Difference between revisions of "RationalWiki:Saloon bar"

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(RW reviews)
(RW reviews)
Line 332: Line 332:
::The <s>I'm all right jack</s> Ron Paul fan's reactions only go to show that extremists are... extreme. [[User:Jack Hughes|Jack Hughes]] ([[User talk:Jack Hughes|talk]]) 17:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
::The <s>I'm all right jack</s> Ron Paul fan's reactions only go to show that extremists are... extreme. [[User:Jack Hughes|Jack Hughes]] ([[User talk:Jack Hughes|talk]]) 17:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
:::RationalWiki is destined for great things. It's possible. Ron Paul, not so much. [[User:Mei II|Mei]] ([[User talk:Mei II|talk]]) 19:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
:::RationalWiki is destined for great things. It's possible. Ron Paul, not so much. [[User:Mei II|Mei]] ([[User talk:Mei II|talk]]) 19:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Just thinking out loud:
I regularly try and sort through discussions about RW that pop up. There is not a lot of specific or constructive criticism to really draw upon. In general I think it can be summarized as either people criticizing us as overly cp-centric, as created for the purpose of merely mocking CP or as a vandal hub. This is a tough one to address, RW was originally created in response to CP, there are several high profile areas of the site that are completely CP centric, and CP matters do have a tendency to over dominate at times. However, we have branched out considerably, and to be honest the "newer" discussions of RW have a tendency to be focused on different aspects of the site. I think there is nothing really to ''do'' but just keep developing the site on multiple fronts, as more people engage with us from different sources and view points CP centric issues will drift ever lower. That is all ready happening, talk:WIGOCP used to be the only place you could really post anything if you wanted to get peoples attention.
The other most common criticism is a lack of seriousness. Articles have a tendency to go through phases, with the initial phases been short stubs that are full of mockery and jokes, if those articles are important they get developed over time, and while often maintaining a certain level of sarcasm and mockery they become more and more "dry" as they develop. I think there is a strong link between "in order to be taken seriously you need to be serious." I think we could be a little more careful in certain important topics. A good example of this is the shift we made with the [[Andrew Schlafly]] article, which started off as nothing but extreme parody with gerbling jokes. Mockery and sarcasm can be effective tools, but if that is all we have on a page people can legitimately criticize it. This also has to do with the whole concept of wiki, and wiki development. Every wiki has problems with "stubs."
A final criticism is a little harder to work with. And that is that we are not really providing anything "new" that can't be found elsewhere. I actually think this is an invalid criticism, and I have elucidated on this point in the past. But maybe others see it differently, or see how we might improve on this. tmtoulouse 20:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
== More about Rasmussen ==
== More about Rasmussen ==

Revision as of 20:35, 29 April 2010

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: Archive list
Saloon bar
WIGO Bar colour.png

Welcome BoN
This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
Spit.gif For previous conversations see the automagic barchives. Guinnesssmiley.gif

What is going on?

The Bar
(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

To do list

Thunderf00t vs Ray Comfort (sticky)

Here is a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2FskTKrx40 Mei (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
For people who have not seen it. Mei (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Too good to let it go to archives so fast. Thanks everyone for the fish, and especially to Mei for being useful. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Anyone ever been to Spain?

I'm going in July for study abroad and would love to know if anyone's been. Thanks! rational ghey (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

*insert bad Three Dog Night joke here* Secret Squirrel (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I have been there. Stupid evil Hoover! 20:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Bob M lives there. 21:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC) yummy Toast&  honey(or marmalade)
I do indeed live in Spain. But I've lived here too long to be able to answer questions in one-line stereotypes along the lines of "Spain is X" or "All Spaniards are Y" . But ... having said that ... what would you like to know?--BobSpring is sprung! 21:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
(But I'm just turning in .. so any answers may take a while.)--BobSpring is sprung! 21:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
In Spain you wear hats on your feet and hamburgers eat people. Acei9 21:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I've been. Well, Menorca if that counts. It was touristy. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 23:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I went to Ibiza last year just after I turned 18. I don't remember any of it, which meant it was fucking awesome. SJ Debaser 00:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Either it was awesome, or your drink was spiked on the first night and you were kept drugged in the room of a large spaniard called Camilo, who used you as a week-long sex toy. I guess that might also be awesome... CrundyTalk nerdy to me 17:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I took a leak over the border from France while spending a week sleeping on the beach a few years ago. Nutty Roux (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Barcelona, Figueras, Mallorca, Seville, Grenada, Denia. But only for holidays (vacations). Depends what you want to know.  Lily Inspirate me. 00:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I too have been to Spain. On a number of occasions. Is that the only information you are seeking? DogPMarmite Patrol 01:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


This thread caused me to look at some Spanish stuff on WP:

a devotion to the traditional role of women in society, that is: loving child to her parents and brothers, faithful to her husband, residing with her family. Official propaganda confined her role to family care and motherhood. Immediately after the war the situation of women suddenly became adverse, because most progressive laws passed by the Republic were made void. Women could not become judges, or testify in trial. They could not become university professors. Their affairs and economy had to be managed by their father or by their husbands. Until the 1970s a woman could not have a bank account without a co-sign by her father or husband.

Remind anyone of anyone?

I was on the bummel around Europe in the 60's & avoided Spain like the plague. 01:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC) yummy Toast&  honey(or marmalade)


