Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?

Archives for this talk page: Archive list (new)

Crocodil Tears?

1. 10:17, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked Freeze (contribs) (mistake - cleared up by email)
2. 10:16, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28154 (mistake - cleared up by email)
3. 10:15, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28152 (mistake - cleared up by email)
4. 10:14, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28156 (mistake - cleared up by email)
5. 10:14, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28163 (mistake - cleared up by email)
6. 10:13, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28164 (mistake - cleared up by email)
7. 10:12, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28161 (mistake - cleared up by email)
8. 10:12, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked #28162 (mistake - cleared up by email)
9. 10:11, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked Heffalump (contribs) (mistake - cleared up by email)
10. 10:10, 20 April 2008 Crocoite (Talk | contribs) unblocked Tolerance (contribs) (mistake - cleared up by email)

  ^Contribs_Talk 11:15, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

and ed recants as well!   ^Contribs_Talk 11:58, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

If by "recant" you mean "reverted an uncomfortable post only to have PJR unrevert him", then yeah, he's been recanting for a while ;) --Sid 12:04, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

ErskineChilders

Just to check - this person created their account at 10:49, then got blocked 9 minutes later. Is that a record, discounting people who are clearly vandals? ^{— Unsigned, by: Zmidponk / talk / contribs}

He created a page that was mocking CP. ^{— Unsigned, by: Kektklik / talk / contribs} ("unsigned" tag changed by Sid to avoid confusion)

Hmmm, Could Fuzzy here be guilty of deceit? Creating a sock and then banninating it and attempting to cover up his association with said sock by adding the "{{Unsigned|Crocoite}}"???

CЯacke® 13:47, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Nope, why would he do that? He has enough socks to manage, and not enough time to impress Aschlafly. The Crocoite signature was for the user who deleted the page. Fuzzy|AFD 15:30, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

CP mocks itself quite well on its own, thank you. --Kels 11:42, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Erm, which page? Zmidponk 11:47, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

This one, presumably. It wouldn't show up in Childers' log if it was deleted. Besides, we all know Conservatives at CP don't have any values. --Kels 11:50, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

You're right. Here's a screencap of the article before it got vaped. --Sid 11:55, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Aha, that makes a bit more sense. Of course, considering such things as all the 'Liberal {insert random word here}' articles, that does kinda show a whopping double standard. Zmidponk 12:35, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

You're forgetting the fine old tradition of IOKIYAC, or in layman's terms It's Okay If You're A Conservative. Any lapse in honesty, morals, or indeed even basic humanity is acceptable so long as it's a Conservative doing it to someone they've called Liberal (whether they actually are or not). --Kels 13:01, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

I'm loving Senex's work: 'Intellligent design and anal butt plague'. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן ^{שְׁלֹום}

Historical Quote

Conservapedia's 'Historical Quote': "Endeavor to be always patient of the faults and imperfections of others for thou has many faults and imperfections of thine own that require forbearance. If thou are not able to make thyself that which thou wishest, how canst thou expect to mold another in conformity to thy will?" Answer: Educate them. Right, Andy? But seriously, this seems to contradict the whole idea of Conservapedia, that is, ignoring your own faults, and attacking others' faults, even when you have way more. So... I just found it interesting. -All Hail Tuna 12:07, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Good one! I rarely check the Main Page, but the Historical Quote surprisingly often contradicts the spirit of CP, which makes them incredibly amusing. But this one is sheer brilliance: "for thou has many faults and imperfections of thine own" - unless you're an ulta-right-wing YEC conservative, of course! For we all know that having flaws is Liberal Style! :D --Sid 12:16, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

I disagree.

The CP conservatives (as opposed to REALConservatives®), will and DO admit to faults and failings among themselves, (should one of them actually ever make a mistake). And that's the key, like a cat that has skidded across the floor bassakwards, recovers with the "I meant to do that!" attitude.

CЯacke® 13:42, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Mister Sticky Fingers

Man, JM's feelin' the heat over his rather...liberal interpretation of "fair use". Gotta admire KTDiputsho there, although I'm a bit surprised JM hasn't just banned him outright given how touchy he is about being called on his theft indiscretions. --Kels 15:58, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

See (FrancisG) FrancisG 16:06, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

O HAI! --Kels 16:07, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Oh, this is comedy gold. "Use the talk pages before removing images." - "I did!" - "Using the talk pages doesn't give you the right to remove images." --Sid 16:17, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Wow, that Lisbon image is total theft. But JM: "For me is fine" ought to hold up well in court (assuming the site owner gives a crap to complain... anyone email them yet?) On another note, I have "recently" been able to obtain permissions to use two separate images on RW from their owners. I'm so proud :) human 16:28, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Pure Karajou in his big thug mode:

"We are not afraid of your legal threats. The material is used under the cp:Fair use rights. That is enough."

