Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?

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

For non CP related talk, go to the saloon.

Archives for this talk page: Archive list (new)

North Korea wigo

Really lame. Funny how the Brit. article is called "North Korea". All the CIA link headers say "North Korea". Everyone calls it "North Korea". The only time the "official name" comes up in life is to mock it, from what I've seen. Of course, Ed could have made a section with the official name, pointing out it isn't democratic or a republic. ħuman 00:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually he has majorly fucked up the article. D.P.R.K. is used right the way through the article without first stating what it means. Actually come to that they also use R.O.K. in the article without stating what it means. The whole article needs a find and replace to fix the mess. - π 06:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, Human, you're completely wrong - each of the linked articles specifies that the official name of the county is DPRK. (c.f. the CIA article has "Country name: conventional long form: Democratic People's Republic of Korea"; Brittanica has "Official name Chosŏn Minjujuŭi In’min Konghwaguk (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)", etc). And whether you or Ed like it or not, that does happen to be the official name of the country. And deciding to 'rename' the country because you disagree with its politics is the lame thing here, my friend. No, of course it isn't either a Republic or Democratic, but that's most certainly not the point. DogP 07:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Countries that call officially call themselves democratic are like encyclopedias that call themselves trustworthy. AlanE 08:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm with DogP. I'm fine with calling NK NK throughout the article, but the full, official name should be stated in the lede. Likewise they should feel free to call the United Kingdom by that name, or China by that name, but it should always be noted that the full, official title is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, or the People's Republic of China. Obviously this doesn't apply to us seeing as we're not an encyclopedia.Dreaded Walrus 10:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

More specifically re AlanE's point, I agree, but noone here would propose going on as "The DPRK is a democratic republic [...]", because as I'm sure we'd all agree that it isn't. If I wrote a book called "This Book is the Greatest Book in the History of the Planet, the Universe, and all of Civilisation", but it was absolutely rubbish, in fact one of the worst books ever, and everyone just called it "This Book" for short, would they not mention the official name somewhere in the article simply because the official name doesn't accurately describe its contents? Dreaded Walrus 10:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Quick! Someone go rename cp:Holy Roman Empire! Vulpius 10:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

This is actually pretty common on CP. I remember that one of the sysops didn't like the subtitle of the Al Franken book "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them, a Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" So they took it out and then defended it with several reverts and argued against the full title in the page because they didn't think it was accurate.... CP is a special world where Colbert's Wikiality is taken to the extreme.

EDIT: Look at that, the Sysop who removed was none other than our good friend Ed Poor." What a creepy bastard. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 15:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As a comparison, they're quite happy to mention the official name of Myanmar in their Burma article, despite noting that the US doesn't recognize the name change. Ah yes, typical 'encyclopediac consistency'. DogP 06:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:World History Homework Eleven - Model (contd.)

As ClementB has largely won his case with facts TK needed to wave a big stick at him, but far from appearing erudite and educated TK only comes across as bombastic and hectoring. Six years of college TK? And all you can do is plagiarise material from other web-sites and act as head-doorman for Andy's Stupid Club? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

"Collegiate discourse is invited by Mr. Schlafly, from what I have observed the past several years." Oh pahleese, Terry! AlanE 08:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I still can't comprehend why Andy is incapable of admitting he's made a mistake. Is he really, really insecure, or really, really convinced of his infallibility? At least TK shows off his troll credentials by being the only sysop to leap to Andy's defence. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

For Andy's infallibility see Il Duce while TK Rather reminds me of Biggus Dickus in Life of Brian - "Let me handle this, Pontius". Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Clement argued with Andy about a couple of things:

• whether Prussia is Germany
• how to state the postulates of special relativity
• who won WWI
• what's the correct term to describe Canada in 1914
• how the sieve of Eratosthenes looks like

Maybe I've even missed a quibble. IMO, Andy was / is wrong on all points, but only caved in twice: once explicitly, and once implicitly.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah it's time for that old favorite. I think we all know what's coming next. StarFish 13:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

You know, I wonder if it's purely ego on Andy's part. The testiness he displays seems to have a real feeling of laziness to it. As in "I've done my lecture, and I don't want to have to put in a lot more work on it." He seems at least as annoyed that Clement wants him to do more than skim a few paragraphs at Wikipedia, as at the affront to his Maximum Quality Teachiness. --Kels 13:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait...wait...OH MY GOD HE NAILED IT!!!1 SCHLAFLY WINS!! SCHALFLY WINS!!! Neveruse513 14:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

EC) BEAUTIFUL. "Clement, you're a liar, and worse, a liberal liar." _and marmite 14:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy really is on top of his game at the moment. This stuff is gold.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 14:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Uh oh...I think this is it... Neveruse513 14:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm really a big fan of ClementB. He isn't tempted to insult Andy (and Andy is really asking for it), he doesn't resort to kiss Andy's ass, he answers every question straight on and he sticks to his path of truth without getting distracted. None of Andy's shit is clinging to him, and he's totally kicking ass. --GTac 14:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Call me old-fashioned, but I always thought that getting the facts right would help everyone to learn. Awwww, how cute. Z3ro^talk 14:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It almost feels like Assfly is trying to goad him into making a "negative personal comment" so TK can ban him. Neveruse513 14:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The funniest part here is how transparent Andy's attempts to push Clement are. Seriously, it doesn't take much to see through them, which I assume Clement does, and thus dismisses their emotional content entirely. His calm responses, despite digs at civility and amazement that Andy's not interested in having accurate lectures, really highlight what an awful man Andy is, and what a horrible teacher. I doubt there's a single person of any political stripe, who'd look at that exchange and not see Andy as the clear loser. --Kels 14:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(undent) Have it screencapped to Andy's last reply. Will upload now, before TK salts the earth, so we add it to the Andy article. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 14:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

"You do persist in your childish snide remarks in nearly every posting..." Okay, which one of you is writing Andy's posts for him? This is parody GOLD! --Kels 14:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC) "You do persist in your childish snide remarks in nearly every posting; you might try pursuing an acting career in sarcastic comedy, though I doubt you'll be very successful at it." Oh my god...how...can...he...not...see...teh...irony. Neveruse513 14:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It's like he got it straight from the assquote generator. Z3ro^talk 14:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

If he makes fun of Clement's grammar here, I'm going to print it out, sneak off to the bathroom and masturbate. Neveruse513 14:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Zing!-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 15:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, guess you need to be careful of papercuts! --GTac 15:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thing is, if Andy TK banhammers Clement, who's Andy going to have left to talk to? --Kels 15:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I need a cigarette and a band aid. Neveruse513 15:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

You mean a nicotine patch? --GTac 15:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I kind of appreciate that Clement is not going out now, as bad as Assfly wants him to. But unless Clement plays his cards just right (which I think he could do) you can be sure that the next time Clement pops his head up, it's going to be 90/10 or some perceived "negative personal comment". Neveruse513 15:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It's awesome how ClementB refuses to get baited. Andy got so desparate, he pretty much begs ClementB to leave on his own. --GTac 16:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And apparantly, acknowledging charecter traits is an insult. So I guess no more calling people diry liberals? Z3ro^talk 17:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Quick question? Has anybody from here from New Jersey considered e-mailing the NJ State Education Board with with a politely worded e-mail outlining their concerns about Schlafly's fitness to teach, and using the links to all the Talk Pages for all the World History Lectures as evidence?--199.20.64.195 16:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Schlafly signed a document saying his instruction was "secular, neutral and non-ideological". I don't think we need to worry too much...but maybe we're all watching a bank get robbed while assuming someone else called the police. Neveruse513 16:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I should think links to the actual lectures would do it, perhaps a comment about the "talk" tab, but let the lectures he's so proud of fall on their own. --Kels 16:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hang on a mo'. What about all those other declarations?

"Provider assures all services are provided outside of the regular school day"

"Provider ensures the confidentiality of students' needs and progress, and shares the information only with parents/guardians and appropriate school personnel"

Does Andy only homeskule in the evenings and at weekends? And although we may not know the actual family names of the pupils I'm sure they are known locally. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 17:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'ld send an e-mail myself, but I don't think NJ State Education would lend much credence to an e-mail form someone living in South Wales (unless maybe I sent in Welsh).--199.20.64.195 18:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't think this has been mentioned yet, but Ed does the old two-face trick: Nice Ed promotes learning while bad Ed goes to Clement's talk page to deliver a final warning for the insult "you seem to be quite opinionated". Bonus for this sentence: "Help us do research, or be elsewhere." --Sid 17:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Clement's "opinionated" vs Assfly's "puerile"...hmm. They know they're doing it...the question is "How?" Neveruse513 17:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The best part is that you know Creepy Ed had to search for something to warn him about. Neveruse513 17:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And how he had to skip past endless accusations and taunts by Andy and Co. to find that one thing. --Sid 17:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Gawd, that series of edits is comedy gold, and a tragedy, a travesty, of "teaching". Schlafly can't even do time zone math - we all screw it up from time to time, but he's using to make a snide accusation. ħuman 20:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The whole thing is fucking unbelievable! What a shit tossing scumbag Andy is. A total fuckface with cunt for brains and scumbag attitude. If I saw him in the street I would cross the road to smack in the chops. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 20:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Why haven't you provided the details I didn't ask for... liberal? This is rapidly becoming one of my favourite pages on CP, shortly after Socialist Kenyan Mullah B. Hussein Obama. I can picture Andy screaming his lungs out at his monitor as Clement quietly and calmly kerpwns him in every way possible. Solution? Deny his arguments wholesale! Accuse everything he says of being a fabrication! I only wish it would last longer - I'll be very surprised if the Bishop lasts until Friday. Viscount 20:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Talking of Bishops and pwns; any one agree that Andy is the sort that somehow accidentally on purpose sends the chessboard and its pieces flying as soon as he realises he's going to lose? (Oh, sorry about that. Just when I had you on the ropes, too. We'll call it a draw, shall we? Godspeed..) AlanE 21:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Creepy Ed ain't gonna like this...but what's he going to do? And on what grounds? Neveruse513 21:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that obvious? He'll ask for a cp:writing plan... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually Alan, Andy reminds me of the Black Knight from Monty Python.... Using your Chess analagy, he seems like the type who, when his king is cornered by the opponents queen, bishop, knight, rook and two pawns, will look up and say "All right, we'll call it a draw." SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 21:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The problem with the Black Knight analogy would be that TK would come up with an RPG about half way through the, um, dismemberment. (Andy's idea of history would just about have swords and rocket propelled grenades in the same era.)AlanE 21:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

All for the sake of proving that they didn't need gun control in the Middle Ages! Junggai 21:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