So whats the culture like? I know its a fairly liberal country but im living in salamanca (near Portugal).. but I still feel anxiety about going to a new country and being gay doesnt really help. rational ghey (talk) 02:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I think A Fistfull of Traveller's Cheques ought to cover it. It's every I know about Ibiza. Also, some people think John Lennon had sex with Brian Epstein there. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I just googled expat american spain and got a whole load (594,000) hits. Do thou likewise. 03:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC) yummy Toast&  honey(or marmalade)
How about going there, studying, enjoying yourself, but not getting off the plane shouting "I'm gay! I'm gay! Everybody look at me! I'm gay! Isn't that important? I'm gay I'm gay I'm gay!" - if you do that I'm sure you'll have a great time. (to answer your original question; yes, I have been to Spain). PS. One more thing: do you speak Spanish? DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 20:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Being gay doesn't help? Well only if you want to flaunt your sexuality. Being straight doesn't help in some countries if you behave in a manner that offends local sensibilities. Trust me, you can have a good time in a foreign country even without sex or getting your tits out in public (metaphorically speaking, as I presume your male). There probably is a gay culture in Spain but it's not as obvious as in the US or UK. They do have a more macho culture and hetero is the accepted norm.  Lily Inspirate me. 10:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest avoiding this conversation:
  • You: Hi I'm Richard Gehay, and guess what? I'm gay!
  • Some Spaniard: And what do you think of our find country Richard?
  • You: It's great! I like the sun and the easy-going people. Are there any gay bars around here? (Because I'm gay you know.)
  • Some Spaniard: Well the big cities may have some. I'm straight myself but, like most young people my age, I don't really care about your sexuality, and it's not necessary for you to talk about yours at every opportunity. Have you been to the beach yet?
  • You: Are there a lot of gay people on the beach?
  • Some Spaniard: There might be, I honestly wouldn't know.
  • Well it's important to me. Did I mention I was gay?
Such a conversation might not be the best way to start.--BobSpring is sprung! 19:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)--BobSpring is sprung! 19:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm more modest in person. thanks rational ghey (send a message) 22:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Sleep paralysis

Anyone have much personal experience with this phenomenon? Particularly interested in the sensory aspects of it beyond the mere paralysis. I am particularly interested in some neural modeling hypothesis about it, particularly as it might relate to dysregulation of proprioception. The "sense of a presence" is an odd phenomenon, and might be explainable as the normal proprioception some how becoming external. But it gets more complicated as people report being able to apply cognition, intentionality even gender to the presence. It is "focused" on you, it has attention, and its universally malevolent "pure evil." What the heck is going on here? I would be interested in any experiences anyone might have had. I have been trying to purposefully induce it and have some luck but only the paralysis part. I get the "awake but can't move" thing but I can't seem to tap into the sensory hallucinations or "abject terror" so often associated with it. tmtoulouse 05:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You take too many interesting drugs... ħumanUser talk:Human 06:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Trent, I'm off to bed, but send me an e-mail reminding me to get back to you, I may have something you'll find interesting...P-Foster (talk) 06:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I used to experience this quite a lot, but now only occasionally. It was frightening when I didn't know what it was, but once I read about it it stopped being so horrifying. Sometimes however I seem to be both dreaming, awake and immobile and a bad thing is happening in the dream, the conscious part of me knows that I've got to break sleep paralysis in order to "wake up". It really takes a hell of a lot of effort and sometimes the muscle of the limb I move hurts from the effort. I also experience "lucid dreams" - but in that case you've got to make an effort not to move! More later If you're interested.BobSpring is sprung! 06:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I've actually experienced it - i.e., "awake but can't move" - or just suffered a really fucked up dream due to a bout of illness. It kind of felt like I was in a dream but so tired I couldn't actually bring myself out of it, which is both unusual and scary because I can do that fairly effectively as I lucid dream fairly regularly. I've also had a dream that I was convinced was real for a couple of days and even with hindsight what I was seeing was a perfect representation of where I was at the time, so it wasn't a case of "oh, of course it was a dream, it looked nothing like my house even though I thought it was at the time". So given that, I can't tell if my sleep paralysis experience was me actually awake (and viewing the real world while paralysed) or asleep (and viewing just a very accurate picture while my head went mental). I can't really recall any other specifics that would be of help though, but should it happen any time soon I'll let you know. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 07:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I experienced it once for a few seconds, it is not fun. Afterwards, when I could move again, and sure there were not things moving around me (I remember lights even though it was dark, 3 I think, not bright more sort of shadow lights) I realized that it was sleep paralysis. - π 08:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
When I was very young, I had this. I didn't really have a focused presence thing so much as the abject terror. I did get the awake but paralysed thing later, but I haven't experienced it in years. --IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 09:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I find the concept very interesting. There are a few documentaries on the subject. What creeps me out is the similarity of sleep paralysis experiences. The succubus "old witch" presence and the "dark man" are commonly reported across all spectrum. A curious happening. I have had the frozen sensation and other weird things take place (bed shaking and sleep walking) but not as severe as real sufferers. Acei9 09:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I used to get this quite regularly, although I have not experienced it for a good few years now. It was very scary at first, as I would still be vividly dreaming about something happening within my bedroom. Often it involved some kind of intruder(s) in my room (from alien monsters to to Ben Elton - really), and I would be awake, but experiencing a very real 'dream' and unable to move. After a while I realised that all I had to do to make it stop was to switch on my bedside light, but this was a huge struggle. It sounds really weird, but I was able to abstract away so I'd be lying there thinking "Fucking hell, here we go again. Why can't I reach that fucking lightswitch so this episode will be over and I can get on with a night's sleep". As I said, I no longer get this, but I do sometimes get extremely vivid dreams (or even hallucinations, as when I'm in this 'mode' as soon as I close my eyes it starts) which can be somewhat disturbing. This usually happens when I'm sobering up after a few days on the booze, I've heard it refered to as 'getting the electric dreams'. Hope this helps and people don't think I'm a weirdo. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 15:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I dont know much about it but there was an article that said at a point in the sleep cycle , your brain disconnects from concious motor control of the body. This seemed to be a protection so you dont move during a dream phase and hurt yourself. This motor control should re-establish itself without you noticing. A sleep study would be good if its a recurring problem. That would identify if you are actually awake and unable to move , or dreaming that you are .. etc. A neurologist would likely be the person to ask or your family Doctor to start with. Hamster (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes on the sleep paralysis and yes on the lucid dream thingy. Not so much about terror and presences but maybe thats because it happens so often (compared to other people) that I've got used to it. So I am more: "oh, it's this again".
However here one experience: First off, one thing to keep in mind is that if I do get sleep paralysis while falling asleep (doesn't only happen when you wake up), then it almost assured to be able to turn that into a lucid dream. Another thing to keep in mind is that lucid dreaming isn't so much as being in a holodeck, rather simply being "your normal self" aware in a world you can't control. However often you can make "suggestions" interacting with the content. I have noticed that often lucid dreams have something to do with the last subject I was thinking when awake. Finally, a third thing to keep in mind is that little Sen was never afraid of "monsters under the bed / ghosts" etc. I was an atheist/sceptic as far as I remember. On the other hand I had once seen a "documentary" regarding alien abductions which had terrified me (you can see where this is going no?), especially an interview with a guy who said that first he work up in the middle of the night paralyzed, and then was taken up the ship etc etc. Come some years then and a sleep paralysis event happens, and at that point I happened to remember about that interview for a moment but shrugged it off. Realizing that I am getting lucid, I start thinking about castles (hey, I had to think of something) in order to try to control the scenery a bit and suddenly: Bam, Grey Aliens, because "the last thought before falling asleep" was guess what.
Conclusion: Lucid Dream of Alien Abduction and seeing that "childhood fear" played out startled me so much that I kept feeling feeling paralyzed and unable to wake up. (for a while) So basically I self-abducted myself in very nice and vivid detail. Hows that for "entities"? :P Sen (talk) 01:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
"I have noticed that often lucid dreams have something to do with the last subject I was thinking when awake." That's why I think of sex as I drift off. I also have what I call "building dreams", a continuing series that mixes up many buildings I have interacted with into one great big place, sort of. Including fiction. They are fairly consistent, ie, the same weird shit from one dream to the next. For instance, in one version I have some waterfront property at the end of where I live now. The fucked up chimney is an old standard, as are the holes/gaps in the walls in some rooms. But you all knew that already. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Building stuff? Scarlet A.pngd hominem 02:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Had a bout of sleep paralysis a few days ago, the alarm clock went off, but I physically could not move to turn it off for what I would estimate was 15 seconds. My body just would not respond at all, then I could move again. I didn't have any terrors or anything else, though. Javasca₧ sysop and 'crat! (does it matter?) 03:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the very interesting responses and feedback. I have become increasingly interested in examining cognition from angles where normal rational and mundane experience breaks down for "normal" people. A lot of focus has been put on cognition changes and breakdowns of the more permanent type, but there are many incidents where normal fully functioning people with no significant psychological diagnoses have major, temporary, disruptions in cognition. With sleep paralysis the "paralysis" is interesting but fairly easily understood aspect of REM sleep. But the cognitive breakdown is not so easily understood.

