Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?

Template:AOTW Navigation As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting on existing topics. This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts. Thank you.

When adding a link to Conservapedia that is not already on What is going on at CP? please place <capture></capture> around the link.

For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the saloon bar.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: Archive list

Conservapedia day awards (sticky)

Okay, I had loads of fun organising this last year and being the sad, lonely person I am, I have decided to kick this off again. So here we have The 2009 Conservapedia day awards. Please fight amongst yourselves. - π 11:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks like the arguing is going to take place on talk page again. - π 13:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Voting is open on the on the debate page, show your support for you favourite candidates on the talk page. - π 04:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Do I have to? ħuman 05:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

No you don't have to, but you have free will to reject it. Do so and you will be discredited. Godspeed. - π 09:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The weakly Toon

It is funny. They really DO feel persecuted. --Ireon 16:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

What the FUCK? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

..Why do the liberals talk in southerner accents?.. --GTac 17:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Where is Kels??? Can't she make a response to this? KELS!!!! ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 17:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Other than some elements suffering from serious Fridge Logic (the atheists should better look for land since they don't believe the flood was global, the Ark was supposedly fairly eco-friendly and back-to-nature, and God apparently missed all those people in his kill-them-all flood), this made me laugh in a good way. Kudos for that, Kara. Further approval because several people will hopefully go "Wait... DINOSAURS ON THE ARK?" at this, making them aware of just how weird The Biblical Worldview is. --Sid 17:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

That was one of the funniest thing I have seen from CP in a very, very long time. I love the artwork. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I like how they assume that if atheists came across the global flood and the ark in real life, we'd still be screaming for evidence of the global flood and the ark. They really don't get it do they? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 20:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Karajou, and people like him, don't understand the idea of physical or even probable evidence. He thinks that scientists have made up their mind and no amount of evidence will change thier minds. The irony is that, if the evidnece really supported the idea, scientists would accept it. That being said, I love how the "e" looks like a "z" dzny dzny dzny SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 20:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

"Deny deny deny!" I'm glad Kara made it clear that it's a boat full of atheists, because you could be forgiven for thinking that the CP sysops had gone on a cruise. EddyP 21:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I hope he keeps it up and it becomes a weekly thing. We should compliment him on his art and to tell him to start a webcomic. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: It is going to be a weekly thing. Also, MarkGall has clearly outdone himself there. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Freakin' awesome. Conservapedia - the webcomic. I can't wait. Will he discuss vidja games as well? --䷉䷻䷶䷈䷰䷒䷰䷈䷶䷈䷡^䷶䷀䷵䷥

Wow, what a drop in quality from last week. Conservapedian's really don't understand humour (which is odd seeing as Christ invented it...). I do like that implied by Karajou's "if libruls were around" hypothesis is the fact that we seem to have built sleek modern metal mechanically-driven ships, whereas Noah only managed to knock a few boards together.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 00:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Great point! That's those science-embracing lib-urr-ul idiots for you. It has made me think though; when the world flooded (undeniable), did no one else, at all, have a boat? DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 11:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I hope it really is a weekly thing; it will be like watching a car wreck. I assume Karajou tried to open strong by using his "best" ideas already. Seeing his second and third tier efforts are bound to be downright painful. Though I imagine this will be a "weekly" comic in the way they have a "daily" bible verse. DickTurpis 02:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Forget weekly on CP.... Lets burn socks and get Karajou to submit his work to the syndicates. I wanna see this shit in my local paper. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 04:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

By far the best bit is the first panel.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

EXCELLENT. --䷉䷻䷶䷈䷰䷒䷰䷈䷶䷈䷡^䷶䷀䷵䷥

My opinion of MarkGall is becoming clearer and clearer. --Ireon 11:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

He is particularly skilled at making people feel good about themselves and, as a result, trust him more for it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I would like to point out Karajou's tacit admission that liberals, atheists, and environmentalists were spared death, thus making them worthy and righteous. Corry 23:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point. They also seem to have nice hi-tech tug boats, perhaps this is his subconscious speaking. But personally, I quite like the comic, it's quite funny if you don't let ideology get in the way. ^narchist 15:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I had a nice comment here, but I hit the wrong button and wikEd ate it. Quick summary: Art: The lettering is pretty illegible. Comic Sans must be annihilated. Lines must be antialiased, because this isn't 1990s any more. The artwork is reasonably clear and straightforward and suffers only from a slight does-its-jobbiness. Writing: The message it tries to send is very confusing to me at 2 AM with no coffee. <shamelessplug>Only really commenting here because the name "Kara" rang the wrong bell for me the whole time. I was thinking of my own webcomic.</shamelessplug> --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 23:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Fresh droppings observed

I'm not much of a CP-chaser, but it's raining and dark... Andy's given us a new toy to play with! ħuman 22:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

*shudder* - π 22:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Clearly feeling the need for affirmation after the spanking he received from Ms Sorenson. And I see it didn't take long before the New Bastardised English version became the basis of his warblings. Still, at least it means somebody reads it. --Psygremlin講話 22:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Well whatcha know.--4perf 22:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Lovely. Once again she bends Andy over her knee. Actually, that analogy is conjuring up horrible images, so I'm not going to say anymore. Surely a blocking is looming... Andy can't let a girl show him up. We get another non-answer in reply. --PsygremlinSnakk! 22:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