But they did have "gun" control! Ever see a serf with a longbow? AlanE 22:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess if Leonardo di Caprio could carry around a gun which he called a "sword" in "Romeo + Juliet" (See Hollywood values), Andy can say what he wants about how there was no gun control, only religious piety, in the Middle Ages. Whatever liberal historians say, this was not really the Dark Ages, after all. Junggai 22:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hollywood was always ahead of its time. Kevin Costner was blowing things up in Nottingham at least 100 years before gunpowder arrived in England; Hugh Jackman came through a timewarp caused by the Brooklyn Bridge (1879) as an expert on La Boheme (1896); and so on. And I love the religious piety (tautology of the day, perhaps? :-)) of those enlightened times - I see someone's "favorite battle" above is "Beziers"... what was the quote? "Kill them all; God will know his own". Andy's right about the joys of serfdom though. Serfing's great.AlanE 23:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

So!! Terry's come in with the RPG and knocked the board over. What a horrible little bit of slime he is! AlanE 01:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

TK's attempt at winning the argument through intellectual discourse is a massive fail. Really, 6 years of debating at college and the best he can do is randomly block for "being a troublemaker"? This just proves how (I'd like to say "morally bankrupt" but I believe JPatti has a monopoly on that) mind-numbingly dumb and hypocritical they all are. The only ones who show any semblance of being intelligent are JessicaT and RJJensen. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 02:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

God, that's the thinnest justification for a block I've seen so far. Because he knows he has nothing to go on, Terry can only insinuate in hs little screed that ClementB's been using multiple socks. As has become the standard deceitful conservative debating tactic, you don't have to give any proof if you repeat an insinuation enough times. This is a new low watermark, even for TK. Junggai 07:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

TK appreciation society

I dunno why people hate on TK. True he's a shit I'd cross the street to avoid, and he tried it on RW, but his stated intention was to destroy CP and he's doing a fine job of it. Totnesmartin 09:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Because the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend - and he's still a nasty underhand piece of work. Silver Sloth 09:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC)The he tried it on RW bit. This is what fuck me off most about TK is not TK himself but the way people act about him. He is funny and the best parodist in the world when it is CP but when he come around and does it here everyone is outraged. Everyone should be outraged at his behaviour on CP too, it smacks of hypocrisy. He is a troll of the highest order. I don't even know if he is intentionally destroying CP or whether it is just his nature to be a dick, but I for one would like to hear people stop complimenting him. You wouldn't like him shitting in our lounge room, why are you happy he is shitting in Andy's? - π 09:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He is indeed shitting in Andy's room, but he's doing it in full view of Andy, with his total consent. I take my hat off to him. EddyP 10:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

careful, he'd shit in that too. Totnesmartin 10:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the guy is a fuck-knuckle. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 10:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He's not only obnoxious in his behavior at CP, he's an ass in his emails. So, yes, I can't stand him. I can't believe his stated motivations, so I judge him by his current deeds.

And no, I don't think that the aim destroy CP justifies all means: you have to be funny at least --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, he is as thoroughly repulsive in his private e-mails as he is on CP. The man has no redeeming qualities (except that one day he'll be tree fertilizer). He treats everybody, even Andy and the other sysops, with equal contempt. Which in turn speaks volumes about Andy, who values him so highly. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I doubt anything would grow where TK is buried. His grave will probably be marked by all the dead grass on top of it. - π 10:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

TK would have himself cremated just so some tree would be denied that fertilizer. And bonus, the smoke would harm the environment too. --Kels 13:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope Clement drops by. Neveruse513 12:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope he doesn't, in a way, otherwise it'll just allow Andy and TK to say, "See! See!" - nevermind the fact that their actions drove from from there to here. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 13:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, teh TeaKay blocked his e-mail, so we can't shout out. (of course, he might be here already, behind the curtains) _and marmite 13:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

CPalmer plays the game. Neveruse513 16:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

SES

Doesn't Andy realise that the eleven-model-talk is going to blow his application out of the water if anyone reads it? Or maybe he does & he wants to feed his martyr syndrome. _and marmite 13:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What? What are you talking about? The debate he won? Neveruse513 13:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Morally Bankrupt

So Morally Bankrupt = Atheism. Hm. Suppose I was to substitute any of the following words as a single word definition for "morally bankrupt": white, black, gay, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Asian, European, Buddhist, Sikh, Protestant, American, conservative, liberal, moderate, Republican, Democrat, Independent, etc. etc. Would this be OK? They sure love their labels, don't they? Jimaginator 14:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Pfft; no, it wouldn't be okay, because all of those groups are not morally bankrupt (except maybe Muslims) </CP Logic>. Z3ro^talk 14:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

When are they going to realize that anyone can be a member of any group and behave badly? And anyone can be a member of any group and behave well? This seems so simple to understand. *sigh* Jimaginator 14:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I think their logic goes something like this: Christianity says to act good, therefore, if you act bad, you are not acting like a christian, as christians act good (or something like that), therefore, the flaw is yours, not your faiths. Since atheists are not told to be good, those who are good act against their evil impulses, therefore a bad atheist is acting like a christian (or something like that). Wow, typing that made my head hurt. Z3ro^talk 14:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

That sounds plausible. (I almost wrote reasonable, but reason don't enter into it) It is such a fractured, and downright dangerous way to look at things. Jimaginator 15:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Fucking perfect. Neveruse513 16:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Obama - Notre Dame

There is precedent for refusing to give a leader an Honorary Degree. The dearly beloved Maggie was counted out at Oxford despite it being her alma mater. Oxford, however, were concerned about policy and money, not ethics. _and marmite 15:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope this is a Poe........

I haven't laughed so much since my Uncle caught his nadgers in the mangle![1]

Mick McT 15:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

starting with the 1940 - 45 war where even Britain suffered some bombings. Silver Sloth 15:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Other than being too long-winded for Assflea's taste, this student has some well thought-out answers despite a few minor inaccuracies. Remember, she supposedly got her information from Professor Andy. Jorge 15:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not that inaccurate. Okay, the war really started in 1939 but it's true that it never really began in earnest until 1940. Q3 looks interesting. My arsey objective side would say "the same reason that Churchill and his supporters killed so many"... it's called WAR. ^sshole 16:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC) The only two things I really have are A, the strange timeline she uses suggesting that Russia went through two world wars and everything else before turning Communist (and Russia didn't really get beat by Japan per se, but no matter) and she leaves out that a huge part of cracking Enigma was the outright laziness of the German who didn't follow protocol in changing the master codes or accepting that the Allies could crack it.... But overall, an excellent paper from a high school student using Andy's lectures as a starting point, and a hELL of a lot better than most of the other efforts we've seen. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 17:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

D'ya think she may have actually looked at Wikipedia for info instead? ^sshole 10:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

In 1939, no French or British had died yet, but all Poland knew that there was a war happening... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Miss CA

That's a failed WIGO ... it was more accurately a "whiny gay" who made a big deal out of her opinion. Sure she sounded ignorant, but she was asked her opinion and gave it. Old news. Jrssr5 19:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

She told a guy to his face that she believes that "in [her] country...marriage should be between a man and a woman". What a fucking bigot. Can bigotry disqualify you from being Miss America? If she said her hobbies were killing puppies would that cost her? I hope so. I'm so glad this bitch lost. Neveruse513 19:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooh. I love this argument. Remember, beauty paegent contestants aren't exactly our best and brightest (Remember this chick?). If Ms. CA had thrown in the civil-union talking point along with her answer everyone would have been fine. Marriage is a religious institution and calling people 'bigots' who believe such thing is, in fact, bigotry in in its own right. :p Jorge 20:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, she is not as dumb as all that; she figured out how to turn losing a pageant to her advantage by grandstanding. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Marriage is not a religious institution, it's a social institution that has been co-opted by religion. The fact that every religion claims control of marriage ought to be a hint. I tend to be lumped in with the libertarians on this front, I don't care who gets married. If heterosexual life buddies want to get married for whatever financial reason floats their boat, I say let 'em. Hell, if every single moonie wants to marry every mormon in want giant web of sexual exploitation, go right ahead. Letting religion get away with maintaining their stranglehold on the institution is just a recipe for retarding any sort of social progress. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I would argue that marriage is as much a religous as a social institution, mainly because early societies were largely ruled by their churches, making the religious defacto social. Z3ro^talk 20:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, marriage used to be very much a private thing in many places; many churches presently treat it as a civil matter, and a marriage ceremony did not require a priest in the Catholic church until the Council of Trent. Under Scots law one could make a marriage-by-consent until 1940, apparently. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, I believe government should have no place in defining marriage and that gay couples should have the same legal protections as straight couples. Jorge 20:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, I believe religion should have no place in exclusively defining marriage and that gay couples should have the same legal protections as straight couples. Neveruse513 21:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, which religion do you think owns marriage? Or do they all get to share it even if they have wildly conflicting views of what it is? Neveruse513 21:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC)The interesting thing about this marraige debate is that it falls in the middle of the religious/government institution.... Whereas marraige is a part of almost all religions, it still need government backing (a license) to be considered valid. As such, individual religions can exclude whoever they want from their little ceremony, but the government can not and should be carrying religious water. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 21:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Neveruse513-if that is your real name, I don't believe any religion owns 'marriage', but I believe it's OK for them to think they do so long as all couples are afforded the same rights under the law. Jorge 21:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

(undent)Miss CA better get her act together. America's going gay on her watch! ENorman 21:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Isn't religion itself a social institution anyways? Or am I derailing the discussion now? And concerning marriage, personally I see it as a thing between a man and a woman. Like sex, I can't imagine someone would prefer it being same sex. But obviously not everybody is the same as me, and if they really want that who am I to object to their happiness. --GTac 22:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It's baaaa-aaaaa-aaaaaack!

NicholasT is debating Andy on his bizarre contention that humor didn't exist before Christ. MDB 19:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

What is it with Andy and Trading Places?? StarFish 19:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, for me it's Jamie Lee Curtis' tits. Neveruse513 19:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I love when Andy tries to defend stupid positions... "Most ancient "comedies" were not really "humor" in the modern sense of the word, but were charming poetry." What a fucking moron.... Poetry was poetry, ancient comedies are plays that are not tragedy. Has Andy ever read anything from this era? Does he even know how to read? SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 21:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to say something about how there may be a distinction between classic comedies and modern humor, but how would a whitty play makes sense without the concept of humor. I was going to comment on what the hell Andy's definition of humor was. I could mark upon the mystery of what the fuck Christianity ever contributed on humor... But what does it matter, it's just Andy being a retarded dick again, and I'll just be repeating what everybody already knows and has said before -_- GTac 00:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy's definition of humor? Anything amusing that came after Christ. It's called moving the goalposts. Bluefish 06:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Goat, make it stop!