This whole idea that we have some sort of mild sensory modality for detecting "presence" of other people is interesting. The question is whether that really is the case. We clearly have proprioception of our own body, and there is some interesting research that shows that can be disrupted. For example, transcranial magnetic stimulation against posterior areas of the temporal lobe known to be involved in proprioception will cause participants to report the sensation that there is someone else in the room, behind them or to the site. Most interesting is that they almost universally report that it is malevolent in nature. This sides well with a lot of the reports from sleep paralysis. Disruption of proprioception could fit in the model. This becomes particularly interesting because it suggests that the feeling of the presence comes first and that the hallucinations are the brain trying to make sense of that perception in a half-dream state. Bayesian cognition in your dreams? Perhaps...

The most interesting aspect of both the TMS research and sleep paralysis is the seeming ability for people to assign qualities to the perceived presence. It often has a gender, and not only does it have intentionality (malevolent, evil) but it has attention (it seems focused on the subject). Very, very strange. Is this some sort of predatory/prey type adaptation like I have talked about with pattern recognition? Maybe...

I really wish I could have more luck purposefully inducing this. I have been working on it for a week. Usually early morning a few hours before I would normally get up I have a lot of success introducing brief bouts of the paralysis. About 10-15 seconds, I get a bit panicky towards the end but nothing like some people describe, and I have had never had any of the sensory hallucinations or illusions. Maybe I am being to cognitive about the whole thing. One interesting side effect of playing around with it though is that it has drastically increased the incidents of lucid dreaming. I get them now and then but they are usually short and not very clear. Today I had my first ever fully lucid dream where I felt completely cognitive about the situation and had near perfect control over the dream. I decided to fly....why is that what everyone always wants to do? It lasted a good long while too, and I have full memory of it.

This should also be of interest to some more general issues that RW is interested in. Sleep paralysis illusions and hallucinations are probably at the root of many, many mythologies and monsters. And disruption of proprioception as a means to explain sensations of presences, even with attentional and motivational characteristics could explain a host of other phenomenon. I also think some of this might be relatable back to differences in dopamine regulation in the dorsal striatum. Massive dysregulation is clearly involved in positive symptomatology of schizophrenia. However, there is clearly differences in the more normal populations as well.

My recent behavioural work in the lab used a schizotypal personality questionnaire on psychology undergraduates and found a wide spread of scores in this population. More interesting than that we were able to correlate higher scores in cognitive-perceptual effects with behavioural tasks with a known sensitivity to dopamine levels. People have naturally different endogenous dopamine levels, and this lead to significant differences in cognitive proccessing.

My models of the dopamine system link it to motivational salience and probability assessment. Higher levels of dopamine lead to an higher abundance of type II errors when processing environmental and cognitive noise. Ideally, it would be really interesting to show that peoples beliefs in fringe ideas, paranormal, woo, quack medicine, what-have-you is related to large levels of dopamine and larger scores in disruption of cognitive-perceptual effects.

Coming back to sleep paralysis, I think the frontal lobe is primarily responsible for "damping down" salience effects of the striatum by being able to process direct sensory information and mix it with context. The classic example is that we don't need to be afraid of a rubber snake. The frontal lobe function is greatly diminished in REM sleep, and still even during sleep paralysis stages. I think this leads to a hyperinflation of the effects of lower brain regions. So the pons-adrenal system is allowed to run unchecked producing what amounts to a basic animal terror of overwhelming threat. And heightened salience of cognitive noise or environmental noise as being interpreted as something with incentive salience. So general audio white noise, whether random neuronal firing, or the sounds of your ceiling fan are perceived as having incentive salience because of a lack of frontal lobe inhibition. This salience has to be explained somehow, and when mixed with the pons-adrenal system running away with itself things get interpreted as threats. The illusion and hallucinations are emergent properties of the continuation of dream like REM sleep being overlaid on the brain going haywire with salience cues.

