs. Most of them, based on a few spot checks, appear to be Ed emesis. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 23:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Paranoia and Language ==
 
 
 
Please enjoy <capture>[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Title_IX&diff=767233&oldid=574332 this recent Andy edit re: Title IX]</capture>. There's a vaguely amusing slip there: observe that Title IX is not used by homosexuals or the homosexual community but by the homosexual ''agenda'', i. e. the homosexual agenda has gone from an abstract product of human discourse to a person-like sentient entity with political consciousness. It almost like reading de Beauvoir again. I you've seen one persecution complex you've really seen them all. [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 12:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:It's like the ontological god: if it is imaginable, it exists.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 15:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::You do know I'm '''really''' afraid of Cthulhu, right? {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 17:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::I love how he just drops this blatant assertion in the middle of an "encyclopedic" article and doesn't even attempt to find a source to back up his bullshit.  He cites no court cases, no press releases, nothing. {{User:SirChuckB/sig|}} 18:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::The legal claim he refers to is real and there is a DoE guideline that may have the force of law (I don't know). The homosexual agenda stuff is deflection to distract from his butthurt at living in a world where homosexual students get to go to public school, which to him is wrong on so many levels. I love these glimpses into how hate filled and unsavory Andy's world is. {{:User:Nutty Roux/sig|}} 22:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I'm not disputing the claim, I just find it funny that a trained attorney would just drop something like in an article with no citation.  It can't be hard to find one. {{User:SirChuckB/sig|}} 18:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== More whatthefuckery. ==
 
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:_Regenerative_ability_of_early_humans&oldid=767893 Regenerative ability of early humans]</capture>. I can't wait for Andy latch onto ''this'' insight. Of course, if early humans could regenerate, wouldn't that negate Jesus' miracles. Hmmm? --[[User:Psygremlin|<b><font color="blue">PsyGremlin</font></b>]]{{User:Psygremlin/sig|}} 18:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I see Poe written all over it, but that might be just me.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 18:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::TSpencer seems like some pretty deep parody to me...and I like it. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 19:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Someone should copy that to aWK.  As a mainspace article. {{User:Human/sig|}} 20:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Heh heh. It'd work just fine on CP as a mainspace article if the author could find some kind of anti-homosexual/liberal slant. Teh gay takes away our ability to regenerate like Wolverine. It's Stephen Fry's fault that I don't have adamantium claws! --{{User:Concernedresident/sig|}} 21:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Do liberal teachings cause us to decay? [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Regardless of whether it is parody or not, it is obviously self-defeating because it uses YEC as its basis but suggests that human have been affected by mutations over time. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 21:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Well, he does explain those mutations only caused "loss" of information. That's pretty YECcy. [[User:Internetmoniker|Internetmoniker]] ([[User talk:Internetmoniker|talk]]) 22:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::ConcernedResident, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. When I first looked at the essay, I had the strangest sense of deja-vu, but I couldn't put my finger on where I had seen it before. Your Wolverine comment finally reminded me: It was <capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=762721&oldid=762696 this]</capture> comment (mentioned in Archive 174, the JimPT section where Wolverine was also brought up in the same context) by the same guy. So thanks for letting me sleep easily tonight. =P --[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 22:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
Please note that Wolverine does not naturally have adamantium claws. He has regular bone claws that were later covered in adamantium (along with the rest of his skeleton) by a shady government department for shady government reasons (probably obama's death pannels needing a new assassin). So Stephen Fry has taken away our <i>bone</i> claws. </comicnerd> [[User:X Stickman|X Stickman]] ([[User talk:X Stickman|talk]]) 11:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Ah, but Stick my friend, you are going off of the recent retcon story.  Originally, Wolverine only had regeneration.  The adamantium claws were added by the Weapon X program.  This is obviously Obama's secret plan to upgrade his private Readycorps Army (which may not be an army, but has an army sounding name, so we'll assume it's an Army) to supersoldier levels so he can force all dissenters into Fema Camps. {{User:SirChuckB/sig|}} 18:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Retcons are still canon! Plus this is still talking about the 90s, when magneto magneted his ass. Also it totally makes sense; they couldn't just jam metal claws in there, because they'd have to add a whole system to cope with it, like a method of locking them into place, muscles to control it etc... and we all know that Obama's healthcare will be so terrible that they won't have the ability to perform such complex surgery. So they must have been there right from the start. One thing I've always wondered, though; how does he bend his wrists? He's either got some amazingly strong wrist muscles when they're extended, or he shouldn't be able to bend his wrists at all. Also they must retract all the way into his forearms. [[User:X Stickman|X Stickman]] ([[User talk:X Stickman|talk]]) 20:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Wait...''what??'' ==
 
