Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?

From RationalWiki

Article of the Weak  • Previous AotWs • Talk AotW
WIGO CP • WIGO Clogs • WIGO Blogs • WIGO World • WIGO ASK
Talk CP • Talk Clogs • Talk Blogs • Talk World • Talk ASK

As a point of decorum, please use the [+] tab above when adding a new section, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting within an existing section. This will minimise the incidence of edit conflicts. New sections must be added at the bottom of the page. Thank you for your attention.

For non CP related talk, go to the saloon.

Contents 1 Push to 100M by on July 4 Status Page 1.1 Bot back up 1.2 Minor issue 1.3 Slow Down!! 1.4 Andy is making threatening noises 1.5 A certain article has surpassed another certain article in page views on a certain website 1.6 Stat bot offline 1.7 Status Update Question 1.8 Hammertime 2 Video games 3 RobS Bushism Redux 4 I can make things up too! 5 Someone is deleting pageviews... 6 Linking to the news 7 It is liberal deceit... 8 Jpatt ferrets out the fake christians, praise jezus 9 TK probing MAC addresses? 10 Update active users 11 You know what would be cool? 12 What happened to WIGO aSK? 13 Point of etiquette 13.1 <insert name here>'s unfunny WIGOs 14 Acedemics and Atheletics 15 Lenski 16 JDWPianist steps closer and closer to the edge 17 Isn't he Cute 18 Since we're talking about "TK vs. everybody"... 19 "I trained for this day." 20 A message for TK..... 21 Concierge Medicine WIGO 22 Blatant bullshit. 23 Spread the love... 24 Conservapedia Club 25 Andy informs SCOTUS that Video Games source of all evil 26 Is It Just Me 27 Fourth of 7 28 The competition 29 Moar Conservative words.

[edit] Push to 100M by on July 4 Status Page

I spent the last couple hours cobbling together a bot to monitor the CP statistics page and provide an ongoing report about how we are doing. The stats are updated every minute and the current rate of progress is based only on the last hour of data. Currently we are lagging far behind. Fedhaji 12:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

We don't need stats updated every minute. Oncce a day is sufficient. Otherwise it floods our recent changes and I'll have to vandalbin it. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 12:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I requested it be flagged as a bot, which means that it shouldn't clutter up RC at all. Fedhaji 12:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

That's better. But it still doesn't need to update every minute. Surely hourly would do? Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 12:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I have changed it to every hour, averaging over the past day. I intended for it to be fairly quick to respond to changes in the overall rate, but I guess you are right. Fedhaji 12:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Anybody know if history views count as page views in this context? Mountain Blue 12:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

We need WesleyS back over there, categorizing and finding links for orphaned pages. They would have easily hit 100M views already. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 13:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, no idea what you're talking about. What am I missing? Mountain Blue 13:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

When I was at CP, as WesleyS, I made like 8500 edits in 5 months. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 13:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I had my computer running all night, viewed 15,000 pages, is there any chance the bot could be modified to feed out when we will finish at this rate? --Opcn 14:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a communist or anything but I don't really understand the point in this. Is it just for a bit of a laugh? I would have thought if they reach 100M Andy will be the one laughing? I feel sure I'm missing something obvious here. StarFish 15:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

It's to see Andy's reaction. 100 million site views will instantly gratify and embolden him. It will become serious business, and the true insightz will flow like wine.

I was thinking about notifying local New Jersey news networks. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

What, are you from New Jersey? 16:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No, but I was thinking that might not come up... "Hi, I'm calling to report the wild success of New Jersey local Andrew Schlafly's on-line encyclopedia, which recently surpassed the amazing milestone of up serving 100 million page views of Christian, family-friendly truth. I thought it might be appropriate for you to do a story on this local hero." Something to that effect. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I do not condone any sort of wandalism / page bumping. That said, one should recall Andy's consternation when the last wiki upgrade was done. The page count is stored individually for each page, and for the site. Different counters - but they get updated at the same time. When a page is deleted, it doesn't reduce the site counter by that much. However, when the wiki software is updated, the site counter is set to the sum of the page counters. Andy was a bit disappointed to see the page count for the site drop (I think he called it a liberal counting scheme or something like that, though by all accounts, it is likely a more conservative one). If one was to bump the site count with a page that would be deleted for having too high a page count and Andy trumpets the 10M number, when the software is upgraded and it drops below 10M (anyone want to do the actual count? I know a number of high volume pages have been deleted) we can once again enjoy his disappointment at dropping below another imaginary number. --Shagie 16:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

For those of you wondering I use firefox with the iMacros add on, I set the macro to go to )i.e. click on) random page every time a page finishes loading. I also went under the edit menu to preferences, then to the content tab, and shutoff pictures javascript and java and that speeds it up and uses less bandwidth --Opcn 16:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure it doesn't really matter, but I'd try to be a bit moar discreet. "If I was going to bump page views, this is how I would do it...etc...but of course, I wouldn't do that". ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of which, should those of us who might or might not be operating clickbots spread out the traffic among a number of pages or aim en masse for a single page (such as Law Terms D, per above discussion)? In the interest of traffic maximization in the face of burning, I think we should spread it out, but inflating a single embarrassing page of our choosing has a certain appeal. Also, is there a page (or pages) that contribute to view count but minimize server load? The number of views we might or might not be generating is around 4/sec, and we do not want to bring the site down or degrade it significantly. Fedhaji 17:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

In the interest of reducing bandwidth consumption on both ends, disabling image loading is an excellent route (especially if you're using Firefox & ReloadEvery, for example), or not accessing monstrous pages like Evolution or Alger Hiss. 17:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

100 mil? cratcratcratcratcrat oh pleeeeeeeeeeez! The Palpatine^{I told you it would come to this! I was right!} 17:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Law terms D is a great target largely because there is so little on the page, but I think perhaps the whole law terms list might be a good idea. Just now D with out pictures took 2 seconds to load, I, C, and K all load in under half a second. If we tried with Alger Hiss then we would crash out the server and no one wants that, I used to hate the CP server, the one that was slow as mud, I do not want to recreate that experience for others. --Opcn 17:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Aren't we aiming 100 Mil on July 4th instead of by that day? Thieh^{Ask me for relationship advice} 17:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I am not sure how to manage this, though. I propose that everyone stops at, say, 6 hours before we hit the 100M mark, whenever that is, then we can sit and cool our jets until midnight EDT, July 4, and then make the final sprint in the early hours of the 4th. If I invested some time in making a nice GUI-licious downloadable tool to automatically do clicks and manage this throttling, would people download it? Fedhaji 17:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

As we get close to 100M we can slow down, if its the 3rd and we are at 97M there is so way we can make it --Opcn 17:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't stop too close to 100M, as there is (surprisingly) actual web traffic on the site that may cause 100M to be achieved too early. Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 17:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Having this occur on the 4th of July is a must. It will push Andy into a patriotic state of delirium...he will be completely overcome. The ensuing insights will be priceless. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 17:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I am changing the section title now. Thieh^{Looking for potion recipes} 17:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bot back up

Bot was not tolerant of occasional HTTP errors and went down. Now it is back. Fedhaji 17:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Minor issue

I'll preface this by whining about how I'd don't approve of this sort of thing, especially using the wiki to discuss it. Which isn't to say that I don't find the goal funny. With those delightfully contradictory statements out of the way, aren't DoS attacks illegal? Not that this is one, and people are even actively trying to make sure they don't break the CP server (well, someone mentioned it, at least), but the activities might look like a DoS thing, which might have repercussions. I'm probably wrong, of course. I do acknowledge that this isn't "vandalism", or "trying to mess up a website", by the way. The "plan" is to actually give the site owner some more of what he likes to boast about, as far as I can tell. ħuman ^waste 19:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I mentioned that earlier. It's an awful lot of trouble to make Andy smile. --Kels 20:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe the current pace is just fine to satisfy the goal and the server's response is well within normal limits. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I was curious about the legality as well. I don't think they're illegal in the US, but they are in Sweden and the UK. In any event, your ISP can get rid of you for doing it. Are there guidelines for what's appropriate for number of requests per second? NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 20:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Great. I clicked on the next CP link I saw and got "503: The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later." Coinkydink, I'm sure, but still... ħuman^{e society} 20:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I saw that. But it's back up now. Fedhaji 20:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I was having a hard time reading articles because of that. I'm glad CP is back so I can keep reading. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 21:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Slow Down!!

I just got a 503 error on 7 out of 10 tries, we have to slow down, even if we cannot make it. Anyone who is working with random pages, or with ♥ K e n D o l l ♥'s homosexual anthologies has to stop permanently, stick to small pages please. Keeping CP up is more important than reaching 100M by the 4th --Opcn 21:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Andy is making threatening noises

This may just be a coincidence, but a half hour ago Andy created this, talking about the illegality of bots. He seems to be bothered by our 4th of July celebration. Now we've been through this before—it's in the archives somewhere—but CP is not a "protected computer" in the sense of Federal law. Also, there is no "intent to defraud", and there is no "obtain[ing] anything of value", and the value, if there were any, is not "more than $ 5,000", and that there is no intent to "obtain or alter information in the computer that the accesser is not entitled so to obtain or alter". But other than that, Andy is, as usual, right on target. Gauss 01:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Andy read your own rules:

“

The operation of unauthorized wiki-bots is prohibited*. *Search engine and read only bots are exempt from this Commandment. To get authorization please post a note on User_talk:Aschlafly, stating what the bot will do, what username it will be under, and whether you have a working prototype. Bot owners are responsible for their bots' actions.