Literature, you're doing it wrong. All you need to know about how awful this page is? "Examples from popular literature: Star Wars" Terry's definitely talking about the movies, not the books (which, in those six parts, are just novelizations of the movies, not literature). --Irrational Atheist 19:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Atlas Shrugged...I didn't realize "crap" was a style of literature. --Kels 19:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize a villian is entirely capsilized by someone who does the same thing and never changes. Maybe the crappy villians are, but certainly not well-written ones. Z3ro^talk 19:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose that's what happens when your entire reading shelf consists of 50's era Superman Comics and the bible..... SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 19:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And Batman, judging by recent edits. Z3ro^talk 20:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As a big Dumas and Verne fan, horrified doesn't start to express my sentiment at seeing them beside Star Wars and Ayn "Can't write worth shit" Rand. Shit, he's obviously never actually read 20000 leagues, as Nemo is not a typical villain, or a villain at all, really. 22:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh god that is just a terrible article. If I didn't already know the types, this wouldn't help me at all. A crisis is defined as a situation calling for "judgment"? An anti-hero serves the cause of evil? A villain is one dimensional and is ONLY stopped by death, total defeat or unconditional surrender? An anti-villain is a character who single mindedly follows good instead of evil? An anti-villain follows the path of good, so he is a hero who's only stopped by death, defeat or surrender? Wait, but... what? --GTac 22:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

This is why you don't let Conservative Christians near literature. Terrible things occur. Terrible things. 23:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see all the red links though....DogP 23:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait... Sidious was a villain in all six movies... Sidious wasn't even mentioned in the first... so how could he even be the villain? If you are going to classify Star Wars as literature, should't you at least see it first? User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 00:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"A literary villain is any character who never changes his mind or his goals or his outlook [...], even if unless an overwhelming force, physical or psychological, compels him so to act. A villain approaches life, and his goals, with single-minded determination, and cares nothing of what anyone, ally or adversary or bystander, might think of his actions." Looks like a perfect description of Andy to me.. Cantabrigian 09:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

So a villain must be present in any well written story. I've just finished Jane Austen's 'Persuasion' (again) and, whilst there are characters who are less than perfect I'm not sure I could spot the villain. Charles Elliott, perhaps? And he's not exactly defeated, it's just that Anne sees through him. Maybe Austen isn't great literature. Silver Sloth 10:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

So I looked at the site for that campus group CP was talking about...

I'd have to say I'm thoroughly disgusted. It's like Andy on a bad day mixed with the spite of TK and the racist evil of Metapedia. Especially their indescribable hatred of "Trendy" multiculturalism, whatever that's supposed to mean. I feel sorry for Andy's kids if they are forced to do shit like this. ENorman 23:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Trendy multiculturalism = "non white cultures looked at and considered equal." SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 23:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I must say, what with this kind of thing, the rout in November, the defection of Specter (what a brilliant name, btw), and the frothing-at-the-mouth ravings of Limbaugh et al, I'm delighted to see that the Republicans are spiraling down the hole of narrowing extreme-right support. The way they're going about things, it looks very similar to the downward spiral the UK Conservative Party suffered after they NOTBK'd Thatcher. Since then (12 years ago now), they've never been electable, and have flailed about wildly, shifting to the extreme right, then back a bit, then more the centre, than back again. So we have great hopes the same will happen to Republicans. And with any luck, that means many, many years without Republicans being in power. Hurray for right-wing nutjobs! You've destroyed your own agenda! Hurray! DogP 23:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

NOTBK? 00:37, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Night of the Blunt Knives ħuman 00:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It's pretty revealing to look at the stuff they actually talk about on the site - you would think that a student group interested in Western culture might host events celebrating Shakespeare, the great German composers, Renaissance art, Greek philosophy, American film, and so on. Of course, there's no sign of any of that, just rants about how immigrants are ruining the world and we better kick them mud races out boy howdy! Viscount 00:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

One interesting facet is if they "succeed" at all, these will be the people around to run the GOP when the pendulum swings back in 20-30 years. Scary... ħuman 00:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Kan we haz snartikle? Also, kan we haz linksies to the virulent hate you guys are finding there? ħuman 00:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I purged it from my browser history after looking at it because I felt unclean after looking at the stoopid. You can search for the group and it will probably be the first thing that pops up. Also, Viscount: to them Western culture is probably staying in Church all day and saying how everybody else sucks. I seriously think that is what Andy does for fun. ENorman 01:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

But since you asked nicely, I'm gonna go shower again now. ENorman 01:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, haha. I found the site - linked at the Fox article. But seriously, I can't find the "hate", just a bit of stupid. ħuman 01:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It's the "Other cultures and people who think differently than us are bad!" mindset. So probably the better choice of words would be psychotic xenophobia. ENorman 01:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"This is for people who are proud to be members of the West and want to work in defense of their people, culture, and traditions." Change "the West" for "the White race" and it could have been lifted from anyone of a number of hate sites. Chilling. Amin7b5 01:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Their website certainly has the look of a White Supremacist group, but I don't see anything explicitly hateful...yet. On the other hand I think the spoiled brats at UNC didn't help their case much either. Jorge 01:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They aren't going to launch into full hate on their website. They start with a few "things in the old times were better" stuff. You are expected to go "yeah they were" then you get their reading list, and the book will start with the "things in the old times were better" stuff and then over the course of 300 pages build up to the "everything is the fault of foreigners" and then the literature they give you gets more and more extreme. That is how these groups operate, they take in the disaffected and disgruntled and slowly feed them more and more reactionary material until they are full-blown racists running around beating shop keepers. - π 01:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, except you are making that up without evidence. Maybe they are Buckleyites, Rockerfellerites, who knows without evidence!? ħuman 03:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well we could look into them more, how about someone joins and finds out what this reading material they don't list is about? - π 03:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. Will you guys forgive me in advance? Crap, I'll need a disposable email address. And address. And name. And life... ħuman 03:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah,Π said what I was about to say. These folks (or volk, if you prefer) seem clever enough to know how to play the game--I mean, they're a college student group, right, so they at least managed to pass the SATs.But the logo and the tone reek of White supremacy stuff--and part of me thinks that they might not even be aware that that's the card they're playing--that people can actually start to believe for reals that their discourses aren't really racist. It can be that insidious. Amin7b5 02:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever. I found no explicit hate on their site, actually not much at all. Sure, some "right wing" "Western civ" crap, but nothing that rang my bell as "subtle racism". Hell, I couldn't even find the stuff about immigration. So, LINKS PLEASE? Or quit with the accusations beyond what is there. ħuman 03:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, their blog has some subtly racist stuff on it. And it links to what seems to be an anti-Muslim blog. Amin7b5 03:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. This one certainly reeks. But folks, if we/you are going to rap about how a site is full of hate, direct links to the hate, please. Otherwise it's just casting aspersions. You know how well we document crap at CP? Let's stick to those standards. Now, can we haz snarticle? ħuman 03:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They also pimped a talk by Larry Pratt, a fellow who has spoken at neo-Nazi gatherings... Amin7b5 03:37, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The group draws on a thinly veiled appeal to fears of the Other and modern trends. But more importantly, groups like this and Club for Growth are all emblematic of the dominant issue in conservative politics (and really, American politics as a whole): whether to broaden or purify. Great NYT article about it in the wake of Specter's defection.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 03:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I stubbed up nasty youth on the web, please to add all insights there? ħuman 03:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks like they generated a little too much interest:

"Due to recent YWC activism and publicity we have received thousands of visitors and hundreds of e-mail and comments over the past 48 hours. As a result we are a bit backlogged and it may take some time to answer your inquiries."

Jorge 03:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help in clarifying our criticisms of them, here and at the article, folks. ħuman 04:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Not really news.

But as we all know, and need no further proof of, is that TK is a dishonest, lying fuckbag with no scruples nor redeaming features. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 00:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

All bow to the god of parody. ENorman 00:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

No surprise here, but TK has outdone himself this time.

• If good intentions were the reason for your coming here, that is laudable, of course. But your idealogical opposition outweighs your good intentions, and in point of fact, you use one to justify the other, which is intellectually dishonest.

If you disagree with Assfly and co. about such contentious ideological matters as "whether Canada was a dominion during WWI," using good intentions as a justification is intellectually dishonest. Conservapedia in a nutshell, really. Viscount 00:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This entire storyline was amazing. The irony, the hypocrisy, the predictability, the lulz - it was all there. Classic Conservapedia, indeed. I love these guys. tealish^??!!!1 00:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

And he IP blocked an /18 & a /24 to be sure. _and marmite 01:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I think this is as far as TK's ever taken it. I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Ed or Andy unblocked Clement. -- JArneal 01:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Bet they don't! _and marmite 01:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

TK should be more civil when dealing with a chessmaster. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 01:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Aschlafly will be relieved - and ignore the whole incident... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 03:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Larron is right. TK did his job, as site pit bull. Schlafly washes hands of matter - since they went away, obviously the interlocutor was just a liberal troll. ħuman 06:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy gets to keep his moral high ground by not being the one to block Clem. However, what caused me to snort my coffee was TK's assertion - "I can see your agenda, which is one of self-appointment, almost as a "messiah" to "save the children" which of course is the excuse given by all vandal site members and radical liberals the world over". 'Saving the children' was always TK's stated reason when trying to recruit RW members to help with his own anti-CP plans. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 09:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

MOAR block reasons

Apparently multiculturalism is now an acceptable block reason. What more new reasons will Terry Koeckritz pull out of his ass invent? User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 00:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

When do you think TK is going to be honest and block himself for cyber-harassment? - π 00:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You mean liberal cyber-harassment. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 00:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Why doesn't he add "good intentions" as well? ħuman 00:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Worse. Liberal good intentions. Mei 00:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Liberal ineptness, of course. Flare^Talk 01:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I see "we don't block for ideology" has now become "we block whoever TK says is an evildoer." Why doesn't Andy just hand over the keys of his wiki to TK and call it a day? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That rule is becoming more farcical with every passing day. Now TK is going on about it being a conservative encyclopaedia and how Andy as the site owner what he says goes. These are both true statements but don't square with the ideological blocking rule. Why not just rewrite the rule to "anyone found disagreeing with Andy factually or ideologically will be blocked" and just be done with it? - π 02:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

To preempt all the ClementBs out there, he should just add "Desiring factual information" or simply "Has standards." 02:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Or "Because I can." --Just passing by 09:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone noticed this juicy bit of deceit? Why is it necessary to hide the "Troublemaker" reason? TK's reasoning:"I left the *, because sometimes its better to have it not displayed." Junggai 09:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I see he added Terrorism as a reason. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He was going on about us being Internet Terrorist^TM the other day when he wasn't calling us Baby Murders^TM. He likes to push the buttons with the most extreme snarl words he can find he can find. - π 10:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, this little exchange made me chuckle. TK doing his dirty washing in public? Anything to try and oust another furriner I suppose. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It just struck me that without PJR it's only the distaff side at CP who stand up to any of the bullying: Jallen, BethanyS and JessicaT. Each one of them has more cojones than Karajerk, JPratt, Crockoshite, Ed Poor, TerryH, Conservative, TK and Andy put together. Let's face it, the men are all just cowardly punks because they have the largely defensive weapon of banhammer. They're a disgrace. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

OMG, more proof that men are an inferior form of life to women. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 21:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

When will 'being Jewish' or 'being a black' be added? -- 21:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice, how TK imitates Den Bishop larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 22:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess it's just too much work to atually type a proper explanation. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, I know...