 
 
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=next&oldid=767874 He must be kidding. No one can be this insane...] {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 23:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:The bill creates a "Ready Reserve Corps" as part of its attempt to help reform the national medical response teams which supplement local emergency aid.  This is a deliberately stupid interpretation of that section (5210).--{{User:AD/sig2|}} 00:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I read the articles he linked to - nowhere does it mention "military" or even "militia," so the Reserve Corps in question is obviously a ''medical'' emergency response team. It's stunning that anyone could be so hyperbolic or that CP (for all its insanity, there are people even crazier) would allow something like that on the main page. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 00:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I looked into this. The link points to a YouTube video of a Fox News segment. Andrew Napolitano goes off on this tear about how someone is trying to build a corps of 6,000 armed and uniformed doctors. Not joking. Naturally, he doesn't give the numbers of any segments of the bill, thus making it hard to look up. I picked up a few context clues and learned that he was blathering on about [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text Sec. 5210: Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps]. What it does is establish an organization similar to the National Guard, but designed specifically to aid in public health emergencies. Actually, it doesn't really establish the organization - Sec. 5210 is [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00000203----000-.html an amendment to a bill passed in 1944]. What it does is change the organization of the health corps.
 
:Are the corpsman armed? No. Are there 6,000 of them? The section doesn't say. Does it allow the corps to poach men from the National Guard? Not by my reading. In sum: Napolitano is full of shit, and so is BenjaminS. [[User:Colonel of Squirrels|<b>Colonel of Squirrels</b>]][[User_Talk:Colonel of Squirrels|<sup><i>白山羊不山羊。商讨。</i></sup>]] 00:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I'm probably being a bit naive here but why would Obama even need to create a new army by using sneaky wording in the healthcare bill. Doesn't he already control the actual military? Plus the national guard. 6,000 doctors/healthcare specialists, armed or not, don't really compare to that. [[User:X Stickman|X Stickman]] ([[User talk:X Stickman|talk]]) 10:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::: I'm going to have to find my copy of [http://www.amazon.com/Beating-Back-Devil-Detectives-ebook/dp/B0036QVO4G/ this book] (I've moved so often lately that I have no idea where half my library is any more) but from it, my recollection is that some, but by no means all, employees of the the CDC (and possibly other public health organisations) are members of a "uniformed service" and have uniforms (obviously!) and so on. Of course I can't remember useful details such as the name of said service!--[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 16:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::: Just to clarify, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention already has a rapid response section (the Epidemic Investigation Service) which investigates outbreaks of disease caused by anything from food-borne microorganisms (my area of interest) to Ebola and everything inbetween. Some EIS members are part of the uniformed corps referred to in the previous edit but so are other CDC employees. This corps might be called the Commissioned Corps but don't quote me on that.--[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 16:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
Andy [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAschlafly&diff=767944&oldid=767942 explains]:  "Reserve Corps" sounds like an army name, so therefore it must be one.  Perfectly logical.--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] ([[User talk:WJThomas|talk]]) 02:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I've always wondered if being a judge isn't one of Andy's secret fantasies, actually. To some extent, a lot of ECHR and UK HoL cases do end up boiling down to 'because I said so', just as Andy's done here - it's just that the person or persons saying so have decades of experience and are infinitely more intelligent than Andy are (though it's shaky at times, I know). If Andy was to become a judge, I think he would be a little bit like [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U&feature=related this] (explanation for why this is so fucking hilarious at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Thorpe, incidentally, from 'Homosexuality scandal' onwards, though it is a stunning sketch without the foreknowledge anyway). [[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 11:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Everything with "corps" in it is a military organization, obviously.  Marine Corps, Peace Corps, Americorps... [[User:TheMayor|TheMayor]] ([[User talk:TheMayor|talk]]) 15:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:: Citicorp? :P --[[Image:TheEgyptiansig001.png|link=User:TheEgyptian]] 20:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Didn't she die like 30 years ago? ==
 
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=768034&oldid=768001 yet there she is]</capture>, spreading the cancer. Perhaps I'm being too nitpicky, but I think that even in a vacuum the rest of the statement would earn the whole thing some scorn. --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 17:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:OH NOZ! $700,000 went to Planned Parenthood affiliates...that give breast cancer screenings and mammograms... <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 18:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Don't you see, they are treating the breast cancer caused by the abortions so that they can have the women have more abortions.  It's crystal clear.  Big red truck, duh... [[User:Ravenhull|Ravenhull]] ([[User talk:Ravenhull|talk]]) 18:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Maybe she caught the boob canzer from an abortion. --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 00:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Nuke WIGO ==
 
