Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive71

This is an archive page, last updated 14 April 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Atheists (of Cthulhu)

Am I the only one who missed this?--Antifly 22:17, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

One suspects that someone's taking a leetle bit of piss.   ^Contribs_Talk 22:19, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Pinochet

Am I the only one who found the fawning over Pinochet made them want to throw up? I can't believe the crap he is writing. And as for Ed, I have never heard a leftist defend the murders by Castro and Guevara, but I am only 25 so it is probably the times I live in. But Pinochet was good and the leftist smeared him? Isn't this the sort of revisionist history crap the Chompsky comes out with for Pol Pot? I was watching a documentary on Opus Dei, and when there leadership started talking about the good old days under Pinochet I lost any sympathy I had for them in the attacks by Brown in The Da Vinci Code. Also they are conveniently over looking the fact that socialist government in Chile was voted in and Pinochet overthrew the democratically elected government. $\approx$$\pi$ 23:35, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

No, I also wanted to puke. Republicans have no problem with brutal dictators, as long as he's Christian and conservative. δλερνερ ^{διαλέγομαι | συνεισφέρω} 23:40, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Correction - the far-right nutjobs that would fit right in at CP have no problem with brutal dictators, as long as he's Christian and conservative, same as they uphold the idea of democratically elected governments - unless those governments are a bit too socialist. More moderate Republicans would find that just as nuts as you do. 92.16.51.127 23:49, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

Bunch of numbers, you made me feel better by saying that. Thankyou. $\approx$$\pi$ 00:14, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Thatcher (spit) was a big fan of Augusto, say no more!   ^Contribs_Talk 00:46, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, hey, you have that spitting thing, too? Barikada 02:07, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Spit! And I made the pretty "heart" for teh assfly & his bff, Pinochet. PS, I dislike authoritarianism from the left and right. Um, I don't like dictators. ħuman 02:19, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I have that with Reagan (spit), too. Thatcher (twitch) is slightly less familiar to me. Anyway, yeah, the Pinochet (glare) thing. I love when Ed (...) loses his veneer of geniality and explodes with random accusations that have nothing to do with anything. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 03:28, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

<unindent> I have a theory why Andy likes Pinochet. The CIA was involved in overthrowing the democratically elected President Salvador Allende, the first Marxist to ever be democratically elected to high office, this was in 1973 during the Nixon administration, so, it must have been good, thus, Pinchet was good. This fits well with the way Andy thinks. δλερνερ ^{διαλέγομαι | συνεισφέρω} 03:50, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

This reminds me, CP really needs an article on Operation Condor. -Judas Reward 03:54, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Remember that right now Schlafly is theorizing about Orwell being a conservative. As somebody put it with Bush and Hitler, regarding Pinochet, Castro, Che, Pol Pot, et al., it's the same shit, just different assholes. --JJ4e^{Got milk?} 09:05, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I know exposing parody is bad, but what with all the Orwell stuff going on over there can this little gem by Bungler really be ignored? --Kels 09:16, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

As vocal against him as I have been, I like him, for example here, when he doesn't jump against innocent CP editors, RW trolls or his fellow parodists. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:27, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Greetings, foreign traveler. Please obey the orders given by me, or be summarily executed.

"Welcome, weary traveler. If you'd like to help us shovel back the liberal tide of Wikipedia, please write about the influence Hollywood has had on the world at large. I hope you will agree to accept this [[writing assignment]]." —Ed Poor[1]

This message has been brought to you by Conservapedia—the encyclopedia that cares. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:37, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Epic lulz

This is just perfect. I'm actually involved in one of the diffs provided :D I can't say who I am in the Land of Conserawackia or they'll pwn me and report me to the FBI (which is their way of saying their mommies) but I am a "conservative, God-fearing" user on there. So keep this going, even if it is just for the epic lulz -

IP sig removed - don't ask.   ^Contribs_Talk 00:51, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for giving me some lulz on my b-day. PWN'd! Candlewick 09:16, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Actions have consequences. weaseLOId~ 09:28, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Cheater.

Hey, IP -- use Tor. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^Chaos! 09:33, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Please, someone tell me what this Epic lulz is and where to find diffs. I must be missing the obvious here - it wouldn't be the first time. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:41, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm not exactly sure. The user who wrote the above note (anonymously using their IP address) is obviously socking on CP & involved in some of the stuff on WIGO, but I don't know under what name. CP sysop NathanG was watching us & has blocked that IP - see the block log linked above, currently fourth one down, 09:14, quotes '"Epic Lulz" - Thanks for the tip' so obviously watching this page. weaseLOId~ 09:49, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Ah! I saw that NathanG's block and I thought it referred to something specific happening over there. Thanks, Weaseloid. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:53, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

*sigh* so once again, one of the goon squad has blocked somebody there for something they said on another site. The fact that it was an IP could mean that more than one person is blocked too. Way to go Nate. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:15, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

It's Nate's birthday after all. Won't we let him party with a cake, some presents and a few blocks? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:17, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

It's one of the many ways in which CP is hypocritical, they try to expunge us from the records but they're all _{(Hi Jinx!)} logged in here watching like hawks Silver Sloth 10:35, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) It truly does not matter what other people do on other sites. Part of the block policy is not to block users on their activities outside of CP. RAAAAH! Irony Meter redlining! Initializing hard liquor counter-balance! Norseman^Wassail! 10:38, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Must be very frustrating for them, seeing us saying what they'd like to say on their own site. Perhaps they could sign up and speak their minds without fear of permablocks by ego-tripping sysops. Please join us. We have goats! Totnesmartin 10:43, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

1. I'm not a sysop, just really close to it (immunity and block/upload/edit rights)
2. The user foolishly used his/her IP to "brag" about socking/vandalism, s/he deserved it, eh? The user didn't say anything to offend me or CP on this site, so I didn't block the user for "outside activities". Candlewick 13:32, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, unless you can provide evidence of the vandalism or socking (the anon IP didn't say that they had multiple accounts or had actually committed vandalism) then you are hypocritically blocking for things said on another site. I just hope they're not supplying Kool-Aid at your birthday bash because you seem to be slipping into the dark side. Genghis^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:08, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I would agree with you, Nate, if the user had actually admitted to socking/vandalism, but he didn't and could very well be, say, the guy who wrote stuff on the "Best Concepts to Teach Teenagers" essay or the guy Andy complimented and incited to bash liberals. At this point the only thing we know (unless you asked somebody to run Checkuser on him or something) is that he knows about rationalwiki and was involved in something he founds funny. Either way, happy birthday! NightFlare^{i haz a talk page.} 19:31, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Nope, I don't drink anything, ever.. except if I'm sick or about to get sick, then I drink "wooder".

Meh, alright. I'll make a note of it, but I won't unblock the IP because then it will raise an eyebrow or two at CP... putting my reputation at jeopardy. I'm learning ever so slowly, the opposite of how I was in school. Candlewick 22:21, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Nah, I'm not the sockpuppet you've been talking about. I'm just a user on the site who contributes. Anyway, don't remove my IP address this time. If those whackjobs want to block this IP again, let them; it goes against their rules of not blocking because of off-wiki remarks. I bolded it so the monitoring CP sysops could see it clearly. While this won't be the first time it'll happen, it will be nice to see what their reasoning is for blocking me. Oh well. 75.169.211.214 22:58, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, btw, look at NathanG's reasoning for blocking Sockofames: "Personal remarks: swearing is prohibited.. I think". Sigh

Ossification

Watch out, Andy is doing "science" again...--Antifly 10:52, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

A new Conservapedia insight... Maybe Andy finally came to his senses and selfdiagnosed the problem? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:53, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Where is the curve in all that? $\approx$$\pi$ 19:43, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Genius!

Oh, Bugler, bravo. Bra-VO. He'll go for it, too. Watching Bugler at work is like watching a concert pianist. --Phentari 11:07, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

And he did! I find it hilarious that Andy doesn't even know when he started his own blog! --Kels 11:18, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Even we know that! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 11:21, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

November, huh? What would life be like if he'd decided to be productive and done NaNoWriMo instead? --Kels 11:32, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

We'd have an unholy abomination of a novel as damaging to the sanity of those who attempted to read it as the Necronomicon. Fortunately, egregious errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation would render it illegible to the casual reader. --Phentari 11:34, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Someone has given it too him. He doesn't let go of his ideas easily does Andy? $\approx$$\pi$ 19:51, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Karajou vs. PJR, round whatever

Perhaps not WIGO-worthy, but Karajou resurrects a few day old issue (which we talked about earlier) just to insult DLerner and smack PJR down. It's an interesting acknowledgment of the unspoken sysop hierarchy, and I anxiously await PJR's response. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 12:10, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

OH!!!! The throwdown gets a little more interesting! The stakes are raised! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 12:13, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

And then comes the Holy Crap! WIGO entry. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 12:36, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

And Karajou is down! But is he out? We're just waiting on the 10 count. 10... 9...

Boxing commentary aside, how much denial is it going to take to make Karajou look like the good guy in this situation (which is surely how they'll spin this)? I mean, he just took his ball and left. This can't reflect well on him. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 12:39, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

(conflict) And in an Inverse Schlafly Reversal, Karajou blanks and protects their talk page and leaves. So... Karajou didn't have the authority to demand that PJR leave Conservapedia then? --Toiretni 12:40, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

My call is there was a brief, furious exchange of emails, someone (Andy, likely) said that was too much, and Karajou threw a tantrum. We'll see the spin really get going in the next day or so. Prediction: The Koward will be back after burning his talk page, everyone will act as if nothing happened, but there will be prickliness at PJR in general for calling other sysops on their shit. He might even decide it's not worth the effort in the end and quietly wander off himself. --Kels 12:44, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Cheek! Who does he think he is? ME?   ^Contribs_Talk 12:47, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Kara retired!! [2] Candlewick 12:49, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Nice reaction time there, old boy. =3 --Kels 12:51, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Alternate WIGO:

Karajou: Rabbit season!