..Ignore him, ignore him but I am bored at work and listening to New Order with fuck all else to do so.....hasn't this been going on for over a year and now we have to wait another 120 days? Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 02:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It is hard to tell, he is so vague it could be anything. Most like it will amount to dick like everything else he has ever done. The highlight being the Dempski blog that was deleted within a week. - π 02:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Still 14th on my Google. Still no improvement from last time I checked. Jorge 02:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He made a really big deal about some stuff that was happening in late February, but here it is in late April, and there ain't no "there" there. C'mon Ken, you've got operations completed here, how 'bout fessing up on what they were now that it's too late to do anything. You did have actual plans for each of them fancy names, didn't you? Didn't you? Ken? --Kels 03:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to know what his "operations" actually consist of. Is it just him sitting around eating boiled hotdogs, spamming message boards with links to his article, and occasionally e-mailing some apologist/Christian blogger? Or is it... more?! "More" meaning "calling high-ups at Google and offering to fellate them in exchange for a higher search ranking. Then offering to fellate them without the higher search ranking." 03:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

14th? Really? I checked and the CP article didn't even make it in the top 200 for me. ENorman 04:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yum, boiled hotdogs! Now I'm hungry. ħuman 04:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What is he on?

First he decides that we're angry because of view counts or something[2]. But, in retrospect, decides we're not nearly so angry?[3]. Personally, I'm enraged that he's not using more animated gifs and youtube links. 06:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, that's just great. "Oh, apparently they're not angry, I better remove this trolling then". DogP 06:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Moar Hitwin! ħuman 06:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh certainly, MOAR HITWIN! Your Prime Directive Ken - get Hitwin to the top of the left column of the Main Page. If Joaquin won't let you make him your bitch, get it to second place under the paintings. DogP 06:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

His operations are all in his head. Yeah I'm really angry. It looks like I might lose my daily lulz. StarFish 07:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

ARGHH!!! I'm so angry that the evolution article is doing well in view counts lately!!! Does Ken realize that we (I) want more people to go to his article? I'd love it for that many more people to see how fucking stoopid he is. Neveruse513 13:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's interesting, the Alexa link shows that more than half of the people going to CP take a quick look at one page, then don't come back. I expect through some search or old blog link or something, but most of them aren't even there for two minutes before they take off. Well done, Ken! I think this should show you as clearly as anything how incredibly bad your articles are. --Kels 13:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ken!

That is not considered sufficient attribution, you need the photographs name dumbass. - π 08:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Pwning evolutionists on teh innertubes: free! ħuman 08:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This why the protect the picture policy is stupid. Unless you have upload rights you can't replace the picture but it prevents people fixing the licensing issues and cataloguing them; something the sysops are too lazy to do themselves. - π 08:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Is Kotomi paying attention?

Now that multiculturalism is a valid block reason, this user better watch her back, with her shady, time-wasting articles like this and this, which go on for hundreds of words without a mention of how inferior these art forms are to those of Western culture. Said user should reconsider her improper fixation on these obscure triviliaties, open her mind, and start putting more truth into her articles. Junggai 08:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

No doubt Wormtongue is already whispering in Andy's ear, now that he's blocked most of the known world, that they shouldn't have another furriner on the books, after all, remember what PJR did? --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

And that limey Jew Fox! Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget Moony Ed and his forriner-worshipping ways. EddyP 10:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Psst..."multiculturalism" means "thinks Mexicans and Muslims are human". Pass it on. --Kels 13:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I guess she was paying attention after all. Junggai 20:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

RJJensen and the Bishop

Another one to be relieved by Clement's absence will be RJJensen. It's interesting how silent the historian in residence is on this subject. On ClementB's talk page, there is a short exchange between RJJensen and ClementB: ClementB had obviously inserted one of Andy's insights into an article RJJensen was editing , and RJJensen didn't like it at all. He would scold ClementB for inserting information he knew to be wrong - but would he call Andy on it. No. Double standards, anyone? larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I think your first link (cp user Clement Bishop) is not what you want. ħuman 08:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

fixed, thanks larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 08:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Reaching a New High

At least nominally, CP has achieved to block a /8 range, now:

Number of Active Range Blocks at CP on April 30th, 2009

Range	/16	/17	/18	/19	/20	/21	/22	/23	/24	/25	/26	/27	/28	/29	/30	/31	/32
IPs in Range	65536	32768	16384	8192	4096	2048	1024	512	256	128	64	32	16	8	4	2	1
#Blocks	228	15	34	57	59	10	130	15	181	3	2	3	2	7	0	0	864

These add up to 16,908,568 blocked IPs, while a /8 block would cover a mere 16,777,216 numbers (blue line).

number of range blocks

File:Ipblock-range-contrib-Conservapedia-20090125.png blocked ranges

So, it's party time over there? No, not yet. Due to liberal deceit reactionary incompetence, quite a few of the blocks which are active now cover similar ranges or are nested. In fact, at this moment only 15,147,743 individual IPs are actually blocked. So, don't open the bottles of champagne to early. Just wait a few days.

Individual IPs

RIR

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

A peon celebrates as 15,000,000 people now can't edit Conservapedia.

This site's block log is growing rapidly. - π 09:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

And the parents of Akmal Kady will be surprised that they gave him an inappropriate name. Sorry, WASPs only larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Akmal will be equally surprised that he can't recreate his account; despite being told to by TK. EddyP 10:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't they know they should look after their Saudi friends otherwise they'll cut off teh oil! Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He could email TK to ask him for guidance - oh, sorry, he can't... larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

One thing I never understood was why TK blocks for anything less than infinite. Who is he kidding? He (they) want these people to never come back. Neveruse513 13:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The Homeskollars

Is it just me or are they scaling back operations on CP? I don't see DuncanB unless he's putting up homework, and I don't see Addison as frequently as I used to. Maybe the novelty is wearing off, or maybe they realize that their teacher is a dick and CP a failure. EddyP 10:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

A few seem to have followed PJR. I am hoping for the latter of your suggestions, it would show that even indoctrination doesn't work. - π 10:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I would love to listen to one of Andy's classes. What happens when someone asks how should I refer to Canada in WWI - dominion or colony? Would Andy explode? I bet he makes some lousy jokes about liberals, states that there are more important issues, and starts praying...

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 10:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That assumes, of course, that they are allowed to ask questions. That sort of thing isn't really the fundie way, especially where Andypants is concerned. He'll just stare them down and say *nasally* "Who's the teacher here?" --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The colony/dominion/commonwealth thing is quite interesting. I always, in my clumsy broad-brush way, thought that Britain learned from losing the 13 colonies in north America and relaxed their grip on their other colonies (more self-rule, etc.) in order to avoid silly wars of independence and maintain the wealth-producing trade relationships. A broad brush, I know, but basically, it worked. ħuman 20:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's true - but only for Canada, Australia and New Zealand - their attitude towards colonies which weren't domineered by European settlers tended to be quite different. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Stupid git redux

From CP's RC (I reversed the chronology):

# (Upload log); 01:24 . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) uploaded "File:3274284465 28b4cc5f24.jpg"

# (Protection log); 01:24 . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) protected "File:3274284465 28b4cc5f24.jpg" [edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite)

# (diff) (hist) . . User:Conservative‎; 01:29 . . (-351) . . Conservative (Talk | contribs)

diff = [[File:3274284465 28b4cc5f24.jpg|right|thumb|200px|The near future of [[evolution]] on the internet. ]]

# (Deletion log); 01:31 . . Conservative (Talk | contribs) deleted "File:3274284465 28b4cc5f24.jpg"

Ken uploads file, protects it, puts it on his user page, then deletes it. No wonder the man-child can't string two coherent sentences together. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 11:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

A modest suggestion

In the spirit of Andy's Best New Conservative Words, I'd like to propose that we develop a word to describe a bit of parody on CP that we don't want to out, but that's so funny it just has to be honored with a round of internet beers. Found one this morning and now I'll have to get one of the aides to change my Depends.--Simple 14:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Nasal Cavity is a rational word now. Why? Because I said so. ENorman 14:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Key Lime is another rational word, originated in 1926. --GTac 15:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Rational" is a rational word. Let's not let CP use it for anything (that should be easy for them). Can we copyright it? 8-) Jimaginator 15:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you can put a patent application in on the concept. ^sshole 16:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

sure you can ENorman 16:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I would think that "easter-egg" would be apposite, however it may need to be de-religified somehow. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 17:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Bunny egg"? "Sock lint"? "Goat droppings"? ħuman 20:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

World History Lecture Twelve and Cryptography

Okay, so Andy's lecture on World War II covers the Enigma. Which is good, in and of itself -- the Allies breaking Axis codes was certainly a key factor in winning the war, or at least shortening it.

However, there a key omission: it doesn't mention Alan Turing! Discussing WWII cryptography without mentioning Turing is like discussing the history of modern physics without mentioning Einstein!

And Andy mentions a Polish cryptologist by name in the lecture, so he's not just avoiding mentioning specific people.

Could it be that Andy doesn't mention him because Turing was gay?

Disclaimer: since I'm gay, and a computer professional, Turing is personal hero of mine. I don't like seeing him slighted. MDB 15:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What did the gay computer professional say to the other gay computer professional? Who cares. Gay jokes suck. Anyway, I'll bet 3.14 rationalwikis that there are other obvious examples of CP omitting prominent members of intellectual communities who also happened to be teh ghayz. 70.228.38.134 15:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of slighting Alan Turing, I won't have you slinging these allegations. Mr. Turing was a confirmed bachelor, not teh gay. Neveruse513 15:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

In the immortal words of one of the greatest living American philosophers, "now who's being naive?" MDB 15:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Neveruse, but he was prosecuted for 'Gross Indecency' which, amongst many other things, resulted in the withdrawal of his security clearance. He truly suffered for his sexuality and, whilst I know you were joking, I'm with MDB on this one, he was a true hero. Silver Sloth 15:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Amongst many other things" includes, sadly, what's believed to be his suicide. (To be fair, his mother said it was an accident.) Sigh. One of the most brilliant minds in history, probably hounded literally to death because he liked, as Neal Stephenson's novel Cryptonomicon put it, the occasional "improbable arrangement involving penises". At least the British government has finally said they were dreadfully wrong, though it was way too late for Turing. MDB 15:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, Assfly is omitting a lot, including any effort by the British people and the American people. Thieh 15:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm slightly surprised he didn't mention how the capture of an enigma machine by an American operation. After all, we've all seen U-571 so it must be true. Silver Sloth 15:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at the history of cp:Alan Turing. Since last year, he doesn't belong to the category homosexuals any longer. I suppose, he became something of an honorary heterosexual after his death, who committed homosexual acts - probably, by chance, once.