 
 
Sorry to be a nuisance but TK, not Andy, posted the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=767973&oldid=767962 news item] about the reduction in the number of nukes the US has. --[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 20:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Fixed, nice catch. [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::I was about to fix this, so if anyone asks, I'm the one who did. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 21:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Not that it matters, I removed it because it ruined an otherwise decent wigo. --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 21:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I agree with Nx, TK aint funny. [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::(EC) Thanks Ace. I've enjoyed RW for a long time and it's nice to be able to help out once in a while, albeit in minor ways. I'm sorry for ruining the WIGO though! --[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 21:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::You're [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Conservapedia:What_is_going_on_at_CP%3F&diff=559902&oldid=559900 Overlord]? --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 21:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::: Nope, that's not me Nx - it's hard enough wiki-editing as myself without having socks! --[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 21:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::TK is not funny to the cabal. The cabal can go fuck themselves. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 21:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::The cabal frequently fuck themselves and others. [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Just saying that non-cabalists still occasionally find TK funny. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 21:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I am glad you enjoy him. [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::I am glad you are glad. Let's go for a long walk together. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 21:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Can we hold hands? [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::Only because yours are so soft. <sup>&mdash; Sincerely, [[User:Neveruse|Neveruse]] / [[User_Talk:Neveruse|Talk]] / [[Special:Block/Neveruse|Block]]</sup> 21:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::I use a cream. [[User:Ace McWicked|Ace]][[User Talk:Ace McWicked|<sup>i9</sup>]] 21:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::: Non-cabalist here: Tk is not funny but interesting to watch like a train-wreck or the freak show at the state fair. A bit like Marcus Cicero... I dont understand why you guys bannninnated them after having fed those troll for years. Oh, yeah, the lawsuit... OOoOOoOOh.. scary :P  man 4chan has been up for years now, even with scientology on their back. They have absolutely no case about RW. It's a schlafly FBI menace redux. [[User:Alain|Alain]] ([[User talk:Alain|talk]]) 21:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::::As a wanna-be Cabalist, I share the opinion that TK isn't usually much fun. MC was a little better, but noisy ''all the time'' instead of just during CP slumps...and not everybody enjoys watching trolls interrupt threads and flip articles over. Anyway, the WIGO itself was at least decently written... ~ [[User:Kupochama|Kupochama]]<sup>[[User_talk:Kupochama|[1]]][[Special:Contributions/Kupochama|[2]]]</sup> 21:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::::TK, the wannabe intellectual, doesn't understand what [[wp:Begging_the_question|begging the question]] means. Stupid old fart. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 09:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Ed "knows he's right" WIGO ==
 
 
 
That's one of the funniest things Ed has said in a long time. My favorite quote: ''"We don't use article[s] to "prove my side is right" but rather to explain what each POV is, and why its adherents support it."'' Remember, Ed, you're not on WP anymore. {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 21:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:My favourite part is the implication that he hopes people on CP can ''"work together on world-class encyclopedia articles"''. There's a bonus chuckle in his Ken-like ''"over hope"''. --[[User:NotANumber|NotANumber]] ([[User talk:NotANumber|talk]]) 21:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::when Ed starts to call you ''my friend'' you know, he's up to something devious. What a sanctimonious prick {{User:LArron/sig}} 22:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::'':Learn to live, we learn to give each other'' blocks, in general. And not ''each other'', actually... {{User:LArron/sig}} 22:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Isn't it somewhat... ''unusual'' for them to be openly unhappy about someone departing? Don't they usually declare themselves (a) greatly relieved to be rid of the deceitful liberal prevaricator or (b) completely indifferent? First TK, now Ed? [[User:Mountain Blue|mb]] 23:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Don't worry, Andy restored the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&curid=97948&diff=768105&oldid=768101 status quo.] [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 23:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Andy's first sentence says a lot about him. He sees the world as completely black and white, and he thinks that teaching this to someone is "opening their mind." Though he recognizes that others don't share his view, he sees compromise and [[NOMA]] as self-denial. Also, he could definitely benefit from the following expression: "Don't try to have the last word. You might get it." {{User:Tetronian/sig|}} 23:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Has anyone figured out what Bert is [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=next&oldid=768111 prattling on] about here? [[User:Junggai|Junggai]] ([[User talk:Junggai|talk]]) 00:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Does anyone ever know what Bert is talking about? [[User:Keegscee|Keegscee]] ([[User talk:Keegscee|talk]]) 00:50, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Is it just me, or is the response in that thread getting ever more [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&curid=97948&diff=768128&oldid=768127 listless]? I don't think Andy even believes what he just wrote. [[User:Junggai|Junggai]] ([[User talk:Junggai|talk]]) 01:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::Bert is searching for validation, he is only human. Is it me or is JimPT winning a conversation with Andy? --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 02:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Well, if by winning you mean "making reasonable points while Andy keeps falling back on a single shit example that doesn't match the situation, because that's all he's got," then yeah, but then, what else is new? Perhaps the fact that he's taking it and trying to argue back rather than threatening to block JimPT's ass for MYOB.
 