”

They are read only bots, but seriously if you are going to do this you can't interfere with the normal, smooth operation of the site. So keep the clicks down to a pace where you can't be reasonably accused of a DoS attack. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 02:06, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Also it says "exceeded authorized access", requesting a page does not exceeded authorized access, as any one can do that. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 02:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a coincidence, TK told him the ebil librul vandal site was gonna run scripts to muck up his site. Who knows how much "truth" was involved in what TK told Andy, since We all (us and TK) know Andy doesn't read here, but presumably, Andy and others have been seeing the 503's too, and are konfused. TK explained. This reads like an episode of Schlafly Doo. But it's what is really happening. ħuman ^{indefensible turds on the cheap!} 02:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems plausible. Also, we now have this. Fedhaji 02:47, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I think:

“

Defendants need to something more than merely using a public website in the manner it was intended to be liable under the CFAA.

”

might be applicable but I don't understand what it means. ENGLISH, MOTHERFUCKER! DO YOU SPEAK IT? ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 02:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile, he has yet to respond to my formal complaint of accusation of fraud on his site by a senior admin... f'ing twerp. Certified letter goes out Monday if he ain't on it... ħuman ^{eats glue} 03:05, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you can do that (Complaining to whom? Send a legal demand letter to Andy demanding to remove your name from the site? I would be surprised if he actually cares) ? No wonder everyone want to graduate from Law school. Thieh^{Blocked by TK (Who isn't?)} 17:07, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Seriously though... would Andy really want to risk FBI II? Mountain Blue 03:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Has Andy paid/lost anything of monetary value due to the FBI incident? I don't think so. Since this is FREE, I think he doesn't mind doing it again. Thieh^{Blocked by TK (Who isn't?)} 14:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Would the FBI really care? I highly doubt it, I mean they would have to look into the complaint but any amount of researching would point to this not being a DoS attack or anything of the sort. Alot of wackos, CP included, make claims to the FBI and are filed in the wacko pile. No fear gents, gman has limited reasources and tends to spend them on more important issues. As long as WE keep it civil, we are golden.--DylanB 04:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

K: I don't think Andy has lost anything tangible; you don't need a lawyer to report people to law enforcement. Andy seems to be pretty embarrassed by the whole thing, however; even mentioning the FBI incident over at CP means instant banhammer. For some reason or other Andy understands how much he's humiliated himself with this particular fuckup, and I don't see him wanting to repeat the experience. Mountain Blue 05:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Andy lost his marbles late December 2008 when he decided to let Terry Koeckritz back into the asylum. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 22:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

(UI) Moar Threatening noises from Andy. Thieh^{CP≠Child Porn?} 02:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The thing is, refreshing isn't considered a DoS attack (was taught this in Routing I CCNA, Systems Analysis, and Web Design I). I think we're safe on that part as well. Silly^{Mister Cat} 20:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A certain article has surpassed another certain article in page views on a certain website

Cheers to whoever's responsible for that. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 16:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I kindly request that moar attention be paid to cp:Homosexual Obsession. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 16:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

It's hard to dump hits onto Homosexual Obsession at a substantial enough rate to matter without beating the server up. Sorry. 70.228.38.134 17:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it is a little larger. Thanks for the consideration. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 17:41, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The index pages are the best bet (things like Law Terms, Chemistry Terms etc). They are only few bytes as they have nothing on them. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 08:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Relatively speaking. They still have a lot of Mediawiki boilerplate on them. Fedhaji 11:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Look through Ed Poor's contributions, you should find some good stubs there. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 13:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Look at the dead end pages, there are few pages with only a category, no content whatsoever. I'm currently bumping John III. Bumped it up 1000 places so far. o.o Silly^{Mister Cat} 08:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

cp:Sound is quite a good one.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Judging by the bot report you guys'll have to double the rate to achieve this. So close...! I would like to contribute - who can lend me a program to do it? 194.6.79.200 15:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

From what I've noticed, regular refreshing doesn't work. You have to do CTRL+F5 to renew the cache of the page in order for it to work (this was tested using one page and checking its pageview count continuously). I'm using jitbit MacroRecorder to do CTRL+R (since Opera doesn't use CTRL+F5). I've bumped John III up from 31k to 9k so far, but that's only 800 pageviews.

Jitbit's MacroRecorder. You can get a trial program (lasts 28 days). To use: after installation, go into settings and change some stuff like, unclicking the box that says "record mouse movement" or something like that. You would also want to change the speed to low (because you can't refresh too quickly either). Set the loop count to 0 for infinite looping. Then, go to the page you want to refresh, press CTRL+R (activates recording), and press CTRL+F5, then press Scroll Lock (stops recording). View the steps that the program has recorded and make sure to save the macro for later use.

Then, minimize the jitbit window, go to the page you want to refresh, and press CTRL+P (starts playback). Finally, leave your computer running. NOTE: If you try to do any other tasks on that computer, it will screw up your intended purpose of pushing pageviews. Make sure to press Scroll Lock or CTRL+P again to quit the macro. I hope this helped Silly^{Mister Cat} 18:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

If you don't mind being close to 4th July already, iMacro addin for FireFox might be helpful as well. Things to stir up more lulz: check the popular pages for two short article to rotate/clear. Thieh^{[Talk needed]} 00:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Stat bot offline

As you may have noticed, the stats bot has been offline for several days. I have not brought it back online because of family problems that take priority over trolling. If someone else wishes to operate it, drop me a talkpage message. Fedhaji 11:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Status Update Question

Are we confident enough to have like 2.5 million page views done in this 4 days? It's getting close. Thieh^{Monitoring virgin birth experiment} 01:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No, because I can only contribute about 5k views in 4 hours--I blame my slow connection on this one. Silly^{Mister Cat} 02:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, you guys may have done something, there's a definite spike and then a tail off according to Alexa. And what articles are you attacking refreshing? ArmondikoV^{...I'll sanctify your Xbox 360!} 12:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I am doing law terms C,D,E,F, starting yesterday kind of (right after Andy deleted the page views of D and Arbitrary inferences). Oh wait a minute. I think I got rid of Alexa on my computer though (nLite?) Thieh^{What is NOT going on?} 13:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

A word of advise, don't draw attention to the articles you are bumping by mentioning them. The young these days, I don't know. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 13:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I more or less only care about getting 100M on July 4th. they can recreate the article for all I care (we can always add views on other articles after). Thieh^{Looking for potion recipes} 13:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I was doing less than 200kb articles that were found around rank 31200. Silly^{Mister Cat} 02:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I was curious so I checked where it's at, about 98,358,598, almost a cool mil ahead of Andy's 97,500,000 front page brag. Looks like it's in sight? 1,700,000 in a day and a half or so? Even 48 hours and it's still July 4, but late in the day he might not notice it. ħuman ^waste 01:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Also amusing on the statistics pages: "active users" (have made an action in last 7 days) - RW 138, CP 128. ħuman ^ingenuity 01:36, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Correction, Human: CP 127. Thieh^{What is NOT going on?} 17:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

That, or CP has a 1 editor/16 hour loss rate right now. Thieh^{Monitoring virgin birth experiment} 17:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you received a thank-you card from Andy for giving him more stuff to brag about yet? --Kels 17:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hammertime

I can read about 2.5 random pages per second, or 9k random pages per hour, pretty much indefinitely. My scripts currently read edit (well, "view source" for me) forms because wiki code is more useful to me than HTML. Do these reads count as pageviews? I can't really tell from the statistics page. Mountain Blue 03:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. --The Sidious^{You have paid the price for your lack of vision!} 03:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Crap. How do find out? Mountain Blue 05:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

EVERYONE! Chill the fudge out! Silly^{Mister Cat} 04:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

99,116,935 and not much time left. Oh well. Oh, and "active users" is up to 136 at CP (and ours is up to 139). It's a crappy metric, of course. ħuman^{itarian aid} 05:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What's the problem, Kek? Just tell your script to retry on 503 (or 500). Works for me. Nothing else did. Hammertime. Mountain Blue 05:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't use scripts, just a macro that goes off every 5 seconds. Silly^{Mister Cat} 05:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What you mean macro? I can mail you my script if you like. It's Python. I know it runs on Linux and all three major BSDs. I don't think you'd need more than five minutes to port it to Windows. Mountain Blue 05:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Just recorded my keystrokes of CTRL (down), R (down), R (up), CTRL (up)... and I have that play continuously. And I checked again, it refreshes every 2.3 seconds. My lappy is close to overheating though. It's at 53^oC Silly^{Mister Cat} 07:35, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

99,145,287 at 06:05, that's just barely 30,000 per hour, or slightly over 30 hours to go. I have a bad feeling about this. I could open up some more but every other request I make gets me a 5xx response already. There's diminishing returns here. Mountain Blue 06:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Just do it. If he notices on Sunday 7/5 he won't know exactly when the clock ticked over. Merkins look at holiday weekends as one big glommy holyday anyway. ħuman ^{indefensible turds on the cheap!} 06:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Right. 99,174,987 at 07:05; that's still about 30,000 completed and registered page views per hour. I'll try reasonably hard to keep this up, but I won't be able to supervise it very closely over the next twelve or so hours. It's Saturday evening here in NZ and RL is interfering, hard. I'll prolly be back by tomorrow 9 am, by which time it will be Saturday 5 pm in Andyland. Mountain Blue 07:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Video games

I don't know what he is talking about. If video games influenced people the result of Pac-Man should be that we have an entire generation of people that standard around in dark rooms, with bright flashing coloured lights, listening to repetitive electronic music, whilst taking magic pills. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 01:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

It's called public schooling. See what I did there? :D Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 01:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Shows how outdated they are. They just picked up on this now. Wait until they learn about games like Assassin's Creed. Anyway, how can two players dying of heart attacks be used against violent video games?--Nate River 01:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

All of you missed the tunnel that connects the two sides of the room such that you can go from the left side of the room to the right side of the room by travelling left. It's the desire to find this tunnel that stem a bunch of scientists to look for things such as wormholes.