This is blossoming into something beautiful. Andy pulled a value out of his ass, got called on it, and is flailing wildly. Banhammer soon? Corry 23:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I really don't know what's up with this. She's been all up in Andy's shit since Wednesday and still she lives. I've basically been hitting reload on her history page for three days now, waiting for the moment to come. Also? Reading this hurts my brain now, but I think I like it. --4perf 23:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps this is where Andy's dark void, both the one behind him and the one in his head, got the 43 arc-seconds. Careful observations of Mercury showed that the actual value of the precession disagreed with that calculated from Newton's theory by 43 arc seconds per century. Also, is it me or is "The theory of relativity developed to explain the then-observed shift in Mercury's perihelion of 43 arc-seconds per century." not even a sentence. Great scholarship Andy. Netharian^{Cubicles are prisons!} 23:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't speak Intellectual Cripple, what does this whole "5599.7 Mercury" nonsense mean? --Kels 00:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Did I mention I've basically been stalking Ksorenson? All is made clear.--4perf 00:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I call shenanigans. Something is very very fishy about KSorenson.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 00:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah. Mah. Gah. "Their position is uncertain until observed, for example." Isn't the position of everything uncertain until it's observed? --4perf 00:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Also, Andy gives us an insight into his "scholarship:" The physics journals all seem to require payment for access... Google returns fragments from limited-access journals. He seems to be admitting that he simply Googles phrases, then gleans what he can from the bits and pieces of limited-access journal articles. It's like quote-mining; except instead of twisting the meaning of the whole by quoting an extract, he is inventing the meaning of the whole from knowledge of an extract.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 00:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, he's used that excuse before. Netharian^{Cubicles are prisons!} 01:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't he know about Google Scholar? It's great for snagging a pdf of an article from a journal that your uni is too cheap to subscribe to. Also, I would like to reiterate how amazing this convo is. "I have no ax to grind, but I am digging in my heels and grinding my ax. Free will, blah blah." Corry 02:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

What's the protocol on adding new elements to an existing WIGO? [1] --4perf 02:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Feel free. Add an UPDATE or something similar. Lolspeak seems to be falling out of fashion, but fashion is cyclical, so we might just be ripe for some moar, oh hai, and the like. Corry 02:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm with 4perf, with the not understanding why Andy hasn't banhammered, reverted and oversighted this stuff yet. I guess he can't do it now because it would be running away from a losing discussion even more obviously than he usually does it, but I don't get why she has been able to get this far. Anyone else would've been talk-talk-talk'd or "no substansive edits"ed out of there way, way before this point. 'Cos she really is hammering him, and is being pretty blunt about it. X Stickman 03:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm really not sure how far the "no substantive edits" thing would go, even in that place. Since signing up for the site on Wednesday she's totally rewritten the articles on gravitation and black hole (provoking fight #1 with Andy) and … I don't even know what to say about this. Didn't she even scold Andy once for not being substantive himself? Lemme look… Yeah, twice. Maybe those aren't substantive articles about how the Bible predicted the remote control, or how homosexuals are ten times as likely to get the hiccups, but … oh. Never mind. I see now exactly how he's going to banninate her. She's way too liberal for him. --4perf 03:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

He won't do any of that. When Andy is truly and utterly bodyslammed like this and made to look like the rank amateur he truly is, he will apply the Schlafly Slip and just walk away from the dialogue claiming he's got better things to be doing, like proving the existence of the Ark or something. He might try and catch her out with a quick accusation of her desire to ban classroom prayer though, she needs to watch out for that one, it tends to come from out of left field very rapidly when you weren't expecting it, and there can be a terrible tendency to try and respond, which means instant death. Beware the Schlafly Reversal, Kate! DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 03:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC)I stick with my opinion. Since she has been there Kate has engaged Andy several times, calling him a liar more than once. Not only has Andy not said a peep, she has not been banned or harassed by the rearguard. Also odd is that she is staying there at all. Most reasonable people quickly realize how batshit insane the whole site is, and move on. The fact that she is staying put, and that Andy is putting up with her, suggest that Kate isn't all she seems.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 03:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

She is obviously either a parodist playing dangerously, or has a real-life connection to Andy in some way. Etc 04:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Or Kate is the type who after being slighted like Andy saying she's closed-minded and only believes what she does to suck up to professors to get her degree, refuses to back down. However, she hasn't realized that Andy's mind is so warped reason doesn't work anymore. ENorman 04:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I vote lonely unemployed middle-aged guy with too much free time on his hands, a compulsive need for human contact and a Rain Man-like understanding of theoretical physics and google-fu. --4perf 04:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh! Or maybe A's had an attack of conscience, and done some reading, and Ksorensen is his own sockpuppet! Think about it. This way he gets to atone for his crimes against intellectual humanity, AND save face at the same time! Oh, Andy! You devious devil! --4perf 04:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I am warm and wet that I actually started a decent thread on talk wigo cp. I am so happy now. And reading many new links.... 04:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I love this - she's pointed out in so many ways why Andy is wrong and exactly where he's making his mistake and he's still bleating on - and not changing his mind. Wonderful display of just how closed his mind is and what a deceitful little prick he is. Sadly, she's been silenced by night editing. --PsygremlinTala! 07:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The way Andy keeps saying that it's typical of liberals to stick up for relativity is just... beautiful. KSorenson comes out with facts that demolish Andy's statements; all he does is bleat on about relativity reducing interest in the bible; but it's her sticking up for an indefensible point of view?