PJR: Duck season!

Karajou: Rabbit season!

Karajou: Duck season!

*BANG* --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 12:52, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I for one am not sorry to see that petulant child slink off into the sunset. His reply to PJR was pure Kajagoogoo, all bully and bluster. Alas, somehow I don't think we've seen the last of him. I wonder how Andy the Admin is gong to respond to this shit storm? I'm guessing he's already pulled down the hatch... although I'm sure the wires are humming behind the scenes. Good for you PJR - now if you can convince Ed and Andy to leave, there might be some hope for that little blog. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:53, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I'm just hoping PJR doesn't back down for the sake of unity or some nonsense. I'm guessing Andy's safely hidden under his bed or something at this point, hoping it all goes away. --Kels 12:59, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

He could make it all go away by telling sysops they can't just go around demanding things impromptu. Peon, you will talk to me before making any edits to math articles! Peon, you will complete this writing assignment! Peon, you will never criticize me in public! --Toiretni 13:12, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

...and now CP has crashed (or is it just me?) Fretfulporpentine 13:14, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, the big hypocrite. He's just victimizing himself, now that PJR is not on good terms with teh Assfly. --JJ4e^{Got milk?} 13:15, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

EC) side note: Karajou let sysops have an e-mail addy not users though.

Wonder if the indirect GUN reference was intended by our favourite parodist: "We need people of his calibre here." :Bungler.   ^Contribs_Talk 13:18, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I was going to propose to Bungler to take Kara's place, but I'm IP banned now :P Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 13:26, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I've screengrabbed K's talk page, just in case he does delete it. I'll upload it to here (hopefully as text, otherwise an image of the page) if anyone wants me to. Totnesmartin 13:37, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Got it: Image:Karajou takes ball goes home.png --Toiretni 13:39, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Lovely. Also saves me farting about with a 787x10875 picture, which would probably make Roxio Photosuite pass out. Totnesmartin 14:02, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Sweetness. Let's hope that Karajou took a sufficiently "him or me" stance with Andy for pride to forbid him to slink back. If I had to put money on it, though, I'd go with Kels' prediction. --Robledo 13:47, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm sure Karajou will be back. The conversation was probably like: Andy: Look, above all, I don't want any of my "good" guys leaving. Please stop demanding each other leave. Karajou: Oh yeah? If wanting to keep everyone here makes you spineless, then fine! I'm leaving. (but for really petty and theatrical reasons, which means I'm going to be back tomorrow) --Toiretni 13:55, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Is there any serious doubt that he's coming back? It's just immature temper tantrum bullshit. He'll be back, they'll never speak of it again, but there will always be an undercurrent of distrust and anger. 'Cause remember, Jesus said "forgive" but he didn't say "forget!" --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 14:02, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Well, Jesus also said sumpin about "love thy neighbour" and "turn the other cheek", but do we ever see much of that? ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like rapturous guns

Clearly you're reading a Liberal sentiment that was inserted into the Bible after the fact, in the same way the Adulteress leftist propaganda was. After all, God is obviously a Conservative and would never allow anything that could be used to embarrass Conservatives into His Holy Book! --Kels 14:09, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I have little doubt (but much hope) that he'll be back before long. Have any of these quits-in-a-huff departures ever held? I guess DanH, but it hasn't been long and I wouldn't be surprised if he returned too. The longest absence for a big wheel is RobS, and he just disappeared, he never resigned. DickTurpis 14:07, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

When people leave for other reasons in their life (their boss/gf/wife tells them to knock off the web surfing), they tend to do it quietly, and it has a higher chance of sticking. When they leave in a really visible way like this, and especially if they don't give any substantive reason for why they have problems with the site, they tend to be back in short order. --Toiretni 14:10, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Still, I don't think DanH will be back. He's been gone for 2 1/2 months, and Andy staunchly refuses to fix the reason he left (unlike Croc's similar retirement). Hopefully, he's gotten enough distance to really see CP for what it is. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 14:13, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

This is such good news, it deserves its very own template:

One dickhead down, only a handful more to go. --JeevesMkII 14:14, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh Bohdan you know us too well. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 14:25, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Maybe if Karajou comes back because of that, we can then change everything else on CP using reverse psychology? 'YAY! They're not deleting the page on Affirmative Action Presidents!' -Judas Reward 14:32, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

The fact that I know that Kara only imitates JM's "OH NOES! I LEAVE! FOREVER! BECAUSE OF PJR!" drama whoring takes all the fun out of this (for me). :( Seriously, can't that guy discuss like a sane human being? The moment his powertripping runs into a speedbump, he hits the Drama Button. --Sid 14:31, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

In order to discuss something in a sane manner, you have to be prepared to acknowledge at least the possibility that the other part could be right. Karajou is far too insecure to do that. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:43, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Is it just me, or is Bodhan often doing stuff that'll harm CP, like asking the Koward to come back, blocking legit users, or encouraging obvious censorship? --Kels 14:41, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

He's kind of like Loki, he gets his lulz from both sides. --JeevesMkII 14:48, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Is that legal in Denmark? --Kels 15:27, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

It's COMPULSORY!!  ^Contribs_Talk 15:32, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, we have a long tradition of that. Such as during the Napoleonic Wars. Instead of allying with one or the other like everyone else, Denmark managed for years to get their lulz from both the British and Napoleon. Of course, in the end, the British got fed up with it, so they beat us up and took our ships away. But that's another story. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:40, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Thought Kels had an other both sides in mind, but that's probably my pornograph working overtime.   ^Contribs_Talk 15:53, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I think I had a pornograph, back in the 80's. I keep all my HenryS/AKjeldsen slash on a flash drive now. --Kels 16:25, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Drive it home, someone spam the reports of his abuse, nail the coffin shut! :p (Y'know what I think? Karajou couldn't bully PJR, even after that threatening statement. Because of ONE instance he couldn't abuse his power, he left in a trail of piss. He just couldn't get his way, what a crying bitch.) Norseman^Wassail! 15:31, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Hrm, I was just totting up who really needs to go to make Conservapedia somewhat sane, or at least dead, which might be the same thing. Really, only Crock o'shite comes to mind. I'd say Bugler too, but I'm almost certain he's a parodist. I kind of hope he fills the dead man's shoes and becomes a sysop so he can fulfil whatever dastardly plan he has hatched. Of course, really to achieve full sanity Andy would have to go. Sadly, that probably won't happen any time soon. --JeevesMkII 15:43, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy and Ed would basically have to go. Croc should too, but since he doesn't edit anything he's not as significant; he'd just make the entire site a link farm to conservative blogs. Ken would likely need to go, though he could be kept for comic effect. Jinx is as bad as the rest of them. Bugler can stay, since he's a confirmed parodist. He'd have to get to the finale of his grand scheme soon, though. Problem is I'm not even sure he knows what it is. He may be so deep undercover that's he's gone rouge. DickTurpis 16:50, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

He's gone rouge? Do we have the photographs? :D --JeevesMkII 17:07, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, Wikipedia in-joke that I guess hasn't taken off here. DickTurpis 17:43, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

LEST WE FORGET. Genghis^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:26, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah. While I think champagne is definitely in order, if only to celebrate the spectacle, I think it is important to remember that the jerky one threw a very similar fit before and came slinking back within days. He's definitely not strong on follow through except for reflexive jerkiness and bullying of course. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 09:38, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Wait a minute!

Did I start the ball rolling that made Karajou quit? Wow, I never realised I was that good at annoying people. Intresting that one of last things he posts before he quits was a ad hominem attack on me, "I assumed the worst about this individual because the worst is what he displays on a constant basis". If I didn't have thick skin, I would consider quitting if a high-ranking member of a corrupt site spoke about me like that. But I iz a Joo, and we have big noses and thick skin. (And we're very good with money too.) I never inteneded to make people quit, I'm fine with loons and crazies being there as long as they don't block like it's going out of style. δλερνερ ^{διαλέγομαι | συνεισφέρω} 07:44, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It had been foreshadowed that PJR & Kajagoogoo would have a machismo contest sometime but I don't think sanyone expected K to throw his teddy out like that. You were a definite factor - congratulations.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:50, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Bristol Palin

I see making mention that little Bris is up the spout is gossip [3], whilst Obama being a muslim and not American must therefore be fact. Bunch of hypocrites. PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:33, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Compare the gossip Commandment with the entire contents of CP:Hollywood values. weaseLOId~ 13:37, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Let's see how long Jareddr's new edits last. Not long, I think. Pity, as the last paragraph is exactly the sort of thing Andy would put in the introduction to an article on a liberal who did that. DickTurpis 15:05, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I got you beat, I'll explain to them what her daugther has to do with the campaign when they explain what Al Gore's son's drug convictions have to do with his political career. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 15:11, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

So, are they going to have to change the Jamie-Lynn Spears entry in Hollywood values now? "The parents of 16-year old Jamie Lynn Spears allowing her unwed pregnancy to be publicly portrayed as a normal act even though she is a role model for millions of underage teenagers."HMcTavitch 15:15, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

No kidding, Bristol Palin mustbe a role model for dozens of young Alaskans. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 15:17, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I was actually going to change "Jamie Lynn Spears" to "Bristol Palin" in that article, but they're not accepting new accounts, it seems. This is what I get for getting all my socks banned. Anyway, I'm going to blame the parents here. This is what you get when you give your daughter a name that's slang for "tits". DickTurpis 15:21, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Too...damn...easy... --Kels 15:25, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

What the hell happened to my witty WIGO? Damn, Interiot, I'm gonna de-lulz your work next... DogP 15:59, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

*shrug* Humor is subjective. If you think yours is probably better, feel free to revert it. It just seemed like Andy's quote was unusually ironic and should be the first thing mentioned. --Toiretni 16:58, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

James Dobson: "The media are already trying to spin this as evidence Gov. Palin is a 'hypocrite,' but all it really means is that she and her family are human." What was Human saying about the "tightest U-turns"? --Toiretni 16:58, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, there's going to be the most tortuous arguments made here. Evangelicals can't be seen to criticise Palin, but they can't be seen to condone sleeping around as a 16-year-old either. This kind of "oh, we're all just human" talk is a timebomb . Andy's avoiding the topic like the plague over there, his ant-like brain can't figure out how to take a position on the issue, as he's so tied up in dogma. Wonderful. DogP 17:08, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Er..."We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby." Given she'd already said she'd force her daughter to give birth even if she was raped, where's the "decision" here? --Kels 17:42, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

It reminds me of those 1920's "business mergers." You know what I'm sayin SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 18:29, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Of course there's still a decision to make... anti-choice people have abortions too.