And then why the age of consent (age of the victim that get people accuse of statutory rape) is lower than the age rated for sexually explicit games, while the opposite happens for legally using guns killing people (The military has a age limit higher than the teen rated games, I think)? Thieh^{Looking for potion recipes} 01:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Phyllie and Scruff played Super Smash Bros. (for the N64) and they turned out fine. >.> Silly^{Mister Cat} 01:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

AS Jr = Scruff? Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 09:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

What exactly do they mean by violent video games? Are they talking about T rated FPS? Stuff like God of War, DMC and Assassin's Creed I understand (I actually have to show my ID when buying these where I live) but seriously. Parents have to look at the rating systems of games and understand that they are no longer simple distractions like the games they grew up with (my mom cannot understand why I still buy games, especially when I bought my PS3)--Nate River 01:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Tough computer game laws, you should try living in Australia. Games are sold in New Zealand with stickers on them that say "banned in Australia" as a marketing devise. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 01:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh, it works too. NZ has everything Australia wants but cant have. Like an intelligent populous, awesomely violent video games and better looking woman, like Helen Clark. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 02:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

What about Julia Gillard? ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 03:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Cool, I'd actually buy them with that kind of label. I'm nearly pissing myself reading the SCOTUS. If Andy could pass Harvard law, I actually think that I could. I'm still wondering which violent rating theey are talking about. Violence, cartoon violence, excessive or graphic? All of the above perhaps? Or just the ones with blood and gore? I cannot see them having difficulty with those FPS used by the US to promote the army. Hell, playing Ace Combat almost makes me want to join the air force--Nate River 02:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

If you can pass law nearly any where else, you can pass it at Harvard. Most unis teach the same things (the god botherer ones being an exception). Harvard is just harder to get into, once you are there it is much the same course work. The difference between you and Andy is he has connections, although you are probably a bit smarter. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 03:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Help me decypher this Schlafly-quote

Some claim that 2/3rds of videogamers are over 18 years old, but far more people are over that age and a much higher percentage of minors are videogamers

Teabag 03:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it means that Andy plays video games in his spare time (he's well above the age of 18), and I'm not sure about the second part. Silly^{Mister Cat}

I actually figured it out and it does make sense. Congrats Andy. Teabag 03:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I figured it out but it doesn't make sense. More than 2/3 of the general population (of the U.S.? World?) are over 18 years old, but the percentage of minors that play videogames is greater than that of adults, therefore less than 2/3 of those who play videogames are over 18 years old. What about an hypothetical population of 50 minors and 150 adults, where 10 minors (20%) and 25 adults (16.667%) play videogames? Flare^Talk 03:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure Andy would love Assassin's Creed. Kill a traitor, yayy! Kill an abortionist, yayyy! Kill a moslem, yayyyy! Kill a guy who burns books. Eh, bummer, burning books is cool - hope the next mission makes up for it... Kill a guy with a French-sounding name, yayyyyy! --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 13:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

its all statistics , say 1000 people in the world 300 of them gamers , that means that 200 are over 18 , thats 2/3 of the gamers, sp 200/700 =200/7 % = 28% of adults and 100/300 = 33% so percentage wise under 18 is bigger ... I think ...but that would mean he got a statistic right ;( Hamster 03:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

But that's precisely what he was refuting. Flare^Talk 04:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

When is Andy teaching that math course again?--Nate River 04:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RobS Bushism Redux

Wow, being made a fool the last time wasn't enough for ya, eh Rob? The quote you claim isn't even in the article you cite, and you are mangling the paraphrase in the article. As it originally appeared in the article it all makes perfect sense. Maybe you should try Phylis Schlafly's phonics course? tmtoulouse 20:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yah, this makes sense:

• 7 percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes (directly quoting the president).
• "substantial savings between 2012 and 2042, saving consumers up to $4 billion annually, conserving enough energy to power every U.S. home for 10 months..."

(and we are not even getting into the 166 million cars or 14 power plant assdertions)

Is this, (a) restoring science to its rightful place, or (b) restoring logic to its rightful place? RobS 20:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

(1) All light bulbs take up the 7%; (2) How is 10 months' savings over 30 years implausible? (3) Where is the Bushism? ListenerX^TalkerX 20:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

"Between 2012 and 2042, these new standards will save consumers up to $4 billion a year, conserve enough electricity to power every home in America for 10 months, reduce emissions equal to the amount produced by 166 million cars each year and eliminate the need for as many as 14 coal-fired power plants."

Are you really that dumb, Rob? Or are you just trying that hard? ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

"That's not an 'or' question." -- Dogbert. --Gulik 20:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he's that dumb. We kid a lot here about various CPers being not-so-bright, but Rob is honest-and-truly dumb. I'm not saying this to insult the poor guy, just stating a fact. I've dealt with him enough to know that he is the living personification of "thickheaded". He gloms onto an idea and he just can't let go. He is incapable of changing his mind. Logic, reason, arguments, documentation, beatings, whatever--nothing makes a dent. He's just...plain...dumb.--WJThomas 20:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I like when we get to this point and he simply cannot concede. You'll still be a man, Rob. I'll even respect you moar!!! ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 20:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

RobS's stupidity is not your garden variety idiocy, it's positively surreal. I learned long ago not to try to get into discussion or arguments with him, as he is incapable of understanding the meaning of a simple sentence, and he will generally reply to whatever you write in such a manner as to make you wonder if he is actually responding to some other comment only he can see which has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You can say something like "The sky is blue and the grass is green" and he will ask you why you believe grass turns the sky blue, and then probably somehow bring communism into the discussion. This made him very fun to parody on CP back in the day, but is good for little else. DickTurpis 21:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, exactly.--WJThomas 21:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, why isn't Rob a sysop here? Stile4aly 03:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I dont agree with the namecalling here. Bushisms aside, I respect RobS for at least coming here and defending his position in a normal fashion (unlike Jynx). --GTac 06:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to be namecalling, I'm just describing the situation, and "dumb" is what fits. I'm open to nicer descriptions, if you have any suggestions. And I don't think Rob comes here out of honor or bravery, I think he just doesn't get why we can't understand his bleatings, and he comes here to explain it to us--he thinks we're dumb ("What?! They don't understand that 2+2=orange? I'll show them, the morons!!")--WJThomas 09:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with spadecalling. The guy's a complete nutter. He rivals Assfly. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 12:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you all for the warm welcome. To respond to ListenerX/sig0:

1) All light bulbs take up the 7%; (2) How is 10 months' savings over 30 years implausible?

Therein lies a bushism, either on Obama's part, or perhaps Liz Soldati of AP. Let's review the facts. Soldati directly quotes Obama, "7 percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes," then summarizes more statements attributed to the president, "saving consumers up to $4 billion annually, conserving enough energy to power every U.S. home for 10 months..."

This isn't a bushism, you know, where you scratch you're head and say "What the hell is he talking about?" RobS 17:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I am scratching my head and saying "what the hell is he talking about?" but not in regards to Obama. --PitchBlackMind 17:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Er, Rob. The quote is "7 percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes and businesses" (My emphasis). Obama is saying that lighting, all lighting, not just the light in your den but the McDonalds arches, the office lights left on at night, the runway lights, the terminal building lights. All of it. Every last light bulb accounts for around 7% of the energy needs of America. That doesn't sound like an unreasonable figure to me. What else do you guys use energy for? Heat. Transport. Manufacturing. Is the idea that that accounts for a "mere" 93% of your energy usage such a massive underestimate? Now if he was just talking about domestic usage then 7% would have been silly. But he wasn't. You only made it look like he was by removing the majority of lighting usage from his estimate of lighting.

Right 2012 to 2042 is 360 months. At the current rate lighting will use energy over that time equivalent to 7% x 360 = 25 months and one week of total energy consumption. Obama is saying that under his new standards it will use 15 months and 6 days. That's a reduction of 40%.