I'm not sure there's a Real World connection between the two: Andy's "or may I call you Kate?" would be out of place if they knew each other off-site. That just makes the absence of a banhammer even more odd though. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 08:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I can only assume the "may I call you Kate" comes from Andy reading TWIGO. Hi Andy! --Psygremlin講話 09:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

My favorite part of the whole discussion is when Andy says "antifying_Order&diff=next&oldid=720273 It chills progress by intimidating people against criticizing it. which is Andy in a nut shell. --Opcn 12:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

She must know Andy in real life. Perhaps she's a "true believer" who happens to like physics and dislike cheap lies?-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 17:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that this is the end times of conservapedia. They're finally going to come out and admit they were trolls all along. There are only 3 people there at all, two parodists and JPatt who thinks everything is real, and the two parodists are playing all the other roles, including KSorenson. Of course, for all this to make sense, Rationalwiki must also be part of the conspiracy. All of you except me are in on it. This is how conspiracy theories work. I'm onto you. I'm onto all of you. X Stickman 18:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Was surprised to realise that KSorenson has not been blocked yet after going through the conversation. Usually one of the cronies would banhammer her by this time. Are they also enjoying it... or does she have some privilege or status unknown to us? Also how did he start calling her by first name?^{— Unsigned, by: Buscombe / talk / contribs}

See here.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 20:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Rear guard be damned, Koward is encouraging her. --Kels 19:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I like her articles and explanations. I'm actually learning something on CP... ħuman 22:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Oooo, it burns the eyes. "This disorder may be what underlies an interpretation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, or the impossibility perpetual motion machines. The disorder is not well-quantified." You dipshit, Andy. Take a book and look up "statistical mechanics." Sterile hub cap 23:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

This post (best part was copypasted into the edit summary) made me facepalm in real life. Also some groantastic stuff added to the essay itself ("order could be quantified as roughly proportional to the inverse of the surface area of the smallest sphere that encloses the objects"). --Sid 23:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Very subtle, but I think that was the Schlafly Slip. 23:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

"I don't want to perpetuate this debate" - that's yer Schalfly Sip right there folks. Show's over, shutters about to be rolled down, sorry, no, we're finished serving, time now gentlemen please, have you no homes to go to? DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 02:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

And finally, the "moron edit comment that has nothing to do with the topic": "(If empirically the promotion of relativity leads people away from the Bible, would you still support promoting relativity?)" And if it doesn't? Andy, do you even know what "empirically" means? ħuman 03:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if one thing that bothers Andy is that Relativity, created by some atheist Jew, is "crowding out" the theory put forward by that Godly Christian creationist, Newton. It sounds like the sort of bizarrely strained logic Andy would find reasonable. --Kels 04:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's that, but there's also the really big deal: Andy understands Newtonian mechanics, and he learned it in high school [from a good Christian teacher]. Andy, on the other hand, does not understand Relativity, special or general, at all. Note how a few minutes ago he called them "relativists", also (I think). So it's a perfect storm: he doesn't understand it, he conflates it with "moral relativism", he doesn't understand it, it was an atheist Jew, and he doesn't understand it; also, he thinks it's a religion - and he still doesn't understand it. ħuman 04:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wildly off the topic, but I'm really not sure Einstein was an atheist. I only know a little about him, but he's always struck me as sort of a modern-day deist. Sort of an "everything before the universe was created is none of my business, believe what you want" kind of guy. Anyway, have you guys been watching this? It's gone completely off the topic of Mercury and turned into a late-night stoned bull-session between college freshmen. --4perf 04:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"Einstein was an atheist" is in comparison to "Einstein was a creationist". And, yes, we are all reloading the last diff of that talk page with bated breath. ħuman 06:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, well, sure. By Andy's standards, Jesus was an atheist. Or at least a liberal, which is close enough. --4perf 06:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

This is practically begging for the banhammer. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 13:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

scientology (the study of truth)

Why did no one call me to tell me that this was the featured article, I was surfing on the kindle just now and found it, holy cow! At least someone managed to tack a pseudoscience tag on that sucker, but the blurb reads like the Scientology brochure that I am sure it was plagiarized from. Sorry if this has been discussed at length and I just missed it. I have a hard spot in my heart for Scientology (Want to know why? Look at the reviews for Dianetics on Amazon). --Opcn 12:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand why they wouldn't hate Scientology. Broccoli 16:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

A Less Vain Andy?

It's been a long time since we have seen one of these.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 16:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to remember him studiously avoiding mention of The Numbers when Operation Moist Pages successfully pushed it over the hundred million mark first time 'round. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 02:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Keeping the Sabbath safe and warm and dry

Doesn't Andy live in Bergen County? ħuman 19:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

This might not be the best place to ask this question, but what's with all the bans of car sales on Sunday? Is it to prevent car salesmen from telling porkies on the Day of the Lord? Strelok 22:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I think he actually lives in Chester, which is in Morris County, and close to where I grew up. I apologize for growing up in the same county as Andy. Not everyone in that county is like that. Hell, from what my boss told me, Chester is pretty liberal for a Morris County town (I think because of its historic nature; neighboring Mendham is Republican McMansion subdivision city). --Crazyswordsman 22:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Strelok, the modern argument is generally in order to give people a sure day off each week without worrying about their competition being open. Car salespeople tend to work from open to close seven days a week, since they depend on commissions, and if you're not there, someone else sells the car. Of course the old reason was to keep god's day nice and shiny. I like the exploration of the conflict this creates for those whose Sabbath is observed on Saturday living in such regions... And CSM, thanks, oh well, I was wrong. ħuman 22:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Negative, he lives in Far Hills, Somerset County. Up 206 about 30 minutes from me. Senator Harrison 01:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Black Holes

On a related note, What is the current evidence for black holes? I thought their presence have been confirmed already.. through indirect evidence like gravitational lensing and other evidence. can someone with the knowledge comment please?

Black holes have all but been "seen". Read here plus there are many more evidence's. Ace^McWicked 20:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course NASA is your source. Please, please open your mind, Ace McWicked, for your sake. I think you must have been taught that black holes exist by your liberal science teachers as a child and taken that load of liberal claptrap hook, line, and sinker, but we're going to tell the truth here and won't censor criticism of the Theory of Relativity, which may have been exciting almost 100 years ago, but fails to provide any data that's accurate within the margin of error. Godspeed. Aschlafly

If you knew that asking people to open their minds would distract them from reading the Bible, would you still do it? Are you unwilling to deny that black holes aren't impossible, despite the billions of dollars spent on starships and the men to crew them? That sounds like liberal deceit to me. --4perf 20:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

"Beat it, Satan, as it is written, one shall worship the Lord, and only Him shall one serve."