::::::To me, it seems that Andy's conspicuously having to strain a little bit to justify his earlier comments. In most casess, he would have dismissed the situation immediately afterwards as typical liberal denial, but now, 2-3 days later, he's still letting himself be engaged in discussion about it. [[User:Junggai|Junggai]] ([[User talk:Junggai|talk]]) 08:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== I didn't know that Ken said "Deny this and loose all credibility" ==
 
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=768123&oldid=767949 Ken runs on]</capture> and a <capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=768125&oldid=768123 reply]</capture> --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 00:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
: Loose credibility is a terrible thing. [[User:Cantabrigian|Cantabrigian]] ([[User talk:Cantabrigian|talk]]) 08:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Oh good, a new confederacy ==
 
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&curid=85316&diff=768130&oldid=768129 blarg]</capture> and just in time for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_History_Month Confederate history month] too! --[[User:Opcn|Opcn]] ([[User talk:Opcn|talk]]) 01:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Fitting it be the same month that starts off with a holiday like April Fools. :p
 
 
 
:Seriously though, am I the only one who sometimes thinks that should the Tea Baggers or Neo-cons or whatever ultra far right policial faction tickles your toenails actually decide and succede in causing states to once again break away from the union that it might be better to just let them go this time? [[User:Tygrehart|Tygrehart]]
 
 
 
== Image not in Liberal media ==
 
 
 
[http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/billboard-attack-president-obama-10147284 It's there].  Perhaps it should have been there during the Bush years.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 04:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== If it's "liberal" it can't be charity ==
 
 
 
<capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal_charity&curid=101583&diff=768163&oldid=768162 Andy removes Bill Gates from Charity list.]</capture> Edit comment: ''(Gates and Buffett's view of charity deserve criticism; I don't think they've built many hospitals either, and much of Gates' "charity" has gone toward liberal approaches to education)'' {{User:Toast/Zug}} 11:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:[[File:Jesus-facepalm.jpg|100px]]
 
:--[[User:Sid|Sid]] ([[User talk:Sid|talk]]) 11:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Soooo.... only hospital-building qualifies as charity? All of sudden, Andy's quip "Atheists do not give to charities" makes perfect sense when you define "charities" as "religious organisations".  Facepalm indeed. --[[User:Ireon|Ireon]] ([[User talk:Ireon|talk]]) 11:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::This is petty even by Andy's standards. [[User:Webbtje|Webbtje]] ([[User talk:Webbtje|talk]]) 12:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
:::I hate Microsoft with a heated passion greater than the fires of perdition itself, but I do greatly respect Bill Gates for attempting to recreate the concept of the wealthy philanthropist. Here's [http://www.gatesfoundation.org/global-health/Documents/global-health-fact-sheet-english-version.pdf a listing of the global health efforts of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation]. (warning -- its a PDF). Okay, there aren't any hospitals, per se, but there's quite a commitment to health. [[User:MDB|MDB]] ([[User talk:MDB|talk]]) 12:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I was unaware that negotiating and buying a buttload of medicine is uncharitable, and that Mr. Gates must build the building that contains the medicine to be considered so. But hey, what do I know? – [[User talk:nickheer|Nick Heer]] 14:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::If you're trying to get specific medication to third-world countries then building a hospital is a pretty inefficient way of doing it. A hospital needs a lot of capital expenditure and where poor people don't have access to transport then getting to a hospital is almost impossible. Many small clinics, which may already exist, are a much better way way of disseminating treatment. Schlalfy is an utter moron and knows nothing of the rest of the world other than what he gets fom his biased right-wing US sources. Like most of the regulars at CP he is contemptible. {{User:Lily The Pink/sig}} 14:47, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Yes, it's missing the point to call Schlafly insane.  He is worse than that: he is contemptible, nasty, self-centered, and dishonest. [[User:Fawlty|Fawlty]] ([[User talk:Fawlty|talk]]) 15:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== "At least one?" ==
 
 
 
Please note how Andy censors an unwanted edit by using among the reasons that it contains [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Matthew_Shepard&curid=21159&diff=768156&oldid=768150 "at least one" ] broken link. It contains EXACTLY one broken link, Andy. There were three links total, so it's not like it is so difficult to check them all, or to keep count.
 