Now, as energy efficient lightbulbs (you know the things used for lighting) use 75% less energy than standard lightbulbs (the things mostly being used now) this 40% saving would be achieved by swapping just over half of all lightbulbs for energy efficient ones. What number is in doubt? Is 75% saving a massive overestimate? Is having half of all lightbulbs as energy efficient lightbulbs wildly optimistic?

There are around 300 million people in America. At a guess of 3 per household on average that's 100 million households. Obama's $4 billion saving amounts to 40 bucks per household per year. If that's a 40% saving that implies that the average household spends $100 bucks per annum on energy for lighting. Sounds pretty cheap to me. Toffeeman 20:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Good analysis, and you've touched on all the major points. The 7%, for example "energy," refers not just to electricity. So the article evidently intends to say 10 months savings over 360 months. Let's play connect the dots now; that presumably does not take into consideration the recent CBO report on the cap and trade tax increase scheme which adds $175 per year ($5250) over 360 months. Or the Heritage Foundations claim the real impact of cap and trade on household energy costs is $2900 per annum (or $87,000 over 360 months).

10 months savings over 30 years. Wow. On is reminded of Reagan's across the board tax cut, initially it was $8 per week for people making union scale wages. That was paltry enough for them to spend sums of money even greater in the mid-term elections to complain about it. RobS 22:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Rob, I think its just wonderful that you can post here without any fear of TK blocking you and getting Andy to rid you of your rights...unlike Jinx. Makes me smile. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 22:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Because TK reads the shit out of this page and blocks any random user on CP who makes a point remotely similar to anything addressed on this page as a "vandal site member." Make me feel all warm and tender inside. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 22:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Not as warm and tender as you make me feel Nutty. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 22:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

One day when the war is over we'll all of us, CP and RW alike, put down our rifles and meet in Andalusia to hoist a sangria and laugh about our travails. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 23:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes. As Sen. Moynihan says, "What if the American government disclosed the Communist conspiracy when it first learned of it...that might have informed the legitimate American patriotic left that there was indeed a problem...that did not happen. Ignorant armies clashed by night."[1] RobS 00:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Rob, I probably wouldn't buy you a drink. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 01:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I can make things up too!

TK once again just goes and makes a whole lot of shit up. I would suggest that since Obama is in it would probably be conservatives wanting to leave the United States. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 01:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No, the conservatives are trying to put words in Obama's mouth by saying that President Obama wants to leave the country. Thieh^{[Talk needed]} 01:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You know Conservapedia will never rely on facts if they can twist things and assume or make up stuff out of the water to smear liberals. Of course they defend this as "insights" which don't belong in a serious encyclopedia to begin with.... --Crazyswordsman 02:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I love how TK thinks he can put in his opinion along with "factual" statistics. It's against Cp Commandments / Guidelines to post opinions on any place except Talk/User/Debate pages. And through reading the article, it says "Younger Americans are slightly less enthusiastic about living in America than their elders". Silly^{Mister Cat} 02:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

He misses all the fun stuff out of the source .. naturally. Worm ^{(t | c)} 08:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Fifty percent (50%) of Americans believe hate is growing in America following the murders of a doctor who performed late-term abortions, a military recruiter and a guard at the U.S. Holocaust Museum. Thirty-five percent (35%) disagree.

To quote TK

Just 11% (most likely all liberals) say they would not choose to live in America.

Let's see... is it liberals who

• constantly argue that America is wicked for allowing abortions and stem cell research?
• insist that we're sliding into the horrors of socialism?
• claim that they're massively persecuted because of their faith?
• absolutely loathe the current president?
• at least considered Rick Perry's suggestion that Texas secede to be a reasonable idea?

Feh. If a Christian theocracy was established on some island somewhere, American conservatives would move there in droves. MDB 11:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Narr, it'd be the wrong sort of Christianity for 90% of them. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 15:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I fully support the Texas Secessionist movement. --Gulik 18:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Someone is deleting pageviews...

cp:Law Terms D and cp:Arbitrary inference has page views mysteriously disappeared (without affecting the total). Can someone look into it? Thieh^{Ask me for relationship advice} 04:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

found it. Someone apparently don't want them on the popular pages list. Thieh^{Ahh! my eyes!!} 04:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

cp:Law Terms C is very close though. *bumps Arbitrary inference up to 15k* Silly^{Mister Cat} 06:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, no! cp:Law Terms D was doing so well... Imagine how many pageviews it would get if it actually listed some actual terms. Defendant? Decree nisi? Death penalty? Dick Tracy?-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

One has to remember that Schlafly is the site owner and has developer status so he knows exactly what is going on. I don'think he realised what was going on at first but the SDG archives do record him mentioning an unusually large number of page counts from one area. He has been quite happy to accept the bumped pageviews knowing full well that they are bogus because it enhances the status of CP - in his Eagle Forum interview he boasts about having over 76m page views. However, he doesn't like to have joke pages hanging around the top 20 because it looks too contrived. High page-view count articles have been frequently deleted and recreated before and some of the fringe homosex articles were downgraded. What he has done though is command his sysops not to delete & recreate any of the so called "flagship" articles as he is quite happy to have 4.7m views for Atheism and 3.3m for Homosexuality, so that he can brag about these having high counts despite knowing full well that they are bogus views. Mentioning 1 million views for Goat or Law Terms D would only make him look foolish. Although the top 9/10 homosex-related articles attracted much mirth in the blogosphere and some of the mainstream media it actually generated a lot of genuine traffic for CP, even if it was only just people who couldn't believe the insanity of the place and needed to see for themselves. I think he was genuinely disappointed when he lost 10 million views with the MediaWiki upgrade. However, as much as likes to blog about liberal deceit his own rejoicing in the pageview count is deceitful and he jolly well knows it. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 11:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What was law terms D up to? --Opcn 00:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought I saw it in the top 5, so 800k? 01:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Linking to the news

In every way, shape, and form I stand against what this judge has proposed, and yet there's a part of me that would love to see it go through, just because of the way that it would destroy Conservpaedia's front page (or, even better, getting to see AndyPandy being prosecuted and screaming "FAIR USE! FAIR USE!" all the way to Conservapedia's 'bankruptcy').--Precumming Storm 14:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I've long been of the opinion that one of the major legal problems we have now is that the law has not caught up with the digital world. Such a law would be the exact opposite: it would force the digital world to conform with a law that has not yet caught up with it.

That being said, it would be hilarious to watch it destroy Conservapedia. MDB 15:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It'd just drive all the blogs to non-American hosts - think of all that revenue going to the rest of the world. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 15:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What a horrifying thought. This would to do newspapers what the prosecution of mp3 downloads did to the music industry. All this will do is drastically cut down on page hits for US news sites. I don't know how they can claim that a link is infringing upon a copyright, though, any more than me showing an article to a friend does. What a pile of idiocy.

I would like to point out that as much as I dislike Conservapedia, I would not wish for them to be shut down by something like this. Corry 23:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] It is liberal deceit...

... to make a posting at MetaWiki claiming to be ASchlafly.

Yes, even if all of the quotes were something the AssFly has said, or almost certainly would say. MDB 14:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

And the Jinxter proudly crows that he beat us to the punch by registering his own name. As if anyone would want to impersonate him. If we need to talk about large phalli, we can do it under our own name!--WJThomas 21:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Jpatt ferrets out the fake christians, praise jezus

Jpratt has such peering insight into the faith of a user whose entire editing history consists of a single instance of disagreeing with CP's presentation of Ayn Rand, an atheist, as such a saint, then taking umbrage at an all too typical personal attack from Schlafly, that he can call the user a "Troublemaker / Prevaricator: fake Christian."

Jpatt, TK, Karajou. The baseless personal attacks are sickening. I won't WIGO this kind of shit because it's not funny, new, or enlightening. But Jpatt needs an article that's not in the funspace. He's at least 1/4 of the reason CP is a viper's nest of hate. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 16:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh you would love to know what TK thought about who Chrisitians were and who they associate themselves with... but alas, I promised not to tell a soul... except Andy and my fiancée. Silly^{Mister Cat} 18:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

How does Andy's online crazy compare to IRL? ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 18:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Jpatt 1/4 the reason CP is a viper's nest? Nah--he's just a wanna-be. He doesn't have the meat to be first-string. He's the waterboy.--WJThomas 21:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] TK probing MAC addresses?

In this, TK acts as though he can identify individual computers, not just the IP address through which they operate. Of course, he's probably lying, as usual. And I note that the user "Sam" to which he seems to refer was deleted back in 2007. Though there is a "SamH" that still hasn't been banhammered.