Just last week a woman announced loudly enough for all to hear in the recovery room, that she thought abortion should be illegal. Amazingly, this was her second abortion within the last few months, having gotten pregnant again within a month of the first abortion.

That's what you get when you preach "no contraception, no abortion". --Toiretni 18:39, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I got a good one. read this have a little chuckle on me. If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 18:52, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Interesting to note that Fox news, which banner-headlined the story all morning as breaking news, and had a Front Page article on it until very recently, has now dropped the story entirely from sight. Ah...family values. DogP 19:13, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Much as I love to bash Fox_notNews...I went to their website and it's still on the front page, under the Laura Bush speech headline. "Teen daughter of GOP VP pick pregnant"--Jdellaro 19:25, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oops, yer right. Sorry, Mr.Murdoch, for my scurrilous allegations of news-rigging. DogP 19:27, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Provocateur

Who can he mean? http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Provocateur&diff=508664&oldid=420970 Fretfulporpentine 14:09, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

This just demands something like "such as a RationalWiki based sock-puppet account" added into it. Armondikov 14:38, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

The second "section" demands that it be turned into English... ħuman 15:50, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I wonder if he ever reads all of an article or just the latest entry. History (Skimming) would suggest that if there's more than about 100 words his brain can't manage it but almost everything he's touched is the same: disjointed and repetitive making any attempt to read it torture. It's probably a fault with the way wikis work but he's supposed to be intelligent </snigger/>.   ^Contribs_Talk 16:16, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Reagan

Another Reagan apologist makes his mark. Interesting bit (apart from the Supreme court appointments which seem to be fairly accurate) is the juxtaposition of: "Reduce government regulation of the economy." and "Control the money supply to reduce inflation.". Shome mishtake shurely! Oh! the Spelln's pretty atroshus too: weather/whether wear/where etc.   ^Contribs_Talk 15:26, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I think control the money supply might mean money supply to the government, if it does then a blow out in the debt of 160% means it didn't work. If it mean literally control the money (through government control of printing) then it is fairly economically reckless thing to do. $\approx$$\pi$ 19:59, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

The Fed cut the money supply drastically in the late 70's to combat inflation, causing the devastating recession early in Reagan's first term. Once inflation had cooled off, they opened the spigots, fueling the subsequent economic boom period a bit too enthusiastically, making the next recession a bad one as well. ħuman 20:05, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Bugler - chinks in the armour?

If Bugler's undercover then he's deeeeep undercover. If he's undercover then is this [4] a little rip in the cover? A little glimpse of humour? Or this [5] "Toffers, you are the incorrigible liberal", Toffers? Toffers? That almost sounds affectionate. To a liberal? --Toffeeman 18:15, 1 September 2008 (EDT) I he hoping I'll respond with "Buggers old chap!" and he can ban me?--Toffeeman 18:16, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Hello Toffeeman / Toffers. I didn't know you were an editor here. I noticed the copyright lawyer thing too. I assume it's a joke, whether or not he is a parodist. weaseLOId~ 18:25, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Ok, if Bugly is a parodist, what's his plan? A collective blockage? Massive vaporizing of pages? JJ4e^{Karajerk is dead} 21:08, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Wheeling the entire site around in the middle of the night would be funny. ħuman 21:15, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

At sysop level you can delete pages -- wiping the page views.

That's the only thing I can think of, really. Far better to do a TK and hold out for bureaucracy. With a bit of creativity, BureauPowers can do lasting damage. Not that I'd condone that sort of thing. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^Chaos! 21:23, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Personally, if I had the patience to do a Bugler, I'd go for javascript in main.js to steal sessions, change passwords (and email addresses) and then redirect to a shemale porn site. But that's just me. I'm far too liberal for my own good. --JeevesMkII 00:19, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You know, what surprises me is that for all of our speculation, no one has bothered to try and crack Aschlafly's password and really wreak some havoc. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:35, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Did TK ever actually get bureaucrat powers, though? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

No, TK never got the office keys. Like all good totalitarian leaders Andy doesn't trust the thugs around him with too much power. The only active (and I use that term loosely) bureaucrats are SharonS (one of his carefully groomed pet homeskollars) and Jallen (a relatively inoffensive Sheila who confines herself largely to administrative matters). Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 02:06, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

wouldn't password hacking & subsequent wandalism be a tad ... err illegal? Quick, call the FBI!   ^Contribs_Talk 02:16, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Wandering

So, thats the end of User:Wandering over at CP. I know I have mentioned it before but I am always in awe of Ed Poors ability to come along and fuck everything up within minutes. Ace McWicked^whisky 21:54, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

There is an old saying around wikis, "it takes Ed one minute to undo one months work by competent editors". $\approx$$\pi$ 22:00, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I was watching earlier, the minute he showed up, he set in on a bunch of the more productive non-crazy editors. Way to keep the morale up, Ed! Can't imagine what happened to that WP adminship. --Kels 22:03, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I like how he was blocked for "opposing the project", isn't this Ed's proposal rather than actual policy? Actually deleting articles because they are esoteric is an essay by Ed not policy. It seems he gets an idea in his head it is now policy. Like Andy he writes and essay and it becomes truth and articles are adjusted accordingly. $\approx$$\pi$ 22:21, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

This is a "proxy call out" to PJR with Wandering as the scapegoat. Should PJR raise to the bait lulz will ensue...Philip will lose sysopship since Ed is obviously extorting Aschlafly or footing the bandwidth bill until Andy gets Mom to cough up more dough. CЯacke® 22:40, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

MOER: The call out is over this here, note the edit summary for Wandering's last block.

Ed has nothing on Andy. Look at how he grovels when he has nothing to show Andy for a month. $\approx$$\pi$ 22:56, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

To his credit, he did manage to block some productive editors and alienate some more, so he hasn't been totally idle. --Kels 22:58, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Why does he do this? He goes around to Andy once a month and tells him all about his crappy little stub articles and Andy tells him how good it is and how much he has learnt (an obvious lie). He must view Andy as a strong authority figure as he so desperately needs his approval. $\approx$$\pi$ 23:03, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

He's obviously susceptible to authority figures: Rev Moon - Andy Schlafly. If L Ron had got there first he probably have been ..., or he might have been a KoolFlavor ade drinker. The guy's obviously suggestible cult fodder.  ^Contribs_Talk 23:11, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I think it's more the power thing. Guy like Andy gives Ed a gun, and Ed takes this as a sign to go shoot up the "bad guys" Old West style. Except Ed ends up shooting his deputies, too. And his horse...and that cactus that looks at him funny. Not that that necessarily negates the susceptibility to cult-like behaviour. But Ed's actions, to me, anyway, seem to stem more from being a narcissistic dick than being a drone. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 00:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

"... but I did not shoot the deputy". I laffed. Nice sig, too. How's that blow-up dinghy thingy working out for you? Yossarion! Get on that plane! ħuman 00:11, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

But please put some clothes on first.   ^Contribs_Talk 00:16, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

<undent>Thank you, I'm quite proud of the sig. Though, Jellyfish! was very helpful in the finicky technical details. As for the dinghy...I lost my orrs. :( To SusanG: that's not going to happen. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 00:18, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That book is, IMHO, probably the best book of the 20th century. I've bought it at least 12 times - having worn it out or loaned & lost it or just lost it. I love every page.   ^Contribs_Talk 00:22, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I have no idea what book you're talking about. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:37, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Catch 22.   ^Contribs_Talk 00:40, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Wow, RA, you need to get out (or in) more... ħuman 00:55, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Specially as a good(?) Jewish (?) boy.   ^Contribs_Talk 00:58, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

*looks suggestively at SusanG* Call me a naughty Jewish boy. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:06, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Err... I've got a great nephew older than I suspect you are!!!   ^Contribs_Talk 01:17, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Um, you realize you are trying to seduce a goyim with a girlfriend? Quit grossing us out and contribute to this trusworthy resource!! ħuman 01:15, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed's Getting Cranky

Ed "math genius" Poor has taken a shine to Stephen Wolfram. Inevitable lulz ensue...--Antifly 22:11, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I really like the edit comment on one of those links:"(We need not copy Wikipedia's anti-scientific bias)"   ^Contribs_Talk 23:01, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I am glad I just made some modifications to my irony meter it could have burnt out otherwise. $\approx$$\pi$ 23:04, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh no even the RW 3.0 IM could withstand "(It's a better math encyclopedia than Wikipedia, so lost the scare quotes)". Oh well maybe they will build one at CERN that could withstand that. $\approx$$\pi$ 23:07, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm working on the bugs, the RW 3.1 IM should be available shortly, and it's an easy patch to upgrade previous versions. HINT: It ain't running MS software - that was the biggest bug. ħuman 23:18, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

"MS software". WHAT? Why wasn't I informed of this? --λινυσ^(☮) 18:36, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

The patches and software updates are good but could the hardware really survive the statement that Conservapedia is a better maths encyclopedia than Wikipedia. $\approx$$\pi$ 23:24, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