Oh, my mistake it's Joaquin backed into a corner!  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 18:04, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

KT gets the 5 year banHAMMER.   ^Contribs_Talk 18:36, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Bodhan blocked him for 5 years because of his name? Seriously man, you're not even trying any more. --Kels 18:46, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Read it backwards!   ^Contribs_Talk 18:48, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

It's strange that Bohdan just popped up and spotted it like that when he apparently has been offline for a while. Unless of course TK is pulling his strings - Dance for me little Henry, dance! What a wimp! KTDiputsho may have been a sock puppet as Bohdan claims on the talk page, but Bohdan's just a marionette. Of course the block doesn't make the real issue of copyright go away. I've a good mind to contact the relevant parties my self and let them know they're being ripped off.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 19:15, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Come to that, I dunno how far back you've read, but Bodhan and TK used to be thick as lovers thieves back when the latter was trolling over here. He's not nearly so destructive, mind. --Kels 23:01, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Lol. We both appreciated a good bout of headless chicken mode. SHahB 23:06, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Flailing is good for the soul! --Kels 23:44, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

HenryS:"Your first contribution was to mock user TK". Actually KTD was just pointing out how TK's plagiarism was proved by the references - so catching someone out is mocking them? (It was that edit prompted me to write Conservapedia:UCLA (Plagiarized Article)‎, so I have to be grateful for the head start.)  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 19:27, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Well, well, well. Despite Bodhan's "make it go away" block and JM's "I said Fair Use so no backsies" interpretation of copyright law, Andy just went and deleted all the images that were brought to his attention. Not bad, Andy. There's hope for you yet. Now go through your whole image database and check which ones are really fair use, or come under other licenses. --Kels 22:11, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

I think there's a fair chance he'll get a few emails when people read their incoming on Monday! FrancisG 22:36, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Sticky Fingers encore

Somebody's had an effect:

1. 23:55, 20 April 2008 Karajou (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Public domain sign.png" (Image for public domain licence tags Category:Tag Images)
2. 23:55, 20 April 2008 Karajou (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:509px-CZ traffic mark C1 roundabout svg.png" (image for public domain license tags Category:Tag Images)
3. 23:42, 20 April 2008 Karajou (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:GreatSeal.jpg" (Great Seal image for U.S. goverment licence tag Category:Tag Images)
4. 23:24, 20 April 2008 Karajou (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Stop sign.png" (Proposed image for "No Source" warning tag Category:Tag Images)
5. 23:22, 20 April 2008 Karajou (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Fair Use 1.png" (Proposed image for Fair Use" licence tags. Category:Tag Images)

Stable doors & Horses? Well done ohstupiDTK sorry I mean KTDiputsho

Does he think that planting a damn silly symbol on the image page will cover them?   ^Contribs_Talk 00:03, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Actually, the 509 sign and PD sign are the same image, I think. He got it from Wikimedia Commons, and says it's actually released as Public Domain by the Czech government. What's amusing is his petulant labelling of each of them, in a sort of childish, foot-stomping "Fine, are you happy now?" sort of way. --Kels 00:08, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Blatant Bloggery

This item in the news section is the most blatant act of bloggery I've seen yet...

A student at Ohio State, America's largest university, takes issue with our professor values entry. [2] Then 40% of his comments reply that, duh, professors really do push their liberal views, and the other 60% are liberal comments implying that is what they want!

...it's just Andy ranting at some guy who writes a blog. The sad thing is the guy writing the blog is very fair and I don't think misrepresents CP at all. But CPs back-lash? Classic spinning, taking out of context, etc. Just the usual really. Sigh. RedDog 16:28, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

BTW that 40-60 is out of FIVE (5) comments of which in fact 1 (20%) is agreeing with the naughty liberal professor values slant. One assumes that CP is a parody site!   ^Contribs_Talk 17:02, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Yes, that struck me, too. The entry is also about 3 weeks old. And has five comments. Clearly this blogger is at the epicenter of Western discourse on politics in education! I feel the need to be fair and balanced coming on, though - Teh Assfly got a math problem correct!!! He correctly calculated the percentage (well, 40 and 60 are 2 and 3 out of five, at least), although I couldn't really figure out which part of which percentage some of the comments were. He also used the always-front-page ready phrase "duh" - this from a man who only weeks ago was so unhip he thinks when you say "Dylan", you mean Dylan Thomas - whoever he was he thought calling him Assfly-Dawg was an insult! PS, thanks for archiving this page, whoever did it... human 22:08, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Intellectual (?!) Conservative

Crocdil's latest supporter of Expelled quotes Alan Roebuck (A professor of mathematics at Chaffey College (a community college in Southern California which certainly doesn't share his views) and a theologically reformed (i.e., Calvinistic) Christian. - their words not mine) If you're a Darwinist (which includes the creation of life for some reason) then you must be an atheist! Oh and the cambrian explosion proves the bible's right! I give up!   ^Contribs_Talk 17:19, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Approach