Is it possible to get the network ID of the computer itself? Do proxies and TOR cloak this? Gauss 18:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Checkuser only gives the IP address and all other user accounts under that address. Silly^{Mister Cat} 18:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he thinks same IP = same comuter. The MAC address that he could see would be that of whatever LAN, not the NIC. ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 18:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What TK is actually doing is only inferring that it's the same computer. Your IP address is not the only piece of information that you give out you also transmit the OS and the browser versions and they often use that information as corroboration when they are comparing IDs. Not foolproof by any means, but they accept it as more circumstantial evidence. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 18:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I keep forgetting to add that to the Parodists Guide to Villainy - use different browsers for your socks and if you have a spare PC keep a different OS version on it. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 19:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Almost makes me want to investigate Terry Koeckritz... ^{— Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs} 19:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

That bit about the browsers is interesting indeed. I just checked with IE, and it seems I've only received an autoblock of a few hours. I guess I can create another account just for fun. Silly^{Mister Cat} 20:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No need to change browser / OS, just change your user agent string. Crundy^{Also available in sober} 20:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Neato. I just did this on FF. Will someone with checkuser on RWW check my last login and repeat the user agent string to me by email for thee testings? Much obliged. Go here to test you user agent string. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 21:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

If you want to use multiple OSes, may I suggest installing VirtualBox? It will even mount ISOs as CD drives, so you can install 'Box, download e.g. ubuntu's ISO, and mount and install it into a 'Box image. You could ditto that for various flavors of Win, linux, multi browsers, etc... all within one install of 'Box. 24.22.135.175 05:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Update active users

• I just up-dated (updated?) RationalWiki:Active users.
• I'll postpone CP's up-date for a couple of days due to real life ;-)
• Anyone interested in something similar for aSK?

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 20:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Does aSK still have active users? Totnesmartin 22:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Just RuyLopez, RuyLopez, PJR, Bradley, and RuyLopez. The site is growing rapidly. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 23:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What's SK? Ruylopez is a dear old friend I've haven't seen in a long time. RobS 00:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

NR, you forgot Sterile and RuyLopez. ħuman ^{be in} 00:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and Rob, A Storehouse of Knowledge is PJR's new wiki project. ħuman ^{be in} 00:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

In case you don't know Rob, RuyLopez is the painfully obvious sock of ♥ K e n D o l l ♥. --Chancellor Sidious^{POWER!!! UNLIMITED... POWER!!!} 01:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, RuyLopez answers to Ken and defends the homosex articles. Seems like a metaphysical question whether he's a sock if he hasn't appeared as Conservative on PJRblog, a psychiatric question whether he's sane, and a question for his homosexual reparative therapist whether he can be cured of his dirty itchy desires. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 14:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

You mean he's not the RuyLopez of WP, of which was said "A full listing of all this person's misdeeds would exhaust us all? Sources say he is in reality this man. RobS 03:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not that guy. It's Ken. ħuman ^waste 05:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh noes, I ranked 3rd in recent edits per day! Ouch. Thieh^{Looking for potion recipes} 01:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

CUR has been retired for 2 or 3 weeks and he still ranks 4th so I wouldn't worry about it too much. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 02:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

And is the picture going to be updated after the data for CP comes in? I still haven't got my name on the picture. Thieh^{What is NOT going on?} 02:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is Pibot crossed out and has no edits? ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 02:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• He's crossed out by chance: when I looked up the data, he happened to be blocked...
• He has entries, just not before June 2008 larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 02:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Bots should not be counted, methinks, although their user names give away their automatonictronalistic nature... ħuman ^{be in} 03:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It's easier to include the bots. And there were some part-time botted editors botted IIRC. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] You know what would be cool?

If items on the WIGO had a link to the relevant thread in the discussion.d ^{— Unsigned, by: 99.250.97.108 / talk / contribs}

They usually (almost always) are. It's the talk:wigo (here) where links are often missing, since they are at the wigo page itself. Yeah, it gets old. So does signing for BONs... ħuman ^{indefensible turds on the cheap!} 06:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Anorhweer things.. if i wasn't 604'd the whore tiem Silly^{Mister Cat}

[edit] What happened to WIGO aSK?

it seems to have been emptied out, ditto with its talk page. I realise things move fairly slowly there compared with the hurly burly of CP but surely they are not entirely comatose?^{— Unsigned, by: 131.170.90.2 / talk / contribs}

Both still there for me. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 08:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I had a problem the other day when browsing via a 3G connection, I presume a proxy vodafone was running was stripping the question mark from the end of the URL, even though it was URL encoded. I guess this comes from a coding error regarding the URL format http://foo.com/? is a valid URL that is equivalent to http://foo.com/, while http://foo.com/%3F is also a valid URL, but is not equivalent to the other two. Interestingly, WIGO CP already has a redirect minus the end question mark, so I don't know if someone else encountered the same problem. Anyway, check the name of the page you're being served has a question mark on the end or not. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 10:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I get that problem a lot when socking via a proxy at CP - makes it hard to get involved in debates, which usually end in a question mark. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 17:23, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Point of etiquette

What's the proper thing to do if I see a WIGO that's clumsily written and getting low scores, and would be far more effective funnier if it were rewritten to make its point more succinctly? Should I (a) rewrite it, (f) leave it alone and add a new WIGO for the same CP event, or (q) ignore it entirely and go watch 'Ninja Warrior' on my TiVo? - Cuckoo 13:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

a and q are good options. This has been discussed before and previously users felt quite at liberty to alter other people's WIGOs. As long as it doesn't get into an edit war I think that's fair game. It isn't about personal vanity so much as a colaborative project producing a well written page. It's by far the most viewed page on here so it's in everyone's interest to keep it punchy. INO duplicating a WIGO is always a bad plan. If you edit a WIGO you may also want to post in here saying why. StarFish 14:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

One has to remember what the "goal" of WIGO-CP is...pointing out the mind numbingly stoopid hypocrisy that drives away the very people it claims to serve.

CP, (if it were run by a less insane person, [we're talking TK here not Aschlafly since the latter doesn't do much day-to-day besides finding new "insights" at the bottom of his Jack Daniel's bottles]), could have been a credible resource, just think what an intellect like William Buckley would have made CP!

As such WIGO's are individual's perspectives on the sheer insanity that seemingly drives the wiki into Never-never land. The "scores" have nothing whatsoever to do with anything save how each item hits the mob on any particular day.

In general I leave badly writ WIGO's to fial on their own, though I have rewritten a few as well. If I wanted to be mean I'd ask to have ye "appointed" to be the official WIGO gatekeeper. You could have the power to decide which WIGO's were "good enough" and I'd sit back with mine popcorn and watch the lulz as it unfolded until you left in disgust and revulsion.

THAT'S WHAT THE ARROWS IS FER!

People eventually learn "what sells" (higher scores) and write them accordingly or stop writing them altogether.

CЯacke® 14:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

You know, I was actually a bit worried about that in the first place, CP actually being run by someone competent, if intellectually amoral. Basically think of that, a right-wing slant on all topics, presented plausibly and as a valid take on the facts. Believable misinformation that supports Conservatives, all slant all the time. Could have been problematic, but fortunately we got an incompetent nutter who immediately surrounded himself with fruitcakes and sociopaths, and credibility quickly went in the dumpster and we could all just sit here and laugh at the clowns. Philip, on the other hand, had a much better chance to do something similar for Creationist "facts" over at aSK, but he made one huge mistake. Letting himself be questioned and joining in the debates. Not smart, Creationists must never let themselves be questioned, or their arguments fall apart (even if they don't recognize it happening and handwave it away). There's a reason CMI doesn't have comment sections on their articles, y'know. --Kels 16:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Reality has a lib-burr-rul bias, so that is actually impossible. ListenerX^TalkerX 16:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Essentially, the danger is a FoxNewsWiki, where you can get utter bullshit analysis, where moron commentators rewrite history (the New Deal worsened the depression. The US won both World Wars virtually alone) and people believe it because they have fancy titles. Luckily, a conservative project can never be sane so long as it is collaborative. In politics and media, the sane do their best to keep the nutters quiet (see the Canadian Conservative Party), but that's hard, if not impossible, on a wiki. 20:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Plus, to maintain ideological purity from the inevitable hordes of Liberal Saboteurs and apolitical pranksters, they'd need to patrol it like a print-shop in the USSR. Pretty much like CP, in fact. --Gulik 04:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] <insert name here>'s unfunny WIGOs

Lest anyone accuse me of being altruistically interested in the good of RW, let me clear that up: no, my only thought was of myself and my belief that I am much funnier than, for example, <insert name here>. I sometimes look at a WIGO and think, "Hey, I could have written that better!" But then I think that if I were to rewrite it, the original poster would tie me to a stake and light me on fire. - Cuckoo 16:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Setting the bar kinda low there. Pretty much everyone is funnier than <insert name here>. --Kels 17:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey you jerks, leave <insert name here> alone. Why is all your guys ever do is sit around and pick on valued editors who try and make good contributions. I wouldn't be surprised if <insert name here>. got sick of your crap and left. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 17:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for sticking up for me, ChuckB. In everyone's defense, though, my dry wit comes across much better in person. <insert name here> 23:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with improving wigos, regardless of their "score". Fix typos, spelling and grammar, obviously, but also if something just isn't "reporting on the lulz" well, I say fix it. I see no reason why this one page on the wiki should be immune to "merciless editing" to make it better. I know people are a bit "possessive" of items they add, but still, it's not like they solved some important math puzzle, CP's RC is there for all to see... Also, the possessiveness sometimes leads to premature wigoing (IMO), often a story can be told better once it is finished unfolding. ħuman ^bean 18:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

If one of my WIGOs is sucking it, I'm happy to have somebody improve it if they think they can.--WJThomas 20:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

We really need to clarify this "ownership" of wigos, which in my opinion makes for crappy wigos and ego wars over who saw what first on CP:RC. Come on, folks. ħuman ^woo 05:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I have never understood it either really. Meh, its just like sharing a joke and when sharing a joke its the worst sort of people who lean over and say "I made that up myself you know". Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 05:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I give in....what have I done to upset you lot? Isn't it bad enough to keep getting banned over the road without you lot picking on me? If I knew how to exercise my Syop powers here I'd be tempted to set a goat on you all. (The real) Mick McT 08:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh bolloxs....just spotted what's going on! Please ignore the above, I withdraw any threat of goat. Mick McT 08:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It always catches me too. Then I remember where I am. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 09:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I hope the person who invented the myName thing develops itchy balls or something... at least until I stop falling for it. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry Mick, it catches everyone. I made a twat out of myself once many times, but with the Myname thing on "who's going to hell" list here. Boy was my face red! СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 10:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Acedemics and Atheletics

I know this is old news, but for those who haven't yet followed the link under the Home-Schooled football league WIGO, the picture there gave me one of the best lulz I've had in weeks! Junggai 13:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

One of Pat Conroy's novels (I think its The Prince of Tides) includes a scene where the narrator remembers when he played high school football, and a pre game pep talk. It goes something like this...