He's managed to get more undignified language into a Bible translation than any parodist. This guy's a gem. 23:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I was about to castigate you for exposing parody, but then I saw that it was Andy's doing, and I felt a pang of Poe. --Opcn 23:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Where, if anywhere, then can parody be exposed? These Satan-worshiping sinners need to have their evil works exposed! SoldierInGodsArmy 21:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

(Assf)lies makes baby Jesus cry. MDB 23:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps he just is memorializing Michael Jackson. Sterile hub cap 23:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn, Sterile beat me to it. I was gonna say "who knew Jesus was a huge M.J. Fan." SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 00:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The Conservapedia Bible Retranslation Project: Transforming Ancient Literature Into Crispy Word Salad For Under A Buck! DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 02:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Why is the second bit of the quote barely altered? If you preserve the tone he starts out with, you end up with:

"Beat it Satan. Jesus is the fucking daddy. He makes all different styles of drum n' bass."

And I approve this. --Mei II 02:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

What happened to the good, traditional translation, "Hey Satan, GTFO!"? --Kels 03:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Can somebody with an active sock over there have a look at this? I want so badly to ask him how anyone can set out rewriting the bible with "humility." --4perf 03:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

We should put together a comparison of the Joseph Smith Bible (the last large scale rewrite by someone with no linguistic expertise) with the Andy Schlafley Bible. For example:

• Andy's rewrite of John 1:1 "In the beginning was perfect order, and this perfection was with God, and this perfection was God."
• Smith's rewrite of John 1:1: "In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God."

You'd hardly imagine they were "translating" the same document. Or rather, you'd think people would realize they're not "translating" any document, but riffing on one. - Poor Excuse 13:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The Street Bible FTW! ^narchist 14:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, though, isn't that the problem you run into when you're translating any ancient work? I'd imagine that it wouldn't be too difficult to find two radically different English language versions of The Iliad or Beowulf, either. MDB 14:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is the problem. That's why translators tend to work in groups, have some training in the languages they're translating and sometimes put forewords to describe their philosophy on translation. I read one for The Prince which was quite interesting and revealed a lot with respect to how a translation works; it was stuff like "the original author used word x here, but in context it means y, which is why the translation is different in this other context and I translated it as word z". But lets face it, 90% of this isn't coming from an ancient language but by these guys taking the KJV and fucking with the thees and thous. ^narchist 14:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

More like fucking with the language in general. When the CBP is finished, the end result is going to be an incoherent word-salad. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

'It flew like a spear'

Nothing, and I mean nothing, could be more awesome than this. --4perf 02:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Fucking hell, that's good. No fins, thick at the top?! Really? DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 02:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Safety's contribution list is just solid gold from one end to the other. I particularly like this one, added on Nov. 2 and untouched since. --4perf 02:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It is indeed. A work of art, complete art. Every word a brilliang. In other news, that led me to one of Andy's many abandoned brilliangasms. We should try to compile these ADDisms one day. ħuman 04:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Safety has solved the deficit problem! Safety for President! Stile4aly 05:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Did he go to the Mugabe school of economics or something? - π 08:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm no expert, but wouldn't minting a $500 trillion not do something really, really special with inflation. ^narchist 13:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I think Safety is pulling ideas from C.H. Douglas's ideas. Of course, its ok to do something proposed by a liberal Canadian as long as a conservative is doing it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

quotegen

"If empirically the promotion of relativity leads people away from the Bible, would you still support the promotion of relativity?" deserves a place somewhere, can one of you professionals work it in somehow? ħuman 03:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

And so ends the saga of James and the Giant Peach Ark.

I regret that have but one down vote to give for my countries. I can't even follow where to click on that lame wigo. The first link is a block log - who cares. The others are all to the same article's talk page, if I recall correctly. The header is the wigo text, which does not tell a story so much as make me think "and who cares?" ħuman 06:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

While I agree with Human's opinions on the WIGO itself, I must say that page is some of the best entertainment on the intertubes. You have this guy trying to wade through the massive amounts of stupid Karajou dropped at his feet when Andy comes in babbling some crazy shit about mammals fleeing to high ground and nobody denying there was a global flood. Just when it looks like he could fight back, the parodists swoop in like buzzards on a lame Zebra and pick the carcus clean. It all ends with Karajou asserting that mother's milk fed all the animals (my favorite quote:"apparently he forgets that people get milk from cows. That's cows, Dan; it means you tie Bessie to the hitching post, grab a small stool, and sit for an hour filling a wooden bucket. It's where milk came from in the days before people went Krogering." Cause God knows 8 cows would easily feed the entire world population of animals.... and then, in the end, the ban is handed down, as we all knew it must. The cycle is complete once again. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 07:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Chuck - this nonsense about the flood is some of the funniest stuff I've ever seen at CP. Though some WIGOs are not well-written, it doesn't detract too much from the hilarity of what's happening at CP. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you don't like how it's written, rewrite it. Sometimes people have a nice idea for how to word it that doesn't come across that well in practice. ^narchist 14:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wait a second here...

If Jpatt is just now getting Check User, what is the meaning of his prior references to "IP of blocked vandal/troll/troublemaker" in block messages? 14:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Either someone else (TK) tipped him off, or else he was just taking random potshots at IPs. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Simply put he's either a lying little weasel, or incapable of original thought and can only function in a 'See TK do, Do Jpratt do' manner. Actually, it's probably both. --PsygremlinSnakk! 15:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

So, Andy....