Teasing this all apart is not easy, but I think there are some interesting pieces to this puzzle to be found in half-sleep states, whether lucid dreaming, or sleep paralysis, sleep terrors or what-have-you. Personal accounts and experiences really help to understand this stuff because I just can't seem to replicate in my own mind. Ah well, here is hoping aliens come abduct me tonight. tmtoulouse 20:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Personally I am still not over that whole "sleeping" and "dreaming" thing. I mean, am I the only one that finds it rather amazing that the entire humans population occasionally falls into a mini-coma-thingy, it's conciousness essentially destroyed without even being able to tell when exactly that happens and on top of that, generates mini-trips as well? And the processing power that reveals! I mean, I have spend a good chunk of my time waiting in front of computers to complete some "ray tracing" and "global illumination" calculations, and I can't help but look at dreams and think "wow, that's some good real time shadow maps here". We are talking "realistic" lighting calculations, parallax movement calculations & pespective for the background, "random" folliage generation, bucketloads of textures and shaders, physics simulation (aka, when swinging from a bar, pushing doors/water with realistic mass, flying through the air with "realistic" momentum). I do realize that the brain probably doesn't actually "simulate" things rather makes a patchwork out of memories, but still, that's some procedural generation there. Interestingly mirrors are almost always screwed up or lead to screwed up results. Sen (talk) 21:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
It certainly sounds like interesting research Trent! How exactly are you trying to induce such events? I don't want to sound like a twat, but be careful - of course it's very interesting from a science perspective, but from a personal point of view I can tell you it is not nice. I still sometimes literally leap out of bed and run on to the landing, my heart absolutely pounding ten to the dozen, it is extremely unpleasant. And this is from someone who is extremely rational and doesn't believe in any of the woo you mentioned above. I am aware that my pons-adrenal system is a little bit over-zealous, and I suppose that to my sleeping brain this shit is REAL, but waking up with one's heart racing out one's chest does not set one up well for further sleep. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 01:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Just a timid of information I just remembered. I have heard (and it seems to be true for myself as well) that you have a greater chance to get sleep paralysis if you sleep on your back. So there's a helpful tip or placebo suggestion. Sen (talk) 06:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

What does that picture remind me of?

Clangers, anyone? 20:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk

Are they searching for ice or blue string soup? Totnesmartin (talk) 21:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Aw! Toasty just sent me on a 30-year nostalgia trip with one word. I used to love the Clangers. PsyGremlin講話 18:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

And so they found Noah's Ark. Again.

But I only have news articles written in Cantonese. If you got links in English, please post them. This time, it seems to come with Wood! Thieh"6+18=24" 21:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Google translator does a good job of it, but I'm wondering if this is, in fact, a rehash of the original hoax story. Quite often newspapers will do that and get confused, and a language barrier can only add to that (remember when one in China reported The Onion?). Scarlet A.pngd hominem 21:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Aussies sound a bit skeptical. Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 23:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC) Add: Dutch pics look fuzzy. Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 23:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Fake News has the story, along with all the other fair and balanced news items about why Obama is wrong on, eh, everything. DogPMarmite Patrol 16:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I like how they instantly denounce any outside ideas of a settlement by saying 'Its never been found at this altitude around here before' and immediately going to Noah. And they call us narrow minded for not accepting it. Also, it pisses me off that carbon dating is inaccurate unless its Their carbon dating, which then means it's just as infallible as the bible. -- CodyH (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Good observation, but the hypocrisy (maybe it's just inconsistency, rather than actual hypocrisy) doesn't just end there. Take the AIG link and particularly the points at the end where they say "oh, these articles discussing debunked observations have no bearing on this current story". Next consider creationist use of the words "piltdown" and "man". Clearly, only when it suits them do previous forgeries and hoaxes relate to current events. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 19:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Meme Poster

How many can you name?. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 12:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, there's House with a Darwin Fish lapel, he's standing in front of a box of signed xkcd books, xkcd appearing several times with a raptor shadow in the background and a ball-pit to the right. There's ceiling cat looking in over proceedings while Pedo Bear cautiously eyes up David Caruso taking off his sunglasses and putting them back on again so fast it looks like he's a in a quantum superposition where they're both on and off at the same time. The FSM is crawling through the ceiling and seems to be reaching for a snake, but it's not, however, on a plane. The narwhal is wearing Magical Trevor's hat, and the TV suggests that there are over 9000 memes in that picture, so good luck finding them all. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 15:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The IPU, DFTT sign and hypnotoad. K61824Looking for potion recipes 17:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The guy with the bag over his head appears to be wearing Chuck Taylors. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

"snake, but's not, however, on a plane"? Like this? Sen (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

NOOOO! NOT THE HYPNOTOAD!--Thanatos (talk) 00:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Does the axe on the wall represent Leroy Jenkins? --Kels (talk) 00:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Stephen Colbert is on the TV, there is ASCII art on the bulletin board, a Ron Paul bumper sticker, and House is wearing the Gmail symbol on his t-shirt. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 00:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was supposed to be the reddit orangered reply envelope. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 01:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Either way, he's got Gordon (not John) Freeman's crowbar. --Kels (talk) 02:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Marriage is for making babies...

Me heartie Tom be runnin' fer.... eugh I cannot keep that voice up. Anyway, a friend of mine lost a bet and is now running for MP. Last night was the hustings and I only wish I had a video of it because - and this is what accidentally got him elected last time he tried this - he's quite competent and witty on occasion. So when one candidate went on an anti gay marriage screed, saying something like "marriage should be for making babies" and the Mad Cap'n responds with "will ye be makin' couples take fertility tests first, then?". Which is a pretty good response I think! Scarlet A.pngd hominem 15:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, a very good response. Good luck to him. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our oak 20:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


My last of exam of the year is tomorrow, and after that I just have some coursework hand-ins next week. I'm going a bit insane over the formulas I need for the exam - lots of electronic stuff. Entertain me, minions. SJ Debaser 16:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That's new. Back in the day when I need to take exams they list all the equations for us, let us take an aid sheet, or they have open book exams (of course that usually means the difficulty of the exam is adjusted accordingly). ThiehWhat is NOT going on? 17:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
That didn't help at all. SJ Debaser 17:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
One time I let a monkry take notes for me in class. All day long I'd sit there with my mind a complete blank while the monkey scribbled things on little pieces of paper. Then, at the end of the week the teacher asked us to write a term paper based on our notes. This is what I wrote.eek eek I'm a monkey can I have a banana The teacher gave me an "F." When I got home and told my Mom about it she said "I told you to never trust a monkey!" The end. Me!Sheesh!Mine! 19:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
dont forget Ohms law , thats all I remember, the name Ohm. that and how to measure the resistance of a resistor after you burnt off the markings trying to solder it onto something else. Just remembered , capacitors, especially big ones, are pure evil, dont touch them. you are welcome. Hamster (talk) 19:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you and thank you. I haven't trusted monkeys since the great Tottenham Monkey Uprising of 1995. And Ohm's law is by far the easiest thing I have to remember. V = IR. Such a happy equation. SJ Debaser 20:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
To pass time, you could try hooking up an electrolytic capacitor using the wrong polarity. Anything in the uF range is pretty boring, but if you get something that is a few mF or even a 1F cap, well, watch out. Keegscee (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Just remember - "One over two pi, root L C, is the resonant free-quen-ceeee!". Since an instructor sang that little ditty, I've never forgotten that formula. (Never really had to use it much, unfortunately) DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 22:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
That little jingle might get you into trouble though. If you are dealing with frequency in Hz, then it is fine. But if you are dealing in angular frequency, as electrical engineers often do, you'll be off by a factor of 1/2pi! Keegscee (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I've never ever seen frequency refered to as an angular velocity in an electrical context. Maybe that's because I'm a spanner-monkey and not a desk-jockey. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 14:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Omega, and I don't mean fatty acids from oily fish! ħumanUser talk:Human 04:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Exam over. It went alright. Now I've basically finished my first year. It's now 3.23PM and I'm on my way to the shops to buy some booze. SJ Debaser 14:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Nobs being a knob again