The article is an disgrace.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 15:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"This article is a disgrace" would cover roughly 99.85% of CP's database. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 16:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Great. Just great. Now I have to undertake a night-long mission to find the missing 0.15%. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 17:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

NicolasT, Theatre Expert

Humor existed before Christ? Blasphemer! Infidel! Lastwordist! So what if you are an expert!? As proof of your lastwordism, I will ban you as an act of lastwordism! Jimaginator 15:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It was nice whilst it lasted He pwned Andy just a sweetly as Da Bishop, possibly even better, and I for one learnt something about early theatre. Silver Sloth 15:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I forgot about that. "We are here to learn together before someone blocks our Jimaginator 15:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

NicolasT falsely thought that Aschlafly's words I'm not familiar with that work and welcome specific "humor" that you think is in it.^{Hi Human, you hate this font, don't you?} indicated some interest on his side. Luckily, TK saved Andy from getting involved in another discussion. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I loved NicolasT's misspelling of appetite - apatite is a type of mineral and wouldn't be flagged by a spelling checker. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 17:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Is this a new record for the shortest argument with Aschlafly before being banned for last wordism? I think it is! Viscount 18:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed that wordism is an anagram for RWisdom. So, "Viscount" if that is indeed your real name, do you have one Last RWisdom to add before I ban you? ħuman 23:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Not worthy of a wigo

But an amusing example of Karajou douchebaggery:

(Block log); 09:48 . . Karajou (Talk | contribs) blocked Lolaclu (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled) (Your user name is inappropriate, please choose another.)

Good effing luck choosing a different user name when account creation is blocked. Stile4aly 16:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

IIRC, someone more familiar with the wiki workings said that's not exactly what that means. Neveruse513 16:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. It's not an autoblock, but means that User:Lolaclu cannot create new accounts (which is a silly thing to do anyway). 16:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Ironically, the best process would be to let the poorly-named account actually create the new, properly-named one. Or, as sometimes happens, let them pick as the old name, then rename them. But they don't care, really. And it's doubtful that LolACLU signed up to improov the blog, isn't it? ħuman 21:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually guys, unless I'm wrong on this, this guy almost certainly is autoblocked, and thus won't be able to create a new account. If autoblock is disabled, it stated in the block log (as with these recent "recreate your account" blocks: ^{1 2 3 4 5 6}) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 10:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

High traffic page

LOL. Nice one Justine. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 18:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I just checked her userboxen...do you think she really uses a Dvorak layout?? I was thinking about switching just to be moar esoteric (ph33r mah box wit itz scary linux and obscure keybord layowt). Neveruse513 21:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Evolution of Conservapedian Debate Techniques

Now they've gotten as far as "I know you are, but what am I?". At this rate, they should reach "Using facts and logic" sometime around 2314. --Gulik 18:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, they've now fallen back to "I have a big rock, I am the leader" So push that date back about two hundred or so years. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 19:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I love CPalmer's Paradox: "(reinstate so-called last-wordism, and if you accuse me of last wordism, you are guilty of last wordism)". So, logically, the only way not to be a last-wordist, is to be the first person to yell "Last-wordism"...? Ow, my brain. --Gulik 22:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Sysop Jessica R.I.P.

wow. just wow. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Prick. And he doesn't realise how fast his ship is sinking. Mei 22:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

There was plenty of warning that she would be treated unfairly. There's no reason to feel sympathy for someone who keeps poking at the lions with sticks to make them behave. --Irrational Atheist 22:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That puts HSmom next in the firing line. _and marmite 22:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I can hear Terry's (hey--isn't that a girl's name?) evil cackling from here...--WJThomas 22:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What's the betting that TK dribbled venom into his master's ear? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, Duh! _and marmite 22:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Countdown to block by TK. EddyP 22:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The best part about it that is their attacking Jessica while all the time The most obvious parodist ever to hit CP is destroying everything. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 22:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd be surprised, but I'm . . . not. Its almost as if Andy is trying to kill his wiki. FernoKlump ^{What the fuck Mr. Assfly??? That bastard DeanS deleted my petition!} 22:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd have put Jallen next in the firing line but Andy does seem to think the world of her. It'll take a lot more work by TK to get her out. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if Uncle Ed will intervene? Corry 22:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose Jessica just didn't bake enough brownies for all those big macho men. I bet not one of the toads makes a stand in support of her. Call themselves Christians? I guess the parable of the Good Samaritan is completely lost on them. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(Multiple ECs and slow connection to RW) What a beautiful trainwreck. I feel somewhat sad for Jessica (though IIRC, she was quick to fall in line with whatever new insane rule TK made up), but at the same time, I can't help but laugh at the Epic Fail displayed there. You work for ages to become a sysop, and then it all poofs the moment you disagree with TK. And it's funny how edit warring with TK (and from what I see, only TK) equals "repeated conflicts with other Admins". Or did I miss any other major clashes? --Sid 22:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What happened to being chivalrous. Aren't you supposed to protect the ladies from being mishandled by other bruits? (Waiting for Godot)

EC) Kara sided (sort of) with her on the cp:MediaWiki_talk:Ipbreason-dropdown page. _and marmite 22:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah but will he do anything about it? It's a different story when it comes to paying taxes but standing up against bullying and intimidation? I somehow doubt it. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This must like watching a black hole form, that sudden realisation that a deep dark hole has opened up under Conservapedia, and we've reached that point in the process where Conservapedia is about to collapse ito itself and nobody over there is going to be able to escape. The best part is that those inside the rapidly collapsing Conservapedia can't see what's happening because they are now completely trapped inside their own relativistic little bubble.

Or maybe it's just the case that Conservapedia is completely ********** (insert own age appropriate expletive) screwed. Whatever visual imagery you want to use I suppose.--199.20.64.195 23:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Is there any doubt now who is the de facto leader of CP? _and marmite 23:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Must be the height of Trolldome, to infiltrate then take down an entire website virtually on your own. --En attendant Godot_{"«I don't think in any language. I think in images. V.Nabokov»} 23:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I've actually done that on a forum before. The admin was a dick who nobody liked, but I was the only one with balls to say anything. So eventually I was backed up by even the other admins and nothing could be done to me without the entire userbase leaving in protest. Eventually the place shut down when an IRC channel was made. So yeah, feels good man... ENorman 23:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(EC):Ooooooh, a thought!!!! (4, one short of madness) And before anybody says that isn't a reason to get excited, for me it is ;-). Anyway, I mentioned above about somebody from New Jersey e-mailing or writing a polite missive to the NJ State Education department and linking to all the Talk Pages on Andy's World History Lectures as a way of showing how Andy teaches, and how poor his teaching standard and materials are. It might also be worth linking to the 'Reason to Block' page and point out that Andy could very well seek to exclude pupils from his courses using exactly the same criteria. As long as the e-mail/letter is professional, and doesn't resort to leet speak, waving arms frantically, and cries of "won't somebody think of the children ?!", then it is could be something that will give the Education Department real pause for thought--199.20.64.195 23:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Let there be edit section

TK and Andy celebrate their latest pruning of undesirables from Conservapedia...

(square1) I find it ironic that Terry Koeckritz feels users complaining about why they were banned requires MOAR ban options, rather than less stupid bans. --Irrational Atheist 23:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you know what would be absolutely wonderful beyond all reaonsing? If the rabid guard dog that is TK bit Andy and he feels he has to put him down. Seriously, now that Jessica is gone as well as PJR (i.e. the people who actually contribute anything useful) the only asset Andy has left is TK's overeager banhammer. Without TK and the real Guard Dog (which no-one seems capable of fixing) the site will be overrun with parody and abuse and will eventually collapse on itself. Considering the boredom factor it surely won't be long before TK goes on tilt and pisses assfly off. Crundy 23:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Nitpick: Jessica isn't gone... yet. I think she has yet to react to the good news of being a lowly editor contributor target again. Maybe she'll pull a Jinx and suck up extra hard in a futile effort to get her rights back! Or she whines to Andy in an even more futile effort to get her rights back... --Sid 00:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't think Jessica is likely to whine or suck up. More likely to just withdraw her labour. _and marmite 00:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think TK knows which side his bread is buttered on. CP just wouldn't be the same without the Assfly/TK tag team of idiocy. Viscount 01:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised by this. Besides this event, what did Kotomi do to get Andy's attention? Normally he just hides under a desk until the problem fixes itself. Hell, it took vandalism from Fox to earn a demotion and that's someone TK has a personal beef with, and Conservative is still around even though they hate him (Andy included, and he didn't need TK's help with that). Jessica, however, was swiftly dealt with, apparently no questions asked. Did TK's influence rise so dramatically in the last few months? Flare^Talk 00:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The most fitting thing Kotomi could do would be to withdraw from CP and work on ASK instead. Grima TK has Andy's ear, and is basically going to drive anyone off of CP who annoys him. Interesting, btw, that they couldn't ban her for doing anything wrong - they just want her to know that she is no longer a respected member of a sysop team that *cough* embraces different opinions - she failed the groupthink test for acolyte sysop status and the sentence has been handed down. --SpinyNorman 01:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I was away from this all day and am only seeing it now. Incredible. So, we now have Andy, correcting homework and redefining half the dictionary as conservative; we have Ken, waving his arms about at gentlemen and rubbing his faeces all over the front page; we have RJensen uploading pictures of cheese; Daniel1212 and his timecube; Jallen and her reverts; CPalmer and Things Named After Places; Bert Schlossberg and that 50,000 word plane article, and lastly we have TK and his enormous bulletproof cock. Ain't' life grand? OK, next up in front of the Grand Obliterator? We should open a book, but I reckon JKirby, CPalmer, or JDWpianist are not long for this world. DogP 04:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This was surprising, it really was. And for anyone that's somewhat followed CP, that's saying a lot. I had thought they turned Jessica into one of them over the last few months and I saw no evidence against that even inspite of her edits to the block reasons. It didn't seem to be too big a deal, but boom -- DESYSOPED! TK plays the game exceptionally well. I'm starting to wonder if he can get Andy to block himself... tealish^??!!!1 04:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually the REAL money would be to get TK to ban Andy. It's a very long odds bet, but Good Christ wouldn't that be just THE BIDNESS?!! DogP 04:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)

Dear Andrew S.

I am writing this email to relieve you of the constant pressure to deal with trivial on-wiki issues.

I suggest you make me a bureaucrat, and remove yourself from that group, so you can concentrate on your (insert tongue) conservative, Christian, educational, and truthful resource, and teaching your students. I will manage the rowdy crew of "admins", half of whom are likely socks of IceWedge, AmesG, and AuldNick. I will ferret out the trouble-makers and block the entire "academic" world from interfering with your greater glory.