Coach: I want you men to go out there and hit them, and hit them hard!

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: I want to see their fucking blood! I want to see their god damn guts spilled on the field!

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: I need hitters! Do have me some fucking hitters?

Team: Yes sir!

Coach: Let us pray.

That being said, church state issues aside, I see nothing wrong with an athletic team praying prior to the game, asl ong as its asking that they conduct themselves as athletes and gentlemen, no one is injured, etc etc etc. ^{— Unsigned, by: MDB / talk / contribs}

That dialogue sounds as if the prayer immediately following would be to Sol Invictus rather than Jesus. ListenerX^TalkerX 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who spent some time in locker rooms before football games (I was a manager -- read "waterboy"), Conroy's description was a bit over the top, but not far from reality at all. And both my experience and Conroy's novel were in the American South (me: East Tennessee, Conroy: South Carolina's tidewater region), so the prayer was definitely to Jesus. MDB 18:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Aww, shucks. First ListenerX and MDB evoke southern football culture, then JDWpianist goes and creates an article on Gram Parsons, whose "Hickory Wind" always makes me think of my own southern roots. A day for nostalgia, indeed. Junggai 23:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Southern? Wasn't he "country rock" in the sense of leading to the Eagles, Linda, Jackson, etc.? Or am I wrong? ħuman^{itarian aid} 05:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, Gram preferred to call what he was doing "Cosmic American Music," and apparently wasn't thrilled with the Eagles. But the country rock scene in many ways started with the Byrds' Sweetheart of the Radio, which Gram contributed a great deal to inspiration-wise. Anyway, "Hickory Wind" is a great song about being from the south, and having complicated feelings about it. Junggai 07:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess I should do some listening :) Thanks. ħuman^ities 07:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

You should! No one's life is made the poorer by listening to Gram Parsons. Junggai 07:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

PS, I thought this was one of the better recent wigos. That sign... ROTFLMAO! ħuman ^clues 05:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lenski

I find it so funny how Andy's reminded us all of him behaving like a braindead twat by writing about Lenski on the front page. He really is a deluded moron if he thinks the general reception to what he did last year was positive. But obviously, there's no mention of RationalWiki on Conservapedia to refute his bullshit and lies. СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 16:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy is a Professor of Theobiology. Are you a Professor of Theobiology? Don't question little one. 87.198.252.66 17:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm amazed that he actually linked to the mail exchange. It's like he's trying to out-WIGO us. "So, you think you're the only ones who can link to my idiocy? Typical liberal underestimation!" --Sid 17:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hearty lulz, Sid. Bunchanumbas, I'm a Professor of Theobiology, Astrology, Biochemistry, Nuclear Mathematics and Anthropology, not to mention a world class glove-maker. Anyone can lie, seeeeeeee? СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 17:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

You should not lie about being a glove-maker, you rotten librul.--TimS 18:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I also find it funny that Andy would bring this up considering that the only thing his article points out is a possible flawed test statistic, which changes nothing about the bacteria evolving. Perhaps if he were to question the quality controls for possible contamination then he might have a case, but a test statistic (not even a critical test either)... that is like pointing out a speck of dust on a painting.--TimS 18:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The "flawed test statistic" isn't flawed. The article he points to is basically a criticism of Lenski based on the results of a statistical test that was not used because it was not an appropriate test (and hence the results of the unused test are irrelevant). When SJohnson first put that article up, a fair number of people with statistical experience tried to correct him, and he and Andy predictably just reverted all of the attempts. What is more, the article misses a huge chunk of the Lenski paper that would render the conclusion he draws from his flawed statistical complaint ridiculous even if he were correct. As to the quality control issue, Andy did claim that all the instances of Cit+ re-evolution during the contingency experiments in the paper were due to contamination. However, to make the claim, Andy had to ignore the ways that Lenski checked to make sure there was no contamination, and he had to maintain ignorance of basic microbiological technique that is taught to students during the first week of any micro lab course. So, Conservapedia is an all around fail on the Lenski issue. Kaalis 20:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

And you call me a liberal. Tcha!

But I concur with you nonetheless. Only a man as arrogant as Schlafly could possibly think another man would spend twenty years doing an experiment proving evolution and then hand over the proof to some two-bit lawyer and "educator". Andrew Schlafly is synonymous with idiocy. СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 18:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Time heals all wounds. It's long enough ago that he doesn't remember anything but the "points" he made. Their absolute crushing is lost in the mist. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 19:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

My favorite part was that after all those people pointed out Andy's assumptions were incorrect, trying to explain point by point why he's using the wrong method, evaluating the process again and again to show his reasoning is false... Andy just responds "well I don't see anyone finding any problems in my reasoning making me the winner!". WHAT? This is why Andy is the supreme king of trolls. --GTac 11:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

No, he's just a supreme idiot. СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 13:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I love how no one over there has noticed that they don't even have the names of all of the co-authors spelled correctly. That mistake is in a pretty prominent location, it has been there for months, and yet there it is, uncorrect. Says a lot for their rigor (or maybe it says something of the site's rigor, in another sense of the word), doesn't it? Kaalis 16:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] JDWPianist steps closer and closer to the edge

JDWPianist has been playing with fire for a while, and his current reasonableness over the Frankenwin is surely pushing him into TK's line of fire? I suggest he has overstepped the mark and is obviously really a liberal. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 17:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Isn't he Cute

TK's either trying to do logic, or he's decided that if you throw enough words at the screen, the victims people reading will go crossed eyed, pass out, and hit their head on the keyboard, thus allowing him to win the argument. SirChuckB^{A product of Affirmative Action} 17:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC) PS, TK, you're still a giant douche, thanks for reading.

" And we aren't about Democrats or Republicans here, both get their fair share of disapproval from Conservatives." Never realised this before! There doesn't seem to be any mention of Dubya getting the lowest pass rate to get into the American Air Force on Conservapedia, but there's a detailed list of why Obama's probably a Muslim... Terry Koeckritz, you are a silly sausauge, aren't you? СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 18:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Since we're talking about "TK vs. everybody"...

"Well, then, I shall present to you his on-the-record views, Herr Doktor!" - I keep wondering why RJJensen still sticks around. Surely, whatever happened at Citizendium can't have been worse than the constant "No, Doctor Historian, you're wrong. Let me teach you about Real US History and Politics." stuff he gets on CP... --Sid 18:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

We mustn't exclude the possibility of Dr. Jensen trying to write a book and this is his idea to gather data/quotes/conversations. Thieh^{CP≠Child Porn?} 18:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Best part of my day so far. And I dunno. I kinda frown when he goes "the article does a pretty good job of describing his nasty personality and vitriolic rhetoric". Guess that answers my "Why is he staying?" question... :/ --Sid 18:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Funny. RJJ just reverts TK's irreverant idiocy and continues like it wasn't there. And like a piece of shit bobbing up to tell you you're wiping your ass wrong, TK advises "you are forbidden to remove admin posts." They're all so odious I can't decide who to root for. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 19:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who wins, I'm just praying for injuries. --Kels 21:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

No, that's easy. We root for TK, for he is the one whose mission is closest to that of our own - making a laughing stock of CP and reducing its userbase. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 19:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

That's not our mission, or if it is I'm outa here. I thought the mission as relevant to CP was to expose and debunk anti-science, fundamentalism, and other irrational nonsense. Destroying CP would be to kill the goose who lays the golden egg. It's not good business for anyone. Also, CP is mostly irrelevant to all but us, so there's no point in talking big. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 19:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

NEVER support or condone or indicate that we do, anything that the odious little squit does. He's a parasite on the internet who gets his jollies out of making others miserable. The man's an arsehole although not as useful. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 19:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, OK OK OK OK, you're right, fine. I've modified my comment accordingly. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 19:48, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

"You are forbidden to remove Admin posts" - Well, it's certainly nice to finally see a rule that also applies to Admins (because guess what RJJ is...)! --Sid 20:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

RJJ's gotta snap soon. Rob & TK onto his case? ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 20:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It just occurred to me that the phrase "radical-left MSM" is a hilarious oxymoron if you actually think about it. --Gulik 04:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

New user, Phenylala-whatever is blocked for making a template suggestion.. and TK wipes the records... Silly^{Mister Cat} 21:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] "I trained for this day."