Nobs emailed me a troublemaking rant to try to get me to take action against RationalWiki on Wikipedia. I forwarded it to the functionaries list for their digestion. Anyone else getting this sort of thing? I can post a copy here if anyone cares - David Gerard (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, post it on up. He's been trying to get people to unblock him here, so it'd be (ever-so-slightly) interesting to see what he's bitching about. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 22:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
It's probably not a good idea to post a private email without Rob's permission. -- Nx / talk 22:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
He was asking me to take action as an administrator on Wikipedia with a list of evidence as to why I should; public action for private reasons isn't considered a good excuse on Wikipedia. But yeah, I'll offer to post it to the Wikipedia talk page for Conservapedia instead - David Gerard (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
As far as I understand, correspondence belongs to the recipient--it's DG's property and his to do with as he pleases. Redacting real names/e-mail addys is good manners, though...P-Foster (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
It's rightly considered questionable and possibly very rude, though, in the general case - David Gerard (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
ToP/pee foster, the author retains ownership of emails and letters. You could assert fair use under the usual conditions (parody/critique/public interest etc.) --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our entropy 08:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
This should do the job nicely - David Gerard (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I wonder why he chose you ... unless he sent the email to Jimbo and everyone else in the WP cabal. -- Nx / talk 22:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I can't believe he's still at it. Or maybe I can. Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 22:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I would be very amused if this if Rob gets blocked over there for this. It's got a serious crossing the line vibe about it. --Kels (talk) 22:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Just post the thing Dave. If Rob wants public action, then surely his reasons for this should be public. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 23:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Actually, posting it here would probably constitute acting improperly in the dispute at Wikipedia. And I am a public face of Wikipedia (I go on telly and all), so letting my pissed-off side run rampant would not be the helpful response - David Gerard (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
It's TK that's heading for the block, with his constant disregard for WP's rules and tendency to call people a "vandal" because he thinks they are rather than because they've violated any WP policy. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 23:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm a little surprised the both of them haven't had some official warnings by this point. --Kels (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I have asked for clarification on this point also (if it was just me or lots of people) - David Gerard (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
TK has also kindly pointed readers of the Wikipedia talk page to the discussion here as well. Hello and transparency, my fellow Wikipedians! - David Gerard (talk) 23:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, TK. You have to convince people that RW is a vandal site. You're not in Kansas on CP any more! Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 23:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
And Nobs has posted his email to me! And I have of course politely thanked him for doing so - David Gerard (talk) 23:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
We hoaxed Wikipedia? What? --Sid (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. What? - David Gerard (talk) 23:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, I know he's accused us/Tmt/me of controlling the content of the article (too late to dig for links, but it's on my talk page here and in Archive 15 of Talk:CP on WP, I guess?), but us hoaxing WP? Man, it's a pity I have to go to bed now - I'd love to follow this trainwreck live. --Sid (talk) 23:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
His main point is that RW was founded before the night of the blunt knives, therefore Lipson was not actually ideologically blocked, but was blocked for vandalism (anyone who looks at Palmd's last contribs on CP can clearly see that this is a lie). Also, you mislead Simon by telling her that RW was founded by Lipson after the blockage. And he used Flippin's interview (Essay:Rational Response) to prove this ... an interview which was also given to Stephanie Simon. The logical conclusion is that Simon employed liberal deceit against Conservapedia. -- Nx / talk 23:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
What you have to realize is Rob is on to us, he knows all about how George Soros is actually funding this operation, you can check out his commentary in the google docs, he found that post about our budgetary agenda and itemization. Once you understand our fiscal and political backing it is easy to see how we are perpetrating a grand hoax on the media and the Internet in general. tmtoulouse 23:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Whereas it's actually Jimmy Wales. And most people will take me saying that as joking - David Gerard (talk) 00:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
The best laid jokes of mice and men oft spawn into multibillion dollar industries. tmtoulouse 00:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Bono pointed out to me last week how we have a duty - to all of humanity, really - to get RW right - David Gerard (talk) 00:20, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Gawd. All that's left is Face.gif Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 01:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
So much entertainment. I really loves me some Terry Koeckritz on Wikipedia. Fucking clueless idiot up against 100,000 sysops. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
My favorite: TK being shut the fuck up for being clueless about what wikipedia is. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

So, NobS/TK, why don't you idiot fucking write to Stephanie Simon already and get her to write a retraction/correction if she was so duped by the cabal at the vandal site and some guy named Terry Koeckritz who she also spoke to? ħumanUser talk:Human 04:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

This is still going?!?!? Scarlet A.pngd hominem 08:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Rob and TK are rather good at digging holes but not so good at stopping. Human, I did enjoy that diff. Seeing Andy's boys on WP is like watching a spin-off series featuring familiar characters in an alien environment. Kind of like Forrest Gump appearing in The Da Vinci Code.--ConcernedresidentAsk me about our eel 08:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I'd be amused to no end if this little stunt sent Rob to AN/I... again... --Sid (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
What's with the strange threats? What is actually 'at stake', beyond a brief mention of this wiki in an article about another wiki on Wikipedia? Or does Rob just enjoy melodrama and mysterious comments? Broccoli (talk) 10:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I have no trouble believing that Nobs and TK's concerns are one hundred percent sincere. Assume good faith, indeed. Sincere wrongheadedness is ten times as problematic as deliberate malice - David Gerard (talk) 10:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