Thank you, and Godspeed,

Your acolyte,

Terry Kroectiz Kracktwatz Krackwitz KrautWays Killer ħuman 05:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This is why I shouldn't sleep. At least TK could've let her commit hara kiri, the honourable death... oh wait, that fetid ball of pus doesn't know the meaning of the word. 4 sysops down (Tim, PJR, LearnTogether and Jess), only a few more to go. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The rise and rise of Michael Rimmer (another review here) - an early 70's film with Peter Cooke. I think TK is using it as his modus operandi. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 06:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

When I saw the Needful Things film, I couldn't help but think about TK when he was here at RationalWiki. Flare^Talk 07:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What are the odds that one of TK's many rangeblocks since the desysopping cover her? EddyP 08:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Just seen all this - wow. Now all that remains is copy-pasting from Jensen, that Homosex guy, Alger Hiss and the insights of the great man himself. And Joaquin. Judging by this it looks like poor Jess is outta there.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Shame. Looking at her talkpage, tomorrow would have been her 1-year anniversary. Makes her positively ancient as far as non-sysop editors go. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This is such bullshit. Just another case of good people not gaining respect on that site. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 11:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Jessica has commented on the desysoping at aSK http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKotomiT&diff=13544&oldid=13514. Just the usual "my shit doesn't smell" stuff from her. My favourite comment is "Well, he (TK) has free reign now. At least I can hold my head high and my conscience is clear". Of course Jessica, because you just broke your heart standing up to TK all this time. JoeDuffy 11:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Be fair now. She might have been doing all kinds off-wiki that we don't know about.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 11:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I'd be surprised. Her extremely hypocritical block of Falco1029 opened my eyes. I used to think that she was too nice for CP. But in the end she was happy to play along. Anyway, she can always use her ToykoRose account to defend herself if she wants. That'll give TK all he needs to permaban her. JoeDuffy 12:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The Falco1029 block also got me fired up. She was too nice for CP. I badmouthed her a lot, but I did apologize. I'm just disappointed that she stayed with CP and turned a blind eye. Now she gets it. I just wish she would have left of her own accord long ago instead of having this happen. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 13:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, to be fair if you do enjoy editing the site as she seemed to do, standing up for others when they're being bullied can be hard when you know said bullies may easily lock you out AND undo whatever work you've already made. But she did affect CP for the better, treating others with respect, blocking users who deserved it and retracting and apologizing when not (such as Falco1029's case).

Maybe I'm only saying this just because she was surrounded by a bunch of goons though. Flare^Talk 15:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

In fairness, when brave comrade ETrundel was blocked she did stand up for him and eventually managed to get him unblocked. But then The Curious Incident of the Copied Articles in the Wiki occured. So maybe she shouldn't have gotten me unblocked in the first place, I doubt it helped her cause :S. Now I feel guilty. EddyP 19:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Jess stumbled once in a while in trying to balance adhering to the party line with being a decent person, and on the whole the balance of her actions there were for the "decent person" category, which is what caught up with her in the end. When you look at the daily actions and contributions of the remaining sysops there, it's clear that she was showing too much class to remain. --SpinyNorman 20:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Definitions of scientist?

Ripped Extract from CP:

2. Pick your two favorite scientists or mathematicians from the 1800s and explain what you like about them.

I greatly admire Thomas Edison for overcoming his and other people’s doubts and going after his dreams. What amazed me the most about him was that even though he was deaf, he invented many machines that only a person could enjoy with their ears. Many people do not want other people to enjoy something that they are not capable of enjoying themselves, but Thomas Edison was different. Marie Curie is greatly known for her discoveries and theories on radioactivity. She might have experienced discrimination from some of her colleges and friends because she was a woman and, at that period in time, some people believed that women were not as capable in different subjects as men. She did what she enjoyed and believed what was correct no matter what other people thought. What I found interesting was that she died by poisoning from her own lab. She was an amazingly ambitious woman who did not let anyone get in the way of her goals. (Veronika)

My favorites ... were the Wright brothers. The fact that two young men in the biking industry had the brains and determination to invent a machine that would be capable of lifting man into the skies is an inspiration to every single American. I am also impressed y the guts they had in selling their bike shop. (Cole)

As I understand it, these are the model answers for history homework. Do they even know what is defined as scientists?

(Thomas Edison definitely is NOT a Scientist, and the Wright brothers are probably classified as Engineers instead of scientists.) Thieh 23:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, does radiation sickness count as poisoning? Nitpicking, but I was always under the impression that being poisoned involved a foreign chemical being taken into the body rather than radiation being absorbed externally. And anyway, why is it "interesting" that her work killed her? The same could arguably be said about Truman Capote. Crundy 00:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You need to put it in proper anti-science thought. First off, there is the "study something that kills you" being ironic, and certainly more so than a black fly in one's chardonnay. Ohh - science is bad, it can kill you type thought. At the same time this is mixed with the respect for a martyr - dying for what one believes in (science, however misguided that may be - but that only makes the martyrdom all the more impressive). And so, this aspect of her life would be interesting to some. --Shagie 00:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think you are seriously nit picking highschool students. Remember, the students are not or at least "should not be" up for grabs at wigo nor for criticism. Students are not likely to understand your rather specialized understanding of scientist vs., lay inventor, much less "engineer". I was a sub for Highschool students, when doing my grad work, and this is pretty typical of how they take in and process more complex ideas that will be refined over the next 10 years. As for radiation, WikiPedia and web md both call it "radiation poisoning" with a secondary reference to sickness, not sure why you have issues with the term. --En attendant Godot_{"«I don't think in any language. I think in images. V.Nabokov»} 01:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

None of this makes sense, though. Any good YEC knows that radioactive decay barely happened up until the day we started using it to date things, so there would have been so little radiation it would barely have done anything to Curie. Clearly you haven't been reading your Bible, it's all in there. --Kels 01:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

But WFG, "these are the model answers for history homework" makes it a critique of Andy. ħuman 01:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

"Many people do not want other people to enjoy something that they are not capable of enjoying themselves" shows a distinct lack of understanding of how capitalism and marketing works. Andy is failing in teaching economics. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 06:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

"some people believed that women were not as capable in different subjects as men." Model answer that goes against Assfly's sexism. Netharian^{Cubicles are prisons!} 19:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Godspeed, JosephMac!

(Undo revision 658656 by TK (Talk) Please explain reversion.)

*dives for cover* --Sid 00:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... TK casually re-reverts after banning an IP range... of the Christian Outreach College. --Sid 00:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Blocked properly. --Sid 00:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

War on Language regarding World History homework model answers

Shouldn't the answers be at least edited?

Homework eleven

“”Verdun was struggle that basically accomplished nothing. It just took the lives of many men. The Germans were attacked Verdun, France. 220,000 soldiers died and double that number was wounded. This battle took about 10 months to finish.

—Nate

Homework five

“”... The Sunnis have controlled Saudi Arabia and Iraq while the Shiites control a majority of Iraq and Iran. ....

—Sandro

Homework Nine

(Q: Now that you've taken the midterm exam, how might you have prepared better? (5 words or less))

“”By focusing more on how the major empires correlated with one another.

—Jenna N.

Whoever put this up, look at WFG's comment above. Don't pick on the kids. Also, if these are fairly new, yes, they do edit them, they often add to them over several days. ħuman 01:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Take the piss out of Andy marking them as 100% without any comment on grammar/spelling if you must, but the kids are just that: kids.   ^Contribs_Talk 01:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wait... Why is Susan here? User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 01:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

SusanG eh? Somethings a foot.....oh wait, nope thats my hand. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 01:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Because Toast is trying to fix her internets? ħuman 01:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

EC Susan users her atheist powhaz to access the internet with her mind (like the Force!), thus circumventing computer problems. User:Theemperor/Sig/Sig 01:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Bopped a drollock: I was looking @ the move tab for non-sysops & forgot to log out & back in again. Silly, Silly.   ^Contribs_Talk 01:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Back in my new clothes. That feels better. _and marmite 01:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I put it up, because I expect Andy to edit the answers ("Model" answers are something one expects to have copying value), or at least put up edit marks on the answers so that it can be properly read. I am not picking on kids, I am simply picking on the problem of Andy being too lazy to put edit marks on the answers before releasiung them as "Model" (I don't rip them from individual answers, only from the model.) Thieh 01:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Also I have checked, only admins edited the model answer page (They choose which answers are included). Also, for the purpose of "newness", They have finish marking it, and the next assignment starts to be marked in 2 days. Thieh 01:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Still, we repeat, Please don't mock the children. Wait until Andy grades, and makes model answers, then mock him. ħuman 04:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I guess I'll check again after on the day of (the answers has to be final for studying purposes) their final exam which happens on May 21. Keep the fingers crossed. Thieh 06:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite:

Q: Now that you've taken the midterm exam, how might you have prepared better? (5 words or less))

A: Studying the model answers. (Sandro)

Riiiiigght. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 07:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

God. I never cease to be horrified by just how abysmal a teacher Schlafly is. His lectures are criminally full of errors. His assignments range from nonsense, to ideological purity tests, to repetitions of his latest dipshit theories. His responses range from "Great" to "Excellent! May use as model!" and provide absolutely no feedback, except if they disagree with his pet theories, in which case they are wrong without explanation. He tests entirely the wrong sort of "knowledge", desires no development of writing, reading comprehension, analytical, or argumentative skills. And on top of all of this, he thinks he's an absolutely fantastic teacher, singlehandedly getting his students into college while keeping addiction, depression, and mental disorders at bay.

I really wish we knew who these kids' parents were, so we could send them a "wake up" letter about Andy's methods of "teaching." Undoubtedly most all of them are fucking-nuts, but there's hope that at least one would actually look at what the guy is doing. Because if this is what passes for education online, I can hardly see how inclass would be any better. He'd espouse the same insane theories, inflate grades, give no attention to lecture accuracy, and be perfectly chivalrous. 07:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Amen to your first paragraph, in spades. As far as your second, one can only hope there is hope? PS, it's "fucknuts", not "fucking nuts". And the fucknut parents love the Jesus their kids are being taught. And the racism, the USA-centrism, etc. ħuman 07:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Am I the only one who find it weird?

Model answer of Economic homework Ripped extracted from CP

5. Suppose the government limits the supply of Toyota cars that can be imported in 2008 to a certain quota. What effect does this have on the supply curve, and on the equilibrium price? Who is helped by this import quota, and who is hurt? Be as specific as possible. Import quotas cause the supply curve to shift upward, and for the equilibrium where supply meets demand to shift to less quantity at a greater price. the consumers are hurt by import quotas, and everyone pays more for the cars and some people who wanted the car at its lower, free market price, cannot buy it at the higher price. Sellers of Toyota cars are helped because they make bigger profits per car sold, although they cannot sell as many as before.

Edited with link:

The method "with liberal bias": The consumer surplus and producer surplus occupy different regions when the quota is imposed.