... if referring to people with homophobic slurs is actually "criticizing homosexuality", I suppose that if referred to you as a "cock-sucking ass-riding faggot", that would be "critcizing homosexuality", and just fine and dandy on CP, right? Right? MDB 14:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, nice idea. ^narchist 14:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The part I find most amusing is that, once again, he writes a distorted summary, yet links to an article that obviously gives a different picture of the situation. It's as if he's expecting people to never click his links. Andy should spend less time gargling the semen of strangers in bars and more time trying to link to something that'd actually support his interpretation. --^{Ask me about your mother} 14:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

God, I love it. Cut for insolence = banned from NFL. Somebody please burn a sock and mention the fact that he's not banned. I want to see Andy squirm in deceit. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 15:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, Andy is being challenged on this, by someone who knows a lot more about the players history than I do. (I know next to nothing about pro football.) Apparently, he's got a history of problems. Of course, being a screaming queen, Andy's main knowledge of the NFL is his interest in tight ends and wide receivers. MDB 15:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy is just scraping now. Come on Schlafly. DO BETTER OR YOUR CUT FROM THE TEAM.--Thanatos 15:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Aww...DWiggins is playing along that Johnson is banned. I really want someone to tell Andy he's not, then we get to see the "effectively banned!" tripe. Star running back for the 1-7 Chiefs who is averaging 2.7 YPC. This one is pretty good. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 15:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

(unDent) DWiggins isn't going to last much longer, anyway. He just criticized CP in general. MDB 15:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Someone mentioned it before my sock could get there, but it looks like Johnson will either be going to Cleveland or Cinci. To the best of my knowledge, no player has ever received a lifetime ban from the NFL. High profile cases, like Vick, recieve indefinite suspensions, but those are lifted when certain conditions are met. Someone should tell Andy to stop chiming on subjects he knows nothing about. I also love how Andy keeps phrasing this as a criticism of homosexuality. This was an ignorant thug insulting a critic with vulgar language.... Conservapedia: Supporting Gay Bashing since 2001 SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 20:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"Sorry ur a cornball n ur mom birthed u broke. But I'm cakn patna. While u work or school for 5 dollas n hour. Ha! think bout a clever diss then that wit ur fag pic. Christopher street boy. Is what us east coast cats call u." That is clearly commentary on homosexuality in America. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 20:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

And poverty too, and the plight of the working man.... I support Larry Johnson for Senate. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 20:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

On Conservatives and Free Speech

This is one thing I've noticed about the American right -- they seem to think free speech means you can say whatever you want, whenever you want, without repercussions from anyone. And that's not the case. The First Amendment is a protection against the government taking action against someone because of what they say, not private concerns.

When you speak in public, or do anything publicly, as a representative of your employer, your actions reflect on your employer. If I went to a technical conference, wearing a nametag that said "MDB of MDB's Company", and started speaking ill of my company, I'd probably be reprimanded if not fired... and rightly so. And if you're an NFL player of any notability, essentially everything you do in the public eye is representative of your team and the NFL as a whole. (That may not be fair, but its reality.) They have the right to take action if you do something that reflects negatively on them.

Similarly, Carrie Prejean faced no government action after her remarks about "opposite marriage". She faced action from her employer, the Miss USA Pageant.

(And as an aside, was Prejean really harmed (until her sex tape came out)? She's become a right-wing darling since then. (Palin-Prejean in.... uummmm...what year is the next election? 2012!) . What's the actual pageant winner doing now? Can anyone even name her without looking it up?)

Conservatives treat "personal responsibility" as a great virtue (which it is). But when it comes to holding people responsible for the things they say, they don't want to do it. MDB 16:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Let's not overthink this. In contexts like the one we're talking about here, "free speech" is just a meaningless arrangement of syllables. They're trying to make a matter of civility and courtesy into a political issue. I've noticed this is a common tactic not just of conservatives but of political extremists of all stripes. They want to use "free speech!" as a blanket excuse to be a dick whenever they want.

The fundamental conflict here between these people and normal people like us is that they think it's okay to be dicks, and that their being dicks shouldn't detract from their credibility. "Why aren't you listening to me, I'm screaming way louder than anybody else!?"

Of course, none of that has to do with Larry Johnson. He called somebody a fag or something (apparently; I haven't seen a primary source on that) and Andy thinks that qualifies as thoughtful public debate, so Andy's clearly just a moron. --4perf 16:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Considering that almost all of the most notable conservative voices in America are dicks, and that they achieved notoriety by being dicks, is it any surprise that conservatives defend dickitude so forcefully? MDB 18:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

People should stop selling these people megaphones. The more crazed, the more megaphones they are yelling through--Thanatos 02:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

While I agree with what's been said above, I have a nit to pick with the esteemed member from MDB. It's "dickotry," not "dickitude." Sprocket J Cogswell 09:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep trying Ken

Two spellings. Both wrong. Although strangely appropriate for your grasp of the English language. StarFish 15:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Typical Ken. Although that reminds me: WHERE THE hELL IS FLYING FORTRESS?? We've been waiting for it forever. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't encourage him. For his own good, ignore. Broccoli 16:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Obama bowing

I don't understand, why are CP bitching about Obama bowing to the japanese emperor? It is custom to bow in the orient, and I would expect the president of the united states to honor that custom. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

They're just up to their usual tricks: anything that could possibly be interpreted as Obama doing something un-American gets put up on the main page. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 16:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Obama bowed to the Emperor of Japan. George Bush the Elder barfed on him (or was it his predecessor?). I think Obama wins in that regard. MDB 16:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

A head of stated shouldn't bow to another head of state. Neither to the tenno nor to Elisabeth II. or to the President of the United States. Just my opinion. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Obama continues his IRL trolling of conservatives. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 16:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I fail to see what the big deal is. Bowing is a custom, like shaking hands or waving or saying "Hi." Maybe those things had some meaning long ago, but clearly none of them do today. Of course, we're talking about people who went apeshit when Obama and his wife bumped fists a couple years ago, so really, whatever. It's just conservative pareidolia; they see significance where absolutely none exists, then try to assert that others are blind because they don't see it too. He's Richard Dreyfus with the mashed potatoes. "This means something! This is important!" --4perf 17:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I like to imagine that there is a conservative Japanese blog complaining about Akihito's handshake with Obama. The bow is nothing no more significant than Bush kissing Saudi royalty on the lips. --^{Ask me about your mother} 17:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, admittedly that was pretty fruity. --4perf 17:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