It's a bit of an evolutionary arms race, I try to keep my improovmints ahead of their next brilliang statements. Still, protection circuits and logarithmic algorithms go a along way to avoiding burnouts. ħuman 00:19, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It is hard work I know Human. Keep up the good work, the future of the internet depends on it. $\approx$$\pi$ 00:21, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed was saying that Mathworld is a better maths encyclopedia than Wikipedia. Still wrong, but not as wrong as CP is a better maths encyclopedia than Wikipedia. He's definately delusional, but has yet to reach the gold standard set by Andy.--Antifly 23:38, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Interesting how Ed jumps straight from "a better X than Wikipedia" to "a good X". Personally, I find MathWorld to have way too many dead end pages for my taste, and thus wouldn't say it's better than WP... but I hardly think "oh, it's better than Wikipedia" is a valid reason for Ed to remove criticism of MathWorld from the article. (Well, he really just paraphrased a quotation, but whatever.) --Marty 00:41, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Also, this confuses me. Does Ed really believe that Wolfram's cellular automaton theories support creationism, or is he simply assuming that if Modern Science ignores Wolfram's theories, it must be because they would somehow lend support to creationism (or school prayer, or something)? Seems to me that Wolfram's CA crankery is materialistic reductionism taken to the extreme! --Marty 00:41, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

You see according to CP creationism is correct and also according to CP maths is infallible so therefore maths supports creationism, you just need to be open-minded. The fact that they have never read his work and Ed has a chip on his shoulder, because a) he got kicked out of the Wikipedia hierarchy and b) his maths articles are crap and embarrassing when compared to Wikpedia's, has nothing to do with it. $\approx$$\pi$

Triangular trade again

I see more and more people are calling Andy on his "triangular trade is a liberal myth" bullshit (see cp:Triangular trade for the latest), and yet Andy's been ignoring this entirely. Usually he makes up some BS ("Pinochet was innocent", "gossip is only gossip when I say it is") but in this case he's ignoring it entirely. Is it possible he realizes he said some unbelievably stupid stuff and thinks he can make it go away by ignoring it? The only times Andy ever admitted he has been wrong has been about minor things he could dismiss as typos or minor misunderstandings that he could easily dismiss. In this case, he has something he obviously thought about too much to dismiss as a minor error due to paying insufficient attention to the subject (he went out of his way to dismiss a universally held belief). He either has to: 1) make up utterly fanciful and completely unreferenced accusations to back up his hackneyed assumptions, 2) admit he didn't examine the situation sufficiently and admit he made an overly hasty assumption based on nothing, or 3) ignore it and pretend no one ever said anything. I guess the last is the only option it is in his power to consider. DickTurpis 23:21, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I am guessing there'll be a few "You're Clueless" being thrown around before this one is settled. Ace McWicked^whisky 23:24, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd like to see September be a banner month for cluelesses, since August was so slow :( ħuman 23:54, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

That would involve him actually responding, and therefore keeping the issue alive. I think he's going to ignore all contradictions, thus making his assertions all the more unassailable. DickTurpis 23:26, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

See it's brought AliceBG out of near retirement.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:29, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't understand his problem, it is simple economics the slaves have to be bought with something that could otherwise not be obtained in Western Africa otherwise, why sell slaves? $\approx$$\pi$ 23:30, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Please! You're confusing Andy's brain with such talk! DickTurpis 23:33, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

The sad consequence of Andy's latest ostrich impression is that he will be teaching this crap to the "largest ever" history class in the fall. A group of young impressionable students gets to be misled by this asshat simply because he is too vain to admit his mistake.--Antifly 23:44, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Was there a burned talk page before the current one? It seems fairly short compared to how big Andy's claim is. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 09:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

The assertion that it was a myth has been removed, and it's been deleted from the myths page too. I wonder how long that will last? Or will it be allowed? The problem has fixed itself, and Andy never has to acknowledge anything. DickTurpis 10:31, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy has reverted. AliceBG re-reverts and calls Andy "clueless". [6]--Toffeeman 11:01, 2 September 2008 (EDT)[7]

I saw that. He hasn't reverted the triangular trade article itself, though he probably hasn't noticed it. I hope, if nothing else, this forces him to defend this weird idea of his. Right now all he says is that they didn't use the term triangular trade at the time. Gee, Andy, case closed, I guess. DickTurpis 11:11, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

"Africa was too poor at the time to engage in any meaningful purchase of goods.--Aschlafly 11:15, 2 September 2008 (EDT) " Silver Sloth 11:25, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Circa 30AD Jesus didn't call his teachings "Christianity". I guess that term must be a later liberal myth. Damn, those pinkoes get everywhere! Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 11:32, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

And a superb piece of last wordism. So it's over to the judges and, yes it's a 10.0 for a perfect execution. Silver Sloth 11:39, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You have to love the history that lives on in Andy's brain. In his history, only Christians make major developments and discoveries in the world, sailors arrive from Europe and those stupid Negros just hand over captured slaves for no repayment (they're so poor and stupid, they don't even know it) The constitution is a glowing merger of Church and State, Thomas Jefferson was a dirty copier and Those damn Vikings just sat around killing yaks.... Have I missed anything? SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 11:45, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy: Africa was too poor to engage in trade.

AliceBG: Africa was rich in slaves. That's what they used to trade.

Andy: Africa was too poor to buy stuff.

AliceBG: Slaves were a form of wealth. That's the whole point of why people traded for slaves.

Andy: You're ignoring the main point. [Cuts off debate]

Classic.--Bayes

I'm no academic historian (doffs cap towards Denmark) but Wikipedia's article on the Triangular Trade is not exactly a ringing endorsement of the term. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 11:55, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) It's not the term that matters, Andy is denying the basic principle ever occurred. He's whitewashing history to try and paint his religion in the best possible light (although I'd argue that taking slaves from Africa for nothing because the natives didn't understand money isn't a great view in itself) SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 12:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Until he can actually explain where the slaves came from, I don't think he is painting his religion in an especially good light. If he's saying the trade wasn't triangular, it was back and forth between the New World and Africa, then he's exonerated the Europeans but shifted guilt to the Americans, which seems contrary to his MO. If he's saying slaves weren't traded for, but stolen, then he's made Christians look worse. If he's saying no slaves were ever brought from Africa to America then he's exonerated Christians, but he's made himself into the biggest denialist idiot anyone's ever seen. I think he's just a racist and his stereotype of savage Africans doesn't allow him to believe they could have done anything as advanced as trade. I don't think he thought through anything else. DickTurpis 12:23, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I think he skimmed, drew a conclusion and didn't check it. Andy has read that historian "Clifford Shipton, after years of sifting through New England shipping records, could not find a single instance of a ship completing the full triangle as described"[8] This comment applies to ships of American origin only. So Andy skims "Triangular trade by Americans was a myth" to "triangular trade was a myth", puts that in his blog, people say he's wrong but the Andy mentality stops him saying "Oops, missed out "American" there." and instead he has to distort to pretend the original comment was right. --Toffeeman 12:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Actually, it looks like it specifies just New England as not really being a part of triangular trade (at least not with the same ship, which may not be as relevant as it would seem). Since the triangular trade routes seem to be the Caribbean and the South, the fact New England wasn't involved is hardly surprising (slavery never really took off there the way it did in the South anyway). DickTurpis 12:42, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

EC) EC) EC) Well the way I read the WP article is that some historian coined the concept c. 1870 and it got picked up by later historians, but there is no evidence that any New England vessel actually partook in a triangular route. Perhaps this is what Aschlafly's referring to. So, is there any evidence for British vessels actually navigating the triangle? I know that this was the accepted view when I did history at school, but was it actually a physical shipping triangle or just an economic balancing of the books? If it's purely an economic concept then Schlafly's guilty of liberal literalism and I fail to see how it relieves anyone from blame as the forced transfer of Africans to the Caribbean and the USA undoubtedly took place. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 13:01, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It seems like they're discussing a different triangle, between New England, Africa and the Caribbean. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:44, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I love how in any debate Andy will just give up, throw out a few godspeed you close-minded librul's and vanish. Then he reappears from time to time to rip into anyone making tangential points, while ignoring the main debate. Also, does anyone know what begging the obvious means?--Antifly 18:50, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Not WiGo worthy but

Resident idiot Jpatt has decided that there's only ever been one Senator from Arizona. As long as you're making useless redirects, Jpatt, why not cp:The Senior Republican Senator from the state of Arizona John Sidney McCain? DickTurpis 23:33, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

And you forgot cp:some cranky old Viet Vet who thinks Diebold will hook him up with an eighth house. ħuman 00:21, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Not WIGO-worthy, but... Ed gets "pedophile" wrong

No, Ed, a pedophile is not someone who molests children. It is someone who is sexually attracted to children. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:16, 2 September 2008 (EDT) Someone like Andy... (Whoops! Did I say that?)

Wait, did he put it in the poopy hole or the pee pee hole? ħuman 02:27, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed obviously has "issues" with young girls sluts [9], [10], [11]. So by shifting the pedophile label to only those who engage in physical acts he keeps his own conscience clear (possible explanation). (But oooooh the temptation! Down boy! Down I say!) -- Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 03:25, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Woah!! Are you seriously or even not seriously suggesting.....? Come on now. I suggest you edit that comment out, RA. Ajkgordon 03:55, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I wouldn't level any accusations at Ed but his history of comments about "slutty heathen" Britney Spears, women in pants, pretty girls, etc., are inappropriate for a homeschooler resource and suggests a preoccupation with the sexuality of young women that he would be better off not verbalising. Especially if he is going to be a teacher. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Women in pants? Does he want them in or out of them? $\approx$$\pi$ 06:05, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

See this for details. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:14, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

So she did not fulfill the purpose in her life, which is to be married and have kids. ::Trying not to scream:: All because she wore pants. THIS IS THE DUMBEST PIECE OF CRAP THAT HAS EVER SPILLED FORTH FROM THAT STUPID MOONEY ARTICLE VANDAL. $\approx$$\pi$ 06:22, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Well! I'm not a fan of pants (trousers to us Brits) on females especially me, but that makes me want to throw every skirt/dress I've got into the bin! The guy's a TOTAL MISOGYNIST!!!! (and a MOONY)   ^Contribs_Talk 06:30, 2 September 2008 (EDT) ps (what's a MOONY doing quoting the Bible - hasn't the Rev Moon got anything to say on the subject?)  ^Contribs_Talk

I thought this item was common knowledge, funny how what I took for granted is new grrr/lulz (grulz?) for others. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:41, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd known it but the reminder was appreciated.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:43, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

He also has a hard-on for dictators (much like his glorious leader) [12]...I seem to be picking on Ed a lot...is....is that wrong? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 20:08, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Who would have thought it?