TK just emailed me about this thread too, fwiw. It's not clear what he's asking me for, but he's very upset - David Gerard (talk) 10:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I know it's hard to decipher this through all RobS' strange perspectives and argumentation, but the underlying goal behind all this is to separate the monstrous internet persona that is the sysop at CP, "TK", from any mention of a real life person named Terry Koeckritz. By discrediting the Simon article (or any other way they can) they hope to get the name Terry Koeckritz removed from the wikipedia CP article. After that, they'll come here and make us do so as well. Or something like that. They're not very good at it. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
It's not like he hasn't tried to directly stop us from using his real name as well. I recall he was on an "outing" binge a while back, in an attempt to get us to stop. --Kels (talk) 20:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
That's ... really dumb. Wikipedia is so sensitive to BLP issues that if he just asked outright there's a fair chance someone would think it was a reasonable request - David Gerard (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
It's interesting to see TK and Rob struggle in this case, for which an argument requires premises and not mere assertions. Šţěŗĭļė dwarf 00:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I won't speculate what they're trying to achieve in the long run, but right now they're frantically trying to discredit the LA Times article and to push through some sort of "No names! Privacy!" policy.
And yes, WP would of course follow up on BLP issues. There's just one tiny problem: "Terry Koeckritz" isn't mentioned in the WP article and I don't think anybody was planning to insert him, so there is no BLP issue. That's possibly why they're trying to go with the "No names at all!" approach. The most anybody did on WP was me mentioning the name in this talk page post. Which directly led to this accusation of WP:OUTING. Needless to say, the Oversight panel didn't quite share TK's concerns. --Sid (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, RobS just went from "remove all real names" to "remove the entire breast cancer section" here. -- Nx / talk 01:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
He's also using the old "LA Times and Register said the same and there is consensus that they both contained errors!" approach again (in the post you linked and also in one of the collapsed sections of Talk:CP). I'd be bored if his stealth consensus lying wasn't so idiotic. He really goes by "If I repeat a lie often enough, it will become truth!" strategy. --Sid (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Woo, this is a good one. So you've got unsupported allegations of conspiracy, COI and article ownership, plus failure to assume good faith, Forum Shopping and threats of administrative action all in one post. Man, that post alone should get him topic banned, let alone his entire pattern of recent edits. --Kels (talk) 01:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Fucking boot licking...

cock sucking maggots who aren't worth the shit on my toilet paper. Do those fucktards have any sense of right and wrong? Doctors can deny a woman complete information just because a fetus might not be born, and then claiming that it is so the woman can make informed medical decisions? Motherfucker... *is completely pissed off at religious fucktards* ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ the verb of all aviators! 03:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I almost think "informed decision" needs to go on the code words article. It's used a lot but it invariably means "a decision we agree with". It's kind of like card forcing but often less subtle. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 08:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Good idea. I added it to the article. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our disaster 08:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


Pal is asking for a little help. 04:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk

We could post it to WIGO:Blogs if he's interested in seeing how things spread, as that's where this sort of thing would end up 95% of the time. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 08:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Makes sense. The alternative would to have it on the Intercom or chalk board, which may be suitable for a short-term experiment along the lines of what PalMD is proposing. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our riddle 08:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I put it on WIGO:blogs - David Gerard (talk) 10:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
RW was the third largest source of incommings. -- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --Does this sig line make me look fat? 17:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Does that mean we have a future in the public service announcement sector? tmtoulouse 17:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
EC) Saw the update. We were first single website (the first two being "social" sites). 17:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk
Woot, go us. It's nice to know that in an emergency we can raise the word, and if the situation is utterly hopeless people can still learn something or entertain themselves in the CP WIGO. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our exit sign 17:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I suppose it could mean that you shouldn't underestimate sites that you have a personal connection to, but aren't classed as the usual kind of "social network" type stuff. Which means maybe the good old fashioned way of making a social network can be quite powerful. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 17:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. I keep all you guys in mind whenever I think I may need a spare kidney. This is actually one reason why I tend to neglect Facebook and similar generic social networking sites. It's easier to form meaningful connections with people when there's some kind of theme or common interest. They do have potential as a kind of blog, but then that's bringing in a common interest. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our infinity 17:58, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, making a more serious comment than my last, Pal's connection to RW is going to aid in both willingness to post links, as well as the focus and attention it would get. This leads to a bit of a confound, since in an informational link in a disaster recovery scenario would be to a socially neutral location. However, I would be far more likely to see, process and respond to a link on RW than on facebook. Social networking sites generate so much cruft that it is easy to overlook and ignore things. tmtoulouse 18:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
An idea that I'm going to present at the conference is that sites could be convinced to post a link to a centralized information hub, such as a banner-like link to HSA or some such.-- Asclepius staff.png-PalMD --Does this sig line make me look fat? 18:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
It is an interesting idea, and I think it points to some interesting issues with social networking vs. blogs vs. website type stuff. To more succinctly state my point: Social networking sites (twitter, facebook, etc.) will always have the largest and easiest path for spreading a link (I.E. most potential eyeballs), but I think they suffer from cruft and clutter that makes it really easy to ignore; blogs and websites like RW will have less potential eyeballs but posted information is more likely to get the attention of the eyeballs on the site. tmtoulouse 18:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
(aside: obligatory xkcd link alt (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC))

Technical issue

EL's in brackets with alternate text appear to be parsed incorrectly. Look good in preview. Fail on page. Might be my mouse, of course. ħumanUser talk:Human 04:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmmm...... AnarchoGoon Swatting Assflys is how I earn my living 04:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Fixed now. Lord Goonie Hooray! I'm helping! 04:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
'Twas the naughty Armond! 04:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk
Left unclosed tag or sumthin? ħumanUser talk:Human 05:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah: missed a "]" out. 05:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk

For those that like this sort of thing........