More

I am still laughing at the wording of this. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ken's source is even more amusing. I wondered who this mysterious academic would be? Andy has taught us that credentials mean nothing, and that liberal deceit is rife - particularly among those so called professors.. The source described them as being "an academic with expertise about the Japanese Empire, and in general a supporter of President Obama". They're obviously a liberal academic, so I don't know who to trust? Is this liberal deceit, or is a liberal really saying bad things about their Lord Jesus Obama? Andy, help! --^{Ask me about your mother} 18:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

This basically settles it: Conservapedia is the most ridiculous crock of steaming horseshit in the history of the world. Hilarious. Even the rest of the American right-wing can't be fooled by that ridiculous post. SJ ^Debaser 19:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I think Ken was trying to make a joke, but I fail to see how he (or anyone) could find it funny. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Well no, not the joke part of it, the general tone of it just saying how Obama bowed "too low" and as such is an embarrassed the USA. Even the rest of the American right can't possibly think that's a serious thing. That single post embodies how Conservapedia has failed miserably at exposing liberal bias and Obama's supposed belief in Islam/Socialism. SJ ^Debaser 00:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I hereby declare...

...that Andy and Kendoll, beyond reasonable doubt, are either parodying themselves or have true mental problems. Ken's inability to spell 'pidgeon' after TWO tries and Andy's defense of a completely, utterly indefensible point (the NFL issue) - he hasn't even got some poorly constructed sandbags to hide behind and a waterpistol to use, he's just wandering around in an open field shouting out his delusions while more stable people shoot at him - are the worst examples yet and, IMO, the clincher. The question is, what do we do about it? EddyP 17:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy has tacitly admitted that Larry Johnson is not banned from the NFL. Small steps for a big man. I've said repeatedly that both Ken and Andy almost certainly have serious mental problems. We've built up a tolerance to teh crazy. As for what to do about it, unfortunately, everyone in a position to help is either also crazy (the Phy's) or missing in action (dad, wife, John). ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 17:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Other than the religion and the obvious idiocy, quite probably yes. Also, you have a Poe in your eye, don't blink or it'll fly away. And quite honestly, we really have nothing to do other than what we have always done. Frummidge 17:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ken seems to have real problems. Andy, however, is an apparently normal guy from a real-life perspective (a guy who teaches kids, lawyers for quacks and is involved with the American conservative movement - nutty, but not a mental health problem). Broccoli 17:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Apart from his many other problems, he's seeing things that aren't there. Larry Johnson wasn't banned from anything. He's not a star running back. He wasn't criticizing homosexuality. He will play in the NFL again. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 17:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Eddy, I regret to inform you that there are people who are far crazier than Andy and Ken. They may or may not be mental cases, but that question is just academic. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 17:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Can anyone figure out what exactly he's talking about here? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 21:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

He's talking about why the Pioneer 10 and 11 space probes did not follow the trajectories they were supposed to. There are many reasonable explanations (as described in the WP article here.) Andy, however, thinks that it disproves relativity. For some reason he also mentions alternative theories to gravity (by which I assume he means MOND) although I'm not sure why he brings it up. I haven't read his "Quantifying Bullshit Order" essay yet though. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Did they actually call out the Newtonian model of gravity or did he imagine that? ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 21:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It was being considered for a few years when the existence of dark matter was not yet totally proven. Some scientists figured that it was more plausible that Newtonian gravity was slightly off than the possibility of there being this invisible "stuff" out there. But now MOND is mostly bunk. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

MOND is just the sort of theory Andy would get wet for. The guy who thought it up, a crank from Israel (NOT ANTISEMITIC JUST SAYING), described it as being "pure," because he tried to make his equations fit observations without considering whether they actually made any sense. He basically said "okay, everything we think we know about physics is just assumption, so I'll ignore all of it." And just for the record, the so-called Pioneer anomaly is so small that it can easily be explained by noise in the data. It's a very interesting measurement, but it doesn't mean anything until we repeat it. (Voyager, presumably?) --4perf 22:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy would only care about it if it opposes relativity, that evil librul plot by that naughty atheist Einstein. Newton was a Christian, so his theories are automatically correct. I notice that on the "Bias in WP" page he doesn't elaborate on MOND, he just whines that WP doesn't mention relativity. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 22:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, the humanity!

Oh, the horror!!. I bet Andy will drool all over this one. Five bucks (or whatever you non-'Merkins use for money) says it makes it to the mainpage within an hour. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 22:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah of course it will, Jpatt's online. He just blocked an account I'd opened before I'd even done anything that snivelling little cunt. Yes, I'm talking to you Jpatt, you uneducated fuck. SJ ^Debaser 22:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

He has checkuser now, so he can block indiscriminately and make it look like he is blocking potential vandals. Although in your case he may have taken the time to see where you live and then blocked you. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 22:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Most. Ironic. Andyism. EVAR.

[2]

"I accept your challenge. Having decided that I, and only I, am fit to translate God's Holy Word, and that I need no actual education in Bible exegesis to do so, I will make sure that when I speak for God, I do so with proper humility."