My boyfriend seriously edits on Conservapedia, and introduced me to this whole mess. He was recently blocked for a week for standing up to them. But it seems to me like his head-on approach and the blatant vandalism of other people are both the wrong approach. A way better thing to do would be to dedicate ourselves to creating quiet users who go through various articles and change the unobjectionable items to make them false. CEOs of companies, the number of proteases, and so on... these are all minor facts. The more obscure, the better. Changing all of these would make the entire resource hilariously unreliable, and demonstrate the major problem with trying to make the world "us vs. them"... it means there's always a "them" to wandalize you.--70.126.243.83 17:44, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Been there, done that, got the T shirt. Sorry Bunchanumbers, but from the start there were, and still are, persons who shall remain nameless, doing just that. The hysterical lulz of the site sometimes takes over, however.   ^Contribs_Talk 17:50, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Here's evidence of just one of the hundreds of efforts - have a look for unexpected mentions of prominent Sri Lankan cricketers.^{— Unsigned, by: interpreted / talk / contribs}

O'tay! I didn't know that, and think it's great. :) And this page is hilarious! I love it! Good work guys!--70.126.243.83 18:28, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

While I agree with BoN in general, I must take issue with "would make the entire resource hilariously unreliable". It never was remotely reliable, even left to its own devices. human 22:16, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Dear IP, make a user name and join the fight :-). We'd love to have you. Just don't post your boyfriend's CP handle or he'll get banninated.-caius (heckuva job!) 00:03, 21 April 2008 (EDT) These days, I usually go with the old saying:

“”A truth that's told with bad intent Beats any lie you can invent.

Why make up stuff to make CP look bad, when the facts are just as easy to type? And when they deny or 'correct' them, they look like even bigger fools. --Gulik 01:41, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Even better than that is watching a sincere, well meaning editor throw up their hands and bang their heads against the wall. People really do try to help out, but run into the incredible stupidity that is Conservapedia. Case in point, I've been watching the Al Franken page and the talk page for a while now, and this won't end in a pleasant way SirChuckB^{This country needs more Rutabegas} 01:54, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Miss bunchanumbers, your boyfriend wouldn't happen to be Kektklik by any chance?  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 02:25, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

While a hilarious idea, that fails the reality check that, obviously, Lil' Phyl introduced her adoring beau Fuzzy Kettle to CP, not vice versa. Was fuzzkettle blocked for a week recently? Oh, and back to Ms. BoN... being blocked for a week on CP is almost trivial. Many of us here were blocked forever, or for five years, simply for the crime of association - some even without ever having tried to log in or edit CP (that would be Ms. Kels). human 02:38, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, it was just a joke. I knew it couldn't really be him.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 02:44, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Actually, there are very few editors with a one week block (and they were all done by Mandy) so it's not hard to pick him out. Took me less than 30 seconds.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 09:32, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Has Lil' Phyl been beating up Fuzzy? I just wondered what triggered this.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 11:21, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Holocaust Cause Denier

Ok, I'm giving odds. 1000:1. The next time someone says that Hitler wasn't a Darwinist, Andy will call them a Holocaust Cause Denier. Any takers? Stile4aly 00:34, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Forget the odds, but I'll take the bet, even up - - loser takes a 6-month Pi Pledge. PFoster 00:35, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

I'm not in the habit of betting against a certainty.-caius (heckuva job!) 00:53, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Pastor Values anyone?

I bet CP dont run with this story although it has at least as much merit as half the "xxxxxxxx values" articles they create. RedDog 07:59, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Tsk, you need some creativity ;)

A pastor who imported ammunition for Weapon of Gun? Definitely a good conservative! The poor man was just trying to make Russia a safer place (remember, according to CP, "more guns" equals "less crime"), but the Evil Liberal Government tries to censor him! --Sid 08:19, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Wow that IS a trustworthy interpretation. I feel like such a fool for not seeing it myself :) RedDog 08:26, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

See? The Truth Shall Set You Free! :P --Sid 08:34, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

I'm sorry, but your source is the notoriously liberal BBC, which lies systematically and "finds it difficult to understand there may be alternative views of the world". Clearly not a reliable enough blog source to be used by the Tsutrtowthry Enclopiedy. GNUSMAS : TALK 09:10, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

Not so wise monkeys

I'm sure I'm not the first to notice that when something uncomfortable appears on Mandy's talk page he seems to disappear. After the copyright vios were pointed out he made no further changes to his talk page but made a few edits elsewhere. Surely he'd see the big red banner advising him of a change to his talk page? Later he deleted seven images for "copyright issues" only one of which was pointed out by KTDisputsho. A case of hear no evil, see no evil and don't say a word about it? I wish we could have eavesdropped on the private channels of communication as they must have been buzzing last night, which probably explains why he didn't do much editing. The outcome of all this was Kowardjerk uploading those image license tags from Wikimedia (or was it Wikipedia?). I look forward to a lot more images being deleted and Ed Poo writing a new policy.  Lily ^{Ta, wack!} 08:52, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

ID a "scientific" sham

PJR admits that the scientific underpinning for ID is merely window dressing for the idea that a god did it all.

"ID's point is to argue that there is evidence of design, not to argue for common descent or long ages; the latter are merely the background framework into which ID is set. Yes, YEC disagrees on those particular points, but not on ID itself." Rational Ed^evidence 09:49, 21 April 2008 (EDT)