Just spotted a lovely example of the total and complete ignorance on the front page of CP. I suspect it's not a parody or edit because of where and what it is...just a manifestation of someone talking out of their arse. However, if I mention it here it will certainly vanish. What's the drill in such a case? Is it better to point it out so we can all have a laugh or leave it unmentioned and let them wallow in their stupidity? Mick McT 06:15, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Copy it & keep it safe off-wiki until they remove it or just "Publish and be damned" ( I enjoy a laugh) (keep a copy as well)   ^Contribs_Talk 06:24, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

This is one of the great problems we have, because certain people _{Hi Jinx} read this, we need away around this. $\approx$$\pi$ 06:26, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Copy and keep sounds like a cunning plan....Now, can someone enlighten me as to how I do this? I guess its something more techy than just right click copy and paste!Mick McT 06:42, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You can just take a screengrab (alt/prtsc on windoze), paste into an image prog & save (as gif or png). Or (preferred) work out where the original's written (Template:mainpageleft or Template:mainpageright), click "View Source" & Copy paste.   ^Contribs_Talk 06:53, 2 September 2008 (EDT) Or (last resort): e-mail me & I'll do it.   ^Contribs_Talk

EC) Firstly either make a screen cap (ask for directions if you don't know how) or save the page as an mht file for posterity. Main Page stuff is usually fully authorised by the Reich Chancellory and so is fair game for ridicule as it is extremely unlikely that you would be exposing a sock. As only hard-core Waffen can edit it, brown-shits like Jinx can only whine to their master if something is amiss. Of course there is the chance that even if you point it out here then they will merely dismiss your mockery as liberal <insert word here> and actually bask in their own ignorance. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:57, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ok, done both of those option suggested by SusanG and both appeared to work. Just one final query (pardon my total ignorance!)how do I save as a gif or png? The only option I can see is to save as a word doc. [You wouldn't believe I got my ECDL but that was severaly years ago and too much alcohol has passed since then!]Mick McT 07:02, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

OK, please explain whether you used Alt/PrtScrn or the source code. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:05, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

EC) If you've got the actual words of mainpageleft/right (paste into notepad & save as text (.txt).   ^Contribs_Talk 07:06, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ok, cracked it! Many thanks for all your helpMick McT 07:11, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

BTW in notepad, turn wordwrap off.   ^Contribs_Talk 07:15, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I can only hope that them over there who read us over here _{(Hi Jinx!)} are going as mad as I am trying to figure out which entry it is... total and complete ignorance could apply to everything there... --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:13, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I'll point it out tomorrow if you haven't spotted it by then!Mick McT 13:28, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Damn now I'm curious. sighs. I hate not being "in the know" hehehehe. I shall endevor to work hard until such a time as this info is released.--Waiting for Godot 13:51, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I tried looking for what you speak of, but I couldn't eliminate any possibilities. Except the old images of Gustav. Those look accurate. ħuman 15:52, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh bugger! Everybody's looking at me! Now I'm beginning to get shy 'cause you'll all think that English painting WAS influenced by the Celts and nobody will think it's as funny, and as painfully stupid, an idea as I do!.Mick McT 03:40, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Knuckleheads

Hahahaha.Shangrala 08:46, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I already added an article on that to the RL article. However, that is hilarious. -Judas Reward 08:50, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

He's an Expert on Physics, too

A marvelous opusculum of Ed Poor:

Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics which was developed in the early 20th century as physicists adjusted their theories to the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. According to quantum theory, energy comes in discrete amounts or packets (see quanta), rather than being infinitely divisible; this parallels the ancient concept of the atom, viewed by the ancient Greeks as the smallest possible division of matter.

Um, no. That was the Theory of Special Relativity. The origins of Quantum Mechanics lie in the discovery of the Photoelectric Effect. Where are CP's experts to correct this flaw? Ah right, here...- --LArron

You liberals take things too literally. That's why you cling to science! We don't fall for science or facts here. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 09:41, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

As the clueless Lieberal you are, you've completely misunderstood this. Ed is an expert on everything; a modern Renaissance Man, as it were. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 09:55, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You're right, of course. His knowledge of modern physics and mathematics rivals that of any true Renaissance Man :-) --LArron 10:16, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Wait... aren't we mixing up Renaissance with Neanderthal? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:25, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

LArron, you need to open your mind to the Truth^TM and not fall for Liberal Deceit. Only then can you be free. Maybe a writing assignment will help. Try Mystery: Do liberal teachings about Quantum Theory cause insanity? Bondurant 10:26, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Precisely. I suppose it would be trivial to point out that Neanderthals are also the product of Liberal Deceit. No scientists have shown any credible evidence that such beings ever existed. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 11:42, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

No doubt the man who didn't realize there is a difference between radioactivity and radiation likewise is unaware that Quantum mechanics and Special Relativity are not one and the same. DickTurpis 10:27, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Nah. Ed simply knows Conservative Quantum Theory^TM. Conservative EM radiation ain't confused about its nature like no girly man. It was a wave for mah daddy, and that's good enough for me. --JeevesMkII 11:51, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Amazing! Lovely! I think a few new articles need to be written. Gauss 11:54, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Maybe because english is not my first language, but I think Ed's choice of words is a little weird: "...energy comes in discrete amounts or packets..." JJ4e^{Karajerk is dead} 14:45, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't think it's weird (then again, English is not my first language either). NightFlare^{i haz a talk page.} 21:51, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Violence at the RNC

I've been looking into this violence at the RNC that CP is so worked up about, and though I hate to judge before the facts are in, I think it's likely they are exaggerated. There are reports of bags of sand or cement being thrown off an overpass at buses. Looking at the photo on this site it appears the overpass is entirely fenced in, making it nearly impossible to throw off any large object. There's a video of people describing the attack, and they sound very convincing, but it's pretty clear they have no idea what was thrown. I don't see how it could be a 50 lb bag of cement, which is what comes to mind when you hear about it. In a section of the video, some old ladies discuss that they saw/heard something land on the roof (speculation is it's a bag of sand or cement), mentioning that someone was currently up there seeing what it was. The video, somewhat suspiciously, ends just as one of the ladies appears to say "there it is!" So it seems whatever it was, whoever made the video decided not to show it, leading me to believe it may have been as harmless as anything dropped on a moving bus can be (which is still dangerous). Furthermore, blog American Thinker has pictures of an attacked bus, which to me looks like a bus with birdshit on the window. If these attacks are anything like they say they are, there should be more evidence than this. DickTurpis 14:12, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I've no way of knowing but it was probably just a small bag of flour. It doesn't take much to make a loud noise under a metal roof (try dropping a tennis ball onto the roof of your car). IMO a large bag of cement dropped from 15 ft. or so would have made an extremely large dent on a bus roof. I don't excuse the action as dropping anything onto a moving vehicle has potential danger but you can bet the incident has been grossly exaggerated, these things always are (from both sides of the PS). Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 14:38, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

For sure, just as we liberals tend to liven up police actions a bit, the right always seems to be in a life or death struggle against these violent protests, but no evidence seems to turn up. For example, some liberal bloggers swear that the police in Denver were seconds away from opening fire with a gatling gun into the crowd of little girls in first communion dress, whereas the Republicans are being attacked by paramilitary commandos armed with RPGs and Grenades. However, when the details come out on this, I think we'll something much more confined and restrained. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 14:45, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It's all Blue Peter terrorism (RW insight). Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:03, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

The pic Dick linked to looks like it could have been an egg? The heckler's ballistic missile of choice, I suspect. And, yeah, that blog where they describe the "cement and sand bag" attack on the bus(es) makes no sense. Not to say some idiots weren't doing something stupid... ħuman 16:02, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

CERN

Following a strange thought pattern, my musings on what that lot over there would make of string theory, given their problems with relativity and quantum, led to my imagining Andy's reaction if CERN does prove the Big Bang, or finds the God particle or something. He'll probably write a letter demanding that they send the accelerator to him, so he can run the tests himself. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 15:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

He can follow the manual and build his own like everyone else. $\approx$$\pi$ 19:49, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Revising History

So will Andy, Ed or Jinx be the first to rewrite this? I'm betting on Ed right now since he seems to be the most interested in destroying articles at the moment --BoredCPer 15:03, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Is this a bit better? Candlewick 21:28, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Speelinge

OK, this is general advice for all editors:
If you make a deliberate misspelling for the lulz then please insert a hidden comment like this - <!-- This is a comment --> - so that other editors are in on the joke. Thank you for your attention. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 15:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Or, in the case where the mispelig is in the source, type [sic] after it. ħuman 19:26, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I broke another Irony Meter, and Andy wasn't even involved

Turns out Levi Johnston, Sarah Palin's future son-in-law, is homeschooled (see paragraph five). --SpinyNorman 17:04, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Damn those home-schooling "explicit sex-ed programs"! (Note: I was going to link to the Alaska Eagle Forum questionnaire where that came from but, surprise SURPRISE!, they wiped it from their site!) --Jdellaro 17:31, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

He looks like a real keeper.[13]This is why people shouldn't have myspace pages (a quick search and you find it, though in this case it looks like it has been pulled? coverup?) - employers can find out about you, reporters trying to find out about your girlfriends parents can find you. Does the wayback machine have a copy of the link from the eagle forum?[14] --Shagie 17:42, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm waiting for Palin to send her future son-in-law on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney... --SpinyNorman 17:52, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Aaargh! The picture! The stubble chin! The rash on the thighs! NOT female friendly!   ^Contribs_Talk 18:21, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Is it stubble? Looks more like "all the facial hair he ever grew" to me. So it might still be soft. ħuman 19:30, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't think that's supposed to be a problem for Conservatives anyway, is it? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:33, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Look at CP's new article on him. HAH Norseman^Wassail! 19:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, how susceptible they are. Andy deleted it and it was protected too. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 19:56, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Probably not WIGO worthy

One of Ed's new "articles" he told Andy about. To be fair, he did say in the edit summary that it's "really just a quote - fodder for a new article." For extra lulz, the source of the article is priceless. Such a significant contribution! Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 17:42, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That man's giving me headaches on a daily basis now. If he knows it's not enough for an article, why does he create it anyway? Ed, please use Twitter for your random snippets, not the CP Mainspace. --Sid 17:46, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

IF Andy really is Catholic, this could get interesting. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 17:53, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

The "source" is also very critical of H Dubs. Did Ed really read the webpage, think is was lucid and well-supported, and decide to write an article based on it?