He's a parodist. He has to be a parodist. There's not enough stupid in the world. --Phentari 22:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

"Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe." --Al Einstein

I would have to disagree.Frummidge 23:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll see your irony and raise you Super Irony. According to Andy, "the right to free speech is not merely for people we like. To mean anything at all, it should be defended for people we do not like". If only there was a device for measuring irony, it would surely be experiencing some kind of shattering.--^{Ask me about your mother} 23:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean, "if only?" For the past several years the authors of WIGOs have mentioned their near-death experiences with exploding irony meters. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That was a bit of bonus irony, but I think it had some sarcasm from its mother's side.--^{Ask me about your mother} 23:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

*sarcasm makes wooshing sound as it flies over my head* Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 23:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Back to the opening post, I've wondered before now whether or not Andy his whole blog encyclopaedia is, in fact, one epic piece of parody, following in the footsteps of Landover Baptist. On balance I've decided it isn't, but I wouldn't be too surprised if it turned out it's all for lulz. -- 23:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I would be blown away if it was. That would make us all look like some of the stupidest people on Earth, thinking a parody website was real for several years. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 00:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy was pulling this shit long before CP even existed. If he were some sort of parodist, he'd certainly be taking it the extra mile, making radio and TV appearances in character just to further the joke. That's Kaufman-esque. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 01:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

If CP really turned out to be Andy having lulz at our expense, the "Bunch of morons at some site fall for most epic parody ever" headline would be insignificant next to the gigantic "Andy Schlafly trolls his own mother into thinking he's as ultra-conservative as she is" banners that would go up everywhere. ;) --Sid 01:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(unDent)The one thing that keeps me from believing the entirety of CP is a hoax is the homeschooling part. If its a hoax, I can only hope:

• The "homeschoolers" are actually in on it and are all adults.

-or-

• Andy someday pays horribly for fucking around with those poor kids' education.

MDB 01:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

28 year blocks?

Take a look at recent changes on CP's block log... since when are there bans for 28 years? What a weird time frame too. Would 30 years be considered too much? --Composure1 01:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It's MarkGall who is doing those blocks; I assume he is pointing out the absurdity of CP's long blocks by picking an arbitrary number. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I proclaim that in 28 years from now, not even The Great Wikipedia will remain in any way similar to its current form. Also, we still won't have flying cars. Etc 09:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Recent Bowing WIGO

Is a bit ignorant. Truth be told, the conservatives and Andy have a good point on this. Different levels of bows mean very different things, and according to Japanese protocol Obama's bow was deeper than would be appropriate for equals, and implies inferiority on the part of Obama. Now, I'm sure they didn't take it that way and Obama didn't mean it that way, but this is a stupid WIGO.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 04:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The WIGO is bad because it is poorly written with a bad chose of links and misses any humour of the pigeon incident. As for the bow, Obama is 6'1", the Emperor 5'5", it was always going to be an awkward bow. - π 05:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Himmel Gott! CP mentioned in our news!

Local Sunday rag published an article on the 40th birthday of the 'net. Conservapedia even gets a mention! Under a heading describing WikiPedia, it says "It has been accused of bias (the thinking behind its unintentionally hilarious counterpart "Conservapedia")" Good to that even out in the sticks people can see CP for what it is. --PsygremlinParla! 05:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy needs to stop trying to talk sports.

Andy is a fucking idiot. My proof He really thinks that gay political groups can push an NFL into action. Micheal Vick was the target of dozens of Animal Rights groups and the Eagles still hired him and he's doing fine. Should any gay groups attack the Bengals, they would likely be ignored. Not to sterotype, but not many homosexuals care about football. Not to mention that I haven't heard any groups really calling for his termination for the slur. The people who wanted him fired were Cheifs fans who didn't want this jackass in the team record books because of all his problems... But hey, it's Andy, why let reality get in the way of a good Gay Bash. SirChuckB^{Penguin Knight, First Class} 06:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Speaking as one of RW's resident homosexuals, yeah, not a lot of us care about football (since the football players were the ones who picked on us in high school...), or team sports in general. However, many of the more activist types (I'm not especially activist myself) will pay attention if someone makes a homophobic remark, whether or not the field they are in is one of interest to them.

That being said, this player's case got no attention in the gay world yesterday. The big news was the shutdown of Windows Media, the publisher of numerous gay newspapers. More on that in a bit... MDB 12:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

CBP write up

CBP gets a bit of a write up / skewering here http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/1918/the_conservative_bible_project:_looking_for_conservative_diamonds_in_a_liberal_dung-hill?page=entire Steve Kay 11:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

A rather good write up too. It's quite remarkable how something quite factually and neutrally written like that still shows up Schlafly as a buffoon. That'd be reality and its well-known liberal bias, then. ^narchist 11:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn that reality (said Smedley). The reality being that Andrew Schlafly is most definitely a buffoon. There's quite a nice article in re: the politicisation of the Fort Hood massacre as well - http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/2039/words_matter%3A_the_linguistic_damage_of_%22going_muslim%22_/. Basically states that regardless of Hasan's faith/ideology/worldview, he was a homicidal cunt, so it doesn't matter whether he shouted "Allahu Akbar", "Admiral Ackbar", or "Welcome to the Groovie Goolies Show", a homicidal cunt is still a homicidal cunt. Steve Kay 12:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Both of those articles were pretty good. I wouldn't call the first one "neutral," but it was pretty close. And I like that they included the "bimbo" thing. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

On the shutdown of Window Media

JPatt points out that Window Media, the nation's largest publisher of gay newspapers, including DC's Washington Blade, abruptly shut down yesterday.

JPatt, being an asshole, says "When just a fraction of your American audience embraces the gay lifestyle, it's hard to make money." Because, of course, there's no such thing as a special interest publication. Everything has to appeal to a general audience or its doomed, right? Feh.

Print media, of course, is hurting in general. That's true across the board, from the most general interest daily newspaper to the most specialized. Plus, according to my partner last night (I don't have a source for this), Window Media had made some poor business decisions. Basically, they had been on a series of acquisitions of gay papers, including some of debatable financial stability. (The Washington Blade was apparently not one of the financially unstable ones.)

So, it really has nothing to do with the fact Window Media targeted us icky hoe-moe-seck-shew-ulls; it was a bad economy and bad business decisions.