The Way CP did it: The upward shifting of the supply curve implies(As supply curve is determined by cost+"normal" profit) that the total cost producing the goods (at the quantity indicated) increased.

Apparently Andy seem to be trying too hard to teach something that he is not qualify with. Thieh 09:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you rewrite, perhaps provide links, so we can follow your point? ħuman 07:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

SCOTUS wigo

Has no CP link... please to try harder. ħuman 03:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

...oops. right with you. Amin7b5 03:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. ħuman 04:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. You're not nearly as big of a prick as everyone makes you out to be. Amin7b5 04:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The lurkers are impressed with how big a prick I am in pmail! Wait... ħuman 05:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

hahaha what? Human is not a prick? He is a massive prick, just look at him hanging from this African dude.....Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 04:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wood carving depicting human hanging from a proud African

I'd like to say how much I love David Souter and will miss him. Sniffles.-Diadochus 04:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, he hates Washington and has just been waiting to get out, and back to his cozy NH bachelor digs... Hopefully, Obama will pick someone smart and good, since it's virtually impossible for his pick to be blocked. ħuman 05:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It always amuses me when conservatives refer to Souter et al as "leftist/liberal", 'cuz when Souter was nominated he was considered moderately conservative, and replaced a jurist far far far to the left of anyone on the court now. I'd like Obama to appoint a young-ish Brennan/Marshall type to balance out the Roberts/Alito/Scalia/Thomas wing (but I ain't holding my breath).--WJThomas 10:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I was surprised when Hillary Clinton was appointed Secretary of State. I figure she'd be more qualified for the Supreme Court (or Attorney General). I thought John Edwards was a likely Court candidate, too, till he ruined his political career. MDB 14:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Foxtrot

I notice that good old cp:User_talk:Foxtrot hasn't edited since April 9th, 4 days before the senseless burning of the Riemann Integral article. I wonder if he has finally had enough? Not that I have any sympathy for the prick. I get a warm glow of purest evil every time the tables are turned on someone like Foxtrot. Quick to use his special powers to bully other editors, not so happy when the bigger bully-boys turn around to do the same to him. JoeDuffy 07:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Submissive TK?

I'm sure Andy will be thrilled to know what other forums his beloved TK hangs out on. (ah, I love the sound of webstalking in the morning). Just have a read of this piece of weirdness. (and yes, the AIM account is Terry's). I have no idea what the rest of the forum is about, but Terry in a cage? Oh, were that it was true. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

That was posted before he moved to Nevada with his dear old ma. I believe the 92270 was his ZIP code at the time. Some extracts from the Hot-or-Not board postings would reveal many more similar juicy morsels. TK just another Christian, conservative "swinger". Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 08:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The fact that he is a hot or not admin still freaks me out in itself. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It shouldn't. I've said before, he appears very much like a classic sociopath, and one hallmark is the ability to be very charming and convincing if it serves their purposes. And those purposes are whatever interests them at the moment. --Kels 13:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I hate you PsyGremlin. Reading that shit made me want to poke my eyes out and fill my orbital sockets with lye so nothing could ever live there. TK - when you're doing stuff that like, it's best to keep it to private fora like IM and whatnot. Oh, and go fuck yourself. Good thing CP doesn't punish people for what they do on other websites and is so consistent about this rule. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 14:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I just threw up a little in my mouth. Behold, TK's sexboard. Someone go join so I don't have to. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 15:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you can only imagine what's beyond that point. Bondage? Goats? HARD GAY!? --Kels 18:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Back to ClementB's block

Did anyone notice this series of rangeblocks?

• 20:20, 29 April 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked ClementB (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) ‎ ()
• 20:18, 29 April 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked 219.149.102.0/24 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (account creation disabled) ‎ (Chinanet Hostmaster, Beijing, China (ClementB, and others))
• 20:10, 29 April 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked 92.50.64.0/18 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (account creation disabled) ‎ (IP of blocked vandal/troll/troublemaker: Unitymedia GmbH, Germany)
• 18:52, 29 April 2009 TK (Talk | contribs) blocked 85.25.0.0/16 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (account creation disabled) ‎ (Same IP(s) as previously blocked user(s): BSB Service GmbH is part of intergenia AG, Germany)

If one looks up the first two, they're for services in Hessen and Köln, which is likely where ClementB edits from. Then comes the mystifying Beijing block -- it could be that ClementB was using a sock, but this is likely just more deceit, so that TK could have something to accuse Clement with on his talk page message.

By the way, I have no idea how checkuser works, but assuing that TK was telling the truth about Beijing (*crickets*), how would he even know? And if ClementB already was editing from a valid account, what would be the reason for using a foreign ISP? Can anyone who knows more about this explain if there was any possibility for it to be true, or was TK obviously just making shit up for an excuse to ban?

Junggai 09:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

And by the way, notice that while TK accused ClementB of using multiple socks on the talk page message, the block reason didn't mention it. Junggai 09:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The words "truth" and "TK" do not belong in the same sentence. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 09:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I wouldn't try to read too much into anything he does. You'll just drive yourself round the bend.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 09:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's easy guys. Clement was from foreign. Beijing is foreign. What's not to understand? StarFish 10:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Given TK's xenophobia and hard-on for "multi-culturism", I wonder if Joaquin's getting sweaty palms. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Nah. JM's a fellow copy-paster and always kissed TK's feet. He'll be among the last men standing on CP as long as he doesn't actively speak out against TK. --Sid 13:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The checkuser may work, but TK's inferences from it do not. My TK induced ip block (no range-block, I'm pissed off about that) states that the IP is "Freedom2surf proxy", which it definitely isn't. JKirby 10:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

When I look up my work IP address it shows up as being in a completely different country a thousand miles away. The truth is that many companies outsource their IT, and security issues may require specialist content filtering or threat detection. Our payroll is handled in Poland and IT help desks are located in Kuala Lumpur, Bangalore and Wythenshaw. The truth is that all the CP sysops are IT-challenged and cannot understand how the intertubes works. It's like the old fable of the blind men trying to determine the nature of an elephant by feeling different parts of its anatomy.

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen.

Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 11:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I know It's Been Discussed Before...

I know this is nothing new but I think this is just astonishing. It's up there with "2 meters" and was created by the same person of course. I really think we let this article off the hook far too easily. If ever I'm fealing a little bit down or fed up it always cheers me up. It's problems are legion. Amazing. Well done Ed: you make parody impossible. StarFish 13:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ugh. I need a shower after reading that. Taytopacket 14:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Why is there no encyclopedia based on the assumption that Star Trek is factual and scientifically accurate? --Just passing by 15:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I find it odd that of the few Star Trek (TOS) episodes that Eddybaby or anybody else has put up on CP, they have not yet put up "Bread and Circuses." This episode actually mentions Christ. Perhaps Eddybaby got bored...Jimaginator 16:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My favorite part of that whole article is that, due to Ed;s live blogging, a person who isn't a trekkie will have NO IDEA what the episode is actually about... I had to go to a Star Trek Wiki to get a full synopsis. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 17:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, you can do that... if you figure out what series the article's talking about. Flare^Talk 17:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Or that it's even a tv show. again, unless you know the context.--En attendant Godot_{"«I don't think in any language. I think in images. V.Nabokov»} 17:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, even if you're not a Trekkie, mentioning Kirk is a give away that it's the original... But better than this POS from ED is This wonderful bio on Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire where you don't know her position, her information or anything about her other than she's a married catholic democrat and is a DIRTY LAWBREAKING RACIST LIBERAL!!!!!! SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 18:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Kirk's in the movies, too. Could be one of them ;) ħuman 19:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

TerryH: Ayn Rand

The way TerryH is going through Ayn Rand, you'd think Atlas Shrugged was a history book rather than Fiction. _and marmite 14:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's such a massive sense of relief to find a book that says that it's OK to be self centred and mean and that you don't have to worry about those poor people because it's all their own fault that the desire for Shatless Rugged to be true overcomes objectivity. Silver Sloth 14:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

According to IMDB there's a movie in the pipeline which I'm sure will be very popular with the teabaggers. Maybe Ken is advising TerryH on likely linking to the movie on the internet and and attracting scores of fellow teabaggers on the internet so that they will become aware of Conservapedia's Atlas Shrugged article on the internet. Could the works of Ayn Rand rival the behemoth that is homosexuality at CP? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 16:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, once you've accepted one book uncritically as fact, you might as well open the door for more. Me, I steadfastly maintain that Horton Hears a Who is an unquestionable tract on physics, cosmology and biology baraminology. --Kels 16:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

An Atlas Shrugged movie!? Awesome, the perfect cure for my girlfriend's insomnia. EternalCritic 17:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I am open minded to the idea that Horton could have heard his Who, but I remain dubious that science never found it. That proves that science is incapable of being Open Minded, don't you know.--En attendant Godot_{"«I don't think in any language. I think in images. V.Nabokov»} 17:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if Conservatives will forget to go to a Shatlas movie the way they've avoided going to other so-called Conservative movies in the past. --Kels 18:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Horton hears a who is nothing but Liberal claptrap. An overweight elephant who hears voices should be put away, not celebrated as a hero. Furthermore, this idea that a person is a person would be an excellent motto, but that horrible Liberal Dr. Seuss sent nasty letters to pro-life groups that used it on their letterhead and demanded they stop using it. Anyone who thinks Horton hears a who is worth the paper it's printed on is deluding themselves and should open their minds to conservative ideas, which prevent mental disorders. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 18:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I imagine that they are hoping to capitalise on the movie so that they can suck up the Google searches nearer the time. So I expect to see a lot more extensively boring articles about the various characters. However, you really need eye-candy to grab visitors' attention. With no previous adaptations which they could copythieve to illustrate them, can we expect them to skim the discussion boards for ideas and post pictures of Cate Blanchett, Daniel Day-Lewis or Paul Verhoeven who are being suggested as possible participants? Alternatively I could see them asking Karajou to get out his sketch pad like he did for the Sabre-tooth cat and make something up.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 18:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not all that bad for an amateur, probably using someone else's work as a model. Or maybe, it's a self-portrait. --Kels 20:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Objectivists tend to be virulently anti-religious. Seeing them argue with Andy could be amusing. --Gulik 20:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's [NOT] another Schlafly Essay

I'm not sure why but this reminds me of the test you get outside Scientology centres. Go Schlafly you dark lord of Xenu! StarFish 15:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Correction. I just realised this is in fact very old. Sorry. StarFish 15:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's always good to look at the oldies but goodies. There's probably quite a few who haven't seen it. _and marmite 15:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow. That makes that whole "worlds smallest political quiz", you know, the one where all the questions are slanted to make you a libertarian, look positively objective and useful. Indeed, I haven't seen it before. Som much stuff just gets burried on wikis. ^sshole 16:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Quantifying Obsession

Quantifying Obsession

Okay, so I got bored a few days ago. Like, really bored. And then I noticed Karajou adding to the Batman article on CP.