Karajou has some fun with his one-liners today. --Sid 20:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess Karajou doesn't understand the rules of "The Game". Silly^{Mister Cat} 20:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me of when we go on blocking sprees here... except, of course, we block for minutes, and only block fellow sysops... at least he is putting some effort into enjoying his work. ħuman ^cabal 20:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Next thing we know, Karajou is blocked for "silly block comments" Silly^{Mister Cat} 20:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Karajou

For your amusing efforts in creative block reasons,
We at RW would like to present you this tennis racquet for your services.

"DiarrheaFountain" is a perfect example of liberal hilarity which conservatives don't understand. Hilarious and tasteful humour. СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 10:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Where is that? Ahahaha DiarrheaFountain. Is that a user name? NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 16:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It suuuuuuuure is :D СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 10:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A message for TK.....

You know I have never really made a statement about TK, publicly anyway, but I think I might now. TK, if you are reading this then I want you to know....in fact, I am going to tell you something you already know. This isn't what I think of you, this is what we all, including yourself, know about you. You're a lying, scheming, bigoted, unintelligent scumbag who obviously has failed so pitifully in real life, so appallingly, that your only option to make yourself feel important is to take over a little known website by manipulating its owner (which is the owners own fault I might add) so that you may spread your miserable existence, your utter inability to cope in the real world, to others. By throwing your inordinate weight around you get your jollies but you can't hide what you really are. Even with all your over-sighting it is painfully obvious to all what you really are. A nothing, a nobody, a zero, a loser. The fact that you spend all day being a petty asshole to all and sundry just goes to prove that you have NOTHING else in your life. I would pity you if you were not such a mean spirited bastard. All you have to look forward to is to get bureaucrated on CP. And that is a sad thing indeed. What is even sadder is that you know I am telling the truth but you'll deny it to your own face rather than face the failure that you have become. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 21:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Too long, Ace: he'll never read it. Concise version: TK, You're a spiteful loser!. ^{This message brought to you by: respond}_{and marmalade} 21:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course he'll read it. He loves that stuff. The more people talking about him, especially outraged people (or at least ones he can pretend are outraged), the more he loves it. If it weren't for RW as an "audience" with the predictable responses when he does something particularly scummy, I imagine he wouldn't bother with CP at all. He would have gotten bored with it ages ago, but oh does he love it when his public writes about him! --Kels 04:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have had my voice heard. Now I'll never speak of it again. I wasn't outraged, it was just a press release. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 05:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ace, that's incredible! That's almost the exact thing my mother said when I explained the whole TK situation to her. >.> Silly^{Mister Cat} 00:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

We're talking about Terry Koecritz here, right? I just wanted to check that it was a Terry Koeckritz-related piece of news and/or blog information. Carry on. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 05:52, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

No, we're talking about Ace's and KettleKickIt's mother's, um, relationship, you silly troll. ħuman ^{be in} 06:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Concierge Medicine WIGO

This is the latest in a string of reasons why you should never trust the right wing's answers to health. It clearly is trying to make healthy life exclusively for the rich and powerful. These people seem to be making our answer seem like the WAY more common sense answer. --Crazyswordsman 00:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't heard that this was part of any "plan" as such. This has been a phenomenon in the last 8 years or so, mostly in wealthy areas. It's never caught on near me (chronically depressed economy). Basically, you pay a doctor a yearly fee, say 1000 bucks which puts them on retainer. They still get to collect payments for individual services, but they take on far fewer patients and basically make themselves more available, e.g. anytime appointments, meeting you at the ER, no waits ever, snazzy office, etc. The fee lets the doc take on fewer patients and treat them the way most doctors would like to if they weren't reliant on volume. It's a practice that makes me squirm a bit, but not antithetical to fairness in health care, as long as those who cannot afford concierge care are still provided for. -- -PalMD ^{--yada yada} 00:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Looking at it that way, it seems that it sounds acceptable. But still, HMOs shouldn't be telling doctors how many patients they have to be seeing, which is what happens under the current system. --Crazyswordsman 00:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

True, but the concierge system makes the doctor a bunch of guaranteed cash, which offsets doing less procedures for money - 50 to 100 patients sounds reasonable to me, that's a lot of cash! Also, the HMO does not say how many patients a doctor must see, they limit how much time they'll pay for, right? ħuman ^{be in} 01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

"Your money or your life" is supposed to be a cliched line in Westerns, NOT a public policy! --Gulik 04:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. ħuman ^{hilarious link to my talk page goes here} 04:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I would look at concierge medicine as more of a symptom than a problem. The financial and lifestyle realities of primary care are an enormous deterrent to med students. Non-procedural primary care visits are billed to low that a doctor has to see a huge patient load in order to pay the bills- you get paid more to resect a lung cancer than you do to finally get your patient to quit smoking. You get paid more to perform a gastric bypass than you do to help your patient lose weight. You get paid more to amputate a foot than to control a patient's blood glucose. Surgeons deserve to be paid well for what they do, but primary care providers shouldn't be neglected. So because of volume demands we often see fifteen minutes per patient visit. Most people become doctors because they genuinely like people, are interested in them, and want to help them. Fifteen minutes is not enough. A concierge clinic allows a doctor to practice medicine the way they remember their childhood doc practicing. Is this fair? It's a good question. But this phenomenon is something we should pay attention to. Unless we fix primary care, we can't fix the system as a whole. Corry 06:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Well put. ħuman ^ingenuity 06:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Two things I should clarify: the above paragraph makes it look like I'm a physician. I am not. I am a third year medical student. Furthermore, reading above it appears that my only concern is money. It is not, although financial pressures are undeniable. If you attend a private medical school and finance your education through loans (like most everybody does) you almost can't afford to be a family doctor because of the debt load. Corry 20:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with corry that it is a symptom, although under any system, including single payer, this kind of arrangement will be attractive to patients who can afford it.-- -PalMD ^{--yada yada} 00:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

You know, the country I live in has a single-payer system as well. When my wife gave birth last year, she decided that it was important for her private OBGYN to be there during the birth, especially since a C-Section was looking necessary. It meant, necessarily, paying him a healthy sum under the table. Ironically though, since so many other things were free or reimbursed, we ended up paying much less than my sister, who gave birth in the USA a few months later. But I forget, socialized medicine causes rationing, and it kills people, so the USA's system is many times better. *Cough* Junggai 11:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Blatant bullshit.

This just came outta nowhere. The user has never vandalised or anything. Another example of the liar lying. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 00:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but they must have edited Wikipedia or something: "Member of a website supporting vandalism"? ħuman^{ly possible} 01:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hehehe or maybe he's on Bansky's mailing list. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 01:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

hahaha I got a shout out. Oh TK, I could never have a bad when I think of a lonely old nobody like you! Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 01:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

TK made my evening with that flurry of absolutely disgusting skulduggery. Oh, TK. You're the fucking king of creeps. How can you even stand it? Did your dad beat you too much on one side of your head? Were you jilted a time too many? Cursed with a tiny penis? What is it man? Why do you despise yourself and the world so much? If you have kids, and I hope you do not, get right with them or they'll hate you for the rest of their lives. Most people who have anything to do with you already do. You are hands down the biggest piece of shit I've encountered in years. NuttyX ^{SuperProstateFormula™} 01:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Whatever TK is doing to get under people's skin, it's working as of late. Did I miss something? Play TK off, keyboard cat. (take THAT!) Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 03:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Not so much "under my skin" as "Making me feel disgusted for gazing upon his awful scribe" Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 04:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Under My Thumb... delightful misogyny. Apologies, all. ħuman ^{why is there a weird line through the "h" in my username?} 04:52, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah... that would be because of me, I think. Poor bugger linked to my blog as a reference (see "hee hee" above) and in what passes for TK's mind, he's therefore guilty by association. PS TKunt, there's also user:Afrikaner on CP... gosh... he must also be me, because you know, there can only be one user from one location, right, you moron. But we all know it's part of your plan to drive editors away from CP. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the deletion reason he gave, it's clear he's following his usual pattern - whoever has pissed him off here gets a shoutout when the butthurt one over there blocks and deletes some innocent to make himself feel better. I've had a few of those too. Just shows how fragile that little wanker's ego really is. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 11:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Spread the love...

blocks at conservapedia

blocks at wikipedia

blocks at rationalwiki

• on top of the pic, you'll find the number of blocked editors per month, and in brackets the percentage of infinite/indefinite blocks
• in the gray area, these numbers are visualized :-)
• keep in mind that the y-axis for the boxplots is logarithmic!
• thanks to User:Pibot July 2009 is even now in the top 5 of the months with the most blocks...
• have fun!