Also, is there an internet law stating that the longer a webpage is, the more likely it is to be absolute lunacy? Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 18:00, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

If not, I nominate: "The LaRouche Principle", after Lyndon LaRouche, famous pre-internet nutbag politico. His "wall of words" pamphlets put me off politics 25 years ago, (I never wrote to thank him). I would characterize it as principle not a law, since there are long winded, somewhat boring (if historically significant) websites and documents. CЯacke® 18:12, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps this is something similar to Poe's Law? The longer a page is, the more likely it is to be either absolutely insane or absolutely brilliant? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 18:17, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Meaning that the shorter a page, the more likely it is to be both absolutely insane and absolutely brilliant? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 18:22, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Some reference to Schlafly's Law of Skimming: if it's longer than my name , I'm just going to look at the first and last sentences.   ^Contribs_Talk 18:24, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Surely that would be the "Timecube Principle?" --Phentari 18:53, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

hahahahahahahahahah Ok someone needs to fix the meter this just killed it --BoredCPer 19:12, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

SilvioB is on a roll today. Sometimes I wonder if he's one of Bugler's socks. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 19:57, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

No, I don't think he'll survive much there. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 20:08, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I was hoping for 5 years though. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 08:00, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Achilles

I had to laugh at BrianCo's attempts to bowdlerise the Achilles picture. He was unfortunate in that the cached thumb didn't keep up with the uploaded version so I managed to screencap the X-rated version! -- Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:18, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I would have expected that from anyone but BrianCo. Hopefully they'll censor David too! Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 18:28, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

If you MUST censor - why not do a Gaussian Blur or similar over the offending part - putting a multi-point star just draws attention the WAZZOCK.   ^Contribs_Talk 18:48, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

"Uncle" Ed (why does that always make me shudder) was not too happy about the "dick" and requested a G-rated version of the David image. But rather than do anything constructive himself he eventually let it slide. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:53, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I seem to remember some old joke about the Greek army having no privates... ħuman 19:50, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

And there's the Greek general who died in his youth _(Sorry)   ^Contribs_Talk 20:05, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Personally I love the "HOLY SHIT" look Achilles ends up with after the, uh, judicious editing. As if the clumsy figleaf wasn't obvious enough. --Kels 20:20, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That picture makes my pee-pee hurt... --Marty 22:25, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Uncle Ed once asked me to find "G-rated" works of Michaelangelo, apparently kids aren't supposed to know they have wee-wees and hoo-has until marriage.^{— Unsigned, by: DLerner / talk / contribs}

Phyllis and Palin

Andy's hot mum is angered by Palin. I wonder, if Andy's mum comes down hard on Palin will we see a change in the party line at CP? Could be an interesting one to watch. Ace McWicked^whisky 18:37, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It seems that granny Phy is only peeved because Palin cancelled showing up at one of her Pro-Life events rather than some deep-seated antagonism. So I wouldn't place too much store on it just yet. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 18:46, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

And it's not Sarah's but the man's fault. CЯacke® 19:02, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, Phyllis seems quite smitten with Sarah Palin. "Ah, if only John had met a girl like her..." --SpinyNorman 19:10, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That's what I was gonna say... yeah, she loves Palin. It's McSame she doesn't like. And the appearance was not cancelled - it was never scheduled. ħuman 19:19, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That's the luck you have when you're a conservative parent these days, though. You think you're doing your daughters a favor by telling them to stay away from boys who come from single-parent homes and absentee fathers, like this guy (who'll never amount to anything). Just keep hammering away and show them nice Conservative Christian role models like this guy (who might even be VP someday if he keeps licking the right boots), and some day you'll be rewarded when she brings home a positive pregnancy test and a nice, conservative, Republican homeschooled boy like this guy. --SpinyNorman 19:21, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Rules of Chivalry for RWikians

We should have our own Rules of Chivalry too. Any suggestions, by gentlemen and ladies? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 20:21, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Please at least wear pants when editing, it is kind of creepy thing you might not have them on. ^{— Unsigned, by: 3.14159 / talk / contribs}

Uh oh: Andy's class of 56 pupils is starting next Thursday, and they will learn some chivalry. I'd pay to assist to a chivalry lesson by Andy. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 20:28, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

• Be appreciative when girls bake cookies for the entire class.
• Do not attempt to embarrass a boy, as in trying to beat him in arm-wrestling or bragging that you did better on a test.

I just noticed this, and i know i'm not supposed to edit inside other people's comments, but.... has anyone considered that dear andy was himself a victim of embarassment why else would it be such a big deal that boys don't "lose face". maybe andy didn't do so well on tests his mommy didn't grade? and some girl said "I can beat you up" and did!!!! that's my new theory, as of whatever time tuesday jight it is. --97.118.83.146 22:12, 2 September 2008 (EDT)(oops, just noticed i wasn't signed in. that's me. waiting for godot

Words cannot express my disdain on the way he pushes his views into every nook and cranny. :( Norseman^Wassail! 20:31, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

PS - RW chivalry should always have goats involved.

Can we build a time machine and send him back to the middle ages? He seems to want to go there, anyway, so why not lend a hand? We could tell them he's a witch... --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 20:46, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I can't believe he deleted the curtseying one for... being anachronistic... Anyway, chivalry on RW consists mostly of wiping off the goat after using it. ħuman 20:35, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You really worry me sometimes. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^Chaos! 03:43, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Perhaps more codes are to follow.--Antifly 20:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget: "Boys: return the seat to the Down Position after using the facilities".   ^Contribs_Talk 20:45, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

(AND: please aim better)   ^Contribs_Talk

I added teh sports one. *bows, waits for ban*. ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like rapturous guns

These are teh days I really want to blow my puppet and say "but what are boys supposed to do when BOYS bake cookies?"--Waiting for Godot 21:04, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

ANDY MUST BE A SOCK. no man can be THIS outrageous. "Chivalry emphasizes complimenting females. They appreciate it more than males do. In fact, a male can find a compliment to be patronizing or insincere.--Aschlafly 21:24, 2 September 2008 (EDT)" what teh holy hell is he smoking?--Waiting for Godot 21:37, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't get the "seats" joke. All the seats there are folding chairs. A "gender superior" student sets them up.. and fill in the rest of the details yourself. Candlewick 21:37, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Seat as in toilet seat (if you're referring to Susan's comment...?) --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 21:48, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Ohhhh... okay. Well, what's the point of putting the seat up if you just have to put it back down. I leave it down most of the time _{Yes, I pee sitting down 80% of the time.} If the toilet has a "lid", then I put that down too. I'm afraid some toilet monster might come and eat me or the smell might waft down the hall Candlewick 21:59, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, hell. we fucking need help sitting down now????? I think I've been doing that for 40 years, thank you very much... and i definatly had the skills to do it by the time I was in school. but if i need help sitting, why would I want a boy with sick cooties who thinks he is above being embarased about being so fucking stupid helping me?--Waiting for Godot 21:40, 2 September 2008 (EDT) (yes, it is true, i'm again ticked off beyond measure... what goes through this man's mind, assuming he is not a sock?"

You know, it's not easy for us guys who travel around the world. Somewhere girls are offended if you help them sit down or open the door or pay for dinner, somewhere else they don't talk to you if you don't. It's frustrating :-P Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 21:44, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I always liked the line "I'm not holding the door open for you because you are a woman, but because I am polite" (Yeah, I'm a congenital door-opener/holder) ħuman 21:53, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

When I was in my 20's and actually had a body (now i have a blob), i rather liked high heals. I assure you, help with doors when wearing heels is a wonderful thing.

I wonder what sort of classes Andy's running if the girls are routinely arm-wrestling with the boys. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 02:06, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

This being the modern world, I demand a time and motion study on the orientation of the loo seat! I reckon in a household of equal numbers of men and women, the typical toilet is used far more often with the seat in the up position than otherwise, that men spend a disproportionate amount of their toilet time adjusting the position of the seat, and what's more that lifting the seat uses more energy than lowering it. Leaving the seat down is almost certainly sexism of the most crass type! --JeevesMkII 03:04, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Is it just me, or does that odd comment about the toilet seat imply that Andy's "classroom" has *gasp* unisex loos? And wtf is that comment about arm wrestling? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 03:36, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

No, but RW users do share the poopy seats! Hold you nose if Trent ate Mexican, damn, shut the door even...!!! ħuman 03:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

"Be appreciative when girls bake cookies for the entire class"?? I thought you guys were joking about that one. This is just mind-boggling. Christ almighty. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^Chaos! 03:43, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Further to my comment about arm-wrestling, it looks like Andy has finally had enough from these unruly homeschoolers. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 04:04, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

This essay is brilliant. Maybe if we follow these we go back to the Middle Ages! Where the church and state weren't as far separated! Wouldn't that be awesome? -Judas Reward 04:13, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

There weren't any states in the Middle Ages, --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:51, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

It is nice to see that Andy now shares Ed's paranoia about ever editor on Conservapedia that is not a sysop, except Bugler ::cough:: Paraodist ::cough::. $\approx$$\pi$ 04:28, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

The double standard about profanity is interesting (possibly WIGO-worthy?). Editors suggest that both sexes should avoid cursing. Andy 'improves' the issue by stipulating only that boys "talk in a respectful manner in front of a girl". Other editors add avoiding profanity to this statement, but apparently "boys avoiding profanity is a good ideal, but it's not chivalry". weaseLOId~ 06:15, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And you couldn't have separation of church and state without a state, correct? I am never wrong. -Judas Reward 07:30, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Um...