"Hm, wow, that article sure looks long! I wonder if it's longer than some other important article."

And so it began. I got out Paparazzi and made a few snapshots of articles. And then I resized and rotated them and ordered them by visual length (as opposed to "number of characters" or whatever).

The results?

• Alger Hiss and Korean Airlines Flight 007 are longer than two of Ken's pet articles. The third pet article still comes out on top, though.
• The Obama article is longer than the Jesus one.
• The McCain article is smaller than Obama's, but longer than the ones on George W. Bush or the Bible.
• Bias in WP is longer than the article about Jesus. In related news, Batman's entry is a little bit longer than the one on God. Think about that one for a minute.
• The article about Michael Chertoff doesn't even fill one page (the left-hand navigation column is longer than the article)
• The Alger Hiss reference section is longer than the Jesus article.

(All snapshots taken late April 29 at a fixed width of 1000px.) --Sid 16:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I find it hilarious that they've spent more time breaking down Obama than Jesus Christ, The Most Important Person Who Has Ever Live. Also that God is equal to Batman. --CWaddell 17:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The only possible thing that could improve this graph is to add women in pants as the very last column. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 17:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Blasphemy! The Bat is much better than God. At least his fans are willing to admit that he's a work of fiction.--199.20.64.195 17:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant work, Sid. So what happens when TK's block list is longer than the longest article on CP? I'm actually a little worried about what might happen when his block list contains more bits than there are atoms in the universe.--Simple 17:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yay! Richard Dawkins trumps God! Maybe include creation/YEC article to compare to evolution? Thieh 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

If given enough time, Batman could make up a plan to take down God should the two ever meet. ENorman 17:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

And if you close close enough, you can see all the little pictures of Hitler! ^sshole 18:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

This is really incredible. Really. Corry 18:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Great work Sid. It looks as though 45% of the AHiss article is references. I would also have liked to compare those with Ken's user page before he was embarrassed into deleting it. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 18:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe that there is a full-length screenshot of Ken's userpage somewhere around here. Sid could plunder it and add it to the chart. Bluefish

<- Well done! I really like it --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 19:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Sid, if you'll follow me to the Saloon Bar, there's a round of drinks for you and your friends on me. In fact, I'm buying - everyone to the Saloon Bar! DogP 20:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I am working on a spoof/parody

It's sitting at here, and I need opinions/inputs, as a whole and specifically #'s 7,8,20,27,29,31,34-36.

Original Article can be found here.

and where should I put it when I am done? Thieh 17:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Considering it's a rewording of the CP article, probaly in the Conservapedia space when it's done. The strikeout thing makes it clear that it's just parodying the logic used on the original. ^sshole 17:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I am having problems doing #'s 7,8,20,27,29,31,34-36. Requesting help/input please. (I am trying my best to keep the words on the article in CP through italics(I can shange it to underline) and strikeouts so that it looks similar) Thieh 18:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What about this:

35. It is okay to demean an African-American if they are a conservative, but if theyyou are a liberal then you are a racist.

36. It is okay to demean a woman if they are a conservative, but if they are liberal then you are sexist.

--GTac 18:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, 34-36 done. Thieh 18:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done except #7 and #27; I have problem understanding "switching from heterosexual to homosexual is customary". Thieh 19:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget a permalink to the version you copied to build this, noting the date of retreieval. ħuman 19:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Is Andy a closet racist?

I am really curious. I usually give people the benefit of the doubt, but I really question it here. He always rails against "Political correctness" and "Anti-American multiculturalism" and whatnot, which in itself isn't bad if backed up with specific actions and constructive criticisms, but being against them has become a codeword for racism. Ask Racist groups why they are racist and they will probably say "Because I am trying to protect our heretiage (SP?) and culture from those who are trying to taint it". The fact that Andy seems to hate Political correctness and Multiculturism so much, attacks them with so much passion, yet never offers legitimate criticism of their social impact, makes me think that he may be a closet racist. What do you guys think? Oh, and what made me finally put this on here is the news thing about Youth for Western Civilization. --Passerby25 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What? he hasn't come out of the closet for that yet? Thieh 17:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he was ever in the closet with respect to racism. ^sshole 17:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I gave up the last remnants of the idea that "political-correctness is good" the day I was told that if a woman stumps for creationism, telling her how idiotic those ideas are is "gender-oppression." ListenerX^TalkerX 18:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Not even close to the closet in regards to racism. The only reason Stormfront doesn't link repeatedly to Conservapedia is because a) Andy keeps on calling Nazis and Neo-Nazis liberals liebruls, and b) Stormfront probably hasn't heard of Conservapedia, at least not in any substansive way (although funnily enugh they have heard of Drizzt Do-Urden {they are against, because he's black (actually a blue black colour to his skin, but these bigoted idiots are like Andy in not letting facts stop them in the middle of a good hate session)}, and Heroquest (they are for, because all the heroes are white, and anything with an alternate skin colour in Heroquest is a legitimate target for a good lynching beating and killing)). That Nazis are into one of my favourite games of my childhood is just wrong.--199.20.64.195 18:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, does anyone care for "political correctness"? I can't think of a single person I know that is "for" it per se. ^sshole 18:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Comedian Stewart Lee does a good piece in defence of political correctness, if you have 9 minutes [4]. Taytopacket 19:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Andy isn't a closet anything: he's avowedly racist, he just uses code words, or alternate ethnic groups. He's against "Muslims" - specifically, one black Muslim - but not racist. Wink?-Diadochus 19:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You missed out that said black Muslim is a lib-burr-rul, which is enough to make Mr. Schlafly oppose him whatever his race or religion... ListenerX^TalkerX 19:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

For me, it was when he was discussing that Native Americans looked nothing like Asians (actually, if you compared Siberian peoples with Native Americans, they DO look a lot alike), but it wasn't even that, horrific and stupid as it was. In that same conversation, Andy said that intelligence was an inherent racial trait... you get the idea. Photovoltaic Array 19:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Andy is racist per-se, but in attacking what he perceives as liberalism he is willing to consider no attack out of bounds. So using attacks that would be considered racist (like calling Obama an Affirmative Action President) are ok in Andy's book because Andy doesn't hate Obama for being black, he hates him for being liberal. All that being said, I expect Andy is of the sort that believes that people ought to stick to their own kind. I expect a lot of our parents probably are like that (I know mine are). Stile4aly 20:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he is overtly racist, but he has some issues against minorities for sure... Consider he always harps on how some cultures are better than others... Oh yeah. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 20:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

He's definitely not overtly racist, and he's taken a few stands against racist postings in the past. I'd say he's clearly got some issues, but it's not a cudgel I'd choose to beat him with, myself. However, you can have either my Xenophobic Cudgel, my Stupid Cudgel, my Bigot Cudgel, or my Statistics Cudgel, none of which I'm planning to use over the weekend, if you wish. DogP 20:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not exactly CP...

but still Ed-related, On Wikipedia Ed created an entire template whose only purpose is to contain a single quote which will likely only ever be used on one article. For less than three hours. Oh, and in case anyone had almost forgotten the number of articles Ed has "started" which haven't been deleted, Ed reminds us, in the aftermath of his "Newbie club" being moved into userspace, that it's 1,100. Which is good, as I'd almost forgotten. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 18:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think a more interesting statistic would be how many of those articles still contain a single word of what Ed originally wrote? I think I'll baggsie zero in the sweepstake now. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I remember not that long ago he was bragging about this template that he'd started that was still in use all over people's userpages. He neglected to mention that other people had to step in to make it work properly, and a great many more to make it into the version that's widely used. Ed didn't do much of anything except leave a mess for others to clean up. --Kels 18:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was the "age" template, I remember looking at the edit history. Ed stubbed it, with a non-functional version of course, and other people actually "wrote" it. ħuman 20:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. He "started" them, but very early on they changed majorly. The very first article (that still exists, anyway. I'm not an admin so I can't see deleted contribs) he created was, unsurprisingly, Intelligent design, which claimed it to be "a theory of evolution". The next day, the page was completely revamped. His second new page was "wp:Evolved", which contained the gem "Darwinism, generally referred to as "the theory of evolution" as if it were the main (and correct) one". A couple of hours later, someone attempted a minor NPOV edit. Ed later added the curiously-worded "About one in ten Americans believes in Darwinism". It was then redirected to Evolution. I can't be bothered typing up the articles created since then, but they're all hilarious. Also, I like how he mentioned the 1,100 number in the most recent article he created, too. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 18:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ed's such an idiot. ħuman 20:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't decide whether it's stupidity or dishonety, actually. I mean, he could think he's totally awesome, and people wanna know about it. That would be stupidity. Dishonesty would be him using that as a way to intimidate newer editors who might resist his little POV insertions, in a "well, I'VE done this much, what have YOU done?" sort of way. --Kels 20:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hanlon's Razor. That and he likes waving around his e-penis. ENorman 20:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it is blinkered idiocy. Ironically, there are several Ed things that I do habitually here - and wince each time, but I still do them. One is to create a stub and promote it somewhere, to get something written "the easy way", like I did with that racist campus group the other day. Even lazier is to say "kan we haz artikle" and let other people do all the work, to say "someone please archive this pig" on here (OK, to be fair a few weeks ago I paid my dues by doing a handful of needed archives myself, for once). He has an odd habit, that in some ways is "like" leadership, and even perhaps has value on a wiki - like the "age" template. He had, and still has, no idea how to make something like that work, but at least he came up with the "idea" of a template that, given a birth date as input, would return the current age of a person. But he is far lazier than I, with his crummy stubs. Also remember that back in the day, he got a lot of positive feedback on WP, so it probably permanently affected his wiki-self-image. Just my .06 or .07 or so. ħuman 21:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. . .

Google for Homosexuality. Evolution. Yes, I know. The articles are bad. But something inside of me doesn't like Conservapedia getting the top results for anything besides Conservapedia or a pile of lies. Can't we do something about this? -- 20:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

The only thing that will probably come of this is Ken gloating on another one of his Red Telephone pages. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do you keep posting CP stuff here? There's a talk page for it, you know. Please move this... ħuman 20:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

As most of us keep saying, this is excellent news. If you haven't figured it out yet CUR, "the best disinfectant is sunlight" or words to that effect. What we want to see is CP's Evolution and Teh Gayz article at #1 on Google. Nothing - NOTHING - could strengthen the cause against them more. Remember the average member of the public is an all right sort really, and most of them when confronted with these articles, packed to the gills with batshittery, will go "Oh. Well, I think these particular people are CRAZY, I definitely can't side with their arguments" and move on. You think the TimeCube belief system is increasing or decreasing around the world? DogP 20:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

What always works to cheer me up is to type 'online encyclopedia' into Google and see how far down the list Conservapedia is. There are times when Conservapedia doesn't even make it into the search results, which is always cool.--199.20.64.195 21:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)