For what its worth, the Washington Blade's staffers are already trying to restart it an employee-owned publication. And DC, at least, has a second gay weekly, the Metro Weekly, but that's more of a social/events type thing, rather than the news coverage the Blade focused on.

MDB 12:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

"When just a fraction of your American audience embraces you, it's hard to make money" Steve Kay 13:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC, bugger ya (but not literally)) All I can say is: Thank IPU that my favorite homosecksyooal rag (oh how dirty that sounds) is still around - the link isn't porn, but still NSFW by my reckoning. Print media is quickly becoming obsolete as you say, that's all there is to it. Once the baby boomers have all gone, I doubt there will be many hard-copies of the news getting around.
Now, all the gay men and straight women enjoy the eye candy at that link I provided - everyone else please turn around, face the back of the room and chat quietly amongst yourselves. -Redback^G'day 13:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

"The web site http://www.dnamagazine.com.au is classified under a restricted category of Nudity and breaches the company's IT Acceptable Use Policy. Your access has been blocked and logged." Steve Kay 13:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. I believe I've read an issue of DNA mag (a friend sent me a copy that had the "oh dear sweet Lord he's gorgeous" gay Aussie diver from the Olympics on the cover), and I think its more comparable to the Advocate or Out in the states, both glossy monthlies, and not the free weeklies that Window Media published. MDB 13:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Another EC, oh noes!)That surprises me to no end; the site isn't porn (PG, maybe M at worst), it's just a gay interest mag. Hope I didn't get you in trouble. Still, us queers are used to being censored, I mean for fuck's sake, this wonderful film (it's not a porn link, I swear!) was rated R in America, which I just don't understand. -Redback^G'day 13:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I believe that surf blocking software generally determines if something it nudity by determinining the pixels that are flesh colored, and determining what percentage of the image is represented by those colors. If its greater than some value, it assumes its nudity and blocks it. MDB 14:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(undent) Not so much these days, although flesh tone analysis was once considered to be the wave of the future, then someone wag pointed out that not all humans are the same colour. Nearly all smurf-management tools today use category lists. I'm still trying to get CP classified as "Hate Speech"... Steve Kay 14:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(back on topic) Here in Canada, we all know about special interest publications not doing well financially. I wonder when JPratt is going to post about that one? --Kels 15:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy's Next Class...

... will be on (a drumroll please)... writing?

Oh, that should be good for laughs.

Homework 1:

• Non-fiction: Explain how Ronald Reagan was the greatest President in US History, and the greatest leader (except for Jesus) in world history.
• Fiction: Create an alternate history story where Jimmy Carter was re-elected in 1980. Some ideas might include:
  • Invasion by the Russians (see also Red Dawn)
  • A gallon of gas costs more than an ounce of gold
  • Ayatollah Khomeini's face on the dollar bill
• Extra Credit:
  • For boys: Write a story including sports, chivalry and going out and earning a living
  • For girls: Write a story including cooking, sewing, being a mommy, doing exactly what your husband says, and serving as a prominent conservative activist while raising several children, one of which grews up to be perfect, but one other questions the correct mathematical viewpoints and another slips into a hideous lifestyle. Fictional, of course.

MDB 14:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy's teaching writing?? *ducks to avoid shrapnel from exploding irony meter* Wow. I can't believe it. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 14:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Argh, foiled again. Why don't they just oversight the Critical Thinking in Math page and be done with it?-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 14:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Remember, all assignments can be completed with just one or two phrases; complete sentences are not necessary. We don't want to teach liberal wordiness. --4perf 15:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That's right, I forgot about that. Maybe Andy will use the liberal style bot to grade papers? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

KSorenson has...

Left the building:

(Block log); 10:39 . . Jpatt (Talk | contribs) blocked KSorenson (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) (Negative personal comments: childish parthian shot)

I didn't manage to get a screen shot before it was nuked, but it was the Larry Johnson main page article that pushed her over the edge. PenguinLust^{Give me herring or give me death}

Please tell me someone managed to get a screenshot, I must know what was said, in the eloquence that only she can provide. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 15:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Fuck! Jpratt deleted her user page too. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 15:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That's what I get for eating that extra piece of herring before snapping it. In a nutshell, she said she couldn't live with herself if she continued contributing to a site that is ostensibly geared to school children, based on the article. PenguinLust^{Give me herring or give me death}

Gahhh! What a shame. I'm sure it was a very lovely parthian. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 16:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Via email from KSorenson:

I dunno, maybe it was childish. But I'd been collaborating with a few other people on some pages, and didn't want them to think I'd just gotten bored and wandered off. So I left some notes about what I'd been planning to work on, then said something like (I'm doing this from memory), "After sleeping on it, I can't in good conscience associate with a site that characterizes 'think bout a clever diss than that wit your fag pic' as 'criticisms of homosexuality.'" And then I said that I can't continue to contribute and respect myself at the same time. Something like that. I used exact quotes of both what Larry Johnson said and what Andy said about what Larry Johnson said … if that makes any sense.

I've been in email contact with one person who'd been writing articles with me, and we talked last night, so he knows what's up. All I did this morning was to say "I can't do this any more, here's why, here's what was going to happen in the immediate future if anybody wants to pick up the ball."

In the end, I guess they blocked me for the same reason the Chiefs cut Larry Johnson: I publicly went off the reservation. Of course, in this case it was more like a "You can't quit, you're fired!" as I was walking out the door, but whatever. Some people just thrive on drama, I guess.

Write back any time,

Kate

(That was all a copy-paste of her email, in case it wasn't clear. I wrote back to ask permission to share it here and she said sure.) --4perf 16:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

"bowing is a Japanese custom of greeting"

This is true for Japanese citizens, but not for foreign leaders greeting Japan's leaders. SoldierInGodsArmy 15:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)