...

Well, I guess I can't argue against that. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 08:39, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

The talk page is so extra special, I'm surprised NewCrusader is still there considering he outright accused them of parody until he realised ASchlafly was the real deal. I have to admire his balls, we have both the Poe's law and paradox in less that 8 lines of text... Armondikov 09:25, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Everyone should go complement Deborah now! Sterile^snore! 11:59, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Good old MHayes sticking up for the grils.   ^Contribs_Talk 19:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And now Ed's blocked her for "personal remarks". Nothing I said, I trust - the timescale's about right - 19:47 above; 19:54 teh block.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:18, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm actually surprized Andy didn't kill her off first. I blasted ed a few lines down... called him out for not being christ like. Called him out for putting boys ahead of girls, saying no where is that biblical. Guess the little 5 year old can't handle the truth. no wonder even legitmate editors can't edit. they get blocked the only time they really make a contraversial point. not just blocked for 1 hour, and never with a warning. talk about male testostone in an under sexed child of a man. petty. I really liked her. --Waiting for Godot 20:26, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy and Palin's daughter

This one is giving me problems. Whilst there is something hilarious about the fact that he blames the schools whilst Palin is Governor. There is also something funny about the fact that he accuses Disdale of taking advantage of the situation to further his agenda and then uses it himself to beat on public schools. $\approx$$\pi$ 20:35, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It's especially funny considering that the insperminator was homeschooled... ħuman 20:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

But I also must say that "The public school that Palin has control over as Governor" is a weak phrase and we should fix it. Governors don't "control" the schools, really. States do set various standards, but most control is at the local school board level in the US. ħuman 20:39, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Must be an Australian thing. Here each state school is uniform based on the state legislators decisions. $\approx$$\pi$ 21:36, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I could never vote for a mum who doesn't homeschool her children and doesn't teach them abstinence. I'm sure that if she were a housewife, her daughter wouldn't have committed such a horrendous act. Better to vote for that muslim Obama than for a fake Christian. - signed, the next sock of Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 20:40, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

For a moment, I thought the section was accusing Palin of infidelity. Then I started trying to picture what the spawn of Schlafly and Palin would look like.

Then my inner child died. --Phentari 20:43, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Phyllis & Palin would make an interesting wife - mother-in-law couple, to say the least. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 20:47, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

<snark> Don't you mean Elderly husband/Trophy wife couple? </snark>   ^Contribs_Talk 20:50, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

You just knew "they" were somhow responsible for this lovely gem of a woman being in crap up to her ears. --Waiting for Godot 21:01, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

This just shows how far the liberal agenda goes. They have forced the teaching of liberal values in public schools so that they can indoctrinate the governors daughter into thinking Hollywood values are cool. This was all done so that they can then use deceit when she get pregnant and embarrass Palin, who is logically more qualified than Obama, by using the liberal media to make it look like it is her fault when it is not. $\approx$$\pi$ 21:40, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

That's pretty impresive. They should play chess. -Judas Reward 04:07, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

White to play: Mate in one. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 04:18, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, and the black king on a2 is actually on your side, he's an Affirmative Action King. And you cannot perform an 'en passant' move to checkmate their king because you can only play moves named in English. -Judas Reward 04:23, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

King and queen, as they are married, can checkmate together, no one else can. And you pawns, we and God have absolutely nothing against you, as long as you abstain from performing any en passants in your life. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:51, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And don't you dare attack the institution of marriage by promoting pawns to queens while you already have one. NightFlare^{i haz a talk page.} 13:31, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Also, you cannot capture with your Queen, as she is too fragile to capture another piece. However, you must always treat the Queen with courtesy, and sacrificing her is just not chivalry. -Judas Reward 13:52, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And do not get me started on that whole Bishop thing. anyone who moves diaginoally is clearly gay homosexual unless we are doing teh diagnol moving, then it's cause we like to win!--Waiting for Godot 14:11, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Does that make the Knights furries bisexual? -Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 01:41, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Kent State

Err...wow. According to the Protest article at CP, those devious Kent State students PLANNED to get the National Guard to shoot them. That's...gaah. --Phentari 21:17, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Argh! What is there worse than...

... trying to find the vandalism for the lulz but not being able to? RJJensen has an impressive user page and as impressive and rigorous contributions. But he is blocked for 5 years, unblocked to explain himself and blocked again by LearnTogether, for inserting false information, in particular wrong dates, in the Grover Cleveland article. I checked a couple of dates but humanly can't check it all. Will the real RJJensen please stand up and tell us where that vandalism is? Thanks, Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 21:30, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

I've gone over 90% of the dates, and I don't see anything. It's surprising that someone can add a ton of information, and yet if one or two dates are incorrect, that's somehow proof that the dates were "intentionally wrong".

Really, Conservapedia would be far better off if they did everything they could to minimize parodists' impact. The admins are the only ones with the power to decide how much impact the parodists have (it's a wiki — reverting is trivial), but by allowing paranoia to take over the site, they've allowed parodists to influence the site far more than parodists should be allowed to. --Toiretni 22:58, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Also, why was RJJensen editing Conservapedia while inbed? --Toiretni 22:40, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Shhh! They could hear you! JJ4e^{Karajerk is dead} 23:19, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

It's standard librul deceit, they're unlikely to agree anyway. "You're inadvertently giving terrorists undue influence by overhyping the threat in the public consciousness. Absolutely, respond to terrorists substantively when you have real evidence, but otherwise lay off the schtick". "You're weak on security!!111" --Toiretni 00:33, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

That exemplifies why CP is so crap, Learntogether reverts everything because of a couple of suspected incorrect dates. If he knows they are wrong why not fix them? But sysops don't get their kicks by improving articles they just love the power! Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 02:15, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Now he again unblocked RJJensen. What will happen next? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 06:29, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

*LOL* Obious an ignorant vandal! --LArron 06:45, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

That was the reason for an infinite time block?!? No wonder there are no knowledgeable users over there... Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 07:09, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Whether LT's restoration (and correction) of RJJensen's edits is a result of emails or actually considering what was said here, it still shows an itchy trigger finger. In the context of the article the dates were obviously out, so anyone (with a bit of common sense) using the article would realise it was a typo. I have made similar mistakes and Pooh-Bah does it all the time. So even though RJJ's unblocked and the article is improved it still leaves a nasty aftertaste. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 07:37, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

so anyone (with a bit of common sense) - I think you've just put your finger on the problem. Totnesmartin 07:50, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Update: Funnily enough, the same LT gets his date wrong. When a new user corrects it with a mildly ironic edit summary, he is banhammered. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 05:46, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Balanced budgets the Alaskan way

Living in California there is quite a bit of fun of passing a budget bill. LearnTogether suggests that Palin understands balancing budgets too.[15] From what I understand of balancing budgets in Alaska... there is no sales tax in Alaska. Nor is there an income tax. Nor is there a property tax. Instead, they tax the oil companies and get some money that is a budget surplus. Then they write checks to every citizen of Alaska and you're done. Isn't that easy? No, the Alaskan budget is not something that one has to do much with. So to answer LT, Palin has balanced the same number of budgets as Obama. And incidently, Obama had to work with other people rather than using an unconstitutional line item veto (the ability to write and change laws is something that belongs to the legislative branch - not the executive branch) to slash funding for teenage mothers[16] --Shagie 03:22, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Another insight into the mind of Aschlafly

So with a new term starting just why would Andy bother "wikify" an article about the wife of Socrates? Ah, thats's the reason. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 04:08, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Remember, even Socrates isn't welcome there, so obviously his unhappy atheistic public schooled classroom prayer protesting wife isn't either. Norseman^Wassail! 07:57, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Time will tell. ;-) Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 08:37, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed & Maths AGAIN!