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

LArron, you have done it again. Hats off to you my friend. Ace McWickedⁱ⁹ 12:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! It's nice to find some appreciation - especially without the usual qualifiers á là Why am I not mentioned, When is the pic updated, What's wrong with... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 19:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Conservapedia Club

The number of homeschoolers to visit Washington doubles - another example of geometric growth in an more and more conservative world.

But how many are there? 2? 20? 200?

Starting a Conservapedia Club is a brilliant idea: most certainly some of the kids at a club will share a computer - or at least an IP address. To prevent premature blocking, perhaps Ed Poor will undertake the task to contact them - and vouch for them? Shudder...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

We all know Andy can't even be bothered to maintain his shitty blogsite, let alone watch after numerous kids. My bets are around 10 students, give or take. I can just see them taking off in all directions while he has this blank stare of satisfaction that he's making a difference. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 18:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I was just thinking about this when I was earlier on today - his annual trip to Washington. What exactly does he do there? Try and educate them or something? "This is where Jesus landed over 200 years ago and invented the Bill of Rights!" СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 18:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Why does Conservapedia Club give me the creepy mental image of a teenage girl hanging posters of Andy? Vulpius 19:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm thinking "Schlafly Youth". And trying to come up with some comedy possibilities for starting one of these. --Gulik 20:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he just wants a bunch of public schoolers to try and join so he can insult them and recommend watching Comedy Central. --PitchBlackMind 20:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Either that or he wants to try and goad some public school administration into shutting down the club so he can sue them for "persecuting Christians." ListenerX^TalkerX 20:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Funny how he doesn't say when the trip will be. Also, there's no article on "Conservapedia Club"... ħuman ^ingenuity 20:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

That's typical Andy, really. Wasn't there that "Andy Schlafly will be giving a talk!" issue where he wouldn't even give out details when people specifically asked? --Sid 21:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm feeling a Schlafly Youth Fun article. Where they all wear little uniforms and glasses and comb their hair like Andy. СупэрДжош SEX^{Ha, got your attention...} 10:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It's all reminsicent of Ken's shououts that something is going to happen on the internet. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 10:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Andy informs SCOTUS that Video Games source of all evil

Not sure if anyone else posted this; never saw it. This is what inspired his absurd news item a week ago: [2] It's the references to Atari-caused-death and Sega violence which make it most amusing. 20:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OH, that's fine research Herr Publius. Well done for finding this, lots to go through here. But WTF? Did The Governator hire Schlafly? We The People need to know. (Answer: hardly). --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 21:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Good Lord, that makes for wonderful reading. This document submitted to the Court reads just like a CP article of his - endless assertions and unreferenced "it is obvious that"s; Andy bleats on and on about the "smoking causes cancer" cover up; if "Nintendo learned the message that “violence sells video games to children” from competitors Sony and Sega, as Andy claims, why then did they have such enormous success with the utterly childs-play Wii? Oh Lord I can't go on. No wonder no real Court takes him seriously. --DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 22:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

There was an edit conflict here, but damned if I'm going to adjust the indents. You'll just have to suffer for your actions of daring to add stuff before me. Anywas, great find Publius! Skimming through it, some things that amused me:

• The paper had the following bookmarks generated:

"New Cover"

"In the" "Petitioners,"

"Respondents."

"BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EAGLE FORUM EDUCATION & LEGAL DEFENSE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS"

"New Tables"

"New Brief" etc.

• First line: "Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund (“EFELDF”), a nonprofit organization founded in 1981, is a pro-family group that has long advocated fidelity to the text of the U.S. Constitution." You almost lost my interest at the start, Andy.
• "There are many studies confirming what should be obvious: hours of violent video-game-playing by an impressionable, addicted child leads to increased likelihood of violent behavior." Perhaps that's cause the kid was already an addict, hurrrr
• “The younger brother allegedly got mad because he got beat at some video games and got the gun.” Yesss, there was NO problem at all with the kids HAVING DIRECT ACCESS TO A LOADED GUN
• "Although such deaths are unusual, the stress violent video games cause can be seen in most players. Players’ limbs twitch; “[o]ften, they pound the machines as if they were battling real invaders.”" Hahaha, no comment necessary!
• From different paragraps:
  • "Just as researchers could be found for decades to deny that smoking causes lung cancer..."
  • "..becoming desensitized and even brainwashed into violent thought and action patterns..."
  • "It is not easy to prove a direct causal link between pornography and gambling and the harm they cause, just as for decades it was difficult to prove that smoking causes cancer."

Though the Assfly manages to supress the shouting of his crackpot keywords in most of the article, it does occasionally break through, especially with smoking & pornography.

• He keeps on talking how everybody knows that these violent video games made by "predatory, billion-dollar video game industry that churns out increasingly graphic blood and gore" will "cause the child to buy into the rampages of murder and other heinous crimes that he is acting out". However, most sources seem to be random websites (http://home.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/cvg/death.html, really Andy?) or some paper source which sounds suspiciously like a gossip column (most used source: Death by Computer Games,” Shanghai Star).
• "Voluminous research data reinforce the common-sense view that violent video games are hurtful to the young people addicted to them, and these games even place those around them at risk for being victimized too." See, THIS is one of numerous places which could've used a proper source!
• "Our “resilient species” can elect representatives to protect against the corruption of the youth." CP did say that there isn't really such a thing as quoting out of context.. Also, for some reason this quote makes me feel like I should start welcoming our Lizard Overlords.
• "CONCLUSION The Petition for Certiorari should be granted. " . Or else Andy will write up SUCH a scathing rant on you on his blog!

Sorry for the overly use of bulleted points, I tried to make it a bit readable. I'll leave the legal stuff for someone else to pick through. I think he stated that videogames shouldn't be sold to kids, because it was also forbidden for cars with audio equipment to bother pedestrians with their rantings. --GTac 22:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It's all just wonderful. To be complete, it would only need "the video game industry is brainwashing addicted children into beating balls at eachother with paddles, throwing barrels at plumbers, jumping on mushrooms and turtles, and feeding coffee-soaked cheerios to pet hedgehogs. Deny this and lose all credibility. 2+2=4. Godspeed." 00:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah. So when Andy agrees with research results, said results are 100% accurate and cannot be called into question. But when Andy disagrees... well. The research was just crap to begin with. Obviously. X Stickman 01:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

So why don't we copy it over and do our wonderful RW magick trix on it? Side-by-side, perhaps, or maybe we have enough tape of him talking now that we could audio-animate it? ħuman ^waste 02:23, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, it also pissed me off that it doesn't have page numbers. ħuman ^waste 02:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that as well. I mean, what sort of legal document doesn't have page numbers? I can only assume that he typed it himself as any competent legal secretary would have used them as a matter of course. Генгис^{clickin' those ads} 10:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Is It Just Me

Or does the CP server appear to be suffering a little. I'm getting "503 Internal Server Error. The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request." for about one request in five. StarFish 20:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Aye. I just checked a few talk pages today and got 500/503 errors every now and then. --Sid 20:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

They're getting a lot of hits lately, probably a patriotic surge of interest due to the upcoming 7/4 celebrations. Apparently people are visiting approximately as often as the server can manage to keep up (sentence?). ħuman ^cabal 21:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fourth of 7

http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Fourth_of_July&action=history

Ah, good times, good times. ħuman ^{be in} 21:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

So, apparently exposure to CP causes reasonable writing to slowly deteriorate:

"Everyone whose work is not vital (like nurses and police) takes a day or two off work, and people enjoy the summer weather with cookouts, get-togethers, and, at night, displays of fireworks and bonfires. Most towns hold parades, as well as usually sponsoring safe fireworks shows. Some people hold re-enactments of Revolutionary War era events."

Was bit-rotted merely by being on the CP server to:

"Most American businesses are closed and the citizens enjoy the summer holiday with cookouts, get-togethers, concerts, baseball, picnics, barbecues, bon fires, parades, and at night time enjoy displays of fireworks. Some people hold re-enactments of Revolutionary War era and some people give political speeches at events across the nations cities and towns."

I want my edits back, Mr. Schlafly!

I also want to know how the bonfires turned into a daytime activity and became two words. ħuman ^{be in} 02:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The competition

I found a blog that has some interesting insight on it about CP. We get a few shout-outs as well. Can anyone here claim this as their own doing? Aboriginal Noise ^Punkrock 21:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty convinced it's one of us or someone who reads us. On of the links on the side is SirChuckB's blog and that's pretty obscure (sorry chuck, but you gotta update that sometime!) It's quite a good one though, boils down CP's recent greatest WIGOs into readable English. Totnesmartin 22:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It is Psy's blog. ^{— Signed, by: π / annoy me with a yellow box / that's over 9,000 / stuff to do} 08:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Er... yup... guilty as charged. (Thanks for the comment too!) --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Moar Conservative words.

Yup. Now it's "catharsis". Unsurprisingly Andy gets the year wrong (although he's close), as well as the definition. OED: noun the release of pent-up emotions, for example through drama. Dictionary.com: the purging of the emotions or relieving of emotional tensions, esp. through certain kinds of art, as tragedy or music. 1795–1805. Nowhere (although I'm ignoring Mirriam-Webster) are the words "in writing or teaching or confession" mentioned. Andy, if you're going to pull stuff out of your ass, at least try and make an effort - or do you want to look like a prick? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)