 
 
I am rather irked by this usage of "at least one" to imply "more than one"; I had already remarked it when I read that the Shroud of Turin had caused the conversion of "at least one" scientist. Am I overreacting, or do other people find this usage of "at least" pathetic and leading? --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] ([[User talk:Maquissar|talk]]) 13:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Andy?  Pathetic?  Hard to believe...--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] ([[User talk:WJThomas|talk]]) 14:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
::Am slightly more perplexed at the removal of the perpetrators names. It reminds me of the [[cp:Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District|Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District]] where he wouldn't allow any mention of Tammy Kitzmiller because it took away from his ACLU bashing. {{User:Π/Sig|}} 15:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:Actually I think it is typical from a person with a lawyer background to write it like that; after all it is how it is usually written in patents and other legal documents.  {{User:k61824/Sig|}} 15:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
 
 
== Family Friendly? ==
 
 
 
I'm wondering why CP now has a picture of a [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Barcelona_Torre_Agbar_WC.jpg giant glowing penis] on their [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageleft&diff=prev&oldid=768043 front page].--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] ([[User talk:WJThomas|talk]]) 14:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
:I hope i hope i hope oh boy do i hope Joaquín Martínez puts the London olympics "Orbit" under the World Treasure section one day. The fallout would be delightful. <sup>[[User:1|ONE]] / [[User_talk:1|TALK]]</sup> 15:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 
==Why ...==
 
... is it <capture>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=768199&oldid=768194 worthy of mention]</capture> that the supreme court is without a military vet? It's not just CP that grizzles about it, I've seen it several places on t'web. {{User:Toast/Zug}} 15:23, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 

Revision as of 05:43, 20 April 2010

Welcome to RationalWikiWikiWiki!
Hello, dear reader! And welcome to the looking-glass world of RationalWikiWikiWiki, a wiki all about
Για αυτό το λήμμα υπάχει και διαθέσιμο άρθρο στα Ελληνικά, με τίτλο [[1]].

.

RationalWikiWiki currently has π articles.

Check out our new Dive Bar !

Goals Goats

RationalWikiWiki is the most average website made by Radioactive afikomen Hans Johnson. By observing RationalWikiWikians' behavior in their natural habitat, we aim to:

Identify anything happening

Seriously, if you see anything happening - at all - please add it to our news ticker

Observe conflict resolution procedures

RationalWiki doesn't really have a conflict resolution procedure, as a result when slighted the offended RationalWikian will run over to RationalWikiWiki and moan about it. We hope to be able to see who these people are by their tiresome whining.

What is going on at RationalWikiWiki?

upneutraldown
11RationalWikiWiki has a funny WIGO (apparently). Wish we did, we only have shit like this to WIGO.
upneutraldown
5If it is offensive enough to block for why is it not offensive enough to revert?
upneutraldown
6MarcusCicero gets pwned!
upneutraldown
4RationalWikiWiki is now a forum dedicated to the discussion of beer, pizza, chips and other carb-heavy foodstuff.
upneutraldown
6New Leader of RationalWikiWiki (?) MNpunkboy realises giving MarcusCicero a carte blanche to write his thoughts on RationalWiki, would not be a good thing.
upneutraldown
10Trent lays down the law.
upneutraldown
4Fall down reappears to object to his nomination for "most abusive editor." He is promptly blocked for two days.
upneutraldown
4It appears that, thanks to some diplomacy, MarcusCicero is finally gone from both RationalWiki and RationalWikiWiki. Yeah, right.
upneutraldown
7RationalWikiWiki brings in night mode to deal with MarcusCicero's tantrum.
upneutraldown
11MarcusCicero wants you to know just how many sexual favours he is getting. Curiously though - he doesn't make mention of the gender of those providing him with said favours. I'm just saying.... *Update* A sexually self-sufficient walrus offers a hint as to the source of Mr Cicero's sexual favours: Walrus pleasures itself (NSFW, unless you're a zoo keeper) .
upneutraldown
9False Flag proposes a "RationalWiki Awards Contest," which in English means "a free-for-all of copious namecalling."
Older news