I am big fan of mid 1980's techno/electro up to the current stuff (Derrick May, Jeff Mills, Adam Beyer and the like - none of that trancy or disco house bullshit though) and found a great resource for fast, free dowloadable live sets. Have a gander if its your thing. If not, well, go fuc......never mind. Acei9 05:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Jeff Mills aka the Wizard WJLB Detroit 1986. Acei9 08:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Jean-Michel Jarre. For my birthday I bought a copy of Les Concerts en Chine, which my brother used to have on vinyl back in the day. Still holds up very well, a great listen. --Kels (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Another Jarre fan? I thought I was the last one left! I was listening to Les Chants Magnetiques just the other day. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
You are not alone. If there's one thing that really gets my spirits up it's Rendezvous No. 4.  Lily Inspirate me. 16:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yah, I've been a Jarre fan ever since my brother bought Equinoxe way back when I was a kid. And sweet! This site also has a bunch of Boards of Canada shows! I love them. --Kels (talk) 14:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
There was a group of fans at school when I was about 15 and they got me into it. Two of them went to his concert in Docklands, for which I was insanely jealous. I remember buying Waiting for Cousteau on CD on the day of release and making 4 copies of it onto tape for the others that night so they wouldn't be too jealous. Happy days! Oxygene is one of the best ways to chill out ever recorded. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Skeptical Voter

http://skeptical-voter.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page Look familiar? Banana.gif Scarlet A.pngd hominem 16:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

This was covered earlier, I believe.  Lily Inspirate me. 16:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Was it? Scarlet A.pngd hominem 16:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Here. SusanGContribsTalk 17:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Ah shit, that's where I've seen it before. I'm slowly slipping into dementia in my old age... Scarlet A.pngd hominem 17:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
It is horrible, this age thing, I am actually starting to have to make notes to remember things....tmtoulouse 17:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah but you can be selective if you try: forget the less good, remember the more good. I've many times looked around for my glasses while looking through my glasses. Age isn't horrible: it's a sign that (so far) you're winning: it's a consequence of outliving a whole load of others; at least you're still here to forget things. Trent: as you're studying sleep, you should be familiar with the instant dream noting on awakening to prevent forgetting the dream. 17:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk
As technology advances we should have fewer things to remember, at least in theory. I remember in the 90s when email addresses at my Uni were pretty cryptic and I never bothered putting them in to Pine's address book. I remembered an insane number of cryptic addresses, but now I barely remember any due to the fancy address books. Same with website, since most things can be found pretty quickly via Google. Yup, the future is looking bright. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about our encyclopedia 17:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I remember when you needed to remember telephone numbers rather than just logging them into your mobile, digital handset or skype and forgetting about them.  Lily Inspirate me. 18:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking just the other day how lucky we are that the web uses domain names which are magically matched to IP addresses. Imagine if we had to enter the IP address to go to a site? And re: the OP, I for one feel mildly flattered. We worked hard on that layout. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems to have been done by our own Genghis Khant. Professor Moriarty 21:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


Have fun - http://funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/388084/Goats/ Javasca₧ A sig not even he can predict! 21:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidently Sacha Baron Cohen's new film will feature goats.  Lily Inspirate me. 07:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


Pizza, but no stone.

Wow, what a crap night. The wife isn't here, so I'm bored anyway, and then I cook a pizza (so I can use my new pizza peel) in my new oven which goes super high. Unfortunately it goes a bit too high, and my pizza stone shattered into three (pizza was OK though). Then I go to play Modern Warfare 2 only to come to the realisation that it's fucking shit, and is only good for remtards who are able to spend 3 hours a night every night for 3 months playing it, and is populated with screechy-voiced prepubescent scousers who don't understand that you don't have to shout when a mic is an inch from your mouth. So then I go play 3 poker tournaments, and only get in the money in one of them. I'm gonna go hang myself in the loft now. Excuse me. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 22:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

hahaha, Crundy is miserable. Ha ha. Acei9 22:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I make homemade pizza all the time. I can give you the recipe its super good. Use a pizza pan too -- the circular pans with the holes on the bottom. Work just as well. PS how hot was ur oven??--rational ghey (send a message) 22:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
The census people just showed up at my house and I chased them off with a shotgun yelling, "get the hell off my lawn! I'm white goddammit!!1!"...hope that helps...PACODOGwoof, bitches 22:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I went the other way. I attached five single spaced pages to my census with no parapgraph breaks and only a couple of periods essentially telling everything them everything I could think of about everyone I know. It was very cathartic but i think there is a warrent out for my arrest now. Me!Sheesh!Mine! 23:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
@Ace: I'm always fucking miserable, what's new? @RG: Pizza was great, observe attached photo. The problem was my faithful pizza stone splitting in three. I'll post a picture of the stone if anyone's really interested. If the rotation of the dial is anything to go by then it must have been around 280-300c. Oh, forgot to mention, I also opened my expensive duck pate (NOT fois gras) I bought when in the Cotswolds and it was fucking shit. No taste at all. I'm sticking to making my own. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 00:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Who cares about your pizza, please upload trinity stone. And what the fuck is "C"? Please translate to American like my stove so I can follow. PS, did we lose the guy who was killing himself? ħumanUser talk:Human 07:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
@Crundy: I am always excited and happy. Particularly when speaking to Crundy. Acei9 00:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Because your life doesn't seem so shit when you're talking to me? You on Skype atm btw? CrundyTalk nerdy to me 00:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
At work sorry dude. Oh hey, remember what I told you would happen if I didn't stop smoking? yeah well that only lasted about 3 days. Ace Wins! Acei9 00:23, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
You should have it written into your contract that you are allowed to have drunken skype chats with friends in different timezones. Move to Australia, it's practically the law there. I quit smoking again. In fact, quitting smoking is easy, I've done it thousands of times </MarkTwain>. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 00:26, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Pizza dough looks too thick for my taste. Most pizzas I have had in Italy are really thin.  Lily Inspirate me. 07:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I do always try to make it really thin, but I suck at rolling it out thin and always seem to add too much yeast. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 09:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I've taken up smoking again in light of recent life events. I feel sickened with myself for doing so, but I'm fucking weak. Also Crundy, I'm gonna be super pissed off if you actually kill yourself. You can't leave me on Skype surrounded by a load of Americans and one drunk New Zealander. I wouldn't know what to say. SJ Debaser 10:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

This sort of thing helped me through some of my younger confusion. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

More fun on Wikipedia:Talk:Conservapedia

I have just posted the following to Talk:Conservapedia:

==Someone is trolling this discussion==
(Sorry to post a topic not directly related to article improvement here, but this is the one place where users who need to know this will see it.)
I have had a number of emails claiming they have received an email from "TK-CP" that states that TK is meeting with me and Jimbo Wales to discuss this article and RW, and that the recipient's WP account is in danger of being suspended or deleted.
This is, of course, entirely false.
I am sure TK-CP would not send out any such ridiculous claims, so I assume someone is trolling this discussion. People's WP accounts don't get suspended just for editing at another wiki. This just doesn't happen.
So if you get an email like this, you shouldn't worry. Though you may wish to forward it to the Arbitration Committe or the functionaries list, because this sort of intimidation is completely unacceptable at Wikipedia. I've also emailed TK to alert him this is happening - David Gerard (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

- David Gerard (talk) 10:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

TK has just emailed me to say "Yes, very clever. Tell Trent he will soon know the very real pain he has put me through for three years. Thanks." (Quoting because he did say to pass it on.) This suggests his problems with RationalWiki as cited on Talk:Conservapedia are in fact nothing to do with the Wikipedia article, and so any discussion on that page by him of RationalWiki is not really in the right venue at all - David Gerard (talk) 11:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Looks like the TK lie machine is moving up a gear over there. Note the "forged screenshots" comment. I thought even TK had realised that was a lie too far. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 12:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll be honest, despite TK's bluster I see no compulsion to keep threats, intimidation or harassment confidential. If he'd mailed you personal details about himself that's one thing, but threatening to visit "pain" even in the form of a scolding from Jimbo crosses several lines, as does his repeated contention that he'll shop this around to as many admins as he has to until he finds one that'll do what he wants. Rob's been doing similar by going to all those message boards, and I can only assume he got the idea from TK. It's all a bit odd, since as sickening as TK is, he's not usually stupid. --Kels (talk) 13:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
While it's possible that the mails were sent by some impostor/troll, TK really comes over as a sneering bully in that section. --Sid (talk) 13:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
"In that section"? You're too kind to him! –SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way: those who feel they are individually being slandered on Talk:Conservapedia may wish to avail themselves of an email to info@wikimedia.org with a list of diffs and a note that it's been going on for a while now. BLP applies to talk pages too - David Gerard (talk) 14:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this right?

TK wants to remove all mention of his real name from both WP and RW, because it shows him for the lying, backstabbing person he is. Part of this involves trying to show the LA Times interview (containing a mention of TK's name) to be unreliable, and thus have it removed. They are trying to show it is unreliable by trying to show that she was wrong about the founding of RW. EddyP (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

RW reviews

Following the massive attention RW got recently, I decided to look up what the world are saying about us. I hope people try to take this on board, postiive and negative. http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=45086 http://www.evidencesoup.com/canopener/2010/04/rational-wiki-uses-evidence-to-refute-pseudoscience.html http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/rationalwiki.com%252Fwiki%252FScientific_evidence_of_evolution_being_a_hoax%252C_and_God%252527s_existence http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/hilarious-rationalwiki-entry-for-el.html http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T59K7JTC2E13PM1P4 (search "rationalwiki", as it's 1/3 down the page) http://scienceblogs.com/sunclipse/2008/11/conservapdia_legitimized.php (again, search for it in the comments, talking about the Demski case) http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=187521 (Ron Paul fans can go fuck themselves, but I'm including this for completeness) Scarlet A.pngd hominem 15:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Why did we get so much attention? Someone mentioned FB, but I don't believe that. EddyP (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
The I'm all right jack Ron Paul fan's reactions only go to show that extremists are... extreme. Jack Hughes (talk) 17:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
RationalWiki is destined for great things. It's possible. Ron Paul, not so much. Mei (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Just thinking out loud:

I regularly try and sort through discussions about RW that pop up. There is not a lot of specific or constructive criticism to really draw upon. In general I think it can be summarized as either people criticizing us as overly cp-centric, as created for the purpose of merely mocking CP or as a vandal hub. This is a tough one to address, RW was originally created in response to CP, there are several high profile areas of the site that are completely CP centric, and CP matters do have a tendency to over dominate at times. However, we have branched out considerably, and to be honest the "newer" discussions of RW have a tendency to be focused on different aspects of the site. I think there is nothing really to do but just keep developing the site on multiple fronts, as more people engage with us from different sources and view points CP centric issues will drift ever lower. That is all ready happening, talk:WIGOCP used to be the only place you could really post anything if you wanted to get peoples attention.

The other most common criticism is a lack of seriousness. Articles have a tendency to go through phases, with the initial phases been short stubs that are full of mockery and jokes, if those articles are important they get developed over time, and while often maintaining a certain level of sarcasm and mockery they become more and more "dry" as they develop. I think there is a strong link between "in order to be taken seriously you need to be serious." I think we could be a little more careful in certain important topics. A good example of this is the shift we made with the Andrew Schlafly article, which started off as nothing but extreme parody with gerbling jokes. Mockery and sarcasm can be effective tools, but if that is all we have on a page people can legitimately criticize it. This also has to do with the whole concept of wiki, and wiki development. Every wiki has problems with "stubs."

A final criticism is a little harder to work with. And that is that we are not really providing anything "new" that can't be found elsewhere. I actually think this is an invalid criticism, and I have elucidated on this point in the past. But maybe others see it differently, or see how we might improve on this. tmtoulouse 20:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

More about Rasmussen

In this discussion I mentioned that Conservatives love citing Rasmussen but that they have a flawed polling model that gives more weight to Republicans. FiveThreeEight.com has come out with another story related to Rasmussen and their poll showing overwhelming support for Americans for the new Arizona immigration law:

The Rasmussen poll says that 60 percent of Americans (and 70 percent of Arizonans) favor the new law, but how would those numbers change if people were read a longer or more complete description of the measure? Since there's been no other polling on the subject, we have no idea. It wouldn't shock me if the law indeed proved to be popular, especially in Arizona, if a fuller description were read. (Liberals, who uniformly seem to think that the law will be unpopular with certain key demographic groups, are a bit too sanguine about this). But this poll is so simplistic as to provide very little informational value. To their credit, Rasmussen later asked people whether they were concerned that "efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants will also end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens"; 58 percent said they were in fact somewhat or very concerned. But that finding did not get their lede, nor was that concern expressed relative to Arizona's law itself.

Just FYI - sigh. Except to see them quoted more and more by the conservative media and blogs to cheer up their ideological brethren. --Leotardo (talk) 18:28, 29 April 2010 (UTC)