Seriously, does he wake up, start drinking, then beats up on maths in the absence of a wife and kids? This edit once again astounds me. Ed, you are a complete tappet and you work on a wiki - correct it yourself (if you are capable of typing). At the moment, you are no better than a vandal, especially as no sane person should be willing to correct your stuff. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:16, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Just defending his title.Shangrala 08:29, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

This is to certify that Edmund Poor was voted CONSERVAPEDIA'S BIGGEST IDIOT By RationalWiki, on June 30, 2008 Reaffirmed 3 September 2008

Note that Ed wants to merge Multiplication Property of Equality with Equality. The former is about a = b implying ac = bc, the latter is about Social Equality, so, same thing then. Silver Sloth 08:54, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Argh! I'd like parodists not to touch Ed's maths articles, as they are so funny by themselves! Sure the fact that Ed doesn't even understand the parody is funny too. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Another suggestion. If you put a piece of wonderful parody, and some idiot over there not only doesn't understand it as parody, but also praises you for that, don't ruin everything by putting more obvious parody. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 09:59, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

The article is pretty hilarious in its current state.Shangrala 11:11, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

That's quite correct. Let's hope it isn't changed anymore. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 12:01, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

You'd think that at least Ed would appreciate the merits of disambiguation pages, considering he was once a big wheel at Wikipedia before he pissed it all away for the cause of "Reverend" Moon and creationism. --JeevesMkII 12:05, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

That's a good point. I notice they seem to eschew disambiguation pages. Is that official, or have they just not figured out how well they work, or have they still not have enough articles that having two with the same name is a problem yet? Or is it one of those "Wikipedia does it so it must be bad" things? DickTurpis 12:23, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd swear that there was some discussion on disambiguation pages a long time ago, in TK's times, and they decided not to use them if at all possible, but I don't remember why, probably just because of Wikipedia. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 12:44, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Unrelated question: I noticed on the award that he is called Edmund. Is that his real first name, not Edward? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 12:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

It is. I'm pretty sure it's confirmed. DickTurpis 12:51, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, and corrected. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 12:54, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

The very first posting of the award on his CP page called him Edward. Red faces all round I fear. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 13:01, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Darn, I removed some of teh stoopid from the article before reading this :( Maybe Po'Ed will put it back... ħuman 16:53, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed Poor is at it again, jesus I would love to meet him so I can slap him around the face a little. Ace McWicked^whisky 19:57, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Hol-e crap

Take a look at the recent changes. Go baby! Go! (I believe this is starting to constitute an edit war... in site link.) ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like rapturous guns

PJR is turning into a troll. He should be banned from CP due to his inability to keep an open mind and his insistence on bickering with his betters. He seems to just go looking for stuff to complain about. He sees bullying and he complains; misinformation? he complains; lies? PJR complains; Hypocrisy. more complaints from PJR. I for one am getting sick and tired of his complaints and his endless talk, talk, talk. He is a liberal in liberal denial, deceiving himself with liberal deceit. Other than his completley, over the top crazy fundy-looney views of course) . ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 10:12, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Uh, I think he meant the wandals are attacking in droves. PJR only made one edit today. (?????) Norseman^Wassail! 11:14, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And when we are getting bored...

... Andy comes to the rescue with a new Conservapedia term: emotional gambling. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:27, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't we already have a term for an emotional investment in something? You know, "emotional investment." --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:30, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Good start, Andy. Now, how can you get this to apply solely to liberals? DickTurpis 10:31, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah. Where the hell could this possibly be going? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:32, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Emotional investment is good Conservative, emotional gambling is bad Liberal. Why do I have to point the obvious? Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:33, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And now it is official. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:35, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

!   ^Contribs_Talk 10:44, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

You know, aside from the fact that it's obviously going to lead on to some nonsense, I actually quite like the term "Emotional Gambling"! The Lay Scientist 10:46, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm putting all my sadness on red! Spin that wheel! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:48, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, Emotional gambling was only the appetizer. Liberal fairness is the real deal. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:51, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

With the Stamp of Approval. Editor at CP^{Liar at RP!} 10:53, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

And when they say riots, liberals can't be too far away... ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like rapturous guns 5 %*#(ing edit conflicts!!

Calling it now. "Liberals like to gamble with the emotions of pregnant teenagers and their parents."Shangrala 11:09, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

So far, it's probably the best term Andy's come up with (though I wouldn't be surprised if others have used it), though there's not a hell of a lot of competition there. I do wonder how it will be used to demonize liberals. Right now it's largely about sports, which if anything is stronger associations with conservatives. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Or could this be Andy's first term that isn't designed to be a political attack? Is he back on his meds? DickTurpis 11:23, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Liberals in their blind and ignorant support of Obama are emotionally gambling that the impossible will happen and Obama will turn out not to be the anti-Christ after all. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 11:38, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

WTF? I didn't realize Andy was consciously creating as many neologisms as he could. Is he trying to be a cool /b/tard or something? --Toiretni 14:14, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I think he's trying to break Rule 34. -Judas Reward 14:16, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

How exactly do you set about breaking Rule 34? You cannot do the impossible! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 14:31, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

It's so conservapedia can be top of the google rankings, thus attracting new readers - even though only someone familiar with CP would type in the phrase. Or he could be doing it to be number one at something, but as Conservatives have no emotional problems that's obviously impossible. (BTW, why is Google Chrome's spellchecker questioning "google"?) Totnesmartin 14:22, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

It probably wants you to capitalize it, much as firefox wants to see "Firefox". ħuman 17:29, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy can play the Googlewhack game all he wants... it almost always means that RationalWiki gets the second-place search result (nobody else has enough time and boredom to track his every edit), which is just as good as linking to us from Conservapedia. Keep to it, Andy. --Toiretni 14:41, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

It's because elitist liberals have co-opted history (specifically etymology) and have allowed words to be twisted into their original meanings. Thus, the only way to roll these wave of liberal fluency back is . . . Newspeak. See Andy 's definition of swift-boatingfor a cogent example. ^{Exasperate me!}Sheesh!_{Not the most impressive contributor here} 14:28, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I have to admit, not only is this surprisingly free of political slant, but it's a good term by itself (well, the crap Bugler added needs a huge {{fact}} tag but that's about it). Good job CP! NightFlare^{i haz a talk page.} 15:26, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Aschlafly In Charge

I just wanted to preserve this funny Asshat made before moving on to the next diff. I'm gonna quote the asshat in his entirety, responding to the question "who is in charge of this wiki?":

"Your question reminds me of a funny scene in the classic Monty Python movie. "Who is your lord? Who lives in that castle?" Answer: "No one!" Meritocracy rules here. JohnI, one day you may find yourself in charge if your merit deserves it!"

Very amusing. ħuman 17:27, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Cool. Andy basically admits there's nobody actually in charge, since he abdicates any duties at the slightest sign of actual unrest between the non-expendables. Been kinda obvious for a while, but what the heck? --Kels 17:35, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Monty Python? I never pictured Conservapedia as an autonymous collective... I know they're not a commune. SirChuckB^{Further bulletins as events warrant} 17:43, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting. By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more--

ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet! // Order, eh -- who does he think he is? // I am your king! // Well, I didn't vote for you. // You don't vote for kings. // Well, 'ow did you become king then? // The Lady of the Lake, [angels sing] her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. [singing stops] That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. // Be quiet! // Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! ^{— Unsigned, by: Toiretni / talk / contribs}

He had the balls to claim meritocracy right when HelpJazz returns. ROFL! Someone go point CollegeRepublican to him. That'd be amusing. Norseman^Wassail! 18:17, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Deniability (He claims to be a lawyer after all...)--Antifly 19:02, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Hmmmm--Antifly 19:08, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I would be just fine with a CP noob in charge... particually considered how fanatical and crazed Teh Assfly is. ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ I like rapturous guns

Deborah is the only one kiss arse enough to have that on their page. $\approx$$\pi$ 20:20, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Kels, Andy didn't say that he wasn't in charge only that the person in charge (Andy) has the most merit. $\approx$$\pi$ 20:22, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Pi, you're so right, I completely missed that interpretation! ħuman 20:44, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Call it as you like, the fact is in practice any time he actually has to do "in charge" stuff, he hides under his bed and shivers. He got the title, but his sorry ass ain't runnin' nuttin'. --Kels 21:56, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

"Charge" = Bureaucrat. Managing rights is enough to control the site. You change everyone's rights to (none) and turn on night editing, and what do you have? A lone editor--blogger by your terms. Candlewick 22:28, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Hey there to all of my leftist buddies in Conservapedia! Unless Andy just randomly decided to quote Monty Python while disregarding the context of the quote. -Judas Reward 04:02, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed's on a roll

Blocking people because he simply "can't handle the truth". Does he think we will go into time out then come back? What an infant he is!--Waiting for Godot 20:00, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Jesus he fucks me off. "Editorial Direction from a senior admin"? WTF? Godamn Asshole! And lets not forget this brilliant summary "math teacher speaks" Ace McWicked^whisky 20:14, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I was blocked for a month for "personal comments" for calling him out on his sexist shit. Course, who would seriously ever go back there if they have to wait a monht? seriously, does he think he's putting us into timeout and it will make us all stop having our opinions that are better than his? God he pisses me off. and the math one? "don't EVER write on a math article without my persmission". i have to say, while i do think women should be treated like women and not little girls, and while idon't think girls are some subhuman catigory, i expected that from Ed. But what is his great math obsession? who knew 2+2 is contentious"? wfg ^{— Unsigned, by: WaitingforGodot / talk / contribs}

Noted in the "chivalry" bit above WFG.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:26, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Why don't we just put a link to Ed's contribs at the top of WIGO CP and have done with all the work? [17] ħuman 20:38, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

That just might suffice. He either loves his power trips, decidedly thought to make CP look as ridiculous as possible, or he always has some trusty Skullsplitter by his side. Norseman^Wassail! 20:39, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed always refers to himself as the "math teacher." Has he ever taught math outside of CP? He seems to be very jealous of his position. Corry^{Hey, who wants to take me to the hospital?} 22:44, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Has Bungler committed near regicide?

The identity of Goggles and BethanyS is too much to be coincidence - I noticed her clearing her talk page last night & looked @ Goggles' when (s)he was blocked - definitely something there.   ^Contribs_Talk 20:49, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

If it's true, she can fix it easily, right? She is, after all, a sysop. ħuman 21:08, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

What if she were temporarily demoted and got caught by the autoblock?

I know, I know. It doesn't work, but it's such a fun possibility. Back to the drawing board, I think... :( <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!^Chaos! 21:16, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Sorry to be the unlulzification messenger but...

Contributions like this and to a lesser extent this make a pretty convincing case that EdmundP (apparently later christened EdwardP after the initial block) was not exactly as sincere as the WIGO would have him appear.--Bayes 21:48, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, you're right. I didn't check all the edits. I'll try to make the entry more accurate. Norseman^Wassail! 00:15, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Liberal Facts

While Andy his ilk watch the Palin speech someone has been insterting "facts".....Ace McWicked^whisky 23:20, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I think I broke my finger using my mouse scroll ball too much.... Norseman^Wassail! 00:15, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

And they fall over themselves racing to make it all better. The sadsacks. Totnesmartin 13:24, 4 September 2008 (EDT)